Archive for the 'Gun Control' Category

The Guardian:

Rifles and submachine guns assembled in the UK could be exported for use in conflicts involving child soldiers, according to a report by European children’s charities.

The report accuses Heckler & Koch (H&K) – a German company that is among the world’s largest producers of small arms – of sidestepping obstacles to exports at home by using its subsidiary in the UK, where a “lack of transparency” has frustrated attempts to scrutinise arms deals.

H&K and another major German firm, Sig Sauer, turn to UK and US operations when guidelines and political pressure in Germany are likely to block exports to conflict-affected countries, according to the report – entitled Small Arms in the Hands of Children (English, German pdf) – by the Berlin Information-centre for Transatlantic Security.

The cases cited by the study include H&K’s attempts to export thousands of guns to Nepal in 2000-01. “When it became obvious that Germany would deny such an export deal due to public pressure because of the ongoing civil war, Heckler & Koch quickly applied for an export licence for 6,780 rifles in Great Britain, which was then granted,” said the report’s authors.

The point I’d like to make has nothing whatsoever to do with arms shipments, or selling arms on the open market, or H&K (whom I don’t like), or the British people per se.

The point is simply this.  Governments disarm those they fear.  They send arms wherever they can make a pound, but disarm their own people with gun control laws that are more extreme by a wide margin than those in Russia.

They have yet to latch on to the danger posed by Islamic migration.  Sending arms overseas and disarming their own people is an open and honest admission that they have a greater fear of being toppled by their own people for their infidelity to the citizens and malfeasance in office than they do Muslim gangs of rapists.

USA Today:

President Trump killed a regulation that would have tightened gun background checks Tuesday, signing a bill to undo one of his predecessor’s executive actions following the San Bernardino shootings in 2015.

The Obama administration rule required the Social Security Administration to submit records of mentally disabled people to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, the FBI database used to determine whether someone can buy a firearm under the 1993 Brady Bill.

Ooooo … hold me Uncle Bob, I’m askeerd!!!   The oogey boogey man’s gonna’ gettcha!!!   Quick.  Look under the bed, in the closet.  Somebody’s there, I just know it!!!  All those severely, seriously, horribly, terminally, mentally ill to the point they cannot do finances are coming for me!!!

Good.  Trump undid Obama’s treachery concerning the elderly who want someone else to do their finances for them but still want a means of self defense.  This should never have been done in the first place, and it was worth the price of admission.  Go to hell, Obama.

Now, there’s much more treachery to undo.  Get busy.

KGAB.com:

David Codrea:

True, both he and Ellison have long histories of oath-breaking and subversion. Both are for cultural terraforming of the Republic through “immigration” and “refugee” actions to bring in and embed or sanction existing unvetted foreign nationals. And both are hostile to the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

But Ellison is more vulnerable to exploitable suspicions over his agenda and motives …

Well, they certainly picked the least vulnerable ass-clown.  But make no mistake about it, this ass-clown will run as fast as he can down the road to cultural chaos and transformation in order to destroy liberty.

As Kurt Schlichter recently observed, “it’s reasonable to wonder how this can end peacefully.”  You haven’t stopped preparing, have you?  You haven’t stopped activism, have you?  We’re just in the skirmishes.  There is much more to come.

AL.com:

Pistol permits are a financial boon to the Madison County sheriff’s department but that’s not why Sheriff Blake Dorning opposes a Senate bill that would eliminate them.

“We hear it’s just a money thing,” Dorning said Wednesday.

I wonder where he’s hearing that?

“No, it’s not. It’s a life and death safety issue for our men and women because the equipment we’re able to provide them with drastically makes them more efficient and more able to address the situations that they come into every day.”

Dorning and other top department officials held a press conference Wednesday to follow up on the open letter the sheriff posted online over the weekend.

Capt. Michael Salomonsky outlined a handful of cases where law enforcement tracked down criminals through their pistol permits as evidence for the need to oppose the bill introduced by Sen. Gerald Allen, R-Tuscaloosa.

The bill would repeal the requirement to have a permit to conceal carry a pistol. It would also allow conceal carry at events such as demonstrations and protest rallies. Without the criminal background checks required for a permit, applicants with a violent criminal past would be able to conceal carry, Dorning said.

Officials also met head-on the issue of money associated with the permit fees, saying that the permits yield about $700,000 annually to the department.

