Washington Post: Be Scared That Congress Won’t Do Anything About Guns

First they tell us that the problem is only the scary looking assault rifles, so we have to Do Something. But, then they expose their true agenda. Here’s the Washington Post Editorial Board exposing the true agenda

Don’t be scared by NRA hysteria. Be scared Congress will do nothing.

IT WAS a stunning moment: The father of a 14-year-old girl killed in a mass shooting at her high school confronted a U.S. senator: “Look at me and tell me. Guns were the factor in the hunting of our kids in this school this week. And look at me and tell me you accept it and you will work with us to do something about guns.”

Those words from Fred Guttenberg at CNN’s town hall just seven days after his daughter Jaime (“the energy in the room ”) was one of 17 people murdered at a South Florida school were unnerving to Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), and we hope to other members of Congress. Finally they must recognize that there is a crisis of guns in this country, and that they have an urgent responsibility to do something about it. (snip)

The first step, as Mr. Guttenberg emphasized, must be to actually say what the problem is — and the problem clearly is guns. Yes, there are other issues at play, such as mental health and violence in our culture, and they too must be addressed. But troubled people and violent videos exist in other countries and yet only the United States is awash in gun deaths — from homicides, suicides, accidental shootings and the ever-increasing mass shootings.

There’s no other way to read this but that the WPEB is blaming guns, so, something needs to be done about them all. It doesn’t matter that Government at multiple levels utterly failed in the case of Nutjob Shooter Cruz in Florida, that the sheriff’s department failed to do their duty and go into the school, it’s the guns

To seriously confront gun violence — save lives and prevent injuries — there have to be fewer guns. We would start with banning the semiautomatic rifles that — along with large-capacity ammunition magazines — have become the weapon of choice of mass shooters

See? A ban on scary looking weapons and large capacity magazines are just the first things to do. The first things to start with. The WPEB offers some other ideas

Just as there is the expectation of responsibility and accountability for people who drive cars, so there should be for people who own guns. That means requiring registration, training and insurance.

Training sounds good. I’ve never had a problem with requiring that gun owners go through a training course for approval of a permit. But, registration? This is just a way for Government to know exactly which weapons you have, the better to be able to confiscate it. Insurance? That’s simply to make the cost of ownership so expensive that people cannot afford a firearm.

Other steps are needed. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives should be strengthened so it can do its job of regulating and tracing guns. Innovations should be encouraged that make weapons safer, such as improved gun triggers or smart guns. Laws should be amended to keep weapons out of the hands of domestic abusers. And research funding should be directed at determining what has worked in reducing gun violence.

Perhaps the WPEB could finally come out in favor of full investigation into the Fast and Furious gun running scheme by the Obama administration, which included BATFE. Get NJ to nullify their law on smart guns, and people would develop them. I’m actually all for studies on what works, because we’ll find that having people in gun free zones with guns tends to dissuade nutjobs, while massive controls and bans in places like Chicago do not.

Regardless, all these things are just steps to banning private ownership of firearms by citizens, leaving them in the hands of government.


Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

24 Responses to “Washington Post: Be Scared That Congress Won’t Do Anything About Guns”

  1. Jeffery says:

    Relax. Congress will do nothing. We, the People will do nothing. The horse is already out of the barn.

    We understand the angst of these teenagers, and they are right. But nothing will get done. The GOP’s only fear will be that these teens will eventually be voters and that NRA members are dying faster than gunmen can shoot teens.

    We will no more confiscate millions of AR-15 type guns than we will deport 11 million brown residents. Neither effort is practical.

    AR-15 type guns have no use for civilians but they’re here to stay. The only cost to the ammosexuals is the public sturm and drang every few weeks when a bunch of kids get gun downed by a crazy ammosexual. The gunnies can live with that, in fact, they enjoy the attention.

    We need to adjust to kids getting gunned down.

    The NRA contacted t-Rump and he’s backing down on his early statements on gun regulations.

  2. Jeffery says:

    Since guns are not a problem, why do we so tightly regulate machine guns?

    Do you support Congress making machine guns more readily available?

    Since guns are not a problem, do you oppose age restrictions on when children can obtain rifles and pistols? Since he was 12, my grandson shoots deer every year with my Remington 700 .243 (it’s a bolt action). Should my son give him his own S&W 40 for self defense in high school?

    • Some Hillbilly in St Louis says:

      From the time that the 1934 National Firearms Act was passed until the NFA civilian registry was closed by the Hughes amendment to the May 1986 FOPA there was exactly one crime committed by a legally owned NFA weapon – murder by a policeman. The cost, time, and attention by law enforcement (forever and at random intervals) makes it unlikely that a criminal would try to legally get an NFA weapon. With the closure of the NFA registry pre-may ’86 weapons that are transferable are out of the reach of all but the most wealthy – a junk Sendra AR converted to select fire might have cost you $500 in 1986 but will run you $15k+ as well as transfer fees, a year plus wait etc etc.

