In an unintentionally funny article, The Hill reports that the weapons that the Boston Marathon terrorists used in the shootout against police were unregistered, a violation of Massachusetts law. That is certainly no surprise. Most terrorists don't care much about local gun laws.
So what does The Hill take away from this fact? This is the funny part. According to The Hill, the use of these unregistered firearms will strengthen calls for gun control legislation especially for stronger background checks. Amazing! Two Islamic terrorists get guns illegally, and the remedy from the left is to increase the background checks for those who try to get guns in accordance with the law. Once again, the gun control crowd looks for solutions that will not affect the basic problem.
For decades, opponents of gun control have said, in essence, that if guns are banned, only criminals will have them. It seems to me that The Hill point of view is a vindication of this argument.
Simply put, nothing in any of the proposed gun legislation in Congress would have prevented the attack by these terrorists. We do not even know where they got the weapons yet. Possibly, the rifles came from the 2000 that the Obama administration sold to the Mexican drug cartels in Fast and Furious. We don't know. Sure, it is doubtful, but the public just does not know yet. Maybe the guns were stolen.
Since the shootings in Newtown, all that America has wanted is for steps to be taken to reduce the likelihood that such an event happen again. Instead of that, all we have gotten is a push for meaningless changes to gun laws, changes that, if implemented, would not have stopped Newtown. What a disgrace.
So what does The Hill take away from this fact? This is the funny part. According to The Hill, the use of these unregistered firearms will strengthen calls for gun control legislation especially for stronger background checks. Amazing! Two Islamic terrorists get guns illegally, and the remedy from the left is to increase the background checks for those who try to get guns in accordance with the law. Once again, the gun control crowd looks for solutions that will not affect the basic problem.
For decades, opponents of gun control have said, in essence, that if guns are banned, only criminals will have them. It seems to me that The Hill point of view is a vindication of this argument.
Simply put, nothing in any of the proposed gun legislation in Congress would have prevented the attack by these terrorists. We do not even know where they got the weapons yet. Possibly, the rifles came from the 2000 that the Obama administration sold to the Mexican drug cartels in Fast and Furious. We don't know. Sure, it is doubtful, but the public just does not know yet. Maybe the guns were stolen.
Since the shootings in Newtown, all that America has wanted is for steps to be taken to reduce the likelihood that such an event happen again. Instead of that, all we have gotten is a push for meaningless changes to gun laws, changes that, if implemented, would not have stopped Newtown. What a disgrace.
No comments:
Post a Comment