Quote of the day—Hannah Shearer

Kavanaugh’s illogical claim was that public safety should play no role in determining the constitutionality of public safety laws.

Hannah Shearer
September 4, 2018
Brett Kavanaugh’s extreme beliefs on gun control ignore the concerns of most Americans
[Wow.

“Illogical”? I don’t think that word means what Shearer thinks it means. But then it’s clear, that to Shearer, words mean whatever she wants them to mean. Apparently she expects people to forget that if there needs to be some exception carved out of the Bill of Rights there is an amendment process for that. The constitution doesn’t give Federal judges the power to rewrite the constitution.

But, again, she doesn’t want to acknowledge the judges don’t have the power. She appears to thinks the constitution means whatever she wants it to mean.

Ms. Shearer, please get yourself a copy of the constitution, the Bill of Rights, and a dictionary. Words mean something and you, and especially judges, don’t get to redefine them to suit your whims.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Adam Lankford

I am not interested in giving any serious thought to John Lott or his claims.

Adam Lankford
Professor at the University of Alabama
August 2018
Shock study: U.S. had far fewer mass shootings than previously reported
[Of course not. Liars have no desire for the truth.

Lankford claimed the U.S. has more mass shooters per capita, by far, than any country. And has, what appears to be, a socialist explanation:

Mr. Lankford, who claimed to be the first to attempt a global survey, said his results suggested there was something to the American psyche that left people disaffected when they failed to achieve the American dream. He said they turn to violent outbursts with firearms.

“It may thus be the lofty aspirations and broken dreams of a tiny percentage of America’s students and workers — combined with their mental health problems, distorted perceptions of victimization, delusions of grandeur, and access to firearms — that makes them more likely to commit public mass shootings than people from other cultures,” he postulated in his 2015 paper.

He refuses to share his data and his exact methodology and John Lott, and others, easily find many more mass shootings in the rest of the world that what Lankford claims. This results in:

Mr. Lankford studied the period from 1966 to 2012 using data from the New York City Police Department’s active shooter report, a 2014 FBI active shooter report and some foreign accounts.

He identified 292 incidents worldwide in which at least four people were killed — the FBI’s definition of a mass murder. Of those, 90 were in the U.S. — 31 percent of the total among –Jooe171 countries.

Mr. Lott, meanwhile, turned to data from the University of Maryland’s Global Terrorism Database and followed up with Nexis and web searches to try to catch cases that the database missed.

He said good data exist only for recent years, so he looked from 1998 to 2012 and found 1,491 mass public shootings worldwide. Of those, only 43 — or 2.88 percent — were in the U.S. Divide that by per capita rates, and the U.S. comes in 58th, behind Finland, Peru, Russia, Norway and Thailand — though still worse than France, Mexico, Germany and the United Kingdom.

Looked at from the number of victims in those shootings, the U.S. again ranks low, with just 2.1 percent of mass shooting deaths, Mr. Lott said.

Lott released his data and even sent it to Lankford. Who, of course, has an agenda to support and is “not interested in giving any serious thought” to it.

They have to lie to even attempt to win, and they know it.—Joe]

Preliminary injunction on 3-D printed guns granted

The Seattle judge found the arguments of the tyrants more convincing than those of who yearn to be free:

The private defendants raise the more substantive argument that a preliminary injunction will impair their First Amendment rights, a loss which, “for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury.” Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347, 373-74 (1976). The First Amendment argument raises a number of challenging issues. Is computer code speech? If yes, is it protected under the First Amendment? To answer those questions, one would have to determine what the nature of the files at issue here is: are they written and designed to interact solely with a computer in the absence of the intercession of the mind or will of the recipient or is it an expressive means for the exchange of information regarding computer programming and/or weapons manufacturing? Are the export controls of the ITAR a prior restraint giving rise to a presumption that they are unconstitutional? Is the AECA a general regulatory statute not intended to control the content of speech but only incidentally limiting its unfettered exercise? Or is the government attempting to regulate distribution of the CAD files because of the message they convey? Depending on which level of scrutiny applies, does the regulation advance important governmental interests unrelated to the suppression of free speech and avoid burdening more speech than necessary or is the regulation narrowly tailored to promote a compelling Government interest?

