In a world of growing uncertainty, there’s one thing you can count on: Nearly every time President Joe Biden (D) gets in front of a camera or audience, he’s going to tell some falsehoods about guns, gun laws, and gun owners.
Last April, Biden discussed his proposed “assault weapon” and “high-capacity” magazine ban during a joint session of Congress, claiming, “We’ve done it before, and it worked.” Biden is, of course, referring to the Clinton gun ban of the 1990s that banned many semi-automatic firearms by categorizing them according to cosmetic features. That ban also forbid the sale of magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammo.
His statement that the ban “worked” is, indeed, a lie. A congressionally mandated study of the federal “assault-weapon ban” of 1994 to 2004 found that the ban had no impact on crime. It concluded: “Should it be renewed, the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best.” Additionally, research conducted later by the Rand Corporation found no conclusive evidence that banning so-called “assault weapons” or “large-capacity” magazines had an effect on either mass-murder events or violent crime.
Gunmakers Have Blanket Immunity From Lawsuits
Biden has repeatedly said that gunmakers can’t be sued; he even went so far in a recent gun-control speech to say, “If I get one thing on my list—the Lord came down and said, ‘Joe, you get one of these’—give me that one. Because I tell you what, there would be a ‘come to the Lord’ moment these folks would have real quickly. But they’re not. They’re not. They’re exempt.”
What Biden is talking about is repealing the Protection of Lawful Commerce In Arms Act (PLCAA), which he falsely says gives gun makers blanket immunity from being sued. Passed in 2005 with bipartisan support, the law actually was reaction to gun haters who were attempting to run gun makers out of business with frivolous lawsuits that forced manufacturers to spend millions of dollars to fight the suits. In truth, the PLCAA simply keeps gunmakers and sellers from being sued for the criminal misuse of their safe, lawfully made products.
Closing the “Charleston Loophole” Would Save Lives
“The second thing is, close what is known as the ‘Charleston loophole,’” Biden said during a White House gun-control speech. “There’s a process. If [it] wasn’t done in three days, according to [the] Charleston loophole, you get to buy the gun.”
In truth, what Biden and other gun-ban proponents call the “Charleston loophole” is a safeguard built into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) that says if the FBI does not determine that an individual is statutorily prohibited from purchasing a firearm through the “instant” background check in three working days, the firearm licensee may proceed with the sale. That so-called “loophole” is the only thing standing between the ability to purchase a gun and an FBI being able to delay any and all guns sales indefinitely.
Besides, the Charleston church murderer first attempted to buy his gun on April 11 of that year, but was delayed due to a prior arrest for drug possession. The gun was actually transferred to him on April 16—five days after his initial attempt to purchase it. The crime he later committed didn’t occur until June 17, more than two months after he first tried to buy the firearm. During that time, the FBI investigation was not impeded because the firearm was transferred, and the person who purchased the firearm and later committed the crime was not prohibited from purchasing a firearm due to the earlier drug arrest.
You Don’t Need 100 Rounds to Hunt Deer
In a recent rant about “high-capacity magazines that hold 100 rounds that can be fired in seconds,” Biden ignorantly quipped, “Talk to most responsible gun owners, most hunters—they’ll tell you there’s no possible justification for having 100 rounds—100 bullets—in a weapon.” While this is, of course, not an outright lie, the way Biden repeatedly uses it is both disingenuous and misleading.
First, the proposal the president and other gun-ban proponents are pushing is a law to outlaw magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, not 100. Furthermore, the Second Amendment protects the rights of all law-abiding gun owners, irrespective of whether or not they own those firearms for hunting. Biden’s constant blabbering about 100-round magazines and hunters is just a way to exaggerate and obfuscate the situation, and take away attention from the fact that the current proposal would ban magazines that come standard with the majority of semi-auto rifles and handguns sold today—even sub-compact handguns popular for concealed carry.
His Proposals Don’t Infringe on the Second Amendment
During a recent speech, Biden said, “Nothing—nothing I’m about to recommend in any way impinges on the Second Amendment. They’re phony, arguments suggesting that these are Second Amendment rights at stake from what we’re talking about.”
This might be Biden’s biggest lie of all. Of course, nearly every proposal Biden supports would infringe on the right to keep and bear arms—exactly what the Second Amendment protects American citizens against. Biden actually knows that his proposals violate the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding American gun owners. That’s why he also strongly favors changing the make-up of the U.S. Supreme court by adding a number of justices to the current mix that would support rulings based on political ideology, rather than constitutionality. By him making such appointments, it would ensure the high court ruled against the Second Amendment for the next generation.