Category: Crap For Brains

There’s a reason why gun control fails after mass shootings

In the wake of any mass shooting, we hear a lot about gun control. Proponents of it argue we simply need to embrace it to make such shootings a thing of the past. It just hasn’t worked out for them.

Over at Axios, they decided to lament this fact by pointing out all the times gun control failed to materialize after a mass shooting.

What they miss is that there’s a reason it didn’t pass in pretty much all of those cases.

Sandy Hook, December 2012
  • After the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, in which 26 victims — including 20 children — were killed, Congress proposed a bipartisan bill expanding background checks for gun buyers, a ban on assault weapons and a ban on high-capacity gun magazines.

Part of the reason that didn’t pass was that the killer didn’t purchase his gun. He murdered his own mother and took an AR-15 that she lawfully purchased–and underwent and passed a background check for–to use it to carry out that particular atrocity.

Expanding background checks wouldn’t have prevented such an attack.

Charleston church, June 2015

When a white man opened fire at a Black church congregation in Charleston, South Carolina, killing nine people, Democrats proposed legislation to tighten background checks.

Democrats sought to eliminate what became known as the “Charleston loophole,” which allows people with incomplete background checks to purchase guns after three days, Politico reports.

And that remains because going beyond those three days is too much of an infringement on people’s Second Amendment rights.

What people have to remember is that the three-day window was put in place to appease gun rights advocates who worried that people could be long-term denied the ability to purchase a firearm simply because their background checks never came back.

The three-day window remains because no one trusts the government enough to take it away.

San Bernardino, December 2015

A shooting at a San Bernardino County Department of Public Health holiday party killed 14 people and injured 22 others.

One day after the shooting, the Senate rejected two gun control proposals introduced by Democrats on background checks, the Washington Post reports.

California pass universal background checks in 1991. The killers in this case still acquired weapons illegally and without undergoing a background check.

Why pass more of what clearly didn’t work?

Pulse Nightclub, June 2016

The proposed bills would have prevented people on the federal terrorism watch list from buying guns and closed loopholes in background check laws, per the Times.

And that one failed because there’s no due process on the terrorism watchlist. You can be added for any reason and aren’t told you’re on it. Getting yourself removed is a nightmare.

Plus, the terrorism watch list is a list of names. There are no other identifiers. So if a terrorist named Tom Knighton exists somewhere on Earth, I don’t get to purchase a firearm under this rule.

Yeah, it’s an absolute mystery why this didn’t pass.

Look, you’re starting to see how this goes, and Axios does continue.

For example, they bring up Atlanta and how background check bills didn’t pass despite President Biden calling for just that, but the shooter in that one actually passed a background check. They tie this to Boulder, but he also passed a background check.

Time and time again, there’s a mass shooting, then lawmakers make demands for laws that wouldn’t do anything to stop the attack, but would do wonders for infringing on people’s rights.

Look, gun control isn’t the answer to this. Especially since the two high-profile attacks we saw last weekend were both in heavily gun-controlled states.

Gun control doesn’t pass because, in each of these cases, it’s clear that the laws proposed wouldn’t have done a damn thing. Further, each of these is actually something of a black swan event, meaning they’re not the norm, despite people trying to pretend they are.

So I’m actually OK with inaction from Congress on this. Frankly, I prefer inaction in Congress on most things, but especially here.

There are better ways to handle mass shootings than infringing on the rights of the non-shooters, especially when it’s clear that infringement wouldn’t have stopped diddly.

But they said nobody wants to take your guns.
And actually, if there were magically, mystically, no guns, life would return to the world of ‘main force’ where might makes right and the stronger rule over the weaker. The world “BG” – before guns – had a much higher murder rate than after they became reliable. That’s her world with swords

Sick of Massacres? Get Rid of the Guns. [hah]

Gail Collins Gail Collins

[it’s sooo nice they provide pictures for positive identification]

A) Toughen background check laws
B) Limit the sale of semiautomatics to people with hunting licenses
C) Good Lord, just get rid of them
Yeah, C does simplify things, doesn’t it?

Continue reading “”

What he also wants is for the reinstitution of the Obammy era program of listing Veterans and Social Security recipients who get their monthly payments sent to a fiduciary who manages the person’s finances to be entered as a prohibited people in NICS.

