Excuse if all we can think about Joe Biden after Wednesday night’s marathon climate crisis town hall is his gross bleeding eyeball, but now that he’s laid down his claim that the Green New Deal is a good start, his campaign’s turned its attention back to gun control.
If Biden did anything about gun violence in the eight years he was vice president besides turn his head the other way when Eric Holder was arming Mexican drug cartels, we don’t know about it, but he is cashing in on his experience teaming up with Sen. Dianne Feinstein to push through the 1994 assault weapons ban, which of course he’d like to see back on the books.
I’ll ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines once again. We will get these weapons of war off our streets. https://t.co/KpXXPzjYjJ
— Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) September 5, 2019
Notice, though, that Biden links to an opinion piece in the New York Times and not a study of the assault weapons ban, like the ones Dana Loesch handily linked to.
— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) September 5, 2019
— Michael Porter (@michael1porter) September 5, 2019
Not one sentence of this is true….. pic.twitter.com/ZDrq6goza2
— Ben Biggar (@TheKryptonian41) September 5, 2019
— Jessica Yamron (@jessicayamron) September 5, 2019
PLEASE STOP DEBATING JOE WITH FACTS.
He only understands “truths”.
— Director Haspell 💎 (@GinaHaspell1) September 5, 2019
Provide the data to back that claim up.
I dare you.https://t.co/7VWWyVYA7R
— BonkPolitics (@BonkPolitics) September 5, 2019
— CΔPŦΔIN BΞRZ (@CaptainBerz) September 5, 2019
ProPublica reported back in 2014 in its fact-check of Feinstein:
… “There is no compelling evidence that it saved lives,” Duke University public policy experts Philip Cook and Kristin Goss wrote in their book “The Gun Debate: What Everyone Needs to Know.”
A definitive study of the 1994 law — which prohibited the manufacture and sale of semiautomatic guns with “military-style features” such pistol grips or bayonet mounts as well as magazines holding more than ten rounds of ammunition — found no evidence that it had reduced overall gun crime or made shootings less lethal. “We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence,” the Department of Justice-funded study concluded in 2004. “Should it be renewed, the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement.”
And Feinstein’s ban didn’t even take into consideration such modern modifications as USA Today’s frightening chainsaw bayonet attachment for the AR-15.
Who says it worked? Not experts who analyzed the data.
— DamCue (@dmccue69) September 5, 2019
Of course it worked. ..it helped get them votes, and that let's them live their lives in the manner they are used to…thereby saving their lives, or at least their lifestyles.
— Nix Nadir (@NixNadir) September 5, 2019
Biden is lying. The ban didn't do as he said it did.
— Demetri ❌ (@bad_robot_57) September 5, 2019
Except it didn't.
— Daniel 🇺🇸 (@bamabear82) September 5, 2019
Citing an Opinion piece rather then a documented peer reviewed study. Also for it to have worked it would have had to been lower/less then when the ban started. It wasn't.
— RealRick (@darkcuriou) September 5, 2019
— Jerome Grammentz ❌ ⭐⭐⭐ (@grammentz) September 5, 2019
No. It did not work
— Adizzle 🇺🇸 (@21Lafayette1776) September 5, 2019
They didn't even stop selling AR15s during the ban. They just didn't thread the barrels. How can something that didn't even prevent the manufacture and sale of AR15s "work?"
— Mike Belcher (@MikeBelcher14) September 5, 2019
I think there are some families in Colorado that would dispute this claim.
— Andrew DeMaio (@andrew_demaio) September 5, 2019
Good. These bans are really doing wonders in states like California; they will definitely lead to improvements in other states, as well.
— Tweeting_Savage (@Hostile_Tweeter) September 5, 2019
I'm seriously surprised you can even remember that far back, Joe.
— Big Sarge (@rangerwhite92) September 5, 2019
No, it did not.
"Assault Weapons" aren't a real thing, just a dramatic term coined by anti-gun activists.
"Weapons of war", likewise, is just a slogan term for bumper stickers, political campaigns, and a naked attempt to cast simple defensive firearms as something scary.
— Mike Moss (@_MikeMoss) September 5, 2019
You’ve got to admit, the black metal ones with the things on them are scarier than the wooden ones.
“Weapons of war “ the exact term everyone should be very worried about, that’s a dog whistle for gun grab
— Derek (@therealdorrell) September 5, 2019
Assault weapons is a made up term, and semi auto rifles are not on the streets joe. They are in the homes of millions of law abiding gun owners which you hate. And no, it did not work.
— shaughn felton (@shotgunshaughn) September 5, 2019
Banned items don’t magically disappear.
— Nope (@DonnaIsntHere) September 5, 2019
Can you still ban mine if lost them in a boating accident over Labor Day weekend, sir?
— Buck Bretherton (@Yeti330) September 5, 2019
WHAT? Joe Biden says he’s going after magazines that can hold multiple bullets https://t.co/rKydzkj9fv
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) September 2, 2019