So we have two strories in New York. One of a man caught for having a bunch of magazines. And is looking at up to 35 years.
And another is a 18 year old with two stolen handguns, one with a removed serial number who was flashing one on a New York City bus.
Wanna guess who'll get more prison time?
Wanna guess who the media and the Gun Control movement think is a bigger threat?
As Sebastian says:
Chris in Alaska has a look at Nathan Haddad. He’s looking at a seven year prison sentence for each magazine, and he had five of them. I anxiously await someone from the gun control movement to explain to me how locking this man away for 35 years is going to benefit public safety. Fines are enough to deter honest people, so why throw the book at people like this? I’ll tell you why. Because they hate you. They hate guys like Mr. Haddad. He’s a gun owner. He going to get what’s coming to him.
This fits in with Robb Allen's thoughts on why the media keeps pressing to publish the addresses of gun owners. (Another bonus of registration!)
The mistake these people make Is that they honestly believe gun owners are ashamed at being gun owners.
Publishing the list of gun owners is a danger as it gives out a clear map to criminals where guns are (and on the flipside, where they aren’t). These magazines don’t care about that, what they care about is their belief that nobody wants people to know they’re a gun owner as if being one were some sort of scarlet letter.
...This is true for the people with the real passion for gun control. The ones who are amped up and dedicate themselves towards infringing on a civil right.
They hate us, and even worse, they hate their version of us which is generally a strawman of epic proportions. The problem is they cannot face reality where gun owners are women, minorities, or anything other than old, fat, white guys. They cling to that stereotype with a faith so pure and strong that it makes Billy Graham’s views look like atheism.
It's not the guns. Otherwise they'd be worried about why the police have machine guns by the bushel.
Instead of being gleeful about it.
I'll put in a quibble. Not everyone for gun control is doing it out of hate. Some sincerely think that it could help. And they see the infringement on legal gun owners to be a sad side effect.
Those are the folks who honestly ask: "Why don't you make your gun less scary looking? It can't hurt?"
It's the soft good intentions of "What could it hurt to try." That's why the President and the other gun banners love the "If it saves one life." Trope.
Know what else would save a lot of lives? Banning booze and tobacco. Or how about all private swimming pools? No one needs a pool in their house. And if they really want to swim
That said, there's no passion among those folks. Most have never used a gun, and the few that have have used them in a hunting or other situation. It takes very strong emotions to be a high level gun grabber.
Consider what it takes for someone to go "Why do those folks need a magazine like that?" to "How DARE those people think they can have those murder magazines! We need to put them in prison!"
It'd be like someone saying "Well why not ban all cars with cup-holders, spoilers or red paint? It can't hurt."
Some would say that because they don't own cars and don't see the trouble. Others would say it because they hate car owners.
The hardcore antis we can't really convince.
Those that don't know guns and don't really think about it. We can.
Speaking of that, contact your congress critters if you haven't this month.
Don't be complacent.