Guns – Page 539 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Astroturfing

Earlier in the day, Carl from Chicago alerted me to an NPR interview that was going on with Paul Helmke, Robert Levy, and some unknown person being touted as a gun rights blogger. Noting that it looks like her blog was just getting started, that immediately raised suspicion that something wasn’t going to pass the smell test. How did they pick out some unknown blogger who is just getting started while ignoring the whole of us? The answer, would obviously be this person is not an unknown blogger, but a false flag; someone flying under the banner of being pro-Second Amendment while in truth being no such thing. Google shows the truth:

So it would seem that Tracee Larson is previously associated with the false flag operation American Hunters and Shooters Association. This woman has no credibility as a pro-gun spokesman, and it’s quite likely the NPR interviewers are aware of that. It’s also likely that perhaps Helmke either got to pick his opponents here, or it was arranged to be Â softball interview. What better people to use on the pro-gun side than Bob Levy, who endorses magazine restrictions, and Tracee Larson, who is an AHSA shill flying a false flag.

All so Paul could get away with saying police don’t use magazines that hold more than 10 rounds (which begs the question of why the ban exempt law enforcement), and conveniently gloss over the fact that this bill would ban large number of guns, both modern and antique. Levy doesn’t really know the issue, and the other woman is a shill for the anti-gunners. Great job NPR! I hope Congress defunds you shortly.

UPDATE: Paul also notes that the magazines banned by the 1994 AWB were as rare as hens teeth in 2004, before the ban expired. This is a complete and utter fabrication, as anyone here can tell you.

Taking The Magazine Ban Seriously

Sean notices that there doesn’t appear to be any great run on magazines. If McCarthy’s bill started to move, I’d probably stock up, but I have most of the magazines I need currently. One habit I got into with the AWB, is when you pick up a new gun that takes a new magazine, order five or so magazines for it. I suspect many people got in similar habits.

Another Antique Gun Banned

Tam finds another two examples of guns that would be banned by McCarthy’s bill. A twenty shot revolver, and this Swiss rifle.

UPDATE: Got my guns mixed up a bit on this post. Fixed.

The Votes Aren’t There

Chuck Schumer seems resigned to the fact that he won’t get to pass more gun control in the wake of the Arizona shootings.

Contradiction

One question I would have for our opponents, is that if private sales are such a huge loophole, why is straw purchasing such a problem? It would seem to be that, since private sales are completely lawful, that it would be preferable for gun traffickers to go this route, over the route of committing a felony in order to acquire guns. Why is straw purchasing such a big issue then?

I suspect for the same reason I’ve gotten very few guns in private sales: generally speaking, it’s really hard to find what you’re looking for, if you have something particular in mind. Every private buy I’ve ever done has been a purchase of opportunity. I wasn’t specifically looking to buy that particular gun, but someone wanted to sell it, the price was right, and it was something I thought I might want to have. As a collector, I’m generally looking for opportunities. An illegal gun trafficker is going to want guns that are desirable on the streets. He will also not likely have contacts among lawful gun owners looking to sell. That’s why they choose to use straw purchasers — it’s quicker and easier to find what you want.

One Gun McCarthy’s Magazine Ban Would Ban

The Henry Repeating Rifle:

To the amazed muzzleloader-armedÂ Confederates who had to face this deadly “sixteen shooter,” it was “that damned Yankee rifle that they load on Sunday and shoot all week!”

I for one am very happy that Carrie McCarthy and the gun control groups have such consideration for the lives of confederate soldiers by banning this deadly sixteen shooter.

UPDATE: The interesting thing about her bill is that, normally, a Henry rifle wouldn’t even be considered a firearm for legal purposes, having been made before 1898. It is an antique firearm under federal law, and normally unregulated. But the law bans the magazine on the gun, and thus the gun with it, since the magazine cannot be removed. Because her law chooses to exempt a particular type of attached, fixed magazine, it can be reasonably argued that other types of attached magazines are meant to be covered by the ban. Since the ban makes no distinction between modern and antique firearms, the Henry Rifle is covered by the ban.

