The Indianapolis City-County Council passed Mayor Joe Hogsett’s gun control plan on Monday night. The decision is in response to concerns over violent crime in the city.
Unveiled in May, Hogsett’s plan splits into two parts. The first proposes stricter gun restrictions, subject to state law changes.
These include:
Raising the handgun purchasing age to 21
Mandating handgun licenses
Banning concealed carry w/o license
Banning so-called “assault weapons”
A 2011 state preemption law currently blocks cities from regulating guns. Despite this, the council voted along party lines, 18-5, in favor of Hogsett’s gun control proposals.
The second part, unanimously approved, targets serious offenders.
Indianapolis will hire three federal prosecutors. They’ll report to the Southern District of Indiana’s U.S. Attorney’s Office’s Violent Crimes Unit. The unit focuses on serious violent and gun crimes.
The city’s corporation counsel’s office will fund the new prosecutors. This year’s budget allocates $225,000 for their salaries, with future costs covered by the office.
Mayor Hogsett praised the council’s decision.
“Tonight’s Council votes on Proposals 149 and 156 prove that Indianapolis and its leadership won’t back down from taking bold steps to protect residents and neighborhoods,” said the mayor on Monday night.
“I applaud the Council’s bipartisan support for funding our partnership with U.S. Attorney Zach Myers, holding the worst of the worst offenders to account,” he continued.
“I also wish to thank those who approved our common-sense gun safety measures, increasing the purchasing age to 21, requiring handgun licenses, and removing the concealed carry of firearms. Tonight we are sending a clear message of where we stand about the causes of gun violence and the proliferation of illegal weapons on our streets,” he concluded.
Every Republican councilor, totaling five, opposed the gun control measures.
During the council meeting, Minority Leader Brian Mowery articulated his disapproval.
“I’m voting against this because I disagree with the toothless language and the policy itself, but also because it likely violates state statute and the state constitution,” he said, according to theIndyStar.
He further expressed concerns about the proposal likely contravening state statute and the constitution. Mowery cited the opinion of the Indiana Office of the Attorney General, stating that the proposal breaches the state preemption law.
There’s no doubt it does violate the state’s preemption law. As such, one can argue it isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on. That said, the second proposal — the hiring of prosecutors — may help to put and keep bad guys behind bars.
In a shocking revelation, Christopher A. Wray, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), recently confirmed that the U.S. government has been quietly working in collaboration with prominent financial institutions, including Bank of America, to mine the personal data of law-abiding citizens without the use of legal warrants or subpoenas.
This data includes sensitive information such as records of firearms purchases. In the video above, you can watch Congressman Massie (R-KY) question Wray about the supposed extrajudicial surveillance.
The disclosure came on Wednesday during a House Judiciary Committee hearing on the “Oversight of the Federal Bureau of Investigation” (FBI).
Wray was also raked over the coals by Congressman Matt Gaetz. The Florida Republican sharply criticized the FBI director for numerous alleged bureau offenses, including mass violations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and a perceived lack of investigation into the Biden family.
Gaetz, citing low public trust in the FBI, voiced concern over Wray’s lack of scrutiny towards these issues.
Wray denied protecting anyone for political reasons, including the Biden Family, and defended the bureau, prompting Gaetz to imply that Wray’s responses were dishonest or ignorant.
Gaetz further critiqued Wray’s lack of accountability regarding personal misuse of the FISA process by FBI personnel. Despite this criticism, Wray maintained that there had been disciplinary actions taken for such misconduct. Grumpy
Today, Gun Owners of America (GOA) and the Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) filed a federal lawsuit. They lodged it in the District of North Dakota against the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). The lawsuit contests the ATF’s “Zero Tolerance” policy for Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs).
This policy, enacted by the Biden Administration, demands strict recordkeeping. Any errors can trigger immediate license revocation. This policy contrasts with previous practices, which prioritized warnings and corrective measures.
Morehouse Enterprises joined the lawsuit. Doing business as Bridge City Ordnance, they face the potential loss of their FFL. They’ve incurred five minor recordkeeping infractions, none involving illegal firearms distribution.
Interestingly, ATF inspected Bridge City Ordnance after it joined another GOA and GOF lawsuit. That ongoing case challenges the ATF’s Ghost Gun Frame and Receiver Rule.
