archives

gun control

This tag is associated with 259 posts

Second Amendment Guarantee Act Would Protect Popular Rifles, Shotguns from Antigun Politicians

(from NRA/ILA)

This week, Congressman Chris Collins (R-NY) introduced legislation that would shield popular rifles and shotguns, including the AR-15, from being banned under state laws. The bill, known as the Second Amendment Guarantee Act (SAGA), would also protect parts for these firearms, including detachable magazines and ammunition feeding devices.
The bill is a response to antigun laws in a small handful of states – including California, Connecticut, D.C., Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York – that criminalize the mere possession of highly popular semiautomatic long guns widely available throughout the rest of the country. Although rifles or shotguns of any sort are used less often in murders than knives, blunt objects such as clubs or hammers, or even hands, fists, and feet, gun control advocates have sought to portray the banned guns as somehow uniquely dangerous to public safety.
Ask Your Representative to support the Second Amendment Guarantee Act
Please contact your U.S. Representative and ask him or her to cosponsor and support H.R. 3576, the Second Amendment Guarantee Act. You can call your U.S. Representative at 202-225-3121.
TAKE ACTION TODAY
Anti-gunners’ focus on these so-called “assault weapons” was renewed after the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. That decision made clear that handguns – by far the type of firearm most commonly used in crime – were subject to Second Amendment protection and could not be banned. This led gun control advocates to seek out other sorts of guns to demonize, and they’ve since been strenuously promoting the myth that semiautomatic rifles and shotguns with certain features such as detachable magazines, pistol grips or adjustable stocks are “weapons of war” with no legitimate civilian use.
Yet Americans overwhelmingly choose these types of firearms for legitimate purposes, including protection of their homes and properties, “three-gun” and other practical shooting sports, and hunting and pest control. And, indeed, the states’ legislative attempts to ban these guns has spurred a market for innovative products that use the same basic calibers and firing mechanisms, but with stock, grip, and accessory configurations that comply with legislative guidelines.
Although the U.S. Supreme Court has yet to review any of these state bans, lower courts have come up with increasingly strained readings of the Second Amendment and Supreme Court precedents to try to justify them. The Seventh Circuit, for example, held that even if a ban’s incursion on Second Amendment rights had no beneficial effect on safety whatsoever, it could still be justified on the basis of the false sense of security it might impart to local residents with exaggerated fears of the banned guns. “[I]f it has no other effect,” the majority opinion stated, the challenged “ordinance may increase the public’s sense of safety.” That’s hardly an acceptable offset for the infringement of a constitutional right.
Members of the Supreme Court have criticized their colleagues for failing to review these cases and the lower courts for misapplying Supreme Court precedent. As noted in a dissent filed by Justice Clarence Thomas and joined by Heller’s author, the late Justice Antonin Scalia, “Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles.” Moreover, the “overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting.” “Under our precedents,” Thomas concluded, “that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons.”
With states’ violating Americans’ rights and federal courts allowing them to act with impunity, it is up to Congress to ensure that all Americans, wherever they may live, have access the best, most modern and innovative firearms for their lawful needs, including the protection of themselves and their families.
The SAGA would ensure that state regulations could not effectively prevent the manufacture, sale, importation, or possession of any rifle or shotgun lawfully available under federal law or impose any prohibitive taxes, fees, or design limitations on such firearms.
The NRA thanks Rep. Chris Collins for leading this important effort and urges his colleagues to cosponsor and support this staunchly pro-gun legislation.
Please contact your U.S. Representative and ask him or her to cosponsor and support H.R. 3576, the Second Amendment Guarantee Act. You can call your U.S. Representative at 202-225-3121.

IT’S ABOUT TIME!

Where were bills like this when the various ‘assault weapon bans’ were introduced?  Of course, the political climate has changed.

Let’s support bills like this before the pendulum swings back again the other way!

The truly sad part is if State and federal legislators truly followed their oaths, none of this would be necessary.

