Democrat walks out of moment of silence for Texas massacre victims

He doesn't care 2 cents for the family of the killed. In true Socialist Progressive fashion he only cares about his agenda, everyone else be damned.

I urge us to pass reasonable gun safety legislation, including a universal background check law supported by 80 percent of Americans, a ban on assault rifles and a ban on bump stocks,” Lieu added.

Let's look at this statement:

First: "...reasonable gun safety legislation". It isn't "gun safety legislation" that is on the table with these people...it's gun control legislation, with emphasis on "control", because that's the key word.

Second: There are over 20,000 gun laws on the books already. In addition to being 20,000+ too many, the ones already on the books aren't being enforced properly already. Point of fact here is that it is a REQUIREMENT that convicted domestic abusers (re: the recent Texas tragedy that this Congressman refuses to stand a moment of silence for), and yet THAT LAW WAS NOT FOLLOWED.

It is a point of fact that if a problem is caused by NOT following the existing rules/regulations/laws, then enacting MORE rules/regulations/laws WILL NOT FIX THE UNDERLYING PROBLEM.

What are we to do here...pass a law which says "This law is written to ensure legal compliance with the written law"?

Third: A "universal background check" isn't supported by 80% of Americans. If ANYTHING were literally supported by 80% of Americans, then it would happen regardless of what the 20% said or did about it. This is pure hyperbole. AND...if we're going to REQUIRE QUALIFICATIONS IN ORDER TO EXERCISE A CONSTITUTIONALLY DOCUMENTED RIGHT (Note: Notice that I did not say "Constitutionally guaranteed right". The Constitution does not grant rights...rights exist and are simply acknowledged as such, with limitations placed on the government with respect to interfering with those rights.) then we should likewise require qualifications for all other such rights. BUT...you'll not see that happening. At least, not until the Second Amendment is thoroughly gutted and neutered so that the government can do this with impunity.

Forth: WHAT "ASSAULT RIFLES"? SHOW ME THESE "ASSAULT RIFLES"! And stop playing =semantic games about it, too. There is a definition for an Assault Rifle, and since clear and concise definitions are not only important, but VITAL to any written law, we need to STICK WITH THE REALITY OF WHAT AN ASSAULT RIFLE ACTUALLY IS. The fact that these people do not and WILL NOT tells me that they're NOT concerned about "assault rifles", they concerned about CONTROL. No more, no less. Do NOT try to snow the snowman here.

Fifth: "Bump stocks". The actual mechanics behind how this works is as simple as a good firm stance and a belt loop on your jeans. In fact, the ONLY thing required is (insert drum roll here) a semi-automatic weapon. That's it. And any wording about "devices designed or intended" to increase the firing rate of a semi-automatic weapon? Gimme a tenpenny nail and a small piece of wood and I can make you a device in a few minutes that can enable your semi-automatic weapon to crank out ammunition in the hundreds of rounds per minute rate. THAT'S HOW SIMPLE THIS IS!

And yet...these devices are NOT "machine guns", "sub-machine guns", or "automatic weapons". Why? BECAUSE THEY DON'T MEET THE DEFINITION! Again...quit trying to snow the snowman here.

In order to effectively ban such devices, the ONE THING IN COMMON with ALL of these is...a semi-automatic weapon. And guess where the "reasonable gun safety legislation" is honestly headed? Yeah...take your snowstorm somewhere else, buddy.

Congressman Ted Lieu...you, sir, can have a nice, piping hot cuppa STFU with a side order of Shall-Not-Be-Infringed.