Category Archives: Gun Rights

Quote of the day—Clayton E. Cramer

Posted on by

The evidence is clear that AW bans fail rational basis scrutiny because AWs are seldom criminally misused relative to more readily accessible weapons.  The disproportionate minimum sentences in California’s AWCA law relative to much more dangerous weapons suggests a panic reaction that is hardly rational.  The comments of journalists, elected officials, and gun control activists reveal bigotry that makes Colorado Amendment 2 seem pretty calm by comparison.  Even the courts are reduced to arguing that perceived benefit as opposed to actual benefit is a sufficient reason to uphold bans. There is no way to hold that AW bans which deny a fundamental right, as Heller determined the Second Amendment to protect, survives the “rational basis” standard of scrutiny.

Clayton E. Cramer
April 13, 2016
Assault Weapon Bans: Can They Survive Rational Basis Scrutiny?
[This is a well researched paper and brings to light some fascinating information. An example is the ruling upholding the Chicago AW ban. Cramer rewords a section of the ruling and explains as follows:

The same reasoning could have been applied to uphold the constitutional provision struck down in Romer: “Colorado voters may be irrational in their bigotry against homosexuals, but if it reduces their perceived risk of homosexuals being given free rein to molest children, that’s a substantial benefit.”  Clearly, when the courts argue that feeling safer is a legitimate reason to do something that makes no real difference in public safety, this is the definition of irrational.  It makes people feel better, but without any actual basis in fact.

Numerous other examples of irrationality abound. It’s great fun to go through the enumerations of the crazy talk of our opponents.—Joe]

Washington state women with CPLs

Posted on by

Via Dave Workman we have this article in the Kitsap Sun:

Since January 2013 through the end of April, the only period for which the department has data available, the number of women license-holders in Kitsap grew about 71 percent, to 6,419 from 3,748.

In other words, at the beginning of 2013, in Kitsap there were about four men with the license for every woman with the license. As of last week, the gap shrank to about three men with the license for every woman.

Statewide, the number of women holding the license increased nearly 62 percent, to 129,428 from 80,016. Washington state has 535,596 people with active concealed pistol licenses.

And in the state’s most urbanized areas, women are increasingly becoming licensed to carry pistols. King County saw the number of women holding the license grow by nearly 39 percent during the same period.

Workman also points out:

Washington state has added more than 25,000 new concealed pistol licenses during the first four months of this year…

This is known as winning.

Quote of the day—Shaun King ‏@ShaunKing

Posted on by

Guns are the ULTIMATE phallic symbol. No item in our society looks, and even functions more like a penis than a handgun.

Shaun King ‏@ShaunKing
Tweeted on December 5, 2015
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!

Via a Tweet from Michael Z Williamson ‏@mzmadmike.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Alan Korwin

Posted on by

An arbitrary list, with no checks and balances, no functional controls or due process of any kind, will deny our fundamental constitutional civil and human rights. The man currently in the White House is calling for the list. You’re insane if you object, he says.

By implication, if you can’t buy a gun, you certainly aren’t free to possess any of the firearms you already own, right? Someone should come and take all those dangerous guns away from you because they must be contraband. You’re too dangerous to own them.

Alan Korwin
February 19, 2016
Obama Announces No-Buy List for Guns
[If the government can, which they do, add people to a secret list without notification, justification, or chance to defend yourself and prohibits you from exercising a specific enumerated right they are in possession of tool which enables an end-run around the constitution.

If you think there is nothing wrong with this then what is your argument as to why the government couldn’t just as well say you may only exercise “constitutionally protected” rights if you are on their secret list?—Joe]

Of course you can trust the government

Posted on by

From David Hardy on the Waco investigation:

The House Committee on Government Reform hired Carlos to examine the tapes. Unfortunately, he died from a heart attack (a weakness that ran in his family). The Committee thereupon issued statements that he’d never given them a report, that they were about to fire him, and essentially disavowing everything to do with him.

There was one problem with that story. Carlos had faxed me the report right after he gave it to the committee and briefed its staff. He found there were indeed gunshots. In fact, he pieced together an encounter. A Davidian appeared to throw something at an armored vehicle, and the something went off with a quick burst of heat. The hatches on the vehicle opened, some people dismounted, and fired in the direction of the fleeing Davidian. The battle went on from there. Carlos told me that as he played and paused the video for the congressional staffers, explaining what they were seeing, they looked like they were sucking on lemons.

