Biden's Anti-Gun Plan is Constitutionally and Consequentially Defenseless | Newsmax.com Highlights: . . . . . moving rapidly . . . . . Even in 2005, then-Senator Biden voted against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act that protects manufacturers from being held civilly liable for irresponsible and criminal actions by users of their products in much the same way that automakers can’t be sued for accidents caused by drunk drivers. Gun manufactures are relatively small companies, and even the threat of such legal suits would put them out of business as obviously intended. The "Biden Plan to End Our Gun Violence Epidemic" that appears on the Biden-Harris website goes even further as a frontal assault on Second Amendment rights. As always, the term "assault weapons" is never defined, subject to a predictable series of slippery slope restrictions that include semi-automatic firearms that can be claimed to look like military weapons. As stated, Biden will also "enact legislation to prohibit all online sales of firearms [presumably of all types] ammunition, kits, and gun parts." And the bans won’t be limited to the supply chain manufacture, import, and sales of new guns. "As president," the plan says, "Biden will pursue legislation to regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act." This can fully be expected to entail classifying many semi-automatic rifles and magazines holding more than 10 bullets as Class 3 weapons (which can require nine months or more for approval and a $200 fee), national gun licensing, and "red flag" laws that let judges take away people’s guns without a hearing. "Biden," his website promises, will "direct his Attorney General to deliver to him within his first 100 days a set of recommendations for restructuring the ATF and related Justice Department agencies to most effectively enforce our gun laws." Everyone I know supports enforcing existing gun laws. It’s Biden’s new ones that leave it open for criminalization and confiscation of any guns arbitrarily deemed illegal that are unacceptable, representing a direct assault on our Second Amendment protections. Economist John Lott, co-founder and former president of the Crime Prevention Research Center and author of numerous academic and popular publications on the topic, argues that increased gun ownership is associated with less crime - not more. Lott’s recent Epoch Times article "The Flawed Thinking Behind Biden’s Gun Control Bill" points out that it is poor people in the highest crime areas who benefit most from owning guns, and that rising costs resulting from making gun makers legally liable for their misuse by criminals would make them unaffordable for those individuals. Many suburban residents and businesses are concerned about protections from lawlessness as well. We can all be reminded of the helpless plight of Mike and Pat McCloskey in St. Louis, who, after defending their home from threatening mobs, were treated by legal officials as if they were the offending criminals. We all watched "mostly peaceful" protests (as described on mainstream media) devolve into violent and destructive arson and looting binges. We witnessed anarchist hoodlums destroy buildings, vandalize properties, and hurl objects and expletives at police in full confidence that, if arrested, they would either be quickly released without bail or not even charged. Then-Sen. Kamala Harris, now Vice President Harris, supported those bounce-back releases. Law-abiding gun owners are invariably among the staunchest champions of strong law enforcement – not defund police movements. Yet although police are important to fighting crime, officers virtually always arrive after the perpetrators have fled the scene. There’s unavoidable truth in the old adage, "When seconds really count, police are only minutes away."