P1010102

Democrats Aim to Regulate Boom-Boom Sticks

As if it weren’t bad enough to have Democrats all over the country lecture us on guns when they’ve shown they know nothing about them, the proposals they’ve put forth really, really stink.

Since President Obama is leading the anti-gun crusade, it’s especially frustrating to listen to him prattle on about banning this or that when he has no clue what he’s even trying to ban. In a presser last month he focused on limiting access to “magazine clips with high capacity.”

A magazine and a clip are two completely different things. A clip holds cartridges together before they’re loaded into a gun. A magazine is the container that holds the cartridges and is usually detachable from the gun. A clip can be used to load magazines, but whenever someone today discusses such a high-capacity ban, they are talking about magazines. In the words of Emily Miller, such a ban would be like banning “motorcycle cars.

Obama concluded his speech by saying this is the type of “[thing] I continue to believe [makes] sense.”

Another anti-gun apologist, Jesse Jackson, put the gun debate in perspective when he told Fox News that the assault weapons ban is important because semi-automatic firearms can blow up airplanes and railroads. How Adam Lanza managed not to annihilate the buildings at Sandy Hook Elementary with his anti-aircraft-semi-automatic gun, I’ll never know.

But ignorance aside, what are the merits of their latest gun control proposals?

Universal background checks

In an effort to curb gun violence, this would accomplish nothing. We already have background checks for the vast majority of gun sales. If you buy your gun at a retailer, a gun show (in most cases), or online (with the help of federally-licensed dealers), you are subjected to a federal background check that looks at your criminal and mental health history.

What a universal background check (called that because everyone — even criminals — would be compelled to participate) would do is require private sales or transfers between family members and friends to pay for the expensive background check. The goal here isn’t keeping guns away from the criminally insane, it’s to have every gun in the country registered. Registered things are more easily taken.

Banning high-capacity magazines (or “magazine-clips” for those Obamanese speakers out there)

A magazine capacity of 10 rounds is the magic number to which Democrats like California Senator Dianne Feinstein have chosen to limit gun owners. This is only a way to accomplish their main goal: ban big, scary, black assault weapons.

Why 10 rounds? Experts have already shown how 1. gunmen who aim to kill do just fine firing off less than 10 rounds, and 2. such capacity restrictions don’t reduce crime.

It’s true that murderers like Adam Lanza, James Holmes, and Jared Loughner committed their crimes with the assistance of firearms with high-capacity magazines, but we have no evidence that a ban against them would have prevented it. If we want to stop multiple victim public shootings, concealed-carry laws are the only proven solution. Read all about it here.

High-capacity magazines can be lifesavers to fearful marksmen who can’t guarantee that their assailants will be taken care of with 10 rounds. Melinda Herman was home alone with her two nine-year-old children when a man with a crowbar entered the home and chased them to their attic. Herman was armed with a .38 revolver and she fired all six of its rounds, hitting the intruder five times. The man was even able to get away alive.

What if she had missed more than once? What if there had been two or three intruders? No, the Hermans didn’t have an AR-15, but why should they be unable to posses one? Sometimes more than 10 rounds is needed when you’re defending your life and the life of your family.

Under the high-capacity magazine ban, the 15-year-old boy who used his dad’s AR-15 to keep two home intruders from murdering himself and his little sister would have been unable to do so.

The governmental solutions to gun violence are so poor. No talk of concealed-carry. No talk of reforming our mental health system. Anything that would genuinely help reduce gun violence is ignored because it doesn’t go with the agenda of scaring Americans into agreeing to gun confiscation.

Keith Fierro | California State University | @kjfierro

Related News

4 Responses

Leave a Reply
  1. Christopher Rushlau
    Feb 07, 2013 - 04:03 PM

    The problem is caricature thinking, cartoon thinking: “boom boom stick” instead of careful language.
    Once you cross that river, to the promised land of talking clearly, issues sort themselves out differently, now that they are clearly labeled.
    Racism is the actual content of the Global War On Terror. Ask a vet of OIF or OEF what a “haji” is.
    Racism makes Israel go. Why not separation of church and state in Israel? Why no equal treatment of the laws in Israel?
    The two comments above here show the alternative: quibbling about undefined terms so as to generate a lot of heat but no light, or touching on huge areas of anarchy or tyranny. I think back on the psychiatrists and psychologists I’ve run into and try to think if any of them seemed sane to me. You’ve probably heard that psychiatrists choose that line after having troubles in medical school and taking the leap of faith into psychiatry like a lost soul joins a cult. That would explain a lot, but not why we’re waging this huge insane war, partly in aid of this insane legal project called the Jewish democratic (?) state of Israel, and there is not any serious discussion of the oddness. It’s like we’re all characters in a Bill Cosby comedy sketch: “Officer, this tree jumped out of the woods and bit my car!” Crazy white people.
    Racism. If that doesn’t offend a conservative, what are you conserving?

    Reply
  2. Trilby
    Feb 07, 2013 - 02:17 PM

    40% of ALL gun sales right now happen without background checks. This is a huge loophole. It makes it very easy for the millions of people who are rejected through the normal background check to still get their hands on firearms, even if they are on the terrorist watch-list or a felon with a violent criminal history. 90+ of Americans support closing this huge loophole, and so do over 85% of NRA members. The NRA cares more about the gun lobbies profits than its members or protecting Americans from gun violence.

    Also- why not allow us to track gun sales? 1% of gun dealers are responsible for about 50% of the illegal weapons used in crimes, why has Congress stopped us from being able to shut down gun dealers who don’t follow the law and contribute to gun violence?

    And of course there was Bush’s gift to the industry- protection from any lawsuit. How would you feel if the Democrats legislated that labor unions or teachers could never be held accountable in the court of law? The NRA and the GOP don’t care about gun safety, they want to protect the gun lobbies profits and convincing Americans that the Democrats want to confiscate all the gun so they can get reelected.

    Keith- where has concealed carry been shown to reduce gun violence? Are you aware that other developed countries have less gun violence then we do? Any thought on why that might be? You think it’s because they’ve addressed mental illness and allowed lots of concealed carry?

    Reply
  3. Jack Penland
    Feb 07, 2013 - 01:57 PM

    Keith, we need to be very careful, indeed with talk of “reforming” the mental health care system.An administration as dishonest as this one would have no qualms about defining “mental illness” in such a manner as to preclude most people from firearms ownership. Having already shown his contempt for the Constitution, and willingness to act unilaterally by executive fiat, how far do you trust the current occupant of the “Kremlin-on-the -Potomac? Every little chip away at our freedom that is successful sets a precedent that others can follow. I’d like to think we will never have another Obama, but given the ignorance, gullibility and apathy of the average American voter, that’s probably wishful thinking. We get the government we deserve, or actually, I get the government that you non-voters and uninformed voters deserve, because people like me are apparently outnumbered.
    Thanks for a good column
    Jack

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyrıght 2014 THE COLLEGE CONSERVATIVE.

Facebook

Twitter