Archive for the 'Gun Control' Category

The Trace.

Mexican authorities were outgunned by criminal cartels in two notable incidents this month. In both cases, the criminals were armed with high-powered .50-caliber firearms. First, on October 13, in the state of Michoacan, a police convoy was ambushed with .50-caliber sniper rifles, leaving 13 officers dead and nine wounded. Four days later, in the state of Sinaloa, the government was forced to abandon an operation to arrest the son of Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán, after his henchmen assaulted the authorities with both sniper rifles and truck-mounted machine guns.

“We are seeing a full-out criminal insurgency in Mexico right now,” said Robert Bunker, an international security expert who teaches at the Army War College Strategic Studies Institute and has written about the use of .50-caliber rifles by Mexican cartels.

Often, the weapons come from the United States, where civilian sales of high-caliber sniper rifles are unregulated in all but three states.

Oh.  So we’re going to do this again?

Okay.  It might be just a wee bit interesting if it really meant anything.  And if it did, the only thing it would mean for me is that the FedGov needs to close the border.  I mean really close it.  To all traffic, both human and vehicular.

But that’s not what this is about.  The Trace wants you to think that if we just have more gun control we might be able to help the Mexican government, something I couldn’t care less about and isn’t even on my radar screen.

But where to weapons in Mexico really come from?

Ever wonder where Mexican drug cartels are getting all their weapons? After all, since 1972, the most power rifle that you can buy in the country is a .22 caliber weapon. Yet, Mexican drug cartels have grenades, grenade launchers, and fully automatic guns. We have been collecting some quotes on where Mexico gets its guns.

1. “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.”
2. “These kinds of guns — the auto versions of these guns — they are not coming from El Paso,” [Ed Head, a firearms instructor in Arizona who spent 24 years with the U.S. Border Patrol] said. “They are coming from other sources. They are brought in from Guatemala. They are brought in from places like China. They are being diverted from the military. But you don’t get these guns from the U.S.”
3. Fox News: The fact is, only 17 percent of guns found at Mexican crime scenes have been traced to the U.S.

So there’s that.  But don’t confuse them with the facts.

Guns.com.

A federal judge last week dismissed a claim from bump stock retailers who sued the government for damages they incurred after having to destroy their inventory.

The plaintiffs include two companies as well as two individuals who in all lost 74,995 bump stocks to the ban which took effect in March. The case, filed in a Washington, D.C. federal court, argued that the ban’s requirement that bump-stocks be surrendered or destroyed within 90 days, with no opportunity for registration, violated the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment which states that private property can’t be taken for public use without compensation.

The court didn’t see it that way.

“The law is different in this case because the government, as the sovereign, has the power to take property that is dangerous, diseased, or used in criminal activities without compensation,” said Senior Circuit Judge Loren A. Smith in his nine-page ruling. “Here, ATF acted properly within the confines of the limited federal police power.”

Smith, appointed to the federal bench in 1985 by President Ronald Reagan, said the $500,000 claim under the Tucker Act would be different “if the government confiscated a gun legally possessed by a person not committing a crime,” but argued that “machine guns,” which was how bump stocks were reclassified, are not protected by the Second Amendment.

First of all, machine guns, since they are used for military purposes, are absolutely protected by the second amendment.

Second,this is called “begging the question.”  I hate it when writers misuse the term “begging the question.”  It doesn’t mean that something necessarily brings up a question, as many writers assume.  It is a formal logical fallacy.  It’s circular reasoning, or proving the presupposition.  Bump stocks were declared machine guns.  Now that they have been declared machine guns, they can be regulated as such, so argues the judge.  That’s like declaring your skin to be green, and for proof reverting back to my declaration.

That’s not the issue.  The issue was and is whether the FedGov ever had the right to declare bump stocks to be machine guns in the first place, and then do they have the authority to take it without compensation.  So much for “judges.”  So much for Reagan.  So much for the constitution.

The constitution, which is merely a covenant, is unimportant to these people.  The FedGov can declare anything they want to be illegal, take it, and ignore appellations in court.  The constitution is a dead document.  The covenant has been broken.  It is null and void, like when a spouse cheats.

David Codrea.

