Category Archives: Gun Rights

Consequences for their actions

Posted on by

I’ve been listening to The Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy by Thomas Sowell and something he said resonated with a theme Robb has been blogging about and the latest news in Fast and Furious (H//T to Rob for this last link). Governments (actually people in general but the present context is government) will not abide by the law (or contracts) unless there is some punishment they fear if they fail to comply with the terms. When people in government spent other peoples money (OPM: pronounced “opium”) they have virtually no incentive to spend it wisely.

Had the people responsible for Fast and Furious been handed over to the Mexican Government within a week of the request being made most of the gun community would have considered justice had been mostly served. But more importantly future excursions outside the law, such as the long gun reporting rule, would have been given much greater scrutiny before being implemented. As it is the message sent is that the worst that will happen is those responsible will be given boring jobs and the whistle blowers will be punished to the fullest extent possible without bending the law too far.

As Sowell expresses it the self-anointed implement government policies with OPM, other peoples lives, and no consequences for failed outcomes except those that are truly and obviously disastrous. The outcome is as you might expect. It’s no different than letting your children run wild and giving them whatever they ask for. They end up as spoiled brats who cause problems for everyone and are incapable of functioning in society. Only as government officials they are in a position to destroy society.

Most of our government officials have “qualified immunity” which protects them from breaking the law unless they clearly should have known better. IIRC the argument is that we need to give them this sort of immunity so that “good people” won’t be afraid to enter public service. This argument never held any water for me because there is no similar immunity granted to corporate officials or individuals who unknowingly break (there are some exceptions to this) laws. And you don’t hear people arguing that “good people” are scared to become corporate executives or individuals living their lives as if they in constant fear of arrest and punishment.

Government officials, more so than individuals, need to have consequences for breaking the law. It’s working in Florida and it would work everywhere.

Quote of the day—Sebastian

Posted on by

I don’t believe modern gun control advocates are fueled by racists and xenophobic fears, I think they are largely afraid of anyone with a firearm, but they have continually denied history, and denied its relevance. This has been a great advantage to our side in this debate, as it allows us to have one. The reason our opponents don’t want to debate, is because they can’t. They can’t because they’ve had no serious intellectual challenge to the case we’ve built against them.

Sebastian
August 30, 2011
Quote of the Day: Federal Farmer Edition
[Remember that last sentence, “…they’ve had no serious intellectual challenge to the case we’ve built against them”. Most of them do not have a process by which they can determine truth from falsity. Furthermore, many of them do not care that they cannot determine truth from falsity. It is irrelevant to them and their goals. They flat out admit they are intellectually bankrupt yet they continue with their advocacy and have people that support them.

What is incredibly depressing to me about this is that instead of the debate being completely over in about 50 weeks (it takes a while for a few monthly magazines cycles to be processed) it has taken us 50 years to gain the upper hand and we still have a lot of work left to do.—Joe]

Quote of the day—(REDACTED)

Posted on by

Please join us on Wednesday, August 31, at 9:30 a.m., in Conference Room B to celebrate the successful completion of the rifle multiple sale reporting program. Collaboration among many directorates made this program possible, and REDACTED and I want to recognize and thank all the employees who contributed to our success.

(REDACTED)
August 25, 2011
ATF invitation to celebrate successfully (so far) breaking the law.
[I would love to attend but it’s a little far away for me with my busy work schedule. Could I send the U.S. Marshalls with arrests warrants for everyone in my place?—Joe]

Quote of the day—The Cruel Meatball of War

Posted on by

Note that there is no one that is trying to take guns away from law-abiding citizens. The left is only attempting to prevent guns falling into the hands of violent criminals and the mentally ill.

For some reason, Conservatives insist on the right of criminals and the mentally ill to have guns. I could not figure this out until it occurred to me that if the mentally ill cannot have guns, then the Conservatives could not have guns. Then I understood why they were so angry about that protection for the American people…

The Cruel Meatball of War
August 20, 2011
Answer to the question, “Guns, do we need more gun control or less?”
[The first paragraph is a lie. The Brady Campaign says the same thing (look in the FAQ under “Is Brady a “gun ban” organization?”), then in the next breath talks about the bans they approve of. That doesn’t even look at some of the more extreme organizations like the VPC who says, “handguns should be banned” and “A clear-cut plan to ban handguns should be developed and implemented soon.”

The second paragraph is the type of rhetoric used by the left throughout history before sending their opponents to mental hospitals, reeducation camps, gulags, and mass graves.

