As if you needed more proof showing how the anti-gunner crowd is not concerned with stopping gun violence, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) recently posted a lengthy Twitter thread further demonstrating what their true objectives are. On Sunday, the lawmaker announced that a “bipartisan group of 20 senators” has made a “breakthrough” on a legislative proposal that will “save lives.”
Sen. Murphy has been in negotiations with Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) on crafting a piece of legislation ostensibly designed to curtail gun violence. The development comes after the mass shooting that occurred at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, and a white supremacist terrorist attack carried out in Buffalo, New York. Murphy tweeted:
NEWS: We have a deal. Today a bipartisan group of 20 Senators (10 D and 10 R) is announcing a breakthrough agreement on gun violence – the first in 30 years – that will save lives.
🚨NEWS: We have a deal. Today a bipartisan group of 20 Senators (10 D and 10 R) is announcing a breakthrough agreement on gun violence – the first in 30 years – that will save lives.
I think you’ll be surprised at the scope of our framework.
1/ Here’s what it includes:
— Chris Murphy (@ChrisMurphyCT) June 12, 2022
In subsequent tweets, Murphy outlined some of the details of the proposed legislation. This includes funding to help states implement red flag laws, which allow law enforcement to confiscate firearms from individuals deemed to be dangerous to themselves or others. The bill would also provide billions of dollars in funding for mental health and school safety, “including money for the national build out of community mental health clinics,” according to Murphy.
If passed, this law would also mandate “enhanced” background checks for people under 21-years-old who are looking to purchase a gun. “Young buyers can get the gun only after the enhanced check is completed,” the senator explained.
The legislation has not yet been drafted, and Murphy acknowledges that doing so, and then passing it through both chambers of Congress “will not be easy.” However, over the past week, it became apparent that there is a decent chance Democrats will have enough support from Republicans to get some kind of anti-gun legislation passed. Several GOP senators signaled that they might be amenable to red flag laws and other restrictions.
But there was one part of Murphy’s thread that I found interesting. Later in his thread, he indicated the new proposal would have the “[f]irst ever federal law against gun trafficking and straw purchasing. This will be a difference making tool to stop the flow of illegal guns into cities.”
However, as with most gun control measures pushed by the anti-gunner crowd when they are exploiting a mass shooting, none of these are intended to actually decrease the proliferation of illegally-obtained firearms. In this case, it would only make the practice more illegal as there are already laws on the books against straw purchases and trafficking.
As anyone familiar with the gun debate and statistics on gun violence knows, the overwhelming majority of gun crimes are committed using firearms that the offender obtained illegally. There are several ways this happens. The Justice Department in 2019 conducted a study of inmates incarcerated for gun crimes. Its findings showed that 43 percent of these individuals purchased their weapons on the black market, six percent stole them from homes or vehicles, and 11 percent obtained them through straw purchases. Only about 10 percent bought them legally.
Where are the legislative proposals that would tamp down on these methods of acquiring firearms? How many anti-gun Democrats have put forth ideas that would curtail the circulation of these guns? Given that gun violence committed using illegal guns accounts for far more deaths than mass shootings, shouldn’t we expect to see these people looking to address the prime contributor to the problem?
The answer: Yes, if we assume Democrats are actually serious about stopping gun crimes.
But the fact of the matter is that they are not.
What Democrats are doing is pushing what I call “feel-good legislation.” These measures don’t produce any real results but persuade the public that the government is doing something to solve the problem. They give us a false sense of security. Everything Murphy listed in his thread will make a lot of people feel good – until the next mass shooting occurs and we have yet another national conversation about gun control, mass shootings, gun violence, and mental health that leads to no real solutions.
The question is: Will we ever learn our lesson?
