If President Biden Is in Charge, Why Would America Need a Gun Czar?

By Larry Keane

Constitution Gun iStock-648978888
Congress is lining up behind billionaire-backed gun control groups demanding that President Joe Biden appoint a gun control czar. iStock-648978888

U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- Congress is lining up behind billionaire-backed gun control groups demanding that President Joe Biden appoint a gun control czar to dictate to America just who, when, how, and how much gun rights they can actually exercise.

It begs a question, though. Isn’t President Biden supposed to be in charge? If he is, then it should be his policies for which he needs to answer to the American public. If he needs to appoint a political appointee, why?

The entire notion opens up a can of worms that Democrats who signed onto a letter should answer to the American people. When did fundamental pre-existing rights, that are protected by the Constitution, become something that needed to be parceled out by a partisan bureaucrat?

U.S. Reps. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) and Lucy McBath (D-Ga.) led a letter to President Biden that was signed by 34 additional Members of Congress, demanding he “appoint a National Director of Gun Violence Prevention and empower this newly appointed official to create and chair an Interagency Task Force on Gun Violence Prevention.”

Ready Resources

It would seem the president has the assistance to fight criminal misuse of firearms already. He’s got an attorney general, who oversees the Department of Justice. Within that, he’s got an FBI director to investigate federal crimes and an acting director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), which regulates firearms and the firearm industry and has law enforcement authority.

There’s been smashing success on operations by the Department of Justice to fight criminal misuse of firearms. The DoJ is still running Operation Legend, a sustained and cooperative law enforcement effort to fight crime. There’s also Operation Relentless Pursuit, a law enforcement initiative aimed at cracking down on crime in seven major U.S. cities. Those operations run alongside the DoJ’s Project Safe Neighborhoods, a collaboration between federal, state, and local law enforcement to identify violent crime and develop comprehensive answers to stopping it.

There’s not a shortage of initiatives to fight crime or create pathways for combine federal resources with local law enforcement. The call for this “gun czar” isn’t about crime. It’s about guns.

Controlling Guns, Not Crime

The intent of appointing a “gun czar” isn’t to combat crime. Clearly, the resources and infrastructure are there and the Department of Justice is doing this. The calls are to control guns and to have it be done by a partisan political appointee who isn’t accountable to the people. Members of Congress are merely echoing what the gun control group March for Our Lives has already demanded. That group, funded by antigun billionaire Michael Bloomberg, demanded a “gun czar,” along with $1 billion of taxpayer money to enact their radical gun control agenda that was actually captured in a “demand list” for the Biden-Harris administration. The group’s policy director Max Markham said he wanted a cabinet-level position to “Highlight the executive side over the legislative side.”

That’s beyond bureaucracy. That’s dictatorial.

Rights vs. Privileges

The problem with their entire demand is that they are attempting to ration a right that’s not theirs to measure. The right to keep and bear arms is a pre-existing right. It’s one that every American has as their birthright, endowed by their Creator. The Constitution’s Second Amendment recognizes this right existed before the founding of the U.S. government and it isn’t for lawmakers, the President, or an appointed “czar” to measure out. No such bureaucrat would be tolerated to tell Americans when they’ve had enough free speech or enough free exercise of their religion.

Delegating the Second Amendment to a second-class right or a privilege that a bureaucrat would be able to turn off the spigot to is an abdication of the responsibilities of the President of the United States. It’s also ceding a right that belongs to the people to an unelected and unaccountable “czar” or king of guns.

Americans threw off a king once who attempted to seize guns and powder in Lexington and Concord. There’s no room to invite one back.


About The National Shooting Sports Foundation

NSSF is the trade association for the firearm industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of thousands of manufacturers, distributors, firearm retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations, and publishers nationwide. For more information, visit nssf.org

National Shooting Sports Foundation

Subscribe
Notify of
29 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Get Out
Get Out
1 month ago

Maybe they should appoint a U.S. Constitution and Bill of rights czar instead of appointing a useless gun control czar. These anti-gun buffoons say we need to follow the Constitution but forget the shall not be infringed part of the 2nd Amendment.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

KK
KK
1 month ago

“The problem with their entire demand is that they are attempting to ration a right that’s not theirs to measure.”
The problem with this statement, is that their “entire demand” is tried, true, and tested, at the state level, has passed federal court scrutiny – and for at least eight years now, if not longer, seems to have been FINE with the supreme court that MILLIONS of American Citizens have had their Second Amendment right RATIONED in this manner.
We are NOT in uncharted waters here.

KK
KK
1 month ago

“The problem with their entire demand is that they are attempting to ration a right that’s not theirs to measure.”

The problem with this statement, is that their “entire demand” is tried, true, and tested, at the state level, has passed federal court scrutiny – and for at least eight years now, if not longer, seems to have been FINE with the supreme court that MILLIONS of American Citizens have had their Second Amendment right RATIONED in this manner.
We are NOT in uncharted waters here.

chocopot
chocopot
1 month ago

I have never been able to understand how it is that what are clearly stated and guaranteed Constitutional rights are open to negotiations which amount to gradually increasing infringement over time, with those infringements eventually reaching the point at which those rights are virtually eliminated. Can someone explain that for me?

StLPro2A
StLPro2A
1 month ago

“If President Biden Is in Charge, Why Would America Need a Gun Czar?”
Even as senile and crazy as Xiden/KamelHo are, they know better than to be the “first one through the door” when gun confiscation starts. Butto O’Dork won’t be missed by anyone……he’s their “cannon fodder”……”zero confirmation” dummy.

Coelacanth
Coelacanth
1 month ago

No matter the proclamations from the evil office or the halls of Congress, any law that is not in accord with the Constitution is null and void.