It’s no wonder he/she doesn’t use their real name.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Marcia Capellan

Posted on by

#GunControl, por favor! Or just ban guns completely! What’s wrong with the world? #whereisthelove? [link]

@linoge_wotc Why should I respect ignorance and violence? I could never do that. #peaceonearth [link]

Just realized that I’ve done absolutely nothing to prepare for the hurricane. Oops! Hope Philly will be OK. #Irene [link]

Marcia Capellan
August 26, 2011
See also her follow up blog posting.
I also gave serious consideration to “Thank you, dear Twitter gods, for giving the willfully ignorant, narrow-minded, and bigoted a place to demonstrate their shortcomings freely and without limitations to the rest of the world.”
[The irony is almost intolerable. In addition to her realization that she has done nothing to prepare her blog is titled “Clear Quiet Thoughts”. It’s easy to be clear and quiet when they are so ignorant.

Of course “Reasoned Discourse” has broken out at her place. See the continuing discussion someplace more free.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Marlene

Posted on by

I am a trans woman. Because of that, I can reasonably expect the police to be as likely a danger to me in most of the United States as a source of protection from violence. The idea that the police should have the monopoly on the power to exert deadly force for my protection is completely ludicrous to me.

The scarcity model of gun control does not work for crime prevention, but does work to disarm social movements. If a person intends to murder or intimidate people as a means of support, a gun is of much greater value to that person than the cost increase caused by illegality. Most gun control legislation in recent history has been designed to induce price increases or difficulty of purchase, while having no impact on the operation of the illicit market. That has a greater impact on broad social movements, especially those by the poor.

Marlene
August 26, 2011
More About Guns
[There are two different and important points here.

The first is the clear example of the police not always being a force for good. At the current time I’m not too worried about the police, in general, being a direct threat to certain segments of society but it does happen. There are specific instances in this country where a few individual officers misbehave and some of those may even qualify for use of deadly force to defend against them. But those instance are very rare. Much more likely is that the police will “look the other way” or be slow to respond when individuals of certain social groups are attacked. I would expect situations like this to represent the vast majority of examples of the fallacy of a police monopoly on force. Regardless, Marlene is correct to state it is completely ludicrous for the police to have a monopoly on the power to use deadly force.

The second point is is the phrase, “The scarcity model of gun control”. I like that phrase a lot. It can be used when someone says something about “the easy availability of guns”. Names and concise accurate descriptions of things enables clear thought and understanding.

Thank you Marlene—Joe]

Choices

Posted on by

Jared Cano has been making some really bad choices for quite a while:

Tampa Police Maj. John Newman said that Cano had been on a list of juveniles who police checked on from time to time because of their brushes with the law.

“We’ve been very, very familiar with him,” Newman said.

Then on Tuesday, in his own words, “I jut [sic] did the dumbest thing ever”.

Here is a hint:

He now faces a variety of felony bomb and drug charges including threat to throw, project, place or discharge a destructive device, possession of bomb making materials, cultivation of cannabis, possession of drug paraphernalia and possession of marijuana.

As Roger S. said in the email he sent me about this, “Why aren’t the lefties trying to ban PVC pipes, fuel, and ‘shrapnel’?”

He is correct in that they are far from consistent. Their answers may include:

  1. Guns are “different” from PVC pipe, fuel, and ‘shrapnel’.
  2. Some tools are just too dangerous and too tempting.
  3. Guns are only to kill.
  4. Individuals are not capable of making choices in the best interests of society and “bad choices” must be removed from the realm of possibility.

My answer is that lefties do not have principles. They have issues.

Quote of the day—phlcstgan

Posted on by

The fact that “gun blogs” are a thing makes me really worry about America.

phlcstgan
August 24, 2011
Comment to Gun Blogger Ignores NRA Undermining Gun Law Enforcement Measures
[The fact this person has such an aversion to our Bill of Rights makes me really certain they do not belong in the U.S.—Joe]

Quote of the day—The Washington Times

Posted on by

The arguments of the gun-control crowd are like an annoying barfly that needs to be sent home. Expanding the rights of lawful gun owners makes everyone safer.

