A Million Fallacies
How a bunch of marchers confuse statutes with enforcement of statues

by dischord
(redistribution permitted and encouraged)

I finally got around to the Million Moms’ website. I’m not too impressed. They run through lists of unenforced laws and use this as evidence that some additional *undefined* laws need to be passed. Or they demand unrealistic laws like background checks for ammo sales (honest).

Take their “Responsible Limits on Gun Access and Use.” (http://www.millionmommarch.com/html/who/reducing_access.html). It is full of grossly illogical statements akin to, “The law allows gun traffickers to supply illegal buyers”

No the *law* does not allow illegal sales. Lax enforcement allows it.

Indeed, throughout, the moms confuse two legal concepts: statute and enforcement. Most of their complaints are about “illegal” purchasers getting away with this and that or sellers getting away with this or that “illegal” sale. They fail to understand that the solution to unregulated illegal behavior is to regulate the illegal behavior rather than to put additional statutes into a lax system.

For example: “Consequently, licensed dealers can and do make questionable or clearly illegal sales with little fear of being discovered or punished.” The NRA could not have written a better account of the need to enforce the existing laws!

They also show a gross lack of knowledge about existing negligence and liability laws. Take this statement. “People who keep guns at home can store them unlocked, loaded, and within the reach of children, without fear of prosecution if someone is hurt or killed by a child who finds an improperly stored gun.” This is wrong. They can be prosecuted under negligent manslaughter laws and similarly sued for liability in civil court. If this doesn’t occur, it is not due to a lack of laws.

But it is their ideas on ammo that are breathtakingly short sighted in how they would undermine the gun background check system by overburdening it: “Ammunition sellers….are not required to keep any records.” and “[There should be] background checks for ammunition buyers. Ammunition purchases [should be] limited to ammunition compatible with a handgun registered to the buyer, or with a long-gun for which the buyer has proof of ownership.” Imagine the poor bureaucracies trying to do proper gun background checks while keeping up with the ammo stuff!

And finally, making that ole apples and oranges comparison between licensing gun *buyers* and licensing car *drivers,* they suggest that the following requirements (none of which actually exist for drivers) would bring guns up to the level of car regulation. Where? Stalin’s Soviet Union?

** Provide fingerprints and a photograph;
** Pass a thorough background check, including a check for misdemeanor convictions;
** Demonstrate detailed knowledge of the laws governing the use, possession, storage, and transfer of guns;
** Demonstrate a basic understanding of how guns work, including the use and limitations of safety devices;