A Scarlet Letter For Gun Owners!

(from Gun Talk Media – SAF)

A Scarlet Letter for Gun Owners

Imagine being a grandfather seeking custody of his grandson. The state says that will be okay, but you’ll have to give us the serial numbers of all your guns. A caseworker says, “If you want to care for your grandson you will have to give up some of your constitutional rights.”

You appeal to a court of law, and the judge says, “We know we are violating numerous constitutional rights here, but if you do not comply, we will remove the boy from your home.”

That’s what happened in Michigan, and it is why the Second Amendment Foundation has filed suit against that state’s Department of Health and Human Services. The state prohibits foster parents and adoptive parents from having guns — a clear violation of constitutional rights — fully acknowledged by the judge. (Hear from attorney David Sigale this Sunday on Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk Radio!)

This kind of branding gun owners as less desirable is part of a larger pattern, where zoning laws treat gun stores as though they were sex shops, and won’t allow them near schools. Responsible gun owners and shooters are treated, by law, in ways that other identifiable groups would never stand for. Get a permit for free speech? Have financial services denied through a government program (Operation Choke Point)? Be required to be photographed, fingerprinted, and have a mandatory background check to exercise what clearly is a fundamental right guaranteed in the Bill of Rights?

We simply must challenge every single one of these blatant discriminatory laws and practices, and it takes all of us. It takes the NRA, the Second Amendment Foundation, state groups, and individuals — you and me. It’s why I created the Gun Talk Truth Squad more than a decade ago — so we can challenge each one of these. So we WILL challenge every media slight, smear, and lie. Every. Single. Time.

A lie left unchallenged becomes the truth.

~Tom

 

Tom Gresham
Author, outdoorsman, gun rights activist, and firearms enthusiast for more than five decades, 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.

This kind of unconstitutional BS really torques my jaw!

We have won many battles, but have not yet won the war.  We must continue to be vigilant.

 

It Happened Again…

A leftist, Democrat, criminal shot up the place!

Four people, including United States Congressman Steve Scalise were shot, the congressman critically.  The shooter reported had asked if the folks on the field were Democrats or Republicans, upon finding out they were the latter, returned to his car, obtained a rifle and handgun and began shooting.

The shooter’s (name redacted) Facebook page was rife with hate toward the Republicans.  He was also a Bernie Sanders supporter.  Bernie has expressed shock at this grievous act.

Of course, if these weren’t politicians, it’d only be a blip on the radar.

In Chicago last weekend, 43 people were shot, 6 of those fatally.

Do we know any of their names?

And, while we’re on the subject, when was the last time a right-winger, Republican, someone NOT a leftist shot up the place?

How many serial shooters are right-of-center?  Or libertarian?

I’ll bet the numbers are small, if any (?)

The Left constantly accuses The Right (tea partisans?) of being violent, bitter, gun owners.  But, when violence occurs, be it shootings, riots, stabbings, WHO are the responsible parties?

And then The Left screams for more gun control, when the police officers doing security on the scene stopped the shooter.  With firearms.

Prayers for all who are injured.  None (from me) for the suspect, who reportedly has been dispatched.

Leftist Media Pushes Trump To Nominate Anti-Gun Liberal For FBI Chief

Quelle Surprise!

(from Gun Owners of America, in part)

Dear Guffaw, 

For four months, the Leftist media has worked to stampede the Trump administration into jettisoning conservative principles and moving to the Left.

Thus far, the White House has been good on guns. 

Trump signed a resolution repealing the Social Security Gun Ban.  He signaled that he will sign concealed carry legislation.

Trump’s Supreme Court pick is a lot better than we would have gotten from Hillary Clinton.

And yet the Left keeps trying.

The most recent media “siren song” is a call for Trump to nominate a “moderate” to head the FBI.

From the standpoint of Trump’s self-interest, a liberal nominee would spend the next three and a half years providing fodder for the Left’s campaign to impeach and incarcerate Trump.

