Category: Gun Rights

I thought this young man did an admirable job of handling Morgan.

The Sportsman Channel and NRA are launching a launching a live daily talk show. Cam is a great spokesperson, and I can think of few other people I’d rather have representing the Second Amendment to the public at large.

Thought pump action shotguns would be safe? Think again.

I heard from a reader that MoveOn is raising $175,000 for “civil action” on gun control and they are 39% there. I don’t think folks can reasonably say there’s no longer any money in this issue against us. That is changing, and it is very dangerous. We’ve benefitted greatly by our opponents lack of funding in the past decade.

Meanwhile, the Administration is planning an end run around NRA. Sounds like former lobbyist Richard Feldman was at the meeting with Biden, NRA, and the other gun groups. Who Feldman was representing, I don’t know, but he was pre-conceding private sales on behalf of whoever he was there for (probably himself.) I would remind folks that we outlaw private sales of handguns in Pennsylvania, and that hasn’t stopped gun control groups from seeking more restrictions. Why, before we’ve even really locked horns, just concede something out of the gate? Clearly Feldman went to the John Boehner school of negotiation.

Over at the Volokh Conspiracy, Dave Kopel opines on real gun free zones, and fake gun free zones. I wrote a similar article on how gun free zones might be constitutionally created back in 2010, borrowing the term “Practicing the Three S’s,” which in the usual context means “Shoot, Shovel, and Shutup,” an old saying coined by ranchers about how to deal with wolves (which were protected). In my substituted context, it stands for “Substitution, Screening, and Storage.”

(this post is called how we recycle content on a Friday when I’m in the office working the day shift) ;)

Wyoming is paving the way:

In fact, under the proposed bill, anyone who tried to enforce a federal gun ban could be charged with a felony. The Wyoming Attorney General’s office would also be permitted to defend any state resident against a federal gun ban.

What worries me is that I hear talk of civil war from otherwise sensible people if much of what is being spoken of comes to pass. I’m a firm believer in the rule of law, and I think actions should have the legitimacy of law, which means acting through state legislatures, and not a bunch of lone wolves shooting it out with the feds. This is still a union of 50 separate sovereigns, and there are further actions that can be taken even if the face of a devastating loss at the federal level.

But all law is ultimately force. Men with guns will be sent to enforce those laws. This isn’t any symbolic Firearms Freedom Act. Wyoming lawmakers here are proposing a law with penalties. Felony penalties. Penalties that will have to be enforced. Like all law enforcement actions, how it plays out depends on how serious the players are. What happens when the Wyoming State Police decide to go enforce this law against other men, men with guns, who think they are also the law? This doesn’t have to escalate to violence, but it could. People underestimate how much of our federal system is built upon willing cooperation. The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution doesn’t mean jack if the states are unwilling to enforce federal law, and not willing to allow the feds to enforce it. I fully support this idea as a next step in the event we take a devastating loss. But let us not let it come to that.

USA Today notes that the assault will come Tuesday.

Holder will also hold a separate meeting with some of the nation’s top gun sellers, including the megaretailer Wal-Mart, to discuss the issue. Wal-Mart had initially turned down an invitation from the Obama administration to participate because the company said senior executives were unavailable to travel.

We must keep the pressure on Wal-Mart. I can easily stop shopping there. I know it’s hard for a lot of you folks, but Amazon Prime is pretty damned good, and there’s also Target. If Wal-Mart decides they don’t need us, I say screw them, we don’t need them. At the very least, if you can’t boycott Wal-Mart if they play ball with Obama, don’t buy guns or ammo there.

We need to beat these bastards back, and turn turn around and continue to free New York and Chicago. Don’t just beat Bloomberg and Rahm, they have to pay for this. They will pay for this by being forced to respect the Second Amendment. You’re part of America, whether you like that or not.

My apologies for being offline most of the day, but today was an in-office day where I had stuff that needed to get done while I was there. Tonight was a club meeting, and I had Bitter spending the day printing letter templates she pre-wrote. As legislative chair, I had to give my report. I had felt my report was getting kind of dry and uninteresting. What a difference a month makes. I got what I needed from the Board for further action, partly thanks to the vote of confidence from the previous occupant of my offices (both of them) vote of confidence.

My idea was to give people a bit of a helping hand in communicating with lawmakers. The response was quite a bit more than I expected. Usually it’s hard to get people to take that next step, but they did at my club tonight. This is where the hope meets the change, I think, only not in the way the Administration likely wants. People are scared. They should be. Everything we’ve achieved in the past 12 years is on the line now. I will crawl over broken glass to do whatever I can to beat this back, and if we do, I don’t want to stop there. There have to be consequences to our opponents for raising the stakes.

Reading the gun control measures specifically cited in NY Governor Andrew Cuomo’s State of the State report, it reminds me so much of what happened to Massachusetts gun owners in the late `90s. If you were a legal gun owner who had your state-issued firearms identification card, it was good for life unless you were convicted of a disqualifying offense and it was revoked. Then, one day, the legislature told gun owners that “valid for life” really meant “valid until we want more money from you.”