The Court declines to wade through these issues based on the limited record before it and instead presumes that the private defendants have a First Amendment right to disseminate the CAD files. That right is currently abridged, but it has not been abrogated. Regulation under the AECA means that the files cannot be uploaded to the internet, but they can be emailed, mailed, securely transmitted, or otherwise published within the United States. The Court finds that the irreparable burdens on the private defendants’ First Amendment rights are dwarfed by the irreparable harms the States are likely to suffer if the existing restrictions are withdrawn and that, overall, the public interest strongly supports maintaining the status quo through the pendency of this litigation.

For all of the foregoing reasons, plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction is GRANTED. The federal defendants and all of their respective officers, agents, and employees are hereby enjoined from implementing or enforcing the “Temporary Modification of Category I of the United States Munitions List” and the letter to Cody R. Wilson, Defense Distributed, and the Second Amendment Foundation issued by the U.S. Department of State on July 27, 2018, and shall preserve the status quo ex ante as if the modification had not occurred and the letter had not been issued until further order of the Court.

I’m on the side of Code Is Free Speech and suggest you get your 3-D printed gun CAD files there.

No surprise

The site of the mass shooting in Jacksonville today has this in it’s rules of conduct:

a. The commission of any act defined by Federal, State or local ordinances as a criminal act is prohibited. These include, but are not limited to: graffiti, property damage, defacing, damaging or destroying any real or personal property, etc.

b. Possession of a weapon, even if legally carried (except by law enforcement officers) is absolutely prohibited on Landing property

c. Using or possessing fireworks is prohibited

A mass shooting in a “gun free zone”. This comes as no surprise. It is to be expected. Most people will be hard pressed to name a mass shooting that doesn’t occur in a “gun free zone”.

Of course this won’t stop the anti-gun people from demanding the entire country be turned into a gun free zone.

Quote of the day—Robert Lasnik

You know, it’s a little bit frustrating to be sitting in this chair as a United States District Court judge and seeing this is an issue that should be solved by the political branches of government. And I really hope and wish that the executive branch and Congress would face up to this and say, it’s a tough issue, but that’s why you got into public service to begin with.

Robert Lasnik
U.S. District Court Judge
August 21, 2018
3D-printed guns: Federal judge in Seattle frustrated over case, could make decision by Monday
[My initial response was, “The issue was resolved long ago and is still resolved. There is no Federal law against 3D-printing a gun. Therefore there isn’t anything the court can say except, ‘Case dismissed.’”

But reading a little closer it appears the argument of the anti-freedom people is a little more twisted:

The legal dispute before the court centers on ITAR, a law that involves regulating the export of certain weapons — not the potential dangers that may result if criminals print out guns and later use them to commit offenses.

Okay, unless ITAR is directly challenged, which it is not, the court has to assume ITAR is valid law. And then the question, “Is the Federal government following the letter of that law?” is a fair question that is a valid for the court to get involved in.

Wilson’s lawyer has to be scoring some points with this argument:

Chad Flores, a lawyer representing Wilson, also raised the arguments that other files for 3D guns are already available online, and Wilson could simply disseminate his plans legally by other means.

My client could mail the files at issue to everyone in the country and violate no law.

Next week we find out which side is more convincing to Judge Lasnik.—Joe]

Quote of the day—George Parry

The gun control advocates may not realize it, but they lost the fight long ago. It’s all over but the shouting.

In the meantime, as the war of words continues, there sits DD’s founder, Cody Wilson, having more fun than should be legally allowed. Like a mischievous adolescent waving a laser pointer, he has the gun control cats racing in circles knocking over furniture and banging into walls as they try to catch and hold the elusive bouncing red dot of readily available firearms. Due to the efforts of Wilson and his little company, the government is once again being exposed as a lumbering and ineffectual colossus. All in all, it’s a dramatic public demonstration of the limits of government power and the fecklessness of those who worship at its altar.

And from out here in the cheap seats, it sure is fun to watch.

George Parry
August 6, 2018
The Utter Futility of Gun Control
[While it is futile in the sense of keeping guns out of the hands of violent criminals it is possible to make life difficult for those who wish to be able to keep and bear arms openly.—Joe]

It’s the Russians!

