Category Archives: Gun Rights

Email leaks: Hillary on guns

Posted on by

If you ever had any doubt about Hillary Clintons intentions toward gun ownership the most recent email leaks should remove all doubt:

Of particular note is an October 4, 2015 email written by Clinton campaign press secretary Brian Fallon, which detailed the campaign’s intent to share with reporters the types of gun control proposals a President Clinton would support. The email stated:

Circling back around on guns as a follow up to the Friday morning discussion: the Today show has indicated they definitely plan to ask bout guns, and so to have the discussion be more of a news event than her previous times discussing guns, we are going to background reporters tonight on a few of the specific proposals she would support as President – universal background checks of course, but also closing the gun show loophole by executive order and imposing manufacturer liability.

Note that, in her mind, no legislative action is required. Stroke of the pen, rule of law as was said during the first Clinton presidency.

I also find it “interesting” how the media works with Hillary Clinton in preparation for their encounters. It’s all orchestrated. There are no surprises or challenges to her position. Glenn Reynolds says, “Just think of the MSM as Democratic operatives with bylines, and it all makes sense.”

Sandy Hook lawsuit against Bushmaster dismissed

Posted on by

I understand the desire for some sort of justice in the wake of an atrocity like the Sandy Hook massacre. But it’s not justice when people and companies who had nothing to do with the actions of the criminal are punished. That is what the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was to prevent. And that is what it did:

A Connecticut judge has dismissed a lawsuit that families of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting victims had filed against a gun manufacturer.

In her decision granting the company’s motion to strike the case, Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis invoked a federal statute known as PLCAA, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.

    The law prohibits lawsuits against gun manufacturers and distributors if their firearms were used in the commission of a criminal act.

    The families had sought an exemption through a claim of “negligent entrustment,” arguing the maker knowingly marketed and sold the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle to civilians despite knowing it posed a risk when used outside “highly regulated institutions” such as law enforcement or the military. Remington is the parent company of Bushmaster.

    Bellis said the “criminal misuse of a weapon” by Adam Lanza means the action “falls squarely within the broad immunity provided by PLCAA,” adding that the arguments presented by the families do not fit within the definition of negligent entrustment.

    Joshua Koskoff, an attorney for the families, said in a statement that his clients plan to appeal.

    Hillary Clinton has explicitly said this law should not exist. It is my opinion that Hillary Clinton should not have a political existence.

    Those who need to know already know what the following means. If it’s not crystal clear to you then don’t worry about it. It’s not for you. It’s more fun and games for the NSA:

    jyrBnULUnDqq6F3iPRCbhFNeZUaFhHVYgE60KiCr5fSIQifvJet1Ly72x2K0qXrIwy9VcEHY
    5ingcX2p63fya8dDLOadFhalAh0ezScWWIplBCPS121+mEV+8L+VJfStyWg4TAauHv1Cq7b
    AJGWk3p9z3wbxdwjkgduPgMAT8jyZeErMCmgp011Nz+BA+eAfPE7PY8miSuLhZovSG8QHDO
    qc1Ocj+vyzGR7tY5ydv3HuiFpHLWMCXndQet0aMnNKwx9uRe8Y8ZNAhZfg4vN4UcNxrFNtU
    bUwQmwRDZE6ZjgRj2pbJixe+BSmPZ97r0LDy6f+w0tMBUXI53Xw/qcGgLVi6yryVvY1Fqja
    9dT6B8Ucu990uuBF1YwVYx3qUDrn

    Quote of the day—Brian

    Posted on by

    The use of the lefts term “gun control” is completely wrong. It infers that guns are somehow out of control and need to be curtailed. Clearly this is not the case, but every time we use that term we subtly reinforce the idea that controlling guns has anything to do with something except a nice tight grouping.

    It’s a restriction of our constitutional right or an infringement of our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

    Every time you feel the urge to type or say “gun control” replace it with what’s really happening.

