Just when it appears the Obama administration can’t move without revealing another scandal, various news agencies are reporting that a Justice Department program dubbed “Operation Choke Point” is now under scrutiny, and yesterday, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF)
revealed that it “has been investigating the possible role of the
federal government in influencing banks in their lending and business
banking relationship decisions regarding companies” in the firearms
industry.
In a statement released yesterday, NSSF said it is “is
unacceptable…to discriminate against businesses simply because they are
engaged in the lawful commerce of firearms, an activity protected by the
Second Amendment.” That came as the Wall Street Journal was
reporting that Capitol Hill Republicans were alleging that “the
government has pressured banks to stop handling payments for merchants
deemed as high risk—including gun dealers, short-term lenders and
credit-repair programs—punishing good actors along with bad ones.”
More Here
Saturday, May 31, 2014
Richard Ebeling: The Importance of the Second Amendment
A well written essay that cuts to the heart of the Second Amendment. Armed people are more powerful than unarmed people.
For millions of Americans the Second Amendment and its guarantee of the right of the individual to bear arms appears irrelevant and practically anachronistic. It seems a throwback to those earlier days of the Wild West, when many men, far from the law and order provided by the town sheriff and circuit judge, had to protect their families and land from cattle rustlers and outlaw bands. Such people are wrong.
More Here
Charles C. W. Cooke: On Gun Control, Americans Aren’t Callous, They’re Smart
To write like this in good conscience, one has to believe two things:
1) That the gun-control measures mentioned would inevitably lower the
gun-crime rate, and 2) That most people think this to be the case but
don’t care. Is there any evidence for this?
Certainly, Americans do not want to tighten up the laws. Gallup shows us that most people are either satisfied with the status quo or want the rules loosened:
More here at nationalreview.com
Certainly, Americans do not want to tighten up the laws. Gallup shows us that most people are either satisfied with the status quo or want the rules loosened:
More here at nationalreview.com
Missouri Gun Reform Bill Goes to Governor Nixon
On May 16th the Missouri legislature passed a bill containing a number of gun law reforms. The reforms were all passed as part of a bill that does not contain any provision for nullification of federal gun laws. LMTD at opencarry.org has this to say about the possibility of Democrat Governor Nixon signing the bill:
Since this is the same as last year less nullification and nullification was his objection he is in a rock and hard place, I am wondering if he won't just ignore and let it expire and move along. Seems a veto might be bad timing for him but you never know.Here are the primary reforms that would be enacted with SB0656:
- Guarantees the right to posses arms in public housing
- Forbids physical restraint or disarmament unless there is an arrest or an articulable and reasonable suspicion of criminal activity
- Mandates that POST determine the training standards for school protection officers
- Allows school districts to designate school protection officers
- Forbids health care professionals from entering data about firearms ownership into databases
- Allows for a demonstration of proficiency with either a revolver or semi-automatic handgun instead of both for the carry permit
- Uniform open carry law throughout the state with a concealed carry permit
- Changes the age of eligibility for the carry permit from 21 to 19
One of the reforms of the law is to prevent police officers from "chilling" the right to bear arms. Plumberdan at opencarry.org relates this anecdote:
encounter with local leo in st. Louis muni..officer says he always disarms ccw people so heThis is a classic case of police using their authority to chill the exercise of a constitutional right. Consider if the police would routinely take your cell phone to "check the serial number to see if it was stolen". Many more people would not be talking on cell phones in public or would keep them hidden while walking about.
can run serial number...what's with that..I informed him with new bill in legislation that would be
an unlawfull act to disarm with out making arrest merely for snooping purpose of valid ccw carriers,
and could lead to lawsuit against officer with out his being able to hide behind immunity....
SB656 passed the House 118 to 28 and the Senate 21 to 8. Both houses passed the bill with the necessary 2/3 required to override a veto.
Governor Nixon has until the middle of July to sign the bill, veto the bill or allow the bill to become law by doing nothing. He vetoed a similar bill last year that had nullification as part of it.
Here is Governor Nixon's contact information:
Governor Jay Nixon:
(573) 751-3222
©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch
HI: Edward Peruta Endorses Joe Kamaka for Hawaii State Senate
Edward Peruta, became famous because of the lawsuit that bears his name. The Ninth Circuit decision brought "Shall Issue" concealed carry permits to California, Hawaii, and the territory of Guam, though the issue is still being challenged in the courts.
He has endorsed the son of a Marine sargent that he knew in combat for the State Senate. In this Youtube video, Edward Peruta talks to Hawaii state senate candidate Joe Kamaka.
The elder Kamaka was Edward Peruta's sargent in Vietnam, who Peruta credits with saving his life. From opencarry.org:
To the voters of Maui,While endorsements from organizations that support the Second Amendment are common, it is unusual to find one from an ordinary citizen that gained his fame from a lawsuit to enforce second amendment rights.
I recently had a conversation with Hawaii candidate Joseph Kamaka, who is running for a seat in the Hawaii State Senate.
Here is a link to the conversation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tt6...CCATyM2hATf1eg
My connection to Joe and his family is through his father Joseph Mamoa Kamaka who I knew in combat.
I thought I would share my conversation and ask the voters on Maui to support him this November.
Attorney Rachel Baird and I began a live cable access program called Summary Judgment which is also streamed live in real time on the internet at: http://www.wctv14.com/live.html.
You can also see previous shows at www.sjtalkshow.com.
I will be following his run for the Hawaii Senate
Mahalo and stay safe,
Edward A. Peruta
Perhaps this is the start of a trend.
©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch
David Codrea: Never Enough Gun Restrictions for Those Who Push Citizen Diarmament
No matter how many infringements those who favor an all powerful state create to disarm citizens, the next law is always a "good first step". David Codrea shows this deception for what it is in this excellent article:
The firestorm of hatred directed at gun owners following an evil misfit’s stabbing/shooting/car ramming spree in Isla Vista confirms this column’s observation that no amount of “gun control,” short of a total ban, will ever be enough for citizen disarmament proponents.
