Archive for the 'Gun Control' Category

Views from Ohio:

“If I have a gun and I shoot somebody, I should have to describe why I did that,” Kasich said in an interview.

He also expressed frustration that Ohio’s GOP-controlled Legislature would not pass a “red flag” law to allow relatives or police to ask a court to remove temporarily any guns from a person they fear might be a threat to themselves or others.

“There’s no ‘red flag’ law,” Kasich said. “I pleaded with them to put the ‘red flag’ law in there. They didn’t do it.”

Let me say in the clearest language possible: No, Kasich, a person is not required to testify against himself.  That’s a protection we’re guaranteed in the Fifth Amendment to the constitution.

That may be uncomfortable to you, but I don’t care because it’s a right of all citizens.  One very important reason for it is that it’s based on Biblical law, which requires two or more witnesses, independent of the accused, to convict a man for a crime. Coercion is unbiblical and immoral.

As for your red flag law, that’s an equally unconstitutional and immoral infringement upon the rights guaranteed under the constitution.

Via WiscoDave, as you knew would happen:

Mother Jones reports that Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA) met with gun control groups that included the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Everytown for Gun Safety, the Center for American Progress, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, and Gabby Giffords’ group. He asked them what they wanted, and a bill to criminalize private gun sales was on their wish list.

So Thompson will sponsor legislation requiring a background check before someone may buy a gun from his neighbor, a co-worker to get a background check before buying a gun from a co-worker, and so forth. The bill will go so far as to require a son to get a background check before a father can give him a gun as a gift.

Expect it to pass the House, and I predict that enough GOP senators will go along for it to pass the senate.  I also predict that Trump will sign it into law, but we’ll have to see if it’s this specific bill or some other version of it that exempts gifts between family members (which he’ll call a win and trot out as his protection of gun owners, demanding gun owner votes in the next election cycle).

Reuters:

New Jersey may enforce a new law that lowered the number of bullets that guns can hold, a divided federal appeals court ruled on Wednesday.

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia upheld a lower court’s refusal to temporarily enjoin the law, which was passed in June and reduced maximum magazine capacity to 10 rounds from a 15-round limit adopted in 1990.

What?  You didn’t expect the black-robed tyrants to ensure your rights, did you?  And make sure to notice that this limit never applies to LEOs who do virtually as they please and are the most dangerous people on earth (via David Codrea).

According to Michael Harriot at The Root, police killed more Americans in 2017 (1,129) than military combat, terrorism, airplane crashes, mass shootings, and Chicago gang violence combined. Furthermore, of those 1,129 slain, most (718) were suspects in nonviolent offenses, stopped for traffic violations, or were found innocent of any crime whatsoever. The recent case of Jemel Roberson in suburban Chicago is one more reason to remove law enforcement from Swalwell’s exempt list.

Because gun control isn’t about controlling guns.  It’s about controlling you.

Not unexpected news from Florida:

Florida has joined a coalition of major pension funds and investment companies that have adopted a set of principles aimed at encouraging gun manufacturers and retailers to act responsibly.

Ash Williams, executive director of the State Board of Administration, which oversees the state pension fund and other investments, said the agreement carries no mandates for gun-related companies. But he said it is designed to raise awareness of issues that could impact the value of investments in the firearms industry.

“We’re not telling anybody, any private company, exactly what they should be doing. Our concern is motivated very simply by one thing, as fiduciaries anything that poses a risk to the value of the assets that we own on behalf of our beneficiaries, we want to make sure we’re managing it properly,” Williams said in an interview with The News Service of Florida.

“By extension, if there is a risk or peril to the stock value of a company that we own in our portfolio, we want to make sure that company is, A, aware of it and, B, attentive to it. That’s all this is,” he said.

In signing the “Principles for a Responsible Civilian Firearms Industry” last month, Florida joined more than a dozen public pension funds and investment companies that have adopted the document.

“We believe that enterprises involved in the manufacturing, distribution, sale and enforcement of regulations of the firearms industry are well-positioned to support pragmatic transparency and safety measures that contribute to the responsible use of firearms,” the document said.