Interesting:

Facebook announced on Tuesday that it has identified a coordinated political influence campaign, with dozens of inauthentic accounts and pages that are believed to be engaging in political activity ahead of November’s midterm elections, according to three people briefed on the matter.

In a series of briefings on Capitol Hill this week and a public post on Tuesday, the company told lawmakers that it had detected and removed 32 pages and accounts connected to the influence campaign on Facebook and Instagram as part of its investigations into election interference. It publicly said it had been unable to tie the accounts to Russia, whose Internet Research Agency was at the center of an indictment earlier this year for interfering in the 2016 election, but company officials told Capitol Hill that Russia was possibly involved, according to two officials briefed on the matter.

Like the Russian interference campaign in 2016, the recently detected campaign dealt with divisive social issues.

Facebook discovered coordinated activity around issues like a sequel to last year’s deadly “Unite the Right” white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va. Specifically, a page called “Resisters,” which interacted with one Internet Research Agency account in 2017, created an event called “No Unite the Right 2 — DC” to serve as a counterprotest to the white nationalist gathering, scheduled to take place in Washington in August. Mr. Gleicher said “inauthentic” administrators for the “Resisters” page went as far as to coordinate with administrators for five other apparently real pages to co-host the event, publicizing details about transportation and other logistics.

Mr. Gleicher said it disabled the event on Tuesday and notified 2,600 users of the site who had indicated interest in attending the event.

Coordinated activity was also detected around #AbolishICE, a left-wing campaign on social media that seeks to end the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, according to two people briefed on the findings. That echoed efforts in 2016 to fan division around the Black Lives Matter movement.

American intelligence and law enforcement officials have been warning for months that Russia’s efforts to undermine American democracy remain active and pose a threat to this year’s elections. If in fact Russian, the activity would provide vivid evidence that the kind of cyber operations used around the 2016 campaign were still in use.

I sometimes have contact with current or former people in the intelligence community. I don’t have any specific information but “it is well known” the Russians like to create internal conflict in their enemies. It is a part of their culture and even have a word for it (sorry, I don’t remember it). I have been told they organized both anti-Hillary and anti-Trump events in 2016. It’s what they do. Hacking into the DNC and Hillary’s email servers and releasing the contents wasn’t necessarily to help elect Trump. It was to create conflict.

I have to wonder… is a lot of the conflict on social media regarding firearms fueled by Russia? When you are debating some twit on Twitter are you actually wasting time talking to a paid Russian troll?

Quote of the day—Josh Horwitz

Anthony Kennedy is retiring. Those four words could set the gun violence prevention movement back forty years.

In the past week, we’ve seen how devastatingly influential the Supreme Court can be to social justice in this country. With the news yesterday, it could get a whole lot worse.

A “guns everywhere” society.

Josh Horwitz
Executive Director
Coalition to Stop Gun Violence
June 28, 2018
[Via email.

A “guns everywhere society”? Like everywhere someone might need to defend themselves or other innocent people from predators? Sure, what’s the problem with that?

And since Horwitz wants to prevent gun violence instead of punish people who commit crimes with guns I hope his movement is set back, not just 40 years but, to sometime approaching the beginning of time. I know that is a bit too much to hope for. I’d settle for something like 10,000 years. That’s a reasonable compromise, right?—Joe]

Don’t think it can’t happen where you live

I used to live a five minute walk from here. My kids daycare was a block away. I have filled up my car at this station many times:

Redmond Police officers shot and killed a man outside a busy Safeway gas station in Kirkland Thursday evening.

The shooting happened just before 5:00 p.m. outside the Kingsgate station near 124th Ave. NE and NE 144th St.

According to police, the officers recognized the man, who they say was considered armed and dangerous.

Quote of the day—Alan Korwin

No one in mass media is talking about murder and murderers. Watch. They’re only talking about shooting and shooters. By itself, shooters and shooting is not anything bad—and they know that. Being a shooter and shooting is what good Americans do all the time.

Murder is ugly, too ugly to bear. Murderers are horrible, to be rejected outright by society. No glory in being a murderer. Especially no prize for being a mass murderer. So the media avoids it, and in their conspicuous campaign against private arms, they avoid dealing with the murder angle.

The media are leading the nation down a path of perdition, turning shooters and shooting—people and activities with wonderful, excellent attributes—into targets for fear, loathing and legislative assault. And they’re good at it.

