Don’t Believe Bloomberg’s Polls

It’s good to see that progress is being made in Idaho in regards to constitutional carry, but Bloomberg is doing his level best to fight it. They are disingenuously trying to pass off support for the concealed carry permitting system as opposition to constitutional carry. Consider this poll they are putting in front of lawmakers:

Under current Idaho law, people are required to have a permit in order to carry a concealed handgun in public places. In order to get a permit, people may need to complete a handgun-safety training course and must pay a processing fee. Do you … strongly support? Support? Oppose? Or strongly oppose … requiring permits to carry a concealed handgun in public in Idaho?

How would you answer this question? A no answer could be taken for not supporting concealed carry at all. It’s not like they offer the option for “No, I don’t support it because I don’t think you should need a permit.”

What this is reflecting is strong support for the current system, which is bad news for Bloomberg’s overall goals, not good news.

Weekly Gun News – Edition 30

It’s not often I’ll start out with a news post on Monday, but if I sit on some of these links, they’ll go stale.

Bill to legalize silencers passes out of committee…. in Massachusetts. I think the hearing argument is a powerful one. We should ask our opponents why they want people to go deaf? Traditional hearing protection can interfere with the ability to hear range commands, which is also a safety issue.

Yes, next question: “Did Guns Doom Hillary in Michigan?”

A counter drone system. Looks good for one or two drones, but what about a swarm attack?

The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a hatchet, is a good guy with a gun.

Anti-gun Republicans are a rare breed these days, but where I grew up, you can still find them in the wild. There’s almost nowhere to shoot in Delco. There’s one club, and one public range, and I’ve seen enough unsafe things in that public range that I won’t shoot there. That’s not good for a healthy gun culture.

Let’s hope this is a trend: Jury nullification instructions coming to New Hampshire.

Trump & Guns: Bob Owens correctly points out some really bad advice. The law frowns on shooting people threatening or using non-deadly force.

Don’t for a minute think folks like this wouldn’t take your guns if given half the chance.

European gun control push on hold for now. They learned exactly the wrong lessons from the Paris attacks.

Maryland is looking to make colleges and universities gun free zones. Meanwhile, Georgia is moving in the opposite direction.

Yellow Journalism: Inside the Crackdown on Florida’s Shady Private Gun Dealers. They are conflating very illegal sales with lawful private sales.

Miguel on Colorado Magazine Ban: “When you see Dudley Brown, Be Sure to Thank Him.” The Dems were willing to cut a deal to do at least a partial repeal of the ban, but it was scuttled by Dudley. Now Coloradans are probably stuck with the 15 round limit forever.

What liberals can learn from the NRA.” It’s not just liberals. A lot of conservative and libertarian groups would do well to look at how NRA does things.

Ban cars? Ban private sales of cars? No more lending your keys to your buddy! That would be the gun control mentality applied here: “Pedestrian deaths appear to be climbing: Can we reverse the trend.

Trump’s supporters aren’t notably authoritarian, according to the WaPo. There’s a lot more authoritarianism to go around than I’m comfortable with, but that’s nothing new.

A private transfer ban is being considered in Minnesota.

Looks like Facebook’s anti-gun-sale policies aren’t really having much of an effect. It’s almost like gun control doesn’t work at all!

How Gun Control Supporting is Your District?

John Richardson points to an interesting map showing support for gun control. It looks to me done by congressional district. Looking at the source, I’m doubtful this is a scientific poll, because the participants are self-selected, but I like how they broke down the data in this manner:

Gun Control Support Map

My district (8th) is a big greenish, so about split, but 6th and 7th district are a lot more yellow than I’d like them to be. That’s not necessarily disaster, however.

As it stands now, all those district are represented by Republicans, two of which (Fitzpatrick & Meehan) are soft on the gun issue, but 6th (Costello) is more solid. An intensity gap can make up for an unfavorable public viewpoint, but I’ve found gun owners in Southeastern Pennsylvania are largely apathetic about protecting the right for themselves and future generations. That’s not everybody. There are people here definitely willing to stand up and be counted, but not nearly enough given how many gun owners live here and what we’re up against. To some degree we’ve always free-ridden on the work of Western Pennsylvanians. But that will end as that part of the state depopulates.

