Dueling dumbasses

Vintage had a nice writeup on the Chicago Tribune's idiotic and fascist call to repeal the Second Amendment, but not to be outdone, Patterico's punching bag of choice offered up their own brand of weapons-grade stupidity when it comes to the Second Amendment. 

Gun manufacturers insist that these deaths are not their fault, preferring to pin the blame on criminals and irresponsible dealers. They have fiercely resisted even minimal restrictions on sales and have simultaneously washed their hands of responsibility for this "collateral damage."

Possibly because it is the fault of criminals and shady dealers?  Most guns that are used in crime are stolen or bought by a straw purchaser, there's no way to stop straw purchases unless you're planning on creating a police sta...oh, I see.  Nah, we're not buying.  Anyway, here's the half-baked scheme the LA Times columnists have cooked up,

We propose a new way to prod gun makers to reduce gun deaths, one that would be unlikely to put them out of business or to prevent law-abiding citizens from obtaining guns. By using a strategy known as "performance-based regulation," we would deputize private actors -- the gun makers -- to deal with the negative effects of their products in ways that promote the public good.

Essentially, they want the government to try and somehow force gun companies themselves to lower the murder rate, then I think they demand a unicorn. 

I think I see the game plan here.  They want to punish gun companies that see their guns used in crime more frequently, and we all know, common firearms (the ones the Nanny Staters swear they don't want to take away) are the ones used the most in crime. 

When the inevitable penalties come down, the price of basic firearm companies like Remington, Mossberg, Ruger, Smith&Wesson and any other traditional firearms manufacturer skyrocket and the companies will suffer immensely.  Fewer people would be able to buy firearms, particularly younger people interested in shooting sports or hunting.  Makers of budget firearms would quickly fold as well.  Criminals would then inevitably go to eeeevil assault weapons, and those manufacturers suffer, and lose new shooters to the skyrocketing costs.

This plan would ultimately leave any manufacturer for common folks destroyed.  It would ultimately be done through the combination of federal penalties and making gun ownership such an expensive, miserable hassle it makes it prohibitive to new shooters and in the long term destroys American gun culture.

Further, they propose a cap and trade scheme, which would allow gun manufacturers to sell I guess what you could call chalk outline credits, which would have a similar effect as the penalties would.  Again, the costs would go to the buyer, and costs would skyrocket, which would again keep younger people away from taking up shooting sports or hunting.

They reveal themselves here, this is all fascist gun control by other means,

How would gun companies go about reducing gun deaths? The main thing to emphasize is that this approach relies on the nimbleness, innovation and experimentation that come from private competition -- rather than on the heavy-handed power of governmental regulation. Gun makers might decide to add trigger locks to their guns, or to work only with dealers who meet certain standards of responsibility. They might withdraw their semiautomatic weapons from the consumer market, or even work hand in hand with local officials to fight gangs and increase youth employment opportunities. Surely they will think up new strategies once they have a legal obligation and financial incentive to take responsibility for the harm their products cause.

Translation:  We can't impose fascist bans and regulation on the public, but we can force you gunmakers to do it for us! 

This dance never ends. 

Posted by: doubleplusundead at 06:12 PM | Comments (17) | Add Comment
Post contains 623 words, total size 5 kb.