I nearly fell off my chair when I came across this:
Fact check: Would stronger background checks have stopped El Paso and Dayton?
I clicked in wondering what kind of twisting they’d put on it to fulfill their normal Narrative (which, if you haven’t been paying attention, is pretty much no guns, no where. You know, like their latest ratings). But I have to admit, it basically told our NH Federal Delegation they’re all wet on this:
Would strengthening or expanding background checks have prevented the alleged shooters from purchasing firearms?
Facts First: Doubtful. There is no indication that the shooting in Dayton, Ohio, would have been prevented by proposed universal background checks or legislation to bolster the federal background check system. The alleged El Paso, Texas, shooter purchased his firearm legally, according to the Wall Street Journal, and there is no evidence that he had a criminal history that a background check would’ve caught.
Wow, just wow. It’s what most of us gun owners already know and have been saying for years – criminals don’t go through background checks but they are an impediment (therefore, an Infringement) to our Second Amendment Right. Law abiding folks get through the check with no problem. In the case of Dayton and El Paso, those shooters also passed the check, then went postal. And unless you admit to having been involuntarily committed or use illegal drugs, you’re cleared there, too. It’s almost like the TSA security theater – especially since most of those that do lie on the gun purchase form never get prosecuted. So what’s the point other than “appearing to do something”?
A background check can ONLY look backwards – it is no predictor of the future. If you’ve kept your nose clean, you get to buy a gun.
The Universal Background Check, I’m afraid (like most other gun owners) will be use as an on ramp for gun registration – and that is what, I bet, our Federal Delegation (Jeanne Shaheen, Maggie “The Red” Hassan, Annie “I’m the most Progressive in this race” Kuster, and Chris “I won’t pay my help $15/hour until the Govt tells me to” Pappas) wants.
After all, Jeanne Shaheen is already on record for wanting to infringe our Free Speech rights (e.g., against Citizens United, who simply wanted to put out a movie about Hillary) so why shouldn’t she have our Second Amendment Rights next in her sight picture?
But still, for CNN to have said, effectively, that background checks are useless when a gun buyer is perfectly clean and law abiding? Wow!