Democrats and Biden propose bills that would not have stopped mass murder attacks

 Washington Examiner:

Democrats are pushing gun control in the immediate aftermath of a mass shooting. Once again, they have no idea whether their chosen proposals would have done anything at all, and they’re already ignoring many of the facts at hand.

President Biden started the fact-free mission, rather proudly declaring that it didn’t matter that he didn’t know anything about the shooter in Boulder, Colorado, his motive, or the weapons he used. “I don’t need to wait another minute, let alone an hour, to take commonsense steps or save the lives in the future,” he said.

He called for an assault weapons ban, even though the shooter was also armed with a handgun. He called for closing the “Charleston loophole,” which wasn’t a loophole but a human error in the background check process. He said Republicans should back the universal background check bill put forward in the House of Representatives, even though Colorado already signed universal background checks into law in 2013.

What about other typical gun-control proposals? Fox News contributor Richard Fowler was certain that a 10-day waiting period would have prevented the Boulder shooting and the Atlanta spa shootings, but that can’t be claimed definitively until we get more information about both (the Colorado shooter bought his gun six days earlier, for what that’s worth).

What about red flag laws? After all, the Boulder shooter’s brother said he was paranoid, and former classmates of his said he had a quick temper. But Colorado already instituted its own red flag laws at the start of 2020. Like the state's universal background checks, the red flag law obviously didn't stop this shooting.

The fact is that we don’t know what, if anything, could have prevented this shooting. As is often the case, Democrats are chasing shiny objects, repeating talking points about background checks and assault weapons that have become stale after being trotted out for every gun-control discussion, regardless of the facts.

...

Democrats have two instincts after such shootings--Disarm the innocent and then criminalize the owners of guns Democrats see as scary.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more