Now before you just think me insensitive, read on (although you may still think I'm insensitive).
Recently, CBS Morning News had on Senators Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Pat Toomey (R-PA) to speak about their “bipartsan” gun control bill.
Senator Pat Toomey: “the problems that we have are not law-abiding gun owners like Joe and myself. Uh, and we don't need, in my view, to put restrictions on what law-abiding people can do. What we need to do is try to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and dangerously mentally ill people.”
Toomey went on to say that he and Joe met with families. That’s a problem for me. In my opinion, legislation that will affect the general public should not be born out of anecdotal tragedy. Isn’t the Senate supposed to be the deliberative body, where cooler heads are supposed to prevail?
And to think I was a supporter of Toomey. I thought he would go to Washington and actually govern as a constitutionalist. It sure doesn’t take long to show one’s true colors in that town. And is anyone else sick to death of the word “bipartisan”?
From what I understand from the Toomey/Manchin bill, doctors are to report any signs of mental illness to the feds without the knowledge or consent of the patient. Most of my more liberal friends think I am mentally ill. Does that mean if my doctor happens to be a lib and I a conservative, he can alert the authorities that I may be unstable?
Toomey continued: “But a measure that helps to make it harder for violent criminals and the dangerously mentally ill to get guns, I think that’s just common sense.”
Well, that sounds good and well-intentioned, but it will just be one more of thousands of gun laws that are not being prosecuted now. What’s one more law going to do? The answer: absolutely nothing, but to further erode the Second Amendment rights of the law-abiding citizen. That and politicians can claim they did something.
As usual, we can always count on a REAL conservative, Senator Ted Cruz to set the record straight.
Cruz said on the Lou Dobbs show: “In 2010, over 15,000 felons, fugitives tried illegally to purchase guns and were turned down. Out of those 15,000, the Obama Justice Department prosecuted just 44. Let me repeat those numbers: out of 15,000 felons and fugitives illegally trying to purchase a gun, the Obama Justice Department only prosecuted 44." That’s less than 0.003%.
It appears to me as if the background checks we currently employ are working just fine. But of course that empirical data won't tug on the heartstrings of the general public, nor advance the agenda of the left; that agenda being the eventual confiscation of our guns.
Cruz continued: “But I think it is also sad that so many politicians are trying to take advantage of that tragedy, not to pass legislation targeting violent criminals, but instead working to take away the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms of law-abiding, peaceful citizens."
Rush Limbaugh, on his radio show, made a great point regarding this issue.
He said: "People aren’t being prosecuted. They're not being utilized, the laws already on the books, because the image must be that we don't have enough laws to deal with these kinds of tragedies. They are trying to create the impression that we don't have enough laws to deal with Sandy Hook. None of what's been proposed would've stopped it, by the way, because Sen. Cruz is right: it's not about that."
Once again, Rush is right. If criminals were prosecuted under our current laws, the public would realize we don’t need any new ones.
In my opinion, it is intentional. They wait for the inevitable tragedy to occur, and then swoop in like vultures, or more like the ambulance chasing attorneys most of them are, exclaiming: “If we only had a law to prevent this tragedy?”
Remember the Progressive credo: Never let a crisis go to waste! During a crisis, one can accomplish much more than would otherwise be possible.