Gun Control – American Conservative Movement https://americanconservativemovement.com American exceptionalism isn't dead. It just needs to be embraced. Thu, 05 Sep 2024 00:48:18 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.6.2 https://americanconservativemovement.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/cropped-America-First-Favicon-32x32.png Gun Control – American Conservative Movement https://americanconservativemovement.com 32 32 135597105 Kamala Harris’ Dangerous Stance on School Safety Exposed https://americanconservativemovement.com/kamala-harris-dangerous-stance-on-school-safety-exposed/ https://americanconservativemovement.com/kamala-harris-dangerous-stance-on-school-safety-exposed/#respond Thu, 29 Aug 2024 22:04:09 +0000 https://americanconservativemovement.com/kamala-harris-dangerous-stance-on-school-safety-exposed/ In a shocking revelation, Vice President Kamala Harris has been exposed for advocating policies that could endanger our children. Comments from 2019 have resurfaced, showing Harris supporting the removal of police officers from schools, a move that could leave students vulnerable to the very threats that have already claimed too many young lives.

JT Lewis, whose brother Jesse was tragically killed in the Sandy Hook shooting, expressed his outrage on X, stating, “My brother was killed in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting because of liberal policies like the one Kamala is pushing here… I wish there had been a police officer there to protect him. Students need more protection, not less!”

The comments in question were made by Harris during her 2020 presidential campaign at Benedict College in South Carolina. She spoke of “demilitarizing” schools, a euphemism for stripping away the very security measures that could prevent another tragedy. Harris’s focus was on what she perceives as “inequities” in school discipline, particularly affecting Black and Brown boys, rather than on the safety of all students.

Her stance was not just about removing police but also about reducing juvenile incarceration, arguing for less incarceration and an end to solitary confinement for juveniles. While these might sound compassionate, they ignore the reality that without proper security and consequences for actions, school environments can become chaotic and dangerous.

Fox News Digital attempted to get clarification from Harris’s campaign on whether she still supports these policies, but received no response. This silence is deafening, especially when parents like Ryan Petty and Andrew Pollack, who lost their daughters in the Parkland shooting, have publicly condemned her views.

Petty tweeted, “Wreckless. Radical. Kamala wants to make schools less safe. Your kids aren’t safe with Kamala Harris in office,” while Pollack added, “This is sickening. My daughter was killed because Parkland didn’t have enough security. We need more school resource officers — not fewer!”

The timing of Harris’s comments was particularly irresponsible, coming just before the 2020 riots following George Floyd’s death, which saw calls to “defund the police.” This movement led to many school districts across the country cutting ties with law enforcement, only to see a rise in school violence, forcing many to reverse these decisions.

Education Week reported in 2022 that at least 50 school districts had either removed officers or slashed their budgets, only to regret it as school violence spiked. This backtracking on security measures underscores the folly of Harris’s original stance.

Now, as Harris steps into the presidential race following Biden’s withdrawal, her past comments on school safety come under renewed scrutiny. They reveal a pattern of prioritizing ideological purity over the practical safety needs of American students. This is not just a policy misstep; it’s a failure of leadership that could have dire consequences for our nation’s youth.

It’s clear that if we want our schools to be safe havens for learning, not battlegrounds for political ideologies, we must reject the dangerous policies Harris once championed. Our children deserve better than to be pawns in a political game where their safety is the stake.

Article generated from corporate media reports.

]]> https://americanconservativemovement.com/kamala-harris-dangerous-stance-on-school-safety-exposed/feed/ 0 211140 More New Mexico Lawmakers Call for Governor’s Impeachment Over 2A Overreach https://americanconservativemovement.com/more-new-mexico-lawmakers-call-for-governors-impeachment-over-2a-overreach/ https://americanconservativemovement.com/more-new-mexico-lawmakers-call-for-governors-impeachment-over-2a-overreach/#respond Sun, 10 Sep 2023 08:09:32 +0000 https://americanconservativemovement.com/?p=196526 New Mexico State Representatives Stefani Lord (R-22) and John Block (R-51) called for the impeaching of Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) after she issued a public health emergency to strip the right away for law-abiding citizens to carry firearms in public in and around Albuquerque, the state’s largest city.

(Article cross-posted from Zero Hedge)

“This is an abhorrent attempt at imposing a radical, progressive agenda on an unwilling populous. Rather than addressing crime at its core, Governor Grisham is restricting the rights of law-abiding gun owners,” Lord wrote in a press release shared on X.

While impeachment calls grow, Erich Pratt, Senior VP of Gun Owners of America, told us: “The Governor’s actions are evil and tyrannical. GOA’s attorneys are already preparing a complaint. So heads up to the Governor: ‘We will see you in court.'”

*   *   *

On Friday evening, New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) issued an emergency order suspending the right of law-abiding citizens to open and conceal carry firearms in crime-ridden Albuquerque and the surrounding county for at least 30 days, after declaring a public health emergency in response to a spate of recent gun violence.

Grisham, who apparently thinks criminals will follow her orders, says she expects legal challenges, but was ‘compelled to act’ following recent shootings, AP reports.

“Today I issued a 30-day ban on the open & concealed carrying of guns in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County. Gun violence is killing between 2 and 3 children every month in NM – every single one of these deaths is unconscionable and they must stop,” Grisham posted on X.

Grisham declared in a statement, “As I said yesterday, the time for standard measures has passed. And when New Mexicans are afraid to be in crowds, to take their kids to school, to leave a baseball game—when their very right to exist is threatened by the prospect of violence at every turn—something is very wrong.”

Yes governor, now law-abiding citizens won’t be able to match force with criminal threats while in public, after failed progressive policies transformed Albuquerque into a crime-infested metro area with soaring violence.

According to a recent report by the Major Cities Chiefs Association, Albuquerque had one of the highest homicide rates in the country.

Constitutional law attorney Jonathan Turley said the move by Grisham is “flagrantly unconstitutional under existing Second Amendment precedent.”

Turley continued, “Democratic leaders have increasing turned to a claim used successfully during the pandemic in declaring a health emergency to maximize unilateral authority of governors.” 

“The taking away of individual rights as an emergency measure is hardly new. For centuries, governments have claimed that the suspension of individual rights is necessary for the good of citizens,” he said.

