Given the way the rest of the world is circling the drain, one of the few bright spots is the fact that the right to self defense has never been stronger in my lifetime.
This editorial by the Detroit Free Press is illustrative of just how petty the gun control movement has become. Go ahead and read it. It's pretty weak tea.
Given the past hyperbole regarding “wild-west shootouts” and “blood flowing in the streets,” their current complaints are, well, pathetic.
They basically boil down to:
1. Can’t the Legislature work on something else first?
2. We’d like to see a system were constitutional rights can be denied through a non-judicial process based on local gossip.
The first objection is the silliest. There are many bills pending in the Legislature, as a perusal of their own news pages makes clear. The reason why these particular bills are first up for passage is that they require the least amount of work to pass. Gov. Rick Snyder's veto message offered and easy fix, so the Legislature made it. Mind you, this was something that has been kicking around Lansing for a decade or so - ever since the original reform passed.
It’s a simple concept:vvclear out the easy stuff first while working through items that require more heavy lifting.
Okay, so besides complaining about an easy layup, what else is such a burning concern?
Democrats say that county gun boards provide an additional layer of oversight. Because not all domestic abuse ends in arrest, local officials might be better appraised of the bad actors in a community.
This the Freep calls a “valid concern.”
Of course it’s not valid at all. Short of an arrest or actual conviction, rumored behavior should be inadmissible to state officials. I could add that it is precisely this mode of thinking – that whispered accusations must be given legal standing – that is destroying our universities through the systematic persecution of innocent men.
I also find it fascinating that the Freep clings to the old trope that domestic violence is entirely men vs women. Even more revealing is the staggeringly stupid notion that denying a concealed carry permit would do anything to prevent such violence. Does it not occur to them that it cuts both ways - that a vengeful man might try to smear a woman and deny her the means to effective self-defense?
Note: this has nothing to do with buying the gun or even transporting it to one’s home. In fact, one doesn’t need a permit to carry concealed on one’s property. So what exactly is the Freep so worried about?
The answer is that they hate guns and feel generally squeamish about them, and so they wrote a whining, incoherent editorial.
Like watching Skunk Bear fans complain about other teams running up the score, the feeble complaints of the Freep editorial board are music to my ears. It ain't much, but I'll take joy where I can find it.