If gun-control advocates were honest, they’d look at these facts—and all the data behind what actually makes Americans safer—and demand that armed criminals be prosecuted. They would, in sum, get on the law-and-order bandwagon in what must be a law-and-order election.
But they can’t, as control is what they’re really after.
Frank Miniter
September 21, 2022
This Is Not A Culture War
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
New York’s most recent infringement upon gun owner rights just got kneecapped:
A federal judge in New York temporarily blocked parts of the state’s revised concealed-carry gun law on Thursday, finding that it is too strict and should not have barred weapons from being carried in areas such as public playgrounds and health care facilities.
…
A group of gun owners filed suit in federal court in Syracuse, charging the new law violated their Second Amendment rights. In his ruling Thursday, Suddaby agreed some of its restrictions are unconstitutional.
“Simply stated, instead of moving toward becoming a shall-issue jurisdiction, New York State has further entrenched itself as a shall-not-issue jurisdiction. And, by doing so, it has further reduced a first-class constitutional right to bear arms in public for self defense … into a mere request,” Suddaby wrote.
I look forward to the day judges get fed up with the defiance and start levying fines of $100K/day to be paid to the plaintiffs for contempt of court while the politicians are being prosecuted.
We all deserve to live in safe communities, but denying ownership of the most commonly owned firearms in the country is not the way to achieve it.
Holly Sullivan
President of the Connecticut Citizens Defense League
September 30, 2022
Gun owners, rights groups challenge Connecticut firearms ban
[This is just one of several challenges to the bans of “assault weapons”.
I wish them well.—Joe]
Come and take it.
Texas GOP @TexasGOP
Tweeted on September 24, 2022
[This was in response to this:
It’s time we ban assault weapons in this country.
— President Biden (@POTUS) September 24, 2022
Considering Texas history this is particularly appropriate.
We’ll probably never get to find out if Texas will stand by those words because I don’t think President Biden has the political power to ban any guns that common.—Joe]
I find this attitude “interesting”:
Gun reformers feel history is on their side despite bleak outlook in Congress
In the face of such tragedy, anti–gun violence activists have doubled down on their commitment to push for more reform, regardless of who controls Congress after November.
Murphy echoed that commitment, even as he conceded that Congress was unlikely to pass another gun control bill this year. Praising the anti–gun violence community as “one of the great social change movements in the history of this nation,” Murphy said he and his allies were just getting started.
“All of those great social change movements that you read about in the history books, they failed a whole bunch of times before they ever changed the world,” Murphy said. “My hope is based upon the history books, which tell you – when your cause is right and you choose not to give up, in this country, in a democracy – you eventually prevail.”
There is zero mention of the Second Amendment and recent SCOTUS decisions in the article. Is this something they really believe and are delusional? Or are they just trying to “rally the troops” in a time of great depression? Either reason would explain the omission of the 2nd Amendment.
Of course I could be delusional. This was totally unexpected: Bump stock ban remains as Supreme Court turned away challenge from gun rights advocates. I hope the ATF creation of new law without congressional action will be addressed in an unrelated case, but directly applicable to, the bump stock issue. The end result could be the same overruling of the bump stock ban but much cleaner, broad ranging, and perhaps decreased perception of SCOTUS being owned by gun owners or some such thing.
This is a gun country, it’s crazy, we’re the most armed country in world history and we’re one of the least safest. Until Americans decide that they want to give up the guns, and give up the opportunity to get guns, we’re gonna have this problem. I’ll be happy when I’m not… mayor.
Jim Kenney
Philadelphia Mayor
July 5, 2022
Philly Mayor Jim Kenney Says He’s So Sick of Guns He’ll Be ‘Happy’ to Not Be Mayor
[With that attitude toward a specific enumerated right, a lot of other people will be glad when he is not mayor too.—Joe]
It’s been 878 days since the Libs “banned” my AR-15. It’s right where it’s always been, locked away in my safe, in my gun room. Violent criminals continue to shoot up our cities & illicit guns still flow across our borders to gangs.
It’s all theatre 
#FakeBan #FakePublicSafety
Tracey Wilson (@TWilsonOttawa)
Tweeted on September 26, 2022
[I’m hoping to get a chance to get some face time with a gun owning friend in British Columbia in the next couple of months. I want to know what the “word on the street” is like.—Joe]
Alberta is not legally obligated and will not offer any provincial resources to the Federal Government as it seeks to confiscate lawfully acquired firearms.
