RogerW aks why gun banlobbies are pushing State and local gun laws instead of Federal laws.
Simply put in two words, “track record.” Laws that harass the most law abiding demographic, lawful gun owners, cause that population to divest themselves of their guns.
Since the ban lobbies do not care whether you surrender your guns voluntarily or they send the National Guard to open your house with a tank are both in line with their goal of total disarmament will have been achieved.
Massachusetts and new Jersey are examples of harassing the law abiding to the point they give up their guns. Criminals, on the other hand, are protected since they have no guns registered to them, and the Supreme Court has ruled that search and seize campaigns are unconstitutional.
Please note that the years marked in red denote the years Bloomberg’s “Everytown against guns” has been active. By media report, those years have show a steady increase in violent crime that appears to have been edited out of these police reported numbers.
Since the “benefits” of greater crime and increased criminal violence seem to outweigh the costs, it makes no matter whether making gun ownership a problem or a criminal act. The result is the same in either case:
Another factor to be considered is that Bloomberg has reportedly put almost $100,000,000 into gun ban candidates campaigns, gaining one Senator, and two governors. Twp pf those successes came with the aid of libelous comments about the pro-gun candidates character, with no physical proof.
So State or local gun ban campaigns are just as effective and cheaper than trying for Federal ban legislation. And that is an important point, even with billionaires.