Categories
All About Guns Born again Cynic!

THIS Is The Gun Most Returned By Gun Panic Buyers!

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Born again Cynic!

Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont Drops Kitchen-Sink Gun Control to Cover for Crime Failures by NEWS WIRE

Gov. Ned Lamont

By Larry Keane

Connecticut’s Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont doesn’t have the celebrity status of some of his gun control colleagues like New York’s Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul, New Jersey’s Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy or California’s Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom. His recent gun control proposal arguably outdoes them all, though.

Connecticut’s governor ripped a page from the Biden administration playbook and attempted to divert attention from failures to address rising crime by calling for increased gun control. Gov. Lamont said in a press conference announcement, “You’re not tough on crime if you’re weak on guns. We’re going to continue to stay tough on guns.”

That’s obfuscation. Gov. Lamont is miring two unrelated issues to confuse voters in a re-election year. He’s running again to keep his job and instead of admitting he’s done nothing to address criminal activity in the state, he’s proposing policy changes that would crush firearm retailers and individual gun rights of law-abiding citizens.

Read that again. Gov. Lamont isn’t proposing to target criminals, but those who abide by the law.

Layered Bureaucracy

Gov. Lamont explained he was proud that Connecticut already had among the nation’s strictest gun laws. “But that’s not good enough. I’ve just been shocked by what I’ve seen over the past couple of years,” he added.

What he saw in his state are sky high legal firearm sales, the most in five years. That’s occurring in the middle of “defund the police” schemes embraced by Hartford, New Haven and Bridgeport, and rising crime in those cities. Gov. Lamont’s proposals would do little to hold criminals to account.

Chief among Gov. Lamont’s gun control wish list is the creation of a state-level firearm licensing agency to track and enforce Connecticut’s strict laws.

“The lack of state licensing for gun dealers makes it difficult for the Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection to enforce the laws,” the governor said.

The governor is ignoring, of course, that every firearm retailer in Connecticut is already required to be licensed and regulated by the federal government through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).

Another state-level licensing agency is more than just layered bureaucracy. It’s a tool to grind local gun shops into oblivion.

Gov. Lamont’s administration has a track record of dismissing and outright ignoring gun owner and firearm retailer rights and concerns. Just last year officials from the Lamont administration ignored retailer requests for robust guidance and assistance during his poorly-managed transition of the state’s background check system. Now, Gov. Lamont’s office wants to expand their grip on power and licensing authority with little to no desire to dedicate resources to support the proposals.

That won’t stop criminals from illegally-selling guns on the black market or stealing them. The only people impacted by this legislation will be those trying to follow the laws in the first place. Gov. Lamont’s goal is to use the new laws as a bludgeon against the lawful industry ensuring law-abiding Connecticut residents can exercise their Second Amendment rights.

Blue State Red Tape

Gov. Lamont’s proposals include mandatory registration of so-called “ghost guns” manufactured prior to the state’s already existing 2019 ban, expanding a ban on so-called “assault weapons” purchased prior to a 1993 state law requiring registration, expanding firearm storage laws even though Connecticut already has mandatory storage laws and enactment of a “stop and frisk” policy for police to check carry permits for those who are openly carrying firearms.

Second Amendment supporters are howling. Connecticut’s highest-ranking Republicans on the state’s House Judiciary and Public Safety Committee criticized the governor.

“While lawful Connecticut citizens are, on an almost daily basis, being victimized by brazen criminals with little fear of punishment, the governor has chosen an aged election-year tactic of attacking law-abiding gun owners in an effort to distract from his administration’s utter failure to address criminal justice policies,” Reps. Craig Fishbein and Greg Howard said.

Other Second Amendment and Constitutional rights groups, including the non-partisan Connecticut Citizens Defense League, (CCDL) denounced the proposals. CCDL stated parts of Gov. Lamont’s gun control package, “is out of touch with the people of Connecticut as thousands of residents have become new permit holders within the last year.”

