Gun Lies, Myths, Half-Truths, and Conspiracy Theories


Full Access Member
Guns and gun crime are the new climate change: those who know nothing about the subject are suddenly "experts."

I call this faux expertise Albert Gore-itis, and I discuss it at length in my upcoming book, 10 Warning Signs Your Child is Becoming a Democrat.

Here's a roundup of some of the new – and old – lies, myths, half-truths and conspiracy theories.
Conspiracy theory:

"Assault weapons," "assault rifles," and "weapons of war"

It's estimated that there are 300 million legally owned firearms in the U.S., and 2 trillion rounds of legally owned ammunition. The percentage of households owning one or more firearm has fluctuated over the years and was at 42% last year.

It is accurate to say that assault weapons, assault rifles, and weapons of war exist. They exist, however, solely in the military and law enforcement. Civilians cannot legally own them.

The conspiracy theory that civilians could legally purchase Rambo-like weapons of war was concocted in the 1980s by gun-grabbing "activist" Josh Sugarmann. His organization, the Violence Policy Center (sounds so wonkishly noble), was financed by a non-profit that Barack Obama would years later become a director of, called the Joyce Foundation.

What conspiracy theorizing Democrats call "assault weapons," "assault rifles," and "weapons of war" are identical to hunting rifles: same functionality, magazine capacity, rate of fire, and caliber. The only difference is the aesthetic. Saying "weapon of war" is far heart-poundingly scarier-sounding than "the shooter used a rifle that our fathers, uncles, and cousins used to hunt deer and quail."

Assault weapons are automatic, machine-gun style, meaning that a shooter can fire all rounds of ammo by holding down the trigger. Americans can (usually) legally own only semi-automatic rifles, meaning that the trigger must be pulled to shoot a round of ammo. In case it's unclear to the Democrats and Tessio Republicans in your life, changing the purchase age from 18 to 21 doesn't have a miraculous water-into-wine effect of changing the rifle from semi-automatic to automatic.

The difference between automatic and semi-automatic/military and civilian is technically immense. This fact is detrimental to the Democrats' and the DMIC (Democrat Media Industrial Complex)'s peddling of a conspiracy theory that makes the dark web blush.


Democrats aren't coming for your guns.

Australia's gun ban worked.

Here's John Paul Stevens, a former Supreme Court justice, who took an oath to uphold our Constitution, demanding a full repeal of the Second Amendment.

U.S. representative Eric Swalwell, a California Democrat, called for a mandatory buyback of "assault weapons," even though, as I mentioned earlier, assault weapons are legal only in the military and law enforcement.

Perhaps mannequin man Swalwell has figured out how to convince criminals to turn in their illegal guns?

Nah. He's just another privileged, affluent white Democrat who propagates the lie that Australia's "assault weapon" ban worked. Australia, sadly, just saw its first mass shooting last month since the ban was enacted.

Swalwell, like all other Democrats who cite Australia, lies by withholding: Australia's homicide rate (and suicide rate, by the way) was declining at the time of the ban, and post-ban, the rates of armed and unarmed robberies, manslaughter, sexual assault, and kidnapping all rose. Robberies, assault, kidnapping, and manslaughter are all the acceptable cost of doing business, just so long as Democrats get their gun confiscation. Democrat "logic" is that it's OK to die, just so long as the death isn't caused by an "assault weapon."

As a PS, after the ban, Australia suffered from an awful, violent firearms black market. Think Goodfellas meets Crocodile Dundee.

Democrats know, but don't care, that bad people are more empowered and emboldened to do bad things when they know with a virtual certainty that their prey is unarmed. They don't worry about inconveniences we mere mortals worry about, such as robberies and assault against their loved ones, because their armed bodyguards in scary black suits, armed with scary black handguns (which hold more bullets than some "assault weapons"), protect them.

