Articles by Herschel Smith

Source.

TALLAHASSEE — Incoming Florida House Speaker Paul Renner told a supporter his chamber would move a “constitutional carry” policy for gun owners in Florida in the next legislative session, according to a video surreptitiously recorded at a fundraising event last month and posted online.

In the video, which was filmed at a House GOP fundraising event in Ocala on May 17, a man pulls Renner aside and asks if expanding the right for Floridians to carry guns without permits would be a legislative priority.

“I can tell you, we’ll do it in the House,” Renner tells the man. “We need to work on the Senate a little bit.”

In an interview Wednesday, Renner said he didn’t know he was being recorded or who he was speaking with at the Ocala event, but confirmed the video’s authenticity. The Palm Coast Republican reaffirmed his support for “constitutional carry” legislation but said he didn’t call it a priority.

“The issue on constitutional carry is whether government should be playing a role in saying whether you can or can’t carry outside the home when you meet the basic requirements of being able to pass a background check,” he said.

In April, Gov. Ron DeSantis promised to deliver a bill allowing permitless carry before his time as governor was through. The support of Renner, who leads one of Florida’s two legislative bodies, would mean the policy would have significant momentum in the next legislative session.

Current Florida law requires handgun owners to obtain a license to carry their weapons in most public places. Open carry of weapons is mostly prohibited: Florida’s licenses only allow gun owners to carry guns concealed on their person. In order to get a concealed carry permit, a handgun owner has to take a training class that includes instruction involving the live firing of a loaded gun.

In other states, “constitutional carry” has allowed gun owners to carry their weapon without a permit — and thus without going through that training. Supporters call the policy “constitutional carry” because they argue the Second Amendment’s guarantee of the right to bear arms means Americans should be able to carry without the regulatory burden of obtaining a permit.

[ … ]

Passidomo on Wednesday pointed to Florida’s red flag law as a good balance between Second Amendment rights and protecting communities and schools. That law allows law enforcement to petition for a risk protection order if they believe someone is a danger to themselves or others. If a judge approves the order, firearms are removed from a person’s home. The process allows the person given the order to oppose it in court.

Luis Valdes, Florida state director for Gun Owners of America, who posted the clip of Renner to YouTube, said he planned to push for a permitless carry policy this legislative session. Valdes believes Passidomo will come around eventually.

“She is right now kind of being a little bit squishy on the issue, but I think with a little bit of political education, she would push the bill,” Valdes said in an interview Thursday.

For fighting the good fight in Florida for open carry, I recommend The Armed Fisherman.

And while some may disagree, I think this is the wrong order.  Florida police are far too arrogant and need their comeuppance.  We need to see people openly carrying in Florida.

When people get accustomed to seeing men carry weapons, and seeing that the sky doesn’t fall, then proceed to constitutional carry next.

I would be most dissatisfied with constitutional carry passed without open carry.

Where are the strong men in Florida?  Why is there no push to see this happen?  Florida apparently wants to be like Hawaii, New York, New Jersey, Illinois and Massachusetts.

Dean Weingarten.

Red-flag laws do not appear to produce measurable results. They can be very effective at undercutting fundamental Constitutional rights.  The wording used in this reporting, does not bode well:

will allow law enforcement to temporarily take dangerous weapons away from people 

Once taken, it can be complicated to regain possession of firearms from “law enforcement.” All weapons are “dangerous.” All people are potentially dangerous.

Temporarily often becomes indefinite, which often becomes permanent.

What is a “boyfriend loophole”?  It is not a legal term but rather Orwellian propaganda meant to deceive. There is no “boyfriend loophole” in federal law.

The term is meant as a way to expand the prohibited status of people who commit domestic violence to people who are in casual relationships. It is a way of expanding the list of people prohibited from exercising their Second Amendment rights.

Misdemeanors are inherently less serious than felonies. The details here are important and unspecified so far.

Prohibition against a person buying guns for others.

