Photo via Pixabay

Many of us, myself included, have rested easily on the idea that gun control wasn’t likely to happen at the federal level due to the Republican control of the Senate. However, Sen. Lindsey Graham has signaled his willingness to hear at least some gun control bills in his judicial committee. That indicates that at least some in the GOP are willing to work with Democrats on anti-gun legislation.

That may have emboldened a few anti-gun Democrats to introduce gun control legislation in that chamber on Wednesday.

U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy, as well as and Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Sschultz are holding a press conference Wednesday at 2:30 p.m. to introduce ‘Jaime’s Law.’

The bill would require universal background checks for ammunition purchases. It’s named after Jaime Guttenberg, who was killed in the 2018 mass shooting in Parkland, Florida.

Now, what are the odds of this one flying? Not likely.

Ammunition restrictions are popular with the anti-gun crowd, but there’s not nearly as much broad support for that as there are for universal background checks or red flag laws.

That doesn’t mean it won’t gain some traction, though.

With Rep. Wasserman Schultz involved, that suggests a House version of the bill is coming as well, and that chamber has made it clear it’s all too willing to consider gun control. However, Nancy Pelosi did indicate that she intends to push bills that at least have a chance of gaining Republican support.

This ain’t one of them.

For many gun owners, the idea of universal background checks isn’t an issue. They buy their guns from licensed dealers anyway, so they’re not impacted and thus don’t care all that much. Some may oppose universal background checks, but they’re not all that worked up about it.

But tell them they have to go through a background check on ammunition purchases? Yeah, that’s not going to be pleasant.

After all, if I have to go through a background check for the gun, why would I have to do so for the ammo, too?

What’s that? Gun control doesn’t work, and bad guys might get guns despite the background check requirement? You don’t say.

Then what, pray tell, makes anyone think the exact same requirement on ammo would yield a different result? In fact, it’s going to be even more useless because ammunition is both disposable and reloadable. There are no serial numbers on ammo, so it’ll make straw purchases of ammo ridiculously easy to do.

“Sir, where are these five boxes of 9mm you bought on Thursday?”

“Shot it all up on Friday. Why?”

Prove they didn’t.

Honestly, this is what I’ve come up with in about 30 seconds of thinking about it. Do you think career criminals won’t find a way around this kind of thing?

Yet these three individuals seem to think that a law like this would actually do anything?

And naming it after a Parkland victim is pure pandering. Naming laws after people usually means that the law would somehow have prevented whatever happened to that person, at least in theory. However, Jamie Gutenberg was killed in Parkland, a mass shooting where the killer purchased a weapon from a licensed dealer after undergoing a background check. Do these jackwagons believe that somehow buying ammo would have tripped him up?

But what do you expect from these three gun grabbers, anyway?