Category: Gun Rights

It looks like, for now at least, air gun shooters in the UK are safe:

“The home secretary is not persuaded by any further change in firearm legislation at the moment and that is something we disagree with,” he added.

“We have to tackle the scourge of air weapons and, frankly, existing legislation is out of date and too confusing. Our position is: We do not care who does it, whether it is done in London or Scotland, but done it must be.”

As part of the campaign launched yesterday, adverts, posters and leaflets highlighting the consequences of using the weapons will be used across the country.

It is supported by the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland, Crimestoppers, Gun Control Network, Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and Scottish Target Shooting Federation.

I wouldn’t count on this position of the Home Secretary to last if the groups mentioned can exert any significant political pressure for more restrictions.  This is a useful lesson for American shooters, about letting the camel’s nose under the tent.  There is one US state that requires licensing to purchase and possess air guns, and that is New Jersey.  Some airsoft pistols and rifles could be considered assault firearms under New Jersey’s law as well.  So much for Action Airgun, a version of IPSC competition that uses air guns instead of powder guns.  In New Jersey you’re just as regulated as the powder gun shooters.

There’s no gun that will be safe once you let them start restricting any gun.

This time the White House is beating down Hillary’s suggestion that we need to renew the ban.

After meeting with Mexican President Felipe Calderón, Clinton said that reinstating the U.S. ban on assault weapons—which was passed in 1994 and expired in 2004—is one step this country could take to curb the flow of guns to Mexico’s drug cartels. “These military-style weapons don’t belong on anybody’s street,” Clinton told NBC. Within hours, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters that he was unaware of “any plans” to push for such a ban—even though Obama had backed one during last year’s campaign.

I think the problem the Democrats are facing is that they’ve been used to being able to sing platitudes about banning assault weapons with little or no consequence.  Now every time someone well placed in the Administration opens their yap about assault weapons, Bushmaster gets another couple of months of backorder, and NRA no doubt signs up a lot of new members.  That has to scare the hell out of the White House.

Because of efforts in Congress, it’s unlikely a ban is going to end up passed this Congress, but we still have a lot of work.  We need to work on two fronts.  One on the political front, to ensure that in 2010, we cut the Democrats numbers, and two, on the shooting front, that all these people buying AR-15s, and many of them will be new buyers, get it out to the range to shoot it.  It would be great if we could turn the surge in sales into hundreds of new high-power shooters.

It is indeed a happy birthday.  Kansas House and Senate have passed a right to keep and bear arms constitutional amendment:

A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and state, for lawful hunting and recreational use, and for any other lawful purpose.

Better part is that it passed 39-1 in the Senate, and 116-9 in the House.  Now it goes to the voters for approval, which it will likely win.  If the anti-gun groups choose to fight this battle, ballot initiative fights are expensive as hell.  This must not be a good day at Brady headquarters.  Definitely not a good day for the Kansas Chapter. Ooops, looks like they don’t have one.  What a pity.  NRA has a state association in Kansas.

A crime to:

Amends the Criminal Code of 1961. Provides that it is unlawful for any person to store or leave, within premises under his or her control, a firearm if the person knows or has reason to believe that a minor under the age of 18 (rather than 14) years who does not have a Firearm Owners Identification Card or who is not serving in the military is likely to gain access to the firearm without the lawful permission of the minor’s parent, guardian, or person having charge of the minor unless the firearm is secured.

This bill also “Eliminates the provision that the firearm may be placed in some location that a reasonable person would believe would be secure from a minor.”  That means if junior gets the gun, you’re liable.  This makes owning a firearm an automatic hazard, whether you’re responsible or not.

Good thing the anti-gunners can’t even get traction in Illinois.  This was defeated 62 to 54.

This doesn’t bode well chances of national passage of the same measure if it can’t pass in Obama’s home state of Illinois.  Just to understand what the consequences of this measure is, it cost me 35 dollars to get TD’s FAL from Michigan because I had to pay an FFL for their time to handle the transfer for me.  I don’t know of any FFL in the area who will do a transfer for under 30 dollars, and most of them are charging 40 and 50 dollars for a transfer.

