I don’t know if it’s because there are national elections next year, but the Democrats in Washington and nationwide just keep pushing gun control measure after gun control measure. It’s as if they think that tossing a ton of new legislative proposals at us is like tossing a pot of spaghetti at a wall – one or two are bound to stick, right?
The latest unconstitutional attempt to kick gun owners in the gut (or lower) comes from Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-imwit, Md.), who has decided that in order to exercise your fundamental rights to a) make a legitimate purchase and b) use the most effective tool to defend your family and your property, you must have a license – a permission from the federal government. No, it’s not the same as applying for a permit to carry a concealed weapon, which is ineffective and unconstitutional in and of itself. The Handgun Purchaser Licensing Act would require anyone wishing to purchase certain firearms to get permission from the feds first. In addition to that, the proposal bars anyone under the age of 21 (old enough to serve in the Armed Forces and protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic, but not old enough to protect themselves or their families against armed thugs) from buying a gun, and yank federal funding from states that refuse to implement this onerous legislation.
Now, there’s obviously no chance of this travesty ever passing Congress… unless Boehner and the other put-the-finger-in-the-wind-and-see-which-way-public-opinion-is-blowing legisleeches overdose on the gun grabber Kool-Aid. That said, Van Hollen and the other gun grabbing, authoritarian swine in Washington are wasting time and resources on proposals they know have no chance of passage.
My educated guess is that with the general election approaching next year, they have to show the hands that feed them (read: Bloomberg, Soros, et. al.) that they’re actually doing something. It may not be something realistic, constitutional, or even sane…
…but it’s something.
“Of the thousands of Americans murdered every single year by firearms, nearly 90 percent of those deaths occur with a handgun,” Van Hollen said. “With mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, and friends dying every day because of guns, there is no question that gun violence is tearing at the fabric of our communities.”
Of course, this is a lie – or as gun grabbers would claim after being debunked, a “hyperbole.” The FBI Violent Crime Statistics show less than 70 percent of homicides in the United States in 2013 were committed with firearms – and that’s all firearms, not just handguns. And handguns comprised 68.4 percent of the firearms used in murder and non-negligent manslaughter incidents in 2013, according to the FBI’s expanded data set.
In other words, Van Hollen’s claims are so much garbage. And considering only a tiny percentage of all gun-related homicides are actually committed with legally-owned firearms, licensing law abiding citizens to make constitutional purchases will do next to nothing to reduce violence committed with handguns, but hey… they’re doing something, right?
Of course, I’m not addressing the more onerous agenda that could be present behind these efforts: disinformation.
We all know how hard it is to pull back information in the digital age. Once it’s out there, it’s out there, and no amount of retractions, debunking, and truth to counter said lies will help.
We also know that the majority of Americans do very little fact checking. They get their information via Internet memes, Twitter, and short snippets of news. I like to call it McNews – the fast food of journalism. Policy makers rely on this. So does the media. And putting wrong, inflated, erroneous, or outright false information out there ensures that at least a certain percentage of the population immediately assimilates it and propagates it.
The lies become part of the fabric of the Internet.
That’s why even if these measures have no chance of passage, those of us who know the facts must act to disseminate them and counter all the polluted information spread by those with an obvious political agenda.
That’s why even though I know Van Hollen’s and others’ lunatic proposals are so much crap, I will continue to point out their lies and spread the truth.
It’s not about ensuring the measures never pass. They wont.
It’s about ensuring that the truth gets out.
Did you read the bill? It does not create a Federal license program. Instead it grants money to states that setup a license program with certain minimum requirements. Get it right!
Yes, I did. And the “potAYto” vice “potAHto” difference is irrelevant. It’s comparable to the speed limit laws which differ from state to state. You don’t implement a particular speed limit? There goes your money. It’s not a federal database, but it directs states to implement federal standards, including the 21 years of age requirement. So, yes, I do have it right. Thank you for your input.
Here’s the fact sheet about this bill.
To be eligible, states must require individuals applying for a license to meet the following criteria:
And I didn’t say it created a federal licensing program. What I said was you had to get a licence – permission from the federal government. The standards are federally set, leaving it to the states to implement them.
Nicki… According to settled science tyrants only reside in Washington D.C., and “local” tyranny is not tyranny, it’s just over-weaning neighborliness. Also, uniform “standards”, enforced by bribes and guns, are only for our own good. After all, who would want a patchwork of liberty when we can have a nice, uniform, predictable, plantation. Don’t be so uppity.
Damn. I must have not gotten the memo, Eric. Thanks for clearing that up!
I don’t understand why politicians keep pushing for gun control. It seems a losing proposition at present. My understanding is that the anti-gunners do not choose candidates to vote for because of their stance on gun control. Certainly many of us who care about liberty and true security (Never again!) will choose pro civil rights and personal freedoms candidates because of their stance.