Category: Anti Civil Rights ideas & “Friends”

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Cops Paint me surprised by this

HOME ABOUT US Search Here… Seattle’s ‘Violence Surge’ Continues, Despite Gun/Ammo Tax, State Laws POSTED BY DAVE WORKMAN

The city of Seattle, once kn own for its laid-back lifestyle, is experiencing a sharp rise in violent crime and murder, despite passage of several gun control measures. (GoodFreePhotos)

By Dave Workman

Editor-in-Chief

Violent crime is continuing to surge in the city of Seattle and surrounding King County, where the number of homicides in the city this year has already surpassed last year’s body count, and with three months remaining in 2024, a new record could be reached.

According to the Seattle Times, there have been 114 killings in King County as of Sept. 29, which brings the total to 114, just shy of the 119 investigated in both 2021 and 2022. Half of those murders have been inside the Seattle city limits, which carries no small amount of irony since the city is headquarters to the billionaire-backed gun prohibition lobby responsible for two restrictive statewide gun control initiatives in 2014 and 2018, both of which were sold to the public as mechanisms to reduce violent crime.

Perhaps one result of this has been a rebound over the past two months of concealed pistol license numbers in the county. The Department of Licensing says there are now 696,540 active CPLs in Washington, of which 111,332 are held by King County residents. Roughly 25 percent of those licenses are held by women. Last month at this time, there were 693,551 active CPLs statewide, including 110,627 in King County.

The numbers represent a rebound from a six-month decline in the number of active licenses, which hit 698,147 back on March 31.

KOMO News, the local ABC affiliate, is reporting September was a “deadly” month with 10 homicides, more than double the number of murders during the same month in 2022 (4) and 2021 (3).

Why are the number of active CPLs moving back up? It could be related to the loss of some 600 commissioned police officers in Seattle over the past three years, since the COVID-19 pandemic erupted.

And reports about rising violent crime, coupled with police manpower losses, could be factors as well. Washington has been nudging the 700,000 mark for carry licenses for the past year. It might meet that threshold by year’s end if the rebound continues.

KOMO is reporting comments from people who say they “don’t feel safe around the city,” and the station quoted one individual specifically citing reports of “shootings and stabbings.”

But with this news, Seattle-based gun prohibitionists are mute. Their gun control restrictions have been, according to Second Amendment activists, total failures. Only law-abiding citizens have been inconvenienced, while criminals have continued hurting and killing people.

Here’s a look back at the history of gun control in Washington since 2014:

2014 – Voters approve anti-gun Initiative 594 after proponents spent more than $10 million in a lopsided campaign to pass the measure. It requires so-called “universal background checks” on all firearm transfers, with certain exemptions for family members.

2015 – The Seattle City Council adopts a Chicago-style tax on retail firearm and ammunition sales. Proponents project annual revenue between $300,000 and $500,000, which has never come close. The money would ostensibly go to anti-violence programs. Since 2016, the first full year of tax collection, the number of homicides in the city has more than doubled.

2018 – Washington voters again approve a gun control initiative (I-1639), this one inventing a definition for a “semi-automatic assault weapon” and prohibiting young adults ages 18-20 from buying them. It also requires proof of training within the previous five years in order to complete the purchase.

2022 – The Washington Legislature passes the magazine ban and is immediately sued by the Second Amendment Foundation and several others.

2023 – The Legislature passes a ban on so-called “assault weapons” and is immediately sued in federal court, again by the Second Amendment Foundation and others. Another bill signed by Democrat Gov. Jay Inslee requires proof of safety training for any firearm purchase and expands the waiting period on gun purchases to ten days.

Looking back to 2018 when I-1639 was on the ballot, gun right activists predicted anti-gunners would eventually move to ban the firearms they had taken so much trouble to define. Their concerns were largely dismissed or ignored by the media, and that remains the case today.

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" You have to be kidding, right!?!

ATF Warns Texas FFLs About Dangerous Cartel Activity in the Next 60 Days by John Crump

Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) in Texas are receiving emails and phone calls from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) warning of people trying to acquire .50 caliber rifles and belt-fed firearms.

The ATF started emailing and placing calls to gun dealers in the Dallas and Houston areas, warning about attempts by straw purchasers to acquire high-powered weapons. According to one recorded phone call, the ATF believes that the cartels are behind the straw purchases and are “gearing up” for something over the next 60 days. The ATF agent did not give any specifics as to exactly what the cartels were planning. The email reads:

“(U) Law enforcement is advising Federal Firearms Licensees or expanding interest of criminal networks’ intention to utilize straw purchasers in acquiring large caliber firearms such as .50 caliber and/or belt fed rifles within the next 60 days. This activity is anticipated to occur throughout the entire State of Texas. Please contact your local ATF office if any suspicious, attempted or finalized purchases occur.”


The warning extends to all of Texas. The ATF asks any dealer to contact them immediately if there are any suspicious purchases. The ATF is playing their cards close to their chest.

