Archive for the 'Gun Control' Category

News from Virginia.

PORTSMOUTH, Va. (WAVY) — Portsmouth is one of the latest localities to send a message to lawmakers in Richmond in support of Second Amendment rights.

City Council voted 4-3 in favor of passing a resolution of support of the Second Amendment resolution, which declares Portsmouth a “Second Amendment Constitutional City.”

Mayor John Rowe, Vice Mayor Lisa Lucas-Burke and council member Shannon Glover voted in opposition. Rowe said he believes in sensible gun legislation.

The meeting started at 7 p.m. in the City Council Chamber and went past 11 p.m.

Speakers addressed city leaders for several hours. The council chamber was packed full, with people watching on monitors and more downstairs on the first floor watching.

But one of the most talked-about moments in Tuesday’s meeting: Councilman Nathan Clark showed up wearing an AR-15 rifle.

The councilman said he did this to make a statement about his stance on the proposed gun laws. In a letter to citizens, he said the new legislation is ludicrous and he says he plans to defend the oath to the Constitution that he swore to as a law enforcement officer.

“The newly proposed gun legislation for the state of Virginia is ludicrous,” the letter reads. “The legislation will make criminals of lawful citizens and gun owners. Again, I am a law enforcement officer, and if this legislation is passed, I will also be made a criminal.

“Taking away the rights of our citizens not only puts them in greater danger, but the act is unconstitutional. Criminals have always and will always break the law. We must punish the existing criminals for their actions, and not take away the means of defense from law-abiding citizens.”

So the voters now have three people who need to be booted to the curb.  One good thing about all of this is that the controllers have to self-identify.

This is a remarkable document, a complete slapdown of the controllers.  I’m surprised it happened where it did (California).  Here’s an excerpt.

Everytown contends that its brief will provide the Court with the historical backdrop necessary to evaluate the Second Amendment challenges to firearms regulations. Id. at 3. However, this is not a perspective beyond what Defendant’s attorneys could provide on their own. Moreover, like Giffords Law Center, Everytown’s partisanship is apparent.  The Court finds that the amicus brief may prejudice Plaintiffs on the trial level because the brief allows Defendant to have a proverbial “another bite of the apple” due to partisan influence.

The document is linked here (2020-1-14-jones-order-denying-amicus-motions).

It comes mighty close.

Two identical bills that require universal background checks completed by federally licensed dealers for all firearm transfers have been introduced in the Missouri House by State Representative Ashley Bland Manlove and State Representative Greg Razer. House Bill 1529 and House Bill 1676 would even require two sportsmen to use a licensed firearm dealer and undergo the background-check process to temporarily loan a firearm for hunting purposes or even simply handing their gun to someone momentarily.

Although the language in this legislation would allow family firearm transfers without a licensed dealer, these bills fail to provide exceptions for loaning firearms to non-family members for hunting purposes or common acts of safety in the field and everyday use at the range. The language in HB 1529 and HB 1676 would make it unlawful for an experienced hunter to allow a friend to borrow a firearm for hunting or target shooting without first going through a licensed dealer, even if the owner of the firearm is present.

I don’t like the focus on hunting.  Hunting is a subset of activities that shouldn’t be subject to background checks.  Another might be loaning a firearm to a friend for purposes of self defense, or practice.  Or in other words, everything.  Because the RKBA is a God-given right.

Via reader Wynn A.

KIRO Radio.

If you are a commercial pilot or general contractor likely you understand the value of licensing; So why not license gun owners?

Tell me I’m wrong.

Okay.  You’re wrong.  The right of self defense is not just a right, but a duty, and that means self defense against both individuals and tyranny.

Gun rights people — same as gun control supporters — talk a good game about background checks, mental health, warning signs, red flags. But existing laws and loopholes prevent effective, universal screening.

And before we argue that the Second Amendment means that no restriction should be put on gun ownership, we already place limit on every constitutional amendment, including the Second.  And the argument that it would not affect criminals is true for every new criminal law – until someone gets arrest for violating it.

