From a comment to Steadily stay on course to end gun deaths:
It is YOU and your NRA thug friends who continue to make America an uncivilized place to live. A place where any idiot can pick up an assault weapon at Walmart, hee-haw.
Congrats on all that. Remember, guns don’t kill people, the NRA kills people.
And what do you suppose this person thinks should be done with people and their “NRA thug friends” who kill people?
Seattle Times opinion writer Jerry Large is no friend of gun owners but he did do us a bit of a favor by revealing to us that our opponents explicitly admit to deliberate subterfuge:
The panelists leaned toward discussing treatment of gun violence as a public-health issue, partly to avoid the blowback attached to the idea of gun control.
This tactic isn’t anything new. They have been doing it since at least the late 1990s. But this is the first time I have seen it explicitly admitted they were trying to call it something other than what it is. Gun control. The infringement of a specific enumerated right.
Maybe it’s in the air they breath or something but California has more than its share of crazies. This is someone legally representing the state:
California argued that even under intermediate scrutiny, the State could give everyone a handgun and mandate it is the only gun you could use for self-defense in the home….and that would be enough. The Court seemed troubled by the logical extension of California’s argument that only one handgun was enough to allow the full and unencumbered exercise of Second Amendment rights. Peña counsel made it clear that the Constitutional analysis the State wanted to implement would logically allow them to restrict all handguns by caliber to only .22lr, or even to ban all handguns and only allow Tasers — an argument the District of Columbia made and lost on in Heller.
Can you imagine someone arguing that the 1st Amendment would not be infringed if the state gave everyone their one and only religious book and mandated it never leave your home or be replaced by some other book? Or that it doesn’t violate your freedom of association if the state were to assign you your job, social circle, and spouse? Or that it doesn’t violate your right to be represented in court by supplying your one and only defense lawyer? That would be crazy talk.
Okay, maybe the lawyer for California isn’t actually crazy. Maybe they were just doing the best they could while attempting to defend, as is their job, an indefensible law. I can buy that.
These people have mental problems:
Senator Kevin de Leόn (D-Los Angeles) today announced he would introduce legislation to ban the sale, manufacture, purchase and trafficking of “ghost guns” unless they are pre-registered with the Department of Justice through a serial number and gun owner background check. In order to receive a serial number, self-made or assembled firearm must include permanent metal components that cannot be detached and that are detectable as required by existing law.
…
“Gun parts can be obtained online or now with 3D printers made at home, leaving no way for law enforcement to ensure that prohibited individuals are not making ghost guns on their own,” said Senator De Leόn. “No one knows they exist and there is no way to know if criminals or other dangerous individuals are circumventing firearm laws by making these guns.”
If the concern is, as it appears to be in the press release, that a gun can be easily made with a 3-D printer by someone prohibited from possessing a firearm then how is a law prohibiting such guns being made going to be more effective than the law prohibiting the possession once the gun is finished?
“Permanent metal components that cannot be detached”? I don’t care if it is riveted, glued, or completely encased in plastic, it can, almost trivially, be removed. Drill or grind out any rivets, drill a hole in the metal to insert a screw, heat the metal until it slightly melts the plastic and then pull it the metal out via the inserted screw. Then, if needed, refill the void with plastic/wood/fiberglass/whatever.
And that is if the guy pushing the “Print” button isn’t smart enough to delete the extra instructions for the 3-D printer to make the void for the metal part in the first place.
And in any case does this guy think such a law will be any more effective than laws banning recreational drugs? This is crazy talk.
I would expect to find more rational people in long term care at a psych ward. Maybe he hasn’t been taking his meds recently.
Yet another cowardly mass shooting committed by a left-wing neo-marxist shooter. The idea that we allow liberals access to firearms in this nation is truly frightening to me. Is having the IRS intimidating political enemies not enough for the left?
John Spero
December 14, 2013
Comment to Police in Colorado probe motives of dead high school gunman
[While a case could be made that keeping guns out of the hands of progressives/liberals/socialists/communists/but-I-repeat-myself would make society safer I think the reality would be different. Such a law would be no more effective than the laws prohibiting recreational drugs, including alcohol and tobacco, from people. And that doesn’t even consider the principles involved such as equal rights, due process, and First Amendment issues.
The best that we can do is be armed and prepared to defend innocent life from these violent people.—Joe]
Brian Malte, of Handgun Control Inc. (aka The Brady Campaign), says:
The laws that Colorado passed are still on the books, and even the senators that were recalled said they would do it all over again for public safety. And when you have nine out of 10 Americans feeling strongly that background checks are the right thing to do, we will prevail. We’ll do everything we can to protect those gun laws, and we don’t think they’ll be repealed. We think they’re popular enough.
