Very interesting piece by Jeff Jacoby of the Boston Globe on the failure of the 1998 Massachusetts draconian gun control law to bring about the results that the Bay State's "Best and Brightest" legislators assured the public would flow from their brave efforts:
After the 'toughest' gun law, gun crime rose
In 1998, Massachusetts passed what was hailed as the toughest
gun-control legislation in the country. Among other stringencies, it
banned semiautomatic "assault" weapons, imposed strict new licensing
rules, prohibited anyone convicted of a violent crime or drug
trafficking from ever carrying or owning a gun, and enacted severe
penalties for storing guns unlocked.
"Today, Massachusetts leads the way in cracking down on gun
violence," said Republican Governor Paul Cellucci as he signed the bill
into law. "It will save lives and help fight crime in our communities."
Scott Harshbarger, the state's Democratic attorney general, agreed:
"This vote is a victory for common sense and for the protection of our
children and our neighborhoods." One of the state's leading anti-gun
activists, John Rosenthal of Stop Handgun Violence, joined the applause.
"The new gun law," he predicted, "will certainly prevent future gun
violence and countless grief."
Discussing private firearms ownership (Bill of Rights) with a progressive is much like trying to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig.
The precisely opposite reaction is true. In every case, enacting concealed carry laws that allow people to exercise the RIGHT they have been given reduces firearms violence.
In a sense it's like the old Soviet Russian argument that communism would actually work if only all capitalist countries were communist as well. The bread lines would be shorter and there would be other types of food on the shelves as well. The reality of "they pretend to pay us and we pretend to work" was the case.
A nationwide campaign on firearms confiscation would work every bit as well in the US as it has been working in Mexico with one exception. It would justify many people to take up arms against the country that they live in. Progressives dismiss that, but the whole 'molan labe' scenario is an extremely serious matter that I would hate to see played out here for the sake of the collectivist desires of the Chief Executive.
off topic but excellent libertarian student gathering hosted by John Stossel with guest Ann Coulter. As posted by Professor Jacobson at Legal Insurrection.
Discussing private firearms ownership (Bill of Rights) with a progressive is much like trying to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig.
ReplyDeleteThe precisely opposite reaction is true. In every case, enacting concealed carry laws that allow people to exercise the RIGHT they have been given reduces firearms violence.
In a sense it's like the old Soviet Russian argument that communism would actually work if only all capitalist countries were communist as well. The bread lines would be shorter and there would be other types of food on the shelves as well. The reality of "they pretend to pay us and we pretend to work" was the case.
A nationwide campaign on firearms confiscation would work every bit as well in the US as it has been working in Mexico with one exception. It would justify many people to take up arms against the country that they live in. Progressives dismiss that, but the whole 'molan labe' scenario is an extremely serious matter that I would hate to see played out here for the sake of the collectivist desires of the Chief Executive.
off topic but excellent libertarian student gathering hosted by John Stossel with guest Ann Coulter. As posted by Professor Jacobson at Legal Insurrection.
ReplyDeletehttp://legalinsurrection.com/2013/02/coulter-on-stossel-shows-foolishness-of-fordhams-cancellation/