White House officials met last week with several gun violence prevention groups as they weigh how to move forward on an issue that has stymied Democrats for years.
The White House says
President Biden is “personally committed” to action on an issue he has tackled many times in the past. Less than a month into the new administration, Biden officials are meeting with advocates backing reforms that Democrats have been pushing for in Congress, like strengthening background checks.
However, Americans' views on guns may be even more divided than the last time Biden confronted the issue. A November
Gallup poll found support for stricter gun laws is at its lowest level since 2016.
But anti-gun violence groups still see momentum. Brady, Giffords, Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action met virtually on Wednesday with
Susan Rice, the head of the Domestic Policy Council, and
Cedric Richmond, a senior adviser to the president.
Officials familiar with the meeting said Rice and Richmond signaled the White House was prepared to use multiple avenues to try to curb gun violence, including executive action, though the administration has yet to roll out any specific proposals.
“I think everything is on the table. I think the White House is certainly supportive of Congress doing their part. I think there are things we’d like to see happen through legislation. ... But certainly there is a role for executive action,” said Adzi Vokhiwa, director of federal affairs at Giffords, an anti-gun violence advocacy group.
White House officials met last week with several gun violence prevention groups as they weigh how to move forward on an issue that has stymied Democrats for years.The White House says Presiden…
thehill.com
Biden making noise again about gun control...So, the argument redux is again on the table...
I have three questions, and would like people to respond without the normal talking pont answers, and bumper sticker slogans....
1. What is an "assault weapon"?
2. Why should law abiding citizens give up their weapons if they are breaking no laws with them?
3. Why are liberals so frightened by a tool owned by someone else legally?
Ok, let's have at it....
1. My neighbor, who is off work working on his truck in his driveway next door, was walking around this morning with a tire iron gripped tightly in one hand. According to my state's legal definition of assault and battery, that tire iron
could certainly be deemed an "assault" weapon, if he used it to crack someone's skull, or even tapped them with it in their noggin.
The same
could be said about a knife, an axe, a sledgehammer or even a rake. All of them
could be classified as assault weapons under specific circumstances.
For political purposes certain lawmakers and cable news talking heads would have Americans believe assaults, defined by local, state and federal legalese, can only be carried out by high capacity "black" rifles such as the AR-15 and AK-47. But some nutty person eating at Denny's could easily "assault" another patron with their spork and do plenty of physical damage.
From a military perspective an
assault operation can mean a coordinated attack on some form of enemy target, be it a bunker, machine gun position, AAA battery, base or whatever. In such a case, in the course of carrying out such an operation, what democrats love to define as an "assault" weapon or rifle is sure as hell not gonna be enough weapon on its own to carry out the assault. In addition to whatever battle rifle or carbine or submachine gun troops involved in the assault Op are packing, in order to pull it off they will need some kind of air support, ground support in the form of mortars or artillery, armored vehicles waiting in reserve, perhaps—but definitely squad machine guns, under barrel grenade launchers, NODS (night vision), smoke grenades, frag grenades, flash bangs and all kinds of other stuff not related to the infamous "black rifles" democrats so despise.
Seems to me the reason parliamentarians and other politicians around the world despise civilian version black rifles capable of accepting high capacity magazines is they fear some average Joe could storm their chambers and gun half of them down before the first one shot is dead on the floor. Frankly, that is exactly the reason black rifles/"assault" rifles should never be outlawed. In many ways they are the perfect collateral for government not abusing its citizens.
2. Law abiding gun owners should never give up their firearms. Neither should good people who don't abide every gun law to come down the pike. The sheer number of constraints put on our American Second Amendment right to keep and bear are ridiculous and often almost fully neutralize that right or restrict it to the point of it becoming nearly useless. Taxes on certain kinds of weapons or parts of weapons are also anti-American/2nd Amendment, as are waiting periods and background checks.
If a criminal or mentally unstable nutcase wants to get a gun then they will get a gun. They will steal a firearm from someone they know, get someone to buy one for them, get one from a gun show or purchase it on the street. Which is the perfect argument for good, law-abiding citizens owning high capacity, military style firearms—so that when in the event a mass shooting begins to unfold around them they can neutralize the shooter and save lives, their own and their family's included.
Same goes for home invasions. If one or more bad guy invades a law-abiding American's home, said lawful individual had better be packing some easily accessible, high capacity heat or their families could be killed, wives and daughters raped, etc.
Surrendering our ability to defend ourselves and our families and to provide game as sustenance for our families is the most important individual right imaginable.
3. Some fear what they don't understand. Others are terrified of gun culture because they only see stereotypes of rednecks dumping hundred round drums out of "assault" rifles on You Tube. More than any other reason their fear of black rifles is directly based on cable news propaganda. At heart they want armed men to defend them, both overseas from foreign enemies and at home, from criminals. But their propaganda programming forbids them from making the connection between good person and responsible gun owner. They need to be educated and shown that owning a gun is as natural as our distant ancestors carving spears and blackening their tips in cooking fires as defense against ancient predators.
Speaking to democrat/leftist politicians, the answer is obvious—why they fear civilians/citizens armed with black rifles. Citizens so armed and banded together in even small groups cannot easily be rounded up and dropped in a gulag, nor can their terrorist arm, BLM/Antifa, so easily terrify well armed citizens. But deep inside, as I mentioned above, I believe leftist politicians and all other politicians for that matter, fear black rifles in citizens' hands because of what even a lone citizen could do to them with it after they publicly act against a citizen's well being. And that is exactly how it should be . . . government fearing its citizens.