The anti gun zealots are out in full force trying to usurp the Second Amendment by removing guns from society. Some members of Congress (and other politicians) are touting outright bans on specific types of guns as well as laws forcing people who already own such firearms to sell them to the government, in a sort of forced buyback program. These people are either mentally deficient or are hiding their true agenda. You see, gun laws and gun bans do not stop people who are intent on doing harm with a firearm from doing so.
This is evident in nearly all mass shootings since about 1950. In all but one of them the criminal opened fire in a place where guns are not allowed. The one where guns are allowed is Arizona where Congresswoman Giffords was shot. The gunman, by the way, was stopped by a citizen who was legally carrying a firearm.
I do not think these folks are mentally deficient (they might be but that is not the issue here) because they know what they are doing. They are using mass murder incidents to gin up public support for disarming Americans. They want this because one of the steps to Socialism requires people to be disarmed of the tools that would allow them to resist. Once all firearms are outlawed then government becomes the holder of the weapons and is free to impose its will on those who will no longer have the means to resist. These people need to have citizens willingly turn in their guns (or try to force them to sell them back) because an outright confiscation would lead to a lot of dead government agents. Americans will not be disarmed by force and there are many more gun owners than there are government agents.
Besides, many of those agents have stated they would not follow any order to disarm their fellow citizens.
But will these laws actually work? We have seen time and again that laws banning guns do not stop criminals from using guns. Chicago is a glaring example. In fact, no law stops criminals. The very nature of a criminal is that he breaks laws. Even everyday people break the law (hell we probably break a lot of laws each day because we do not know they exist) as when they go over the posted speed limit. How many non handicapped people park in a handicapped spot? How many times do people drink alcohol and drive? Those who would do violence are no exception to this except they do not know where to draw a line. They will use firearms (that they are not legally allowed to buy or posses) to commit crimes regardless of what society has deemed via its laws.
David Gregory of NBC is not a stupid person. He is an educated man who is quite successful. He is a liberal so he obviously has a brain deficiency but he is otherwise intelligent. He is under investigation for breaking a DC firearm law. Gregory displayed a 30 round magazine on his Sunday show. It is against the law in DC to posses a magazine with a capacity larger than 10 rounds. New reports have indicated that Gregory was made aware of this prior to his show and yet he chose to go ahead and display the magazine.
This means that he knew it was against the law to posses that particular item but he decided to break the law anyway.
The law did not stop Gregory from possessing the magazine and knowledge of the law did not keep him from displaying it to the three or four people who watch his show. He knew he would be in violation but did not care enough about the law to obey it.
We can argue all day about the stupidity of size limits on magazines (they are worthless laws) but the reality is, this is the law and Gregory broke it.
How would any other law have kept him from consciously deciding to break the law? How would any other law have prevented him from doing what he did when the law already on the books failed to accomplish that?
The truth is laws do not keep people from breaking them. They only provide a framework for the law abiding to follow and a system for the legal process to function once someone breaks the law.
We do not need more gun laws, we have plenty of them. We need the government to stop infringing on the Second Amendment rights we all have by virtue of our birth. If law abiding people were not restricted then criminals would think twice.
Laws only hamper those who follow them as the criminal is unencumbered by such things.
Ask David Gregory who unintentionally demonstrated why more laws are not the answer.
Never surrender, never submit.