The "Gun control" farce

[Little-Acorn]

Thomas Sowell nails it once again.

Liberals keep pushing for the same tired "laws" that they have already proven don't work.

And that's because they don't dare look at the actual results... and don't dare let the American people do what the citizens know is best.

-------------------------------------------------------

Thomas Sowell - The 'Gun Control' Farce

The 'Gun Control' Farce
Thomas Sowell | Oct 13, 2015

President Obama's intrusion into the mourning community of Roseburg, Oregon, in order to promote his political crusade for stronger gun control laws, is part of a pattern of his using various other sites of shooting rampages in the past to promote this long-standing crusade of the political left.

The zealotry of gun control advocates might make some sense if they had any serious evidence that more restrictive gun control laws actually reduce gun crimes. But they seldom even discuss the issue in terms of empirical evidence.

Saving lives is serious business. But claiming to be saving lives and refusing to deal with evidence is a farce. Nor is the Second Amendment or the National Rifle Association the real issue, despite how much the media and the intelligentsia focus on them.

If there is hard evidence that stronger gun control laws actually reduce gun crimes in general or reduce murders in particular, the Second Amendment can be repealed, as other Amendments have been repealed. Constitutional Amendments exist to serve the people. People do not exist to be sacrificed to Constitutional Amendments.

But if hard evidence shows that restrictions on gun ownership lead to more gun crimes, rather than less, then the National Rifle Association's opposition to those restrictions makes sense, independently of the Second Amendment.


(full text of the article can be read at the above URL)

 

[waltky]

Granny says, "Dat's right, dey always constipated - can't pass a thing...

Congress in gun law gridlock after deadly shootings
Wed Dec 9, 2015 - Lawmakers have dropped a Republican effort to make it easier for felons to buy firearms, as measures on both sides of the gun debate failed to make headway in Congress just days after the massacre of 14 people in California.

Underscoring the divisive nature of gun legislation, Democratic proposals to restrict firearms ownership were also left off the table as lawmakers raced on Wednesday to conclude their work for the year, lobbyists and aides said. The stalemate -- due in part to members avoiding controversial issues as they wrangle over a must-pass spending bill -- means Congress is on track to leave firearms laws unchanged this year despite a spate of mass shootings. Lawmakers backed away from a provision supported by the pro-gun National Rifle Association to make it easier for convicted felons to win back their right to own firearms.

A customer looks over weapons for sale at the Pony Express Firearms shop in Parker, Colorado​

The measure, sponsored by Representative Ken Buck, had been adopted by the House of Representatives but has been cut out of the latest version of a federal spending bill, known as the omnibus, that must pass soon to keep the government open. "At this point it doesn't appear to be in the omnibus," said Greg Brophy, an aide to Buck, a Colorado Republican. Democratic proposals for tighter gun control were also in trouble. Democrats have repeatedly failed over the past week to pass legislation that would prevent those on the government's terrorism watch list from buying guns. That measure is also unlikely to be included on the spending bill, lobbyists say.

Long-time provisions known as "riders" that restrict the government's ability to enforce gun laws are expected to remain in this year's spending bill, lobbyists on both sides of the issue told Reuters. "It's going to be status quo on gun riders. Nothing new this year," said Chris Vieson, a lobbyist for Everytown for Gun Safety, a group that aims to reduce gun violence. President Barack Obama has repeatedly urged Congress to tighten gun laws, most recently in an Oval Office address following last week's massacre in San Bernardino, California. The Federal Bureau of Investigation classified that shooting, by a couple believed to be Islamist radicals, as a terrorist act.

MORE

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Sowell is wrong again, as usual.

This fails as a straw man fallacy.

No one has presented any gun control measure as a 'panacea' for addressing all gun crimes, all gun violence, and all mass shootings; measures proposed are designed to address a specific issue or aspect of the problem and comport with current Second Amendment jurisprudence.

In fact, 'liberals' accept current Second Amendment jurisprudence as settled and acknowledged case law, there are no measures proposed or advocated that would in any way 'restrict' citizens' access to guns, restrict the number of guns a citizen might possess, or limit citizens' access to ammunition.

“Statistics on murder are among the most widely available statistics, and among the most accurate, since no one ignores a dead body. With so many facts available from so many places and times, why is gun control still a heated issue? The short answer is that most gun control zealots do not even discuss the issue in terms of hard facts.”