In it we learn how “the public health establishment threw science into the wastebasket, confusing microbiology and pathology with sociology and politics.” Faria shows us how the corrupt “public health model” of “gun violence” is really social engineering, not science, how to spot and debunk fraudulent “studies,” and how the American Medical Association has discarded the scientific method to instead push partisan politics.

Doctors need to focus on the healing arts, the amelioration of pain, and the care of individuals.  National policy is best left to others.  We don’t need or want their help.

Via reader Joe, this terrible report.

Last Wednesday, U.S. Attorney General William Barr issued a memorandum to all U.S. attorneys, law enforcement agencies and top ranking Justice Department officials announcing the imminent implementation of a new “national disruption and early engagement program” aimed at detecting potential mass shooters before they commit any crime.

Per the memorandum, Barr has “directed the Department [of Justice] and the FBI to lead an effort to refine our ability to identify, assess and engage potential mass shooters before they strike.” The Attorney General further described the coming initiative, slated to be implemented early next year, as “an efficient, effective and programmatic strategy to disrupt individuals who are mobilizing towards violence, by all lawful means.” More specific information about the program is set to follow the recent memorandum, according to Barr, though it is unclear if that forthcoming document will be made public.

Barr also requested that those who received the memorandum send their “best and brightest” to a training conference at FBI headquarters this coming December where the DOJ, FBI and “private sector partners” will prepare for the full implementation of the new policy and will also be able to provide “new ideas” for inclusion in the program.

Perhaps the most jarring aspect of the memorandum is Barr’s frank admission that many of the “early engagement” tactics that the new program would utilize were “born of the posture we adopted with respect to terrorist threats.” In other words, the foundation for many of the policies utilized following the post-9/11 “war on terror” are also the foundation for the “early engagement” tactics that Barr seeks to use to identify potential criminals as part of this new policy. Though those “war on terror” policies have largely targeted individuals abroad, Barr’s memorandum makes it clear that some of those same controversial tactics will soon be used domestically.

Barr’s memorandum also alludes to current practices by the FBI and DOJ that will shape the new plan. Though more specifics of the new policy will be provided in the forthcoming notice, Barr notes that “newly developed tactics” used by the Joint Terrorist Task Forces “include the use of clinical psychologists, threat assessment professionals, intervention teams and community groups” to detect risk and suggests that the new “early engagement program” will work along similar lines. Barr also alludes to this “community” approach in a separate instance, when he writes that “when the public ‘says something’ to alert us to a potential threat, we must do something.”

As I’ve said before, “Ouija boards, palm readers, witches, warlocks, carnival fortune tellers, tribal witchdoctors, and “small changes that might foretell violence.”

It’s all the same thing to me, and if you have any sense at all, you too.  The Bible clearly says that those guilty of divination will not inherit the kingdom of heaven, and that the Lord hates such people (Galatians 5:19-21, Leviticus 19:24-32, Deuteronomy 18:9-15, Jeremiah 27: 9-19, Exodus 22: 18-19, 1 Samuel 15:23, Isaiah 2:5-8).”

God will not bless these designs.  No, I’m not saying they won’t catch a person here or there they think might have done something had it not been for the cops on their doorstep.  If you’re vision is that short-sighted, you need spectacles.

I’m saying something much deeper and more extensive.  When a country sacrifices it’s unborn, arms the state, tries to disarm it’s people and render them incapable of defense, and allows forcible conversion of children to Islam in its schools, God has turned His back on that people.  That brings a whole host of awful things down.  God is sovereign, the only lawgiver.  He will not be mocked.

We are at the end of an era.  America is “storing up wrath” for itself (Romans 1:5), and that means the righteous will suffer earthly pains in the wake of God’s judgment on the wicked.  Those who have a salvific relationship with Christ will face the doom of earthly judgment (even if not heavenly judgment) along with everyone else.

We’re all headed for hard times, folks.

And just to make sure you’ve got this, William Barr is Donald Trump’s AG.  Trump managed to implement red flag laws without red flag laws.  He said he would do it, and the plans are in place.  This is your president.  He owns this.  You don’t think Barr is acting on his own, do you?

News from Maine.

Leaders of the Maine Legislature voted against allowing seven different gun-related bills to be introduced in the next legislative session.

The bills, sponsored by number of different lawmakers, would have included improving public school security and creating a new child endangerment crime for those who fail to lock up stored firearms.

Gun-control advocates were critical of leadership’s votes, some of which broke along party lines.

[ … ]

The Legislature’s 10-member Legislative Council reviewed 399 proposed bills on Wednesday and voted to exclude all but 133 of them – including the gun-related measures – from the session that begins in January. The council, which comprises the minority and majority leadership in both House and Senate, as well as the speaker of the House and the Senate president, includes six Democrats and four Republicans.

[ … ]

A bill that would have banned the distribution of assault weapons without proper authority was defeated on a 4-6 vote while another that would have required all gun owners to buy liability insurance for their weapons was defeated unanimously.

Other bills that were rejected sought to redefine machine guns and ban assault-style weapons outright. Also rejected was a Republican proposal that would allow retired law enforcement officers who are cleared by the federal government to carry concealed firearms on school grounds.

It’s good to see the leftists get the comeuppance from time to time.  But don’t get cocky.  It’s only defeated for now.  The statists never sleep in their designs for total control over your life.

Via this smart post, I saw a researcher at Sandia National Laboratory had been working in the past on smart guns.  In the past he has observed the following concerning smart guns.

There are many items that the models could not demonstrate to the officers. A few of these are the technology’s cost, reliability, and adversarial strengths. Items like these will remain a concern for officers until a fieldable prototype is thoroughly tested.

Yea, I’ll bet.  To this, I’ll say the following as I’ve said before.

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.

Care to take the challenge, Mr. Weiss?

Maine Examiner.

A bill proposed by Rep. Victoria Doudera (D – Camden) would redefine what a “machine gun” is under state law. The Maine Legislature has attempted, without success, to pass more than a dozen laws that would impact Maine gun owners since the new Democrat majority was ushered in alongside Governor Janet Mills.

Rep. Doudera’s bill is one of a new group of proposals that will be considered by the Legislative Council on October 23. It is currently labeled LR 2829 “An Act To Amend the Definition of the Term “Machine Gun”” on the website of the Maine Revisor of Statutes.

Under current criminal code, unlawful possession of a “machine gun” is considered a substantive offense and subject to seizure and confiscation.

Maine Revised Statutes Title 17-A: Part 2, Chapter 43
§1053. Confiscation and seizure of machine gun

“Any machine gun possessed in violation of section 1051 is declared to be contraband and is subject to forfeiture to the State. Any law enforcement officer shall have the power to seize the same with due process.”

The definition of a “machine gun” subject to confiscation and seizure under state law is as follows:

Maine Revised Statutes Title 17-A: Part 2, Chapter 43
§1051. Possession of machine gun

“A weapon of any description, by whatever name known, loaded or unloaded, which is capable of discharging a number of projectiles in rapid succession by one manual or mechanical action on the trigger or firing mechanism.”

By changing the definition of a “machine gun” to encompass more of the firearms owned by Mainers, Rep. Doudera’s proposal could also make those newly defined “machine guns” subject to confiscation and seizure, turning owners of those firearms into criminals under the new law.

Rep. Doudera’s proposal is subject to approval by a majority of the Legislature’s Legislative Council at their meeting on October 23. The council is comprised of the members of House and Senate leadership from both parties, with six Democrats and four Republicans. Senate President Troy Jackson Chairs the council, with Speaker Sara Gideon serving as Vice Chair.

A contact in Maine sends this in response.

Yup;

Our “dear” Governor and the rest of the almost all, Dem contingency up here
will be spending a good piece of this next year unraveling all of the good
that was signed in by Lepage.

They intend to “do something” about AR’s/AK’s, eliminate the private sale
and “Constitutional Carry”.

All this as Maine was just determined to be the safest state in the Union
with New Hampshire and Vermont in very close contention for the same.

…another solution in search of a problem.

Of course it doesn’t matter that a semi-automatic firearm isn’t a machine gun.  Lying is just another tactic used by the left.  And by the way, after banning machine guns, what did you thing was next?  You didn’t believe the controllers would ever be happy without your total disarmament, did you?

