I realize that’s a bit of a “dog bites man” headline. It would be much bigger news if the New York Times had a columnist on staff who was elated over the fact that gun control activist David Chipman won’t be the next ATF director, but the odds of that happening are roughly the same as Joe Biden admitting he completely botched the Afghanistan pullout. Not gonna happen.

So, on today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co we’re fisking Gail Colllins’ latest anti-gun screen instead of highlighting a surprising pro-2A take. If the New York Times ever publishes such a piece, however, I’ll jump on that column too.

Collins is clearly bothered by the fact that millions of Americans have embraced their Second Amendment rights since the start of the COVID pandemic, and she doesn’t sound too impressed by Joe Biden’s efforts to implement his anti-gun agenda.

Let’s take a look at how well Joe Biden is doing with his gun safety agenda.

We call this gun safety, people, because “gun control” makes a lot of politicians nervous. And really, what the heck? I’m going to go out on a limb and say that eliminating the sale of semiautomatic rifles would make the country more … gun safe.

I’d crawl back off that limb there, Gail, because banning the sale of semi-automatic rifles would’t do anything to make this country safer. Rifles of all kind are used in fewer homicides every year than fists and feet, according to the FBI, so banning their sale seems like an awfully dumb way to crack down on violent crime.

Banning assault weapons was on Biden’s to-do list, along with universal background checks and a stronger, more forward-looking Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives under the leadership of David Chipman.

Well, here we are, less than a year into the administration, and Chipman’s nomination is kaput. Biden hasn’t yet come up with a new name. This is not all that unusual, since congressional gun politics has limited the A.T.F. to only one actual confirmed chief in the last 15 years.

Biden hasn’t come up with a new name because he and his gun control allies were convinced they could ram Chipman’s nomination through despite his years of work as a paid gun control lobbyist; work that Gail Collins inexplicably fails to mention to her readers.

There are a limited number of other things Biden can do on his own. He’s made it harder for folks to acquire “ghost gun” kits that let them build their own weapons at home. And he ordered a survey of weapons-trafficking patterns, which sounds like a great idea except for the part about the beleaguered A.T.F. having to do the work.

Actually, Biden hasn’t done anything on “ghost guns” other than to propose a rule that probably won’t take effect until sometime in mid-2022 and will be immediately challenged in court once it does. Oddly, Collins doesn’t bring up Biden’s other proposed rule targeting pistols with stabilizing braces, even though its implementation would result in a backdoor gun ban of millions of lawfully-owned firearms. Maybe the issue is too complicated for her to explain to her readers, or maybe she herself doesn’t have a strong grasp of what the proposed rule would do. Of course there’s also the possibility that Gail Collins has never heard of that proposed rule, because while she may have very strong opinions on gun control, she doesn’t pay that much attention to the issue on a regular basis.

Meanwhile Senator Christopher Murphy of Connecticut — whose state was, of course, the site of the Sandy Hook school shooting — is trying to rally support for a bill to extend the current background check program to unlicensed sellers at gun shows. Yeah, right now one easy way to buy a gun without having anyone check to see if you have a history of criminal convictions, mental illness or a domestic violence restraining order is to just plunk down some cash at a gun show.

“I may be chasing the white whale, but I’m still in hot pursuit of a deal that can get 60 votes in the Senate,” Murphy told me.

Kudos to him, although the fact that Murphy believes he might have a 50-50 chance of getting a reform that modest through the Senate is still pretty darned depressing.

What’s really depressing is that Collins thinks a law like this would do any good. I mean, I thought criminals were all building their own “ghost guns” now, so why would they bother with a gun show?

In all seriousness, criminals mostly get their guns through theft, family and friends, and the black market. Gun shows are not a significant source of guns illegally obtained by criminals, and it’s also important to note that in California, where universal background checks are in place along with a 10-day waiting period, gun control activists are still trying to ban gun shows. If Murphy’s bill became law, Collins would simply find some other reason to go after gun shows and gun owners, particularly once it became clear that Murphy’s Law was having no impact whatsoever on the nation’s crime rate.

Collins concludes her piece by hoping for passage of Murphy’s legislation, declaring that if it gets to Biden’s desk it would be a bad day for the “weapons lobby.” Not criminals, mind you. Apparently on some level even Collins understands that they wouldn’t care. No, it’s the legal gun owners who are really bugging Gail Collins for some reason. It’s almost like she has more of a problem with people standing up for their civil rights than those committing violent crimes, which is a bad take, even for the New York Times.

Here’s my advice to Gail Collins: get ready for more disappointment and more bad days for your side. The Supreme Court is not only going to hear a challenge to New York’s carry laws this fall, but they’ll be considering whether to accept almost a half-dozen other Second Amendment cases when the Court returns from its recess in just a few weeks. I think the odds are good that one or more of those cases will be accepted, with a majority ultimately coming down on the side of the Constitution and our individual right to keep and bear arms.