Anti-Gun Folks – Page 45 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Defining Guns Down

Bob Owens noticed that Shannon Watts, the head of Moms Demand Action, put out a new definition for the guns the group wants to ban: “An assault weapon enables humans to shoot 10 rounds in one minute.”

Bob goes through and provides video examples of all types of guns that can shoot 10 rounds in one minute or less.

That means guns that Moms Demand Action want to see banned include lever actions, bolt actions, and even single-shot shotguns. He provides plenty of evidence that shows all can load and fire 10 rounds or more in less than a minute.

WaPo Says Bloomberg “Misleading” in His Virginia Attack Ads

Give credit to the WaPo for this one, they just rated Bloomberg’s effort to attack Ken Cuccinelli on gun rights 3 “Pinocchios” out of a possible 4. In fact, in their minds, these attack ads by anti-gunners should be considered to have “[s]ignificant factual error and/or obvious contradictions.”

They note that nothing that the ad complains about in regards to Cuccinelli’s record has anything to do with the murderers they show on the screen. Unfortunately, that won’t keep Bloomberg’s $3 million spend off the air.

Bigger Money in Virginia

Mike Bloomberg is putting nearly $3 million into Virginia’s elections across different races now. Politico is also reporting that Bloomberg has made smaller investments in lower level legislative races.

For those gun owners who say that they aren’t concerned about the gubernatorial winner because the legislature will keep the gun control threat at bay, this may possibly change your calculations.

Weekly White House Gun Control Meetings

The White House Office of Public Engagement, which is under Obama’s favorite aide, Valerie Jarrett, is still somewhat on top of gun control as a primary goal of this Administration.

They are hosting weekly meetings with Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Moms Demand Action, the Center for American Progress, Organizing for Action and Americans for Responsible Solutions in order to plan out the future of more gun control in the next 3 years.

Interestingly, it would seem that Vice President Joe Biden has either been sidelined for not getting “the job” done before, or he’s just lost interest in it since there is no path to federal legislation. The gun control groups have now made it very clear that they are steering clear of federal gun control and focusing on the states.

Changing the Tone of the Argument

VSSA looks at a comment that Virginia gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe made during a debate where he basically said he doesn’t care about what NRA or its members think about his positions. He’s running on an openly hostile platform for guns, a switch from what most Virginia Democrats have had to do in the past in order to be competitive.

Now, I realize at this point that the Virginia race was largely polling in one direction before the gun control groups really started pouring money in so they can claim the result is a verdict on gun control. However, it’s important to understand this shift in rhetoric from the candidate himself.

I think you’ll see more Democrats really run on outright hostility to gun owners and the most popular firearms in America because they’ll look at facts like Barak Obama winning two elections, Terry McAuliffe possibly winning purple Virginia, and the fact that gun owners couldn’t stop legislation in purple Colorado. Even with some high-profile consequences in Colorado, the Democrats are still in charge. It sent a message, but a limited one.

So, while some people may embrace the honesty of anti-gun people speaking out about their disdain for gun owning voters, is it really a “good” thing if we end up losing those elections?

Ignorance of History

I’ve seen the “civic duty” meme floating around gun control circles lately, with the conclusion that you should have to join the National Guard if you want a firearm. That’s what the founders intended, according to them. It ignores the reality that the National Guard was created by the Dick Act of 1903Â and was nothing at all like a militia system the founders would have understood. From Miguel’s quoting at Daily Kos:

If you truly believe in the founders intent, then the answer is yes, the intent of the Second Amendment was to codify a civic duty. Those duties arenâ€™t found in local gun clubs or so-called militia organizations, in their 20th century flavor. One place that civic duty can be found is in the National Guard.

Actually, the militia system our founders understood was closer to the local gun club than to the National Guard. To make matters worse for the historically challenged Kos contributor, the modern private militia groups they so derideÂ were something the founder had intimate familiarity with.Â Actually, the closest modern civic body that offers the best analogy the founder’s militia, at least in structure and operation, is your local volunteer fire company.

