Archive for the 'Gun Control' Category

Source:

At SSRN. He finds that, despite 24 states having gone to permit-less concealed carry, the number of CCW licenses continues to expand.(He doesn’t count Alabama, since it will only go permit-less on January 1).

Outside of California and New York, 10% of the adult population now has a permit. Even 4.5% of Illinois has one.

Lott’s data is the most complete and accurate out there. The abstract is one short page; read it all. These numbers and trends are going to matter, both pro and con, and enemies within will use them in an attempt to control gun owners. Hopefully, the NRA will be gone soon; that’ll help, but there will be other “friends” gun owners don’t need.

Source:

Multi-barreled, homemade matchlock or “cigarette” pistols were used in the attack on Korean policemen. Img from Korea JoongAng Daily.

On 19 October 2016, a 46-year-old suspect with the surname of Seong started attacking people. He had various weapons, including homemade guns, a bomb, a hammer, and knives. He was wearing an electronic tracking device on his ankle. From Korea JoongAng Daily:

An ex-convict went on a shooting spree in northern Seoul’s Gangbuk District Wednesday night using a gun he manufactured himself, fatally shooting a police officer before he was apprehended.

The ex-convict was wearing a type of bullet-proof vest and helmet and had with him 16 more homemade guns, a bomb and seven knives.

The suspect, a 46-year-old surnamed Seong, was wearing an electronic tracking device on his ankle when he started attacking people near Opaesan Tunnel in Beon-dong. He had a record of prison sentences for sexual assaults.

Seong allegedly shot a passerby with a homemade gun and missed him, although another passerby was hit. Seong then bludgeoned the first passerby with a hammer.

While this event occurred six years ago, it is worth recording as another murder with a homemade gun. It is possible the assassin of former Prime Minister Abe knew of this murder.

Another report says the suspect had six guns. The killer is reported to have made a bomb as well. He was wearing a “bulletproof” vest used in paintball games. The vest was said to be effective in stopping three police bullets. He was also wearing a helmet, origin not stated.

The article from Korea does not show how the propellant for the homemade guns was ignited. The article explains the mechanism as a simple matchlock, or perhaps a sophisticated hand canon, that was ignited by a similar method.

More details are at the link.

Source:

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday turned away another challenge to a federal ban imposed under former President Donald Trump on devices called “bump stocks” that enable a semi-automatic weapon to fire like a machine gun.

The justices declined to review an appeal by a group of firearms dealers and individuals in Minnesota, Texas and Kentucky after a lower court rejected their argument that the government had violated the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment “takings clause” by effectively taking their private property without just compensation.

Trump’s administration moved to reclassify bump stocks as machine guns, which are forbidden under U.S. law, in a rare firearms control measure prompted by a 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas. The Supreme Court in 2019 declined to block the ban from going into effect. The justices last month rejected appeals by a Utah gun lobbyist and firearms rights groups of lower court rulings upholding the ban as a reasonable interpretation of a federal law prohibiting machine gun possession.

Having banned the bump stock, now the BATF is coming for arm braces. Next, it’ll be the six-position AR stock. If this isn’t stopped, gunstocks of every kind will be outlawed by fiat. Perhaps you say that’s ridiculous? But if we’re playing chess and not checkers, it sounds like a “reasonable” pathway to outlawing rifles altogether.

To quote WoG,  “And thanks again, Donald.”

Source.

HONOLULU (HawaiiNewsNow) – Hawaii County has issued 19 concealed carry licenses so far and another 58 are pending approval, following the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that eased gun rules.

West Hawaii Today reported that some police officers are concerned they aren’t getting proper training for when they encounter license holders.

The Hawaii County Police Department said training was implemented last week. But, West Hawaii Today said it mostly consisted of a short PowerPoint presentation and a quiz.

One un-named officer told the paper that the training did not address real life situations.

There are now 19 CHPs that have been issued.  Why not 19,000?

