Some of those on the anti-gun left might claim they really don’t want to outlaw all firearms, just some. And maybe there actually is a small minority in this group who see a place for some private ownership of some firearms. More than likely, however, they are just massaging words in pursuing an incremental plan to eventually do away with privately held firearms completely. In other words, they want to just keep chipping away at the Second Amendment until it’s gone. They must be identified and stopped.
In a recent case, anti-gun forces got so carried away as to attempt to regulate something that is physically impossible to do.
The State of California would require firearms manufacturers to use technology that doesn’t exist in order to satisfy a totalitarian fantasy. The industry fired back with a lawsuit challenging the impossibility of complying with the law, which was dismissed by a flaky California judge. A wiser appellate court capable of understanding that laws can’t make fantasy become reality is now reversing that dismissal, according to a press release from the NSSF.
A California Appellate Court has reversed the Fresno Superior Court’s dismissal of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) and the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute (SAAMI) lawsuit seeking an injunction to block enforcement of the state’s ammunition microstamping law and remanded the case back to the lower court to hear arguments.
This is California, so no one should be surprised at any effort to eventually outlaw firearms, regardless of how bizarre or unworkable the plan might be.
We hammered the idiocy of the California microstamping law just over a month ago, while the clueless editors of the Los Angeles Times were singing its praises.
For those of us that actually know a few things about firearms, microstamping makes about as much sense as putting serial numbers on toilet paper squares or regulating unicorn farts.
The California Democrats who pushed the Crime Gun Identification Act knew that microstamping is a commercial impossibility with existing technology. They also were aware of the many ways in which this fantasy technology would fail or actually complicate the lives of law enforcement officers, and actually reduce the likelihood of getting convictions, when they pushed for the law.
So why would California Democrats force through a law mandating a technology that doesn’t exist in a viable form, and which can’t work in the real world?
That’s simple: by requiring a technology that doesn’t exist, they have created the circumstance that will eventually ban all handguns in California.
Of course, the liberals infesting California’s legislature care nothing about the real safety of the citizens, as illustrated by the following spectacular example of hypocrisy.
California’s Democrat Party is rabidly anti-gun, doing everything in their power to eviscerate the right to bear arms for the 55 million citizens of their state, with wave after wave of patently absurd legislation that forces law-abiding citizens to jump through hoops to enjoy the shooting sports or defend their families.
Meanwhile, they’ve only paid lip-service to putting violent criminals behind bars for long lengths of time, and have made no attempt to gut the culture of gang violence that drives criminal homicides in the state, or deport tens of thousands of foreign criminals from their proud “sanctuary cities.”
Here’s a novel idea that will be sure to be rejected by anti-gun legislators: Lock up violent criminals who are citizens, and deport the violent non-citizens. Don’t hold your breath for that to happen.
Source: Bearing Arms