According to Erich Pratt, Senior VP of Gun Owners of America, “The Governor’s actions are evil and tyrannical. GOA’s attorneys are already preparing a complaint. So heads up to the Governor: ‘We will see you in court.’”

Trial Balloon?

Grisham’s move signals a new attack strategy by Democrats on the Second Amendment. We must remind readers ever since the ‘defund the police’ movement began several years ago, many Democratic-led cities have faced soaring crime rates. Failed social justice reform only sparked more violence, which may have been intentional to create a crisis and then offer a novel solution with even more gun control.

And this…

Democrats have faced gun control roadblocks ever since the US Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen in 2022, which hindered their ability to pass expansive laws restricting guns ever since.

Now, the tactic is to use emergency orders to suspend rights – which police chiefs for both Albuquerque and Bernalillo Counties have said might be civil violations.

Social media users on X weren’t pleased with the governor:

Any bets on which Democrat governors will follow suit?

]]> https://americanconservativemovement.com/more-new-mexico-lawmakers-call-for-governors-impeachment-over-2a-overreach/feed/ 0 196526 ‘Violates the US Constitution’: Even Radical Leftists Ted Lieu and David Hogg Are Slamming New Mexico Gun Ban https://americanconservativemovement.com/violates-the-us-constitution-even-radical-leftists-ted-lieu-and-david-hogg-are-slamming-new-mexico-gun-ban/ https://americanconservativemovement.com/violates-the-us-constitution-even-radical-leftists-ted-lieu-and-david-hogg-are-slamming-new-mexico-gun-ban/#comments Sun, 10 Sep 2023 07:59:27 +0000 https://americanconservativemovement.com/?p=196523 DCNFTwo prominent liberals ripped New Mexico’s Friday public health decree temporarily banning non-law enforcement personnel from carrying firearms.

Democratic Rep. Ted Lieu of California and David Hogg, a Parkland shooting survivor and prominent gun control advocate, took to Twitter to criticize the public health order. On Friday, Democratic New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham enacted the order, which bans individuals from carrying firearms in certain areas of the state for 30 days regardless of their permit status.

“I support gun safety laws,” Lieu wrote, referencing his prior support for gun control legislation. “However, this order from the Governor of New Mexico violates the U.S. Constitution. No state in the union can suspend the federal Constitution,” he continued, adding that “there is no such thing as a state public health emergency exception to the U.S. Constitution.”

Hogg, who himself survived a mass shooting in 2017, agreed with Lieu’s take. “I support gun safety but there is no such thing as a state public health emergency exception to the U.S. Constitution,” he wrote.

After the Parkland High School mass shooting in 2017, Hogg became a leading activist for gun control reform in the U.S., helping to organize the March for Our Lives in March 2018, according to the March for Our Lives website.

The order states that “no person, other than a law enforcement officer or licensed security officer, shall possess a firearm … either openly or concealed, within cities or counties averaging 1,000 or more violent crimes per 100,000 residents per year since 2021.” The public health decree applies to Albuquerque, the state’s largest city, and Bernalillo County, according to the Santa Fe New Mexican.

Lieu and Hogg join a chorus of legal pundits and officials who have questioned the constitutionality of the Grisham administration’s declaration that gun violence is a public health emergency.

“There are literally too many people to arrest,” Grisham said in response to a reporter’s question during a press conference announcing the order. “If there’s an emergency, and I’ve declared an emergency for a temporary amount of time, I can invoke additional powers. No constitutional right, in my view, including my oath, is intended to be absolute.”

Grisham’s office did not respond immediately to a request for comment.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].

]]> https://americanconservativemovement.com/violates-the-us-constitution-even-radical-leftists-ted-lieu-and-david-hogg-are-slamming-new-mexico-gun-ban/feed/ 2 196523 California Becomes First State to Pass 11 Percent Tax on Guns and Ammunition, Now Awaiting Governor’s Signature https://americanconservativemovement.com/california-becomes-first-state-to-pass-11-percent-tax-on-guns-and-ammunition-now-awaiting-governors-signature/ https://americanconservativemovement.com/california-becomes-first-state-to-pass-11-percent-tax-on-guns-and-ammunition-now-awaiting-governors-signature/#comments Sat, 09 Sep 2023 08:51:25 +0000 https://americanconservativemovement.com/?p=196497 California legislators narrowly passed an 11-percent excise tax on guns and ammunition Sept. 7 despite bipartisan opposition.

State Sen. Tom Umberg (D-Santa Ana) provided the final vote Democrats needed to pass Assembly Bill 28—the Gun Violence Prevention and Schools Act—passed with the two-thirds margin it required. The bill now awaits Gov. Gavin Newsom’s signature before becoming law.

The final tally was 27–9 after Sen. Marie Alvarado-Gil (D-Jackson) joined with Senate Republicans to vote against it. Four senators abstained.

The bill’s author, Assemblyman Jesse Gabriel (D-Los Angeles), stressed the importance of paying for gun violence prevention programs with funds generated by the new tax.

The measure passed the Assembly along party lines with a vote of 56–17. Seven additional members—six Democrats and one Republican—did not vote.

“It’s shameful that gun manufacturers are reaping record profits at the same time that gun violence has become the leading cause of death for kids in the United States,” Mr. Gabriel said in a July statement. “This bill will fund critical school safety measures and proven violence prevention programs that will save lives and protect communities across California.”

The bill now awaits Gov. Gavin Newsom’s signature before becoming law. If signed, California would become the first state to impose such a tax, though some municipalities—such as Seattle and Pennsylvania—collect fees on gun sales and ammunition.

The California state capitol building in Sacramento, Calif., on March 11, 2023. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

The federal government charges a similar tax on gun and ammunition sales. The United States began taxing guns and ammunition over 100 years ago and now charges 10 percent on the wholesale price of handguns and an 11 percent tax on long guns and ammunition to pay for wildlife restoration projects.

California already charges fees of $31 on gun sales to cover background checks.

The state’s tax and fee department estimates the new tax would generate $159 million from July 2024 to July 2025. If dealers pass the tax onto customers, it would generate another $14 million in state and local sales and tax revenue—$6.3 million of which would go to the state’s General Fund, according to a legislative analysis.