Erich Pratt, GOA’s Senior Vice President, issued a statement. He called out the administration for its politicization of federal agencies.
ATF is revoking gun shop licenses at the highest rate in 16 years, according to a 2022 report by The Trace. (Photo: The Trace)
“This zero tolerance policy towards lawful commerce guaranteed by the Second Amendment is just the latest example of this Administration weaponizing federal agencies against their political enemies. It also is just one more compelling piece of evidence to support gun owners’ demands that Congress defund the ATF,” he said.
Sam Paredes, a GOF Board representative, also expressed concern. He spoke out about the hardship businesses face due to minor clerical errors.
“It’s ridiculous that good people trying to make an honest living are facing this assault on their livelihoods simply over inconsequential paperwork errors. GOF is proud to be lending our support in defense of Bridge City Ordnance and all of those small businesses facing devastating consequences if this Administration’s hostility towards firearms is permitted to go unchecked,” Paredes stated.
Fox News first covered this case. More information can be found there. As always, stay tuned for updates.
California’s legislative Democrats are jamming a bill through to authorize the killing of Bald Eagles, Golden Eagles and other protected raptors, occurring at wind and solar farms throughout the state, all under the guise of helping enable statewide infrastructure projects.
On behalf of the green agenda, a placeholder spot bill, officially now Senate Bill 147 by Sen. Angelique Ashby (D-Sacramento) has prioritized intermittent green energy over wildlife. And it is an “urgency” bill; urgency clause bills go into effect immediately upon their enactment.
What is the “urgency?”
SB 147 will “authorize the Department of Fish and Wildlife to issue a permit under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) that would authorize ‘the take’ of a fully protected species resulting from impacts attributable to the implementation of specified projects if certain conditions are satisfied, including, among others, the conditions required for the issuance of an incidental take permit.”
“Take” includes pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, destroy molest or disturb. Activities that directly or indirectly lead to “taking” are prohibited without a permit, according to the American Eagle Foundation.
But with a permit, one can shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, destroy molest or disturb a Golden Eagle or Bald Eagle apparently.
SB 147 will allow competing environmental factions on the left to kill off eagles in the name of saving the planet. Who spoke on behalf of the eagles?
Last year, the Washington Post reported on eagles being killed at an alarming rate by “clean energy” wind turbines. “An American wind energy company has admitted to killing at least 150 bald and golden eagles, most of which were fatally struck by wind turbine blades, federal prosecutors said,” the Post reported. “ESI Energy pleaded guilty to three counts of violating the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) after eagles died at three of its facilities in Wyoming and New Mexico, according to a statement from the Justice Department.”
Here is the crux of the legal issue:
“The Migratory Bird Treaty Act prohibits killing, capturing or transporting protected migratory bird species without a permit.”
So what does California’s progressive left do?
They push a bill which “Authorizes the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) to issue a permit that would authorize the ‘take’ of a fully protected species…” to help enable statewide infrastructure projects.
Specifically, the bill names:
Wind projects, and any appurtenant infrastructure improvements, and associated electric transmission projects carrying electric power from a facility that is located in the state to a point of junction with any California-based balancing authority; and
e) Solar photovoltaic projects, and any appurtenant infrastructure improvements, and associated California-based balancing authority.
Perhaps even worse, there is no opposition to the bill by the hundreds of environmental organizations which lobby lawmakers daily at the Capitol, as this page from the Senate analysis shows.
In the case of ESI Energy, the company will pay $29,623 for each bald or golden eagle killed by its turbine blades in the future. “ESI has since acknowledged that at least 150 bald and golden eagles have died at 50 of its 154 wind farms over the past decade and that 136 of the deaths occurred when the birds flew into a turbine blade, prosecutors said.”
So as long as the wind turbine producers pay $30,000 per dead eagle, the dead bird is “mitigated,” and the government collects the money. Mitigate means to “assuage,” “mollify” or “diminish.”
The Smithsonian reported that ESI must also follow an “Eagle Management Plan,” which “requires up to $27 million for measures to minimize eagle deaths.”
The scheme is in the “mitigation plan.” Where does the permit and fine money go, and why aren’t environmentalists screaming about this? Sierra Club? Nature Conservancy? Audubon Society (they are committed to working on racism)? Anyone? Environment California says it “works for clean air, clean water, clean energy, wildlife and open spaces, and a livable climate.” What about the wildlife?
