Category Archives: Gun Rights

Quote of the day—Alan M. Gottlieb

Posted on by

It was silly for Seattle to withhold this information, but we’re pretty certain why the city did it. The council was told that this tax could generate between $300,000 and a half-million dollars, but now it appears the city has collected just over $100,000, which is an embarrassing shortfall.

As a result the city has essentially lost money on this scheme because now they have to pay our attorney fees, plus a small penalty. On top of that, the city has lost tax revenue because one major gun dealer has moved out of the city and another has reported considerable sales losses. That is tax money the city will never realize.

Alan M. Gottlieb
SAF Executive Vice President
JUDGE FINDS AGAINST SEATTLE IN PRA CASE FILED BY SAF, MAGAZINE EDITOR
[Almost for certain, even without paying SAF lawyer fees, the city of Seattle lost money by creating a tax on guns.

But, it was never really about “revenue to provide broad-based benefits through research and prevention programs”. It was about raising the cost of exercising a specific enumerated right. They succeeded in driving sellers out of the city and encouraging legal buyers to travel out of the city.

They should be prosecuted.—Joe]

Quote of the day—David Fallick

Posted on by

Michael Hammond, legislative counsel for Gun Owners of America, claimed that “he’s ‘probably’ the guy who, after the Newtown massacre, killed the bipartisan bill that would’ve required background checks on commercial sales of guns. He had ‘a very big role’ in designing opposition in the Senate.” That’s too bad. I would have preferred a guy who “probably” pushed through legislation so that not one more person since that massacre was ever shot in the United States. Let’s work toward that — keeping everyone safe and preventing any danger of anyone being shot ever again. We need gun control.

David Fallick
July 24, 2017
We need gun control
[If Fallick believes there is legislative action possible such that “not one more person since that massacre was ever shot in the United States” he has to be the all-time winner of the Crap for Brains award.

That is industrial grade stupidity.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Weer’d Beard

Posted on by

Planting a Mole in the Brady Campaign is like sending a torpedo at a sinking ship.

Weer’d Beard
July 24, 2017
Comment to Brady Campaign is hiring
[I can’t see any advantage to having a mole inside of the Brady Campaign either. They just aren’t effective enough at anything except generating material for us to mock to be a threat.

I could see it being useful to have someone inside who leads them further into self delusion and irrelevancy. It would be amusing for them to spend a ton of money “getting back to their roots” and openly advocate for the things they did when they had the most power in the White House.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Emily Miller‏ @EmilyMiller

Posted on by

ALL AMERICANS can apply for DC gun carry permit, not just residents. Here’s link, but ignore the good reason part!

Emily Miller‏ @EmilyMiller
Tweeted on July 26, 2017
[Amazing. I started carrying a gun in the mid 1990s and DC not only prohibited carry, it also prohibited handgun possession unless the gun was registered with DC before 1976.

I still see the requirement to be registered and pay money to exercise what is acknowledged to be a specific enumerated right as an infringement of that right but it is a extreme improvement.

We have a lot of people to thank for this change, Alan Gura, CATO Institute, SAF, and the NRA are the most obvious but Emily Miller and her book were also significant contributors.

If you squint just a little you can see constitutional carry in DCs future.*—Joe]

* Yes. I know DC had constitutional carry for a few days three years ago (to the day of Emilly’s tweet) but it did not persist. This may not persist either but this time it is going to last more than a few days.

Quote of the day—ThatNormalBunny

Posted on by

Instead of smart people with guns there should be no people with guns

ThatNormalBunny
July 24, 2017
Comment to video How a Hacker Fired a Locked Smart Gun Using Only Magnets | WIRED
[Don’t ever let someone get away with telling you that no one wants to take away your guns.—Joe]

It will always be relatively easy

Posted on by

Sebastian has interesting comments on his site about this video:

See also my blog category of Smart Guns.

