Archive for the 'Guns' Category

News from communist controlled territory:

A Pennsauken-based weapons and ammunition supply company is set to win a $500,000 contract to provide firearms and ammo to Jersey City police under new rules that Mayor Steve Fulop has said will help “shape the dialogue” on gun control nationwide.

Lawmen Supply Company, one of two bidders for the contract, had to answer questions regarding how it handles firearms it purchases back from the city, whether it manufactures or sells assault weapons for civilian use and whether it agrees not to sell certain firearms for civilian use.

Jersey City is the first municipality to seek this kind of information about suppliers’ practices. Seattle and other cities are reportedly interested in replicating the city’s initiative.

The questions, which have raised the ire of gun rights advocates, are “socially responsible,” according to Jersey City. Fulop, who will travel to Los Angeles today to participate on a panel on gun violence, has said that in the absence of nationwide legislation to curb gun violence, big-city mayors must act.

Lawmen’s bid was about $10,000 higher than the only other bidder — Atlantic Tactical, of Pennsylvania — but the city said Lawman’s bid “best met the needs of the department.”

The questionnaires the city required the bidders to fill out show Lawmen said it does not sell weapons to civilians …

Shape the dialogue, huh?  There’s only one problem with all of this.  Neither Lawmen’s nor Atlantic Tactical has anything to do with manufacturing anything.  They are distributors and sellers.  They are a middle man.  There are ten thousand just like them, and it sounds like the boy-mayor of Jersey City is perhaps a little jealous over real manufacturing being driven South?  Or does he not know that we’re taking gun jobs away from the North?  I can get nice custom built firearms at Hyatt Gun Shop.  I can go down to talk to the dozen or so gunsmiths at Hyatt and get more real manufacturing done than any of the bidders for this silly contract.

David Codrea:

“[Kennedy] said there should be a law that lets authorities punish skeptics and deniers — those who engage in ‘selling out the public trust,’” The Washington Times reported Tuesday, citing an interview the “progressive” activist gave to Climate Depot at the people’s Climate March in New York City. “I wish there were a law you could punish them with. I don’t think there is a law that you can punish these politicians under…

And while Kennedy maintains a police officer was lying when, as a teenager, he was accused of spitting ice cream in the officer’s face precipitating his arrest, he did not take the judge up on pleading not guilty, despite having the Kennedy fortune to mount a legal defense that would have allowed him to challenge the testimony. Likewise, his 1982 arrest for heroin possession resulted in probation, community service and an expunged record. Curious, that the man who would control those without addictive personalities is still described as a man who can’t – or won’t – control himself.

David goes on.  Really, read the rest of the hypocrisy here.  Kennedy is sounding crazier and crazier not only because he is an ideologically driven communist who likes being special and above everyone else, but also because he knows that AGW is a perishing science.  It is dying because there is no evidence for it.  There is no evidence for it because it’s a myth, a fairly tale of rich elitists who have nothing else to worry about.

Kurt Hofmann:

The proposal was put on the ballot by the same Republican-controlled Legislature that believes, in the absence of any evidence, that President Barack Obama is coming for your guns” … “The current state of affairs seems to reinforce Mr. Dotson’s position that the amendment’s wording was misleading. It surely didn’t tell voters that they’d be handing guns to felons, but that’s precisely what is happening right now” …

Read the rest of Kurt’s setup with St. Louis Police chief Sam Dotson and his opposition to the gun rights amendment which recently passed by a large majority.  It wouldn’t matter if the language really was unclear.  It wouldn’t matter if they really were giving guns to felons (although they aren’t).  It wouldn’t matter who dislikes the amendment.  It passed, and it passed overwhelmingly.  That closes the issues.  As far as Dotson is concerned, he can be replaced.  He sounds like an outdated dinosaur.

In other news, the Sandy Hook Commission calls for a crackdown on home schooling.  For any readers I have in Connecticut, seriously, is there any reason at all to stay there?  Think hard.  Why would anyone live there?

And this is one reason I am reluctant to ship firearms through the TSA and airline when I am flying.

The Bang Switch has a must read on gun control in France, lengthy, but well worth reading.  Some of it is highly detailed in the legalities of firearms ownership in France.  There are many salient points for gun control in America, but this quote encapsulates the spirit of the article.

This French writer is telling you what the American left is saying concerning their ultimate aim.

The only way we can truly be safe and prevent further gun violence is to ban civilian ownership of all guns. That means everything. No pistols, no revolvers, no semiautomatic or automatic rifles. No bolt action. No breaking actions or falling blocks. Nothing. This is the only thing that we can possibly do to keep our children safe from both mass murder and common street violence.

Unfortunately, right now we can’t. The political will is there, but the institutions are not. Honestly, this is a good thing. If we passed a law tomorrow banning all firearms, we would have massive noncompliance. What we need to do is establish the regulatory and informational institutions first. This is how we do it.  The very first thing we need is national registry. We need to know where the guns are, and who has them.

This lefty writer at Daily Kos couches a total gun ban in terms of safety, but even if he believes in this state sponsored utopia, most on the left know that it’s a lie.  In the end it’s all about control over people.