It is unclear if the mentioned cartel action is expected in the United States or south of Mexico’s border.

The Circle of Trust

The situation reminds a lot of Texas FFLs of the Obama-era “Fast and Furious” gun-walking scandal. Former Attorney General Eric Holder authorized the sale of guns to the cartels in that operation. The idea was to track the weapons back to Mexico, but the Department of Justice (DOJ) lost track of the firearms. Cartels soon turned the guns on U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) agents, causing one officer working the border to lose his life.

U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was pursuing a group of armed robbers near the Nogales border when a man named Heraclio Osorio-Arellanes pulled out a firearm and fired at the agents. A bullet would strike Terry, killing him.

Mr. Terry was a Michigan native who always wanted to be a cop. He joined the Marines and then became a police officer. Terry felt that he could help more people by joining CBP. He excelled at his job and soon would be assigned to the CBP’s elite unit that deals with the most dangerous situations. The bullet that killed Terry was fired from a gun that the DOJ and the ATF let the cartels acquire through the Fast and Furious scandal.

Since the U.S. government has a history of using FFLs to arm the cartels, many FFLs in the Lone Star State are weary of helping the embattled Bureau. Right now, there is a lack of trust between gun stores and what they see as hostile entities trying to shut down their livelihood.

 

Some FFLs expressed concerns about the ATF targeting their gun shops if they do report a suspicious sale. The ATF and the Biden administration enacted a “zero tolerance” policy, which has seen FFL revocations hit record levels.

Right now, there is a trust issue between FFLs and gun shops. Instead of being a partner in the industry, under President Joe Biden, the ATF has taken an adversarial role. These conflicts hurt the ATF’s chances of stopping crime and are strengthening the Mexican cartels.

AmmoLand News asked the ATF to comment on the story, but the Bureau did not respond to our request by publicatio

 

Categories
Another potential ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Gun Fearing Wussies You have to be kidding, right!?!

Seeking Attention, Not Solutions in New Mexico

After several weeks of the abject failure of New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s (D) attempt to suspend constitutional rights in her state, there are a number of theories as to what, exactly, she was hoping to accomplish. First, and foremost, though, it appears to have been little more than a PR stunt. She all but said as much.

After receiving public opposition to her outlandish announcement of an unconstitutional 30-day ban on open and concealed carry of firearms in public places in Bernalillo County, followed quickly by numerous lawsuits and a temporary restraining order (TRO) against enforcing the ban, part of Lujan Grisham’s response to the TRO was to state, “Over the past four days (since issuing the order), I’ve seen more attention on resolving the crisis of gun violence than I have in the past four years.”

So she apparently got the publicity she was craving.

Not only is her comment a bald-faced lie, though, it’s an admission of failure, as Lujan Grisham has been in office for the past four years, and her party has controlled both chambers of the New Mexico legislature over that same time period. If she hasn’t been able to enact the laws she thinks will address violent crime involving those who use firearms in an illegal fashion over the last four years, either she is bad at governing, or her ideas are simply wildly unpopular or complete failures at achieving their alleged goals.

Probably a bit of all of that, really.

For the past four years, there has been a great deal of “attention” in the legislature on Lujan Grisham’s notion that infringing on the rights of law-abiding gun owners will somehow stop violent criminals from being violent criminals. Just go to NRAILA.org, then scroll down and use the filter to select New Mexico and All Dates. There have been countless anti-gun bills introduced, and some have even passed to become law. None have proven to be capable of reducing the violent acts of criminals misusing firearms.

Speaking of the apparent unpopularity of her ideas, one cannot help but notice the lack of support for her PR stunt. Honestly, it’s a bit surprising, knowing just how radical the anti-Second Amendment community is.

Lujan Grisham, during her press conference announcing her attempt to suspend the rights of law-abiding gun owners, stated that she had spoken to the White House prior to enacting the order. She didn’t say what kind of feedback she received, but considering there have not been any comments from anyone in the Biden administration about her actions—actions that have received national coverage by many media outlets—it may be safe to presume the subject matter is as toxic to Biden as his son’s legal problems.

Anti-gun organizations have been equally mum. None of the groups that supported Lujan Grisham’s election—like Everytown/Moms Demand and Giffords—have issued a single statement in support of the governor’s stunt. Normally, anti-gun organizations are eager to praise the actions of anti-gun politicians; especially when they are put in the national spotlight.

But so far, all we’ve heard are crickets.

Similarly, these groups tend to file amicus briefs in support of anti-gun efforts that are challenged in court. Again, nothing on the aforementioned groups’ websites mentions filing any briefs in support of Lujan Grisham.

In fact, New Mexico’s attorney general, Raul Torrez (D), has publicly stated he will not defend the governor’s order in court, noting that it is clearly unconstitutional. Torrez, it should be noted, was also endorsed by the anti-gun groups Giffords and Everytown/Moms Demand.

