A number of states have preemption laws on the books. These laws prevent local communities from creating their own gun control laws, preserving the authority to pass such regulations with the state legislature.

Proponents of preemption laws argue that they prevent there being an unnavigable patchwork of gun control laws that no one would ever be able to keep straight.

Opponents tend to argue that local communities should be able to determine what gun control laws they need.

That’s the argument one Indiana legislator is trying to make, as well.

Indiana State Sen. Fady Qaddoura said he’s pushing to give communities a say over their own gun control policies.

State law currently prohibits municipalities from regulating guns. However, the senator is arguing local law enforcement and community organizations need a seat at the table.

”We have heard clearly from many communities that they would like organic solutions that are not mandated by the state of Indiana,” State Sen. Qaddoura said.

Except that this is never really about self-determination for local communities, now is it?

See, I’d accept that argument if it wasn’t going to be a one-way street.

Sure, Indianapolis could have more gun control if they want, but some small town in Indiana couldn’t decide to have less. Could they decide that regardless of Indiana’s gun laws–which, admittedly, are few enough–they would have even less?

We all know the answer to that.

Preemption creates an even playing field for anyone traveling through the state. They’re not required to find the local ordinances of every town they might need to stop in for gas or food. If they know the state laws, they’re golden.

But those who oppose this and pretend it’s about communities deciding for themselves are really just wanting communities to be able to make the approved decisions.

They want more gun control laws in as many places as they can manage. They don’t care if a city thinks less would be better–self-determination doesn’t matter when you’ll make what they think is the wrong decision–only that more and more violations of people’s Second Amendment rights can take place.

It doesn’t bother them that cities can’t make their own determination with regard to gun laws. It bothers them that cities can’t pass more gun control. Those two things are not remotely the same and I’m not going to sit here and pretend they are.

I’m also sick and tired of these kinds of people trying to spin this as if it’s really about self-determination for local communities. It’s not and it’s never going to be about that.

It’s about maximizing the amount of anti-gun regulation an individual might be subjected to during their lifetimes. It’s well past time these anti-gunners be held accountable for their misrepresentation of this simple, basic fact.

Obviously, removing preemption laws should be opposed with every fiber of our being, but the best way to do it is to include calling these efforts what they truly are: And excuse to infringe on our rights as much as humanly possible while actually doing nothing to make these communities safer.