The “Assault” ban obsession is no answer


It would seem that the current selection of Democratic presidential candidates all share a profound obsession with ‘gun control’, and in particular the desire to ban anything they can remotely classify as an “assault weapon”. This is a much over used and inaccurate definition that gets unjustifiably applied to almost any rifle that is an auto-loader, commonly often including the cosmetic features of the dreaded ‘black rifle’ with attributes such as a pistol grip and adjustable or folding stock.

Of course these candidates are not alone with their obsession, as many states seek the same goal – such as the recent ban attempts in Virginia have demonstrated. It has to be wondered where is the logic as to why a majority of gun owners should be penalized for the sins of the very few, other than simply achieving the means to effect a wide spread disarmament policy.

If as is estimated some 45 million gun owners possess so called “assault” rifles, and applying a ‘guestimated’ evil-use figure of one in every 1,000,000 owners (0.000001%) we might have, say, a hypothetical figure of as many as 45 potential mass murderers – an unlikely high number. Result – many millions of legitimate owner’s rights would be infringed upon – and yet, the potential availability of such firearms thoughout the criminal underworld would remain unchanged.

Being facetious, consider this – if a popular make of SUV for example was used to maliciously drive into a crowd resulting in multiple deaths and injuries – would that be reason enough to ban said make of vehicle? Of course not but the principle would seem little different from that proposed for “assault” weapon bans – penalize the overwhelming majority of good people’s rights.

From Washington Times:

One of the avenues the candidates are all pursuing is to ban certain types of gun, which they have labelled as ‘Assault’ Weapons. This despite the fact that the federal ‘Assault’ Weapons ban of 1994-2004 showed no benefits and, on a thorough examination of the data, may even have increased the criminal use of such weapons. Any such policies would not affect automatic weapons, which are very tightly controlled at federal level. Instead they seem to be centered on AR-15 style rifles, despite the fact that rifles tend to be used in less than 5 percent of all criminal shootings, and would do nothing to limit criminal access to the handguns which feature in over 95 percent of shootings.

And a ban, which would affect around 1,000,000 Virginians and over 45,000,000 Americans by requiring surrender, confiscation and/or registration, is not limited to AR-15 style weapons (and one must wonder if they choose the features of such weapons because they incorrectly believe that AR stands for either Assault Rifle or perhaps Army Rifle instead of the Armalite Rifle company who originally designed it specifically for hunting) but any rifle with any single one of a number of similar features. Such a ban would therefore affect vastly more than just AR-15 style rifles.

In the wake of horrifying mass shootings such as the Virginia Beach and Virginia Tech shootings such a ban might seem reasonable to many, but in addition to the points made above, it would also fail to address additional substantial legal problems. For example the Supreme Court has ruled on more than one occasion that Second Amendment protections extend to weapons “in common use for lawful purposes.” With the sheer quantity of AR-15 style firearms involved, this most popular of rifle styles can certainly be considered to be “in common use for lawful purposes.” So what is the point in proposing policies which may be neither constitutionally permissible nor enforceable?

If major outright bans of “assault” weapons are successful, what might be the consequences? Firstly, we would see widespread criminalization of majority legitimate gun owners and secondly, the very strong possibility of multiple incarcerations and even potential deaths from ‘no-knock’ warrents being implemented. It is not the object that needs attention, rather it is the evil people who should be identified (with due process), along with major reduction of the prolific numbers of gun-free-zones.

Elizabeth Warren, A Walking Nightmare For Your 2nd Amendment

H/T AmmoLand.


Editors Notes: There is so much wrong with this copy and paste from Elizbeth Warren’s website that we can hardly begin to unpack all the things that are factually wrong, false or just flat out lies and mischaracterizations of the real world we live in. It is a shameful and shocking display of ignorance and hate for one of our most scared GOD-given rights.

Elizabeth Warren img elizabethwarrendotcom
Elizabeth Warren img elizabethwarrendotcom

Nevada – -( I apologize for the length of this, but Elizabeth’s Warns plan to take away your gun rights is over 3,000 words long and include new ways to take away your rights that even Mike Bloomberg hasn’t thought of yet, including limiting your free speech rights as gun owners to get involved politically and to speak out against bad and dangerous gun laws.

While NVFAC PAC is a state PAC and we don’t get involved in federal elections, it’s worth the time to read Elizbeth Warren plan because it includes every new anti-gun initiative we will be opposing over the next decade in Nevada.

Elizabeth Warren in her own words and what she vows to do to our right to keep and bear arms: (what follows is quoted directly from her website)

  • As president, I will immediately take executive action to rein in an out-of-control gun industry — and to hold both gun dealers and manufacturers accountable for the violence promoted by their products.

  • I will break the NRA’s stranglehold on Congress by passing sweeping anti-corruption legislation and eliminating the filibuster so that our nation can no longer be held hostage by a small group of well-financed extremists who have already made it perfectly clear that they will never put the safety of the American people first.

