The prospect of a universal background check was so awful that even the ACLU was against it. (Although it wasn't exactly a full throated opposition. See Dailycaller.com.)
So along came Senators Toomey (R-Pa.) and Manchin (D-W.Va.) with an amendment which required background cheks for transfers at gun shows or resulting from published listings. It sounded reasonable initially.
However, now that the amendment has been defeated and President Obama raged at the Senate for not passing it one has to notice the red flags. Others had previously speculated the motive behind the gun control push was to try to make the Republicans in the House look bad and win back the House for Dems in 2014.
Now that the Senate has rejected the amendment, that plan has hit a speed bump. However, if anyone wasn't suspicious of Obama before, they certainly should be now. It's pretty obvious that he wants to disarm the populace and was using a tragedy to gain support. We can speculate on the reasons, but President Obama's push toward socialism has been so steadfast that it's become clear why he is hell bent on controlling guns.
As the nation gets more and more in debt and the deficit continues to grow, the nation will need money. And with a stagnant economy, the money will have to come from someone. Obama's war on the rich looked at first to be silly leftism. But all his rhetoric about sharing the wealth makes it more and more obvious. He will eventually have to start taking. Not just from the rich, but from anyone who owns more or makes more than some blue ribbon panel deems sufficient. As the government creeps closer and closer to Venezuelan style socialism, there will be calls to nationalize industries and take more and more property from citizens. The government will decide wealth issues, in particular, how much someone should contribute to the common good. Citizens will resist having their possessions, their savings, their inheritance, their land and their businesses taken away from them.
So the first things that gets taken are their guns. Then the rest will be easy. Oh sure, criminals will still have guns, but that's not relevant to the overall need to disarm anyone who might otherwise resist the government. (BTW, Venezuela has strict gun control laws.)
So something that sounds as simple as closing the gun show loophole is only the first step.
One final thought. The typical Obama voter probably thinks Ruby Ridge is a piece of jewelry and Branch Davidian Compound is an imported brew. For the rest of us, when President Obama says it's silly to think the government would ever confiscate guns, it's wise to remember that those two events resulted from an effort by the government to confiscate citizens' guns.
Comments