Archive

Archive for the ‘Gun Control’ Category

Gun Groups Files Appeal Against California’s Exemptions for Retired Law Enforcement Officers

April 10, 2017 Leave a comment

Groups say special exceptions to strict gun laws violate the Fourteenth Amendment

In federal circuit court on Wednesday, a coalition of gun-rights groups filed its opening brief in a suit against exemptions for retired law enforcement officers under California’s strict gun laws.

The Calguns Foundation, Firearms Policy Foundation, Firearms Policy Coalition, Madison Society Foundation, and 11 individuals signed on to the suit, which District Judge Beverly Reid O’Connell, an Obama appointee, ruled against in August. They’re now taking their case to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, claiming the exemptions are a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause. The group says the exemptions for retired law enforcement personnel are unfair and unconstitutional.

The groups cite the recent passage of SB707, which banned those with gun-carry permits from bringing a gun on any school property but left in place exemptions for retired law enforcement, as an example of special protections they believe are wrong.

“The case is about a politically powerful group of civilians receiving special rights that other, similarly situated civilians do not receive,” Craig DeLuz, a spokesperson for Firearms Policy Coalition and one of the plaintiffs in the case, told the Washington Free Beacon. “Politically powerful police unions opposed SB707 until their retired members were exempted from the measure. Then, they not only removed their opposition, they supported it. Even the author of the measure admitted that the only reason she exempted retired law enforcement is because she could not get the law passed with their opposition.

“That is a clear violation of the Equal Protection Act, as retired law enforcement officers have not more police powers than everyday citizens.”

The exemption included in that law applied to any retired law enforcement officer regardless of whether or not their former jobs required the use of a firearm.

“For instance, retired Internal Revenue Service agents and other federal agents are exempt simply by virtue of retiring in California or working for the agency in California for more than a year,” Bradley Benbrook, the group’s attorney, wrote in the court brief.

DeLuz, who opposes SB707’s expansion of gun-free zones, said he does not believe the exemption granted to retired law enforcement is based on the group’s level of training.

“The exemption makes even less sense when one considers that there are higher standards for civilians to qualify for a CCW than for most retired law enforcement,” he said. “Look at the training standards for peace officer training, I believe you will find that there are not training requirements upon their graduation from the academy. And, in fact, the retired law enforcement exemption includes anyone who has worked for a law enforcement agency, whether they carried a firearm as a part of their duties prior to retirement.”

A hearing date for the case has not yet been announced.

Virginia Governor McAuliffe Vetoes Bill Allowing Those With Protective Orders to Carry Guns

March 29, 2017 Leave a comment

‘The governor’s veto will likely cost innocent lives’, says advocacy group president

Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D.) vetoed a bill on Friday that aimed to allow victims of domestic violence to carry concealed firearms without obtaining a permit.

House Bill 1852 would allow anyone in Virginia who has a protective order and is over 21 to carry a concealed firearm without a permit for up to 45 days after the order is issued. It would then give anyone with an active order an additional 45 days to carry concealed should they apply for a permanent concealed-handgun permit, which can take up to 45 days to process. The person with the protective order would be required to show police the order or permit application and photo ID if stopped.

Governor McAuliffe noted in a statement that the bill bypasses the training and background check requirements associated with obtaining a Virginia concealed handgun permit and said it would make domestic violence situations worse, not better. “The bill perpetuates the dangerous fiction that the victims of domestic violence will be safer by arming themselves,” he said. “It would inject firearms into a volatile domestic violence situation, making that situation less safe, not more.

“In 2014, there were 112 family and intimate-partner related homicides in Virginia. Sixty-six of those deaths were with a firearm. I will not allow this bill to become law when too many Virginia women have already fallen victim to firearms violence at the hands of their intimate partner.”

McAuliffe’s office did not respond to questions about whether the governor believed victims of domestic violence should ever arm themselves or what victims, especially those located far from police stations, should do if they find themselves in life-threatening situations.

Gun-rights advocates who championed the bill decried the governor’s veto and said it would likely cost innocent lives.

“Governor McAuliffe claims we don’t need to introduce a gun into a ‘volatile situation,’ where there is a protective order in place,” Philip Van Cleave, the Virginia Citizens Defense League’s president, told the Washington Free Beacon. “He’s completely wrong. That situation is exactly where we DO want to introduce a firearm. Knowledge that the victim is armed is a great incentive for the aggressor to stay away.”

