Remember, a few days ago, when Joe Biden said that if you want to buy a gun for protection, that you should buy a shotgun, not a so-called “assault rifle”? Well it turns out that more crimes are committed by shotguns than assault rifles.
This morning J.D. Tuccille noted Vice President Joe Biden’s dubious advice to his wife about how she should defend herself against would-be home invaders. It is interesting that Biden’s weapon of choice is a shotgun, which he contrasts with “an AR-15,” one of the military-style semiautomatic rifles he wants to ban, supposedly because they are especially suited to committing mass murder and other crimes. Biden says an AR-15 is “harder to aim” and “harder to use,” which makes you wonder why he believes it is favored by criminals. It also makes you wonder why aim matters when you are firing warning shots into the air, as Biden recommends.
…Contrary to the impression left by such favoritism, there is nothing inherently virtuous about shotguns, such that they can be used only for legitimate purposes and never to hurt or kill innocent people. On the same day that Biden lauded shotguns as the ideal weapons for home defense, a young man used one to murder three people in the Los Angeles area. In fact, shotguns are used in crimes considerably more often than the “assault weapons” that Biden and Feinstein say pose an intolerable threat to public safety. A 2004 study sponsored by the National Institute of Justice estimated that “assault weapons” (mostly pistols) were used in something like 2 percent of gun crimes before they were banned by a federal law that expired that year. By comparison, according to the National Crime Victimization Survey, shotguns were used in 5 percent of gun crimes in 1993, the year before Congress passed the “assault weapon” ban. In a 1997 survey of state and federal prison inmates, 7 percent of those who had carried a firearm while committing the crime for which they were serving time said it was a military-style semiautomatic, while 13 percent said it was a shotgun.
This is just more evidence that left’s anti-gun rampage right now has very little to do with safety and very much to do with politics. If it truly were about safety, they would look at the statistics objectively and come to the overwhelming conclusion that there should be more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens, not fewer. If it were truly about safety, why would the leftist media nickname a semiautomatic rifle (that has a handle on it) an “assault rifle” in the first place? It was obviously to conjure up images of violence and death in those less experienced with weapons. And, to some extent, it worked. I was talking to a friend recently who asked the offensive yet all too common question: “why does anyone need an assault rifle?” Clearly she has no idea that an “assault rifle” is very little more than a scary looking rifle. That’s it. And even using their faulty logic, if it were truly about safety, they would try to ban hand guns, right?
But like quite literally everything else the left does, it’s about style, not substance. It’s about perception, not reality.