This is a lie, the straw man Sowell has contrived and then attacks 'liberals' with, thus misrepresenting their position on the issue.

To advocate for necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory measures is not 'zealotry,' where the facts are indeed discussed and factored into the debate; such as the fact that there is no objective, documented evidence whatsoever in support of the notion that citizens carrying concealed firearms 'reduces' violent gun crime, or that the myth of 'gun free zones,' are 'responsible' for mass shootings.

The reason why gun control remains a heated issue is due to the fact that many on the right continue to use their lies as a partisan weapon against democrats, by contriving and propagating lies about democrats' position on the issue for some perceived partisan gain.

Sowell's lies are yet another example of that.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Sowell is wrong again, as usual.

This fails as a straw man fallacy.

No one has presented any gun control measure as a 'panacea' for addressing all gun crimes, all gun violence, and all mass shootings; measures proposed are designed to address a specific issue or aspect of the problem and comport with current Second Amendment jurisprudence.

In fact, 'liberals' accept current Second Amendment jurisprudence as settled and acknowledged case law, there are no measures proposed or advocated that would in any way 'restrict' citizens' access to guns, restrict the number of guns a citizen might possess, or limit citizens' access to ammunition.

“Statistics on murder are among the most widely available statistics, and among the most accurate, since no one ignores a dead body. With so many facts available from so many places and times, why is gun control still a heated issue? The short answer is that most gun control zealots do not even discuss the issue in terms of hard facts.”

This is a lie, the straw man Sowell has contrived and then attacks 'liberals' with, thus misrepresenting their position on the issue.

To advocate for necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory measures is not 'zealotry,' where the facts are indeed discussed and factored into the debate; such as the fact that there is no objective, documented evidence whatsoever in support of the notion that citizens carrying concealed firearms 'reduces' violent gun crime, or that the myth of 'gun free zones,' are 'responsible' for mass shootings.

The reason why gun control remains a heated issue is due to the fact that many on the right continue to use their lies as a partisan weapon against democrats, by contriving and propagating lies about democrats' position on the issue for some perceived partisan gain.

Sowell's lies are yet another example of that.

Fuck off. You get no new gun control laws and you'll fucking like it. The bullshit you spread is far worse than anything you listed.

 

[BluesLegend]

There's one inescapable fact gun control advocates cannot overcome, heaping even more gun control laws on already law abiding citizens will accomplish nothing. If gun control advocates were not such blatant liars and scheming lowlifes MAYBE we could discuss common sense safeguards but you give these assholes an inch and they take a mile.

 

[waltky]

Are terrorism and gun control two seperate issues?...

WH Working on Gun Control Plan; Calls Recent Surge in Gun Sales a 'Tragic Irony'
December 11, 2015 | Keeping guns out of the hands of those who shouldn't have them continues to be a priority for President Obama, and the White House is sending hints that he plans to do it soon by executive action.

Meanwhile, a White House spokesman on Thursday called it a "tragic irony" that legal gun sales are soaring. Speaking at a vigil in Newtown, Conn. Wednesday night, Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett said the president has asked his team to send him a proposal "in short order" outlining how he can use his executive authority to expand background checks on gun buyers without congressional action. White House spokesman Josh Earnest was asked about Jarrett's comment at Thursday's White House press briefing:

"I still don't have an update in terms of the progress that the administration is making in scrubbing the rules and determining what elements of the president's executive authority can be used to do a better job of keeping guns away from those who shouldn't have them," Earnest said. "This means, you know, what additional steps can we take to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and those who are mentally ill. And that's -- it's no surprise that that has been a priority of the president, but in terms of ongoing process or a timeline for rolling out some new ideas, I just don't have an update for you at this point." Earnest noted that "Congress hasn't acted," and therefore, "the question that's been raised is what more can the Obama administration do."

Another reporter asked Earnest if recent shootings, including the terror attack in San Bernardino, are giving momentum to gun rights advocates rather than gun control activists. "Well I guess there is some evidence to indicate this," Earnest said. "The FBI put out information that -- a week or so ago, that Black Friday, the day after Thanksgiving when many people go shopping, that they actually processed the largest number of background checks for gun purchases in history.