In Buffalo, Biden calls for gun control that’s already law and didn’t work

Joe Biden brought his confusing anti-gun rhetoric to Buffalo, Tuesday – a city still grieving the loss of 10 good souls who were cut down Saturday by a hell-bound madman.

Even though most of the victims have yet to be buried, Biden didn’t hesitate to use the solemn occasion as an opportunity to advocate for more gun control, in this case another federal “assault weapon” ban.

“There are certain things we can do,” Biden told the grieving crowd. “We can keep assault weapons off of our streets. We did it before and violence went down.”

Even the FBI has acknowledged that the Federal Assault Weapons Ban that Biden referenced, which was a part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, did little to deter or prevent crime.

Besides, New York already has a stringent “assault weapon” ban, as well as every other anti-gun law Biden has ever called for. They’re codified into state law, yet none of them worked.

The mass murderer was not stopped by New York’s SAFE Act, which bans AR-15s and similar weapons. The state’s ban on standard-capacity magazines didn’t stop him, nor did the New York’s mandatory background check requirement or its Red Flag gun-confiscation law.

New York State Police were called to the gunman’s high school last June because he threatened to commit a mass shooting during the school’s graduation ceremonies. He was involuntarily committed to a mental hospital for an evaluation, and was released after a day and a half. However, this did not trigger New York’s red-flag law, which should have stopped him from purchasing a firearm.

Rather than infringing upon the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens, Biden should focus on why yet another mass murderer was “known to law enforcement,” yet no action was taken before he began killing people.

New York state has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation and it didn’t make one itty bit of difference, so crap-for-brains Goobernor believes crims will somehow obey more laws.

NY Gov. Wants More Gun Control in State with Tough Restrictions

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul used the weekend mass shooting at a Buffalo supermarket to demand “stronger” gun control laws in a state that already has some of the toughest gun laws in the country, and President Joe Biden will fly the city on Tuesday, likely to make the same plea.

According to WIVB News, Hochul told reporters during a Sunday press conference, “I continue to call on Washington to do just some basic things that we’ve done here in New York. I also call on the Supreme Court, which is actually considering rolling back some of the protections that were put in place here to protect New York citizens from gun violence.”

The high court is expected to hand down a ruling on New York’s restrictive “good cause” concealed carry permit requirement by the end of June.

The Associated Press is reporting that Biden and his wife will go to Buffalo to “grieve with the community.” Biden, a perennial gun control advocate during his nearly half-century inside the Beltway, is expected to call for new gun control measures.

Ten people were killed in what authorities are saying was a “racially motivated” attack. The suspect, an 18-year-old, was armed with an AR-15 rifle, according to published reports. There were other guns in his car, WIVB said.

Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown appeared on NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday to declare, “So I think people all across this country have to rise up. They have to speak more loudly and more clearly that there must be gun control in this country. This is a uniquely American phenomenon. These mass shootings don’t happen in other countries across the world. We have to ask ourselves — and more than ask ourselves, we have to take action to stop it, to stop it after this Buffalo, New York incident, to make sure that other communities, that other families don’t go through this again.”

WIVB quoted Gov. Hochul acknowledging, “What was used was not purchased legally in the state of New York. The basic gun was, but the high-capacity magazine associated with it had to come from another state because it is illegal in the state of New York. We need a smart national policy. And let’s start with something that’s — what I would say — is in the no-brainer category after Sandy Hook. Shame on this county, shame on Congress at that time, for not passing something as basic as a background check.”

However, Congress years ago passed a background check requirement. The National Instant Check System (NICS) has been in operation since November 1998. New York adopted the SAFE (Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement) Act under Hochul’s predecessor, anti-gun Democrat Andrew Cuomo, in 2013.

BECAUSE IT WORKED WELL IN CHICAGO: DEMS SEEK CHICAGO-STYLE GUN CONTROL NATIONWIDE

Lawmakers from Illinois last week introduced bicameral legislation on Capitol Hill that would make unlicensed gun possession illegal.

The move, billed as a way to stomp out gun crime, doesn’t target gun criminals. Instead, the Blair Holt Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act would outlaw unlicensed firearm ownership and the transfer of firearms without such a government-issued permit, then direct the U.S. Attorney General to create a federal registry for sales tied to fingerprint-based nationwide criminal background checks.