Connecticut is witnessing the same bait-and-switch that President Joe Biden attempted in New York City. He traveled there to address crime, only to pitch a series of gun control proposals. The president didn’t offer any plan to get serious about tackling crime. The same thing is coming out of Hartford. Unfortunately for Connecticut, the governor is just as unserious about locking up criminals as he is serious about locking down gun stores.

Larry Keane is Senior Vice President of Government and Public Affairs and General Counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the firearms industry trade association.

Categories
Born again Cynic!

To me she looks like nothing but trouble! (From The Film “Goldfinger” 1964)

Bond Girl Tania Mallet of Goldfinger fame dies at 77 | SYFY WIRE

Categories
Born again Cynic!

Makes sense to me!

Categories
Born again Cynic! Well I thought it was funny!

Why indeed!

Categories
Ammo Born again Cynic!

Some Red Hot Gospel there!

Categories
Born again Cynic! Grumpy's hall of Shame Some Red Hot Gospel there!

How America’s biggest crisis killed my nephew. (Enjoy The DECLINE now as it is going get very scary soon! Grumpy)

On September 26, my family went to dinner to celebrate my mother-in-law’s birthday. We brought our nephew Joshua—her grandson—along with us. We had a nice meal then stopped for dessert. When I got home, I tweeted about the conversation I had with him. Three weeks later, he was dead. As one can imagine, the family is devastated; a happy, healthy young man struck down in the prime of his life. That pain is heightened by the way he died.

Joshua was riding his motorcycle with a friend on Sunday night. His friend—riding in the wrong direction—hit a car and left the scene. Joshua and the driver of the car got into a verbal altercation. The driver got out of the car and the two began to fight. Joshua rode away on his motorcycle. The driver then got back behind the wheel of his car and intentionally mowed my nephew down. While the investigation is ongoing, there is video of the altercation.

How could this happen? Why was Joshua’s friend riding in the wrong direction? Why did Joshua get into an argument with the driver of the car over an accident he wasn’t involved in? How did a minor fender bender lead to a fight and more importantly, what made the driver lose control and run a man down in cold blood? While the car was the tool used to end his life, Joshua was killed by America’s greatest crisis, one that most of us can see but the media rarely talks about. It is a cultural crisis.

Dealing with this crisis is difficult, but we are not even discussing the actual problem. There is no shortage of talk of crises, but the talk never seems to be about the things that are really doing us harm. There is incessant talk about the COVID-19 pandemic. While it is important, much of the conversation is centered around government power and how one segment of the population is “killing” the rest of us. Racism is another major crisis in the discourse. Recently, NYC joined Chicago, Milwaukee, Louisville, and other cities in declaring racism a “public health crisis.” No word on how they are going to fix racism, though they are removing a statue of Thomas Jefferson from the city council chambers.

Something deeper underlies all these phenomena: a roiling collapse in how we behave and what we tolerate—a crisis of conscience. We have lost a common sense of decency. We are quick to virtue signal about “justice” in the virtual world but spend the greater part of our day ignoring those who are truly in need. Recently a woman was raped on a train in Philadelphia. People held up their phones, but no one tried to help or even—with phone in hand—bothered to call 911.

We are increasingly narcissistic. We believe the world was made to bend to our will. When we are wronged—or we perceive we were—we will settle for nothing less than total social annihilation of the wrongdoer. We believe we have the right to decide if they can keep their career or be ostracized from society.

We are weak. We cannot be bothered to deal with things we do not like so anything that we deem offensive must be removed from society. However, if we like something, we should have the right to enjoy it, even if it offends others. This has led to an entertainment industry replete with debauchery, and if you happen to find that offensive, well too bad—that’s your problem.

Finally, we are losing our religion, without which it is difficult, if not impossible, for a society to maintain a collective moral standard. Standards must have foundations, and our once overwhelmingly shared Biblical foundations are crumbling away. As Charles Murray—an agnostic—told Jonathan Van Maren, “Without religion, there was simply no ‘intrinsic motivation’ for people to behave morally — and no definition for what constitutes moral behavior in the first place.”

As President Eisenhower famously put it, “our form of government has no sense unless it is founded in a deeply felt religious faith, and I don’t care what it is.” As a fast-growing share of Americans turn with worshipful devotion to post-Biblical creeds, that proposition is now being tested.

