Category: Gun Fearing Wussies

Categories
All About Guns Gun Fearing Wussies Some Red Hot Gospel there!

A SATIRICAL DISCOURSE ON BIGOTRY WRITTEN BY WILL DABBS, MD

Behold the target of the bigot in modern American society.
There is little tolerance on the political Left for white male gun owners.

 

Tolerance is the new holy gospel in America. Bigotry is the unforgivable sin of the Information Age. It doesn’t matter what good you might have otherwise accomplished, in the 21st century, if you can be painted as intolerant, you are an irredeemable reprobate.

Given the purported pervasive prevalence of bigotry in our society, I propose that we explore the holy dicta of tolerance as they relate to the traditionally conservative American gun owner. This stuff is important. Microaggressions can evolve into macroaggressions. If we tolerate bigotry, then we begin flirting with fascism. The next thing you know some yahoo will be trying to clone Hitler from a tooth fragment. Literally, nobody wants that.

 

Start With The Basics

 

Bigotry is formally defined as “intolerance of those who hold different opinions from oneself.” In the modern age, bigotry is the manifestation of innate animosity toward an individual or people group based upon their unwillingness or inability to conform to the bigot’s expected norms of philosophy, worldview, or behavior. Now, how might we recognize bigotry when confronted by it?

For starters, the offending behavior that drives the bigot must be harmless. I think we can all agree that a little innate disdain for Nazi death camp guards or serial murderers is both warranted and healthy. However, if the target of the bigot’s ire causes no discernible harm, then we must question the underlying motivations. Is the bigot driven by the furtherance of the public good, or is he actually trying to impose his will unfairly upon others? Such imposition reeks of rank imperialism and is obviously a throwback to a darker, more misogynistic and institutionally oppressive age.

 

The Landscape

 

Crime rates have been demonstrably falling since the 1970s, whilst rates of private gun ownership have been skyrocketing. Cherry-picking statistics and fixation on isolated tragedy can indeed drive a false narrative. However, statistically speaking, the reality is that America has become steadily safer as we have become ever better armed. It is simply that egregious examples of violence are now pumped into our pockets via our phones where, in decades past, we lacked this capacity.

In the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, America saw a drastic rise in concealed carry. In 2017, there were 17,251,354 concealed carry permit holders in the United States. In a nation with a population of 328 million, that is roughly one in twelve adult Americans. Considering half of the 50 states also now allow some form of permitless carry the absolute number of Americans wandering about armed in public staggers the imagination.

In 1980, the rate of overall property crime in America was 5,400 incidents per 100,000 people. Today, the number is less than half that. These same trends hold true for burglary, larceny, auto theft, and murder. The media will not tell you that because a demonstrably safer world doesn’t earn clicks.

 

The Very Definition Of Bigotry

 

With the assistance of biased and complicit media, Leftists control the presidency as well as both houses of Congress. Among their published legislative priorities is the re-enactment of an assault weapons ban, a ban on standard-capacity magazines, and sweeping restrictions on gun ownership. All this is in the face of demonstrable reductions in crime rates since the 1980s.

Thirty-two percent of American adults admit to owning at least one firearm. It follows that 68% of American adults are, therefore, not gun owners. That makes gun owners in America a statistically significant minority. Of those 66,921,246 gun owners, at least 66,910,242 are not criminals. Why then should there be such abject animosity directed toward this one people group by those who do not share their worldview? Is that not the textbook definition of bigotry?

 

Ruminations

 

I once heard a CEO pontificate that the only thing she would not tolerate was intolerance. I came to appreciate later that what she actually meant was that the only thing she would not tolerate was anyone who did not conform to her standard of normality. Tolerance is a one-way street in America. You can sleep with road kill and be considered some sort of protected minority. However, in certain circles, if you admit to being a white hetero gun-owning Christian, you are viewed as some kind of malevolent leper. Ask me how I know this.