Reading David’s series of posts on Waco is bringing back some very unpleasant memories and way too much adrenaline:

What the government did to Randy Weaver and his family and what they did at Waco are a why I purchased my first gun, why I’m involved in the gun rights movement and why there is Boomershoot.

Never again.

What’s the real reason?

Posted on by

Today President Obama said:

As I said in January, these commonsense steps are not going to prevent every tragedy, but what if they prevented even one?

This is incredibly simple minded thinking. There are tradeoffs involved in nearly everything. In this case the tradeoffs include:

  • How many people will be unable to save innocent lives because the gun failed to fire when it was required?
  • How many people will be unable to purchase a gun to save innocent lives because of the increased cost?
  • How many lives could be saved if the resources put into “smart gun” technology were instead spent on safety training?

I think it is very telling President Obama and his anti-freedom cohorts haven’t proposed increased gun safety instruction. This demonstrates this isn’t about safety. This is about increasing the price of guns and making firearms less user friendly.

Quote of the day—Basepaul Season @paulbensonsucks

Posted on by

@NRA @Bradybuzz there would be 0 child gun accidents if we banned guns which is the good thing to do

Basepaul Season @paulbensonsucks
Tweeted on April 12, 2016
[Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Tyler Durden

Posted on by

King Obama sees political trends he doesn’t like, knows that Congress can’t do anything about it because the public doesn’t want it to, so he does it by himself by executive decree.

Tyler Durden
January 9, 2016
Americans’ Positive Perception Of NRA Soars As Obama Escalates Gun-Control Agenda
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Richard Feldman

Posted on by

A government which cannot protect its citizens has no right denying them the means to protect themselves.

Richard Feldman
1984
At the Bernie Goetz news conference in Manhattan when he was the NRA/ILA rep for the Northeast.
Via email from Feldman
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Lily Tang Williams

Posted on by

If you believe more gun control by your government is going to save lives, you are being naïve. The champion of all the mass killings in this world is always a tyrannical government.

Where I came from, China had killed thousands of the students by its own government during the massacre of Tian An Men square in 1989. I surely wish my fellow Chinese citizens back then had guns like this one I am holding in the picture.

I am a Chinese immigrant and an American citizen by choice. I once was a slave before and I will never be one again.

I will always stand with my AR, no matter what my President signs with his pen.

LilyTangWilliams20160105

Lily Tang Williams
Facebook post on January 5, 2016

Gun cartoon of the day

Posted on by

20160112_gunsWhyDoes

Mr. President, How’s that hypocrisy working out for you? Perhaps you would like some prejudice and bigotry to go with it? Oh! That’s right, your plate is already overflowing with those as well.

ZORE X, a high tech gun lock

Posted on by

I received an email the other day:

Hello Joe.

My name Is Yachdav. I’m part of an Israeli team that developed a unique gun lock called ZORE X.

Our bullet shaped lock prevents the gun from being charged and when unlocked it ejects by just charging the gun. It also notifies the gun owner if someone tampers with their gun. Is this something you’d write / post about?
We believe ZORE X will save many lives by both preventing unauthorized use of guns and at the same time making guns more accessible for their gun owners when they need them.

This is our website: http://zore.life/
This is 1 minute a video showing our lock: http://zore.life/youtube

I’m attaching some material about us. I’d be happy to send you more information about ZORE if you’d like.

Thank you very much,

Yachdav

I watched the video and was bit annoyed with the falling brass without primers from the simulated gunfire but my only real concern was battery life and how they handle the dead battery situation. I read their FAQ and found:

What if my battery runs out, will my gun disable with no way of opening it?

No.

  1. Your battery will last for more than a year.
  2. Three months before your battery drains, ZØRE will send you notifications, reminding you to change your battery.
  3. One month before the battery drains, when unlocking ZØRE, it will not allow you to re-lock without changing the battery.
  4. In addition, you are able to set your ZØRE to open automatically before draining out.
  5. If your battery drains out nonetheless, you are able to connect an external battery to give it power, enabling you to dial your code and open it.

And:

What if someone removes the battery from my ZORE?

That is impossible – as long as your gun is locked, no one can remove the battery from your ZORE. The battery is only accessible when ZORE is open.
The battery is accessible only when ZØRE is open. Therefore, when your gun is locked, no one can take the battery out of your ZØRE.