That’s because California is top-rated by “gun control” groups, and Santa Barbara County public areas are effectively “gun-free zones” due to Sheriff Bill Brown’s commitment to restrict and rescind concealed carry permits (after conning NRA into giving him an “A” grade and endorsing him to their members). There’s literally no place left for the gun-grabbers to go.
But don’t take my word for it.
“You say gun control doesn't work? Fine. Let's ban guns altogether,” Scott Martelle wrote yesterday in an opinion piece for The Los Angeles Times.
“Hunters could own shotguns (and rifles where state laws allow them for hunting), but they would have to be registered and the owners would have to pass a gun safety course before they could get a hunting license,” Martelle generously offers. “Ammunition sales would be tracked much like we do sales of pseudoephinedrine (an ingredient in meth).”
Well why not? Guns have already been compared to porn, so why not toss in the drug analogy, just to make them double-icky?
“As for handguns, assault-style weapons, etc., let’s have a flat-out ban,” he idiotically proposes (it's pretty funny that his Twitter handle is "Smartelle"). The rationale he goes into is hardly important. He’s told us what he and those behind the “common sense gun safety laws / nobody wants to take your guns, you paranoid nuts” lie really want. Of course they want to take them. Martelle just told us. And anyone paying attention knows the Fourth Estate Fifth Columnists at The Times have been after them for years.
More Here
The firestorm of hatred directed at gun owners following an evil misfit’s stabbing/shooting/car ramming spree in Isla Vista confirms this column’s observation that no amount of “gun control,” short of a total ban, will ever be enough for citizen disarmament proponents.
That’s because California is top-rated by “gun control” groups, and Santa Barbara County public areas are effectively “gun-free zones” due to Sheriff Bill Brown’s commitment to restrict and rescind concealed carry permits (after conning NRA into giving him an “A” grade and endorsing him to their members). There’s literally no place left for the gun-grabbers to go.
But don’t take my word for it.
“You say gun control doesn't work? Fine. Let's ban guns altogether,” Scott Martelle wrote yesterday in an opinion piece for The Los Angeles Times.
“Hunters could own shotguns (and rifles where state laws allow them for hunting), but they would have to be registered and the owners would have to pass a gun safety course before they could get a hunting license,” Martelle generously offers. “Ammunition sales would be tracked much like we do sales of pseudoephinedrine (an ingredient in meth).”
Well why not? Guns have already been compared to porn, so why not toss in the drug analogy, just to make them double-icky?
“As for handguns, assault-style weapons, etc., let’s have a flat-out ban,” he idiotically proposes (it's pretty funny that his Twitter handle is "Smartelle"). The rationale he goes into is hardly important. He’s told us what he and those behind the “common sense gun safety laws / nobody wants to take your guns, you paranoid nuts” lie really want. Of course they want to take them. Martelle just told us. And anyone paying attention knows the Fourth Estate Fifth Columnists at The Times have been after them for years.
More Here
Dave Workman: Local Cease Fire President Admits Laws Would Not Have Stopped Shooting Spree
In a stunning acknowledgement Thursday morning during the last half-hour of KVI’s John Carlson show, the head of Washington CeaseFire said that there probably is no law that could have prevented the Santa Barbara spree killing.
CeaseFire President Ralph Fascitelli stated that, “I don’t know of anything…that could have been done to prevent this tragedy in Santa Barbara.” It is an admission that could come back to haunt him and the gun prohibition lobby later this year as the Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility pushes Initiative 594, the 18-page gun control measure with a so-called “universal background check” at its core.
Fascitelli said he also wants Washington’s “shall issue” concealed carry law to revert to a “may issue” scenario with family interviews before a carry license is issued. He also asserted that the reason people visit gun shows is so they can purchase firearms without background checks.
More Here
CeaseFire President Ralph Fascitelli stated that, “I don’t know of anything…that could have been done to prevent this tragedy in Santa Barbara.” It is an admission that could come back to haunt him and the gun prohibition lobby later this year as the Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility pushes Initiative 594, the 18-page gun control measure with a so-called “universal background check” at its core.
Fascitelli said he also wants Washington’s “shall issue” concealed carry law to revert to a “may issue” scenario with family interviews before a carry license is issued. He also asserted that the reason people visit gun shows is so they can purchase firearms without background checks.
More Here
SC:No Charges Filed in Justified Shooting
INDIAN LAND — No charges will
be filed in the shooting death of David Hammer, 21, of Fort Mill,
because the man who fired the shot feared he would be seriously harmed,
according a news release from the Lancaster County Sheriff’s Office.
Hammer was shot March 22 in the driveway of a home on Fort Mill Highway. The county coroner’s office confirmed at the time that Hammer died from single gunshot wound to the chest.
More Here
Hammer was shot March 22 in the driveway of a home on Fort Mill Highway. The county coroner’s office confirmed at the time that Hammer died from single gunshot wound to the chest.
More Here
WA:Sailor Justified in Shooting
“At that point, (the sailor) was in fear that he was going to be
struck in the head or neck with a large glass bottle,” Lee wrote. “It
also appears he was concerned about what might happen to (the woman) if
he left her alone with (her ex-boyfriend.)”
When the sailor drew his handgun, the other man said he didn’t care about the gun, and didn’t back away or leave the residence.
“At this point (the sailor), fired a single round in to (the ex-boyfriends) abdomen and then called 9-1-1 to report the situation,” according to the letter.
More Here
When the sailor drew his handgun, the other man said he didn’t care about the gun, and didn’t back away or leave the residence.
“At this point (the sailor), fired a single round in to (the ex-boyfriends) abdomen and then called 9-1-1 to report the situation,” according to the letter.
