There’s a Massive Flaw in Newsom’s Gun Control Logic

Matt Gush /
Matt Gush /

If you haven’t heard, there’s been another tragedy, another mass shooting in America. This one took place last Saturday in Monterey Park, California, and left eleven innocents dead.

As usual, action is being taken against the shooter, and local authorities are working tirelessly to put the tragedy behind the people of the community.

Of course, that isn’t the only usual thing taking place. As I’m sure you can imagine, the liberal left has once again used this event to trot out their favorite anti-Second Amendment rhetoric, demanding that more gun controls and restrictions be put in place to make it harder for criminals and those with ill intent from getting their hands on dangerous weapons.

Naturally, near socialist and California Governor Gavin Newsom was among some of the loudest voicing these demands after the recent shooting.

However, in a rare appearance of actual journalism, a rather massive and ongoing flaw in his logic was rightfully called out and for all the world to hear.
CBS News journalist Norah O’Donnell was on hand to interview Newsom on Monday when he made his expected anti-gun talking points. Hell, he even insinuated that the Second Amendment was a “suicide pact.”

Normally, this is the point where whoever the journalist is either agrees and adds to the crazy or just seems to ignore it completely, brushing it under the rug yet again.

O’Donnell, rather surprising, does neither. Instead, she actually calls Newsom out on a rather glaring problem with the whole gun control logic. She said, “But there’s many people in this country that support the Second Amendment and are lawful gun owners.”

And she’s right. Hundreds of thousands of Americans, millions actually, own plenty of guns and have used them legally and responsibly for decades without incident. And to be sure, they have saved a good many lives.

This alone would seem to imply that guns or the particular weapon of choice are not the problems.

Even Newsom couldn’t object to it. He was pretty much forced to backtrack a bit, saying that he didn’t have a problem with anyone who reasonably owned and used guns.

But here’s where things get even more interesting, and I have to admit my respect for O’Donnell increases dramatically.

Having Newsom backtrack would have been enough of a win for most, and she was credited with a fair point. But O’Donnell continued to push the envelope.
She then asked how the shooter of this particular event was able to get his hands on the modified pistol, which had a high-capacity magazine and is already illegal under California’s strict gun laws.

Taken back again, Newsom was forced to admit that he didn’t know.

“We’ll figure it out. That’s gonna happen. We gotta enforce laws. Things fall through the cracks.”

Well, that’s about as vague as it can be. And it points out another major problem with this line of thinking that gun control and more laws aren’t the answer.
If you didn’t know, California already has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation. And yet, crime rates aren’t going down in the state. If anything, they are going up. This shooting alone proves that despite restrictive gun laws, this guy was still able to get his hands on an illegal weapon and use it on the American public.

States like New York and Illinois are other good examples. Like California, they both have heavily restrictive gun laws, making it nearly impossible or, at the very least difficult for law-abiding citizens to legally own and operate firearms. And yet, everyday criminals are caught with them.

In essence, it means the laws aren’t working. And adding a couple more or banning more types of guns won’t change that, as we can already tell.