U.S.A. –-(Ammoland.com)- Vice President Joe Biden is known as a gaffe machine. He regularly produces headline inducing gaffes. How much of this is simply the changing media landscape is uncertain. It may be many Progressive politicians produced copious gaffes, but they were simply not reported to the American people.
John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson's industrial level womanizing and promiscuity were well known in Washington, D.C. The American public was kept in the dark for decades.
While saying he supports the Second Amendment, Biden called the absolutist arguments of some gun-rights supporters “bizarre.” Noting people can’t own machine guns or bazookas, Biden said, “Why should we allow people to have military-style weapons including pistols with 9-mm bullets and can hold 10 or more rounds?”
Military-style pistols 9mm and more, which hold 10 or more rounds, and which fire a shot with every pull of the trigger, have been available for over 160 years. The Chaineux double-action revolver was patented in 1853; the LeMat revolver held 9 rounds of .42 caliber (10.5mm), and 1 of 20 gauge (15mm), and was used in the Civil War. The C96 Mauser was chambered in 9mm in 1916. They are not a new phenomenon, and for most of that period were essentially unregulated, in much of Europe until after WWI, in the United States to the present day.
They were commonly available in England until after WWI. In England, crime was much lower and murder far less common when those firearms were easily available, including homicide with firearms and mass murder. It is clear 9mm pistols, which hold 10 rounds or more, are not a cause of crime and mass murder, or, at a minimum, not a significant cause.
There are several answers to Biden's question: Why allow them?
- Because not allowing them is a violation of the Constitution and the rule of law.
- Because not allowing them violates the principle that the federal government is limited in what it may do, under the 9th and 10th Amendments.
- Because not allowing them is bad policy based on emotional simplicities.
- Because not allowing them is likely to invite a backlash ranging from civil disobedience to black markets, to civil war, any one of which is far worse than the problems mentioned.
- Because there is no demonstrable harm associated with their legal possession and use, which is not offset by a greater good.
Far-left Democrat Vice President Biden continues:
He called the anxiety among young people over being shot in school these days “overwhelming” and “not just in tough neighborhoods but in great neighborhoods like this.”
Yes, the anxiety level is high, not because of the existence and common availability of such pistols; rather because of the hype and hysteria promulgated by the Progressive media. In the media's unhinged desire to ban citizen ownership of common guns, there is much emotion, but little logic. There is much evidence the media hype is far more responsible for the current uptick in mass killing at schools, than the availability of guns.
Biden continues his irrational tirade, apparently believing the Progressive media will cover for his silliness, as it has for decades.
Mentioning his own shotgun ownership, Biden talked about Delaware goose-hunting restrictions that limit hunters to three shotgun shells. “We protect geese from Canada more than we do people,” he said.
Nationwide restrictions on shotgun hunting magazines were put in place, nationally, in 1937. They were a response to declining populations of waterfowl, both ducks and geese. The international treaty with Mexico was ratified in 1936. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt had issued emergency orders to protect migratory waterfowl in 1934, 1935, and 1936. From a letter by J.N. Darling, to FDR, on 4 February, 1935:
A short open season, while not so productive of immediate increase in the duck population as a closed season may be so regulated as to contribute more permanent results in the long haul toward our final objective, if by prohibiting all artificial baiting, prohibiting the use of automatics and repeaters of more than three-shell capacity, and reducing live decoys to a minimum, the hunting of migratory waterfowl may be permanently rid of those pernicious practices which have been responsible for the heavy slaughter and commercialization of the sport.
Following Biden's inappropriate comparison of people to geese, we should have unlimited hunting for humans, and not reduce magazine capacity of the instruments used until human populations have been reduced by 90% or more in all of North America. We should have butchered humans carcasses sold in grocery stores; we should be selling people to farmers to raise for human consumption. Given recent leftist suggestions about the benefits of cannibalism, a sarcasm tag is in order.
The silliness of the comparison is so egregious, it serves as a reminder of the irrationality of the entire debate. I am reminded of a roommate in my freshman year in college, who was offended by deer hunting. He said deer should be given rifles to even the odds. I would have been happy for him to leave dozens of rifles scattered about the woods, available for easy pick-up.
The idea that deer should be armed to “even the odds” when hunting them is absurd. Deer are not people. Humans are qualitatively different from animals.
It is not surprising modern leftists have routinely equated humans and animals. It explains much of the willingness of the Left to slaughter vast numbers of humans.
About Dean Weingarten:
Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.