In case you ever wondered what ‘bureaucrapese’ was:
"Can you point to one thing the White House is doing *right now* that is making an impact on the border?"
KIRBY: No pic.twitter.com/NUh3fwGKkC
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) December 21, 2023
Category: Bureaucraps
New Mexico Anti-Gun Group Investigated for Breaking Gun Laws
Does everyone feel safer now?
“Pictured are unwanted firearms from one household in Farmington, NM,” New Mexicans to Prevent Gun Violence “Xed” Saturday. “Our gun buyback was cancelled by the City, but local residents asked us to show up anyway. So, we spent today dismantling guns house by house.”
This was their “after action report” for their “Guns to Garden” program, intending to destroy guns and turn them into tools, reported on AmmoLand on Dec. 6, with the title observing “New Mexico Gun ‘Buyback’ an Exercise in Contradictions.”
“What, no background checks?” this correspondent asked at the time. “Will there be an FFL on the premises to record transfers?”
“The @NMStatePolice should investigate a private party going door to door and sawing people’s guns in half without doing a background check as required for a transfer in New Mexico,” State Representative Stefani Lord noted in response to the NMPGV post. “The @FBI and @ATFHQ should also look into this since a private group does NOT have the ability to check NCIC to see if they are now in possession of a stolen firearm. So many crimes committed by this anti-gun group. @newmexicooag needs to look into this offense.”
“We have been doing this for years,” NMPGV shot back. “Often, police give people our phone number when they want to turn in an unwanted firearm. This doesn’t violate any background check laws as there is no transfer of firearms. We simply dismantle them. All that is left is wood and metal.”
“So, you’ve been breaking the law for years?” State Rep. John Block asked. He’s got a point. How can you “dismantle” guns if you don’t first take possession of them?
Gun owners were quick to join in, pointing out the hypocrisy of gun-grabbers allegedly breaking gun laws they lobbied for and the delicious irony of the prohibitionists “hoist with their own petard.” And it turns out Lord’s concerns were prescient.
“UPDATE: New Mexico Sheriff has opened an investigation into whether anti-gun group illegally purchased guns in violation of Universal Background Checks during a “buyback” and failed to destroy these firearms in a legal manner,” Gun Owners of America commented when forwarding the NMPGV announcement. “YOU CAN’T MAKE THIS STUFF UP.”
Don’t get your hopes up. From what we’ve seen lately, Justice Barret isn’t – as advertised – a sure thing, and Kavanaugh doesn’t look much, if any better
Everytown and Baltimore Go Fishing With New ATF Lawsuit
Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott is teaming up with Everytown Law to challenge the ATF’s policy on firearm trace data; specifically, the agency’s determination that the particulars of firearm traces can be shared only with law enforcement and not, say, gun control groups or their anti-2A allies.
In a series of posts on X, the Bloomberg-funded gun control outfit claimed that mayors like Scott cannot keep their communities safe “without access to critical data that shows where crime guns are coming from,” but the real impetus for the lawsuit is about fueling even more litigation, not public safety.
According to Scott, city officials requested “the identity of the top ten sources of crime guns in Baltimore from 2018 to 2022 as part of the City’s effort to fight gun violence.” What they’re really looking for, however, are the names of high-volume FFLs; gun stores that they can blame for the city’s woeful rate of violent crime, suing them under the theory that they should be held responsible for the actions of criminals, even if there’s no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of the retailer or its employees.
The ATF makes clear that the data isn’t supposed to be used in this fashion. Not every firearm that’s traced has been used in a crime, and not every gun used in a crime will be traced by the ATF, but that hasn’t stopped the gun control lobby from wanting to get its hands on the granular data collected by the agency; data that is, by the way, already available to the Baltimore Police Department, Maryland State Police, and other law enforcement entities across the state.
California Is Attempting an Expedited End Run Around the 2A
California is trying to sneak in a ruling that will exclude almost everyone except law enforcement from teaching a concealed carry class.
The California Department of Justice sent out a notification on Monday about some proposed changes in California’s concealed carry instructor qualifications. The changes might mean more than half of the current qualified instructors could no longer teach a concealed carry class in California.
Some instructors have told me they didn’t even get the email, and the deadline to voice any concerns or disapproval is this Friday. The DOJ will make the final decision about the rule change, and they will need no vote from the state legislature to pass it. This is being rushed through and will go into effect on January 1st.