The Washington Times
August 22, 2011
EDITORIAL: No gunfights at the saloon–Crime rate drops as concealed-carry restrictions are relaxed
[While an appropriate metaphor in the given context I think the Brady Campaign is more accurately viewed as a geriatric sports team. Former President Paul Helmke was never a strong player and there was evidence of Alzheimer’s and/or profound stupidity. And this was the best and brightest the Brady Campaign was ever able to field on their team! With a “star” player that feeble it shouldn’t be too surprising that up and comer Colin Goddard hid under a desk at Virginia Tech waiting to be shot rather than attempting to fight back, and second stringer Dennis Henigan is an invalid who soils his own bed.—Joe]

Hunger is coming

Posted on by

I’ve been saying for years that hunger is coming and that lots of people are going to die. I can’t find it on my blog but I know I have said it many times in private, “People have to get hunger before they revolt.”

Instapundit linked to the overview (via Kenneth Anderson) and David linked to the paper supporting my claims.

One of the biggest questions that comes to mind is what about the government forced famines in the Ukraine in the 1930s? Were there riots then? If so we know they weren’t sufficient to overthrow the communists but they didn’t have personal firearms either.

I agree with some of the others, the August 2013 date is a little too precise. The world could have bumper crops for a while and push the date out or there could be a bunch of crop failures and the date gets closer. But the bottom line is the conditions for revolt are approaching. As a general rule revolutions are bad for liberty. Will the U.S be different? What needs to be done to hold on to a free market and freedoms in general if there is a revolution? Would the preservation of private property via the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms be sufficient? Or will the forces demanding the abolition of private property be overwhelming? If the latter then it is my opinion that many more millions will die.

Quote of the day—The Charleston Gazette

Posted on by

Chicago and Toronto are roughly equal in size. Yet Chicago averages 450 gun murders per year, while Toronto has fewer than 60. Why are Chicagoans seven times more violent and deadly than Toronto residents? Maybe it’s because Canada has sensible gun control laws.

The Charleston Gazette
August 21, 2011
Gun murders: American curse
[And maybe the Charleston Gazette editors are ignoramuses. My friend from Toronto legally owns 40 guns. Most of them are handguns. Handguns, until recently, have been banned in Chicago. How much more “sensible” than banned do these idiots want the gun control laws to be?—Joe]

Two words for Dennis Henigan

Posted on by

Dennis Henigan of the Brady Campaign soiled his pants when presidential hopeful Rick Perry hinted he might be carrying a handgun while on the campaign trail.

I have just two words for Henigan: Eleanor Roosevelt.

Okay, I have some more words for Henigan. Dennis, if you are going to try running with the big dogs you really should get yourself some diapers.

H/T to The Volokh Conspiracy for the link to the picture.

Quote of the day—Dallas Morning News

Posted on by

Finding someone to stand up and take responsibility for the feds’ ill-advised gun-walk-to-Mexico program has been anything but fast. Only the denying, obfuscating and bus-throwing-under has been furious.

Dallas Morning News
August 19, 2011
Editorial: Details only get worse from ATF’s Fast and Furious fiasco
[That seems to capture the situation so far pretty well.

H/T to NRA-ILA.—Joe]

A Little History

Posted on by

I’ve long suspected (“suspected” as in I hadn’t set out to prove it, though I knew for sure anyway) that many of our gun restriction laws were vigorously supported by the gun industry.  It’s the only explanation for some of the import restrictions, and it makes sense to explain licensing requirements for manufacturers– protection for the established companies against cheap imports and upstart competitors, respectively.  This motivated American companies, and even the NRA, to get into bed with the anti-rights movement.  Add to that the government’s multi million dollar contracts potentially held over company’s heads, and you have an extremely powerful influence against liberty.  I bring this up because this sort of thing has been going on all throughout our society for, well, essentially forever.

Researching an answer for a customer, which is something I spend a lot of my time doing, I came across this (emphasis mine);

“The patent on the M1 carbine was owned by Western Cartridge Co. and David “Carbine” Williams, and still in effect when Penney and Arnold wanted to begin manufacturing M1 carbines in 1958. Penney and Arnold contacted Winchester-Western and offered them a percentage per carbine manufactured, in return for permission to manufacture the M1 carbine. John Olin, owner of Winchester-Western, refused. Olin, Winchester-Western, and more than a few other American manufacturers were opposed to all of the surplus weapons being returned to the United States, where they were being sold at prices the manufacturers couldn’t compete with. This opposition eventually led the manufacturers and the National Rifle Association to support the Gun Control Act of 1968, which, amongst many other things, prohibited the importation of U.S. military surplus.“

The capitalist in me, which comprises my entire being, says; “Why didn’t Winchester and other manufacturers buy up all the cheap imports, then, or at least strike a deal with the new company?”  But some obvious questions often go unanswered, or un-asked.

