I remember a story from elementary school about farmers having their crops overrun by rabbits, so they imported wolves to keep the rabbit population down. Then the wolf population got out of control and when there were not enough rabbits to sustain the wolves, they move into the suburbs and started killing pets. Now there was a wolf problem.
The moral of the story was, when man intervenes in the ecology, unintentional consequences arise. Apparently, lawmakers don’t apply this lesson to the human ecology as well.
Take “Universal Background Checks” for example. They claim that there is a “gunshow loophole” that allows criminals to purchase guns at gunshows or from private individuals where the standard background check isn’t required. Nevermind the fact that knowingly selling a gun to a prohibited person is a felony. But this isn’t the point. I’m going to point out the consequences, unintentional or non advertised, of H.R.8 which passed in the House of Representatives.
This do nothing, feel good bill intended to reduce violent gun crime, even if successful in that endeavor, has a greater domino affect that few people are aware of or openly admit.
This law specifically targets private transfers of firearms whether buying, selling, gifting or loaning. These private transfers do not require a transfer fee nor a background check. The background check will have to be done buy a Federal Firearms License holder, gun stores. There will be a transfer fee because the FFL is now a third party in the transaction and they charge this fee on gun transfers not sold by that store. I’ve seen fees as low as $20 up to $45. Once private transactions, a large segment in the used gun market, are forced into dealerships, one of two things will happen. The fees will increase or these FFLs will stop providing the service.
Why does this matter? Because now, the used gun market will be less competitive with new sales from a gun shop. If you have to go to a gun store anyway and the fees close the price gap between the used gun and a new one from that store, where no transfer fee is charged, why not buy a new one?
Why does this matter to anti 2A Progressives? They claim to want to “get guns off the streets” but they can’t come out with an outright ban and confiscation, so they propose gun laws and regulations that move the ball closer to that goal. Unfortunately for them, H.R.8 will increase the amount of guns in the hands of citizens. Used guns in circulation today won’t be as available to first time buyers so they will turn to the new gun market and an FFL. This will drive demand and manufacturers will work to meet that demand, essentially adding more firearms into society. Their pet gun control resolution will be devoured by a wolf intended to control the rabbits.
Categories
10 replies on “Of Mice and Men”
I wonder if someone retired from one business or industry or another, but with experience in the government bureaucracy would not start a business just for background checks, setup in such a way to minimize the overhead and streamline the process, just for private sales?
I could see certain veterans and human resource type staffing companies that might specialize in security personnel being good candidates.
Assuming this all passes the Senate.
The 2nd amendment is something you will never need until they try to take it away. It’s not up to the government to protect your rights; it’s up to you. Government is the problem. The only way to solve this problem is to get out of the water before it boils! Convenience is our Achilles heel.
Ultimately, the “rabbits” must learn to be like the one comically-destroyed by the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch — be armed (even if such arms are just sharp teeth) and prepared to defend one’s property and liberty.
Seriously though … civil disobedience will be required to retain our liberty.
I’m afraid it’s going to take a bit more than civil disobedience this time, and it’s looking more like things will get much worse before we see daylight again. These maniacal fools that the ignorance of the American voter have unleashed upon our governing bodies are hell-bent on getting their way by any means necessary, and that means we’re going to have to use any means necessary to fight back.
I did not claim that the “civil disobedience” will be civil. Rather, I use the adjective to reference the civilian — not an expectation of behavior.
Gun control laws for the most part are nothing more than feel good legislation whose authors are content with no positive results (in their view) as long as they can preen about how they are “doing something”.
Gun control laws are much more insidious than that. On the surface, they are as you describe; however, in simplest terms, there are many legislators who’s agenda is the control/subjugation of the people they’re elected to govern. Let’s not be fooled by empty promises and platitudes; power is the ultimate goal, and such power is thwarted by an armed populace.
Gun control laws, one by one, are like turning up the temperature one degree every minute when boiling a frog in a pot of water.
The simple fact is this “Criminals” by the very description and nature don’t care what new gun laws are passed. “Criminals” already don’t follow the laws in place, that is why they are “non-law following persons or criminals”. So making new gun laws only prevents law abiding citizens (the only ones these laws apply to) from freedom and a US Constitutional right. The laws already on the books for criminals possessing firearms are already fairly strict, but according to the “Left” this still hasn’t stopped the “criminals” from continuing to utilize them. So why would new laws not even targeting the criminals change anything?
More guns in law abiding hands -good. Less guns in law abiding hands due to restrictions criminals will ignore -bad (well, duh!)😆