In fact, I like licensing so much I’d be willing to toss out any bans on so-called assault weapons or ammunition restrictions. Heck, I’d be fine with no purchase restrictions on any firearms sold today in this country in exchange for licensing.

Well bless your heart.  Are you offering a compromise?  No one on your side has ever done that before.  Why, shazam.  This is the very first time, don’t ya’ know.

The fact that we might place restrictions on rights is no argument that it is righteous and acceptable to put those restrictions in place.  That’s argument de facto, which is a formal logical fallacy.

If the real problem is, as I am often told, “it’s the person not the gun,” then let’s put our money where our thoughts and prayers are and license the person. Everybody wants to lionize that good guy with a gun; I simply want to license him – or her – as well.

I don’t care what you’ve been told.  And as for licensing people instead of weapons, we’ve known all along that’s what your ilk wanted to do.  It’s the same thing Adolf Hitler did.  You can check here, or watch this.

Tell me I’m wrong.

Okay.  You’re wrong.  Rights come from the Almighty, it is He alone who is the only sovereign, and man doesn’t get to give or take rights.  Rights are only recognized, not given, by anyone but God.  And we won’t be giving up our solemn duties to assuage anyone’s irrational fears, most especially you.

Via WiscoDave, this misleading piece from Breitbart.

Virginia Democrats withdrew an AR-15 confiscation bill Monday after thousands of NRA members showed up to oppose new gun controls.

The NRA asked members to flood the January 13, 2020, Virginia Senate meetings and ensure pro-Second Amendment voices drowned out those calling for gun control.

The Washington Free Beacon reports the presence of thousands of NRA members “appeared to have an impact.” Democrats withdrew a bill aimed at AR-15 confiscation and moderated other gun control proposals.

But NRA-ILA Virginia state director Daniel Spiker made clear the changes, though good, were not enough.

He said, “While there were some improvements to some of these bills, overall, it’s still bad legislation. Putting in more regulations and making it more onerous on the law-abiding citizens of Virginia is not something we stand for.”

Richard Cosner, a Chester, Virginia, preacher, was present to oppose new gun controls.

He pointed out attempts to legislate gun control serve as a way to usurp the Constitution:  “The Constitution is specific; it ‘shall not be infringed.’ If somebody wants to restrict those rights then they need to follow it by altering the Constitution, not by putting in place legislation that is in conflict with the Constitution.”

This lede is very misleading.  That’s not what happened at all, and the Virginia lawmakers couldn’t care less what the NRA or its members think.

They’re dropping redundant bills and focusing on getting their preferred bills out of committee.  There will still be a universal background check.  There will still be an AWB.  There will still be the restrictions on shooting ranges.  There will still be magazine capacity limits.  We could go on.

An earlier version of the article had this.

Lawmakers will continue to work on the bills passed today and consider other gun-control bills. Those include a House of Delegates bill that would ban new sales of AR-15s, force gun owners to register AR-15s, and outlaw possession of magazines holding more than 10 rounds.

Here’s a note to writers: please don’t be misleading.

News from New Zealand.

I opened the door to see a number of police officers outside. They served me with a search warrant under Section 6 of the Search and Surveillance Act 2012. Half a dozen armed police officers swarmed in the front door (holstered sidearms only) as several more ran around the sides of the house. They later called for more backup as the house was larger than your average state-house drug lab. I got the impression that they’d never had to raid a middle-class suburban house like mine before. Everyone on the property was detained, read their rights, and questioned separately. I opted to call a lawyer who advised me to refuse to answer any questions.

The warrant claimed they had reason to believe I was in possession of a prohibited magazine fitted to a “.22RL lever-action rifle. Blued metal, brown wooden stock.” The officer told me I had posted about it online, which I had—in my public written submission against the Firearms Amendment Act passed last year. That submission was shared on several blogs and social media. I had used the firearm as an example to prove the legislation was not targeting “military-style assault weapons” as the media, prime minister, and her cabinet repeated ad nauseum. The vast majority of firearms affected by the legislation were just like mine.

