An Idea So Off The Wall It Just Might Work

Gun control pushing politicians and their media supporters usually know squat about firearms. Most have seen the clip where Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) when asked what a “barrel shroud” was, answered she thought it was a “shoulder thing that goes up.”

In this vein, Frank J. Fleming has a suggestion about new gun control laws. Make them “pretend gun control”.

What we can do is pass a law banning a bunch of made-up things that
sound scary, and many gun control proponents already have great ideas
along this line. For instance, I read a column
in which Howard Kurtz mentioned a ban on high-magazine clips — we can
certainly do without something that nonsensical. And I’ve heard the
press before mention armor-piercing hollow points and plastic guns
(actually, I think we already banned that made-up weapon in the ’80s).
And as long as the NRA and Wayne LaPierre go apoplectic about it (“This
ban on sorcerer-enchanted guns is just a slippery slope toward
eliminating all witch-hexed weaponry!”), gun control proponents won’t
know the difference between this and actual gun control. And this will
help protect our most vulnerable people out there: politicians. Because
long after the gun control advocates move on to other things, like who
they want to tax next, gun owners will still be annoyed by any actual
gun control legislation. One of the greatest fears politicians have is
seeing an angry guy with lots of guns charging down the street, because
they know he’s probably on his way to commit an act of voting.

You know this idea is so off the wall that it just might work. While my preference is for no law, banning made up stuff just might satisfy those clamoring that “we must do something”.

2 thoughts on “An Idea So Off The Wall It Just Might Work”

  1. I'm sticking by my idea–have a pro-gun representative add an amendment that removes any exemptions for police departments. I can't see the bill as a whole coming to a vote if we manage to get that kind of poison pill in it.

  2. Do that and the prosecutors will just map the nonsense onto real things, and the judges will OK that on the principle that the legislators must have meant something real in passing the bills. "high-magazine clips" in particular is an obvious candidate for this.

Comments are closed.