Even some of the most vocal, radical anti-gun individuals called out Lujan Grisham for overstepping her authority with the unconstitutional ban on the right to carry. Anti-gun US Representative Ted Lieu (D-Cal.) posted to X (formerly Twitter) that the order “violates the U.S. Constitution,” and that “(t)here is no such thing as a public health emergency exception to the U.S. Constitution.” Anti-gun activist David Hogg, as if cutting and pasting from some damage control script sent out by “moderate” anti-gunners, used virtually the same language as Lieu about a “public health emergency exception.”

Then, the very weekend the order was first put into place, peaceful protestors in Albuquerque carried firearms in the city—both openly and, presumably, concealed—with not a single arrest made or citation issued.

Some of the more radical political operatives in the country may not have realized these were peaceful protests, as no riots took place, no businesses were looted or burned down, and nobody was assaulted. Nonetheless, they were the epitome of peaceful protests.

Thus far, her actions have resulted in numerous legal challenges, including one filed by NRA-ILA, and one TRO issued by a Biden-appointed judge. Yes, you read that right, the first of what will likely be numerous defeats for Lujan Grisham’s PR stunt was issued by a judge appointed by Joe Biden.

After the TRO was issued, the governor amended her order to narrow the unconstitutional suspension of the right to carry firearms to apply to “public parks or playgrounds” in the affected area. Of course, diminishing the area an unconstitutional order impacts does not make it less unconstitutional, it just has the potential to decrease the number of people who might be affected. Virtually every legal challenge to the order, even as amended, shall likely continue. We know ours will.

But if you need any more evidence that the governor was merely looking for attention, rather than actual solutions, again, just consider what she says. When asked directly, during her own press conference announcing her action, if she thought criminals would obey the order, she said no, but thought it would send a message. She even openly admitted that she was issuing the order without having figured out how it would be enforced.

“Sending a message” may be one of the worst defenses of an unconstitutional law we’ve heard, but considering she admits her order will not affect criminals, it may be the only defense she has.

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

And the Swamp gets bigger.

Biden to Launch Federal Office for “Gun Violence Prevention”  by
President Joe Biden is set to launch a new federal office of "gun violence prevention" Friday in Washington, D.C. as the 38th annual Gun Rights Policy Conference kicks off in Phoenix, Arizona. (IMG whitehouse-gov)
President Joe Biden is set to launch a new federal office of “gun violence prevention” Friday in Washington, D.C. as the 38th annual Gun Rights Policy Conference kicks off in Phoenix, Arizona. (IMG whitehouse-gov)

Anti-gun Democrat President Joe Biden will reportedly announce this Friday the creation of what Fox News is calling “of the first-ever federal office of gun violence prevention,” ironically on the same day the 2023 Gun Rights Policy Conference opens in Phoenix, Arizona.

The Hill reports that the new White House office will have the formal name “Office of Gun Violence Prevention.” We have yet to see whether it actually prevents so-called “gun violence” or merely pushes more restrictive gun control schemes.

Co-sponsored by the Second Amendment Foundation and Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, the 38th annual GRPC will convene at the Marriott Phoenix Airport Hotel, and this year’s theme is “Road to Liberty.”

But Second Amendment activists see Biden wanting to travel down a different road, one headed into a mire of gun bans, so-called “expanded background checks,” licensing and training mandates, and other machinations that would ultimately lead to gutting the Second Amendment and turning the right to keep and bear arms into a government-regulated privilege.

As noted by Politico, “The new office will present an opportunity for the president to point to his action on gun safety at a time when Congress is unlikely to pass additional legislation, potentially increasing enthusiasm among key voting blocs, including young people.”

Translation: It’s a campaign gimmick, as well as an ominous indication of a ramped-up war on gun rights.

Press reports say the effort is being led by White House Staff Secretary Stefanie Feldman, described as “a longtime Biden aide with expertise on firearms issues.” Additionally, the Washington Post reports that gun control proponents, such as Greg Jackson, executive director of the Community Justice Action Fund, and Rob Wilcox, senior director for federal government affairs at Everytown for Gun Safety, will participate.

But will this new Biden administration office actually produce any reduction in violent crime involving firearms? Buried in the Politico report is one possible answer. Recalling last year’s passage and signing of Biden’s “Bipartisan Safer Communities Act,” which strengthened background checks and “helped states implement red flag laws,” Political noted the bad news from the Gun Violence Archive: “Nevertheless, there have been 504 mass shootings in which four or more people were injured or killed during 2023 alone.”

Just how far anti-gun-rights Democrats want to push their agenda was best illustrated earlier this month when New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham declared a “public health emergency” in Albuquerque and surrounding Bernalillo County and decreed a 30-day ban on the open or concealed carry of firearms. It took a half-dozen federal lawsuits and criticism from members of her own party, plus the granting of a temporary restraining order by a judge to force the governor to pull back, but only a little bit.

