BALTIMORE, MD --5/15/10-- Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley gives the thumb up right before the start of the 135th running of the Preakness Stakes. PHOTO BY:Kenneth K. Lam [Baltimore Sun staff] #2477 MANDATORY CREDIT: Baltimore Examiner and Washington Examiner OUT ORG XMIT: BAL1005152007330720

Martin O’Malley used to be the governor of Maryland, one of the states which enacted some of the most ridiculous and restrictive gun control laws in the United States. And despite all of those laws putting roadblocks up to make civilian gun ownership more difficult, shootings in Maryland have increased. In short, looking around the country, gun control legislation seems to spur “gun violence” rather than reduce it. Nevertheless, in the wake of the Charleston church shooting, presidential candidate O’Malley has decided to dedicate his campaign to spreading the gospel of gun control and making it known that infringing on the civil rights of Americans is one his top priorities . . .

From the Business Insider:

“I proudly hold an F rating from the NRA, and when I worked to pass gun control in Maryland, the NRA threatened me with legal action, but I never backed down,” O’Malley wrote.

In his email, O’Malley outlined some of the gun control reforms he would push for if he is elected in 2016 including stronger background checks, a nationwide assault weapons ban, and steps to prevent people from buying guns on others’ behalf. O’Malley described making gun control a major part of his campaign as “doubling down” on what he did in Maryland.

“What we did in Maryland should be the first step of what we do as a nation,” O’Malley wrote.

The majority of Americans support the expansion of gun rights rather than more gun control. SO it sounds like O’Malley is a bit out of touch with what the electorate really wants, instead projecting his own authoritarian desires on the population. But even if we were to indulge him and enact all the legislation he’d like, would it have any impact whatsoever on mass shootings? Let’s look at his prescription, point by point.

Stronger Background Checks

What, exactly, does that mean? It sounds nice, but what constitutes “stronger?” We have seen time and again that even in a place such as California, which has some of the strictest background check laws in the country, these “enhanced” background checks have failed to stop mass shooters from getting their hands on firearms. You can’t stop someone with a background check when there’s no paper trail to follow. Never mind the fact that Dylann Roof (like Holmes, Like Loughner) passed a NICS check when he bought his gun.

Assault Weapons Ban

This horse has been beaten to death, but “assault weapons” are not the problem. Of all the highest profile mass shootings in the United States, (with the exception of Newtown) the worst of the worst — including Charleston — were carried out with handguns, not “assault weapons.” Handguns are specifically protected under the Second Amendment, as affirmed by the Supreme Court, so maybe it makes sense that O’Malley would go after the only scary firearm that still appears to be fair game. The problem is that doing so would have no impact whatsoever on reducing “mass shootings” while further alienating gun owners.

Steps to Prevent Straw Purchases

This is, quite possibly, the dumbest thing O’Malley could have proposed (a low bar, perhaps). The attacker in Charleston passed a NICS background check and properly completed an ATF form 4473. He bought the gun himself, complying with all local, state and federal laws. Cracking down on straw purchases would done absolutely nothing to have stopped him. Nor would it have done anything about the Newtown shooting. Or the Virginia Tech shooting. Or Aurora. Or Tucson. All of these people had legally purchased (though not all legally possessed) firearms in their possession. Set aside the fact that straw purchases are already clearly illegal on a federal level, how exactly would O’Malley “crack down” on them further? So-called “universal background checks?” Right, because criminals will totally obey that new rule.

Leave it to a Maryland Democrat to be so blindingly wrong in coming up with “solutions” to mass shootings. How about trying to address the broader social issues rather than blaming the inanimate objects? Wait. That’s difficult. Let’s not do that….

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

54 COMMENTS

  1. He seems out of touch with America, because he’s not talking to Americans.

    He’s directing his campaign at the “Amerkianski” urbanites who drink grande lattes and think the Toyota Prius isn’t clean enough.Unfortunately , the population density of urban areas combined with our electoral college system means for the White House, ignoring most of America and pandering to the left leaning cities is an effective way to get elected.

    It did work for Obama, after all.

    • Actually the “electoral college” somewhat mitigates the effect of urban concentrations. If Nebraska did not have a set number of “electoral votes”, the politicos would be free to ignore its interests altogether.

      • Nebraska splits its electoral votes. Otherwise, there would be no reason for a presidential candidate to ever go there, it would be solidly Republican. The electoral college has it’s upsides and downsides.