Van Cleave said the first 48 hours after a protective order is issued are the most crucial time for a potential victim to be armed.

“Protective orders really enrage the aggressor and the vetoed bill would have allowed the victim to be fully armed, yet in a discreet manner, even during those initial 48 hours,” he said. “Sadly, the governor’s veto will likely cost innocent lives.”

The bill passed by a vote of 63-31 in the house of delegates and 26-14 in the senate. A veto override would require a two-thirds majority in both houses.

The National Rifle Association said McAuliffe’s veto was driven by his association with gun control groups.

“Victims of domestic abuse should be free to protect themselves with more than a piece of paper,” Catherine Mortensen, a spokesperson for the NRA’s lobbying arm, told the Beacon. “This bill would allow a victim of abuse who already has a protective order to immediately protect herself with a concealed firearm. Governor McAuliffe is siding with the gun control lobby that funds his campaign over victims of abuse who want more than a piece of paper to protect themselves.”

U.S. appeals court upholds Maryland’s ban on assault rifles

February 23, 2017 Leave a comment

Assault-style rifles hang on display inside a Dallas, Texas gun shop, September 13, 2004. REUTERS/Jeff Mitchell  JM

REUTERS/Jeff Mitchell JM

A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld Maryland’s ban on assault rifles, ruling gun owners are not protected under the U.S. Constitution to possess “weapons of war,” court documents showed.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit decided 10-4 that the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, a law in response to the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, by a gunman with an assault rifle, does not violate the right to bear arms within the Second Amendment.

“Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war,” Judge Robert King wrote, referring to the “military-style rifles” that were also used during mass shootings in Aurora, Colorado, San Bernardino, California, and Orlando, Florida.

These are “places whose names have become synonymous with the slaughters that occurred there,” he wrote, noting that the Supreme Court’s decision in the 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller case excluded coverage of assault weapons.

The United States has among the most permissive gun rights in the world. Because the U.S. Congress has long been a graveyard for gun control legislation, some states and localities have enacted their own measures.

In total, seven states and the District of Columbia have laws that ban semiautomatic rifles, several of which that have faced various court challenges as there is a longstanding legal debate over the scope of Second Amendment rights.

Four appeal courts have rejected Second Amendment challenges to bans on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines, King wrote.

In 2015, U.S. District Judge Catherine Blake upheld Maryland’s law that bans the AR-15 and other military-style rifles and shotguns and limits magazine capacity to 10 rounds, but a smaller panel of circuit court judges reversed her ruling in 2016. The case could be eventually be heard by the Supreme Court.

The majority “has gone to greater lengths than any other court to eviscerate the constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms,” Judge William Traxler wrote in the dissent of the ruling released on Tuesday.

 

Report: Obama Issued A Massive Ammunition Ban Just One Day Before He Left Office

January 25, 2017 Leave a comment

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dan Ashe, an Obama appointee, ordered a new ammunition ban for certain federal lands on Thursday–his last full day in office

Report: Obama Issued A Massive Ammunition Ban Just One Day Before He Left Office

In early December SHTFplan contributor Jeremiah Johnson warned the inauguration was still a long way off and that we should never underestimate a Marxist with an army of oligarchs to lean on. It turns out that Johnson’s warnings were right on target, as we have learned over the last couple of weeks that President Obama and officials in his administration moved feverishly to implement new rules and regulations with last minute initiatives.

One such regulation, which seemingly disappeared within the hustle and bustle of inauguration day, was a new order issued by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dan Ashe just 12 hours before our new President was sworn into office.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dan Ashe, an Obama appointee, ordered a new ammunition ban for certain federal lands on Thursday–his last full day in office.

The ban, which took effect immediately, eliminates the use of lead-based ammunition on federal lands like national parks and wildlife refuges, as well as any other land administered by the Fish and Wildlife Service.The ban is expected to have a major impact on much of the hunting that takes place on federal lands across the United States as lead-based ammunition is widely legal and used throughout the country.

Ashe said the order was necessary to protect wildlife from exposure to lead.

Source: The Free Beacon Via Survival Blog

That may seem like a big win for the anti-gun left, but The National Shooting Sports Foundation has already leapt into action:

“This directive is irresponsible and driven not out of sound science but unchecked politics,” said Lawrence Keane, the group’s senior vice president. “The timing alone is suspect. This directive was published without dialogue with industry, sportsmen, and conservationists. The next director should immediately rescind this and, instead, create policy based upon scientific evidence of population impacts with regard to the use of traditional ammunition.”

