Bearing Arms

  • Rant of the Week: It’s Time To Belly Up To The Bar of Accountability
    “What the hell was I thinking?” was my morning after-reaction to what I thought was a brilliant idea as I was drifting off to sleep the night before. The thought that keeps reoccurring is that I should be a liberal. Let’s face it, liberalism is the path of least resistance. No fuss, no muss, facts-be-damned, full speed ahead. Take gun laws, for instance. Someone with way too much time on their hands has figured out there are approximately 20,000 gun laws spread over the many levels of local, county, state and federal government. Admittedly, some are flat-out stupid, such as zero-tolerance for gun-shaped objects on school campuses. Eat a Pop Tart that some loonie-left teacher thinks resembles the shape of a gun, and you’re suspended from school. But many laws are dead serious, such as bans against specific firearms because they simply have a militaristic appearance. Those laws control John Q. Public, the owners of about 325 million legally-possessed firearms; and its true, that’s one bodacious amount of guns in the United States. In fact, there are about 101 firearms per 100 U.S. citizens. The next closest country with a similar statistic is Serbia, with 58.2 guns per 100 residents. The point is, if the owners of those 325 million firearms were the problem, you wouldn’t need the press to tell you. Now all of those anti-gun laws and ordinances were passed by government officials who blatantly ignore the reality of the Second Amendment. If you’ve ever fantasized about somehow giving some anti-gun elected official their comeuppance, you’ll appreciate what’s happening in Concord, New Hampshire. State Representative J.R. Hoell has introduced a bill that would allow citizens to put pressure on local government officials to not restrict gun rights. The proposed bill would allow citizens to individually sue local elected officials who vote to restrict gun rights. Think about how many pro-Second Amendment people there are in your community, then contemplate each one of them suing an elected official for voting in favor of a law that would restrict your rights under the constitution. Casting a political body onto the rocks of eternal litigation would be a mighty checks-and-balances system. One would anticipate it would be a rallying cry for all pro-Second Amendment believers – but not entirely. A group called Pro-Gun New Hampshire expressed concern that such a law would give the legislature too much power by taking the decision making out of the local level and investing it in the state legislature. In gutting local-level power, the bill gives “exclusive authority and jurisdiction” over all things relating to guns to the state. On the other side of the aisle, reaction from the Dems is predictable. They say it’s an abomination, and the bill’s crafters will be consumed by a plague of locusts. Apparently, none of the Democrats heard about how their own party in Washington, just two years ago, tried to enact legislation that would have allowed victims of gun violence to sue the gun’s manufacturer and ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Sunday, January 21, 2018By David Lombardo
    12 hours ago
  • Defense Department Fights Back Against Gun Database Lawsuit
    While the Department of Defense has taken some lumps over its failure to report the Sutherland Springs shooter to the NICS database, it’s not willing to go down without a fight. After all, we do tend to want our military to fight, though possibly not on something like this, but if they’re in the right–or at least not in the wrong. There’s a difference–I don’t blame them. The DOD argues the lawsuit overreaches what should be permissible by law. The Department of Defense told a federal court last week a lawsuit pending from three major cities over the gun background check system overreaches. In a 25-page response filed Jan. 12, federal attorneys called the expedited discovery request — via a claim under the Administrative Procedure Act — from the legal team representing the cities of New York City, Philadelphia and San Francisco “both meritless and premature,” insisting the court deny the motion ahead of the case’s April 6 hearing. “Plaintiffs seek to wield this scalpel as a bludgeon, asking the Court to engage in far-reaching oversight of Defendants’ compliance with … a statute directing agencies to report criminal history data to the Attorney General, over a period of decades,” the motion says. “To that end, Plaintiffs have filed for a preliminary injunction and ask this Court to grant expedited discovery. Every aspect of Plaintiffs’ request is disfavored.” City officials sued the department Dec. 22 for its repeated failure to report disqualifying service member records to federal authorities — a longstanding issue illuminated by the shooting at a Texas church last year. The legal challenge seeks an injunction and judicial oversight to mandate the department submit missing criminal records to the databases feeding the National Instant Criminal Background Check System — restoring its integrity for the sake of the three cities whom “regularly” rely on it. This comes as Congress is currently considering a bill to fix the NICS, a bill that seeks to correct oversights that many feel resulted in the Sutherland Springs massacre. I get where these cities are coming from, though. Someone who should be barred from owning firearms can pass the NICS check? All because someone didn’t forward the information to the right database? I’m sorry, but I get where some folks are coming from on this. However, I’ll also say there’s no cause so righteous that it won’t attract some fuggheads who will screw the whole damn thing up. That’s what I feel is happening here. Rather than leaning on elected officials to pass the Fix NICS bill, they want to push a lawsuit? They’re taking taxpayer money to sue and entity using taxpayer money to accomplish something that could easily be handled legislatively. The fact is, the NICS issue is about as bipartisan as you can get, though a handful of folks are a little worked up over some things they believe are in the bill. A legislative fix would make a lot more sense than a judicial one. But since these cities are liberal bastions, they simply want to make sure they can ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Sunday, January 21, 2018By Tom Knighton
    19 hours ago
  • Kimber’s Expansion Into Alabama, Due To Gun Laws Or Something Else?