Biden/Buttigieg DEI Policies Endanger the Country. They Don’t Care.
The FAA is seeking people suffering from “severe intellectual and psychiatric disabilities” to be air traffic controllers.
The country currently is in the throes of an epidemic of mass insanity and irrationality. The manifestations of the disorder are too numerous to cite, but the explosion of the DEI plague being pushed by the government, many businesses, and the intellectual pigmies in most of the media, must be included in any list of the most egregious. As currently advocated and practiced by our leftist “elites,”1 it is incompatible with rationality, common sense, and morality, among other things, and, as the Wall Street Journal, not to mention the Supreme Court, have pointed out, the U.S. Constitution.
There is a brand of this particular wokeness that is relatively unknown to the general public, but that is particularly irrational and dangerous. It is the Federal Aviation Administration’s relatively young DEI mandates. These Biden/Buttigieg DEI commands now apply to the employment of FAA air traffic controllers in an insidious way, a way that threatens the safety of our skies and of anyone who flies.
WHAT DO AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS DO?
To understand how insidious and dangerous the FAA’s DEI policies are, it is necessary to examine briefly just what air traffic controllers do and the nature of the job. The description that follows includes some detail about their tasks. Bear with me because it shows that being an ATC is not a job for dummies, or even for intellectual giants who cannot make crucial decisions in a short amount of time while under great stress.
First, just to be considered for possible employment, an ATC candidate must first pass a battery of seven tests covering numerical calculations, progressively difficult memory tests, problems involving rapidly changing image relationships, visual computer problems simulating collision avoidance, reading comprehension, logical reasoning, and a personality test. A description of the tests and sample problems are here. Take a stab at some of the sample problems to see how difficult they are and the built-in time limitations and pressures.
By the time they finish their training, ATCs must be experts in a number of areas that affect safety. These include weather, types of aircraft and their characteristics, navigation and the use of multiple types of navigational aids, effective communications with pilots, and radio and radar operations. To ensure pilot and passenger safety, ATCs must be skilled in, among other things, math, including the ability to make quick calculations in a dynamic environment, problem-solving, effective communication, and split-second decision making.
House Votes To Overturn Biden’s EV Mandate that Cars Produced in the US be Fully Electric by 2032.
The House of Representatives on Dec. 6 voted to pass a bill that will block a proposed rule by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to effectively mandate that most cars produced in the United States be fully electric by 2032.
The bill, H.R. 4468, dubbed the Choice in Automobile Retail Sales Act of 2023, passed the House by a 221–197 vote. That included total GOP support; Democrats, meanwhile, sought to have the bill sent back to committee.
The bill would block an EPA rule that would require roughly 68 percent of cars manufactured in the United States be fully electric by 2032. The rule has won the support of President Joe Biden’s administration.
Republicans have rallied against the proposed standards, which they say are unrealistic and threaten to undermine consumer freedom—as well as to increase U.S. dependence on China.
Around 90 percent of the rare earth minerals used to create electric vehicles (EVs) are sourced from the top U.S. adversary.
The broad support among Republicans for blocking the rule was on full display in November, when over 200 House and Senate Republicans signed onto a letter to House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) urging opposition to the rule (pdf).
Former Career US Diplomat Charged With Secretly Spying for Cuban Intelligence for Decades
Manuel Rocha wept as he sat handcuffed in Miami federal court on charges that he engaged in “clandestine activity” on Cuba’s behalf since at least 1981 — the year he joined the U.S. foreign service — including by meeting with Cuban intelligence operatives and providing false information to U.S. government officials about his contacts.
The complaint unsealed Monday is short on specifics of how Rocha may have assisted Cuba. But it provides a vivid case study of what American officials say are long-standing efforts by Cuba and its notoriously sophisticated intelligence services to target U.S. government officials who can be flipped.
“This action exposes one of the highest-reaching and longest-lasting infiltrations of the United States government by a foreign agent,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement. “To betray that trust by falsely pledging loyalty to the United States while serving a foreign power is a crime that will be met with the full force of the Justice Department.”
The 73-year-old Rocha, whose two-decade career as a U.S. diplomat included top posts in Bolivia, Argentina and the U.S. Interests Section in Havana, was arrested by the FBI at his Miami home Friday. He was ordered held following Monday’s brief court appearance pending a bond hearing Wednesday. His attorney declined to comment.