There is already a prohibition against people purchasing guns for others in federal law. Watch for this to be expanded so than no one is allowed to buy a firearm for anyone else. This may be a way to push for a ban on private sales.

Enhanced background checks for those under 21. Almost certainly unconstitutional, this appears to be a waiting period measure. Watch for this to be used as justification to ban private sales.

Clarification of who is a gun dealer.  This is a double edged sword. A clear definition of what constitutes “doing business” has been sought for decades. It seems unlikely a good definition can come from this administration. Watch for a definition where it is hard to obtain a Federal Firearms License, but easy to be prosecuted for not having one.

As usual, I think Dean is right.  And as usual, the republican senators and congressmen are too stupid to see through the smoke, or too collectivist to care.

Wait for the details to come out.  No, I’m not saying wait for the details like some pols are saying wait for the details to decide whether to support this (like the fools at NRO).  I’m saying wait for the details and you will see just how bad this is and just how much trouble this causes to the gun community.

And then never forget the men and women who did this.

Source.

Mark Burns in South Carolina, for example, was an early Trump supporter in 2016. He’s an evangelical minister, a conspiracy theorist and pastor at the Harvest Praise & Worship Center. He’s running for Congress in the state’s 4th congressional district, and his platform reads like a grab bag of right-wing ideas:

• Our right to bear arms is INHERENT, given to us by God almighty — NOT by any man;
• If we don’t fix these elections NOW, America will be lost. Without open, honest, transparent elections, no other issue matters;
• Life begins at conception;
• Marriage is defined as between one man and one woman;
• Critical Race Theory is Communist, anti-white Racism;
• Vaccine and mask mandates are medical tyranny, and have no place in America;
• The Pelosi budget opens the door wide open to full-blown communism.

A “grab bag” of right-wing ideas, you say?  It sounds like a reasonable list of things to run on to me.

The Salon writer is aghast at all of this.  Wonder what he would say if he found out I’m a Christian Reconstructionist and read R. J. Rushdoony?

Source.

Illinois deer hunters will soon have more tools available to them during the hunting season after the signing of a recent law.

House Bill 4386, signed by Gov. Pritzker on May 27, allows for the use of centerfire, single-shot rifles for deer hunting in the firearm set as set by the director of natural resources every year.

These lighter rifles join the list of legal hunting firearms, which includes slug-ammunition shotguns, muzzleloading rifles and centerfire handguns.

The newly-approved firearms must still abide by site-specific regulations and use legal ammunition.

Additionally, the law makes it illegal, during deer hunting season, to possess or be in proximity of a non-centerfire rifle or a magazine capable of making a rifle not a single shot.

The bill goes into effect on January 1, 2023. You can read the text of the bill here.

Have y’all ever been to Ilinois?  I have.  Only to visit on a work assignment.

What most people don’t understand is that the corn belt runs through Illinois.  Miles upon miles upon miles upon miles of nothing but corn fields as far as the eye can see.

Here the controllers are “giving up” something for the deer hunters by giving them a rifle to hunt.  Single shot only.  I might have understood it a bit more if they had limited it to straight walled cartridges as they do in some states, but in this case, they want no semiautomatics, or at least, no magazine to be found near the hunter.

I’m glad I don’t live there.

Source.

After days of negotiations that worried Second Amendment advocates and law-abiding firearm owners due to talk of sweeping new restrictions, it seems like — for now at least — the Republican members of the bipartisan working group held the line on the strictest proposals, though they didn’t stop Democrats on all fronts in the talks that made many conservatives scratch their heads.

The bipartisan group of Senators — led by Chris Murphy (D-CT) and John Cornyn (R-TX) — announced their proposal for legislation they seem to think has a chance of making it through their evenly-divided chamber.

