‘Common Dreams’ Opinion Piece is Both Deceptive and Wrong

When an opinion piece at Frequent Desires.org providing options to so-called “gun violence” cites how different nations regulate firearms, it reveals the writer(s) should have skipped highschool Civics as a result of the US isn’t like these different nations for one vital cause: The Second Modification.

The article in query headlined “What the US Can Study From Different Nations About Tackling Our Gun Violence Disaster,” refers, through a hyperlink, to the Democrat social gathering platform and to information from the Gun Violence Archive, making the whole lot else within the article suspect.

That it appeared proper earlier than the Democratic Social gathering convenes in Chicago would possibly basically dismiss the entire thing as camo-speak, aside from one essential level: That is how Democrats nonetheless take into consideration weapons and the fitting to maintain and bear arms. All through the 843-word piece, one more and more is impressed that the tenor leans left.

Authors Frances Moore Lappé and Hannah Stokes-Ramos level to Canada as one instance to comply with. It appears an incredible thought to them that there’s a “ban on civilian possession of computerized weapons.” They like how Canada regulates handguns by requiring a allow, limiting possession to gun membership members and gun collectors and “anybody demonstrating a necessity or self-defense functions.”

Evidently, the authors neglected the Supreme Courtroom’s 2022 Bruen ruling, which nullified the “wants” requirement as a violation of the Second Modification. Likewise, the proper to maintain and bear arms is hardly restricted to gun membership members.

Subsequent, the authors take us to Finland, the place gun possession requires a license and registration, a flair take a look at for the license and a minimal age of 20. And, weapons “can solely be carried for a selected objective.”

Effectively, let’s see now. A flair take a look at. Isn’t that the equal of a literacy take a look at, which was dominated unconstitutional years in the past by the Supreme Courtroom? 

As a result of the fitting to bear arms doesn’t require residents to offer any cause, a lot much less a “particular objective,” this suggestion as soon as once more runs smack into the Second Modification.

Then we bounce to Norway, the place semiautomatic weapons are banned, one wants a license from police “s properly as a ‘legitimate’ cause for acquiring it,” and “self-defense isn’t thought of a legitimate cause.” Oops, once more. Bruen, McDonald and Heller—all rulings by the Supreme Courtroom on this century—type of put the kibosh on the Norwegian strategy.

Lastly, the authors come to what quantities to a gross sales pitch for Democrats.

“Because the resolution to gun violence goes properly past addressing psychological well being,” they write, “let’s start with essentially the most primary gun reforms advocated by the Democratic Social gathering: strengthening background checks and conserving weapons out of the arms of these with a historical past of violent crime or posing a hazard to themselves or others, equivalent to home abusers.

“Our upcoming nationwide election gives an incredible alternative to focus on these essential steps for public security,” they observe, “because the Democratic candidate for vice-president°—Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz—grew to become a gun-control advocate in response to the 2018 Parkland high-school taking pictures.”

After which they provide a plea for “commonsense gun reforms.” Gun rights activists counter this alarm-bell phrase by noting these are gun controls, not ‘reforms,” and in the case of “commonsense,” they don’t make any sense in any respect as a result of they aim law-abiding residents, whereas criminals proceed to disregard the regulation.

Frequent Desires describes itself as a gaggle “powered by optimists who consider within the energy of knowledgeable and engaged residents to ignite and enact change to make the world a greater place.”

For residents to be told and engaged ought to require a full perspective, which incorporates being suggested in regards to the constitutional issues associated to any coverage ideas.

However in response to Fox Information, Democrats can’t even get their very own platform textual content straight.

“The official platform of the Democrat Social gathering was launched Saturday and makes a number of references to a ‘second Biden time period’ regardless of President Biden dropping out of the race a month in the past,” the community reported. “On Monday night time, the social gathering will vote on the platform that makes 19 references to a second Biden time period.”

In a single paragraph quoted by Fox, the platform asserts, “In President Biden’s second time period, he’ll proceed deciding on judges who will shield elementary rights and who signify the variety of the American expertise.”

Besides that the judges chosen by Joe Biden haven’t appeared all that eager on defending the basic rights secured by the Second Modification. If Kamala Harris follows him into the Oval Workplace, and Democrats retain management of the Senate, many pundits recommend America can count on extra of the identical.

About Dave Workman