I know some people who are amenable to gun control who feel that way because they feel it would make us all safer. They have no malice in their support of various laws and proposals. I know this is true because I used to be one of those people.
Another thing that is true for these people is they are NOT invested in the gun debate in one bit. They haven’t spent much or any time shooting, they don’t know even the most basic laws, and they are either ignorant of disinterested in statistics.
Their affliction is curable, to the effect that if you lead a horse to water they will often drink. The few horses you DO lead to water but they REFUSE to drink aren’t really an issue because A) they likely won’t get involved at achieving their dreams, even if that simply means walking down to a local polling place, B) they are EASILY defeated in any form of debate helping bring others to the water to drink.
This post isn’t about them. This post is about the OTHER gun control proponents. We are talking about anti-rights activists, lobbyists, and politicians. These people want gun control PURELY out of malice. They have read the statistics, they have seen the debate, they may have even logged some time at a shooting range. When they talk about “Public Safety” they are openly lying.
Joe posts this video from a New York gun control discussion:
Here we have evidence that a full-on confiscation is on the table in New York. But they say “We aren’t coming for your guns!”…except they are! He’ll, Joan Peterson of the Brady Campaign and the Joyce Foundation is often VERY vocal about how she isn’t coming for our guns, or how much she hate’s the term “Gun Banner”…but she’s all in favor of door-to-door confiscation. (So long as you get a little compensation for your banned property)
She’s a liar. Gun Control advocates want one thing, blanket gun bans with no grandfathering. Period, full stop.
To accomplish this, they need registration, they need incremental bans, and they need barriers to ownership.
The first two are self explanatory. Registration means you can door-to-door confiscate, and punish and confiscate from anybody trying to conceal guns from the .gov. Incremental bans also just go over smoother than blanket bans. The didn’t ban all guns in 1994 (tho they sure wanted to), they banned a (then) small portion of the guns owned by Americans.
They want barriers for ownership so that the pro-gun side will find it difficult to recruit. There has been several times when I’ve taken new shooters to the range and they got bit by the bug. They started asking me how much their favorite gun might cost…then they asked me what the permits cost.
If this was Maine they could just drive to their local gun shop and BUY a gun. In Mass they need to take a safety class, fill out paperwork, and wait MONTHS to get the PERMIT that lets the WALK INTO the gun shop.
That has prevented MANY a gun owner from bothering. Same goes for “Insurance”, or demanding “Theft proof” storage, or mandatory safety classes.
These things all do NOTHING to benefit the gun owner, but it does make it less pleasant to BE a gun owner. If we can no longer recruit new shooters because the burden is too great to own a gun, we all but die out in a generation, and there will also be nobody to fight against them.
This is a DREAM!
They ARE coming for your gun, and they don’t want anybody to buy another gun EVER again.