The Justice Department did not reveal how Rocha attracted the attention of Cuba’s intelligence operatives nor did it describe what, if any, sensitive information he may have provided while working for the State Department and in a lucrative post-government career that included a stint as a special adviser to the commander of U.S. Southern Command.
This image provided by the Justice Department and contained in the affidavit in support of a criminal complaint, shows Manuel Rocha. The Justice Department says Rocha, a former American diplomat who served as U.S. ambassador to Bolivia, has been charged with serving as a covert agent for Cuba’s intelligence services since at least 1981. Newly unsealed court papers allege that Manuel Rocha engaged in “clandestine activity” on Cuba’s behalf for decades, including by meeting with Cuban intelligence operatives. (Justice Department via AP)
The FBI Stole Millions From Individuals Who Were Not Charged With a Crime – the Victims Are Suing
An FBI raid on private safe deposit boxes has triggered a significant legal battle over civil asset forfeiture and the lengths to which federal authorities can use the practice, which has often been referred to as “Policing for Profit.”
The outcome of the court proceedings could turn this into a landmark case that helps to further define the parameters in which federal law enforcement can use the controversial procedure.
FBI agents cataloged Cartier bracelets, Rolex watches and stacks of cash as they combed through safe deposit boxes seized from a Beverly Hills business accused of money laundering. But the owners of many of those boxes were not accused of any crimes.
After hearing arguments from both sides Thursday, a panel of judges from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will decide whether the sweeping raid violated customers’ Fourth Amendment rights.
“I think the public sees this and recognizes that this is just a total abuse of people’s constitutional rights,” Institute for Justice senior attorney Rob Johnson told Fox News, adding that he felt “extremely optimistic” about the panel’s forthcoming decision.
On March 22, 2021, the FBI seized around 1,400 safe deposit boxes from U.S. Private Vaults, a Beverly Hills–based company that, according to court documents, was regularly used by “unsavory characters to store criminal proceeds.”
Agents took about $86 million in cash from the boxes, as well as a trove of jewelry, gold bars and coins, silver and other valuables. In May of that year, the FBI “commenced administrative forfeiture proceedings” against an unspecified number of the boxes, according to court documents.
The procedure the FBI used to seize this property is known as civil asset forfeiture, which empowers local, state, and federal governments to take a citizen’s property if they suspect that it has been used to commit a crime. In many states and at the federal level, one does not have to be convicted – or even charged – with a crime for officers to seize the property.
Apple Reveals Governments Use App Notifications to Surveil Users
In a chilling revelation that feels all too familiar, Apple has confirmed that governments are using push notifications for the surveillance of users — an imposition on personal freedoms and a glaring example of state overreach.
This unsettling news was disclosed in response to Senator Ron Wyden’s urgent communication to the Department of Justice. Wyden highlighted that foreign officials have been pressuring technology companies for data to track smartphones via apps that send notifications.
These apps, he noted, put tech companies in a pivotal role to assist in governmental monitoring of app usage.
Senator Wyden urged the Department of Justice to alter or revoke any existing policies that restrict public discourse on the surveillance of push notifications.
In a reaction to this, Apple stated to Reuters that Wyden’s letter presented them with an opportunity to divulge more information about government monitoring of push notifications. The tech giant clarified, “In this case, the federal government prohibited us from sharing any information. Now that this method has become public we are updating our transparency reporting to detail these kinds of requests.”
The letter from Wyden reportedly stemmed from a “tip” about this surveillance activity. An informed source confirmed that both foreign and US agencies have been requesting metadata related to notifications from Apple and Google. This metadata has been allegedly used to link anonymous messaging app users to specific accounts on these platforms.
While the source, speaking to Reuters, did not specify which governments were involved, they characterized them as “democracies allied to the United States” and were uncertain about the duration of these requests.
“In this case, the federal government prohibited us from sharing any information,” Apple said in a statement. “Now that this method has become public we are updating our transparency reporting to detail these kinds of requests.”
Apple, meanwhile, has advised app developers to refrain from including sensitive data in notifications and to encrypt any data before it is incorporated into a notification payload.
However, this relies on the developers’ initiative. Importantly, metadata such as the frequency and origin of notifications remains unencrypted, potentially offering insights into users’ app activities to those who can access this data.
The news, which is hardly unexpected yet nonetheless deeply troubling, underscores the precarious path we seem to be treading, one that veers ominously towards policies that infringe on civil liberties.
