ldsuttonjr Loc: ShangriLa

It has long been my opinion that gun control has absolutely nothing to do with crime reduction or public safety. If it were, gun laws would actually address crime and safety instead of imposing restrictions on law-abiding citizens and charging excessive fees to exercise one’s 2nd Amendment rights. Finally, a New York State lawmaker has admitted, though unintentionally, that the real aim of gun control is to generate money.

During last week’s anti-SAFE Act demonstration in New York, a handful of democrats staged a counter-demonstration. Richard Gottfried (D-Manhattan), the Chair of the Assembly Health Committee, made this statement:

I appreciate New Yorkers cherish their guns, but we also cherish our marriages, our children, our houses, our cars, ours dogs, and yet all these things have to be registered and are subject to regulation. And we do that because it’s necessary to protect public health safety and welfare. That’s true of our marriages, and our homes, and our children, its true of our guns.

On face value, this quote seems like an asinine comparison between gun rights and things that are not gun rights, but upon further examination it shows that the true aim of gun control is cold hard cash. Let’s look at Gottfried’s comparison items to see why:

Marriage: I don’t care where you live, if you want to get married you have to apply for a license and pay a fee. Our taxes already pay the salary of the clerk that files the marriage license, so why do we have to pay a fee on top of that? Also, why should two people in love need a government issued license to get married?

Children: Besides the pointless cost of a birth certificate, the government regulates virtually everything parents do with their children: education, discipline, nutrition. On top of that, the government reserves the right to take your children away for any reason with no recourse to get them back.

Houses: When you start adding up all of the fees and licenses that must be paid to the city, county, and state just to buy a house it seems pretty ridiculous. Then, when you consider that property taxes must be paid every year for the rest of your life, you realize that home ownership is a lie.

Cars: Like houses, cars must be registered and taxes paid on them for as long as you own them. If you buy a car: pay taxes. If you sell a car: pay taxes. Considering that there are always two parties per t***saction, the government is really raking it in.

Dogs: Nearly every municipality in the country requires citizens to register their dogs and, naturally, pay a fee. Why? I don’t know. Even worse, many places require additional licensing of deadly “assault dogs” like pit bulls and mandate neutering.

All of the above items are those things that are supposed to represent freedom, but are actually heavily regulated by the government. In each case, public safety is not at issue, only the government controlling lives and collecting taxes and fees. Gottfried’s comparison of those things with guns is apt. Gun registration won’t lead to safer streets, just less freedom and money for the people.

I doubt the New York democrat was trying to draw this conclusion, but that’s what I got out of it. Sadly, I think he was trying to say that because the government already controls so much of our lives through regulations and taxes that we shouldn’t resist one more infringement. Spoken like a true liberal.

Ve'hoe

It is mostly about r****m,,,,, when Bloomberg said this:


"It is time for cities to ban minority males between the ages of 15 and 25 from owning guns. According to the anti-gun activist, “95 percent of all murders fall into this category,” and getting guns away from this demographic would reduce crime and save lives."

All, b****s, Mexicans, Asians, and anyone else,, I care about!! Better watch your a--es,,,, the white liberal is about to "protect" you to death!!!!

I know,, I lived on a reservation!!! Don't let congress get your guns,,,,v**e for the nutless republicans,,, at least they are still lying to us!!!