…hopes that Glocester will oppose this measure if it comes up again in June. Although the resolution is symbolic, it is undoubtedly harmful because it advances the false narrative that the very rights and livelihoods of Second Amendment supporters are at risk. Law-abiding gun owners though should have no reason to feel threatened by the gun safety measures that community organizers advocate for, and in fact, all regulations–from banning guns in schools to banning military style assault weapons are constitutional.
Today, we are standing up to our leaders to let them know that it is time to drain the swamp. It is time to dissolve the National Rifle Association.
Josh Horwitz Executive Director of Coalition to Stop Gun Violence May 17, 2019 Email with the subject “The NRA has got to go”. [I find it very telling that Horwitz is eager to destroy the nations oldest civil rights organization.
It tells people everything they need to know about him and his organization. He is opposed to civil rights and should he succeed in this endeavor it will make it that much easier to attack and destroy other civil rights organizations and the rights they are attempting to protect.
This afternoon daughter Jaime, her fiancé, and I went to see John Wick 3 – Parabellum. It’s a good action movie. There is some humor too. As Jaime pointed out the humor is “interesting”. It’s delivered completely straight and frequently without even any words. I recommend it for more than the entertainment value. It shows very skilled gun handling and shooting by both Keanu Reeves and Halle Barry. I’m inclined to believe, as is stated in the second video below, we see actors shooting guns at skill level never before seen in a movie.
Below is Barry doing, essentially, USPSA stages. I expect she is performing at about a low class B for a USPSA shooter.
I expect the anti-gun people universally hate the movie and the training videos. It shows what can be done with guns and make it look fun. And it is fun. I’m going to a USPSA match tomorrow, and do most of what Reeves and Barry did in the videos above and I’m going to have fun doing it.
Of course, enforcement is an issue, and often law enforcement won’t know that a storage law has been violated until someone dies. But in adopting such laws society sends a message about what behavior we expect.
Suppose we ignore the constitutional issues of requiring guns to be locked up at all times, why is it so difficult for people to understand that having unenforceable laws is a bad thing? It leads to contempt for the law in general. I suppose they write it off as a reasonable price to pay for their real goal.
I strongly suspect that in this case they are more interested in poking gun owners in the eye than they are in saving lives. Using “pointy sticks” against people you dislike “sends a message” too.—Joe]
Unconstitutional to require training and tests for a right > Oregon v Mitchell Unconstitutional to license a right > Murdock v Pennsylvania Unconstitutional to ban #guns > DC v Heller #gunsense is stupidity #guncontrol is statist trash #2a trumps your feelz
Dstroyr (@Dstroyr_U2b) Tweeted on May 11, 2019 [Just because something is illegal or even unconstitutional doesn’t mean the politicians won’t do it anyway. Remember what Henry Kissinger said:
The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a bit longer.
This is why we have the 2nd Amendment. It is to slow them down, stop them, and reverse directions when they will not abide by the restrictions placed upon them.—Joe]
Ahh… the sweet voice of tolerance and reasoned discourse. Well, I suppose they have to make do with what they have–hate and violence. It’s comforting to know we can defend ourselves against people like this.—Joe]
I’m taking the sanctuary city status that’s been used by progressives and liberals around this country and turning it on its head. We’re thumbing our nose at the federal government. We’re no longer going to be used as a punching bag for the left, for the anti-gun movement.
Every spring, I have to put on my yellow vest and defend the rights that are afforded to me under the Constitution. I finally got tired of it. Maybe it’s time for the town to take a stand.
I remember when Rhode Island required you to take a state run class to get a concealed carry permit. It was only put on once a year with a limited number of students. It could take years to get your permit. You also had to get a passing score in the shooting part of the class using the supplied gun—which had a bent barrel.
If a shooting starts and the marshal’s gun is in a locked box on the other side of school, it might as well not even be on campus. A firearm that is not employable has no value. You have no school marshal program if the gun is locked up in a safe.
Jerry Patterson May 7, 2019 Texas seeks more armed school personnel after mass shooting [Anti-gun people are demanding that if gun is at a school that it be in a safe instead being carry in a holster. It’s easy to draw the conclusion that they do not want guns used to save lives. That would provide evidence their narrative is false and they are willing, perhaps even eager, to pay the price in children’s lives to further their narrative.
Plaintiffs contend that there is no genuine dispute that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the individual right of every law-abiding citizen to acquire, possess, and keep common firearms and their common magazines holding more than 10 rounds – magazines which are typically possessed for lawful purposes. Plaintiffs also contend that the state of California has not carried its burden to demonstrate a reasonable fit between the flat ban on such magazines and its important interests in public safety. Plaintiffs contend that the state’s magazine ban thus cannot survive constitutionally-required heightened scrutiny and they are entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief as a matter of law. Plaintiffs are correct.