So the next time someone gives you a hard time about gun ownership, just politely state that you choose not to associate with bigots and move on. The oppression of law-abiding gun owners is the practical manifestation of institutional bigotry. Perhaps as a persecuted minority we could get some kind of special license plates or something. I’m not holding my breath.

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

CNN Sounds Alarm: SCOTUS May Wipe Out Gun Control ‘Nationwide’

U.S. Supreme Court building; inset-Tierney Sneed
J. Scott Applewhite, File/AP; JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images
AWR HAWKINS

2,652

3:48

CNN sounded the alarm Sunday, warning that the pro-Second Amendment makeup of  the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) portends an end to gun control “nationwide.”

CNN’s Tierney Sneed pointed to the June 23, 2022, SCOTUS decision in NYSRPA v. Bruen, noting that it not only struck down New York’s proper cause requirement but also set forward stringent rules for how lower courts must decide cases related to the Second Amendment.

On July 1 Breitbart News noted that SCOTUS remanded a number of cases, vacating the decisions and ordering them to be reconsidered in light of Bruen. The cases centered on an “assault weapons” ban in Maryland, a “high capacity” magazine ban in California, and carry restrictions in Hawaii, among other things.

Roughly two weeks later Breitbart News pointed to a Washington Times article suggesting the Bruen decision puts all types of gun control in the crosshairs of gun rights groups.

The Washington Times paraphrased Justice Clarence Thomas’s emphasis on the important of decisions like Bruen, McDonald v. Chicago (2010), and District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), saying, “The test courts must apply is whether a firearms restriction would have seemed reasonable to the founding generation that crafted and ratified the Second Amendment. If not, the law must give way to the Constitution.”

In light of this framework for testing restrictions, CNN warns that gun control in every state is in jeopardy:

Since the June ruling, federal judges in at least a half-dozen different cases have already cited the Bruen decision to rule against gun restrictions that have included local assault weapons bans, prohibitions on the manufacture of homemade firearms and bans on older teenagers publicly carrying handguns.

Several other laws now face new legal challenges under the precedent, among them zoning restrictions barring shooting ranges, licensing and training laws and the federal ban on certain misdemeanor offenders from possessing firearms.

CNN noted changes that have already occurred in jurisprudence in light of Bruen:

A federal district judge cited the ruling last month when halting Delaware restrictions on possessing and manufacturing untraceable firearms, saying that the law’s defenders failed to provide persuasive evidence that similar restrictions existed in the historical record. The precedent was also referenced when local assault weapon bans in two Colorado jurisdictions were put on hold this summer; the judges in both cases were each appointed by Democratic presidents.

CNN also noted a decision handed down on Thursday to “pause” new gun controls New York enacted in response to Bruen.

Breitbart News indicated the New York controls were paused via a temporary restraining order issued by U.S. District Judge Glenn T. Suddaby.

AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and the writer/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is the political analyst for Armed American Radio and a Turning Point USA Ambassador. AWR Hawkins holds a PhD in Military History, with a focus on the Vietnam War (brown water navy), U.S. Navy since Inception, the Civil War, and Early Modern Europe. Follow him on Instagram: @awr_hawkins. You can sign up to get Down Range at breitbart.com/downrange. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.

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

CRPA Files Suit To Stop The State’s “Chilling” Effect

Last summer, Governor Gavin Newsom expressed outrage over a Texas law he found objectionable.  In fact, Mr. Newsom was so incensed that he bought billboards outside California to air his frustrations (and annoy potential national political rivals).  Then, he decided to copy that law and aim it at something he found even more objectionable: gun culture.  He even tipped the scales to make sure those who object would be at a distinct disadvantage.

Last week, CRPA filed suit to roll back the most insidious aspect of Mr. Newsom’s gambit.  In the complaint, CRPA and a host of plaintiffs point out not only the logical fallacies behind the Governor’s ill-fated attack, but the many reasons that the law is patently unconstitutional.  Making those who challenge new Second Amendment restrictions pay all legal costs unless they win EVERY argument in their case while the state can recover their costs if they win ANY part of their case is, of course, in direct violation of the Constitution (not to mention all sense of fairness).

