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

How the ATF is Deceiving Media in their War on Gun Dealers by Lee Williams

ATF Police Raid IMG 2nd instagram.com/atfhq/
ATF Police Raid IMG 2nd instagram.com/atfhq/

Hallelujah! The legacy media has finally started covering ATF’s unconstitutional war on the country’s gun dealers, which the pro-gun media has been denouncing and warning the public about for more than two years.

The Wall Street Journal published a story Friday morning titled: “Hundreds of Gun Dealers Lose Licenses Under Biden Administration Crackdown.” Nine hours later, FOX News posted their take of the WSJ story titled: “Gun industry cries foul after hundreds of gun dealers lose licenses amid Biden administration crackdown.”

This friends, could be a very good thing.

The more scrutiny the ATF receives, the more difficult it will be for them to continue violating our constitutional rights. But remember that ATF officials are masters of hoodwinking and gaslighting the media and the public. Their responses to the WSJ and FOX show that ATF’s leadership are up to their old tricks. Clearly, they’re trying to downplay the significance of what they’ve already done, and what they continue to do every single day.

Everchanging Rules

In an emailed statement to Fox News, ATF said it is merely following the law:

“Federal Firearms Licensees are often our first line of defense against gun crime and are often a source of critical enforcement information that helps law enforcement identify straw purchasers and disrupt firearms trafficking schemes,” ATF Spokesperson Kristina Mastropasqua said. “FFLs that willfully (emphasis mine) violate the law, however, must be held accountable. ATF conducts inspections to ensure compliance with applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations and to educate licensees on the specific requirements of those laws and regulations.”

For those familiar with Joe Biden’s weaponized ATF, the word “willfully” should jump off the page.

In a story published in May 2020, one expert warned that the ATF had redefined “willful” to bolster Biden’s zero-tolerance for willful violations policy. Now, because of the new definition, if a dealer makes a simple clerical error, they can lose their license because the new definition of willful states that the dealer knew the law, but willfully chose to violate it anyway – regardless of whether it was a simple oversight, an error by an employee or a minor paperwork mistake.

“They have twisted negligence into willful,” the ATF expert said. “These are not uncommon errors that we’re seeing. Things happen.”

Revoked vs. Surrendered

Both FOX and the WSJ cited ATF revocation data that claimed there were 122 Federal Firearm License revocations during the last fiscal year, which began in October.

First, I need to point out that ATF data – any ATF data – is immediately suspect. I’d rather rely on an 8mm Type 94 Nambu for home defense than any numbers ATF publishes. There is no doubt that far more then 122 FFLs were revoked, but this is not the point.

After a series of embarrassing losses during their own revocation hearings, ATF switched up some of its tactics. Now, in addition to formal revocation proceedings, ATF agents try to scare the hell out of a gun dealer they’ve targeted, hoping they will “voluntarily” surrender their license and avoid hearings and reams of paperwork.

This tactic worked when ATF sent a SWAT team to the home of a gun dealer in rural Oklahoma and handcuffed him in front of his 13-year-old son, but it failed when they threatened a longtime gun dealer in Texas with unspecified federal charges, who instead opted to take them to court.

An FFL is an FFL to the ATF. It doesn’t matter how they get their hands on them, but any truthful data should also include the number of FFLs that were “voluntarily” surrendered.

ATF-Speak

When covering anything ATF, particular attention needs to be paid to their legalese. Often, when ATF claims a gun dealer broke the law, it’s not really a law. It’s actually a rule the ATF came up with themselves. More than a few courts have chastised the agency for trying to be judge, jury and executioner. They’ve violated real laws by creating and enforcing their own rules, which carry the full weight of a federal law, such as fines and lengthy prison terms.

ATF still can’t grasp that Congress creates laws, not the administration or any federal law enforcement agency. They’re headed for a spanking from the Supreme Court that will be legendary in its scope.

Written Statements

When a public official or the agency they represent have nothing to hide, they take questions. They submit to interviews. They give out their cellphone numbers. They make themselves available to the media and the public. After all, they work for us, or at least they’re supposed to.

