What the Democrats Are REALLY Trying To Achieve With Gun Control Push (Hint-It's Not Stopping Criminals)

Another twofer today.  The first is from Stu Tarlowe, who tells us that 'Red Flag Laws' Just Legitimize 'Swatting' at the American Thinker. Turlowe writes:

In a nutshell, a "prankster" in California made a call to the 9-1-1 operator in Wichita, claiming he was being held hostage at a Wichita home, and that a murder had already occurred there. The caller thought the address he gave was that of an online gamer with whom he was involved in a feud, but that person had tricked him into giving police the address of Andrew Finch, who was not involved in the feud and was at home minding his own business.

Long story short, the Wichita SWAT team responded, and when Andrew Finch stepped out his front door to see what all the commotion was about, the officers, thinking he was the murderer and hostage-taker and that he was reaching for a weapon, shot him dead.

...snip...

Why do I mention this? Because, even though it was easy enough for anyone to see how very wrong it was for someone to be able to make a call, even from halfway across the continent, that would result in a perfectly innocent person unexpectedly finding himself the target of a SWAT team at his front door, the "red flag laws" now being proposed to keep guns out of the hands of mentally unstable persons will actually legitimize and institutionalize "swatting." Such laws will enable anyone, anywhere, essentially to call down a police raid on another person, no matter how spurious the "evidence" of mental instability, for the purpose of seizing the "unstable" person's firearms.

Besides permitting and facilitating patent violations of the Second and Fourth Amendments, such "red flag laws" provide an avenue for vindictive persons (from jilted lovers to anyone with a real or imagined "beef") to use local police as surrogates for their own anger and resentment, with the potential for the confrontations to turn as deadly as that one in Wichita.

The second article was written by Michael Filozof, at the American Thinker entitled Proposed Gun Laws Would Do Nothing To Prevent Mass Killings, And Everyone Knows It.  If Filozof's thesis is correct, one wonders why the 'everyone' is so anxious to pass yet more laws that will be ignored by criminals, and probably won't be used by prosecutors any more than they use the ones they already have?  He does get to that, but first he goes through the history of Federal gun control legislation starting with the 1934 National Firearms Act.  He also lists a number of mass killings that were accomplished without so called "assault weapons."  Then he gets to the point:

That is the real goal of proposed gun confiscations and "red flag" laws: to completely disarm the public, destroy all individuality and all independence, and have the population eating from the hand of the government as if they were domesticated animals.

The notion of treating people like domesticated animals can be seen at any airport in the land every day. Each day people line up like cattle being herded to the slaughter to go through security theater. Indeed, one wonders if the security theater was designed to desensitize people to it. In any case, I believe Filozof has nailed the truth of what the Democrats are really after.