    Anti-gun states don’t get it. They don’t understand that for every law they pass, there are unintended consequences. Countless unintended consequences. For example, in New York, one employer may be beating feet to the South because of the Empire State’s decision to treat law-abiding citizens as royal subjects, inhibiting their sacred and protected right to keep and bear arms. That employer is Kimber. Alabamians are celebrating and New Yorkers are left scratching their heads. No… it’s not about the BCS championship game where the Crimson Tide pulled out an overtime win against Georgia. The most recent victory for the Yellowhammer state was luring Kimber Manufacturing, Inc., to build a $38-million facility in Troy instead of expanding production at its location in Yonkers, New York. That’s right. Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey announced in her State of the State address that Kimber, maker of handguns and bolt-action rifles, would be putting a little drawl, y’all, into their products. Kimber’s going to build a $38 million automated design, engineering and manufacturing facility that will employ 366 people. The doors will open and customers can expect Troy, Alabama markings on their guns in 2019. “Kimber’s investment in Troy will create a significant number of high-paying design engineering and manufacturing jobs, and we are committed to helping the company find long-lasting success in Alabama,” Gov. Ivey said. Who Says You Can’t Leave Home? Kimber made note of their roots in the Empire State. But it seems that the new facility will do more than just allow the company to double manufacturing capacity. It will also invest and plant roots in a state that respects gun rights. While Kimber has grown, New York’s Gov. Andrew Cuomo rammed through New York’s SAFE Act, a massive gun control legislative package that has been a headache for New York gun owners since it was implemented five years ago. While Kimber may not be a massive employer, it’s economic impact is much larger than its 366 employees would indicate. After all, they also pay for materials, transportation, power, water, taxes, and a whole host of other things. Now, those will likely all benefit the state of Alabama…to some extent, at least. You see, Kimber describes the move as an expansion into Alabama rather than a relocation. Kimber Mfg., Inc., a leading American firearms manufacturer, today announced that it has finalized plans to expand manufacturing operations to Alabama. Kimber will begin operations in early 2019, with a new design engineering and manufacturing facility in the City of Troy. Once a small manufacturing company based in Yonkers, NY, Kimber has grown at a rapid pace over the past 21 years with locations in the New York metro area and Montana. The new Troy facility will double Kimber’s manufacturing capacity. “Due to an unprecedented year-over-year growth in demand, every time the company has embarked upon a planned expansion, the newly created capacity is exhausted before the expansion is complete,” said James Cox, Kimber’s chief financial officer. “As we continue to move into uncharted waters in regards to ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Saturday, January 20, 2018By Tom Knighton
    2 days ago
  • When ‘Stand Your Ground’ Doesn’t Apply
    Pretty much everyone who reads Bearing Arms on a regular basis is a fan of Stand Your Ground laws. The idea that there’s a duty to retreat from an attacker is idiotic, especially when you consider that doing so may well create more of a risk to life and limb. However, it’s important to remember what Stand Your Ground laws don’t cover. For example, this case: On scene, officers found a man inside a vehicle suffering from gunshot wounds, with the owner of the vehicle nearby, according to North Charleston Police Dept. spokesperson Spencer Pryor. The owner told police he learned his allegedly stolen vehicle was in the area, and went to Celestial Court to confront the person who was found shot in the vehicle. Police say the vehicle’s owner fired a gun at the person he found inside his vehicle. That individual later died from injuries he suffered in the shooting, police say. Now, based on what we’re seeing here in the news–which doesn’t necessarily tell the whole story–this is probably not a viable example of stand your ground laws in use. There doesn’t appear to be any risk to anyone’s life. While it’s not uncommon for burglars to murder people, it’s not that common for car thieves to do so. Without a specific threatening action with some kind of weapon, it seems hard to say this is a justified use of lethal force. Another example that’s a little trickier: Weiss claims that a male passenger got out of the vehicle and became aggressive. At that point, Weiss told police he returned to his Subaru and retrieved his phone and a handgun. Weiss said the Cavalier moved to the south side of 31st St. NE before the driver, Rahim, got out of the vehicle and became confrontational. According to a passenger in Rahim’s vehicle, Weiss got out of his car after the crash “as if he wished to fight.” The passenger also said that Rahim got very close to Weiss, “puffing out his chest” before Weiss pulled a gun. According to the passenger, Rahim told Weiss, “I ******* dare you to do it” once the gun was pulled. The passenger claims that neither he nor Rahim touched Weiss before the shooting. Why is this tricky? Well, for one thing, there were two people. A fistfight, even one you’re losing badly, isn’t necessarily grounds for pulling a gun. But if you’re facing multiple threats? Well, then maybe. However, we don’t have any information of the passenger acting aggressively, he simply exited the vehicle. Absent an actual threat, it appears that this might not be a justifiable case of self-defense. And that’s really the rub here. You see, Stand Your Ground laws don’t change what is and isn’t considered a threat to your life or someone else’s. Those kinds of things are still pretty much the same. What a Stand Your Ground law does is make it so you’re not required to run away because a criminal threatens you. It means you don’t have ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Saturday, January 20, 2018By Tom Knighton
    2 days ago
  • Dana Loesch Tears Into CNN for Celebrating THESE Protestors During March for Life
    As thousands of women – and men – prepare to march through the streets of Washington on the 45th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision, CNN thought it would be a good time to draw attention to those activists who have gone largely unrecognized this past year. No, we’re not talking about the March of Life protestors. The Women’s March brought millions to the streets for a historic day of protest the day after President Trump’s inauguration. CNN followed the national organizers of the Women's March over the course of a year, documenting how a moment became a movement. https://t.co/hsBzYw3MJh pic.twitter.com/vEuiAfIyGC — CNN (@CNN) January 19, 2018 Of course, CNN’s feature left out of a few minor, not-so-pretty, details. I hope you also included the convicted terrorist and murderer they featured as speakers, covered the well-documented antisemitism of their organizer, and their aggressive exclusion of pro-life women. https://t.co/lzyvvxGjBN — Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) January 19, 2018 And that’s not all that will likely be missing from CNN today. I also hope CNN equally covers the March for Life, that has brought to the street hundreds of thousands of women from all political persuasions year after year. https://t.co/FLr3QsWmcd — Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) January 19, 2018 We wouldn’t get your hopes up. Currently, the site features virtually no coverage of the demonstration. On its Twitter page, CNN say it’s their “job to #GoThere & tell the most difficult stories.” And yet, no one from the network is willing to “go there” today – to go into D.C. and share these women’s stories. What CNN fails to understand is that you don’t have to be pro-life to think the March for Life is an important political event worth covering. If your motto really is “facts first,” then at least give your readers the option to hear all sides of a debate. They can decide from there where they stand. Thankfully Dana called them out, because it’s not just 2A misinformation we need to hold them accountable for. The post Dana Loesch Tears Into CNN for Celebrating THESE Protestors During March for Life appeared first on Bearing Arms. ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Friday, January 19, 2018By Erika Haas
    3 days ago
  • Many Of Washington, D.C.’s New Permits Issued To People Who Don’t Live There
    Washington, D.C. isn’t one of those places people seem to live. While many undoubtedly do, most of the people who make up Washington are really folks who live outside of D.C. in one of the many suburbs. Now that D.C. is required to be a shall issue jurisdiction, it seems that they’re issuing a whole lot more permits these days, and the Washington Post thinks it’s newsworthy that so many people applying for permits are people who don’t reside in Washington itself. More than 700 people have asked the D.C. police for licenses to carry loaded concealed handguns when they dine, shop and walk the streets of the nation’s capital. In the months since a court ordered city officials to scale back local gun-control laws, police department records show that more than half the applicants are not District residents. The loosening of the law marks a cultural shift in a city where most residents could not legally keep handguns in their homes until a landmark Supreme Court decision a decade ago. City officials have long fought efforts to chip away at the District’s strict controls since the high court used a local case in 2008 to declare that an individual has a right to gun ownership. A string of successful legal challenges from gun rights advocates culminated last fall and now make it much easier to get a permit to carry a handgun in the District. “It’s definitely a new day,” said former assistant police chief Diane Groomes, who oversees security at the new Wharf development of restaurants, hotels and stores on the Southwest Waterfront. The article also notes that city officials opted to not appeal the decision to the Supreme Court because of the potential ramifications on a national level should they lose. However, it seems odd that this is surprising enough to warrant a news report. Many who work and function in Washington actually live in places like Virginia or Maryland. They work in D.C. and they visit restaurants and other entertainment venues in D.C., but they reside outside the city. This isn’t unusual for large cities, either. Many people live outside of Chicago, New York, and Los Angeles and travel in for work and play. This is because so many cities are virtual sewers in many regards, thus necessitating people finding somewhere to live that doesn’t completely blow. Where D.C. differs is that it’s an entity unto itself. There are no state regulations overseeing it, unlike most other major cities. No one can get a state-issued permit that will cover them inside the city. It’s just not an option. As a result, people are applying directly for permits good within Washington, often on top of their permits for their home states. This isn’t unusual. So why is this newsworthy? Mostly, it’s because the Post wants folks to be freaked out that people are crossing into the city armed. They want to create this perception that Washingtonians are too enlightened to want to be armed, that it’s only because of ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Friday, January 19, 2018By Tom Knighton
    3 days ago
  • Is Mitch McConnell The Reason We Don’t Have National Reciprocity?
