Is Bernie Sanders' Gun Control Plan Effective or Misleading?

The recent renewed discourse around gun control has brought Bernie Sanders' proposals to the forefront. Many argue that existing measures such as universal background checks are already in place and question the necessity of further bans or restrictions. Critics claim that the problem lies not with the weapons themselves but with the enforcement of current laws. Additionally, some point out that the issue of voter fraud and the need for stricter proof of citizenship could be prioritized over the debate on firearms.

Background Checks: A Must or Redundant?

"We already have background checks, so why does Bernie Sanders still propose these?" asks one commentator. The assertion comes with a background check on the integrity ofthose in power. Some politicians, including Bernie Sanders, are advocating for stricter enforcement of current laws, rather than new bans. A prominent argument against banning specific types of firearms is that the actual numbers of deaths attributed to these weapons are much lower than what is often publicized. For instance, the number of fatal incidents involving rifles is around 400 per year, significantly less than the 'thousands' often cited in the media.

The argument also extends to the idea that universal background checks for firearm purchases from licensed dealers (FFLs) are already in place. The focus shifts to ensuring broader compliance with these existing laws, particularly in private person-to-person transactions which are not currently covered by background check requirements.

Assault Weapons and the Media Hype

The term 'Assault Weapons' often serves as a misleading narrative, some argue. The idea painted by some is that these are uniquely dangerous weapons, but the term 'Assault Weapon' refers to certain semiautomatic firearms that were restricted under federal law from 1994 to 2004. In reality, there is no substantiated evidence that such weapons pose an extraordinary risk when compared to other firearms. Critics argue that the proliferation of misinformation and the fear-mongering tactics employed by some politicians contribute to public misunderstanding.

Further complicating the issue is the mention of people like George Soros and his influence on prosecutors. Critics argue that some District Attorneys (DAs) have prioritized prosecuting high-profile individuals, such as President Donald Trump, over enforcing the law. This selective enforcement of the law is seen as a larger issue that should be addressed, beyond the question of specific weapon bans.

The Source of the Problem: Voter Fraud and Proof of Citizenship?

Additionally, many believe the root problem lies not with gun control measures but with voter fraud and the lack of strict proof of citizenship requirements. Voter fraud continues to be a significant concern in the United States, with anecdotal evidence suggesting that it can undermine public trust in the electoral process.

One suggestion is that the focus should be on implementing universal proof of citizenship for voting and receiving government benefits. This measure would help ensure that individuals who do not meet the legal requirements are not burdening taxpayers with the costs of government services. Critics argue that the current system of checks and balances is compromised by the lack of such measures, leading to a wasteful and inefficient use of taxpayer funds.

The Way Forward

With the current political climate, the call to action is clear: the American public must take matters into their own hands by voting out politicians who do not address these core issues. Critics emphasize that the goal is not to go back to any previous political era, but rather to move the country in a positive direction. Political leaders need to prioritize transparency, law enforcement, and structural reform to address the underlying issues rather than simply advocating for more restrictions on weapons.

The push for stricter voter fraud detection measures and the elimination of corrupt elements in society, such as politicians and media figures who are misleading the public, are seen as crucial steps toward a healthier, more stable political environment. Advocates of these ideas believe that by focusing on these broader societal issues, the country can achieve the much-needed reform without resorting to extreme measures.