When U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (yeah, he's also a Democrat) said last month that there's a "real" Second Amendment and an "imaginary" Second Amendment, I contacted his office for clarification: is his armed security detail part of the "real" or "imaginary" Second Amendment? I've not heard back, likely because Murphy is brushing up on the Federalist Papers. Like all his Democrat colleagues, Murphy need not concern himself with ever having to pull a trigger to protect himself and his family; he's got others to do that for him, God forbid it happen.


The National Rifle Association wields infinite power and influence over politicians and policy.
After the horrific Parkland school shooting this past February, this myth has reached...well, mythical heights.

Full disclosure: Yes, I am a member of the NRA, and no, I was not paid to defend the NRA here.
Democrats pretend the NRA is the only organization that lobbies politicians. In candidate and party contributions, independent expenditures, and lobbying, the NRA has spent $203 million since 1998.
Remember, this is total spending for everything: elections at all levels of government and attempts to influence lawmakers and gun rights advocacy groups. Since 1998, the NRA doesn't come close to sniffing the highest contributing lobbyists. (Note that the Podesta Group, headed by John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign manager, is in the top ten.)

The $203 million is a pittance compared to what other organizations in unrelated industries spent in 2016 alone.

The top ten individual Democrat donors in 2016, for federal races, spent $317 million. This figure is just spending on candidates and doesn't include spending on Democrat causes and lobbying.

So who's really influencing whom? Many of the NRA's members are undoubtedly passionate about firearms and the Second Amendment, but is the NRA really convincing any of its members to vote for pro-gun candidates? Doubtful; I'm certain those voters are, and have been for quite a long time, already pro-gun.

In the grand scheme of things, the money spent by the NRA is barely a blip on the multi-gazillion-dollar business of campaign finance.

Lastly, find me just one instance where the DMIC asks the Parkland Redcoat Hitler Youth creepy kid activists if they actually know how much the NRA has spent over the last five or ten or twenty years. You won't, because no such instance exists.


There have been 23 school shootings year to date.
No, there haven't been. This half-truth has been peddled by many DMIC outlets and Parkland's David Hogg.

The originator of this half-truth is former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg's Everytown for Gun Safety. According to Everytown's "criteria," no one has to be injured, and the shooting can occur off school grounds – but if the shooting off school grounds is heard on campus, or a bullet from the off campus shooting hits somewhere on campus, we have, voilà, a school shooting. In eight of the 23 cases counted by Everytown, no one was injured or killed, and two were suicides. Twenty-three minus 10 doesn't equal 23.

Any act of gun crime is reprehensible. So are regurgitated, fabricated, and debunked lies, myths, half-truths, and conspiracy theories, especially when spewed ad nauseam by teenagers who have been socially engineered into lying liars.

Democrats and their sheeple voters will never tell the truth about guns. Lock and load for the future struggle to preserve our Second Amendment rights; the struggle is just getting started.

Rich Logis is the host of The Rich Logis Show and author of the upcoming book 10 Warning Signs Your Child Is Becoming a Democrat. Follow him at

Read more:
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook


Full Access Member
Actually, assault weapon is a made up term. It's purpose, of course, is purely political and intentionally deceptive just like full semiautomatic.


Full Access Member
Weapons of war is another term misused and exploited by Democrats. It is also completely useless for describing how a firearm operates. A 1911 pistol is, without question, a weapon of war. It is also a wonderful sidearm and target pistol. The bolt action mauser in my safe is a weapon of war and was actually used for that purpose. Pump action shotguns have been weapons of war. My 1858 Remington revolver was a weapon of war as was the muzzle loading rifle next to it. Even my belt action 30-06, the prototypical American deer rifle, is essentially the same as the rifle we used to fight WW1. Essentially all firearms have their roots in military designs. The AR15 is no different in that regard than a muzzle loader, revolver, pistol, lever action, pump action, breech loader, or bolt action. It is merely the advancement of technology. It is also a wonderfully versatile rifle great for both self defense and hunting. It also happens to be a highly accurate design as the bolt locks directly to the barrel.

Members online

No members online now.