I appreciate why the gun control folks want to reframe the discussion, but I think a bare requirement to accomplish that is for them to familiarize themselves with the literature on this topic. I am no expert, by any means, but it wouldn’t take but a few days of reading to develop a good enough understanding to have a reasonable discussion. Should we revive the militia system of the founding generation? It’s an interesting question, and something fine to debate, but first you have to know what you’re talking about when you say that.

Big Anti-Gun Money in Virginia

I already saw comments and photos from friends in Northern Virginia that the Gabby Giffords PAC has spent lots of money on a constant stream of campaign mailers that practically accuse gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli of wanting to give away free guns to babies, terrorists, and domestic abusers.

Then word broke yesterday that Michael Bloomberg is dropping another $1.1 million in advertising into the state in just the final two weeks of the race. Politico notes that if Terry McAuliffe wins, he is a guarantee to be a very big Bloomberg ally on gun control.

They will always try to outspend us, and with someone like Bloomberg behind them, it will sometimes work. Fortunately, Colorado showed that sometimes we can also counter their big money by motivating voters in a big way. In fact, I would argue that the Colorado losses and the continued threat of more recalls there is why the gun control groups are going so big into the Virginia governor’s race. They can’t afford to lose something so high profile in another purple state, and they know it. Unfortunately, the polls look like they just might get that win they so desperately need to remain relevant unless Virginia voters really step up and turn out.

Brown Takes Heat from the Gun Haters

The Los Angeles Times is lambasting Brown’s decision to veto denying gun rights to people convicted of misdemeanor DUI:

Studies show that a gun owner with one misdemeanor conviction â€” such as a DUI â€” is five times more likely to commit a violent crime with a firearm than a gunner with no prior arrest record, according to Garen Wintemute, director of the UC Davis Violence Prevention Research Program.

I’m sure it would show a correlation between other lesser traffic offenses and violent crime as well. Does it translate that we should consider lesser traffic offenses as prohibiting? At what point do you just admit you’re trying to deny Second Amendment rights to as many people as humanly possible?

“I was just stunned,” Wintemute says. “He was just wrong on the facts. There is persuasive evidence out there. There are dozens of studies associating acute alcohol intoxication and a history of DUIs with the risk of committing future gun violence. That’s established beyond doubt.”

Instead of restricting their gun rights, why not just ban alcohol? It also raises the question as to why we only suspend their drivers license for 30-10 months for a first offense, and only 3 years for a third offense. And driving, according to the courts, is a privilege rather than a right. I would think the correlation between earning a DUI and eventually killing someone in an alcohol related traffic accident is much much higher than the correlation to future gun violence, and yet we don’t even deny them the “privilege” to drive for 5 years, let alone a lifetime prohibition.

If Garen Wintemute is unhappy with Jerry Brown, maybe I shouldn’t be so harsh on the guy. There’s points to be earned for disappointing the right people, and Wintemute is the kind of busybody who needs to learn to keep his nose out of other people’s lives and choices. It’s also pretty clear, by focusing on the gun issue, Wintemute’s motivation is hating on guns and gun owners, rather than concern for life. In 2010, 10,228 people were killed in alcohol-related traffic accidents in the United States. In that same year, 8,874 people were killed in gun-related homicides. I am not suggesting this means California needs to “get tough on crime” in terms or DUI, but it’s worth considering where some people’s priorities lie, and it’s not in saving lives.

A Potential Gold Mine

Judicial Watch seems to be doing a lot of heavy lifting when it comes to holding Mayor Bloomberg accountable.

The nonprofit, nonpartisan Judicial Watch reported that it filed a Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) lawsuit with the New York State Supreme Court requesting that the office of New York City’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg be ordered by a judge “to produce all records of communications between the Office of the Mayor, the director ofÂ Mayors Against Illegal GunsÂ (MAIG), and U.S. Vice President Joe Biden.

â€œWe have good reason to suspect that New York taxpayers have been forced to foot the bill for Mayor Bloombergâ€™s anti-gun group,â€ said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

All communication from the Mayor’s office should be public record. If Bloomberg spends his own money to advocate for gun control, well, that’s his First Amendment right as an American, but if he’s using his office to do so at taxpayer expense, we have a right to know.

“Grow the hell up.”

I have to say that I rather enjoyed this video that takes on the issue of anti-gunners justifying their infringement upon your rights because doing so makes them feel good.