"So, you know, I described this, I think, in a briefing earlier this week as a tragic irony, that the more that we see this kind of violence on our streets, the more people go out and buy guns. And that is -- that is both ironic and tragic. "I think the president's view is that he is going forcefully advocate for the kind of gun safety measures that common sense tells us will not prevent every act of gun violence, but even if it makes some acts of gun violence less likely -- and we can do all of that without undermining the Constitutional rights of law-abiding Americans -- then why wouldn't we do it?"

MORE

See also:

Actor Kurt Russell: ‘Absolutely Insane’ to Think Gun Control Will Stop Terrorists
December 11, 2015 | In an interview with a Los Angeles-based entertainment reporter, actor Kurt Russell said that gun control won’t do anything to stop terrorists and that to think otherwise is “absolutely insane.”

“If you think gun control is going to change the terrorists’ point of view, I think you’re, like, out of your mind,” Russell said in Dec. 5 interview with Jeffrey Wells for his Hollywood Elsewhere website. “I think anybody [who says that] is. I think it’s absolutely insane.” Wells was interviewing Russell about the new Quentin Tarantino film, “Hateful Eight,” in which Russell plays a hardscrabble bounty hunter after the U.S. civil war. Wells asked Russell if the signature violence of Tarantino’s films might be seen in a new light given the recent terror attacks in Paris and California that killed 134 people. Wells: “We all know right now guns is a trope. I mean, not a trope – it’s a totem; it’s a metaphor that disenfranchised white guys need…it makes them feel good, because they’re being …..”

Russell: “You can say what you want. I don’t agree with that. It’s not my thing.”

Wells: “Well, it’s statistically … irrefutable.”

Russell: “If you think gun control or something like that is going to change the terrorists’ point of view, I think you’re, like, out of your mind. I think anybody is. I think it’s absolutely insane. The problem, the problem we’re having right is now is that we don’t have the concept of how to turn it around and say, ‘You know, you may think you’ve got me worried about what you’re gonna do? Dude, you’re about to find out what I’m gonna do, and that’s gonna worry you a lot more. And that‘s what we need. That will change the concept of gun culture, as you call it, to something of reality, which is, if I’m a hockey team and I’ve got a guy bearing down on me as a goal tender, I’m not concerned about what he’s gonna do — I’m gonna make him concerned about what I’m gonna do…to stop him. That’s when things change.”

MORE

 

[waltky]

Gun control support in Congress...

If Same Number of Gun Deaths Were Due to Illness, ‘This Nation Would Be Up in Arms’
December 10, 2015 – Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said Thursday that “If 30,000 people in the United States of America fell sick of flu or Ebola or polio, this nation would be up in arms,” adding that the U.S. is dealing with “an epidemic of gun death and gun disease that is taking lives.”

“If 30,000 people in the United States of America fell sick of flu or ebola or polio this nation would be up in arms, there would be drastic, effective action, 30,000 people falling sick as a result of a public epidemic, dying as a result is a public health crisis,” he said. “We have in this nation truly an epidemic of gun death and gun disease that is taking lives, 90 of them every day and should be treated as a public health crisis.”

The phrase “up in arms” meaning to become angry and protest over something was initially a phrase literally meaning to equip oneself with weaponry and appeared first in print in Shakespeare’s plays in the 1590s, including “Richard III” (“March on, march on, since we are up in arms”) and “Henry VI, Part II” (“Whose dreadful swords were never drawn in vain, as hating thee, are rising up in arms”). Blumenthal spoke during an event on Capitol Hill with the Newtown Action Alliance and the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence to "demand congressional action to expand background checks and curb gun violence in the United States."

Blumenthal was likely referencing the most recent firearm fatality data available from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which lists 33,636 firearm-related deaths for 2013 with 21,175 of those deaths listed as suicides and 11,208 listed as homicides. Also, 281 of those deaths were listed as due to an undetermined cause, and 467 as due to legal intervention/war. “Congress is complicit by its inaction,” Blumenthal claimed in his speech. “Congress is complicit by failing to enact a universal background check so we keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people.”

Blumenthal: If Same Number of Gun Deaths Were Due to Illness, ‘This Nation Would Be Up in Arms’

See also:

Rep. Thompson: ‘I’m a Gun Owner’ Who Supports Expanded Gun Control
December 11, 2015 -- Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA) says that although he is a gun owner himself and strongly believes in the Second Amendment, he also believes people on the no-fly list should be barred from purchasing guns.

