This from Mother Jones:
House Democrats plan to prioritize a bill that will require a background check for every gun sale, according to multiple sources close to the matter. The legislation represents an aggressive shift in strategy by Democrats and their gun reform allies, who in previous years had tended to pursue more modest background check bills that would have exempted large numbers of gun purchases.
Federal law currently only requires licensed firearm retailers, such as gun stores or hunting shops, to run the would-be buyer through the FBI’s National Instant Background Check System. This means any firearms purchased outside those venues—on the internet or from a private dealer at a gun show, for instance—can be sold without taking that step. According to a 2017 study in the Annals of Internal Medicine, which was funded in part by supporters of gun control, 22 percent of US gun owners obtained a firearm without a background check over the past two years…
But with Ryan leaving Congress and Democrats winning control of the House, Thompson now plans to introduce a bill that will go further than any of those earlier proposals: It will require a background check for every gun sale or transfer, regardless of who’s doing the selling or transferring. The move has been in the works since before the election, when Thompson met with outside gun reform allies like the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Everytown for Gun Safety, the Center for American Progress, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, and Giffords to talk about what they might push for if Democrats won the House.
So now that the Democrats regained control of the House, they want to ban all private firearm transfers.
All. Of. Them.
You want to give a gun to your son or daughter? You better go to a dealer and have an NICS run on them. Somebody dies and you inherit the guns? The estate is going to have to have an FFL have you do a 4473. Do you want to borrow a gun from your buddy to try it out? You get the idea.
One of the groups pushing for this bill, but not mentioned in Mother Jones, is Doctors Demand Action.
I bet you can guess who is bankrolling them?
They were “founded” (I use quotes because it was hardly organic) by a couple of doctors after the NRA sent out a tweet saying “Someone should tell self-important anti-gun doctors to stay in their lane. Half of the articles in Annals of Internal Medicine are pushing for gun control. Most upsetting, however, the medical community seems to have consulted NO ONE but themselves.”
This is why I hate Twitter, 140 characters are not enough to make a reasoned point and it just becomes who can make the snarkiest comment.
The fact is that the medical profession is leaning ever further Left, especially in areas like pediatrics.
We watched under Obama a portion of the medical community tried to use their medical credentials in an entirely partisan way. Vivek Murthy founded Doctors for America, a group of medical doctors that pushed hard for Obama and Obamacare. Murthy was rewarded for his politicking by being made Surgeon General, despite having made no significant medical research, having no significant history of patient care, or having never managed a hospital or a medical school. He pretty much ran a medical super PAC for Obama.
We saw this again with the medical and psychology community collectively decide that Donald Trump was clearly insane and should be removed from office under the 25th Amendment, all from watching TV interviews.
The APA had to publicly remind those in the profession about the Goldwater Rule before every psychologist who wanted to virtue signal found a CNN or MSNBC camera to stand in front of an diagnose Trump with being unfit.
From Josef Mengele to the psychologists of the Soviet Union to Japanese Unit 731 (Japan had an army of Mengeles who performed medical torture on Chinese and US prisoners in WWII), history has shown us just how quickly politics can turn any MD in a white coat into a partisan hack capable of the most brutal human rights violations in the name of political ideology.
There is nothing to suggest American physicians are any different.
What disgusts me is that these people use their position as doctors as a facade of objective, evidence based professionals, while being totally partisan.
“My medical degree, board certifications, and white coat are all the proof you need to see that I am beholden only to the highest professional standards of objectivity, while I claim that all assault weapon owners and NRA members are sociopaths and all Trump voters are pathological and need to be lobotomized.”
So that a bunch of Medical Doctors who know nothing about firearms policy or law, come up with some highly partisan study, try to influence politics in a partisan way, get called out by the NRA is not unreasonable.
There were a lot responses to that Tweet like this:
Besides being a potential HIPAA violation, is the “I have taken bullets out of bodies so I know about gun violence.”
No you don’t. Pulling bullets out of bodies has nothing to do with gun policy. It’s politics driven by emotion and bloody pictures from a hospital, not an understanding of the root of a lot of gun violence as a gang and drug related problem.
Many of the Tweets as well as the policy of Doctors Demand Action call for CDC funding of “gun violence research.”
Apparently, like the partisans that they are, they ignore research they don’t like. Such as the CDC report that said:
Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.
Because they don’t want the truth, they want the CDC to make up a justification for massive gun control with the CDC giving the facade of an objective study instead of a partisan hatchet job to a Constitutional right.
That brings us all the way to this article from Annals of Epidemiology.
In 1991, California implemented a law that mandated a background check for all firearm purchases with limited exceptions (comprehensive background check or CBC policy) and prohibited firearm purchase and possession for persons convicted within the past 10 years of certain violent crimes classified as misdemeanors (MVP policy). We evaluated the population effect of the simultaneous implementation of CBC and MVP policies in California on firearm homicide and suicide.
The simultaneous implementation of CBC and MVP policies was not associated with a net change in the firearm homicide rate over the ensuing 10 years in California. The decrease in firearm suicides in California was similar to the decrease in nonfirearm suicides in that state. Results were robust across multiple model specifications and methods.
CBC and MVP policies were not associated with changes in firearm suicide or homicide. Incomplete and missing records for background checks, incomplete compliance and enforcement, and narrowly constructed prohibitions may be among the reasons for these null findings.
So California’s universal background check law did… just like the Brady Bill before it… fuck all nothing to reduce crime or gun deaths!
But that study didn’t come to the conclusion that they wanted, so the Democrats and Doctors Demand Action are just going to ignore it and keep driving forward with their political desires.
There is one thing that all of this conclusively proves:
It is not about safety, is is about control. They are going to take your rights because they want to. Saving lives is the excuse they will use, even though there is no evidence that their bill will do that at all.