From the platform released at the Democratic National Convention last week…
We recognize that the individual right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans’ Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation. We understand the terrible consequences of gun violence; it serves as a reminder that life is fragile, and our time here is limited and precious. We believe in an honest, open national conversation about firearms. We can focus on effective enforcement of existing laws, especially strengthening our background check system, and we can work together to enact commonsense improvements–like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole–so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking few.As if to signal that the Democratic Party is ready to follow Obama’s lead on the issue, Senator Dianne Feinstein announced in her keynote speech to the convention’s California delegation that she intends to reintroduce an “updated” version of the 1994-2004 “assault weapons” and “large” magazines. (For more coverage of Feinstein’s plans, please see related story.)
Please note the buzz words in the platform. Reasonable regulation…terrible consequences of gun violence…honest, open national conversation…strengthening our background check system…reinstituting the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole…
- reasonable – whose reason? What constitutes reason?
- consequences of gun violence – why not consequences of CRIME?
- honest, open conversation – like secretly using Fast & Furious to force a gun control agenda, and painting gun owners as slack-jawed yokel bigots?
- strengthening our background check system – at what cost to the already eroded few civil liberties and privacy left?
- assault weapons ban – When the previous ban sunset, crime went down significantly.
- gun show loophole – what loophole? Most guns purchased at gun shows are through licensed dealers required to follow existing laws. And most criminal steal their guns, they don’t purchase them.
As usual, the same suspects are pushing the same agenda with the same buzz words. It’s not about crime control – it’s about people control, and they know it. How?
Most of them are lawyers and not stupid. And they know that passing more laws only restricts the inalienable rights of the law-abiding. Criminals don’t care!
PS – This doesn’t mean I support the Republicans!
h/t NRA-ILA
As we have all noted before, it’s not about guns; it’s about control. What do they want from us that will be easier to take when we’re disarmed?
One doesn’t need much imagination to figure THAT out.
Posted by Rev. Paul | September 10, 2012, 7:19 amI’m thinking ‘social justice’ aka distribution of wealth. Leveling the playing field.
So not only are we created equal, we’re all equal as adults.
You know, like Angola.
Posted by guffaw1952 | September 10, 2012, 7:22 amThe playing is level only so long as We the People own firearms. They don’t WANT it level.
Posted by Rev. Paul | September 10, 2012, 8:44 amWhen will Democrats learn that gun control == lost elections? Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin was especially hated by the Dems and many working-class people, his Democrat opponent, the Mayor of Milwaukee, was virulently anti-gun, and lost the recall big-time. Wisconsin had just become the 49th state to re-authorize conceal and carry, effective Nov 1, 2011, and had so many applicants they had to pull people off other offices and hire temps to handle the volume, I believe over 20,000 in the first week.
Posted by Liam McCumber | September 11, 2012, 1:53 am“reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole–so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking few.”
So instead of locking up the “few” that are the problem, we will punish everyone. These idiots have no clue. And to think that Swinestien is one of their leaders.
Posted by robertsgunshop | September 11, 2012, 3:37 pm