Elizabeth Warren announced a plan to reduce gun deaths in America by eighty percent. As reported by Fox News, Elizabeth Warren said, “In 2017, almost 40,000 people died from guns in the United States. My goal as President and our goal as a society will be to reduce that number by 80 percent.” That would lower the deaths from 40,000 to 8,000.
This is an ambitious plan. The main talking points in the news has been about background checks and red flag laws. Elizabeth Warren is talking about sweeping changes to the current laws. The first discussion, of course, to any changes has to be per the Constitution.
The 2nd amendment guarantees a citizen’s right to bear arms. The actual wording of the 2nd amendment in the Constitution is:
"A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
That is the actual language of the 2nd amendment so where does Elizabeth Warren’s plan stack up?
Elizabeth Warren plans to raise taxes for gun control
Elizabeth Warren wants to increase funding for studying gun safety. To pay for this, she wants to raise taxes. She wants to raise taxes on gun manufacturers from ten percent to thirty percent for guns. She also wants to raise the tax on ammunition to fifty percent.
The goal behind the higher taxes will be to fund studies on gun violence.
Warren compared these studies to the studies for automobile safety. The taxes will also raise the price of guns, decreasing the demand for guns, and reducing the amount sold to the public.
Elizabeth Warren also proposed the ability of the gun manufacturers to be responsible and liable for gun violence. This would include the chief operating officers of the gun manufacturers.
This making the gun responsible for the violence, not the person pulling the trigger.
Other elements of Elizabeth Warren's plan to reduce gun violence
She is going further than requiring background checks. Her plan does propose background checks but it does not go into specifics about what the background checks will entail.
Another element of her plan will cap the number of guns a person can buy.
She also proposed to create a licensing system for gun ownership. This would make gun ownership a privilege and not a right as guaranteed by the Constitution.
Warren also wants to investigate the National Rifle Association (NRA). The NRA is the largest gun lobbyist in the country. They support political candidates in their fight to protect gun rights for Americans.
Constitutionality of Elizabeth Warren's plan
Elizabeth Warren is now a senator from Massachusetts. She has taken an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. That means she understands the elements of the Constitution. Take a look at the elements of the plan.
The first part is the taxes. Many argue that taxes are unconstitutional to begin.
The Constitution does state that taxes could be levied and collected from citizens of the United States.
The taxes must be equal and not vary from each individual. Gun manufacturers would have to pay up to thirty percent in taxes and ammunition manufacturers would have to pay fifty percent. This proposal is not equal thus it would not be constitutional.
Another element is the licensing of gun owners. When the government requires a license to own a gun, then they can revoke the license at any time. This would make gun ownership a privilege and not a right. This is unconstitutional.
Warren also wants to restrict the number of guns a person can own. Unconstitutional. She wants to investigate the NRA.
This would violate their 1st amendment rights to free speech unless they broke a law. This is also unconstitutional.
Elizabeth Warren wants to also install background checks. Depending on the depth of the background checks would depend on the constitutionality of this proposal. I will say that this could be constitutional. Elizabeth Warren’s plan for gun control is unconstitutional. The 2nd amendment gives Americans the right to own guns. The Constitution is a living document which means it can be enhanced. The Constitution cannot be changed to take away the rights. An incumbent senator knows this and a person who is running for president should abide by the only document they take an oath to protect.