“I’m a gun owner. I strongly believe in the Second Amendment,” Thompson said during an emotional press conference on Capitol Hill Thursday held by House and Senate Democrats to commemorate the third anniversary of the Newtown, Conn. shootings. “But I would darn sure rather err on the side of caution and inconvenience somebody who maybe shouldn’t be on that list than to allow somebody who is on that list, who shouldn’t have a gun, to be able to buy one and do terror in the United States of America,” he continued. Thompson is trying to get enough signatures on a discharge petition to compel the Republican leadership to schedule a vote on the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terroists Act (HR 1076).

Joining Thompson at the press conference were House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), and Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), all of whom are in favor of expanded gun control. Members of the Newtown Action Alliance and families of the victims of the Sandy Hook and other mass shootings also spoke in favor of banning those listed on the no-fly list from purchasing guns. According to the FBI, the no-fly list, a subset of its much larger Terrorist Watchlist, bars around 16,000 individuals linked to terrorists from boarding airplanes. That number includes "fewer than 500 U.S. persons." And some critics have pointed out that while the Second Amendment guarantees the right to have a gun, there’s no constitutional right to fly.

Others, such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), say the list includes many people who merely have the same name as a known terrorist or have travelled to particular countries. “You’re correct; it’s been criticized. They say that there’s people who shouldn’t be on that list,” Thompson responded to a reporter who asked about the controversy surrounding the no-fly list, which was compiled by the government after Sept. 11, 2001. “Until the government fixes its unconstitutional new process, people on the No Fly List are barred from commercial air travel with no meaningful chance to clear their names, resulting in a vast and growing group of individuals whom the government deems too dangerous to fly, but too harmless to arrest,” a lawsuit filed by ACLU states.

MORE

 

[Auld Phart]

 

[Timmy]

States wh tougher gun laws have less gun crime that their gun nut counterpart states.

 

[The Rabbi]

Sowell is wrong again, as usual.

This fails as a straw man fallacy.

No one has presented any gun control measure as a 'panacea' for addressing all gun crimes, all gun violence, and all mass shootings; measures proposed are designed to address a specific issue or aspect of the problem and comport with current Second Amendment jurisprudence.

In fact, 'liberals' accept current Second Amendment jurisprudence as settled and acknowledged case law, there are no measures proposed or advocated that would in any way 'restrict' citizens' access to guns, restrict the number of guns a citizen might possess, or limit citizens' access to ammunition.

“Statistics on murder are among the most widely available statistics, and among the most accurate, since no one ignores a dead body. With so many facts available from so many places and times, why is gun control still a heated issue? The short answer is that most gun control zealots do not even discuss the issue in terms of hard facts.”

This is a lie, the straw man Sowell has contrived and then attacks 'liberals' with, thus misrepresenting their position on the issue.

To advocate for necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory measures is not 'zealotry,' where the facts are indeed discussed and factored into the debate; such as the fact that there is no objective, documented evidence whatsoever in support of the notion that citizens carrying concealed firearms 'reduces' violent gun crime, or that the myth of 'gun free zones,' are 'responsible' for mass shootings.

The reason why gun control remains a heated issue is due to the fact that many on the right continue to use their lies as a partisan weapon against democrats, by contriving and propagating lies about democrats' position on the issue for some perceived partisan gain.

Sowell's lies are yet another example of that.

This fails as an example of the mere assertion fallacy.
For the record, Sowell has more smarts in his left nut than you do in your whole body.

 

[Kosh]

Sowell is wrong again, as usual.

This fails as a straw man fallacy.

No one has presented any gun control measure as a 'panacea' for addressing all gun crimes, all gun violence, and all mass shootings; measures proposed are designed to address a specific issue or aspect of the problem and comport with current Second Amendment jurisprudence.

In fact, 'liberals' accept current Second Amendment jurisprudence as settled and acknowledged case law, there are no measures proposed or advocated that would in any way 'restrict' citizens' access to guns, restrict the number of guns a citizen might possess, or limit citizens' access to ammunition.

