In the spirit of “never let a crisis go to waste,” President Joe Biden suggested banning all semi-automatic firearms.

While on Thanksgiving trip, Biden made comments on the recent shootings at a gay nightclub in Colorado, and a Walmart in Virginia.

Biden stated, “I’m sick and tired of these shootings. We should have much stricter gun laws.” He added, “The idea we still allow semiautomatic weapons to be purchased is sick. It’s just sick. It has no, no social redeeming value. Zero. None. Not a single, solitary rationale for it except profit for the gun manufacturers.”

While he later responded to a question by saying, “I’m going to try to get rid of assault weapons,” the blanket demonization of all semi-automatic firearms represents some of, if the not the most, radical gun control platforms in decades. 

RELATED: EPA to Spend $13 Billion on ‘Environmental Justice’ and Climate

Americans Divided On Gun Laws

According to a survey done for the Associated Press by NORC at the University of Chicago, as might be expected, Americans’ views on more gun laws fall along party lines.

Problems arise from general ignorance and politically-useful definitions. 

The oft-heard call for an “assault weapons” ban, for example, usually means exclusively civilian semi-automatic rifles that have cosmetic – not functional – modifications. 

You’ll often see knowledgable gun owners easily fool gun controllers by showing images of an AR-15 next to a Mini-14, to use but one example. The former being universally recognized by gun controllers as an “assault rifle” while the latter is not. Yet both fire 5.56 ammunition and are semi-automatic.

Automatic weapons, on the other hand, are heavily regulated by the ATF and outrageously expensive.

Semi-automatic pistols, rifles, and shotguns are all extremely popular. So to hear Biden proclaim that it’s “sick” that anyone can buy a semi-automatic, he’s not just talking about the “scary” AR-15. 

He’s also talking about Granny Mae’s little .380 in her purse. He’s also talking about Little Johnny’s 28 gauge shotgun. In other words, nearly everything designed after the 20th Century.

RELATED: Democrats Never Admit Defeat

Double Whammy

Since escaping huge losses in the House and Senate earlier this month, and on the heels of recent mass shootings, Democrats may see a back door entrance to more gun control.

And in addition, if Senate Democrats were on board with Murphy’s idea, it could also be a polite way of bringing back another Democrat favorite, defunding the police.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT). appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday. He said to host Dana Bash:

What we learned in Colorado is that the county in which the shooting happened is a so-called 2nd Amendment sanctuary state. The majority of counties in this country have declared they’re not going to enforce state and federal gun laws. They have decided that they are going to essentially refuse to implement laws that are on the books. That is a growing problem in this country and I think we’re going to have to have a conversation about that in the United States Senate. Do we want to continue to supply funding to law enforcement in counties that refuse to implement state and federal gun laws?”

Bash then bizarrely teed up Murphy with this question: “Do you want to withhold money from law enforcement?” Why would she ask that?

At any rate, Murphy replied:

“I think we have to have a conversation about whether we can continue to fund law enforcement in states where they are refusing to implement these gun laws. I’ll talk to my colleagues about what our approach should be to this problem. But 60% of counties in this country are refusing to implement the nation’s gun laws. We’ve got to do something about that.”

Second Amendment-supporting Americans may just agree with Murphy’s proposal.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”