Biden rode into the White House with a political agenda that included major gun restrictions. He has shown no sign of moderation, and many view the creation of this new office as a way to get around Congressional reluctance to adopt new measures.

Fox News is reporting that Congressman Michael Cloud (R-TX) has re-introduced legislation to “prohibit the president and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) from declaring public health emergencies to enforce gun control measures.” It appears to be in reaction to Lujan Grisham’s effort.

“That is unacceptable, and it is Congress’ duty to prevent it,” Cloud reportedly said, according to the Fox report. “The Biden administration, Gov. Grisham, and others have exercised extraordinary executive power to push their liberal agenda and expand the power of the government. My bill would push back against any infringement on the Second Amendment and prevent the federal government from gaming the system to implement sweeping gun control regulations.”

Participants will likely discuss all of this during this weekend’s Gun Rights Conference. There will be several leading Second Amendment advocates at the event, which will see panel discussions on significant gun rights issues. The conference typically attracts hundreds of grassroots activists from across the country.

The list of speakers includes SAF President Masad Ayoob, National Review’s John Fund, SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut, Nationally-syndicated radio personalities Tom Gresham and Mark Walters, Ammoland founder and editor Fredy Riehl, plus John Lott, author and founder of the Crime Prevention Research Center, several attorneys who focus on Second Amendment litigation, and Robert Cottrol, author and law professor at George Washington University.

While some might view the timing of Biden’s announcement as likely to throw water on the conference, quite the opposite outcome is likely. Perhaps another gun control announcement by a president who devoted much of his Capitol Hill career to championing every restrictive gun control measure would energize the conference attendees more than anything else.

About Dave Workman

Dave Workman is a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms, and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.

Dave Workman

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

Gun control organizations have been seeking to dismantle the bipartisan Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA).

By Larry Keane

When Something Ruins Everything Weak link iStock-Madmaxer 627816108
When Something Ruins Everything Weak link iStock-Madmaxer 627816108
For years, gun control organizations have been seeking to dismantle the bipartisan Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA).

That’s the crucial federal law shielding firearm manufacturers and sellers from frivolous lawsuits designed to bankrupt law-abiding businesses by blaming them for the criminal misuse of lawfully sold firearms or drive the industry to its knees and impose gun control through court-ordered settlements. It is what former Clinton Secretary of Labor Robert Reich dubbed “regulation through litigation.”

Gun control advocates have unsuccessfully urged Congress to repeal the law, falsely claiming it provides total immunity from all lawsuits – a falsehood regularly repeated by President Joe Biden even though the media has fact-checked him and said it is not true.  In court, these groups have unsuccessfully challenged the PLCAA’s constitutionality. Attorney General Merrick Garland testified before Congress that the PLCAA was Constitutionally-sound, despite the contrary rhetoric coming from The White House and the gun ban lobby.

They continue to ask courts to misapply the law’s exceptions (disproving the total immunity claim). All these efforts are designed to open up a new floodgate of frivolous litigation against the industry not seen since the late 1990s and early 2000s. It was that litigation which the bipartisan PLCAA prevents.

Now, the enemies of the Second Amendment have opened up a new line of attack on the PLCAA. Surreptitiously led by the Bloomberg-funded Everytown for Gun Safety, they have convinced a few “Blue” antigun legislatures to pass an unconstitutional “public nuisance” (anti-PLCAA) statute.

These statutes attempt an end run around the PLCAA to set the table for a renaissance of reckless lawsuits against members of the industry. NSSF is challenging the Everytown-backed laws in New York, New Jersey, Delaware, California, Illinois, Washington and Hawaii.

Out of the Shadows

Not content to be the “man behind the curtain,” however, Everytown is now stepping into the well of the courtroom to defend its unconstitutional law. Everytown Law recently filed petitions for three of their staff attorneys to represent Hawaii’s Attorney General Anne E. Lopez, in NSSF’s challenge to Hawaii’s unconstitutional “public nuisance” law. This puts Everytown Law in an active role, not just a supporting role, of defending unconstitutional laws.

NSSF is committed to preventing Everytown and other gun-grabbing organizations from destroying our industry and with it, the Second Amendment.

In a blatant display of its true intentions, Everytown has now stepped out from behind the scenes and onto center stage to defend Hawaii’s House Bill 426. This legislation seeks to impose vague and unenforceable “reasonable controls” on firearm products produced outside of Hawaii. It grants state officials, organizations and private individuals the power to unleash civil lawsuits against firearm industry members for the actions of deranged criminals.

Everytown’s court appearance in support of this bill is a glaring confirmation of its active role in undermining the PLCAA and burdening the firearm industry with stifling regulations that threaten the Second Amendment altogether.

This maneuver not only tramples on the rights of responsible gun owners but also heaves an unfair burden onto small businesses struggling to navigate an already complex legal and economic landscape inherent in operating with a Federal Firearms License (FFL).