The measure was introduced in the U.S. Senate as S.4184 by Sen. Tammy Duckworth and in the U.S. House as H.R. 7730 by Rep. Bobby Rush. Both lawmakers are Illinois Democrats with offices in Chicago. Both have been endorsed in the past by a variety of national anti-gun groups, which have given them platforms for support.

According to a hyperbolic joint release by their respective offices, the proposal is modeled in part after the controversial Illinois Firearm Owners Identification Card statute. FOID cards are seen by some in the Land of Lincoln as obsolete and, while they haven’t proven to prevent criminals from getting guns, they have sometimes delayed law-abiding citizens from getting them by months. Notably, courts have also found the FOID process flawed and potentially unconstitutional.

Of note, on the trail to the White House in 2020, Joe Biden endorsed such mandatory gun owner licensing as a part of his platform, to the accolade of assorted gun control groups.

KAMALA’S LATEST DEEP THOUGHTS
Vice President Kamala Harris has offered up fresh profundities, this time on the manner in which we will all “work together,” though there is no reference to the time frame, as in, whether the time to work together is now, or every day, as we have been doing while working together, all the time.

You think I’m making this up? See for yourself (only 35 seconds, but it seems much longer, like time has stretched into tomorrow, or whatever):

Inconsistent nonsense and garbage? Not surprising as most of these morons are mentally defective, and no, that’s not saying this one is insane, just a room temperature IQ mental midget

BLUF:
But let’s not pretend that, assuming the manifesto is legitimate, the rhetoric espoused in its pages means the shooter cannot be legitimately aligned with either major political party or political movement. While I would argue that the views expressed in the manifesto echo rhetoric of radical leftism, the manifesto is full of nonsense and garbage that is at times inconsistent. The people who were quick to exploit the situation to attack Fox News and conservatives were wrong and should be ashamed of themselves.

Here’s What the Buffalo Shooter’s Alleged Manifesto Actually Says

On Saturday afternoon, an 18-year-old from Upstate New York traveled to Buffalo and live-streamed himself shooting several people, ten of whom he killed, at a Tops Friendly Market in a predominantly black neighborhood. The suspect was captured by law enforcement and has been arraigned on 10 first-degree murder charges.

With their usual swiftness, leftists on Twitter quickly launched a seemingly coordinated effort to blame Fox News and Tucker Carlson for allegedly radicalizing the suspect.

As word of the shooting quickly spread on social media, so did reports that the shooter had posted a 180-page manifesto online, explaining his racist and anti-Semitic motives and detailing how he planned to carry out the attack. PJ Media obtained a copy of the manifesto, and while we cannot independently verify its authenticity, it is widely believed to be genuine, and some left-wing operatives are intent on claiming that the manifesto proves the shooter was radicalized by Fox News and right-wing politics. I’ll show you want the manifesto actually says (though I will not link to it).

First, despite the coordinated effort to blame Fox News, the manifesto attacks a number of news networks, including Fox, for hiring Jews.

Continue reading “”

BLUF:
So from this quarter, while you can surely be dismayed and irritated at the stupidity emanating from Team Biden, the advice is this: just know that they’re showing their hand — and it’s a weak one.

But be on your guard, because the drowning man will pull others under if he can. And Team Biden is drowning. Make no mistake about it.

POTATUS Speaks, A Nation Groans
A shot and a chaser from a drowning man.

It’s hard to single out just one thing which came out of the Biden administration this past week which best illustrates how transformationally awful it is.

We’ll have to settle on two of them, which together made up a one-two punch to the gut of American morale.

First was his hyperbolic bromide against MAGA/revivalist conservatism. The president, showing off his status as a thoroughgoing nincompoop, thought it would be a good idea to verbally assault some 75 million Americans by predicting that since “this MAGA crowd is really the most extreme political organization that’s existed in American history,” that red-state legislatures will pass laws segregating gay and “trans” kids from their classmates in schools.

No, Joe. Maybe just the bathrooms, though — there seem to be fewer rapes that way.

That was the shot. The chaser was a day later, when after several Supreme Court justices were set upon by angry mobs protesting at their residences and a speaking engagement scheduled for Associate Justice Samuel Alito, the author of the draft majority opinion in the Dobbs case, had to be canceled due to violent threats, the administration refused to condemn the behavior of the pro-abortion extremists.

