Assault weapons are not protected by the Second Amendment because they are weapons of war.
Brian Moran
Virginia Secretary of Public Safety and Homeland Security
February 11, 2020
Virginia House passes ‘assault weapon’ ban
[Mr. Moran, SCOTUS disagrees with you. See US v. Miller, 1939.
Pass such a law and we will be seeing you in court. And, eventfully, I plan to enjoy your trial.—Joe]
They don’t need to take the bad guys guns. The bad guys aren’t who they are trying to control!
Bob Stockbriidge
February 9, 2020
Comment to 2nd Amendment Alert
[This hypothesis fits the known data.
Respond appropriately.—Joe]
We’re grateful to the 18 attorneys general for joining the amicus, on behalf of the residents of their respective states. The right to bear arms does not end at the Illinois state line, and untold numbers of citizens from other states have occasion to travel to or through Illinois and they should not be expected to leave their right of self- defense at the border.
Alan Gottlieb
Chairman of SAF
February 9, 2020
45 American states ‘illegally affected’ by 1 state’s serious gun control: 18 attorneys general join fight against firearm restrictions
[The case before SCOTUS is here. It is scheduled to be in conference 10 days from now.
My quick review of the case leads me to believe Illinois is looking for excuses to not allow other state residents to apply for conceal weapon licenses. Their excuse is that they require proof the out of state resident isn’t disqualified by reason of felony conviction or mental health reasons. They claim::
while the Illinois State Police have direct access to information about the criminal and mental health history of Illinois residents, they lack access to such information about nonresidents.
I find that “interesting”. If someone were to move to their state and become a resident, do they magically have their databases filled with criminal and mental health history? If so, I’d like to learn their magic. I have some databases of my own I would like kept update by such means.
I didn’t read all the briefs, or even any in their entirety, but I did not see them address the issue of why someone so dangerous they cannot be allowed to carry a firearm is allowed to walk their public streets unescorted or obtain other dangerous items like gasoline and matches. If they are so concerned about people they consider dangerous because they don’t have databases entries on them why don’t the stop all traffic at the state border and demand their criminal and mental health records before being allowed entry? It’s because it’s the excuse, not the reason, to deny out of state people their specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms.
The petitioners bring up a related point with this:
Respondents claim it is impossible to know if the non-resident carrying in Illinois, who has a concealed carry license in her home state, who is trusted to carry in her vehicle on Illinois roads, on Illinois private property, on Illinois firing ranges and hunting grounds, is nonetheless too dangerous or mentally ill to carry for self-defense and exercise her Second Amendment right anywhere else in the State.
The go on to destroy the fraudulent claim.—Joe]
If you have a problem with the truth, who’s the bad guy?
Dan O’Kelly
February 7, 2020
Former ATF agent at center of legal dispute over AR-15
[The answer should be obvious. The problem is that the truth is a problem for a lot of people and they will insist the truth teller is the bad guy. Worst than that telling the truth can make you the enemy. And frequently it’s not just the enemy of one or a few people. You can be enemy of the state. In some countries that can get you prison or even death sentence.
O’Kelly is telling the truth and making himself the enemy of a lot of people. Fortunately, in this country he is unlikely to earn official sanctions from the government even though he is certainly making a lot of people in government very uncomfortable.
I wish him well in his continued truth telling.—Joe]
Why a certain sector of elected officials, whose job is to serve the public, are hellbent on trampling individual rights, boggles the minds of clear thinking folks. I believe it has to do with power and control. The battle over gun control is not really about guns; it is about control.
Dave Ellis
February 3, 2020
St. Lawrence Co. gun owners seek to declare 2nd amendment sanctuary
[It may boggle your mind at first. But gradually it makes sense as you see it all around you. And what cements it is when you discover that not only do some people think like this:
And it is a thrill; it’s a high… I love it; I absolutely love it. I was born to regulate. I don’t know why, but that’s very true. So as long as I’m regulating, I’m happy.