The American Eagle Foundation gives the background of the Endangered Species Act:
Originally passed in 1940, this law provides for the protection of the bald eagle and the golden eagle (amended in 1962) by prohibiting the take, possession, sale, purchase, barter, offer to sell, purchase or barter, transport, export, or import, of any bald or golden eagle, alive or dead, including any part, nest, or egg, unless allowed by permit.
Bald eagles were removed from the federal list of threatened and endangered species in 2007, and are no longer protected under the Endangered Species Act. However, bald eagles remain protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
“Wind turbines are a known killer of numerous species of birds, including eagles. At their tips, the blades can spin up to 200 mph,” the Post reported. “Research shows that between 140,000 and 328,000 birds are killed each year at monopole turbines in the United States, with an increase risk of death the higher the turbines.”
That’s a lot of dead birds.
The Globe learned SB 147 will help project developers (primarily Department of Water Resources, Caltrans and other local transportation agencies, as well as a few private wind and solar developers) with the regulatory hurdle of dealing with incidental take of fully protected species.
The scheme:
Renewable energy companies must apply for a permit with the Department of Fish and Wildlife, and pay a permit fee to the wildlife agency. “The permit provides for the development and implementation, in cooperation with DFW and applicable federal and state agencies, of a monitoring program and an adaptive management plan that satisfy the conservation standard of the NCCP Act for monitoring the effectiveness of the measures to minimize and fully mitigate the impacts of the authorized take,” Senate bill analysis says.
The environment and wildlife don’t get the same priority treatment when the state wants to approve its own projects, or grease the skids for others.
Feeding on catfish and other various fishes, by John James Audubon. (Photo: public domain)
The Smithsonian reported “there are about 316,708 bald eagles live across lower 48 states. Golden eagles only number to approximately 40,000.”
The State’s Fully Protected Birds Species list currently includes:
American peregrine falcon
Brown pelican
California black rail
California clapper rail
California condor
California least tern
Golden eagle
Greater sandhill crane
Light-footed clapper rail
Southern bald eagle
Trumpeter swan
White-tailed kite
Yuma clapper rail
In case you missed it, France entered into a pseudo-civil war this past weekend. Rioters took to the streets, destroyed billions of dollars in local property, violent criminals pulled out their illegal guns, and there was nothing the average disarmed Frenchman could do about it.
These recent riots proved the old adage, “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.”
France has much stricter gun laws than anywhere in the United States. French citizens do not have the individual right to bear arms, nor carry a firearm in public for self-defense. Instead, they have strict regulations for anyone that does want to keep a firearm at home:
limits on the type and amount of guns and ammo you can own;
universal background checks; and
gun registration.
Nevertheless, what began in France as mostly peaceful protests would end with fully automatic weapons and banned “weapons of war” being used to terrorize the streets of France.
Protesters started by burning cars, starting fires, and shooting off fireworks, but soon began using shotguns to shoot out police cameras.
Criminals soon brought out the bigger guns—semiautomatic AK-style firearms. Video footage revealed the criminals shooting directly into the air in the city center—endangering the surrounding area.
Shortly after that, footage surfaced online of protestors with handguns and belt-fed machine guns marching down the street in broad daylight. Terrorized citizens ran and screamed as security alarms blared.
Meanwhile, average French citizens attempted to stand up to the rioters with wooden bats and other improvised weaponry.
France’s gun control did nothing to protect its people.
Criminals dominated the streets. In this short period of civil unrest, thousands were arrested, and more than a billion dollars of damage was done to local businesses—which doesn’t even include schools, town halls, or community centers.
These rioters didn’t care for France’s gun laws. They had illegal firearms—such as banned, fully-automatic belt-fed machine guns.
They took those illegal firearms and shot them in public to wreak havoc—without regard for France’s ban on the public carry of firearms or the safety of the general public.
While armed criminals ignored French gun laws and destroyed cities, Florida’s permitless concealed carry law went into effect.
Anti-gun advocates decried Florida for becoming a “more dangerous state.” Yet, Florida celebrated the weekend in peace while gun-controlled France burned.
The Founding Fathers fostered our well-armed society “for the security of [our] free state.” In other words, the individual Second Amendment right is protected for the common good and helps us keep ourselves, our loved ones, and our nation safe.