The bill would also establish a fund to pay for school safety and gun-violence reduction programs, counseling and support programs for victims, firearm violence research, and a court-based program to seize firearms from subjects named in domestic violence protective orders.

Former Democratic Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who survived an assassination attempt in 2011, applauded the measure’s passage.

“California just made history – again,” Giffords said in a statement posted on her website Giffords: Courage to Fight Gun Violence. “The state continues to take on the gun lobby and pave the way for effective methods to reduce gun violence.”

Additionally, the gun-control activist organization Moms Demand Action was grateful to legislators who approved the measure.

“This bill is an innovative approach to tackling gun violence and a crucial step to improve the safety of all California families,” Cassandra Whetstone, a volunteer with the group’s California chapter, said in a Sept. 7 statement. “We are grateful to gun sense champions in the [Legislature] and community partners who worked so hard to pass this comprehensive bill that seeks to make our communities safer and target the root causes of gun violence.”

However, the National Rifle Association (NRA) opposed the new tax, saying it was not fair.

“It is unjust to saddle law-abiding gun owners with special taxes,” the NRA said on its website. “Such a measure makes it more expensive for law-abiding citizens to exercise a constitutional right and discourages them from practicing to be safe and proficient with their firearms for purposes such as self-defense, competition, and hunting.”

Sales to active or retired law enforcement officers or any law enforcement agency would be exempt from the tax.

Among the lawmakers who opposed the measure, Ms. Alvarado-Gil told colleagues on the Senate floor Thursday she researched gun violence statistics, and her findings didn’t match data included in the bill. She said her data showed drug overdose deaths far outnumbered firearm deaths in the state.

She said she also discovered that California had the lowest mass-shooting victimization rate among the most populous states.

“For me, I tend to analyze the legislation before us,” Ms. Alvarado-Gil said. “When I look at this very sensitive issue, I feel that we have a duty to legislate through facts, and not fear.”

Sen. Brian Dahle (R-Bieber) also highlighted drug overdose deaths compared to those from gun violence when arguing against the bill.

According to Mr. Newsom’s office, California’s gun death rate is 43 percent lower than the rest of the nation’s and the state is ranked No. 1 for gun safety by the gun-control advocacy organization Giffords Law Center, also associated with the former Arizona congresswoman.

The state’s gun homicide rate is also 33 percent lower than the national average, the governor’s office said in a press release Aug. 29.

Meanwhile, California saw nearly 6,000 deaths from fentanyl in 2021, according to the California Department of Public Health.

“You want to do something about deaths in California, why don’t we focus on fentanyl?” Mr. Dahle asked senators. “Why don’t we focus on fentanyl more than we focus on taxing young folks and people who enjoy their Second Amendment rights?”

Sen. Kelly Seyarto (R-Murrieta) additionally called the bill “ineffective.” He also noted that some initiatives, such as gun buyback programs, can backfire and allow people to turn firearms into being destroyed after the guns are used in crimes.

“That gun gets destroyed and there goes the evidence,” Mr. Seyarto said. “Until we start going after where those illegal guns are coming from, and holding the people who have those illegal guns accountable, you are not going to do anything.”

Democrat Sen. Bill Dodd, of Napa, also opposed the bill, he said, because duck hunters were left out of the process.

“I think there is a way to exclude these 70,000 duck hunters [from paying the tax],” Mr. Dodd said. “Frankly, I look at this as something, when you add another 11 percent [tax], all it’s going to do is decrease the number of young hunters and sooner.”

Sen. Anna Caballero (D-Merced) agreed, saying duck hunters have contributed greatly to a large wetland conservation area in her district, and placing another fee on that kind of activity was an unfair burden.

Sen. Dave Cortese (D-San Jose) also refrained from voting because he did not agree with passing the tax onto consumers. He also said everyone should be paying for gun violence programs, not just firearm owners.

“It is a pass-through to the consumer and, frankly, it’s disingenuous to say it’s anything other than that. It’s not equitable,” Mr. Cortese said. “Why aren’t all of us paying for these programs?”

The California Rifle and Pistol Association opposed the bill for the same reason.

“All of California’s law-abiding citizens benefit from efforts to implement programs which remediate the impacts of illegal gun violence upon our public, and all should equally help to fund their implementation,” the organization said in a statement. “Yet, AB 28 would unjustifiably place the entire burden of funding efforts to address illegal gun violence on the backs of law-abiding citizens who legally purchase and lawfully use firearms and ammunition.”

If approved, the firearm excise tax would begin in July 2024.

About the Author

Jill McLaughlin is an award-winning journalist covering politics, environment, and statewide issues. She has been a reporter and editor for newspapers in Oregon, Nevada, and New Mexico. Jill was born in Yosemite National Park and enjoys the majestic outdoors, traveling, golfing, and hiking.

Article cross-posted from our premium news partners at The Epoch Times.

]]> https://americanconservativemovement.com/california-becomes-first-state-to-pass-11-percent-tax-on-guns-and-ammunition-now-awaiting-governors-signature/feed/ 1 196497 Study Proves There Is No Correlation Between Gun Control Laws and Mass Murders https://americanconservativemovement.com/study-proves-there-is-no-correlation-between-gun-control-laws-and-mass-murders/ https://americanconservativemovement.com/study-proves-there-is-no-correlation-between-gun-control-laws-and-mass-murders/#comments Sun, 30 Jul 2023 09:26:35 +0000 https://americanconservativemovement.com/?p=195312 A new study by researchers from the University of Colorado Boulder has found that there is no correlation between the strength of gun control laws and the number of mass shootings that occur in each state.

The United States has more than 10 times the number of mass shootings than any other developed country in the world. In the study, the researchers looked at 4,011 mass shootings – defined as four or more gun deaths in the same short period, not including the shooter – between Jan. 1, 2014 and Dec. 31, 2022. (Related: RFK Jr.: Seizing lawful firearms will not STOP mass shootings.)

Illinois, with its restrictive gun laws and comparatively low gun ownership of 22 percent, had 414 mass shootings and a per capita rate of 3.6 mass shootings per million people.

Washington, D.C., despite not being a state, was included in the study and the researchers were shocked to find that the district had the highest rate of mass shootings per capita at 10.4 shootings for every one million people. This is despite the fact that the country’s capital has some of the strongest gun control laws in the nation.

