The Republican Party has become a front for the National Rifle Association (NRA). Its arguments against any gun control border on the absurd. Now, this comment, no doubt, will bring me widespread condemnation from the gun reactionaries populating this state but the arguments against the most sensible curbs proposed by President Barack Obama are mere confections.

Take, for example, the President’s move to expand background checks to cover more firearms sold at gun shows, online and anywhere else. If somebody is in the business of selling guns as opposed to isolated sales, regardless of where he or she sells the guns for profit, regulations will designate them as gun dealers. This appellation angers gun enthusiasts who counter that criminals always get guns. The reason why that argument is correct is because upwards of 40 percent of guns are sold without any background checks, hence their availability to the bad guys. It’s the very opposition to any regulations by the NRA which makes the argument a truism. The reality is that criminals in so-called strict gun regulatory states purchase their firearms in states with loose regulations. While NRA supporters tout the fact that strict gun control doesn’t work, as evidenced by jurisdictions that have strict laws but multiple gun-related deaths, the fact is that the NRA opposition to background checks enhances the problem of access by criminals or mentally ill people who purchase without any background checks across the border or online because they can do so.

The ultimate ludicrousness of the Republican opposition becomes apparent when Congress refuses to ban purchases of guns by those on the terrorist list. The argument there is that some people may be mistakenly on that list. So what! There is an avenue to get your name removed, but talk about the tail wagging the dog. It’s the same stupid argument that Democrats make about background checks for illegal immigrants in job-hiring. Because there might be a few errors and the system isn’t 100 percent perfect then you shouldn’t do any check. In both instances the politicians who espouse these respective views have sold their souls to special interests.

Unless something is a 100 percent “cure” for a problem the NRA remains opposed to the effort. Of course, nothing in life is a perfect antidote to any ills at such a success rate. Yet, whether it is any other social issue, like registering a car which is safe and insured, or warnings on cigarette labels, perfection is not the standard. Why the public accepts this pablum that murders will still occur is one of the puzzles of life. So is the opposition to smart technology where only the owner can shoot the gun. Instead of looking at the lives saved by kids not being able to discharge their parents' weapons or  a thief being able to use a purloined gun, the argument is that the owner may have a problem someday.

Now the state of Texas is being praised for letting people wear firearms on their person. One only needs to read a little history about the Old West to see how that capability curbed violence. Republican Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s comment, “Obama wants to impose more gun control. My response? Come and take it.”

Personally, I am not pleased by the expansion of executive powers but the do-nothing Republicans have created this monster. How discouraging.

Arlene Violet is an attorney and former Rhode Island Attorney General.