“Statistics on murder are among the most widely available statistics, and among the most accurate, since no one ignores a dead body. With so many facts available from so many places and times, why is gun control still a heated issue? The short answer is that most gun control zealots do not even discuss the issue in terms of hard facts.”

This is a lie, the straw man Sowell has contrived and then attacks 'liberals' with, thus misrepresenting their position on the issue.

To advocate for necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory measures is not 'zealotry,' where the facts are indeed discussed and factored into the debate; such as the fact that there is no objective, documented evidence whatsoever in support of the notion that citizens carrying concealed firearms 'reduces' violent gun crime, or that the myth of 'gun free zones,' are 'responsible' for mass shootings.

The reason why gun control remains a heated issue is due to the fact that many on the right continue to use their lies as a partisan weapon against democrats, by contriving and propagating lies about democrats' position on the issue for some perceived partisan gain.

Sowell's lies are yet another example of that.

See the far left drones want an open border and no one to have guns, not even the police or the military. They prove they only want the criminals to have the guns..

 

[Kosh]

States wh tougher gun laws have less gun crime that their gun nut counterpart states.

It is great to watch the far left narrative self destruct as it is being posted..

 

[frigidweirdo]

Thomas Sowell nails it once again.

Liberals keep pushing for the same tired "laws" that they have already proven don't work.

And that's because they don't dare look at the actual results... and don't dare let the American people do what the citizens know is best.

-------------------------------------------------------

Thomas Sowell - The 'Gun Control' Farce

The 'Gun Control' Farce
Thomas Sowell | Oct 13, 2015

President Obama's intrusion into the mourning community of Roseburg, Oregon, in order to promote his political crusade for stronger gun control laws, is part of a pattern of his using various other sites of shooting rampages in the past to promote this long-standing crusade of the political left.

The zealotry of gun control advocates might make some sense if they had any serious evidence that more restrictive gun control laws actually reduce gun crimes. But they seldom even discuss the issue in terms of empirical evidence.

Saving lives is serious business. But claiming to be saving lives and refusing to deal with evidence is a farce. Nor is the Second Amendment or the National Rifle Association the real issue, despite how much the media and the intelligentsia focus on them.

If there is hard evidence that stronger gun control laws actually reduce gun crimes in general or reduce murders in particular, the Second Amendment can be repealed, as other Amendments have been repealed. Constitutional Amendments exist to serve the people. People do not exist to be sacrificed to Constitutional Amendments.

But if hard evidence shows that restrictions on gun ownership lead to more gun crimes, rather than less, then the National Rifle Association's opposition to those restrictions makes sense, independently of the Second Amendment.


(full text of the article can be read at the above URL)

So, the left try for laws that don't work, and the right try and prevent laws that work.

That's how the US works. Both sides are ineffective, and both sides cause problems, but for different reasons.

 

[Kosh]

Thomas Sowell nails it once again.

Liberals keep pushing for the same tired "laws" that they have already proven don't work.

And that's because they don't dare look at the actual results... and don't dare let the American people do what the citizens know is best.

-------------------------------------------------------

Thomas Sowell - The 'Gun Control' Farce

The 'Gun Control' Farce
Thomas Sowell | Oct 13, 2015

President Obama's intrusion into the mourning community of Roseburg, Oregon, in order to promote his political crusade for stronger gun control laws, is part of a pattern of his using various other sites of shooting rampages in the past to promote this long-standing crusade of the political left.

The zealotry of gun control advocates might make some sense if they had any serious evidence that more restrictive gun control laws actually reduce gun crimes. But they seldom even discuss the issue in terms of empirical evidence.

Saving lives is serious business. But claiming to be saving lives and refusing to deal with evidence is a farce. Nor is the Second Amendment or the National Rifle Association the real issue, despite how much the media and the intelligentsia focus on them.

If there is hard evidence that stronger gun control laws actually reduce gun crimes in general or reduce murders in particular, the Second Amendment can be repealed, as other Amendments have been repealed. Constitutional Amendments exist to serve the people. People do not exist to be sacrificed to Constitutional Amendments.

But if hard evidence shows that restrictions on gun ownership lead to more gun crimes, rather than less, then the National Rifle Association's opposition to those restrictions makes sense, independently of the Second Amendment.


(full text of the article can be read at the above URL)

So, the left try for laws that don't work, and the right try and prevent laws that work.