But, a lot of people think like that. They absolutely get off on coming up with ideas for controlling other people “for their own good”. Some people even literally believe they need to be in control of other people’s money because they know how to spend it better than the people who earned it.
These type of people are those who seek political office. And they are the type of people who should be kept away from the levers of political power. And when those type of people became too numerous and too powerful, that is why we have the Second Amendment.—Joe]
As the days go by, the School House Rock version of politics that Americans have been accustomed to has increasingly become a distant memory, thanks to DC’s thorough embrace of managerial politics. So, no matter who’s in charge, politics is business as usual, which means more government growth at the expense of local jurisdictions and civil society. However, politics is the art of the possible, especially when people appreciate the value of American federalism and all of its implications. The opportunities are endless, provided that people break free from the conventional wisdom they’ve been fed about political action and start acting locally. Gun rights issues could be the catalyst that kicks off a decentralization revolution America desperately needs.
José Niño
February 6, 2020
What’s Next for the Virginia Sanctuary Movement?
[It’s a pleasant thought. But I’m far from convinced it has a high probability of turning out that way.
Also by José Niño: How Gun Control Became an Instrument of Tyranny in Venezuela.—Joe]
From NRA-ILA:
On January 31st, the House Civil Rights & Judiciary Committee voted to pass bills to ban most standard capacity magazines and make it more difficult to obtain a CPL. These bills will now go to the Rules Committee awaiting being pulled to the House floor. Please contact your state representative and ask them to OPPOSE House Bills 2240 and 1315.
House Bill 2240, as passed out of committee, bans the manufacture, possession, sale, transfer, etc. of magazines that hold more than fifteen rounds of ammunition. Those who own non-compliant magazines prior to the ban are only allowed to possess them on their own property and in other limited instances such as at licensed shooting ranges or while hunting. These magazines have to be transported unloaded and locked separately from firearms and stored at home locked, making them unavailable for self-defense.
House Bill 1315 requires onerous government red tape and further training to obtain a Concealed Pistol License.
Again, please contact your state representative and ask them to OPPOSE House Bills 2240 and 1315.
Yours in Freedom,
Zach Anderson
NRA-ILA
Grassroots Field Coordinator, Northwest Region
(703) 708-4487
zach@nrailafrontlines.com
When it comes down to it, the gun-ban cheerleaders won’t be happy until guns, “go away.” But there is no “go away.” They are guaranteed to remain dissatisfied, while we refuse to cooperate. Have the government take guns? You’re only giving them to Mr. Trump, who gun grabbers think is a Nazi personified, so that’s hopelessly irrational. Irrational. And even a wave-a-magic-wand disappearance method (or 100% effective bill) is nonsense, communist China would start imports worse than cocaine trafficking. South America too. All we face from the left on guns is mythology and Utopianism that interferes with life.
Alan Korwin
January 23, 2020
Why Background Checks Are A Lie: Stopping Psychos and Gun Checks Are Unrelated
[There is no negotiating or even discussion with irrational people. There is only ignoring, avoiding, and controlling them. The ignoring and avoiding haven’t been working so well lately. It’s time to start prosecuting those in power.—Joe]
Tom Gresham* of Gun Talk has a plan: How We Win In November – A Plan.
Via email from KW.
* Tom Gresham hosts Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk, the first nationally-syndicated radio show about guns and the shooting sports, and is also the producer and co-host of the Guns & Gear, GunVenture and First Person Defender television series.
I don’t give a shit about the second amendment, and I think it would be nothing short of hilarious if all of your guns were taken away.
Tade Winslow @SolidarityPimp
Tweeted on February 1, 2020
[Don’t ever let anyone tell you that no one want to take your guns.—Joe]
It is true that the Swiss surrender their ammo back to the local armory at the end of each summer’s training. It is also true that the political tradition of democracy is so deeply ingrained that it would be impossible for any Swiss government to refuse to return those weapons the following summer. The Swiss are not a disarmed population. They simply let the government store the ammo during the year. The attitude is not that the government lets the citizens have access to weapons. The attitude is that the citizens allow the government to store the ammo.