    One of the biggest items on the agenda for many gun owners is national reciprocity. The time for such a law has never been better, with the GOP holding both chambers of Congress, the White House, and a majority on the Supreme Court. It seems likely that national reciprocity needs to happen now or it may never happen. However, despite passing in the House, there’s been no movement on the Senate’s version of the bill. Is Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell to blame? Some say he is. Texas Republican Senator John Cornyn introduced the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 some 45 weeks ago. Three-hundred-and-twenty-three days have passed since the introduction of Senate Bill 446 on March 1, 2017. Nothing. You can thank Kentucky Republican and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell . . .   … Perhaps there’s some other political calculus of which I’m not aware. Maybe Senator McConnell is waiting for the right moment to restore gun rights on the federal level. When would that be, exactly? While we’re asking questions, where does Sen. McConnell stand on Americans’ Constitutional rights? Does he support the Second Amendment as writ, or did he swindle those Kentucky voters back in 2014 and the millions of NRA voters that poured their hard earned money into his campaign? We shall see. Politics is a messy business, especially when you’re in leadership. There’s no point in bringing a law to a vote when you know it won’t pass unless you’re trying to make a point with it not passing. While Republicans control the Senate, they don’t have a supermajority. Perhaps McConnell is worried about Democrats filibustering the bill, thus bogging it down? However, if that’s the case, then you might as well give up now. You’re giving Democrats the ground without there even being a fight. Democrats from pro-gun states won’t be forced to choose between party and their constituents, thus leveraging them to either vote for the bill or set the groundwork for a Republican to take that seat come next election. You’re just making it too easy for them. But I can’t help but think McConnell’s been around too long for that to be the reason. He knows how the game is played, and he knows that even the bill being blocked can count as a win if you handle it right. So why the holdup? Frankly, I haven’t got a clue. It does seem to boil down to McConnell not being as pro-gun as he claimed to be as Candidate McConnell. He was more than willing to take the NRA’s money as well as the money of legions of the NRA’s supporters for his campaign war chest, but now that it’s time for those contributors to get a little something back for their investment, McConnell doesn’t seem willing to deliver. National reciprocity needs to be brought to a vote. Win or lose, gun rights advocates have earned the chance to see who really stands with us and to make ready to remove ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Friday, January 19, 2018By Tom Knighton
    3 days ago
  • NY State Police Won’t Enforce Pistol Recert Rules For Now
    New York Governor Andrew Cuomo doesn’t care about gun owners. In fact, I can’t help but believe that he’s really alright with turning legions of law-abiding New Yorkers into criminals simply because they own guns. This is especially clear, since he did so little to deal with the clusterflop New York law that requires even people with lifetime gun permits to recertify. There was a lot of confusion over the law, and a lot of people didn’t get notification of their need to recertify. Now, at least, there’s a little bit of a reprieve. It seems the New York State Police won’t be enforcing the recertify rules just yet. With thousands of pistol permit holders yet to re-up by the end of the month, state police say they will not take action on those who “unknowingly failed to recertify.” As of Wednesday, authorities say that just 262,114 New Yorkers have submitted a pistol permit re-certification. However, with an estimated 1.2 million formerly lifetime permits in circulation and the SAFE Act-mandated re-certification deadline looming, officials say they are not looking to take anyone’s guns. “To be clear, the State Police will not be confiscating weapons from those permit holders who fail to recertify by January 31st,” says a notice on the NYSP’s re-certification site. “This provision was never intended to be a ‘Gotcha’ for pistol permit holders. It was included in the law that was passed by the legislature and signed by the Governor in order to update the accuracy of both state and local records.” The State Police say they will continue to accept re-certifications throughout 2018 as they work to update the database, but will take note of those submitted late. While the agency points out that according to state law, failure to re-certify acts as a revocation of a permit — required in New York to possess a pistol or revolver– until they have a chance to process the backlog of re-certifications they are not taking any enforcement action against those “who have unknowingly failed to recertify.”  Many local police and sheriffs are taking the same stand. Of course, this also illustrates the pure ridiculousness of New York’s gun laws. Imagine having to ask for permission to keep your guns. Not just get permission to buy, but to keep them after you’ve already purchased them with your hard-earned money. I’m sorry, but this baffles me. It completely flummoxes me how people in the state can manage to put up with this kind of invasive meddling from people who are elected to serve them. I get that many don’t support this, that it’s driven by a handful of heavily liberal regions that dominate the more reasonable parts of the state, but still… The NYSP’s decision to not enforce the rules, for the time being, makes sense. It’s the most reasonable option in a sea of horrible choices created by an obtrusively tyrannical regime in Albany, NY. However, it should never have come to this. It’s past time we start looking at states like New ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Friday, January 19, 2018By Tom Knighton
    3 days ago
  • LA Times: 10,000 Californians Who Shouldn’t Own Guns, Do. That’s Unpossible!
    California has some of the most strict gun control laws in the country, yet despite the laws, it seems that thousands of Californians who shouldn’t own firearms, do. At least, that’s what the Los Angeles Times notes in their story on the situation. In response to the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut five years ago, outraged California lawmakers launched a crackdown within months of the tragedy that has seized 18,000 firearms, including assault rifles, from thousands of people convicted of felonies, subject to domestic violence restraining orders or judged by the courts to be severely mentally ill. But a surge in gun sales and a reduction in funding for the program has stymied efforts by the state Department of Justice to eliminate a backlog of people in California who have firearms and shouldn’t. Approximately 10,226 people remain on a list of Californians who legally purchased guns but were later disqualified from possessing them Now, a new law is giving law enforcement officials hope that greater headway can be made in disarming Californians who are ineligible to own guns. “Significantly, it means we finally have a process in place to ensure that dangerous, convicted criminals are forced to get rid of their guns,” said Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, who sponsored the new law as part of Proposition 63, a ballot measure that also included background checks on ammunition purchases and banned the sale of large-capacity firearm magazines. It was approved by voters in 2016. In 2006, California became the first state in the nation to create a database that cross-references firearms purchasers against a list of people convicted of crimes, or who are subject to mental health judgments or domestic violence restraining orders that prohibit them from possessing guns. You mean that despite all the gun control laws in California, thousands of people were able to buy firearms? Really? That doesn’t seem possible. After all, we have it on good authority that gun control works and that gun control laws keep guns out of the wrong hands, so how did more than 10,000 people get guns if they weren’t legally allowed to have them in the first place? And I hate to break it to California, but I’d be willing to bet there are more than 10,000 people who own guns despite being ineligible in L.A. alone, much less the rest of the state. These numbers just reflect people who otherwise obeyed the law. It has zero reflection of people who purchased guns through black market sources or the darknet. Frankly, those are the guns you need to worry more about. Those are the people who bought guns with the express purpose of using them illegally. But hey, it’s California. This is what they do. They focus on the showy stuff to look like they’re doing something about violent crime, but they’re still accomplishing absolutely nothing about the guns that are the real problem. Don’t get me wrong, if people aren’t legally allowed to own guns, they don’t need to have guns. I ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Friday, January 19, 2018By Tom Knighton
    3 days ago
  • ATF Releases the Number of Gun Store Thefts in 2017
