It’s not often that I agree with our current president, but it does happen. Of course, most of those deals happen when he says something by mistake, like he did on Friday.
President Joe Biden has conceded — accidentally, of course — an argument pro-Second Amendment conservatives have been making for decades: So-called “assault weapons” defend American lives.
Biden made the comments Friday at a Democratic National Committee event at the National Education Association headquarters, and while it’s not always easy to figure out what the president is saying when speaking in public, I’m pretty sure his handlers didn’t send him to ask a rhetorical question and then answer it himself like this:
“What in God’s name do you need an assault weapon for?” It’s an assault weapon designed to kill people, to defend America, to defend people.
Right. To defend the Americans. This is what firearms — and our Second Amendment protections — exist to do.
Here’s what Biden said to his grateful audience — and if there’s an audience more grateful to a leftist politician singing the same old leftist song as attendees at a DNC event at the NEA, I can’t. imagine what it could be. (It can be tough to get through – there’s a video below, if you’d rather fight this.)
“It is time to pass the ban on assault weapons. Listen, I support the second amendment. I have two shotguns… the only thing I really do is practice shooting; I haven’t done this for a long time. But here’s the thing: there is no justification for a weapon of war. None. The speed of this ball is five times that [of what] comes out of the muzzle of most guns. It can penetrate your vest. By the way, as I pointed out when I first got the law passed as a senator, in Delaware we are a big state that has guns. Lots of duck hunters, lots of hunters. And I was going there, and I literally went up and down streams campaigning and going to people who were part of it, who were part of the NRA, and others. And I was like, ‘How many, how many deer here are wearing Kevlar vests? But I’m – seriously, think about it: why the hell do you need an assault weapon? It’s an assault weapon designed to kill people, to defend America, to defend people.
So many logical errors, so little time. But let’s see if we can unpack that.
First: As readers of the Western Journal no doubt know, there is no such thing as an “assault weapon.” Or rather, every weapon is an assault weapon – weapons, by definition, are made for assault. The term is a bugaboo, designed to conjure up images of a psychopathic Rambo (the one in the book, not Stallone’s troubled hero) mowing down innocent civilians with a one-handed super-weapon with astonishing precision.
Second: There is little evidence that the 1994 federal assault weapons ban had any positive effect during the 10 years it was in effect. Admittedly, there is not enough evidence to justify encroaching on the God-given right to defend human life enshrined in the Second Amendment.
Third: Biden claims to own two shotguns, but says there’s “no justification for a weapon of war.” Apparently our Commander-in-Chief is unfamiliar with the use of shotguns in wartime (my favorite being the Mossberg 590A1). Again, all weapons are, at least potentially, weapons of war; they wouldn’t be of much use otherwise.
Fourth: “Bullet speed” is determined by the ammunition used, not the gun. A comparison of rifle ballistics (there is a fairly handy reference here) shows that a typical .223 cartridge fired by an AR-15 has a muzzle velocity roughly in line with the other cartridges on this list. Sure, a .223 cartridge is two to three (not five) times faster than a typical pistol cartridge, but that’s comparing apples to oranges. In fact, it’s not even that close – more like popcorn shrimp apples.
Fifth: According to CBS News, approximately 34.4% of Delaware residents own guns, which places Joe Biden’s home state 41st out of our 50 states in gun ownership. This, for Joe Biden, apparently constitutes a “great gun-owning state” – which should give you a pretty good idea of what the president thinks the percentage of possession of firearms should be.
Sixth: Does anyone think – I mean, really think – that Joe Biden “literally went up and down the streams campaigning” for a bill that the citizens he represented could not directly vote for and that he already supported and which, in fact, was so widely born after the Waco fiasco that 95 out of 100 senators voted for? What exactly are we supposed to believe that he was campaigning for hunters to do anything?
Seventh: If we can clear that credibility hurdle, does anyone then think that Biden actually asked those hunters how many deer wore Kevlar vests? I don’t care how many times he claims to be “serious” about the matter, that claim is decidedly not serious. How stupid does he think his constituents are?
Don’t answer that.
Bonus: Just in case that was too lucid for you, the leader of the free world went on to add the following: “But folks, look: it’s just, we just, well we’re just, it’s is completely uncontrollable. I’ve faced the RNA and I’ve beaten them before and plan to do it again.
Apparently Joe Biden thinks he’s defeated ribonucleic acid. Or was he referring to the Religion Newswriters Association? The world may never know.
You can try to understand here:
In the name of God, why do you need an assault weapon? It’s funny you put it that way, Joe.
In the name of God, we need firearms to defend those created in the image of God, whether it be ourselves or those around us. threatened by people who themselves have firearms. Or knives. Or pointed sticks.
No, we’d rather not take God given life to someone else protect others or ourselves, but sometimes it’s the best option available to us in a fallen world. Sometimes that’s the only option.
In other words, sometimes we need guns “to kill people, to defend America, to defend people,” as you so aptly put it, Mr. President.
May God grant that we never have to use them for this, and may God have mercy on us if we need them but are not prepared to do so.
This article originally appeared on The Western newspaper.