We first saw gun control advocates attempt to use government contracts as leverage against gun makers in New Jersey. Institute gun control or our cops won’t buy your guns! That came to nought. In October on this year, New York Senator Chuck Schumer demanded that the Army make its handgun selection contingent on whether or not the aspiring supplier complied with various gun control proposals. That also fell by the wayside. And here it is again, via huffingtonpost.com‘s Why Aren’t We Talking About This Practical Way to Curb Gun Violence? Because it puts our police in peril? Here’s the authors list of demands . . .
There are several common sense, feasible conditions that should be part of every government contract with a firearms manufacturer or seller. Here are some key ones:
1) Require that, at every stage of the distribution process, the manufacturer or distributor sell guns only to dealers with responsible business practices that minimize the risk that criminals will obtain the weapons. The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence’s Code of Conduct is a model for responsible practices.
2) Require the manufacturer to commit to developing and installing life-saving features on firearms, such as user authorized or childproof “smart” technology;
3) Require manufacturers to sell military-purposed assault weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines only to governments, and not to civilians.
Former U.S., Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman and New Yorkers Against Gun Violence Executive Director Leah Gunn Barrett (yes, that’s her name) reckon that “mayors and governors across America [should] use their collective purchasing power right now to stop the appalling carnage that, sadly, has come to define us as a nation.”
What these hoplophobic harridans don’t understand: the free market helps define us as a nation. But then why should they understand that when they can’t read the U.S. Constitution?>