        • How funny, I just picked Nebraska off the top of my head, and I wound up naming one of the few states that splits its electoral votes. But I guess that makes my point, even more so.

        • When general elections are essentially 50-50 how does making your state effectively only a one elector advantage make your state more powerful? The Dems love you states narcissism about wanting candidates to visit because they get electors they never would have got otherwise. Really stupid on your states part.

          I would love for all solidly democrat states to unilaterally disarm and make themselves proportional so NY and Calif end up being only a 2-3 elector advantage for the Dems instead of 100 or so. You don’t see NY or CA democrat leaders hankering for proportional electors in those states.

          Another example that I’m a member of the Stupid Party.

    • I’m an urbanite who thinks Priuses (Prii?) aren’t clean enough: if a car sucks that totally in performance, drivability, and overall fun, then it should remove SO2 from the atmosphere as it goes. But nobody I’ve ever voted for has ever won.

      • Subarus with the PZEV (Partial Zero Emissions Vehicle) badge are about as clean as a Prius when it comes to emissions, and a hell of a lot more fun to drive. They are definitely more tactical too, with AWD and room for gear in back with the hatchbacks like the Forester. With the way they handle on the road, not many SUVs or trucks are going to be able to keep up with you in the twisty backroads. Great bug out vehicles for any weather. They have a liberal association about them too, which adds a certain camouflage. If you don’t sticker them up with gun swag, nobody will suspect you have an AR and survival gear under that cargo cover in the back.

        • The new clean diesels are even cleaner. The exhaust from a Jetta or Passat TDI is cleaner than the intake air on a urban expressway and they are a heck of lot more fun to drive than a Subie. (Full disclosure: I own one of each.)

      • Actually a Prius creates more pollution over the car’s lifetime than a regular gasoline powered engine due to all of the pollutants in the batteries. In reality, they are very dirty cars when battery disposal is included in the equation.

  3. “Assault weapons” are the low-hanging fruit for Dem candidates. Proposing to ban them is one of the necessary sacraments to be performed by primary candidates at the Presidential level.

    • That sounds about right. If he wins the Dem nomination, he’ll probably be pretty quiet on the issue in the general election (unless he’s talking to key interest groups). Not that I doubt that he would indeed be happy to sign any gun control law that came across his desk.

      • Yup, I think you are right. Among the Dem party faithful, it is necessary to be all-in for gun-control, and the most visible form of that is an AW ban. Among the general populace–not so much. But statists are gonna state, and that means as much gun control as is politically possible once elected.

  4. Yeah, these ideas failed before, but that doesn’t mean they won’t work NEXT time……you’ll see……..cause I know BETTER.

  5. That pic…

    That’s perfectly timed snapshot of what I like to call the “doofus laugh”.

    • And yet 9 threads down there is an entire artical bitching out the AP for using a picture RF has an issue with.

      It’s okay when you do it, right Robert?

      • A photo catching a moment of derpiness is one thing, all politicians get caught one time or another. It’s only natural.

        Waiting for the right moment to photograph, and specifically cropping pictures to show a firearm pointing at a politician’s forehead is not natural. It’s biased and borderline inflammatory.

        C’mon man you can bitch better than that.

  6. Surely all those 2A “supporting” (D’s) will not vote for him, if he were to win the nomination.

  7. It’s so hard to take candidates from either side seriously these days….

    I’ll continue to live my life how I see fit and pay no attention to the aristocracy.

    • I’m slowly coming around to this idea. Now, if only the aristocracy would leave US alone. But I really don’t see that happening.

  8. Yesterday I think I figured out why “gun control” is such a winner for leftists, if you’re anti-freedom all you need to do is vote for whoever you were going to vote for anyway, that’s it. Do that and you can feel you’ve DONE SOMETHING. If you actually want to DO something, well that’s hard, buy a gun learn to use it well then legally carry it with you, those things are expensive, stressful and time consuming, but well worth doing.

  9. This is the reason the PA legislature gave the boot to Gov. Wolf’s choice for top cop, Marcus Brown, an O’Malley lackey. The rest of the country doesn’t need Maryland style totalitarianism. I’d be very surprised if this guy gets any traction, he’s just there to figuratively draw fire for Clinton.

  10. Yeah Martin, because gun control in Baltimore has really been effective on crime. (eyes rolling)

  11. Minor nitpick: The Newtown shooter did not pass a NICS check, nor did he fill out a 4473. His mother did both of those, and then he killed her to take the guns that he used.

