In a war of one-upmanship, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) is leading most polls, but what about the battle to be the most anti-gun candidate? I am not sure whether Warren is in the lead on that front after Beto’s “Hell yes, we will take your AR-15 and AK-47s!),” but she is certainly in the running to trample our Rights and ability to defend ourselves. A couple months ago, Sen. Warren penned her positions on gun control. There was not much new — licensing of gun owners, waiting periods, increasing taxes on guns and ammunition, limiting firearm purchases, raising the minimum purchasing age, banning so-called “assault weapons” and full capacity magazines.
Everyone has the right to espouse their own opinion. I can completely support that. The problem arises when the person’s opinion can effectively become law with a stroke of a pen. Worse than that is when the person does not understand the basic difference between a Right enumerated in the Constitution or Bill of Rights and a privilege “granted or regulated” by the government.
Why do I write this in the case of Sen. Elizabeth Warren? Simple. According to Sen Warren:
“When I am president, I will send Congress comprehensive legislation containing our best ideas about what will work to reduce gun violence.
“It starts by ensuring that safe, responsible ownership is the standard for everyone who chooses to own a gun. We’ll do that by:
Creating a federal licensing system. States with strict licensing requirements experience lower rates of gun trafficking and violence. A license is required to drive a car, and Congress should establish a similarly straightforward federal licensing system for the purchase of any type of firearm or ammunition.
Exactly when did driving a car become a Constitutional Right? Should we also have a license to speak freely? What about a permit to exempt your home from being used to quarter military troops or the right against self-incrimination? Does Sen. Warren want to issue permits for the rights as well?
Requiring universal background checks. I’ll expand background checks via executive action — but Congress should act to permanently mandate universal background checks. And I’ll push Congress to close the so-called “Charleston loophole” that allows a sale to proceed after three days even if the background check is not complete.
There is that famous pen of the President. No need to actually enact a law through the legislative body when you can simply bypass the checks and balances system with a stroke of a pen.
And what of the Dangers of the “Charleston Loophole?” It would make gun control so easy. Simply never approve a 4473 and voila! You have an instant gun ban. At a minimum, you could choke out every gun manufacturer and retail outlet in a matter of months.
Increasing taxes on gun manufacturers. Since 1919, the federal government has imposed an excise tax on manufacturers and importers of guns and ammunition. Handguns are taxed at 10% and other guns and ammunition are taxed at 11%. These taxes raise less in revenue than the federal excise tax on cigarettes, domestic wine, or even airline tickets. It’s time for Congress to raise those rates — to 30% on guns and 50% on ammunition — both to reduce new gun and ammunition sales overall and to bring in new federal revenue that we can use for gun violence prevention and enforcement of existing gun laws.
Ah, ye olde let’s put a sin tax that is so high that we force them buckle under the weight of the tax and fill the coffers for future oppression! What about honest, every day citizens who wish nothing more than to exercise their right of self-defense? Should we price that right to a level that only the rich can afford to be safe?
Establishing a real waiting period. Waiting periods prevent impulsive gun violence, reducing gun suicides by 7–11% and gun homicides by 17%. Over the past 5 years, a national handgun waiting period would have stopped at least 4,550 gun deaths. The federal government should establish a one-week waiting period for all firearm purchases.
Reduce gun suicides… no one would ever wait or fell suicidal a few days later. Would an ill individual, bent on taking their own life, just give up the thought if they could not buy a gun today or tomorrow? Not to mention that dirty little fact that California has a 10-day waiting period and ranks about fourth nationally (per capita) for gun related suicides.
And how many people intentionally overdose on drugs? For that matter, while gun homicides have been steadily going down since the late 1980s, deaths by drug overdose have increased each year. Where are the Democrats on the War on Drugs… still arguing to legalize marijuana and opiates while handing out more needles to addicts?
Capping firearms purchases. About one out of four of firearms recovered at the scene of a crime were part of a bulk purchase. Congress should limit the number of guns that can be purchased to one per month, similar to a Virginia law that successfully reduced the likelihood of Virginia-bought guns being used in criminal activity.
Show us the proof that this reduced a single Virginia-bought gun being used in criminal activity. Where did Warren and her cronies fabricate this number from? Reread this one closely. It says nothing. What is there logic beyond less guns automatically equals less gun crime? And that has been well disproven by looking at the rate firearms were used in crime versus firearm ownership after the sunsetting of the “Assault Weapons ban” in 2004. Gun ownership, particularly ownership of the often vilified AR-15, skyrocketed and gun crime went down!
Creating a new federal anti-trafficking law. Congress should make clear that trafficking firearms or engaging in “straw purchases” — when an individual buys a gun on behalf of a prohibited purchaser — are federal crimes. This would give law enforcement new tools to crack down on gun trafficking and help keep guns out of the wrong hands.
So, let’s get this straight. Straw Purchases and gun trafficking are already illegal, but if we pass more laws making them (more illegal?) illegal, then the FEDs will magically be able to enforce the laws…? Why don’t they just make murder more illegal and prevent crime that way?
Raising the minimum age for gun purchases. I’ll extend existing age requirements to virtually all sales, but federal law is currently conflicting — for example, a person must be 21 to purchase a handgun from a federally licensed dealer, but only 18 to purchase a rifle. Congress should set the federal minimum age at 21 for all gun sales.
Why? I want Elizabeth Warren to show us the empirical evidence that raising the age limit to 21 makes anyone safer. Because denying legal adults, who no criminal or mental health records will certainly make millions of young adult less safe.
Does Warren even look at the crime statistics? Other than sensational headlines, does she realize which firearms are used most in crime? What is your prediction for the outcome of the 2020 Presidential election? Which candidate do you thing is the most anti-gun? Share your answers in the comment section.
Sign up for K-Var’s weekly newsletter and discounts here.
What about all the armed guards these people use ? They gonna take those guns away ?
Well if they raise the minimum age to 21 to buy a black rifle or any other rifle they should have the raise the minimum age to join the military to 21 as well. Oh we all know they won’t do that, they’ll exempt those actively serving . You can go over seas and kill our enemies but when you come home you can’t go hunting or shooting. The very book definition of hypocrite. But that’s what all those rich Democrat politicians are because they surrounded by armed security, Secret Service no less.
Should we also have a license to speak freely? That’s probably next on the Dimocratic agenda. Remember the words of Joe Biden during an interview with the NRA’s Jim Baker, ““And to your point, Mr. Baker, regarding the lack of prosecutions on lying on Form 4473s, we simply don’t have the time or manpower to prosecute everybody who lies on a form, that checks a wrong box, that answers a question inaccurately.” Hopefully if they ever do tread on Constitutional Rights, they won’t have the “time or manpower to prosecute” us either.
One has to realize there isn’t a liberal commie Democratic politician whether on the local state or national level in this here U.S. that doesn’t want to confiscate your guns’ arren is a progressive, which is a nicer way of saying she is a communist, just like Bernie and Beto. Calling oneself a progressive is a better sell to the voters, than trying to sell the voters that you are a socialist/communist. If one values your liberties and freedoms, vote no on any Democratic politician, unless you want to live like Socialist Europe, and have a government run like Communist China.