David Kopel debunks a stupid set of claims with a made-up set of indices that proves nothing, all promulgated by the idiots at Duke University (among others).  We’ve run into these dummies before.

The authors, one at Duke, and one at Wesleyan University (who has probably never shot a firearm in her life), should read Kopel’s analysis and be ashamed for the poor “research” and bad analysis and writing they did.

Anyway, if you want to read all about this stupid notion of the lethality index, read Kopel’s analysis of what these writer claim.  I found the most interesting part of Kopel’s article to be these few paragraphs.

Miller and Tucker write:

The Founders lived in a period when they could perhaps be forgiven for thinking that “a gun is a gun is a gun,” because the basic flintlock hadn’t really become significantly more lethal in the previous 150 or so years. If the Constitution had been written in the middle of the nineteenth century, instead of the 1780s, the Founders would have been much more aware of the pace of innovation. (p. 2511).

This is incorrect. The American colonists from Europe who arrived in the early 17th century came mainly with matchlocks. In a matchlock, pressing the trigger lowers a smoldering hemp cord to touch the gunpowder in the firing pan. Over the course of the century, Americans shifted to the more expensive flintlock. In a flintlock, pressing the trigger causes a sharpened flint (held in the gun’s “jaws”) to fall forward. The flint strikes a piece of metal, and the shower of sparks ignites the gunpowder in the firing pan.

Unlike matchlocks, flintlocks can be kept always-ready. There is no smoldering cord to give away the location of the user. Flintlocks are much more reliable than matchlocks, and all the more so in adverse weather.

Americans made the shift from matchlocks to flintlocks sooner than did European armies or European civilians, because the flintlock was so vastly superior for use in the dense woods of the eastern seaboard, and for Indian fighting, which was very different from the rigidly organized, linear tactics of European warfare. For the same reasons, American Indians greatly preferred flintlocks to matchlocks. The TLI of a 17th century musket is 19 and the TLI of an 18th century flintlock is 43. So the transition of firearm type in the American colonies more than doubled the TLI. There is no reason to believe that the American Founders were ignorant of how much better their own firearms were compared to those of the early colonists.

Besides, the men who penned and approved the 2A had spent their lives and fortunes on overthrowing tyranny, which is the singular point of the 2A.  It would be idiotic to believe they would have written the 2A any other way based on a “lethality index” created by ne’er-do-wells in the twenty first century.

Source:

We are in early voting in Tennessee and there are lots of individuals running for governor and the state Legislature.  Many of them, including incumbents, are claiming that a) they are 2nd Amendment supporters and b) that they voted for “constitutional carry”.

Before you vote, know the truth.  The truth is Tennessee has NEVER had real constitutional carry in the last 200+ years and it does not today.

REAL “constitutional carry” means that it is not a crime to carry a firearm for a lawful purpose, such as self-defense.  Nor is it a crime to carry a firearm in most places – including public places – unless the place falls into a very narrow and limited exception.

Tennessee’s laws fail that standard.

First, Tennessee has Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-17-1307(a)(1) which says “A person commits an offense who carries, with the intent to go armed, a firearm or a club.”   That means it is a crime to carry any firearm in Tennessee “with the intent to go armed”.   That law is broad that it is even a crime to carry a firearm with the intent to go armed on your own property, in your own home, or even with a permit.  That is a true statement because Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-17-1308 makes each of those factors “defenses” to the criminal charge.   When something is a “defense” or an “exception” to a criminal charge, the burden is on the citizen to prove to a law enforcement officer or a jury that the individual’s conduct satisfied the elements of the defense.

Now, many police officers would not arrest or charge someone if they clearly could demonstrate the existence of facts supporting the defense – but the officer has the discretion to do so.

Even the 2021 “permitless carry” law, which many have erroneously referred to as constitutional carry” has at least 7 elements or conditions to its application.  Further, it is also written as an “exception” which means that the burden is on the individual to prove that the individual satisfies all of those conditions.

