House Schedules ‘Gun Violence’ (Gun Control) Hearing

The Democrats are on a mission to make gun control an issue in the 2020 election. Rightly, the Democrats have blamed the Republican majorities for not being able to hold hearings on what they term ‘gun violence’ since the Democrats lost the majority in both Houses nearly a decade ago.

Last week, Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) boasted that the House Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on gun violence prevention for the first time in eight years.

Thompson is chairman of the Democratic Gun Violence Prevention Task Force. In a recent statement, he offered that House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) announced the committee will hold the hearing next Wednesday.

The U.S. House of Representatives is finally taking action to prevent gun violence – our new majority is answering the call of the American people,” Thompson said.

“For six years, our Task Force implored the previous majority to hold hearings and we were denied. This is a new day, we will have a hearing and we will get results. I am deeply grateful to Chairman Nadler for his leadership on this issue. No longer will Congress be silent on this issue.

Rep. Thompson’s idea of preventing gun violence is to champion a universal background check bill. It seems he missed the memo about the violence in cities such as Chicago, Detroit, Saint Louis, New Orleans, and others. America does not have a surplus of murders that could have been prevented by tightening background checks.

According to The Hill, the national conversation on gun control saw renewed energy after a gunman killed 17 students and staff at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., almost one year ago. Unfortunately, unreasoned emotion, knee-jerk reactions, and politicians that operate under the credo of “Never letting a tragedy go waste” equate to a huge threat to our Second Amendment rights. Several states passed gun control measures last year amid what politicians have hyped as mass shootings. Fortunately, the House and Senate under Republican leadership failed to move forward on any widespread legislation.

Just to be clear, this is not an article to favor one party over another. There are anti-gun republicans and pro gun democrats, but right now the general direction of the parties is very clear, and the democrats are running against the Second Amendment. I, unfortunately, live in Illinois. Our last governor was a Republican and although the state legislature passed several anti-gun measures, he kept them from becoming laws. Within 48 hours of a new Democrat being sworn in as governor, a bill was signed into law essentially creating a state version of the Federal Firearms License. Since then, a least a dozen bills have been proposed, including one that would force every firearm purchaser to undergo a check of all social media accounts before being able to buy the firearm. Another want a registry of every ammunition purchase. These are not new ideas, California and New York have proposed or passed similar legislation, Neither state can show any successful prosecutions resulting from such onersly oppressive laws.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in December that House Democrats planned to act “boldly and decisively” on gun reform in the new Congress. For those who doubt the difference between the political parties and their record on gun control, the internet waits. There are plenty of nonpartisan news outlets. Of course, if you are afraid of fake news, you can always look up the candidates in their own words. They are not shy about saying they want to abolish our Second Amendment Rights. Not so directly, but very thinly veiled for those who want to look.

If society is honest and accurate, there is only one relevant question to the Gun Control debate: “Do you trust those in government, now and forever in the future, to not take your life, liberty, or property by force of government?” If answer is “no,” the debate is over.

Do you trust those in government, now and forever in the future, to not take your life, liberty, or property by force of government? Share your answer in the comment section.