[ … ]

“Without technology, you’re almost going back 20 years to a deputy who just has the basics,” Jernigan said. “I really feel this community wants a professionally trained and a professionally equipped law enforcement agency to go out and protect the public.”

Jernigan said pistol permit fees are not an infringement on the Second Amendment, which provides for the right to bear arms. Jernigan it’s no different than paying a fee for a drivers license, marriage license, hunting license or car registration.

Thanks for self-identifying as a liar.  Driving a car is not mentioned in the constitution.  And if you really feel that the community wants the things you say you think you need, then why not make that case straight to the community and let them decide whether they want to fund them or not?

Oh, it’s because you have people who want to defend their lives over a barrel.  This is a forced tax of a targeted set of people for exercising what God and the founders consider an inalienable right.  You know it’s true.

In telling me it’s not all about the money, and then spending so much effort try to tell us what you need the money for, you’ve told us it’s all about the money.  So we’re back where we started, and you have no case.

The Fourth Circuit made a very good decision in the case of Nathaniel Black.  They didn’t seem to care about that decision and specifically violated their own precedents and showed they couldn’t care less about consistency in the case of U.S. Versus Robinson.  Now they have gone off the deep end.

A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld Maryland’s ban on semiautomatic guns with certain military-style features that the state passed after the 2012 mass shooting at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school.

The 10-to-4 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit vacates an earlier panel decision that cast doubt on the constitutionality of the ban that is similar to laws in seven states, including California, Connecticut and New Jersey.

The ruling from the Richmond-based court goes further than other appellate courts that have reviewed similar laws in stating clearly that “assault weapons and large-capacity magazines are not protected by the Second Amendment.” The majority opinion, written by Judge Robert B. King, refers to the banned firearms as “weapons of war” that the court says are most useful in the military.

In a strongly worded dissent, Judge William B. Traxler Jr. said his colleagues have “gone to greater lengths than any other court to eviscerate the constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms.”

That they have, and they have also added language to both the second amendment and Heller that isn’t there.

“It’s unthinkable that people could say that those weapons of war are protected by the Second Amendment,” Frosh said Tuesday. “Especially when you look at the carnage at Newtown and elsewhere around the country.”

[ … ]

Like Maryland, Connecticut’s ban was expanded after a gunman used a military-style semiautomatic weapon to kill 20 students and six teachers at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

The 81-page opinion issued Tuesday opens with a detailed description of that day, including the number of rounds of ammunition fired, and goes on to describe mass shootings involving similar military-style firearms in a long list of other U.S. cities.

“We have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war that the Heller decision explicitly excluded from such coverage,” King wrote in the 4th Circuit opinion, referring to the Supreme Court case known as District of Columbia v. Heller.

The court also found that Maryland lawmakers were justified in passing the ban in the interest of public safety because magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition “enable shooters to inflict mass casualties while depriving victims and law enforcement officers of opportunities to escape or overwhelm the shooters while they reload their weapons.”

Forget the fact that Charles Whitman used a bolt action long gun (Remington 700), that storied Marine sniper Carlos Hathcock used a Winchester Model 70 .30-06, that Marines initially in Iraq during the push to Baghdad used the same rifle for long distance shooting, and that Marines in Now Zad, Afghanistan, used 12 gauge shotguns for room clearing operations.  Left unsaid is why the laws don’t regulate assault hammers.  This is what happens when idiots try to make legal decisions who have no knowledge of the facts.

It’s also what happens when men and women who have no moral compunction about violating their oath of office get to make judgments that affect the rest of the country.  Recognizing the right of every citizen to have the weapon that best allows him to defend his own family isn’t an expansion of the second amendment.  And Heller said nothing about forbidding semi-automatic firearms from its scope, semi-automatic firearms having been around for more than a century when Heller was decided, in use by both civilians and the military.

This neat, clean bifurcation between civilian and military weapons is non-existent, an imaginary phantom concocted by judges to make themselves feel better for depriving citizens of their rights, pretend sociology wrapped up in legal language.  These are God-given rights, not subject to the whims or vicissitudes of judicial political leanings.

Here is the ruling.  Frosh said “It’s unthinkable that people could say that those weapons of war are protected by the Second Amendment … Especially when you look at the carnage at Newtown and elsewhere around the country.”  Well think it, collectivist hack.  I’m telling you flat out that weapons of war are protected by God, and included within the scope of the second amendment.

