Like vultures, anti-gun congressmen are always picking the bones of some national tragedy looking for political advantage.
And the horrific shooting in Tucson earlier this year is just another example, as a string of anti-gun bills have been introduced recently. You may have seen a television ad about one of them: H.R. 308, introduced by gun-hating Carolyn McCarthy less than two weeks after the shooting, would ban so-called “high-capacity” magazines.
“I think when you think about just common sense here, large capacity clips [sic] that can basically, in my opinion, be weapons of mass destruction, should not be available to the average citizen,” McCarthy said in an NPR interview.
But in virtually every way possible, Arizona shooter Jared Loughner is testimony to a generation of failed gun control.
Remember when, in 1968, we were told that if felons and other undesirables were prohibited from having guns, gun crime would stop? Well, Loughner was not a felon. Likewise, he was not an illegal, military deserter, or a fugitive from justice.
Remember when, in 1993, we were assured that if gun purchasers were “checked out” against an FBI database, gun crime would stop? Loughner was checked out by the FBI; he passed.
Remember when, in 1999 after Columbine, we were told that if we cracked down on gun shows, gun crime would stop? That crackdown didn’t pass, but Loughner didn’t buy his gun at a gun show.
Remember when, after Virginia Tech, we were told that if we sent more of Americans’ mental health records to the FBI’s secret list, gun crime would stop? Loughner’s name wasn’t on the FBI expanded list because he hadn’t been “adjudicated as a mental defective” or “committed to a mental institution.”
Now we are told by McCarthy and her ilk that the solution to tragedies like the one in Tucson consists of banning what are, in her opinion, “high-capacity” magazines.
Well, setting aside for a moment that her legislation ignores the issue of Congress’ constitutional authority, what about regular Americans who face multiple attackers, such as the Korean store owners during the LA riots of 1992, or the man in Long Island last year who was forced to defend his family from 20 gang members?
McCarthy seems to care less about how her political maneuverings would endanger ordinary Americans. She, after all, can huddle behind the massive billion dollar-plus Capitol Hill security apparatus.
And, of course, she is not only interested in banning magazines, but also the firearms that accept such magazines. She inadvertently admitted, in an NPR radio interview, that she is a political vulture with a larger agenda. She was asked by a reporter, “And so you want legislation that specifically targets that kind of magazine, not actually the weapons themselves?”
Rep. McCarthy: “No. The weapons in themselves — number one, I have to look at, you know, what can actually pass in Congress and have it signed by the president. The House and the Senate are pro-gun houses. So with that being said, I have to find something that will be reasonable to the majority of the members so that we can cut down.”
Well, it’s time, once again, to remind the Congress that it cannot violate the Constitution just because Carolyn McCarthy thinks it’s a good idea. Secondly, Congress needs to be reminded that no gun control measure has ever reduced crime or prevented criminals from getting their hands on firearms—to the contrary, gun control laws only turn law-abiding citizens into mandatory victims.
GOA is briefing members of Congress on the dangers—both to constitutional rights as well as public safety—of the McCarthy bill. But Congress needs to hear from you, too.