Last night, Las Vegas hosted the democratic candidates’ debate and a major segment of the debate centered on gun control. Hillary and former Maryland Governor O’Malley basically beat up on Bernie Sanders (elder abuse, anyone?) because he didn’t support the Democratic position on gun control one hundred percent. Independent thought is not allowed in that party and Sen. Sanders was chastised for deviating from the party line. Even if a gun owner considers themselves to be a liberal, they should not support Democrats for the single reason of gun control and the Democratic Party’s apparent goal to destroy gun rights entirely.
All you need to know about the debate and the left’s (including the media) view on guns is contained in this short video clip. There was a time when Democrats were just another viewpoint on the world. Today, their party represents the virtual eradication of gun rights and a vehement hatred against guns and gun owners. In a shrill voice, Hillary decried gun rights, working herself into apoplexy, like some sort of revolutionary denouncing capitalism. The Democrats fervor for gun control is akin to a religious obsession and their loathing of gun owners would be unimaginable if gun owners were a racial minority.
Democrats mistakenly view the Second Amendment, at best, as a soft throw to hunters. In the debate, O’Malley said of his draconian anti-gun legislation: “We were able to pass this and still respect the hunting tradition.” It was one of the knee-jerk reactions to the Sandy Hook school massacre that the left used to push their gun control schemes in their typical exploitation of such tragedies. Those who advocate for such bans fail to realize that the notorious Columbine school massacre occurred during the height of the Clinton-era Assault Weapons Ban.
Gun control is the one area where Democrats and the progressive, statist regime must hammer to crush all opposition. Whether they acknowledge it publicly or even internally, they are aware that civilian gun ownership will derail their ultimate agenda. Though they are nominally for the public good, instead of the individual good, they know that the socialism they seek to enact will be resisted with violence once it inevitably attacks individual freedoms. We’ve seen socialism and communism fail in all its forms in the past century and all those regimes tolerated no dissent towards their failing policies.
Democrats are the same way. Internal dissent cannot be tolerated, just as external dissent must be ridiculed and drowned out with a chorus of mindless, chanting drones. The same topics come up, time and time again, repeating the same manipulated data, overly simplistic talking points, and offering the same pointless solutions. This debate was no different.
The gun control portion of the debate focused on the need for more background checks and being able to sue gun manufactures. Background checks were mentioned because they are the gun control cause du jour, and bans from suing gun manufacturers because it was something Bernie Sanders supported. In 2004, the gun control talking points were the Assault Weapons Ban, while in 1992, the Brady Bill. It’s the same non-sense, just with different gibberish.
The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was passed in 2005 to prevent firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable for negligence in nuisance lawsuits when crimes have been committed with their products. This was found to be necessary when dealers and gun makers were being successfully sued because someone used their product to commit a crime. Protecting manufacturers and dealers was needed because without it, they could be sued to force them out of business by vengeful or greedy victims of gun crimes.
Frivolous lawsuits are nothing new to Americans. We all know of the tragic McDonalds hot coffee scalding which could have been prevented with a simple ‘Caution—Hot’ warning label.
Such suits would be like suing Sunbeam because an angry wife dropped a toaster in the tub to electrocute her husband. No one sues car dealers for selling a car to someone that later drove drunk and killed a family in a crosswalk. Manufacturers and dealers would only be liable for a defective or dangerous product or if they knowingly sold a firearm to a prohibited person.
The major issue of the night was the relentless harping on background checks; our nation’s ‘need’ for more and Bernie Sanders softness on them. Background checks are going to be a very big deal in 2016 here in Nevada. You can bet big the candidates and their lackeys on the left will stump for them. Never mind that background checks never stopped the recent high-profile shootings and that most criminals don’t utilize (legal) private gun sales.
The Universal Background Check initiative will have the effect of forcing all gun sales to go through a dealer. No more private sales; they will all require the same NICS check, Form 4473, and the sale recorded in the dealer’s bound book just like a commercial sale. This isn’t a voluntary thing or something that will only be required in Clark County (like the blue cards were). This will be mandatory across Nevada, and across the country if Democrats have their way.
President Obama’s token action after the Umpqua Community College shooting was to propose that Curio and Relics dealers be required to get background checks on their sellers. C&R licenses are basically meant for collectors to obtain older, antique firearms by receiving them directly, instead of going through a dealer. This proposal would do nothing.
Yet Obama and the left has what they believe to be a moral duty ‘to do something’ after a school shooting. So they choose the little they can do without a majority in Congress. One small nibble at a time, they make it harder to buy guns. It’s part satisfying their base and part exploitation of a crisis to further their disarmament agenda. We have seen it enough in the past few years to know this is their M.O.
If you cherish your Second Amendment rights, don’t vote for a Democrat. Until the two-party system is broken in America, we can’t afford to have anyone other than true conservative or libertarian representatives in office at that doesn’t mean voting Republican either. The whole system needs to change, but we must be aware that the Democratic party in control would severely curtail gun rights.