Victimizing Victims

Everytown’s Affirmative Litigation Counsel, Alla Lefkowitz, is pivotal in the group’s campaign against the PLCAA. Formerly associated with the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, Lefkowitz’s history of spearheading legal action against firearm businesses is alarming. The infamous case involving the Phillips family is a prime example.

The Brady Center urged the family to bring a baseless lawsuit against Lucky Gunner, a firearm business, following the tragic murder of their daughter by a mentally ill criminal in Aurora, Colo., in 2012. Brady urged the family to sue without disclosing that both Colorado law and the PLCAA prevent such civil actions and left the family to fend for itself when its lawsuit predictably failed and, under Colorado law, they were required to pay the defendant’s attorney’s fees.

The result? The Phillips family was left bankrupt. This case underscores how gun control organizations like Everytown and Brady are ready to exploit grieving families’ emotions to advance their ideologies, even at the cost of justice and fairness.

Everytown’s masquerade as a champion of responsible firearm regulation is a sham. Their actions speak louder than their hollow words. By actively participating in “public nuisance” lawsuits and championing laws like Hawaii’s HB 426, Everytown lays plain its intention to undermine the PLCAA and smother the firearm industry with irrational restrictions that only erode the Second Amendment rights of Americans and do nothing to make communities safer. Their track record of manipulating tragic events for their own political gain is morally reprehensible.

True advocates for responsible firearm ownership must critically examine Everytown’s motives and actions to ensure genuine safety and justice prevail. Everytown’s tactics prioritize radical politics over the well-being of families and small businesses. It is imperative to unmask these deceitful ploys and stand against any agenda that threatens civil liberties and the integrity of industries that serve law-abiding citizens.

About The National Shooting Sports Foundation

NSSF is the trade association for the firearm industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of thousands of manufacturers, distributors, firearm retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations, and publishers nationwide. For more information, visit nssf.org

Categories
All About Guns Allies Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Gun Fearing Wussies

NO GREAT SURPRISE

BIDEN’S BLANKET ENDORSEMENT AS GUN CONFERENCE LOOMS
WRITTEN BY DAVE WORKMAN

President Joe Biden recently picked up a literal “blanket endorsement”
from several gun control lobbying groups for his 2024 re-election run.
(Official White House portrait, public domain)

In politics, as well as business, timing is everything, so let’s take a look at current events and test the theory.

Last month, in something of a first, it seems like every gun prohibitionist lobbying group on the map joined together to endorse Joe Biden for re-election in 2024. This is quite possibly the biggest non-surprise in recent political history, and it tells us something important.

Gun grabbers, as my pal Alan Gottlieb at the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) calls them, are dead serious about keeping their guy in the White House for another four years.

Adding to the mix, just about this time last month, CNN was reporting how the president would be making an announcement right after Labor Day about how gun control would be a centerpiece in his campaign over the next 14 months.

By now, if CNN was right, we should know what this was all about. It was supposed to include expanding the definition of what a firearms dealer is, and whether active gun traders and/or buyers and sellers should have a federal firearms license. There was more mentioned, and none of it was good news for gun owners.

Another talking point was supposed to be expanded background checks, or so-called “universal background checks,” which translates to more red tape and inconvenience for honest citizens and no problem at all for criminals who simply bypass background checks. There was some question about whether Biden could do this without legislation, which would likely be DOA on Capitol Hill, with an election year looming.

What really makes this interesting is — as I mentioned right up front — is the timing. The weekend of Sept. 22-24, the 38th annual Gun Rights Policy Conference will unfold in Phoenix, Arizona. Would anyone care to bet what and who will be the main subjects of discussion during that lively 72-hour gathering?

Alan Gottlieb created the Gun Rights Policy Conference
38 years ago. It has grown to be an important grassroots event.

What is the Gun Rights Conference?

For the past 38 years, gun rights advocates and grassroots activists from across the country have gathered at some hotel in some city for a weekend of panel discussions, reports, networking, socializing and learning about Second Amendment issues from the top names in the gun rights movement.

The Gun Rights Policy Conference (GRPC), which is co-hosted by the Second Amendment Foundation and CCRKBA, is something of a “Who’s Who” event. Over the years, it has attracted leaders from virtually every gun rights group on the map.

We’re talking NRA, GOA, National Shooting Sports Foundation, SAF and CCRKBA of course; Illinois State Rifle Association, California Rifle & Pistol Association, Gun Owners Action League of Massachusetts, Washington Arms Collectors, Florida Carry, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association and so many other groups it’s impossible to name them all.

GRPC was and remains the brainchild of the aforementioned Alan Gottlieb. Unlike a National Rifle Association convention, this event was designed to always be an educational gathering. It is oriented toward grassroots activism, and over the past couple of years, features have been added.