      Yes, I absolutely am in favor of opening the NFA registry. The fact that the feds can and will enter your home and check on compliance, the fact that you cannot cross state lines without permission, the year plus wait, and the cost assures that legally owned NFA weapons will continue to be a non-issue regarding gun crime.

      • Jeffery says:

        Great. And we assume you aren’t in favor of loosening the restrictions on fully auto firearms?

        It’s seems as if tight restrictions work. Would they work on semi-autos?

        • Some Hillbilly in St Louis says:

          Reading comprehension seams not to be your strong suit. Nor logic.

          • Jeffery says:

            Spelling seems not to be your strong suit. Nor expository writing.

            Our apologies if we don’t follow your indistinct trail of crumbs. You add dollops of irrelevant details in an attempt to impress your colleagues and to mislead the rest of us.

            So you’re in favor of people having machine guns too? Why not say it clearly?

            At what age would you allow kids to have machine guns? What’s your legal justification for that”

  3. Jeffery says:

    TEACH typed:

    Insurance? That’s simply to make the cost of ownership so expensive that people cannot afford a firearm.

    You don’t feel that gun owners should be held responsible for negligent actions? Congress/NRA agrees with you.

    The NRA/GOP have enacted special protections for gun owners, specifically to help sales by gun manufacturers. Clearly the weak background checks, while doing little to keep guns away from crazies, DOES give the NRA and gun sellers gov’t cover for any bad acts committed with the dangerous items they pimp and sell.

    • formwiz says:

      Which shooter was negligent?

      Broward County? The FIB? CNN (I’m sure they have armed security)?

      And the biggest boost to sales over the last decade was your boy, Zippy.

      • Jeffery says:

        And now the biggest boost to sales is your pervert/rapist/serial molester in DC, Fvckface von Clownstick.

        Which gun owners are negligent? Nearly every accidental death (nearly 1000) each year is because of negligence. There are many thousand injuries each year. Who pays for the medical care, sometimes for a lifetime? Who pays for the lost employment. We understand why the gun industry/NRA and their GOP handmaidens prefer to push the expense to health insurers and the government. It cuts the operating costs of gun ownership increasing sales.

        Doesn’t it make sense to have gun owners purchase an insurance policy to pay for any damages resulting from their gun? Shouldn’t they be liable (responsible) for damages? We were under the impression that conservatives encouraged responsibility. Just not with guns?

        • Dana says:

          Jeffery wrote:

          And now the biggest boost to sales is your pervert/rapist/serial molester in DC, Fvckface von Clownstick.

          While we have noted your downward spiraling plummet into ever-sillier name-calling, some of have also noted your ever increasing inability to check your statements. I had already told you that firearms sales had decreased since President Trump took office, so you should have known better than to make such a statement as the one you did above, so now I’ll provide the proof:

          Why Donald Trump Is Bad for Gun Sales
          By Sy Mukherjee September 11, 2017

          President Donald Trump really, really likes guns. To the extent that his April speech to the National Rifle Association (NRA) made him the first sitting president to directly address the gun lobby group since Ronald Reagan in 1983. But that pro-firearms attitude may actually be a double-edged sword, as sharply declining 2017 gun sales suggest—a phenomenon that the industry is informally dubbing its “Trump slump.”

          Gun giant Smith & Wesson, which has renamed itself American Outdoor Brands, said that its quarterly net sales had declined nearly 40% in the fiscal quarter ending July 31. That’s $78 million in fewer overall sales, and the drop may be closer to $100 million year-over-year if you’re only taking firearms revenues into account.

          The NRA put out multiple ads warning that 2016 Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton would push strong gun control legislation if elected (including this horror movie-esque advertisement arguing a Clinton presidency would “leave you defenseless”). Clinton and former President Barack Obama both made gun violence prevention legislation, including bans on assault rifles and national background check bills, major priorities in the wake of the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre that left 20 children and six adults dead at a Connecticut elementary school.

          Clinton’s candidacy was one of the main catalysts for a record-breaking spike in 2016 gun sales as the industry played on consumer paranoia that the government would be “coming for their guns.” So, to an extent, 2017 was bound to be a bear year for gun purchases given last year’s firearms-palooza. Other gun makers like Sturm Ruger & Company have also reported precipitous sales drops this year.