An Open Invitation

New Trajectory asks:

In your comment, please suggest an issue that YOU feel both sides canÂ agree (like that too many criminals get guns), andÂ what you would do to help that issue.Â Â As Obama said, keep it civil and honest.Â Â Links to positive articles are welcome.Â Â Please don’t write a book, and please keep it to one suggestion and solution, in the interest of space and simplifying the conversation.Â Â This should get us talking.

I agree too many criminals get guns, but the argument is over, at root, what can be done about it. I will say this categorically: there is no gun control I believe that works effectively at reducing criminal access to guns. At best, our existing laws have only a marginal effect.

Even if you assume a starting state of no guns, which is a fantasy, the only way you can reduce availability to criminals is to reduce availability to the law abiding. And note the word reduce. You will never eliminate criminal gun possession, even if your starting point is a society without guns.

But we’re not a society without guns, and therefore even total prohibition would still mean a very high availability of guns for criminals, with no concurrent availability to the law abiding for defense against those criminals. The end result will be that many otherwise law abiding people will keep guns illegally, which will continue to feed another violent black market, in the same manner that’s happened because of drug prohibition. Not to mention such laws would turn ordinary people into criminals themselves for no greater crime than wanting to protect themselves and their families.

So I don’t think there is common understanding, because you’re starting from the premise that gun control can be effective. I don’t think it can be. So it really comes down to, what set of useless laws am I willing to live with in order to make enough people who are wary of guns comfortable enough to not spend their time and money trying to pass more and more regulations. That’s the better question.

New Gun Control Blog

A New Trajectory. Looks to be a project of CeaseFire Oregon. We can see it starts out with some interesting statistics. Not sure what value you can draw by correlating generic death with gun ownership. Is it reasonable to even assume someone who died of cancer, stroke, or heart disease had any reasonable relationship to gun laws? It’s starting with a nonsensical premise. The next graph is at least based on a reasonable premise, but it’s very similar to the analysis I did here, here, and here, which showed absolutely no correlation to crime rates and gun control laws, and a very mild inverse correlation between gun ownership rates and violent crime. The correlation seen by New Trajectory appears because “gun deaths” include suicide by gun, which I speculated probably does, unsurprisingly, correlate with gun ownership, much like tall buildings likely correlates to jumping suicides.

But I applaud our New Trajectory blogger for trying to speak to the issue with more than just emotions.

Bloomberg: Large Magazines Save Lives

He’s speaking in the context of police officers, who everyone know have magical training, but he admits it, whether he cares to or not. That’s also an implicit admission that guns, including magazines that hold more than ten rounds, can contribute to public safety.

But, I suppose, only when they are in the hands of police, who have magical abilities the rest of us can’t possibly possess, if you ask our opponents. If your hands, they are only used for murdering as many people as fast as possible. Think for a minute about what you have to think about your fellow citizens to believe such nonsense.

Draft McCarthy Bill

Thanks to Jacob, we have found a draft copy of the bill McCarthy plans to introduce. Here’s the features.

10 round limit
Importation completely prohibited.
Transfer completely prohibited
Manufacture completely prohibited
Grandfathering for current owners only.
Exception for law enforcement because they need “to be able to shoot as many people as possible as quickly as possible,” apparently.
Ten year prison sentence for violation.

Needless to say the response to this bill isn’t “no.” It’s “Hell no!” Under this law, I could become a felon for giving a magazine to Bitter. There’s no exception to transfer except for law enforcement. Technically handing one to your friend would be a felony.

You can all take your ball and go home now, gun control folks, the answer is no. She’s introducing it Tuesday. I’d suggest calling shortly thereafter, to tell your critter you expect it to go nowhere. Don’t take anything for granted.

UPDATE: Some more features, looking more closely:

Would ban stripper clips that hold more than 10 rounds.
Would ban any gun with a fixed tubular magazine that was not a .22 that held more than 10 rounds.
Ban any gun with a fixed magazine capacity that is more than 10 rounds of any caliber, if magazine is not tubular.
Would ban all belted ammunition, or parts that could be use to make up a belt.
Would ban any repair parts for a magazine if the repair parts could be used to make a magazine.
Presumably retired law enforcement need to shoot as many people as fast as possible too, because they are also exempted.

UPDATE: Yes, looking over it, this will ban some guns folks. This isn’t just a magazine ban.