  • I will send Congress comprehensive gun violence prevention legislation. I will sign it into law within my first 100 days. And we will revisit this comprehensive legislation every single year — adding new ideas and tweaking existing ones based on new data — to continually reduce the number of gun deaths in America.

Reform advocates are engaged in a valuable discussion about gun reforms that can be achieved by executive action. We must pursue these solutions to the fullest extent of the law, including by redefining anyone “engaged in the business” of dealing in firearms to include the vast majority of gun sales outside of family-to-family exchanges. This will extend requirements — not only for background checks, but all federal gun rules — to cover all of those sales. This includes:

  • Requiring background checks. We will bring the vast majority of private sales, including at gun shows and online, under the existing background check umbrella.
  • Reporting on multiple purchases. We will extend the existing requirement to report bulk sales to nearly all gun sales. And I’ll extend existing reporting requirements on the mass purchase of certain rifles from the southwestern border states to all 50 states.
  • Raising the minimum age. We will expand the number of sales covered by existing age restriction provisions that require the purchaser to be at least 18 years old, keeping guns out of the hands of more teenagers.

My administration will use all the authorities at the federal government’s disposal to investigate and prosecute all those who circumvent or violate existing federal gun laws. This includes:

  • Prosecuting gun traffickers. Gun trafficking across state lines allows guns to move from states with fewer restrictions to those with strict safety standards, and gun trafficking across our southern border contributes to gang violence that sends migrants fleeing north. I’ll instruct my Attorney General to go after the interstate and transnational gun trafficking trade with all the resources of the federal government.
  • Revoking licenses for gun dealers who break the rules. Only 1% of gun dealers are responsible for 57% of guns used in crimes. My Administration will direct the ATF to prioritize oversight of dealers with serial compliance violations — and then use its authority to revoke the license of dealers who repeatedly violate the rules.
  • Investigating the NRA and its cronies. The NRA is accused of exploiting loopholes in federal laws governing non-profit spending to divert member dues into lavish payments for its board members and senior leadership. I’ll appoint an attorney general committed to investigating these types of corrupt business practices, and the banks and third-party vendors — like Wells Fargo — that enabled the NRA to skirt the rules for so long.

To protect the most vulnerable, my administration will use ATF’s existing regulatory authority to the greatest degree possible, including by:

  • Protecting survivors of domestic abuse. We will close the so-called “boyfriend loophole” by defining intimate partner to include anyone with a domestic violence conviction involving any form of romantic partner.
  • Reversing the Trump administration’s efforts to weaken our existing gun rules. We will rescind the Trump-era rules and policies that weaken our gun safety regime, including rules that lower the standards for purchasing a gun, and those that make it easier to create untraceable weapons or modify weapons in ways that circumvent the law. This includes overturning Trump-era policies enabling 3-D printed guns, regulating 80% receivers as firearms, and reversing the ATF ruling that allows a shooter to convert a pistol to a short-barreled rifle using pistol braces.
  • Restrict the movement of guns across our borders. We will reverse the Trump administration’s efforts to make it easier to export U.S.-manufactured weapons by transferring exports of semi-automatic firearms and ammunition from the State Department to the Commerce Department, and we will prevent the import of foreign-manufactured assault weapons into the United States.

Structural Changes To Pass Gun Safety Legislation

The next president has a moral obligation to use whatever executive authority she has to address the gun crisis. But it is obvious that executive action is not enough. Durable reform requires legislation — but right now legislation is impossible. Why? A virulent mix of corruption and abuse of power.

Big money talks in Washington. And the NRA represents a particularly noxious example of Washington corruption at work. Over the last two decades, the NRA has spent over $200 million on lobbying Congress, influencing elections, and buying off politicians — and that’s just the tip of the iceberg. The NRA spends millions poisoning our political discourse with hateful, conspiracy-fueled propaganda, blocking even modest reforms supported by 90% of American voters.

In the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre, the American people rallied for reform. President Obama suggested several serious legislative changes. The Senate voted down an assault weapons ban. It rejected a background checks proposal, even though 54 Senators from both parties voted for it, because of a right-wing-filibuster. These were the bare minimum steps we needed to take. And six years later, Congress still hasn’t done a thing.

This pattern repeats itself throughout our government. When money and influence can override the will of a huge majority of Americans, that is corruption, pure and simple.

It’s time to fight back. I have proposed the most sweeping set of anticorruption reforms since Watergate — a set of big structural changes that includes ending lobbying as we know it and slamming shut the revolving door. My first priority when I’m elected President is to enact this package to get our government working for everyone again.

But anti-corruption legislation alone won’t be enough to get gun safety legislation done. After decades of inaction, Democrats have rallied behind a number of important gun reforms. If we continue to allow bought and paid for extremists in the Senate to thwart the will of the people, we will never enact any of them.

Enough is enough. Lasting gun reform requires the elimination of the filibuster.

