It's creative ideas like that which make Prof. Lott stand out among gun bloggers. Then presuming his superficial arguments have been convincing, and that contrary to evidence we now believe the president has been pushing for "more gun regulations," he goes on to say this.In fact, Obama allowed the change in regarding the guns in national parks, not because he supported the idea, but because it was a very popular amendment to a bill that he wanted, the “Cardholders’ Bill of Rights Act of 2009.”
Obama’s push for more gun regulations begs a question he refuses to address. When have any of the laws that he has supported previously reduced crime rates? It would be nice if some in the press, including Dionne, would actually ask whether the previous background check changes reduced crime rates. Yet, again, may be they don’t ask the question because they already know the answer.Talk about creative, talk about innovative, was that a slick way to link to one's own book on Amazon or what?
The fact is, what "they already know" is that "more guns, less crime" is a ridiculous idea that is only supported by biased gun owners desperate for justification.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.