They don’t even try to hide it. They just come right out and say it, Children need to be protected:
Constitutional issues aside, consider youths: In Seattle, firearms are the leading cause of death among 15- to 24-year-olds. In King County, an estimated 32,000 children live in homes with unlocked firearms; about 7,000 of them live in homes with loaded firearms and about 2,000 in homes where guns are stored loaded and unlocked. Does this make sense? Don’t children deserve to live in a community where guns are safely stored, their purchase closely regulated and weapons clearly intended for maximum damage banned?
As one commenter said, “The phrase in this article that I find the most chilling ‘Constitutional issues aside…'”. Constitutional issues are just dismissed by invoking “youths”. And ignoring the fact that more children have been killed because of gun control (start by counting the number of kids killed by the Nazis) rather than in spite of it. In the comments I asked them my usual, Just One Question. No response yet. I don’t expect one either. It’s not about logic or safety. It’s “for the children.”