Like a lot of people, I am sick and disgusted when politicians’ launch knee jerk attacks on guns with every newsworthy shooting atrocity. On the Buffalo terror attack, we got Tom Moran, the editorial page editor of the New Jersey Star-Ledger. The Texas school massacre was no exception. True to form, we get Angry Murphy issues challenge for N.J. gun laws after Texas elementary school shooting. ‘Choose whose side you’re on’ by Brent Johnson and Matt Arco | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com.
Gee. The ruler, NJ Governor Phil Murphy, is angry. I guess we should be shaking in our boots. The laws referred to—there are 8 listed in the article—are pending before the legislature. So Murphy demands legislators circumvent the usual process to vote willy-nilly on these bills.
“Let’s make every legislator choose whose side they have chosen to be on: the people of New Jersey’s on the one hand or the gun lobby on the other hand," an angry [Governor Phil] Murphy said.
So, I guess opponents of Murphy's laws can't possibly have rational, fact-based, constitution-minded, principled arguments worthy of discussion, consideration, and debate. For that matter, even proponents, should they have any qualms about any detail[s] of any of these laws, are not worthy of getting a respectful hearing. They too will be targeted by King Murphy’s anger. Anyone, Republican or Democrat, political enemy or ally, who votes against any of these laws for any reason is ipso-facto a hack of "the gun lobby" (which, remember, represents not just gun manufacturers but millions of law-abiding fellow Americans who are their customers, and millions more—including yours truly—who do not own a gun but who value their right to own a gun).
Murphy is a cold, calculating politician who is exploiting the Texas atrocity to bully his pet political agenda through the legislature.
One more thing worth noting.
Among the laws he wants immediate votes on is this "poison pill" gem.
Amend the state’s public nuisance laws to prohibit the gun industry from endangering the safety or health of the public through its sale, manufacturing, importing, or marketing of guns. (A1765)
Any sale, manufacture, import, or marketing of guns can be said to fit the vague "endangering the safety or health of the public," since any gun can be mis-used to endanger someone. But the same can be said of cars, knives, or baseball bats.
What legal gun manufacturer, or gun retailer, will be willing to take on the liability risk of producing, marketing, or selling a legal firearm in New Jersey under such an incredibly broad based liability law like A1765? But that’s the point, isn’t it? This is just a backdoor attack on gun rights, which is a direct assault on the individual's right to self-defense, which derives from the individual's right to his own life. Such a law is not consistent with the rule of objective law, or with Americanism.
A1765 points to the ultimate strategy of Murphy, and of the Left, generally—to regulate guns out of existence without outright outlawing them, which the Constitution wouldn't allow.
Related Reading:
Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens’ Scary Attack on the Right of ‘Personal Self-Defense'
Gun Control Should focus On Principles, Not Guns
It's NOT the Guns, it's the Rights
Banning Guns Punishes the Innocent and Violates Rights
Armed Self-Defense Saves Lives
Media Underplays Successful Defensive Gun Use, by Paul Hsieh
Human Volition, not Guns, is the Source of Gun Aggression
No comments:
Post a Comment