ANOTHER SOCIALIST REPUBLIC, MARYLAND, SEEKS TO BAN GUNS….

 

 

Comrade Martin O'Malley, the General Secretary presently in charge of running the Socialist Republic of Maryland, has now urged his fellow party members to pass legislation which will require residents of his state to obtain a license before purchasing a handgun. Comrade O'Malley, obviously a Democrat, and even more obviously a strong opponent of our Second Amendment right, testified before the Senate Judicial Proceeding Committee, (the what?), in favor of his bill, which would also, by the way, ban assault weapons, limit magazine capacities to 10 rounds and require prospective gun buyers to complete a safety course as well as to pay a $100 application fee. Which I think brings up the question of whether Comrade O'Malley's bill has more to do with raising revenue than with any supposed concerns about public safety as he claims.

Gun-rights advocates are set to descend upon Annapolis to rally against a bill that they say tramples on gun owners’ rights and won’t do anything to stop criminals who carry illegal guns. "The overriding problem with the governor’s bill is that it does little to address the bad guys with the guns," said Delegate Michael D. Smigiel Sr., Cecil Republican, who said rally organizers are expecting 1,000 to 3,000 people. "It deals with ways of curtailing law-abiding citizens from being able to exercise their full Second Amendment rights. Comrade O'Malley proposed his legislation last month in an effort he said was intended to fight gun violence and prevent incidents similar to last year’s deadly shootings in Newtown, Conn., and Aurora, Colo. But what he's actually proposing will, essentially, effect no one but law abiding citizens.

And while requiring a permit to carry a handgun in public is the norm throughout most of the U.S., only nine states currently require a license or permit to purchase a handgun. So in that respect, the Socialist Republic of Maryland (SRM) would be joining Connecticut and Iowa as states that require applicants to also provide fingerprints and give state officials authority to reject applications. Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York have authority to reject applications but don’t require fingerprinting, while Illinois, Michigan, Nebraska and North Carolina require licenses, but have no authority to reject applications. Supporters cite studies showing that license-to-purchase laws in these states have decreased illegal straw purchases and gun trafficking, but as always the numbers used can be manipulated.

"We lose too many American lives to gun violence," Comrade O'Malley said last week in his State of the State address. "Who can watch the sad images of the last several weeks, who can see the pictures of those young faces and honestly say we are doing enough?" I would like to ask Comrade O'Malley if the images to which he refers are any more sad than, say, images of those young faces belonging to victims who have died in horrific auto accidents, or those victims of any other incident that has resulted their death? While gun-rights advocates question the legality of license-to-purchase laws, Maryland Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler, another Democrat, issued an opinion last week saying that such laws are constitutional because the government is allowed to place some regulations on gun ownership.

Mr. Gansler added that Comrade O'Malley's bill would not allow the state to confiscate handguns purchased under current laws. O'Malley's proposal has heavy backing from his fellow Democrats, but is expected to receive virtually unanimous opposition from Republicans and conservative Democrats. In addition to questioning the bill’s impact on law-abiding citizens, Mr. Smigiel argued that the legislation’s licensing and training costs will discourage lower-income residents who might want to purchase a handgun for protection. He said Wednesday’s rally will be organized by groups including the Second Amendment Foundation and Maryland Shall Issue, two groups that have fought against the state’s concealed-carry permit law, which was struck down last year by a judge who considered it to be unconstitutional.

Ah, to be able to live in one of the many utopian/socialist republics that seem to be spread all across our great land. What must it be like to reside in a place where those in charge insist upon treating those not in charge, like children? And what must it be like to be told that the government doesn't think you responsible enough to own a gun? Personally, at this point in time, I think it's a pretty safe bet to say that many a bad guy, if they're not already, will soon be making a beeline for these tempting blue states that insist upon refusing their citizens the right to defend themselves. Which makes me, one who lives in a red state, feel a little bit safer. After all, there's many of us here in my state who remain well armed and with no noise coming from our leaders about the need to take away my ability to protect me and mine.