Most Of The Senate Will Support Universal Background Checks
BY Herschel Smith
11 years, 10 months ago
Soon to the report – but first a little story.
Once upon a time some teenagers were racing hot rods down Ocean Drive in Myrtle Beach, S.C. Tourists were hit by one of these kids, and so the townsfolk came together and decided that something must be done to make things safer. The decided on a plan, and even had a real time, in-situ display of their new ideas for the voters before the town voted on it.
They all got together that day and after speeches about “caring for the children,” and waded into the ocean, each participant having another participant (they called him their swimming buddy) within 20 feet of him, both to the right and left. No one, according to the new ordinance, would be allowed to swim in the ocean, night or day, without buddies within 20 feet. It would all be monitored by cameras and enforced by newly hired police officers.
Some of the townsfolk objected that no one could ever swim again because the line of buddies would never end since a person would have to be flanked on both sides, and thus the stipulations could not be logically met, but the participants told the objectors to “shut up, just because.” Others objected that this all had nothing whatsoever to do with High School kids racing hot rods on Ocean Drive, but the partipants and local politicians all told them to “shut up, just because.” And besides, “think about the children.” And then, “shut up.”
I hope that this little parable has been a useful introduction to what seems to be coming down the road.
No surprise but newsworthy insofar as I think this is the first time a Republican as prominent as McCain has talked openly about some new form of gun control passing Congress. If you’re not sure what he means when he refers to the plan Coburn and Schumer are working on, read this. They’re going to close the “gun-show loophole” but carve out exceptions for family transfers and maybe for people who’ve already been vetted for concealed carry. How many votes will there be for that? Well, they’ll start at 58: Coburn and Mark Kirk are part of the group that’s working on a compromise bill and McCain’s already hinting that he’s a yes, so add those three to the Democrats’ 55 (no Dem would dare oppose a measure that might complicate Obama’s “Republican obstructionism” message on gun control). Collins and Murkowski are always gimmes on big bipartisan initiatives too, so there you go — 60 votes for cloture, although there’s bound to be many, many more than that. Follow the last link for your reminder that expanded background checks is the one gun-control measure that polls fantastically well across party lines. Even Lindsey Graham, who needs to protect his right flank in case of a primary challenge in South Carolina next year, is open to some form of new background checks albeit not the Democratic plan. You might see a majority of House Republicans vote no, partly as a symbolic rejection of further gun-control regulations and partly to distinguish themselves from the squishy RINOs in the Senate for the benefit of red-district voters, but it’s going to pass that chamber too with bipartisan support. When push comes to shove, I think Boehner would rather violate the “Hastert Rule” and push this thing through with mostly Democratic votes than risk handing Obama a potential weapon for 2014 by rejecting something that even many Senate Republicans support.
Regular readers know my view. Universal background checks are a pretext for and necessary prerequisite to a national gun registry, and a national gun registry is a precondition for gun confiscations. Furthermore, none of this has anything to do with the shootings that have been in the news lately. And finally, we’ll see how that exception goes where they want to carve out provisions for transfer of firearms to children. Give it some time – it will turn totalitarian because that’s the way totalitarian systems work.
But remember this fact about the entire conversation. None of this is related to the antecedent events. The only clear-cut and logical legislative action I support is abolishing gun-free zones. Everything else is just a smoke screen.
|
|
On February 21, 2013 at 4:36 pm, Burk said:
I’d bet that a national car registry is a prerequisite and precondition to national car confiscations too. Somehow we seem to have staved off that aspect of the end-times.
Edit: Burk lost his commenting privileges long ago due to accusations and disrespectful comments. However, I’ll let this one slide. The last sentence isn’t really relevant to the article or anything else, but whatever. Somehow it made sense to Burk. A national car registry isn’t a prerequisite to confiscation of cars because the totalitarians don’t care about cars. You cannot resist tyranny with cars. You can with guns. But you prove my point by your absurd and illlogical analogue, so again, I’ll let the comment slide.
On February 21, 2013 at 5:12 pm, Chuck said:
Your absurd analogy doesn’t even have any basis in fact. There is no such thing as a national car registry. Cars are registered at the state and local level.
So what the hell is your point?
You think confiscation can’t happen? It already has, in New York City and California for starters. And if Feinstein and others COULD confiscate guns they would have done so already. Not to mention all the current legislative proposals at local, state and Federal level that propose to ban and confiscate entire classes of firearms.
The progressive doublespeak is outrageous and shameless. For example, the group formerly known as Million Moms for Gun Control states in one breath that they don’t want to BAN guns and in the next breath while listing their legislative agenda they state that they want to BAN so-called “assault weapons” and magazines that hold more than ten rounds. In other words, yes, they DO want to ban guns.
The only gun grabbers I respect are the ones who come right out and tell us that they want to repeal the 2nd Amendment and that they want full citizen disarmament. I’ll die rather than submit to their evil agenda, but at least they have the honesty and the balls to tell us up front what their ultimate goal is.
The rest of the gun-grabbers will simply lie to us as they pursue their incremental strategy of disarmament.
On February 21, 2013 at 7:12 pm, Erik said:
Two things:
First, as someone who has the misfortune of growing up and living in California, I’ve got to say that the actual enforcement of a lot of gun laws are relatively meager. I’ve seen plenty of “high capacity magazine clips” at the range and even some of the local law enforcement guys let a lot slide by without any care.
Second, party politics is really chewing our nation up. Anyone with the “foolishness” to actually speak their own mind, form their own opinions, or pursue their own opinions that are different from their party get an office in the back where no one can hear or see them. It’s pretty disgusting and only hurts our rights when one or both of the parties get a hard-on for clamping down on law abiding citizens.
On February 22, 2013 at 11:13 am, Publius said:
Well, if the Senate caves — as seems likely — it becomes even more important to stop this cold in the House. So — become a friendly voice on the phone and in letters to your Congressman/woman.
Just do it. And do it again. And again.
Keep it short, but make it clear that you will do everything legal to oust them from office next election if they don’t safeguard your 2nd Amendment constitutional right.
No new gun laws.
On February 22, 2013 at 8:25 pm, HempRopeAndStreetlight said:
Burk said:
“I’d bet that a national car registry is a prerequisite and precondition to national car confiscations too.”
The only good use for a fuckwitt like you Burk is a streelight ornament. Molon Labe you totalitarian asshat.
PS: You libs are sorely mistaken if you think you won’t personally become targets once the shooting starts. We know who sent the goons, and after they are DEALT with we will be looking to hang those that sent em.