A Second Amendment win just occurred in Nevada. Thousands (possibly hundreds of thousands), of gun rights supporters strongly encouraged Governor Brian Sandoval to veto Senate Bill 221. The latest attempt at gun grabbing by a state government would have required universal background checks, even on privately sold or gifted firearms. If the legislation would have become law, grandchildren in Nevada would have had unnecessary burdens placed upon even an antique rifle bequeathed in Grandpa’s last will and testament.
Obama administration officials may still be trying to convince Americans that 90 percent of the populace believes in backgrounds checks, but public opposition to such laws paint an entirely different picture. Polls generally only include about 1,500 participants. Basing how an entire nation feels on any given topic via such a survey is purely conjecture and irresponsible.
Governor Sandoval established a hotline where Nevadans could offer their opinions about whether or not he should veto Senate Bill 221. Callers heard this message when dialing the hotline, “You have reached the office of Governor Brian Sandoval. If you are calling to vote in support of Senate Bill 221, please press one. If you are calling to vote against Senate Bill 221, please press two.”
The choices were very straightforward, unlike many polling questions. Tens of thousands of calls were registered on a daily basis. For every one call supporting the Nevada gun control bill, about four callers noted their opposition to the legislation.
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg spent millions of dollars on pro-Senate Bill 221 background check ads, via his Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG) group. Liberals across the nation are still scratching their heads wondering what went wrong. Progressive “wisdom” indicated the anti-Second Amendment bill would easily pass in Nevada. MSNBC’s Chris Matthews will not likely get a tingle down his leg when he rants about the background check legislation failure.
US Senator Harry Reid (D) had this to say about the SB 221 veto:
“I am deeply disappointed in Gov. Sandoval’s decision to veto this bill. People convicted of a felony or suffering from a severe mental illness should be prevented from buying a gun with a simple background check. Ninety percent of Nevadans agree and it is too bad this bill has been vetoed.”
Once again Harry Reid’s statements sound like lines from a warped fairytale. Background checks would not have stopped the Boston Marathon bombers from purchasing a gun and obviously did not impact their ability to cause massive carnage with alternative homemade weapons. The Chardon High School shooter stole guns from a locked case at his grandfather’s house. Background checks would not have stopped the horror TJ Lane caused in the Ohio school cafeteria either.
The mother of the Sandy Hook shooter passed a background check too. Considering the alleged mental health issues of her son, it was not wise to let him have access to guns. Would SB 221 have denied such a parent the ability to buy a gun because a person with a mental health issue lived inside the home? The New York firefighters shooter could not pass a background check, so he simply paid someone to go buy him a weapon—which is also illegal. Only law-abiding citizens are concerned about breaking the law; criminals could not care less about adding another immoral act to their resume.
Mark Kelly, former US Representative Gabrielle Giffords’ husband, was extremely angry with the Nevada governor for vetoing the background check legislation. Kelly said, “Nevadans won’t forget and neither will we.” Kelly is probably like his fellow progressive circle who will not forget, but the masses will probably be thanking Brian Sandoval and not cursing his name.
The Nevada governor promised to veto the gun control bill when it was introduced. Perhaps President Obama fans are so used to a man not living up to his word that they doubted Brian Sandoval’s willingness to do exactly what he said.
The Nevada governor had this to say about Senate Bill 221 after the veto:
“Provisions pertaining to background checks for the private sale and transfer of firearms constitute an erosion of Nevadan’s Second Amendment rights.”
Sandoval also noted his support for the mental health reporting requirements in the bill, but stated that it imposed “harsh penalties” on residents and did little to actually thwart the ability of criminals to get their hands on guns.
The Nevada Firearms Coalition offered Governor Sandoval a big pat on the back for standing up for Second Amendment rights and for refusing to be intimidated by Mayor Bloomberg’s deep pockets. A statement by the Nevada gun group reads:
“The governor put the wishes of his constituents over the lobbying and advertising dollars of New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his gun control group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns. In the days since SB 221 passed the Assembly with all Republicans and four Democrats in opposition, Governor Sandoval has been bombarded with calls and e-mails urging him to pass or veto the controversial bill. Telephone calls came in such large numbers that the governor’s office had to set up a separate telephone line to handle the traffic, which was running four to one against SB 221 and in favor of a veto.”
Another bill Governor Sandoval acted upon will also garner him a big thumbs up from Libertarian voters. Medical marijuana has been legal to use in Nevada for more than a decade, but it remained illegal to sell. Sandoval approved legislation which would pave the way for medical marijuana dispensaries, with the tax revenue generated from the business being used to regulate the medicinal cannabis industry in the state.
If Nevada SB 221 had been enacted, it would be illegal to sell a gun to someone who already holds a concealed carry permit or to a family member, unless a background check was conducted. When detailing why he vetoed the background check law, he also stated that the bill would create unnecessary problems for gun dealers—it would actually reduce the burden of proof in illegal firearms sales.
Under current Nevada law, a gun dealer must have “actual knowledge” that the buyer cannot legally buy a gun. The new law says that a dealer can be convicted if there was “reasonable cause to believe” the buyer did not have the right to buy a gun. Exactly what constitutes “reasonable cause” is very vague and would be highly subjective dependent upon the mindset of individual prosecutors.
Backgrounds checks will not prevent criminals from getting their hands on guns in nearly all circumstances. Mental health provisions are worthy of pursuing, but manipulation of such laws still pose significant concerns, as several recent cases noted by Off The Grid News have shown. The breakdown of morality and decorum in America spurred by broken homes, adults who behave as pals instead of parents, and the misguided belief that life is fair and everyone deserves a trophy have spawned an entire generation of ticking time bombs. Until we toss political correctness aside and acknowledge the root cause of violent behavior, there is no fixing the mounting crime problem in the United States.