But law enforcement in Colorado says:
Some sheriffs, like Sheriff Cooke, are refusing to enforce the laws, saying that they are too vague and violate Second Amendment rights. Many more say that enforcement will be “a very low priority,” as several sheriffs put it. All but seven of the 62 elected sheriffs in Colorado signed on in May to a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the statutes.
The resistance of sheriffs in Colorado is playing out in other states, raising questions about whether tougher rules passed since Newtown will have a muted effect in parts of the American heartland, where gun ownership is common and grass-roots opposition to tighter restrictions is high.
Beyond that are the court challenges to the new laws and the successful recall elections of three (two plus one resignation because of the recall in process) of the politicians who voted for the laws.
Malte says, “I think 2013 was incredibly successful.”
They passed laws which law enforcement is refusing to enforce, politicians are getting recalled over, are being seriously challenged in the courts and he thinks that is “incredibly successful”?
I think his group over reached, is headed for major defeats, and he is delusional.
These people have mental problems.
@linoge_wotc @RSheibal @scaruso5555 @Keith1911 On the plus side a gun in the home will most likely kill an occupant. #NRAdicklesswonders
rich roberts @boris3324
Tweeted on May 16, 2013
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday via a Tweet from Linoge! Plus a bonus celebration of violence against gun owners.
This was in response to:
Ahh, the ignorance of #guncontrol #extremists. So very child-like. @boris3324 @RSheibal @scaruso5555 @Keith1911.
—Joe]
In the course of world history there have been officials that strip inalienable rights from the people that were given to all by our Creator. Most of these officials inevitably come to trial, some do not.
Intentionally violating constitutional rights by officials that have sworn to uphold them should have severe prison sentences.
With the clear vision of horrible events in history repeating itself, all manufacturers of firearms or related equipment remaining in partnership with such violators should have a respectable fear of being found with the guilty on their day of trial.
Barrett
February 20, 2013
Barrett’s Position Regarding the Assault on Liberty
[H/T to Paul Koning for his comment.
This is the firearms company Barrett.
I look forward to the day, perhaps in Nuremberg (PA), when said officials and their collaborators are brought to justice.—Joe]
American Mercenary elaborates on some stuff I have been saying.
He pulled many of the symptoms of Emotional Regulation Disorder (aka Borderline Personality Disorder) from here and puts them in the context of our debates with anti-gun people. It’s scary accurate.
I’m certain these people have a mental disorder.
Barb and I both have personal experience with people that have these behaviors. I read many of the symptoms aloud to her as I was reading his post. It’s really spooky to read about someone you know from a list of mental disorder symptoms.
Today I received a signed copy of Emily Gets Her Gun: …But Obama Wants to Take Yours from her publisher.
Thank you Emily. The book is great. And you didn’t really have to do that. I purchased the Audible version and listened to it weeks ago.
Here are earlier posts about her book:
Last May I told of the risks posed to us by International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR).
Yesterday I received an email from a friend who is a NRA Instructor who had concerns about the implications. He wanted more information so I had a long chat with my “source” last night. He is a lawyer and he got the advice from another lawyer to “Not get involved.” This is a very risky area. When Hillary was head of the State Department there wasn’t a problem. But with Kerry things changed.
He contacted the Department of State and asked about Basic Firearm Safety training. He wanted to know if this was considered regulated under ITAR. The answer came back, “Yes.”
The law, as written, is very broad. Strictly speaking; telling a foreigner the NRA three safety rules could be construed as a felony. All firearms are considered munitions and cannot be exported without a license. Hence telling someone how to load the magazine of a Ruger Mark III is training someone on the use of export controlled munitions.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/22/120.10
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/22/120.16
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/22/120.17
The advice is to not teach foreigners anything about firearms. This is also the advice from the NRA. From the NRA Instructors website:
NRA cannot provide any assistance in training foreign persons due to conflicting information from the U.S. Government regarding regulations pertinent to foreign persons and arms training. NRA cannot process any requests for assistance in training foreign persons. In view of the above, we regret to inform you that NRA cannot renew NRA firearm trainer credentials for any foreign national.
This is not good.