For states, Louisiana had the highest rate of mass shootings per capita at 4.3 shootings per million people – less than half the per capita rate in Washington, D.C. despite the lax gun laws and 52 percent gun ownership.

Hawaii and North Dakota had zero mass shootings from 2014 to 2022. They are followed by New Hampshire, Vermont and Wyoming, which all had one each, Idaho with two and Maine with three.

Environmental and sociocultural factors more likely to lead to mass shootings

The high per capita number of mass shootings in states with supposedly strong gun laws strongly suggests that gun violence is caused more by environmental and sociocultural factors other than gun policy.

“I’m constantly asked, ‘What is public health doing about the rise in mass shootings?'” said researcher Leslie Barnard, a student working with the University of Colorado School of Medicine’s Firearm Injury Prevention Initiative.

“We want to help explain the ‘why, where and how often,’ to give people an understanding of this issue,” Barnard continued. “This study is not intended to answer every question, but highlights components to generate more hypotheses.”

In the data, Barnard and her colleagues noted that over the nine years when the 4,011 mass shootings took place, 27 percent of the mass shootings were social-related, 16 percent were crime-related, 11 percent were domestic violence-related, and just one percent were school- or work-related. A full 52 percent of the mass shooting incidents were not part of any of those categories. These 4,011 mass shootings caused over 21,000 injuries and deaths.

“From this data, we can speculate that certain communities and victims are underrepresented,” said Barnard. “Mass shootings in public places are covered by media, but 11 percent of mass shootings are domestic violence-related, and even more may never be reported or receive coverage. We ask ourselves how we can raise awareness and bring support to this issue.”

“Understanding where mass shootings occur across the country, and more about the context, such as how often these tragic events happen in homes, can point firearm injury prevention specialists toward how to prevent them,” said researcher Ashley Brooks-Russell, director of the Injury and Violence Prevention Center of the Colorado School of Public Health.

Barnard noted that future research on mass shootings should move away from taking a look at gun control, but should focus more on assessing socioeconomic, cultural, demographic and other political factors associated with incidents of mass shootings across states and address policies and social determinants that are associated with these shootings.

Learn more about gun violence incidents as well as their causes at GunViolence.news. Watch this clip from Fox News featuring Texas Rep. Beth Van Duyne discussing the actual issues impacting mass shootings.

This video is from the News Clips channel on Brighteon.com.

More related stories:

Sources include:

]]> https://americanconservativemovement.com/study-proves-there-is-no-correlation-between-gun-control-laws-and-mass-murders/feed/ 2 195312 Our Guns Protect Us Against Tyranny https://americanconservativemovement.com/our-guns-protect-us-against-tyranny/ https://americanconservativemovement.com/our-guns-protect-us-against-tyranny/#respond Mon, 03 Apr 2023 06:57:26 +0000 https://americanconservativemovement.com/?p=191451 You can be sure that brain-dead Biden and his gang of neocon controllers will use the latest school shooting to try to restrict our right to own guns, despite the fact that the right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by the Second Amendment. They will say, “AR-15s and AK-47s are military-style weapons. People shouldn’t be allowed to own them.” But we need weapons like this to protect us from a tyrannical government.

As Michael Gaddy pointed out when Obama was president, “’Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.’

While we stumble along economically with bailouts, buyouts, and poor sales in almost all sectors, two products in America are seeing dramatic increases in sales: guns and ammo. People who never owned a gun before are buying; people are buying multiples of military style weapons and ammo is being bought by the case instead of by the box.

Many explain this away as folks simply worried that Obama will move to ban certain firearms, especially those referred to by the ignorant as ‘assault weapons,’ I believe the motivation to buy firearms and ammunition goes much deeper.

More and more Americans are becoming increasingly aware of the storm that is brewing on the horizon, a storm driven by the possibility of a complete economic collapse.

The more astute are reading the handwriting on the wall: military combat units being assigned for stateside duty to quell domestic disturbances, a militarization of law enforcement, and the fear of what will happen when the state is no longer able to provide monthly checks to the millions currently living on government handouts labeled as ‘entitlements.’

Americans are purchasing firearms and ammunition in record numbers, not because they believe 2009 will offer unusually good duck hunting, but because they fear the fallout from the coming economic storm and the state’s reaction to that fallout.

The larger question is: how many of those who have gone out and purchased firearms and ammo will actually use them? I believe a large number would bring those weapons to bear against criminals who would steal and threaten their families and property, but, how many would use them against the criminal state as it moves to seize their weapons, as was done in New Orleans, when the next ‘emergency’ occurs, be it an economic meltdown or terrorist attack?

Rest assured, there will be a great majority who will not stand against tyranny. Those who have ‘gone along to get along’ and those who have continually voted for the ‘lesser of two evils’ will capitulate and surrender their weapons, as cowards normally do. They will rue the day they failed to support those who stood for liberty such as Ron Paul. Remember, they were offered liberty, but chose instead to support the status quo, because, in their eyes, liberty could not be elected.

Those among us who are afraid to be free will surrender their guns, their families, and their freedom to tyranny. Do not place your freedom or trust in their hands or depend on them to cover your six.” See this.

Gaddy also has some words of wisdom on AK-47s: “Then there are those bastions of liberty in the pro-gun crowd who question why anyone would want to own an AK-47 or any other of those dastardly assault weapons. They contend there is no ‘legitimate’ reason to own one. Let me make this as simple as I can: I own a legal AK-47 and several other assault weapons so I can assault the tyrant who seeks to deprive me of my rights granted by my creator, or any other criminal who attempts to take that which is mine, or harm me and those I love. Simple enough?

From past experience I know I am going to catch a lot of flak for my opinion of concealed carry laws, because I believe them to be another form of registration. Gun owners who claim they are totally against ‘registration’ of firearms have no problem in registering themselves as gun owners. Most egregious is their paying the state to bestow on them the rights they already possess as free men.

If the true purpose of the Second Amendment is to provide the means to resist a tyrannical government, where is the logic in begging and paying that same government to allow us to possess the weapons to protect ourselves from their tyrannical pursuits? Groveling at the feet of tyrants is no reflection of courage.

Not only do concealed carry permit holders place themselves in a database available to all bureaucrats whose goal is to disarm everyone, they place themselves in the database of all law enforcement agencies. How convenient it must be for the cop who runs your drivers or vehicle license number to immediately know you are armed, what you drive, where you live, and in some cases, what type firearm you have.” See this.