Nowadays, ATF leadership is hiding deep in a bunker. They don’t respond to emails, phone calls or ever FOIA requests. When pressed hard, they’ll sometimes send a written statement, but only after it’s been approved by teams of lawyers and communications staffers.

This alone speaks volumes about the ATF. It says they don’t believe in accountability to the public, which pays their salaries. It also screams that they have a lot to hide – far more than what’s already been uncovered.

I hope the legacy media’s interest in ATF’s shenanigans continues – the more, the merrier. Besides, ATF has become bloated with lies and is long overdue for a massive investigative enema.

This story is presented by the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project and wouldn’t be possible without you. Please click here to make a tax-deductible donation to support more pro-gun stories like this.


About Lee Williams

Lee Williams, who is also known as “The Gun Writer,” is the chief editor of the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project. Until recently, he was also an editor for a daily newspaper in Florida. Before becoming an editor, Lee was an investigative reporter at newspapers in three states and a U.S. Territory. Before becoming a journalist, he worked as a police officer. Before becoming a cop, Lee served in the Army. He’s earned more than a dozen national journalism awards as a reporter, and three medals of valor as a cop. Lee is an avid tactical shoote

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

Sure Mike!

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Gun Fearing Wussies

Federal Court Clears Path for New Jersey to Pursue Legal Action Against Gun Manufacturers by F Riehl, Editor in Chief

Business Woman Thumb Down Vote No iStock-Lazy_Bear 1137891404
iStock-Lazy_Bear

In a significant ruling, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals announced on Thursday that New Jersey possesses the authority to sue firearm manufacturers under its “public nuisance” law. This comes as a substantial victory for the ant-freedom state and its ongoing efforts to gut public safety amidst the backdrop of gun rights affirmation by the U.S. Supreme Court.

From Fox News:

“A three-judge panel on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that a legal challenge brought against the law by the National Sports Shooting Foundation (NSSF) was premature. Though the court acknowledged the law is somewhat vague about what conduct can trigger a lawsuit from the state, it nevertheless said the firearms industry “jumped the gun” by filing a legal challenge before demonstrating injury. “

Although New Jersey’s “public nuisance” legislation was signed into law by Democratic Governor Phil Murphy in July 2022, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) moved swiftly, only four months later, to block its enforcement.

NSSF argued that this state law was in direct contradiction to the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which offers broad protective measures against liabilities for the gun industry. However, the recent 3rd Circuit decision ruled that NSSF’s legal challenge might have been too hasty. This sentiment was mirrored in Judge Stephanos Bibas’ statement, noting that there was little evidence to indicate that enforcement was imminent.

As a result, he commented, the firearms industry “jumped the gun” by filing a legal challenge prior to any observable harm.

Despite this setback for the gun industry, the NSSF remains resolute. Lawrence Keane, the NSSF General Counsel, pointed out that while they disagreed with the court’s decision, it’s important to underline the court hasn’t expressly stated that New Jersey’s law is compliant with the PLCAA. This distinction leaves a door open for further legal challenges if New Jersey moves to enforce the “public nuisance” law against firearm manufacturers.

This constitutionally shaky law is part of a broader series of gun reforms rushed into law by Governor Murphy. It grants New Jersey the ability to sue the firearms sector over concocted “public nuisance” violations that government officials claim arise from various stages in the gun lifecycle – from manufacturing and distribution to marketing. The significance of this strategy is further highlighted by the establishment of a new office by the state attorney general, Matt Platkin. This office, reportedly the first of its kind in the nation, sole purpose is initiating civil enforcement actions against firearm companies at taxpayers’ expense.

Democrat supporters of the legislation believe it’s an essential tool for public safety. Attorney General Platkin reaffirmed this belief, stating that the law aims to hold accountable those whose actions, driven by profit motives, exacerbate the epidemic of gun violence.

On the national stage, New Jersey’s initiative appears to be setting a foreboding precedent. Following the state’s lead, other predominantly blue states, including Delaware, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Washington, and Illinois, have either passed or are considering analogous measures to attack the gun industry, one of America’s last robust manufacturing sectors. With the 3rd Circuit’s ruling being the first instance of a federal appellate court weighing in on such laws, the decision will likely influence subsequent judicial perspectives.