Whether citizens of Maryland choose to stay and fight or move to a free state, remember Matt Bracken’s advice.  “If you have eighteen guns and twelve of them are declared illegal, how many do you have?  Eighteen.  Your move.”

WAFF.com:

Dear Citizens of Madison County,

My message today is to inform you of an impending Senate Bill in the Alabama Legislature directly threatening the safety for our Law Enforcement Officers and Deputy Sheriffs. It is a threat to law abiding citizens like you and me and a threat to this great state and country.

I am talking about  Alabama Senate Bill 24 (SB24) introduced by Senator Gerald Allen. This bill has proposed the repeal of the current Alabama statute that requires a permit, issued by the Sheriff of the county you reside, to allow for the full concealment of a handgun on your person or in a vehicle.

The pistol permit is a tool used by law enforcement to quickly screen an occupant of a vehicle or a person stopped in investigative detention to determine if they are lawfully allowed to possess a concealed handgun. Lacking a permit, the driver or person is in violation of state statute that prohibits concealed weapons. The permit is issued based upon a background investigation conducted by your local Sheriff and verifies the holder has not been convicted of a crime of violence to include domestic violence. The repeal of the current statute will allow everyone who was previously denied a lawful permit to now be able to conceal a handgun in their vehicle to drive or walk freely to attend church services, enter a movie theatre, football stadium, business or other gatherings in our communities.

Oh it does no such thing.  If you’re as felon convicted of a violent crime, which is about the only legitimate excuse a CLEO can use in Alabama, you can’t legally purchase a gun anyway.  Besides, violent felons won’t care about the law, and can carry as it is right now since you’re not there to watch them get dressed in the morning.

But this is about more, isn’t it?  Yes, it always is.

“As a Sheriff, I firmly back the Second Amendment,” says Abston … “This money generated from the pistol permit goes to buy our uniforms, equipment, our firearms, our training, our ammunition to train and send people to the police academy. Once you take away that funding where’s the money going to come from?”

It’s the revenue.  Don’t worry about slimming down and perhaps NOT buying those brand new Dodge Chargers and fancy comms gear.  Or perhaps laying off those unnecessary workers.  No, the pistol permit fee is a good way to raise money.

Other CLEOs have said the same thing as I’ve noted.

But opponents said it would have serious financial consequences for the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, which administers firearms licenses issued under the Oklahoma Self Defense Act.

A fiscal analysis performed for the House indicates the measure would reduce OSBI’s revenue by at least $6 million and would lead to the loss of jobs and reduced operating expenses at the agency.

The reduction in revenue would be because firearms owners would no longer seek concealed carry licenses – which cost $100 for initial 5-year license and $200 for 10 years – if they could carry a gun openly without a license. There are now more than 238,300 Oklahomans with active licenses to carry handguns, according to state figures.

And regarding the proposed constitutional carry bill in North Carolina, I’ve said that “I suspect that a little truth-telling by North Carolina CLEOs would yield similar results.”

Perhaps it would be a good thing if the tax monies people allocated to your office were tied to the degree to which they see your services as good and needful, delivered in the right way.

What a novel approach.  I wish someone had thought of that before.

We’ve discussed the ridiculous ban on social security beneficiaries that Obama unilaterally declared before leaving office.  We’ve discussed how the ban applied to those who were deemed, according to various MSM reports, “mentally ill, not only that, severely mentally ill, and moreover, disabled and disordered.”

The reality of the matter is much more pedestrian.  These are folks who no longer work and either choose to or have to have someone do their finances for them.  Absent the issue about no longer working, this includes about half of America.

Furthermore, we’ve seen that the issue doesn’t really pertain to mental illness or severe mental illness or disabilities or disorderly anything.  Mental health professionals have weighed in telling us that they cannot bear the burden America wants to place on them (they have no predictive capabilities for propensity to violence), that mental illness has no correspondence to violence, and that even when mentally ill people commit suicide, they don’t usually use a gun.  Read the reports.  I wouldn’t send you to the links if they weren’t so convincing and absolute.  They are uncompromising.  Mental health professionals absolutely do not want this burden and have no capabilities to fulfill that obligation.  Like pagan tribes worshipping witch doctors, we continue to want to know the future, but alas, doctors cannot do that.  Science doesn’t do that.