But a Leftist nominee will do a lot of damage to the Second Amendment too. 

Currently on the table is the question of whether an unpaid parking ticket will make you a “fugitive from justice” and strip you of your gun rights. 

The FBI will also decide whether to back up the NICS system and create a de facto national gun registry.

And, if the president orders the FBI to remove the names of 257,000 law-abiding veterans from its NICS gun ban list, there is the question of whether the FBI will comply with that order.

All of which brings us to an anti-gun liberal,  former Connecticut Democrat Senator Joe Lieberman.

Make no mistake:  Despite what MSNBC thinks, Lieberman is no moderate.  True, he staged a revolt against ultra-Left Connecticut Democrats when they tried to nominate someone else for his Senate seat.

Lieberman’s record on guns is abysmal.  He voted against legislation to allow law-abiding Americans to exercise their Second Amendment rights in parks, on trains, or in the District of Columbia. 

He supports so-called “gun free zones,” which turn innocent civilians into sitting ducks. 

Lieberman supported legislation to ban all private firearms sales in the country, and he cast one of the deciding votes against concealed carry reciprocity. 

His voting record earned him an “F” rating with Gun Owners of America.

In short, Lieberman hates guns as much as the craziest gun hater in the Senate.  And, as FBI director, he would have an enormous influence over gun policy.

Lieberman’s ascendancy falls on the heels of equally dangerous suggestions. 

Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe, who, as you know accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of bribes on behalf of his wife’s state Senate campaign in Virginia — and, in exchange, dropped charges against Clinton’s home-brew server.

And, lest we forget, the spotlight briefly shined on the potential nomination of Merrick Garland (Obama’s Supreme Court pick), who, as you remember, voted to overturn Heller and declare that the Second Amendment was nothing but a “militia right.”

Why are all of these crazy Leftists suddenly gaining favor with Republican politicos?

Supposedly, they are pushing for a nominee who would gain quick support from Chuck Schumer and would be expedited through the Senate.

But trust us:  No one who would be acceptable to Schumer would be any friend of the Second Amendment.  And any Schumer candidate would spend the next three years working to destroy the Trump administration — and Republicans’ House and Senate reelection prospects.

ACTION:  Click here to contact President Trump.  Urge him to reject Joe Lieberman, Andrew McCabe, Merrick Garland or any other anti-gun candidate as a prospect for the new FBI director.

Sincerely,

Tim Macy
Chairman


While I’m not directly supporting the GOA, they did send me this email with a link to contact the President regarding concerns for the yet-to-be named FBI director.

I’d suggest you do the same, if the issue so moves you.

I have done so!

How The Bad Guys Get Guns

(from TFB, in part)

Over 100 Ruger Pistols Stolen From Chicago Train Yard

It appears that over 100 Ruger pistols were stolen from a Chicago train yard by gangs in a one-time heist. Apparently, this is becoming a large problem in a city that prides itself on its strict gun control measures with over 150 firearms reported stolen from Chicago train yards since 2013. City leadership seems rather clueless about the root cause of the problem, one alderwomen was quoted as saying “How in the world are these kids getting these guns? I see them on Facebook. Everybody got guns. They can’t go purchase a gun, so where are they getting them from?”

It appears that train cars containing firearms are being specifically targeted somehow and is being looked into by the Chicago Police Department. The only way a firearm can be shipped by rail is through the United States Postal Service, most likely by Federal Firearms License holders due to shipping regulations.

You can read more about the theft over at the Fox News website where they covered it in much greater detail (with a political slant as you might imagine.) Even though the story smacks of political overtones, it is interesting to see what happens when a larger problem goes unnoticed while blaming the tool for actions.

Obviously, ‘they’ are ignoring the fact that they are purchasing guns through FFL-licensed dealers (after they obtain their Illinois FOIA card), and that the only way to curtail these purchases is further, more intrusive background checks!/(snark)MAROONS!