The journey is far from over. As states tread this shady legal path, they are guaranteed to encounter additional challenges from the gun industry and advocates for the U.S. Constitution. The primary contention remains the incongruence between overarching state laws like New Jersey’s and the federal PLCAA.

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

Pop Quiz

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Born again Cynic! Cops

Hundreds of Gun Dealers Lose Licenses Under Biden Administration Crackdown By Zusha Elinson

After years of light enforcement to encourage cooperation, ATF is clamping down on firearm sellers, who say they are being unfairly targeted
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives employs about 800 people to inspect licensed firearms dealers across the country. PHOTO: TIM SLOAN/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

The Biden administration is revoking licenses from hundreds of firearms dealers in a significant escalation of federal enforcement actions that has angered many in the gun industry.

It has also provoked disagreement among law-enforcement veterans. Some say it is a welcome change after years of wrist slaps, while others say it risks alienating some of the government’s most valuable sources in combating gun violence.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has revoked the licenses of 122 gun dealers in the fiscal year that began in October, up from 90 for all last fiscal year and 27 in 2021.

Previously, ATF issued warnings to many firearms dealers for legal violations, in part because they are a valuable source of tips on suspicious gun buyers. The Trump and Obama administrations never revoked more than 81 dealers’ licenses annually since at least 2013, the earliest year for which data are available. 

Gun dealers have filed lawsuits and threatened to stop informing federal agents about suspicious buyers, claiming that the crackdown is a way to punish the firearms industry by an administration hostile to them.

The Biden administration, which has been pushing to more tightly regulate guns both via legislation and administrative action, said it is simply enforcing the law.

ATF Director Steve Dettelbach said guns can end up getting sold to criminals and others who shouldn’t have them if dealers don’t follow the rules. PHOTO: OLIVER CONTRERAS/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES

“We’ve taken steps to hold accountable those few dealers who are engaging in these willful violations,” said ATF Director Steve Dettelbach. “They’re not going to have the privilege of being a gun dealer anymore.”

Dettelbach said guns can end up getting sold to criminals and others who shouldn’t have them if dealers don’t follow the rules.

Gun-store owners complain that the federal government is taking away their livelihoods over paperwork errors.

“We were making $1 million a year, now it’s less than $100,000,” said Anthony Navarro, who lost his license last year after receiving three earlier warnings since 2009. “This policy is designed to be a backdoor violation of the Second Amendment.”

Navarro still sells firearm accessories at his Greeley, Colo., store.

The ATF employs about 800 people to inspect more than 50,000 licensed dealers across the country. In the past, the agency had a light touch with inspections in part because it relied on dealers for information about suspicious gun buyers, according to former ATF officials.

“The gun dealers were our first line of defense against gun trafficking,” said Peter Forcelli, a retired deputy assistant director. “Why are we now beating an ally into submission?”

Other former officials said that the soft approach created an environment in which dealers weren’t worried about breaking the rules.

“The ATF, previous to this administration, had a ‘Let’s see if we can help you’ attitude and some gun dealers took advantage of that,” said Rick Vasquez, a retired ATF official.

President Biden’s tougher approach comes after a yearslong push by gun-control groups such as Brady to go after rogue gun dealers. Brady compiled about 80,000 pages of ATF inspection reports in recent years to highlight the issue.

Christian Heyne is vice president of policy and programs at Brady, which advocates for tighter gun laws. PHOTO: TOM WILLIAMS/ZUMA PRESS

“We could see regularly that recommendations for revocation were being downgraded and then these same stores would be inspected again for even at times even more than a decade,” said Christian Heyne, vice president of policy and programs at Brady.

Heyne discovered that an ATF inspector had in 2015 recommended revoking Navarro’s license for his shop in Colorado after sending him warning letters in 2009 and 2011. The 2015 inspection turned up 10 violations, including selling guns to people who said they were prohibited from owning guns on background check forms. An ATF supervisor overturned the recommendation, saying Navarro should be given a warning conference instead, the inspection reports show.