Last year, there was a day-long legal symposium which drew several attorneys who are getting deeply involved in Second Amendment litigation. In conjunction with the conference there has been a gathering of bloggers and podcasters.

The first one of these gatherings was held in Bellevue, Washington, and I was there. It was, from a journalist’s perspective, one of those rare opportunities to listen and get an understanding of how the most energetic folks in the gun rights movement talked and thought. Things haven’t really changed much; the faces, of course, but not the philosophy. If you want to understand gun rights from the ground up, this little soiree is just what you need.

Among this year’s confirmed speakers will be American Handgunner and GUNS Magazine columnist Massad Ayoob, who happens to also serve as president of the SAF. He will be joined by radio legends Tom Gresham (SAF Board of Trustees) and Mark Walters (CCRKBA Board of Directors), SAF and CCRKBA leader Alan Gottlieb, SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut, journalist John Fund and many others. A full program should be available online within days right here.

Massad Ayoob is no stranger to readers of American Handgunner
and GUNS magazine. What many don’t know is that he is the
president of the Second Amendment Foundation.

Only twice has the event been totally online — during the COVID-19 pandemic — and the virtual GRPC events were viewed online by tens of thousands of people.

Panel discussions frequently involve politicians, academics, attorneys, writers, historians, firearms trainers, and local activists.

There are two receptions, one Friday evening and the other Saturday evening. Saturday’s agenda runs from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. and includes an awards luncheon. Sunday’s agenda runs from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m.

For those unable to attend, the sessions will be live-streamed, and you should be able to hook up by visiting the SAF website.

Who Backs Biden?

Returning to endorsements for the president, it’s a veritable Rogue’s Gallery of gun control extremists.

The lineup includes Everytown for Gun Safety, the Brady Campaign, Moms Demand Action, Students Demand Action, Team Enough, Community Justice Action Fund, and Giffords. Would you believe it, Spectrum News identifies this bunch as “gun safety groups.” (If you ever want to have a little fun, ask representatives from any of these groups how many certified “gun safety” instructors they have, where they offer “gun safety” courses and what kinds of guns they personally own.)

When CNN announced Biden’s campaign plans, the report said he would “make gun safety a central issue of his reelection campaign.” What’s he going to do, encourage people to take an NRA home firearms safety course?

The courts have lately been unkind to gun control, but not entirely hostile. After U.S. District Court Judge Reed O’Connor in Texas ruled ATF overstepped its authority in writing a “new rule” on parts kits — the so-called “ghost guns” — the Supreme Court reversed and allowed the rule to stand, at least while the actual case makes its way through the lower courts.

Hunter Biden’s so-called “sweetheart deal” on drug charges and alleged gun law violations was derailed by a judge several weeks ago, so that could come up during the campaign. There was a strange silence from the gun control crowd when Hunter’s “deal” on the gun law violation was announced. Hey, if it weren’t for the double standard, the Left would have no standards at all.

But, these people vote, so we better vote, too.

Fatal Choice

An Indiana man made the fatal mistake of apparently driving into the front yard of a couple in the Salem area, then pulling a gun on the male homeowner, according to Fox News.

It was his bad luck the man’s wife was inside. She grabbed her own handgun and shot the suspect — identified as 45-year-old Michael Chastain — fatally. Chastain reportedly had previously dated the couple’s daughter, but she no longer lived at her parents’ home, so it’s not clear why he went there in the first place. It turned out to be the last place he visited, not counting the hospital, where he was pronounced dead.

Chastain reportedly had a criminal record.

Limping to Jail?

There’s a 23-year-old guy in Hammond, Louisiana, who may be limping into court shortly, thanks to a nastily-placed bullet which hit him just above the knee.

Of course, he earned the lead by allegedly forcing his way into the wrong residence at a mobile home park in Tangipahoa Parish (I can’t pronounce it, either) last month. According to WWL News, the suspect broke in through a window, threatening to kill the homeowner and her family. He also reportedly assaulted a guest in the process. He immediately learned this was the wrong way to win new friends because the female homeowner produced a pistol and plugged him.

Instead of running or even hobbling away, our miscreant reportedly stripped off all of his clothes and then ran to a nearby vehicle, broke a window and tried to barricade himself inside.

If you guessed drugs were somehow involved, you are a good guesser. According to the report, the suspect confessed to the sheriff’s office that he had consumed some “illegal narcotics” prior to the incident. Our model citizen now faces charges including home invasion, second-degree battery, “vehicle burglary,” and resisting arrest.

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

Seems reasonable to me

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Gun Fearing Wussies

Some more Red Hot Gospel here!

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Born again Cynic! California Grumpy's hall of Shame Gun Fearing Wussies You have to be kidding, right!?!

California Democrats pass state tax on guns and ammunition after nearly a decade of attempts by Lindsey Holden

Taya Gray/USA TODAY NETWORK file

California lawmakers will send a state excise tax on guns and ammunition to Gov. Gavin Newsom after years of failed attempts by Democratic legislators.