Gun Talk Media VS The NRA

I received two emails yesterday from two (one would think) like-minded entities.  One, the NRA (full disclosure, I am long time Life Member), the second, Gun Talk Media, an Internet blog and media source.

I have posted on this blog regarding the NRAs push to contact Congress regarding the last administration’s efforts to restrict gun rights to those who may have mental limitations (by their view mental illness).  And I have supported their efforts to reverse this measure.

Now comes these emails.  The NRAs requesting immediate action on a pending Senate vote to stop this travesty.

And this from Gun Talk Media:

FAKE NEWS ALERT
Social Security Administration Gets Into Gun Ban Business

As he left office, President Obama screwed American seniors who own or want to own guns by issuing an executive order directing the Social Security Administration to treat seniors in the same miserable way the Veterans Administration does our vets. That is, the SSA now reports to the FBI anyone who prefers to have someone else handle their finances, and the FBI puts that person on the list that is a LIFETIME BAN on owning firearms.

Naturally, the general media portrayed this as keeping guns out of the hands of those with serious mental defects, and when the House of Representatives voted 235 to 180 to repeal this gun confiscation move, the howls from the fourth estate nearly drowned out the facts. Nearly.

As a Gun Talk Truth Squad member, you have the opportunity to push back on these bogus reports, and to answer friends who offer that this ban “seems reasonable.” Here are the facts.

The media said that the SSA would be providing the information to the FBI so these people could

be included in a “background check database.” Well … doesn’t that sound reasonable? The fact is that this move actually puts these people on a list that bans firearms ownership for life.

Who would oppose putting those with “serious mental defects” into a “background check database?” The NRA, of course. But wait. Another vocal opponent is the ACLU. Yes, the American Civil Liberties Union.  Groups supporting and providing aid to those who actually do suffer from mental handicaps also opposed the “I’m outta here” move by the departing “vertical pronoun” President to ban tens of thousand of Americans from owning guns, and all without due process.

Here’s an example of the media coverage of the House vote to repeal this rule. This is from Politico.

Democrats ripped the move as an effort by Republicans to undermine background checks for gun purchasers. After the House vote, Sen. Dianne Feinstein pleaded with supporters to rally against the move in the Senate. “Senate may vote today to weaken background checks on gun purchases. Call your Senator to oppose this change — ensure your voice is heard!” she wrote.

Tell your friends that there has been a law in effect for decades that prohibits the truly mentally incompetent from owning guns, and this law provides for due process. Under current law, if one has been adjudicated mentally incompetent, he or she can’t own a gun. “Adjudicated.” As in, a judge and a court room. Where you can defend yourself. Not a bureaucrat who checks a box and places your name on the banned-for-life list. ~ Tom

So, has the NRA been waving a false flag (creating FAKE NEWS) to feather it’s own nest?  Or is it simply rubber stamping additional efforts to let the government know we are no longer allowing our civil rights to be curtailed without due process?

What do YOU think?

ATF White Paper Leaked

(in part from TFB)

There are some bold issues being addressed. One of which is point 5, the use of a stabilizing brace.

5.  Firearm Arm or Stabilizing Brace:
Manufacturers have produced an arm brace or stabilizing brace which is designed to strap a handgun to a forearm to allow a disabled shooter to fire the firearm. ATF determined that the brace was not a stock, and therefore its attachment to a handgun
did not constitute the making of a short-barreled rifle or “any other firearm” under the
National Firearms Act (NFA). (NFA classification subjects the product to a tax and registration requirement.) In the determination letter, however, ATF indicated that if the brace was held to the shoulder and used as a stock, such use would constitute a “redesign” that would result in classification of the brace/handgun combination as
an NFA firearm (i.e., the “use” would be a “redesign” and making of a short – barreled rifle). ATF has not made an other NFA determination where a shooter’s use alone was deemed be a “redesign” of the product/firearm resulting in an NFA classification. This ruling has caused confusion and concern among firearm manufacturers, dealers, and consumers about the extent to which unintended use of a product may be a basis for NFA classification. To mitigate this confusion and concern, ATF could amend the determination letter to remove the language indicating that simple use of a product for a purpose other than intended by the manufacturer – without additional proof or redesign – may result in re-classification as an NFA weapon.
While many at ATF are concerned about manufacturing processes continuing to push
the boundaries between a Gun Control Act (GCA) and an NFA firearm, ATF has a
relatively consistent history of what crosses the line between GCA and NFA firearms
with which to draw from, and still maintains the ability to exercise good judgement with
future requests based upon the firearm’s individual characteristics
.

