Harris Calls On Congress To Pass Gun Control

H/T Bearing Arms.

The thing that scares me worse than a Joe Pee Pads Biden presidency is a Kalama Knee Pads Harris presidency.

If there’s one person who probably wants to take away your gun rights more than President Joe Biden, it’s Vice President Kamala Harris. Gun control was a major point for both of their campaigns during the primary. While they downplayed it during the general election, it was always there. They just didn’t make a big thing of it until after the general election.

While Biden is trying to do what he can, the fact remains that Harris wants to see gun control pass.

Now, she’s demanding it.

Vice President Kamala Harris is urging lawmakers to pass what she says are “reasonable gun safety laws.”

During an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash that aired on Sunday, Harris was asked why President Joe Biden is not focusing more on the issue of gun violence after it was reported that there were at least 45 mass shootings in March 2021.

She responded by noting that last month Biden took six executive actions aimed at curbing gun violence. She said, “There is only so much, however, that a president can do through executive action. This president, Joe Biden, has a long-standing history of speaking very clearly and unambiguously about the need for smart gun safety laws.”

“Congress has to act because we have to codify… make permanent, make the law. That we agree we should have background checks, that’s just reasonable safety laws. We should have an assault weapons ban. Assault weapons have been designed to kill a lot of people quickly. They are weapons of war,” she added.

When asked if she believed Congress would take action on gun control legislation, Harris responded, “It has to happen.”

Nah, it really doesn’t.

You see, we have background checks. The vast majority of firearm sales go through a background check process already. The media and anti-gun politicians like to pretend they don’t, but that’s simply not the case. Further, it’s already illegal to sell a gun to anyone you have reason to believe may not be eligible to have a firearm.

And yet, criminals keep getting guns. How?

Well, probably because black market gun dealers don’t conduct them. These are illegal transactions at every level, and they’re not going to start carrying out background checks, either. It’s not how they conduct business and it never will be.

All universal background checks will do is make it more difficult to gift firearms lawfully, make it impossible to loan someone a firearm, and heaven forbid you try to pass a gun down to your family after you die.

As for an assault weapon ban, sorry, but that’s simply not going to happen.

First, they’re not “weapons of war.” The AR-15 has profound functional differences from the M-4 used by the military, namely the select-fire feature not being included in the AR-15. The AR-15 is a semi-automatic rifle that is functionally no different than many hunting weapons, so why is it the evil one?

Frankly, we’re not giving up our AR-15s. We’re not giving up our right to keep buying AR-15s, either, so a grandfather clause doesn’t fill us with happy thoughts.

What Harris and Biden have failed to address is that violence is violence, whether it’s carried out with a knife or a gun. Knives kill more people every year than AR-15s, so why are we banning AR-15s? Because they’re scary-looking. They make for great headlines because they intimidate people, but they’re not the boogieman. They’re rifles that a lot of us enjoy shooting that also happen to be useful if we need to defend this great land, be it from enemies foreign or domestic.

Harris can make her demands if she wants, but one of many great things about this nation is that members of Congress not only can tell the vice president to go take a flying leap, they’re constitutionally obligated to do so.

God bless America.

Elizabeth Warren: Nuke the Filibuster To Pass Gun Control

H/T Bearing Arms.

Princess Fauxahontis is on the warpath against the Second Amendment.

Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren says she has a plan to reduce gun-related deaths by 80% in the United States, but in order to pass it, she wants to nuke the filibuster rule that, in essence, requires bills have the votes of 60 Senators. With the filibuster gone, a simple majority of 51 could pass any law they wanted, and Elizabeth Warren wants a LOT of new gun control laws.

We’ve previously pointed out here that gun licensing reduces gun ownership, and the more bureaucracy you have to navigate to exercise your constitutional rights, the fewer Americans will bother. We’ve also noted that “universal background checks” are unenforceable without gun registration as well.

Warren wants to raise the taxes on guns and ammunition, because making it too expensive for people to exercise a constitutional right will also reduce legal gun ownership. Gun rationing (limiting the purchase of a firearm to one per month) will impact law-abiding citizens far more than it will impact criminals, most of whom get their firearms from family or friends, through theft, or on the black market. And raising the age to purchase a firearm to 21 would prevent many young adults from exercising their 2nd Amendment rights.

But that’s not all, folks.

First off, the Clinton Gun Ban wasn’t effective. Even the Justice Department acknowledged this back in 2004 when the first AWB was sunsetting. Now, Warren wants to require existing owner to register their semi-automatic rifles under the NFA, pay a $200 fee per firearm to continue to own them, or turn them in for some unknown amount of cash. If not, you’ll face “penalties”?  What kind of penalty? Warren doesn’t say. Weird how that little detail escaped her, isn’t it?

Next up, a ban on magazines beyond a certain size (again, Warren doesn’t say what her magic number would be), suppressors, and anything else she thinks makes guns “more dangerous”.

And we’re not done yet.

“Red Flag” laws come with their own set of problems, including due process concerns, a lack of mental health treatment, and a focus on the gun instead of the person deemed to be “dangerous”. Expanding the number of prohibited persons by making misdemeanor offenses a disqualifying factor to own firearms is also dangerous in my opinion. Felons are already prohibited from owning a firearm or even a round of ammunition, so what Warren is talking about here is lowering the bar to prohibit gun possession. Her idea to make anyone who’s the subject of a restraining order a prohibited person for life is absolutely absurd. It’s common, for instance, during divorce proceedings for both sides to file restraining orders against their soon-to-be ex. And as someone who’s had a stalker in the past, the bigger issue is actually prosecuting them in the first place.

Warren’s push to declare college and university campuses “gun free zones” would gut campus carry in states like Colorado, Texas, Utah, and others that allow for lawful gun owners and those who possess a concealed carry license to carry while on campus.

And she’s still not done yet.

Basically, let’s make it so legally dangerous to own a gun store or a firearms manufacturing business that companies will either be sued out of existence when a criminal uses a firearm in a crime. No gun stores and no gun companies means a lot fewer legal gun owners, right?

It’s no wonder Warren says she’ll need to nuke the filibuster to get these bills through Congress. But Warren says as president, she won’t just rely on Congress. She’ll abuse executive actions as well.

Essentially, Warren has adopted virtually every gun control proposal that’s been introduced in the past decade with the exception of “microstamping” and “smart gun” laws, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see her amend her gun control plan to include those ideas as well.

You can’t help but notice that Warren’s plans (with the exception of her call for a federal gun trafficking statute) are all directed at legal gun owners, legal gun sellers, and legal gun manufacturers. There’s nothing in her plan about helping communities target the most violent offenders, or reducing the number of plea bargains offered to individuals who use firearms in the commission of a violent crime. It’s clear that Elizabeth Warren believes, as so many anti-gun politicians do, that the way to address violent crime is to keep as many Americans as possible away from their constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.