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]
The national law enforcement organization PoliceOne conducted its Gun Policy & Law Enforcement survey between March 4 and March 13, 2013, receiving 15,595 responses from verified police professionals across all ranks and department sizes. Respondents were asked, “Do you think a federal ban on manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than ten rounds would reduce violent crime?” PoliceOne Survey, Question 6. The results were overwhelming: 95.7% (14,013) of the respondents said “no,” only 2.7% (391) said “yes,” and 1.6% (238) were unsure. This extraordinary consensus by law enforcement professionals that even a nationwide ban on magazines will not reduce violent crime is in stark contrast to the State’s position that banning magazines already possessed by law-abiding citizens is somehow a solution to violent crime.
Dan M. Peterson
January 12, 2018
No. 17-56081
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
VIRGINIA DUNCAN et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. XAVIER BECERRA, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of California, Defendant-Appellant
BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE LAW ENFORCEMENT GROUPS AND STATE AND LOCAL FIREARMS RIGHTS GROUPS IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES
Page 18
An alternate copy of the brief is here.
[The referenced survey is here. An alternate copy of the survey is here.
We have the facts on our side. We have the police on our side. We have the U.S. Constitution on our side. And most importantly we have the moral philosophy on our side.
It’s time we politically crushed those who dare to infringe upon our right to keep and bear arms and prosecute the perpetrators.—Joe]
I stumbled across a survey of police officers taken in 2013 on gun policy (back up copy here). Interesting. Very interesting. There were “15,595 responses from verified police professionals across all ranks and department sizes.”
Here are some highlights:
|
5. What effect do you think a federal ban on manufacture and sale of some semi-automatic firearms, termed by some as “assault weapons,” would have on reducing violent crime? |
||
| Response Response Percent Count | ||
|
Significant
|
|
227 |
|
Moderate
|
|
885 |
|
None
|
|
10,397 |
|
Negative
|
|
3,004 |
|
Unsure
|
|
129 |
|
answered question 14,642 |
||
|
6. Do you think a federal ban on manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds would reduce violent crime? |
||
|
Response Response Percent Count |
||
|
Yes |
|
391 |
|
No |
|
14,013 |
|
Unsure
|
|
238 |
| answered question 14,642 | ||
|
7. Do you think that a federal law prohibiting private, non-dealer transfers of firearms between individuals would reduce violent crime? |
||
| Response Response
Percent Count |
||
|
Yes
|
|
1,684
|
|
No
|
|
11,663
|
|
Unsure
|
|
1,295
|
|
answered question 14,642 |
||
|
11. Do you support the concept of a national database tracking all legal gun sales? |
|
|
|
Response |
Response |
|
|
Yes
|
|
3,334
|
|
No
|
|
10,155
|
|
Unsure
|
|
1,026
|
|
answered question |
14,515 | |
|
19. Do you support the concealed carry of firearms by civilians who have not been convicted of a felony and/or not been deemed psychologically/medically incapable? |
|
|
|
Response |
Response |
|
|
Yes, without question and without further
|
|
12,968
|
|
No,
|
|
586
|
|
Unsure/Neutral
|
|
646
|
|
answered question |
14,200 |
|
|
22. Considering the particulars of recent tragedies like Newtown and Aurora, what level of impact do you think a legally-armed citizen could have made? Choose the statement that you feel is most accurate: |
||
|
Response Response Percent Count |
||
|
Innocent casualties would likely have been avoided altogether |
|
865 |
|
Casualties would likely have been reduced |
|
11,215 |
|
There would have been no difference in outcome |
|
568 |
|
An active gunfight might have resulted in greater loss of innocent lives |
|
767 |
|
Unsure or prefer not to answer |
|
607 |
|
answered question 14,022 |
||
This was what I found most interesting:
|
14. What is your opinion of some law enforcement leaders’ public statements that they would not enforce more restrictive gun laws in their jurisdictions? |
||
|
Response Response Percent Count |
||
|
Very Favorable
|
|
7,004 |
|
Favorable
|
|
3,181 |
|
Unfavorable
|
|
1,382
|
|
Very unfavorable
|
|
1,029
|
|
Unsure/Neutral
|
|
1,753 |
|
answered question 14,349
|
||
|
15. If you were Sheriff or Chief, how would you respond to more restrictive gun laws? |
||
|
Response Response Percent Count |
||
|
Not enforce and join in the public, vocal opposition effort
|
|
6,440
|
|
Not enforce and quietly lead agency in opposite direction
|
|
2,468 |
|
Enforce and publicly support the proposed legislation
|
|
1,132 |
|
Enforce and quietly lead agency in support of legislation
|
|
1,440
|
|
Unsure
|
|
2,869
|
|
answered question 14,349 |
||
Over 70% have a favorable opinion to law enforcement not enforcing more restrictive gun law!