I thought I had seen just about everything from Daily Kos.  It has been degrading over the past several years, with run-on sentences, misspellings, poor grammar, poor editing and stale ideas.  But this is a new low, even for them.  The House and Senate have rolled back this Obama ban on social security recipients purchasing guns, and how does Kos spin it?

As part of their ongoing efforts to make America less safe, the Republican Party is doing away with one of the few reforms to America’s lunatic gun policies that followed the murders at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012. Because it’s important, says the Republican Party, that Americans with mental disorders be able to purchase enough guns and ammunition to murder a few classrooms full of our children if they feel like doing that.

The Republican-led Senate voted Wednesday to block an Obama-era regulation that would prevent an estimated 75,000 people with mental disorders from being able to purchase a firearm. The measure now goes to President Donald Trump, who is expected to sign it.

Social security beneficiaries are going to buy guns and go all rogue on us, shooting up people and places and things.  The fact that they haven’t so far is no excuse for lack of regulation, dammit.

Only later do they state the real sweep of the regulation, which was “to collect a list of the 75,000ish people in America who both have a mental disorder and whose Social Security benefits are managed by someone other than themselves because of that impairment, and forwards that list on to the federal background check system. The goal was to screen out those whose condition is so severe that it renders them unable to make their own financial decisions, under the presumption that those people probably should be among those also least capable of making decisions about when or when not to murder people.”

“Condition so severe that it renders them unable to make their own financial decisions.”  “Murder.”  Tough language for the elderly who want means of self defense and yet need a child to assist them with online finances.  I observed at the time that

I seriously doubt the authors of any of these commentaries know anything about the computer they use as a dumb terminal anyway.

Most of them couldn’t code their way through a hand held calculator and are likely only barely able to operate the calculator on their iPhones to multiply two numbers together.  I’d like to see them solve a differential equation, and upon failure perhaps I could cast doubt on their mental readiness to operate a vehicle.

Say, that’s not a bad idea.  How about the author of this article, who conveniently gives us only one name (only cowards do that), meet up and let me give him a math test to see just how mentally competent he is?  I welcome the opportunity, and I’ll even wager a little on the idea that I can give him simple mathematical problems that stump him.

How about it, Hunter?  Care to take the test?  Or perhaps Hunter knows that the real issue has nothing to do with social security beneficiaries, but rather, a trial balloon to see just how far gun grabbing regulations can go with the American people and just what it will take to roll them back.

I love it when people self-identify as statists.  It keeps me from having to do the hard work.

David Codrea:

No matter – when “progressives” are on a roll, what they want is all that matters. Why should the unconstitutional tyranny of imposing prior restraint punishments without due process on male gun owners (especially the evil white ones who belong to NRA and own “assault weapons” with “30 magazine clips” and “shoulder things that go up”) trump feelings?

No matter that “boyfriend” is hardly a fixed legal term, nor is “date.” There’s also the “Hell hath no fury” factor, along with just finding out you’ve let a confused and hostile bipolar head case vampire cross your threshold, and now you just want them out.

Oh, I think she makes good company for Jennifer Mascia.  Two peas in a pod, or birds of a feather.

NMPolitics.net:

Everytown For Gun Safety — the lobbyist for HB 50 and SB 48 — says private party sales allow felons to buy guns online. The ATF rules are clear here too: Online sellers must ship their guns to a FFL willing to receive them and run a background check on the buyer. That Everytown For Gun Safety found felons trying to buy a gun from one of their fake online ads only means that criminals are criminals. It so happens that those banned from buying a firearm also come into FFL retail outlets fully knowing they will not pass a background check just to see if that FFL would be willing to sell it to them anyway.

The author, Elisabeth Miller, has an impressive CV at the end of the article, and her husband owns Miller Guns & Ammo.  Listen to me my New Mexico friends.  This is part of Bloomberg’s state-to-state strategy to infringe on God-given liberties.

You cannot deal gently with Everytown.  You will get buried.  You must deal with them harshly.  When Everytown folks invaded my back yard, they tried to run with the big dogs and got chewed up by my readers.

That’s what you have to do to these people.  Chew them up.  Make them regret ever targeting New Mexico.  Make them sorry to have ever known you.

I’m not kidding.  They will use Alinsky techniques.  If you’re not prepared for battle, you need to get prepared.  You must savage these people.  Do not talk with them, do not banter with them, do not try to persuade them, do not compromise with them.  Savage them.