Today, the men and women of the @NRA honor the profound life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Dr. King applied for a concealed carry permit in a “may issue” state and was denied. We will never stop fighting for every law-abiding citizen’s right to self-defense. #MLKDay
NRA @NRA
Tweeted on January 21, 2019
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: “Stick to the Devil you know.“
Rudyard Kipling
1919
The Gods of the Copybook Headings
[This truth was well known 100 years ago yet people still believe the lie it refutes.
Closely related.—Joe]
There is absolutely no reason at all for anyone to buy an assault weapon. These high power firearms have one sole purpose — to commit mass murder.
U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez
January 19, 2019
Gun control push is back in Washington, and N.J. lawmakers are all in
[Interesting. Since there are tens of millions of these guns in circulation in the U.S. and only about 400 murders committed each year with rifles of all types we have a limited number of possible conclusions:
I’m going with #2 with the added extrapolation that he probably has evil intentions as his motivation to pursue this legislation.—Joe]
Once you realize that “assault weapons” are in the eye of the beholder, it’s hard to take seriously the extravagant promises of legislators who want to ban them. Feinstein claims her bill would “put a stop to mass shootings.” Yet even if it eliminated the millions of “assault weapons” that Americans already own (something it does not even purport to do), mass shooters would still have plenty of equally lethal alternatives.
After three decades of this nonsense, Americans may be starting to wise up. According to Gallup, support for legislation like Feinstein’s fell from a peak of 59 percent in 2000 to 40 percent last year.
Jacob Sullum
January 16, 2019
The Whimsical Illogic of ‘Assault Weapon’ Bans
[At a national scale I think we are making progress. At the state level we are losing. Ultimately it will be decided in Federal courts. I think we need to fight a holding action at the state level and put as much resources as we can into winning in the courts.—Joe]
You can’t arm slaves and expect them to remain slaves, and similarly, you can’t disarm free citizens and expect them to remain free.
Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership
January 7, 2019
CIVIL RIGHTS RALLY IN PITTSBURGH IS THE HIGH ROAD
Misguided effort to disarm Jews and the public is wrong
JPFO Statement for the Pittsburgh Rally
[There is nearly incontrovertible evidence that is the point. It is a feature, not a bug.
Respond accordingly.—Joe]
Self-defense is not a sufficient argument against gun control.
Zack Ford @ZackFord
Tweeted on January 15, 2019
[The United States Supreme Court and about 100 million United States gun owners disagree with this absurd assertion. But you should know that people like this exist.—Joe]
Via email from Drew.
Oregon is demonstrating what they want for the future of gun ownership. These legislators are the want-to-be tyrants sponsoring Senate bill 501:
Senator Rob Wagner
503-986-1719
Sen.RobWagner@oregonlegislature.govRepresentative Andrea Salinas
503-986-1438
Rep.AndreaSalinas@oregonlegislature.gov
They are proposing you spend 364 days in jail and/or pay a $6250 fine if you are caught in possession of a magazine which holds more than five rounds. No grandfathering. Furthermore, you would be prohibited from purchasing more than 20 rounds of ammunition in a month unless you purchased it and used it at the range.
I remember when the 1994 AWB was being proposed. It restricted magazine size to 10 rounds. Gun rights activists pointed out that if it was constitutional to limit the magazine size to 10 rounds there was no real limit and that in the future we would see seven, five, two, and zero magazine size limits. The anti-rights people dismissed the concerns.
The New York SAFE Act restricted magazine size to seven rounds or put a maximum of seven rounds in larger capacity magazines but the courts struck that down and “allowed” people to load ten rounds into ten round magazines.
We now have a state, in the more “liberal” 9th Federal Circuit, proposing a limit of five round magazines and that you destroy, permanently modify, turn over to police, or transfer any higher capacity magazines out of state.