Legislation To Reduce Gun Violence

When I am president, I will send Congress comprehensive legislation containing our best ideas about what will work to reduce gun violence. It starts by ensuring that safe, responsible ownership is the standard for everyone who chooses to own a gun. We’ll do that by:

  • Creating a federal licensing system. States with strict licensing requirements experience lower rates of gun trafficking and violence. A license is required to drive a car, and Congress should establish a similarly straightforward federal licensing system for the purchase of any type of firearm or ammunition.
  • Requiring universal background checks. I’ll expand background checks via executive action — but Congress should act to permanently mandate universal background checks. And I’ll push Congress to close the so-called “Charleston loophole” that allows a sale to proceed after three days even if the background check is not complete.
    Increasing taxes on gun manufacturers. Since 1919, the federal government has imposed an excise tax on manufacturers and importers of guns and ammunition. Handguns are taxed at 10% and other guns and ammunition are taxed at 11%. These taxes raise less in revenue than the federal excise tax on cigarettes, domestic wine, or even airline tickets. It’s time for Congress to raise those rates — to 30% on guns and 50% on ammunition — both to reduce new gun and ammunition sales overall and to bring in new federal revenue that we can use for gun violence prevention and enforcement of existing gun laws.
  • Establishing a real waiting period. Waiting periods prevent impulsive gun violence, reducing gun suicides by 7–11% and gun homicides by 17%. Over the past 5 years, a national handgun waiting period would have stopped at least 4,550 gun deaths. The federal government should establish a one-week waiting period for all firearm purchases.
  • Capping firearms purchases. About one out of four of firearms recovered at the scene of a crime were part of a bulk purchase. Congress should limit the number of guns that can be purchased to one per month, similar to a Virginia law that successfully reduced the likelihood of Virginia-bought guns being used in criminal activity.
  • Creating a new federal anti-trafficking law. Congress should make clear that trafficking firearms or engaging in “straw purchases” — when an individual buys a gun on behalf of a prohibited purchaser — are federal crimes. This would give law enforcement new tools to crack down on gun trafficking and help keep guns out of the wrong hands.
  • Raising the minimum age for gun purchases. I’ll extend existing age requirements to virtually all sales, but federal law is currently conflicting — for example, a person must be 21 to purchase a handgun from a federally licensed dealer, but only 18 to purchase a rifle. Congress should set the federal minimum age at 21 for all gun sales.

We can also do more to keep military-style assault weapons off our streets. We’ll do that by:

  • Passing a new federal assault weapons ban. The 1994 federal assault weapons ban successfully reduced gun deaths but was allowed to expire ten years later. Congress should again ban the future production, sale, and importation of military-style assault weapons, and require individuals already in possession of assault weapons to register them under the National Firearms Act. Just as we did successfully with machine guns after the passage of that law, we should establish a buyback program to allow those who wish to do so to return their weapon for safe disposal, and individuals who fail to register or return their assault weapon should face penalties.
  • Banning high-capacity ammunition magazines. High-capacity magazines were used in 57% of mass shootings from 2009 to 2015, allowing the shooters to target large numbers of people without stopping to reload. Congress should enact a federal ban on large-capacity magazines for all firearms, setting reasonable limits on the lethality of these weapons.
  • Prohibiting accessories that make weapons more deadly. Gun manufacturers sell increasingly deadly gun accessories, including silencers, trigger cranks, and other mechanisms that increase the rate of fire or make semi-automatic weapons fully automatic. Congress should ban these dangerous accessories entirely.

We should also do everything possible to keep guns out of the hands of those at highest risk of violence. We’ll do that by:

  • Passing extreme risk protection laws. Extreme risk protection orders allow families and law enforcement to petition to temporarily restrict access to firearms for individuals in crisis or at elevated risk of harming themselves or others. Congress should pass a federal extreme risk law and create a grant system to incentivize states to enact their own laws that clearly define extreme risk.
  • Prohibiting anyone convicted of a hate crime from owning a gun. Too often, guns are used in acts of mass violence intended to provoke fear in minority communities; more than 10,000 hate crimes involve a gun every year. Any individual convicted of a hate crime should be permanently prohibited from owning a gun, full stop.
  • Protecting survivors of domestic abuse. Domestic violence and gun violence are deeply connected — in an average month, more than 50 women are shot and killed by an intimate partner. I’ll close the boyfriend loophole, but Congress should make that permanent, and expand the law to include individuals with restraining orders or who have been convicted of stalking.
  • Securing our schools. Parents shouldn’t have to buy bullet-proof backpacks for their children — guns have no place on our campuses or in our schools. Congress should improve the Gun-Free School Zones Act to include college and university campuses, and apply to individuals licensed by a state or locality to carry a firearm.

