We keep doing our best about moving some bills forward to rid our area of more and more guns, but we’re kind of locked in here, not being in the majority.
Lucia Guzman
Senate Minority Leader, D-Denver
February 6, 2018
How to end line of duty deaths in Colorado?
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
There are things that are very, very good and have worked, and we can’t just stop,
Andrea Stewart-Cousins
New York State Senate Minority Leader
February 6, 2018
New York Democrats renew call for gun control laws
[These sound like the words of a drug addict.
I guess it shouldn’t be surprising. Power is a very potent drug. And like other recreational drugs it tends to be destructive to both the user and innocent people near the addict.
The people of New York should intervene and remove her from power.—Joe]
You are literally promoting anti Semitism and white supremacy. Guns do not belong in the hands of private citizens. Shame on you.
Bernie Sanders 2020 @Bernie2020X
Tweeted on January 7, 2018
[This was in response to Maj Toure @MAJTOURE tweeting the four rules of firearm safety.
Many anti-gun people literally do not have the ability to think logically. This is an example of that.
Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
There are far, far too many guns in this country.
Adam Smith
U.S. Representative (WA-9)
January 29, 2013
Rep. Smith visits Bellevue High, discusses gun control and I-502
[And if there are “too many guns” what does that suggest needs to be done? Get rid of many of them, of course!
This is my representative in congress.
I have some work to do.—Joe]
Either gun possession makes people stupid irrational cowards or stupid irrational cowards are drawn to gun possession
I’ve never spoken with a single gun owner who was by any measure, a decent intelligent human being. They’re either wannabe terrorists planning on killing law enforcement or terrified of a situation that could be prevented with locks and motion lights.
Creatures that worthless and evil are undeserving of living among actual human beings.
Mitchell Alvardo
Post on Facebook
November 26, 2018
[I thought I would start out the new year with something particularly good. Enjoy!
This is just another example of someone who thinks they have the wisdom, and should have the power, to decide which groups of people lives and who should be put to death.
Also note that Facebook hasn’t taken down this hateful post. This post meets their standards.
And now you know why the right to keep and bear arms is so important.—Joe]
Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you no one wants to take your guns. The state of New York wants to:
The passage of New York’s so-called SAFE Act (“Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act of 2013”) drastically changed the landscape for lawful gun owners in the Empire State. Besides new restrictions on commonly owned semi-automatic rifles the state calls “assault weapons,” bans on magazines, and limits on the number of rounds that could be loaded into a gun, the Act imposed a requirement that handgun license holders be “recertified” every five years, with all licensees completing the initial recertification by January 31, 2018. The recertification form requires that the licensee disclose his or her “name, date of birth, gender, race, residential address, social security number, [and] firearms possessed by such license holder,” along with the listed identifying details (make, model, caliber, and serial number). (“Firearm” under the applicable New York law means a handgun or other gun of a size which may be concealed upon the person.)
A failure to recertify operates as an automatic revocation of the license. Possession of a “firearm” without a valid license is a criminal offense, and the revocation makes the person ineligible to apply for or renew a license. Once a license is revoked, state law mandates that every gun owned or possessed by the licensee be “surrendered” to a law enforcement agency. A New York State Police field guide on the SAFE Act, prepared by attorneys for the Division of State Police, unequivocally instructs officers that when “a licensee becomes ineligible to hold a pistol permit, the Safe Act requires the person to surrender all firearms to police, including all rifles and shotguns for which no license or registration is required.” (Emphasis in the original.)
Should the person fail to comply by turning in every gun, the SAFE Act (codified as NY Penal Law § 400.00(11)(c)) not only authorizes but requires that police officers confiscate such property: the guns “shall be removed and declared a nuisance and any police officer or peace officer acting pursuant to his or her special duties is authorized to remove any and all such weapons.”
Once the gun is deemed a “nuisance,” the owner loses the ability to reclaim or legally transfer it. State law directs that nuisance guns be destroyed without the need for a court order or other judicial proceedings, and courts have confirmed that a person has no “legitimate possessory interest” in firearms for which he or she has no license.
Even if you ignored the absurdity of having to get a license to exercise a specific enumerated right consider the following situation. If someone forgets about the renewal deadline, or are serious injured or sick and can’t meet the deadline, their specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms will be forever infringed by the state of New York.
This will come up at their trials.
I’d also like to, and I may get in trouble with other members of the committee, just say how insane it is that in the United States of America a civilian can go out and buy a semi-automatic assault rifle like an AR-15.
Dean Winslow
November 6, 2017
Trump Pentagon nominee on Texas shooting: It’s ‘insane’ that civilians can buy ‘assault’ rifles.
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
we ARE coming for your guns.
Gavin Newsom @GavinNewsom
Lt. Governor of California and former San Francisco Mayor
Tweeted on November 14, 2017
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
Without drastic reduction in the number of guns – by say 80 percent – alongside very tight gun type and use restrictions, we will continue to live in a country where deer get far better protection than humans.