All my concerns about “smart guns” (this isn’t really a smart gun, but it achieves some of the worthy goals of them) were well addressed except for the potential to have them become government mandated. I liked the phone app that tells you if someone has moved (probably accelerometer based, it doesn’t use GPS) your gun. The app also allows you to unlock the gun remotely and helps you train to get to your gun and unlock it quickly.

It would appear to be a good solution for many situations.

Update: I received another email after they read my blog post above. Here is most of the email:

It is important for me to say that the option of government mandating it is something we gave a lot of thought to.

We wanted to make sure there’s no [way] to force anyone to use it – that’s how we came to the conclusion we must separate the lock from the gun itself (or from the magazine – anything that’s involved in actually using the gun).

We’re a company that strongly believes in freedom – and ZORE X’s market is people who make the choice of locking their gun, enabling them a reliable and fast to remove solution. For those who don’t lock their gun – ZORE X is irrelevant. We are making a notification-only device that might be relevant for some of those people – but we intentionally avoided making a products that could [not] bring with it any type of legislation.

I’m attaching pictures of the ZORE Watchdog.

Thanks again,
Yachdav
clip_image002clip_image004clip_image006

Boomershoot 2016 speaker

Posted on by

We now have a speaker for the Boomershoot 2016 dinner this Saturday. It will be Brian Keith. I’ve mentioned him here before:

I just read his outline and I’m okay with it. He includes me in a list of “gun rights heroes” which makes me uncomfortable but other than that I think it should be excellent.

Quote of the day—Hal Lillywhite

Posted on by

Actors are good at acting, at pretending to be what they are not. They earn their living in a fantasy world, and I fear that many of them lose touch with reality. Their talent does not include any particular wisdom; if it did we would see fewer Hollywood stars in the news for all the wrong reasons.

Hal Lillywhite
2015
From chapter 27 in Freedom or Serfdom?: The Case for Limited, Constitutional Government and Against Statism
[Via a comment to Dear Julianne Moore: Strict Gun Control Makes Single Women Prime Targets For Rape and Murder.

As I have said before:

Think of it this way. In this case we have the police and the military on our side of the issue, as well as nine Supreme Court Justices who agree the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right. The anti-gun side has someone who plays make-believe for a living.

They get a lot of attention but convincing friends, neighbors, and politicians to vote your way is easier and more important than convincing actors to read your lines.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Basepaul Season @paulbensonsucks

Posted on by

@_Stars_Stripes_ @NRA ban all guns for the actions of the majority. Gun owners are terrorists throw them in prison

Basepaul Season @paulbensonsucks
Tweeted on April 12, 2016
[This is what they think of you.

This is typical thinking of statists. They refuse, or are unable, to think in terms of individual rights and responsibilities. If one, or a small minority, of people do something wrong it is justification for punishment of an entire class of people. One of the problem with this type of thinking is that you can justify almost anything. People could justify prison for all young black males because the statistics show young black males commit crimes at a higher rate than young Asian females. Our nation, and to a certain extent Western Civilization, was founded upon the principle of individual rights. People like this appear to think in terms of group responsibility. It’s a slippery slope to the good of the many outweighs the good of the individual and to everyone according to their need and from everyone according to their ability.

Then look at potential consequences of what he is saying about gun owners being terrorists and belonging in prison. Do these people think things through? This is very dangerous talk. I keep thinking that if this is what they really think of us then why would people bother to try and convince them otherwise? If one is told they belong in prison for simply existing, and there are people actively attempting to put them there, then what is the downside for doing something the actually earns a prison sentence? It would be easy for people to rationalize showing them the contrast between the way things are now and the way they could be if typical gun owners really were terrorists.

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

Quote of the day—Carry Sword in France

Posted on by

Because-as society evolves, governments can no longer deal effectively with violence ever-present in our streets. Because-all citizens should have the right to defend itself, to ensure its security when the forces of order are absent or impotent. We French of all backgrounds, faiths and political tendencies united in this petition are asking the legitimate right to carry a firearm.

Carry Sword in France.
We ask the government to order the establishment of a decree authorizing all citizens to be entitled to carry a firearm in France
[I’m not sure about the organization, the date, and the translation in general, but the sentiment is fairly clear.

As Paul Koning said, “If that petition succeeds, the French will have a concealed carry system about as friendly as that of California. I suppose it’s a start.”