If we want real, long-lasting change, we must also hold the gun industry accountable, including online sites that look the other way when sellers abuse their platforms. We’ll do that by:

  • Repealing the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. Nearly every other industry has civil liability as a check on irresponsible actions, but a 2005 law insulates firearms and dealers from civil liability when a weapon is used to commit a crime, even in cases when dealers were shockingly irresponsible. No one should be above the law, and that includes the gun industry. Congress should repeal this law, immediately.
  • Holding gun manufacturers strictly liable for the harm they cause through a federal private right of action. Gun manufacturers make billions in profit by knowingly selling deadly products. Then they are let completely off the hook when people take those deadly products and inflict harm on thousands of victims each year. State tort law already recognizes that certain types of products and activities are so abnormally dangerous that the entities responsible for them should be held strictly liable when people are injured. Congress should codify that same principle at the federal level for guns by creating a new private right of action allowing survivors of gun violence to hold the manufacturer of the weapon that harmed them strictly liable for compensatory damages to the victim or their family.
  • Strengthening ATF. The NRA has long sought to hobble the ATF, lobbying against staffing and funding increases for the agency and getting its congressional allies to impose absurd restrictions on its work even as the agency struggled to meet its basic responsibilities. Congress should fully fund ATF’s regulatory and compliance programs and remove the riders and restrictions that prevent it from doing its job.
  • Regulating firearms for consumer safety. Today there are no federal safety standards for firearms produced in the United States. We can recall unsafe products from trampolines to children’s pajamas — but not defective guns. Congress should repeal the provision of law that prevents the Consumer Product Safety Commission from regulating the safety of firearms and their accessories.
  • Tightening oversight for gun dealers. Today there is no requirement for federally-licensed gun shops to take even simple steps to prevent guns from falling into the wrong hands. Congress should pass basic safety standards for federally-licensed gun dealers, including employee background checks, locked cabinets, and up-to-date inventories of the weapons they have in stock.
  • Holding gun industry CEOs personally accountable. I’ve proposed a law that would impose criminal liability and jail time for corporate executives when their company is found guilty of a crime or their negligence causes severe harm to American families — and that includes gun industry CEOs

Tragedies like the shootings we witnessed in El Paso and Dayton capture our attention and dominate the conversation about gun reform. But they’re just the tip of the iceberg of gun violence in America. Every day, we lose one hundred Americans to gun violence, with hundreds more physically injured and countless more mentally and emotionally traumatized. And Black and Latinx Americans have borne the brunt of the gun violence tragedy in our country.

In the past, those statistics have been used to justify increased policing and strict sentencing laws. Communities already traumatized by gun violence were doubly victimized by policies that locked up their young people and threw away the key. We’ve got a chance to show that we’ve learned from the past and to chart a new path. It starts by acknowledging that gun violence is a public health crisis, one that cannot be solved solely by the criminal justice system.

We can start to do that by investing in evidence-based community violence intervention programs. Federal grant funding today focuses significantly on law enforcement and incarceration, rather than interventions designed to stop gun violence before it occurs. The data in urban communities indicate that the majority of violence is perpetrated by a small number of offenders, and many cities have found success with programs that identify those at highest risk of becoming the victim or perpetrator of a violent gun crime, then employing strategies to interrupt the cycle of violence before it escalates. Programs that engage the surrounding community, employ mediation to prevent retaliation, build trust with law enforcement, and provide needed long-term social services have been proven to de-escalate tensions and dramatically reduce violence. As president, I’ll establish a grant program to invest in and pilot these types of evidence-based intervention programs at scale.

Annual Research And Annual Reauthorization

Historically, when Congress works to address big national issues, we don’t simply pass one law and cross our fingers. Instead, we continue the research — into new policies and around the consequences of our existing policies — and then come back on a regular basis to update the law.

We don’t do this with guns. Not only have we not passed meaningful legislation in almost a generation, but thanks to the NRA, for decades Congress prohibited federal funding from being used to promote gun safety at all, effectively freezing nearly all research on ways to reduce gun violence. Last year, Congress finally clarified that the CDC could in fact conduct gun violence research — but provided no funding to do so.

This ends when I’m President. My budget will include an annual investment of $100 million for DOJ and HHS to conduct research into the root causes of gun violence and the most effective ways to prevent it, including by analyzing gun trafficking patterns and researching new technologies to improve gun safety. These funds will also be used to study the reforms we enact — to see what’s working, what new ideas should be added, and what existing policies should be tweaked. And every year, I will send Congress an updated set of reforms based on this new information. That’s how we’ll meet our goal.

The conversation about gun violence in America is shifting — but not just because we’ve seen a spike in violence fueled by the NRA and the Trump administration’s dangerous policies and extremist rhetoric. It’s also because of the tireless work of activists, organizers, and community leaders who have been fighting for reform at the state and local level.

If you need proof that the majority of Americans support common-sense gun reform, look at what’s happening in state legislatures and city councils across the country. Moms, students, and faith leaders have been packing hearing rooms and taking back spaces formerly reserved for NRA lobbyists. Survivors of mass shootings are doing the critical work of turning our attention to daily gun violence in cities that don’t make headlines.

And it’s working. States that pass expanded background checks see lower rates of gun-related deaths and gun trafficking. States that disarm domestic abusers see lower rates of intimate partner gun violence. States with extreme risk laws have been successful in reducing gun suicides and have used them to prevent potential mass shootings. Community-based violence intervention programs are popping up in cities across the country.

