Imagine What President Kamala Harris Could Do to Guns If She Has Price Control Power

Vice President Kamala Harris rolled out the first of her policy positions and they seem eerily familiar. The Democratic nominee for president wants to attack runaway rising food prices by inserting government to set the prices grocery stores could charge at the checkout counter. That’s not what happens in a free-market society. That’s what happened in the Soviet Union and other failed communist and socialist states, like Cuba and Venezuela.

But what does that mean for gun sales? It could mean everything. If Vice President Harris were to get Congress to go along with her big government price controlling schemes, it’s not a stretch that she could use those same authorities to demand that firearm prices are artificially high and beyond the reach for all but the ultra-rich.

It would be a policy of “If you like your Second Amendment, you can keep your Second Amendment…if you can afford it.”

And recall that we recently discussed the growing trend of courts ruling you don’t have a Second Amendment right to purchase a firearm. Would a Second Amendment challenge to government price fixing succeed?

History and Economics

First, a little economic and history lesson to explain how this has been tried and failed – even in the United States. Vice President Harris wants the authority for the Federal Trade Commission to set prices for food. Stores that deviate from that – include big box wholesale discount stores that offer savings through bulk buys – would face punitive action. Vice President Harris’s plan would have the FTC and state attorneys general investigate and levy penalties if they’re found a violation.

Not only did the Soviets try that and fail – they infamously ended in food lines and bare shelves – but it was also tried before and failed in the United States. President Richard Nixon implemented a 90-day “freeze on all prices and wages throughout the United States,” in 1971. After the freeze, prices and wages would have to be approved by the federal government’s “Pay Board” or “Price Commission.” Two years later, he was forced to abandon the idea. The problem of rampant inflation wasn’t fixed. It was made worse, resulting in shortages of goods and services. America didn’t get relief. It got fuel lines and gas rationing.

Vice President Harris’ plan is short on details but even The Washington Post is dismissing the idea.

“It’s hard to exaggerate how bad this policy is. It is, in all but name, a sweeping set of government-enforced price controls across every industry, not only food,” Breitbart reported of Catherine Rampell’s opinion column in The Washington Post. “Supply and demand would no longer determine prices or profit levels. Far-off Washington bureaucrats would.”

Rampell added, “Worse, it would require public companies to publish detailed internal data about costs, margins, contracts and their future pricing strategies. Posting cost and pricing plans publicly is a fantastic way for companies to collude to keep prices higher — all facilitated by the government.”

Government vs. Guns

It’s also a fantastic way for the government to abuse political authorities and punish an industry it despises. The Biden-Harris administration has already demonstrated unprecedented hostility against the firearm and ammunition industry by weaponizing government against it. Putting the FTC in charge of government price fixing would hand the ammunition the gun control politicians like Vice President Harris want to dismantle the firearm industry.

If Vice President Harris were able to set the price of milk and eggs, she could lean on those same authorities to set the price for firearms and ammunition – so no one could afford them. If she could have the FTC force manufacturers to post internal data, contracts and pricing strategies, she could dismantle the way the firearm and ammunition industry competes to make a better product for a more discerning customer.

If that sounds far-fetched, there’s proof of what gun control politicians do with unchecked authority. They have already proposed using the FTC to deny First Amendment rights to firearm manufacturers. U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) has already proposed that the FTC ban firearm advertising under “unfair and deceptive” practices, among other gun control demands. Democratic Connecticut Sens. Chris Murphy and Richard Blumenthal introduced the Responsible Firearms Marketing Act, S. 1737, in an attempt to push the independent FTC to deny the First Amendment rights of firearm manufacturers and businesses to advertise lawful products. Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) introduced legislation that would weaponize the FTC through S. 252, or the Protecting Kids from Gun Marketing Act, which would direct the FTC to create rules banning the First Amendment free speech rights of lawful firearm manufacturers.

Vice President Harris would wield unchecked authority if her plan to fix consumer prices is enacted. She could bypass the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) that prohibits frivolous lawsuits against the firearm industry for the harm caused by the criminal misuse of a firearm. Instead, she would be able to dismantle firearm companies in courts because of noncompliance with her price fixing laws. Those not immediately targeted would have all internal documents exposed, negating the research and development investments to bring firearms to the marketplace.

Vice President Harris’ plan to fix food prices to beat inflation is a big government power grab. It’s a proven failure. It’s also a harbinger of the communist ideas she’s got in store for not just America’s economy but American rights.