Image Source: Shutterstock via Gints Ivuskans
Biden-Harris Campaign Pushes for Aggressive Gun Control
The Biden-Harris reelection campaign is aggressively promoting their commitment to implement draconian gun control measures.
The Biden-Harris campaigns recent memo “Trump’s America in 2025: More Guns, More Shootings, More Deaths” is a blatant fear-mongering tactic, presenting a dystopian future under a Trump presidency characterized by rampant gun violence and chaos. Their strategy is designed to exploit public fear for political gain as a deliberate attempt to sway public opinion by painting a chaotic scenario under Trump's leadership, focusing on a dramatic increase in firearms, shootings, and fatalities.
In a direct statement, Seth Schuster, a spokesperson for the Biden campaign, stated, “A Donald Trump presidency will mean more guns in schools and more guns in the hands of criminals, all because he thinks being pro-gun makes him look tough,” Biden campaign spokesperson Seth Schuster said in a statement. “But his refusal to stand up to the gun lobby to protect our kids makes him weak and a coward. Allowing such an extreme agenda back into the White House would only result in more loss of American lives.”
Despite their advocacy for the reintroduction of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, current polls indicate that the majority of Americans reside in households with guns. Furthermore, a Department of Justice study concluded that the original ban had an insignificant impact on gun violence, suggesting that any potential renewal would likely have minimal, if not immeasurable, effects on reducing such violence. Additionally, two recent studies, one in the Journal of General Internal Medicine and another in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), examined various state gun control measures. They found no significant statistical correlation between the prohibition of assault weapons or high-capacity magazines and a reduction in homicide rates.
The Biden administration is also heavily criticized for using the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to bypass congress to unfairly target the firearm industry. Recent actions by the ATF, such as redefining firearm frames and receivers and attempting to ban pistols with attached braces, are overreaching and not supported by Congressional approval. While the Biden administration is creating a special office for gun violence prevention, they are simultaneously ignoring the ineffectiveness of "gun-free zones" and the reality that criminals often target areas where they won't face armed resistance.
They're so desperate to enact gun control that they are bypassing Congressional authority via the ATF and leaning heavily on the support of special interest groups and wealthy donors who advocate for gun control. Biden’s pledge to “finish the job” is a threat to Constitutional rights, especially the Second Amendment.
Image Source: Shutterstock via Bennian
California's Gun Owner Data Sharing Sparks Privacy Concerns
A state appeals court has decided that California can maintain its practice of supplying researchers with personal information about gun owners. This ruling overturns a decision made last year by a lower court judge, who had declared that sharing such data infringes upon privacy rights.
In 2021, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed a law enabling the Department of Justice to share the sensitive data of over 4 million gun owners with research institutions. This data, includes names, addresses, phone numbers, and criminal records. While researchers are prohibited from releasing gun owners' identities, the sharing of such data itself has been the subject of controversy.
Gun owners and organizations are citing concerns over privacy rights and the lack of adequate protective measures for sensitive information. Their concerns are underscored by a 2022 incident where the California Department of Justice ‘accidentally’ leaked the personal data of thousands of gun owners.
Comparatively, a 2012 incident in New York, saw a newspaper publishing an interactive map with names and addresses of handgun permit holders. This act raised nationwide debates about balancing the public right to information with individual privacy rights, demonstrating the potential consequences of publicly releasing such data.
There is a clear lack of specific federal protections for gun owner information. Unlike other types of sensitive personal data, which are often protected under various privacy laws, there is no clear federal mandate safeguarding the details of gun owners. This absence of explicit protection means that gun owner data is more vulnerable to misuse or accidental exposure.
The California court’s decision sets a troubling precedent for other states to follow, potentially leading to a widespread breach of privacy for gun owners across the United States.
There is a massive possibility of data misuse due to the risks associated with government entities managing and distributing personal information without robust protective measures.
Image Source: Shutterstock via Zerbor
Democrats Unveil Gun Control Bill Targeting Magazines Over 10 Rounds: Claims to Focus on Function, Not Appearance
On Thursday, Senators Angus King and Martin Heinrich, with backing from Senators Mark Kelly and Michael Bennet, introduced legislation to tighten gun control by specifically outlawing magazines over 10 rounds, as well as modifications such as bump stocks, and prohibits the production of 80% build kits. Additionally, the act proposes a voluntary buy-back scheme. They claim that this bill is focused on the functional aspects of firearms rather than their appearance.
King said in an MSNBC interview Thursday, “We’re taking a leap here and doing something that we think is absolutely necessary and will work, the fundamental is to really get at these high-capacity magazines on these guns that make them so dangerous because when you have to stop to reload, that’s when you can intervene in a shooting.”
Senator King's endorsement of the GOSAFE Act, misses key considerations. It assumes that there's a significant opportunity to intervene during the short reloading periods in a shooting, which are usually too fleeting for meaningful action. The emphasis on the technical features of guns, rather than the behaviors of shooters, overlooks the ability of determined individuals to bypass such limitations. King's confidence in the bill's impact is not firmly supported by evidence. Moreover, these measures infringe on the rights of law-abiding gun owners who use high-capacity magazines for valid reasons, unfairly impacting many for the actions of a few.