I thought nothing more of my little example to the select committee. It was no longer in my possession when the police raided my house. They departed empty-handed after turning the place inside out for ninety minutes and left me with my firearms and a visibly shaken wife who broke down in tears. Thankfully, the kids didn’t quite get what was going on—but I realised after that they had gone to bed without icecream.

I’ve been vocal about the amnesty being a disaster, and the police were rather open about the failure of the whole process. Maybe if they stopped raiding innocent people’s houses there might have been some more good will? They implied that they’d keep having to raid the houses of people I knew until the firearm turned up. This is for an A-Category firearm, which I have no reason to believe is fitted with a prohibited magazine! Are these the kind of intimidation tactics now the norm in New Zealand? Are we going to accept this in a first-world democracy?

This is for a lever-action .22LR that’s designed to hit paper or be used to hunt bunnies. What happened to going after the “weapons designed to kill people” as the police minister Stuart Nash has claimed?

The implications of this are rather stunning. I took the photo and publicised the details about this firearm as part of the select committee process. This good-faith evidence was used by the police as a justification for their raid. Do we now live in a country where public evidence given to a select committee will be used against you to suit the political purposes of the police?

You see, the problem here sir is that you are a peaceable, law abiding man.  That’s exactly who gun control laws target.  They intend it to be that way.They controllers don’t care about violent men, criminals or gangsters.

They fear you, a peaceable family man.  And yes, they even fear your lever action .22LR.  You can’t have anything.  The .gov has a monopoly on sanctioned violence, and thus you are left utterly powerless and impotent to protect your family against the gangsters, whether they work for the government or not.

Interesting reddit/firearms comment thread.  One reader gets it and has sense of where this is headed.

The is one of the main issues to me. People will obviously not comply with registration, and there will obviously be illegal private transactions that take place after the law goes in to effect. But FFL’s are in an unfortunate position where they have no choice but to follow the law. I think a lot of people aren’t thinking of this aspect. They assume that if the law passes, everyone will disobey the law, and that things will more or less go on as normal.

That’s a good point and one that I have been thinking about.

Remember, while there will indeed still be private transactions, as there should be, and while I suspect most gun owners will neither give up nor register their firearms, nor should they, FFLs will be in a mess.

This is one of the goals of the controllers.  For my Virginian readers and friends, you’ll still likely be able to purchase bolt action rifles, maybe lever action rifles, revolvers and shotguns (I expect limits on tube mag capacity, and perhaps limits on type, i.e., pump action allowed, no auto-loaders), you won’t be able to purchase MSRs or standard capacity magazines from your local FFL.  It’s likely that pistol sales will be tightly controlled and monitored.

Some FFLs will shut down.  Some will barely be able to stay afloat.  In the mean time, remember that you can still purchase what you want, and also remember this: under current ATF rules, long guns sales from an FFL can cross state lines in adjacent states.

That means you can drive to North Carolina, West Virginia, Kentucky or Tennessee to buy MSRs, pistols, magazines, and whatever else you need.  Ammunition is a huge deal.  Make sure you have everything you will want or need, for both you and your progeny.

Via WRSA (and reader QuidProQuo), some common sense resistance.

For starters, I seem to recall at least one sheriff in one county stated that should the state begin unconstitutional confiscations, he’d deputize the population as a posse-at-large to nip that right in the bud.

So tell me, those of you on the ground there, with actual skin in the game, WhyTF aren’t all your 2A sanctuary counties and cities pushing your respective sheriffs and police chiefs for the exact same plan??

Why are you leaving it as a what-if contingency?
Why aren’t you pushing to make it a by-God reality, RightF-ingNow??
1000 yahoos fapping in the park at the statehouse are a juicy target for the leftards, the media, and the minions of jackbooted thuggery.
But 500 or 1000 folks at the county meeting or sheriff’s office is a voting bloc that won’t be ignored. Because how in hell did all y’all get those 2A sanctuary votes pushed through? Hmmm???

