Senate Democrats Launch “Gun Violence Prevention Caucus”

There is one thing we know for certain about gun control-minded politicians: they will never stop. Ever. They ask why gun rights advocates won’t “compromise” with them, yet every such interaction results in our side doing all the giving while getting nothing in return. Hardly the definition of “compromise.” And just like clockwork, those same gun-controlling politicians are back the next week, pushing for more. 

So now, eight Senate Democrats have formed the “Gun Violence Prevention Caucus,” made up of a veritable “who’s who” of the gun control movement: California’s Dianne Feinstein, Connecticut’s Dick Blumenthal and Chris Murphy, Illinois’ Dick Durbin, New Jersey’s Bob Menendez and Cory Booker, Massachusetts’ Ed Markey, and Colorado’s John Hickenlooper. The group’s stated mission is to “promote commonsense solutions to battle the epidemic of gun violence plaguing the United States.”

More Propaganda

We won’t bore you with each senator’s propaganda-laced statement regarding the organization’s launch, but a couple of points deserve mention, other than their hijacking the term “commonsense.” Blumenthal’s press release reads like a Christmas wish list for gun controllers, expressing his enthusiasm for so-called “safe storage” laws, stronger Red Flag laws, and, of course, an “assault weapons” ban. In other words, “commonsense” is a relative term, depending on who’s using it. But we already knew that.

Not to be outdone, Markey claimed that “Already this year, Americans have suffered from 52 mass shootings and 3,700 gun-related deaths.” That statement was echoed by the Giffords organization’s Adzi Vokhiwa, who said that “Last year, there were more mass shootings than days in the year, and so far, 2023 is following the same pattern.”

The only problem with those characterizations is that they are only achieved by manipulating the data. Those numbers come from a gun control advocacy group called the Gun Violence Archive (GVA). The GVA, despite their scholarly-sounding moniker, unilaterally changed the definition of “mass shooting” to artificially pump up the numbers. And pump them up they did.

We are told that the definition of “mass shooting” is when four or more people are killed or wounded in a given incident. But what the anti-gunners don’t tell you is the FBI always excluded incidents in which the shootings were part of other crimes, such as gang turf wars or drug disputes. The GVA, which is now the go-to source for all gun control advocates, removed that qualifier. American “mass shooting” numbers skyrocketed from between two and 12 per year to hundreds. Of course, they neglect to tell you how those numbers are calculated. They’re happy to mislead you into thinking all those shootings took place in schools or shopping malls.

Biased and Untruthful Sources

Speaking of the GVA, you may recall a couple of months back when they complained to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that their published study on defensive gun use was harming GVA’s gun control efforts. A sympathetic member of the Biden Administration, the most anti-Second Amendment administration in American history, pulled some strings and had the study removed.

For the record, that study, conducted by Florida State University criminology professor Gary Kleck, found that Americans use their firearms in self-defense up to 2.5 million times per year. But those scholarly numbers hurt the political and ideological narrative, so they had to go.

So, when you hear these senators spouting those numbers, as they certainly will, understand that they come from the dishonest and decidedly unscholarly Gun Violence Archive. But since when have gun controllers worried about dishonesty?

Christmas List

Speaking of Blumenthal’s Christmas List, here are some of the many infringements the Caucus members say they will be pursuing:

• “3D Printed Gun Safety Act” (Can’t have the plebes making their own stuff, can we?)
• “Accountability for Online Firearms Marketplaces (This is part of the propaganda effort to make people think Amazon delivers guns to peoples’ doors. They don’t, nor does any other online retailer.)
• “Background Check Completion Act” and “Background Check Expansion Act” (Like we don’t already have background checks. But this will no doubt be “universal background checks, which aren’t enforceable without a national firearms registry. Which they will then push for when their checks do not curb crime. It’s part of the plan.)
• “Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act” (This mouthful means they want crime victims to be able to sue firearms manufacturers into oblivion when their products are misused by criminals. Like suing Ford when a drunk driver kills or injures someone.)
• “Federal Firearms Licensing Act” (Just what it sounds like. They want you to have a federal license to exercise a Constitutionally protected right.)
• “Gun Violence Prevention Through Financial Intelligence Act” (They want to track all gun sales to flag “suspicious transactions.” What could possibly go wrong?)
• “HEAR Act” (Before you think they’re doing something good, like the Hearing Protection Act, they aren’t. This is Menendez’s bill to outlaw suppressors entirely and “buy back” those in circulation. HEAR stands for Help Americans Respond Act. Menendez thinks that all suppressed firearms are Hollywood quiet and allow murderers to do their work without being discovered. Completely wrong, of course, and never mind that criminals almost never use suppressors. But never let facts dim the narrative. The HEAR Act is the exact opposite of the HPA.)
• “Jaime’s Law” (This bill aims to require background checks for ammunition sales. It’s named for Jaime Guttenberg, a victim of the Parkland, Florida murderer. The Florida tragedy aside, it’s a dumb idea that won’t accomplish anything, it’s blatantly unconstitutional, and it exploits that same tragedy for propaganda purposes.)

The list goes on, but you get the idea. There are 20 total items, for now. There will certainly be more since none of these senators has ever met a gun control proposal they didn’t like.

But Don’t Worry…

The Senate Gun Violence Prevention Caucus has your back. They pledge to develop “gun safety” legislation that will “preserve constitutional rights and will avoid frivolous lawsuits.”

Let’s clarify that, shall we? These senators and their allies have done everything they possibly can to end civilian firearms ownership. When asked why existing firearms were grandfathered in the 1994 “Assault Weapons Ban,” Feinstein noted that she didn’t have the votes. “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them…Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in…I would have done it.”

Nothing has changed. If anything, Feinstein is worse now and Murphy is her heir apparent in the Senate. “Constitutional” doesn’t mean the same thing to them as it does to us. They want you to be “well-regulated,” meaning they want to regulate you as opposed to the 1791 definition that meant “well-equipped” and “well-trained.” And about that militia thing…watch their heads explode if you suggest joining one. They do not acknowledge the part that says, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” You know, the inconvenient part.

And about those frivolous lawsuits. We would certainly be down with preventing crime victims from frivolously suing gunmakers. But we’ve already seen that they support that. No, what they mean here is that groups like Gun Owners of America, the Firearms Policy Coalition, the Second Amendment Foundation, and the National Rifle Association should not be able to challenge gun control laws, like the draconian measures in places like New York, New Jersey, California, and others. And it’s no coincidence that all these senators represent those draconian states.

But anyway, legal challenges like that led to the Heller, McDonald, and Bruen Decisions that currently imperil gun control regimes across the country. They are very concerned about the march of freedom, and they will do everything they can to stop it. Because it’s “frivolous.” In reality, it’s because it threatens their power, and they don’t like it.

Never forget that the operative word in “gun control” is “control.” Which is why I think of this new alliance as the “Senate Gun Control Caucus.” Emphasis on the “control.”