Archive for the 'Gun Control' Category

Reason.

The lawyers at the Department of Justice (DOJ) came up with a new Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives regulation “to clarify that [bump stocks] are ‘machineguns’ as defined by the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Gun Control Act of 1968” because “such devices allow a shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger.” The federal ban on machine guns, in other words, would be interpreted by the Trump administration to ban bump stocks too.

That unilateral executive action has now come under fire from two federal judges appointed by Trump himself.

On March 2, Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch issued a statement respecting the denial of certiorari in Guedes v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The executive branch “used to tell everyone that bump stocks don’t qualify as ‘machineguns.’ Now it says the opposite.” Yet “the law hasn’t changed, only an agency’s interpretation of it,” Gorsuch complained. “How, in all of this, can ordinary citizens be expected to keep up….And why should courts, charged with the independent and neutral interpretation of the laws Congress has enacted, defer to such bureaucratic pirouetting?”

Gorsuch wasn’t alone. On March 30, Judge Brantley Starr, a Trump appointee who sits on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, issued a blistering opinion in Lane v. United States that basically accused the DOJ of ignoring foundational constitutional principles in its defense of Trump’s bump stock ban.

The Justice Department justified the ban as a lawful exercise of the “federal police power,” Starr observed. But “the federal government forgot the Tenth Amendment and the structure of the Constitution itself,” which grants no such power to the feds. “It is concerning that the federal government believes it swallowed the states whole. Assuming the federal government didn’t abolish the states to take their police power,” Starr wrote, he had no choice but to deny the government’s motion to dismiss the case. He then tartly added: “The Court will allow the government to try again and explain which enumerated power justifies the federal regulation.”

Complaining isn’t the same thing as overturning and nullifying because it was, is, and always will be, unconstitutional.

Judges and justices using their opinions to bitch about things, even if that’s all the power they have if they’re aren’t in the majority, is extremely weak tea.

So do a lot of other people.  But Shannon wants to make it abundantly clear.

News from New Zealand.

New figures obtained by RNZ show last year had the highest rates of gun crime and deaths involving firearms for nearly 10 years.

But despite that rise, there has not been a corresponding increase in officers taking out or using their guns.

The figures, obtained from police under the Official Information Act, show the rates of gun crime went up in both 2018 and 2019.

Last year, there were 3540 occasions where an offender was found with a gun.

And in both of the last two years, the rate of deadly incidents involving a firearm was the highest it had been since 2009.

Right after peaceable men turned in their guns to the government.  Who’d a thunk it!

David Codrea.

This is the secular fundamental transformation/cultural terraforming of America that Democrats are counting on for votes and Chamber of Commerce Republicans for cheap labor. It’s also, not coincidentally, the greatest threat to continued legal recognition of the right to keep and bear arms, something none of our state and national “gun rights leaders” has been willing to acknowledge, let alone champion, lest the “national socialists” behind it all smear them as “haters,” too. As if they don’t already.

Those who hold religion in contempt have always been more than happy to exploit religious useful idiots if it advances their agenda. At some point, when they’re no longer needed, useful idiots are then “fundamentally transformed” into useless eaters, right before they’re further “fundamentally transformed” into fertilizer.

Serving man rather than God.  It goes on until they are judged, and that judgment certainly comes in eternity.  More often than not, it occurs in time as well, and that judgment makes no differentiation between the perpetrators and the victims.

Everyone suffers in the wake of God’s corporate judgment on nations.

We’re there.  Seventy million babies.  Legalized theft of family wealth.  Force indoctrination in schools of communist indoctrination.  Foreign wars to enrich bankers and corporations.  Readers can add to the list.

The church is all to blame for not being salt and light in the world, for preaching false doctrine, and for pretending that God doesn’t punish wickedness.

That all has to do with gun control how, you ask?  You didn’t really have to ask.

News from Missouri.

Relatives of one of three people shot to death in Springfield in 2018 are suing Academy Sports and Outdoors for selling bullets to a woman who gave them to the man charged in the killings.

The lawsuit alleges a worker at Academy Sports in Springfield should have realized the woman who bought the bullets, Nyadia Burden, intended to give them to Luiz Perez. The 24-year-old Perez couldn’t buy ammunition because he was in the country illegally, had no driver’s license and was facing felony charges, according to police. The lawsuit also names Burden.

Perez is facing the death penalty in the Oct. 31, 2018, deaths of his ex-roommates, 38-year-old Steven Marler and 23-year-old Aaron “Josh” Hampton, and the wounding of two others. Prosecutors allege he fatally shot Sabrina Starr, 21, the next day. She had provided him with the gun he used, police said.

The lawsuit alleges that Perez, Burden and Aaron Anderson went to Academy Sports after a Walmart worker refused to sell them bullets.

