How can any gun owner take Joe Biden seriously?
Over the years, not only has Biden told folks that ARs are “harder to use” and “harder to aim” than shotguns, but he has also advised homeowners who feel threatened by a potential invader to empty their double-barreled shotgun into the air, “fire two blasts outside the house,” and, more recently, told police to shoot knife-wielding attackers “in the leg” as opposed to center mass.
Now, we have yet another foot-in-mouth situation. About a month ago Biden did a video interview for WIRED in which he claimed that part of the reason why one should support a ban on “assault weapons” is because cannons were outlawed during the Revolutionary War.
Gun-related content begins around the 8-minute mark.
“They [“assault weapons”] have no rationale for being owned by individuals on the street,” Biden said. “They should be outlawed. … From the very beginning, you weren’t allowed to have certain weapons. You weren’t allowed to own a cannon during the Revolutionary War as an individual.”
That’s false! Biden is talking out of his behind. As Politifact pointed out:
- The Biden campaign didn’t offer evidence to support his statement, and historians of the period are dubious laws against private cannon ownership existed.
- There are documented instances of privateers, or privately owned vessels that legally attacked enemy ships during wartime, setting sail with cannons during the period.
Instead of admitting that the former vice president made a mistake (or worse, lied), his handlers told the fact-checkers, “The vice president’s point is that to help end the tragic epidemic of mass shootings that is taking so many American lives, we need to ban weapons of war from our streets.”
Of course, their statement is problematic, too. Mass shootings are not on the rise and not more common than they used to be. There is no “epidemic.” Additionally, schools are safer today than they were in the early ’90s, as GunsAmerica previously reported.
And if we actually wanted to take weapons of war of the streets, we wouldn’t be laying a finger on ARs, rather we’d be confiscating surplus military rifles, like M1 Garands and M1 Carbines, which are in the hands of collectors and hobbyists around the country. Not exactly the sort of people responsible for shooting up schools or drug houses in the inner city.
What Biden and his camp don’t seem to realize is an AR is not a “weapon of war” but the civilian version of its military counterpart, the select-fire M4 rifle. The truth is, ARs are rarely used in crime and even if they were outlawed, the ban would not stop mass shooters — as a recent Bloomberg-funded study even acknowledged!!!
What all this points to is, again, Biden has no idea what he’s talking about. But honestly, saying that feels like punching down. As is the case with every interview the man does, it’s clear that he is suffering from some form of cognitive impairment.
Did anyone else notice that he called his sister (and not his wife) “the love of his life?” Bizarre, right? I always thought that designation was reserved for one’s soulmate, a person someone is romantically involved with, the person one loves, body and soul, more than any other. Maybe I’m wrong about that, though.
In any case, I can’t imagine Biden being the next president of the United States. If he is elected in November, the 2A is in trouble.