Since 2016, leftists and Democrats have been frustrated to such a degree that there is no longer a veil over their intended policy positions, and none more unveiled than positions on the Second Amendment. The old rebuttal of “nobody is trying to take your guns” has lost steam. Let us look at a few proposed policies, and examine if the 2020 Democratic candidates do want to “take guns.” 

First there is Joe Biden. Biden has promised to reinstate the assault weapons ban of 1994 if he was to win the election, and also promises to install a mandatory buyback of “assault weapons” in possession of citizens. Beto O’Rourke has promised to do the same, and declared he will work with Congress to ban the sale and possession of “military-style assault rifles along with a mandatory buyback for the rifles and a voluntary buyback for handguns. Cory Booker wants to make firearm ownership dependent upon a fee, a five-year license, an interview, establish a database to track guns (firearm owners) and an assault weapons ban. Bernie Sanders wants to ban rifles. Back in April, Kamala Harris declared she would issue executive orders within the first 100 days to achieve these aforementioned goals. Do these politicians want to take draconian measures for firearm confiscation? The answer is explicitly yes. 

It is not surprising that these Democratic candidates wish to simply bypass the Constitution to achieve their policy goals. Recently, Democrats have threatened the Supreme Court to rule as Democrats desire on Second Amendment interpretations or “face restructuring.”  What is ironic, however, is how other Democratic party policy positions stack up logically compared to their understanding of the Second. To a leftist and these leftist Democratic candidates, the following proposed policies are sacrosanct: healthcare as a right, free college as a right, abortion as a right, borders as inhumane and voter ID laws as racist. When it comes to an actual right, like the Second Amendment in our Bill of Rights, Democrats simply dismiss the amendment. In the case of Kamala Harris and her proposed executive actions, there is also apparently no problem engaging in the tyrannical. Ironic still is the fact that to enforce something like a mandatory buyback, the federal government would have to send agents armed with firearms to do the work of enforcing the mandatory aspect.

One more irony is the policy of Elizbeth Warren. Warren says she will increase excise taxes on guns to 30 percent and ammunition to 50 percent, with a goal of making it, in the end, more expensive to own a firearm. This is the same Warren who has a plan to close the racial wealth disparity. Implementing a plan to make firearms and ammunition more expensive, if I can indulge in the leftist worldview for only a moment, would disproportionately hurt a minority’s ability to exercise their Second Amendment rights. By that logic, it would be racist to implement such taxes, and it would also bring the Democratic Party full circle, for after the American Civil War and into the Jim Crow era, black codes were imposed by Southern Democrats to make it nearly impossible for a black citizen to own a firearm. Is Elizabeth Warren racist? No, but her ideas are ironic when compared against the history. If poll taxes and voter ID laws are racist because of accessibility issues, then that same logic must be applied to the accessibility issues concerning the right to bear arms.

Moreover, not a single one of these candidates seems to understand that firearm homicides are perpetrated by a user with a handgun over a user with a rifle, let alone, “assault” rifle by a wide margin. In fact, handguns are used 17 times more than rifles in a firearm homicides the margin is not even close. So, Democrats, it is all or nothing. Instead of pandering to the fear of your supporters on rifles, please explain how you will end gun violence due to handguns. If indeed you truly believe confiscation and banning will end gun violence, you are focusing on the wrong firearm. With weapons bans, essentially, your party must go the whole nine yards and advocate banning all firearms, if you were to be honest.

The Second Amendment is an individual right and an American right. Change it legally through the repeal of the amendment if you wish, but trying to tyrannically impose draconian measures to bypass a constitutional right is wrong and is exactly why we have the Bill of Rights in the first place. Thankfully, the true policy positions on these issues are becoming more and more unambiguous.