Weapons Used in Texas School Shooting Present Quandary for Gun-Grabbers

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- “[E]arlier reports that the shooter used an AR-15 style rifle were wrong,” Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said in a statement about Friday’s murders at Santa Fe High School. Per the Houston Chronicle, “He said the shooter … used a shotgun and a .38 caliber revolver…”

No semi-automatic handguns or rifles were involved. No so-called “assault weapons”…

You could almost hear gun-grabber hearts breaking. And it leads to a dilemma for them, because their M.O. is to call for gun bans as a necessary step every time semi-autos are used. To be consistent, especially noting how much human carnage was accomplished without them, they must now demand something they haven’t felt politically ready to unveil: A ban on revolvers and shotguns.

You know it’s what they ultimately want.

The first would return to the origins of the modern gun-grab movement.

“We’re going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily — given the political realities — going to be very modest,” Handgun Control, Inc. founder Nelson “Pete” Shields told The New Yorker in 1976.  To help mask its intent, the group changed its name to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, but its ultimate goals as articulated by Shields remain.

“[W]e’ll have to start working again to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen the next law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we’d be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal — total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time. . . . The first problem is to slow down the number of handguns being produced and sold in this country. The second problem is to get handguns registered. The final problem is to make possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition-except for the military, police, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors-totally illegal.”

Chris Murphy’s “baby steps” advocacy and Nancy Pelosi’s “slippery slope” enthusiasm prove the original goal of incremental to total disarmament is still being pursued.

As for shotguns, why is it no one is now accusing the Fudds or Dick’s Sporting Goods of having blood on their hands? They couldn’t throw semi-auto owners under the bus fast enough. Now, just as a matter of logical consistency, it ought to be their turn in the barrel.

Impulse control-challenged blood dancers would love to see that happen, but seasoned political pragmatism will win out. Democrats will look to pass “something” and “moderate” Republicans will look for a new surrender point to make people think they’re “reasonable” (even though every time they do, they’re still called fascists). The revelation of how Monster Boy got his guns suggests what that “something” will be.

He “used guns owned by his father” and “did not legally possess them,” we are told.

“I have no information at this time whether the father knows the weapons were taken,” Gov. Abbott said.

In addition to repeating calls for all the usual prior restraints, don’t be surprised to see a new “lock up your safety” push, under the ignorant presumption that one “solution” fits all. They stand a good chance of getting away with it, too, because relatively few people have heard of or remember the Merced pitchfork murders.

About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating / defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament.
In addition to being a field editor/columnist at GUNS Magazine and associate editor for Oath Keepers, he blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.