More Here
Friday, May 30, 2014
The Volokh Conspiracy: The history of magazines holding 11 or more rounds: Amicus brief in 9th Circuit
Currently before the Ninth Circuit is an appeal in the case of Fyock v. Sunnyvale,
a case which challenges a California’s city’s ban on magazines which
hold more than 10 rounds. While the State of California outlaws the
sale, import, or transfer of such magazines, the Sunnyvale ban goes
further, by prohibiting possession of these magazines, with no provision
for grandfathering. The District Court upheld the ban; part of the
Court’s analysis stated that magazines did not exist at the time the
Second Amendment was ratified. Last Friday, amicus briefs in support of
appellant were filed, including a brief which I co-authored on the history of magazines and of magazine prohibition.
My co-author on the amicus brief was the DC law firm of Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, and the brief was filed on behalf of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence (which is part of the Claremont Institute), and Gun Owners of California. As the amicus brief states, the NRA contributed funds supporting the preparation of the brief.
The longest section of brief provides the history of magazines, with a particular focus on magazines holding more than 10 rounds. The first such magazine was invented in the late 16th century. Over the next two centuries, many inventors created guns with magazines holding more than 10 rounds. The consumer demand for such magazines is easy to understand: when a gun is out of ammunition, the user is in effect disarmed, and does not possess an operable firearm until the gun is reloaded. As Heller teaches, the Second Amendment protects the right to an operable firearm.
By the time of the Second Amendment, the state of the art for multishot guns was the Girandoni air rifle, with a 20 or 22 round magazine. Ballistically, it was superior to the powder guns of its time, and had been created for elite marksmen in the Austrian army. Lewis & Clark carried a Girandoni on their famous expedition.
By 1791, much progress had been made in firearms design and it was easy to foresee that future progress would include improvements in multishot guns. However, as of 1791, the very large majority of American firearms were single-shot, likely because of the expense of multishot guns, and also perhaps because of concerns about reliability. The first half of the 19th century saw the first widespread commercial success of multi-shot guns–namely the revolvers from companies such as Colt’s and Smith & Wesson, as well as multi-barrel handguns called “pepperboxes.” There were some pepperboxes which could fire more than 10 rounds, but most pepperboxes held 8 or less.
More Here at the Washington Post:
My co-author on the amicus brief was the DC law firm of Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, and the brief was filed on behalf of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence (which is part of the Claremont Institute), and Gun Owners of California. As the amicus brief states, the NRA contributed funds supporting the preparation of the brief.
The longest section of brief provides the history of magazines, with a particular focus on magazines holding more than 10 rounds. The first such magazine was invented in the late 16th century. Over the next two centuries, many inventors created guns with magazines holding more than 10 rounds. The consumer demand for such magazines is easy to understand: when a gun is out of ammunition, the user is in effect disarmed, and does not possess an operable firearm until the gun is reloaded. As Heller teaches, the Second Amendment protects the right to an operable firearm.
By the time of the Second Amendment, the state of the art for multishot guns was the Girandoni air rifle, with a 20 or 22 round magazine. Ballistically, it was superior to the powder guns of its time, and had been created for elite marksmen in the Austrian army. Lewis & Clark carried a Girandoni on their famous expedition.
By 1791, much progress had been made in firearms design and it was easy to foresee that future progress would include improvements in multishot guns. However, as of 1791, the very large majority of American firearms were single-shot, likely because of the expense of multishot guns, and also perhaps because of concerns about reliability. The first half of the 19th century saw the first widespread commercial success of multi-shot guns–namely the revolvers from companies such as Colt’s and Smith & Wesson, as well as multi-barrel handguns called “pepperboxes.” There were some pepperboxes which could fire more than 10 rounds, but most pepperboxes held 8 or less.
More Here at the Washington Post:
David Codrea: 'News' team drops all pretenses of objectivity with gun violence awareness month
Another excellent article by David Codrea:
A New York television station’s news programming has dropped all pretenses of unbiased reporting and relegated itself to being a purveyor of anti-gun propaganda.
“PIX11 is taking a stand against gun violence,” the station announced in a commercial promoting its involvement “teaming up with local leaders and the families of victims to make June gun violence awareness month.”
“PIX11, where every story hits home. Some more powerful than others,” the voiceover announcer intones on a commercial that begins with the assertion, presented as a given, that there are “too many guns.” Their intent here could not be clearer: Get rid of guns.
“A special thank you to WPIX, who have said that they will cover the things that are being done in communities,” New York City Council member Jumaane D. Williams said at a ceremony on the steps of New York City Hall. Williams, to put things in perspective, is someone who thinks New York’s draconian anti-gun edicts are merely “a good first start.”
More Here at Gun Rights Examiner
A New York television station’s news programming has dropped all pretenses of unbiased reporting and relegated itself to being a purveyor of anti-gun propaganda.
“PIX11 is taking a stand against gun violence,” the station announced in a commercial promoting its involvement “teaming up with local leaders and the families of victims to make June gun violence awareness month.”
“PIX11, where every story hits home. Some more powerful than others,” the voiceover announcer intones on a commercial that begins with the assertion, presented as a given, that there are “too many guns.” Their intent here could not be clearer: Get rid of guns.
“A special thank you to WPIX, who have said that they will cover the things that are being done in communities,” New York City Council member Jumaane D. Williams said at a ceremony on the steps of New York City Hall. Williams, to put things in perspective, is someone who thinks New York’s draconian anti-gun edicts are merely “a good first start.”
More Here at Gun Rights Examiner
Court upholds “First Amendment” right to film police
The decision is but one in a string of decisions that are slowly sticking the needle into laws
nationwide barring the recording of police as they perform their
duties. But some states, like Massachusetts, outlaw the secret audio
recording of police. A woman accused of secretly turning on the audio
recording feature of her mobile phone while she was being arrested was charged with wiretapping two weeks ago in Massachusetts.