The price is high because in Pennsylvania, it is unlawful to transfer a handgun without going through an FFL or the local Sheriff.  People still do it, but they are, most of them unknowingly, committing a second degree misdemeanor.  Dealers don’t typically want a lot transfer business.  In other states, dealers don’t deal with transfers often, so are happy to take ten or twenty bucks to cover their time and trouble, and don’t have to worry about the opportunity cost of processing a lot of transfer applications. 

That dynamic changes once everyone who wants to transfer a gun needs to come to you to do it.  That ends up cutting into selling people guns.  So what do you do?  Jack the price of a transfer up to reduce the opportunity cost.  Other dealers will be in the same boat and do the same thing.  And who can compete to lower the price?  It’s not like you can go to the ATF, get an FFL, and start a transfer processing business out of your living room.  Clinton put and end to that.  To get a dealer FFL, you need to run a business with regular store hours.

Banning private sales would make transferring firearms under certain conditions economically infeasible, which is probably the point.  It’s not like gang members will care, and suddenly start process their gats through local FFLs.

Clayton Cramer reports.  I figured they would have already had such a law.

It looks like they will be bringing the D.C. Voting Rights Act to the floor of the House soon.  My prediction is that it will pass with the Senate pro-gun amendment.  With Fenty caving on the gun issue, it just seems likely to me.  If they already had the votes, I’m not sure you’d see groups running ads like this.

The Washington Post is busy running letters on the topic today.  Just keep scrolling through.  You can find Chris Cox’s here, after three letters in opposition to passing the Voting Rights Act with the NRA amendments.

From Michael Bane:

If you’ve been following the news over the last year or so, Canada’s not crazy about this wild-and-crazy free speech stuff, especially if it offends Muslims, which is why best-selling author Mark Steyn got charged with “hate speech” in Canada for his wildly poplar book AMERICA ALONE, which speculated that Europe, including England, would be Islamic countries within 20 years if for no other reason that demographics. So the Canadians, tired of the endless, unregulated speech pouring over the border from the south, petition the United States government to place strict regulation on speech, lest it slip over the border and annoy the LeBatts crowd, maybe licensing and strictly monitoring connections to the Internet, prior restraint of radio and television broadcasts to give the U.S. government a chance to make sure the content is Canada A-Okay, etc.

Should we do that to help our Poor Cold Brothers and Sisters?

The Federal Lands Omnibus bill will be coming up again in the House today under the special rules that does not allow amendments, but requires a 2/3rd super-majority for passage.  Last time it was up, it failed by two votes.  I alluded to this somewhat when I excoriated GOA over their reaction to it.

The Democrats are back, and with the same suspension of rules, which means they must have picked up the two votes they need to pass it without the pro-gun amendments.  I am not optimistic about how this is going to go, but we will see.

This bill will vastly expand the amount of federal land that is under control of the Department of the Interior, and add several new National Parks.  This means the amount of federal land where functional firearms are contraband will be increasing greatly.  This should demonstrate to folks that while we have many pro-gun Democrats as friends in Congress, the Democratic leadership is still very much against us.

From the Sherrif’s Office in Placer County, California:

Lt. Mark Reed, who reviews concealed weapons applications in Placer County, said local law enforcement often recommend alternatives to carrying a gun. For example, he said, many people apply because they carry around lots of money as part of their job. “If they could use a courier service, that’d be safer. … If I can offer a safer alternative, it negates the ‘good cause.’ “

This is exactly why you can’t have government officials deciding who does and who doesn’t get to exercise constitutional rights.  Can’t issue that battered wife a concealed carry permit, since a safer alternative is to sell her house and move out of state and away from her ex-husband.  Why give one to the gay couple?  It’s safer just to stay home, and maybe not look so gay.  But can we change this?  Hell no.  O.J. might get a pistol license.

Do California officials really believe there are more potential OJs out there than Deanna Skykes?