Speaking to the House Democratic Caucus Issues Conference Wednesday in Baltimore, President Joe Biden once again vowed to ban so-called “assault weapons” as the Democrat audience cheered.

The reaction Biden received only serves to reinforce what the Second Amendment Foundation said recently in the organization’s 2023 advertising effort: “Your Second Amendment rights are under attack like no other time in history.”

Biden had been speaking for 24 minutes before he told the audience, “I know it may make some of you uncomfortable, but that little state above me, Delaware is one of them, has the highest rate, one of the highest rates of gun ownership. But guess what? We’re going to ban assault weapons again come hell or high water and high capacity magazines.”

However, Ammoland checked and discovered Biden’s remarks about Delaware are not true, according to a chart posted online by World Population Review, which lists Biden’s home state near the bottom of the list with 34.4 percent gun ownership. Putting this in perspective, Montana is at the top with 66.3 percent, followed by neighboring Wyoming at 66.2 percent and Alaska at 64.5 percent.

Going down the Top Ten list, Idaho is fourth at 60.1 percent, West Virginia is next with 58.5 percent, Arkansas at 57.2 percent, followed by Mississippi at 55.8 percent, Alabama with 55.5 percent, South Dakota at 55.3 percent and North Dakota 55.1 percent.

While the remark is yet one more example of Biden fibbing about guns, his remark inadvertently recognized how uncomfortable some members of his party are about the rate of gun ownership in the country.

Thanks to the SAF advertising effort, Biden has become infamous for telling a CNN Townhall audience in 2021 that he not only wants to ban semiautomatic rifles—the so-called “assault weapons” against which has crusaded for decades—but also 9mm pistols, the most popular personal protection handgun in the country. The film clip of Biden actually saying so is at the heart of the SAF 60-second advertisement.

SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb noted recently that their advertisements were aired more than 1,000 times last year, and were viewed by more than 85 million people, including those who saw the ad “multiple times.” The message is broadcast on several different cable networks.

While Fox News reported Biden’s remarks, other news outlets have overlooked his promise, instead focusing on other parts of the president’s 34-minute speech.

Biden has repeated the vow to ban “assault weapons” since the Feb. 13 attack at Michigan State University left three students dead and others wounded. The man believed responsible, Anthony McRae, was not a student or staffer at the university in Lansing, Mich. Authorities still haven’t publicized a motive, and McRae left the campus only to take his own life a couple of hours later. He used a handgun, not a rifle, in the attack.

That attack came almost five years to the day (Feb. 14, 2018) that 17 students and adults were murdered at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla.

But Biden may be unable to fulfill his threat to ban semi-auto rifles for a couple of reasons:

• Republicans now control the U.S. House of Representatives, and the caucus appears in no mood to entertain the president’s anti-gun agenda.
• Federal courts in Maryland and California are currently in the throes of re-examining bans in those states under the new guidelines established by the Supreme Court last June in the Bruen ruling.

Biden has been a leading proponent of gun control since he arrived on Capitol Hill some 50 years ago. He claims credit for shepherding the Clinton ban through Congress in the mid-1990s, but never mentions that passage of that legislation—during Bill Clinton’s first term as president—cost Democrats the majority in both the House and Senate in the 1994 mid-term elections.

His promise to ban “high capacity magazines” is also in trouble, as state-level bans are being challenged in federal courts by SAF and other gun rights organizations.

According to the World Population Review report, “Estimates show that there are anywhere from over 200 million to more than 350 million guns in the U.S. Because of variances in regulations throughout the nation, it’s impossible to get exact numbers when it comes to the total number of guns in the nation and the number of guns in each state.”

About Dave Workman

Dave Workman is a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms, and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.

Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont announced a series of proposals aimed at curbing gun violence in the state during a press conference in Waterbury on Monday.

The proposals, which will be introduced during the 2023 legislative session include:

• Banning open carry of firearms in public
• Allowing concealed carry with a permit except in certain locations
• Limiting handgun purchases to one per month
• Updating the state’s ban on unregistered “ghost guns.”

These proposals will be part of the governor’s package of priorities for the 2023 legislative session, which he plans to present to the Connecticut General Assembly in February.

Gov. Lamont’s plans were also introduced in a press release via his official site.

Even though Lamont acknowledged that Connecticut is one of the safest states in the country, he claims the reforms are “commonsense” and even necessary due to rising rates of gun violence around the country.

“It’s our responsibility to implement policies that keep our homes and our neighborhoods safe, and we have to take every opportunity to keep our residents protected,” Lamont said. “These commonsense reforms will protect our neighborhoods and the people who live in them.”

State Sen. Gary Winfield and State Rep. Steven Stafstrom, co-chairs of the Judiciary Committee, praised the governor’s proposals.

“I have seen the success of our state-supported community violence intervention programs up close and personal,”  Winfield said. “They are critical to addressing and preventing gun violence in our communities, where strict gun laws fail to stop gun-related crime. We have the ability to address the root causes of gun violence and get to the individuals at risk of committing these offenses.”

Stafstrom agreed with Winfield.

“These critical reforms attack gun violence in our neighborhoods from every angle,” Stafstrom said. “I’ve supported some of these proposals in the past, and I look forward to working with the committee and the governor to get a commonsense gun violence package accomplished this session.”

According to Fox News, Republicans in the Democratic-controlled legislature took issue with the governor’s proposals, criticizing him for putting law-abiding citizens at risk while not placing enough emphasis on criminals.

“Today the Governor and Democrats pitched a familiar path to an ‘everybody problem’ by offering proposals that will again have law-abiding gun owners carrying most of the freight,” said House Republican Leader Vincent Candelora. “Missing from their news conference was any talk about focusing on the people who are squarely responsible for causing mayhem in our communities.”