This is why universal background checks and a national gun registry gain no traction in the gun community.  We don’t believe the lie of public safety, and we know your ultimate aim.  We will never relent.  We will never register our guns.  We will never turn in our guns.  We will never be put on a list.  We will fight a gun registry with all of our might.

As the philosophers would say, these truths hold “positive epistemic status.”

The Montana Standard:

By my count this is at least the second life that has been saved from a bear attack after legalization of firearms in National Parks, the first instance being mid-2010 in Denali.

Of course, Mr. Murphy is now charged with a crime.  There are two problems that could be contributing, the first being that laws are now passed in broad sweeping language that apparently ignores guilty intent, or in other words, Congress is Eroding the Mens Rea Requirement in Federal Criminal Law.

The second problem that could be contributing is that the enforcement in question may be of a regulation rather than a law, which is made via federal register by armies of lawyers sitting inside the beltway who have been (unfortunately) empowered by Congress to do just that.

But the third problem is there  is obviously a prosecutor who wants to take this case to court, otherwise he wouldn’t have a scheduled court appearance and need a lawyer.

The law becomes absolute in contemporary America, regardless of the fact that a man’s life was saved because he discharged a firearm.  But it’s absurd that Congress would have passed a law allowing firearms in National Parks early in 2010, but then refused to allow people to use that firearm to defend their lives.  Since it is absurd, it clearly wasn’t the intent of Congress (or should not have been).  Therefore, the prosecutor is likely to blame for the fact that Mr. Murphy has to defend himself in court for saving his own life.

Detroit Free Press:

About 20 people, openly armed with rifles and handguns, marched along Mound Road in Detroit Sunday to show support for a man who says he was unlawfully arrested because city police officers are against open-carry laws.

Detroiter Elijah Woody, 24, said he was open carrying a pistol while walking on Hague near Beaubien on Sept. 13 when he stopped to talk with friends around 7 p.m. Police pulled up a short time later.

Woody said he was arrested and charged with carrying a concealed weapon, a felony, and detained five days. He said his gun, a .40-caliber Glock 40, was in plain sight in a holster on his right hip when he was taken into custody.

Here is what the police are saying.

Elijah Woody, who claims he was legally open-carrying his handgun when Detroit police arrested him, is charged with carrying a concealed weapon without a license, a felony punishable by up to five years in prison.

While Elijah Woody claims police exited their vehicle and arrested him within 15 seconds, Detroit Police Sgt. Michael Woody (no relation to Elijah Woody), said police reported smelling the strong odor of marijuana, which gave them probable cause to search Elijah Woody and the group he was standing on the sidewalk of Hague between Brush and Beaubian. Sgt. Woody said a marijuana blunt was found at the scene and logged into evidence and that, although Elijah Woody had his “over-sized jacket” tucked in behind his handgun, it folded over the gun and illegally concealed it.

For a number of reasons I suspect that the police report is false.  Here is Kurt Hofmann in other open carry news.

Mr. Loftus goes on to note that this event takes place in an area in which every single legislator has opposed every single pro-gun rights bill since the year 2000. In short, to attend with an openly carried firearm, and without a concealed carry permit, is to face the risk of arrest and prosecution, with no certainty that the courts will recognize Amendment 5 as invalidating all laws against permit-less open carry. Not for the faint of heart.

The implication is that open carriers will be arrested.  They’d better not be.  As we’ve noted, there is state preemption now and open carry is legal everywhere in Missouri.

Since I don’t have time for a Notes tonight, read also David Codrea’s latest with Examiner.

Just as the billionaire-funded Astroturfers pose as the grassroots, the overabundance of safe selections, guaranteed to give them a track record of victories they can them claim as proof of their political wallop, is all part of the carefully-staged illusion-making.

I’ve remarked before that the collectivists work top down, while we work bottom up.  They have to make it look like their their method works best.

News from New Jersey:

WEST MILFORD, N.J. – Authorities believe a 300-pound black bear attacked and killed a hiker in a North Jersey nature preserve.

West Milford police said five friends from Edison, N.J., were hiking in the Apshawa Preserve when they encountered the bear on Sunday. Police say the group of inexperienced hikers became frightened and ran in different directions at about 3:44 p.m. They noticed one member was missing when they regrouped.

A search team located the body of 22-year-old Darsh Patel at 5:54 p.m. West Milford Police Chief Timothy Storbeck said there was evidence of bite marks and claw marks on Patel’s body.

The bear was about 35 yards from Patel’s body, circling the area, according to West Milford Police Capt. Richard Fiorilla.

Storbeck said members of a search-and-rescue team clapped in an attempt to scare away the bear, but it stayed there as if protecting the body. The bear, which was believed to about 4 years old, Fiorilla said, was euthanized at the scene.

Take note that this isn’t a Western state where we are discussing a brown bear attack or a mountain lion attack.  This is the East, and it was a black bear attack.