But what is “a foreign person”? My source emailed me the following “cheat sheet” to answer the question:
|
Status |
Can Possess? | Can Train? |
|
US Citizen or National (not otherwise prohibited) |
Yes | Yes |
|
Permanent resident (Green Card) |
Yes | Yes |
|
Tourist visa or waiver |
Yes | No |
|
Non-immigrant visa (H-1B, J-1 etc.) |
No | No |
|
Non-immigrant visa with valid hunting license or admitted for lawful hunting or sporting purposes |
Yes | No |
I reported back to my friendly neighborhood NRA instructor, he replied with more than a little concern and anger about the situation and then I watched as the hits accumulated on my web page from last May.
As my source told me last night, “I used to think we would all be sent to prison because DMCA violations. Now I think it’s going to be because of ITAR.”
Jersey City is attempting to get gun and ammo manufactures to help in their malicious attempts at infringing upon the specific enumerated right of the people to keep and bear arms.
But how significant is the police market? Do manufactures have a significant incentive to participate in this attempt?
NICS checks (a proxy for private citizen gun sales):
Approximate number of state and local police officers with arrest authority: (2008 appears to be the most recently available data) 800,000.
Assumptions:
Analysis:
Using the given facts and assumptions the participating agencies would account for annual sales of about 200,000 firearms.
The net new firearms supply in the U.S. is about 11,000,000 (U.S. manufactured plus imported minus exports).
Private citizen sales, including used guns, is something on the order of 16,000,000 to 19,000,000 per year. Therefore civilian sales are a major portion of the total new firearms sales.
The “back of the envelope” estimate is that even using the optimistic assumption that a fourth of sales to law enforcement officers would contribute to the infringement that would only account for less than 2% of all new gun sales.
Any manufacture which considers going along with this will also give extremely serious consideration to the effect on Smith and Wesson when they collaborated with the enemy.
Conclusion:
Jersey City attempts to push manufactures into assisting them in their attempts to infringe upon the rights of the people to keep and bear arms will be ignored, if not actively rejected, by firearm and ammunition suppliers.
Whoever thought up this screwball plan did not do, or is incapable of, simple arithmetic involving easily available data. But one should not be surprised. We know these people have mental problems.
The end result of pushing through gun laws that people won’t obey is very predictable. You end up with a society in which people continue to own vast numbers of weapons regardless of the law. Connecticut may be on the way, sometime after the new year’s registration deadline, to turning itself into a replica of Germany, where up to 20 million unregistered firearms are held in addition to 7.2 million legal ones, or France, where as many as 17 million illegal guns overshadow 2.8 million legal ones.
If you bother to learn from history, it shouldn’t be a surprise that people stop caring whether they’re “not a law-abiding citizen” when they lose respect for the law and the people who inflict it on them.
J.D. Tuccille
December 3, 2013
Connecticut Shouldn’t Be Surprised That “Fewer People Than Expected Have Registered Weapons”
[H/T to Sebastian.
I expect the registration rate in Connecticut will be much lower than that in either Germany or France. And if you could get a police officer to talk to you about the “benefits” of the registration be prepared for a 10 minute profanity laced rant about how it makes their job more difficult. People that used to cooperate with police will now regard them as suspect and the enemy.—Joe]
This is in the 2014 Jan/Feb issue of Playboy magazine (page 238):
As Barb said when I showed it to her, “I can barely get the joke.”
Could it be they actually think in those terms and it make sense to them?
Via email from Jay F. who says, “Perhaps the antis really are addicted to this sort of thing.”
I received the following email from CSGV which gives us insight into just how small their support base is. $3000 after a week of fundraising? And a goal of $10000? Wow!
If the contributions were the suggested $20 then that means they have about 150 people who were willing to support them with actual money as opposed to just pressing the “Like” button on Facebook. Boomershoot attracts that many people who travel hundreds or thousands of miles and spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars to participate.
Even though I am far from an expert on the subject I know they are totally clueless about writing a fundraising letter. But what do you expect from people who are totally clueless about the people and culture they want to destroy?
Small goals from small minds.
Paul Barrett and I have a friendly but somewhat strained “relationship”. But today he wrote something I completely agree with. That he works for Bloomberg means I fear for his job. From his article in Bloomberg Buisnessweek, Why Gun Control Is Basically Dead:
Dispassionate observers must question the simplistic liberal slogan that more guns equals more crime. The U.S. has seen a two-decade period during which private gun ownership has continued to soar (some 300 million firearms are now in civilian hands), while crime has diminished.
