Joe Biden Has Revealed The True Nature Of Gun Control

If you believe the gun control crowd, anti-gun laws serve a noble purpose. At the mild end, gun control consists of just minor, necessary guardrails meant to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, people with dangerous mental illnesses, and other ne’er-do-wells. At the more strict end, it’s obvious that they believe no one can be trusted with a gun and we’re all better off without the tools of violence available to be misused on a whim.

But the history of gun laws tells a very different story. It’s a story that Joe Biden has recently unwittingly retold for us. In his press release announcing the pardon of his ne’er-do-well son, it was clear that he feels that gun laws had been selectively used against Hunter.

“Without aggravating factors like use in a crime, multiple purchases, or buying a weapon as a straw purchaser, people are almost never brought to trial on felony charges solely for how they filled out a gun form.” the statement said. “Those who were late paying their taxes because of serious addictions, but paid them back subsequently with interest and penalties, are typically given non-criminal resolutions. It is clear that Hunter was treated differently.”

Biden went on to allege that Hunter had been singled out simply because he was the president’s son and that a number of political opponents in Congress had put pressure on the process to use gun laws to do something unusual and political. He asserted that his son has been a sober, law-abiding citizen for years and that this kind of political persecution of him will continue unless he — the President — puts a stop to it. For that reason (along with being a concerned father, an argument we can all relate to), he used his pardon power to make it stop.

Whether you agree with Biden or not (I personally have mixed feelings, especially as a mom), there’s a deeper truth buried in the debate that’s been stirred up that needs to be considered more…the true purpose of gun control laws. The problem is that the narrative — furthered by the gun control industry and the media — that laws restricting gun rights serve the public interest by keeping us all safe falls apart when we take a harder look.

Jim Crow Laws

You don’t have to look too hard to see how the history of gun control in the United States demolishes that narrative. The Civil War didn’t really end when Robert E. Lee surrendered at Appomattox Court House on April 9, 1865. Nor did it end when Andrew Johnson declared an end to the war on August 20, 1866. A bitter and ruthless insurgency against Reconstruction continued for over two decades, culminating in the Compromise of 1877.

Despite regaining control over their state governments, southern states were still bound by the Reconstruction Amendments. Slavery wasn’t going to come back (13th Amendment), and the former slaves had to be treated the same as any other citizen (14th Amendment). Those still wishing to relegate blacks to second class citizenship, then, had to come up with a workaround.

Jim Crow laws appeared to apply to everyone on the surface, and thus didn’t theoretically run afoul of the 14th Amendment. Everyone was equal, but the races were separated in public life. Everyone was barred from carrying guns in public, for public safety after all of the fighting that had happened during the insurgency. Voting laws placed value on literacy, not the color of one’s skin.

Beneath the surface, though, none of that was really true. Under the thin veneer of equality was the fact that separate wasn’t equal at all. Systematically denied a good education, former slaves and their descendants struggled to pass voting tests that effectively but legally (at the time) disenfranchising them. After this disenfranchisement, elected officials who weren’t accountable to the black population would enforce gun control only against them, and largely not against whites.

The Law Today Still Operates This Way, But With More Selective Targeting

Anti-gun figures would have you believe that gun control’s legacy as a Jim Crow relic doesn’t matter now. After the civil rights movement, gun control applies equally to everybody, right? But, that’s a flat-out lie.

Even now, the “progressive” District of Columbia government discriminates in handgun licensing for blacks, and in New Jersey (a state that was forced to do “shall issue” permits), blacks are denied at twice the rate of whites.

While this form of Jim Crow persists even today, the basic idea of abusing laws against people disfavored by public officials has only grown, and they can target anyone they want. One judge famously commented that a good prosecutor could get a grand jury to “indict a ham sandwich.” Sadly, this is true (figuratively speaking), because there are so many criminal laws on the books that a prosecutor could indict virtually anyone they choose if they have some time to find the right law.

I could write a 10,000 word article about this, but you can learn a lot more by watching this law school professor explain how the system really works, and why you shouldn’t talk to police.

 

In a time when everyone basically commits three felonies every day (if not more), the political class can and does use the law to abuse and persecute anyone of their choosing. This time, it was Hunter Biden (if you believe the President) who was “targeted” for committing largely victimless “crimes” when he did drugs and violated unconstitutional gun laws. (He was also convicted of a range of tax code violations that are less victimless). The same has arguably happened to Donald Trump and the NRA to some extent at the hands of blue state officials.

However you feel about the Biden family, one thing is definitely true: we need to simplify and repeal many of these pointless and needlessly complex laws to protect people from political predation, and we should start with all of the gun control laws. If someone like Hunter Biden, with his access to power and connections can be, if you believe his father, politically targeted and legally persecuted, what chance do the rest of us stand?