The key cog in a functioning democracy, our judicial system, and its informed oversight exists precisely to prevent such oversteps. It endows a suspected individual with the crucial right to mount a robust defense against unwarranted infiltration by the state government. Alarmingly, the situation at hand eerily mirrors scenarios where private entities and individuals are strong-armed into being active partners in such covert operations, all the while being legally bound to cryptic silence.
Meet the new FISA, same as the old FISA
Question O’ The Day
Wonder what dirt does the DOJ have on him?
Speaker Mike Johson (R-LA) backtracked and caved to the deep state and Democrats, moving to slip a deep state authorization into the defense bill.
Reports say that congressional leaders, including Johnson, agreed to put an extension of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The bill would extend Section 702 until April 19.
This frustrated many conservatives, including those who were supposed to be instrumental in crafting the final texts for the NDAA.
Rep. Majorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) released a video statement after she said that leadership asked conferees, which includes herself, to agree to the 3000-plus page NDAA, which is “being released behind closed doors without even getting time to read it!”
The Peach State conservative blamed Johnson for negotiating with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to “cut a deal” that would contain prohibitions against funding for abortion and “trans surgery prohibitions” that were in the House-passed NDAA under former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA).
She explained:
It also would pass a CLEAN FISA extension. Not to mention, more of your taxpayer dollars sent to Ukraine to fund the proxy war. No member of the NDAA conference had any influence on this process. It was done in secret meetings with no input from conferees. Now, we’re supposed to just grin and take it with no say in the final bill. Is the GOP really going to fund abortion vacations and trans surgeries, fund the Ukraine war, all with a CLEAN FISA extension under Speaker Johnson?
This was a total sell-out of conservative principles and a huge win for Democrats.
Congratulations to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, you should all be excited to vote for this!
I’m a HELL NO! [Emphasis added]
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene / X
The news comes as a shock to many of those who were most intimately involved in crafting solutions to reform Section 702, a controversial surveillance law that Republicans and Democrats, progressives and conservatives, want to reform.
Senator John Kennedy grilled FBI Director Christopher Wray in the Senate on Tuesday, demanding to know why the agency did not come out and say that Hunter Biden’s laptop “was real” when it was reported on by the New York Post in October 2020. The FBI had known about the existence of the laptop for nearly a year before the contents were made public. Despite this, the FBI had warned Twitter execs to be on the lookout for potential Russian disinformation, such as a hypothetical Hunter Biden laptop.
“Why didn’t the FBI just say ‘hey, the laptop’s real?’ Why didn’t you just tell everybody ‘the laptop’s for real. We’re not vouching for what’s on it, but it’s real. This isn’t a fiction.'” Kennedy asked Wray.
“Well, I, as you might imagine,” Wray replied, “the FBI cannot, especially in a time like that, be talking about an ongoing investigation. Second, I would tell you that at least my understanding is that both the FBI folks involved in the conversations and the Twitter folks involved in the conversations, both say that the FBI did not direct Twitter to suppress that particular story.”
“But others were in government,” Kennedy said.
“Again, I can’t speak to others in government. That’s part of the point that I was trying to make because the—”
“You’re the FBI,” Kennedy interrupted, “you’re not part of the White House and part of Homeland Security. You’re not supposed to be political. You see all this controversy going on? Why didn’t the FBI say ‘timeout folks, we’re not getting in the middle of this but the laptop is real.'”
“Again, we have to be very careful about what we can say— especially in the middle of an election season— because that’s precisely some of the problems that led to my predecessor’s negative findings from the inspector general,” Wray said.
The laptop was widely derided as having been Russian disinformation. This messaging came from the Biden campaign, was disseminated from there to the intelligence community, and was picked up as fact by mainstream media outlets, many of which had to go on to eat their words as it was proven, again and again, that the contents belonged to Hunter Biden.
In addition to cracked-out photos of the younger Biden, his genitals, and his dates, the laptop contained potential evidence of influence peddling, information about the Biden family business, emails, correspondence, and more. This material has been used as a starting point for Republicans to investigate the Bidens’ relationship to foreign business partners and to insinuate that Joe Biden has been guilty of selling the power of his office during his time as Vice President in Barack Obama’s White House.
Quip O’ The Day
“Ooh no, not their performance reviews!!!! The horror!”