This could change their determination that came out back in 2015 that using a brace could constitute a redesign. As Adam Kraut had explained, misusing a product is not the same as redesigning or manufacturing.

If that got you excited wait until you see what else they got cooking.

Next up is the point about Slencers.

Silencers: Current Federal law requires ATF to regulate silencers under the NFA. This
requires a Federal tax payment of $200 for transfers, ATF approval, and entry of the
silencer into a national NFA database. In the past several years, opinions about silencers
have changed across the United States. Their use to reduce noise at shooting ranges
and applications within the sporting and hunting industry are now well recognized.
At present, 42 states generally allow silencers to be used for sporting purposes. The
wide acceptance of silencers and corresponding changes in state laws have created
substantial demand across the country. This surge in demand has caused ATF
to have a significant backlog on silencer applications. ATF’s processing time is
now approximately 8 months. ATF has devoted substantial resources in attempts to reduce processing times, spending over $1 million annually in overtime and temporary duty expenses, and dedicating over 33 additional full-time and contract positions since 2011 to support NFA processing. Despite these efforts, NFA processing times are widely viewed by applicants and the industry as far too long, resulting in numerous complaints to Congress. Since silencers account for the vast majority of NFA applications, the most direct way to reduce processing times is to reduce the number of silencer applications. In light of the expanding demand and acceptance of silencers, however, that volume is unlikely to diminish unless they are removed from the NFA. While DOJ and ATF have historically not supported removal of items from the NFA, the change in public acceptance of silencers arguably indicates that the reason for their inclusion in the NFA is archaic and historical reluctance to removing them from the NFA should be reevaluated. ATF’s experience with the criminal use of silencers also supports reassessing their inclusion in the NFA. On average in the past 10 years, ATF has only recommended 44 defendants a year for prosecution on silencer-related violations; of those, only approximately 6 of the defendants had prior felony convictions. Moreover, consistent with this low number of prosecution referrals, silencers are very rarely used in criminal shootings. Given the lack of criminality associated with silencers, it is reasonable to conclude that they should not be viewed as a threat to public safety necessitating NFA classification, and should be considered for reclassification under the GCA.
If such a change were to be considered, a revision in the definition of a silencer
would be important. The current definition of a silencer extends to “any combination of
[silencer] parts, ” as well as “any part intended only for use in” a silencer. Compared to
the definition of a firearm, which specifies the frame or receiver is the key regulated
part, any individual silencer part is generally regulated just as if it were a completed
silencer. Revising the definition could eliminate many of the current issues encountered
by silencer manufacturers and their parts suppliers. Specifically, clarifying when a part
or combination of parts meets a minimum threshold requiring serialization would be
useful.

These two points are huge. There are other great points addressed in the White Paper and I encourage you to read it all.

The conclusion of the White Paper addresses it nicely:

There are many regulatory changes or modifications that can be made by or through ATF that would have an immediate, positive impact on commerce and industry without significantly hindering ATFs mission or adversely affecting public safety.
There are also areas where adjustments to policy or processes could improve ATF operations. Alleviating some of these concerns would continue to support
ATF’s relationships across the firearms and sporting industry, and allow ATF to further focus precious personnel and resources on the mission to combat gun violence.
The future looks bright and I hope the ATF accepts these issues and solutions.
I wonder if this ‘reversal’ of some contentious regulations has anything to do with the rumor that the President, in his consolidation and streamlining of government bureaucracy, wants to eliminate the BATFE and create a division of the FBI to handle such matters?  (Fast & Furious come to mind?)  Are they trying to appear more ‘user friendly’ to their constituency to keep their agency and their jobs?
Naw, not possible…

The Patriot Pin for California

from TFB (in part)

Stupid gun laws develop new solutions, and there seems to be no limits on either.