Together, we can build on this momentum. We can build a grassroots movement to take back the Senate, eliminate the filibuster, and pass federal gun safety legislation that will save lives. And from the White House, I’ll make sure that the NRA and their cronies are held accountable with executive action. If we turn our heartbreak and our anger into action, I know we can take the power from the NRA and the lawmakers in their pockets and return it to the people.

After reading all of her plans to disarm and silence Americans, all I have to say is: she must be stopped.

Click here to join the Caliber Club to pledge a monthly donation or click here to make a one-time donation to help us continue to oppose these efforts in Nevada.

Thank you for your continued support of NVFAC PAC.

Northam’s Gun Ban Bill Defeated in Committee. What Happens Next?

H/T Bearing Arms.

It will be interesting to see what Governor Ralph”Blackface” Northam(Delusional-VA) and his fellow DemocRats come up with gun control-wise. 


Now that Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam’s gun ban bill has been pushed to the Virginia Crime Commission to “study” the bill, HB961 is dead for this session. That doesn’t mean, however, that gun owners are out of the woods just yet. As David Adams, legislative chair of the Virginia Shooting Sports Association tells me on today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co., it’s possible that Northam and House Democrats will insert the language banning modern sporting rifles, ammunition magazines with a 13+ round capacity, suppressors, and “trigger activators” into one of the gun control bills that is still alive this session.

House Democrats have already modified several of the gun control bills approved by the state Senate, and if the Senate doesn’t agree to the changes, those bills will head to a conference committee to iron out the differences. The same is likely to happen to gun control bills that originated in the House, but are now being considered by senators. Those conference committees aren’t public hearings, so gun owners won’t have a chance to attend. It also only takes a simple majority vote by the conference committee to send the modified bills to the floor of the House and Senate.

It doesn’t make a whole lot of sense for Northam to do this if the four Democrat senators who opposed HB961 remain firm in their opposition, but the governor is serious about getting something he can call an “assault weapons ban” to his desk, and he still has some room to maneuver legislatively. The most obvious move would be to grandfather in existing magazines in the hopes of bringing recalcitrant Democrats on board, which might be why we didn’t see such an amendment offered in the Judiciary committee on Monday. Northam may be holding that back as a last-ditch effort to save the gun ban language and deliver him a political victory at the expense of the rights of Virginians.

Even if the gun ban language remains off the table this session, there are plenty of bills moving forward that are awful for the exercise of our Second Amendment rights, including legislation that guts the state’s firearm preemption law, criminalizes parents who allow their minor child access to a firearm to hunt or use in self-defense, rations the purchase of a firearm to one-per-month, changes the training requirements for a concealed carry license, and more. Virginia gun owners can and should be proud of defeating HB961, but our work isn’t done yet.

Also on today’s show we have the story of an 18-year old in North Carolina sentenced to probation earlier this month for a string of crimes who’s now accused of murdering a teenager in Raleigh last week, an armed resident of Birmingham, Alabama who shot the man trying to rob him, and a police officer and a jeweler in southern California who helped an 89-year old veteran when he lost the most treasured memento from his marriage to his late wife (it’s gonna get a little dusty when you read this, just so you know).

Don’t forget to subscribe to the show at Apple Podcasts, or Townhall Media on YouTube, and thanks as always for watching, listening, and spreading the word!




Biden Goes Swalwell-Lite: “you cannot have 20, 30, 40, 50 clips in a weapon”

H/T AmmoLand.

Slow Joe The Gaff Machine Biden is showing his ignorance of firearms nomenclature.

Joe Biden Groping Mom Demand Actions Moms IMG NRA-ILA
Biden Goes Swalwell-Lite: “you cannot have 20, 30, 40, 50 clips in a weapon” IMG NRA-ILA

Fairfax, VA – -( The campaigns of Democrats seeking to challenge President Donald Trump in November 2020 seem to be on a never-ending quest to see which one can implode in the most spectacular fashion. We’ve documented the collapse of Representatives Eric Swalwell and Robert Francis O’Rourke, as well as predicted the demise of Senator Kamala Harris. Senator Cory Booker has also left the building, and Senator Elizabeth Warren has seen her support fade precipitously.

All (with the exception of Swalwell) of these candidates, at one point or another, were considered rising stars or poised to be embraced nationally as the new standard-bearer for the Democrats. And while Warren does remain an active candidate, her third-place finish (at least as far as we know) in Iowa was somewhat of a push for her among those making wagers on who will face Trump. Finishing a distant fourth in New Hampshire this week should be enough to tell her that a head-to-head against President Trump is simply not in her future.

Which brings us to the man who had been the frontrunner for the Democrats since he entered the race; former Vice President Joe Biden.

At one point last May, Biden held a commanding lead over his competition, hitting 41% support at the national level, and outpacing his closest rival by slightly more than 25%.

But oh, how the mighty have fallen.

The polling aggregators at Real Clear Politics recently put Biden in second place, his national support having plummeted by more than 20%. Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders is their new frontrunner.