The unfolding crisis of conscience has given us a culture where people do what they want with little regard for consequences, which they regard as an injustice. Others assume that certain groups do not have the capacity to control their behavior, and thus hold them to a lower standard—a kind of sub-humanity.

We are living in the safest, wealthiest, most technologically advanced society with more opportunities than any society in human history and yet, by all logical accounts, we are failing at being decent human beings. I do not know what, if anything, will turn the tide, but I hope that we can get away from the things we disagree on long enough to see the humanity in our adversaries. If the guy driving that car saw my nephew as a human of value, odds are he would not have been able to take his life.

I write this as the family prepares for Joshua’s funeral. I don’t expect the world to stop at one untimely death, though we’ve known it to happen with the “right” kind of death. I do hope people will take a moment to consider that there are issues we face that are greater than the things that get the most attention, and that the physical, emotional, and economic toll this cultural crisis has on our society will only get worse if we continue to ignore it.

Categories
Born again Cynic! Well I thought it was funny!

I guess that means no, That and this is one of your luckiest days Kid!

Categories
All About Guns Born again Cynic!

A silencer on a 1911? it must weigh almost twice the gun!

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

San Jose approves 1st U.S. liability insurance law for gun owners

San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo stops to view a makeshift memorial for the rail yard shooting victims in front of City Hall in San Jose on May 27, 2021. (Haven Daley/Associated Press)

San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo stops to view a makeshift memorial for the rail yard shooting victims in front of City Hall in San Jose on May 27, 2021. (Haven Daley/Associated Press)

 A California city voted Tuesday night to require gun owners to carry liability insurance in what’s believed to be the first measure of its kind in the United States.

The San Jose City Council overwhelmingly approved the measure despite opposition from gun owners who said it would violate their Second Amendment rights and promised to sue.

The Silicon Valley city of about 1 million followed a trend of other Democratic-led cities that have sought to rein in violence through stricter rules. But while similar laws have been proposed, San Jose is the first city to pass one, according to Brady United, a national nonprofit that advocates against gun violence.

Council members, including several who had lost friends to gun violence, said it was a step toward dealing with gun violence that Councilman Sergio Jimenez called “a scourge on our society.”

Having liability insurance would encourage people in the 55,000 households in San Jose who legally own at least one registered gun to have gun safes, install trigger locks and take gun safety classes, Mayor Sam Liccardo said.

The liability insurance would cover losses or damages resulting from any accidental use of the firearm, including death, injury, or property damage, according to the ordinance. If a gun is stolen or lost, the owner of the firearm would be considered liable until the theft or loss is reported to authorities.

However, gun owners who don’t have insurance won’t lose their guns or face any criminal charges, the mayor said.

The council also voted to require gun owners to pay an estimated $25 fee, which would be collected by a yet-to-be-named nonprofit and doled out to community groups to be used for firearm safety education and training, suicide prevention, domestic violence, and mental health services.

The proposed ordinance is part of a broad gun control plan that Liccardo announced following the May 26 mass shooting at the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority rail yard that left nine people dead, including the employee who opened fire on his colleagues then killed himself.

At an hours-long meeting, critics argued that the fee and liability requirements violated their right to bear arms and would do nothing to stop gun crimes, including the use of untraceable, build-it-yourself “ghost guns.”

“You cannot tax a constitutional right. This does nothing to reduce crime,” one speaker said.

The measure didn’t address the massive problem of illegally obtained weapons that are stolen or purchased without background checks.

Liccardo acknowledged those concerns.

“This won’t stop mass shootings and keep bad people from committing violent crime,” the mayor said, but added most gun deaths nationally are from suicide, accidental shootings or other causes and even many homicides stem from domestic violence.

Liccardo also said gun violence costs San Jose taxpayers $40 million a year in emergency response services.

Some speakers argued that the law would face costly and lengthy court challenges.

Before the vote, Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California, said his group would sue if the proposal takes effect, calling it “totally unconstitutional in any configuration.”

However, Liccardo said some attorneys had already offered to defend the city pro bono.