Navarro said some customers made mistakes when filling out background check forms, but weren’t prohibited from buying firearms.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

How should regulation of gun dealers be enforced? Join the conversation below.

In 2020, inspectors found more violations, including failing to report multiple sales of handguns and failing to keep records of some transactions. Officials noted that they had warned Navarro to clean up his act on multiple occasions, according to agency documents.

Navarro said he discovered those issues after one of his employees quit. “It was a horrendous mess,” he said. “This guy hid forms underneath the printer.”

He said he reported the problems to the ATF as soon as he found them.

Advertisement – Scroll to Continue

The agency revoked his license to sell firearms last year.

An ATF spokeswoman declined to comment on specific cases.

A North Dakota gun store that recently filed a lawsuit against the ATF alleged that the new approach to inspections is being “wielded as a political weapon.” Bridge City Ordnance had sued the agency over an unrelated matter when inspectors recommended revoking its license. Lawyers for the gun store declined to comment, as did the ATF.

Leslie Gifford, an 82-year-old retiree who sold firearms out of his garage in Burlington, Kan., for the past three decades, tried to fight back when the ATF pulled his license last year for several violations including selling a gun to a man from NebraskaSuch sales are required to go through a dealer in the purchaser’s home state.

At a hearing, Gifford said he thought the sale was allowed because the man had a concealed-carry license from Nebraska, and he apologized, according to ATF documents. He attributed other violations to being too busy.

The ATF wasn’t moved by his pleas, ruling that “there is no legal justification for a licensee’s claim that circumstances, such as being busy or overwhelmed, excuses the failure.”

Gifford said he believes the government was determined to revoke his license, rather than reach a reasonable compromise.

“Mr. Biden wants to get rid of all of us little dealers,” said Gifford. “Gets me wound up, boy. It’s a political game, sure as hell.”

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

But of course!

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

I didn’t know that many of my friends may be terrorists! – Bayou Renaissance Man

Looks like Big Brother is doing his usual stupid thing again.  According to Public Intelligence:

A joint bulletin issued in early August by the Department of Homeland Security and FBI warns state and local law enforcement agencies to look out for people in possession of “large amounts” of weapons and ammunition, describing the discovery of “unusual amounts” of weapons as a potential indicator of criminal or terrorist activity.

Citing the example of Norwegian mass-murderer Anders Behring Breivik, who reportedly “stockpiled approximately 12,000 pounds of precursors, weapons, and armor and hid them underground in remote, wooded locations,” the bulletin instructs law enforcement to look for “large amounts of weapons, ammunition, explosives, accelerants, or explosive precursor chemicals” that “could indicate pre-operational terrorist attack planning or criminal activity.”  Weapons do not have to be “cached” in remote locations to meet the standard for suspicious activity.  According to the bulletin, weapons could be stored in an “individual’s home, storage facility, or vehicle” and may include common firearms such as “rifles, shotguns, pistols” as well as “military grade weapons.”  The illegal possession of large amounts of ammunition is also listed as a potential indicator of “criminal weapons possession related to terrorism.”  While the bulletin never clarifies what constitutes a “large” or “unusual” quantity of weapons or ammunition, it does say that such a quantity would “arouse suspicion in a reasonable person.”

There’s more at the link.

The photograph of a ‘weapons cache’ accompanying the article shows a mere five long guns (rifles and shotguns) and seven handguns, for a total of twelve firearms.  I could multiply that total a couple of times before running out of the contents of my gun safe, and I don’t have a particularly large collection.  Some of my friends could out-do me by an order of magnitude!  Consider, for example, these photographs of private – yes, private – gun collections borrowed from this thread on AR15.com (click over there to see many pages of similar pictures – it’s a feast for the eyes of any firearm hobbyist!).

 

 

 

So tell me – are those collections “potential indicator[s] of criminal or terrorist activity”?  If not, then my much smaller and lower-quality collection can hardly be considered to be so . . . unless you’re an unthinking, knee-jerk-reacting bureaucrat, I suppose!