    Brian
    October 2016
    Editor’s Corner: Stop Trying to Make “Gun Control” Happen, It’s Not Going to Happen.
    [I have nothing to add.—Joe]

    The science is settled

    Posted on by

    I found this, from the CDC, interesting:

    Unintentional fall deaths
    • Number of deaths: 31,959
    • Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.0
    Motor vehicle traffic deaths
    • Number of deaths: 35,398
    • Deaths per 100,000 population: 11.1
    Unintentional poisoning deaths
    • Number of deaths: 38,851
    • Deaths per 100,000 population: 12.3

    And from another CDC page:

    Firearm homicides
    • Number of deaths: 10,945
    • Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.4

    So, the average resident of the United States is about three times more likely to die from an unintentional fall, motor vehicle traffic accident, or unintentional poisoning than to be killed, including JUSTIFIABLE homicide, by someone with a firearm.

    Hence, the science is settled. If Bloomberg, Hillary Clinton, and others were really interested in saving lives they would spend their money and political capital on banning ladders, stairs, cars, and household chemicals instead of guns. And since they are not their real objective is something other than saving lives.

    So, what is the real reason they continue to advocate for infringing upon our specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms? And what are we going to do about it?

    Quote of the day—YA GIRL CHILLARY‏@H_Clinton11

    Posted on by

    Small penis alert

    YA GIRL CHILLARY‏@H_Clinton11
    Tweeted on January 22, 2016 in response to:


    [It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!

    Via a tweet from ScottInSC and  a tweet from Linoge.—Joe]

    Don’t let Hillary leave you defenseless

    Posted on by

    From the NRA:

    Black Guns Matter at Boomershoot 2017

    Posted on by

    From Stephanie:BGM2017

    Why Black Guns Matter? Because the 2nd Amendment is color blind.

    BGM educates people in urban communities on their 2nd Amendment rights and responsibilities through firearms training and education. @blkgunsmattr

    From the battlefields of North Philly in battleground state of Pennsylvania, Maj Toure started BGM in hopes that conflicts won’t end with someone getting killed. You see, gun education brings peace.

    BGM’s currently fundraising for a 13 city tour to continue informing urban communities – especially youth – about safe and legal firearms knowledge, conflict resolution, and the 2nd Amendment. Next stop on tour: Chicago.

    (Ah, Chicago. The city I once called home. The city where, despite hefty gun bans, I dodged bullets from inner-city shooters. Go, Maj!)

    >>>>>Right now, go here to donate to Toure’s rightous cause.<<<<<

    Shoot alongside Maj and several other BGM members at Boomershoot 2017 by signing up here.

    BGM Chicago training is this Saturday, October 8. Share this message to citizens of Chicago and surrounding communities:

    ChicagoBGM

    No longer the victim Hillary needs

    Posted on by

    Via Stephanie:

    KimberlyCorban10012016

    This is in reference to a recent QOTD.

    Quote of the day—Alan Korwin

    Posted on by

    A medical marijuana CARD (not use) is now Second Amendment disqualification, according to a decision of the uber-liberal federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. In a case with no parallels, a woman who obtained the card to show support for the medical-marijuana movement — but who doesn’t use pot — has been disqualified from her constitutional rights, for possession of the plastic card. Wherever you may stand on the drug issue, even the statute itself requires drug use, not government permission-slip possession. In its decision, this Court introduced the idea that you might not be sufficiently mentally OK at times to bear arms, so summarily removing your rights is totally is fine. Whether this applies to beer, over-the-counter medicine that might cause drowsiness and any other mental evaluations was not addressed, but surely can’t be far behind in the minds of those who can come up with a decision like this, would seek any means to control the public.

    Alan Korwin
    September 12, 2016
    Attack On Gun Rights Takes New Shapes
    [The Second Amendment—void where prohibited by law. Or court. Or political whim.—Joe]

    Quote of the day—Phoebe Maltz Bovy

    Posted on by

    On the pro-gun-control side of things, there’s far too much timidity. What’s needed to stop all gun violence is a vocal ban guns contingent. Getting bogged down in discussions of what’s feasible keeps what needs to happen—no more guns—from entering the realm of possibility. Public opinion needs to shift. The no-guns stance needs to be an identifiable place on the spectrum, embraced unapologetically, if it’s to be reckoned with. 