Continue reading “”

Once again, just like Finestein’s ‘Assault Weapon’ ban.

Congressional Democrats introduce gun licensing bill

The state of Illinois requires every lawful gun owner to get a Firearm Owner Identification Card. You can’t have a gun without out and you have to jump through the hoops to lawfully get one.

They also have the city of Chicago, where violent crime is rampant. It seems gun licensing doesn’t actually help as some want to believe.

In fact, two Illinois Democrats believe it so hard that they want to make it federal law.

May 11, 2022 Press Release WASHINGTON — U.S. Representative Bobby L. Rush (D-Ill.) and U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) reintroduced the Blair Holt Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act, today, to help reduce firearm violence in Illinois and across the country. This legislation would prohibit unlicensed firearm ownership and the transfer of firearms without a valid firearms license, as well as direct the U.S. Attorney General to establish and maintain a federal record of sale system and conduct fingerprint-based nationwide criminal background checks — which could have prevented the gunman who killed five people in Aurora, IL in 2019 from acquiring the firearm he used in the shooting.

Of course, it should be remembered that as I noted previously, it hasn’t done jack to stop the violence in Chicago.

Further, the shooter in the Aurora, IL case was a convicted felon who actually passed the FOID background check and NICS check

Whoops.

Continue reading “”

I think Schumer did this thinking it would fail but then using that for political electioneering to ‘rock the vote’ for the elections this fall.
I think that’s a losing proposition and here’s why:
My Baby Needs Formula, And I’m Getting Scared She Won’t Have It.

According to analysis from Datasembly, 40 percent of top-selling baby formula products were out of stock at retailers across the United States as of April 24. That’s up from 11 percent in November of 2021. Six states — Tennessee, Texas, Missouri, Iowa, South Dakota, and North Dakota — hit shortages of more than 50 percent. Why is this happening?

As in the previous post, economic issues – which includes food – will override cultural/philosophical issues every time. The party that screws that pooch gets kicked out of office

Schumer Show Vote on Radical Abortion Bill Goes Down in Flames

Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has repeatedly shown his ineptitude when it comes to leading Democrats in the upper chamber, and he did so again in spectacular fashion on Wednesday afternoon. In what he seems to think was a grand gesture to prove his party’s commitment to a woman’s (birthing person’s?) right to kill her unborn child only put Democrats on the record supporting a bill that’s more radical than Roe ever was.

After the unprecedented leak of a draft Supreme Court opinion signaling that Roe v. Wade would be overturned, Schumer jumped into action and called for the passage of a bill to supposedly “codify” Roe in federal law. But he once again failed to do the math among his own caucus or the Senate as a whole before holding what became nothing but a failed show vote to prove Democrats support radical abortion rights that go beyond what even most pro-abortion Americans support.

The vote to break a Republican filibuster and move to the final vote on the “Women’s Health Protection Act” came down 51-49, with every Democrat but one voting to move ahead — Democrat Joe Manchin of West Virginia joined all the Republicans to block the legislation from moving forward.

Sixty votes were necessary to end debate on the bill and move ahead — but that threshold was never going to be met. Even if, somehow, enough Republicans agreed to vote with all the Democrats to move forward to a vote on the bill, Schumer didn’t have the 50 votes necessary to achieve a tie that would be broken by Vice President Kamala Harris to pass the measure after Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) said he opposed the Women’s Health Protection Act outright.

The legislative vehicle for Schumer and Democrats’ plan, which Speaker Nancy Pelosi previously passed through the House of Representatives, does far more than “codify” the right to abortion manufactured in the Court’s decision in federal law. That claim was thoroughly debunked by Guy here in a deep-dive on the “appalling and extreme departure from the current status quo” the bill Schumer pushed to a failed vote on Wednesday would be:

Continue reading “”

He literally can’t even read off the teleprompter anymore

Well, to be honest, I think SloJoe knows little beyond what he had for breakfast, if that. It’s his puppet masters that we have to be worried about

The War Is Getting More Dangerous for America, and Biden Knows It

If you just followed news reports on Ukraine, you might think that the war has settled into a long, grinding and somewhat boring slog. You would be wrong.

Things are actually getting more dangerous by the day.