As for ammunition – what precisely do they mean by “the illegal possession of large amounts of ammunition”?  It’s not illegal to possess ammunition unless you’re a convicted felon – and there are no federal restrictions whatsoever on the quantity of ammunition one may have in one’s possession.  (There may be local restrictions such as fire regulations, etc., but these will be area-specific.)  To merely say that the quantity would “arouse suspicion in a reasonable person” is ridiculous.  For a start, define ‘reasonable’.  What does it mean?  What’s a reasonable quantity of ammunition to me, as a rifle shooter, might seem alarmingly large to someone who doesn’t shoot at all, or appear ridiculously inadequate to someone who owns one or more machine-guns in the same caliber as my rifle.  He might consume a one-year supply of ammunition for me in only a few minutes of firing!  Witness last April’s Knob Creek Machine Gun Shoot:

I know a few private individuals who each currently have more than a million rounds of ammunition in their storerooms.  (Two of them are friends of mine.)  They happen to shoot several hundred thousand rounds per year, so they don’t consider such stocks unreasonable – but the average suburban soccer mom who doesn’t shoot at all would probably have hysterics if she knew they were stored in her neighborhood.  (I don’t know why, because it’s no threat to her;  but logic usually doesn’t enter into the calculation for such people.)

I try to buy ammunition in case lots – 500 or 1,000 rounds at a time.  That quantity will last me for anything from a few months to a few years in the calibers I shoot.  I buy it in bulk because it’s cheaper that way.  I’m a retired pastor and retired law enforcement officer.  Does my buying ammunition in bulk, and possessing a few thousand rounds of it, suddenly render me suspicious to the authorities?  If so, I have a few words for them . . . none of them polite!

This is yet another bureaucratic overreach.  Perfectly normal activities are now classified as potentially suspicious – and don’t let that word ‘potentially’ fool you.  In practice, it means that some law enforcement officers and/or agencies will claim that your possession of large quantities of firearms and/or ammunition is automatically grounds for suspicion, and that you’re therefore automatically to be regarded as a potential terrorist, or criminal, or whatever.  Don’t tell me that doesn’t happen.  It does.  I’ve seen it far too many times before – and the more bureaucratic and unthinking the officer or agency, the more likely it is to happen.  Constitutional safeguards are all too often ignored in the process.

It’s long gone time we tossed out of office the politicians who approved the ‘security state’, and dismantled the ‘security bureaucracies’ that do nothing whatsoever to keep us safe – except consume our tax dollars in ever-increasing amounts, and put out such inane ‘alerts’.

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

SPRING CLEANING ‘TIS THE SEASON FOR SHOOTING, CLEANING AND ADJUSTING WRITTEN BY DAVE WORKMAN

Polished brass is one sign of spring around my house. This means I’ve
already hit the range, cleaned the guns and tumbled the empties.

 

Traditionally, when spring rolls around (it started March 20, just in case you missed it), it’s been my habit to head for the range and burn up a few rounds just to make up for all the time spent inside, escaping the winter weather.

It also provides an excuse to do a couple of things. First, I wind up with a lot of spent brass, which goes immediately into the tumbler for a good hot water scrub. Second, it forces me to clean and lubricate some firearms that may have been sitting idle since last fall. And finally, it is always revealing and humbling when guns I may have felt were zeroed a few months ago need a sight adjustment.

Firearms are lots of things to lots of people. They are tools, investments and personal reminders of experiences in the past; memories that can grow fonder as the months and years pass. We all have a few favorites, and some which may have been around for a while simply because they still come in handy.

Last fall, for example, I pulled a 20-gauge side-by-side double-barrel shotgun from the safe I hadn’t used in some time. It rode along on a couple of deer hunts, and we caught up on life, politics, the weather, and both of us wondered where all the grouse had gone. It is now spiffed up with a fresh wipe from an oily cloth, and the action has gotten a couple of drops of oil in the right spots.

 

Dave says it’s a good idea to shoot in all kinds of conditions, all times of year. Yep, that’s snow in the background, light was fading and that parka wasn’t just for laughs.

