“Common sense gun control”
How many times have you heard that term? It’s the only thing the new
gun grabbing left gun safety movement wants; not gun bans. Or so they keep saying. They want you to think that they’re not like those other people. They’re not like Senator Dianne “Mr. and Mrs. America, Turn ’em all in…” Feinstein and the other extremists. They’re all about safety.
The latest to spin this yarn are former Arkansas Congressman Jay Dickey-R, and the long since fired head of the Centers for Disease Control’s anti-gun propaganda department, Mark Rosenberg. Dickey helped to defund Rosenberg’s propaganda operation at the CDC, but has since been seduced by the Dark Side. He’s now joining with Rosenberg to restore funding to the CDC’s anti-gun “research” efforts.
There is urgency to our task. Both of us now believe strongly that federal funding for research into gun-violence prevention should be dramatically increased. But the language accompanying this appropriation should mirror the language already in the law: “No funds shall be used to advocate or promote gun control.” This prohibition can help to reassure supporters of the Second Amendment that the CDC will use the money for important research and not for gun-control advocacy. However, it is also important for all to understand that this wording does not constitute an outright ban on federal gun-violence prevention research. It is critical that the appropriation contain enough money to let science thrive and help us determine what works.
This fails the smell test from the first sentence. What urgency? Gun-related deaths and injuries in the US are at a 20-year low. Accident rates have never been lower. The programs that Rosenberg, who now claims to be a gun owner and NRA member just like Dickey, has long supported were doing nothing to make us safer; just less free. The programs and laws that Dickey once supported are what caused the drop in both crime rates and accident rates. The new
gun grabbing left gun safety movement keeps claiming that this is what they want. Well… They got it. So why to they keep asking for more?
Because it’s not really what they want.
These “safety” advocates are absolutists. Any gun-related death is one too many. And that one death should be prevented by any means necessary; even if those means cost other lives. They don’t care if a woman lies dead in an alleyway, raped and strangled, so long as neither she nor her attacker were shot. They don’t care if an old man was beaten to death over his Social Security check if that’s what it took to keep his attackers unarmed. Somehow, I guess, they’re less dead if they weren’t shot.
“Common sense”, from their perspective, means the very same gun bans and confiscation that Dianne Feinstein is already calling for. (But unlike these new “safety” advocates, she’s being honest about her goals.) “Common sense” means disarming victims in the vain hope that their attackers will also be disarmed. These people don’t care that homicide and accident rates are at levels not seen in decades. Safety was never their desire. What they really want is an America without privately held arms. That is their idea of “common sense”.