    Phoebe Maltz Bovy
    December 10, 2015
    It’s Time to Ban Guns. Yes, All of Them.
    [I have to wonder how much timidity she would have in taking point on those door-to-door raids.

    Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]

    Quote of the day—Alan Franklin‏@alanfranklin

    Posted on by

    I’m just saying, boys. This is a bit different from the gun nut/micropenis correlation but no less important. #copolitics #gunsense

    Alan Franklin‏@alanfranklin
    Tweeted on January 22, 2016
    [It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!

    Via a tweet from Linoge.—Joe]

    Quote of the day—Hillary Clinton

    Posted on by

    I stand in support of this common sense legislation to license everyone who wishes to purchase a gun. I also believe that every new handgun sale or transfer should be registered in a national registry.

    Hillary Clinton
    June 2, 2000
    Hillary Clinton offers support for gun licensing bill; Lazio wraps up three-day bus tour
    [See also here and here.

    Keeping Hillary out of the White House is essential to the free exercise of the specific enumerate right to keep and bear arms.—Joe]

    Quote of the day—Kimberly Corban

    Posted on by

    This November, I refuse to again vote in favor of being controlled. I was once utterly defenseless at the mercy of a person who felt entitled to my life, and I refuse to allow that to ever happen again.

    I am no longer the victim Hillary needs. I am a survivor. And this November, you can be, too.

    Kimberly Corban
    September 27, 2016
    Not The Victim Hillary Needs
    [I have nothing to add.—Joe]

    Quote of the day—Kenneth Walker

    Posted on by

    If I could I would take all the guns in America, put them on big barges and go dump them in the ocean, nobody would have a gun. Not police, not security, not anybody. We should eliminate all of them. We could save 33,000 people a year if we didn’t have guns in this country.

    …

    They are a scourge of this country and no one should have one as far as I’m concerned. There’s no defense to guns. There’s just absolutely no reason to have them.

    Kenneth Walker
    Multnomah County (Portland, Oregon) Circuit Court Judge
    September 28, 2016
    All guns in U.S. should be dumped in ocean, judge says
    [Why someone with such an astounding lack of understanding of such issues is a judge instead of reaching the peak of his career shoveling pig manure is a mystery to me.

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

    Gun cartoon of the day

    Posted on by

    Via Sheila Stokes-Begley:

    terrorist-coming-disarm

    It’s scary that it’s true. I have to conclude it’s some sort of mental disorder that there are so many people that think this way.

    Hillary & Trump on gun control

    Posted on by

    Hillary espouses the Australia model. Donald espouses the Bloomberg model (specifically upholding it in last night’s debate as the example to follow).

    Oh, you Trump supporters, who once thought yourselves tea partiers. You’re in for such disillusionment. I almost hope he wins, just for that reason. I can envision some of you joining the Stop & Frisk teams with a hearty enthusiasm.

    Quote of the day—Bennie G. Thompson

    Posted on by

    Taking action to prevent terrorists from having access to assault weapons would be a good start.  However, it seems that in the waning days of this Congress, there is more appetite for advancing un-American and counter-productive proposals such as closing the borders to Muslims or ethnically profiling whole communities.

    To reiterate what Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson has testified to Congress, that with the current threat picture, homeland security cannot be achieved without sensible gun control laws.

    Bennie G. Thompson
    House Homeland Security Committee ranking member (D-Miss)
    September 21, 2016
    Homeland security means keeping assault weapons off our streets
    [Sometimes I’m just amazed that people can say and believe the things they do. Immigration from other countries is not a constitutionally protected right. There isn’t anything more American than our country’s founding document. The right to keep and bear arms is a specific enumerated right protected by that document. Is this guy’s mind that well partitioned that he can’t connected what he wrote in consecutive sentences?

