“Moderate” Joe Biden has vowed to push as many radical policies the far-left can cook up. That includes massive spending on social programs, an open border, and—of course—more gun control. Biden and his cohorts are proposing some of the strictest gun control we’ve ever seen. Among the many restrictions Biden is calling Congress to pass, he wants a second “assault weapons” ban.
We can go around and around explain to liberals that “assault weapon” is not a proper term for a firearm. Most of the time, Democrats think “assault weapons” are “machine guns,” that fire rounds rapidly. (Other leftists think the “AR” in AR-15 actually means assault rifle, proving their total ignorance on the issue).
Biden is trying to sell his weapon ban by claiming the 90s-era ban “saved lives.” He points to shady statistics that seem to prove that banning semi-automatic rifles helped prevent shootings. But even a New York Times writer had to admit that is not the case.
A left-wing columnist at The New York Times admitted over the weekend that there was no strong evidence that the assault weapons ban enacted under the Clinton administration, which lasted 10 years, “saved lives.”
Columnist Nicholas Kristof, who advocates for laws cracking down on the Second Amendment, made the admission in a piece about the some of the executive orders that he wants Democrat President Joe Biden to use against the Second Amendment. Kristof said that he was “sympathetic” toward wanting to ban so-called “assault weapons,” which are semi-automatic firearms that effectively operate the same way that basic pistols do, but noted that there was no way that Congress was going to ban them.
“It’s also true that while liberals loved the assault weapons ban for the 10 years it was in effect, there is no strong evidence that it saved lives — but it did turn the AR-15 into a conservative icon, so that today there appear to be more AR and AK rifles in private hands than in the United States military,” Kristof wrote. “And most crime and deaths involve handguns, not rifles.” [Source: Daily Wire]
Second Amendment-hating Kristof had to admit that Clinton’s assault weapons ban did not prevent any loss of life. Why is that the case? Partly because most firearm-related deaths and crimes are committed by handguns, not rifles.
That’s an obvious fact. A criminal (who doesn’t obey gun laws, by the way) will most likely carry something small that they can conceal. A mugger or carjacker isn’t going to try to hide a rifle in their waistband.
But Democrats aren’t really about finding effective solutions for problems. They always go for the big, flashy move that does nothing. You can’t ban handguns, so they want to ban those “big, scary” rifles they suggest are the same kind used by the military.
Kristof claims more civilians own AR-15s and AK-style rifles than the military. Yeah, because those aren’t military rifles. A soldier wouldn’t be caught dead with an AR-15, because it would be useless in a combat situation.
You see, Democrats don’t know much about firearms to begin with. And they’re not interested in saving lives. They simply want to spread propaganda that “guns kill,” so that fewer and fewer Americans would even want to own a gun.
But the reality is, more Americans bought guns last year for the first time than ever before. So… yeah, Democrats have a real battle ahead of them.