…
The strategy adopted by well-meaning activists post-Newtown may undermine their cause. Consider Moms Demand Action, which is allied with Mayors Against Illegal Guns, an organization started by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg (the founder and majority owner of Bloomberg Businessweek parent Bloomberg LP). Watts, the Moms leader, describes her campaign as “a war for the culture.” She talks about firearms as a symbol of an America she doesn’t “recognize.”
Watts is fighting on the NRA’s preferred battlefield. Gun rights organizers have become expert at framing any gun control proposal as an attack on their culture. In a Dec. 6 “grassroots alert” to members, the NRA sounded its usual theme that President Obama and gun control backers push an agenda seeking to “fundamentally transform America” and will “exploit any occasion, no matter how crassly, to promote it.”
Gun control advocates often appear not to appreciate that their country, for better or worse, has a widespread and deeply rooted gun subculture that isn’t going away. No lesser body than the Supreme Court, in decisions issued as recently as 2008 and 2010, has interpreted the Constitution as enshrining that reality.
Barrett has spent a lot of time associating with gun people. It would be a stretch to say he is “one of us” but I think it is fair to say he understands and respects us while only partially agreeing with us.
This understanding, his Harvard law background, his living in New York City, and his calm, cool approach means he has a better view into the political and culture gun rights war than most. That he says “gun control is basically dead” is a very good sign we are winning the war more than just superficially.
@JoeHuffman @linoge_wotc that’s a backwards argument. I own guns to kill people with guns. *facepalm*
Keri L (@ikeriover)
December 11, 2013
In response to “Defense of innocent life is why I own guns.”
[Then why do the police have guns?
The lack of rational thought process in these type of people has me convinced they have a mental disorder. Further evidence is that this tweet of mine:
If you believe no one is trying to take away our rights then you aren’t paying attention: https://blog.joehuffman.org/category/gun-rights/no-one-wants-to-take-your-guns/.
Resulted in a response from her of:
if you believe that it’s OK to gun down little children… you both need your head checked.
I’m very familiar with this sort of thought “process”. Apparently they imagine, and truly believe, you said or wrote something other than what you did. There was a case where I went through an email line-by-line with a certain person and ultimately they agreed I didn’t say what they claimed I said. Then mere seconds later they again made the same false claim. Pointing out they just agreed I didn’t say that resulted in a claim that they didn’t mean it when they said it. I went through this process three times with the same result each time before I finally gave up in extreme frustration.
Mental problems. I’m completely convinced of it.—Joe]
As I have mentioned before Barb refers to a street close to where I work as “Mugme Street”. It’s a pretty rough place at times:
A man sustained minor injuries after a group of women assaulted him and stole his wallet while he waited for a bus downtown.
…
Seattle Police officers responded to the scene, assumed control of the incident and investigated further. The victim told officers that he was waiting near the bus stop at 3rd Avenue and Pine Street to catch a bus home. A female suspect approached and asked him for a cigarette. The victim declined to give one to her. The female suspect got angry and began striking the victim with her fists. Some of the suspect’s female friends joined in on the attack and then stole the victim’s wallet from his backpack before fleeing the area on foot.
One block away is Westlake Park with more criminals as Seattle Police report:
Two men are now in custody after detectives identified and located the suspects wanted in connection with Friday night’s robbery of a First Hill gas station.
…one of the suspects, an 18-year-old man, was observed by officers as he was walking through Westlake Park. He was taken into custody and interviewed by robbery detectives.
Tell me again that it’s safe here and people don’t need to carry tools to defend themselves.
The plastic guns being made have been tested with conventional ammo intended to be fired in conventional guns. Why not load up some low pressure rounds specifically intended to work with the plastic guns?
Even if the bullets had muzzle velocities half that of conventional guns you aren’t going to get volunteers to be bullet backstops. Choose a common cartridge which already has a fairly low pressure then tweak the bullet weight and powder charge to get something that the plastic is much more capable of handling.
Here is a list of max pressure recommendations in PSI for various cartridges with the obvious high pressure cartridges removed:
380 Auto 21,500
25 Auto 25,000
32 S&W Long 15,000
38 Auto 26,500
38 S&W 14,500
38 Special 17,000
44 S&W Spl 15,500
45 Auto 21,000
45 Colt 14,000
The truth about the average American gun owner is that he is a slobbering fundamentalist alcoholic who would rather shoot you dead than shake your hand. These are people that would rather commit acts of terrorism against their homeland than work within the legal confines of the system to get their message out.
Anonymous Reader
July 26, 2001
The Terrible Truth About Gun Owners
[Imagine what they think “the government should do” about “the average American gun owner”.
These are very dangerous people.—Joe]