Why Biden's gun control solutions can't possibly work

Last week, President Joe Biden called for the ban of assault rifles and extended magazines following a pair of tragic shootings, including the school shooting in Uvalde and a recent incident in Tulsa.  In his statement, he noted that enough was enough. "This time, it's time for the Senate to do something."  But he also said that this was "not about vilifying gun owners."

That seems a little contradictory.  However, if you really need to see just how ineffective a gun ban would be, all you need to do is take a glimpse at a recent FBI report making the rounds a little while ago.

In a press statement, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) noted that there has been an increase in mass shooting events from 2020 to 2021.  In that time, incidents increased by 52.5 percent.  But if you want to hear more startling numbers, there was a 96.8-percent increase from 2017 to 2021.  And chances are that those numbers will remain on the rise for this year, considering all the incidents that have taken place over the past few months.

So what does this have to do with the ineffectiveness of Biden's plan?  Well, according to Breitbart, California was the number-one state for these incidents, with six that have taken place in 2021.

Now, keep something in mind with California: they have stricter gun laws than most.  The state has a lot in place, including universal background checks; an "assault weapons" ban; a "high capacity" magazine ban; a 10-day waiting period on gun purchases; a red flag law; various gun registration requirements; a ban that calls for no guns to be carried on a college campus for self-defense; a ban on K–12 teachers being armed on campus for classroom defense; a background check requirement for ammunition purchases; and a limit on the number of guns a law-abiding citizen can purchase within a given month.

That's a lot, isn't it?  And yet, even with all these put into place by California government, that didn't stop the state from being home to six deadly shootings that resulted in the loss of many lives.

It says a lot about what President Biden has in mind for his laws.  He stated that he's "not about vilifying gun owners" when speaking about a potential ban.  But the thing is, that seems to be the only group that this potential law could affect.

The thing about mass shooters is that they always seem to find a way to get the gear they need to carry out their incidents.  They can find an assault rifle, usually at some pawn shop or some online place that won't even think twice to check an ID.  They can find tactical gear, like the protective vest that the shooters in Buffalo and Uvalde were wearing.  So even if Biden called for his ban and somehow got it through Congress, that wouldn't stop these people from creating more terror on the streets.

So what's the solution, then?  While there may not be an easy answer for some, for me, there's something to be said about constitutional carry.

Essentially, constitutional carry means that the state cannot prohibit citizens from legally wearing a firearm.  Under this law, a person who owns said firearm can carry it in public, either visibly or concealed, at almost any time or place, without training, registration, or government licensing.  Obviously, there are some exceptions, like police stations and government buildings, but, for the most part, constitutional carry would allow them to have a weapon.

While some may find this intimidating, think about it.  If there was an active shooter in the area, someone who's carrying a firearm would be able to act and protect innocent lives by containing the situation.  And we're not talking everyone entering a state of vigilantism.  These would obviously be registered citizens who are able to tackle a scenario should the situation call for it, or if the police don't react in enough of a timely manner.  That would certainly be more effective than Biden's gun ban, which, sadly, it sounds like anyone with an online account and a credit card would be able to walk through.

If Biden really wants to be effective in slowing or even stopping these mass shooting incidents, he should take a closer look at constitutional carry and what it could mean for this country.  Sometimes a protective few can make all the difference between life and death. 

Michael Letts is the founder, president, and CEO of In-Vest USA, a national grassroots non-profit organization that is helping hundreds of communities provide thousands of bulletproof vests for their police forces through educational, public relations, sponsorship, and fundraising programs.  Those interested in learning more about Letts can visit his official website here.

Image: Gage Skidmore via Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0.

If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com