Currently Browsing: Anti-Gun Folks
Jun 22, 2016
There is no provision in the House where members can hold the floor (in this case literally), so these 30 members of the House are out of order. The sit-in would seem to be lead by Rep. John Lewis (D-GA).
Jun 16, 2016
Gersh Kuntzman, writing in the New York Daily News, doubles down on the article he wrote about his bizarre AR-15 experience. I give him credit that at least he’s fired an AR. Spend a week listening to people blather about ARs who have never fired a gun in their lives makes you start wanting to go “Oh, so you’ve never fired a gun, let alone an AR-15. Well, then shut your ignorant pie hole!” I give kudos for Kuntzman for at least trying it, even if I’ve seen eight year olds handle the experience better than he describes.
But reading his latest article, I think both Kuntzsman and the New York Daily News are just trolling for clicks at this point. It may be shameless, but it works. Those eyeballs are no doubt coming from “Hey, check out this pansy,” as people of the gun spread the link around. But none of that is going to matter to advertisers. So perhaps Kuntzman is willing to endure pot shots at his masculinity for the sake of clicks:
To summarize, this line of argument suggests that I’m not a real man because I am frightened by the awesome power of an AR-15, which, despite however you willfully misread my story, can discharge dozens of rounds in mere seconds.
If you can fire dozens of rounds in mere seconds on semi-automatic, and actually hit what you’re aiming at, having no prior shooting experience, I’ll eat my hat. That is likely a fabrication, or the adrenaline was warping his sense of time. I’d struggle to do that, and I’ve been shooting a lot longer than he has. The AR is easy to use and easy to learn on, but it’s not that easy. I’ve been wondering if the shop owner set him up with a rental M-16 rather than an AR-15.
Yes, this weapon scared the crap out of me. And it should scare the crap out of all of you, too. An AR-15 is a weapon of mass destruction, a tool that should only be in the hands of our soldiers and cops, as Rep. Seth Moulton wrote in the Daily News on Tuesday. I don’t think there’s anything unmanly about pointing out this fact.
Kuntzman’s fears are his own problem, not mine, and he shouldn’t make his issues the world’s issues. It also begs the question of why cops should have a weapon of mass destruction? They carry guns for the same reasons we do: self-defense. If it’s useful for police to protect the public and themselves with an AR-15, why is it then not useful to me? Just because he can’t handle it doesn’t mean he should project his inadequacies onto others.
As far as the challenges on his masculinity go: when he ridiculously claimed shooting an AR gave him PTSD, he insulted a lot of people who actually have or have had PTSD from experiencing things far far worse than firing a rifle in a safe and controlled environment. And he gets indigent that people then fling insults? He cheapened what those folks went through, and he should get over himself.
Personally, when I started shooting, especially on indoor ranges, it took a bit of conditioning to get over being jumpy at unexpected loud noises. Even when I would get used to the basic din of a range, some dude would show up with a hand cannon, or large rifle and *jump*. Some people struggle with that more than others. I suspect most of us took a bit to get used to a range, especially if we weren’t raised as shooters (which I was not).
Jun 15, 2016
So says Roll Call. He started at 11:21. In this case he’s not filibustering to prevent a bill, but continuing to hold the floor in order to hold up the Senate’s business until it agrees to do some gun control, namely “Terror Watch List.” Personally, I think Senator Murphy can keep bloviating until he’s blue in the face. Holding up the Senate’s business? As far as I’m concerned, the less those people do the better off we all are. Senators, I say let him have his say, go out to Bullfeathers for a beer, and wait for him to finish his grandstanding.
Jun 15, 2016
Reporter Helen Ubinas set out to show the world how easy it was to buy an AR-15, but then committed a federal felony, and violated a number of state laws. You see, Ms. Ubinas paid for the AR-15 with her company card, while answering “Yes” that she was the true buyer of the firearm. You see, if the company is buying it, then it’s a purchase by that corporation, and that corporation is what needs to go on the paperwork. If you put yourself up as the person buying, and the money is being fronted by your corporation, then that is a straw purchase.