Josh Hawley is fed up with Chris Wray:
"You said we do not go to priests and ask them about their parishioners. You said we do not. You didn't say we haven't. You didn't say we won't. You said we don't. It turns out you do." pic.twitter.com/UKuEVTYhjK
— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) December 5, 2023
Fifth Circuit Denies ATF’s Request For Stay on the Districts Courts FRT Injunction
After what seems like a year of defeats for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in the courts, the ATF keeps losing. This time, it is forced reset triggers (FRT).
The case, National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR) v. Merrick Garland, was filed by Rare Breed Triggers and NAGR in a Texas Federal District Court challenging the ATF’s opinion that forced reset triggers such as the Rare Breed FRT-15 are machine guns. The ATF has been sending out letters to and visiting owners of the triggers demanding that the users turn over the items to the ATF or face possible charges for violating the National Firearms Act of 1934. At least three people have been charged with NFA violations for having FRTs. A conviction for violating the NFA could carry a penalty of up to ten years of imprisonment and a $250,000 fine.
Federal District Court Judge Reed O’Connor ruled in early October that the plaintiffs had proven that they were likely to succeed on the merits of the case. Judge O’Connor issued a preliminary injunction (PI) barring the ATF from taking enforcement actions over forced reset triggers. The ATF appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and asked the court to stay the lower court’s decision.
The Fifth Circuit has now reviewed the ATF’s motion and denied the requested stay, meaning the injunction will remain in place for now, protecting the public from the ATF taking enforcement actions over Rare Breed’s FRT-15. The Circuit Court believed the defendants didn’t meet the requirements for a stay on the injunction.
Republican Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders is leading a letter with 16 of her fellow GOP governors, including Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, to the Biden administration and congressional leaders in both chambers to tackle the growing issue of China buying American land.
“But national security demands a national response from national leaders,” they continued. “The responsibility is now with you – follow the lead of our States and prevent CCP amassing of American lands.”
The governors noted that it “is no secret the communist regime in China is acquiring swaths of real property throughout the United States” and that very recently, a subsidiary of a Chinese-controlled company “bought two hundred and seventy acres of land in Green Charter Township, Michigan, not far from the Camp Grayling National Guard facility.”
“Unfortunately, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States declined to block – or even review – this plainly alarming transaction,” the governors wrote.
Former Kentucky FBI agent pleads guilty to federal charges, admits taking guns from storage
A former Central Kentucky FBI agent pleaded guilty Monday to federal charges after he illegally took guns from an FBI storage office, according to court records.
Michael Van Aelstyn, 45, pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice and possessing an unregistered firearm, according to court documents. He was originally charged with possession of a firearm made in violation of the National Firearms Act, possession of an unregistered firearm, and unlawful transfer of a firearm to an out-of-state resident, according to a May indictment.
Van Aelstyn is alleged to have removed two illegal firearms from a suspect’s home, transported them to an FBI office for storage, and later removed them from the evidence room, taking them to his residence, according to court documents.
Van Aelstyn also gave an AM-15 multi-caliber rifle to a man identified in court documents as “MH,” and told him “he should not let anyone else know the source of that firearm.”
Another gun, a Cugir Mini Draco pistol, was allegedly destroyed by Van Aelstyn and thrown away, according to court documents.
Van Aelstyn also illegally possessed a 20-gauge Winchester shotgun with a sawed-off barrel, which was not registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record, according to the plea deal.
His attorney, Thomas Bullock, declined to comment Tuesday.
ATF Violates Agreed Upon Timeline By Filing For An Appeal In Pistol Brace Case
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has filed a notice of appeal in a case challenging its rule against pistol braces (FINAL RULE 2021R-08F). Gun Owners of America (GOA) filed a motion for summary judgment a day later.
The case, Texas v. ATF, is a joint effort between GOA, Gun Owners Foundation (GOF), and the state of Texas to take down the ATF’s pistol brace rule.
Just a day before the ATF rule was due to go into effect, Federal District Court Judge Drew Tipton for the Southern District of Texas issued a preliminary injunction (PI) for all GOA members, barring the ATF from taking enforcement actions against them. This ruling came on the heels of the Mock v. Garland Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision that blocked enforcement of the rule on Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) members. Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) also got a preliminary injunction against the rule before the rule’s effective date.