 

The day before writing this installment, I visited the range — located in a ravine where one could probably hang beef anytime between November and early March because direct sunshine doesn’t seem to find its way in there — for about an hour. Shooting off a rest at 25 yards, it became immediately obvious the sights on the three revolvers I was shooting needed adjustment.

It is important to practice as many times as possible, throughout the year. I’ve done stints at the outdoor range after dark, in December and January, when it was bitterly cold. I’ve been there in the March and November rain, a few times when it was snowing, and in less-than-ideal light conditions. Until the weather gods start scheduling all emergencies in mid-summer under blue skies, I’ll stick with my current strategy.

 

Helpful Forum Friend

 

One important thing happened at some point, either during my early March visit or maybe last fall when I last fired one of my most cherished sixguns, a vintage Model 57 Smith & Wesson with a 6-inch barrel.

 

Here’s a big “oops.” Notice the extractor pin is missing from Dave’s cylinder.
But his friends on a popular handgun forum came to the rescue.

 

As I was cleaning this revolver, I noticed one of the two tiny extractor pins had vanished. It wasn’t broken off, it was just gone and all that remained was the hole in which it fit. My first reflex was to check if one was available online, and that was a no-go. So, I then turned my attention to the Smith & Wesson forum, whining as best as I could muster, and within minutes, several of my sixgun comrades responded.

One guy suggested using the tail end of a small drill bit (they’re steel). Another fellow assured me the handgun will “work without it,” which it probably had been. His message was worth a chuckle: “I have replaced one and had it disappear again, so I said the hell with it. No problem for years.”

Then came a fellow named Carter, who made me an offer I couldn’t refuse: “I’ll send you a couple, .052”, .210” long.” When I asked what he was owed, his reply once again underscores how there are remarkably good people in the shooting fraternity.

“No charge,” he wrote. “I made up some extras to give to members. I’ll put them in the mail tomorrow. Plain white envelope that I damaged and re-taped on the back.”

He advised me to make sure the hole was clean and when installing the replacement, add a tiny bit of thread locker, and wipe off the excess. I certainly would have done that anyway, but my gratitude to this fellow says I owe him one.

 

The Capitol building in Olympia, Wash., where anti-gunners have
been trying to repeal state preemption since it became law four
decades ago. Dave was there to testify against the plan in January,
missing the SHOT Show.

Preemption Spared … Again

 

Anti-gun lawmakers in Washington State came up short again last month when they couldn’t pass legislation to repeal the state’s 40-year-old preemption statute.

Why is this important? If you live in a state which adopted a preemption statute sometime during the last four decades, it is likely Washington’s law was the inspiration. The gun control crowd would be happy to knock out the source statute, and then start attacking its progeny. Perhaps it was a good idea to stay home from the SHOT Show and testify against the bill in January.

This isn’t about providing local control over guns; it’s about creating a checkerboard of confusing and sometimes conflicting laws with the ultimate goal of either discouraging gun ownership at the local level or creating legal violations that may be useful to deny people their Second Amendment rights at some future date.

Still, nobody should rest easy in Washington or anywhere else while the legislature is in session. Any kooky idea thought dead could suddenly emerge from the ashes as an amendment to another bill.

 

Nebraska Permitless?

 

As this was written, lawmakers in Nebraska were locked in debate over Legislative Bill 77, which is aimed at allowing concealed carry without a permit.

It’s not technically a “constitutional carry” bill because it does not include open carry. As reported by the Nebraska Examiner, the bill’s prime sponsor, State Sen. Tom Brewer, “pointed out that it’s already legal to carry a firearm openly in Nebraska, except in businesses and other places where it is prohibited.” Presumably, there would not be much point in making that part of the bill.

As reported by the legislation would not eliminate background checks for gun purchases. One opponent contended the current training requirement would be lost if people were not required to take a course in order to obtain a permit. The Lincoln Journal Star said Sen. Brewer offered assurances to his colleagues that volunteer firearm instructors are already “preparing to offer gun safety training at no cost to gun owners throughout the state as a replacement for the current requirement which is accompanied by a fee.”