People who demand all guns must be “smart” must fall into one or more of the following categories:

  • They are evil and are deliberately attempting to raise the price and restrict the exercise of specific enumerated rights.
  • They have intellectual capacity asymptotically approaching that of a fence post.
  • They believe technology is some sort of magic that can do anything once someone figures out the proper technological incantation. They cannot comprehend there are certain things that are physically, or for all practical purposes, impossible. Engineers/scientists (I have been both) are able to things which is indistinguishable from magic to the general population. This does not mean they do not have very real and impenetrable boundaries they must operate within.

Such people should be politely informed they are wrong, mocked, scorned, and prosecuted. In that order.

Quote of the day—Marchelle Tigner

Posted on by

It’s important, especially for black women, to learn how to shoot. We need to learn how to defend ourselves.

Marchelle Tigner
July 24, 2017
Black women picking up firearms for self-defense
[The reason given for it being especially important for black women is that black women are more likely to be victims of domestic violence.

This is an AP story and is an extremely important trend:

It’s hard to find definitive statistics on gun ownership, but a study by the Pew Research Center released this month indicated that just 16 percent of “non-white women” identified themselves as gun owners, compared with about 25 percent of white women. Other Pew surveys in recent years have shown a growing acceptance of firearms among African-Americans: In 2012, one found that less than a third of black households viewed gun ownership as positive; three years later, that number had jumped. By then, 59 percent of black families saw owning guns as a necessity.

If the advocates for gun rights get the African-Americans on board we will politically crush the anti-gun advocates.—Joe]

Brady Campaign is hiring

Posted on by

I ran across this today and even though I know the Brady Campaign folks live in an alternate reality that only occasionally intersects with ours I was still taken aback:

The mission of the Brady organization and its Million Mom March is to create a safer America by cutting gun deaths in half by 2025.

One might claim they are delusional since more than half of “gun deaths” are suicides and it is extremely unlikely they can come up with idea to reduce those significantly, let alone get it implemented. And most of the murders are by gangs who, as part of their “business”, traffic in banned goods already. For them to get a gun is never going to more difficult than it is for the average high school dropout to get the recreation drug of their choice. Which means they probably can get a gun within an hour, 24×7, any day of the year.

I can’t imagine the management of the Brady Campaign doesn’t already know the goal is completely unfeasible. Hence, they are deliberately lying. It’s nothing new.

Then we have this:

Brady is in search of a National Communications Director to lead its communications strategies to drive the national conversation on gun violence prevention (GVP). This position will oversee all external communications, serve internal clients (development, organizing, legal and policy functions) in their communications needs, respond to media inquiries and develop and lead aggressive and proactive earned media strategies to build awareness of Brady’s work. This is a unique opportunity to contribute to an issue and organization of historic importance and shape the national discourse on reducing gun violence in the United States.

To apply, email cover letter and résumé to search@bradymail.org mentioning “National Communications Director” in the subject line.

Responsibilities:

  • Develop and implement communications strategies for the organization to effectively communicate Brady’s work and message as part of the national dialogue on gun violence prevention.
  • Oversee all external communications on behalf of Brady
  • Respond to media inquiries and develop proactive strategies to increase awareness of Brady’s work in traditional and new/social media outlets.

Qualifications:

  • Bachelor’s degree required; related graduate degree desirable.
  • Experience with, passion for and knowledge of the GVP issue desirable.
  • At least 8 years of direct experience in positions with communications responsibility, with considerable experience as a media relations and strategic communications professional and manager required.
  • Experience in public policy, nonprofit, or advocacy campaigns at the state or federal level desirable.
  • Proven experience managing a comprehensive communications team drafting, editing, and overseeing material production including, but not limited to, press releases, fact sheets, social media posts, and op-eds.
  • Proven ability to guide communications strategy, execution and delivery to raise profile of organization.
  • Ability to synthesize and summarize large amounts of information and to focus quickly on the essence of an issue, as well as to identify, understand, and address different policy perspectives.
  • Strong writing skills and willingness to participate in execution of communications tactics when needed to ensure success of initiatives.
  • Confident in presenting one’s own ideas and diplomatically persuading others as appropriate.
  • Ability to work professionally and collegially within a creative, fast-paced culture that demands excellence and emphasizes teamwork.
  • Demonstrated time and project management skills, including an ability to meet multiple deadlines by maintaining a high level of organization. Ability to set priorities and identify resources.
  • Ability to work independently with limited supervision.
  • Flexible and able to routinely juggle multiple competing priorities and work in teams of both support and senior staff to meet project goals.

