In what context are they speaking? Are they merely pointing the Democratic rhetoric in the course of a discussion? Are they actually supporting these policies? And bear in mind that they may not be properly or fully informed about the issues, already existing laws, or even about firearms. The other day a Fox reporter made reference to an “AR-47”. Don’t just hear what they are saying, instead, listen to what they are saying before making judgement. (And yes, there is a big difference between hearing and listening)
Try writing or tweeting or in some way communicating with the personalities to find these answers, and maybe even make an.attempt to educate them if necessary.
Frankly, red flag laws could be an important and useful tool to minimize accessibility to firearms by individuals who should not have access. They must be carefully construed and intelligently enforced though so as to prevent any abusive use of them.
Background checks are another useful tool in the pursuit of minimizing access to firearms by those who should not have it. To believe they solve gun violence is to live in a fantasy land though.
Calling for AW bans is nothing more than a show of ignorance, dishonesty, or an attempt to create an unfounded fear in the public in order to gain support for their true agenda. The rifles they call assault weapons and weapons of war are in fact neither.