The 20 rounds per month limit is totally unenforceable. Each dealer is supposed to keep track of each of their customers to make sure no more than 20 rounds are sold to them each month. The customer can just go to the store next door and buy another box (or part of a box in the case of many types of ammo). There are numerous other loopholes as well.
The five round magazine limit makes nearly all semi-auto firearms into single shot firearms because there are no five round magazines for most semi-autos. This is the slippery slope we predicted in 1994.
This law cannot possibly be viewed as serving any compelling state interest. It can only be viewed as a deliberate infringement upon the specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms.
These people need an legal education. I propose prosecutors educated them by enforcing 18 USC 242.
I’ve been told by someone who should know:
there aren’t any people working in the ATF licensing center (except one person from management) until after the shutdown-furlough.
Interesting. What happens to businesses with FFLs? My guess is that if their license expires, even though they attempted to renew in a timely manner, then they have to stop selling firearms. At what point would such a requirement be an infringement upon the right of the people to keep and bear arms?
NICS is supposedly up. But there are going to be some FFLs with a deadline rapidly approaching.
Interesting times.
I believe that there should be security cameras and full body scanners everywhere in public places to prevent mass shootings. The Second Amendment is not beneficial to anyone, it remains a threat to others due to people taking it into consideration of their rights to commit crimes.
Wykeina Davis
May 2018
Say Yes To Gun Control
[It’s not just guns they want removed from society. It’s the elimination of individual rights.—Joe]
The gun control crowd invariably loses its voice when a bad guy is shot while committing a crime. Groups such as Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action scream loudly when they push restrictive gun laws to disarm honest citizens, but when an intended victim is able to win in a deadly confrontation, they quickly stick their heads in the sand and pretend nothing happened.
Their silence is not only deafening, it is deadly.
Alan Gottlieb
January 9, 2019
CHICAGO INCIDENT ANOTHER CASE OF GUNS SAVING LIVES, THANKS TO LAWSUITS, SAYS SAF
[I have nothing to add.–Joe]
It’s time to take my life into my own hands, forget about all of the anti-gun rhetoric that I hear bandied about by those who exploit tragedy for their own political purposes, and make 2019 the year that I stop expecting others to look out for me.
Christine M. Flowers
January 10, 2019
Why I’m ready to buy a gun | Christine Flowers
[Changing the culture one new gun owner at a time.—Joe]
Get Ready for a Financial Assault on the Second Amendment:
California Democrat Maxine Waters is the new chairwoman of the House Financial Services Committee. To judge from the party’s past behavior and the various proposals emanating from the left, Waters’s Democrats are going to pressure banks, credit unions, and payment companies to severely curtail and even terminate their relationships with firearm manufacturers, licensed gun retailers, and law-abiding citizens exercising their right to purchase and own firearms. In other words, they will use political pressure to force private institutions into creating social policy that threatens constitutional rights.
I’m a little skeptical. If they thought they could get the legislation through, sure. But just through “political pressure” without the support of the Whitehouse seems like a stretch. Still, it might be worthwhile to consider moving your accounts to a friendly bank or credit union if some banks bow to “political pressure”.
In identity politics, loyalty to race, ethnic group and gender often trump the claims of party. The diversity Democrats celebrate is one day going to pull their party apart, as the social, cultural and racial revolutions of the 1960s pulled apart the party of FDR and LBJ.
Patrick J. Buchanan
December 28, 2019
2020: Year of the Democrats? Maybe Not
[Via email from a reader.
It’s something to think about and act upon when the opportunities become available. The reader also suggested some possibilities to help with the conflict:
The best defense is a good offense.—Joe]
Since joining the Court in 1993, Ginsburg has, in case after case, proven herself to be a reliable champion for the liberal side. When the Court declared the University of Michigan’s affirmative action program for undergraduate admissions unconstitutional in Gratz v. Bollinger (2003), Ginsburg accused the majority of turning a blind eye toward “the stain of generations of racial oppression [that] is still visible in our society.” When the Court came within one vote of declaring the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act unconstitutional in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012), Ginsburg denounced the “stunningly retrogressive” idea that Congress might lack the lawful power to force individuals to buy health insurance.