That's how the US works. Both sides are ineffective, and both sides cause problems, but for different reasons.

See how the far left drones will eat their own to stay on narrative..

 

[Rustic]

Sowell is wrong again, as usual.

This fails as a straw man fallacy.

No one has presented any gun control measure as a 'panacea' for addressing all gun crimes, all gun violence, and all mass shootings; measures proposed are designed to address a specific issue or aspect of the problem and comport with current Second Amendment jurisprudence.

In fact, 'liberals' accept current Second Amendment jurisprudence as settled and acknowledged case law, there are no measures proposed or advocated that would in any way 'restrict' citizens' access to guns, restrict the number of guns a citizen might possess, or limit citizens' access to ammunition.

“Statistics on murder are among the most widely available statistics, and among the most accurate, since no one ignores a dead body. With so many facts available from so many places and times, why is gun control still a heated issue? The short answer is that most gun control zealots do not even discuss the issue in terms of hard facts.”

This is a lie, the straw man Sowell has contrived and then attacks 'liberals' with, thus misrepresenting their position on the issue.

To advocate for necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory measures is not 'zealotry,' where the facts are indeed discussed and factored into the debate; such as the fact that there is no objective, documented evidence whatsoever in support of the notion that citizens carrying concealed firearms 'reduces' violent gun crime, or that the myth of 'gun free zones,' are 'responsible' for mass shootings.

The reason why gun control remains a heated issue is due to the fact that many on the right continue to use their lies as a partisan weapon against democrats, by contriving and propagating lies about democrats' position on the issue for some perceived partisan gain.

Sowell's lies are yet another example of that.

Do You always speak in gibberish??
The more laws and regulations we have = the less freedom.

 

[Rustic]

States wh tougher gun laws have less gun crime that their gun nut counterpart states.

Not really.

 

[The Rabbi]

Thomas Sowell nails it once again.

Liberals keep pushing for the same tired "laws" that they have already proven don't work.

And that's because they don't dare look at the actual results... and don't dare let the American people do what the citizens know is best.

-------------------------------------------------------

Thomas Sowell - The 'Gun Control' Farce

The 'Gun Control' Farce
Thomas Sowell | Oct 13, 2015

President Obama's intrusion into the mourning community of Roseburg, Oregon, in order to promote his political crusade for stronger gun control laws, is part of a pattern of his using various other sites of shooting rampages in the past to promote this long-standing crusade of the political left.

The zealotry of gun control advocates might make some sense if they had any serious evidence that more restrictive gun control laws actually reduce gun crimes. But they seldom even discuss the issue in terms of empirical evidence.

Saving lives is serious business. But claiming to be saving lives and refusing to deal with evidence is a farce. Nor is the Second Amendment or the National Rifle Association the real issue, despite how much the media and the intelligentsia focus on them.

If there is hard evidence that stronger gun control laws actually reduce gun crimes in general or reduce murders in particular, the Second Amendment can be repealed, as other Amendments have been repealed. Constitutional Amendments exist to serve the people. People do not exist to be sacrificed to Constitutional Amendments.

But if hard evidence shows that restrictions on gun ownership lead to more gun crimes, rather than less, then the National Rifle Association's opposition to those restrictions makes sense, independently of the Second Amendment.


(full text of the article can be read at the above URL)

So, the left try for laws that don't work, and the right try and prevent laws that work.

That's how the US works. Both sides are ineffective, and both sides cause problems, but for different reasons.

Please cite laws that work that the right is opposed to.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Thomas Sowell nails it once again.

Liberals keep pushing for the same tired "laws" that they have already proven don't work.

And that's because they don't dare look at the actual results... and don't dare let the American people do what the citizens know is best.

-------------------------------------------------------

Thomas Sowell - The 'Gun Control' Farce

The 'Gun Control' Farce
Thomas Sowell | Oct 13, 2015

President Obama's intrusion into the mourning community of Roseburg, Oregon, in order to promote his political crusade for stronger gun control laws, is part of a pattern of his using various other sites of shooting rampages in the past to promote this long-standing crusade of the political left.

The zealotry of gun control advocates might make some sense if they had any serious evidence that more restrictive gun control laws actually reduce gun crimes. But they seldom even discuss the issue in terms of empirical evidence.