The lawsuit contends Academy employees did not try to determine whether Perez was legally able to buy ammunition, even though it was clear that Perez and Burden were together, The Springfield News-Leader reported. He handed her the box of bullets and gave her $20 to pay.

A spokeswoman for Texas-based Academy Sports did not immediately return messages seeking comment.

Federal immigration authorities said in 2018 that Perez should have faced deportation proceedings after a previous arrest in Middlesex County, New Jersey, but he was released because the Immigration and Customs Enforcement request didn’t meet the county’s required criteria.

Perez was charged with three counts of first-degree murder. Anderson was charged with being an accessory to first-degree murder and Burden pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit murder.

The lawsuit was filed May 1 on behalf of Hampton’s parents and son. The relatives are asking for compensation for pain and suffering and for costs such as funeral expenses.

Hampton’s family’s attorney, Craig Heidemann, said the family respects people’s right to bear arms but wants to encourage firearm dealers to obey regulations designed to keep guns and ammunition out of the wrong hands.

This is an interesting case but not really dissimilar from the one faced by Remington (in Connecticut) or by Daniel Defense (in Nevada).

Follow me.  To begin with, this would never have happened if illegals were not allowed in the country.  The very same courts that prevent the deportation of illegals and find virtually every immigration law unconstitutional complain about guns when one of them uses a weapon to commit a crime.  The fault is never the person or system of laws.

Second, the point should be made that even if our borders were secured, this could still happen.  The fact that it happened due to an illegal isn’t relevant to the case.  A gun shop can no more ensure that guns or ammunition aren’t used for nefarious purposes than a car dealership can ensure that the buyer won’t use a new vehicle to intentionally run over people.

And yet here we are, with the system of protection set up by Congress summarily ignored by the courts, people blaming crime on guns, and gun or ammunition manufacturers or sellers being held responsible for everything a buyer does.

It’s quite an effective means of gun control, yes?  So even if Academy Sports wins, they lose because of the legal fees.

David Codrea.

… Rolling Stone has always been one of its most transparent promoters.

As for what those “loose gun laws” are, evidently they’re referring to the fact that criminals can find ways to get around the strict ones. In this case, the “gun law” violations are tied to a retired police officer, from the very class of citizens gun-grabbers tell us are the “Only Ones” we can trust with guns. Add to that their main subject was “a licensed gun dealer since 2007, and had acquired additional federal licenses to manufacture ammunition and possess machine guns.”

Yea, how did the FedGov treat their star patsy, their “main subject?”

Also, it was never really fertile ground to claim that guns mainly come from the U.S.

“Most cartels buy in bulk, and the weapons are coming from places like Nicaragua and other South American countries. Also Asia and some from the Middle East,” a Tijuana-based police authority who requested anonymity explained. “And, another factor is the CNC machines making uppers in clandestine shops in Mexico.”

Don’t tell Eric Holder.  His feelings may still be a little raw over this deal.

News from one of the corrupt circuits.

SALT LAKE CITY — A federal appeals court has rejected a Utah gun enthusiast’s attempt to block a Trump administration rule that bans a gun accessory known as a bump stock.

A three-judge panel from the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver upheld a district court ruling last year that found Clark Aposhian wasn’t likely to win his challenge to a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives rule that classifies bump stocks as machine guns. The court also found that he failed to show that blocking the ban would not hurt the public’s interest.

“Moreover, the public has a strong interest in banning the possession and transfer of machine guns, including bump stocks. The ban supports the safety of the public in general, and the safety of law enforcement officers and first responders,” according to the 2-1 decision.

Continuing the mythology, I see, as long as it serves their interests.

In a dissenting opinion, Judge Joel Carson concluded that a semiautomatic weapon equipped with a bump stock isn’t a machine gun under federal law.

To be considered a machine gun the trigger must function only once to fire more than one shot, and the mechanism that allows the trigger to function must be self-acting or self-regulating, he wrote.

“So does a bump stock increase the speed by which the user can fire rounds? Yes,” Carson wrote. “But does that mean the firearm to which it is attached is a machine gun under the National Firearms Act? No.”

He has a sense of honor, so he lacks the necessary temperament to sit on a court of any kind.

Never forget it was the NRA and Trump who gave you this.

David Codrea.

We know how most Californians vote and the enabling effect that has on citizen disarmament edicts just by looking at the state’s politics. We also know that a Latino population that became the majority turned the Golden State blue.

