WATCH: Gaffe Machine Joe Proposing A Ban On All Magazines That Hold ‘Multiple Bullets’

Written by Wes Walker on September 4, 2019

Is he really this dumb, or is this a cry for help from a guy who knows he’s in over his head?

The mask has been torn off. Leftists no longer pretend to support Second Amendment rights. The only thing they’re not sure about is how exactly they should go about limiting them.

Joe Biden, after accusing all Republicans who don’t join them in the quest for stripping Americans of the one functional check citizens have against a government hellbent on becoming tyrannical as being somehow beholden to gun manufacturers and the NRA.

And Biden (who doesn’t even know where he is or what he’s doing half of the time) has a grand plan. He’s going to make big changes.

Trending: BOOM! Candace Owens SMOKES Leftists Who Try To ‘Whitesplain’ RACISM To Her(VIDEO)

Just like Beto who freely admitted as much over the weekend, Biden is coming for your guns.

The idea that we don’t have elimination of assault-type weapons, and magazines that can hold multiple bullets in them is absolutely mindless. It is no violation of the Second Amendment, and it’s just a bow to the special interest groups and the gun manufacturers and the NRA. It’s gotta stop.

There is SO much wrong in that 20-second clip it’s astonishing he could pack so much ignorance into so few words.

Ok. Magazines, by definition, hold multiple rounds. That’s kinda their job. They were a step forward from, say, muskets and bolt-action rifles.

Handguns hold multiple rounds. And although revolvers don’t use magazines, they hold multiple rounds as well. And ‘assault-type’ weapons are a phrase that defies all definition.

The obvious problem with his plan is that he’s opposed to almost all gun ownership. But there is no possible way to roll his ‘plan’ into reality. If we were to take his statement at face value, it would require the forcible confiscation of almost every gun out there.

And how, exactly is he going to accomplish that?

What is he REALLY saying here? That he’s trying to roll back technology to a bygone era where guns didn’t fire as fast? And how exactly would he take all of these guns away from the private citizens, anyway?

What he is ultimately saying is that he, like most Democrats, trusts a big, unchecked government more than he trusts a population of armed citizens.

Of course he does. He IS the government. But attitudes like HIS are exactly the REASON we have ZERO intention of relinquishing our Second Amendment.

The problem isn’t gun ownership. They have been around a long time, without causing any serious problems.

In fact, if it weren’t for private gun ownership, 1776 would have had a much different outcome, and nobody would be running for President.

First, let’s put the problem in perspective:

Contrary to the Left’s popular narrative, America is not even leading the Industrialized West in ‘mass public shootings’.

We didn’t even crack the top 10 in that sample size. Not even if we’re counting shootings in violent Democratic cities like Chicago.

And THAT is the elephant in the room.

Democrats are dealing with the wrong end of the ‘gun violence’ problem. It’s like that scene out of The Dark Knight where the Joker is ‘flipping’ Two-Face over to the dark side.

If 40 people get shot one weekend in Chicago, nobody in the Press bats an eye. It’s almost like they are considered ‘acceptable losses’. If someone shoots up a Christmas Party or a Gay Night Club in the name of specific extremist Islamic principles, the story is not a ‘call to action’ against a particular group or threat.

If leaders were putting forward reasonable plans to get ILLEGAL guns out of the hands of known criminals, maybe we’d take an interest in what they are saying. Maybe if we saw them trying to address the gaps of current laws on the books failing to screen out known threats, we’d be interested in what they have to say.

But addressing the problem of criminal gun owners is NOT the focus here, is it?

They have precious little to say about gangland shootings — which mostly involve handguns, anyway — but let someone who fits a narrative they can co-opt in a political power grab go on a killing spree, and suddenly… we ‘must act’! Rights must be amended and infringed.

No.

They must not. The reason is simple.

The very people so hellbent on gaining power are the ones that the Second Amendment is intended to deter and even intimidate into curbing any temptations of tyranny.

Just ask the people of Venezuela if they regret giving up their guns ‘for the greater good’ in June of 2012?

Would they like to have them back, now that they are being literally starved to death by a tyrant who refuses to relinquish power he has no lawful claim to?

What about the Jewish civilians living in the Warsaw Ghettos in World War II. Would guns have helped them?

The people of Hong Kong are Singing the Star-Spangled Banner, waving Old glory, and painting signs in support of the Second Amendment… for the precise reason that freedom, and the tools we as citizens have to defend it, (including free speech and the right to bear arms) are envied around the world.

It’s easy to say ‘that would never happen here’. Not in America!

Oh really? Germany was once the jewel of civilization, philosophy and modern thought. They the 20th Century happened. France, too, before the Reign Of Terror, was an ‘advanced’ society.

Look at the news even here in America.

We’ve seen abuses of power in Spygate, in the CIA hacking the Senate’s computers, and in the Weaponization of the IRS against citizens and groups.

And would be Presidents are calling for the establishment of the societal model that caused Venezuela’s collapse. Nationalizing entire industries, confiscatory tax rates… with the willing support of the credulous masses.

It could ‘never’ happen here… right?

Are you willing to bet your life on that? How about your kids’ lives?

We’ve all seen the dishonest games the left have played with the power they’re entrusted with, they’re obviously unworthy of that trust.

But what about 2020? Could a moral person pull a lever for Trump with their integrity intact? Would Jesus himself vote for Trump? We’re glad you asked. There’s a brand new book that covers precisely that question:

“Would Jesus Vote For Trump?” by Doug Giles and Brandon Vallorani.

Would Jesus ever choose someone, with a less than stellar past, to be a leader? Would Jesus be cool with how Trump blasts CNN, The Left, and his feckless ‘compadres’ on The Right? What about Health Care? Would the Great Physician give Trump’s opposition to ObamaCare the ‘two thumbs up?’ Find out in this BEST-SELLER!

Get it HERE today.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.