There’s No Rational Basis for Enacting Another ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban

Joe Biden

Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)

[A] 2018 study from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health found zero substantiation that “assault weapons bans” will lower “the incidence of fatal mass shootings.” Most of all, the Bloomberg-funded research “did not find an independent association between assault weapon bans and the incidence of fatal mass shootings after controlling for the effects of bans on large-capacity magazines.”

Nonetheless, it is President-elect Biden and his progressive cast of anti-American characters who aim to enforce a citizen registration of assault weapons under the National Firearms Act (levying taxation and forcing firearms not merely being transacted to be in the federal government database) — and enact a mandatory, buy-back program.

It was failed presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke, similarly, who proposed going door-to-door to collect firearms (then changed his stance after realizing the ridiculousness of the idea). On MSNBC in 2019, he said that “a visit by law enforcement to recover that firearm” would be put into law. Interestingly, this is the same Democratic Party that claims it is unfeasible to travel door-to-door deporting illegal immigrants.

While Mr. Biden is adamantly anti-Second Amendment — given his voting record — and having said in February that he would “do everything in my power in office or out of office to get those assault weapons off the street,” the political hypocrisy could not be more exhausting.

— Gabe Kaminsky in Biden’s nonsensical position on banning assault weapons


  1. avatar Hannibal says:

    Almost anything will be decided to have ‘rational basis.’ It is not a question that should be applicable to enumerated rights

  2. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

    you said “rational.”

    1. avatar Art out West says:

      There is one reason for banning firearms (and it is a rational teason).

      It makes it much easier to grind the peasant’s face into the ground.

      These folks are enemies of the American people.

      1. avatar ahem tonto says:

        The reason the socialist/democrats, RINOS and communist want to ban sporting/hunting rifles, assault weapons as they wrongly characterize them to be, is to ensure the populace does not have a chance of fending for themselves against the automatic weapons of the tyrant’s police and troops. Their hypocritical lies are pathetic. We must do it for the children. The rallying call of every twentieth and twenty-first century tyrant and despite to take away every freedom and right of their people. Then the state in every case slaughtered their helpless citizens by the hundreds of millions. It was not the lone citizen or small group of citizens killing each other, it was not a foreign enemy, it was their governments that did it for the money and absolute power. Don’t let that happen in America. We must do whatever it requires to protect and defend our constitutional rights, especially the first and second amendments, our God given inalienable rights.

  3. avatar napresto says:

    Come and take them.

  4. avatar Dude says:

    What’s the rational basis for giving 20+ million illegal immigrants amnesty while simultaneously opening the borders, doing away with ICE, and offering free health care? What could go wrong? They tell us we have to have more immigration in order to build our economy. Is that how China rocketed up to number two in the world? These people are clowns. They don’t care about you, and they don’t care about the science. They’re going to do what’s good for them.

    1. avatar Manse Jolly says:

      Don’t forget the HB-1 visa’s and other types with approx 18mil Americans out of work.

      Yet they want to “try” and take firearms?

      Better pack a lunch.

  5. avatar Eric says:

    The Columbine High School shooting in 1999 came right smack-dab in the middle of the 1994-2004 AWB. Didn’t stop two high-schoolers. Another ban won’t stop the next one. All it will do is violate the civil rights of law-abiding citizens, or make scofflaws out of us.

    1. avatar former water walker says:

      Dylan Kleebold(sp) and that other teen lunatic used a freakin’ Hi point 9mm rifle. Hardly an ASSault rifle!

      1. avatar Brodirt says:

        There’s a famous security camera picture taken of Klebold during the massacre with him brandishing his TEC-9, which was probably the number 1 bogeyman weapon for the initial assault weapon ban, in the empty cafeteria of the school. The weapon had been banned 5 years prior.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Follow the SCIENCE!

  6. avatar Shire-man says:

    There’s no rational basis for 90% of what they do.
    Hasn’t stopped them yet.
    Hell, I think the less rational their policies are the more they get off on making the rest of us live under them.

