While joking about how he’s not running to become Pope, Joe Biden decided to lecture tv viewers and newspaper readers about how banning commonly owned firearms isn’t a violation of the Second Amendment. I say he’s lecturing at media consumers rather than speaking to the public because Joe Biden wouldn’t release details of the event location or time to the public, nor were mere citizens allowed to attend the so-called roundtable on gun control.
One tactic the Vice President is using is to redefine the understanding of the Second Amendment. See, there’s his “legitimate right to bear arms” which doesn’t include semi-automatic rifles or common handguns with 15 or 17 round magazines. Then there’s the “illegitimate right to bear arms” that isn’t worth mentioning because, well, those people who oppose the White House are simply illegitimate.
But Biden isn’t the only one speaking out. Likely gubernatorial candidate Rep. Allyson Schwartz is in attendance and joining the push for a gun ban. Rep. Bob Brady, head of the Philadelphia Democratic Party, highlighted how proud he is of his F rating from NRA. Rep. Chaka Fattah says we can’t allow people to own semi-automatic rifles at all.
I find it telling that while Joe Biden banned citizens from attending or asking questions, the White House reached out to an anti-gun advocate to attend so she could play social hour with political reporters.
Not running for Pope? Tasteless, a little?
Politically, for the anti-gunners to hold a dog-and-pony show in Philadelphia, or anywhere in Pennsylvania, seems like a tactical mistake. In a gun-owning state, it is like waving a red flag in front of the people they should prefer to stay asleep, and it reminds all of us who our bad guys are, in case we’d forgotten.
I also thought the Pope crack was tasteless, especially for an area that seems to have a lot of Catholics. Then again, since it’s Joe Biden, maybe we should be happy that he stopped at one inappropriate crack mocking the religious leader.
I’d guess Biden figured he was insulated from his remark, by being Catholic himself; and in theory, any practicing Catholic could become Pope. However, I think it was still tasteless, and the only thing that would have made it more so would have been if the Pope had died, rather than just announcing his resignation.
What’s a legitimate gun? I dare say if the VP got a look at my F-Class R700 in its JAE stock and AICS metal, he’d think he was looking at a “weapon of war”. Competition rifle but for F/TR, so it is “tactical” in appearance and firing a common military caliber.
Or the custom bolt-action AR-15 rifle I’m building for the same competition? Neither would be banned as neither meet the arbitrary defintions being proposed despite both looking scary as hell to somone unfmailiar with firearms.
These are sporting guns. But heaven forbid I snap a DM service rifle upper on the F/TR lower. Now I have a deadly, “weapon of war”, spray-firing, hip-hugging, child murdering, unicorn slaughtering, puppy maiming machine gun of ultimate death.
Still punching paper.
I’d wish they’d be honest and just say “We want ALL your guns!”.
‘I’d wish they’d be honest and just say “We want ALL your guns!‒
In non-RKBA venues I see people of liberal leanings commenting all the time, “Obama has said he doesn’t want to ban all guns.” Given that they are civilians, I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt that they believe their own bullshit.
However, I point out that Hitler only wanted to annex the Sudetenland. He said so. Chamberlain came home waving a piece of paper, that said he said it. He said he didn’t want any more territory. For instance, he didn’t want Poland.
I know I thereby forfeit, according to Godwin’s Rule, but the analogy seems apt, to me.