    The point still holds for all of the other shooters that you mentioned.

  12. Hey that’s such a winning ticket. ‘Look what we can take away from you, voters!. Isn’t that great? and trust us, you’ll be so much more saferer if we can just make those damn guns more illegaler, because after all, criminals would never break the law!’

  14. A few errors. (1) The Aurora shooter also used an AR until it jammed. I seem to recall that he fired 76 rounds out of the 100 round magazine. (2) The Va. Tech shooter did not pass a background check, having purchased his handgun at a gun show in a PTP transaction. The only reason that he would have passed a background check, had one been required, was that the state that involuntarily committed him did not report those commitments to NICS. (3) the Sandy Hook shooter did not legally posses the firearms used in the attack because he stole those guns from his mother, and since his mother owned them, he had not undergone a background check. In fact, he passed on a purchase of a ling arm because of the State’s mandatory waiting period.
    These facts do not lessen your point that background checks are little more than security theater, except to the extent that they preclude prohibited persons from purchasing from gun stores (and from anyone in states such as California and Washington that require all legal transfers have a background check).

  15. I am a MD resident who has lived through the terms of O’Malley. The guy is a moron. The arm twisting he used to pass his poorly written crap through the state legislature was a sight to behold. Of course the effectiveness of his nonsense is the killing spree seen by Baltimore following the rioting. If he is stupid enough to double down on his gun control crap, he will quickly disappear from the national race.

  16. When I hear a democrat restating their anti gun rhetoric, they are just restating their anti civil history over and over again. Gun rights are civil rights.
    The democrats are anti civil rights.

  17. “What we did in Maryland should be the first step of what we do as a nation,” O’Malley wrote.

    Folding his words into national call for law abiding citizens seeking lawful self defense.

    “What HE did in Maryland should be the first step of what WE do as a nation,” .

  18. Ask a Marylander about the Rain Tax.
    (He could have rolled up his sleeves, told Marylanders that the Chesapeake Bay is polluted, we knew, and told us he was going to raise each of our income taxes $2.00 a year for five years to clean it up. He could have said it will benefit everyone including the crab and oyster industry. No one would have had an issue with it.) Nope Rain Tax. Based on the size of your driveway……..because of runoff.

    This guy is a career politician. Nothing about him says service.

  19. When he ran for governor of Maryland the first time around, he promised he would do for Maryland what he did for Baltimore…sometimes it’s better that politicians DON’T keep their word.

  20. Reminding me that Spiro Agnew was considered the “honest, reform candidate” because the guy he replaced as MD governor was so thoroughly corrupt.

  21. Is it just me? Or does that toothy grin remind anyone else of Alfred E Neumann from Mad magazine?

  22. He’s a sacrificial lamb to make anything gun control related said by Hilary leading up to the election seem less drastic.

    • Maybe, but even the Donkeycrap strategists have figured out that the more their candidates drone about gun control, the more they lose votes.

  23. I guess that O’Malley and Red Francis are both reading from the same page of the hymnal.

  24. Was an AR used at sandy hook? I’m not trying to be a douche but I very vividly remember the AR being found in the trunk by the police, even them being filmed pulling it out. I paid very close attention during the fist few days because I wanted to know what the libturds were going to wave the bloody shirt with. To this day no one can give me a solid answer on that.

  26. Hearing what he intends to do knowing that his strict gun control laws in “Maryland” are a total failure, leads me to believe these democrats are all brain damaged, they just can’t understand the facts

  28. Maryland is clearly at the top of the heap, very safe, better than say, AZ? All his other worn out comments are pure propaganda, but the straw purchase thing? How do you restrict a firearm purchase by a person who you have no idea might be? How do I even assemble this question? How do people get to these jobs, how?

  30. Great article, as always, Nick, however I do have one correction: So-called “assault weapons”. The Sport Utility Rifles are not up for grabs, either.

    Take a good read of the 1939 Miller decision. The Supreme Court in Miller held that any common (fire)arm(s) suitable for militia use or battlefield utility by the common foot soldier is/are the MOST PROTECTED arm(s) under the 2A.

  31. Of course, anyone in Maryland would look at Baltmore and think “Not only are leftist policies working, but I want to be even more disarmed when that comes to my neighborhood.”

    I like how in modern times, a politician has the balls to say he’s proud of having an F from an organization who’s only purpose is to ensure free people remain able to be free.

Comments are closed.