As we noted earlier, President Trump has a lot of work to do to reverse the damage caused by the Obama administration.

Reversing this asinine ammunition ban is a good start.

REPORT: Final Stats Show The REAL Numbers Behind Obama’s “Genius” Gun Control Policies

January 12, 2017 Leave a comment

use-me

Facts have been presented showing that there is an amazing amount of truth in what the pro-Second Amendment movement has been saying in regards to gun-free zones in the Land of the Free. Everyone smarter than a post, or at least than Joe Biden, knew that gun-free zones were havens for those who wish to inflict the maximum amount of misery with no one shooting back at them. And guess what? We were all correct.

Ninety-eight percent–that is how much more often a mass shooting happens in a gun-free zone than in areas where people are allowed to protect themselves as they see fit. This study did not include gang violence, which not only is not motivated by the same outcome as mass shootings or acts of terror, but are usually targeted. Gangs often use illegal guns too, so for those two reasons, gangs do not equate into the number.

image_720

This information should be shown to everyone who has been trying so hard to make (what is now proven to be) targets out of everyone by removing guns from the public at every opportunity. This is why we are seeing states such as Florida move to allow guns in government buildings and airports.

After the truth was seen that taking guns away from travelers in Florida lead to a mass killing of them as they died defenseless at the airport, this may prove to be one of the most prudent moves that we have seen in terms of public safety and defense in years.

Kentucky, home of Senator Rand Paul, is looking at changing the rules to allow guns in schools there, which will go a long way in limiting the amount of damage that a shooter will do, if God forbid that should ever arise. There are very good reasons why the Second Amendment exists, and much of it has nothing to do with hunting or taking over the government, which is always heard.

The Second Amendment means that a small, frail person can walk down the street and not have to be unprotected nor open for attack. This is the basis of protecting one’s God-given right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Flash mobs exist that see homes and stores overrun with tens, sometimes hundreds of looters, so people may feel the need to have more than ten bullets in a gun in order to be safe. That is the person’s right to do so, just as it is the right of a woman who gets off from work at three in the morning to greet any possible attacker with something more than pepper spray and a rape whistle.

By the way, someone let the left know that rape whistles don’t work so well in the age of central air, closed doors, and surround sound systems. They will never figure it out if we don’t tell them.

Let us imagine that a handful of responsible gun owners had a gun on hand during the most recent shooting at the Florida airport. Without a doubt, someone was likely going to lose their lives that day no matter what because, unlike what the media says about most gun owners,  just because someone has a gun on them does not mean that they are planning to use it.

Any gun owner would have been just as busy checking bags, dodging cell phone walkers, and paying for overpriced coffee as anyone who did not have a gun. Therefore, when the madman opened fire, the shock factor was still going to kill at least someone, if not many “someones”.

image

However, from there on out, that is where the story would have most likely changed to a very large degree. Once the first victims had fallen and the running began, a responsible conceal and carry gun owner would have been on alert. If he or she had a clear shot, which is unlikely but possible, they would have taken it. Contrary to popular belief, gun classes do not teach to ever fire if the shot is not clear, such as would have been the case with the initial panicked running. Still, once people started hitting the ground in an effort to not be a target, things would have changed.

The gunman was reported to have stood over those who cowered on the ground as a defense and simply fired his weapon into the sea of bodies while looming over them. This means that there was quite likely a clear shot once this happened. If so, at least some of those that died on the floor could have been saved. Second of all, if one or two of the people on the ground had a gun (assuming that they had ducked or were playing dead), they could have really had a fighting chance.

ngnbn

If this sounds like a bit too much of a “wild west scenario” for many to be comfortable with, are we more comfortable with a “horror movie scenario”? Gunmen who want to kill people have a terrible track record when it comes to obeying gun laws, so this approach is clearly not working. If it did work, then we would not see a 98% higher number of these crimes in places where no one except the law breaker can kill someone. There is no reason why we can not trust the vast majority of our fellow citizens to have a gun when we already know that the vast minority of us (killers) will certainly not be worthy of the trust to pull back.

It was Robert Heilein who said most astutely that an armed society is a polite society, and there are jewels of logic to be mined within those words. If guns are taken away from the people, then in areas where criminals plan, life becomes the survival of the fittest. When guns were taken by China, Russia, and Germany, it lead directly to the worst genocides of the 20th century.

