Archive for the 'Gun Control' Category

The Hill:

Fox News strategic analyst Ralph Peters said “the Founding Fathers didn’t want every juiced-up psycho to have a machine gun collection” and argued that “an armed crowd” would have only made the situation worse after a mass shooting at a Las Vegas concert left at least 58 dead and more than 500 wounded.

“The idea that an armed crowd would’ve made a difference — if it made any difference, it would’ve been worse,” Peters told Stuart Varney on Fox Business. “And I am a gun owner. I will always be a gun owner.”

“But the Founding Fathers didn’t want every juiced-up psycho to have a machine gun collection,” he continued. “We need to look at what kind of weapons they had — clearly, this guy had military-grade weapons — and where he got them. Because automatic rifles are illegal for the average citizen to own.

How the hell do you know what the founding fathers wanted beyond what they wrote, drama queen?  And I assume that you have a clinical definition for the phrase “juiced-up psycho?”  Let’s hear it, doctor.  Give me your clinical definition.  We’re waiting.  Oh, I see.  You don’t have one.  Okay, on to the next point.

As to this notion that the founding fathers didn’t want “civilians” to own “military grade” weapons, you expect us to believe that the patriot fighters during the war of independence, who had risked their lives, livelihoods, families and fortunes, and who shot cannon when they had powder and ball, and who used these weapons against the government, would not have wanted machine guns if they had access to them?  You only think that because you’re an idiot.

I told my sons Joshua and Joseph about your commentary, Ralph, and we all agreed that we care more what our dogs had to say about gun control than we did what you have to say.  Joseph asked Roxie, his Chow, a very sweet girl, and she looked at him like I look over the top of my glasses at somebody stupid.

Roxie thinks you’re full of crap, Ralph.  So do I.

Miguel Faria, writing at The Telegraph:

In 2005, at the time of Hurricane Katrina, the New Orleans police used the excuse of enforcing compliance with the mandatory evacuation order to confiscate firearms. They went door-to-door seizing guns from the people who stayed behind hoping to ride out the storm. These were the same firearms the citizens expected to have available to protect their lives and property in the aftermath of the disaster.

In fact history has repeatedly shown that firearms, including assault weapons, can be very useful and life-saving tools following natural disasters, such as Hurricane Hugo in 1989 and Hurricane Andrew in 1992, and during times of civil unrest, as during the Rodney King L.A. riots of 1992.

In New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Mayor Ray Nagin’s police superintendent said that the only guns allowed would be “in the hands of law enforcement.” Moreover, Stacy Washington, a decorated Air Force veteran, writing for the NRA Americas’ 1st Freedom, pointed out: “Guns were confiscated with disastrous results: Utter lawlessness ensued, and the police were spread too thin to respond to all the mayhem. Before total gun removal was completed, the NRA stepped in — first gaining a preliminary injunction and then an order putting a stop to the ill-conceived plan. The sheriff had to return more than 1,000 firearms to their respective owners.”

Gun-grabbing superintendent should have known that confiscation of firearms from persons, who have not committed a crime, is a violation of the Second Amendment — and under the dire circumstances of a natural catastrophe, an inexcusable and unforgivable misjudgment, as well as an affront to the people of New Orleans.

Gun confiscation at the time of the Katrina disaster—when they are most needed by citizens to protect their families and property—was such an outrage that several states and the federal government passed laws to prevent that egregious constitutional infringement from ever taking place again during natural disasters.

In 2006 Congress passed the Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act that became incorporated as an amendment to the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2007. It was signed into law on October 4, 2006. This federal legislation prevents the government from confiscating legally-owned firearms during times of major disasters or state of emergency. Following the example of the federal government, most state legislatures adopted similar versions of this law.

But be that as it may, on Sept 5, 2017, in preparation for contending with Hurricane Irma, the governor of the U.S. Virgin Islands, Kenneth Mapp, contrary to U.S. law, ordered the National Guard to confiscate firearms and ammunition from the people of the islands. Confiscation was supposedly necessary so the authorities “could carry out their mission.” Whatever that may be, we are left to wonder. Nevertheless, the islands are ruled by federal law approved by Congress in 1954, “Revised Organic Act of the Virgin Islands” and subject to U.S laws. Fortunately, the government of the Islands’ plans for gun confiscation seem to have been put on hold after the NRA threatened to file a lawsuit.

Washington further wrote: “Time after time during natural disasters, reports of looting and increased armed criminal action have been reported. The primary reason for firearms purchases is to protect self and loved ones, and this is especially important at times when the police are overtaxed and crimes of opportunity are more likely to occur. Natural disasters offer criminals an opening too sweet to resist — and once an individual or group of marauders is at your door, it’s too late to ask the National Guard for your guns back.” Exactly.