H/T to Andrew Benghazi.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Leftside Annie‏@LeftsideAnnie

Posted on by

@BrowningMachine Even more ironic that one who substitutes an instrument of killing for their tiny penis projects that onto me. #justsaying

Leftside Annie‏@LeftsideAnnie
Tweeted on October 20, 2015
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday! Via a Tweet from Linoge.

It’s very telling we have the facts and SCOTUS decisions on our side and the best they can muster is childish insults.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Alan Korwin

Posted on by

The left can’t pass any common-sense gun legislation because they aren’t proposing any.

Alan Korwin
March 21, 2016
KORWIN: Moderate Judges, Armed Teachers And Guns Are Germs – Three Myths We Just Busted
[Korwin has a way with words that dramatically clarifies the issue.—Joe]

Taking sides

Posted on by

While I understand that losing your wife and two young daughters can really mess up your mind, that doesn’t mean the media should be putting pushing his ideas without any balance:

I find that pretty revolting to think … that younger children can walk onto a firing range,” Mikac said.

He warned against allowing children to see guns as something fun.

“I just think it’s crazy.”

This makes it crystal clear the media has taken sides.

Suicide and guns

Posted on by

Washington State just passed a law regarding suicide by gun. As I started read the first article on the topic I was highly skeptical:

My husband died by suicide. Here’s what happened during my awkward call with the NRA.

It wasn’t the hardest phone call I’ve ever made, but it was certainly awkward. I was cold-calling the National Rifle Association. Because the NRA is well-known for offering gun safety training, I wanted to know whether the organization had ideas on how to reduce the number of firearm suicides.

…

But I learned a couple of surprising things from that call and the many follow-up meetings with a local NRA lobbyist and the executive director of the Second Amendment Foundation.

First, they were not just willing to talk but also willing to listen.

The details of the law are here. The voting is telling:

Passed by the House March 8, 2016  Yeas 94  Nays 2

Passed by the Senate March 1, 2016  Yeas 47  Nays 0

Basically the law requires a task force, in part, to:

(a) Develop and prepare to disseminate online trainings on suicide awareness and prevention for firearms dealers and their employees and firearm range owners and their employees;
(b) In consultation with the department of fish and wildlife, review the firearm safety pamphlet produced by the department of fish and wildlife under RCW 9.41.310 and, by January 1, 2017, recommend changes to the pamphlet to incorporate information on suicide awareness and prevention;
(c) Develop suicide awareness and prevention messages for posters and brochures that are tailored to be effective for firearms owners for distribution to firearms dealers and firearm ranges;
(d) Develop suicide awareness and prevention messages for posters and brochures for distribution to pharmacies;
(e) In consultation with the department of fish and wildlife, develop strategies for creating and disseminating suicide awareness and prevention information for hunting safety classes, including messages to parents that can be shared during online registration, in either follow up electronic mail communications, or in writing, or both;

Yes. It addresses pharmacies as well as firearms owners, dealers, and ranges. It looks like it has the potential to be a good program that truly tries to address the problem of suicide in a fair handed manner and not just something to demonize gun ownership. Others think so as well:

A couple of years ago, Stuber began reaching out to firearms retailers and asking them if they worried about the possibility of selling a gun to someone who might be suicidal. Virtually every employee she spoke with, she said, answered yes. With some trepidation, Stuber called the National Rifle Association and Gottlieb’s group to enlist their help in reducing firearm suicides. To her surprise, they were willing to talk, and also listen.

“There’s real hurt,” she said. “Everybody showed up at the table willing to share their pain. This is an issue that impacts all of us.”

Forefront, the NRA and the Second Amendment Foundation met with groups including the Seattle Police Department and the Department of Fish and Wildlife over about six months to draft the language for the initiative. Rep. Tina Orwall, D-Des Moines, the bill’s main sponsor, was instrumental in getting the legislation passed, Stuber said.

About 20 other states have taken steps to bring together suicide prevention advocates and gun owners, Stuber said, but none of those efforts are as broad as the Washington bill. Gottlieb thinks the initiative could become a successful model that can be replicated in other states.

“Lots of us in the firearms rights community have been concerned that a significant percentage of suicides involve lethal force,” he said. “If there’s a way to lower those numbers, it’s in gun owners’ interest to do that. To me, this is a no-brainer, but it took someone like Jenn to put it together.”