It is time to understand that instead of banning guns, we need to be teaching the value and respect FOR guns. Our very lives may depend upon it someday.

 

Dems Calling For Complete Gun Control Zone After Florida Airport Killing, Don’t Realize It Already Was

January 11, 2017 Leave a comment

liberals-demanding-gun-control

Unfortunately, we had a tragedy during the opening days of the New Year. On January 6, 2017, the nation saw a mass shooting in the Ft. Lauderdale-Hollywood International airport. A gunman went through baggage claim and opened fire, shooting 13 people and killing five of them.

The nation was quick to mourn, as the top political leaders sent their thoughts and prayers to the people that were affected. President-Elect Donald Trump tweeted out his sympathies, as did Senator Marco Rubio and House Speaker Paul Ryan and a number of other Senators.

Normally this would have been enough and the people of the nation would gladly accept this. However, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence decided to open their mouth and tweet at the President-Elect, as well as the other elected officials that they didn’t need their thoughts and prayers.

Again, they decided to say that they we need to have more gun control in the United States so that these tragedies could be avoided. Oh, and they really played it up this time. The Brady Campaign sent out tweets saying that thoughts and prayers are not the solution, and they were actually “tired of [his] thoughts and prayers” when referencing House Speaker Ryan.

Trump tweeted out, “Monitoring the terrible situation in Florida. Just spoke to Governor Scott. Thoughts and prayers for all. Stay safe!” There was nothing wrong with that, as it was just a tweet to remind the people of Florida that the future president is going to make sure they are okay.

trump-fun-tweet

That was too much for the Brady Campaign, as they sent back, “.@realDonaldTrump We don’t need #thoughtsandprayers – we need commitment to take action & pass life-saving gun laws,” as well as a link to Trump’s original tweet. They also did the same thing to the other Republicans that decided to speak out against the terrible tragedy.

brady-campaign-response

The founder of Micheal Bloomberg-funded Moms Demand Action, Shannon Watts, carried out their message as well. She tweeted out, “If thoughts and prayers solved gun violence, America wouldn’t have the highest rate of gun violence of all developed nations.”

However, let’s focus on that last claim. The claim that America has “the highest rate of gun violence of all developed nations” is actually just part of a distraction. Think about this for a second: Ft. Lauderdale-Hollywood airport is a gun-free zone. In other words, they have 100 percent gun control.

moms-demand-action-idiot

So they’re calling for more gun control in an area that already had 100% gun control? That literally doesn’t make any sense at all! If anything, they should be pushing for the opposite, as in less gun control. That would be the only thing that makes sense!

Consider what happened at the end of November on the campus of Ohio State University. It was there that a terrorist actually drove his car onto the sidewalk, hit a bunch of students, got OUT of the car, and attempted to stab the survivors. Do you know the reason why only 11 people were hurt and nobody except the terrorist died?

That was because a police officer, WITH A GUN, was present and shot the guy right away. However can you imagine what would have happened if he wasn’t there right away? There could have been countless deaths. That was why Ohio, much to the chagrin of the Brady Campaign, passed a conceal carry act that makes sure this situation will never happen again.

Or if that doesn’t work, consider this. The other locations that have had total gun control have been the areas that were locations for other mass shootings. Gee that total gun control really helped out didn’t it? For example, Sandy Hook Elementary, Umpqua Community College, Fort, Hood, the Lafayette and Aurora movie theaters, and the Orlando Pulse night club were all areas that had 100 percent gun control.

Add the airport to this list and you have a pretty good case for wanting to have gun control abolished. Seriously anyone that was armed could have stopped these people. The people that committed these heinous acts are CRIMINALS. They are not going to abide by the law and the people that are going to suffer the most are the law-abiding citizens.

It didn’t matter what occurred, such as that Ohio State attack. Liberals are going to ask for total gun control no matter what happens. Again, the only gun that was involved in the Ohio State attack was the one that killed the terrorist. So what were liberals yelling for? The total removal of guns. They really have no logic whatsoever.

liberal-idiot-press-conference

Not to mention that cities that have the strictest gun laws often experience the most amount of crimes. That is because criminals don’t care about obeying the law. As a result, Chicago, which does have one of the strictest gun laws in the United States, saw a record wave of shootings over Christmas. Again, gun control really works doesn’t it?