The great Dr. Ron Paul makes the essential point with his characteristic eloquence: “Can anyone seriously contend that the Founders, who had just expelled their British rulers mostly by use of light arms, did not want the individual farmer, blacksmith, or merchant to be armed? Those individuals would have been killed or imprisoned by the King’s soldiers if they had relied on a federal armed force to protect them. In the 1700s, militias were local groups made up of ordinary citizens. They were not under federal control! As a practical matter, many of them were barely under the control of colonial or state authorities. When the 2nd Amendment speaks of a ‘well-regulated militia,’ it means local groups of individuals operating to protect their own families, homes, and communities. They regulated themselves because it was necessary and in their own interest to do so.

The Founders themselves wrote in the Federalist papers about the need for individuals to be armed. In fact, James Madison argued in Federalist paper 46 that common citizens should be armed to guard against the threat posed by the newly proposed standing federal army. Today, gun control makes people demonstrably less safe — as any honest examination of criminal statistics reveals. In his book ‘More Guns, Less Crime,’ scholar John Lott demolishes the myth that gun control reduces crime. On the contrary, Lott shows that cities with strict gun control — like Washington DC — experience higher rates of murder and violent crime. It is no coincidence that violent crime flourishes in the nation’s capital, where the individual’s right to defend himself has been most severely curtailed. Understand that residents of DC can be convicted of a felony and put in prison simply for having a gun in their home, even if they live in a very dangerous neighborhood.

The DC gun ban is no joke, and the legal challenges to the ban are not simply academic exercises. People’s lives and safety are at stake. Gun control historically serves as a gateway to tyranny. Tyrants from Hitler to Mao to Stalin have sought to disarm their own citizens, for the simple reason that unarmed people are easier to control. Our Founders, having just expelled the British army, knew that the right to bear arms serves as the guardian of every other right. This is the principle so often ignored by both sides in the gun control debate. Only armed citizens can resist tyrannical government.”

An attorney who worked for the government wrote an article published by the Department of Justice that acknowledged guns enable the people to resist tyranny. This is from the Office of Justice programs of the US Department of Justice: “

NCJ Number

160180

Author(s)

A M Gottlieb

Date Published

1992

Length

8 pages

Annotation

The primary purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure that should a tyrannical power overtake the Nation, Americans will be able to defend themselves; because this danger always exists, gun control should be prohibited.

Abstract

The necessity of an armed populace was so unanimously advocated in the early Republic that it played a central part in the arguments of both sides in the debate over the Constitution. The writings of some of the framers of the Constitution show that they valued the right of individuals to possess arms for their personal and property protection as well as for the common defense. Those who would limit the interpretation of the right to bear arms only to an organized State militia argue that technological changes since 1791 have rendered an armed citizenry irrelevant for either national defense or resistance to domestic tyranny. They also argue that the amendment’s central purpose has no meaning in the modern age of weaponry, since a citizenry having only small arms would have no chance of defeating a modern army. This argument collapses under the lessons of history, which show that a revolutionary people with only small arms have defeated a modern army, such as in Iran and Nicaragua. Further, a people who enter an armed conflict with small arms can secure more sophisticated weaponry from outside sources. It is also important that in a free country the citizenry have arms to deter any renegade military leader who might consider challenging the popular government.” See this.

Let’s do everything we can to protect our right to own guns. Our life and liberty depend on it.

About the Author

Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. [send him mail], former editorial assistant to Ludwig von Mises and congressional chief of staff to Ron Paul, is founder and chairman of the Mises Institute, executor for the estate of Murray N. Rothbard, and editor of LewRockwell.com. He is the author of Against the State and . Follow him on Facebook and Twitter.

Article cross-posted from Lew’s blog.

]]> https://americanconservativemovement.com/our-guns-protect-us-against-tyranny/feed/ 0 191451 Israeli Government’s Response to Latest “Mass Shooting” Is the OPPOSITE of How the U.S. Government Responds https://americanconservativemovement.com/israeli-governments-response-to-latest-mass-shooting-is-the-opposite-of-how-the-u-s-government-responds/ https://americanconservativemovement.com/israeli-governments-response-to-latest-mass-shooting-is-the-opposite-of-how-the-u-s-government-responds/#respond Mon, 30 Jan 2023 09:00:39 +0000 https://americanconservativemovement.com/?p=189636 Anytime there’s a mass murder by firearm in the United States, social media fills with calls to “do something.” Gun-grabbers pounce. Politicians virtue signal. The fervent calls to add stricter gun laws come in almost immediately after the news breaks.

While the confused and easily manipulated masses make these calls without actually comprehending what they mean, Constitutional conservatives jump into action to defend the 2nd Amendment. It’s an ongoing cycle that ebbs and flows based on the narrative du jour. For whatever reason, our side of the 2nd Amendment fence cannot seem to break through to enough hearts and minds with the simple truth that taking guns away from law-abiding citizens has NEVER and will NEVER reduce so-called “gun violence.”

Violent criminals are the only beneficiaries of the ludicrous gun control laws that keep getting added to the books by Democrats and their UniParty brethren among RINOs. Israel’s government seems to know what most in our government do not. The best way to prevent mass murders is to arm MORE law-abiding citizens. According to Fox News:

Israel is poised to speed up gun applications in response to a shooting in East Jerusalem over the weekend that left seven people – including a 70-year-old woman – dead. The measure was among several that Israel’s Security Cabinet announced Saturday evening.

“Firearm licensing will be expedited and expanded in order to enable thousands of additional citizens to carry weapons,” read a statement on the Facebook page of the Prime Minister of Israel.

National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir told reporters over the weekend: “When civilians have guns, they can defend themselves.” The measures also include depriving social security rights to the attacker’s family. The full cabinet was expected to consider the measure on Sunday.

A Palestinian gunman opened fire outside an east Jerusalem synagogue Friday night, killing seven people, including a 70-year-old woman, and wounding three others before he was shot and killed by police, officials said.

The attack, which occurred as residents were observing the Jewish sabbath, came a day after an Israeli military raid killed nine Palestinians in the West Bank. Friday’s shooting set off celebrations in both the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip, where people fired guns into the air, honked horns and distributed sweets.