Odd. They don’t mention anything about “must be willing to be delusional or adopt a culture of lies and deception and violate Federal law.”

Quote of the day—AWR Hawkins

Posted on by

The bottom line is that the Left already knows their gun control schemes do not work; criminals and terrorists have proven it. Yet they keep demanding that Americans submit to more and more restrictive gun laws.

Perhaps it is not gun control they are seeking. Maybe they are just seeking control.

AWR Hawkins
July 21, 2017
When Gun Control Fails
[There is one thing gun control is good for. Genocide.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Andrew Mark Miller

Posted on by

Sadly, liberals don’t care about stopping violent crime.  They care about their own rabid ideology.

One of many examples where liberals are actually hurting the people they think they are protecting with their reckless ideas.

Andrew Mark Miller
July 20, 2017
Gun Control Study: Carry Permits Up 190%, Violent Crime Down 18%
[Perhaps the masses of “useful idiot” progressives think they are “protecting” people. At the top levels they know better. They are in it for the power. Guns and the truth are power. Stalin knew this and knew the masses must not have guns or ideas of their own. The high level progressives know this too. The data is so overwhelming that have to know it. That they say things like “fake but accurate” with complete sincerity and even after getting caught can’t understand why they should get fired or even apologize is proof they care far more about their rabid ideology and power than the truth and what is best for the people in general.—Joe]

Quote of the day—BlackKokkAsian

Posted on by

you can still buy car trunk guns in Oakland.  there’s a 10 second waiting period to count the money.

BlackKokkAsian
July 18, 2017
Comment to California struggles to implement new gun-control measures
[The selection is limited and there is no money back guarantee, but sometimes the prices are below the manufactures’ cost of production.—Joe]

Quote of the day—TexasTopCat

Posted on by

The people pushing this law know that there will be no reduction in criminal violence, it will merely be one more group of people that will be denied civil rights and become unarmed victims of crime.

TexasTopCat
July 16, 2017
Comment to ‘Gun safety’ is not ‘gun control’: Letter to the editor
[The law being discussed is about “extreme risk protection” orders.

The questions I have are:

  1. If these people are so dangerous to themselves and/or others why are they still allowed to drive cars and/or possess a can of gasoline and a book of matches?
  2. Why are they not put in an institution, closely observed, and being treated?

Oh, that’s right. These are gun owners we are talking about. They are a special case. Any plausible, no matter how speculative, rationalization is sufficient justification to infringe upon their rights. And then, once they are no longer gun owners, there is nothing to fear about them.

As TexasTopCat articulates, nearly all the people pushing these laws know the law cannot possibly do what they say it will. It’s just an excuse to forcibly convert people who are more independent than they into a condition of more dependence.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Daniel Greenfield

Posted on by

All the shocked media coverage of the latest acid attacks in London carefully tiptoe around the obvious issue. Acid attacks tend to involve immigrants or the children of immigrants. They’re a horrifying tactic that has been imported to the UK.

Acid attacks are one of those enriching benefits of diversity.

Instead of dealing with the obvious, the proposals push for “Drain cleaner control”. As if you can seriously prevent people from getting their hands on chemicals that don’t go well with the human face. After the triumphs of gun control and knife control, now it’s onward to drain cleaner control.

Acid attacks in London have climbed from 162 in 2012 to 454 last year.

We could talk about immigration. Or we can try to ban drain cleaner.

Daniel Greenfield
July 14, 2017
“Diversity” is Why London has Acid Attacks
[I expected that after gun and knife control they would started demanding either rock or stick control.

I was wrong, but it could still happen. Give them a few years. Intelligence has its limits but stupidity does not appear to have an upper bound.—Joe]

Who Is The Biggest Threat To The Black Lives Matter Plantation?

Posted on by

In his latest video, @MrColionNoir torches the political plantation of Democrats aka Black Lives Matter.

