I have been waiting to get more information on the Colorado shooting before I wrote anything, but so far very little info has come out since a few days following the shooting. It was odd that it took a day to release the shooter's name, even though he was taken alive. In the meantime, it didn’t take the Left long to jump to the conclusion the motive was racism.
President Obama, who Tucker Carlson called a Racism Arsonist, jumped to racism when he released this statement:
"It is long past time for those with the power to fight this epidemic of gun violence to do so. It will take time to root out the disaffection, racism, and misogyny that fuels so many of these senseless acts of violence,”
And the niece of the Vice President tweeted, “The Atlanta shooting was not even a week ago. Violent white men are the greatest threat to our country.”
Once it came out that the shooter was a Syrian born immigrant and all the victims were white . . . crickets.
We haven’t heard anything about motive or what weapons were used and where he got them. There was a report he purchased a Ruger AR 556 a week or so prior to the shooting. There hasn’t been anything on whether he went through a background check or not. I am guessing he did, and that is why there has been no word. Colorado already has universal background checks, a ban on magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, and red flag laws. None of these measures stopped this crime.
Joe Biden is calling for more gun control and banning “assault weapons." He said he did it once, and it worked, and he can do it again.
But did it work?
"We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation's recent drop in gun violence," the Department of Justice-funded study concluded in 2004. "Should it be renewed, the ban's effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement."
Also a criminologist from Northeastern University concluded that the 1994 ban had “virtually no effect.”
Even an analysis by the liberal outlet Vox admitted that there’s “not much empirical weight behind” assault weapon bans and that “studies on assault weapons bans have generally ranged from inconclusive to unfavorable toward a ban.”
The truth of the matter is that the effort to ban AR-15 and similar weapons has little to do with actual safety and everything to do with the perception of safety. After all, most homicides are carried out with handguns, not rifles.
And the public seems to agree.
The latest Rasmussen Reports survey said by a margin of 51% to 39% that “stricter gun control laws” will not prevent shootings like the one in Boulder. In two other questions, the survey indicated that the public is eager for another answer than more anti-gun laws.
For example, likely voters surveyed, 49% to 46%, said the nation does not need more gun laws.
In a second survey about whether it is “completely possible to prevent mass shootings,” a significant 64% said “no,” including 53% of Democrats.
Then on the heals of this story, he crazy Ninth Circuit ruled in the opinion in Young v. Hawaii. The largest appellate court in the country has declared that the average citizen has no right to bear arms at all; instead, the state has the privilege and power to grant certain people the ability to carry a firearm in self-defense.
After careful review of the history of early English and American regulation of carrying arms openly in the public square, the en banc court concluded that Hawaii’s restrictions on the open carrying of firearms reflect longstanding prohibitions, and therefore, the conduct they regulate is outside the historical scope of the Second Amendment.
This is an absolutely bizarre decision by the Ninth Circuit. In order to reach their conclusions, the judges in the majority decided that laws in place in Hawaii, before it ever became a state, should take precedence over the clear and unambiguous language of the Second Amendment, which declares that the right of the people to both keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. According to the Ninth Circuit, those “longstanding traditions” in Hawaii law matter more than the Constitution itself.
So, the judges looked at laws prior to the formation of this country and prior to Hawaii even becoming a territory. To me, they are saying that the Constitution has no bearing and the fact that some of those laws were the reason we created the 2nd amendment makes no sense.
Then Senator Menedez from NJ introduced S. 974, the Gun Records Restoration and Preservation Act that will create a firearm registry. The bill allows the FBI and ATF to collect, preserve and disclose gun records to state officials and members of the public.