After that she says “No need for a concealed carry permit.” Actually, transporting firearms in Philadelphia is illegal except under exceptions. One of those is having a License to Carry Firearms. Another is going directly from the place of purchase to your home. My Jersey readers are quite familiar with this type of transportation regime. It’s the same in Pennsylvania for handguns outside Philadelphia, but applies to all firearms in the City of Philadelphia. The only difference between New Jersey laws and Pennsylvania laws, is that licenses to carry are not difficult to get here, and they exempt you from all these transportation laws. But Ms. Ubinas admittedly drive around the city for a bit (not excepted, and thus illegal) and then drove to the police station (also not excepted, unless you’re under an order to).
I mean, I get that whipping out the company AMEX is an innocent mistake, but there’s no innocent mistake exception to what you put on a 4473. I’m actually surprised the dealer would run a corporate card through the machine without noticing. I hold out the possibility that this is all wistful fiction, and the reporter in question is a liar rather than a felon. But none of this stuff is as unregulated as the reporter leads us to believe. When dealing with guns, it’s very easy for uninitiated people to commit serious crimes without realizing it. Maybe Ms. Ubinas can have some sympathy when we argue that each new regulation, while seemingly well-intended, can often put well-meaning people in prison for understandable mistakes. If you’re going to be a serious gun owner and stay out of trouble, you have to know your law.
Jun 15, 2016
So says this Daily News article that has been making the rounds. That’s funny, because that’s pretty much the opposite reaction I’ve gotten, even from women and children. He even goes so far as to say the first shot gave him PTSD, and insult to people who have gotten PTSD from experiencing something far far worse. This guy is a tool. To me, the bigger story is who enabled the Daily News to come up with this hit piece: Frank Stelmach of Frank’s Double Tap Shooting Range at 4730 Blakiston St, Philadelphia, PA:
“There should be expanded background checks — extending into your family, friends and associates,” he said. “And there should be a mental health screening. In Europe, if you want to buy a gun, you have to see a doctor (for a psychiatric examination) to see if something’s not right.”
Something to keep in mind if you patronize that establishment. Psych evals? Really? At whose expense? Not just believe that stuff, but willing to say so to the media, and cooperate with the media to make gun owners look bad! I don’t really give a crap what you think as an individual, but the game changes when you announce as much to the media in a hit piece to a paper you know is doing a hit piece.
I would note that Classic Pistol is only 12.7 miles further if you live in The City. Pistol People is only 4.6 miles, and 10 minutes. Ready Aim Fire, 11 miles or 18 minutes. So really, you have no excuse.
Notice in the update the author apologized for his hyperbole about firing an AR-15 giving him PTSD. I’m glad to see our folks getting their Alinsky on: make them live up to their own standards.
UPDATE: Double Tap responds that their words were twisted by Kuntzman, and they do not in fact support any of the things the article claimed they supported.
Jun 13, 2016
Sen. Bob Casey who ran a campaign to get the support of gun owners changed his tune quite a while ago. He’s on board with the sweeping semi-auto bans, private sale bans, and magazine bans.
Now he wants to make gun owners a felon if they are even suspected of potential crimes – beyond the standard “terror watch list” restriction which could end your right to possess firearms just for having the same name as some person who may not have even visited this country.
Convictions, evidence, and watch list status are no longer required under the plan he announced today. Let someone give your name as a suspect in some crime that happens to include a victim in a protected class, and you lose your Constitutional rights.
“The Hate Crimes Prevention Act would prohibit the purchase, possession or shipment of a firearm by anyone convicted of a misdemeanor hate crime or who received a hate crime sentence enhancement, and prohibit the sale of firearms to anyone reasonably suspected to be guilty of a misdemeanor hate crime. “
(Link via Reason.)
Jun 9, 2016
This is probably it for the Second Amendment in the 9th Circuit, at least as far as bearing arms goes. From the decision:
We hold that the Second Amendment does not protect, in any degree, the carrying of concealed firearms by members of the general public. This holding resolves the Second Amendment question presented in this case. It also necessarily resolves, adversely to Plaintiffs, their derivative claims of prior restraint, equal protection, privileges and immunities, and due process. In light of our holding, we need not, and do not, answer the question of whether or to what degree the Second Amendment might or might not protect a right of a member of the general public to carry firearms openly in public.
I’m hoping they do not appeal this. Without Scalia, this would, if we are very lucky, split 4-4, which would uphold the lower court ruling.
If Hillary wins this election, there will be no judicially enforceable Second Amendment of any meaning. That’s not hyperbole, it’s what’s going to happen. I also am very skeptical that losing three national elections in a row is going to make a lot of GOP and Dem politicians start whispering among themselves that NRA and the gun vote isn’t such the big deal they think they are.