    While we’re finally expected to see a drop-off in overall crime, violent crime and murder rates for 2017, there is one number that is still steadily on the rise: gun store thefts. According to a new report from the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms, Tobacco and Explosives (ATF), a record number of federally-licensed firearms dealers were burglarized and robbed in 2017. There were a whopping 577 gun stores burglaries last year, approximately a three-percent increase from 2016 during which 558 stores were burglarized, and a 70-percent increase from 2013. The number of robberies has also steadily climbed over the past five years. In 2013, there were only nine reported robberies. By 2016, that number had risen nearly 267-percent to 33. While that number didn’t increase in 2017, it didn’t decrease either. Of course, more burglaries also means more stolen firearms. Since 2013, the number of firearms snatched during burglaries has more than doubled, from 3,355 in 2013 to 7,841 in 2017. Interestingly enough, the number of guns stolen during robberies decreased in 2017 from the previous year, even though the same number of robberies took place. In 2016, 370 guns were taken, while in 2017 only 288 were grabbed. Still, that’s a 200-percent increase over the past five years. In an effort to get these numbers back down, various pieces of legislation have been introduced at both the federal and state levels. In September, SB 464 landed on California Governor Jerry Brown’s desk, which would’ve required gun shop owners to implement at least one new security measure from an approved list, such as storing firearms in a shatter proof display case or installing steel, roll-down doors on perimeter doors and floor-to-ceiling windows. The bill, to many’s surprise, was vetoed by Brown. In December, State Representative Lisa Subeck introduced similar legislation, known as AB 728, in Wisconsin. The bill, if passed, would require gun shop owners to store all firearms in a secured safe or steel gun cabinet, or on a secured rod or cable. At the federal level, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) introduced the Safety Enhancements for Communities Using Reasonable and Effective (SECURE) Firearm Storage Act. The bill, like Subeck’s, would require federally-licensed firearms dealers to secure all firearms in a locked gun safe or cabinet, or secure them with a steel rod. Licensed dealers would also be penalized for failing to comply with these new regulations, and could even have their licenses revoked. Earlier that year, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), also introduced the Federal Firearms Licensee Protection Act, which would enhance penalties for those convicted of stealing from a federally-licensed firearms dealer. Unsurprisingly, Graham’s proposal is the only one to receive considerable support from the Second Amendment community. The other pieces of legislation have drawn ire from the NRA and gun shop owners who believe such requirements are too costly and designed to force smaller dealers out of business. And, let’s not forget, fewer dealers means less accessibility to firearms for law-abiding citizens. The post ATF Releases the Number ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Thursday, January 18, 2018By Erika Haas
    3 days ago
  • New York, Delaware Look At Civil Confiscation Legislation
    It seems reasonable enough — most mass shooters are deranged and therefore we need to do more to keep guns out of the hands of people who are seriously mentally ill. It’s something even most gun owners will agree with. The devil, of course, is in the details. Two states are currently considering laws allowing law enforcement to confiscate guns from people deemed “dangerous” with no more than a court order. In Delaware, lawmakers are considering the so-called “Beau Biden gun control act,” Guns.com reports. Introduced Tuesday by state Rep. David Bentz, D-Christiana, House Bill 302 would require health care workers to report to law enforcement anyone they feel is a danger to themselves or others. Police, obligated to investigate, could then petition the court to order the person turn over their guns pending a hearing. Courts could also authorise officers to seize firearms and ammunition under some circumstances. You read that right; a nurse could call the cops, tell them you’re a danger and you could have Johny Law knocking at your door telling you to turn over your firearms. Given that many doctors are for gun control, it’s a given that many would figure you owning a gun at all means you’re a “danger to yourself or others.” “This legislation will protect our communities by restricting access to firearms for those who are considered a danger to themselves or others,” said Gov. John Carney in support of the legislation. “It will also ensure our health professionals and law enforcement are working more closely together when it comes to the issue of firearms.” Oh and that whole “temporary” thing? Yeah, maybe not so much. In addition to the provision to temporarily take guns from those subject to a court order, under its current language HB 302 would remove the firearms rights of some with a history of mental health treatment as well as those who been found not guilty by reason of insanity, guilty but mentally ill, or mentally incompetent to stand trial. So basically, if you’re on antidepressants — like one-in-six of Americans — a court order would get your 2nd Amendment rights removed, permanently. “The Beau Biden bill achieves a balance between promoting public safety and sensible gun control policy while protecting the due process and Second Amendment rights of Delawareans,” assured Bentz. In New York, similar legislation is being considered, the New York Daily News reports. A coalition of influential gun control advocates joined forces Wednesday to call for legislation that would make it easier to keep guns away from dangerous individuals. The groups urged state lawmakers to adopt legislation that would allow judges to temporarily prohibit individuals considered likely to harm themselves or others from possessing or purchasing firearms. Again, we have a proposed “temporary” confiscation, based on the testimony of… well pretty much anyone in this case. Under the proposed measure, family members or law enforcement could petition a court for “Extreme Risk Protection Orders,” which, if granted, would allow officers to temporarily confiscate firearms ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Thursday, January 18, 2018By Patrick Richardson
    3 days ago
  • Chicago PD Shares Great News About Violent Crime in the Windy City
    After a horrific mass shooting occurs, like that in Las Vegas or Sutherland Springs, the gun control debate ensues with those on the Left advocating for stricter gun control measures and those on the Right wanting to look at mental illness and the root causes of violence. The Right also doesn’t hesitate to point out that though a city like Chicago has some of the most stringent gun laws in the nation, violent crime hasn’t been affected by such legislation. For example, in the first weekend of the new year, the Windy City saw four people killed and 15 others injured due to gun violence. However, despite a tragic start to the year, there is welcome news coming out of the city, according to CBS Chicago: Last year, Chicago was drawing headlines for the soaring number of shootings and murders… [Chicago Police Supt. Eddie] Johnson will tout a 25 percent reduction in shootings in some of the city’s most violent neighborhoods, and a 15 percent drop in the number of murders across the entire city. And what is the reason for this crime drop, exactly? Is it more gun control? Is it the city’s gun buyback programs? Johnson believes the drop in shootings was the result of the city’s growing smart policing strategy. The main focus has been the creation and expansion of strategic decision support centers in several police districts. Also known as “situation rooms,” the first such centers were opened in the districts with the highest violent crime rates. Chicago Police Department spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said officials believe the city’s reduction in violent crime over the past year is due in large part to the use of the support centers, where officers work daily with University of Chicago Crime Lab analysts. “We call it cops and nerds. You have data scientists and police officers sitting in districts, analyzing data, and it’s really a great relationship,” he said. The situation rooms use ShotSpotter gunshot detection systems that can triangulate the precise location of gunfire, and allow officers to respond more quickly to shootings. The first support centers opened in January 2017. Eight districts now have installed the situation rooms. Another four districts were slated to open support centers by the end of 2018. The article also references what the police department calls “hunch labs.” By looking at violent crime data and analyzing it, law enforcement can predict where violent crimes are likely to occur. Here’s what Chicago Police Supt. Johnson had to say: “Over the last year, targeted data-driven enforcement has been the centerpiece of CPD’s crime strategy, which has been supported by significant investments in technology,” Johnson said. “These investments have made us more predictive and more proactive, especially in districts that have presented historical challenges with violence.” What the Chicago PD and its men and women in blue have done for the city is looking to be replicated across the country. These heroes have shown that by investing some time and resources in a police department, by investing in ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Thursday, January 18, 2018By Micah Rate
    3 days ago
  • Robber Has Fake Weapon. Good Guy With A Gun? Not So Much.
