THIS ARTICLE STOLEN FROM WELOVETRUMP.COM. Your IP address has been recorded and a DMCA claim has been filed based on your actions. You should immediately cease and desist copying articles from WeLoveTrump.com
The Democrats vying for 2020 nomination to go head-to-head against Trump on the debate stage attended a gun safety forum Wednesday in Les Vegas, where they proceeded to see who could out-do the others the most in corroding American’s Second Amendment rights.
And, Joe Biden really gave it his best shot!
Biden proposed not only setting up a national gun registry – which would let the government know exactly where every gun in the nation is and who owns it and also make confiscation of guns much easier – but a federal registry for individual magazines as well!
Take a look at the breaking news of Biden’s ammunition registry proposal that hit Twitter:
Bretibart has more to say on Biden's plan to require ammunition magazine registration:
Earlier in the day, Breitbart News reported Biden’s push to register AR-15s then, during the forum, he suggested registration of ammunition magazines as well.
Biden talked of banning the sale and manufacture of “assault weapons.” He then discussed his plan for “assault weapons” that are already in circulation, saying, “Under the Firearms Act of 1934 there was a situation where, when they outlawed machine guns, they said, ‘Okay, you can continue to have the machine gun if you own it, but guess what? You’ve got to let us know you have one.’”
He then said, “I want that for all ‘assault weapons.’ I want that for magazines.”
The Daily Caller also said:
It’s worth noting he released his plan just one day before Democratic candidates were scheduled to promote their various gun control notions in front of an approving audience on the national stage that’s being sponsored by – surprise, surprise – the gun control groups Giffords and March for Our Lives. It’s also worth noting the plan doesn’t actually address crime but targets law-abiding gun owners.
The former vice president would reinstate the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban but would take it a step further. He’s tiptoeing around the “confiscation” debate and instead proposing a national voluntary “buyback” of the existing 16 million lawfully and privately-owned AR-15 modern sporting rifles.
Don’t worry if you won’t want to use your tax dollars to fund a buyback for a firearm for which you’ve already paid – and paid taxes on. Biden says he’s got a plan for that too. He’ll just need you to register it under the authority of the National Firearms Act. You’ll just need to submit fingerprints and registration with the ATF and pay the tax stamp fee. It’s simple, just like the way automatic firearms, short-barreled rifles and suppressors are regulated now. Never mind the paperwork takes an average of nine months.
Biden says he’d do this since NFA-regulated items are rarely used in crimes. But, just this week the FBI’s own crime statistics showed again that just two percent of murders are committed with rifles, far less than the share committed with knives (11 percent) or hands and feet (5 percent).
Ban New MSRs, Magazines
Biden will let you keep your rifle but won’t let you choose to buy a new one. He wants to reinstate the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, so no new modern sporting rifle could be sold. And say goodbye to standard capacity magazines. Those would go too, because, as Biden believes, gun owners must love ducks more than kids.
“Federal law prevents hunters from hunting migratory game birds with more than three shells in their shotguns. That means our federal law does more to protect ducks than children.”
The sickening comparison tries to conflate hunting with self-protection. It also indicates that the value of a gun owner’s life in the Biden campaign’s view is just three rounds.
Biden’s idea of respect for Second Amendment rights is to curb it, as in a federal one-gun-a-month policy. That’s not all. He’s calling for the so-called universal background check to be enforced and closing the so-called Charleston Loophole – that would extend waiting periods to buy a gun to 10 business days. Given weekends, that denies a law-abiding American the right to possess a firearm for more than two weeks. Tens of millions of checks are completed annually, with 91 percent immediately resolved. Just nine percent are delayed. Of that nine percent, 88 percent are resolved in three days and 94 percent are resolved in 10. Just two percent of those going to delayed status are unresolved.
Biden wants to cut gun rights to those whom the Social Security Administration who require a fiduciary – or someone to help manage their financial affairs. It was a policy of the Obama administration that allowed bureaucrats to decide if an individual should be allowed their Second Amendment rights instead of a hearing in front of a judge. President Donald Trump ended it. Biden wants it back.
Take It Off Line
Biden also wants to end online sales of firearms, ammunition and build kits. He ignores that all firearms listed for sale online must be completed with a face-to-face background check at a federal regulated firearms licensed retailer. Ordering ammunition on the web would be a thing of the past, severely interrupting interstate commerce.
