Monday, October 9, 2017

Washington Times redux: We shouldn't ban bump stocks because that will lead to other common-sense reforms

They all seem to relish ritual human sacrifice on the altar of greed.”
Moonies
When it comes to gun safety those Moonies and their enablers at the Washington Times lack the most basic analytical skills. Come to think of it, when it comes to just about everything, the folks associated with the Unification Church have some significant intellectual gaps. Today Cheryl K. Chumley repeats her favorite theme over the past couple of days: Dem senator admits bump stock ban path to universal background checks.

That headline offers mindless fear mongering. Chumley is claiming that we should allow people to possess what are effectively machine guns. Nevermind that some deranged schmuck just killed 58 people and wounded another 500 with one of those devices. Oh, and the reason that we should allow people to have WMD is that not doing so could lead to possibly preventing criminals and crazy people from arming themselves. God forbid. The spectacular stupidity is boundless.

Chumley is claiming the rights of those same criminals and crazy people to own weapons that fire like machine guns. Attagirl! Furthermore Chumley knows (at least she should know) that Congress, as currently constituted with gun fetishists and shrinking violets to the NRA, is not going to pass a background check measure. Congress was not capable of doing so five years ago after 20 six-year-olds were murdered at Sandy Hook.

And exactly why shouldn't we have national background checks? She has an answer for that too?
Apparently, the goal is for us all to become like Chicago.

Illinois has background checks for all gun purchases; Chicago, meanwhile, saw 762 gun-related homicides last year. How’d that happen?

Of course, anti-Second Amendment activists blame neighboring states.
Follow the breadcrumbs. We should not ban bump-stocks because that might lead to background checks which should not be enacted because they do not work in Chicago.

Most of us who champion gun safety are not “anti-Second Amendment activists.” That is rhetoric comparable to asserting that people who are pro-choice are pro-abortion. It is moronic.

In point of fact I have legally owned a handgun. I would own one again except for the fact that I no longer trust my own judgment. PTSD has rendered me volatile and my temper has no rheostat. But I digress.

Chicago is being armed from locales that do not use background checks. Universal background checks would eliminate some — not all — of those weapons. The gun manufacturers who control and support the NRA do not care how their product is used as long as the product is used. Innocent people must die and sustain catastrophic injuries in order to protect the revenues of gun manufacturers. Makes perfect sense — in Mogadishu.

Noticeably absent from Chumley's rhetoric is precisely why people must be able to own devices that turn semi-automatic weapons into automatic weapons. Chumley is also out to lunch when it comes to why we should not have universal background checks. What the hell could possibly be wrong with that? Both measures might save some lives and prevent some carnage. Neither measure will disarm law-abiding citizens.

These wackos assert that we need protection from our own government. Yet they voted for Trump. We do need protection from Agent Orange.

If the National Rifle Association did not exist we would have what George Herbert Walker Bush called “a kinder, gentler nation.” The NRA derives much of its power from its mindless water carriers. They give what is nothing more than an industry group that thrives on violence a patina of legitimacy. They kill people! The NRA kills people! Larry Pratt's group, Gun Owners of America, kills people! That is not hyperbole. It is provable fact. They all seem to relish ritual human sacrifice on the altar of greed.

Related content:



No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.