Gun Control: The Left Just Does Not Get It

After the spectacle of Democrats protesting during a moment of silence in the House for the Orlando terrorist attack victims and after the Murphy filibuster in the Senate to force a vote on four gun control measures everyone knew would not pass (isn’t that what they criticized Ted Cruz over?) and after the childish, “oh so ’60s” sit-in on the House floor, it is quite obvious that the Left just does not get it.  It is certainly true that after every horrendous act whether perpetrated by a terrorist with sworn allegiance to ISIS, or some demented kid in Connecticut, or a racist in South Carolina, we hear cries of “Don’t politicize the situation.”

Well, the job of a politician is politics.  Telling a politician not to politicize the situation is futile.  They could politicize the decreased size of a box of Girl Scout cookies.  So, it becomes inevitable that the situation becomes politicized.  To prove the point, the two big suggestions of the Left are (1) ban assault rifles and (2) expanded background checks for those on terrorist watch lists or no-fly lists.

The “assault rifle” is the big bogeyman of the Left.  Considering the fact they could not identify a true assault rifle from a squirt gun purchased at Five Below, they are laying off that proposal.  Nancy Pelosi has instructed her minions to concentrate on the expanded background check strategy.  Why?  Not because it would have prevented Omar Marteen from purchasing a gun, but because her pollsters tell her more people agree with this knee-jerk non-solution than an assault rifle ban.  Its all politics.

There is another little fact in the way: not a single mass murder, despite who committed it or their motivation, used a damn assault rifle!  In the wake of Orlando, the New York Times had this among one of many suggestions for Congress:

Get weapons of war off our streets.

There is no reason that weapons of war designed to create mass causalities — like dangerous assault weapons and high-capacity magazines — should be easily available. The latter is especially important, given we know that when a mass shooter stops to reload is when people escape (like at Sandy Hook) or he gets tackled (like Gabby Giffords’ attacker).

Um…the military does not use any of the weapons used in any mass murder committed with a firearm.  We did have an “assault weapon” ban at one time that expired in 2004 and guess what?  After the ban was lifted, homicides using rifles decreased!  You are more likely to be killed by a knife or a person’s feet or hands.  Of all the homicides committed in 2014, only 248 are attributed to a rifle of any kind.

Now to the “lists” and background checks.  Some have suggested a “domestic violence” loophole.  For example, married, cohabitating or couples with children who commit acts of domestic violence are prohibited from gun purchases.  Excluded are girlfriends/boyfriends.  Of course, if a boyfriend commits an act of violence on his girlfriend, then there are likely charges pending of a violent nature.  Hence, where the hell is the loophole?  They also suggest those accused of a hate crime be prohibited.  Of course, the definition of a hate crime is ambiguous.  Dragging a black man behind a truck for two miles is certainly a hate crime, but it is also murder and those convicted of murder generally are in jail, or on the convicted felon’s list.  That is, they are already prohibited from buying a gun.  Oh, wait- you mean those people accused of a hate crime because they wrote Donald Trump’s name in sidewalk chalk at Emory University and elsewhere?

Then there is the terror or no-fly lists which Democrats and the Left seem to believe are one and the same.  Whether they are or not (they’re not) makes no difference because of something called the Constitution.  Our Founders wrote these things called amendments and one of them says that a state or the Federal government cannot take away someone’s right without due process of law (you see?  I haven’t even mentioned the 2nd Amendment).  So if you want to deny someone a Constitutional right like life, liberty or property, there must be due process.

In the case of the convicted killer or domestic abuser, there was clearly due process.  But, being placed on a list by anonymous faceless bureaucrats and then denied the right to purchase or own a firearm where your only transgression is suspicion is certainly a violation of due process.  If this was ever allowed, then why have a Fourth, Fifth and 14th Amendment?  The due process considerations are so important that even a Leftist group like the ACLU has voiced their concerns!

The fact is we do not know what goes into getting anyone onto these lists and perhaps that is a good thing.  But we do know that the no-fly list has over 40,000 names on it and there is no way in hell all 40,000 are a risk to commit a gun rampage.  We do know that a sitting Congressman was on the list because he was mistaken for a suspected IRA terrorist.  His “due process” was an 8-month battle to get off a list he should not have been on in the first place.

But here is the irony: Tom McClintock was not an IRA terrorist, but Omar Marteen was on the terrorist list for 10 months.  Of course, he did not know he was on it, nor that he had been taken off.  Regardless, he legally purchased his gun.

While the attack in Orlando was horrible and obviously the work of Islamic terrorism, Obama, in usual fashion, is using the incident to advance his gun control agenda, as is Hillary Clinton.  He claims at one point that his intentions are not to confiscate guns from law-abiding citizens, then holds out the example of Australia as a good measure of gun control.  And what did Australia do?  They instituted a mandatory buy-back of certain weapons (actually a lot); that is, they confiscated weapons from law-abiding citizens and disguised it as a “buy back.”  When refusal to the “buy back” can land you 12 months in jail (as was the case in Australia), that is confiscation.

And this writer is getting quite tired of hearing how this country or that country compares to the United States when it comes to gun statistics.  We have this thing called a written Constitution that has a Second, Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment attached to it and that argument and those comparisons end right then and there!

But most appalling is the outright ignorance of the Left and turning a blind eye to the daily deaths on the streets of Chicago, Philadelphia or Washington DC.  Incidentally, these are three cities with some of the highest firearm homicide rates in the country and some of the most stringent gun control laws in the country.  That ignorance is racism pure and simple.

So the next time the Democrats decide to go all ’60’s on us and stage a sit-in on the floor of the House or Senate, perhaps the Republicans should hold a counter sit-in.  Instead of chanting cute phrases for the few folks who watch you on YouTube or Periscope, the Republicans can just read the pertinent parts of the Constitution as a mantra.  Of course we wouldn’t have a John Lewis to lead the way, but the words of James Madison make more sense than the drivel dribbling from the mouths of Democrats.