Posted on 04/10/2013 9:04:56 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Senate Mulls Background Checks on Potential Victims
April 10th, 2013 Scott Ott
Potential mass-shooting victim background checks mulled by SenateSome senators worry that a bill to screen for potential mass-shooting victims could lead to empty classrooms and theaters, or worse, the specter of armed security personnel or even armed, law-abiding citizens depriving people of their natural right to remain defenseless.
The U.S. Senate next week will reportedly take up debate on a bill to require background checks on potential victims of mass shootings. The alternative to increased gun-purchase background checks came out of closed-door negotiations among Senate leaders when they discovered that mass-shooting victims are easier to spot in advance than mass shooters.
“Victims of mass shootings have some consistent markers,” said one unnamed Senate aide. “They’re the type who tend to congregate in enclosed spaces, unarmed, and who surround themselves with other utterly-defenseless individuals. If we can screen for those factors, perhaps we can develop measures to prevent the behaviors that lead to mass victimization.”
The controversial measure is expected to meet with stiff resistance from Senate Democrats who see potential-victim background checks as “infringing on a person’s God-given natural right to avoid self-defense,” as one unnamed Northeastern senator put it.
“All this does is stigmatize law-abiding citizens,” the Democrat senator said, noting that the bill is the biggest threat yet to the popular perception of safety in “gun-free zones” like schools and theaters.
Indeed, nationwide polls show that people like the idea of believing that a prohibition on carrying guns in certain places, or limitations on buying certain weapon types, will immunize them from sudden ballistic impact syndrome.
Took me three paragraphs into it before I got the V-8 knock to the forehead.
One of the many sad things about the Obamadork and his felonious associates is that sarcasm no longer is obvious.
Change “sad” to “scary”.
Scott Ott was one of my favorite satire writers. He used to write a lot more often on his blog, but now he’s busy as the Lehigh County Executive.
Still, good for us.
I knew something was kooky when I saw this phrase:
"...depriving people of their natural right to remain defenseless."
Da Coyote ~:” One of the many sad things about the Obamadork and his felonious associates is that sarcasm no longer is obvious. “
True dat !
Don’t forget that even the “Jim Crow laws “ started out as sarchasm.
This reminds me of a movie where there was “ Pre-Cognition” of criminal behavior,
so that people were arrested , even though they hadn’t yet committed a crime.
Now a days , I put nothing past the current administration ,
not even the concept of “Pre-Cognition” from ‘the Scientist’ in the White house
Agreed.
Ha ha ha - funny idea.
But it’s based on a false notion.
It’s based on politicans’ wanting to protect the innocent, but nothing could be further from the truth.
Politicians simply want to disarm the people, so that they - the politicans - will be the only ones ‘empowered’ in the United States.
It’s all about power and has nothing whatsoever to do with safety.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.