More Here
More Here
Renee Nal: More Jack in the Box Information
Sergeant Raymond Bush of the Fort Worth Police Department in Texas told the Examiner Monday that statements regarding employees locking themselves in a freezer at a Jack in the Box establishment in Texas were "taken out of context."
The story, first reported at a local NBC affiliate, written by Ken Kalthoff, created a media firestorm and was used by Bloomberg's "Moms Demand Action" gun control group to pressure Jack in the Box and Home Depot (where members of Open Carry Texas were demonstrating) to disallow open carry demonstrations on their premises.
The original news story reported that employees "were scared about the armed men protesting outside of the restaurant." Kalthoff cited an email from Sgt. Bush that quotes him as saying, “They locked themselves inside a freezer for protection out of fear the rifle-carrying men would rob them...” Moms Demand Action started an aggressive social media campaign, releasing a statement that said in part that the companies are subjecting customers “in search of building parts or burgers, to the potential for bullets.”
More Here at Conservative Examiner
The story, first reported at a local NBC affiliate, written by Ken Kalthoff, created a media firestorm and was used by Bloomberg's "Moms Demand Action" gun control group to pressure Jack in the Box and Home Depot (where members of Open Carry Texas were demonstrating) to disallow open carry demonstrations on their premises.
The original news story reported that employees "were scared about the armed men protesting outside of the restaurant." Kalthoff cited an email from Sgt. Bush that quotes him as saying, “They locked themselves inside a freezer for protection out of fear the rifle-carrying men would rob them...” Moms Demand Action started an aggressive social media campaign, releasing a statement that said in part that the companies are subjecting customers “in search of building parts or burgers, to the potential for bullets.”
More Here at Conservative Examiner
Online Poll: Should Concealed Pistol Permit Holders Carry Guns in Schools?
A poll in a Michigan newspaper is asking the following question: Should concealed pistol permit holders carry guns into schools?
The responses allowed are:
Yes
No
Don't know
Don't care
(6 votes)
(7 votes)
This is typical of online polls involving Second Amendment supporters. It measures the ratio of those who are interested enough to answer an online poll. The results fit comfortably in the range expected, with Second Amendment supporters outnumbering those who push for more restrictions by 3-10 to 1. In this case it is a comfortable 4-1 ratio. What is interesting in this poll is that it includes the potentialy emotional trigger of guns in schools. Those who want more restrictions on guns have attempted to set up a taboo: no guns in schools. In fact guns have been commonly associated with schools up until the Bush and Clinton gun bans in and around schools in the 1990's. Even with the emotional trigger in place, we still get a 4-1 ratio in favor of second amendment supporters.
Here is the link to the poll at the record-eagle.com.
Second Amendment supporters are typically better informed and more involved than those who wish for more restrictions on citizens access to firearms.
©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch
Update: votes as of 7:43 pm Central time on 30 May, 2014
Total Votes: 2,292
Update: votes as of 20:57 pm Central time on 5 June, 2014
Update: votes as of 20:57 pm Central time on 5 June, 2014
Total Votes: 2,340
Guam Shall Issue Becomes Law
 | |
| Guam |
Governor Calvo of Guam signed Bill 296-32 into law on the 21st of May, 2014. One of the last changes to be made to the bill before it was sent to the Governor was to change the term of the permit to three years instead of six. From kuam.com:
...and finally the governor signed Bill 296 into law. The bill changes language for concealed firearms licensing from "may" to shall." that means concealed firearm licenses shall be issued to an applicant who meets the various specifications.The Bill 296-32 is now Public Law 32-150. Here are some of the features of the new law:
- Requires that a permit for a concealed firearm be issued if requirements are met.
- Includes all handguns, rifles, and shotguns
- Includes all concealed weapons other than firearms
- Is only available to residents of Guam
- Puts a limit on the required, non-refundable fee of $100
- Requires issue within 90 days of the receipt of a complete application
- Includes methods to regain rights previously lost
- Is valid for a period of three years
- Provides for a 180 day grace period to renew the permit
- Requires a color photograph
- Requires fingerprints; if legible fingerprints cannot be made, can be issued by check of ID
- Applicants must be 21 years of age
- Requires a desire for a legal means to carry a firearm for lawful self defense
- DD214, NRA, or State Hunter Safety Courses among others, meet training course requirement
- Reason for denial required to be given
- Notice of renewal requirement will be mailed out 90 days before expiration
Three of those states, Maryland, New Jersey, and New York, have no state constitutional provision protecting the right to keep and bear arms.
©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch
National Park Service Watches Gun Watch
I am glad to see that someone at the National Park Service is watching Gun Watch. This was in the morning, perhaps before work. Our mission is to inform people about events that the old media is not much interested in. I am gratified that civil servants in the NPS are interested.
At 14 minutes worth of viewing they had time to gain some useful knowledge. The location is listed as the Denver, perhaps they will relate what they learned to the current situation in Colorado.
The more people are informed of the facts, the better. The first page looked at was the article dealing with the absurd convictions that have occurred under current gun control laws. After two page views, the person exited Gun Watch.
It is nice to see that someone in the National Park Service is keeping informed.
©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch
Thursday, May 29, 2014
CA: Legislature Moves to Make Home Manufacture of Guns Illegal
California Bill AB-1609 has already passed the Assembly. It prohibits Californians from obtaining firearms in other states unless they are transferred through a federal firearms dealer. In this it essentially duplicates existing federal law. There are exceptions for licensed manufacturers and estates. The law is not easy to read, because it refers to dozens of existing California statutes. California firearms law is already a complex maze that can take considerable study to understand.
One major change in the law that is significantly different from Federal law is this section:
(g) As used in Sections 29010 to 29150, inclusive, “firearm” includes the unfinished frame or receiver of a weapon that can be readily converted to the functional condition of a finished frame or receiver.It seems that this bill would outlaw people making their own firearms. It has never been illegal to make firearms for your own use that are not contraband. California has been transforming into a state where "everything that is not allowed is forbidden", instead of the default American standard of "everything that is not forbidden is allowed".
