It just goes to show that “comprehensive gun control”, or as they are terming it lately, “gun safety laws”, aren’t actually about safety, they’re about disarming law abiding citizens while doing virtually nothing about criminals who use firearms in the act of committing a crime

You really should read that whole NY Times survey. It is disturbing as hell (and begs the question, when will these Democrats give up their own armed security?). And here we go

The problem is handguns are not fine. A good answer to the Times’ question includes some nuance, sure: The realities of policing violent crime mean that some law enforcement officers and others will still have a use for handguns. But in the hands of the general public, pistols are by far and away the most deadly factor in the gun violence epidemic plaguing the country…

In other words, only The Government should have handguns.

Hilariously, the article is less than impressed with Rep Eric Swalwell, who’s whole campaign is predicated on gun grabbing (and Trump Derangement Syndrome, of course). And ends thusly

The solutions that “common sense” gun reform centrists love to spout are absolutely vital: universal background checks and closing of gun show and private sale loopholes would go a long way to curtailing the proliferation and spread of guns once they’re purchased, as would buybacks and more stringent restrictions on semi-automatic rifles. Those rules are easy, and at least in the case of background checks, have overwhelming public support. But they will not stop the mass death, and it’s a consistent disappointment that the vast majority of Democrats running for president are comfortable with an answer to gun-violence that is, at best, half cocked.

Let’s put it in plain language: they want to ban all law abiding citizens from having a handgun.

Share this: Tweet



Email

Pocket



If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.