June 2016 – Page 6 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Terror Attack in Florida

Last report I saw was more than 50 dead. Being that this is unambiguously a terrorist attack, we’re probably not going to suffer being blamed the same as after Sandy Hook. People view terrorism differently than random attacks. It would appear the shooter was a “known wolf,” and had previously been under FBI investigation. Early on I was wondering why the police took so long to go in. After Columbine, the doctrine stopped being “wait for the SWAT guys to show up.” It appears in this case he may have been wearing a suicide vest or facsimile.

Meanwhile, in LA, “terrorist,” or “careful when you leave America?” Indiana plates with a trunk full of guns and tannerite? Sounds like the latter to me.

We will undoubtedly fall under attack and get the finger pointed at us for this. The media is already doing it. The obvious threat coming is the “terror watch list” bill, because it would be most relevant to this case. Make no mistake, they will attempt to blame us for this and get whatever they think they can get, but “terror watch list” is the obvious line of attack. Remember, the courts don’t think this is a right, and will likely ignore the serious due process issues with denying people fundamental constitutional rights based on being on a secret government list. We’ll have to fight. Don’t depend on the courts to save us here.

Weekly Gun News – Edition 39

Happy Friday! Time to clear the tabs again.

Member of DNC Platform Committee doesn’t think anyone should have a gun.

Clayton Cramer examines “Gunning for America,” which we talked about here. Clayton notes in the paper: “The Gunning of America Builds on Sand.”

Notice how women’s magazines are running all these anti-gun articles? I don’t believe this is a coincidence. It’s got to be someone’s campaign. If this sage advice had been followed.

Civil Rights victory in New Hampshire! They are no longer allowed to deny permits on the basis of not having one from their home state. We happen to know the parties involved in this case. New Hampshire was a good option for New Jersey people to be able to carry in other states, and now it is again!

More evidence that Katie Couric’s documentary “Under the Gun” is just a propaganda piece masquerading as a documentary.

John Lott: “Four ways Hillary Clinton will work to end gun ownership as president”

The Guardian profiles Cody Wilson.

Gun related stocks tank on news that NICS numbers are softening. At some point the gun bubble is going to burst, but if you look at the numbers, this is still the best April on record.

Crime drops when NRA comes to town. Happens every year. You’d think based on what the anti-gun groups say, the city would be rife with shootings over parking spaces and gun accidents.

Dennis Henigan: “Guns Make Killing Easy.” Of course, the flip side to that is they also make it easy to defend yourself. That old saying “God may have created man, but it was Sam Colt that made them equal.”

Boston Globe: “Katie Couricâ€™s editing of â€˜Under the Gunâ€™ seems to have backfired.”

Yeah, it’s a sad truth thatÂ if you watch gun handling at the NRA convention, you’ll start to wonder how accidental shootings are so rare. I’ve always told myself there are probably a lot of non-gun folks who come to ooh and ah. Yes, that sounds comforting.

Hillary Clinton won’t say whether there’s a constitutional right to carry a firearm. Almost certainly she’ll put people on the Supreme Court who will say there isn’t one, if they don’t just overturn Heller outright.

Don’t for a minute let anyone tell you Hillary isn’t flatly against the Second Amendment.

Brian Anse Patrick has a few unkind words to say about ~~“Arming America”~~ “The Gunning of America”

Hot Air: “Remember when Obama lectured Kimberly Corban on firearm safety? Well, her story saved this womanâ€™s life”

The Ivory ban is going through, but it looks like there’s some exception for firearms.

Denying fundamental constitutional rights based on browser history. Obama is a master of “Let me argue against this stereotype of what you believe rather than addressing the real issues.”

Off Topic:

Slaying Daesh: An American Advisor in Iraq.

Not all news from New Jersey is bad

Scott Bach wins one in New Hampshire for out-of-staters.

Guide to the Gun Nut Vacation

I was pleasantly surprised to catch a link on Instagram from Colonial Williamsburg advertising “A CW Guide for Gun Enthusiasts.”

What? A general family vacation spot specifically advertising they would be happy to host people who enjoy the shooting sports? Love it.

If you’re looking for a family vacation spot this year, then maybe check out their entire daily itinerary geared just for gun nuts. It sounds like an enjoyable day. (I’ve never been, so I can’t vouch for it.)

Peruta v. San Diego Loses En Banc

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 alsoÂ 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.

“Under the Gun” Director Stephanie Soechtig Admit to Federal Crime

I mentioned a few days agoÂ that Katie Couric and Stephanie Soechtig may not have necessarilyÂ 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.Â 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. Â I’m happy to report I am not disappointed!Â 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 …Â who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in …Â 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.

Big Money Going to Maine Ballot Fight

Bloomberg is dumping 3 million into the ballot fight we have going in Maine. I appreciate that the Associated Press was kind enough to note:

“Two gun safety groups in Maine are getting more than $3 million from a nonprofit backed by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg in preparation for a big gun control measure on the November ballot.”

The were jerks to call them “gun safety groups” instead of “gun control groups,” but they did note that this is Bloomberg’s effort, and that this is a gun control measure. Everytown has gone to great lengths to try to push money man behind the scenes, and shake off the image that this is meddling by a New York City billionaire. Don’t let them get away with it. Make sure everyone knows what this is, and that this fight is not actually about background checks.

Clayton Cramer Publishes Paper Refuting “The Gunning of America”

Clayton Cramer has a new paper out which examines “The Gunning of America,”Â which we talked aboutÂ here. He doesn’t go into great detail to look at the research footnotes, but perhaps that is not strictly necessary, as he mentions “The Gunning of America Builds on Sand,” noting that the author started the book with the assumption that Michael Bellesiles “Arming America” was correct! Clayton was instrumental in bringing Bellesiles academic fraud to light, and notes the book was “An Almost Unprecedented Historical Fraud,” in this new paper.

The rest of this article could be spent examining Haagâ€™s footnotes in the methodical (some might say, obsessive way) that I deconstructed Michael Bellesilesâ€™ ARMED AMERICA and eventually helped others to do the same to his career. But this article focuses on Haagâ€™s presupposition that renders the validity of the rest of her research worthy of careful study, instead of simple acceptance: was American gun culture an antebellum creation in response to clever marketing by early industrial gun makers such as Colt, Remington, and Winchester? Haag never directly addresses Bellesilesâ€™ claim, simply using nearly every source as evidence in support of this theory.

Proving the existence or absence of a pre-existing gun culture presents an interesting problem. How do you define gun culture? Haag at point distinguishes â€œthe â€˜ordinary shooterâ€™â€ from â€œthe â€˜gun crankâ€™â€. â€œThe latter… was a customer with a deep psychological bond with his gun. This was a transition from imagining a customer who needed guns but didnâ€™t especially want them to a customer who wanted guns but didnâ€™t especially need them.â€44

Fortunately, Michael Bellesiles arrayed a list of sources that demonstrated a strong gun culture well before the industrial gun makers started their marketing. But (as usual) he falsely claimed the opposite. His claim was that most Americans, even on the frontier, according to this astonishing claim, did not hunt until the mid-1830s, when a small number of wealthy Americans chose to ape their upper class British counterparts. An even more amazing claim is that until 1848, when Samuel Colt mass marketed the revolver, violence between whites was somewhat unusual, and murder was rare.

As always, read the whole thing. Someone might want to consider taking the time to look up a few footnotes and see if her research pans out. You’ll notice on the book page, a lot of academics and journalists have spoken favorably of the work, but we know theyÂ won’t bother to do any peer review because they like the conclusion.

Bloomberg Piles on the Hillary Train to Save Her

Hillary is starting to feel the Bern ahead of the California primary, with some polls showing Sanders pulling ahead. I’m cheering for Bernie. I worry he might actually be harder to beat in the general election than Hillary, but I think we have to worry less about the Joe Biden switcheroo if Bernie can take the race outright. That’s probably why Obama is endorsing Hillary.

I’m also cheering Bernie because Bloomberg’sÂ gun control groups have endorsed Hillary Clinton, like that comes with more than a few thousand votes nationwide.Â You can read their article in the Sacramento Bee:

Our litmus test for candidates is that simple. Do they side with the public, or with the gun lobby, whose vision is at odds with creating a safer country?

Oh, that is rich. NRA has five million members, and generally speaking is supported in increments of 25 dollars from its mostly-not-rich members.

Everytown and Mom’s Demand Action is funded almost entirely by a single megalomaniacal billionare, and suddenly they are the public? The gun control movement was dying before Bloomberg came along and flushed it with fresh cash, and it was dying because the publicÂ wasn’t engaged enough in the issue to keep these organizations alive.

I’ll be cheering for Bernie tomorrow. A Bernie win would show their endorsement isn’t worth much, even in a Dem primary.

Did “Under the Gun” Also Violate Federal Law?

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 haveÂ 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?