    The only way this makes sense to me is that people say things with the knowledge, at some level, people will hear what they want to hear. The anti-gun politician will say they “respect the Second Amendment and they don’t want to ban guns”. The next sentence will be that they “support the banning of assault weapons”. It could be that those sort of contradictory messages work on both the receiver and the sender. They say and hear what they want depending upon individual biases of the person at that particular moment. And those biases change from second to second. For example, one second they are of the opinion that the Bill of Rights is important and should be respected. The next second they believe nothing should stand in the way of preventing terrorists from murdering innocent people. They somehow cannot make the connection that these two beliefs are incompatible.

    It could be this a built-in psychological mechanism common to almost all people.

    I view it as some sort of mental illness.—Joe]

    Those who need to know already know what the following means. If it’s not crystal clear to you then don’t worry about it. It’s not for you. It’s more fun and games for the NSA:

    YtjFgQUI9piivFoDaEUbFaQ3wiYkrtGVgMKgc0LlPeVNRu0O/j8NOPzIrWWW0B/JtjMyVv/5
    9xcyyyZpe8b2xxov9BK2M/RBpmQYlk4EXL+KkvlbJHSmQm4+5/QnhOS3mgCkJrGT5zHJ3B2
    w+aQVayAwLJXLouwrkpdjSpT1QJPYlkdFUkmt0jjE6H4pcI3RnX7Y4Gv5KiFInEqRx8Nbjv
    QKvBjCntJ7P5wqECOs3btEbS7ww4zCmCpoguAg9EjZb4Ij0c0bOcvNlbIFivzDkQu6g5mNT
    GiSzCU9AZktK9Z4/2vBKMX+IBbEfH5bIOXTg4xYa3a4igyot6HjPpRIXP3elBRGGjTASoM+
    g0aTHjbj6avR0RYyZFRE3ZN/kJK4MBpULGnkp44lwp+PzoGNEuWNJnwReoHQV16TUcj3wl7
    SRoHRnp6ExSTzkY6vFHeDDCnmcW+2xeLN0JQLR66moi+52atWRer99rSuy7XO1ST2AZdnKe
    ilZKLIIzSMSlC0HnSoXGcJbxFLl9RPCsBfbEp2ht42X6hshhDvDObmn7DGgPbLuwzwG8EY3
    eTW76pFQc+r4CybAD5FeS7jDVEOc8JcFcIKqvQFC4VCnYEhdxY=

    The debate

    Posted on by

    This may have been the first televised presidential debate I have watched in it’s entirety since the first one. Yeah, Nixon v. Kennedy. I was young then, it was on a black and white T.V. and dinosaurs sometimes ate our fruit trees back in those days.

    I think I was as bored with the debate tonight as I was with that first debate when I was a little kid.

    Hillary talked about wanting to tax, spend, and implement gun control. Trump wanted to reduce taxes and regulations, wanted somewhat less gun control than Hillary, and made faces.

    Jaime and I watched it together and afterward she said she was disappointed. She had hoped Hillary would start coughing, have a seizure, and flop around on the stage.

    Yeah, that would have made it less boring. Maybe next time.

    75 days

    Posted on by

    My Arizona CWP expired August 6th. I had a reminder on my phone for July 6th to renew it. I sent in the renewal about day later. About 10 days ago I got a call from someone in Arizona processing my form. I had forgotten to put my phone number on the form so they called my “old” number to see if that was still valid. It was. So that was taken care of. I had also written a personal check. They required a money order or cashiers check. They said I could send them the proper form of payment ASAP and she would match the payment with my existing renewal form or resubmit the form and it would be put at the end of the 75 day queue. I, of course, opted for the sending payment ASAP.

    I got my new CWP last week.

    But the point is they have a 75 day backlog of CWP applications and renewals. This is in a state that recently changed the law to not require a CWP (they have constitutional carry)!

    Multiple conclusions can be made from this. One is “a right delayed is a right denied.” Another is, assuming they didn’t reduce the staff processing CWPs, the change to constitutional carry should have reduced the work load and wait times if the number of people carrying remained constant. This may mean the number of people carrying has gone up significantly.