Debbie Wasserman-Schultz was speaking in reference to Jeb Bush, who had said recently that the feds shouldn’t be involved in gun laws. I’m not a fan of Bush, but he’s right on this issue. Wasserman-Schultz said that Republicans like Jeb Bush want to excuse gun violence and murder just to protect 2nd Amendment rights. She said that Americans want more federal gun control laws, and that the GOP’s refusal to act on gun control shows that they want America to “accept” gun violence. From The Blaze:
“In claiming that there is no role for the federal government in regulating gun safety, Jeb Bush is insisting that Americans simply must accept future violence and leave a response to the possibility of a state-by-state solution. I am speechless,” she said.
“Republicans like Jeb Bush should put the wishes of the American people, who demand action like universal background checks, ahead of the endorsement of special interest groups,” Wasserman Schultz continued. “They must stop excusing the murders of our neighbors as the inevitable price we pay for constitutional liberties. Geography should not determine whether one has basic protections from gun violence.”
Bush said earlier Tuesday at a town hall meeting at a Miami school, “The federal government shouldn’t be involved in gun laws. The country is very different.”
He added, “If you go to a rural area where guns are part of the culture, to impose laws from Washington that are going to work for New York City or work in a rural area, makes no sense.”
Gun control doesn’t work except to increase violent crime. Liberals revived their gun control talks right after Bryce Williams murdered two former co-workers. Wasserman-Schultz mentioned universal background checks. A background check would not have prevented Williams from obtaining a gun, since he didn’t yet have a criminal background. Even if he did have a criminal background, and he was barred from legally purchasing a firearm, he could have easily borrowed a gun from a friend or family member, or he could have stolen one.
Even if he didn’t do that, guns aren’t the only means one can use to kill someone else. He could have stabbed the two to death. He could have detonated a pressure cooker IED. He could have run them over with his car. He could have done any number of things to kill them that wouldn’t have elicited as much national attention as it’s garnered now. The only reason it’s gotten as much national press is that he used a gun. For whatever reason, lives lost to “gun violence” are far more valuable than those lost to other forms of violence.