  7. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    Biden should immediately request his security detail give up their weapons that are not allowed to the plebes in DC, CA, MA, Chicago etc. Lead from the front and all that. I mean police carried 1911s and k-frames for decades right?

  8. avatar strych9 says:

    There’s an entirely rational basis for such a ban.

    You just have to understand the goals of the agenda before you see that basis.

    1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      “You just have to understand the goals of the agenda before you see that basis.”

      Yep, they have to know exactly where every firearm in this country is located, and registration accomplishes that goal…

    2. avatar Southern Cross says:

      While their isn’t a rational basis for another AWB, the Democrats will make an emotional basis for one. Watch for a mass shooting incident, probably at a junior school, within Biden’s first, and probably only, year of his term.

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        Of course there’s a rational basis for it.

        People just don’t want to admit that there is. It’s easier to say “They’re crazy!” than to admit that the Democrats have for decades looked at what happened in California after the Reagan Amnesty and decided they want that for the entire country.

        The Democrats entire plan is to turn the US into Mexico in 1934. Decades of one-party rule because no other party could win. Literally everything they do at the national level is geared towards producing this outcome.

        And, likely at this point, they now have.

  9. avatar 24and7 says:

    They clearly want civil war…the election, however it is decided, is a lose-lose…they are going to keep pushing both sides to the point of rage and frenzy…they want the guns gone to enact their tyranny…rough times are coming…dont give up your guns…even Putin warned you..

  10. avatar WI Patriot says:

    And whoever said that the left is “rational”…???

  11. avatar Ross says:

    It has never been about stopping mass shootings it is always been about stripping from we the people the most effective fighting tools we have for resisting tyranny and oppression in all it’s forms .

  12. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    Leftism is a mental disease, nothing rational about it.

  13. avatar Dude says:

    After January 20, 2021, you’ll never be able to question the narrative. For now, YouTube will just remove “problematic” content. After 1/20/21, they’ll begin issuing strikes when they have to remove something. Democrats are literally cheering this news, and even saying it isn’t going far enough. It’s just about election integrity for now, but why wouldn’t they end up doing this for any other topic, like say a new assault weapons ban?

    we will start removing any piece of content uploaded today (or anytime after) that misleads people by alleging that widespread fraud or errors changed the outcome of the 2020 U.S. Presidential election

    For example, we will remove videos claiming that a Presidential candidate won the election due to widespread software glitches or counting errors. We will begin enforcing this policy today, and will ramp up in the weeks to come.

    Despite these encouraging results, we recognize there’s always more to do. For example, while problematic misinformation represents a fraction of 1% of what’s watched on YouTube in the U.S., we know we can bring that number down even more. And some videos, while not recommended prominently on YouTube, continue to get high views, sometimes coming from other sites. We’re continuing to consider this and other new challenges as we make ongoing improvements.

  14. avatar Darkman says:

    The little less talk and a lot more action. All this Blah Blah Blah gets nothing accomplished or changed. Continual screaming on the interweb is no different than all the Libs who screamed at the sky when Trump won. The difference is the Libs will act upon their control with a united front unlike the Republicans who fight amongst themselves. We have witnessed the slow yet steady destruction of Our Right by politicians, the courts and private businesses (Interweb) for many decades. We have relied on a system that has been taken over by Judges and Bureaucrats who answer to no one and have the complete backing of Politicians on both sides of the aisle to whittle away Our Rights by a thousand little cuts and the best We can do is Scream at the Interweb. I fear the fight for Our Rights was lost a long time ago simply because to many people have decided to accept the inevitable loss of their Rights in exchange for continued life. Even one under the heel of Tyranny. As soon as the last generation who understands what true Freedom is has departed there will be no one left to carry the Flag of Liberty and that generation will forever be known for allowing Freedom to Die. If Liberty is to Die forever let it die after a good fight by Free Citizens rather than with the whimper of Subjects.
    “If a man has not discovered something that he will die for, he isn’t fit to live”.
    Martin Luther King, Jr.

