Category Archives: Gun Rights

Quote of the day—John R. Lott Jr.

Posted on by

The Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC), which I head, hired McLaughlin & Associates to survey 1,000 general election voters from July 21-24, 2022. The survey began by asking people whether they supported red flag laws. It then informed respondents that there are no hearings before an individual’s guns are taken away, and that there are no mental health care experts involved in the process.

People initially answered by a two-to-one margin that they support red flag laws (58% to 29%), with the strongest support coming from Democrats, the wealthy, blacks and Hispanics, and people aged 18-29.

However, after being told that there are no court proceedings before an individual’s guns are taken away, and that there are no mental health care experts involved in the process, support changed to opposition (29% to 47%). Strong support plummeted from 34% to 14% and strong opposition rose from 18% to 29%.

John R. Lott Jr.
October 5, 2022
Media Spin on Gun Control Doesn’t Match Voters’ Opinions
[Lies and deception are the only way they can win. And they know that. It is part of their culture. Don’t let them get away with it. Use it as evidence at their trials.—Joe]

Gun rights in flux—the next steps

Posted on by

The mainstream media is taking notice (the Wall Street Journal):

Judges Across U.S. Expand Gun Rights, Taking Cues From Supreme Court — Courts are placing more emphasis on historical traditions, presenting new challenges for defending gun regulations

The Supreme Court’s decision this year to strengthen Second Amendment protections for carrying concealed weapons is starting to ripple through lower courts, with several judges citing the ruling to strike down other gun regulations.

This is just the first step to cementing our gains. The gun culture needs to expand into the new territory. Fortunately, the political left has cleared a lot of obstacles for us. The whole “defund the police” movement helped the BLM and Antifa riots open a lot of eyes. This made gun ownership seem like “a good idea” to many and a near requirement to others. We need to welcome them and enable them to safely and responsibly exercise their specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms. If we can do this with 60% or 70% of the population, we will have a good chance of being able to breathe easy for a generation or two.

Quote of the day—Robert Milby

Posted on by

There’s a very strong sentiment in this county that the governor has just thumbed her nose at the Supreme Court, in what’s being touted as an unconstitutional conniption fit, She’s absolutely overstepped.

Robert Milby
Sheriff of Wayne County New York
October 9, 2022
Another Challenge to New York’s Gun Law: Sheriffs Who Won’t Enforce It
[The courts are telling New York City politicians (I consider the governor as being in this category) the law is unconstitutional and many in law enforcement openly say they will not enforce the law. That’s really going to put the hurt on the anti-gun movement.

If they keep it up we may yet get to enjoy their trials.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Ketchup dripping down the wall + Pink Lemonade @PinkLemonadePie

Posted on by

She didn’t say she wanted to ban and take away your tiny flaccid penis, you know. Damn.

Ketchup dripping down the wall + Pink Lemonade @PinkLemonadePie
Tweeted on July 6, 2022
[It’s not only another Markley’s Law Monday, it is another science denier!

I wish I knew a research psychologist I could get to study the minds of anti-gun people. I wonder if they could figure out why there is just a high correlation between their obsession with penis size and the advocating of restrictions on civil rights.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Jake Charles

Posted on by

This past summer, the Supreme Court radically refashioned the Second Amendment. Blue states like New York scrambled to enact new gun safety laws to deal with the decision. Those measures are already falling like dominoes.

Jake Charles
October 7, 2022
The Supreme Court’s Big Second Amendment Decision Is Wreaking Havoc on Gun Safety Laws
[He says that like it is a bad thing. He can’t seem to understand that his naïve preferences for government power to violate the inalienable rights of the people don’t override the U.S. Constitution protections of those rights. Prejudice is such an ugly thing.

He lost all credibility when he refers to gun control laws as “gun safety laws”. It goes down from there.

I’ll sleep better tonight knowing he and his ilk are losing.—Joe]

Quote of the day—Frank Miniter

Posted on by

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]

Winning via one lawsuit at time

Posted on by

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.

Quote of the day—Holly Sullivan

Posted on by

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]

Quote of the day—Texas GOP @TexasGOP

Posted on by

Come and take it.

Texas GOP @TexasGOP
Tweeted on September 24, 2022
[This was in response to this:

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]

Who is delusional?

Posted on by

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.

Quote of the day—Jim Kenney

Posted on by

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]

Quote of the day—Tracey Wilson (@TWilsonOttawa)

Posted on by

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]

Quote of the day—Tyler Shandro

Posted on by

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]

St. Javelin

Posted on by

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:

clip_image001

In real life:

clip_image001[4]

How to know if you need a gun

Posted on by

Via CF Active @ActiveCf:

image

Quote of the day—Chip Brownlee

Posted on by

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]

Quote of the day—Lizbeth Adams @Lizbeth69108338

Posted on by

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]

Quote of the day—Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow

Posted on by

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]

Quote of the day—Jolie McCullough

Posted on by

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]

Quote of the day—Frank Miniter

Posted on by

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]