The Senate voted 27-9 on Thursday to approve Assembly Bill 28, which would require manufacturers, vendors and dealers to pay an 11% tax on guns and ammunition to fund violence prevention efforts. The bill passed with exactly the two-thirds threshold needed for approval of a tax.

Gun and ammunition-sellers would pay the new state tax on top of the 10 to 11% federal excise tax they already pay to fund wildlife conservation efforts.

Assemblyman Jesse Gabriel, D-Woodland Hills, authored the bill after former Assemblyman Marc Levine, D-San Rafael, failed multiple times to get excise tax bills through the Legislature.

Prior to Levine’s attempts, at least three other lawmakers had pushed similar taxes on guns and ammunition since 2013. Gabriel’s bill was the first of its kind to pass out of the Assembly.

When the assemblyman first put the bill forward, there were questions about whether it was “in the realm of possibility,” he said after the Senate vote.

“I introduced this bill at the very beginning of session,” Gabriel said. “A few weeks later, we have mass shootings in Half Moon Bay and in Monterey Park and in all these places.”

“Frankly, I think part of the reason the bill passed is the public is demanding this of us,” he added. “They are demanding that we have more solutions that will do more to protect their kids, to protect their communities.”

Lawmakers debate tax effectiveness

Many senators on Thursday cited their children and grandchildren and school safety concerns in their arguments for backing the bill. Floor debate lasted for about an hour before lawmakers voted.

Sen. Angelique Ashby, D-Sacramento, urged her colleagues to support AB 28 as a “mechanism to address gun violence.” She made her plea in the name of her school-age daughter and California children, as well as Amber Clark, a Natomas librarian who was fatally shot in 2018.

“Like so many Americans, I do hug my little daughter each morning as I drop her off at school,” Ashby said. “And as I drive away, I push out of my mind the unthinkable. Otherwise, it would be impossible for me to face the tasks I’m responsible for every day.”

But Republicans, and a handful of Democrats, said the tax would do little to prevent gun violence, and retailers would pass on the added cost on to customers. In this way, it would penalize law-abiding firearm owners, hunters and students taking part in shooting sports, they said.

“When you add another 11% on, all it’s going do is decrease the number of hunters,” said Sen. Bill Dodd, D-Napa. “Sooner or later, this will be like the tobacco tax. And sooner or later, this money’s going to go down, down, down.”

Gun control groups cheered AB 28’s passage and urged Newsom to sign it.

“This bill is an innovative approach in tackling gun violence and a crucial step to improve the safety of all California families,” said Cassandra Whetstone, a volunteer with the California chapter of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, in a statement.

Gun rights advocates said they plan to sue the state over the legislation if the governor makes it law.

“The passage of this bill will be seen for what it is … an unconstitutional tax on an enumerated right,” said Rick Travis, legislative director for the California Rifle and Pistol Association, in an email.

The measure now heads to Newsom, who must sign or veto bills by Oct. 14.

(Yup, you read that right – California is going to tax one of our Constitutionally protected Rights.)

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Gun Fearing Wussies You have to be kidding, right!?!

Biden’s Proposed Rule Will Eliminate Private Gun Sales by John Crump

Canik iStock 1182677191
Biden’s Proposed Rule Will Eliminate Private Gun Sales IMG iStock-1182677191

President Joe Biden and the Department of Justice announced a proposed rule to change who will need a federal firearms license (FFL) to sell firearms.

The long-awaited rule was hailed by anti-gun groups like Everytown for Gun Safety, Giffords, and Brady United as a way of closing the “gun show loophole” and the “internet loophole.” Anti-gun organizations claim this is a step towards universal background checks, a centerpiece of the Biden Administration’s anti-gun policy.

The proposed rule is powered by the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA), which was a law championed by Chris Murphy (D-CT) and John Cornyn (R-TX). The BSCA changed the law’s wording to describe who the federal government considers a gun dealer. The bill altered the language of Section 921(a) of Title 18, United States Code.

The BSCA changed the definition of someone “engaged in the business” of selling guns from “with the principal objective of livelihood and profit” to the ambiguous statement of “to predominantly earn a profit.” Now, the Biden Administration is exploiting that change through the upcoming rule. At the time, some Republicans who backed the law blew off the concerns that an anti-gun administration would exploit the language. The change read:

(22) The term `to predominantly earn a profit’ means that the intent underlying the sale or disposition of firearms is predominantly one of obtaining pecuniary gain, as opposed to other intents, such as improving or liquidating a personal firearms collection: Provided, that proof of profit shall not be required as to a person who engages in the regular and repetitive purchase and disposition of firearms for criminal purposes or terrorism.

The new rule will also affect those that sell multiples of the same type of firearms. This section means that anyone who liquidates a collection of Glock pistols must acquire an FFL before they can liquidate the guns. Many people collect certain guns, and this would prevent the legal transfer of those firearms without an FFL.