    1. avatar Something for Nothing says:

      Live for something, or you’ll surely die for nothing!!!

    2. avatar anonymous4goodreason says:

      Sorry, but my take is you should make the other guy die for his beliefs! (similar to something I think Patton said)

      The problem is, there is no organization and no consensus on what constitutes sufficient government overreach to put our lives on the line. Simply put, without organization we will lose any fight and organizing is not something that can be done overnight, and without a trigger point we will never fight.

      So stop all the nonsense about a civil war or about going out in a pile of hot brass. It ain’t gonna happen.

      Cops come to your home? Don’t be so naïve! ATF hits the FFLs, pulls the 4473s, calls the power company, shuts off power. IRS uses 4473 info to freeze your assets and they wait. They already have a registry for at least 20 years of purchases. These tactics can be deployed simultaneously all over the country. Meanwhile they mail you a postcard that says “Turn in your guns now!”

      In the end you’ll have no choice and you’ll take your guns to the nearest collection center and turn them in with a whimper.

      1. avatar Ing says:

        Possibly. It’s hard to predict what independent-minded people might do when they’ve been ritually humiliated and backed into a corner like that. You and I might fold under the pressure, but how many others won’t?

  15. avatar GS650G says:

    They want us in reeducation camps unlearning our privilege. Or out of the way completely.
    Private gun ownership gets in the way of that rationale.

    1. avatar Petrushka says:

      Surely you don’t believe it is a “privilege?”

      1. avatar Cracka mofo says:

        No…. He was referring to UNLEARNING WHITE PRIVILEGE…..

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Fascinating! The only people with privilege that I know of today are black. In schools, in government, in business, and in courts.

  16. avatar Tired of the bs says:

    I won’t and they can’t make me. They can try but the outcome will be ugly for all involved. I’m positive I’m not the only one with the same outlook.

    1. avatar Ross says:

      You are not.

      1. avatar Redneck BROTHA says:

        No, Y’ALL AIN’T!

  17. avatar Jimmy Beam says:

    It’s not about mass shootings. The real reason Dems want to ban “assault weapons” is because semi-automatic rifles are a means for the people to resist the commie and totalitarian takeover of the country.

    “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”

  18. avatar Docduracoat says:

    As others have said it’s entirely rational to ban assault rifles.
    Since they are the most effective means of defense against tyranny.
    Therefore it is rational that tyrants want the citizens disarmed

  19. avatar Icabod says:

    There is a perceived need to “ Do Something!” about guns. Hence yet another law is needed.
    It doesn’t matter if this law will have any effect on the issue being discussed.
    The people supporting this action will never, ever consider breaking this law or will own guns.
    In fact, they are woefully ignorant about guns, criminals and reality.
    Passing another gun law means “something has been done” and gun violence can again be ignored.

    1. avatar PM in Fl. says:

      They can pass all of the laws they want, whether those laws can be , and are enforced is another matter.

  20. avatar jwm says:

    Why would I take a pay cut?

    Online acting? Internet porn, right?

    1. avatar Tired of the bs says:

      I think it is time to do something about guns. I’m going shooting.

      1. avatar Tired of the bs says:


  21. avatar Dude says:

    $16894 in a month @ $180 per day would require a 3+ month long month. Sounds legit.

  22. avatar Shawn says:

    There only “rationality“ is to take away the cartridge box since they have taken away the soap box, nullified the jury box and burned the ballot box.They want all opposition or possible opposition to their one party oligarchy destroyed.

  23. avatar Dale Menard says:

    They are perfectly rational, they want us disarmed. They have plans we will not like. It’s for our own good, don’t you know.

  24. avatar Mark N. says:

    Assuming I had any, my “assault weapons” are not in the street but locked away in my safe. So there.

    On another note, California does not define my AR style semiauto rifles as “assault weapons” (the latter of which must be registered and cannot be transferred in state to anyone else). If California has the strictest “AW” ban in the country, does that mena I cam safe (for now) from Uncle Joe and his minions?

