37.9 F
Thursday, February 9, 2023
HomeUS PoliticsThorner/Ingold: Democrats use gun control to circumvent the real issue

Thorner/Ingold: Democrats use gun control to circumvent the real issue



U.S. Senators Dick Durbin and Mark Kirk voted the same on four gun control measures Monday

By Nancy Thorner & Ed Ingold - 

Democrats ripped Republicans on Monday evening, June 20, after lawmakers rejected gun control proposals approximately a week after the worst mass shooting in U.S. history.  None of the four bills in introduced in the U.S. Senate in wake of the Orlando shooting  received enough votes to provide for cloture (that requires 60 affirmative votes to move the debate forward for a vote on the actually legislation).  You can see votes HERE.

As Thomas Sowell questioned in his article posted on Tuesday, June 21, The Gun Control Farce, "Do tighter gun control laws reduce the murder rate? 

The NRA’s success in helping to defeat these measures is not money but common sense. Gun control arising from the Orlando tragedy was manufactured by Obama with no clear solution to any problem. The gunman was fully vetted to pass the NICS background check to purchase firearms, as were all of the active shooters under Obama’s (Bush’s, Clinton’s, etc) watch. None of the proposed measures would have had any effect, other than restrict the rights of honest citizens.

The Republican counter proposals, developed jointly with the NRA, would prohibit those on the no fly list from buying firearms if a federal judge could be persuaded of probable cause within 3 days. The Democrats rejected these two amendments because, in the words of Dick Durbin, “due process takes too long.” In other words, Democrats reject due process unless it suits their political needs (e.g., delaying Hillary’s indictment). The issue is moot, because current law already notifies the FBI, BATF and other agencies if someone on the list goes up for a background check.

Common sense would dictate that it is far more effective to remove criminals from guns than guns from criminals (a millions of law-abiding citizens in the process). Federal law already prescribes stiff sentences for gun violations.

  • Falsifying government documents (misdemeanor), like the 4473 gun form.
  • Possession along with illegal drugs.
  • Possession by a convicted felon.
  • Possession by a known gang member.
  • Possession by a minor (21 for handguns).
  • Gun trafficking.
  • Shadow purchasing (by a lawful buyer, on behalf of a prohibited person).

Despite the huge number of guns confiscated in Chicago alone, only one person was convicted for trafficking (52 known illegal guns), and sentenced to time served (3 months awaiting trial). Half of the “non-violent” drug offenders, whose sentences were commuted by Obama this spring, were also guilty of illegal gun possession. On the other hand, an ex-LEO purchased a handgun for his father (LEO discount) in Pennsylvania and made the transfer through a licensed dealer, complete with a background check. He was convicted of perjury for stating he was the intended owner on form 4473 and sentenced to several years in prison. Why? Because his father gave him a check before the actual purchase. The US Supreme Court upheld the conviction.

You would think the opportunity to get gun criminals off the street for 10 years or more would send a message. However, Democrats are consumed by the “control” aspects of gun control and avoid any actions which would solve or mitigate the problems. In fact, “problems” are things which can be for political advantage, and like smoking and drinking, are given only lip service.


- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from up to 5 devices at once

Latest stories


  1. The text of the June 22 Media Reality Check:
    Exploiting Orlando: Nets Advance Anti-Gun Agenda By 8 to 1
    In the wake of the horrific attack on an Orlando nightclub by a man espousing allegiance to ISIS, it didn’t take long for the Big Three networks (ABC, NBC, CBS) to advance the preferred political line of the Democrats, in this election year, to push for more gun control. Beginning on the evening following the shooting, NBC Nightly News anchor Lester Holt on June 12, sounded the clarion call for gun control: “Today’s terror attack brings national security and the debate over gun control to forefront of the presidential campaigns once again.”
    And for the next week, an MRC study shows the broadcast network news programs flooded their shows with statements favoring gun control over gun rights by a ratio of 8 to 1.
    MRC analysts reviewed all 47 gun policy stories (41 full segments, 6 anchor read briefs), plus 10 other stories that mentioned gun policy on the Big Three networks’ evening (ABC’s World News Tonight, CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News) and morning show programs (ABC’s Good Morning America, CBS This Morning, NBC’s Today), beginning with the evening (June 12) after the shooting through Friday evening, June 17.
    The study found a huge disparity in the airtime devoted to advancing more gun control versus arguments in favor of gun rights.
    Time spent arguing in favor of more gun control overwhelmed time devoted to opposing gun rights by 65 minutes and 12 seconds, to just eight minutes and 12 seconds.
    CBS was the most stridently anti-gun rights network. By a whopping 10 to 1 ratio, CBS devoted more time to arguing in favor of gun control (30 minutes, 40 seconds) to time that supported gun rights (2 minutes, 56 seconds). ~Media Research Center

  2. Guns and other items that make loud noises SCARE these liberals. It’s always “the fault of the guns” but NEVER of the shooter.
    That’s because “guns don’t vote, but criminal gunmen DO.”
    Yet, when we point out the violent video games in the hands of kids, and the mental damage these may be doing to their judgement of right vs. wrong, these same TV opinion-molders scream “CENSORSHIP!”
    I have learned to expect this conduct from the “Big Three” of TV media. Their hypocrisy is evident in their support of Obama’s Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who would deny freedom of speech to anyone questioning the motives of Muslims in the U.S. by threatening us with prosecution if we dared to criticize them.
    “Freedom of speech,” to the liberals, is valid only if you agree with THEM.