Over 60% would not enforce more restrictive gun laws if they were Sherriff or Chief! Less that 20% say they would definitely enforce more restrictive gun laws!
Tell this to the politicians who claim to represent you.
Keep this in mind when you consider your response to more restrictive gun laws.
His redirection of the story (intentional or not) right back to criminals and guns reinforces to an already uninformed (ignorant) audience that guns and gun owners are evil, period. To completely ignore the real story, that a group of Democrat lawmakers tried unsuccessfully (with taxpayer dollars) to use a covert ATF operation against law-abiding Americans to push a leftist gun-control agenda, undermine our constitutional rights and failed miserably in the process, is precisely why Americans distrust his profession.
Mark Walters
January 17, 2018
Garbage Reporting In, Garbage Reporting Out – Lawful Gun Owners Get the Shaft
[If it doesn’t fit the narrative it doesn’t get coverage.—Joe]
Interesting study:
The mere presence of weapons can increase aggression—called the “weapons effect.” Weapons are theorized to increase aggression by priming aggressive thoughts. This research tested the robustness of the weapons effect using two large representative samples of American adults (total N = 1,097). Participants saw photos of criminals, soldiers, police in military gear, or police in regular gear with guns. Experiment 2 also included a condition with photos of Olympians with guns used to shoot inanimate targets. The control group was police in plainclothes without guns. The accessibility of aggressive thoughts was measured using a word fragment task (e.g., KI_ _ can be completed as KILL or KISS). Photos of individuals with guns used to shoot human targets primed aggressive thoughts, regardless of whether a “good guy” (soldier, police) or “bad guy” (criminal) held the gun. Photos of Olympians with guns used to shoot inanimate targets did not prime aggressive thoughts.
I think the author was “primed” with their own conclusion. When I think of “kill” in the context of a “good guy” with a gun I don’t think of aggression. I think of it as a strong defense.
See also the fairly neutral, Here’s what can happen to your brain and body when you shoot a gun.
A large group in our government and of our citizens still refuse to admit that gun control and gun violence are correlated; it’s an antiquated, backwards viewpoint that needs to be extinguished.
Alex Arabian
January 17, 2018
SHOT: A Gripping, Timely Pro Gun-Control Thriller
[This is what they think of you.
It would appear to be a safe bet that Arabian doesn’t understand that correlation coefficients can be negative or positive and what that would mean. It’s certain, from reading the entire article, they don’t know the facts about dramatically increased number of firearms in this country is simultaneous with dramatic declines in violent crime rates. With such an erroneous base Arabian then concludes that contrary viewpoints need to be extinguished.
What do you have in mind Alex? If the shadow banning doesn’t work will you move on to reeducation camps?
It doesn’t really matter. The answer is no. And long before we run out of ammunition saying no to Arabian’s plans their viewpoint will have grown dim and died.—Joe]
The government and the liberal leftists with their paid bodyguards think normal little people, us unwashed masses are “dangerous”. I would ask why they think that? What is it they want to do that they think we will resist, and they want to remove the most effective means of resistance we have? The tools that make us dangerous. They haven’t yet figured out it’s what’s in our head, not our hand that makes people dangerous. Dangerous. Reminds me of a conversation I had with a friend not all that long ago. A person can be dangerous, and they can be good or evil. It’s not that fact that they are dangerous you need to fear. It’s whether they are good or evil. I want to be dangerous. I want to have the ability to protect myself and my family. I want to be dangerous.
Sheila Stokes-Begley
January 3, 2018
New Years Eve or Sylvester Night
[Only evil fears the good. Only evil wants to make the good less dangerous.—Joe]
Senate Bill 6146 and its House companion, HB 2666, would allow local governments — cities and counties — to determine their own gun regulation laws. With this passed, Seattle will sprint toward a massive and expensive over-reach for gun control in Washington state by attempting to ban all guns.
This will accomplish several things. The Seattle City Council will enjoy virtue signaling again; they will please their base of genital-hat wearing, business-hating, permanent adolescents. They will spend massive amounts of taxpayer money and they will create record spikes in gun purchases and massive donations to pro self-defense groups. Lastly, City Attorney Pete Holmes, who loves heroin use in Seattle, may get a free trip to Washington D.C. to lose in front of the Supreme Court.
Todd Herman
January 15, 2018
Washington gun control: Dems and Inslee play games
[You might think “ban all guns” is an exaggeration. But remember, Seattle already bans the carrying of slingshots and Airsoft guns. Do you think they will find real guns any more palatable?