Unlicensed sellers who sell through “online auctions” would be required to obtain an FFL under the proposed rule. This section is a targeted shot at sites like Armslist.

These websites do not sell firearms and currently do not have to get an FFL. The new rule seems to change that. This has long been a goal of the Biden Administration, which has put out false narratives about online gun sales, such as buyers not having to go through background checks for guns purchased online. The rule reads:

“In addition, it clarifies the term “dealer,” including how that term applies to auctioneers, and defines the term “responsible person.” These proposed changes would assist persons in understanding when they are required to have a license to deal in firearms.”

“These examples are provided to clarify for unlicensed persons that firearms dealing requires a license in whatever place or through whatever medium the firearms are purchased and sold, including the Internet and locations other than a traditional brick and mortar store.”

Armslist is specifically called out in the rule. Armslist is a firearms version of “Craigslist List.” Armslist has been the target of anti-gun groups for years who keep launching and losing lawsuits against the website. Many think this is a concerted effort to hurt the website’s business by stating up to 25% of people selling on the site will require an FFL under the proposed rule. The rule reads:

“To better estimate both online and offline sales, ATF assumed, based on best professional judgment of FIPB SMEs and with limited available information, that the national online marketplace estimate above may represent 25 percent of the total national firearms market, which would also include in-person, local, or other offline transactions like flea markets, State-wide exchanges, or websites within each of the 50 States.”

The rule would make it so that anyone who rents a table at a gun show will be assumed to be in the business of selling firearms, meaning that private citizens will no longer be able to sell their firearms at any gun show.

Also, if someone advertises their firearms for sale, they could be assumed to be in the business of selling firearms, which will shut down most private sales. The rule reads:

“Based on this decades-long body of experience, the proposed rule provides that, absent reliable evidence to the contrary, a person is presumed to have the intent to “predominantly earn a profit” when the person: (1) advertises, markets, or otherwise promotes a firearms business (e.g., advertises or posts firearms for sale, including on any website, establishes a website for selling or offering for sale their firearms, makes available business cards, or tags firearms with sales prices), regardless of whether the person incurs expenses or only promotes the business informally;94 (2) purchases, rents, or otherwise secures or sets aside permanent or temporary physical space to display or store firearms they offer for sale, including part or all of a business premises, table or space at a gun show, or display case;95 (3) makes or maintains records, in any form, to document, track, or calculate profits and losses from firearms purchases and sales;96 (4) purchases or otherwise secures merchant services as a business (e.g., credit card transaction services, digital wallet for business) through which the person makes or offers to make payments for firearms transactions;97 (5) formally or informally purchases, hires, or otherwise secures business security services (e.g., a central station-monitored security) system registered to a business,98 or guards for security99) to protect business assets or transactions that include firearms; (6) formally or informally establishes a business entity, trade name, or online business account, including an account using a business name on a social media or other website, through which the person makes or offers to make firearms transactions;100 (7) secures or applies for a State or local business license to purchase for resale or to sell merchandise that includes firearms; or (8) purchases a business insurance policy, including any riders that cover firearms inventory. 101 Any of these nonexclusive, firearms-business-related activities justifies a rebuttable presumption that the person has the requisite intent to predominantly earn a profit from reselling or disposing of firearms.”

By requiring more people to get FFLs, it will prevent a lot of Americans from selling guns. The secondary market has been an excellent way for those less fortunate to acquire the means of protection. Those who choose to get an FFL will be subject to unannounced warrantless inspections. These inspections have been used to revoke gun shop’s FFLs under the Biden Administration’s zero-tolerance policy.

FFL revocation is up between 350% and 500% and is currently at a 17-year high. The amount of record keeping, cost, and hostile environment created by the ATF could mean that many will not get an FFL to sell their firearms, which could be part of Biden’s plan.

The government’s argument is most criminals do not get their guns from gun dealers. That fact is true, but most criminals do not get firearms from legal transactions. Most guns used in crimes are obtained illegally through such means as theft, which means this rule will not prevent criminals from getting firearms.

“The U.S. Sentencing Commission reports that “88.8 percent of firearm offenders sentenced under §2K2.1130 [of the United States Sentencing Commission GuidelinesManual (Nov. 2021)] were [already] prohibited from possessing a firearm” under 18U.S.C. 922(g). These individuals would thus have been flagged in a background check,would have therefore been prohibited from buying a firearm from a licensed dealer after their first offense, and would not have been able to commit the subsequent firearms offense(s) if their seller had been licensed.”

There will be an exception for gifting firearms between family members. Although this type of transfer only makes up a small portion of transfers. There will be a 90-day comment period once the proposed rule is posted to the federal registry. After the comment period, a final rule will be unveiled.”

AmmoLand News is currently reaching out to those Republicans who backed the BSCA to get comments.