Alan Korwin
February 26, 2018
The Problem Isn’t the Shootings. It’s the murders.
[Interesting point.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Charles Krauthammer

This is the final verdict. My fight is over.

Charles Krauthammer
June 8, 2018
A note to readers
[Krauthammer is no friend of gun owners. I’m glad he is out of our fight.

May his passing be as comfortable as is practical and may his family and friends have a chance to say their goodbyes and cherish their memories of him.—Joe]

It’s in her nature

I’m written about Rachel Dolezal before and she once suggested a more complex label would be appropriate. Well, it appears she has obtained a simpler label:

Former Spokane Chapter NAACP President Rachel Dolezal is now facing legal trouble that could land her behind bars. KHQ has confirmed that Dolezal, who legally changed her name to Nkechi Diallo in 2016, is accused of 1st Degree Theft by Welfare Fraud, Perjury in the 2nd Degree, and False Verification for Public Assistance. Her potential punishment under RCW 74.08.331 could include up to 15 years in prison.

That label would be “criminal”.

It is quite clear fraud is in her nature and has been for quite some time.

Quote of the day—Don Kilmer

There are no significant Second Amendment obstacles to local and state gun control at this point.

Don Kilmer
May 15, 2018
California Cities Are Free to Regulate Gun Stores Out of Existence
[The twisted bit of reasoning that led to this particular situation is:

No historical authority suggests that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to sell a firearm.

If you read the appeals court ruling a little deeper you will see they don’t see any reason why the manufacture of all firearms couldn’t be regulated out of existence. Sure, you have a right to keep and bear “arms” of some sort, but no right exists for someone to build them or parts to repair them. The same would appear to be true for ammunition.

Assuming you want to retain some semblance of the right to keep and bear arms in the all the states there are three paths ahead of us.

  • Change the culture.
  • Get gun friendly justices into the Federal Courts with particular attention to the SCOTUS.
  • Take up arms and use them effectively and efficiently.

Option 1 is probably a lost cause in places like California, New Jersey, New York, and other tyrannical states.

Option 3 is far too uncomfortable to give serious consideration until all other options are exhausted.

We have to get behind option 2 and make it a reality while preparing for option 3.—Joe]

NRA suing over New York state abuse

I’m glad to see this:

The National Rifle Association sued New York state officials over what it described as a “blacklisting campaign” targeting companies that try to do business with the group.

The organization filed a complaint Friday in Syracuse federal court accusing New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and the state Department of Financial Services of abuses of regulatory power aimed at stifling the gun-rights advocacy group’s right to free speech.

Earlier this month, the state financial services department fined insurance broker Lockton Cos. $7 million and a unit of Chubb Ltd. $1.3 million over an NRA-branded insurance program called Carry Guard. The agency claimed the program illegally permitted gun owners to receive liability coverage even if they were charged with firearms-related crimes. Carry Guard has been criticized by gun control advocates as “murder insurance.”

While I think it has to be done I can’t imagine the district court gives it much more time than it takes to say, “Case dismissed!”. This, almost for certain, will have to go to SCOTUS to get any traction. I just hope we get one or more friendly justices there by the time it arrives.

Quote of the day—Steve Hornady

Today, the State of New York did one of the most despicable acts ever perpetrated by any state by asking New York banks, financial institutions and insurance companies to stop doing business with the gun and ammo industry.

While it may not make a difference to New York, Hornady will not knowingly allow our ammunition to be sold to the Government of the State of NY or any NY agencies. Their actions are a blatant and disgusting abuse of office and we won’t be associated with a government that acts like that. They should be ashamed.

Steve Hornady
President of Hornady Manufacturing Company
April 23, 2018
[I just ordered 500 Hornady bullets for reloading in response to this announcement. I’ll order more if the price stays competitive and they work out well.

I’ve had this sort of restriction on the use of Modern Ballistics since it’s creation over 20 years ago. Not that I have any means to enforce it.

It’s nice to see big players doing something similar with at least some ability to make it stick.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Joe Gallagher

Very unfortunate as this is caused by Trump spreading HATE. Why is it ok for him to do it but if it was normal citizen they would be arrested for inciting this type of behavior.

