We Knew That
Sometimes The Truth Is Inadvertently Revealed
Incredible as it may seem, in so-called “blue” states, firearms like this .45-caliber pistol get blamed more for crime than the people who misuse them. In “red” states, it’s the other way around, a recent news report suggested.
Being a career journalist has its advantages in that I can spot unintentional revelations amid all the verbiage which, when pulled out of the larger narrative, amounts to raw, sometimes embarrassing and occasionally brutal truth.
Take, for example, a paragraph found buried in an Associated Press report on gun control legislation introduced last month in the Democrat-controlled Michigan Legislature in Lansing. This particular 72-word paragraph said perhaps a lot more than the lawmakers may have preferred.
“Mass shootings across the U.S. in recent years seem to have widen the political divide on gun ownership,” wrote reporter Joey Cappelletti. “In Democratic-led states with restrictive gun laws, elected officials have responded to home-state tragedies by enacting and proposing even more limits on guns. In many states with Republican-led legislatures, the shootings appear unlikely to prompt any new restrictions this year, reflecting a belief that violent people, not their possession of weapons, is the problem.”
Ain’t it so? Pick a state with a “blue” legislature and this year you will find there has been a major push to adopt all kinds of restrictive gun control measures in which there is little, if anything, regarding punishment of criminals for the crimes they’ve committed.
The firearm has become the culprit, not the dirtball wielding it, at least in states including Michigan, Minnesota, Washington, New York, New Jersey, Illinois and several others where Democrats have a majority. The other party wants to lock up the bad guys.
Here’s what Michigan Democrats proposed in reaction to the shooting at Michigan State University and Oxford High School in 2021: A package of legislation featuring “safe storage laws, universal background checks and extreme risk protection orders.”
So, when was the last time criminals submitted to a background check to obtain a firearm? Do any of them keep their guns unloaded and locked up between convenience store robberies or drive-by shootings?
Oh, Ya Think?
Last month, when the Connecticut Legislature was considering Democrat Gov. Ned Lamont’s “wide ranging” gun control package, the Hartford Courant, in just eight words, cut right to the heart of the gun prohibition mindset.
Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont (Official photo)
Lamont’s agenda was ultimately written, “to restrict the purchase and use of guns,” the newspaper acknowledged. Such candor doesn’t often show up in news copy, even in a liberal town like Hartford, in a state where voting for Democrats is a developed reflex nurtured almost from birth.
The newspaper didn’t say Lamont’s plan was to “promote public safety” or “reduce violent crime,” but only that he wants to make it tougher for honest citizens to buy guns and enjoy shooting, for whatever legitimate purpose. This is what gun control has always been about, and public safety invariably seems like a distant second thought.
One tenet of his scheme is to limit gun purchases to one per month. Another was to raise the legal age for purchasing a firearm to 21. Then there’s a 10-day waiting period on the legal purchase (how many criminals wait that long?) of any firearm. Lamont’s package also includes a “safe storage” mandate and requires the sale of a trigger lock with each firearm. How much are you willing to bet every armed carjacker in the Nutmeg State will be scrambling to do all of these things?
Running Scared
A report in the Los Angeles Times led us to a recently released UC Berkley survey (co-sponsored by the newspaper), which revealed “more than twice as many Democrats (78%) fear being a victim of gun-related violent crime than Republicans (36%).”
The survey says 86% of Democrats think it’s more important
to control guns than protect the Second Amendment, while
82% of GOP voters think just the opposite.
Maybe if Democrats weren’t so reflexively fearful of firearms — or maybe if they overcame their anxiety and actually become gun owners — they wouldn’t be such scaredy-cats.
The survey also revealed something else we already knew.
Eighty-six percent of Democrats, according to the survey, think imposing greater controls on gun ownership is more important than protecting Second Amendment rights. By contrast, 82% of Republicans believe it is more important to protect Second Amendment rights than to restrict them (12%).
Also, according to the LA Times report, “But while 88% of registered Democrats said stricter laws would be somewhat or strongly effective, that share dropped to 61% among non-party voters and plunged to 20% for registered Republicans. Among the Republicans, 78% said stricter laws would not help much.”
Don’t Forget the ‘Big Guy’
The icing on this cake was, of course, Joe Biden’s recent executive order on guns which outlined lots of actions aimed at law-abiding gun owners/buyers, firearms dealers and gun manufacturers, but was totally lacking in any discussion about locking up criminals who use guns illegally.
The White House fact sheet provided the details. I looked real hard to find something — anything — addressing armed criminals and it just wasn’t there. But here’s what Biden has in store for the good guys:
• Increase the number of background checks by ensuring that all background checks required by law are conducted before firearm purchases, moving the U.S. as close to universal background checks as possible without additional legislation.
Improve public awareness and increase appropriate use of extreme risk protection (“red flag”) orders and safe storage of firearms.
• Address the loss or theft of firearms during shipping.
• Provide the public and policymakers with more information regarding federally licensed firearms dealers who are violating the law.
• Use the Department of Defense’s acquisition of firearms to further firearm and public safety practices.
• Help catch shooters by accelerating federal law enforcement’s reporting of ballistics data.
• Accelerate and intensify implementation of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA).
• Improve federal support for gun violence survivors, victims and survivors’ families, first responders to gun violence, and communities affected by gun violence.
• Advance congressional efforts to prevent the proliferation of firearms undetectable by metal detectors.
That’s quite a menu. It did get a reaction from Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, which bristled with sarcasm.
“So,” he observed, “Biden wants the Defense Department to buy more guns, he will blame crime on gun dealers and tell gun makers how to market their products. But he won’t tell the Justice Department to crack down on recidivist criminals, he’s not asking the courts to lock up armed felons and he’s continuing to treat the Second Amendment as a second-class right.”
Not to worry; the scheme probably makes sense to somebody.
A gruesome dog attack in Alabama reminds us it is better to have
a gun and not need it, than to need one and not have it. This is Dave’s
rural neighborhood walking companion.
Why We Carry on Walks
An especially gruesome report recently from Alabama serves as a reminder why it is a good idea to carry a defensive sidearm, even while taking a morning or evening stroll anywhere in suburban or rural America.
Heck, where I live, it’s not surprising to see coyotes, and neighbors have sometimes seen bobcats and even a black bear. That’s life in the rural slow lane sometimes.
But in the Alabama case, as reported by KIRO News, a 65-year-old gent identified as Joe Cleveland Scott of McDonald Chapel was found lying in the road, “surrounded by six dogs.” A sheriff’s department investigation concluded that Scott had been attacked and fatally mauled by this pack of canines, which may have all been abandoned.
According to WBRC-TV, the dogs were “interfering with the investigation” so Jefferson County Animal Control was called and the dogs were captured, and ultimately euthanized.
Various reports quoted Sheriff’s Lt. Joni Money, who observed, “People will dump animals. Say they had an unwanted litter, they’ll dump those animals in areas like that, and they’ll just allow them to run free. Then, they’ll pack together and look after each other. It’s kind of like a pack of wolves or coyotes. They learn to survive.”
Decades ago, I remember reading a series of stories in the local newspaper about a roving dog pack in a nearby community. One man had to shoot one of the animals in his back yard as he left to go to work.
While it may be a rare event that someone is attacked by a pack of dogs, it’s not unheard of, as this story reveals.
