search
top

Proof That A Vacuum Can Exist – Rep. Carolyn Maloney.

Rep-Carolyn-Maloney---ROH Representative Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) appeared on MSNBC’s “Jansing and Co.” Monday and proved that a true vacuum can exist – between her ears.

When discussing the Boston Bombers, Maloney said:

“(The bomber,) as we know now, was on the terrorist watch list, so we know a gun check would stop him, if there was a background check,” she said. “As it stands now, (the bomber) … or the next terrorist can go to any gun show and buy a hundred round magazine, they can buy all of the assault weapons they want, no questions asked.” (as per our policy of not advertising the names of terrorists and mass murders here at ROH, we have substituted “the bomber” for the person’s name

The problem is that Maloney is wrong. She doesn’t know what she is talking about.

The mere fact you are on a terrorist watch list alone would not prevent you from purchasing firearm,” said Dale Roberts, local lawyer who teaches firearms law for the Missouri Bar.

The 2nd Amendment right can only be denied for certain reasons such as being convicted of a crime or having a mental health record. “So if you are on the terrorist watch list and you have one of those disqualifications, certainly that would stop you,” said Roberts.

According to NPR, 90 percent of the people on the list between 2004-2010 were able to buy guns and explosives. Currently the federal government doesn’t share the watch list with the gun application list. Should the process be changed?

“I have mixed feelings about it. If you have been investigated and you are on the watch list for good reason, then I kind of think they should scrutinize that. But, there’s the possibility you are on the watch list accidentally or incorrectly,” said Roberts.

Being on the terroist “watchlist” doesn’t mean you have been convicted of a crime. In fact, there are people on the list that do not deserve to be on the list because the name has been added in error. One such person was the late Senator Ted Kennedy:

(Sen. Susan) Collins cited the example of the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, who found out in 2004 that he was on the airlines watch list when he was traveling from Washington, D.C. to Boston. It turned out that his name was added to the list by mistake. Kennedy at the time said it took him several weeks to get his name removed from the list.

But what about the weapon Maloney is speaking of?

First, we know the suspects did not have a permit for the weapon and did not apply for one.

Local and federal law enforcement officials either don’t know or aren’t yet saying how (the bomber) and his brother, accused of bombing the Boston Marathon, obtained the guns they later used to kill a university police officer and critically injure a mass-transit officer. They didn’t apply for Massachusetts gun permits, as required by state law.

Secondly, the gun they possessed had its serial number obliterated, which is a crime itself.

Law enforcement sources told ABC News the gun recovered from the scene of the Tsarnaev brothers’ shoot out with police was a Ruger 9 mm semi-automatic handgun. Sources said the gun is in the custody of the Massachusetts State Police lab and that the serial number on the firearm was obliterated.

A background check at a gun show would not and did not stop these terrorists.

Third, it is not illegal to purchase a magazine and the purchasing of a magazine does not require a background check.

This means that Maloney’s points are all false. Every single one of them.

She is using an emotional argument that is devoid of facts and that is a problem.

We can argue all day long as to whether people on the suspected terrorist list should be able to purchase a weapon or not, but that is not what happened in the Boston bombing. The bombers broke the gun laws that are in place and did not care that they did. An additional law would not have made a difference to them.

Additional laws will never make a difference until we start enforcing the laws that are on the books.

To argue the emotional aspect of something that is contrary to facts shows a lack of integrity. Period.

We are not alone in noticing this trend.

Our friend William Teach over at the Pirates Cove has a post from yesterday on how people are pressing for emotion to overcome the law and take away the rights of other people.

I’m trying not to be harsh regarding this tragedy and her loss, but this is an emotional argument, of which the media is all too excited to tell us about, being good little liberals. Guns didn’t murder those people: (The Sandy Hook shooter) did. He’s the one who pulled the trigger, having planned it for years, and intentionally went to a gun free zone because it was an easy kill zone. Putting massive burdens on other citizens who committed no crimes is not the answer. But this doesn’t end there, as (Sen. Kelly) Ayotte (R-NH) has a target on her back.

It is a post well worth the read.

There will always be emotions on an issue like this. But when people make only emotional appeals, or people like Representative Carolyn Maloney makes an emotional appeal that is contrary to the law and facts, people should stand up and say “that’s not right. You are wrong.”

That needed to happen with Maloney and the fact that her statements came from a person who is looking to re-write the law, without knowing the current law should tell you all you need to know.



2 Responses to “Proof That A Vacuum Can Exist – Rep. Carolyn Maloney.”

  1. David Omler says:

    The same vacuum as Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann have.

    • AAfterwit says:

      Mr Omler,

      I didn’t realize that Palin or Bachman was advocating the passing of a law to deprive people of their rights based upon a lie.

      I must have missed that.

      Regards,

      A. Afterwit.

top