With half the nation’s governors reportedly saying “no” to Syrian refugees, according to yesterday’s Los Angeles Times, perhaps one way to calm the concerns is to subject all refugees to the same scrutiny that honest American citizens face when they want to exercise their Second Amendment rights?
That’s a question possibly for Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who supported Initiative 594 last year, and was quoted by the Seattle Times yesterday, saying the welcome mat remains out. It might also be asked of gun control groups that have lately demanded repeal of current federal law that allows a firearms transaction to be completed if no background check is done in 72 hours.
No background check, no admittance to the United States; pretty simple, really, and it would apply the same standard to non-citizens as it does to native-born or naturalized citizens who buy firearms. How might that idea sit with the hundreds of Seattle Times readers weighing in on the issue of Gov. Inslee standing firm with his welcome to refugees in the Evergreen State?
At least two of those readers have already sneered at gun owners. One reader said, in part, “All gun owners should be considered potential mass murderers…” Another argued that, “Americans are much more likely to be killed by an American non-Muslim with an American-made gun than from a Muslim extremist, and the GOP don’t want to take any action on guns except to have gun vending machines on every street corner and to arm kindergarten teachers with guns.” So, one might say anti-gunners started this debate about safety.
Back in January, Interpol Secretary General Ronald Noble reportedly suggested that the answer to terrorist attacks might be armed citizens, according to ABC News. At the time, the headlines were about the deadly al-Shabab attack in Nairobi, Kenya. Now the battleground has shifted to Paris, and there have been reports that terrorists apparently may try to target Washington, D.C.
Critics of this approach contend that armed citizens firing back in self-defense would only add to the mayhem. That seems to be part of the anti-gun mantra, designed to portray armed citizens as boobs and incompetents.
So, how about meeting in the proverbial middle? If a refugee wants admission to the United States, he/she must pass a background check. That’s the standard currently being demanded for anyone buying or even borrowing a firearm, and there is a lot of that going on as Americans’ concerns about terrorism appear to be up.
Yesterdays’ Rasmussen Reports – quoted by this column – revealed that even before the Paris attack last Friday, a majority of likely U.S. voters did not believe the country is safer since the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attack. That sentiment could easily be supported by the estimated number of concealed carry licenses and permits that have been issued over the past decade. Millions of citizens, including more than a half-million in Washington state, are now licensed to carry.
It’s the American way to embrace those in need and welcome people to these shores. It is, however, also an American trait to be vigilant. Gun control advocates repeatedly harp about how the majority of people support background checks on gun buyers. To apply a different standard might be considered hypocrisy.
Got an opinion about this column? Sahre your views in the “Comments” section below.