    A video went viral showing two robbers holding up a convenience store. They’re soon confronted by an armed security guard who ends the confrontation quick, fast, and in a hurry. The video has been shown numerous times, but since it doesn’t seem to get old, here it is again. While the video was attributed to be a robbery at a 7-Eleven in New Jersey, it now appears the robbery took place in Compton, CA on Tuesday. The two suspects attempted to hold up the convenience store. One jumps over the counter and draws what appears to be a firearm. The clerk raises his hands and the second suspect goes over the counter as well. Then an armed security guard enters and fires his weapon at the suspects. At this point, the two master criminals give up, calling out that their guns are fake. “Oh well,” the guard responds. “Mine is real.” You just can’t help but feel a little giddy inside at the exchange. After all, the threat was still very real so far as anyone could tell at the time. Further, I wouldn’t take a crook’s word for a gun being fake until I had the chance to check it out myself, and at no point would I be willing to allow myself to become distracted so I can verify their claims. However, this is a prime example of the phrase, “Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.” If you’re going to hold up a store with a fake gun, it’s important you understand that if it’s realistic enough to work for a holdup, it’s realistic enough to get you shot over it. The reason toy guns now have orange ends on the barrels was because there were several cases where police had mistaken toy guns for real ones. Kids who had otherwise done nothing wrong were shot, and people were horrified. Yet when a criminal modifies a toy gun to be realistic enough to convince a store clerk that their life is in danger if they fail to comply, that criminal is taking his own life in his hands. After all, if the clerk is in fear of his life and he’s armed, he’s justified to use lethal force in many states. It won’t matter that the gun was fake. All that will matter is that a reasonable man would be in fear of his life. Period. So yeah, a lot of us are getting a good laugh over this one. We’re enjoying someone getting an object lesson in how stupidity sometimes hurts. Frankly, most of us love seeing criminals get what they deserve, and this is a great example. The fact that we get an almost action movie-like line about his gun being a real one only makes it that much better. I’m just glad the clerk and guard made it through the ordeal just fine. May the two punks get to enjoy their time on the taxpayer dime. Let it be a lesson that crime doesn’t really ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Thursday, January 18, 2018By Tom Knighton
    4 days ago
  • Bureau Of Land Management May Shut Down Range After Fatal Shooting
    The Bureau of Land Management is considering shutting down a stretch of land near Buckeye, AZ following the fatal shooting of a woman by a stray bullet recently. While the land has a long history of being used for shooting, there have reportedly been several near misses previous to the tragic death of Kami Gilstrap on Sunday. While they haven’t reached a decision, they’re putting in serious consideration of restricting firearm use in the area. Federal officials are considering a temporary shutdown of the recreational shooting area near Buckeye where Kami Gilstrap was killed by a stray bullet on Sunday. Amber Cargile, spokeswoman for the Bureau of Land Management’s Arizona office, said Wednesday the details of a temporary closure still are in the works. Officials also will assess future oversight of the area. “We are pursuing a temporary closure of the area to ensure public safety and address damage to telecommunications infrastructure,” Cargile said. “Ultimately, we will make a determination on management of the Miller Road site based on the facts of the investigation, the safety of public-land users, and the impacts to the local community.” The tragedy added to mounting problems with the site, which, according to Buckeye Police Chief Larry Hall, include recent arrests related to stolen weapons, widespread disregard of gun-safety practices, and shooters targeting an above the ground municipal utility line causing service interruption 40 times last year in north Buckeye. This is what happens when people don’t follow basic, common sense, best practices for firearm safety. They think they have an infinite amount of space and can do what they want. They don’t know their target and what’s beyond it, and as a result, they make life difficult for everyone else. And that was without the senseless death of a young woman due to what some might call an accident, but really is more of a case of negligence. Frankly, if shooters in the area are barred from using the land, I can understand where the bureau is coming from. At least in this case. While many shooters who did nothing wrong will likely be impacted by this, it doesn’t negate the damage an inconsiderate shooter has done. People can’t look at an individual and know who is the responsible shooter and who isn’t. Every irresponsible action by a shooter reflects on each and every one of us. It makes it far more likely that things like this will happen in the future. Policing our own is difficult in a place like this as well. While we can tell someone they’re doing something unsafe, no one has any authority to actually enforce universally acknowledged safety rules on others. All anyone can do is speak up. They can’t make the other person listen or leave, unlike at a formal range. Now, I’m not saying everyone has to use a formal range by any stretch of the imagination. That often comes with burdens and problems all on its own. There’s something liberating about just shooting on a patch of land with something to serve as ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Thursday, January 18, 2018By Tom Knighton
    4 days ago
  • Gun Grabbers Smell Blood In The Water At State Level
    Gun control advocates will never truly stop working to restrict our right to keep and bear arms. Despite their protestations to the contrary–often sincere protestations, to be fair–their every effort seeks to do little more than retard our ability to buy and carry firearms in a lawful manner, all while doing little to stop the criminals who are already skirting existing laws and will think little of breaking still more laws. It’s simply what gun control advocates do. However, they seem to be grasping that there’s little they can do at the national level. Their every attempt seems to die on the vine, making congressional efforts a waste of time. Instead, they’re focusing their attention on the state level where they believe they can create change. Advocates of stricter restrictions on gun ownership believe they can notch new wins in state legislatures across the country this year, after Republicans in some states signaled they would be willing to break with the National Rifle Association to support some new rules. Advocates pointed to Massachusetts and New Jersey, the first two states to ban so-called bump stocks, the rifle modifications used by a gunman to murder dozens at a concert in Las Vegas last year. Both bills were passed by Democratic legislatures and signed by Republican governors. A bump stock ban won approval from a legislative committee in Virginia earlier this week. Similar bills have been introduced in Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Indiana and Washington. “States are really taking the lead on banning these weapons in the face of Congressional inaction,” said Robin Lloyd, director of government affairs at the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. “There is a growing acknowledgement and recognition that we have a gun safety problem in this country, and there are common sense solutions.” No, it’s not an acknowledgment of anything. It’s fear prancing around like it’s a viable basis for good policy when it’s nothing of the sort. It’s funny how they start off talking about “breaking” with the NRA, though. The NRA is still the boogeyman to gun grabbers. What they don’t get is that the power of the NRA isn’t in its bank account or membership, but in its leadership. As the largest gun rights organization in the nation, even non-members look to them to vet politicians. Gun rights supporters look at the NRA grades for politicians in order to decide who to support and who note to support. A bad grade for a Republican is a death sentence in most primaries, for example. Republicans who side with Democrats on gun control measures have all but signed their political death warrants. Only Republicans surviving in Democrat strongholds could possibly survive such a move, and they tend to have supported other Democratic talking points well before that moment. However, this focus only illustrates the importance of supporting local gun rights organizations. While groups like the GOA and the NRA do operate at the state level as well, they tend to ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Thursday, January 18, 2018By Tom Knighton
    4 days ago
  • Number Of Women In Some Shooting Sports Nearly Doubled In Last Two Years
