Democrats, media, and opponents of the Second Amendment rights took no time at all to call for more gun control legislations after the Las Vegas shooting incident, where a gunman opened fire killing at least 58 people, while injuring approximately 500 others on Sunday night.
Senator Chris Murphy – devout opponent of the gun rights said that, “This must stop. It is positively infuriating that my colleagues in Congress are so afraid of the gun industry that they pretend there aren’t public policy responses to this epidemic. There are, and the thoughts and prayers of politicians are cruelly hollow if they are paired with legislative indifference. It’s time for Congress to get off its ass and do something.”
Whereas the Los Angeles Times editorial board wrote that, “The slaughter in Las Vegas is all too familiar, yet Americans refuse to stop it.”
On the other hand, many other politicians and the progressives made somewhat similar claims about guns on Monday, including the Former Democratic presidential candidate Hilary Clinton, who tweeted the silencers as a way to bash up the National Rifle Association.
Though it is more understandable to advocate the legislative remedies after another of such shooting events, with this one being the most deadly in the entire U.S. history. But politicians always seem to struggle with this problem, when supposed to take meaningful steps, all they offer are shallow words and meaningless points in order to grab the most of the public’s attention.
In all his Senate career Murphy has been an anti-Second Amendment crusader, so much so that his websites greet you with the message “Congress must pass comprehensive legislation to make our communities safer from gun violence.”
However, in all his work, if there is one thing that you would not find, it’s the list of steps that Congress should take to rectify the most pressing issues as per his views, i.e. not enough gun control.
If Murphy and other Democrats were serious about implementing more gun control, then they would offer more legitimate steps for Congress to take in order to regulate guns more strictly.
If the shooter has used a modified semi-automatic, Congress could conceivably outlaw the “assault weapons,” which is just a phrase which is used to describe scary-looking rifles. However, America has already tried to ban the assault weapons and it didn’t work. Not only that, but over the past 10 years, the Supreme Court has ruled numerous times in-favor of the Second Amendment and upheld the rights of gun owners.
Second Amendment opponents love to talk about how Britain and Australia seemingly solved their gun problems, but they consistently fail to mention that the gun rights aren’t a foundational right in those countries’ constitutions, and that these countries with strict gun control laws who previously had gun rights were able to grab most guns from their citizens through strict gun confiscation.
And that’s exactly where Democrats like Murphy fail to make their point. No amount of reasonable restrictions can ever be good enough. There are background checks. There are ammunition restrictions. There are magazine capacity restrictions, location restrictions, concealment restrictions. There are an endless amount of regulations on firearms in each state. Only confiscation will satisfy the gun-free vision that Murphy and others like him idolize.
They should be honest about it, instead of continually offering up their shallow words. Most people respect transparency, even if they have differing viewpoints.