Well, this may answer my question.  According to the writer, gun confiscations never actually occurred in the US Virgin Islands, and I’ll say it again.  I suspect that it’s irrelevant anyway.  When the gun control laws are so onerous that no one owns a weapon, there is no need for confiscations.  In effect, guns have already been confiscated.  Take note.  If you allow these gun control laws, you are acquiescing to gun confiscations, albeit slowly, like a frog in boiling water.

The author does a nice job of outlining why you need firearms in times of emergency.  The problem as you know is that you don’t know when an emergency will present itself.  A home invasion is just as much of an emergency as a hurricane.  A church shooting is just as much of an emergency as an earthquake or any other natural disaster.  So you need your firearms all of the time.  All of the time.

David Codrea:

Next up on the Mother Jones hit list is the somehow objectionable fact that opening up the market will create significant new economic opportunities. Horrors.

But that’s important to them.  They don’t want firearms or firearms accessories manufacturers to make money, and they are willing to use any and every means to shut them down.  That the constitution and free market allows them is irrelevant.  They know better.

Besides, this hit list is no different than the one crafted by Amanda Marcotte at Salon.  When nothing really works as an objection, throw in everything but the kitchen sink.  You can always tell it when the controllers themselves think they have a bad case.  They line up ten leaky buckets, hoping that the combination of them will hold water.  It doesn’t.

Dana Milbank:

The days are growing colder, and soon millions of American hunters will pursue a time-honored tradition. They will load their automatic weapons with armor-piercing bullets, strap on silencers, head off to the picnic grounds on nearby public lakes — and start shooting.

If you do not immediately recognize this pastime as part of America’s heritage, then you are sadly out of step with the current Republican majority in Congress. On Tuesday, a House panel takes up the “Sportsmen’s Heritage and Recreational Enhancement Act of 2017,” which promises “to protect and enhance opportunities for recreational hunting, fishing and shooting.”

Among these recreational enhancements:

●Allowing people to bring assault guns and other weapons through jurisdictions where they are banned.

●Rolling back decades-old regulations on the use of silencers.

●Protecting the use of armor-piercing bullets.

●Easing importation of foreign-made assault rifles.

●Protecting the practice of baiting birds with grain as they migrate and then mowing them down.

But more and more hunters are finding that conventional earplugs and muffs are not adequate for today’s weapons — for example, quail hunting with an M777 howitzer or grouse hunting with an FIM-92 Stinger missile launcher.

Hmm … Quail hunting with a Howitzer.  Poor, poor Dana Milbank.  Poor, metrosexual, hand-wringing, paranoid, bed wetter Dana Milbank.  Hey, I notice that you have a history of asking people to write your articles for you.  Did you get Jennifer Mascia or someone else at Everytown to write this one for you, Dana?

If you don’t know that it’s always time to enjoy the shooting sports in America, you’re not out of step with the GOP.  They couldn’t care less.  You’re out of step with most of the American public in “flyover country.”  You’re a chattering class resident of the beltway.  You eat the food that the dirt people grow, so you depend on the dirt people for your very life.

And if you don’t like the idea of killing geese, you can let them ensconce in your yard and foul it up.  They can’t walk two steps without shitting.  Mean, nasty critters.  I hate them.

They are, after all, the king’s forests and king’s parks, never forget.

Valihura also pressed Durstein about an individual’s right to carry a gun for self-defense, which he argued is less acute in a park tent or cabin than in a person’s home. Durstein said the trade-off for banning guns is a commitment by the state to provide law enforcement in state parks.

“Your own regs state that camping is at your own risk, state forests are a public use area and there are no after-hours, nighttime or weekend security,” Valihura noted.

With no evidentiary record to draw on, Justice James Vaughn also wondered about the protection being afforded park visitors.

“We have no idea how much police security is actually provided in these state parks, do we?” Vaughn asked. “I’ve been in them. Occasionally you’ll see a ranger go by, something like that, but I don’t seen any police presence in there.”

Why the hell does the legal system keep promulgating this idiotic myth that the police are there to protect anyone?  They aren’t, and they know it.  And the police know it.  The only people who don’t know it are the peasants who think the police will come to their rescue.

Remember.

In the 1981 decision in Warren v. District of Columbia the D.C. Court of Appeals concluded that it is a “fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen.”  In Castle Rock v. Gonzales (2005), the Supreme Court declined to expand any requirements for protection and ruled that the police cannot be sued for failure to protect individuals, even when restraining orders were in place.