Damon Root
January 5, 2019
The Case of the Notorious RBG
Examining the life and legend of Ruth Bader Ginsburg
[Barb and I recently watched both of the recent movies about Ginsburg (RGB and On the Basis of Sex). Assuming the movies are mostly true, she did some really good work knocking down numerous sexual discrimination laws. We really enjoyed them. And gun rights advocates can learn from her strategies—pick your battles, clients, and venues carefully.
What the movies didn’t even hint at was some of the Constitutional warping, and mutilating, decisions she participated in. See the source for the quote above for more on that.
In somewhat related news:
Ginsburg misses third consecutive day at Supreme Court
Her absence Monday marked the first time in more than 25 years on the court that she missed an oral argument due to her health.
Perhaps she will consider retiring. She has earned the rest.—Joe]
There is no infringement in keeping track of your guns, registering them, transferring title, spot raids by ATF to make sure you don’t mistakenly sell them without reporting, or lose them. No infringement on responsible owners.
BigWallSection @peter_and_louie
Tweeted on January 7th, 2019, deleted by January 8th, 2019.
[This is what they think of, and occasionally share in an unguarded moment, the right to keep and bear arms.
I wonder if cell phones were treated as such (for all intents and purposes a modern day “printing press” and all around “free speech” tool) he would still adhere to this opinion.—Joe]
What is clear is the danger of groups and people who advocate Trask’s position. Trask clarified WAGR’s goals. “This is the first part of our comprehensive gun violence prevention initiative that’s going to make major changes in Washington State’s law and do some big reforms [emphasis mine].”
Okay, now I’ll agree with Trask. His and WAGR’s positions are quite clear: Infringe on Washingtonians’ gun rights in any way possible until you can find a way to completely usurp American’s gun rights.
Steve Pomper
January 4, 2019
Gun Store Owner ‘Resists’ State’s New Gun Law
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
Gun control now has a new precedent: The agenda of the president is more important than due process and the Constitution.
Daniel Gannon
January 4, 2019
Gun rights eroding. You were warned.
[This has been true for, probably, 200+ years. Still, it’s good to have it clearly articulated.—Joe]
Police in Vermont say they can’t conduct mandated background checks required by a new law on private gun sales. The Department of Public Safety last month told lawmakers they are not allowed to access the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System used to vet gun transfers by licensed firearm dealers.
Signed by Vermont Gov. Phil Scott last year among a spate of gun control laws, Act 94 requires virtually all gun transfers, including those between private parties, to first clear a background check. The problem is that Vermont is one of 36 states and territories that do not have a “point of contact” access to NICS, forcing them to rely on the FBI for all firearm background checks performed in the state. While federal firearms license holders can run their checks through the system, the state cannot.
This also happened in Nevada too.
Some of these people pride themselves on their ignorance of guns and gun laws but you would think after one major blunder they would cure their ignorance. One has to conclude they are stupid. I suspect the problem is that as people capable of remedying their ignorance do so they have a high probability of changing sides.
This doesn’t mean they aren’t dangerous. But it does mean it is a weakness that may be vulnerable to attack.
We look at the gun-free zones as laughable for criminals because for them, it’s a killing field. They can go and do their dastardly deeds – if you would – without fear of somebody being there to stop them.
Budd Schroeder
January 4, 2019
Niagara County DA says she will not prosecute SAFE Act provision
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
Prosecutors told the judge that Burke, who has publicly opposed the National Rifle Association and proposed multiple gun-control ordinances over the years, had 23 guns at his offices alone.
Associated Press
January 3, 2018
Powerful Chicago council member charged in federal probe
[You probably will have to put some special effort into finding where it says which political party Alderman Ed Burke belongs to. But you can take an educated guess and almost for certain get it right in about 100 milliseconds.—Joe]