For example, during the race riots in Los Angeles, local Korean business owners stood up to criminals by arming their employees and guarding their neighborhoods from the rooftops.
Again, during riots in Kenosha, Wisconsin, locals like Kyle Rittenhouse used firearms to patrol local communities, put out fires, offer first aid, and defend themselves from violent criminals.
France’s example has proven that gun control only affects law-abiding citizens.
Criminals won’t give up their guns no matter what gun restrictions the government enacts, and the Second Amendment says that the People shouldn’t have to give up their guns either.
We refuse to sit idly by while bureaucrats or legislators enact “feel good” measures that disarm you and leave you searching for improvised weapons during the next wave of riots.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is leading the pack of rabid Democrats prepping to take another stab at passing gun control legislation with the help of suburban women and, believe it or not, Republicans.
Citing mass shootings with no context as to why they are happening, Schumer and the Left continue screaming that something has to be done and that gun rights must be taken away from Americans in the name of safety.
The Hill seems to be in step with the Left on pushing for more gun control, reporting, “At least 10 people were killed in separate shootings in Baltimore, Fort Worth, and Philadelphia over the weekend and July 4, while shootings in Lansing, Mich., and Wichita, Kan., left dozens more injured. The Gun Violence Archive has counted 20 mass shootings across the nation since July 1, leaving 19 people dead and more than 100 injured.”
In the wake of passing gun control measures a year ago, it was, of course, not enough. Now the Left wants further steps taken, Constitution be damned.
“Leader Schumer was proud to have passed a significant bipartisan gun safety bill through the Senate last summer but more must be done. Schumer continues to work with his caucus to find a path forward that can garner enough Republican support and combat the scourge of gun violence, save lives, and bring meaningful change,” Schumer spokesperson Allison Biasotti declared.
Despite the incessant screeching, tearing of hair, and rending of clothes, the prospects for yet mreo gun control are dim, thankfully. However, in an ominous sign, things may be shifting.
Former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) claims the political dynamic concerning gun control is beginning to shift among GOP voters.
“It’s clear from today’s data — especially the growing incidence of mass shooting events involving high-capacity magazines and assault weapons — that it’s time to consider policy changes,” Frist, sounding more Democrat than Republican, wrote in an op-ed for Forbes where he called for a federal assault weapons ban and expanding background checks for all firearms purchases.
Frist has been beating the gun control drum for a while now.
Then Frist went to The Hill to do an interview claiming that Republican voters’ views of gun control are changing.
“Something is changing over the last three years compared to 20 years ago when I was here. There is a willingness to have civil discussions on what have been highly contentious issues that I didn’t see 15 years ago,” he asserted. “More needs to be done on gun safety today. Something more needs to be done because the overall governance of gun safety is outdated and it’s incomplete.”
The Hill dug up a poll in early May by “All In Together,” a nonprofit women’s civic education group, and “Echelon Insights,” a GOP polling firm, to cite that suburban voters support tougher gun laws. The polling venues appear to be leftist in nature despite the hyping of “Echelon Insights” being a GOP polling firm.
To many, the results do not sound conservative in the least and stretch credibility.
“Forty-two percent of independent women voters said a candidate needed to share their view on guns to get their vote, rating the issue as important as a candidate’s view on abortion and the cost of living,” The Hill reported.
“The poll of 1,227 likely voters also showed that 61 percent of Republican women support restricting the ability to purchase certain types of guns — a far higher percentage than the 41 percent of Republican men who feel that way,” the media outlet continued.
The saving grace here is that so far, discharge petitions to push gun control bills through the House are going nowhere fast. Instead, Democrats are likely to start in the Senate with the push. But it will most likely be dead on arrival in the House.
“Leader Schumer called a special caucus meeting last month solely dedicated to combatting gun violence which produced many good ideas. Now, we’re determining the best path forward that could garner enough Republican support,” a Senate Democratic aide said, according to The Hill.
Minority Senate Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is a weak link in the chain. Fifteen Republicans last year supported the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, including McConnell.
“That is one of the absolute critical reasons for why we have seen this issue change,” Christian Heyne, vice president of policy at Brady Campaign, said. “Suburban women are not only wildly supportive of gun violence prevention policies but we’ve seen numbers that it’s a huge motivator to bring people to the polls. It’s why the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act had such overwhelming majority support.”