Gary North
December 24, 2012
In Defense of the Second Amendment
[H/T to Chuck Petras @Chuck_Petras for bringing this to my attention.
There are some interesting observations and history in his post.—Joe]
As a nation we need to live up to the principles of America and that means devotion to the nation and its people.
Self centered elites who break the law all the time for personal gain of power and money are a criminal class. They are not in any way interested in devotion to our people or our country.
Kevin M. Washington
January 28, 2020
Anti-2A lawmakers completely ignore facts, push sweeping gun control legislation
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
This is what the political left say about Trump supporters on national television:
America, this is what CNN thinks of you…
pic.twitter.com/puuVjRLlw1— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) January 28, 2020
Just imagine what they say when they think they have some privacy.
Oh! That’s right. We don’t need to imagine. We have the video.
There have now been FOUR @BernieSanders Field Organizers that were recorded praising Republican “re-education” gulags, violent revolution, and anarcho-communism.
State Directors have been locking their accounts.
The MSM remains silent. #Expose2020 pic.twitter.com/Al1tb2jI4P
— James O’Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) January 29, 2020
Does anyone still wonder why they want to take our guns?
This is a doable and sensible solution in solving our ever growing mass shooting horror in the United States.
There are about 15 million assault rifles out there. Many owners own more than one. So we are talking about 7 million individuals or less than 2% of our population who along with the NRA are running roughshod over the rest of us.
99% of mass shooting are from white male losers who are above all else gun enthusiasts. We cannot red flag them all.
There is zero chance we can take their guns away.
The standard owner of an assault rifle uses a 40 round clip which can be all be fired in a few seconds.
There is no reason for more than six shots other than murdering co workers, movie goers, shoppers, worshipers and school children.
The only viable solution is to reduce the number of rounds a semi automatic weapon can fire before stopping and reloading and giving some brave soul a chance to stop it.
rackjite
September 4, 2019
Sensible and doable Gun Control – Six is Enough
[I won’t bother to fisk this. The errors are blatant enough any of my frequent readers could do it without effort.
Beyond the errors, he has no concern for the constitutional issues.
He goes on to say the government should “buy back” all guns that are capable of self containing more than six rounds and replace all magazines that can hold more than five rounds with five round magazines.
Don’t ever let someone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
He uses the word “little” as a verbal bludgeon, as in his frequent repetition of the phrase “hypocritical little nitwit.”
The purpose of using the word that way is to belittle: literally, to make little. When someone is depicted as “little,” for a moment he might appear (to the flamer) to have become smaller and less threatening. When the flamer is hooked on such talk, it seems likely to me he has revealed that he’s afraid of something — and he has to make the thing that frightens him into a small, harmless, even ludicrous object. But it doesn’t work; he has to go on doing this kind of thing because he can’t stop being afraid. He’s doing it to you today; he’ll do it to another guy tomorrow. (Each time, he’ll think it is a victory for him; in fact it does nothing for him — he’s just a little slow to realize it <g>)
Back in the days when I was very anti-gun, I tended to think of “gun nuts” as drooling, knuckle-dragging morons. Cavemen. Uneducated. Beer-drinking slobs who could barely read and who probably beat up their wives a lot. Maybe they were even all closet Nazis, eh? Etc., etc., etc. It was an image that came instantly to mind. I would talk about “gun nuts” that same way with friends of like mind. It all made such perfect sense to us.
But if ever I came across a “gun nut” in person I would be silent — especially if it was someone dressed in, say, hunting cammos. Or I might see “gun nuts” on TV and make a snide comment about them, but seeing them made me feel a bit afraid (something I didn’t reveal to other people). It wasn’t rational, but it wasn’t surprising considering how I’d been raised. It wasn’t until a long time later that I realized what I’d been doing: trying to make the “gun nuts” almost into sub-humans in my mind, and paint them as ridiculous and stupid so that they shrank in stature and were less scary to me. (But as I said, this doesn’t work. No amount of sneering made me feel less afraid.)
