| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cite It! AWB Discussions |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gregory Morris, 1/5/09 9:21:49 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My last post pointed to a blog post discussing "things to come" under the Obama administration and almost-filibuster-proof Democrat majority. I got a comment asking me to cite sources regarding my personal expectation of a renewed and inflated ban on scary looking guns.
First of all, this is not a scholarly publication. I don't need to cite diddly-squat, so nya-nya. However, I routinely (rightfully) accuse anti-gun bigots of failure to cite source material. So fair is fair.
I don't know Jim Shepard's source... I don't even know anything about this Jim Shepard fellow. It doesn't matter.
The link was more of a "harumph" than a cite. The fact is, we know an "assault weapon" ban in on the table, and will come up eventually. Maybe not this month. Maybe not this year. But eventually it will.
How do I know that?
Increased gun control and reinstating the AWB are planks in Democrat Party Platform. The democrats are going to try and push as many portions of their platform as American can stomach, and we now have a president who has never seen a gun control effort he didn't approve of. How can there be any doubt we will soon be facing an attempt to pass a new "assault weapons" ban? Gun-banning legislators avoided the issue under the Bush administration because there wasn't enough support, and political capital had to be spend on other issues.
Now, there will be far less resistance.
I argue that the new gun ban will be far more expansive than the mostly impotent Clinton-era ban. It isn't some attempt at fear mongering, but merely an observance that the most likely candidate is some version of Carolyn McCarthy's H.R. 1022.
Add to that the fact that McCarthy doesn't even know what her bill does, and you start to see the problem.
Anti-gun legislators (who didn't get booted from office for passing the first one) feel that the old ban didn't do enough. Most Americans understand that it actually did nothing at all, and certainly nothing to stop crime. So, what is the answer? Do it again, only harder! Who said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results?
The thing is, this time they intend to make it harder to undo by eliminating the sunset provision from the original ban, and placing onerous restrictions on grandfathered weapons. The abject failure of the first assault weapons ban to
A) actually ban any guns and
B) stop crime
made the law's loudest supporters into fools. The failure to reinstate the ban when it expired re-enforced that point vividly. A lot of anti-gun liberals probably cringe when they hear this, but Bush actually said he'd sign a reinstatement of ban if congress passed it. Talk about a kick in the face!
Of course, Jim Shepard flat-out states that this upcoming legislation is payback for all the attacks against anti-gunners. I can't say for sure whether there is truth in that or not, but I certainly see a motive for Pelosi, Reid, and Obama, among others.
Obama already said, before he was elected, that he would support a renewed assault weapons ban. It is part of Obama's policy to enact more gun control, including a new ban. Even in his acceptance speech, where he was focused on the most important promises he made to voters, he intimated that stronger gun control would be part of his administration's policy.
I could spend all day looking up more links to support these claims as well, but there is no need. I don't need citations to discuss my own opinion on the matter, but there is clearly a preponderance of evidence pointing towards the fact that there will be a renewed attempt to pass another gun ban. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | [Comments are closed after a month.] |
| | < "Search Term Q&A: New Gun Control Laws" | | "Big Events of the Season" > |
|
|
|
|