Point being; a huge number of the vast mountain of restrictions and barriers to entry into the marketplace we have now, started with a politician getting into bed with someone in business, and working out a deal.

What to do about it?  First be aware of it.  Then understand that our government was set up, partly, to avoid this sort of thing.  Hence I lay the majority of the blame on the corrupt operators in our government.  There will always be one person willing to sell out his country for money, but government is specifically charged with protecting liberty.  Tar and feathers, anyone?  And be aware of what your favorite advocacy group is really doing before you give them money.

Important demographic

Posted on by

One of the most anti-gun demographics are black women. Here is a story by Joshunda Sanders that indicates things may be changing and may help affect that change:

That sense of vulnerability and fear followed me into adulthood, when I found myself, as an African American single woman, working as a reporter in Beaumont in 2001.

In addition to the pressures of learning how to be a reporter, learning Texas and being far from home, I was warned in the newsroom about active clusters of Ku Klux Klan activity. It had only been a few years since James Byrd Jr., a black man, had been beaten by white men and dragged to his death in nearby Jasper.

…

It surprised me to discover that I was part of a larger trend in Texas. Applications for concealed carry permits began rising in the state before the 2008 elections, an increase some attributed to concerns that anti-gun politicians would be voted in . Of the total number of licenses granted, women made up 21.9 percent in 2010, up from 17.7 percent in 2001, according to the Texas Department of Public Safety. For reasons that are unclear, black women are the fastest-growing group of women being issued licenses for concealed handguns in the state.

…

Adam Winkler, author of the forthcoming book, “Gunfight: The Battle Over The Right to Bear Arms in America,” traced the birth of the modern gun rights movement to the Black Panthers in the September issue of The Atlantic. In it was a fact of history that I’d never heard: “Martin Luther King Jr. applied for a permit to carry a concealed firearm in 1956, after his house was bombed. His application was denied,” Winkler wrote. “But from then on, armed supporters guarded his home.”

Closer to my demographic was the historian Danielle McGuire’s book, “At the Dark End of the Street,” which fills out commonly told stories about Rosa Parks and other women of the civil rights movement who were subjected not just to racial intimidation but also sexual violence. Among the most jarring stories of black women attacked in the South, sometimes by police officers, was the story of Recy Taylor, a 24-year-old mother and sharecropper who in 1944, as she walked home after attending church at the Rock Hill Holiness Church in Abbeville, Ala., was snatched from the street by seven white men armed with knives and shotguns. They raped her and left her for dead. It was Rosa Parks, the president of the local NAACP branch office, who was sent to investigate Taylor’s case.

JoshundaSanders

Sanders took and passed a course to get her concealed weapons license in Texas. More pictures are here.

Adam Winkler’s Facebook page is here. The excerpt from his book in the Atlantic is here.

Quote of the day—Melissa Rooney

Posted on by

For each firearm a “Genuine Reason” must be given, relating to pest control, hunting, target shooting, or collecting. Self-defense is not an acceptable reason.

…

If only America responded to our incessant shooting rampages with half this vigor and political consolidation.

Melissa Rooney
August 20, 2011
From Down Under
[Self-defense is not an acceptable reason? I almost made that the QOTD by itself. The most basic of all human rights, the right to defend your life, is “not an acceptable reason.”

Tell that to the people I pointed out here. Or tell Ms. Rooney, Molōn labe!—Joe]

Fighting the last war

Posted on by

The Brady Campaign just sent out a fundraising letter:

I’m sorry, Gov. Perry, I didn’t quite catch what you said…
 
Dear Friend,

Is this the type of President the American public wants?

When asked if he was armed on the campaign trail, Texas Governor Rick Perry smiled and replied, “That’s why it’s called concealed.”

Stop this extremism before it reaches
the White House!

The Republican primary campaign has hardly begun and already it is being dominated by extremists. None as scary as Rick Perry who brazenly carries weapons — concealed and revealed. Even on the campaign trail!

Only an egotistical extremist would carry a loaded weapon into a crowd — encouraging others to do so.

Is this where America is headed? Is this the America you want for our nation’s children?

Polls prove over and over again that Americans support sensible gun laws and don’t want guns in public places. Our goal is for our elected officials to reflect the will of the American people, not the “guns everywhere” ideologues.

Please help us with a donation today to stop gun extremists before it is too late.