Addressing reporters at Israel’s national police headquarters, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he had held a security assessment and decided on “immediate actions.” He said he would convene his Security Cabinet on Saturday night, after the end of the sabbath, to discuss a further response.

What a novel idea! Of course, there’s nothing novel about it, but the indoctrinated masses around us in America likely couldn’t fathom such a solution. Perhaps it’s time for patriots to stop being defensive by telling the left not to take our guns. Perhaps it’s time to educate those around us about the benefits of having more “good guys with guns” on America’s streets.

]]> https://americanconservativemovement.com/israeli-governments-response-to-latest-mass-shooting-is-the-opposite-of-how-the-u-s-government-responds/feed/ 0 189636 After Meeting With Anti-2nd Amendment Extremists, CDC Quietly Removed Defensive Firearm Use Statistics to Support Bad Faith Gun Control Agenda https://americanconservativemovement.com/after-meeting-with-anti-2nd-amendment-extremists-cdc-quietly-removed-defensive-firearm-use-statistics-to-support-bad-faith-gun-control-agenda/ https://americanconservativemovement.com/after-meeting-with-anti-2nd-amendment-extremists-cdc-quietly-removed-defensive-firearm-use-statistics-to-support-bad-faith-gun-control-agenda/#comments Sun, 18 Dec 2022 20:27:03 +0000 https://americanconservativemovement.com/?p=186601 A few years back, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) commissioned a study and associated fact sheet about defensive gun uses (DGU) that showed anywhere from 60,000 to 2.5 million tragedies are prevented with firearms every single year in the United States. You will be hard-pressed to find that information anymore, though, since the CDC tossed the data in response to complaints from anti-Second Amendment extremists who said it made passing more gun control laws extremely difficult.

A lobbying campaign was mounted that spanned several months and ended with a private meeting between CDC officials and three gun control extremists. Emails obtained by The Reload show that Sen. Dick Durbin’s (D-Ill.) office spearheaded the effort, which resulted in critical DGU statistics being scrubbed from the CDC’s data archives.

“[T]hat 2.5 Million number needs to be killed, buried, dug up, killed again and buried again,” wrote Mark Bryant, one of the attendees, in an email to CDC officials following the meeting. “It is highly misleading, is used out of context and I honestly believe it has zero value – even as an outlier point in honest DGU discussions.”

Bryant is in charge of the Gun Violence Archive (GVA), an anti-Second Amendment extremist group that is constantly pushing for more gun restrictions in the United States in response to mass shootings. Bryant argued that the work of criminologist Gary Kleck, who helped put together the DGU data from the CDC, needed to be scrubbed completely from the agency’s website.

“And while that very small study by Gary Kleck has been debunked repeatedly by everyone from all sides of this issue [even Kleck] it still remains canon by gun rights folks and their supporting politicians and is used as a blunt instrument against gun safety regulations every time there is a state or federal level hearing,” Bryant added in an email.

“Put simply, in the time that study has been published as ‘a CDC Study’ gun violence prevention policy has ground to a halt, in no small part because of the misinformation that small study provided.”

The CDC is controlled by anti-gun zealots who want truthful data hidden from the public

The CDC had previously stood behind the DFU section of its “fast facts” website on gun violence, stating that the data was scientifically sound and important for the public to see. However, after an undisclosed virtual meeting with anti-Second Amendment extremists on Sept. 15, 2021, the CDC suddenly changed its tune and decided that the data was going to be removed.

“We are planning to update the fact sheet in early 2022 after the release of some new data,” said Beth Reimels, Associate Director for Policy, Partnerships, and Strategic Communication at the CDC’s Division of Violence Prevention, in an email to the three advocates on December 10 of that same year.

“We will also make some edits to the content we discussed that I think will address the concerns you and other partners have raised.”

The CDC has refused to comment on the matter ever since. The agency also made no attempts whatsoever to gain any outside perspectives beyond what the three anti-gun zealots presented at the private virtual meeting, which resulted in a complete reversal of the agency’s former position on the data.

“The decision to remove a CDC-commissioned report from the agency’s website on gun statistics at the apparent behest of gun-control advocates may further strain its relationship with Congressional overseers, especially pro-gun Republicans who are set to take control of the House next year,” writes Stephen Gutowski for The Reload.

More related news coverage can be found at SecondAmendment.news.

Sources for this article include:

]]> https://americanconservativemovement.com/after-meeting-with-anti-2nd-amendment-extremists-cdc-quietly-removed-defensive-firearm-use-statistics-to-support-bad-faith-gun-control-agenda/feed/ 2 186601 Leftist Despots Require a Disarmed and Defenseless Citizenry https://americanconservativemovement.com/leftist-despots-require-a-disarmed-and-defenseless-citizenry/ https://americanconservativemovement.com/leftist-despots-require-a-disarmed-and-defenseless-citizenry/#respond Tue, 29 Nov 2022 23:06:32 +0000 https://americanconservativemovement.com/?p=185630 America, if you care about the Country you will pass on to your children and your grandchildren, take note of the events unfolding in Canada, Iran, Northern Europe, China, and Brazil. Take a good hard look that you will not soon forget! The mass protests and upheaval reflect the desperation of citizens to be heard by governments who have no intention of listening. And none of this will change in an amicable, reasonable manner.

Whether the excuse of the moment offered by the leftist/globalist despots is “public health and safety” as is the case in China and Canada, enviro-lunacy (Northern Europe), fealty to a despotic “religious” order (Iran), or more stolen elections to empower the Marxist political machine in Brazil, common citizens are recognizing that their world is being pummeled into madness and tragedy by a callous and indifferent ruling class.

Those in power seek to fortify their positions, in service to their own interests, while the suffering and deprivation of that lowly peasantry (people like you and me) is, at most, an irritation that they would prefer to ignore. And that is how they intend to move forward.

Some common folk naively bought the notion that the “will of the people” would usher in an age of freedom and opportunity. Yet even despite that short-sighted caricature of “democracy,” devoid of worthy moral and spiritual principles to guide it, the ability of corrupt and seditious leftist players to defraud and cheat their way into positions of authority has set a dangerous precedent of sham elections that were once only the realm of backwards tinhorn dictatorships.

