So-called assault weapons are guns.
We can all agree on that fact, right?
I ask because there seems to be a segment of the population that apparently doesn't get that, including some folks who work at Snopes.
Don't get me wrong, I'm actually surprised that there are people who don't get that, because I thought everyone considered them guns. Yet it seems that Snopes, still carrying water for any progressive cause that floats by, specifically defended Kamala Harris and Tim Walz from accusations of wanting a gun ban.
Their justification? They only want to ban some guns.
On Aug. 6, 2024, the National Rifle Association's X account posted a video of U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris giving a speech while her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, stood behind her. In the clip, she said: "And together, when we win in November, we are finally going to pass universal background checks, red flag laws and an assault weapons ban."
In the X post, the NRA claimed the pair announced a "gun ban." They wrote: "HARRIS-WALZ ANNOUNCE GUN BAN," and, "They're coming for our guns. Kamala Harris and Tim Walz want to ban commonly owned firearms."
One X user replied: "Military grade assault weapons are commonly owned firearms?"
Well, the term "military grade" is a bit of a misnomer. Many of the common AR-15s are better than military grade, arguably, but yeah, they're commonly owned.
Snopes goes on to try and differentiate between a gun ban and a gun ban. They also defended her history of calling for mandatory buybacks for so-called assault weapons.
In July, the NRA also said Harris supported "gun confiscation," calling her an "existential threat to the Second Amendment." Although Harris did once support assault weapons buybacks, the Harris campaign confirmed with The New York Times in July 2024 that she supported banning assault weapons but did not support any buyback program requiring their sale to the federal government. The 1994 assault weapons ban Harris intends to reinstate made it unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon. The 10-year ban lapsed in 2004.
In short, she supports an assault weapons ban but not a requirement to sell them to the government.
In Sum...
While Harris and Walz expressed their support for the reinstatement of a ban on assault weapons, they did not announce a general "gun ban," as the NRA claimed. Therefore, we rated this claim "Mostly False."
Now, if they want to hit the NRA over saying that Harris still favors something she said she doesn't anymore, that's one thing. I think that a leopard doesn't change their spots and Harris will jump back on the confiscation wagon just as soon as she thinks it's politically beneficial to do so, but the latest word here and now is that she doesn't.
Fair enough.
Yet what Snopes keeps forgetting is that calling for a ban on so-called assault weapons is, in fact, a gun ban. It's not a total gun ban, but it's still banning guns, and banning commonly owned ones at that.
Considering the AR-15 is the most popular rifle model in the nation, that's pretty common, and both of these individuals have called for a ban on them.
What's more, the NRA didn't say it was a general gun ban. That's Snopes sticking words in the organization's mouth so they can present this as false.
The reason this is an issue is that the "fact checkers" routinely spin things to attack critics of progressive candidates, particularly on issues like gun control. Harris and Walz favor a gun ban. That's an established fact based on their own words. Snopes can't even deny that. They don't try. Instead, they try to spin it as if it doesn't really meant what it means.
And this is an issue because too many organizations trust Snopes to fight "misinformation."
The problem is, calling this "mostly false" is, in fact, misinformation of the highest order.