Joe Gallagher
Tweeted on April 3, 2018
Regarding the active shooter at YouTube Headquarters.
[Wow! I knew Trump was incredibly persuasive, but this is almost unbelievable.

Well… actually, I don’t believe it at all. Gallagher has some sort of mental disorder if he believes this.

And, in fact, if politics were involved (highly speculative at this point) in this shooting the odds are that the shooter was a Democrat and if the victims were not random then the chances the victims were not Democrats are higher than local demographics would predict. Hence, Gallagher has crap for brains and/or he is deliberately attempting to troll people.—Joe]

Insurance and magazines and the various things

Recently anti-gun people have been making a big deal about the termination of hotel and rental car discounts for NRA members. The belief that this is the reason gun owners join the NRA goes back to at least 2004 in anti-gun organizations:

There are 90 million gun owners in the United States. Only 3.5 million want the insurance and magazines and the various things you get for joining the NRA.

I wonder if there was some backroom strategy meeting where anti-gun people decided they could cause the NRA significant financial harm by destroying the relationships between these businesses and the NRA.

I have occasionally tried to get a good deal renting a car or hotel using the NRA discounts and I have never found it to be as good a deal as I could get via some other channel. Hence, my guess is that these discounts did not result in much business for the hotels and car rental agencies. So, when they were confronted by the angry mobs perhaps they figured there wasn’t that much to lose anyway. So, why have to deal with the hassle?

If they only looked at the loss of the business from people using the NRA discounts I suspect they miscalculated the total costs of that decision. Let’s make that as obvious to them as we can.

Interesting

This morning I responded to a Facebook comment by someone wanting more restrictions on AR-15s because of the school shootings. The person said armed teachers was the wrong way to solve the problem because training, etc. I included this picture:

20180202_133747Cropped

And I said this was the 37th through 46th shots, in her ENTIRE life, at 15 feet. I said I could do this with any woman of sound mind and body (on average, women learn shooting skills MUCH faster than men) with two hours of her time. And give me four hours and I can get them to the point where they could pass the shooting qualification test of local police departments. I offered free training to any teacher that wanted it.

Within a couple minutes I received a notification my comment had been marked as spam and I should review the comment. I went to do that and found the comment no longer existed. I was unable to review it.

I wonder why… [/sarcasm]

Gun cartoon of the day

Via a tweet from Firearm Policy Coalition:

SchoolA-B

The political left has a strong tendency to deflect when presented with something like this. That tells you all you need to know about them and possession of guns. They hate gun ownership more than they are repulsed by the slaughter of hundreds of innocent children and teachers.

Quote of the day—Chris Hayes

Prediction: the president will approach gun safety legislation the same way he has approached DACA. He will lie about what his own position is and attempt to blame others for nothing getting done.

Chris Hayes
Tweeted on February 21, 2018
[H/T to streiff who wrote President Trump’s Gun Control Ideas are so Bad I Don’t Think He Even Believes Them.

I’ve been thinking something similar although I wouldn’t have put it in those words.

I assume President Trump knows we are in a (Fifth Generation) war. If you are in a state of war and you don’t use deception as one of your weapons you aren’t fighting to win. Telling the ATF to make up some regulation to ban bump stocks could get the anti-gun people to quiet down for a while or encourage them to overreach. See, for example, what Sebastian and his commenters are saying. The ATF may come back in a month or two with the same thing they did earlier, paraphrasing, “Banning bump stocks requires legislation, we cannot create such a rule within the confines of existing law.” With just a few weeks the anti-gun people will run out of steam and we can resume our drive for concealed carry across all state lines, taking suppressors off of the NFA list, and even other things like being able to purchase guns in other states and getting rid of the stupid “sporting purpose” requirements.

If things don’t cool off enough and we do get regulation and even legislation banning bump stocks it isn’t that big of sacrifice if we avoid legislation on “assault weapons” and “high capacity feeding devices”. And if it does go the route of a regulation change that should be a lot easier to defeat in the courts if someone has a real interest in taking it to court. I expect any ban on bump stocks will result in grandfathering existing stock. And since they don’t have serial numbers on them they can’t easily be registered. And 3-D printers mean that you as long as you keep your mouth shut you can make one at anytime in the future and it will be essentially impossible for anyone to prove you didn’t own it prior to the ban.—Joe]