Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut is a big fan of assault weapon bans. He’s touted them at pretty much every opportunity over the last decade or so at least. He’s argued we need a federal one despite his home state already has such a law on the books.
But, then again, it sure seems like Connecticut’s ban isn’t doing all that much.
A South Windsor man was charged after he brought an AK-47 and a ghost gun to work with him following a reported assault over the weekend, according to the Hartford Police Department.
Record show Mike Ortiz-Morales, 34, was issued a misdemeanor summons for second-degree breach of peace early Saturday morning after the South Windsor Police Department said he slapped a female victim in the face during a domestic incident in South Windsor.
…
During the investigation, Hartford police said they found that Ortiz-Morales was in possession of an AK-47 and a pistol without a serial number on it, or a ghost gun. He also had three loaded pistol magazines and two high-capacity assault rifle magazines, according to Hartford police.
Ortiz-Morales was charged with the illegal sale or purchase of a high-capacity magazine, illegal possession of an assault weapon, and failure to obtain a serial number.
Now, someone like Murphy might contend that Ortiz-Morales was able to obtain his AK via a state that doesn’t have an assault weapon ban–which he’d use to content we need a federal one, it should be noted–but that doesn’t tell the whole story.
You see, you can buy a gun outside of your home state. However, sellers then have to adhere to the laws in the buyer’s home state. In other words, no one can sell you a gun that’s legal there but illegal where you live.
So no, Ortiz-Morales wasn’t able to get his AK through a loophole or anything like that.
And let’s also remember that so-called “ghost guns” are illegal there, yet he had no trouble getting his grubby little paws on one of those, either.
You see, all those laws in Connecticut, the same ones people like Murphy want to slam down our throats, don’t actually stop those determined to break the law. At most, it mildly inconveniences them. The people it really impacts are the law-abiding folks.
Those would be the same law-abiding folks who you could trust with a rocket launcher and they wouldn’t harm a soul.
Connecticut thought it could stop people from getting such guns. Sure, the law may have been a desperation move following Sandy Hook, but they still thought it.
Yet we see that it doesn’t work that way. The best intentions and all that jazz do nothing with a determined bad actor decides the law shouldn’t apply to him. Once they decide that, it’s only a matter of time before they have the weapon they want.
Laws don’t stop the law-breaking.
For some, that’s not an argument against the laws themselves. I get that. The fact that people kill isn’t evidence we shouldn’t have laws against murder.
But the problem is that murder is always wrong.
Gun control laws like those in Connecticut, however, equate gun ownership with criminal actions. They disarm the law-abiding, making it harder for them to oppose the criminals, while actually doing nothing to the bad guys.
Therein lies the issue.
And Connecticut’s law is just one of a plethora of examples that show just how little such bans actually accomplish.
Sen. Chris Murphy can tout assault weapon bans until the cows come home, but such a ban doesn’t stop criminals in his neck of the woods any more than it’ll stop them literally anywhere else in the nation.
