Massachusetts Academic Experts Recommend Racist Gun Laws
More than a year after the school shootings in Newtown, Conn., a panel of academic experts today released a long-awaited report recommending that Massachusetts tighten its gun laws, which are already considered among the toughest in the country.
The panel made 44 recommendations, including that Massachusetts join a national mental health database for screening potential gun owners, that it beef up firearms training requirements, and that it eliminate Class B gun licenses, which are seldom used.
It recommended that the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association help define a series of factors that could be used to prohibit “unsuitable persons” from acquiring firearms. The panel said the current process allows local law enforcement officials too much discretion to determine whether a person is suitable to be granted a license to carry.
It also said Massachusetts should require anyone wanting to purchase a hunting rifle or a shotgun to pass those standards of suitability. That could allow local police chiefs to deny gun purchases to people who have been arrested, but not convicted, of a crime.
Wait, let's read that last sentence again:
"That could allow local police chiefs to deny gun purchases to people who have been arrested, but not convicted, of a crime."
Let's skip past the obvious and not discuss the idea that people who in effect are innocent of any crime would be denied their Second Amendment rights under this proposal by academic experts, and skip to the essence of leftist victimhood political dogma.
I did it.
I played the race card.
Liberals have been talking about the "disproportional representation of racial minorities (primarily African Americans, hence "Black crime") at all stages of the criminal justice system, including arrests, prosecutions and incarcerations" (Wikipedia... for what it's worth), and here they go suggesting a "facially neutral" law that would blatantly have an "adverse impact" on a "protected class" of citizens!
(I am quickly running out of progressive racial catch phrases here. Maybe I shouldn't have loaded so many up in one sentence.)
So if the Commonwealth of Massachusetts embraces the recommendation of these "academic experts", not hiring a member of a "protected class" to work in my child care center based on an arrest record for domestic violence or child abuse that did not culminate in a conviction would be both racist and illegal, but the State denying the very same individual their constitutionally-protected right to own a gun would be both legal and socially acceptable.
Pretzel logic much?
This proposal is further proof of the unmitigated disastrous effect that allowing members of academia to craft policy at any level of government could bring about.