In New York’s case, it’s the same for grandfathering. One day, gun owners were told that they could keep the regular capacity magazines they already owned for their guns. Now, they are being told that those magazines will no longer be legal:

Because magazines are not generally stamped with a serial number or other mark that would identify the date of manufacture, it is virtually impossible for law enforcement to determine whether a large capacity magazine was manufactured prior to 1994, and, as aresult, we effectively have no ban in New York State. In order to fix this problem, Governor Cuomo will propose tightening our assault weapons ban and eliminating large capacity magazines regardless of date of manufacture.

The same is being said for pistol licenses. “Good for life” will no longer mean what you think it means. It means constant renewal, even when you’re not convicted, arrested, or even accused of any disqualifying offense, which presumably also means more money for the government.

Currently, licenses for handguns are issued by the county in which the gun owner lives. With few exceptions, licenses are valid for life. As a result, while certain checks—for example, checks against criminal convictions, involuntary commitment records,convictions for crimes of domestic violence, open orders of protection—are run at the time a license is issued, once a license is obtained, there is no subsequent check to determine whether the holder is still eligible to own a gun. Governor Cuomo will propose a single standard across the state to ensure that appropriate checks can be run to bar convicted felons and other prohibited people from possessing firearms.

There are other issues mentioned, but none in quite as much detail as the two above. I’ll let the folks who specialize in NY gun laws break down what the rest of the big push from the Governor will mean in practical terms.

Oh, and I should mention as a warning to New York gun owners: When Massachusetts converted their firearms identification cards from “good for life” to renewable, the state admits that they didn’t bother to tell thousands of gun owners. Even years after it changed, the state pro-gun group would get phone calls from guys who were just stopped with rounds of shotgun ammunition in the car or coming in from a day of hunting, and they were promptly charged with having an expired FID card – even though the card they held said it was good for life. Oh yes, innocent people who think they are following the law will be hurt by these changes if they go through.

So, New Yorkers, get involved with your state groups and try to get a repeat of Illinois.

On November 17, 1993, I was not yet 20 years old. That was the day the federal assault weapons ban was voted on (See my History of the Assault Weapons Ban). I had a lot going on in my life then. My mother’s cancer had just been deemed terminal, and she would die shortly after the ban went into effect. I was also a sophomore in college. While I was aware of the debate, and definitely opposed to any ban, I did not think anything like that could pass in this country.

“How could they pass that? It’s clearly a violation of the Second Amendment,” I thought.

I knew enough about guns to know the difference between a semi-auto rifle and a machine gun. I had attended gun shows with an uncle in the late 80s, and was corrected when asked about the machine guns.

“No, those aren’t machine guns. They are civilianized. They only fire semi-automatically.”

“You should get one.”

“No, that’s a commie rifle, boy.”

It was a Chinese Norinco, which can’t be imported anymore. He was looking for M1 Carbines, which I recall were a cheap and plentiful back then. My Uncle got a few M1 Carbines during the last hellish period gun owners went through, and he wasn’t buying them strictly for defense against criminals, if you know what I mean. The supposed “insurrectionist” theory of the Second Amendment is always how I understood it growing up, even though I came from a house that did not have firearms.

I spent most of that time believing it just couldn’t be passed, and even if it was passed, surely it has to be unconstitutional. I had no idea that it could be, and that it was a reality in California already. I was wrong. When the Assault Weapons Ban passed, and went into effect, that was the point that I became concerned about this issue to start paying attention to it, and the more I learned, the more angry I got. This culminated in my first purchase of a semi-auto Romanian AK-47 variant in 2000 for about $300. I bought 1000 rounds of ammo with it for 80 bucks. I joined the NRA for the first time. After that, I learned there were people who did not believe the Second Amendment was any individual right at all. Then I learned of the lies and deceptions on the part of gun control advocates. I read a lot of papers and publications by Dave Kopel, Dave Hardy, Steve Halbrook, and Don Kates, all of whom I have subsequently met since I took up blogging. Their scholarship was instrumental in bringing me to where I am now.

My journey from concerned citizen to activist took from 1994 to 2006 or so. We’re not going to have that kind of time today. It took a serious loss in 1994 to wake me up to the fact that the Second Amendment was actually controversial, and that there were forces at work who wanted to see it redacted from the Constitution, and it’s true intent ignored. The threat we’re facing today is more severe than in 1994. Confiscation is being openly discussed. Don’t think it can’t happen, and spend twelve years to really get involved. If gun owners today, especially people who like black rifles, are as complacent as I was, we could be facing a meltdown, and one which will take decades to fix, if it can be fixed at all. Don’t be like I was.

UPDATE: I forgot to mention Clayton’s scholarship, which I didn’t find until I was already pretty deep in the rabbit hole. Probably somewhere around the 2003-2004 timeframe.