[ … ]

The proposal includes providing “resources” — likely grant incentives — to states if they implement so-called “red flag laws.” It also includes investing taxpayer dollars in mental health services for families and in schools along with school safety resources to “to help institute safety measures in and around primary and secondary schools, support school violence prevention efforts and provide training to school personnel and students.” The proposal announcement also says legislators will seek to include an “enhanced review period” for firearm purchasers under 21 years old.

Rather than passing a federal red flag law, they’re trying to buy off the states to do it for them using money we don’t have.

Here are a few predictions.  First, you can expect the usual suspects to go along with it (e.g., Cornyn, Collins, Graham, Romney, Thune, etc.).  Second, the red flag laws will be abused by taking away firearms from peaceable men without due process.  Angry wives or girlfriends divorcing or breaking up with their husbands or boyfriends will use this to their advantage.  Men, be careful with whom you cavort, search for godly women, be godly yourselves, and manage your households well.  Be a good leader and keep your home in proper order.

Third, nothing in this will amount to a hill of beans when it comes to actually making schools safer.  But that’s never the point of gun control, is it?  Fourth – and besides red flag laws this is the most significant change – you can bet your bottom dollar on one thing.  Any money that flows to public schools will have strings attached.  You can count on it.

So parents who were (justly) angry over critical race theory or gender confusion being taught to their children can get prepared to be angry all over again.  The strings may involve something like the requirement to teach CRT in order to get the funding for security.

Remember.  The senators and congressmen don’t write the laws.  They just vote on them.  The bottomless pit of money gets attached and spent, and the strings all get attached, as lawyers and congressional aids work through the details and create the resultant monster.  And it will end up being a monster that infringes on constitutional rights.  Mark my words and hold me to it.

You’ll have to pass the bill before you know what’s in it.

I have one final recommendation.  Home school your children.

I think it’s fairly common knowledge that you cannot grip a revolver the same way you do a semi-automatic pistol.  You cannot put your finger near the gap between the cylinder and the forcing cone.

But some newer gun owners may not be aware of this.  If you cannot get some one to teach you to do it the right way, read articles and watch videos to teach yourself.

Wheel guns are awesome and every man should have one or more.  But like any firearm, they come with warnings on their usage.

I would rather never be in a position like this.  That bear closed fast and had ill intentions.

“Shall not be infringed” should have limits. Politicians getting paid by the @NRA need to realize this too. What does the NRA do again? Nothing.

— Robert J. O'Neill (@mchooyah) June 2, 2022

I knew I didn’t like the guy.  A little too attention-seeking for my tastes.  There was also some controversy when the deed was done about who did it and how it went down.

Anyway, this is all the reason I need to dislike him.

Source.

A segment on CNN this Thursday featured experts demonstrating the power of semi-automatic weapons, specifically focusing on the AR-15, which has been the weapon of choice for many mass shooters in the United States over the past several years.

The Los Angeles Police Police (sic) Department pointed out to CNN that bullets fired from an AR-15 are powerful enough to pierce soft body armor.

Then, footage was shown from a ballistic lab where bullets were fired into a gelatin substance meant to mimic human flesh. When a handgun was fired at the substance, it created a single cavity through the substance and the bullet exited from the other side. A bullet fired from an assault rifle broke apart inside the substance and the damage was much more explosive.

“It basically goes inside the body and creates an explosion inside the body,” Wayne University ballistics expert Cynthia Bir said.

In another revelation, the following special reports are scheduled for CNN in the coming days.  (1) How CNN just now learned about the science of ballistics, (2) How any rifle round can penetration soft body armor, with a battery of tests and suite of analyses to prove it, (3) How CNN just now found out about ballistics gel, (4) How any rifle round exceeding about 2200 FPS at impact will cause hydrostatic shock and cavitation inside ballistics gel, (5) A side-by-side ballistics gel comparison between .270 Win PSP ammo and .300 Win Mag PSP ammo, (6) What a feral hog looks like after being shot by .30-06 PSP at 30 yards.

No … not really.

How do these people accept their paychecks with a straight face and without a guilty conscience?