Thursday will mark the fifth anniversary of the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut, and gun prohibitionists – aided by the dominant media – are showing new boldness by running for office, as noted by Reuters.
But determined as they might be to push stricter gun control laws, a new poll in Iowa by the Des Moines Register shows the public still doubts the result of their crusade will be a reduction in mass shootings. The newspaper revealed Tuesday that among Iowa adults, 56 percent “believe increased controls on gun purchases won’t reduce mass shootings.”
The newspaper also noted something not so surprising. “Views split sharply along party lines,” the Register reported. “Seventy-nine percent of Republicans say more gun control won’t reduce mass shootings, as do 59 percent of independents. Most Democrats stake out the opposite view: 65 percent believe it would help.”
This leaves nobody second-guessing what Reuters noted about gun prohibitionists running for public office, after being trained by gun control groups including Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, the Michael Bloomberg-supported component of his Everytown for Gun Safety.
“Nine of 13 volunteers trained by the group ran for office this year and won seats,” Reuters said, “ranging from New Hampshire state representative to city council member in West University Place, Texas. Fourteen more have already declared their intentions to run for office in 2018, seeking seats in Congress, state legislatures and local government, all running as Democrats.”
This only reinforces the image of Democrats as the party of gun control.
ABC News is also running a piece on the Sandy Hook effect on gun politics, but it creates a false impression about background checks for firearm purchases. Quoting the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, the ABC report asserted that there are “new background check laws in four states that didn’t have them before and expansions of existing background check laws in seven others, bringing the total to 18 states and the District of Columbia with background checks in place.”
Second Amendment activists will easily refute that suggestion, because background checks have been part of federal law since the Brady Law was passed more than two decades ago, during the first Clinton administration. Indeed, it was passage of that law and the Clinton Crime Bill with its ban on so-called “assault weapons” the following year that cost Democrats control of Congress.
The National Instant Check System (NICS) became active in November 1998, and that’s a law that applies to all retail purchases in every state.
What anti-gunners, and apparently ABC, are talking about is the so-called “universal background check” that applies to all gun transfers, including gifts, trades and loans of firearms. There is no evidence that in the states where such laws are already in effect they have prevented a single violent crime involving a firearm. California has such a law, but it didn’t prevent the slaying of Kate Steinle on a San Francisco pier.
It should be noted that a majority of mass shooters passed background checks including the Aurora, Colorado movie gunman, both Fort Hood shooters, the Orlando nightclub gunman and even the Las Vegas mass killer.