“The city of Chicago is a good illustration of why allowing local jurisdictions to put in place these gun safety laws doesn’t work,” White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told the press corps ahead of President Obama’s visit to The Windy City. How’s that, you ask? “Because it’s just too easy for those with bad intentions to just cross the city line or just cross the county line and make a handgun purchase that they are prevented from making in some other jurisdictions.” The way I read that . . .
Earnest is arguing that Uncle Sam should be in charge of all gun control – sorry “safety” – laws rather than “local jurisdictions” (cities, towns, counties or States). Before you go all state’s rights on President Obama’s ass, keep in mind that federal law already supersedes all local gun control laws. The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution prevents any infringement on the right to keep and bear arms from any local, state. county or federal government. Heller, dontcha know.
Often somebody who is seeking to evade gun laws like that is somebody who shouldn’t have a gun in the first place.
Interesting use of the word “often.” It’s an admission that some of the people seeking to evade Chicago or Illinois gun laws aren’t people who shouldn’t have a gun in the first place. How about them apples.
This is somebody with a criminal record, somebody who may be the subject of a restraining order or maybe even somebody with a mental problem. Chicago ends up being a pretty good illustration for why those kinds of national laws are important to the safety of communities all across the country.
Sure. Chicago’s failure is an excellent example of how we need national gun control – provided you’re the kind of person who reckons the federal government is the answer to everything. Even when it isn’t.