Ridley Nelson
December 12, 2017
Armed as For a War Zone
[Really! Some might be tempted to demonstrate the fallacy of Nelson’s assertion with a side by side comparison of the differences.
And don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
I’m all for repealing 2a and banning and confiscating all firearms. Give a 90 day grace period and then make all gun possession by civilians a felony.
PuttsForSix
November 12, 2017
Comment to Hand over your weapons
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.
The logistics of this would be “quite interesting” even if the collection points didn’t collect incoming fire. That is a lot of material to dispose of. How do they dispose of the guns without the guns being “reclaimed” in transit? If destroyed onsite how do they keep the site supplied with power and/or fuel for their torches? There would have to be records kept so that individuals couldn’t claim the gun they bought a few months earlier (for which the ATF has the 4473) had already been turned in. What if those records were corrupted or destroyed?
As you start working through the security details of such an operation you end up thinking you could write a novel about it.—Joe]
I want your guns melting in pile in the town square, deal with me.
SteveM081411
November 11, 2017
Comment to Hand over your weapons
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.
People should be careful what they ask for.—Joe]
If gun-control advocates really want to stanch the blood, there’s no way around it: They’ll have to persuade more people of the need to confiscate millions of those firearms…
David Scharfenberg
November 10, 2017
Hand over your weapons
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.
In response to Mr. Scharfenberg, NO!
Your move David.—Joe]
Gun-related homicides in Chicago have reached a new high in 2017, surpassing a body count of at least 600 dead human beings.
If you were to stack those bodies one on top of the other, a graphic graph would look something like this, in comparison to the height of Sears Tower:
In short, Chicago’s restrictions on firearms ownership are deadly. They do more harm than good, making unarmed people easy prey for gun-bearing thugs who care nothing about gun laws.
“600” is a nice, tidy number, but the bottom line is that Chicago’s a total mess.
I lived in Chi-town from 1996-2001. The gun situation was ugly, to say the least. There, I learned that an unarmed populace is easy prey. The break-ins, shootings, homicides, and lost lives were a brutal reality.
Combining my firsthand experiences with second-hand accounts from friends, my stack of Chiraq stories is seven-feet deep. There’s plenty to share; here are two of many, many, many:
On a bicycle ride home from work one night, someone shot at me. I could not see the shooter (the bullet came from behind), but as the bullet sped past me, it made an unforgettable whizzing sound, like what you might see/hear in war movies. I pedaled mightily, for I was more interested in zipping home, rather then calling the police. I doubt the shooter would’ve pulled the trigger if he thought there was a possibility I was packing heat.
Another Chiraq adventure comes from my then-husband/current frex (friend who’s an ex). Once upon a time, back in our Chicago era (Chicago error?), he walked with his pal to the corner store to fetch some goods. To get to the door, he had to step a few feet around a dead body. Cops had just arrived at the scene; the victim was a Latino man who’d been shot by another fella.
If gun-controllers like Chelsea Handler, Julianne Moore, and other privileged celebrities had to step around a dead body each time a Chicagoan was gunned down, they might reconsider their just-one-more-gun-law-will-fix-gun-tragedies strategy.
Whilst the 2010 McDonald case has opened up things a bit, the remaining gun laws of Chicago are extensive and harsh, making it incredibly difficult for the average law-abiding citizen to purchase a tool of self-defense.
Years ago, Joe Huffman encouraged me to blog about my experiences of living in gun-controlled Chicago. He said my pro-gun/pro-self-defense advocacy had a place in gun rights history, and that people would want to read my writings. I’m not sure if that’s true; today, I’m finally giving it a shot, putting pen to paper, fingers on keyboard.
I know there are scores of current and former pro-gun Chicagoans out there who could publicly share their eyewitness gun tragedy stories. But most won’t, out of fear. Pro-gunners from all walks of life understand the consequences of speaking up for their right to armed self-defense: bigotry, harassment, and persecution from anti-gun folk.
On the most basic level, we’re used to being yelled at by bitter GunCoggers. “Shut up! You’re a liar!” is the kind of language they embrace.
Outspoken gunfolk have had their lives threatened to the point of needing to relocate. Vocal anti-tyrannyists have been ousted from families, fired by employers, tattled on by tattlers, and targeted by anti-gun politicians. Some have experienced the meddling of their medical records. Others are locked in cages, incarcerated. Or worse.
I can relate to all of the above. I know I’m not alone. We’re not alone.
I write not for sympathy or attention. I write to shed light on what gun control looks like at ground zero in Chiraq. Nobody needs to go through any of that.
My investment in the gun rights matter is rooted in the fact that I’m profoundly saddened by the 500-foot tall pile of dead bodies in Chicago, plus scores of others elsewhere. Those were real people, not numbers. Heavy is my heart.