This bill would move California another step down the path of prohibiting legal possession of firearms except for those that are subject to immediate confiscation by the state. California has been expanding the definitions of those who are prohibited from legally possessing firearms and has appropriated considerable funds to special teams to go around the state confiscating firearms when a person becomes a prohibited possessor. Last year, California passed a law requiring the registration of any long guns that are purchased.
As noted, gun registration is gun confiscation, because once the guns have been registered, the government can take them whenever it is deemed expedient or necessary to do so.
California is one of only six states that does not have a provision to protect the right to keep and bear arms in its constitution.
©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch
Stranger: Blaming The Weapon Makes Grief Easier To Bear
A worthwhile observation:
A Kentucky lady dropped a long contact comment essentially asking why so many parents blame the weapon instead of their child.
I have had several long discussions with professionals and the answer I get is that externalization; transferring blame from the perpetrator to the the instrument; make grief easier to bear. It is much easier to rave and rage and make someone else the “real cause” instead of looking the world in the face and blaming your child.
More Here
A Kentucky lady dropped a long contact comment essentially asking why so many parents blame the weapon instead of their child.
I have had several long discussions with professionals and the answer I get is that externalization; transferring blame from the perpetrator to the the instrument; make grief easier to bear. It is much easier to rave and rage and make someone else the “real cause” instead of looking the world in the face and blaming your child.
More Here
Stranger: Peer Reviewed Studies Show; TV Increases Violence
I suspect that TV only increases violence if you start with a peaceful society. Most pre-industrial societies were very violent.
I stopped counting the peer reviewed and published studies linking small screen violence a decade ago, when the total reached 4,000. Except for denials by industry figures, and a Network funded “study” at notorious study mill, there has been no attempt to refute what has advanced from hypothesis to settled science. Interpersonal violence on the small screen makes us more violent.
Yet after more than 50 years, actors, producers, studio executives, and others linked to the industry continue to deny the facts.
It is easy to see why television violence might have long lasting effects. Very young children are “rasa tabulae,” blank tablets, ready for the experiences of life to mold them into whatever they may become. Many of those innocents regard the “glass teat” as an extension of reality. And what they learn is “Violence is a success strategy.”
More Here
I stopped counting the peer reviewed and published studies linking small screen violence a decade ago, when the total reached 4,000. Except for denials by industry figures, and a Network funded “study” at notorious study mill, there has been no attempt to refute what has advanced from hypothesis to settled science. Interpersonal violence on the small screen makes us more violent.
Yet after more than 50 years, actors, producers, studio executives, and others linked to the industry continue to deny the facts.
It is easy to see why television violence might have long lasting effects. Very young children are “rasa tabulae,” blank tablets, ready for the experiences of life to mold them into whatever they may become. Many of those innocents regard the “glass teat” as an extension of reality. And what they learn is “Violence is a success strategy.”
More Here
Michael Z. Williamson: WE NEED TO REGULATE CARS THE WAY WE REGULATE GUNS
Over a year old, but an instructive analogy:
I keep hearing people say they want to regulate guns the way we regulate cars.
They don't really mean that, of course. What they mean is they want to make
it acceptable to find more ways to intrude on the right to keep and bear arms.
I propose instead, we regulate cars the way we regulate guns. Let's start:
More Here
I
keep hearing people say they want to regulate guns the way we regulate
cars. They don't really mean that, of course. What they mean is they
want to make it acceptable to find more ways to intrude on the right to
keep and bear arms.
I propose instead, we regulate cars the way we regulate guns. Let's start:
- See more at: http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/item/we-need-to-regulate-cars-the-way-we-regulate-guns#sthash.2msuptFF.dpuf
I propose instead, we regulate cars the way we regulate guns. Let's start:
- See more at: http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/item/we-need-to-regulate-cars-the-way-we-regulate-guns#sthash.2msuptFF.dpuf
I
keep hearing people say they want to regulate guns the way we regulate
cars. They don't really mean that, of course. What they mean is they
want to make it acceptable to find more ways to intrude on the right to
keep and bear arms.
I propose instead, we regulate cars the way we regulate guns. Let's start:
- See more at: http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/item/we-need-to-regulate-cars-the-way-we-regulate-guns#sthash.2msuptFF.dpuf
I propose instead, we regulate cars the way we regulate guns. Let's start:
- See more at: http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/item/we-need-to-regulate-cars-the-way-we-regulate-guns#sthash.2msuptFF.dpuf
I
keep hearing people say they want to regulate guns the way we regulate
cars. They don't really mean that, of course. What they mean is they
want to make it acceptable to find more ways to intrude on the right to
keep and bear arms.
I propose instead, we regulate cars the way we regulate guns. Let's start:
To buy or operate a standard car, one will have to be 18 years old. Under that age, adult supervision will be mandatory. This means the adult must be in the vehicle with the underage driver.
To buy a sports car, you will have to be 21. A "Sports car" will be defined as any combination of any two of the following: 2 doors instead of 4, spoked rims not requiring hubcaps, aerodynamic effects such as spoilers or air dams, a wheelbase under 100 inches, a manual transmission, a curb weight under 3000 lbs, fiberglass or other non-metal construction, or painted logos.
For every purchase, you will have to fill out a questionnaire confirming you're a US citizen, do not use drugs or abuse alcohol, have never had a conviction for alcohol related incidents or reckless driving. Lying on this form will be punishable by 10 years in prison and/or a $10,000 fine.
- See more at: http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/item/we-need-to-regulate-cars-the-way-we-regulate-guns#sthash.2msuptFF.dpuf
I propose instead, we regulate cars the way we regulate guns. Let's start:
To buy or operate a standard car, one will have to be 18 years old. Under that age, adult supervision will be mandatory. This means the adult must be in the vehicle with the underage driver.
