Democrats want to ban the right of civilians to own and carry firearms. Period. Calling it Common Sense, or labeling their legislative actions as such is just marketing. I’d call it good marketing but no sane person would want any government to have all the guns.
Democrats do. You do the math.
Burlington, Vermont, has so many Democrats that their two-party local races pit registered Democrats against actual communists. They call themselves progressive, but in truth, it is the race to the bottom and the one-armed starving poster child for prolonged Democrat rule. Burlington wants to ban guns everywhere, but it can’t. State law forbids any gun control without the express approval of the state legislature.
As Blue as Vermont has been, this has proven difficult. Repeated state and local efforts to allow municipal gun control have floundered. The legislature has managed to pass waiting periods, bans in hospitals, and jumps at every shooting in search of more constraints. Guns are great, but only when the government has them all.
Burlington’s ordinance to ban guns in bars passed the city council, and a majority of both parties’ voters (communists pretending to be Democrats and actual communists) approve. They need the legislature’s approval for the law to take effect.
Why?
Without repeating what I’ve already said about Democrats banning guns the spark for this particular effort was a shooting outside a bar. “Supporters say it’s needed to reduce the increase in homicides in downtown Burlington and elsewhere.“
Everywhere, including elsewhere, that is not inside a bar is outside a bar, so I suppose, if you are insane enough to want the government to have all the guns, this makes some sense. A guy shoots another guy in front of the bar; we need to ban guns in bars. [Related: The Blight of Democrat Rule Continues to Take It’s Toll on Burlington, Vermont.]
Can we do that with Public Schools? If it is illegal to groom children outside public schools, it should be unlawful inside them.
Anyway.
The altercation began in the bar, then moved outside, where the perp shot the victim, but banning guns in bars will do what all gun bans do: ensure that only criminals have guns. As I wrote here,
For the sake of argument, let’s agree that people inclined to ignore the law will. Let us also consider that if you want to shoot someone or a bunch of them, the best possible locations are ones where you know you’ll have a significant force advantage. It, therefore, follows that any act of government that creates opportunities for criminals to have a force advantage is a deliberate move to create victims.
I’m not convinced the legislature will even allow the ordinance to take effect, but if it does, we can predict what happens next. Shootings inside and outside of bars (which, as noted above, is everywhere else) will rise, which is the point. The goal is not to ban guns in Burlington bars; it is to ban guns in Burlington, and until more people get shot inside and outside of bars, Burlington can’t get that done.
More shootings (property crime, assaults, homelessness, and drug overdoses) are, after all, what Burlington has managed just by being Burlington.