Even if they don’t ban the possession of everything except the home possession of the exact model of gun Heller took home in Washington D.C. you can safely bet the result will be an extreme chilling effect on the exercise of a constitutionally protected right. See also this blog post comparing gun ownership in the U.S. to the plight of Jews in 1931 Germany.—Joe]
I received an email from Firearms Policy Coalition this morning:
The
State Senate Law and Justice Committee is going
to hear FIVE anti-gun bills THIS MORNING!The
myriad of anti-2A legislation that this would bring is devastating.
- SB 6146 would allow local mayors and city governments
run ramshod over your 2A rights.- SB 6049 would ban any magazine that holds over 10
rounds.- SB 5463 would hold gun owners criminally liable for a
thief breaking into their home.- SB 5992 is the ridiculous “Trigger Activation Device”
ban that would effectively outlaw most firearms accessories.- SB 5444 which is the crown jewel of gun control:
Washington’s “Assault Weapons” Ban.We need to take action on these bills
NOW!There’s
very little time left for us to make our voices heard and block
them!Send
a message to your legislators and tell them to OPPOSE SB 6146, SB 6049, SB 5463, SB 5992, and SB 5444 today!
If you click on their links it will take you to a web page that allows you to easily send letters to your Washington State legislative creatures.
All gun laws are poor investments. Administration of them costs tens of millions, accomplishes nothing and merely annoys the most lawful, peaceable segment of our population. Bump stocks are the latest of leftist howls heard after every shooting.
Gene Ralno
January 9, 2018
Comment to Letter: Gun control
[And as mere howls should be either ignored or enjoyed as one enjoys listening to the howls of coyotes in the distance while sitting on your porch on a summer evening.—Joe]
You will never understand bureaucracies until you understand that for bureaucrats procedure is everything and outcomes are nothing. If you have been living in a world where outcomes are everything, you may have a very hard time understanding bureaucratic thinking or practices.
Thomas Sowell
November 27, 2003
Random Thoughts
[And so it is with the bureaucracies associated with gun ownership and explosives storage.—Joe]
Over the years, I’ve had many people tell me that media coverage of their work or field is often that it borders on unethical. Even so, had I not attended this party, I would not be able to imagine just how far off-base a story like this could be.
Please keep this in mind when you read anything claiming some salacious “insider” perspective on Silicon Valley. The degree to which these claims can be spun from whole cloth is extremely concerning.
Mason Hartman @webdevMason
Tweeted on January 12, 2018
[It’s beyond unethical. It is at least libelous. And in some instances it is criminal.
In this case the narrative was (see also here and especially here):
this party scene is just a tiny component of a much broader culture that has largely left women out of the greatest wealth creation in the history of the world.
And since reality didn’t align itself with the narrative something had to give. Reality lost.
And so it is with media coverage of gun ownership.—Joe]
State Rep. Katherine Rogers, D-Concord, pleaded guilty to assault and was sentenced on Friday in Concord District Court in connection with a confrontation last year with well-known gun-rights advocate Susan Olsen.
The misdemeanor charge stems from an exchange between Rogers and Olsen during a recount of ballots for a state Senate seat in November 2016. Rogers was charged in August.
Olsen was allegedly sitting next to Rogers when Olsen asked Rogers to move the ballots closer. Olsen says that was when Rogers grabbed her and hit her on the side of her head.
And we have more details here:
Olsen stated that she said to Rogers, “If you strike me again, I will have you arrested.” She alleged that Rogers, a former county attorney, countered, “in a low, mocking, angry whisper,” something to the effect of “Hit me. I know you want to. Go ahead. Hit me.”
Olsen claimed that Rogers was “smirking” while she was speaking and then, reportedly leaned in further, “sounding almost like she was daring me,” and allegedly stated, “I know what you want to do. You want to shoot me.”
One of the signs of certain personality disorders is that they think they can read the minds of other people (ask me in person about some of my experiences with this). I strongly suspect a large number of anti-gun people have mental issues.
Why are these people so violent? Oh, I remember now. It’s in their nature.
Firearms are just as normal as your cell phone. You don’t drop your cell phone in water. You have a lock on your phone. It’s very private. It’s yours. You know how to operate it. It’s like a car. When you first start driving, you don’t know what the hell you’re doing. Then you start paying attention, being observant, looking around and being a responsible driver. Get drunk and shooting your gun is the same as getting drunk and driving. The difference is one is a right. A human right. One is a privilege.