“For these reasons, the Court GRANTS IN PART Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction, (Dkt. No. 16). Defendants are ENJOINED from enforcing the Final Rule against the private Plaintiffs in this case, including its current members and their resident family members, and individuals employed directly by the State of Texas or its agencies. The preliminary injunction will remain in effect pending resolution of the expedited appeal in Mock v. Garland,” the order reads.
Since then, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has expanded the injunction to cover everyone in the nation, effectively killing the ATF’s rule. Before that happened, according to GOA, all parties agreed to the timeline in the Texas v. ATF case.
Merely one day prior to Texas and GOA submitting a motion for summary judgment, the ATF proceeded to lodge a notice of appeal with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Many think the ATF violated the agreed-upon timeline and is trying to stall for time since the Fifth Circuit appears to be a dead end for a Bureau legal victory.
It is unlikely that the Fifth Circuit of Appeals would overturn Judge Tipton’s decision. The Fifth Circuit is openly hostile to the ATF’s use of the rule-making process.
Incremental Strategy to Reform & Repeal the National Firearms Act
Previously, this correspondent wrote an essay on Incrementalism v. “all or nothing”. It was well-received:
Roland T. Gunner ~ “Mr. Weingarten, I take my hat off to you. This article is the best thing I have read in modern memory. Now, tell me, how do we get incremental movement on repealing the NFA? And for all you naysayers, sit down, shut up, or help us get it done.”
Incremental movement is happening to dismantle the National Firearms Act (NFA), bit by bit. The ultimate goal is repeal.
Here is how it is being done, and what needs to be done in the future.
Educate Gun Culture & The General Public
The first step is well underway. It is to educate the gun culture and the general public about the history and failure of the National Firearms Act. When people learn the history and the effects of the act, support for it evaporates.
When people understand the NFA is the result of a political compromise that did nothing to stop crime; but results in thousands of Americans being punished for peaceful acts, support for the NFA drops to politically irrelevant numbers. Support for the NFA is fairly wide, but very shallow, propped up by the dominant Media and their creation and proliferation of false narratives.
Redefining Adulthood to Deny Second Amendment Rights
Since Parkland, there’s been a serious push to restrict the purchase of long guns to those over the age of 21. As it stands, any adult with a clean NICS check can by a firearm, but some want to change that. They want to restrict the Second Amendment entirely for those under the drinking age.
Some might settle for just keeping them from buying so-called assault weapons, but they still want age restrictions.
Which might not be as big of an issue if there weren’t similar age restrictions in place for handguns. In other words, what they want will keep lawful adults from buying any firearm.
Over at America’s 1st Freedom, they ponder the possibility that what’s really happening here is that they’re trying to ultimately redefine adulthood.
Gun-control groups, and the politicians they support, are doing all they can to take Second Amendment rights away from 18-to-20-year-old citizens. But, to do so, they aren’t making the argument that we should redefine what constitutes a legal adult. That would be much more difficult to enact—and, if successful, it would also disenfranchise young voters. Instead, they simply want to take away this group’s right to keep and bear arms.
If they can’t outright repeal the Second Amendment, these groups and politicians are okay with attacking gun ownership at the margins. This is an old approach. That Latin phrase “divide et impera” (divide and rule) has been around for eons: it is more commonly said in English as “divide and conquer.” In essence, it is the principle of conquest by inciting internal divisions in your enemies to break off factions. Gun-control groups often employ this tactic.…
A current example of the divide-and-conquer strategy from the gun-control crowd is the effort to restrict the rights of 18-to-20-year-old citizens. Anti-Second Amendment advocates seem to believe that, since the vast majority of gun owners are older than 20, they can get away with stopping young adults from buying guns.
President Joe Biden (D) has been pushing to clamp down on these young adults’ right to keep and bear arms; for example, in a speech last year, the president specifically mentioned adults in this age group when pushing to ban “assault weapons.”
“If we can’t ban assault weapons, as we should, we must at least raise the age to be able to purchase one to 21,” said Biden.
Now, let’s understand the basic argument being made here, because it’s important.
The argument typically used is that people frontal lobes aren’t fully developed until around age 25. As such, people under that age are more likely to act irrationally. They’re more likely to make impulsive decisions without remotely considering the ramifications of that action.
As such, they shouldn’t be trusted with firearms, especially evil “assault weapons.”
The science on the frontal lobe development is solid. It might be wrong for some reason or another, but that’s unlikely.
Yet what’s interesting to me is how, as noted in the first quoted paragraph, the people pushing this stuff don’t want to take away any other right they might have.