Second, Tennessee also fails the REAL “constitutional carry” standard because of part of what Bill Lee offered and the Legislature passed in 2021 in his “permitless carry” law.   As part of the 2021 law, they added Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-17-1307(g) which is the operative language of the permitless carry law.   However, it does not apply to everyone who can lawfully purchase or possess a firearm.  It only applies to handguns.  It only applies to individuals who can meet the other qualifications under that subsection – such as the age limit qualification and/or the provision that requires that the individual “is in a place where the person is lawfully present.”

Third,  Tennessee fails the REAL “constitutional carry” standard because of another part of what Bill Lee offered and the Legislature passed in 2021 in his “permitless carry” law.   As part of the 2021 law, they added Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-17-1307(h).  At least three subparts of (h) make it a crime for people who can otherwise legally purchase or possess firearms to carry those firearms “with the intent to go armed.”

Fourth, Tennessee fails REAL “constitutional carry” because it has many “prohibited places” statutes that make in crimes to possess firearms in some specific places (e.g., schools or public parks) but also any other place that might be “posted”.   The problem is that the 2nd Amendment never contemplated that these areas would be subject to government regulation.  In fact, the United States Supreme Court just ruled to that effect in June 2022 when it decided the case of New York Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen.  The Supreme Court essentially said if the right to carry or the manner or place of carry was not regulated by a law in 1791 (or in some instances in 1876) then it probably can’t be regulated constitutionally today.

REAL constitutional carry means that it is simply not a crime for someone who can lawfully possess a firearm to carry it for any lawful purpose – including self-defense.   REAL constitutional carry means that unconstitutional geographic and other restrictions on what, when and where you can carry a firearm do not exist.

So, be prepared when these elected officials and candidates start talking about Tennessee and whether it had constitutional carry.  If they can’t get that right, do they need to be in public office to protect your other rights?

First, Big Banks And Credit Card Giants Just Greenlit A Plan To Track Your Gun-Store Purchases:

Last month, gun control advocates hailed the creation and adoption of a new sales code targeted at identifying purchases made at U.S. gun stores. The code was promoted as a way to help banks and credit card companies identify and “recognize dangerous firearm purchasing trends,” thus improving public safety. It won’t.

If anything, this new system, which is susceptible to widespread abuse, could have dangerous consequences. Thankfully, Republican members of Congress are taking steps to resist its implementation.

We stopped counting on Republicans a long time ago.

Next, EVOLUTION: DECADES OF DEER Looks at the most prominent hunting rifles of each decade since the 1950s.

Big game rifles have evolved continuously with the introduction of new models, new cartridges, new manufacturing methods, changing hunting conditions and methods.

I’ve illustrated some of the changes with hypothetical gun racks from deer camps beginning with the 1950s, both heavy cover whitetail hunting and open country mule deer and antelope hunting, as I did plenty of both.

What will the 2020s show?

Next, Hawaii Court Dismisses Two Firearms Charges Citing Bruen Decision

Next, Retired sheriff: Vote no on [Iowa] gun amendment measure

“Strict scrutiny” requires a court to apply the highest level of scrutiny possible to decide whether a law is unconstitutional. This approach has been used to override the original intent of laws, has led to ivfrolous lawsuits, undermined case law, and jeopardized common sense gun laws.

Some current gun safety laws keep felons and people convicted of certain domestic violence crimes from having firearms. Other laws prohibit guns in schools and restrict possession of machine guns and other offensive weapons.

As a retired career law enforcement official of 36 years, I know the importance of these laws. I am a gun owner. I have had many hours of weapons training during my career. Our forefathers created the Second Amendment. I would favor adding the same wording to the Iowa Constitution instead of the proposed language of “strict scrutiny.”

Gun deaths are the leading cause of death of children in America, and the second leading cause here in Iowa. The gun death rate in Iowa is increasing faster than the national average. We owe it to ourselves, to our communities, and to our children to do better.