Your life depends on it.  When in a non-permissive environment you may have to improvise, but improvise you should.

News of St. John.

I’m scared. Those are words I never thought I would write when referring to St. John. But I’m scared. We’re only four days into this mess, and we’re hearing some awful things. For starters, Joe’s Rum Hut was broken into the day after Irma hit. The ATM was stolen. They attempted to get cash out of the register, but it was empty as Joe’s closed for season earlier this month. The ATM next to Cruz Bay Landing was stolen. The ATM at the ferry dock was stolen. Scoops has been broken into. St. John Insurance has been broken into. They hold almost all of the insurance policies on this island. Makes you wonder the intentions of that burglary, doesn’t it? Dolphin Market in Coral Bay was looted the very first night. The very first night. We heard this morning that the Customs building in Cruz Bay was broken into and that guns were stolen. We heard that there was at least three robberies at gunpoint on Gifft Hill. This is not St. John anymore. I’m not sure what it is. What I do know is that I am scared. My friends are scared. And we don’t know what to do.

Last night I was able to go home. What I failed to mention was that we had to install a bar on the inside of our door so no one could break in. This is our new reality. Last night, for the first time since moving here, I was afraid to walk down the streets of Cruz Bay. And it was only 6:30 p.m. People are getting desperate, and desperate times call for desperate measures from some unfortunately. We are only on day four. What’s going to happen next?

I have seen absolutely no aid today except a few boxes of MREs walking down the street. I haven’t seen one helicopter land today. We hear help is on the way. Let’s hope so. We need the military. We need men and women guarding our streets with guns. Our police force does nothing. They sit in their cars and yell at people over the loudspeaker. I kid you not. They’re not even helping with traffic in areas where it’s needed. You know who is? Our homeless people. Our homeless people are directing traffic, and our police are not. Let that sink in for a minute. Several police officers can be seen constantly at Ronnie’s Pizza – our new cell phone spot – and they’re scrolling through Facebook rather than patrolling our streets. Im (sic)shocked they actually got out of their cars for that. I took pictures and I cannot wait until I have internet so I can share them with the world.

We need help. We need the United States government to step up. We need military. We need security. We all survived this monster storm. But will we survive the aftermath? No one knows. And that’s not me being dramatic at all. That, unfortunately, is the new reality of St. John. This is no longer paradise. This is no longer my happy place.

Ah, the wonderful police.  People still believe the myth that the police are there to protect and provide security.  It’s all a lie, so says the U.S. court system.  Understand that.  Your life depends on it.

Neither is it the job of the U.S. military to protect you or your family.  That’s your duty, your responsibility, your God-given right.  These poor people are in a place where they cannot effect that security because guns are not allowed for the peaceable and law abiding citizens, only the criminals.

I’m always of two minds when I hear reports like this.  On the one hand, I have compassion (what normal man wouldn’t have compassion for these people or people in situations like that), and I want the criminals killed.  Not imprisoned, but killed.

Similar thoughts sweep over me when I hear of criminals and gangs dominating cities where gun control is king.  I feel especially sorry for those who want to defend their families but can’t because they live in places where the collectivists rule.

On the other hand, there is nothing more basic and dutiful that the protection of family and life, and if you live in a place where that protection cannot obtain because the collectivists rule you, then you need to get out of there.  That goes for the U.S. Virgin Islands, New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, California or Hawaii.

Relocating, pulling up roots and leaving is hard, and nearly impossible in some circumstances.  But you either have to fight the good fight and win, or you have to leave.  Fighting the good fight and losing, while no reflection on you or your character, is the same as not fighting at all.  Either way, you lose and cannot effect the protection of your family.

At some point, you have to be willing to cut your loses and move on.  I feel sorry for the woman writing the blog.  I’m sure her report is accurate.  I feel compassion for her plight.  But if change doesn’t come, and very soon, she has to cut her ties to the place and people and move on.

David Codrea:

“Why haven’t we seen movement over either 38 or 2909 since the horrific events in Virginia?” Walters asked, noting the Republicans control the House and the Senate and both Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell appear to be blocking bills advancing the right to keep and bear arms.

“You know what?” Massie replied, “The Speaker told me he didn’t think the timing was right. And I think this is the exact timing to bring this bill.”

Paul Ryan is a traitor.  This isn’t a change or shift for him.  He has always been a gun controller in the superlative degree.

It’s nice to see that David got a mention at Instapundit.