I’m not much of a party politics girl, but the moment moved me enough to make a meme:

The biggest threat to the political monopoly of the Democratic Plantation is free-thinking indepdendent African-American citizens who embrace the Second Amendment. - Colion Noir

Feel free to share this image, no need to credit me.

#BlackLivesMatter
@BlackGunsMattr
@ColionNoir
#Everytown
#Soros
#2A

Quote of the day—Vicious Deplorable dollop

Posted on by

The United States is the safest place in the world, as long as you stay away from democrats.

democrats commit 75% or more of the murders every year.

democrats commit 95% or more of the mass killings every year.

The United States has a democrat problem.

Vicious Deplorable dollop
July 10, 2017
Comment to Gun control works. All the western countries that have gun control have lower murder rates
[The statements of facts are plausible but citations are needed.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Dana Loesch

Posted on by

Only people with a predilection for violence would mistake a condemnation of violence as a ‘call to violence.’

Dana Loesch
July 3, 2017
A gun-control group’s cheery response to the NRA’s ‘dystopian’ recruitment ad
[It’s not a “mistake”. It’s rules #1 (lying) and #3 (projection) in SJWs Always Lie.

In the last few months the political left has caused a million dollars of damage in just Portland alone and openly saying (emphasis added):

We are committed to the idea that people in our community should be able to participate in resisting this bigotry in whatever capacity they find appropriate. For this reason, we have chosen to make the primary focus of the event a rally at a separate location that is adjacent to the Alt Right rally.

We are unapologetic about the reality that fighting fascism at points requires physical militancy.

…we are not opposed to the tactic of property destruction…

In Baltimore, 2015, damages were estimated at nearly $13 million. In Ferguson the costs of the riots were in the tens of millions. And millions more in physical damage.

Then, last month, someone from the political left shot Republican Congressmen at a baseball game.

And the political left has a “cheery response” to Loesch’s “dystopian” video expressing concern about the violent left?

The only reason they are “cheery” is because they are getting away with their criminal behavior.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jeffrey C. Dege

Posted on by

Yes, there are people who are terrified of guns, but that is their problem, not ours.

I’m not suggesting that we be argumentative, but I am suggesting that we shouldn’t hide. Every time we act as if gun ownership is something to be embarrassed about, we help convince the people in the middle that the anti-gunners are right.

Jeffrey C. Dege
Epiphanies and gun rights
[I have some “conversation starters” on my desk at work:

WP_20170710_12_58_42_Pro

When someone asks me what I did over the weekend or a holiday I tell them about the match I participated, the ammo I reloaded, or the preparation work for Boomershoot I did. When friends come to the house to visit I show them my reloading bench. And I take new shooters from work, friends, and family to the range.

Be out, proud, safe, and sane.—Joe]

If you carry don’t provoke

Posted on by

In several of the self-defense classes I have taken the instructors have told the class that if you carry a gun you will be held to a higher standard of behavior than those who do not carry. And specifically, do not pick a physical fight you are nearly certain you are going to win.*

We now have a real life example playing out of why this can cause you (and the gun rights movement in general) serious problems.

Remember the University of Washington incident involving a speech by former Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopoulos (see also my blog post here) on January 20th of this year? The couple who were involved in the shooting are now in trouble because there is evidence they went to the event with, shall we say, “a poor attitude”:

Assault charges filed Monday against a Ravenna couple in connection with the shooting of a protester outside a speech by former Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopoulos on Jan. 20 allege they went to the University of Washington campus that night looking for trouble.

Marc and Elizabeth Hokoana had armed themselves — him with pepper-spray and her with a Glock semi-automatic handgun in a holster under her coat — and went to the protest intending to goad demonstrators they knew would be there, King County prosecutors allege. Some witnesses said Marc Hokoana appeared to be intoxicated.

According to the charges, the day before Yiannopoulos was scheduled to talk at Kane Hall, Marc Hokoana had messaged a friend on Facebook, stating, “I can’t wait for tomorrow. I’m going to the milo event and if the snowflakes get out off hand I’m going to wade through their ranks and start cracking skulls.”

His friend asked him if he was “going to carry.”

