Donate search
Listen Now The Erick Erickson Show streaming live arrow_right_alt close


  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • send Email
  • print Print

Biden on guns, Part I

Hint: He’s all in favor of a new assault weapons ban. Here is a look a the first part of his op-ed in the NYT.

The Left is certainly not letting up in the wake of tragedies. Instead of addressing concepts that would provide more impact to lessening mass shootings, the Left is intent on removing gun rights. Neil deGrasse Tyson was excoriated by progressives for posting the following true information about causes of death in the United States:

So, it really isn’t about working to reducing “gun violence”, a made-up term that attributes actions to an inanimate object. Most individuals with even a passing knowledge of firearms understand that the object itself does not commit violence. That responsibility rests solely with the person who pulls the trigger.

Sunday, the New York Times printed an op-ed from former Vice President and Democratic party hopeful, Joe Biden. Biden is back to push a new assault weapons ban, a ban that didn’t really work in the past and some experts say wouldn’t work in the future.

In his op-ed, Biden blasts the bogeyman of gun control, the NRA, Republicans, and President Trump, because they haven’t done enough to address mass shootings.

His rambling continues when he lambasts the current administration for repealing gun laws that Obama put into place to “help keep guns out of the hands of people with certain mental illnesses”. The Left has been harping on this point for several years, saying that the rollback is directly responsible for more shootings. The truth is more inconvenient for Mr. Biden. That law made it acceptable for the removal of gun rights if a person on Social Security was found to be unable to manage their finances, among other things. This is a clear violation of the 2nd Amendment and why the Trump administration removed the law.

Next comes several whoopers:

We have a huge problem with guns. Assault weapons — military-style firearms designed to fire rapidly — are a threat to our national security, and we should treat them as such. Anyone who pretends there’s nothing we can do is lying — and holding that view should be disqualifying for anyone seeking to lead our country.

I know, because with Senator Dianne Feinstein I led the effort to enact the 1994 law that banned assault weapons and high-capacity magazines for 10 years. Those gun safety reforms made our nation demonstrably more secure.

I can say honestly that if there was a huge problem with guns in the U.S, there would be more shootings than we see. Pardon me if I don’t believe that the Left has a single definition for assault weapons. They use the term weapon of war but an AR-15 is not a firearm in use by any military in the world. Calling them a “threat to our national security” is disingenuous at best, but Biden probably knows that. And to call anyone unfit for the nation’s leader because the believe the 2nd Amendment is ludicrous. But then he has probably forgotten what the oath of office text is.

Even the Washington Post in 2012, citing a University of Pennsylvania study, admitted the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban wasn’t as effective as advertised:

Did the law have an effect on crime or gun violence? While gun violence did fall in the 1990s, this was likely due to other factors. Here’s the UPenn study again: “We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence.”

One reason is that assault weapons were never a huge factor in gun violence to begin with. They were used in only 2 percent to 8 percent of gun crimes. Large-capacity magazines were more important — used in as many as a quarter of gun crimes. But, again, the 1994 law left more than 24 million magazines untouched, so the impact was blunted.

Biden’s so called achievement to reduce “gun violence”, and the accomplishment he falls back on, didn’t even perform to a discernible level. I’ll be back later today to address the second half of his op-ed.


  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • send Email
  • print Print


More Top Stories

A Constitutional Alternative

With November approaching, Americans are facing a choice between Donald trump and Joe Biden.  For many, President Trump’s erratic behavior and past amoral lifestyle have always been a deal brea …

The American Auto: A Hundred Years of Symbolism

The car scene in America is in some ways unchanged from the America Fitzgerald attempted to depict: a land teeming with a variety of vehicles to which some attach tremendous motive and meaning.

The Georgia School Where Students Went Maskless Is Closed Again Due To COVID-19 Outbreak

Paulding County reopened its schools at the peak of local community spread.