Zuckerberg Reveals One of the Most 'Bada**' Things He's Ever Seen
Defiant Biden: I'm Not Going Anywhere
A Convention for the Ages
Wait, Most of Trump's Security Detail Weren't Even Secret Service Agents on Day...
Kamala Harris Is Now Being Summoned to Put Out Fires
We Haven't Seen This in Decades
Will Mark Zuckerberg Endorse Trump or Biden? Here's What the Tech Tycoon Had...
Corey Comperatore's Funeral Is Today. Here's How Trump Is Honoring Him
Climate Change Alarmists Among Those Calling on Biden to Drop Out
Human Smuggling Has Become a ‘Primary Focus’ in Another Unlikely Border Sector
'Audacity Is Off the Charts': Tulsi Gabbard Savages Kamala Harris for Going After...
Is This Another Sign That Gavin Newsom Will Replace Joe Biden As the...
Here We Go: Buckle Up for an Absolutely Wild Ride
Does This Statement Mean Biden Is Staying in the Race?
Polls Show Considerable Uncertainty From Democrats on Biden Dropping Out

Gun Control: Liberal Smoke Screen

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Before Christmas break the President vowed to make some changes for his swan song year. When he returned he went to work with his Attorney General Loretta Lynch strengthening gun control laws. Then last Tuesday in his final State of the Union Address the President made it sound as if it was absurd to think that he was after America's guns.


On Wednesday night's GOP debate every single candidate saw this rouse. Ted Cruz laid it all out for America when he sited Eric Holder's mission to brain wash the American people against guns, and the fact that Obama appointing Sonya Mayor's appointment to the Supreme Court. Mayor being as Cruz put "Someone who has been a radical against the 2nd Amendment the right to keep and bear arms." 

Rubio was not silent on the issue either. The Florida senator explained how ineffective the left's plan to control guns is in stopping criminals from obtaining guns. "Criminals don't get their guns from a gun show..." He further dismantle the argument for stricter gun control laws by saying "...and let me tell ya ISIS and terrorists don't get their guns from a gun show."

Essentially, this is a law enforcement issue. To spite what the left is saying, the issue is criminals breaking the law. Great Britain proved this when they took away guns. Then instead of a problem with gun violence, they had a problem with sharp pointy knives. Answers... outlaw pointy knives? 

Although passing laws is not the president's job, enforcing federal law is. Obama's attempt to tame the concerns of the people by saying this executive action does not bring any new legislation. If that is the case, then why file the action in the first place? Why not simply enforce the federal laws on the books, instead of pointing at congress and complaining about how they won't pass the laws you want. 

Of course everyone agrees that no one should be able to own a tank. There does need to be gun control to some extent background checks are a good thing. Like Presidential hopeful Rand Paul said in an interview on ABC's The View. "If you allow a president to pass laws instead of Congress doing it. You might get very dangerous things like the internment of the Japanese, spying on all the civil rights leaders, or spying on the Vietnam War protesters. All that had been done, because of too much executive power. The checks and balances are extremely important." 

The quintessential gun nut, who believes in a second amendment without limitations, does not exist. No one believes that private citizens should own a tank or nuclear missile. The fact is, we as Americans already have those weapons at our disposal. We have a government, of for and by the people. The only issue is that perhaps there are those in government who forgot to whom they report. 

The gun control debate is a farce. Criminals have an agenda that is fed by gun control. Criminals want to victimize people, pure and simple. The idea that somehow building a system that seeks to impede a criminal's ability to obtain firearms by presupposing that they will abide by that system is fundamentally flawed. Criminals by definition; have no respect for the law. As long as guns are in existence criminals will be able to obtain them. Making it more difficult for the general public to obtain firearms, will only benefits criminals. Newtown, UCC, and San Bernardino, we are told time and time again by experts in law enforcement, none of the legislation on the books would have done anything to stop these atrocities. By now those that are for further gun control must understand that. If the Obama administration is not after our guns then why bring countries like Great Britain, or Australia into the conversation.

It is time to change the conversation when it comes to controlling violent crime in America. While Obama has made the case that he wants gun control. He has not proven that he wants to hold criminals accountable for their crimes, or protect the American people.

How do you stop people from speeding? You handle it by punishing criminals for perpetrating crimes. That is exactly how Rudy Giuliani curbed violent crime in New York City. As soon as Giuliani took office in 1993 violent crime was cut in half and New York's murder rate dropped an astonishing 67 percent, according to the FBI Uniform Crime Report. The correlation is staggering. He got these results by keeping his eye on the ball, and good old fashioned law enforcement.

So long as the conversation remains about guns, and we don't hold criminals accountable for their actions, this epidemic will persist. Background checks are supported by both sides of the aisle. The right to bear arms has nothing to do with perpetrating a crime. Those who victimize law abiding Americans need to fear the sword of the government. Americans must have the ability to defend themselves with similar force as their assailants. We need to be a country of both law and grace. 


Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Townhall Videos