To buy a sports car, you will have to be 21. A "Sports car" will be defined as any combination of any two of the following: 2 doors instead of 4, spoked rims not requiring hubcaps, aerodynamic effects such as spoilers or air dams, a wheelbase under 100 inches, a manual transmission, a curb weight under 3000 lbs, fiberglass or other non-metal construction, or painted logos.
For every purchase, you will have to fill out a questionnaire confirming you're a US citizen, do not use drugs or abuse alcohol, have never had a conviction for alcohol related incidents or reckless driving. Lying on this form will be punishable by 10 years in prison and/or a $10,000 fine.
- See more at: http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/item/we-need-to-regulate-cars-the-way-we-regulate-guns#sthash.2msuptFF.dpuf
I
keep hearing people say they want to regulate guns the way we regulate
cars. They don't really mean that, of course. What they mean is they
want to make it acceptable to find more ways to intrude on the right to
keep and bear arms.
I propose instead, we regulate cars the way we regulate guns. Let's start:
To buy or operate a standard car, one will have to be 18 years old. Under that age, adult supervision will be mandatory. This means the adult must be in the vehicle with the underage driver.
To buy a sports car, you will have to be 21. A "Sports car" will be defined as any combination of any two of the following: 2 doors instead of 4, spoked rims not requiring hubcaps, aerodynamic effects such as spoilers or air dams, a wheelbase under 100 inches, a manual transmission, a curb weight under 3000 lbs, fiberglass or other non-metal construction, or painted logos.
For every purchase, you will have to fill out a questionnaire confirming you're a US citizen, do not use drugs or abuse alcohol, have never had a conviction for alcohol related incidents or reckless driving. Lying on this form will be punishable by 10 years in prison and/or a $10,000 fine.
- See more at: http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/item/we-need-to-regulate-cars-the-way-we-regulate-guns#sthash.2msuptFF.dpuf
I propose instead, we regulate cars the way we regulate guns. Let's start:
To buy or operate a standard car, one will have to be 18 years old. Under that age, adult supervision will be mandatory. This means the adult must be in the vehicle with the underage driver.
To buy a sports car, you will have to be 21. A "Sports car" will be defined as any combination of any two of the following: 2 doors instead of 4, spoked rims not requiring hubcaps, aerodynamic effects such as spoilers or air dams, a wheelbase under 100 inches, a manual transmission, a curb weight under 3000 lbs, fiberglass or other non-metal construction, or painted logos.
For every purchase, you will have to fill out a questionnaire confirming you're a US citizen, do not use drugs or abuse alcohol, have never had a conviction for alcohol related incidents or reckless driving. Lying on this form will be punishable by 10 years in prison and/or a $10,000 fine.
- See more at: http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/item/we-need-to-regulate-cars-the-way-we-regulate-guns#sthash.2msuptFF.dpuf
I
keep hearing people say they want to regulate guns the way we regulate
cars. They don't really mean that, of course. What they mean is they
want to make it acceptable to find more ways to intrude on the right to
keep and bear arms.
I propose instead, we regulate cars the way we regulate guns. Let's start:
To buy or operate a standard car, one will have to be 18 years old. Under that age, adult supervision will be mandatory. This means the adult must be in the vehicle with the underage driver.
To buy a sports car, you will have to be 21. A "Sports car" will be defined as any combination of any two of the following: 2 doors instead of 4, spoked rims not requiring hubcaps, aerodynamic effects such as spoilers or air dams, a wheelbase under 100 inches, a manual transmission, a curb weight under 3000 lbs, fiberglass or other non-metal construction, or painted logos.
For every purchase, you will have to fill out a questionnaire confirming you're a US citizen, do not use drugs or abuse alcohol, have never had a conviction for alcohol related incidents or reckless driving. Lying on this form will be punishable by 10 years in prison and/or a $10,000 fine.
- See more at: http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/item/we-need-to-regulate-cars-the-way-we-regulate-guns#sthash.2msuptFF.dpuf
I propose instead, we regulate cars the way we regulate guns. Let's start:
To buy or operate a standard car, one will have to be 18 years old. Under that age, adult supervision will be mandatory. This means the adult must be in the vehicle with the underage driver.
To buy a sports car, you will have to be 21. A "Sports car" will be defined as any combination of any two of the following: 2 doors instead of 4, spoked rims not requiring hubcaps, aerodynamic effects such as spoilers or air dams, a wheelbase under 100 inches, a manual transmission, a curb weight under 3000 lbs, fiberglass or other non-metal construction, or painted logos.
For every purchase, you will have to fill out a questionnaire confirming you're a US citizen, do not use drugs or abuse alcohol, have never had a conviction for alcohol related incidents or reckless driving. Lying on this form will be punishable by 10 years in prison and/or a $10,000 fine.
- See more at: http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/item/we-need-to-regulate-cars-the-way-we-regulate-guns#sthash.2msuptFF.dpuf
FL: Business Owner Shoots at Alleged Burglar
A would-be burglar is in the hospital after tangling with a business owner.
(snip)
Deputies said they were not sure if the would-be burglar was actually shot or cut from the glass as he fled out of a window.
More Here
Do Dead Kids Trump the Constituion?
_(2704807006).jpg/640px-Le_M%C3%A9morial_aux_juifs_assassin%C3%A9s_dEurope_(Berlin)_(2704807006).jpg)
While examples of the old media using their power to push for ever more restrictive gun laws are so common as to be the norm, this segment by CBS is a particularly clear example:
Newtown families have high hopes for N.J. gun ammo billExactly one family was said to be present lobbying for the bill; the father cites a theory with little to no evidence to support its premise. An emotional father who lost a son is pushing for more gun restrictions that are virtually irrelevant to mass shootings; the mass shootings are a tiny segment of homicides that occur in the country; and the actual effects of the law are ignored and downplayed.