For starters, the longer this war goes on, the more opportunity for catastrophic miscalculations — and the raw material for that is piling up fast and furious. Take the two high-profile leaks from American officials this past week about U.S. involvement in the Russia-Ukraine war:

First, The Times disclosed that “the United States has provided intelligence about Russian units that has allowed Ukrainians to target and kill many of the Russian generals who have died in action in the Ukraine war, according to senior American officials.” Second, The Times, following a report by NBC News and citing U.S. officials, reported that America has “provided intelligence that helped Ukrainian forces locate and strike” the Moskva, the flagship of Russia’s Black Sea fleet. This targeting assistance “contributed to the eventual sinking” of the Moskva by two Ukrainian cruise missiles.

As a journalist, I love a good leak story, and the reporters who broke those stories did powerful digging. At the same time, from everything I have been able to glean from senior U.S. officials, who spoke to me on condition of anonymity, the leaks were not part of any thought-out strategy, and President Biden was livid about them. I’m told that he called the director of national intelligence, the director of the C.I.A. and the secretary of defense to make clear in the strongest and most colorful language that this kind of loose talk is reckless and has got to stop immediately — before we end up in an unintended war with Russia.

The staggering takeaway from these leaks is that they suggest we are no longer in an indirect war with Russia but rather are edging toward a direct war — and no one has prepared the American people or Congress for that.

Vladimir Putin surely has no illusions about how much the U.S. and NATO are arming Ukraine with matériel and intelligence, but when American officials start to brag in public about playing a role in killing Russian generals and sinking the Russian flagship, killing many sailors, we could be creating an opening for Putin to respond in ways that could dangerously widen this conflict — and drag the U.S. in deeper than it wants to be.

Continue reading “”

Befuddled Biden: Russians, Hungarians, Ukrainians Are All the Same to Joe

Joe Biden gave some remarks on Tuesday at Lockheed Martin in Alabama about his desire to send more aid to Ukraine.

Biden has asked Congress for $33 billion additional in aid. This was after already getting $13.6 billion last month. Biden claimed that they already had spent that money. Not only that, but he wants to make it a continual thing — to preserve “democracy.” No end in sight as to how much money that might involve. Great concern for Ukraine’s borders, but very little for our own.

But in the process of giving mostly his standard memorized shtick, Biden managed to fumble the delivery in a couple of significant ways.

At one point, Biden claimed that he was arming the Russians before Russia attacked. Yes, he said that.

 

But, that wasn’t the only glaring mistake Biden made when talking about Ukraine. He also confused Ukrainians with Hungarians. During his State of the Union address, Biden confused Ukrainians with Iranians. No, Joe, they’re not the same.

I’d also like to point out another interesting confusion he seemed to have in his remarks made on Tuesday.

In his official written statement, Biden said that the draft opinion meant they needed to get out and vote for pro-choice (Democrats).

Third, if the Court does overturn Roe, it will fall on our nation’s elected officials at all levels of government to protect a woman’s right to choose. And it will fall on voters to elect pro-choice officials this November. At the federal level, we will need more pro-choice Senators and a pro-choice majority in the House to adopt legislation that codifies Roe, which I will work to pass and sign into law.

But then, in his off-the-cuff remarks that he made hours after that statement, he was asked, “What does this mean for the midterms? What does this mean for the Democrats’ argument in the midterms?” His reply? “I haven’t thought that through yet.” So he had some thoughts about it earlier in his official statement but hadn’t thought it through when he was asked about it later. In other words, they’re issuing statements about what “he thinks,” when he can’t even say what he thinks later in person.

It was bad enough when he said that there hadn’t been any senators from Delaware on Monday. That prompted more 25th Amendment talk. But it’s continuing to get worse.

Hypocrites
Leftists change their minds so quickly it’s a wonder they don’t  have whiplash

Suddenly the Left Remembers That Men CAN’T Get Pregnant

Reaction to the leak of the draft opinion of Dobbs v. Jackson came in swiftly Monday night. Liberals haven’t been this outraged since Elon Musk bought Twitter. Pro-abortion activists quickly formed a protest outside the court, and politicians released statements that featured fresh new takes on the usual tropes and slogans we’ve heard for decades.

“A woman’s right to choose is not up for debate. A woman’s right to make her own health care decisions is not up for debate,” said Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.). “We can’t go back. We must not go back. We won’t go back.”

