Anti-Gun Extremism In The Garden State

"The Second Amendment is unique in the world and at the core of our constitutional freedoms. It guarantees an individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms. To argue anything else is to reject the clear meaning of our Founding Fathers.” -Presidential candidate, John McCain
Image courtesy of: http://www.inforwars.net

Selling fewer firearms to law abiding citizens who have passed government background checks will not reduce gun crime, because they are not the cause of gun crime to begin with.

Scott L. Bach, Esq. , USA

Date Posted: 10/16/07

Reader Rating:

Ed's note: The students at Success Tech Academy in Cleveland, Ohio, returned to classes earlier this week. Though security precautions at the school have been heightened, many still feel uneasy and some believe more precautions should be made on the political level. Was the ease in which one can gain access to a deadly weapon a factor in the catastrophe? In Mid-September, the first-ever National Rifle Association sponsored symposium, "A Celebration of American Values," took place in Washington D.C. In the event's closing speech, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich said "the right to keep and bear arms is a political right granted at the core of the American system to ensure that the American people have a right of self-protection and that no tyrant can take away their power or can put them in a concentration camp or can kill them without mercy."

Can drunk driving be reduced by selling fewer cars? Can arson be reduced by selling fewer matches?

The obvious answer to these questions is no. The criminal misuse of any lawful product is not a function of the number of units sold; it's a function of how effectively society deals with the criminals who misuse them.

To reduce drunk driving, we should enforce strict laws punishing drunk drivers. To reduce arson, we should enforce strict laws punishing arsonists. Selling fewer cars won't reduce drunk driving, just like selling fewer matches won't reduce arson. That's just common sense.

Unfortunately for gun ban advocates like Bryan Miller (Executive Director of CeaseFire NJ), the same principle also holds true for firearms. Selling fewer firearms to law abiding citizens who have passed government background checks will not reduce gun crime, because they are not the cause of gun crime to begin with.

But when it comes to anti-gun extremism in the Garden State, common sense and logic go out the window.

Case in point: Miller thinks that New Jersey gun crime can be reduced by rationing guns to law-abiding Pennsylvania citizens. When I pointed out the absurdity of this notion in a recent post, Miller dedicated an entire blog post to attacking my integrity, revealing a typical distraction technique of gun ban extremists when confronted with a principle of truth that exposes the absurdity of their agenda: Attack the messenger.

Miller's group characterizes itself as a leader in the fight against gun violence but a more apt description might be a leader in the fight against lawful gun ownership.