    Anything that grows shooting sports is a good thing. New shooting sports competitors often mean new shooters. New shooters mean new voters to defend our Second Amendment rights. It’s generally a good thing, as a general rule. It’s even better when it’s a group of people who most don’t think of when they think about shooting sports competitors. Excerpts from a new research project released on Tuesday show the number of women involved in the shooting sports has increased over the last two years with some shooting disciplines seeing as much as a 189 percent boost. Shoot Like a Girl, which offers gun-training classes geared towards women across the country, released some of the details of a survey it conducted in 2017. The company said its findings were compiled with data from more than 2,600 women shooters. It said the number of women who completed its survey allowed it to generalize the results to all women shooters with a 99 percent confidence level and 2.6 percent margin of error. The company said the results are evidence that the number of women interested in guns and the shooting sports continues to grow each year. This is welcome news. The only aspect of this that wouldn’t count as such would be a reduction in your ability to get a lane at your local range or something, but even that is a good problem to have in the long run. The growth of female competitors represents a growth of female shooters. Women who compete serve as ambassadors to other women, a way to illustrate that no, shooting isn’t just for me. As a result, more and more women are buying guns and learning to shoot. From a political standpoint, this is a net win as well. Women tend to vote democrat. In 2016, 54 percent of all women voted for Hillary Clinton, an avowed anti-gun crusader. Women are considered a stable source of votes for anti-gun politicians. They count on this. However, as more and more women take up shooting for personal defense and recreation, suddenly the anti-gun position becomes far more untenable. Even Democrats will have to take a step back and dial down the anti-Second Amendment rhetoric. They’ll have to or risk losing votes. Once that happens, we can ease back just a bit. If politicians are terrified of threatening the Second Amendment for fear of angering their base–politicians on both sides, mind you–then they simply won’t do it. Whether it’s because they believe in the Constitution or because they’re too scared of losing reelection, either way, the result is the same. Further, as more women shoot, other demographics may view shooting sports as something not exclusively the purview of white men. They may take on more and more roles within the firearms community, making it even more politically untenable to threaten gun rights. Then, of course, there’s a more personal aspect to more women shooting. For those of us who are married, it means range trips can become family affairs. I don’t know ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Thursday, January 18, 2018By Tom Knighton
    4 days ago
  • Illegal Immigrant On Trial For Killing Two Police Officers Wishes He’d Killed More
    [Author’s note: In this post, I use the term “illegal immigrant.” I have no doubt that many of our readers will take issue with the term, preferring “illegal alien.” That’s fair. However, since I’m also a science fiction writer, the word “alien” invokes images of actually aliens such as squid-like beings. “Illegal immigrant” at least calls to mind the image of a human-shaped lifeform, thus my use of it.] An illegal immigrant on trial for the murder of two police officers wasn’t content to just call one of the officers a coward. He also felt the need to inform the court that he wished he’d kill more of them, as well as his intention to escape and kill more officers. Yeah, he’s what you might call “special.” An illegal immigrant began his murder trial for the 2014 killings of two Northern California sheriff’s deputies on Tuesday with a profanity-laced rant, calling a partner of one of the slain officers a “coward.” Prosecutor Rod Norgaard recounted the events that led to the death of Sacramento Sheriff’s Deputy Danny Oliver outside a Sacramento motel in October 2014, and described how Oliver’s partner, Deputy Scott Brown, was able to retreat from the heavy gunfire. Luis Enrique Monroy Bracamontes, 37, the alleged killer, interrupted the court when he grinned and called Brown a “coward.” Bracamontes was scolded by the Sacramento Superior Court judge, The Sacramento Bee reported. “I wish I had killed more of the mother——-s,” Bracamontes told the court. He continued, “I will break out soon and I will kill more, kill whoever gets in front of me…There’s no need for a f—ing trial. Attorneys for Bracamontes argued this was evidence their client is unfit to stand trial, though I find that hard to believe.  After all, the legal standard for insanity is an inability to differentiate between right and wrong. Nothing in this says he doesn’t grasp the difference. Proving you’re as dumb as a box of rocks doesn’t mean you’re unfit to stand trial either. It’s not enough for Bracamontes to have killed two police officers. He has to threaten more and show the only remorse he has is for not committing more murders. Sounds like premeditation to me. Either way, this is what police face every day. While there are some bad officers out there, most are decent folks trying to do a tough job. It’s also a job made all the tougher by people like Bracamontes who openly talk about their desire to murder police officers. Yes, they have guns, thus the means to protect themselves, but remember that everyone knows they have it. Since the good guys don’t get to pick when a gunfight is going to happen, it means cop killers have the initiative. Think about that the next time someone gripes about the police like they’re scum or something. Blue lives do matter folks. Let’s all just try and remember there are people out there who want to end them all. Every single one of them. The post ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Wednesday, January 17, 2018By Tom Knighton
    5 days ago
  • Another Church Encourages Congregation To Carry
    In the wake of any horrific event, the natural inclination is to say, “How can we prevent this?” This is how we ended up with the Brady Bill and countless other laws, and it’s why we’re currently having to deal with states trying to ban bump stocks. I think it’s normal, though, to want to prevent such an event from happening again. With Sutherland Springs, however, we’re seeing something far more productive. We’re seeing more and more churches calling for an armed congregation. Now, there’s another one. When the parishioners at one Oswego County church gather for worship each week, many of them are armed. And it’s no secret. The Lighthouse Mexico Church of God even advertises that its not a gun-free zone – a response to the frequent mass shootings in the country that’s the subject of some debate. Walking into the church on a Sunday morning is more like joining a family reunion than attending a service. Music plays for the first half as the parishioners move about the church greeting one another and joining in community prayers. The pastor Ron Russell says his church is like a family, and it’s his responsibility to ensure their safety. “Pastors are commissioned by God – I believe by God – to protect their sheep,” Russell said. Russell cares for his flock with a loaded gun, as do several members of his congregation. “Even when you walked in you had no knowledge, and I’m not going to identify who the young ladies were, but they had you pegged,” Russell said. “And they said, ‘He’s either a reporter or he’s a stranger with a bag and we’re going to watch him.’ They were all armed.” There are some who will read this account and think it’s just horrible, but it’s not. Not at all. Being armed and being able to do the Lord’s work aren’t mutually exclusive by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, it’s pretty natural when you think about it. The idea of selflessly putting yourself in the line of fire so others might survive? How is that incongruous with the Lord’s message? It’s not. Yes, it’s sad that we have to take steps like this in churches, but it’s also sad that taking steps like this in churches is somehow controversial or even newsworthy. Sutherland Springs wasn’t the first church shooting by any stretch. It was just the latest in a long line of them. As a response, churches are tired of being targets. Who can really blame them? While gun grabbers would like to pretend that laws will somehow make the problem go away, there’s no evidence of that having happened anywhere in the history of mankind. Ever. That means violence needs to be met with righteous violence. The only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, and that’s been shown to be the case time and time again, including Sutherland Springs. The idea of church congregations arming up doesn’t ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Wednesday, January 17, 2018By Tom Knighton
    5 days ago
  • Washington State Bump Stock Ban Passes Committee