David Codrea:

“Principled Statesman Mike DeWine Endorsed by Brady Campaign,” the headline read.

“While many politicians pander to ideologically out of touch special interests, Mike DeWine does the hard work on bread and butter issues and defends the rights of the majority,” the flack piece continued. “DeWine was a leader in the fight against legislation that called for special rights for gun dealers and manufacturers facing gun violence victims trying to hold them accountable for negligence.”

There.  That’s everything you need to know.  David sums it up nicely – but do go visit and read his full piece.

Via David Codrea.  I’ve had nothing but good things to say about Thomas Massie.  This is no exception.  This is an awesome reminder for the controllers to step carefully.

Via WiscoDave, this sad news from the land of controllers.

An 84-year-old former police officer and veteran of the Korean War, who was working as a school crossing guard, was fired and had his guns confiscated after a waitress overheard parts of a conversation he was having with a friend inside a diner.

Stephen Nichols got the job as a crossing guard because he loves kids, and after his wife passed away, he needed something to occupy his time and his heart.

While he was at a local diner, Nichols was speaking to a friend about a school resource officer who was constantly leaving his post to go get coffee in the morning. Nichols said he was worried that somebody would come and “shoot up the school” while the officer was on one of his coffee runs.

That’s the part of the conversation that the waitress overhead and what she reported to the police.

Now, Nicholas has lost his job, and his guns and gun license were seized under “red flag laws.” All because some waitress in a local diner overheard part of a conversation that was taken out of context, and then reported it to the authorties.

Now this man’s life is ruined.

Nichols said the waitress made a complaint to Tisbury Police about what she overheard and on the strength of that, Saloio and another officer relieved Nichols of his crossing guard duties while he was in the midst of performing them and subsequently drove to his home and took away his firearms license and guns.

“He came up and told me what I said was a felony but he wasn’t going to charge me,” Nichols said of Saloio.

The confiscated guns were later turned over to Nichols’ son-in-law, Nichols told The Times.

Asked if he was given a letter or any paperwork for the seizure of his license, Nichols said,

“No he just told me to hand it over so I took it out of my wallet and handed it to him.”

Nichols said he has been licensed for firearms since 1958.

He said he didn’t receive any paperwork or receipts for the seizure of his guns, either.

In a lengthy interview with The Times, Nichols explained his concern about Tisbury School.

“When I was in the United States Army, and it wasn’t just me, it’s anybody who’s in the United States service, if you are on guard duty for eight hours, you didn’t leave that position,” Nichols said. “And I’m just so accustomed to that, that when I see someone who’s suppose to be protecting kids…leave the school unguarded — if you’re on guard duty, you stay there.”

Tisbury School Principal John Custer told The Times he was familiar with Nichols as a crossing guard but when asked if he knew of the Nichols’ situation, Custer responded by saying crossing guards are “hired, trained and scheduled, entirely by the police department.”

He identified the school resource officer as Scott Ogden. Asked if anyone had complained about Ogden going on coffee breaks, Custer said,  “none whatsoever.”

A message left for Ogden at the Tisbury Police Department was not immediately returned.

Linda Jean’s owner Marc Hanover said he’s known Nichols for decades and vouched for his integrity. He described the situation as “absolutely outrageous.” He said he believes one of his servers “overreacted.” Hanover said he spoke with the restaurant patron who had conversed with Nichols at the time of the alleged threats.

“He assured me there was never a threat made,” Hanover said. [MV Times]

The friend, who was speaking with Stephen Nicholas at the diner, said at no time did Mr. Nicholas make a threat. He said this whole thing is “absurd.” Nicholas was actually expressing concern over the children’s safety, and now he’s been fired and his life’s work of being a police officer has been disrespected and dragged through the mud.

All because some stupid nosy waitress overheard parts of a conversation and reported it to the “gestapo authorties” in tyrannical Massachusetts.

Due to community outcry, he has gotten his job back.  But not his guns.  Because.  Controllers.  Because.  “All of your guns are belong to us.”

It’s difficult to tell who the biggest putz is in this story.  The idiot who did the reporting to the cops, or the cops.  Let’s settle for both.