“This is at the expense of tens of millions of women who could soon be stripped of their bodily autonomy and the constitutional rights they’ve relied on for half a century,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said .

“If you think they’ll stop with a women’s right to choose, you haven’t been paying attention. We have to fight like our lives depend on it, because clearly, they do,” tweeted Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.).

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) called for the packing of the Supreme Court, insisting that overturning Roe would “put the lives of women across the country at risk.”

“I’ll always fight to protect a woman’s right to choose,” insisted Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.). “And that will never change.”

Women. Women. Women.

That’s funny. Hasn’t the radical left been telling us that “trans women are women” and that “men can get pregnant, too” suddenly have such a narrow view about the abortion issue that they only see it as a women’s rights issue? Weird, since less than a month ago, the pregnant man emoji was made available on my iPhone. Before the draft opinion leaked, if you asked a leftist to define what a “woman” is, they couldn’t tell you. Now, these non-biologists know precisely what a woman is.

For most of my life, abortion has been framed as a “women’s rights” issue. Yet on plenty of occasions, Leftists typically didn’t even recognize my right even to have an opinion on abortion because I’m not a woman. As Jennifer Aniston put it last year, “No uterus, no opinion.”

It’s impressive how quickly and easily progressives who have long insisted that “trans women are women” and that “men can get pregnant” showed us that even they know deep down that radical leftist gender theory is nonsensical. It may be fashionable in their circles to buy into it, but they know it’s nonsensical.

Sure, when the outrage cools down, they’ll probably go back to saying “men can get pregnant” and refer to biological women as “birthing people,” but that won’t change the fact that, in the wake of this Supreme Court leak, so many said the quiet part out loud about transgenderism.

And I have a bridge in New York to sell you.

Relax: Mayorkas Says His New Thought Police Won’t Monitor U.S. Citizens

DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas made the rounds of the talking head shows on Sunday to do some damage control and address concerns that the Biden administration’s new Disinformation Governance Board within the Department of Homeland Security signifies an all-out war against the freedom of speech. Those concerns were only exacerbated by the revelation that the chief of Old Joe’s Thought Police, Nina Jankowicz, is an enthusiastic fascist who is so excited about censorship that she sings musical comedy numbers about it in an affected English accent. Mayorkas, however, is telling us now that there is really nothing, nothing whatsoever, to worry about. But his soothing claims show some signs of being yet more of that disinformation he claims he wants to fight.

We’ve already gotten disinformation about the Disinformation Governance Board. Jen Psaki claimed Friday that it wasn’t the sainted President Dementia at all, but the hated Trump, who set up the Board. There doesn’t appear to be a shred of truth to this, as even Mayorkas had announced the Board as “new,” and on Sunday, CNN’s Dana Bash asked Mayorkas, “Would you be okay if Donald Trump were president, if he created this Disinformation Governance Board or if it is in place in 2024, that he’s in charge of such a thing?” Mayorkas didn’t echo Psaki and answer that Trump had actually created the Board. Instead, he insisted “that we’re safeguarding the right of free speech, that we’re safeguarding civil liberties.” Sure they are.

Continue reading “”

Eric Swalwell Deploys More Lies About the Lies He’s Been Telling About Gun Control for Years

A repeated ploy of the gun control movement is to loudly proclaim law-abiding Second Amendment supporters are using “scare tactics” while opposing proposed gun control.

U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), the “Honey Pot Congressman,” isn’t new to this charade. His record is one of support for strict gun control. That includes a failed presidential campaign playing second fiddle to Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke to carry the gun control water.

Rep. Swalwell published an op-ed in Newsweek and deployed the ruse.

“For decades, one of the most tried and true scare tactics by the gun lobby is that the government—specifically Democrats—are coming for your guns,” the Congressman wrote. “These misinformation campaigns have been used for years to scare law-abiding Americans into thinking they are going to be put under government surveillance to confiscate their guns.”

Lies About Lies

The thrust of Rep. Swalwell’s anti-Second Amendment screed is that President Joe Biden isn’t interested in confiscating lawfully-owned firearms.

“Let’s be crystal clear—the Biden administration has no secret plan to take away your guns,” he claimed.

He’s right, though – President Biden’s gun control plans aren’t secret. They’re very public and repeated often.