The Patriot Pin is for AR15s, and to make them compliant to new laws in some US States.

I don’t know how to define this invention if to call it stupid or clever?

I guess you do what you have to do, to adapt to new rules and legislation. Gun owners are typically about as law-abiding as a citizen can get.

From the Patriot Pin homepage:

Because some state laws require the gun be “disassembled”, before the magazine can be loaded from the top or to remove the magazine, the Patriot-Pin makes it extremely fast and easy to do that.

With your hand firmly on the pistol grip, simply extend your thumb to the end of the arm and “push” it in.

You’ll feel the arm stop at just the right spot allowing you to then open your gun so that you have access to the magazine or the magazine lock “button”.

ppin

Hundreds of hours of research and development have gone into making the Patriot-Pin, from every angle, edge, and surface and is proudly 100% made and engineered in the USA.

“One hundred hours is about 2.5 working weeks. Of course there’s no definition on how many hundreds of those that went into the R&D, but I figure that a price of 99 USD for this kind of product is expensive.

Don’t let the price scare you, some of that R&D money went into a rather cool webpage which also explains the function of the Patriot Pin way better than I can with words.

Have a look and tell us what you think in the Comments section below, I look forward to that more than ever.

Patriot Pin Homepage

Thank GOD I live in the Free State of Arizona!  Now, if I could only afford to get an AR-15!  (I used to have FOUR (well, three and a parts gun), in various configurations!)  😦

 

 

Grandma Got Run Over by Obama: SSA Finalizes New Gun Prohibition Rule

(from the NRA/ILA, in part)

Grandma Got Run Over by Obama: SSA Finalizes New Gun Prohibition Rule
On Monday, Barack Obama’s Social Security Administration (SSA) issued
The final version of a rule that will doom tens of thousands of law-abiding
(and vulnerable)disability insurance and Supplemental Security Income (SSI)
recipients to a loss of Second Amendment rights under the guise of recharacterizing
them as “mental defectives.” The SSA, for the first time in it’s history
will be coopted into the federal government’s gun control apparatus,
effectively requiring Social Security applicants to weigh their need for benefits
against their fundamental rights when applying for assistance based on mental health
problems.

Yeah, elderly folks don’t need to defend themselves, right?

In a pig’s eye!

This really torques my jaw!

Most of the ‘older’ folks I know have been gun owners and shooting their entire lives.  To have the bureaucracy remove their rights with no due process is obscene.

 

Don’t Let The Door Hit Ya…

where the Good Lord split ya!

WASHINGTON – Sen. Barbara Boxer of California bid farewell to Congress on Wednesday after 33 years as a liberal champion, choking up as she read a letter from jazz great Sonny Rollins thanking her for “making life beautiful” for the people she’s represented.

“What he said is all I wanted to do, make life beautiful for people,” Boxer said in her farewell speech on the Senate floor. “I didn’t always succeed … I can honestly say that I never stopped trying.”
MORE HERE IF YOU REALLY GIVE A SHIT

Wirecutter

Like the old joke about the guy hitting his dates with a two-by-four…

THAT’S ONE!

Thirty three years is way too long for anyone, progressive/conservative/green/libertarian to be a sitting United States Senator!

So very glad this one is gone.

If memory serves, she demanded a military officer address her as Senator, instead of Ma’am.  Technically, we’re supposed to, in accord with Rules of Etiquette.  But an officer operates under different rules!

I, for one, will not.  Ever.

She’s despicable.

 

"Round up the usual suspects."

In Loving Memory…