In the Iowa Caucus debacle, where Biden once held a solid lead with 28% support, President Obama’s old running mate finished a dismal fourth (again, as far as we can tell). This week, in New Hampshire, Biden pulled out of the state before voting was even completed so he could focus on the upcoming South Carolina primary in a desperate attempt to salvage his campaign’s viability. As is a recurring theme with Biden, he once held a commanding lead in the Granite State with 34% support, but that support collapsed, and he fell even further back in the field, finishing in fifth place.

So, what do we make of the Biden collapse? To be honest, everyone should have seen it coming.

After all, Joe Biden has a propensity for making bizarre statements, and we’ve covered his gift for gaffes in the past. His curious approach to winning over Democrats continued while campaigning in New Hampshire, when he uttered one of the most odd insults ever offered by a candidate for president, after a young lady asked him about his lackluster performance in Iowa.

With a struggling campaign, what should a former frontrunner do? Looks like one approach Biden has chosen is to follow the lead of so many failed presidential campaigns during this election cycle; ratchet up the anti-gun rhetoric.

Of course, Joe being Joe, he had to add his own incomprehensible take on the subject.

During a campaign event in New Hampshire, before his hopes of a positive showing had completely flamed out, Biden lamented over the notion that “we’re unwilling to have a rational policy that says you cannot have 20, 30, 40, 50 clips in a weapon.”

Are those paper clips, binder clips, or just news clips of a candidate having yet another “senior moment?”

Biden regularly (although inaccurately) interchanges the terms clips and magazines, so does he think the gun industry has developed a new firearm that is capable of having dozens of magazines attached to it? Perhaps this is another one of those mythical guns that Biden has dreamed of before, like the “James Bond-style” of firearm he believes exists outside of a Hollywood movie lot.

But Biden didn’t stop there. While he didn’t go full-Swalwell (never go full-Swalwell) with the threat of nuclear weapons being used against American citizens, the foundering candidate did make reference to the futility of Americans offering any resistance should a tyrannical government ever rise to power.

“The fact is,” Biden proclaimed, “if you’re going to take on the government, you need an F-15 with Hellfire missiles.”

In other words, don’t bother trying to resist a tyrannical government, as its military will be too well equipped. Tell that to the rag-tag group of citizens who banded together in 1775, armed with their hunting muskets often pulled down from over the fireplace, to face off against, and defeat, the greatest military power of the time.

Below the Radar: The Gun Safety Board and Research Act of 2019

H/T AmmoLand.

Another attempt to undermine the Second Amendment by DemocRat.


Warning Take Action Call Protest
Warning Take Action Call Protest

United States – -( Sometimes, legislation intended to attack the Second Amendment doesn’t go after our rights directly or indirectly. Yet it can still be a threat, and it warrants strong opposition because the effects will be used in future attacks. This legislation, though, often will fly under the radar because of its indirect approach.

This is the case with HR 4177, the Gun Safety Board and Research Act of 2019, introduced by Representative Mark Desaulnier (D-CA). According to a release from his office, the legislation will create a so-called “Gun Safety Board.” This board would be responsible for doing research and for proposing what the release calls “evidence-based” solutions.

However, we should not be fooled. This Gun Safety Board is not out to look at the facts objectively. Just look at what Desaulnier has on his Congressional web page – a separate page that discusses what he calls “America’s Gun Problem.” The numbers there are a host of out-of-context claims and a fair bit of demonizing the National Rifle Association.

So, we can assume with a fair degree of certainty just from the background that this is not going to be a board with a mandate to take an objective look at the stats. We also can assume this because, according to the text of the legislation, this board is being placed under the Department of Health and Human Services. This is where the Centers for Disease Control is also placed.

Second Amendment supporters should take time to brush up on the history of CDC advocacy for gun control. Because that is what this board will be intended to carry out – using the veneer of science. In essence, Desaulnier’s plan is to treat our constitutional rights as a disease to be eradicated.

What is so diabolical is that this legislation is not a direct attack. Desaulnier and other anti-Second Amendment extremists are instead just asking for “research” into the issue. They will claim that they want experts to look into the issue. But which experts will they find? Ones like Arthur Kellerman or Katherine Kaufer Christoffel.

Kellerman’s 1993 study is still used these days to claim guns do not provide an effective means of self-defense. Of course, we all know (or should know) that Kellerman skewed the data by simply noting fatalities. But most people who use guns for self-defense don’t even have to fire a shot. Often, the sight of the potential victim being armed ended the attempt to commit a crime.

Second Amendment supporters should take the time to contact their Senators and Representative, and politely urge them to oppose this legislation. We don’t need to see taxpayer-funded anti-Second Amendment propaganda.


About Harold Hutchison

Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post,, and other national websites.

You Bernie Suckers Are Going to Get Fooled Again

H/T Town Hall.

Crazy Bernie Sanders proved in 2016 he could be bought off and he will sell out again.