As "Joe the Plumber" observed, speaking of the knife, car, and gun attack in California:
"... your dead kids don’t trump my Constitutional rights.”This is as clear as rationality and logic can make it. Emotional appeals do not trump the rule of law. That leads to lynchings are and mob rule. But at the inquisitr.com, emotion clearly trumps the rule of law, as they castigate Joe the Plumber for pointing out the irrelevance of emotional pleas. Emotions may be necessary to determine goals, such as protecting children, that we wish to achieve. They are absolutely terrible at determining the means to reach those goals.
New Jersey already has some of the most restrictive and illogical firearms laws in the nation. A man who won a hunting rifle in a police lottery was convicted of possessing it a few years later, after New Jersey legislators made it into an "assault" rifle by creating an absurd definition. It was a clear case of the ignorant crafting legislation based on strong negative emotions. That definition is included in this new legislation.
Political pundits have speculated that New Jersey Democrat legislators have seen an opportunity to put a potential Republican presidential candidate in a bind. Pass a very bad piece of legislation that only harms legal gun owners and has no real effect on reducing crime or mass killings. Promote it via the old media as the propaganda arm of the party.
This may well be the case. When the media is on your side, such tactics can work.
It is also likely that many politicians in New Jersey are simply incapable of setting aside emotion in order to decide what to do on this issue. Numerous irrational acts by legislators on the issue of firearms restrictions argue that they are acting from ignorance as much as malice.
"For the Children" is a form of political pedophilia, meant to blind people's ordinary care and caution in order to pass legislation that would never have a chance under sane and careful examination.
©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch
Governments Should Always Pay for Damaged Property
In Washington State, a homeowner is asking why the City of Renton is not willing to pay for extensive damages done to her home by a City SWAT team, on a search for her son who was not there.
From kirotv.com:
Clearly, MS De La Torre was not guilty of any crime. The destruction of her home is, in effect a tax imposed on her without any due process. If such destruction is necessary to enforce the rule of law, then the cost should be spread among the taxpayers that hire those who did the damage, as they all benefit from the rule of law and are the ones who could have mitigated the amount of damage done.
For more than four hours, SWAT team members fired grenades through walls and windows and blasted in the doors with explosives.
De La Torre came home from work while police were still there.
“(An officer) just kinda shook his head and said, ‘I am so sorry, ma’am. It’s your house and it’s…ruined; we destroyed it,’” she said. “Police officers and detectives that were there told me to file a claim with the city of Renton.
©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch
Wednesday, May 28, 2014
Lee Williams: On Open Carry
If the gun rights movement has a vanguard, it would be those who openly carry firearms.
At marches, rallies or a walk down city streets to a fishing pier,
these “open carriers” have done much to educate the public and local law
enforcement about Second Amendment rights.They’ve replaced protest signs with rifles. Holstered pistols have become free speech.
At times they’ve been harassed, arrested and jailed, until police or prosecutors realized the gun owner was acting well within their rights to carry a gun in public.
More Here
NM:Park Shooter Acted in Self Defense
LAS CRUCES >>
Police say last week's shooting at Apodaca Park was an act of
self-defense, and two men, including a man shot in the neck, have been
arrested for their alleged role in the afternoon incident.
(snip)
At Apodaca Park last week, Melero pulled up next to the man's car and Lopez blocked him in. The man told police that Melero exited his truck and tried to force his way into the man's car, saying he was going to kill the man and his son, the complaint states.
So the man pulled out his .40-caliber Smith & Wesson handgun and told his son to get down.
More Here
(snip)
At Apodaca Park last week, Melero pulled up next to the man's car and Lopez blocked him in. The man told police that Melero exited his truck and tried to force his way into the man's car, saying he was going to kill the man and his son, the complaint states.
So the man pulled out his .40-caliber Smith & Wesson handgun and told his son to get down.
More Here
Mona Charen: The Media Response to Mass Shootings
The latest mass-casualty shooting spree —
this one in Santa Barbara, Calif. — has touched off the usual debate
about how to put a stop to these hideous spasms of murder. These random
massacres have become, as I wrote in a previous column, an American psychosis.
Some, including the anguished father of one of the victims, point to guns and the NRA as the villains. Defenders of guns respond with the usual arguments — which I find persuasive. That much having been said, I wish people who defend the Second Amendment wouldn’t talk about their guns with such lascivious pleasure. Guns are necessary to self-defense. The right to own them is enshrined in the Constitution. Enough said. Let’s not worship them. Gun worship — by the Hollywood Left, which uses it to sell tickets, and by the conservative Right, which fetishizes guns — are both part of our national problem.
More Here at National Review
Some, including the anguished father of one of the victims, point to guns and the NRA as the villains. Defenders of guns respond with the usual arguments — which I find persuasive. That much having been said, I wish people who defend the Second Amendment wouldn’t talk about their guns with such lascivious pleasure. Guns are necessary to self-defense. The right to own them is enshrined in the Constitution. Enough said. Let’s not worship them. Gun worship — by the Hollywood Left, which uses it to sell tickets, and by the conservative Right, which fetishizes guns — are both part of our national problem.
More Here at National Review
AR:Off Duty Officer Kills Alleged Robber
The officer said he was loading his bike on the back of a vehicle when
man came from behind and pointed a gun at his head. The officer said he
swung and hit the man in the face, then pulled a weapon out of his
pocket and fired at the men, who fled south in a parking lot of a nearby
apartment complex in the Riverdale area. He also turned and fired back
at the officer, according to the report.
More Here
More Here
CO:City Settles; 25K to Open Gun Carrier
There have been numerous settlements for illegal arrests of people openly carrying firearms.
A man who was arrested for carrying a holstered handgun into a movie theater a week after the Aurora shootings in 2012 received a $25,000 settlement check from the city of Thornton last week, according to Denver’s 7News.