Omaha Police Chief Todd Schmaderer and Lincoln Police Chief Teresa Ewins were opposing the measure at this writing. So was Omaha Mayor Jean Stothert and members of the city council.

What’s at stake here is more than just a Midwest state adopting legislation allowing concealed carry without a permit. It would become symbolic for tilting a small but significant majority of states allowing carry without a license or permit, the way it was at the founding, ergo, the generic nickname “constitutional carry.”

If all the pieces fall into place, this year could see Florida, Nebraska and South Carolina joining the lineup of states where lawmakers trust the people to exercise their right to bear arms without a bunch of red tape. Watch these states. If you live in any of them, stay in touch with your state lawmaker.

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

California bill would force credit card companies to adopt category codes for gun stores By Cam Edwards

California bill would force credit card companies to adopt category codes for gun stores
AP Photo/Ringo H.W. Chiu
When major credit card companies announced earlier this year that they would not be implementing new merchant category codes on sales at gun stores, in part because of pending legislation in several states that would prohibit them from doing so, I predicted it wouldn’t be long before anti-gun states like California took the opposite approach and began mandating the use of those codes.

I will say that there was one thing that surprised me in the anti-gunner’s collective statement of outrage: not one of them said anything about blue-states like California responding in kind to the red-state laws that supposedly led to the cold feet on the part of companies like Visa and Mastercard. Maybe they don’t want to tip their hands, but those efforts are almost certainly coming. Gavin Newsom loves to pick culture war fights, and if he’s going after Walgreens over abortion then it probably won’t be long before he demands credit card companies either implement these MCCs or face the wrath of lawmakers in Sacramento.

Here we are just a few months later and sure enough, some of the California legislature’s most vociferous anti-gunners are doing just that. AB 1587 was approved by the Assembly on a 76-0 vote, and is now moving through the Senate. On Thursday the Senate Banking and Financial Institutions Committee gave it’s preliminary approval, and AB 1587 is scheduled to be heard in Senate Judiciary next Tuesday along with AB 1089, another anti-gun measures that adds three-dimensional printers and CNC milling machines to the definition of firearm-related products; requiring “anybody who uses a three-dimensional printer or CNC milling machine to manufacture a firearm to be a state-licensed manufacturer” while prohibiting “the sale, purchase, possession, or receipt of a three-dimensional printer that has the sole or primary function of manufacturing firearms”.

Ahead of next week’s hearing AB 1587’s primary Senate sponsor is already trying to make the case that the legislation will be able to prevent mass shootings and gun trafficking.

 

Unsurprisingly, Min’s argument doesn’t stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny. First, the merchant category codes wouldn’t identify specific transactions, only dollar amounts and the date and location of purchases. How are credit card companies supposed to determine if a particular transaction is “suspicious” enough to warrant reporting? These MCCs are supposed to help identify financial crimes like fraud, not serve as some sort of Minority Report-style pre-crime surveillance system, and even some credit card company execs have pointed out that the codes will be of no use in identifying potential killers.

Heck, as the Firearms Policy Coalition pointed out to Min, even the legislative analysis of AB 1587 directly contradicts his assertions.

 

California already collects more information on gun and ammo buyers than what would be gathered through the use of merchant category codes for firearm retailers, with “universal” background checks run on all purchases of both guns and ammunition. AB 1587 is a culture war tit-for-tat response to laws in Florida, Mississippi, and other states that would fine companies that adopt and utilize the codes. Just as those states provide financial penalties for adopting the codes, AB 1587 would empower California Attorney General Rob Bonta to fine both those companies that don’t start make those codes available for retailers as well as retailers themselves if they don’t start using the codes by March, 2025.

This is yet another blatant attack on gun owners, firearm retailers, and our Second Amendment rights, and I have no doubt that the Senate Judiciary Committee will give it the green light. The bigger questions are how much pushback the legislation will receive from the credit card companies themselves, and who will be the first to sue over the requirement once Gavin Newsom signs the bill into law.

 

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

See why I always say slippery slope?

image