Dangerous Gun Control Laws

I would laugh if it wasn’t so dangerous. The gun ban flakes think they have used up the lie “gun show loophole” since President Obama said he is illegally taking action to put into effect a law the representatives of the people have refused to pass three different times. So now those gun banners are calling for action on the “Charleston loophole.” Their gun control laws are dangerous and silly.

I heard Hillary use that term a couple of times in the democrat debate this past week and another liberal use it on a talk show. What do they want? No time limit on an answer on the “Instant” background check. So the government can delay your purchase of a gun for an unlimited time.

Right now, if the government can not return an answer on a check on the instant background check within three days the sale can go through. The reason the law was worded that way was to prevent the government from stalling and preventing law-abiding citizens from getting guns. The check is supposed to be instant but they have three days to do it. Gun banners want unlimited, meaning never ending, time.

Think that won’t happen? Many places delay and delay issuing carry permits because they can delay, without giving any reason for the delay. The most famous case of this happening is Carol Brown in New Jersey. She had a restraining order against her violent ex-husband but applied for a gun permit since she knew she could not defend herself with a piece of paper. He stabbed her to death. Her having a gun could have saved her life.

The New Jersey law says the local police are supposed to rule on permits within 30 days, a ridiculously long time to wait to defend yourself. But Browne had applied for her permit on April 21 and was killed in June, well over the 30 day delay. And waiting over 30 days is the norm for police departments in New Jersey that have no legal reason for denying permits, so they just sit on them and illegally deny the permit.

Gun banners whine that I, and fellow NRA members like me, won’t compromise for “common sense” gun laws. But what they propose have nothing to do with common sense, and they are never satisfied, as the “Charleston loophole” mantra shows. Compromise to them means do what I want today so I can demand further ridiculous restriction tomorrow.

These same folks are still lying about the law on suing gun sellers and manufacturers and also on the law on gun research. These folks want to sue gun manufacturers and sellers if a gun is used in a crime. That is like suing Texaco and the local gas station because an arsonists bought gas from them to burn down a house.

It is legal to sue if a gun malfunctions – just like with any other product. But the gun haters want to be able to sue if the gun works but the user commits a crime with it. That is just not rational.

And gun research is legal. A law bans government funding of research that starts with the goal of banning guns. Anyone can prove anything with research if they start with a bias and control the things they look at in their research. The gun banners want you and me to pay folks like Arthur Kellerman to research with the goal of banning guns.

In 1986 Kellerman published a “study” showing you are 43 times more likely to die from your own gun than you are to use it to protect yourself. To show how stupid such studies can be, you can look at protecting yourself only if you kill your attacker. Never mind that most times a bad guy just seeing a gun will run. Kellerman thinks that is not protecting yourself. And he includes suicides on the opposite side.

Kellerman’s numbers have been shown to be ridiculously inaccurate time and time again but the gun haters still parrot them almost daily. Don’t bother them with facts.