President Obama's Town Hall and Gun Rights

Okay, in light of the tragedy at UCLA this last week the President’s Town Hall clip responding to the gun control issue has been making its rounds again. I’ll address each claim. I am not trying to shut down the conversation with a wall of text. I only hope to inform people unaware of the state of gun rights in California and in politics. I would be more than happy to address any particular point in more depth.

Democrats are not “hell bent on taking away folks guns.”

Not according to some places where Democrats speak freely. There are some bold Democrats who will propose outright confiscation. What I have yet to see are any gun control/safety advocates speak against such measures to prove they do not support confiscation. For all I know there are many “gun safety” advocates who approach their goals over time.

Gun Violence Restraining Order was passed after the Isla Vista Rampage. The original text allowed any person to make a claim against another to have their weapons confiscated. The law that passed only allowed family members to make such a claim. AB 2607 is currently on route to the governor’s desk to expand the list of people who can make the claim to include: employers/employees and teachers. Given the state of Civil Discourse in society does anyone seriously think this addition would not be abused?

There are several new gun laws also at the governor's desk to be signed that require gun owners to turn in certain types of previously legal firearms and their accessories. Here is a list of all the gun laws headed to the governor’s desk this year. It might be worth noting the only anti-gun law that didn’t make it through the CA legislature was a ban on all semiautomatic firearms.

More guns have been sold since he’s been president, ever.

This is true. This is due to the rallying cry Democrats start after every mass shooting to put forward gun control. Anytime something people want that is threatened to be banned is believed to be banned, there is a surge. Most calibers have been reasonable to find at their pre-surge prices the .22 Long Rifle rimfire cartridge has gone from about $.02/ea to $.12/ea. Yes, a 6x price per round increase, this is my conservative estimate of what one can find in bulk online sales. If we are talking regular price retail, then it is closer to $.16/ea.

He has never proposed confiscation.

Following the Umpqua killings President Obama lauded the Australian model. Australia required by law many lawful gun owners to turn in their firearms. This endorsement was not an isolated incident. Democrats have frequently lauded the policies in the UK and Australia as positive policies.

We should treat guns like cars.

The President described how seatbelt laws, airbags, DUI crackdown, road design, and the ability to study the events lead to reduced auto deaths. The President wanted to approach gun deaths like public health.

This is a common comparison. Except that every driver’s training class begins to remind us potential drivers that driving is a privilege. If one believes what the Supreme Court said in 2008, then gun ownership is a fundamental right, not a privilege. A more appropriate issue to compare public safety and gun rights would be other fundamental rights such as: speech, religion, assembly, association, unreasonable searches and seizures, self incrimination, etc. See Incorporation of the Bill of Rights for a better list.

Suspected terrorists can buy guns, compares to no fly list.

The President looks at the no fly list a an effective tool, there have been numerous problems with the administration of such a thing. The ACLU has a pretty clear position on watchlists. This at least is a better comparison to driving cars, as the right to freely move between the states is a fundamental right. Then again, this only questions the legitimacy of watchlists in general. If a person has not been charged with a crime or been adjudicated through Due Process, should a fundamental right be lost? The most telling of the President’s response. By his language, he does not think of the 2nd Amendment as an incorporated fundamental right. There is a long history with President’s disagreeing with the Court and he is fine to do so, but he ought to be forthright about such positions.