    There are a lot of really good people in Washington state. It’s beautiful country, too; the kind of place I always dreamed of relocating to someday. Of course, that was before I came to understand just how much the rural parts of the state are dominated by the liberal coast. Now, that liberal coast is one step closer to removing a piece of the state residents’ constitutional rights. Washington would ban certain trigger devices that allow semi-automatic rifles to fire more rapidly under a bill approved by a Senate panel Tuesday. On a party-line vote, the Law and Justice Committee approved Senate Bill 5992 after rejecting a Republican bid to allow them to be sold if the purchaser passes a federal firearms background check. The devices, known as bump stocks or bump-fire stocks, were used in the Las Vegas mass shooting to increase the firing rate of some rifles used by shooter Stephen Paddock. At a hearing Monday, survivors and family members of victims of that mass shooting described the rain of bullets. Sen. Mike Padden, R-Spokane Valley, said the Las Vegas shooting was “horrific” but preventing future events might be better addressed through improved mental health programs. The devices were originally designed to help shooters with disabilities that make it difficult for them to pull a trigger. But Committee Chairman Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle, said the state has had a long-standing law against automatic weapons, and bump stocks essentially turn a semi-automatic weapon into an automatic one. The definition of bump stocks and other trigger devices that would be banned could be revised as the bill moves through the Legislature, he said. According to testimony at Monday’s hearing on SB 5992 and four other gun control bills, bump stocks are relatively rare in Washington. Bump stocks are relatively rare everywhere. They’re a novelty device that yes, simulates automatic fire, but it’s also not the only way to do it. As such, their logic that because automatic weapons are already illegal, so to should bump stocks. If you’re going to ban the means to simulate automatic fire, then I suggest you also add rubber bands and belt loops to the list. Instead, it makes far more sense for someone, anyone with the resources, to start looking at the root causes of violence. And I’m not just talking about a crazy man shooting up people at an outdoor concert, but any and all violence. We need to understand why people become violent if we want to deal with it, rather than trying to ban a piece of plastic. Without that work, the next Las Vegas will be some maniac using a rubber band to do the same thing. Nothing will have been accomplished except to tell people the device they had so they could have some fun with their rifle is illegal now. That’s it. Yet that’s probably what Washington state will do. They’ll pass this law, make bump stocks go away, and then wonder what else they can ban after the ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Wednesday, January 17, 2018By Tom Knighton
    5 days ago
  • South Florida Lawmaker Introduces Bill To Remove State’s Stand Your Ground Law
    There are few laws on the books more important for the average citizen than Stand Your Ground statutes. These laws remove even the hint that someone faced with an armed attacker should have to risk their life further to try and get away from the scumbag and can instead respond with lethal force. It makes it possible for people to act in defense of themselves or others without having to delay and worry about whether they’ll be prosecuted or not. Now, a South Florida lawmaker has introduced a bill to repeal the law and at least one so-called journalist is ecstatic about it. Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law, which lets you shoot anyone who threatens your life, even if you provoked the encounter, is so sh*tty it’s been clearly tied to a huge uptick in murders since it was passed in 2005. It sucks so bad it let George Zimmerman kill 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida, in 2012. It sucks so bad that the incident basically created the modern Black Lives Matter movement. Yet Florida legislators last year voted to strengthen the law and make it easier for people to kill others and invoke Stand Your Ground protections. But today, Hollywood, Florida Rep. Shevrin Jones formally introduced a bill to repeal the state’s Stand Your Ground law. In the state’s Republican-dominated, National Rifle Association-worshipping Legislature, the bill faces a steep uphill battle. Regardless, Jones has filed HB 6073 in an attempt to right what he says is a law that encourages Floridians to murder one another. Well, now. That’s not a gross misrepresentation of anything, now is it? I mean, let’s completely not absolve Zimmerman of his sins such as being an idiot who decided to ignore the police dispatcher and follow Martin, nothing he did was illegal nor did it justify Martin trying to turn a concrete sidewalk into dust with Zimmerman’s head. The law wasn’t actually invoked during Zimmerman’s trial because even had their been a duty to retreat, that’s kind of hard to do when your attacker is right on top of you, bashing your skull into the sidewalk. Yet anti-gun zealots like this don’t care about the facts or the reality involved here. They ignore that the new law seems designed to purposefully prevent the railroad job George Zimmerman experienced. Had they not pushed for prosecutors to put him on trial despite mountains of evidence that Zimmerman shouldn’t have been tried, such a law would likely never have been considered. None of that matters, because they don’t think people should have a right to defend themselves. Not really. If they did, they wouldn’t expect there to be a duty to retreat from an attack. There wouldn’t be any push to create an environment that would instill fear of repercussions into those who may be able to respond to an attack, thus making it more likely they would get hurt. Trayvon Martin was a thug. He might have been so much more than that, but he was still a thug. Only a ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Wednesday, January 17, 2018By Tom Knighton
    5 days ago
  • Christie Pardons Point Out Need for Reciprocity
    I live in Kansas, where no permit is required to carry a concealed handgun and, with local exceptions, open carry was always legal. I live right on the borders of Oklahoma and Missouri, and have to travel to both states routinely, so fortunately for me, Oklahoma recognizes all Constitutional carry states, and Missouri last year passed Constitutional carry as well. But were I to travel to say — New Jersey — I could end up a felon for doing something completely legal in my home state. Now I don’t live on the East Coast, so the odds of me ending up like Donna Marie Gracey, 59, of Seminole, Florida, late last year, who got pulled over for — no joke — having tinted windows, Nj.com said. While she was searching for her license, officers spotted a concealed weapons permit, according to a press release. An investigation revealed Gracey had the handgun in her purse, authorities said. Though Gracey had a permit to carry the gun in her home state, New Jersey’s strict gun laws require weapons to be stored unloaded and locked in the trunk. Gracey is far from the only person caught this way in Jersey, as outgoing Gov. Chris Christie has just issued several pardons to people who were simply transporting their legally-owned firearms through the Garden State, according to Guns.com On his last week in office, outgoing New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie granted over two dozen pardons including several to those who had been ensnared by the state’s firearm laws. Christie granted 26 orders for clemency, almost all pardons, bringing his eight-year total of such actions to just 55. Among those granted relief were media consultant Brian Aitken and Marine Sgt. Hisashi Pompey, men who had been arrested and found guilty of criminal weapon possession even though they had clear records and owned guns legally bought outside the state. The Aiken case, is particularly egregious, as the gun was locked in his trunk. Aiken, arrested in 2009 with two locked and unloaded handguns he had purchased legally in Colorado in the trunk of his car, had originally been sentenced to seven years in prison and released after four months following a commutation order from Christie in 2010. Aiken later wrote a book about his experience, subtitled, “How the Left’s War on Guns Cost Me My Son and My Freedom.” All of this simply points out the need for the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 passed last year in the house. A bill Christie, ironically, opposed, according to Politico. I’ve opposed that forever. I think each state should be able to make their determination on how they govern handgun and other gun ownership throughout their state. The problem here, is this is manifestly not a states’ rights issue. In McDonald v. Chicago SCOTUS held that the 2nd Amendment applies to the Several States. Reciprocity, therefore, is within the purview of Congress. The bottom line here is that draconian laws like New Jersey’s are making felons of otherwise law-abiding folks ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Tuesday, January 16, 2018By Patrick Richardson