Hokoana responded, “Nah, I’m going full melee,” but then wrote “Lily … is,” referring to his wife, Elizabeth.

I’m sure Elizabeth Hokoana didn’t help her case when she was interviewed by the police.

H/T to Julie S. for bringing this new information to my attention. She is also a personal friend of Josh Dukes who was shot by Ms. Hokoana.

* I would generalize this to don’t pick physical fights, but there may be some people who have an issue with that and that discussion is beyond the scope of this post.

Quote of the day—Baltimore Evening Sun

Posted on by

It may take years, but make no mistake, the time will come when the United States will adopt laws similar to those in European nations—laws which virtually ban handguns altogether and which place the most stringent restrictions on ownership of any kind of firearm. There is no other answer.

Baltimore Evening Sun
January 4, 1991
Page A8
[Reading the history of the Evening Sun results in enough schadenfreude to cause me to sleep with a smile on my face tonight:

In 1959, the afternoon edition’s circulation was 220,174, compared to 196,675 for the A.M. edition.[18] However, by the 1980s, cultural, technological and economic shifts in America were eating away at afternoon newspapers’ market share, with readers flocking to morning papers or switching to nightly television news broadcasts.[19] In 1992, the afternoon paper’s circulation was 133,800.[20] By mid-1995, The Evening Sun’s readership — 86,360 — had been eclipsed by The Sun — 264,583.[21] The Evening Sun ceased publication on September 15, 1995.

Also:

In the 1990s and 2000s, The Sun began cutting back its foreign coverage. In 1995 and 1996, closed its Tokyo, Mexico City and Berlin bureaus. Two more — Beijing and London — fell victim to cost-cutting in 2005.[7] The final three bureaus — Moscow, Jerusalem, and Johannesburg, South Africa — fell a couple years later.[8] All were closed by 2008, as the Tribune Co. streamlined and downsized the newspaper chain’s foreign reporting. Some material from The Sun’s foreign correspondents is archived at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County.[9]

So, it turns out the prediction made by The Evening Sun of the disappearance of gun ownership in the United States more accurately reflects the disappearance of The Evening Sun and it’s sibling paper The Sun.

But the biggest take away from this is that you should never let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]

Quote of the day—NRA-ILA

Posted on by

Pew’s recent survey on firearm-related attitudes and experiences of U.S. adults found – based on the percentage saying “yes” to the question about whether they are NRA members – that more than 14 million Americans consider themselves NRA members.  The real NRA membership of about 5 million falls well short of this measure, even accounting for any statistical error the survey produced.

What this means in terms of polling, and one thing that Pew and others simply do not make clear to the public when reporting on the survey results, is that Pew did not actually survey NRA members.  Any views, beliefs, or opinions they ascribe to “NRA members” is a simple guess on their part.  Pew does not know what percentage of NRA members support one law or another, how many guns they own, or anything else for that matter.  At best, they can claim to have the responses of Americans who SAY they are NRA members, but they certainly cannot say much beyond that.

…

Unfortunately, this simple truth hasn’t stopped Pew from attempting to present to the public, along with an eager media, multiple claims or measures about our members’ opinions. Nor has it stopped the similar and blatant attempts by ideologically-driven gun control advocates to claim they know, from polling data alone, how NRA members view particular topics.

NRA-ILA
July 7, 2017
Remarkable Finding from Pew Survey
[In addition to he conclusion outlined above this has rather far reaching implications and one or more of the following:

  1. Many people are lying about belonging to the NRA and want to skew the poll results
  2. Many people align themselves with the NRA but haven’t maintained their membership
  3. Pew sampling is faulty
  4. Pew is lying
  5. NRA is lying about their numbers by understating them by a factor of 2.8

It’s difficult to see how it would be to the NRA’s net advantage to lie in this manner so I am mostly discounting this option. It also seems unlikely that Pew would lie in this manner. Could Pew sampling be this far off? I suppose it’s possible but I doubt it.

That leaves options 1 and 2 as the most likely resolution to the discrepancy. I can only come up with weak cases for either option and end up being dissatisfied with the result. What am I missing?—Joe]