Maj Toure
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
December 26, 2017
Why Black People Own Guns
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
1) I have a plan
2) I claim it will reduce crime
3) My plan proposes nothing that actually punishes wrongful acts or increases the penalty on criminals but rather
4) criminalizes currently legal behavior and only applies to people who have not harmed anyone
5) any plan that either targets malum per se activities or DOES NOT harass honest citizens will be rejected as not being “A PLAN”
6) my plan is valid merely if YOUR plan does not harass legal gun ownership
7) that my plan will decrease crime is guaranteed because I have faith that it will
there is the sum and substance of the anti gun side’s Crime control plans as presented by our energetic gun restrictionist
Turtledude
January 10, 2018
Posted in The gun control thread
[This applies to many, if not most, anti-gun people.—Joe]
The only people who benefit from stricter gun control laws are criminals. That’s why states and cities across America should be looking for other, more promising ways to reduce crime.
Tyler Yzaguirre
January 7, 2018
To reduce shootings, look for better ideas beyond gun control
[The criminals are both the obvious robbers and thugs as well as the not quite as obvious politicians who lust after power.—Joe]
He put it in his mouth, huh? Is anybody surprised, given the left’s insistence that guns be equated with penises?
tkdkerry
January 8, 2018
Comment to Quote of the day—Megan Fox
[I so laughed out loud!—Joe]
Nelson should be investigated right now for defrauding the state of Washington and he should be evaluated for his own safety and the safety of those around him. Someone get this man help and alert the King County Sheriff’s Office that Nelson has an invalid concealed carry permit. In the meantime, maybe we should start seriously considering making it much more difficult for Democrats to get their hands on guns.
Megan Fox
December 19, 2017
Why Leftists Should Not Be Allowed to Have Guns
[Read the article she based her post on. The range he got his training at and bought his gun is the range I go to most frequently. I know his instructor Brett.
But most importantly read the gems like this:
It was perhaps inevitable that the very first thing I did when I brought the gun home and was alone with it was to put it in my mouth. Unloaded at first, then loaded.
This guy is a real piece of work.—Joe]
The .50 caliber Desert Eagle has similarly destructive characteristics that distinguish it from other handgun cartridges. It is an enormously powerful, high-velocity, armor-piercing round manufactured for use in tank-mounted machine guns that has been adapted for use in a few foreign made handguns.
Scott D. Dailard
1994
The Role of Ammunition in a Balanced Program of Gun Control: A Critique of Moynihan Bullet Bills
Journal of Legislation: Vol. 20: Iss. 1, Article 3.
[And this is just one of many reason why we despise anti-gun people doing “research”. They only have a vague idea of what they are talking about and/or deliberately lie. And, note the date, this has been going on for decades.—Joe]
If you don’t feel the need to carry a gun because you believe the government will keep you safe, why do you care if I or anyone else decides to Carry a gun? If anyone tries to harm you, the government will stop it right? 
Where Is your faith in government?
Colion Noir @MrColionNoir
Tweeted on January 2, 2018
[Wow!—Joe]
![clip_image002[4]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0024.png "clip_image002[4]"){kind=small}
![clip_image004[4]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0044.png "clip_image004[4]"){kind=small}
![clip_image006[4]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0064.png "clip_image006[4]"){kind=small}
![clip_image008[4]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0084.png "clip_image008[4]"){kind=small}
![clip_image010[4]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0104.png "clip_image010[4]"){kind=small}
![clip_image002[6]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0026.png "clip_image002[6]"){kind=small}
![clip_image004[6]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0046.png "clip_image004[6]"){kind=small}
![clip_image006[6]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0066.png "clip_image006[6]"){kind=small}
![clip_image002[8]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0028.png "clip_image002[8]"){kind=small}
![clip_image004[8]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0048.png "clip_image004[8]"){kind=small}
![clip_image006[8]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0068.png "clip_image006[8]"){kind=small}
![clip_image002[10]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image00210.png "clip_image002[10]"){kind=small}
![clip_image004[10]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image00410.png "clip_image004[10]"){kind=small}
![clip_image006[10]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image00610.png "clip_image006[10]"){kind=small}
![clip_image002[4]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0024.gif "clip_image002[4]"){kind=small}
![clip_image004[4]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0044.gif "clip_image004[4]"){kind=small}
![clip_image006[4]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0064.gif "clip_image006[4]"){kind=small}
![clip_image002[6]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0026.gif "clip_image002[6]"){kind=small}
![clip_image004[6]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0046.gif "clip_image004[6]"){kind=small}
![clip_image006[6]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0066.gif "clip_image006[6]"){kind=small}
![clip_image008[4]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0084.gif "clip_image008[4]"){kind=small}
![clip_image010[4]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/clip_image0104.gif "clip_image010[4]"){kind=small}