    5 days ago
  • The Stupidity Of Internet Know-It-Alls
    I’m not an expert on much of anything. I’ll be the first to tell you that. While I’m proud of having a pretty broad base of knowledge, there’s no topic at all that I put myself as being near the top of the intellectual heap on. However, I do encounter plenty of them. I’m constantly amused by the people who will routinely address anything they disagree with as something that will get you killed. Not that I’m immune to it, to be sure. I’ve made similar comments from time to time, but there are a few things that are nearly constant triggers for the phrase, “That’ll get you killed in the streets!” And over at Shooting Illustrated, Tamara Keel takes a whack at the stupid. It’s to the point where “Killed on the streets” has become something of an inside joke. I’ve been trying to catalog these methods of self-induced demise, partly to debunk them, and partly in the hopes I can publish a phonebook-size compendium some day and profit handsomely. I’ll  just go ahead and share some of these with y’all today, though, for free. Carrying a revolver, for starters, will apparently get me killed on the street. This caught me off guard, because I’ve seen pictures of pre-1980s America, when revolvers were the predominant sidearm for law enforcement and private citizen alike. You’d think the streets in those pictures would be hip-deep in revolver carriers who had been killed in them, and yet they aren’t. I mean, there’s a reason police have generally moved from revolvers, and yes, I think a quality semi-automatic pistol is capable of solving more defensive problems than a revolver, but that doesn’t magically render a revolver ineffective. There are reasons some prefer wheelguns, including simplicity and the fact that they depend on the trigger finger rather than the ammunition in order to function. For some, those factors outweigh the drawbacks, and some revolver enthusiasts shoot their guns remarkably well. Similar to revolvers in their ability to apparently cause demise upon the public thoroughfares are reloads, or rather the lack thereof. I will say up front that, if carrying a semi-automatic pistol, then carrying a spare magazine is definitely Best Practice with a capital B and P. This is not, however, in case the need should pop up for a 35-round exchange with ninjas in the middle of the Kwik-E-Mart parking lot. Instead, this is because the part most likely to go wrong with your pistol is the magazine. The number of ways it can go wrong are legion, and range from double-feed malfunctions to simply falling out of the gun. The quickest and surest way to fix this malfunction is to insert a fresh magazine and drive on. I’m going to recommend you go over and read the whole thing. A handful are things that I’ve evolved on from my days of being young and stupid, especially on reloads. This is especially true in light of studies that show most gun fights end ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Tuesday, January 16, 2018By Tom Knighton
    5 days ago
  • VA Senate Nukes Much Of Northam’s Gun Control Agenda
    Despite Virginia’s Ralph Northam having campaigned on gun control, it seems his agenda will have to wait a bit. After all, a key part of it was killed in Virginia’s Republican-controlled Senate, thus derailing what I’m sure was Northam’s plans for gun control to take center stage as he rolls into his governorship. In particular, it was a bill for universal background checks that died a horrible and fiery death, much to my amusement. Gov. Ralph Northam made a pitch for gun control at a Capitol Square rally Monday afternoon, but much of his firearm agenda had died Monday morning in a Republican-controlled Senate committee. A Democratic bill to require universal background checks for gun purchases — a key component of Northam’s gun agenda — was defeated in the Senate Courts of Justice Committee. Secretary of Public Safety and Homeland Security Brian Moran, who held the post under former Gov. Terry McAuliffe and now Northam, argued in favor of the bill to require background checks, which had been part of the McAuliffe administration agenda. Opponents of gun control testified that most checks result in “false positives” that hinder law-abiding citizens from purchasing guns, and that the checks do little to reduce crime. Currently, only federally licensed gun dealers are required to do a background check before selling a firearm. Erin Luper, a lobbyist for the National Rifle Association, said people in prison for gun crimes got their guns through theft or from family members. “Background checks do not stop criminals from getting firearms,” she said. No, they don’t. This is a significant setback for Northam, but it’s not the end. Northam has four years to continue trying to ram his legislation through, and there will be elections in the meantime. That means he and his buddy Michael Bloomberg have plenty of opportunities to try and replace pro-gun legislators with their anti-gun puppets. That means Virginians need to remain vigilant. As I noted earlier today, universal background checks simply don’t work as advertised. It’s completely unenforceable, and that doesn’t even touch on the false positives noted in the above blockquote. If you can’t tell when I got my gun, how can you tell if I underwent a background check or not? I can’t help but wonder if people like Northam are just clueless, or sneaky. Is he ignorant over just how impossible this is to enforce, thus making the law useless, or does he know it and wants to use this to set up additional legislation later that would require gun registration? Without knowing the man, I won’t guess. I’m inclined to think it’s the latter, but that’s filtered through a certain degree of paranoia regarding what Democrats seem to want to do when it comes to my constitutional rights. Either way, though, Virginia gun owners have space to breath. Now, they need to dig in and get ready for the next fight, because, with ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Tuesday, January 16, 2018By Tom Knighton
    6 days ago
  • Violent Robbery Inspires Firearm Instructor
    I think anyone who owns a retail business has to be worried about being robbed at some point. Even if the chances are statistically low of it happening, it still looms large in business owners’ minds. It’s something to be concerned about. In Thomasville, NC, it’s really looming large following a violent jewelry store robbery where one witness was shot by the suspects. Now, a local concealed carry instructor is doing what he can to help. Sam Rabon is a local concealed carry license instructor. After the robbery Rabon posted on Facebook that he will give a free class to business owners who want to carry a handgun. “If it comforts them to know that they have the concealed carry permit and carry their gun, I wanted to give them that opportunity,” Rabon said. Rabon says he’s also doing it because he’s seen a lot of misinformation about gun use on social media and hopes the class will educate people. “It is a very complicated issue when you use a gun and use a gun for self-defense,” Rabon said. “It’s not simple. It’s not always cut and dry.” Rabon told us he’s received an overwhelming response. I’m sure he did. While anti-gun zealots like to claim guns make us less safe, the law-abiding armed citizen has been shown time and time again to be one of the most effective countermeasures against crime there are. Rabon, by making his offer, may actually do more to combat crime in his community than any number of gun buyback programs, anti-crime marches, or anything else that basically makes people feel like they’re making a difference without actually doing a thing. Rabon’s offer, and the fact that many are taking him up on it, means the thieves who pulled this know that there’s a much better chance their next job may be their last. These are dangerous, violent criminals. They’re not going to stop because of candlelight vigils or because someone is offering them a grocery store gift card for their firearm. It’ll take someone with a gun to make them stop. By making his offer, Rabon is helping to boost the number of people with guns that might be in a position to stop this crew. That means the mere thought of facing an armed citizen has to be taken into consideration for these guys, and that means the risk is much higher. The more armed citizens, the greater that risk, and they know it. While a firearm is no guarantee that you won’t be the victim of a crime, it is something criminals think about. Make no mistake, they do not want to be staring down the business end of someone’s concealed carry weapon because they picked the wrong target. Rabon’s offer is very generous, and I sincerely hope every business in Thomasville, NC takes advantage of either it or a similar class. I hope every business owner starts carrying. I hope all the customers do too. Enough of that, and we’ll see ... read more
    Source: Bearing ArmsPublished on Tuesday, January 16, 2018By Tom Knighton
    6 days ago