The Governor’s proposal also includes allocating an additional $2.5 million for the community gun violence intervention and prevention program, which will continue funding for the staff at the Department of Public Health who oversee this program and also provide grants for community-based violence intervention organizations.

During Lamont’s time in office, he’s made gun control one of his primary goals. Starting in 2019, he made so-called “ghost guns” illegal unless the purchaser receives an official serial number from the state. In that same month, he banned gun owners from leaving their firearms unsecured in vehicles and homes. Part of that legislation was called “Ethan’s Law” in honor of 15-year-old Ethan Song, who was accidentally shot and killed while handling a .357 Magnum at his neighbor’s house.

This press conference took place less than a year after Lamont announced a $64 million dollar proposal for gun control which he claimed was supposed to address rising crime rates in the state.

“You’re not tough on crime if you’re weak on guns,” Lamont told reporters at the state Capitol in Hartford. ”We’re going to continue to stay tough on guns.”

WASHINGTON, D.C. -(Ammoland.com)- The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) released its final rule surrounding pistol stabilizing devices killing off the market for the items unless court challenges prove successful.

The new rule (ATF final rule 2021R-08F) was published on the ATF’s website today and is set to be posted on the Federal Register on Monday, one day before the industry’s largest trade show, SHOT Show. The regulation will affect millions of Americans that currently own pistol stabilizing devices. What has been considered pistols for years will now be regarded as short barreled rifles (SBR) and be subjected to the National Firearms Act (NFA).

The proposed rule used a form known as “Worksheet 4999” to determine if a firearm equipped with a pistol brace would be considered an SBR by using a point system. The ATF ditched the form in favor of a widespread declaration that almost every pistol equipped with a brace of any kind would be considered an SBR.

“Worksheet 4999 was intended to ensure uniform consideration and application of the statutory definition of those terms. Based on the comments received, the Department agrees that the proposed Worksheet 4999 and point system did not achieve these intended purposes,” the Final Rule reads.

Under the new rule, any firearm that is “designed or redesigned made or remade and intended to be fired from the shoulder” will be considered an SBR.

This designation includes devices such as pistol stabilizing braces which the ATF assumes the shooter installed to be able to shoulder the gun. Also, if a firearm merely has the surface area that would allow it to be fired from the shoulder, the ATF might consider it an SBR if it has a weight or length consistent with a rifle.

Any pistol with a length of pull that is consistent with that of what would be found in a rifle would be considered an SBR. Any adjustable attachments, such as a multi-position buffer tube, would also automatically make the pistol an SBR. If the shooter places an optic on their firearm that requires an eye relief that is consistent with what’s used on a rifle, such as a scope, then that gun will also be considered a short barreled rifle. If a firearm has the surface area to be fired from the shoulder, such as a firearm equipped with a nonadjustable buffer tube, then that will be considered an SBR, basically making every AR-15 pistol and SBR.

“Whether the surface area that allows the weapon to be fired from the shoulder is created by a buffer tube, receiver extension, or any other accessory, component, or other rearward attachment that is necessary for the cycle of operations,” the document reads.

The ATF will also look at marketing material offered by the manufacturer to determine if installing that device on a firearm will convert it to an SBR. Several lawsuits involve companies suing over California’s law preventing the advertisement of firearms to people under the age of 18, including safety classes.

The ATF will also look at how the people in the firearms community use a gun to determine whether it is an SBR. You could use a device as intended by the manufacturer and still violate the rule if others use it in a way that is not consistent with how the manufacturer designed the device to be used.

There is a 120-day grace period to apply for a tax stamp for any device now considered an SBR that was previously considered a pistol.

Although the ATF states a 120-day grace period to register a pistol as an SBR, the ATF only promises not to enforce NFA rules on these devices for 60 days. The ATF will give a tax forbearance for the $200 tax stamp fee. A tax forbearance means that the ATF will not collect the $200 tax fee, although, by the law, you still owe the fee; it just will not be collected. The rule is set up the way it is because the ATF cannot waive a tax.

Gun owners must use e-Forms to file for the tax stamp. Only individuals would qualify for the tax stamp on devices with pistol stabilizing braces. If someone wanted to put the firearm into a trust, they must first register as an individual and then pay the $200 transfer fee to transfer it into a trust. Many people who own NFA items prefer having their firearms in a trust.

Some states do not allow for SBRs. Gun owners in those states do have options.

They could add a 16-inch or greater barrel, converting the firearm from a pistol into a rifle. In the past, the ATF has stated that a pistol could never be converted into a rifle, but the regulation seems to change this determination. The pistol stabilizing device could also be removed, and the gun owner can modify their firearms not to be able to accept a pistol brace. The gun owner also has the option of destroying the firearm. The final option would be turning the gun into the ATF for zero compensation.

The new regulation is expected to cost gun owners over $260 million. It is expected to cost the federal government over $3 million. In addition to the cost, it will put an increasing burden on the already overwhelmed NFA division of the ATF. the ATF claims that the average wait time will be 90 days, although Silencer Shop is showing a wait time of eight months for a tax stamp. Not only will it bog down the new tax stamp applications for SBRs, but it might drastically increase the wait time for other NFA items, such as sound suppressors.

There will be challenges to the new rule. The Second Amendment Foundation has an ongoing case in a federal District Court in North Dakota over the new regulation. Other legal challenges are expected shortly from other Second Amendment organizations.

Ammoland News reached out to SB tactical for a comment on the final rule but has not received one at the time of this writing.

About John Crump

John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.