I have no doubt that some small percentage of “gun people” (those few who are outright fascistically-minded) “deserve” every bit of fear I had for them — then and now. But for crying out loud . . . what a stupid, prejudicial way to think about an entire group of people, with no distinctions made. It took some years to realize what a big lie there was in imagining myself enlightened and non-bigoted — all the while that I’d been thinking like a garden-variety bigot. That was one of the fun things about the ’60s and ’70s: You could fantasize that you were on a higher plane of consciousness than “those” people — and be every bit as bigoted and vicious as you thought they were. You didn’t have to hold yourself accountable, nor wonder if you weren’t being two-faced about it. By definition, as a more “enlightened” person, you didn’t have any of those problems. Only other people had such problems. It was all so convenient . . .
Mike Arst
December 1998
Rack Jite — Liberal Hate Monger
[This is an attempt to answer the comment from MTHead on perhaps why anti-gun people so frequently confirm Markley’s Law.—Joe]
Because this is what life looks like when you have a 1″ penis.
Matt Scott
January 20, 2020
Comment to a Facebook post in the group Repeal the Second Amendment.
[It’s another Markley’s Law Monday!
And if they want to repeal the 2nd Amendment you know for certain they want to take your guns.
H/T to Jonathan Sullivan.—Joe]
Ultimately, the egregiously and flagrantly unConstitutional Brady handgun Control Act of 1993 must be rescinded, repealed, or otherwise struck down with extreme prejudice. It threatens our entire Constitutional form of government under the rule of law.
Donald L. Cline
January 22, 2020
A Thesis on our Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and how to reverse the damage
[I’ve been says politicians enacting, or even introducing, firearms restrictions should be prosecuted for violation of 18 USC 242. In this post it is brought up, as also suggested many times by Paul Koning (see here, here, here, here, here, etc.), such politicians can also be impeached for perjury. This is because they violate their oath of office to uphold the constitution.
I would rather it be prison with the potential for a death sentence (all the easier to get guilty pleas). But I’d be willing to consider a compromise on that point.—Joe]
We’re in a moment when George Orwell’s dystopian masterpiece Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949) feels more and more prescient, the left seems to be in favor of bringing the novel’s “Two Minute Hate” to modern America. In the novel, citizens were forced to publicly exhibit hate for two minutes every day as they looked at pictures of people the state deemed to be enemies. It’s not hard to imagine, given the level of “Trump-derangement syndrome,” many on the left doing this anytime they happen to see an image of President Trump on TV or the internet.
Frank Miniter
Editor in Chief of America’s First Freedom
January 17, 2020
The Real Reason We Can’t Talk to Gun-Control Activists
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
IMO the Second Amendment has outlived it’s useful life and should be repealed. There, I said it.
Constitutional Lawyer @Constit71567558
Tweeted on January 17, 2019
[If he were a real constitutional lawyer of any competence he would know repealing the 2nd Amendment was of little importance:
The right there specified is that of ‘bearing arms for a lawful purpose.’ This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed; but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress.
Chief Justice Morrison Waite
U.S. Supreme Court
U S v Cruikshank
92 U.S. 542 (1875)
It’s settled law.—Joe]
It’s possible I noticed this before but it’s hard to say. The Firearms Blog has a picture of me at the event which inspired Boomershoot: At the bottom of the post is a picture from the 1997 Blanchard Blast.
I stumbled across this while reading Deplatformed: How Big Tech Companies & Corporate America Subvert the Second Amendment (very well done). This post linked to PSA: Microsoft’s ban on using its services to promote guns. Having worked there, and my daughter still working there, this is extremely annoying. And that blog post led to the Microsoft Gun Club post where the picture was found.
