Grassroots Commentary

Gun Control: Punishment of the Law Abiding

By James H. Lilley · Feb. 14, 2013

The shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School sparked another massive wave of gun control hysteria across America. President Obama, Mayor Bloomberg, Governor O'Malley, Senator Feinstein and hundreds of others have been fanning the fires of gun control frenzy since December 14, 2012. The loss of those innocent lives is indeed a tragedy of unimaginable proportions for those who lived and are still living that nightmare.

Yet, the voices of those calling for gun control, speak without solid rational thought. Everyone, from President Obama to Governor O'Malley, Mayor Bloomberg and Senator Feinstein, along with dozens of other politicians are clamoring for everything from a ban on assault weapons, to high capacity magazines, a 50% tax on ammunition, a $25.00 registration fee on guns, banning on-line sales of ammunition, requiring background checks to buy ammo, allowing only seven rounds to be loaded into a magazine, declaring a shotgun that holds more then five rounds an assault weapon and, in New York, forcing those currently owning high capacity magazines to sell them out of state within one year.

Some of these measures have already been signed into law without first asking the most logical questions.

Who is most impacted by every existing gun law across America?

Who will face the greater consequences of new gun laws?

The answer, of course, is the law-abiding citizens. Unfortunately, this has always been the standard. Why? Is it because our lawmakers know it's the easier path to pursue? Maybe so, but the bigger issues still remain after the passing of new gun laws. The violent criminals, gangs, the mentally impaired and the mentally unstable will continue to be a problem, and no laws enacted years ago, laws passed today or tomorrow will effect them.

Does anyone truly believe that a criminal will immediately run out and purchase liability insurance?

Does anyone really believe that a criminal will register a firearm and pay the $25.00 registration fee?

Does anyone believe that a criminal will turn in or sell their high capacity magazines?

Does anyone believe that a criminal will load only seven rounds into a high capacity magazine?

Does anyone believe that a mentally impaired person will carefully assess the aftermath of their planned violent rampage?

Anyone with an ounce of common sense, including those clamoring for these laws, surely knows the answer to those questions is a resounding “No.” Yet, the president, governors, mayors and others will charge ahead, full throttle, powered by the anti-gun hysteria to get their laws passed. And, in the end, the only people of America affected by these laws will be those who already obey the law.

Quacking loud and long for some of the strictest gun laws ever is Senator Dianne Feinstein who, in fact, has a permit to carry a firearm and has declared publicly that she would use it to defend herself. What is she saying with this declaration? It's okay for her to have a firearm to defend herself, but to hell with the rest of America?

It also appears that Hypocrite Feinstein puts a favorable gun control spin on facts and figures. The following quotes are direct from an article titled, Feinstein Goes For Broke With New Gun-Ban Bill:

Department of Justice Study. On her website, Feinstein claims that a study for the DOJ found that the 1994 ban (Assault Weapons) resulted in a 6.7 percent decrease in murders. To the contrary, this is what the study said: “At best, the assault weapons ban can have only a limited effect on total gun murders, because the banned weapons and magazines were never involved in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders. Our best estimate is that the ban contributed to a 6.7 percent decrease in total gun murders between 1994 and 1995… However, with only one year of past-ban data, we cannot rule out the possibility that this decrease reflects chance year-to-year variation rather than a true effect of the ban. Nor can we rule out effects of other features of the 1994 Crime Act or a host of state and local initiatives that took place simultaneously.”

“Assault weapon” numbers and murder trends. From the imposition of Feinstein's “assault weapon” ban (Sept. 13, 1994) through the present, the number of “assault weapons” has risen dramatically. For example, the most common firearm that Feinstein considers an “assault weapon” is the AR-15 rifle, the manufacturing numbers of which can be gleaned from the BATFE's firearm manufacturer reports. From 1995 through 2011, the number of AR-15s – all models of which Feinstein's new bill defines as “assault weapons” – rose by over 2.5 million. During the same period, the nation's murder rate fell 48 percent, to a 48-year low. According to the FBI, 8.5 times as many people are murdered with knives, blunt objects and bare hands, as with rifles of any type.“

Another article of interest titled ”Ten Big Killers: The Chart Anti-Gunners Don't Want You To See“ was posted online January 7, 2013. The sources for the data relating to deaths per year are, The Centers for Disease Control, The FBI and the U. S. Federal Government. The data for causes of death reveals:

  1. Tobacco Use: 529,000
  2. Medical Errors: 195,000
  3. Unintentional Injuries: 118,021
  4. Alcohol Abuse: 107,400
  5. Motor Vehicle Accidents: 34,485
  6. Unintentional Poisoning: 31,758
  7. Drug Abuse: 25,500
  8. Unintentional Falls: 24,792
  9. Non-firearm Homicides: 16,799
  10. Firearm Homicides: 11,493

In fact, I believe that Obama, Feinstein, O'Malley, Bloomberg and their supporters know that more gun control laws cannot and will not prevent another mass shooting event. They could pass a gun control law a day from now throughout eternity and it would not prevent another mass shooting. Yet, their solution to a problem they cannot fix is to attack the law-abiding citizens and punish them for crimes committed by others. Is this the way of the new America? If we cannot prevent criminals and the mentally unstable from killing, we the lawmakers will take it out on those who live by the law. Well, that certainly seems to be their answer.

