**Written by Doug Powers
Democrats have been demanding that Congress and the White House “do something” following the mass shooting in Las Vegas, but they’re also desperate to try and make the NRA complicit. The answer? Sound the alarm about something that wasn’t even used in the attack. Chuck Schumer leads it off:
Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) is demanding President Trump say he would veto a bill that would ease regulations on gun silencers.
“Today I am calling on the President to come out against the absurd law about silencers. Threaten to veto it if he must and put an end to that bill,” Schumer said from the Senate floor.
[…]
“Let me tell you something. One of the few ways the police had to go after this shooter was they could look for the sound, try to hear the sound of where the guns came from,” Schumer said on Tuesday.
If the NRA wants to broaden their support they’ll help design a silencer that fits the mouths of agenda-driven politicians.
Hillary Clinton jumped on that bandwagon not long after the shooting and before any facts were known:
The crowd fled at the sound of gunshots.
Imagine the deaths if the shooter had a silencer, which the NRA wants to make easier to get.
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) October 2, 2017
Other Dems joined in:
“Rather we believe that, in the wake of the horrific shootings last evening in Las Vegas, you must clearly state that the House will not seek to make matters worse by passing this legislation,” wrote Democrat Rep. John Conyers Jr., on the House Judiciary Committee, and Raul Grijalva, on the Committee on Natural Resources.
The Congressmen are referring to the Sportsmen’s Heritage And Recreational Enhancement Act, which last month House Republicans put on track for a vote.
The Dem sleight-of-hand is so blatantly obvious that Chipps Cooney should sue the DNC for copyright infringement:
1) Politicize horrible attack
2) Imagine what could have made it worse
3) Blame NRA for hypothetical scenario
4) Repeat
MSNBC had a guest recently who constructed a huge straw man and then set it ablaze right there in the studio:
Former FBI agent Manny Gomez claimed on MSNBC on Monday that hunters use suppressors so that deer cannot hear the gunshots.
Firearm owners actually use suppressors to prevent hearing loss, and even with a suppressor, a firearm would still be loud enough to spook a deer or other wild game.
“Sportsmen, hunters would make an argument that they need that so that their target, whether it’s a deer, etc. don’t hear the shot,” Gomez claimed, “but numerous other sportsmen have shot from muskets — when the founding fathers started the Second Amendment — up until now successfully killed game animals without the use of a silencer.”
Gomez also asked, “Are we going to legalize grenades next because sportsmen need averages to be on their side more?” Fittingly enough the interviewer was Brian Williams, who tried to dodge a grenade or two in his prime.
Dems and their allies in the network news media who keep referring to suppressors as “silencers” during panel discussions usually lack the journalistic curiosity to go to a gun range and test how truly “silent” they are and wreck the narrative. It’s gotten so bad even the Washington Post is calling out Democrats:
Actually, even with “a silencer,” it’s pretty loud. An AR-15 rifle would have a noise equivalent to a jack hammer. https://t.co/rL1YFuAB5b https://t.co/YE9smBZqGG
— Glenn Kessler (@GlennKesslerWP) October 2, 2017
According to Paul Ryan there are no plans to bring a bill to ease restrictions on suppressors to the floor. That won’t stop the Dems from imagining what might happen if it does.
**Written by Doug Powers
Twitter @ThePowersThatBe
