OK, perhaps the headlines is not quite fair in terms of where this Washington Post article goes, but, gun grabbing is always relevant
Why doesn’t support for gun-control laws translate to gun-control laws?
Polls routinely show that a majority of Americans support gun-control legislation, such as background checks, gun licensing, assault-weapons bans and red-flag laws. So why hasn’t public opinion filtered up to Washington, which hasn’t passed a major gun-control law in more than 20 years?
On Thursday, Quinnipiac University released a poll that shows that voters strongly support stricter gun laws, and support for some of these proposals is overwhelming. Jim Sciutto of CNN shared the breakdown and asked the question that spurred this post.
https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1167137519802232842
Amber Phillips attempts to break down why they don’t get passed
For decades, opponents of this kind of legislation have been better organized.
How dare groups like the NRA use their 1st Amendment Rights to protect the 2nd
People who support gun-control laws also aren’t sure how it affects them. Jim Kessler has studied this issue with the center-left think tank Third Way, and they found that people outside of urban areas who aren’t affected daily by gun violence “would be perfectly fine if [a background check law] passed, but it was more a shrug of the shoulders than a shout to the rafters.â€
They also notice that the cities with massive gun grabbing have the worst gun violence.
Anyhow, she offers some other reasons, but, she misses the biggest one: gun owners and gun rights supporters do not trust their opponents in the least. We may agree on doing a few things to attempt to keep firearms out of the hands of bad people, but, we know that those laws will go too far, and, even when they don’t initially, they keep attempting to move the goalpost further and further out. Mission creep. So, there is zero trust. Red Flag laws violate multiple Amendments, especially the 4th, and gun grabbers have made no attempt to protect the rights of citizens. We know they are meant for stealth gun grabbing, and they even tell us this.
Their version of universal background checks do not work without a gun database, which makes confiscation easier. Hey, they’re the ones who have been talking about implementing the “Australian solution”, which is a massive blanket banning of privately owned firearms. Reportedly, only 20% of firearms where turned in in Australia. Because they had no database. Huh.
So, we do not trust the gun grabbers. Pass something, then something else, then more, and keep doing things, just like we see in California, NY, NJ, Chicago, Baltimore, etc.
[…] William Teach, The Pirate’s Cove: “Say, Why Doesn’t Support For Gun Grabbing Laws Translate To Gun Grabbing“ […]
There are already in place enough laws to forbid people who should not have firearms from getting them. Anything more will only hurt the law abiding. We need to concentrate on the mental health aspect and not the tools. One thing we should never do is give up our rights like with Red Flag Laws. I guarantee that the abuse will be monumental as cops “take” everything from cash to jewelry as well as guns on a Red Flag raid. They can’t help themselves, it’s the nature of forfeiture laws and the nature of cops.
Ammosexual-Americans tend to be conservative males who base their worth on their apparent “manliness”. They are also part of the American “conspiracy class”.
Well, it has been proven that physically weak men are more likely to be liberals. Stronger, more self-reliant people are more conservative because they know that they can do things for themselves, and don’t need to suckle at the government teat.
And it’s true that conservatives tend to mock the beta-males who are liberal, because they are, after all, mockworthy.
They are also part of the American “military class”, the American “first responders class” and the American patriotic class” none of which apply to leftists or pajama boy-Americans.
Our esteemed host wrote:
Of course we don’t trust them. After all, they’ve told us what they want, the complete end of our right to keep and bear arms.
What other constitutional right to the left believe should be licensed and restricted? Should Mr Dowd have to get permission from the government to speak? Are there ‘common sense restrictions’ on the right to trial by jury or right not to incriminate yourself? And we know that the left oppose any restrictions, including having to have identification on the right to vote.