I’ve said it before.  Don’t go into the wilderness without a gun.  Of course in New Jersey the problem is that it is a “may issue” state, where one must “specify in detail the urgent necessity for self protection” in order to carry a weapon.

The fact that a bear killed a man wouldn’t be considered an urgent necessity for self protection by the authorities.  They would rather see people die at the hands of animals or men than to allow their citizens to go armed.

So says Professor David Gushee of Mercer University.  He says, “That’s not Biblical reasoning; that’s cultural reasoning.”

To which I responded this way directly to Professor Gushee.

Would you care to respond this my article on this subject (it’s one of many)?  Stay orthodox, please.  No deconstruction or other oddball views.

I haven’t heard back from the professor.  I don’t expect to.

News From Florida:

Jennifer Bair is a 25-year-old resident of Belvedere Lane in Palm Coast. She owns a beagle called Daisy, which she takes on walks in her neighborhood or in her backyard, on a leash, as was the case Sunday. Bair started carrying a gun after a neighborhood pit bull charged her and her dog on a previous occasion.

On Sunday, as she was walking Daisy in her backyard, the pit bull, known as KimK, charged her again, according to a Flagler County Sheriff’s report, “barking and snarling.”

Bair took out her Bersa 38 mm handgun and fired.

You saw it right.  I’m certain that I haven’t seen this particular 38 mm handgun in any gun show or store I have visited.  On the other hand …

So says Green Bay:

A group promoting gun owner rights in Wisconsin is suing the city of Green Bay in a dispute that stems from restrictions on guns inside a popular farmers market.

Wisconsin Carry Inc. has asked a judge in Brown County Circuit Court to order Green Bay city officials to relinquish public records that might indicate whether the city has a policy on carrying guns in the open.

The same group previously sued Ashwaubenon and Madison after both municipalities arrested individuals suspected of improperly carrying guns in public.

Nik Clark, president of Wisconsin Carry Inc., said a member of the organization complained this summer after he was told he couldn’t open-carry a gun in a Green Bay downtown farmers market. Police officers told him that guns were not permitted at the Saturday morning event, Clark said.

Afterward, Wisconsin Carry asked the city police department for copies of any procedures or directives on the subject. The department declined, citing attorney-client confidentiality.

Clark said his group decided to file suit because, he said, Green Bay residents have a right to know their city government’s policy on controlling open-carry of guns.

I’m not a lawyer, but this has got to be the most oddball, peculiar application of attorney-client privilege I have ever heard.  Surely they don’t mean that laws and regulations are not subject to public knowledge and scrutiny?  That would be absurd.

More than likely they mean that the officers who stopped the gentlemen didn’t have a basis for doing so and they don’t want to divulge their vulnerability to anyone.  For the stop to have been legitimate there would have to be a specific regulation pertaining to this establishment and/or the establishment would have to post.  Wisconsin is an open carry state with complete state preemption and has only weak stop and identify laws (the one stopped need not follow the request even though an officer can ask for identification).

Perhaps someone who is more familiar with Wisconsin law can weigh in, but it appears to me that the police acted improperly and fear just the sort of lawsuit they are currently facing.

Fox News:

Australian counterterrorism forces detained 15 people Thursday in a series of suburban raids after receiving intelligence that the Islamic State militant group was planning public beheadings in two Australian cities to demonstrate its reach.

About 800 federal and state police officers raided more than a dozen properties across 12 Sydney suburbs as part of the operation — the largest in Australian history, Australian Federal Police Deputy Commissioner Andrew Colvin told the Associated Press. A sword was removed as part of evidence at one of the homes.

Separate raids in the eastern cities of Brisbane and Logan were also conducted.

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation reported that the plan involved kidnapping randomly selected members of the public off the streets in Sydney and Brisbane, beheading them on camera, and releasing the recordings through Islamic State’s propaganda arm in the Middle East.

[ … ]

A second man was charged Thursday night in connection with the raids. The 24-year-old, who police didn’t name, was charged with possessing ammunition without license and unauthorized possession of a prohibited weapon. He was released on bail and ordered to appear in court next week.

Most readers probably pondered how ISIS was able to infiltrate a country and the awful acts they were prepared to perpetrate.  I didn’t.  My thoughts ran immediately to the fact that at least one of the individuals had a “prohibited” weapon and ammunition.  As with all gun control, law abiding citizens are unarmed and unprotected, while the criminals have their weapons.

Australia has some of the most restrictive gun control laws on earth.  We’ve discussed this before.  An Australian farmer lost his fight to obtain a handgun to shoot feral hogs because he couldn’t satisfy the woman heading the “administrative tribunal” that he really needed the gun.

The response to the ISIS members in Australia points out several important things.  First of all, gun control doesn’t apply to those in charge.  Law enforcement will always have their weapons.  Second, when law enforcement acts, they do so in order to secure the hive, or the collective.  Their concern isn’t and wasn’t for any particular individual who may have been (or will be) targeted by ISIS, because if it was, they would allow people to be armed for purposes of self defense.  But actions directed against the collective is a threat to their command and control, and will not be allowed.

So do the ordinary people feel threatened?