I’m a cop. I’m better than you, super more trained than you, and it’s for the children.

But some Iowa sheriffs endorse gun rights constitutional amendment

“Whenever one of my constituents loses a freedom it’s my fault. It’s our job to speak out,” said Cedar County Sheriff Warren Wethington.

Wethington is one of six Iowa sheriffs officially endorsing what he calls the freedom amendment. It says, in part, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” and is basically creating an Iowa gun rights amendment similar to the second amendment in the federal constitution.

We’re absolutely floored; is that, what’s the quaint and archaic term, personal responsibility?

Full Text: Article I of the Constitution of the State of Iowa is amended by adding the folloing new section: Right to keep and bear arms. Sec. 1A. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The sovereign state of Iowa affirms and recognizes this right to be a fundamental individual right. Any and all restrictions of this right shall be subject to strict scrutiny.

No scrutiny is better.

Next, Texas Goes Permitless on Guns, and Police Face an Armed Public

Blood in the streets and dead children.

Next, Federal Judge Upholds California ‘Ghost Gun’ Ban, Rules Gun-Making Not Protected by Second Amendment

That’s laughable. More, Analysis: Federal Judge Finds ‘One Weird Trick’ to Uphold Gun Law Despite Bruen

Source:

“A $1,000 fine for simply exercising your God-given right to keep and bear arms unless you bow down, buy insurance, and kiss their ring is simply atrocious,” said one opponent about the city’s new rules.

There are better ways to frame the argument both to TPB and as a way to educate CCW holders. We’ll warn you one more time; carry insurance will lead to registration of at least the firearms you intend to carry.

San Jose’s new gun control law just got a bit stricter.

Gun owners in the nation’s 10th largest city who disobey a requirement to carry liability insurance and pay a yearly fee will have to fork over up to $1,000 in fines as part of San Jose’s unique and controversial push to combat gun violence — a novel legislative approach that has triggered a challenge in federal court and has 2nd Amendment supporters up in arms.

This is akin to saying; we’ll stop hit-and-run, uninsured Mexican drivers by requiring law-abiding drivers to carry extra insurance. Oh, wait, that’s already the law in TN and other states.

The insurance and fee requirements — first approved by council members in January — make San Jose the first city in America to impose such rules against gun owners.

Proponents of the new mandate, championed by Mayor Sam Liccardo since 2019, argue that it will motivate safer gun handling and help counter the public cost of gun violence, which health officials found in a May report amounts to $72 million a year for Santa Clara County.

But opponents, who filed a lawsuit against the requirements moments after the council passed them in January, argue that the rules are unconstitutional, burdensome and that the city hasn’t proven they will prevent gun violence. Plaintiffs in the ongoing lawsuit are the Colorado-based National Association for Gun Rights, the state’s Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and San Jose resident Mark Sikes.

And if we visit, *checks notes*; never mind, we don’t go to communist California. But what if somebody did want to visit San Jose; do they need insurance?

This is surely illegal:

The ordinance also mandates that gun owners pay a $25 fee every year to a nonprofit that will distribute funds to mental health and suicide prevention services for those who own a firearm or live with someone who does. The nonprofit is being set up by local health officials and academics will provide a bi-annual report on its work.

How do they know who has guns and who pays? King Charles, to his credit, was at least straightforward about his intent.

Via WoG

You’ve all heard about FFLs and gunsmiths being pressured to tell the FedGov everything about everyone, as well as banks in the pocket of big government and tracking gun and ammunition sales.  Yes, you have.  Well, there is nothing new about this.

The colonies fought a war over this sort of thing.  But then, I think they were of stouter stock than we.

Always remember the roots of the desire to control others.

On the one hand, technically, I understand his points about why the previous two cases were not granted certiorari.

On the other hand, while I understand why he makes his prediction, he tends to be over-optimistic in my opinion.

I predict exactly the opposite. I predict that if it ever makes it to the SDCOTUS, it will lose.