Cleveland gun grabbers using tragedy to call for waiting periods
When violent offenders strike in a high-profile fashion, the gun ban lobby's hypocracy comes in spades, especially, it would seem, in Cleveland.
In the wake of the Case Western Reserve University shooting last year, in spite of the fact that it was the Million Mom March who held a tasteless press conference before the victim of the shooting was even laid to rest, a headline in the Cleveland Plain Dealer that same week shouted:
"Gun backers are quick to spin every tragedy"
Fast-forward to this week: On Tuesday, a man in Lorain, having spent the prior evening arguing with his wife and having his guns confiscated by police, who feared for her safety, walked into a gun store. After breaking the law by lying on his Brady instant background check form, he broke another gun control law when he concealed his new gun on the drive to his wife's workplace, and paced the street for 20 minutes waiting for her arrival. When she arrived, the man murdered his wife, a librarian, in cold blood, and in front of several bystanders, including school children.
We could easily have called a press conference to claim that this is a perfect example of why women need to obtain concealed carry licenses, and why removing the affirmative defense laws put people at risk in Ohio. We could easily have pointed out that all the gun control laws in Ohio failed to stop this man.
But we didn't.
Look who HAS already started using this tragedy, yet again, before the victim is even laid to rest.
Click on the "Read More..." link below for more.
The Lorain Morning Journal editorializes that waiting period[s are] needed before buyer can take new gun home in Ohio. "There's no good reason for being able to buy a gun and take it out the gun shop door in a rush. Especially now that carrying concealed handguns has been legalized in Ohio." Since the current BAN on concealed carry made no difference to this lunatic - it is illogical for the Morning Journal suggest a mandatory waiting period would have stopped him.
Jan. 23rd's Plain Dealer's coverage screams "Man buys gun on day of murder"(!!). The story's opening line tells you where they're headed: "George Kallas didn't have any trouble getting a gun."
On Jan. 22, WMJI's Chip Kullik tied this incident to our new concealed carry law, commenting that it wouldn't have protected her because, "what is she supposed to do, get into a gunfight with her husband?"
Action 19 News described his lying to purchase a gun as the exploitation of a "loophole".
Lorain police Lt. Jim Rohner, who heads the city’s detective bureau, is using the opportunity to claim that a person should have a “cooling off” period before buying a gun — even if it’s only a few days. “I think it’s crazy someone can go in and get a background check and have a gun in a matter of an hour,” he said. “What’s the hurry? When you’re buying a gun why do you need it right now?”
Democrat Rep. Joseph Koziura (who has consistently voted against your right to carry) is already proposing new background check legislation, claiming that his ideas could have saved this woman's life.
What we have not seen in initial coverage of the gun banner's spin is an examination of the facts:
Mandatory waiting periods (like other gun control laws) have failed to reduce crime in other states, and they would fail here as well.
On October 3, 2003, the Associated Press reported that a sweeping federal review of the nation's gun control laws - including mandatory waiting periods and bans on certain weapons - found no proof they reduce firearms violence.
The anti-gun Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had appointed a group of scientists to conduct the review. But rather than propping up their gun ban bias, the review undercuts everything the gun-control movement stands for.
The task force reviewed 51 published studies about the effectiveness of eight types of gun- control laws. The laws included bans on specific firearms or ammunition, measures barring felons from buying guns, and mandatory waiting periods and firearm registration. None of the studies were done by the federal government.
In every case, a CDC task force found "insufficient evidence to determine effectiveness."
The truth is, once this sick individual in Lorain decided to murder, no law would have stopped him. If he couldn't have obtained a firearm at a gun store, he could have bought one on the street. In lieu of a gun, he could have used a knife, or his hands (According to the FBI, 2 1/2 times as many homicides occur with fists and feet than with assault weapons). He could have driven over her with his car. He could have poisoned her. He could have.... The list is endless.
Had there been a mandatory waiting period on Tuesday, the only person it would have deterred would have been Mrs. Kallas, a law-abiding, defenseless citizen. Even if, after his threats, she had decided she needed to be prepared to defend herself, a mandatory waiting period would have made her preparations too little, too late.
But don't listen to us. We're probably just being quick to spin the tragedy, right?
- 1317 reads