By Dave Workman | Senior Editor
Republican U.S. Senator Rick Scott of Florida has accused congressional Democrats of being more concerned about pushing gun control onto American firearms owners than addressing problems associated with mental health, according to Fox News.
In an appearance on “America’s Newsroom,” the Fox midday newscast, Scott stated, “This is like Groundhog Day, we have a shooting and Democrats want to take away your guns. They don’t want to solve problems, they want to take away your guns. That’s what totalitarian governments do.”
Revelations about the mental health of recent mass shooters has become a common thing in the aftermath of recent mass shooters. In several cases, reports have surfaced that killers had displayed several “warning signs” that might have alerted authorities, had anyone reported them.
In the case of the accused Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooter in Parkland, Fla., local law enforcement was familiar with the suspect, as they had been called to his home in the past.
Scott, who was Florida governor last year when the massacre occurred, noted that in the aftermath of the Parkland incident, “I sat down within days, within four to five days, I got law enforcement together, mental health counselors together, and I got educators together and within three weeks, we passed logical, common-sense legislation to make our schools and communities safer.”
Congressional Democrats seem focused on passing “universal background checks” – which many people see as a precursor to registration – and Extreme Risk Protection Order legislation, generically called “red flag laws,” which alarm gun owners because of due process concerns.
Meanwhile, a mayor in California has proposed a requirement that all gun owners have liability insurance. San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo would mandate insurance to cover “accidental discharge of the gun, and for the intentional acts of third parties who steal, borrow, or otherwise acquire the gun,” CNN reported. Such insurance would not cover “liability of the policyholder for his or her own intentional conduct,” the story noted.
Perhaps the greatest challenge in passing such a mandate would be in finding an insurance company that would provide such plans for gun owners.
If San Jose takes action on that proposal, it may face a legal challenge based on the state’s preemptory language in statute. There is no state constitutional right-to-bear-arms provision, but the 2010 McDonald ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court did incorporate the Second Amendment to the states via the 14th Amendment.
Under Liccardo’s proposal, gun owners who can’t afford insurance would pay into a government fund that would help offset the costs of “gun violence,” but even then the scheme would penalize honest gun owners for crimes they didn’t commit.