          But federal data underscores just how much of a downturn 2017 could prove for the industry. The most recent FBI National Instant Criminal Background Check (NICS) data, which tracks the number of federal firearm-related background checks made every month, shows that there were about 16.3 million checks performed this year through August 2017. There were more than 27.5 million checks (an all-time record) in 2016; at the current pace, 2017 NICS checks will clock in under 24.5 million, or a nearly 11% yearly decline. While background checks aren’t a perfect 1:1 indicator for gun sales (you can buy more than one firearm under a check, depending on state and local laws), they are a fairly good bellwether.

          To be clear, 24.5 million NICS entries (and the pursuant gun purchases) would still be a strong overall year for the industry, which has experienced growth nearly every single year since 2003. But it could also represent the first drop-off in 14 years thanks to a gun-friendly president.

          There are a lot of internal links I did not copy, since it would have sent this into the moderation queue.

          • Jeffery says:

            Your article was from Sep 2017, so it reflected at most 7 mo of data. The article said the S&W data was from end of Q2 2017 (July). Since Sep, we’ve had the Las Vegas and FL HS shootings (plus others between those two) with echoing threats of gun bans. Sales have picked up.

            Paradoxically, tRump’s empty threats to tighten gun regulations will further serve to help the NRA/gun manufacturers.

            In fact, mass shootings boost sales, and increased sales make the next mass shooting more likely. It’s like a self-fulfilling prophecy, or a positive feedback loop.

  4. Some Hillbilly in St Louis says:

    The NFA was never intended to “solve” the problem of machine gun violence. The depression era outlaws didn’t buy their Thompson machine guns or their Browning BAR’s, they stole them from the thousands of National guard armories that were in many small towns. A thief couldn’t even afford them if they wanted to. At the signing of the ’34 NFA a Thompson was the most expensive gun in America at $50, this is why the $200 registration fee was chosen. The NFA was initially written to effectively ban through registration and high fees the ownership of handguns. This is why it has the sections on short barreled rifles, minimum length on rifles and shotguns. Cut down a rifle’s barrel and voila – you have a pistol.

    It turns out that they couldn’t get it passed with the pistol language, so they added in silencers. So the NFA was marketed as a measure to control machine guns (but did nothing to address the real problem) & was intended to eliminate pistols. The progs have had their eyes on a disarmed populace for about a hundred years, noone should take the left at their word.

  5. Jeffery says:

    The homicide rate in the US is about 5 homicides/ 100,000 inhabitants. The closest advanced nation is Belgium, the inhabitants who murder less than 2 people/ 100,000. Our murder rate exceeds Burundi, North Korea, Iran, Rwanda and 220 other nations. Japan’s homicide rate is 0.31/ 100,000.

    Our unfettered access to guns is only part of the reason we murder as we do. Our designed inequality and ghettoization of swaths of our citizens also contribute. Violent crime is related to poverty. Guns are a mere tool.

    • drowningpuppies says:

      Take away the homocide stats from St.Louis, Baltimore, Detroit, and Chicago and the U,S. rates are comparable to white Europe.

      The city of the ignorant angry little black fella is a large part of the problem.

  6. Jl says:

    Yes, take away Democratic run cities and the homicide rate goes way down.

  7. Jl says:

    Saw this on Twitter- the gun control argument in a nutshell: “because government failed at every level you need to have your rights curtailed….by the government that failed at every level.”

  8. Jl says:

    J, translated: I can’t refute that!

  9. Jl says:

    But seeing as you love Twitter, here’s an oldy but goody: https://twitter.com/realsaavedra/status/964247869505994752

  10. Jeffery says:

    But seeing as you love The Tweeter Machine, here’s some where they pretend tRump is a normal, mature, reasonable, human adult – compared to the real tRump:




  11. Jeffery says:

    No one ever answered:

    Why do Con Men favor the AR-15 style rifles over less expensive .223 wooden/sythetic stocked rifles (see TEACHs modified picture), since they “are the same”, according to TEACH et al?

    Is it because the guns just look “military” or does the AR-15 style offer some actual advantage to the longer, bulkier “hunting” variety?

    If it offers a real advantage, is that an advantage that mass murderers also value?

    • Some Hillbilly in St Louis says:

      I did answer it. The mini-14 is not as accurate, is not modular, and once one figures in ar upper conversions, – you can effectively get another weapon in another caliber and/or configuration for same or lesser price in an ar, but have your lower set up as you like it with a match trigger etc. Moreover, you can get a mini-14 in .223 & 7.62×39, you can get an ar in pretty much any caliber you want, and many you don’t.

  12. drowningpuppies says:

    The ignorant angry little negro once again asks:

    Why do Con Men favor the AR-15 style rifles…?

    And once again the answer is:
    Because fvck you, that’s why.

Pirate's Cove