After two high profile mass shootings in a week, the BidenHarris White House is under intense pressure from their backers in the Civilian Disarmament Industrial Complex as well as their cheerleaders in the media to do something…anything…to further impinge on Americans’ right to keep and bear arms. Not wanting to let the current “crisis” pass without taking full advantage of the waning news cycle, the administration is now floating ideas for executive actions with their allies in the press and on Capitol Hill.
The gun control industry has been mightily frustrated so far by the realities of the legislative process. Despite Democrats’ thin margin of control in the House, all Speaker Nancy Pelosi needed to ram through two background check-related “reform” bills — a ban on private gun sales and a “fix” of the non-existent so-called Charleston loophole — was a simple majority of her compliant foot soldiers.
But despite the fervent wishes of Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, there’s no prospect of getting rid of the Senate filibuster any time soon. Not given the expressed opposition of both Arizona’s Kyrsten Sinema and West Virginia’s Joe Manchin.
That’s thrown cold water all over the far left’s most dearly held legislative dreams since any legislation — including background checks, an “assault weapons” ban, or “high capacity” magazine limits — would need to attract at least 10 Republican votes to clear the Senate and wind up on a confused President’s desk where someone will put a pen in his hand and promise him a bowl of pudding and a nice nap if he’ll sign it.
As a result, following Atlanta and Boulder, the powers that be in the White House — whoever that is — have been whispering to their pliant stenographers at the New York Times that they’re thinking about three potential executive actions.
Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, said that legislation was necessary to make permanent changes. But she also suggested that the executive actions under consideration could be a realistic starting place.
“There’s lots of leverage you can take, obviously, as president and vice president,” she said.
For now, administration officials have been reaching out to Democrats in the Senate to consult with them about three executive actions. One would classify as firearms so-called ghost guns — kits that allow a gun to be assembled from pieces. Another would fund community violence intervention programs, and the third would strengthen the background checks system, according to congressional aides familiar with the conversations.
Aware that any executive actions on guns will face legal challenges, the White House Counsel’s Office has also been vetting those actions to make sure they can withstand judicial review, officials said.
Ordering the ATF to do to 80% firearm kits what they did to bump stocks has been a goal of the gun control industry ever since California’s dearly departed Kevin de Leon raised a couple of scary-looking firearms in front of a group of reporters back in 2014 and coined the term “ghost gun.”
Funding “community violence intervention programs” probably wouldn’t affect gun sales or gun owners in any significant way. That’s merely a sop to groups the Democrats see as their key urban constituencies. Biden would be able to announce that he’s fully in support of throwing still more taxpayer dollars at failed “violence interruptor” programs and the like and then allow the media to pretend he’s actually accomplished something.
As for “strengthening” the background check system, exactly what that would entail isn’t clear. Do Biden’s handlers think they can unilaterally ban private gun sales as H.R. 8 would do? Or extend the three-day limit the FBI has to complete a background check to 10 days as H.R. 1446 would do?
Surely the administration isn’t deluded enough to think that any of these proposed actions would have prevented either the Atlanta or the Boulder shootings. Are they?
Would community violence intervention programs have kept a pathetic incel from taking his sexual frustrations out on three massage parlors he frequented? Would a “ghost gun” ban or extending the FBI’s background check window have prevented a violent, possibly mentally ill Syrian immigrant from shooting up a grocery store?
No. No, they wouldn’t. Literally no one thinks so.
But that’s not the point of any of this. The White House is busy making political calculations, surveying the landscape to see how much political and media
cover support they can expect if they make some or all of these moves with the stroke of an executive pen.
They know full well that banning the sale of 80% gun kits and parts or unilaterally tinkering with the current laws surrounding background checks would draw immediate court challenges, but that’s another problem for another day. In the mean time, the mysterious powers that be in the Executive Branch would be able to draft a speech, load it into the TelePrompter and prop up President Bidenharris before the cameras long enough to read it and announce that, finally, they’ve done something about “gun violence” in the U.S.
That would immediately be followed by a raft of supportive commentary, earnest nodding, and praise on cable news networks and in the pages of the state newspapers around the country. Kris Brown, John Feinblatt, Peter Ambler and Shannon Watts would also immediately publish supportive tweets and issue victorious press releases announcing that after four years of failure, we now have a Commander in Chief who’s willing to act.