Often gun control zealots like to espouse why their ideas are valid. They try to explain away their disdain for firearms and others freedom to possess behind the straw man of lowering crime. It doesn’t matter how many times they are factually proven wrong; their gun control measures only work in disarming law abiding citizens thus making it easier for criminals to do their nefarious deeds.
The truth is, the zealots don’t really care about lowering crime. Oh sure, that’s a nice thing to get out to the people, that and they are just trying to “protect the children”. But in truth, what they really want is control. For the high ranking officials and the super rich who buy protection, they wish to maintain control over an unarmed populace. Easier to subjugate that populace to their will.
One need look no further than Mayor Michael Bloomberg to see what form a power hungry despot in America would take. His complete disdain for the Second Amendment goes hand in hand with his utter disdain for the citizens of New York’s free will and ability to choose for themselves. He has made NYC a fiefdom that has seperated itself away from the rest of New York in regards to gun laws, thus denying his subjects even the limited gun-rights the citizens of the rest of the state have.
But he doesn’t stop there. He tells his subjects what they must eat, the portions of their food, that new mothers must breast feed their babies, and he even outlaws food donations at homeless shelters because the city can’t verify the salt content. In his domain, it is better to go hungry than have too much salt. Here’s a rundown of his autocracy.
Before I digress too much from the main point of this posting, this is about the difference between gun control and gun laws. The former being the desire of Bloomberg and people of his ilk to control the lives of all the little peons beneath them that they believe can’t take care of themselves…in other words…the people.
Gun laws on the other hand, ones designed to actually punish criminals for the misuse of firearms in commission of crimes, I am fully behind. Just like voter fraud and rioting, the use of a firearm in a violent crime is a voiding of a constitutional right and should be punished. Limiting law abiding citizens the right to bear arms because of the crimes of a few would be akin to banning the right to assemble because of the LA riots back in 1992.
So lets punish those who commit crimes with firearms (and I mean actually crimes, not trumped up BS charges placed on railroaded gunowners) and punish them hard. In Pennsylvania after passing the house by a vote of 190-7 a bill now awaits approval from the Senate that would make the possession of a firearm by a felon a mandatory 5 year jail sentence and an additional 5 if they use it for a crime. Also 5 years on straw man purchases and illegal transfers.
THIS is the kind of gun law that I can sink my teeth into. And these are mandatory years, not up to the discretion of some coddling “criminals are just misunderstood” bleeding heart judge.
I appreciate the efforts by state Rep. Todd Stephens, R-Montgomery, in sponsoring this gun law that doesn’t punish or limit law abiding citizens from their Second Amendment rights.
I hope more politicians and states take this viewpoint. Protect the people by keeping them armed and punish the criminals by keeping them in jail.