Accordingly, based upon the law and the evidence, upon which there is no genuine issue, and for the reasons stated in this opinion, Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment is granted.69 California Penal Code § 32310 is hereby declared to be unconstitutional in its entirety and shall be enjoined.
A stay of the enforcement of this judgement has been made so I will have to continue taking the P-89 until this goes through the appeal process. But I look forward to taking my usual carry gun and 18-round magazines and thumbing my nose at the tyrannical California politicians.—Joe]
While some try to hide their intentions by saying that they are just wanting “common sense” gun regulation, the reality is that ALL gun laws are gun bans. ALL gun laws are threats of deadly violence against peaceful people. Inherently, men, women, and children will be executed for gun ownership as has been demonstrated time again throughout history, including instances within the U.S. like with the ATF and Ruby Ridge. If you support gun control by the state, you’re for gun violence; you’re for gun violence so long as the people perpetrating that violence wear fancy costumes and a badge. Stop the mass violence. Stop the violence of the state.
If recent policies have any indication on Democrats’ intentions, the candidates have stopped their consideration for the rights of gun owners. Here are six ways — big and small — that 2020 Democrats plan to strip gun owners of their access to firearms.
I can think of no reason for a resident of this country to own a handgun or an assault rifle, as these firearms are only used to shoot at other humans. Therefore, the tougher the laws for these types of weapons, the safer we all are.
David Southern April 30, 2019 LETTER: Tough gun control laws create a safer society [Even if we were to accept Southern’s faulty claim that the named firearm types are only used to shoot at humans he has remarkably deficient thinking abilities. He apparently cannot envision that some humans need to be shot and need to be shot in a hurry. This is convincing proof he has crap for brains.—Joe]
Their ultimate desire to take and confiscate guns from law-abiding citizens is where they have always wanted to go, but they know the public is not there, the country is not there, so they try to go in backdoor ways.
California has every gun law the Democrats are pushing on the federal level but none of it prevented 19-year-old John Earnest from allegedly opening fire in Congregation Chabad in Poway.
California has universal background checks, firearm registration requirements, and firearm confiscation orders, via Red Flag Laws. The state requires would-be gun owners to first obtain gun safety certification from the state and then requires a 10-day waiting period for all gun purchases. They also have a one-handgun-a-month purchase limit and a minimum age of 21 for all gun purchases, whether long guns or handguns. Campus carry is banned, K-12 teachers are barred from being armed in school for self-defense, and concealed carry permit issuance is constrained by a “good cause” requirement.
Moreover, California has an “assault weapons” ban. Yet CNN reports that the Chabad in Poway attacker used an “AR-type assault weapon.”
On December 9, 2018, Breitbart News reported that California firearm homicides were up 18 percent 2014-2016, despite the passage of gun control after gun control law.
Awr Hawkins April 28, 2019 Stringent California Gun Controls Failed to Stop Synagogue Attack [Gun control is not about making the general population safer. The accomplishment of gun control is exactly the opposite. It puts the general population at greater risk of criminal violence. I believe all politicians with an above average IQ, at some level, know this. They either view the increased criminal violence as an acceptable price to pay or, in many cases, the desired result.
This increased risk may or may not show up in the general crime statistics as it did for California. Where it really shows up is in those catastrophic events which happen once every few decades in a disarmed population under control of a criminal government. People forget or never really learn the lessons of history. Remember the lessons from the 20th Century originally taught by schoolmasters Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Mao Tse-Tung, Pol Pot, and many others.—Joe]
They will not trust their fellow, gun-owning Americans to act responsibly with firearms, because they do not perceive their fellow American to be harnessed or dedicated to the common good. No republic is established or long stands on such a foundation.
Jeff Snyder 2001 Nation of Cowards, Who’s Under Assault in the Assault Weapon Ban? page 65. [And here we are, 18 years later, talking about Civil War II.—Joe]
Law is . . . not simply a set of spoken, written or formalized rules that people blindly follow. Rather, law represents the formalization of behavioral rules, about which a high percentage of people agree, that reflect behavioral propensities and that offer potential benefits to those who follow them.
There is a lot of discussion regarding the formulation of law in developing countries, former communist countries and how certain laws came to be the U.S. and some other western countries. In many cases the rulers set down some law and the common folk ignored it and created their own alternate law which served the people better. In the examples given the rulers frequently gave up even after, in some cases, the military was brought in, burned peoples houses down and drove them off. When the people, as a whole, disagree with a law the rulers frequently adopt, at least in part, the law of the people and give up on their own decrees.