Tyler Shandro
Alberta’s Minister of Justice
September 26, 2022
BREAKING: Kenney Commands Alberta RCMP to Ignore Trudeau’s Gun Laws
[Via email from Rolf and a blog post by Clayton.
It’s a much stronger statement than just the above quote. It is made very clear they are not going to take this gun banning crap from the Feds.
As Rolf said in the email:
Nullification? They may be getting close to a national split faster than we are.
And Clayton:
Anytime you want to change teams, Alberta, we would love to have another gun rights state.
Alberta connects with Montana. I could see that working. If their politics were suitable I’d like to see British Columbia joining. That would connect Alaska to the lower 48 (or 49 with Alberta).—Joe]
Via email from PKoning:
Today’s WSJ had an article about a group that’s ridiculing Putin online, calling itself “NAFO”. The article came with a photo of a mural on a building depicting “St. Javelin”. It reminded me of an article a week earlier, describing the “ragtag army” that saved Kyiv from the invading Russians. One of the soldiers featured in that article is a lady anti-tank missile operator, who in civilian life was a journalist.
As depicted in popular media:
In real life:
![clip_image001[4]](https://blog.joehuffman.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/clip_image0014.jpg "clip_image001[4]")
Via CF Active @ActiveCf:
People convicted of violent felonies were not prohibited from purchasing or possessing guns under federal law until 1934. It wasn’t until the 1968 Gun Control Act when that prohibition was extended to all felonies and to people with a history of drug abuse or mental illness. Background checks were not mandated by federal law until 1994, and the National Instant Criminal Background Check System didn’t start until 1998. States didn’t begin criminalizing domestic violence until the 1900s, and federal law didn’t prohibit people convicted of domestic violence misdemeanor offenses from getting a firearm until 1996.
Chip Brownlee
July 19, 2022
The Real Significance of the Supreme Court’s Gun Decision
[This is from The Trace.
It is nice for them to admit this. Because these laws are far newer than when the 2nd Amendment was ratified, the Bruen decision will almost certainly mean these laws are vulnerable to being thrown out as unconstitutional.
It is long road but the signage to a win is easily visible.—Joe]
No one wants to take away your ‘right’ to own your small penis compensating firearms.
That’s a stu*id dog whistle for you gun nutters.
Lizbeth Adams @Lizbeth69108338
Tweeted on June 20, 2022
[It’s not only another Markley’s Law Monday, it is another science denier!
“No one wants to take away your firearms?” Really? Who are you going to believe? Her or your lying eyes?—Joe]
The research also found that gun owners who are receptive to regulations feel alienated by the current national conversation. They have a fundamentally different view than most gun-safety activists and pro-reform politicians who don’t own guns. Whereas someone like me sees guns as dangerous, gun owners typically see them as a way to keep safe. Whereas I associate guns exclusively with harm, gun owners see them as a tool that can be used for good or bad purposes. This helps explain a widespread conviction among gun owners: that policy should focus on “keeping guns out of the wrong hands,” not on bans of certain types of weapons or attempts to reduce the number of guns in the country. Another survey found that most gun owners believe that gun-reform advocates ultimately want to take their guns away. This belief makes them mistrustful and reluctant to speak out for any reforms at all — the “slippery slope” argument.
Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow
September 21, 2022
Will Gun Owners Fight for Stronger Gun Laws? — A new group, which includes two former NRA lobbyists, is betting on it
[Yet another gun control group. How many have failed now? Yet they keep trying to put lipstick on the pig.
While she has a better understanding of her opposition than most anti-gun people she has certain important “facts” wrong. For example she apparently believes:
Siegel has found that the majority of gun owners support four laws shown to be effective: universal background checks, prohibitions for those convicted of violent misdemeanors, permits for concealed carry, and permits for gun purchases and possession. He estimates that if all four were implemented, firearm homicides would decline by 35 percent.
Technically this may be true. But it is extremely deceptive in it’s wording.
“Firearm homicide” includes defensive use of firearms. Even if it did only include murder by firearm it does not mean it would decrease the murder rate because criminals substitute other weapons when firearms become difficult to obtain.
There are other weasel words and phrases in this claim as well as outright lies which I will leave as an exercise for the reader.
