No matter how you parse it, most Americans want reasonable solutions to gun violence. Most Americans (88% according to Quinnipac’s latest poll support universal background checks.
By a smaller margin of 54% a different Quinnipiac poll shows that the majority of Americans support an assault weapon ban and limits on high capacity ammunition magazines.
That’s because most Americans understand that a policy to keep guns away from convicted felons, people we don’t trust to go on an airplane and people with certain mental health problems makes sense. Most people recognize the difference between restrictions on assault weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines and the universal ban that was never on the table.
Most Americans recognize that keeping guns away from people who are more likely to be a danger to society is not the same thing as keeping guns away from all people.
Still, there are some special people in America. In the name of opposing this imaginary ban, they are passing gun ownership and gun training mandates. Somehow compelling people to have guns is “necessary” for people who decry healthcare mandates as the end of freedom. Granted, for the most part, the gun mandate enthusiasts acknowledge that their ordinances are symbolic.
In Nelson City, Georgia Councilman Duane Cronic argues his gun mandate is necessary because people don’t have enough protection during the sixteen hours each night there is no officer patrolling the community. This is a deterrent ordinance and nothing more,” councilman Duane Cronic, who proposed the law, told POLITICO. “I liken it to putting a security sign up in your yard.”
Right, forcing people to own a gun is exactly like putting a security sign in your yard.
Under Cronic’s mandate, ”heads of households” who suffer from physical or mental disability” are exempt. Also exempt are “heads of households” who are “paupers”, a convicted felon or oppose gun ownership on religious grounds or belief.
The three members of Byron, Maine’s Board of Selectman voted for mandatory gun ownership, which is subject to approval at a town hall meeting scheduled for March 11. The stated intent behind this ordinance is to “pre-emptively block gun-control laws” despite the fact that Maine has a law barring municipalities from adopting firearms regulations. Moreover, the ordinance exempts the same people from mandatory gun ownership who wouldn’t be allowed to own a gun under existing and proposed federal laws. The exception is people who oppose gun ownership for religious or other reasons. It’s also likely that this, like a similar proposal in Sabattus, will be struck down.
Even if these ordinances pass, the mandate enthusiasts acknowledge that they are unenforceable.
Some communities like Spring City, Virgin in Utah and Cherry Tree, Pennsylvania aren’t calling it a mandate – but rather are using the language “strongly recommend” or something similar. Greenleaf, Idaho “encourages” residents who “don’t objection on religious or other reasons” to keep a gun and seek firearms training.
Others have a different approach, like forcing first graders to undergo gun training in school because gosh darn it, mandated gun ownership and gun training is necessary as the good Senator explained:
“I hate mandates as much as anyone, but some concerns and conditions rise to the level of needing a mandate.”
Besides, the NRA is willing to fund school programs to teach kids how to use a gun. Granted, the NRA isn’t willing to fund the mandatory training for teachers (also proposed in Brown’s law.) Since forcing teachers to take gun training is much more important than books, or school lunch programs, Republicans will find a way to pay for this all important mandate.
The irony lies in the fact that the gun mandaters acknowledge that certain people shouldn’t have guns. As noted above, the proposed ordinances exempt the very people that would be precluded from owning or buying a gun under the President’s universal background check proposal that an overwhelming majority of Americans support. Even if the ordinances do pass, they also acknowledge that gun ownership mandates are unenforceable.
At best, the ordinances that can pass are unenforceable and, in reality, recognize the validity of Federal laws that in some cases, they are “preemptively” trying to block. At worst, programs to mandate gun training for six-year- olds seems odd in a state that is simultaneously seeking to cut its education budget.
For people who claim to be so concerned about wasting tax payers’ money, these lawmakers have a funny way of showing it by spending time (and money) passing symbolic ordinances that can’t be enforced and coincide with the idea that certain people shouldn’t have guns
Welcome to Republican “logic!”
Image: Occupy The NRA




dawgsrbtr
Mar. 11th, 2013 at 9:58 pm
Lived near Kennesaw, Georgia From 1987-1996. They never enforced the law. It was all for show and bragging rights.
loading...
Cyndi
Mar. 11th, 2013 at 10:42 pm
“I hate mandates as much as anyone, but some concerns and conditions rise to the level of needing a mandate.”
In other words – we want smaller government unless we decide to create new laws that fit our beliefs and needs.
You can’t force me to own a gun. And please explain the “pauper” part…..is that saying that only rich people can own guns?
Last but not least – I wholeheartedly hope that that is the last picture I’ll ever see of a three year old holding a gun.
loading...
Evermore Jones
Mar. 12th, 2013 at 6:28 am
This is part of an alarming trend that I keep seeing in government these days which seems to be “We can’t figure out the right thing to so let’s just do something.”. Someone needs to make the point to these people that if they are not doing the right thing then they are not helping.
By the way- a picture of a three year old with a gun? Could you get more manipulative? I don’t think so:)
loading...
djchefron(Moderator)
Mar. 12th, 2013 at 7:51 am
6 month old baby shot while it’s diaper was being changed
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/18784544-418/6-month-old-girl-man-each-shot-multiple-times-in-woodlawn.html
“The only thing to stop a 6 month old baby from being shot is to start arming 6 month old babies.”
Wayne Laperrie NRA
loading...
Shiva(Moderator)
Mar. 12th, 2013 at 10:50 am
this reminds me of the Citadel that the gun freaks are going to build. An internal government built on gun ownership which means that in time the strongest will rule the roost. And when you ruled by the gun you have to force your rules with a gun. This is what the NRA, ALEC and others are pushing for. The strongest and the most guns are always on top
A day ago a three-year-old shot itself in the skull with a gun that a paranoid Tennessee gun freak mother had to carry with her at all times in her house, especially into the bathroom where she set it down and the baby grabbed it.this is the kind of people that we don’t need
if the local government wants to mandate gun ownership, then that government had damn well better pay for the guns. It seems to me if they think that mandating health insurance is unconstitutional, how can forcing gun ownership the constitutional? This is extremism at its best while it’s being at its worst
loading...
Evermore Jones
Mar. 13th, 2013 at 9:16 pm
Thank you for answering my question? Even though you did not answer me directly the gist of your response seems to be that yes indeed you can be more manipulative. If anyone out there reads this and doesn’t believe me look up psychological manipulation techniques on wikipedia especially the section on weasel words and their uses.
loading...