An ammunition magazine registry wasn't the only far-left proposal by Biden at the gun forum.
The Washington Post has more on Biden's plan for gun control if elected president:
Joe Biden’s campaign on Wednesday outlined a proposal to put new restrictions on gun sales and combat gun violence, packaging a series of ideas that he has spoken about on the campaign trail over the past several months.
Biden’s 11-page plan includes support for universal background checks and reinstating the assault weapons ban, which have widespread support from the Democratic presidential field.
His proposal calls for a voluntary buyback program of assault weapons, stopping short of candidates and advocates who are calling for a mandatory gun buyback.
His campaign would not specify how much he would propose the government offer for the military-style guns, or how many people they anticipate would voluntarily give up their firearms. Under Biden’s proposal, a gun owner would either have to sell the weapon to the government or register it.
Biden also proposes requiring new guns to include biometric technology that enables a gun to be used only by those authorized to do so, an idea he talks about frequently on the campaign trail.
“Why is it any violation of the First Amendment at all to say, from this moment on, every weapon we sold, every gun we sold in America, has to have your biometric marker on it?” Biden told reporters in August. “You can still buy a gun if you pass a background check. You go out there and you can own it, you can use it.”
Biden’s plan comes as the campaign attempts to shift focus to guns this week — as it focused onhealth care last week — amid a rapidly shifting political dynamic that has altered the presidential campaign. Biden has become a central character in the impeachment inquiry that resulted from President Trump’s decision to ask the Ukrainian president to investigate unsubstantiated allegations about Biden and his son Hunter.
The National Review (via MSN), however, poked some holes in Biden's Second Amendment denying gun proposals:
This morning, Democratic presidential front-runner Joe Biden unveiled his “Plan to End Our Gun Violence Epidemic,” and it’s a mess. It contains provisions that would bankrupt gun manufacturers for the crime of selling fully functional, legal firearms. It would ban the sale of the most popular rifles in America and the standard-capacity magazines made for America’s most commonly used handguns. Oh, and to incentivize a voluntary buyback of existing “assault weapons,” it would grant the owners of such weapons a choice: sell your rifle to the government or join a firearms registry.
Put simply, Biden’s plan would leave law-abiding citizens outgunned in their own homes by predatory criminals, and place virtually every gun-maker at risk of financial ruin. This is what Democratic “moderation” looks like?
Biden begins his plan by pledging to repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, a 2005 law that was designed to shield gun-makers from liability for “harm solely caused by the criminal or unlawful misuse of firearm products or ammunition products by others when the product functioned as designed and intended.” This is a solid basic principle. If a terrorist uses an SUV in a ramming attack or puts a bomb in a van, it’s not the automaker’s fault. Why should it be the gun-maker’s fault if an evil man uses a lawful product unlawfully?
It shouldn’t be. Yet there are all too many Americans (and American judges, especially in state courts) who view the manufacture and sale of guns as morally suspect, and of so-called assault weapons as inherently illegitimate. The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act stands as a firewall against activist litigation designed to put gun companies out of business. Biden would destroy that firewall.
What of his proposed assault-weapons ban? Let’s be clear — what the Biden plan calls “weapons of war” are not the weapons that our soldiers carry into combat. Instead, AR-style rifles are among the most popular civilian firearms in the United States. They are extraordinarily useful for self-defense, and they’re rarely used to commit crimes. (Indeed, rifles more broadly are used to kill fewer people than blunt objects or hands and feet.) Yes, they have been used in several high-profile mass killings, but there’s no meaningful evidence indicating that banning them would decrease mass shootings. In fact, they’ve been used in mass shootings in states that already ban them.
Taken together, Biden’s bans on the sales of assault weapons and the magazines that come standard with millions of popular rifles and handguns would create the perverse result of placing law-abiding Americans at a distinct disadvantage in defending themselves from criminals. With hundreds of millions of magazines already in circulation, the foreseeable threat comes from a criminal armed with just such a magazine. That’s one reason why police officers carry equivalent weapons. It’s one reason why bans on standard-capacity magazines tend to contain exceptions for law-enforcement officers. But if police can protect themselves from common domestic threats, why can’t my family?