Back in another life, America played a central role on the world stage, as a government “of, by, and for the people,” actively bolstering the efforts of those who yearned to breathe free. But that was before our Nation succumbed to the wiles of the leftist counterculture, with its shameless sanctimony presented as the fig leaf over a truly vile ideology and agenda. It was not sufficiently excised when its dangerous nature first became evident. So, like any malignancy it has spread and grown in toxicity.

America in 2022 is no longer the “shining city on a hill.” For several years now, America has been abhorrently playing precisely the opposite role. And the devastation unleashed on innocent peoples throughout the world, who once looked to us as their heroic champions, is beyond words.

Under Barack Obama, freedom fighters in Iran were betrayed, as they sought help from the West to overthrow the illegitimate and repressive regimes of the Islamists. Sadly, Obama’s affections were (and still are) entirely in the camp of militant Islam. Rather than working to free the people of Iran, and neutralize its agenda of state sponsored terrorism throughout the region, he sided with the Islamists and fully supported the murderous, hate-filled government of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Immediately upon consolidating his power, Ahmadinejad began rounding up and executing his political opposition.

Last winter, a similar pattern of treachery emerged from the Biden Cabal (likely with Obama pulling the strings here as well). As Canadian truckers courageously rallied against the arbitrary and excessive lockdowns and vax mandates of the Trudeau government, the US began demanding that something be done to suppress the protests on the grounds that American auto manufacturers were feeling the effects. Rather than insisting that this Hemisphere be restored to freedom and justice by lifting the onerous orders, the call came from Washington to simply confront and disperse the truckers. In short, a demand was made for a despotic exercise of power in Ottawa, in order to put down the rebellion.

Similar rumblings are currently being heard from the Biden Cabal in regards to the upheaval in Brazil, where the good citizens of that Nation are refusing to accept the results of their own, obviously stolen election. Massive protests, on a scale never seen previously, are occurring in major cities across South America’s largest country. The chicanery in the days before and after the election was at least as flagrant as it was in America’s 2020 debacle. But unlike Americans, the Brazilian people are not willing to simply accept all of it as their inescapable fate. With cultural and geographical closeness to Venezuela and other nightmarish Marxist cesspools of the region, Brazilians know the stakes of the battle they are in.

A good and legitimate American government would be loudly decrying the corruption and fraud. But of course this administration can do no such thing. Nor is it willing to see freedom and justice restored in Brazil or anywhere else. Such an event could set off an avalanche of freedom fighters throughout the world, rising up to confront the evils and right the wrongs of those who illegitimately hold power. America’s own Democrat Party has massive dirt on its hands in that respect.

It is hardly a coincidence that, as these events around the world reach critical mass, what we heard from the Biden Cabal in the past few days was another effort to create momentum for gun confiscation in America. The single element of the massive protests, whether in Tehran, Beijing, or Brasilia, which could be potentially different if Americans felt compelled to undertake direct action against their government, is that the inherent right of the people to “keep and bear arms” is still upheld and guaranteed by the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights.

For the despot wannabes in Washington to wield similar brutish power over the “We the People,” that long standing “obstacle” must somehow be invalidated. So once again, America was subjected to more grandstanding over the evils of an armed populace. In a November 25 event among the ultra rich liberals of Nantucket Island, Biden stated “The idea we still allow semiautomatic weapons to be purchased is sick. It has no social redeeming value. Zero. None… I’m going to try to get rid of assault weapons.”

So once again, the efforts to outlaw “assault weapons” are couched in leftist sanctimony, as if their agenda has ever had any “social redeeming value.” And once again, the real effort is to hamstring Americans from defending themselves against despotic over-reaches from an out of control government.

While it is inspiring to see how willing the people of Brazil, China, and elsewhere are to rally and fight for their innate rights and freedoms, it is also sobering to realize just how much of an uphill battle they face, owing to their totally disarmed and defenseless condition. Americans have their own major battle against just such evil forces. Ceding our inherent and unalienable rights to the leftist power mongers in government would only make that effort much more difficult, if not totally impossible.

Bio

Christopher G. Adamo is a lifelong conservative from the American Heartland. He has been involved in grassroots and state-level politics for many years, seeking to restore and uphold the Judeo-Christian principles on which our Nation was founded. His book, “Rules for Defeating Radicals,” is the “Go To” guide for effectively confronting and overcoming the dirty tricks of the political left. It is available at Amazon.

]]> https://americanconservativemovement.com/leftist-despots-require-a-disarmed-and-defenseless-citizenry/feed/ 0 185630 The 5 Most Idiotic Things Benito Biden Said in His Gun-Grabbing Speech https://americanconservativemovement.com/the-5-most-idiotic-things-benito-biden-said-in-his-gun-grabbing-speech/ https://americanconservativemovement.com/the-5-most-idiotic-things-benito-biden-said-in-his-gun-grabbing-speech/#respond Sat, 10 Sep 2022 00:45:12 +0000 https://americanconservativemovement.com/?p=180547 President Joe Biden recently gave a speech in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, touting his “Safer America Plan” and a gun control bill he had signed into law.

For many American gun owners, these speeches on preventing gun violence so obviously have become stump speeches for gun control that they no longer tune in, unable to bear cringey zingers about “deer in Kevlar vests” and blatantly false “gun facts.”

But don’t worry—I listened to the president’s Aug. 30 speech so that you didn’t have to. Here are the top 5 most unserious things Biden said about guns and the Second Amendment:

1. “Right now you can’t go on [sic] and buy an automatic weapon. You can’t go out and buy a cannon.”

Biden has made some variation of this assertion numerous times since taking office as president, and every time it has been roundly debunked by fact-checkers.

Private cannon ownership apparently was so widespread that one of the first types of “gun control” laws implemented in the early 1800s by some towns was a prohibition on firing one’s cannon inside city limits during certain times or without permission.

Today, it’s still not uncommon for civilians to own heavy ordnance, including 18th-century cannons and their modern equivalents. In fact, civilians even may buy tanks and other tactical military vehicles if they can afford the steep price tags. (But fair warning to would-be tank owners: Many places won’t consider your tank “street legal,” and you’ll be able to drive it only on private property.)

