Shockingly, Usual Suspects Call For More Gun Control

I’m sure you’re aware of the mass shooting in San Bernardino, in the People’s Republik Of California. So, of course, before the bodies had even cooled, the ghoulish left immediately jumped to their Typical Calls for gun control. We do no know the motives of Syed Farook and his wife Tasheen Malik. And the name of the supposed 3rd suspect, if there is one. Doesn’t matter. Liberals have a Narrative

(NY Times Editorial Board) Those who reject sensible gun controls will say anything to avoid implicating the growth in the civilian arsenal. The House speaker, Paul Ryan, for one, responded to the killings at the Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs with a call for better mental health care, and is supporting a new bill that sponsors said would expand services to provide earlier treatment so violent people might theoretically be intercepted. “For those with mental illness, what we ought to be doing is treating the mental illness instead of responding to the crime,” Representative Tim Murphy, a Pennsylvania Republican and a chief sponsor of the bill, told The Wall Street Journal in an interview on Tuesday.

This is the familiar line trotted out by Republican politicians after every massacre, as if unfettered access to high-powered weaponry — which they and the gun lobby have made possible — is not a factor in this national catastrophe. Congress’s Republican leaders are betting they can brazenly go through another election cycle without enacting gun safety laws.

Congress has allowed the domestic gun industry to use assorted loopholes to sell arsenals that are used against innocent Americans who cannot hide. Without firm action, violent criminals will keep terrorizing communities and the nation, inflicting mass death and damage across the land.

And, of course, you had Mr. Obama (who is surrounded by people carrying weapons, many of which are banned for ownership by American citizens) calling for more gun control, along with Hillary, Bernie Sanders, and Martin O’Malley. Many more newspapers and news outlets are doing the same, along with liberals galore on blogs and social media. Let’s consider a few things, though.

First, California has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation

That the shooting took place in California is particularly remarkable, given that it has the most restrictive gun laws in the United States, thanks to a highly progressive legislature. Anyone who wishes to purchase a gun in California must produce a Firearm Safety Certificate, and must purchase a “California legal” gun which complies with stringent mandates on what can and cannot be sold within state borders. Sales include a waiting period, and must be conducted through a licensed dealer, and the state constitution doesn’t guarantee firearms rights, though federal suits are pending against the state on the grounds that some of its laws may violate the Second Amendment.

While I am sometimes loath to cite Wikipedia, they lay out many of the restrictions. Assault weapons? Banned for purchase, sale, and import. Magazines above 10 rounds? Banned. Private sales of any gun must go through a federally licensed dealer, eliminating the so-called gun show loophole. Concealed Carry is very restrictive, and many cities have “No Issue” policies in place. That Firearm Safety Certificate is a written test. All weapons must be registered with the state, and all buyers have their fingerprints recorded and placed on file.

This is almost everything that Liberals have been pushing regarding gun control, in a state pretty much run by Democrats for a long, long time.

Bombs? Bombs are restricted by state and federal law. Yet, there were supposedly pipe bombs left all over the place. Whether real or not, they are illegal. As a sidebar, whether real or not, leaving them around shows this was not just a spur of the moment crime of passion, but something that required planning. Whether this was terrorism based on ideology or something else, we will wait and see.

The basic fact is this: California is so restrictive that there’s not much more to do but ban private ownership of all firearms. Is that what the NY Times, Obama, Hillary, et all want? If so, speak up. Speak out. Tell us your plans.

Second, have you noticed that there only is concern from liberals when the shootings are large and/or involve White people? Rarely is there any concern from Liberals over Black people shooting each other in Democratic Party run cities like Chicago, Detroit, and Baltimore. There have been over 300 murders in Baltimore this year, with the majority of victims being Black, and the majority of the shooters being Black. Why so little concern from Liberals? Do they just really not like Black people?

BTW, the article I linked regarding restrictive gun laws isn’t Conservative and/or supportive of gun rights.

He wasn’t wrong. This shouldn’t be normal, and this shouldn’t be the face of America, domestically and for the world. But it is. Citizens of most of the West and a fair chunk of the Global South are shocked by how insufficient our gun laws are, and they should be. What private individual needs to own a long gun? A handgun kept anywhere other than a range for recreational shooting? Military-grade equipment? We aren’t living in an era in which we need a “well-regulated militia.” In fact, the organizations calling themselves “militias” today tend to land on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of known hate groups on a regular basis. These are precisely the people we don’twant carrying guns. Many of them are terrorists disrupting American society and inculcating us with a sense of deep fear of going about our daily business.

We can blame the gun lobby for all of this, and we should keep blaming the gun lobby until Congress cannot avoid this problem any longer. Even though we keep saying this after every mass shooting, it is apparently not enough. We must march on Congress, we must lean on our representatives, and we must vote for candidates who promise to take aggressive stances on gun control. We owe it to our dead, if not to ourselves.

So, yes, this is about taking away private ownership of guns as much as possible.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

4 Responses to “Shockingly, Usual Suspects Call For More Gun Control”

  1. drowningpuppies says:

    Just wondering what motivated a nice, quiet guy named Farook and his adorable wife, Tashfeen, to slaughter innocent
    people at a Christmas party.
    Can’t quite figure that one out.

  2. drowningpuppies says:

    For future reference concerning office Christmas

    1. If you are Secret Santa to a nice quiet guy named Farooq, forget the honey baked ham as a gift.

    2. If a nice quiet guy named Farooq leaves the party and appears upset, call the police immediately.

    3. Always conceal carry.

  3. david7134 says:

    The characterizations of all shootings:
    1. Either a crazy guy or a Muslim.
    2. A gun free zone.

    Now, it would seem that all those things could easily be fixed. Taking guns from law abiding people, not a fix, after all killing someone with a gun is against the law.

  4. […] I mentioned this morning, California has very restrictive background checks, which require a Firearm Safety Certificate, 10 […]

Pirate's Cove