JoeUSooner
JoeUSooner
1 month ago

My response to those 34 waste-of-human-skin anti-gun “Members of Congress”… is a Bronx Cheer, accompanied by a single uplifted finger and a cheerful/heartfelt invitation to go straight to hell [and to commit an act of auto-eroticism, on the way down].

Is my stance clear? Does a “strong letter to follow” need to be issued?

Vern
Vern
1 month ago

The term, “czar,” is from the “O”, administration, you know, the one who is behind the curtain pulling the strings of the one in the oval office. Communists don’t like guns unless they are under the complete control of the government. Those who voted for obama, (biden) are now feeling sick to their stomach for some reason, maybe it is the knowledge they voted for the nullification of their country. Nah, as long as they are fed and watered by the government they are OK. It is those who aren’t being fed and watered by the government that the lefty… Read more »

Vern
Vern
1 month ago
Reply to  JSNMGC

I’m old enough to know what czars are, it is that the communist administrations over the last few years are liking to use the name for their ministers of pain to the American people.
I don’t click on links because I have found some to be bugs.

Last edited 1 month ago by Vern
JSNMGC
JSNMGC
1 month ago
Reply to  Vern

The link wasn’t explaining the definition of a czar, it listed out the many czars named by G.W. Bush.

Age does not equal high IQ, amount/quality of education, level of knowledge, wisdom, or relevant experience. It is only indicative of the passage of time.

shakesfist.
shakesfist.
1 month ago

The Smithsonian wrote an article on the success of the gun control advocats in the UK. Go there and tell them what you think.

Boz
Boz
1 month ago

ANY so-called “gun control” is NEVER about stopping crime, saving lives, for the children, etc. It is ALWAYS about disarming the American Citizen. Remember that and act accordingly.

When the Founding Fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment, they didn’t just return from a hunting trip, they had just liberated a country.

Bozz
Bozz
1 month ago

Why not a crime czar or immigration czar or election over-watch czar?

JNew
JNew
1 month ago

Creating unelected bureaucratic panels to do the dirty work of their intentions is a common tactic of progressives as a method of circumventing the laws. I’m astonished over how many people don’t know this fact and yet, I’m not surprised at all.

*Plus ça change* will kill us all.

buzzsaw
buzzsaw
1 month ago

A czar, sometimes spelled tsar, was a pre-Soviet absolute monarch of Russia. In short, a tyrant. Apparently, by 1917 it got so bad, enough people thought the Communists would be a step UP, and they carried out a successful revolution.

The very idea of a czar is contrary to everything this country claims to stand for. It’s telling that they would use that title to refer to the holder of any position in our government, even informally.

How about NSSF members unite to refuse to sell anything to a government that normal citizens of their jurisdiction can’t legally own?

Arny
Arny
1 month ago
Reply to  buzzsaw

That might work if the Govt needed them. You see they need the Govt contracts. They won’t do cheet. https://alu.army.mil/alog/issues/SepOct10/spectrum_smallarms_ammo.html

Jonesy
Jonesy
1 month ago

This is just a ploy to get the Fake Mexican O’Rourke a job with Dementia Joe.

Montana454Casull
Montana454Casull
1 month ago

We can live free without a gun czar and without Democrats . Modern Democrsts are Marxists and need to be eradicated from American soil . ASAP .

Dee
Dee
1 month ago

Lol…you silly dude. Google democracy.

JoeUSooner
JoeUSooner
1 month ago
Reply to  Dee

Question… how many times does the word “democracy” appear in the Constitution? I’ll give you credit if you give me the correct number either including or excluding the Bill of Rights…

**Trick question. The answer is zero! – the US us NOT a f*cking democracy (which is sheer ‘Mob Rule’ that the Founders hated and feared)… we are a Constitutional Republic!! [Google THAT, Dippy Dee]**

Last edited 1 month ago by JoeUSooner
JSNMGC
JSNMGC
1 month ago
Reply to  JoeUSooner

He needs it to be considered a simple Democracy because then the majority will vote for even more redistribution of wealth.

Dee wants your money.

RoyD
RoyD
1 month ago

I really don’t GAF.

Autsin Miller III
Autsin Miller III
1 month ago

“If President Biden Is in Charge, Why Would America Need a Gun Czar?”
Answer: we don’t. But what we need and what we get from our government isn’t determined by what we need is it? We get whatever advances the agenda of the group in power, not what we need. Shame on any gun owner who voted THIS group in.

musicman44mag
musicman44mag
1 month ago

Typical demonrat. Lets make a new department to study or enforce something, then make another department to study what the first department studied to make sure they did it right all having the intention of drawing the same conclusion in the end to justify their actions and their pay checks meanwhile making the union’s bigger to obtain more demonrat votes. It’s a pattern that I have seen for years and unfortunately been a part of for a short period of time but long enough to experience it and know it exists. It is the position of a person that doesn’t… Read more »

Dee
Dee
1 month ago
Reply to  musicman44mag

There are LEOs of police departments that has your mentality. We need to eradicate individuals like this from American soil AND definitely from law enforcement and leader rolls ASAP!! How can a truth be a lie. Smh. Again dude you are silly..lol. Comical.

musicman44mag
musicman44mag
1 month ago
Reply to  Dee

Funny, you say I am silly but I am not laughing at your silly statement. I believe your opinion would be correct if only you would have chosen the opposite individuals who are more like yourself.
Are you so foolish that you think all scientists draw the same conclusion? Silly girl you are.

Last edited 1 month ago by musicman44mag
uncle dudley
uncle dudley
1 month ago

Since so many members in congress believe Russia is the big enemy of the USA why in the world do they want to use the term czar for position in our government.
The more I see and hear out of the mouths of these fools makes me wonder what country are we now living in.
They should be expanding our freedoms not trying to stop what has been in place for years.