We know the fight we have on our hands in defending the Second Amendment here in California.  From outlawing youth shooting sports, to banning gun shows, to the endless attempts to tax and outright prohibit one’s fundamental right to self-defense, anti-2A advocates have shown no regard for the Constitution in an attempt to demonize lawful gun owners.

In this case, the Governor wants to use a law he himself views as outrageous to attack your rights.  The Constitution is not a vehicle for wannabe Presidential candidates to send messages to rivals.
Categories
All About Guns Allies Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" California Gun Fearing Wussies

BREAKING: Judge Issues Ruling to Save Magazine Owners from Confiscation

Judge Benitez Issues Ruling to Save Magazine Owners from Government 
Confiscation and Prosecution

On Monday, September 26, 2022, Judge Roger T. Benitez proved once again that he is ten steps ahead of the California government and its anti-gun leaders when he re-issued his ruling to protect “traditional” magazine owners from prosecution.

If you have been following the “merry-go-round” that has been the life of Duncan v Bonta (formerly Becerra), it’s entirely possible that you have been confused.

Let’s break this down:

Initially, the case of Duncan v Becerra (ban on 10+ round magazines which originated from legislation and an initiative) went before Federal District Court Judge Roger T. Benitez. He said that it violated the text, history and tradition of the Second Amendment using the test that Justice Scalia established in Heller v DC and was therefore unconstitutional. Knowing that the crazy 9th would use a different standard, Benitez ruled that it would still be unconstitutional regardless of what standard was used.

This opened what became known as “Freedom Week” where Californians legally purchased between one and two million magazines.

California threatened to appeal the ruling to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, so Judge Benitez issued an order staying his decision from going into effect until all legal proceedings were completed, thus preventing the California government from banning any “Freedom Week” magazines.

The 9th assigned the case to a 3-judge panel who agreed with Judge Benitez that the mag ban was unconstitutional.

Angered by this defeat, the State immediately asked for an 11-judge en banc panel who as expected, reversed the previous pro 2A decisions and sided with the State.

The pro-gun forces – which included Gun Owners of California – appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). SCOTUS kept the case alive pending their decision in NYSRPA v Bruen. Once the court declared that the only rule that lower courts can use to test Second Amendment challenges, that being text, as informed by history and tradition and nothing else, the court accepted the case (granted Certiorari which means it could be heard), then vacated the anti-2A decision of the 9th Circuit and remanded the case back to them, with the instructions to reconsider the case with the new one-step standard.

At this point, the 9th Circuit en banc panel could have reversed its decision and declared the mag ban unconstitutional. Of course, they did not. Instead, they returned the case to Judge Benitez who had already declared the law unconstitutional.

Is your head swimming by now?

In doing so, the 9th essentially “erased” Judge Benitez’ original decision and directed him to start from scratch.

Given this turn of events, we are confident the State of California had been preparing to begin the confiscation of magazines and enforcing the ban because forcing Benitez start from scratch meant that his original order that protected “Freedom Week” magazine buyers from prosecution was no longer in place.

As we’ve said time and time again, Judge Benitez doesn’t pussy-foot around; he was one step ahead of the gun mag grabbers, and re-issued his order protecting magazine owners from prosecution by the state.

Bottomline? We are free to own, possess and in many cases use our 10+ magazines (as long as they are not used on “California Compliant Semi-Autos”).

What happens next? The entire convoluted process is set to begin again, but with one huge difference: lower courts MUST follow the rules for deciding Second Amendment case as established by the Supreme Court in the Bruen decision.  This changes everything.  Both SCOTUS and Judge Benitez have come to the rescue, not only of citizens who abide by the law, but of the Constitution itself.

Get off the merry-go-round/rollercoaster of confusion and join Gun Owners of California;  we will keep you up-to-speed and continue to march ahead to fully restore, then defend and protect the Second Amendment. We will accept NO COMPROMISE!