If you are dumb enough to slobber over a socialist then you’re already inclined toward being a hapless mark, so it should be no surprise that you Bernie dorks are about to get screwed over again by the Democratic Party. Here’s how it’s going to go: Because you are stupid – you support a socialist, so you are presumptively stupid – you think that if you work really hard and win the votes the establishment creeps who own the Democratic Party are going to let you have a say. But, like last time, you won’t get a say. You’ll work real hard – maybe if you worked really hard at actual jobs you wouldn’t be half-wit socialists – and you’ll win the votes, and all your dreams will die as you end up with the nomination going to a malignant midget multi-zillionaire.

I don’t know exactly how they are going to do it – more convenient caucus kerfuffles, super-delegates, shenanigans at the convention – but there is no way your masters will ever let you win. Like I said, you’re socialists, and therefore stupid, so you will get cheated and you will end up having to vote for the Verne Troyer of American big-money politics.

And, like the obedient saps you are, you’ll do it.

Now, at this point, you probably have some complaints about this column. By complaining, you can temporarily distract from the indisputable fact that your own foolishness has put you in the position of being crushingly humiliated by the Democratic elite once again. Let me briefly address your whiny protests.

Yes, I say “socialist” like it’s a bad thing. This is because it’s a very bad thing. Like, to the tune of 100 million corpses bad thing. I’ve actually lived in the ruins of socialism and you, well, you had a man-bunned sociology TA tell you it was swell. And you believed him because you are a dupe. Be glad that I am assuming that you are stupid instead of the only other reason one would ever cavort with these blood-stained goblins: that you are evil.

But he’s a “democratic socialist,” you interject, because you are stupid. Would you feel fine with a “democratic Nazi?” Actually, you probably would, since Nazis are just a genre of socialist with white and black added to the color palette.

Then you’ll claim that the Box Boy won’t be the nominee, no, one of the other pouty posse will get it. Maybe Biden will. You totally want to vote for a guy who thinks his powder-diving, dancer-diddling loser son should totally be getting $83K a month. Man, if you got money like that you could move out of your parents’ place! Or maybe Audie Buttigieg – he seems plausible. No, I’m not laughing! And then there’s Big Chief Sanders Lite. Maybe she could get elected. Really, I’m not laughing. Okay, then Amy Klobuchar – no, I’m not laughing, I’m just scratching my head wondering why she is even still in. Face it. The only viable option besides Vermont Stalin is Scrooge McSuck.

And your next protest will be that Donald Trump is worse than Mini Mike. In fact, you’ll say, Trump is like Hitler combined with…well, Hitler is the only dictator you don’t like, so we’ll just stick with “He’s literally Hitler for real!” Again, you have been suckered. If you were actually raging against the machine rather than aspiring to be a cog in it, you would back him. Now, you may not like it, and you may be too dumb to see it, but Trump is the only disruptor of the establishment in this race. Short Stuff’s gnome-ination is designed to re-establish the establishment. And mark my words: you’ll help him do it.

Yeah, I bet Wall Street is quivering in its collective Guccis over the muffled pitter-patter of the tiny little footsteps of the approaching Bloomberg administration. Bloomberg is not just an eager supporter of the globalist vision but a leading advocate, the Dwarf King of Davos. Trump, not so much. But you’ve been told to hate Trump, and like obedient little ants, you hate him.

In fact, you hate Trump so much that you will vote for the polar opposite of your crusty commie hero even after your preference has been torn from your soft little hands yet again. If you wanted to burn down the system, Trump would be your man. But you don’t…not really. You just want some scraps, like getting out of your loans or making other people pay for your doctor and you’ll be happy. That’s why you’ll give your general election vote to the Stop ‘N Frisk Doughboy even as you assure yourself that the guy who got minority unemployment to record lows is the big, bad racist in this race

You’ve been had. You’ll cry, but you’ll still go along with the scam as this all plays out.

Suddenly, the media will turn on the Bern in a coordinated attack. Oh wait, that’s happening. Then Frodo Moneybags will start buying off individuals and liberal groups. Oh wait, that’s happening too. Crusty has-been Sam Donaldson decided to show off his new blonde rug during his endorsement; so many more are coming. And I bet it’s not his cash but the power of Mikey’s ideas…okay, now I am laughing.

There will be more primary and caucus “surprises,” except the only people who will be surprised are you suckers. If it gets as far as the convention, your masters will adjourn to the un-smoke-filled rooms and decide for you who you will vote for. And you’ll whine and winge and ultimately obey like the good little suckers you are.

See, you bought into the idea that another four years of prosperity and peace under Donald Trump is much, much worse than reinstalling the party apparatus that has screwed you over in the last two cycles. You’ll ignore the economy, the lack of new wars, the trade rebalancing, and all the other stuff and instead focus on what your masters have commanded you to focus on: that Trump tweeted something mean. Oh, and Russians.