The Gilt Negligent Shooting Brings Out the Worst

The media went absolutely ape shit over the story that Jamie Gilt was accidentally shot by her 4-year old son, who retrieved the firearm off the floor of the vehicle and shot mom with it. My guess is she put the firearm under the seat and it slid back to where the kid could get it. The lessons here are pretty obvious:

  • The best place for a gun is strapped on your person in a quality holster that offers good trigger protection.
  • Guns belong in holsters, always, even if you’re carrying off body (a less than ideal solution to begin with). Triggers must be protected from external manipulation. My guns never leave their holsters unless they are being fired, cleaned, or stored unloaded for a protracted period of time (which never happens).
  • If you’re going to do vehicle carry, in a locked container within the car (and in a holster) is more prudent than tossing it under a seat. I’ve also seen ways to mount holsters to a vehicle that provides a reasonable degree of control while the driver is in the driver’s seat.
  • Carrying a firearm regularly is a serious commitment. If you’re not really willing to be serious about it, you’re probably better off leaving it secured at home. Tossing a gun under a seat when you have kids in the car is not being serious about the responsibilities that go with carrying a deadly weapon.
  • Teach your kids not to touch guns. They should understand firearms are very dangerous. Kids of a certain age don’t always listen, so that’s why we do the previous things I’ve mentioned.

Of course, apparently the media has decided if you post a few pro-Second Amendment Facebook posts that means you’re a “gun activist.” I believe this is deliberate on the part of the media, because the implication is that if even the die-hards can’t carry firearms safely, what makes you ordinary folk can do it safely? This is certainly bringing out the worst of the media.

It’s also bringing out the worst of the anti-gun folks.

No less than three fake facebook pages have been created to do nothing but shame this woman. The comments left on her page and the fake pages are the most inhuman and vile I’ve seen in a very long time.

We claim to be tolerant and inclusive, but people are calling for her sterilization, her child to be taken from her and saying that it’s only too bad that she was not outright killed […]

It’s amazing how violent supposed non-violent people can be when they smell blood in the water.

Funny how that seems to work, isn’t it. In truth there’s plenty of nastiness to go around any public issue, but the claims of peace loving very often ring hollow.

Ms. Lauer seems to offer some other useful advice on carrying with kids.

Debating Ben Crump on Stand Your Ground

This is back from August, but it’s the first I’ve seen it. Rick Ector of Rick’s Firearms Academy of Detroit debates Ben Crump on Stand Your Ground laws. Rick is absolutely right that the Martin case was a classic self-defense case and had nothing to do with Stand  Your Ground in Florida. Our opponents can only win by misleading people, as Ben Crump is doing here.

Rick did pretty well if you ask me. Debating on camera is harder than it looks.

A New Party System?

US Map FlagThe United State is either on its fifth party system, or its sixth, depending on who you talk to. I accept the theory that the post 1968 realignment represented a new party system. I think we 2016 may, in fact, mark the end of the sixth party system, causing us to head into a seventh party system. I think this is what drives a lot of fear in regards to Trump. No one knows what the seventh party system looks like. I can safely say there are a few factors that will go into the realignment.

Both parties are experiencing populist uprisings. Other than the possibility the DOJ removes Hillary from the race, she’s still the presumptive nominee if she can hold the Dem super delegates, which she failed to do in 2008. Even minus the super delegates, she’s still leading Bernie. I think the Republicans stand a high likelihood of going into a brokered convention. As much as I do not want Trump, I think a brokered convention is a disaster for the party. How much of a disaster depends on whether the establishment types put their own guy in the race, or whether they remain committed to rallying for a candidate who at least ran this election cycle. I think the GOP are the more vulnerable party to the uprising because, frankly, most of the people in the GOP’s tent pretty much hate each other. Like Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman will always have Paris, the Dems will always have “free” shit.

The evangelical voters have shown their cards to a large degree in this election. Cruz was the perfectly tailored candidate to capture the evangelical vote. They couldn’t have asked for more. Yet going into South Carolina, more than half of evangelical voters were behind Trump. All the religious pandering, which Trump does not do, has the effect of turning off a lot of potential GOP voters outside the Bible Belt. After Trump, can there be any justification for politicians continuing to pander this way? Probably not if we’re looking at a completely new electoral map built around the Trump coalition.