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

New York Historical Reenactments Canceled Over Gun Laws by Madeline Leesman

New York Historical Reenactments Canceled Over Gun Laws

Source: AP Photo/Wilson Ring

Several historical reenactments in New York have been canceled in recent weeks over concerns that participants could be violating the state’s restrictive gun laws.

A law that took effect Sept. 1 prohibits carrying weapons in “sensitive locations,” including public parks, sport fields and museums.

In Allegany County, a Civil War reenactment weekend for Sept. 23-25 was nixed after participants consulted with local law enforcement about the new law. A War of 1812 Battle of Plattsburgh reenactment was postponed. A separate Living History Weekend in German Flatts, which included a Civil War reenactment, was canceled after law enforcement consulted their attorneys, the Observer-Dispatch reported.

“Our attorneys advised us that there is no exemption in the law for civil war reenactments,” Herkimer County Sheriff Scott Scherrer told the Dispatch. “It would be illegal according to the letter of the governor’s law.”

The Observer-Dispatch noted that in each of the events, the use of a black powder musket “seems to violate” the law’s restrictions. However, a statement sent to USA TODAY Network New York claimed that the law allows historical reenactments to occur.

“These laws allow historical re-enactments to occur,” Hochul’s statement read, “and we will work with legislators and local law enforcement to ensure these events can legally and safely proceed.”

Terry Parker, who runs the historical reenactment events in Allegany County, told the Observer-Dispatch that there are “no plans” to revive the Civil War reenactment weekend.

“All it would take is a citizen complaint,” he said, adding that “and the whole thing will become a mess.”

Last week, Townhall covered how Mayor Eric Adams has taken to scapegoating gun manufacturers for New York City’s rise in violent crime. In remarks he made at the National Press Club, he claimed that gun violence has stemmed from “greedy” gun manufacturers who employ “aggressive” marketing tactics to sell guns.

When a gun crime is committed, we need the name of the gun and how that gun was obtained by the shooter. Who looked the other way. Where it was bought and who profited from that sale. Following the money is how you get to the heart of the story.

Gun violence is no exception.

Guns don’t magically appear in the hands of shooters. They don’t fall from the sky or grow on trees. Guns are made and marketed with the express purpose of generating profit.

Over the summer, President and CEO Mark Smith of Smith & Wesson fired back at politicians like Adams and Hochul. A report from the New York Daily News found that Glock, Taurus, Smith & Wesson, Ruger and Polymer8o produced more than half of the guns used in crimes in New York and 11 other major U.S. cities.

A number of politicians and their lobbying partners in the media have recently sought to disparage Smith & Wesson. Some have had the audacity to suggest that after they have vilified, undermined and defunded law enforcement for years, supported prosecutors who refuse to hold criminals accountable for their actions, overseen the decay of our country’s mental health infrastructure, and generally promoted a culture of lawlessness, Smith & Wesson and other firearm manufacturers are somehow responsible for the crime wave that has predictably resulted from these destructive policies…

But they are the ones to blame for the surge in violence and lawlessness, and they seek to avoid any responsibility for the crisis of violence they have created by attempting to shift the blame to Smith & Wesson, other firearm manufacturers and law abiding gun owners…To be clear, a Smith & Wesson firearm has never broken into a home; a Smith & Wesson firearm has never assaulted a woman out for a late-night run in the city; a Smith & Wesson firearm has never carjacked an unsuspecting driver stopped at a traffic light. Instead, Smith & Wesson provides these citizens with the means to protect themselves and their families…

We will continue to work alongside law enforcement, community leaders and lawmakers who are genuinely interested in creating safe neighborhoods. We will engage those who genuinely seek productive discussions, not a means of scoring political points. We will continue informing law-abiding citizens that they have a Constitutionally-protected right to defend themselves and their families. We will never back down in our defense of the 2nd Amendment.