The democratic party seems to be digging up their old playbook, again. Their claim is that they support private gun ownership, but only if gun owners follow their so-called “Common Sense Gun Controls.”
Below are some examples of so-called common sense gun controls. The major issue with many of 
these potential laws end up making gun ownership an elitist privilege. Gun ownership is a right, and it isn’t a second class right. By implementing extra taxes, excessive amounts of training, and other costs, the right is taken away from the common citizen.
We should never make a fundamental right into an elitist privilege.
Eliminate Gun Show Loopholes
Well, there are absolutely no such loopholes, and there never have been. Firearm purchases at Gun shows have always had to follow the same laws as every other gun sale. The laws have never given exemptions to gun shows.
Require Background Checks
The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) was established in 1993 as part of the Brady Handgun Violence Act. Some states allow private sales of firearms without a background check. From 1966 to 2022, there were 12 instances of mass shootings that used a gun acquired in a private sale without a background check.
Universal background checks are not “common sense” when they are so flawed that:
Owners can’t loan a gun to a friend or family member.
Owners can’t let others try a gun from another person, even at a range, and even under supervision of the owner.
Owners can’t store guns of friends and family.
Owners can’t engage in consignment sales of guns even with a federal firearms licensee.
Owners can’t even let an instructor handle their gun during training classes.
Red Flag Laws
Gun owners can have their guns taken away based on a single claim by another person without having the ability to have a hearing until after the fact. These laws violate HIPAA in many cases, and they expose law enforcement to high risks when making unannounced “raids” to take away guns.
There are no punishments for those that make false claims.
Assault Weapons Bans
This one makes me laugh because those trying to take away gun rights use the term, “Assault Weapon,” and they don’t even understand the definition. Then to top it off, they fail back to using “Semi-Automatics” even those pretty much every gun made today, whether a rifle or a pistol, is a semi-automatic.
The AR-15 is NOT a weapon of war. It is like every other semi-automatic firearm, but they are villainized because of their looks. The AR-15 doesn’t use special exploding ammunition like many gun grabbers like to say, and in fact, the 5.56mm (also .223 caliber) aren’t even powerful enough to be used for deer hunting.
Magazine Restrictions
The claim is that smaller magazines will result in fewer casualties. Yet, it has never been shown. In fact, some of the mass shootings in the US show that magazine size doesn’t have an impact. Columbine is the perfect example. Klebold used several magazines and was able to shoot 96 rounds with a gun that held only 10 rounds. The Orlando nightclub attack is another example where magazine changes didn’t have any impact. There were hundreds of able-bodied adults, and the attacker had to change his magazines multiple times. Nobody rushed him from behind, from the side, or from the front while he was reloading. Reloading magazines didn’t slow down the shooter. It is one of those sad situations where the magazine size doesn’t make a difference when evil people are involved and attacking others.
However, defensive gun uses show the true value of larger capacity magazines. The person who is defending their lives and the lives of their loved ones doesn’t have the ability to choose when to reload their magazine. They need every round possible to defend themselves, and they are the ones that don’t have time to reload while being attacked.
Training Requirements
This is the only one that I can agree with, but even then, the training requirements become onerous and don’t event take into account the ability held by many people to safely teach how to use a firearm.