Let's take one more step with the cry for stricter gun control laws. What would happen if our lawmakers were able to push through a bill ordering the confiscation of all firearms? Who would they immediately go after? You can bet your life it would be the law-abiding citizen. Why? Because they obeyed the law requiring registration of their firearms, government officials know where they reside and the good citizen will, in all likelihood, offer the path of least resistance. The criminals? Well, the criminals would get a free pass because they did not obey the law.

So, it would be gun crime as usual on the streets of Chicago, Baltimore, New York, Washington, D. C., Houston and Los Angeles, while a mentally unstable person loads his guns and plans a mass shooting at a mall, church or school in your neighborhood.

Welcome to the real world of Obama, Feinstein, Bloomberg and O'Malley gun control.


wjm in Colorado said:

Hitler was for gun control, and look how that turned out. All Marxists are for gun control, and that is all it is about, control of the people. Marxist Ideology has always failed, but it is a great way to rule until it implodes.

Thursday, February 14, 2013 at 3:19 PM

Fred in Oregon replied:

WJM-- it puzzles me that people do not understand. You are 100% correct.
I know my spelling is bad, jsut live with it. Please.

Thursday, February 14, 2013 at 4:44 PM

OhGosch in New York State said:

It is amazing to me that so many articles are written pointing out that gun control laws do not affect criminals. The criminal legislators know that. They know gun control laws aren't about crime prevention or safety. Gun control is all about tyranny. We know it, the government knows it. So lets stop talking about non issues.

Friday, February 15, 2013 at 8:24 AM

rab in jo,mo said:

I am tired of our government treating us like a bunch of unruly kindergarten students. They know that the 2nd Amendment is what puts the teeth in the Bill of Rights, that's why they hate it so much. An armed citizenry prevents the "social engineers" in DC from doing what they really want to do.

A bill has just been introduced in the MO State Legislature - this bill would require everyone to turn in what the bill classifies as "assault weapons" and magazines with a capacity over 10rds. within 90 days. Non-compliance would be a Class C felony.

While it doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of passing, it certainly shows the mindset of the progressives. I'd almost like to see what would happen if it did pass and thousands of gun owners suddenly faced potential felony prosecution. At that point, what would one have to lose if the penalty was the same as an unregistered full-auto, or bomb, destructive device, etc.?

Friday, February 15, 2013 at 9:30 AM

Ted R. Weiland in Nebraska said:

Think about it, the amendment that contains the language "shall not be infringed" is arguably the most infringed, licensed, and limited amendment of the entire twenty seven.

Under Constitutional law, self-defense and the defense of others is an optional right. Under Yahweh’s law, self-defense and the defense of others is a God-expected responsibility (1 Timothy 5:8, etc.). Which do you think is more easily infringed, licensed, and limited?

See blog article "You Can't Win Bringing a Knife to a Gunfight" at

See also blog article "Rights, Rights: Everyone Wants Their Rights" at

Friday, February 15, 2013 at 6:39 PM

David in Mountain View Missouri replied:

"Shall not be infringed" is an extremely clear phrase with absolutely no wiggle room, as clear as any Bible passage. Yet it is infringed upon and even ignored, how? Why? Simple, it is the bad leaders choosing to ignore law just as they will ignore and twist the Bible into a tyrannical theocracy that will fall as it has every other time in history. It is bad leaders that is the problem, not our Constitution and form of government as the Christian Founding Fathers intended it to be. Theses same people will destroy your government even faster, while the Christian Founding Fathers government has stood their assaults for over 200 years, God, giving us time to fix it if we as men will govern ourselves, instead of expecting or leaving government to do it for us as you would have it.

Saturday, February 16, 2013 at 10:29 PM

Robert in Texas Republic said:

It's ALREADY been infringed when they make you pay a TAX for a suppressor & Machine-gun. Just because some good Ol boys wanted to KEEP their jobs at the close of probation - imagine that. WOW. OBEY GOD rather than men - I SAY I would NEVER EVER comply even at point of a gun, I would still fight back and lie and cheat and steal to keep my hands on Guns as ANY real Christian is called to do by Jesus.

Proverbs 16.25 There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

Monday, February 18, 2013 at 11:24 AM

Hermit in Hazelhurst, WI said:

Who is the "O'Malley" guy? I know of the other three legs on the useful idiot stool but don't know who O'Malley is.

Monday, February 18, 2013 at 11:41 AM

Korea Vet in Bedford, NH said:

"O'Malley" is the Dem governor of Maryland...

Monday, February 18, 2013 at 3:39 PM

lr22 in pa said:

there is no question they want to disarm America.I know quite a number of criminals who love what the demo facist are doing.It will make their job easier to roband kill. do these nitwits know what will happen if they turn law abiding citizens into criminals? I guess they wish because I dont care how much security you have it WONT HELP YOU

Saturday, February 23, 2013 at 11:59 AM

lr22 in pa said:


Saturday, February 23, 2013 at 12:02 PM

Adam` in Houston said:

Ummm, Houston isn't part of this tyrannical gun control craziness, get the facts straight, Texas will NOT succumb to unconstitutional gun laws so keep it movin.

Wednesday, February 27, 2013 at 12:18 PM