And the last point I would like to make is that she totally ignores the Bruen decision.—Joe]
The U.S. attorney’s office said the law to prohibit those under felony indictment from obtaining guns does not interfere with the Second Amendment “because it does not disarm felony indictees who already had guns and does not prohibit possession or public carry.”
Jolie McCullough
September 19, 2022
Texas judge rules that people under felony indictment have the right to buy guns under the Second Amendment
[As I understand it, this Federal Prosecutor is making the argument that the law prohibiting the purchase of a firearm by someone with a felony indictment is constitutional because the person can continue to possess and carry any existing firearms they own. But can’t the defense attorney also claim because their client is allowed to keep and use any firearm they already own the law against purchase is nonsensical, serves no purpose, and the client has harmed no one despite breaking a law? Or is this one of those cases where you just have to say, “It’s just a law. It doesn’t have to make sense?”—Joe]
Gun-control groups want this freedom issue framed as a “safety issue,” with gun control as the solution; as in, if the elites just had the power to ban, confiscate or deeply restrict the use of firearms, they could save the people. That’s nonsense, of course, as history shows again and again that disarmed peoples are not and do not remain free; “safe” is not an adjective the people of Venezuela, to give one example, would now use to describe their situation.
Frank Miniter
September 21, 2022
This Is Not A Culture War
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
The creation of a Merchant Category Code for sales at U.S. gun stores will not only not accomplish its intended goal, but is rife for misuse and abuse. Missourians value their Second Amendment rights and oppose any attempts to create a de-facto gun registry. I’m proud to stand up for those rights and will oppose this decision by the major credit card companies at every turn.
Eric Schmitt
Missouri Attorney General
September 21, 2022
Missouri Attorney General slams credit card companies for violation of Second Amendment rights
[Twenty four attorneys general signed a letter sent to American Express, Master Card and VISA CEOs. I can’t imagine this accomplishing anything more than some positive publicity for the signers of the letter. But it doesn’t hurt our cause any either.—Joe]
At the time of its enactment ATF had testified that crime with registered full autos were virtually nonexistent. I did quite a bit of research, and had only found 3-4 homicides in which one was used (two I think were by LEOs), over an 80+ year period (I also found one use in self-defense). So how could the 1986 ban be justified, except as a completely arbitrary decision? Bruen of course rules out balancing tests, but in practice that will weigh on every judge’s mind, “what will I look like if I strike that down?” For the 1986 ban, the answer would be “I merely struck down a law that had been aimed at a problem that didn’t exist.”
David Hardy
September 7, 2022
My latest law review manuscript is online
[When you think about it, a realistic path to legalizing access to new machine guns is pretty amazing compared to the dark ages of the 1990s.—Joe]
Here’s the loophole in the new regulation that software developers are exploiting: if the jig isn’t part of the “kit,” then there’s no firearm under the latest definition and hence no required background check. Specifically, the rule states that when an unfinished frame or receiver is “distributed or possessed with a compatible jig or template,” it is now automatically considered to be a firearm. Leave out the jig, however, and the” kit” is incomplete and doesn’t fall under the rule.
Bob Adelmann
September 14, 2022
New Software Negates Latest “Ghost Gun” Rules
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
We do not believe private companies should serve as moral arbiters. Asking private companies to decide what legal products or services can or cannot be bought and from what store sets a dangerous precedent. Further, it would be an invasion of consumers’ privacy for banks and payment networks to know each of our most personal purchasing habits. Visa is firmly against this.
VISA
September 13, 2022
Visa Warns Merchant Codes Won’t Show Customer Gun Purchases
[It would seem to me that VISA could decisively limit future activities by these anti-gun and other moral busybodies. They could cancel all credit cards owned by the politicians and activists who contributed to this B.S.
It won’t happen, but it’s a pleasant thought.
New York decided to add a First Amendment violation as a bit of sauce to flavor the violation of the Second Amendment. The law is clumsily crafted. It’s not entirely clear whether I would be committing a crime if I forgot to include a LinkedIn account that I had not used for three years but that did exist in the past three years. It’s not clear whether law enforcement could disqualify carry permits based on content from five years ago. Could my overheated remarks about Jesuits or the pope disqualify me? There is no guidance.
Michael Brendan Dougherty
September 9, 2022
September Begins Gun-Control Season in New York
[We need a Prosecute Rights Violators Season. I would like to suggest a season that starts every January 1st and ends December 31st.—Joe]