This was really no time to nominate a clown car campaign to go against Hillary.
Jun 8, 2016
I mentioned a few days ago that Katie Couric and Stephanie Soechtig may not have necessarily violated the law by sending a resident of Colorado to Arizona to purchase firearms in a private sale, since an element of the crime under 18 U.S.C. Section 922(a)(3) is transporting back to your home state. I did not mention 922(a)(5), because I was hoping they’d feel the pressure and open their mouths about what happened to it, possibly admitting to a federal crime in the process. I’m happy to report I am not disappointed! Soechtig informs us that the firearms in question were turned over to the police in Arizona.
That does not violate 922(a)(3), but it does violate 922(a)(5), which is just as serious as an offense. Section 922(a)(5) makes it unlawful for a non-licensee “to transfer, sell, trade, give, transport, or deliver any firearm to any person … who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in … the State in which the transferor resides” Now there’s an exception if you’re transferring it to a licensee, so Couric and Soechtig had the legal option to have it transferred back to an FFL holder outside of Colorado. But there is no exception for police, who under the state in question are non-licensees. So their Coloradan agent here, and Couric and Soechtig by way of conspiracy, did commit a serious federal felony if the circumstances they have described are correct.
Now, will they be prosecuted for it, or will they get the David Gregory treatment? Almost certainly the latter. But there is a technical violation of the law, and otherwise good people have been sent to federal prison for these kinds of violations. There is no “good intentions” exception to these laws, and people with good intentions are routinely prosecuted. But I doubt those involved with “Under the Gun” will be, and that’s because elites take care of their own. One thing it’s not is justice.
Jun 3, 2016
According to Ammoland, Stephanie Soechtig admitted in an interview with Lip TV that she sent a resident of Colorado to Arizona to buy firearms from a private seller. We had this issue come up before when Colin Goddard was working for Brady and was accused of the same thing. The crime is actually transporting the firearm back to your home state, not the purchase itself. The seller only commits a crime when the seller knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in his home state. For instance, if the guy pulls up and has Colorado tags, that could amount to such reasonable cause.
Colin Goddard claimed the firearm he purchased out-of-state was disposed of in that state, in which case there was no crime committed. Remember that a lot of the crimes that revolve around deception in a sale only apply if you deceive a licensee. If you tell a non-licensee that you’re from Arizona when you’re really from Colorado, that’s is not a crime. Until the person involved in the sale transports the firearms back to his home state, there is no crime.
That said, if the producers of this show did have the firearm transported back to Colorado, absolutely a federal crime was committed, and they should be forced to answer what happened to the firearms in question. Ammoland is correct that in that instance, the producers can be reached on conspiracy charges if they were involved in the plot, even if they did not bring the firearms back to Colorado themselves. So did they?
Jun 3, 2016
I keep saying that our opponents are not against money in politics, they are just against your money in politics. To that end, Bloomberg has bought up all the free add space in the Las Vegas market from September up to October and through the election:
This effectively prevents our side from being heard on Nevada’s Question 1. Bloomberg is using his billions to silence your voices. Our voices. We’re only going to win this with grassroots, folks. We simply do not have the money to play this game at Bloomberg’s level. We have to beat him with people on the ground. If we don’t, he’s going to come back again, and again, and again, and keep playing this game until we lose half a dozen more states like California, New York, and New Jersey are lost.
So what can you do if you’re a Nevada, or even I dare say a California gun owner?
- Talk to people and make sure they understand this has nothing to do with background checks. They want the registry they can get out of all that 4473 data.
- Make sure they know Bloomberg’s proposal means even temporary transfers are unlawful. It’s literally illegal to hand a friend a gun except under limited exception.
- The proposed law is entirely unenforceable and will only result in widespread lawlessness.
- Criminals have no trouble getting around background checks. California has all the laws these people want and more, and their violent crime rate is still higher than Nevada’s.
Also, make sure people know this is Mike Bloomberg meddling in their affairs. This is no grassroots movement of people. It’s a carefully crafted illusion that you can buy if you have enough money like he does. The entire gun control movement is funded by one megalomaniacal rich billionaire who can’t mind his own damned business. If they don’t believe that, then why won’t Everytown reveal what percentage of their funding comes from Mike Bloomberg.