Good manufacturing jobs aren’t coming back no matter who is President. A protectionist economy would be economically devastating to implement. Even if Trump can swing a few immigration restrictions, it’s not going to amount to much. The real long term threat to working class (and even some upper middle class) jobs is automation and robotics. Self-driving cars aren’t all that far off. Think about how many people are employed in trucking and transportation and you can see why this is going to be a huge problem. Short term we’ve put too much emphasis on college for people not well suited for it, at the expense of teaching skilled trades robots will have a hard time doing (for a while at least). I don’t know what the solution will be for the long term problem. What do we do when we have a huge robot labor force and humans just don’t have to work all that hard? Some people do well when they win the lottery, but for many, it destroys their lives. That kind of micro-economy is what we’d be dealing with at large. What’s the solution? One thing I know for certain is Donald Trump does not have the answer.

One thing pundits have been talking about is the turn of the “Reagan Democrat” in the Trump coalition. It’s also been called the Archie Bunker Vote, and some of them are paleocon Buchananites previously alienated from the GOP by the Bushs. The problem with building a coalition around this voting bloc is that it’s unreliable. They only tend to show up when they are angry. I wouldn’t expect whatever coalition Trump builds to last more than two or three cycles. Nixon’s coalition didn’t last. With the sixth party system smashed to bits, whatever coalition reforms on the other side will be different, and I suspect will reflect some of the realities here.

Michigan Apparently Felt the Bern

Michigan Primary

Maybe it turned out to be a bad idea for Hillary to go into Michigan and tell working-class primary voters she cared more about her wild-eyed gun control schemes than she did about good manufacturing jobs. I’m not saying that gun control is all that caused Bernie to overcome a 21 point deficit in the polls to take Michigan, but a talented politician would know you don’t go into a state that’s been hammered by the loss of manufacturing jobs and state there are some good manufacturing jobs (making firearms) that the country could do without. But as you all well know, I think Hillary’s got less political talent than your average high school class president.

Hillary’s strange obsession with the PLCAA isn’t doing her any favors. I think if Bernie backed away from more gun control, it might even help him gain. Remember, 20% of Dems own guns too.

Is Bernie Backing off Gun Control One-Upmanship?

It seemed to me the Democratic Primary had devolved into who wants to have more control, with Bernie backing away from some of his previous positions, chiefly voting for the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. Apparently in the last Dem debate, Bernie wasn’t backing down this time, even drawing praise from the NRA. Of course, Hillary is doubling down.

Is Bernie Sanders finally recognizing that gun control is a losing issue? He was running from his PLCAA vote just a few weeks ago. What has changed?

Bloomberg Won’t Run

I guess he probably realized that if people like me would have been willing to travel to New York City to sign the petition to get him on the ballot in person, that perhaps it wasn’t such a good idea after all. His candidacy would have:

  • Pulled more votes from the Democratic nominee than the Republican nominee.
  • Pulled money away from his gun control efforts to fund his campaign.
  • Put his gun control efforts front and center, and made it easier for our side to tie Everytown to Bloomberg.
  • Tied his other unpopular nannying to his gun control efforts.
  • Reveal the extent to which the entire gun control movement is funded by one rich billionaire.

The way I saw it, there just wasn’t any downside.

SAFE Act Not Accomplishing Much

There have been a few media stories going around showing that SAFE Act prosecutions have been on the rise, but a local NBC affiliate takes a look at the actual numbers, and it turns out most of the prosecutions are in New York City, and are for unlicensed handgun possession, a crime before the SAFE Act but which the SAFE Act raised from a misdemeanor to a felony.

There have been only 31 cases prosecuted in the entire state of New York for possession of an illegal assault weapon, and only 8 people charged with failure to register.

Leah Gunn Barrett, executive director of New Yorkers Against Gun Violence, said her organization believes the statistics show the SAFE Act is being enforced uniformly, despite some of the charges being rarely used.

“You’re not going to have the State Police going door to door seeing if you have an AR-15 and if it’s registered,” Barrett said. “I don’t know, maybe that will start to happen, particularly if there’s a massacre using one of these weapons in the state.”

Don’t for a minute believe these people aren’t in favor of a pervasive police state in order to accomplish their goals. The SAFE Act was never about public safety at all. It was about expressing disapproval for “those kinds of people,” and making them uncomfortable such that they’ll either move elsewhere, or become “better” people, you know, like downstate elites.

Criminals don’t bother with “assault weapons,” which is reflected in the fact that they are very very seldom used in crimes, and now reflected in the paltry number of cases prosecuted under New York State’s enhanced ban.