Safety measures.  Like stop selling semi-automatic firearms, invest in so-called “smart guns,” and do anything else the collectivists want, like go out of business entirely.

All by plan.  The answer is simple.  If you’re a firearm manufacturer, ensure that your employees own a majority of the stock and tell the hand-wringers to go pound sand.

Elizabeth MacBride is doing just that.  Take a look.

“The firearms made by our member companies are designed to perform in austere and less-than-ideal conditions when lives are literally at stake,” wrote the NSSF spokesman. “To date, authorized-user technology developments have only introduced points of failure that could put the lives of lawful and authorized users at risk when they need those firearms to preserve lives.”

I asked iGun founder Jonathan Mossberg about how reliable the iGun is. He says the gun already passes military specification testing, including “a 3,000 round torture test including freezing and dropping.”

“We have already built a personalized firearm that is more reliable than most commercial firearms available,” he wrote.

Based on conversations with companies and engineers developing military weapons with chip technology, reliability is a valid worry – but it’s an existing worry for every gun. Weapons without chips or ID technology fail now (we don’t know how often, but they do).

“The market should decide which technology and which product to buy based on its merits as the market does now,” Mossberg said.

It’s important to note that in the gun community, where the belief in the singular defensive power of guns is common, a higher risk of a gun failing means a higher risk of dying in a confrontation.

This would be amusing if it wasn’t so sad.  Read it again if you must.

First of all, she said that the iGun founder “wrote.”  In other words, she sent him an email and he responded.  This is reporting, apparently.

Second, freezing and dropping has nothing at all to do with anything.  That she didn’t know how to press the issue with him is an indication that she shouldn’t have been writing this piece.

Third, she (or her sources) acknowledge that failure of the technology is a “valid worry,” but she dismisses that “worry” because a failure can happen anyway.  This shows absolutely no knowledge or understanding of anything mechanical or electronic.

The fact that a tire on an automobile can burst while driving and throw the automobile into a spin is no reason for sticking a nail in the tire.  The nail increases the probability of failure.

Let’s turn to the next bit of propaganda on smart guns, written within a few days by none other than Ms. Elizabeth MacBride.

There’s a revolution building in gun design, one with far-reaching implications in military and civilian weaponry, says one of Israel’s top tech investors.

“We believe that in less than 5 years every gun that will be produced will have a smart chip in it,” said Ron Zuckerman, a long-time executive, investor and angel whose list of successes includes co-founding Sapiens International Corp., which develops software for the insurance industry, serving as CEO of Brazilian telecom GVT and as co-founder of influential Israeli venture funds, including Magma. Now a California-based angel, he is an investor in many tech startups.

One of those is a small tech company, Secubit, that is focused on one of the hottest areas in the gun world: tech-enabled weapons. Zuckerman estimates there is a $50 billion market for high-tech guns, including military, law enforcement and civilian. The company’s first market is the military, where there is a growing interest in tech-enabled weapons as war becomes more distant and mechanized.

Yea, there’s “growing interest” in smart guns in the military, just as in law enforcement.  Right.  That she would publish shit like this is embarrassing.  To her.

So in case readers have forgotten it, my bet is still on the table.

I am a registered professional engineer, and I spend all day analyzing things and performing calculations.  Let’s not speak in broad generalities and murky platitudes (such as “good enough”).  That doesn’t work with me.  By education, training and experience, I reject such things out of hand.  Perform a fault tree analysis of smart guns.  Use highly respected guidance like the NRC fault tree handbook.

Assess the reliability of one of my semi-automatic handguns as the first state point, and then add smart gun technology to it, and assess it again.  Compare the state points.  Then do that again with a revolver.  Be honest.  Assign a failure probability of greater than zero (0) to the smart technology, because you know that each additional electronic and mechanical component has a failure probability of greater than zero.

Get a PE to seal the work to demonstrate thorough and independent review.  If you can prove that so-called “smart guns” are as reliable as my guns, I’ll pour ketchup on my hard hat, eat it, and post video for everyone to see.  If you lose, you buy me the gun of my choice.  No one will take the challenge because you will lose that challenge.  I’ll win.  Case closed.  End of discussion.

