NC Dem Lawmakers Push Gun Control Legislation

RALEIGH – Democrat lawmakers held a press conference Monday at the N.C. General Assembly to outline a package of gun control and school safety measures they plan to file as legislation when the legislature reconvenes in May.

Sens. Jay Chaudhuri (D-Wake), Jeff Jackson (D-Mecklenburg), Floyd McKissick (D-Durham), and Reps. Grier Martin and Marcia Morey (D-Durham) described what they called a bipartisan package that includes banning the sale of “assault weapons” to anyone under 21, banning bump-stock devices, investing more state funds for school psychologists and guidance counselors.

“The idea is to find common ground between Republicans and Democrats, but to do something real, not to just do something at the margins, to actually address this epidemic that we have,” said Jackson.

An epidemic? Gun violence in this country is hardly an epidemic, let alone mass murders at schools. However, this type of alarmist rhetoric is central to the Left’s narrative that ‘we must do something.’

Along with more money for school psychologists and guidance counselors, that ‘something’ includes gun control measures. Never mind the fact that gun control has never meaningfully reduced gun violence. Actually, there is plenty of evidence to debunk the myth that gun violence is because we have too many guns in this country.

Last week Gov. Roy Cooper proposed raising the age for purchasing “assault weapons” and banning bump-stocks, and now legislative Democrats have followed his lead in proposing those measures in legislation.

Under their proposal, persons under 21 years of age could not purchase “assault weapons.” Rep. Grier Martin tried to assuage any concerns about removing the Second Amendment rights of a whole class of adults by claiming it was much more moderate than a similar provision in the recently passed laws in Florida

“I think [this] portion is the most moderate provision.[…] This would only ban the sale of assault weapons, not the broader approach of the Florida law. But we firmly believe that assault weapons have no place out in society by those under the age of 21,” said Martin.

Of course, a definition of assault weapons was never offered. Do they merely have to look scary? A ban on matte black finishes? While Martins claims this to be the most moderate provision, it certainly sets the stage for moving the line time and again to place more and more restrictions on owning firearms.

Further, raising the age for the purchase of certain weapons would have had absolutely no impact on 90 percent of the most notable mass shootings over the past 20 years. It doesn’t matter, because ‘we must do something.’

The Democratic lawmakers also jumped at the chance to highlight the student walkouts last week, exploiting kids as political pawns in a movement to strip away your Second Amendment rights piece by piece. After all, Sen. McKissick said this proposal was merely an incremental step in the process, and suggested that they’d look to go further in the near future.

“Masses of students all across America are deeply and gravely concerned about their future. Gravely concerned about their safety and security within their schools.”

These masses of students are mostly being pimped out by the Left and in many instances being forced to participate in a political protest sanctioned by “educators.” The Left simply uses tragic events like Parkland, Florida to build momentum for gun control, with disdain for Individual Rights and disregard for the actual effectiveness of the proposals they put forward.

To that end, the lawmakers also outlined provisions to require enhanced background checks and purchase permits for long guns.

And while they sought to correlate this package with the recent Florida reforms, noting multiple times that it was advanced by Republicans and signed by a Republican governor, one key portion of the Sunshine State legislation was notably absent – allowing for trained, armed school personnel.

When asked about the common sense proposal of securing schools by allowing for training and arming some school personnel, or employing retired veterans and law enforcement for those purposes, the Democrats predictably suggested that more guns were never the answer.

They are quick to highlight the dangers of misfires, or unintended targets, while completely ignoring the glaring fact that opposition to armed school security is tacit support for keeping kids and teachers defenseless.

Moreover, the Democrats, some of which have served in the military themselves, think that veterans have no business defending school children. Seriously.

“Any proposal to allow veteran, someone who just has veteran status makes no sense at all. […] I have no business, as a veteran, taking on responsibility for defending school children from an active shooter. There are very few veterans I think who would meet that requirement,” said Martin.

No wonder their ‘bipartisan’ proposal did not feature any Republicans at the press conference. What self-respecting Republican would sign on to support such an opportunistic gun control push.