Kansas Thrid District Rep. Sharice Davids Tweets today:
It’s been 161 days since the House passed H.R. 8, a bipartisan, common sense bill to institute universal background checks on gun purchases.
And it's been 161 days of no action from Mitch McConnell. 161 days of more lives being cut short by gun violence.
No more. https://t.co/fRGxnLT4YT
— Rep. Sharice Davids (@RepDavids) August 7, 2019
It’s been 161 days since the House passed H.R. 8, a bipartisan, common sense bill to institute universal background checks on gun purchases.
And it’s been 161 days of no action from Mitch McConnell. 161 days of more lives being cut short by gun violence.
No more.
Now, which “lives being cut short” is Rep. Davids referring to? Is it the seven who died and 52 injured in Chicago over the weekend?
Or is she specifically referring to the El Paso or Dayton shooters?
Because Left leaning CNN reports that:
There is no indication that the shooting in Dayton, Ohio, would have been prevented by proposed universal background checks or legislation to bolster the federal background check system.
At this point there is insufficient evidence about the El Paso shooter on that point.
So once again, Rep. Davids shows that she is on the Clinton Bandwagon of “Never let a crisis go to waste…”
Which is sort of a disgusting and disingenuous way to go about leading a country.
But no one ever said Rep. Davids or the Democrats were beyond that.
***
And FWIW, here are a few things to noodle about the current, “We have to do SOMETHING about guns issue.”
First, there doesn’t seem to have been any indication that any gun legislation would have prevented either of the recent mass shootings. Agreed that both shooters had “AR-15 type” weapons — one apparently a pistol, but if they had Glocks or other handguns, there is not a great indication that these murderers would have been stopped.
The argument on this probably will go somewhere towards more lethality of AR-15s or guns with large clips — thus having quick ammo to do more damage.
These are interesting questions, to which some gun rights folks take great umbrage. One of the common retorts is, “I will not be ‘out-gunned’ by someone who does not follow the law!” It’s not clear why this weapons proliferation argument is the most persuasive. It would seem that you could always argue that you’ll be one-upped unless you have <insert illegal large gun>.
***
But the go-to Democrat talking point seems to be, “the Republicans are bought and paid for by the NRA!!! Mitch gets X dollars from the gun lobby and that’s why blah blah blah…”
Of course no one ever considers that maybe, just maybe, McConnell and others get the support of the NRA because they feel a certain way about gun-rights.
Funny thing, that.
There is an interesting piece from The Atlantic re-running now from a DC reporter who used to be an Alabama country girl. She talks about her life growing up around guns. And getting shot. And her grandfather’s views on all of the gray — as opposed to black-and-white — issues around gun ownership.
One suggestion her grandfather, a gun store owner, makes is having an age requirement for AR-15s — something like 21 years old. She suggests that maybe it’s a good idea.
Many states have done it, and there are suggestions to make it a federal law.
But just note this, gun-haters:
If you don’t get the buy-in from the gun-rights people, and just try to jam gun legislation down their throats, it’ll go nowhere.
You know why?
Because of smokers. (And I’m stealing this from Adam Carolla.)
You see, gun owners and gun-rights supporters saw what happened to smokers.
“We don’t want to stop you from smoking! We just want you to have your own smoking area at the restaurant.”
That seems reasonable. OK.
“Well actually, how about you just move your smoking over to the restaurant’s bar?”
OK.
“Hmm. We can still smell your smoke. We have put a special area outside, just for you to smoke.”
Well…OK.
“Actually, we don’t like that either. You can’t smoke in front of the restaurant at all. Take it over to that no-food, liquor only, bar across the street.”
Hmph. OK.
“Actually, you’re not going to be allowed to smoke in the bar either. How about taking it to the park over there.”
Ehhh, what?
“Sorry, no smoking in the park. Go home.”
So I can’t…?
“Yeah, and if your home is an apartment, you can’t smoke there either.”
But it’s….
“By the way, do you have kids? You’re aware of 3rd-hand smoke, right?”
And…Scene.
And now you’ll see why the Gunners are afraid of giving an INCH.
And if you still don’t buy this logic, remember when the idea of ObamaCare had absolutely NOTHING to do with establishing a single-payer health care system.
Until we started calling it, “Medicare for All”…
***
Could Be Big is part of the Patreon network, where we ask readers like YOU to become patrons to help keep this site running.
Please consider becoming a Could Be Big patron by clicking here.