That’s a population that according to all observable realities as well as all credible polls is overwhelmingly Democrat and anti-gun. That means “amnesty” and a “pathway to citizenship” for MILLIONS of foreign nationals in this country illegally (and legally, with CURRENT culturally suicidal policies) overwhelmingly favor Democrats and anti-gunners, which is why they’re all pushing for it. And that means if unchecked, it will result in supermajorities in state and federal legislatures that will then be able to pass whatever anti-gun edicts they want while confirming judges who will uphold those edicts and reverse gains made to date.

David took the words right out of my mouth (actually, I’m just quoting him).  Everytown and Bloomberg want to turn Texas blue and are spending millions to do it.  They did it in Virginia, and they can do it in Texas.

Why do they think it just might work?  Demographics.  If Latinos didn’t vote against gun rights, they wouldn’t have targeted Texas to begin with.

There is more, of course, but there’s all the proof you need to know how Latinos vote.  They wouldn’t be throwing that much money away if it was obviously a losing cause.

Via David Codrea, it isn’t just rifles he’s interested in.  News from the land up North.

A government official speaking on background at a technical briefing for journalists said the number of these now-banned firearms currently in circulation is unknown.

Some of the firearms being prohibited are currently classified as “non-restricted” — mostly firearms like shotguns — meaning licensed owners do not have to register them with the police. (The long-gun registry was abolished by the previous Conservative government.)

There are 105,000 firearms currently classified as “restricted” that will now be classified as “prohibited.”

The government official said that, at the end of the two-year amnesty, gun owners must dispose of the firearm or they may be able apply for the firearm to be “grandfathered.” Details on the grandfather process would be released at a later date, the official said.

As we all know, that’s the purpose of a registry – to know who has them and where to go to pick them up (by them, I mean both the guns and the people).

Y’all folks in Canada are in a bad way, being subjects of the Queen.  The truth is, however, we may not be far behind.

You have two years to make your plans.  Don’t turn in your guns.

WSJ.

What an enormous abdication. The Supreme Court ducked its first Second Amendment case in a decade on Monday, and the only plausible explanation is that Chief Justice John Roberts wanted to avoid becoming a target of vengeful Senate Democrats.

In an unsigned per curiam opinion, the Chief joined the four liberals and a (conflicted) Justice Brett Kavanaugh in declaring moot a challenge to New York City’s onerous gun regulation (New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. City of New York). At issue is a New York City rule that prevents residents with gun licenses from transporting their guns from their city homes to shooting ranges and homes outside the city. Obtaining even a “premises” license requires a $431 fee and police investigation into an applicant’s mental health, criminal history and moral character. It can take six months.

A few points of order.  First, the SCOTUS didn’t have to drop the case.  They can accept anything they want.  Second, New York can go right back to legislating liberty away now, and an aggrieved party must go through the process all over again.  It games the system, and we and they all know it.

Third, the WSJ is assuming that Roberts is a coward.  This may be true, but it also may be true that he fears nothing from Senators and is simply a controller at heart.  Fourth, assuming that he really was afraid of the Senators and is awaiting a less divisive time to rule on the 2A, he’s ignorant.  America is becoming more polarized, not less.

On the mootness point, Justice Alito also pokes his colleagues with this hypothetical: “A State enacts a law providing that any woman wishing to obtain an abortion must submit certification from five doctors that the procedure is medically necessary. After a woman sues, claiming that any requirement of physician certification is unconstitutional, the State replaces its old law with a new one requiring certification by three physicians. Would the court be required to dismiss the woman’s suit?” You know the answer.

Justice Kavanaugh’s role here is curious because, while he joined the majority on mootness, he wrote a concurrence agreeing with the dissent on the Second Amendment merits. This looks to us as if he is trying to protect the Chief Justice from being the fifth vote, and the sole “conservative,” providing a liberal victory while making clear he’s still a solid vote himself for gun rights. The phrase for this is too clever by half.

Justice Kavanaugh may agree with the Chief that the Court needs to avoid political controversies, especially with Democrats threatening to pack the Court if they win the White House and Senate in November. But the Court’s timidity on gun rights amid Senate threats means that liberal and media intimidation will escalate. The Court hasn’t taken a Second Amendment case in a decade, even as cities and states erode its landmark Heller decision bit by bit. The Court is sending a signal that the Second Amendment is the exception in the Bill of Rights, a second-class freedom.

“By incorrectly dismissing this case as moot, the Court permits our docket to be manipulated in a way that should not be countenanced,” Justice Alito warns. He’s right but too polite.

The Chief Justice is carving out a reputation as a highly political Justice whose views on the law can be coerced with threats to the Court’s “independence.” The danger for the Court is that, in bending to these threats, the Chief is compromising the very independence he claims to want to protect.

The time for politeness has ended.  The progs declared war long ago, and what’s left of believers in liberty is drinking tea in the front room playing parlor games and making sure their suits don’t get soiled.