Sincerely,
 
Sarah Brady, Chair
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence
 

They keep using that word “extremist”. I don’t think it means what they think it means (from Princess Bride of course). There are about six million active concealed weapons licenses in this country. That doesn’t count all the people who legally carry concealed weapons in Vermont, Alaska, and Arizona without a license. Compare that to the number of Brady Campaign donors. 6,000,000 versus 50,000 is a ratio of 120:1. In other words the Brady Campaign donors number just 0.83% that of active concealed weapon licenses. Even if compared to the entire population of the U.S. there are active concealed weapons licenses for about 3% of the population eligible to legally carry. By any measure I can come up with the Brady Campaign is by far more extreme than those who possess concealed weapon licenses.

The problem for the Brady Campaign is they are fighting the last war with the same tactics they used then. And what makes it even worse is it was war they lost. That’s not too bright. But what do you expect from an organization that doesn’t know the meaning of the words they use?

Thirdpower and Lonely Machines have more.

Quote of the day—Janet Napolitano

Posted on by

Let me be very clear: we monitor the risks of violent extremism taking root here in the United States. We don’t have the luxury of focusing our efforts on one group; we must protect the country from terrorism whether foreign or homegrown, and regardless of the ideology that motivates its violence.

We are on the lookout for criminal and terrorist activity but we do not – nor will we ever – monitor ideology or political beliefs. We take seriously our responsibility to protect the civil rights and liberties of the American people, including subjecting our activities to rigorous oversight from numerous internal and external sources.

Janet Napolitano
Head of Department of Homeland Security
April 16, 2009
Homeland Security chief responds to right-wing extremism report
[Really? I wonder what sort of action Ms. Napolitano and her organization have taken in response to those responsible for operation Fast and Furious. It involved criminal activities and arguably terrorist activities as well as strong hints that it was aimed at infringing upon the civil rights of American people.—Joe]

CCW population by state

Posted on by

Ken G. uploaded a spreadsheet to the wa-ccw-Washington State Concealed Weapons Discussion Yahoo Group. It contains the number of CCWs issued by state along with various statistics related to CCW {CCWPopulationByState.xls (145 KB)}. I have uploaded it to here for better visibility.

There are a total of about six million CCW active licenses out there.

Traditional hunting ammo banned in Washington state

Posted on by

Joe Waldron sent out an email with an alert from the NRA. Here are some important points (emphasis in original):

The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has imposed a ban on the use of traditional ammunition for all upland bird hunting on all WDFW pheasant release sites across the state.  This restriction was adopted by the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission two years ago but its implementation was delayed until this hunting season.  The Commission adopted the restriction during the course of its 2010-2012 hunting season-setting process.

With this in mind, it is critical that hunters and sportsmen participate in the 2012-2014 season-setting process, which is just getting underway.  The WDFW will be hosting a series of public meetings next week to take comments from the public as the first step in the process.  You can bet that the anti-hunting extremists will be represented at these meetings so the importance of hunters and sportsmen participating cannot be overstated!

…

…

No scientific studies have been cited showing population-level impacts on any species.  The WDFW seems to be acting on emotion and politics, citing the “potential” for problems associated with traditional ammunition as the basis for these far-reaching restrictions.

The NRA believes that the current push to ban the use of traditional ammunition in Washington is part of a new strategy being used by anti-hunting and anti-gun activists all over the country to attack our hunting traditions and firearm freedoms.  Traditional ammunition bans have a significant chilling effect on hunting by pricing hunters out of the market while hunters’ ranks are already in decline.  The opposition’s “next logical step” will be to propose a complete traditional ammunition ban throughout Washington.  This is the pattern in other states so don’t think “it won’t happen here!”

…

With that in mind, it is important for you to attend the WDFW meeting in your part of the state.  The following meetings will run from 7:00-9:00 p.m.:

–         August 22 – Federal Way Community Center (Alder & Birch rooms), 876 South 333rd St, Federal Way
–         August 23 – Edison Place Event Center (Edison Room), 201 North Rock St, Centralia
–         August 24 – The Lincoln Center (Monroe Ballroom), 1316 North Lincoln St, Spokane
–         August 25 – Clarion Hotel & Conference Center (Selah Wapato rooms), 1507 North First St, Yakima

In addition to attending one of the above meetings, please comment on the issues at the WDFW’s hunting website.  Your voice matters!  Comments must be submitted by Tuesday, September 20.

It’s another case of policies being implemented by a theocratic government of the self-anointed.