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who played a leading role in negotiating last year’s gun violence legislation, bluntly contends that an assault weapons ban has no chance of passing Congress.
“I don’t think that’s going to happen. And, truthfully, the so-called assault weapons ban — what are they going to do about the millions of semi-automatic rifles that are already out there? I don’t think a prospective ban will have any of the intended effect of the proponents,” he remarked. “Basically what they’re advocating for is confiscation from law-abiding citizens. I’m willing to look at whatever the proposal is but I’m not willing to erode the rights of law-abiding citizens.”
Unbelievably, Frist told The Hill that “a majority of Republicans” support improved “gun safety.”
“It really is having people own guns if they want them and be able to do it in a way that is safe and secure,” he declared.
“The visibility with the increase in shootings, the lethality of the incidents that happen, the numbers of people [killed or injured] make it a real teaching point,” Frist claimed.
“Man, what a huge relief it is for us, the nation’s military recruiters, to know that people who took on crippling predatory loans in search of making better lives through education for themselves and their offspring may still have to turn to us for relief,” said Army Master Sergeant Kim Babcock.
On a 6-3 vote along ideological lines, the Supreme Court ruled that the Executive Branch had no standing to cancel the debt of 40 million borrowers.
“The good news is that we now have a list of 40 million Americans who thought for a few years that they wouldn’t have these massive, interest-bearing debts to pay off. Jackpot!” shouted Air Force Tech Sergeant James Tchaikovsky.
On Tuesday, it was announced the Department of Justice (DOJ) reached a plea agreement with Hunter Biden, son of President Joe Biden, to avoid prosecution for illegally possessing a firearm as an admitted drug user.
Hunter Biden’s plea agreement to misdemeanor tax offenses allows him to avoid federal felony charges for lying on a background check form when he purchased a firearm. Hunter Biden was an illegal user of crack cocaine at the time, which made him ineligible to legally purchase or possess a firearm.
The punishment for the felony offense of lying on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Form 4473 is up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Not to mention, the firearm Hunter Biden purchased was later disposed of in a public trash can.
In a statement released by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the organization criticizes the agreement as it comes at the same time the Biden administration is punishing firearm retailers by revoking licenses and terminating livelihoods for minor clerical errors with its “zero-tolerance” policy.
“Under this administration’s ‘zero tolerance’ policy, licensed firearm retailers have had their lives destroyed for paperwork mistakes far less egregious than buying a gun when you are a crack addict,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF’s Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “They are not serious about reducing gun violence, only scoring cheap political points. It is worth noting this announcement came today, after President Biden’s appearance in Hartford last Friday to call for gun control.”
During the appearance, President Biden once again called on Congress to pass unconstitutional gun control measures that would ban an entire class of commonly-owned semiautomatic rifles and allow for suing members of the firearm industry.
The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms released a statement in response calling the deal “an insult to the intelligence of the American people.”
“Why should anybody respect any gun laws if the president’s son gets a pass,” CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb questioned. “The American public should be outraged at what amounts to a deplorable double standard.
“It is important to note that none of the gun prohibition lobbying groups have uttered a word of condemnation,” he continued. “This fact alone shows what hypocrites they are, and what a hypocrite Joe Biden is. Their silence is deafening.”
Gottlieb noted how President Biden has spent his entire political career campaigning for strict gun control, including bans on so-called “assault weapons” and more recently, an acknowledged effort to prevent the sale of 9mm pistols. But the rules evidently change when the president’s son is involved in a federal gun crime that would result in fines and imprisonment for up to 10 years for anybody else who knowingly lied about not being a prohibited person, to obtain a handgun.
“If Joe Biden wasn’t president,” Gottlieb said, “Hunter Biden would be heading to jail. Looks like the biggest loophole of them all is to violate a federal gun law when you’re the president’s son.”
The CCRKBA chairman also said the gun ban lobby’s silence on this case should erase any influence they have on the nation’s gun law policies.
“The anti-gun-rights movement, from Joe Biden on down through all of the billionaire-backed gun control groups have just lost whatever credibility they ever had, and ever will have, by not immediately denouncing this deal,” Gottlieb stated. “These elitist anti-gunners must never again be taken seriously by the public, the media or members of Congress and state legislatures when they advocate for tougher gun laws, while remaining silent about the Biden gun crime loophole.”
Grumpy