It’s also simply not true that civilians can’t legally buy machine guns today. These firearms are subject to special taxing and registration provisions under the National Firearms Act, and the Firearm Owners Protection Act prohibits civilian ownership of machine guns manufactured after 1986. Nevertheless, over 700,000 of them currently are registered to American civilians.

2. “Do you realize the bullet out of an AR-15 travels five times as rapidly as a bullet shot out of any other gun, five times lighter and can pierce Kevlar?”

A simple internet search by an intern could have told the president that this statement about an AR-15’s muzzle velocity and weight was laughably false.

Although a .223/5.56 bullet—the most common caliber for an AR-15 platform—is certainly among the lighter and faster of rifle rounds, it’s not even close to the lightest or fastest, much less five times faster or lighter.

Several important factors will affect muzzle velocity, including the weight of the bullet (also known as the bullet’s “grain”) and the length of the barrel from which it is fired. A typical .223/5.56 round fired from an AR-15 with a standard 16- to 20-inch barrel generally will have a muzzle velocity between 2,800 and 3,300 feet per second at the moment it leaves the barrel.

Many other rifle calibers will fall within that velocity range, again depending on the grain of the bullet and the barrel length of the firearm. This muzzle velocity also pales in comparison to the average velocity of rounds such as the .220 Swift, which generally will travel between 4,000 and 4,300 feet per second.

Even if it were true that a .223/5.56 round travels far faster than other caliber, muzzle velocity is not synonymous with “lethality” or “stopping power.” A faster bullet doesn’t necessarily mean a deadlier bullet or even necessarily more “carnage”—as anyone who has seen the devastating power of a shotgun blast at close range will attest.

The AR-15’s alleged (but fictional) super-lethality is also just a poor basis for banning so-called assault weapons. These bans don’t define “assault weapons” based on caliber, muzzle velocity, or any other functional measure, but on the presence of features such as pistol grips, barrel shrouds, and collapsing stocks.

How would banning AR-15s with these features lessen their muzzle velocity or alleged “deadliness”? The answer: It wouldn’t.

As for Biden’s claim that rounds fired from an AR-15 can “pierce Kevlar,” this is true of almost all common rifle calibers against soft body armor, which is not typically graded to stop rifle rounds.

3. “For God sake [sic], what’s the rationale for these weapons outside of a war zone? They inflict severe damage … the AR-15 just rips the body apart.”

Biden can’t really believe that AR-15s are solely useful for combat. If he did, he and other gun control advocates wouldn’t universally exempt law enforcement officers from these bans (including while the officers are off duty).

In the United States, law enforcement officers aren’t waging offensive warfare or engaging in open combat on a battlefield. Instead, they are peace officers, responding to common criminal threats in a civilian context. They routinely carry AR-15s precisely because these guns are genuinely useful for a wide variety of lawful civilian purposes.

The president’s appeal to the horrific school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, as evidence of the AR-15’s ability to “inflict severe damage” on the human body is horribly misguided.

As should already be clear at this point, rounds fired from an AR-15 don’t have a particularly devastating effect compared to either other types of rifle rounds or to the exact same round fired from a “nonassault weapon.” As difficult as it is to consider, not a single child in Uvalde would be any less dead or any less horribly maimed had the gunman used a shotgun, handgun, or “nonassault” rifle under the exact same circumstances.

4. “For those brave right-wing Americans who say it’s all about keeping America independent and safe, if you want to fight against the country, you need an F-15 … You need something more than a gun.”

This is an odd assertion for the president to make after dedicating so much time to the mutually exclusive argument that AR-15s are ultra-deadly weapons of war and useful only for combat purposes.

Either the gun is a useless hunk of carbon fiber without any value in a hypothetical armed defense against a tyrant’s military forces, or it is a war zone weapon that should be limited to the battlefield. It cannot be both at the same time.

More importantly, Biden’s argument misunderstands how any large-scale armed defense against a tyrannical government or foreign invader would unfold and underappreciates the role of federalism in ensuring a far more adequate response to such a scenario.

The Framers well understood that an armed but disorganized citizenry alone might struggle against a large standing army under the control of a tyrannical central power. This is precisely why every state has its own organized militia unit, in the form of its State Guard and National Guard units.

Any hypothetical large-scale revolt against a tyrannical federal government almost certainly would involve these well-trained and well-equipped state organized militias—including their fighter jets, tanks, anti-aircraft weapons, and special operations forces.

In other words, although the body of armed citizens (constituting the unorganized militia) creates an incredibly valuable foundation for resisting tyranny, these citizens are not the sole mechanism for it.

5. “There are certain gun dealers that are basically … not gun dealers, they’re wholesalers providing the weapons to anybody who has the money.”

Is Biden alleging that these “gun dealers” are breaking federal law, either by failing to obtain a Federal Firearms License or by failing to abide by laws requiring such licensees to conduct background checks on firearm purchasers?

If so, the president, as chief executive, should direct federal law enforcement agencies to do their jobs, investigate this alleged criminal noncompliance, and ensure these criminals are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

But if Biden is not suggesting that these gun sellers are breaking the law, it’s not clear why he seems to hold such disdain for them selling their products in compliance with state and federal regulations.

By definition, if these transactions are conducted lawfully, the prospective buyer passed a federal background and took possession of a firearm that he was permitted to own under all relevant state laws.

Does the president believe that gun stores should act unilaterally to deny law-abiding citizens the exercise of their constitutional rights? Should they not sell to “certain” customers for arbitrary reasons, despite their ability to pay?

Biden never has shown himself to be a particularly serious person when it comes to guns, gun violence, or the Second Amendment.

But this, perhaps, was his most unserious speech yet on these issues.

If Biden really were concerned with saving lives, he would have been in Philadelphia—a city wracked by three straight years with record levels of violence—denouncing rogue prosecutors and detailing his plans to combat “straw” purchasing of firearms.

Instead, Biden was in Wilkes-Barre, arguing that law-abiding citizens should be stopped from buying more of the nation’s most commonly owned rifles because, after all, what’s the point of those rifles when he could just carpet-bomb them into compliance.

At least we’ve now been duly reminded of the dangers posed by large standing armies.

Article cross-posted from Daily Signal.

]]> https://americanconservativemovement.com/the-5-most-idiotic-things-benito-biden-said-in-his-gun-grabbing-speech/feed/ 0 180547