Ms. MacBride?  Questions?

David Codrea:

It’s unclear what the president hopes to accomplish by alienating his strongest supporters at a time he is being closed in on from all sides by powers intent on destroying him. If he believes this will satisfy the gun-grabbers and make them go away, that ignores everything about their incremental tactics. Experience shows they will take a piece here and a “compromise” there, and then use that position to launch their next demand for more.

And if you don’t think this will alienate his allies, just spend a few minutes reading the comments at Breitbart.

Trump has little real political sense concerning his base, and he’s being led by people who are the same.  And David is right.  This isn’t just about bump stocks – it’s more about the incrementalism this catalyzes.

Buckeye Firearms:

Earlier this month, the City of Toledo announced a new policy that says it will only purchase firearms from “responsible” gun companies. In order to determine which companies are “responsible,” city officials say they will ask six questions of manufacturers:

Those questions are:

• Do you manufacture assault weapons for civilian use?
• Do you sell assault weapons for civilian use?
• Which firearms does your company agree to not sell to civilians?
• Do you require your dealers to conduct background checks?
• Does your company have a plan in place to invest in gun and ammunition-tracing technologies?
• Do you use, at a minimum, industry best practices for inventory control and transactions?

Toledo Mayor Wade Kapszukiewicz says he hopes other cities will follow his lead, given that the city’s $150,000 annual budget for firearms, ammunition and parts is not likely to put a major dent in manufacturers’ bottom lines all by itself.

To my knowledge there has been no public response from a manufacturer to the policy, but I have a few suggestions.

First, it is interesting to note that the city did not say what answers would be considered to be “successful,” or how many answers a company has to get “correct.” But one can hazard a guess as to what they want to hear. And thanks to the poor wording of their questions, it is likely most manufacturers can tell them exactly what they want to hear, even if they sell the wildly-popular modern sporting rifles.

“Do you manufacture assault weapons for civilian use?” If you’re a manufacturer of AR-15s, for example, you can honestly answer “no.” Semi-automatic firearms are NOT “assault weapons.”

“Do you sell assault weapons for civilian use?” Again, if you sell AR-15s to law-abiding citizens, for example, you can honestly answer “no.” Semi-automatic firearms are NOT “assault weapons.”

“Which firearms does your company agree to not sell to civilians?” A fitting and truthful answer to this question could simply be, “Those prohibited by state and or Federal law.”

“Do you require your dealers to conduct background checks?” Once again, a truthful answer is simply, “We follow all Federal and state laws.”

“Does your company have a plan in place to invest in gun and ammunition-tracing technologies?” This is, presumably, a question referring to unproven micro-stamping, or so-called “ballistic fingerprinting” – a technique that has repeatedly failed in test, and that could be easily defeated by a criminal. Once again, a truthful answer is simply, “We follow all Federal and state laws.”

“Do you use, at a minimum, industry best practices for inventory control and transactions?” The answer? You guessed it. “We follow all Federal and state laws.”

So many manufacturers could probably answer the questions and still win contracts. But I’d like to suggest another idea …

I like his suggestion for “another idea” better.  Just say no.

Do not sell firearms of any kind to the City of Toledo, at any time, for any reason whatsoever.

I don’t like the classification of something as an “assault weapon,” any more than I like the gun rights crowd (us) trying to argue the contrary, i.e., that there is no such thing as an “assault weapon” or that AR-15s aren’t “weapons of war.”  Virtually every weapon, from bolt action rifles, to shotguns, to revolvers, to rocks and spears, have been weapons of war, and all weapons can be used to assault someone or some position.

Don’t argue semantics.  When we do that we just adopt the language framework of the enemy.  Just refuse to sell the firearms to the Toledo police department.  It’s for their own good.  After all, if the cops have guns, they’ll just execute a no-knock raid and cause some unsuspecting homeowner to think there’s a break-in, ending with the imprisonment of the homeowner.

Or something else nefarious like that.