Share this article to show that liberals are now asking for total gun control in areas that already have it. They don’t realize that gun control DOESN’T WORK. Name me a time when criminals obeyed the law. I’ll wait.

Chicago Boasts Strictest Gun Laws, Experiences Record Wave Of Shootings Over Christmas

December 30, 2016 Leave a comment

Source:

The streets of Chicago are awash in blood. More than 60 people were shot over Christmas weekend alone. The struggling city witnessed a record 735 homicides in 2016.

“We had a reprehensible amount of shootings and murders,” Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson said this week. “Many,” he continued, “were deliberate and planned shootings by one gang against another. They were targeted knowing fully well that individuals would be at homes of family and friends celebrating the holidays. This was followed by several acts of retaliation.”

Chicago is in the grip of the sternest gun control laws in the country. Yet so many shootings occur that the city’s earned the apt nickname “Chiraq.”

 

During his campaign, President-elect Donald Trump often used Chicago as an example of a city suffering under failed liberal policies. Gun control doesn’t work. Poverty is the real driver of violence, and that won’t be fixed by a misguided law.

Speaking in Chicago over Thanksgiving, another bloody weekend, the Rev. Jesse Jackson said “Poverty is a weapon of mass destruction. There’s 700 empty spaces at the the Thanksgiving table. That’s 700 heartbreaking reasons why we must recommit and redouble our efforts to stop the violence and eradicate poverty in urban and rural America.”

In 2016, Chicago recorded more murders than New York City and Los Angeles combined. Residents in the South and West areas of the city live a lifestyle more suited to a developing country. While Democrats have been wasting time with failed measures, the city’s ghettos have continued to deteriorate.

 

Where are the Black Lives Matters protests? The violence in Chicago overwhelmingly affects blacks. Far more minorities are gunned down by thugs in Chicago’s South Side than are harassed or brutalized by police.

“If you look at a place like Chicago … it’s got the single toughest gun laws in the United States and it’s a disaster they’re having in certain areas of Chicago,” Trump said on MSNBC’s Morning Joe. “Chicago is sort of a tale of two of cities. But in certain areas of Chicago, there’s tremendous gun violence. More than just about any place.”

Trump put his finger on the problem. Liberals bleating about gun control has done nothing but impinge upon the 2nd Amendment rights of honest citizens.

“If you look we actually have strong laws on the books. And again, you look at places like Chicago. Look at New York City. In New York City, we have among the toughest gun laws in the country and we have gun violence. It’s a real problem. But we have the laws. So you have to make the laws work. The government is not making the laws work. But beyond that, you do have a huge mental health problem. There’s no question about it,” Trump said.

The national murder rate, while historically low, is projected to rise by at least 13 percent this year. Nearly half of that increase is attributable to Chicago.

Almost all of the violence springs from gangs. Teen boys slaughter each other to appear tough and fit in. Adult men kill to settle scores or establish new territory. A generation of poor Chicago boys are trapped in a never-ending cycle of violence.

Tensions that have simmered for years finally boiled over in 2016. This year witnessed a staggering increase in the city’s murder rate. Experts believe that agitators like the BLM protesters are partly responsible for the surge in violence.

“Over the past 18 months, the drawdown of police…has led to an explosion of violence not seen in almost 20 years—in August, 90 people were killed. It’s as if Chicago pulled its firefighters off a massive blaze and now residents are watching the flames engulf the entire city” writes NewsWeek.

Liberals are exacerbating the problems in Chicago by allowing distrust between cops and citizens to fester. Police cannot properly protect a city that doesn’t trust them.

Chicago is already on Trump’s radar. He has a real plan for cleaning up the city- create jobs. Many young men drift into gangs because they feel like they have no other options. Provide them with an outlet to a new life, and many boys would refrain from picking up a gun.

The changes will be slow and grueling. The problems are deeply entrenched. Yet, they can be solved. There is hope for Chicago’s poorer residents. They don’t need to tear each other apart, their lives can be expanded beyond their own cramped neighborhoods. What they need to thrive is better opportunities, which can be granted through improved schooling and employment opportunities.

Trump’s pro-business agenda is set to increase jobs and his school voucher program intends to allow poorer parents the choice of where to send their children to school.

Chicago is a city teetering on the edge of destruction. Crime rates are rising rather than falling. The Democrats plan to save the city has failed. It’s time to see what conservatives can do.

%d bloggers like this: