Anti-Gun Folks – Page 43 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Schumer Still Trying for UFA Expansion

Schumer is still talking about floating an expansion to the Undetectable Firearms ActÂ when it comes before the Senate today:

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said in an interview Friday he plans to separately propose expanding the law to require that all firearms have integral metal components detectable by X-ray machines.

I haven’t seen Schumer’s proposal yet, and I don’t think anyone else has either, but I’d be willing to bet it would ban a number of guns currently on the market. Their target in all of this has always been to ban polymer framed pistols like the Glock, or to cause some other issue that just makes engaging in the gun manufacturing business difficult.

h/t to Jacob, who notes that Schumer’s not even keeping up with technology.

New England Mayor on Gun Control Groups

A mayor in New England speaks out on MAIG’s efforts to control gun ~~crime~~ owners in a column called “Enough is Enough.” You might want to read his take on MAIG before commenting…

On a related note, Thirdpower notes some fuzzy math by MAIG and its claimed membership in Illinois.

Multiple Gun Control PACs, Same Backer

I guess the gun control groups have decided that the best strategy they have now is to create multiple groups to create the appearance of increased support for gun control. When I saw this headline from this morning, I was confused:

Gabrielle Giffords sets up gun control PAC

Giffords already set up a gun control PAC. The newest gun control PAC headed by the same couple as the other gun control PAC is using a new name – the Rights and Responsibilities PAC.

Enlisting Retired and Former Military

A lot of blogs have been talking about this article in Esquire that’s just full of fail. I don’t really have anything to say about people who ignorantly prattle on about Heller and the law when they clearly have actually read none of it. My only commentary is that there’s been a renewed push across the gun control spectrum to recruit military members to speak out against the rights of Americans, and betray their oaths. A few weeks ago it was Mark Kelly, and it’s also been Bloomberg as well. My guess is this is fruit of that effort.

UPDATE: More here.

The Answer is Easy: The Are the Enemy

Why the NFL chose to reject an ad from Daniel Defense while taking them from Bloomberg’s group of criminal mayors.Â They showed their true feelings when they banned guns from NFL games and started doing security screening like it was an airport. Screw those people. Not going to watch. Not going to go. They are already thieves for shaking down the public to get stadium funding on the taxpayer dime. Now they are actively working to undermine American freedom.

The ad rejected by the NFL is very well done, IMHO. It’s definitely not a hard sell:

MAIG Pulls Gov’t Workers to the Private Sector

Now this is really funny. When a gun owner in the Sunshine State started using sunshine laws to get ahold of the communications between a public worker whose main job was actually to work for MAIG, Bloomberg pulled her into the private sector to work for him directly so those pesky taxpayers can’t see how he’s trying to force their government to do his bidding.

It seems that Floridaâ€™s public records laws were a little too much for NYC Mayor Bloombergâ€™s anti-gun Mayors Against ilLEGAL Guns to bear. At the end of her one year contract, the former Orlando city employee who actually worked for MAIG became a direct employee of MAIG.

Go check out All Nine Yards for more on the latest round of emails they turned up from the tax-funded Bloomberg employee. He seems to enjoy their hypocrisy on the amazing benefit of federal regulation when it comes to gun control, but their horror at the idea of federal interference when it comes to protecting Second Amendment rights.

Carving Your Turkey Jerry Miculek Style

Of course, for hunters who don’t think their hunting guns are in any real danger should note this reaction from our favorite Brady Board member, who has been on a tear of inanity lately, and who I must credit for pointing me to this video:

The thing is, he mentioned at about 2:20 or so into the video that you could see the damage done to the soft tissue. Since we all know that no one is going to “carve” a turkey by shooting the raw bird, this reference must have been for how well one can inflict soft tissue damage on a human being. Or did he mean to a deer perhaps? Does one want to do a lot of soft tissue damage to a deer? What would be left of the deer for eating? I don’t know. I’m just asking. Why would he mention this at all? A .460 Magnum is a powerful gun all right. He made his point but he had to carry on for 4 minutes showing the slow motion video of the turkey exploding over and over again. I’m sure the video was meant to be funny. It’s pathetic actually.

In the interest in developing some holiday season understanding between the two sides, I will describe all this to our pearl-clutching opponent. The “humor” is that as soon as one mentions they have a rifle chambered in .460 Weatherby Magnum, which few would disagree deserves application of the term “elephant gun,” it becomes immediately apparent to the astute viewer what is about to transpire if the intended target is a turkey. That is, what we would technically call “way too much gun” for the intended target. The end result does not disappoint. All living things have what we would refer to as “soft tissue.” Hunters are very aware of what rifle bullets do to “soft tissue.” That your brain immediately drew the analogy to “human” says a lot more about you than it does about us, or Jerry Miculek, doesn’t it?

Latest MAIG Mayor in Trouble

I meant to post this yesterday, but forgot. For anyone who hasn’t yet heard about the video of the Monticello, NY Mayors Against Illegal Guns member who was arrested recently, well, you should go check out some of the video at Miguel’s blog.

However, for those of you who don’t have the time to run a video that runs about an hour and a half, I watched it for you. Here are the extra special highlights:

When the first officer comes in, Mayor Gordon Jenkins (who identifies himself several times in the video) reminds the officer that he got the officer his job in the first place and that he knows his family. It’s not really a coherent attempt at intimidation since the Mayor, to me, comes off as quite belligerent at this point.

Then, it gets really weird. He goes on about how he doesn’t care if he dies tomorrow before issuing a warning to the officer: “Be careful how you f***in f*** with people…just be careful how you f***in f*** with people.” That still falls into the belligerent territory in my opinion. However, when it starts getting into what people might interpret as real threats is where it gets interesting: “Down the road, you’re going to say, ‘Why did I do that to that man?’ and you’re going to pay for it.”

After ranting about the time he might serve in jail, he says this about his plans for his release: “Mayor or dog catcher, I’m going to be on your ass.”

The Mayor is held for a long time because they wanted to notify the Police Chief about his arrest so he could handle it. Unfortunate, the Chief was out hunting. When the Mayor is informed that the Chief is unavailable at that very moment, the Mayor’s response is this: “The chief’s got to pay for this.”

After a bit more time talking about how the officers “got to pay for this,” an officer finally asked him if he was issuing a threat. The Mayor claims he was not issuing a threat. However, the next major action in the video is the Mayor getting up out of his chair and using his free arm to rip a clock off the wall and throw it rather violently toward the front desk just outside of the room he’s held in. Seconds later, he kicks the chair he was sitting in across the room. According to an officer who came in to check on him, the clock was broken during the Mayor’s fit.

Keep in mind that this Mayor is actually due in court soon for his 2012 arrest for hitting and injuring a local police officer in an altercation outside of his beauty supply store. And, yet, MAIG still proudly boasts him as an ally as of today on their website.

Then again, this is apparently what Mayor Gordon Jenkins thinks about the importance of his public service as an elected official: “The f***in’ mayorship don’t mean nothing.”

Against Basic Tenets of American Justice

I do believe that it is, in fact, a basic tenet of not only American justice, but of English justice, that when one is found not guilty of a charge, that means all the rights, privileges and immunities of citizenship are fully restored. Sadly, it seems our opponents in the gun control movement don’t even believe in that:

The irony of all of this is that he has already killed someone with a gun but he got his guns and his rights back after the trial. Why? Because that is what the gun rights extremists want. They think it’s perfectly fine for someone like George Zimmerman to be able to possess and carry lethal weapons around even after that person has already killed someone with a gun.

He was found not guilty of the crime of murder by a jury of his peers. So yes, that is what I want. I want people who are found not guilty to not be punished by the law as if they had been. If that makes me a “gun rights extremist,” I’ll wear the banner proudly. I tend to think that just makes me a believer in the basic tenets of justice and human rights.

Regardless of what kind of trouble Zimmerman has found himself in since his acquittal (to me it almost seems like he wants to go to jail) he has not yet been found guilty of any crime serious enough to warrant deprivation of rights. Do the leaders of the gun control movement really want to argue that people found not guilty of crimes should be punished anyway? Do you really want to argue that someone found not guilty of a crime should be found guilty anyway, just because you know he’s guilty? If you think that, pardon me if I do question your patriotism, and belief in the basic legal institutions that have served this country for more than two centuries.

Philadelphia Bans 3D Gun Printing

It is now illegal to hit “Print …” in Philadelphia, if the thing you loaded was a design for a firearm.

Which is interesting, because the author of the bill, Kenyatta Johnson, isnâ€™t aware of of any local gun-printing 3-D printers.Â â€Itâ€™s all pre-emptive,â€ says Johnsonâ€™s director of legislation Steve Cobb. â€œItâ€™s just based upon internet stuff out there.â€

It’s not “preemptive,” it’s just stupid. It’s up there in terms of ignorance with burning witches. It’s not going to preempt anybody, because no one is going to be dissuaded from hitting “Print …” if they are seriously intending to cause harm. It is also quite arguably, and ironically, given Johnson’s quote, preempted by state law banning cities and local communities from regulating firearms.

It is not unusual for people who don’t understand new technology to be frightened by it. That goes double if you’re a politician. The same primitive fears of the unknown were responsible for all manner of laws when the automobile first appeared, or really any new technology first appeared on the scene. Life among the barbarians, I suppose.