Saving lives is serious business. But claiming to be saving lives and refusing to deal with evidence is a farce. Nor is the Second Amendment or the National Rifle Association the real issue, despite how much the media and the intelligentsia focus on them.

If there is hard evidence that stronger gun control laws actually reduce gun crimes in general or reduce murders in particular, the Second Amendment can be repealed, as other Amendments have been repealed. Constitutional Amendments exist to serve the people. People do not exist to be sacrificed to Constitutional Amendments.

But if hard evidence shows that restrictions on gun ownership lead to more gun crimes, rather than less, then the National Rifle Association's opposition to those restrictions makes sense, independently of the Second Amendment.


(full text of the article can be read at the above URL)

So, the left try for laws that don't work, and the right try and prevent laws that work.

That's how the US works. Both sides are ineffective, and both sides cause problems, but for different reasons.

Please cite laws that work that the right is opposed to.

good question

 

[Skull Pilot]

Sowell is wrong again, as usual.

This fails as a straw man fallacy.

No one has presented any gun control measure as a 'panacea' for addressing all gun crimes, all gun violence, and all mass shootings; measures proposed are designed to address a specific issue or aspect of the problem and comport with current Second Amendment jurisprudence.

In fact, 'liberals' accept current Second Amendment jurisprudence as settled and acknowledged case law, there are no measures proposed or advocated that would in any way 'restrict' citizens' access to guns, restrict the number of guns a citizen might possess, or limit citizens' access to ammunition.

“Statistics on murder are among the most widely available statistics, and among the most accurate, since no one ignores a dead body. With so many facts available from so many places and times, why is gun control still a heated issue? The short answer is that most gun control zealots do not even discuss the issue in terms of hard facts.”

This is a lie, the straw man Sowell has contrived and then attacks 'liberals' with, thus misrepresenting their position on the issue.

To advocate for necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory measures is not 'zealotry,' where the facts are indeed discussed and factored into the debate; such as the fact that there is no objective, documented evidence whatsoever in support of the notion that citizens carrying concealed firearms 'reduces' violent gun crime, or that the myth of 'gun free zones,' are 'responsible' for mass shootings.

The reason why gun control remains a heated issue is due to the fact that many on the right continue to use their lies as a partisan weapon against democrats, by contriving and propagating lies about democrats' position on the issue for some perceived partisan gain.

Sowell's lies are yet another example of that.

But none of the control proposed would have stopped any of the most recent shootings

So tell me other than political theater and mental masturbation what can all this gun control fervor be?

And let's not forget that as gun ownership has risen both murder and violent crimes overall have decreased

 

[frigidweirdo]

Sowell is wrong again, as usual.

This fails as a straw man fallacy.

No one has presented any gun control measure as a 'panacea' for addressing all gun crimes, all gun violence, and all mass shootings; measures proposed are designed to address a specific issue or aspect of the problem and comport with current Second Amendment jurisprudence.

In fact, 'liberals' accept current Second Amendment jurisprudence as settled and acknowledged case law, there are no measures proposed or advocated that would in any way 'restrict' citizens' access to guns, restrict the number of guns a citizen might possess, or limit citizens' access to ammunition.

“Statistics on murder are among the most widely available statistics, and among the most accurate, since no one ignores a dead body. With so many facts available from so many places and times, why is gun control still a heated issue? The short answer is that most gun control zealots do not even discuss the issue in terms of hard facts.”

This is a lie, the straw man Sowell has contrived and then attacks 'liberals' with, thus misrepresenting their position on the issue.

To advocate for necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory measures is not 'zealotry,' where the facts are indeed discussed and factored into the debate; such as the fact that there is no objective, documented evidence whatsoever in support of the notion that citizens carrying concealed firearms 'reduces' violent gun crime, or that the myth of 'gun free zones,' are 'responsible' for mass shootings.

The reason why gun control remains a heated issue is due to the fact that many on the right continue to use their lies as a partisan weapon against democrats, by contriving and propagating lies about democrats' position on the issue for some perceived partisan gain.

Sowell's lies are yet another example of that.

Do You always speak in gibberish??
The more laws and regulations we have = the less freedom.

But I thought the right were big on taking away people's freedoms? How many people on the right have been calling for restrictions on rights and freedoms in the past month or so, so we can be more secure in the face of Muslims?