How’s That SAFE Act Working Out?

It always blows my mind when our opponents point to the horrors of violent crime in cities with very restrictive gun laws. What more could we do gun law wise than is currently being done in New York City? Isn’t this basically an admission that gun control doesn’t work? Is the SAFE act really making anyone safer? Sometimes I don’t think they honestly believe their own BS, but crime seems like a good argument for turning a fear and loathing of firearms into policy.

Related posts (automatically generated):

  1. Playing the Odds
  2. Safe Purchased
  3. What is Safe Enough Storage for the Pittsburgh Police?

3 thoughts on “How’s That SAFE Act Working Out?”

  2. I think they do believe it. They have a number of what I think of as mental health problems that hinder their thinking. Here are a few:

    1) They “just” will not or cannot determine truth from falsity.
    2) Their capacity to understand what 10,000 versus 300,000,000 million guns in circulation means is non-existent.
    3) The difference between intent and actual effect is incomprehensible to them.

    There are some exceptions of course. I think Schumer, Feinstein, Boxer, Holder, Obama, and many others know that both constitutionally and from a public safety standpoint we are correct. They have ulterior motives and such low morals that it the only way it bothers them is if it makes it difficult to accomplish their main goals.

    Those that “believe” are useful idiots to those in power.

  3. See, the SAFE act is working perfectly. It’s all those ‘other’ places that don’t have it that are causing all of NYC’s crime now. So obviously we need to pass a national SAFE act. Then it will be all the fault of those firearms that were grandfathered so we need to start having mandatory ‘buy backs’ to get them out of the hands of irresponsible owners.

    Then the unicorns will return.

Comments are closed.