David Codrea:

“U.S. Virgin Islands Gov. Kenneth Mapp signed an emergency order allowing the seizure of private guns, ammunition, explosives and property the National Guard may need to respond to Hurricane Irma,” Michael Bastasch reported Tuesday at The Daily Caller.  “The order allows the Adjutant General of the Virgin Islands to seize private property they believe necessary to protect the islands, subject to approval by the territory’s Justice Department.”

David updates the article with an attempt at damage control that actually makes matters worse, essentially saying that not only can they do this, they regularly do it as a matter of course and they have the right to do it.  At least that’s the way I read it.

I’ll point out a few things.  First of all, there is the British Virgin Islands and the U.S. Virgin islands.  The two are not the same thing, and this is occurring in the U.S. Virgin Islands.  Second, while the people there are technically considered U.S. citizens, they aren’t treated that way.

For example, the U.S. Code (48 U.S. Code 1561) outlines a bill of rights for their citizens that doesn’t include any hint of bearing arms.  This seems to me to be ripe the litigation before the SCOTUS, but apparently that’s for another time.

Third, even though no one can effect change in the confiscation at the moment, this does go to show the first reflex of collectivists.  And you do understand how they know who has firearms, don’t you?

Finally, in a somewhat related vein today I saw a discussion thread at reddit/r/firearms that needs to be addressed.  When responding to a post that compared these confiscations to those post-Katrina, one commenter said this.

No, what happened in Katrina was very different. The order in Katrina was given by the local police superintendent, not the governor. As well, the overwhelming majority of those confiscated in New Orleans were abandoned in houses or forfeited upon being rescued when people were taken to refugee sites. By in (sic) large if a person wanted to stay in their home with their gun, they could.

This is simply a lie, and the commenter knows it.  The comment sounds like it was written by a LEO or former LEO, but it’s wrong in the superlative degree.  There were weapons confiscations done forcibly, i.e., without owner consent, and those weapons were either never gotten back or were in such bad shape (having been cared for poorly) that they were non-functional.

They were returned only because the NRA sponsored a lawsuit to force return of the weapons.  Those confiscations were conducted by local police and military contractors (insert groups like DynCorp here), with supplemental manpower and backup provided by the Louisiana National Guard under the command of Russel Honore, who is proud of his gun confiscation efforts during Katrina.

CNN:

No one will bear the burden of those tragedies more heavily than our police. Under the CCRA, cops would have to patrol our streets surrounded by hidden, loaded guns. They would have no way to confirm whether an out-of-state permit is legitimate and no database to check on the status of those permits. And because many states don’t even require permits to carry, the NYPD would have to take armed individuals at their word.

So police officers are against this bill. Prosecutors, like me, are against this bill. Who would actually be for this bill? I can offer one answer: ISIS.

I’m glad he brought up ISIS.  It’s Vance who is aligned with ISIS, not gun owners.  Remember?  One of the first things ISIS did when they took any area was to outlaw firearm ownership and confiscate them.  ISIS is big on gun control, just like New York City officials.

As for turning New York into the Wild, Wild West, I don’t think anybody has anything to worry about from concealed handgun carriers.  It’s the NYPD we all have to worry about.  Given their < 20% hit rate, if they’re shooting at you, then you don’t have much to fear.  If they aren’t but are just shooting, then find a hole, crawl in it, and pray.  Or run.

On the other hand, you can just stay out of shitholes like NYC like I do.

Rolling Stone:

In 1980, the nation’s gun-violence epidemic hit close to home for Rolling Stone when John Lennon was gunned down by Mark David Chapman. For the magazine’s founder, the slaying in New York sparked a now-four-decade commitment on the gun issue. “It all started with Lennon,” says Jann S. Wenner. “That tragedy. Trying to make sense of it. Or make something good come out of it.” Within months, Wenner had launched the Foundation on Violence in America, a nonprofit that began a public-education campaign, including PSAs starring Oprah Winfrey and Walter Cronkite. But momentum quickly stalled. “It became obvious that the beginning and end of this was the NRA,” Wenner says.

So I guess nobody mattered except John Lennon.  Nice people, they are.  But what they ran smack into was us.  The NRA is sometimes effective, sometimes not, and could be much more effective if they would end their stupid rating awards to politicians for poor voting records.

What Rolling Stone gets wrong on this is what all of the other progressives get wrong.  We won’t let them take our guns, no matter what else obtains.  The NRA thinks the way they do because we do, not vice versa.  The NRA is merely a manifestation of our political power, but there is so much untapped power there.

Rolling Stone lost.  Don’t put a pretty face on this, guys.  It makes you look stupid.