So how about leading with your strength, instead of your chin for a change?

Dear Sheriff Dawg,
We, the citizens of Bugtussle County, respectfully require that you come up with a plan to deputize auxiliary deputies, to prevent or oppose any unconstitutional enforcement actions in Bugtussle County, effective ASAP.  – signed, 500 registered voters

If he does it, you’ve just grown fangs for liberty teeth. If not, you’ve identified that he was just paying lip service, and needs to go in the next election, if not sooner.

Sounds a lot like something I said.

In the mean time, I really wonder if it might be a much better use of time and resources to leave Richmond alone (after all, there is virtually nothing that can be done to stop the controllers on their way to the Tower of Babel), and schedule a cup of coffee with your local town police, county Sheriff or county deputies.

You can see exactly where they stand, and perhaps make a difference in their views.  If not, you know exactly where you stand.  Yes?

Shhh … quiet.  Hidden from view.  Don’t telegraph your plans to the controllers.  Prepare your own terrain, physical and human, and meet them there.  Focus on your strengths, not theirs.  The pit of vipers is their terrain.  Don’t silhouette the skyline.

The innovative citizen could come up with any number of good plans that don’t silhouette the skyline.  Nothing you say or do will change the controllers’ minds to build their tower of babel.  “Can a leopard change its spots?”

But you can make it too costly for them to finish the job.

Via David Codrea, this bit of non-news from Virginia.

RICHMOND — The Northam administration threw its weight Thursday behind the eight proposals it will back on gun control this legislative session, including a ban on assault weapons defined as any semiautomatic rifle or pistol with a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds.

The Northam-backed bill would go into effect in July, but would allow people who already own an assault weapon to obtain a permit from the state for restricted use. Without a permit, the guns would have to be disposed of, surrendered or made inoperable by January 2021.

[ … ]

It is different from a bill filed by Senate Majority Leader Dick Saslaw, D-Fairfax, which does not include a “grandfather” provision for current owners of weapons deemed “assault weapons.” The lack of such a provision in Saslaw’s bill has raised concerns among some gun-rights backers about confiscation. Saslaw has said his bill will be amended in committee to “resolve some problems.”

[ … ]

The definition of an assault weapon, under this bill, also includes features like a folding or telescoping stock, and thumbhole stock, a second grip and barrel that can hold a silencer or extender. The bill also classifies a semiautomatic pistol that weighs more than 50 ounces unloaded as an assault weapon.

Uh huh.  “Resolve some problems.”  I’ll bet.

So I lied.  We do learn something from this.  The ban includes all or most large frame semi-automatic pistols, perhaps leaving some compacts and sub-compacts alone as long as they are single stack or have limited capacity magazines.

Resolve some problems.  Something tells me there will be massive non-compliance with this, so the next question on all of our minds is what happens next?  What will the 2A sanctuary counties do?  See, this was never going to be door-to-door confiscations.  It was always going to be about traffic stops, red flag visits in the middle of the night based on social media entries, etc., etc.  Will gun owners support each other or let the state pick them off one-by-one?

The next steps are sure to come.  So get on with it.

David Codrea fisks her.  Here is the full quote from WaPo, part of which David includes.

The commentary is behind a paywall and I refuse to fund the CIA blog.  I got it through other means.

I had read the commentary and just couldn’t bring myself to link or quote it without doing a full fisking (which would take more of my time than I wanted to devote).

David does a good job.  To her, the 2A is all about duck hunting.  She loves the Fudds, wants a monopoly of power, and loves the state.  She’s a collectivist.

And see, these common sense gun controls are all they want!  Imagine that.  Gun bans, red flag laws, magazine bans, universal background checks, gun registration.

All common sense, no?  And always remember.  The folks who want to take your guns intend to do something that would make you need them.

Petula Dvorak.  Leninist.