And here’s why you will let the Democrat puppetmasters succeed. It’s because you are stupid. Now, you could stop being stupid. You could refuse to play along. You could even insist Bernie run as a third-party candidate. I like that because it guarantees Trump II: Fossil-Fuel Generated Electric Boogaloo. But it would serve your interests too by forcing the party to recognize and respect you instead of assuming you’ll fall into line once again. But you won’t. You’re all talk and no revolution. Take off that Che t-shirt and put on one with Mini Mayor’s pouty little mug on it. He’s your man. You’re all Bloomberg Bros. Just give it time.

You’re saps, and you’ll take whatever you’re given and tell yourself you like it.

Speaking of what might happen if America’s urban dummies were foolish enough to elect an out socialist, check out my latest conservative thriller, Collapse, along with the other entries in the best-selling series, People’s RepublicIndian Country, and Wildfire.  America breaks in two as leftist foolishness, and evil, becomes unbearable. Action and liberal bashing ensue. Get them all, and also check out my Townhall VIP podcast, “Unredacted” every Monday as well as my new Hugh Hewitt-affiliated Salem podcast, “Fighting Words”!


H/T Guns In The News.

Elections have consequences.

Looking for an indication of how important a single race for a single elected position can be for gun owners? Look no further than Pennsylvania’s Attorney General Josh Shapiro. In 2016, Donald Trump narrowly carried the Keystone State, but—thanks to Michael Bloomberg’s generous support of gun-hating candidates—Shapiro prevailed in his race to become attorney general. Let’s see what this has meant for Pennsylvanians:

Circumventing the legislative process, Shapiro issued a December 2019 opinion in which he (re)defined unfinished receivers as “firearms.” Shapiro’s tortured opinion flies in stark contrast to the prevailing classification of unfinished receivers, which aren’t “firearms” at all. These hunks of polymer, steel and aluminum are unfinished items incapable of firing bullets. Without additional work, inoperative frames and receivers have about as much in common with “firearms” as a shovel; it’s like calling a piece of lead ore a bullet because it one day (with sufficient time, energy and expertise) could be made into a bullet.

So why did Shapiro re-define “firearms” as he did? Because, once he calls something a “firearm,” Shapiro believed he could start restricting our rights. To advance his absurd agenda, Shapiro relied on an exceptionally weak argument: He claimed that unfinished receivers are “designed” to expel a projectile via an explosive action. It doesn’t take a law degree to figure out how backward this thinking is. Unfinished receivers are explicitly designed so that they are unable to function as an operable receiver without further work and sufficient mechanical expertise. In other words, by their very nature, they are not firearms.

Gun-control organizations (and this attorney general) like to argue that the ability to make firearms for personal use is a “loophole” in federal law. This anti-gun narrative is not only false, but inconsistent with American history. Who do they think made many of the firearms that helped win America’s independence? Law-abiding Americans with a passion for firearms and working with their hands often purchase unfinished firearm receivers to craft their own guns for personal use. Unfinished materials used for this pastime take significant additional manufacturing to complete, are purchased for various reasons and advance a legitimate interest in the American tradition of firearm customization. Why should Pennsylvania’s firearm enthusiasts and craftsmen have to suffer infringements because a Bloomberg-funded bureaucrat like Shapiro decided to re-define “firearms” for them?

Predictably, Shapiro’s press office and the media have portrayed his opinion as a way to improve “public safety.” If anything, Shapiro’s interpretation as Pennsylvania’s attorney general encumbers the use of lawful frames and receivers that could lawfully defend the safety of other Pennsylvanians. There is nothing safe about limiting law-abiding Americans’ options for self-defense.

Undeterred, Shapiro is swinging for the most widespread restriction on our rights as possible. His “theory” of treating non-functioning blocks of polymer, steel or aluminum as “firearms” is the equivalent of calling a pile of aluminum tubes a bicycle or even considering a hickory or ash tree a baseball bat.

It’s worth remembering that Pennsylvanians elected both Shapiro and President Trump in the same election because the distinction highlights the consequences of each vote for our right to keep and bear arms. Contrary to Shapiro’s Obama-esque passion for governmental infringement, President Trump has spent most of his first term undoing Obama-era rules and appointing federal judges who will defend the Second Amendment for generations to come. I was present when President Trump ended U.S. involvement in the terrible U.N. Arms Trade Treaty at our Annual Meetings last year. Perhaps our brothers and sisters in Pennsylvania have learned their lesson: if you want to continue enjoying freedom, don’t elect a Bloomberg-backed politician like Shapiro to be your attorney general.

I’ll close with this: I just received word of a victory in NRA-backed litigation to keep 77 million acres in Alaska open to predator hunting. Here again, this victory is made possible by electing a pro-Second Amendment president of the United States. When you add this accomplishment to the long list of nearly 200 judges President Trump and pro-freedom members of the U.S. Senate have confirmed, you can see it for yourself: elections matter.

I’m asking all NRA members, gun owners and all other Second Amendment supporters to get involved. Elect more pro-gun candidates at every level of government this year. There is no position too big or small to occupy in defense of our liberty. If you wish to fight alongside good people in support of America’s most fundamental freedom, I invite you join me alongside the largest, most powerful grassroots army by signing up at