David Codrea:

Things have not gotten better, as WND.com reports. The Motion Picture Association of America has given lead actor Kevin Sorbo’s new film “The Reliant” an “R” rating, ensuring many families that don’t know any better will not let their children see the film.

The reason? Executive producer (and president of the United States Concealed Carry Association) Tim Schmidt offers his view:

“It seems the MPAA gave ‘The Reliant’ an R-rating due to their discomfort with how the movie depicts the responsible use of a firearm by a pre-teen boy. This boy saved the innocent lives of his own family members! It just doesn’t make sense to me.”

Well it makes perfect sense to me.  It’s what progressives do.  Light is called darkness, darkness is called light.

Sort of like what Facebook has done to conservative views on their website, while at the same time, Facebook allowed a child to be sold in a post.  Yes.  You read that right.  Facebook allowed a child to be sold in a post, while focusing on and banning conservative alternative media.

Via WRSA, MHN has a very interesting and riveting take on what forcible confiscation of guns would look like in America.  Actually, I think it would be much worse, and I’ve said so and described it before.

However, take this with a grain of salt.  This is what unrestricted warfare against American gun owners would look like.  As I’ve said many times before, this isn’t how it will go down.

It will be a gradual drip, drip, drip of increasing infringements, all codified and substantiated by the court system as legitimate, mind you, but all designed to target gun manufacturers and gun owners with increasing difficulty.  Consider this.

The Detroit City Council approved a “Bullet Bill” gun control resolution Wednesday with a unanimous vote.

The resolution limits ammunition amounts that can be bought while requiring a mental health background check on buyers of ammo in Wayne County. Commissioner Reggie Reg Davis of the 6th district spearheaded the resolution.

I recently covered this, and at least some readers guffawed.  But my prediction has been proven out.  Then consider this.

S9191 “requires a person applying for a license to carry or possess a pistol or revolver or a renewal of such license to consent to having his or her social media accounts and search engine history reviewed and investigated for certain posts and/or searches over a period of 1-3 years prior to the approval of such application or renewal,” the draft bill states.

If the bill passes, investigators would be able to look for posts or searches that contain threats to the health or safety of others; intentions to carry out an act of terrorism; or commonly known profane slurs or biased language describing the race, color, national origin, ancestry, gender, religion, age, disability or sexual orientation of a person.

Then consider this.

Neither Dantos nor any other official at the hearing on Baatz’s petition to recover the pistol ever told Baatz, who represented himself, that he had to provide some sort of evidence of ownership, Lazarus observed.

Instead, she wrote, Dantos “abruptly” ended the hearing by telling Baatz, “There is no way I’m giving you that gun back. Not happening. Your petition is denied.”

You’d better have records, boys.  You’d better not ever have to use your firearm in self defense.  You’d better register your weapon with the state, and you’d better watch what you say and how you say at all times, even in private.

Gun manufacturers had better never issue public stock or their stockholders could shut them down.  The banks are another story, and gun manufacturers had better never take out a loan for expansion or building of any kind.

You get the point, I think.  From money, to driver’s licenses, to professional licenses, to statements made in the workplace or over the internet, FedGov is watching you (as is the local government, apparently).

The intent is to boil the frog, not go to war with him.  Do you understand?  Don’t be stolid.  Be thinking men and women.

Townhall:

TOMS shoe company plans to donate $5 million to various gun control groups. The company also launched a campaign to mobilize their customers to support the gun control agenda.

One of TOMS’ campaigns includes a postcard campaign. Customers can input their name and address on their website and the company will send a postcard to their representative.

Here’s what the postcards say:

Dear (representative),

More than 90% of Americans support universal background checks.

And I’m one of them.

As your constituent, I urge you to stand with me and pass this life-saving legislation.

Let’s end gun violence together.

Sincerely, (your name)

The company’s founder, Blake Mycoskie, came to the decision shortly after the tragic shooting in Thousand Oaks, California, not far from his family’s home. His wife, Heather Lang, called Mycoskie in fear.

Isn’t that sweet.  A “common” cause.

Never heard of them.  I wear Oboz, even into the office.  But I’m glad I’ve heard of them now, and I note that they have declared themselves my eternal enemy.