President Biden has on multiple occasions called the lawful firearm industry “the enemy.” A major selling point of his gun control agenda is that he claims he’s, “the only one to have taken on the industry and won.” “I’ve done it before and I’ll do it again,” he’s said.

The president was speaking about his ability to pass a ban on Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs), which he incorrectly and pejoratively terms as “assault weapons.” President Biden, in the 1990s, when he was in the U.S. Senate, voted to ban America’s most popular selling centerfire semiautomatic rifle. He continues to push for a new ban today on the commonly-owned firearm. He claims the ban will drive down crime, but data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says the, “Assault Weapons Ban (AWB)…did not reduce crime rates.” In fact, when the ban expired, violent crime rates continued to drop even as MSR ownership skyrocketed to more than 20 million rifles in circulation.

The president has also repeated his favorite lie that the firearm industry is “the only outfit in the country that is immune,” from liability. This lie has been fact-checked into oblivion, with media saying, “Gun manufacturers can certainly be sued…Biden is wrong to say gun manufacturers are alone.”

The president lies about his wishes to ban certain lawfully-manufactured and legally-purchased firearms, as well as his wishes to shut down an entire industry that supports the ability of Americans to exercise their Second Amendment rights. That would certainly qualify as, “taking away guns.”

Twisting Truth

Rep. Swalwell would ban MSRs as well and he’s not alone. He’d go even further, telling Fox News’s Tucker Carlson he’d implement a forced government buyback scheme of the firearms and even, “criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons.” Rep. Swalwell went so far as to absurdly suggest if Americans still refused to give up their firearms to a government confiscation scheme, the U.S. government would use nukes against holdouts.

Rep. Swalwell would make confiscation easier, if he had his way, by requiring a national firearm registry. That’s the only way a universal background check could work, a policy that both Rep. Swalwell and President Biden support. Universal background checks (UBCs) are unenforceable without mandatory registration – which is illegal under the 1986 Gun Control Act and 1993 Brady Act.

In his op-ed, Rep. Swalwell says claims about a national gun registry are “conspiracy theories,” and that, “The simple truth is that a gun registry does not exist and is not even being contemplated to illegally track law-abiding individuals who exercise their Second Amendment rights.” He even twists one of my tweets to suggest the firearm industry agrees with his bogus claims.

It’s true – the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) does not currently maintain a searchable national firearm registry. It does, however, keep an Out-of-business Records (OBR) database to trace firearms when they are used in a crime. That collection of records doesn’t allow anyone to run a search for how many and what kind of firearms are owned by any one individual.

About 30 percent of all firearm traces involve searching OBR data. The most recent ATF trace data shows that the average time between when a firearm was originally sold lawfully after a background check and before it was recovered by law enforcement has been close to 10 years as recently as 2017. Searching very old records rarely yields actionable intelligence to law enforcement. That’s why NSSF has long supported requiring ATF to purge records that are older than 20 years to save taxpayer money and to use those dollars to put more agents on the streets to stop crime from occurring in the first place.

Rep. Swalwell knowingly took the tweet out of context in order to lie again about what would be required if a universal background check were to be adopted.

President Biden is clearly doing the bidding of his gun control donors. After repeating his lies about the firearm industry and what his policies would do to law-abiding Americans, there is no doubt that President Biden would indeed go after lawful gun owners and dismantle the industry that provides for the exercise of the Second Amendment. Rep. Swalwell is simply carrying the president’s gun control water because he would do the same exact thing.

How much longer? As long as they can keep pumping him full of whatever anti-dementia drug cocktail that will keep the meat puppet at least able to function at a minimal level. That’s how long

And no, he’s not being too harsh on SloJoe™ who should be a patient in an Alzheimer’s unit.

HOW MUCH LONGER CAN THIS GO ON?
Today’s Biden struggle with the Teleprompter delivered this 15-second gem:

Back in 2010, P.J. O’Rourke said the Republican mid-term landslide was a restraining order against Obama. Maybe this year’s likely mid-term GOP blowout will be understood as a national intervention, in which the people will tell Democrats that it is time for Biden to be put out to pasture and the Democratic Party sent to rehab.

Chaser: Maybe I am being too harsh on Biden. It’s understandable that Democrats would have trouble pronouncing “kleptocracy.” It could just as easily happen to Elizabeth Warren.