Luke Scott said: “Gun control means control. It means control for the government and the government starts controlling the people.” When I read that, I cannot help but think of the domino effect; one piece falls, and the others have no choice but to fall in sequence. Of course, this theory isn’t accurate 100% of the time, but in the world of gun control, it could not be more applicable. There is solid evidence showing that strict gun control fails miserably.
This week, an anti-gun bill was introduced by Democrats in the Missouri state legislature. A portion of the bill is as follows:
“Any person who, prior to the effective date of this law, was legally in possession of an assault weapon or large capacity magazine shall have ninety days from such effective date to do any of the following without being subject to prosecution…Remove the assault weapon or large capacity magazine from the state of Missouri…Render the assault weapon permanently inoperable; or…Surrender the assault weapon or large capacity magazine to the appropriate law enforcement agency for destruction, subject to specific agency regulations…Unlawful manufacture, import, possession, purchase, sale, or transfer of an assault weapon or a large capacity magazine is a class C felony.”
Firstly, because the Missouri legislature is predominantly Republican, I doubt that this bill will get any kind of traction; but that isn’t what concerns me. The very act of introducing this bill sets a precedent that others will follow. In fact, Minnesota has already followed suit with a bill featuring identical language. Once a precedent is firmly established, it leads to further precedents that build upon the one previously set.
The language of the second amendment is such that any bill threatening infringement upon the rights of an American to hold arms is walking a very thin line. In addition to this, assault weapons have been banned since the 1930’s. According to The Christian Science Monitor: “…US civilians have been prohibited from owning automatic machine guns since the 1930s. Assault rifles available for domestic sale are semi-automatic, meaning a pull of the trigger fires one bullet.”
So, if automatic weapons have been banned since the 1930’s; what would this bill accomplish? The answer lies in the details. In addition to automatic weapons, the bill mentions semi-automatic weapons. The dominoes are falling.
Let’s put some perspective on this. Many years ago, England began with the banning of assault weapons; then moved to semi-automatic weapons; and finally moved on to a full out guns ban.
According to CNN:
“In the wake of the 1987 Hungerford massacre, in which one lone gunman killed 16 people, Britain introduced new legislation — the Firearms (Amendment) Act 1988 — making registration mandatory for owning shotguns and banning semi-automatic and pump-action weapons…Within a year and a half of the Dunblane massacre [in 1996], UK lawmakers had passed a ban on the private ownership of all handguns in mainland Britain, giving the country some of the toughest anti-gun legislation in the world.”
In 1998, the UK banned handguns, following the previously mentioned massacre. Since then, handgun crime has doubled.
Joyce Lee Malcolm of The Wall Street Journal writes:
“…In the two years following the 1996 National Firearms Agreement…Suicides with firearms went down but suicides by other means went up. They reported ‘a modest reduction in the severity’ of massacres (four or more indiscriminate homicides) in the five years since the government weapons buyback. These involved knives, gas and arson rather than firearms.”
What is my point in all of this? My point is that even though the UK doesn’t have the same constitutional provision we have that allows for citizens to be armed, it doesn’t matter. The Democrats, using all the passion and emotion they can invoke, will effectively walk around the second amendment, until they achieve what they want: a full out weapons ban. It will begin with a precedent banning assault weapons—though they have already been banned–then semi-automatic weapons; and it will end with handguns. Have no doubt that it will happen.
Liberals claim that banning guns will make us safer. We have solid evidence that crime knows no weapons, and it will rise or fall only depending on the whims of humanity. Liberals want us to believe that they truly care about safety; but if that was the case, they wouldn’t be blathering about gun control, because it doesn’t work.
What Liberals care about is votes. They know that gun control—specifically in the wake of several severe shootings–will help them acquire more control. With control comes power. Dictators throughout all time knew that; everyone knows that. In every human being sleeps a monster that only needs power to wake it. Once awakened, that monster seeks election.