….The World starts looking like a nail:
Yeah, well…probably not:
Er, “we know a gun check would stop him,” really? That’s quite the conclusion to draw, considering that A) the most recent update from ABC reports the only gun recovered so far from the scene of the Tsarnaev brothers’ shootout was a semiautomatic handgun with its serial number scratched off, suggesting that it was probably purchased through illicit means that wouldn’t have subjected to a background check no matter what; and B) the brothers somehow neglected to register for gun permits as required in Massachusetts, suggesting that they were pretty unconcerned with the law — as also evidenced by their blowing up a busy street with pressure-cooker bombs. (Not to mention, that “90 percent” figure is getting wildly overused as an indicator of public opinion that isn’t nearly as robust as it makes it out to be.) Lawmakers have been arguing over introducing some stringent coordination between the terror watch list and background checks, but let’s not make it sound like universal background checks would have definitively thwarted the Boston bombing nor are a reliable method for thwarting terrorism in general, shall we?
Hey, but they’ll try and make their agenda fit ANYTHING, because, well, they have an agenda, and little actual support for it anyway.
I happen to own an assault hammer. The only victims so far are my thumbs and a few dozen tenpenny nails.
“Please sir, may I have some more” (ammo)?
Background checks are another one of those things that sound good if you haven’t thought it through but wind up being completely useless in application.