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Joe plans to close your California Loophole, on day one in office (since he’s doing everything “first” and “on the first day”.) Then you can go ahead and turn all your guns in, as you clearly wish to, since you live in CA.

  25. avatar Survivordude1090 says:

    Meanwhile in an undisclosed location with a box full of 80s

    Me: “Ha ha router and drill go butter.”

  26. avatar Survivordude1090 says:

    Meanwhile in an undisclosed location with a box full of 80s

    Me: “Ha ha router and drill go burrrr.”

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Does make more sense like that!

  27. avatar Mjd says:

    Why do people keep looking for reason when it doesn’t exist on the left. The goal is an unarmed population.

  28. avatar ICE says:


    1. avatar GS650G says:

      Press that button right above the shift and control keys on your keyboard.

  29. avatar Petrushka says:

    Two words: Supreme Court
    Three words: will not comply.

  30. avatar Ttag DADDY says:

    It’s all so TIRESOME!!!!
    To read all of the internet bravado…..
    To watch this country burn….
    What is one man to do alone?
    Nobody ever does ANYTHING AROUND HERE!!!!!!


    Now go to your rooms!!!!

  31. avatar The Grey Man says:

    Looks like there is going to be another Daniel Day Lewis movie: There Will Be Blood, Part 2…….

  32. avatar Alan says:

    What was the “rational basis” for the original, so-called assault weapons ban. By the way, while I’m perfectly aware of what an “assault rifle” is, selective fire capable rifle/carbine chambered for an intermediate cartridge, I remain curious as to exactly what this often referenced, yet still undefined “assault weapon” is.

    1. avatar anonymous4goodreason says:

      Oh heck Alan, that’s an easy one! Anything that looks scary is an “Assault Weapon”. I doesn’t even have to be a gun! Dems: “It scares me! Ban it!”

      1. avatar Southern Cross says:

        Assault Rifle and Assault Gun had formal definitions. Assault Weapon is deliberately vague to allow maximum flexibility. Currently it is self-loading rifles of military appearance. But it is already being extended to lever-action rifles by those who’ve seen too many westerns.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Alan, an “assault weapon” is everything that is not an assault rifle, including a bicycle or a dump truck. Joe and the Hoe will ban *everything*, then utilize selective enforcement to jail anyone who opposes his dementia.

  33. avatar adverse6 says:

    The Party Front for Organized Crime just got elected. “Rational” means nothing.

  34. avatar anonymous4goodreason says:

    And from there it will go to those “Bolt action sniper rifles” and then ultimately, as in the UK, kitchen knives, forks, straws (can be used to fire projectiles by blowing through them), etc., etc.

    Meanwhile, the things that kill most people, cars, trucks, hammers, bats, etc. go merrily on running folks down or beating the life out of them. Gasoline and other fire accelerants are still readily available. There is no end to the stupidity!

  35. avatar anonymous4goodreason says:

    “opposes his dementia”

    opposes the party’s dementia – FIFY!

  36. avatar anonymous4goodreason says:

    Too late, They don’t need to pack the court. Barrett has a family. Watch her go from ultra-conservative to liberal virtually overnight then we’ll know and we’ll see the end of the 2A within 2 years.

    We lost the war when the NFA passed. The rest have all been battles with the GCA being the equivalent of Gettysburg. It was the turning point when it became clear that the war was over and it was just a matter of time.

    If we start something now it will be too little too late.

  37. avatar anonymous4goodreason says:

    TTAG, when I reply to someone why do my comments always go to the bottom of the page rather than reply to the comment where I clicked “Reply”?

  38. avatar anonymous4goodreason says:

    They can wait you out. What are you going to do? There’s no one there for you to shoot. Suicide is about all you’ve got or maybe you go shoot up a bunch of innocent folks? Those won’t do any good and would just make their case that we’re a bunch of nut jobs. Nope, nothing you can do. Eventually you will capitulate unless you really are a nut job. (I don’t me “you” personally here, it’s the corporate “you” meaning any of us).

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email