To the current residents of Chicago, do what I did:
Get the hell out of Dodge; dodge with Godspeed out of Chicago.
—–
Definition of “gun-related homicide” is here.
#Chiraq #Chicago #GunCog
I’d like to ban guns. Almost all of them, at least the ones in private hands.
…
We’d be much better off if we abandoned the absurd fetishism around guns that leaves us awash in so much blood and gore. America would simply be safer if we constructed our gun laws like one of our peer countries in Europe or Asia.
Paul Waldman
October 6, 2017
Ban guns
[Don’t ever let someone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.
Safer? Tell that to the people in the Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin in the early and mid 20th Century. Or the residents of Nanking who survived December 1937 and January of 1938. Or read Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn’s The Gulag Archipelago, 1918-1956: An Experiment in Literary Investigation (Volume One). And the more astute should only have to read one paragraph of Solzhenitsyn’s.
And once the safety argument has been completely destroyed lets “have a discussion” about the morality of denying people the best available tools to defend themselves and their families.
If they can’t be swayed I think one must conclude they regard all which we consider hazards of infringing the specific enumerate right to keep and bear arms as features, not bugs. Their first principles must include claiming the necessity of a ruling class with absolute power over the ignorant bitter clingers, or in more modern terminology “basket of deplorables”.—Joe]
I have never understood the conservative fetish for the Second Amendment.
From a law-and-order standpoint, more guns means more murder.
Bret Stephens
October 5, 2017
Repeal the Second Amendment
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.
Even if the Second Amendment were to be repealed, the Supreme Court has already said:
This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed…
So, the right would still exist even if Stephens could accomplish his desire. And as the repeal date approached you can be sure the preparation for what was to follow would make the previous world’s greatest gun salesmen record look pathetic.
And then Stephens would discover the, probably only, circumstances for which more guns means more murder as some foolish government types attempted to forcibly take those guns from their owners.—Joe]
the only infringement from taking your AR 15 is your penis shrinking
The Wildebeest @wildebeest4160
Tweeted on October 20, 2017
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!
It’s very telling that our opposition resorts to childish insults and we have Supreme Court decisions.
Via a tweet from BFD @BigFatDave —Joe]
As over 90% of gun violence is committed by men, in order for a man to purchase a gun, he must first get a waiver from his current wife, plus his most recent ex-wife, or any woman with whom he is currently in a relationship (if he’s gay, he must get the waiver from his male spouse/partner). This law has greatly reduced most spousal/domestic gun murders in Canada.
• All automatic and semi-automatic guns are banned.
• No gun or clip can hold more than 6 bullets.
• To activate a gun for it to be used, the trigger must recognize the fingerprint of its registered owner. This will eliminate most crimes committed with a gun as 80% of these crimes are done with a stolen gun.
• One’s guns must be stored at a licensed gun club or government-regulated gun storage facility. Believing that having a gun in your home provides you with protection is an American myth. People who die from a home invasion make up a sad but minuscule .04% of all gun murders in the US. And over a third of them are killed by their own gun that the criminal has either stolen or wrestled from them.
Michael Moore
Facebook post on October 4, 2017
[Other than recognizing that Moore is out of touch with the real world of facts the important takeaway is that you should never let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
We have to have the courage to call the NRA exactly what it has become—a domestic terrorist organization that places profit above the lives of the American people.
Jonathan L. Walton
October 3, 2017
Prof. Jonathan L. Walton calls NRA a “domestic terrorist organization” in wake of Las Vegas shooting
[Ignoring the gross errors of fact regarding NRA “profit” you should give a little bit of thought to what the official response to terrorist organizations is. That’s all you really need to know about Walton.
Yeah, he wants you in prison or dead. Maybe even both.—Joe]
They’re going to say, ‘You give them bump stock, it’s going to be a slippery slope.’ I certainly hope so.
Nancy Pelosi
House Minority Leader
Oct 5, 2017
Pelosi Hopes Ban on Bump Stocks Is a ‘Slippery Slope’ to More Gun Control
[Via email from Paul Koning.
If they get bump stocks, it won’t be for free. And the slippery slope is likely to be leaning in a different direction than Pelosi is hoping for.—Joe]
This shooting is more evidence that NO ONE is safe from gun violence. Let’s all recognize that and get guns out of our society. The sense of security advocated by people in favor of gun rights is false and not real protection. Gun pushers like the NRA should be treated like the pariahs on society that they are. They’re conducting a war on the American people. Let’s take away the arms.
Repeal the 2nd Amendment. The time to talk about it has passed. The time to do it is now.
gwaz17
October 2, 2017
Comment to Preventing Future Mass Shootings Like Las Vegas
[People like this aren’t telling you something:
This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed.
Chief Justice Morrison Waite
U.S. Supreme Court
U S v Cruikshank
92 U.S. 542 (1875)
But almost as important is for freedom loving people to make sure that no one gets away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]