Jim Mapes had a concealed-carry permit and said he’d carried his gun to the same theater several times in the past. Another theater-goer called 911, saying a man with a weapon had just entered a movie theater. He was originally charged with brandishing the weapon, which Mapes denied.
(snip)
The city settled for $25,000, but admitted no wrongdoing. Wareham said the check itself was evidence that Mapes’ arrest was unwarranted.
“They got to apologize to him in the form of a nice, healthy check,” he told 7News.
More Here
A man who was arrested for carrying a holstered handgun into a movie theater a week after the Aurora shootings in 2012 received a $25,000 settlement check from the city of Thornton last week, according to Denver’s 7News.
Jim Mapes had a concealed-carry permit and said he’d carried his gun to the same theater several times in the past. Another theater-goer called 911, saying a man with a weapon had just entered a movie theater. He was originally charged with brandishing the weapon, which Mapes denied.
(snip)
The city settled for $25,000, but admitted no wrongdoing. Wareham said the check itself was evidence that Mapes’ arrest was unwarranted.
“They got to apologize to him in the form of a nice, healthy check,” he told 7News.
More Here
David Codrea: Party Differences Highlighted in G&A Rankings
David hits another out of the park with this article. It is worth reading it all.
In an analysis published Thursday, Guns & Ammo magazine has ranked the states for 2014 to determine which are best and worst for gun owners. The magazine based its assessment on five categories: Right to Carry; Modern Sporting Rifles; NFA (National Firearms Act items including machine guns, suppressors, etc.); Castle Doctrine; and a “catch-all” Miscellaneous category that includes state protections, citizen attitudes and the like.
What is immediately apparent is the division between people and their political preferences as exemplified by the “best” and worst”-ranked states. To illustrate, this column will look at the top and bottom 10, starting with the worst.
Coming in at 51 is Washington D.C. The mayor is a Democrat, as are 11 of the 13 City Council positions (with two “Independents”) as are all federal representatives. Presidential Electoral College votes went to the Obama/Biden ticket.
The next nine states listed, with “worst” listed first, are New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Hawaii, California, Connecticut, Maryland, Rhode Island and Delaware, Democrat strongholds all. And while there are notable (and rare) exceptions, such as Republican Chris Christie in New Jersey, the governor, who occasionally gets things right, more often does not, and in very destructive ways against the right to keep and bear arms.
On the other side of the equation, the “best” state is Arizona, slightly edging out Alaska. The “top 10,” going down the list, include Georgia, Utah, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Wyoming, Montana, Kansas and Florida. Again, there are some splits, as in Kentucky, Montana and Florida, but in all those states, the influence of Democrats has been tempered by Republicans. See “Political party strength in U.S. states” for a breakdown.
More Here
In an analysis published Thursday, Guns & Ammo magazine has ranked the states for 2014 to determine which are best and worst for gun owners. The magazine based its assessment on five categories: Right to Carry; Modern Sporting Rifles; NFA (National Firearms Act items including machine guns, suppressors, etc.); Castle Doctrine; and a “catch-all” Miscellaneous category that includes state protections, citizen attitudes and the like.
What is immediately apparent is the division between people and their political preferences as exemplified by the “best” and worst”-ranked states. To illustrate, this column will look at the top and bottom 10, starting with the worst.
Coming in at 51 is Washington D.C. The mayor is a Democrat, as are 11 of the 13 City Council positions (with two “Independents”) as are all federal representatives. Presidential Electoral College votes went to the Obama/Biden ticket.
The next nine states listed, with “worst” listed first, are New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Hawaii, California, Connecticut, Maryland, Rhode Island and Delaware, Democrat strongholds all. And while there are notable (and rare) exceptions, such as Republican Chris Christie in New Jersey, the governor, who occasionally gets things right, more often does not, and in very destructive ways against the right to keep and bear arms.
On the other side of the equation, the “best” state is Arizona, slightly edging out Alaska. The “top 10,” going down the list, include Georgia, Utah, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Wyoming, Montana, Kansas and Florida. Again, there are some splits, as in Kentucky, Montana and Florida, but in all those states, the influence of Democrats has been tempered by Republicans. See “Political party strength in U.S. states” for a breakdown.
More Here
WI:Memorial Day Open Carry at McDonalds
Much of Memorial day weekend was spent in cleaning up my parents estate, now owned by my brother. After hauling three pickup loads of priceless antiques, or barely valuable used property, depending on your viewpoint, to the Salvation Army; my able partner, driver, and recently married nephew deserved a break.
We stopped by Micky D's for some needed refreshment. As befits a Retired Uncle, I paid. He is at least a fourth generation member of the American gun culture. We know one greatgrandfather was in the U.S. Navy during the Civil War, or War Between the States, whichever you prefer.
The Glock was openly carried in a retention holster, in a full Memorial day crowd in McDonalds. It was Hayward, Wisconsin with the population swelled to three times that of permanent residents. No one said anything. No one looked cross eyed that I could tell. To show the normalization that has occurred, I did not think anything of it until we had finished eating and were on the way out. That is when the camera came out.
A few years ago police checked me out while I open carried in the town, but as I was pacing back and forth in front of a retail establishment, talking to no one visible, on a bluetooth earpiece, it was quite understandable. They did their job and determined that I was not a threat, and left. It did not hurt that if we looked past three degrees of separation, we were probably related in some way or another.
This Memorial day, nothing.
As it should be.
©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch
Nathan Pieters: Who Calls 911 on People Exercising their Constitutional Rights?
Who Calls 911 on Legally Armed Citizens? Second Edition
 |
| Photo Source: Gun talk, how not to be a moron |
This one was almost too easy. I found this on my Facebook news feed, and I thanked the author of the post.
Marc Folco: Massachusetts Sheriff Hodgson Educated on "Assault Weapons"
As peace officers become educated, they support an armed population.
Hodgson also said that the primary duty of a
sheriff is to uphold the Constitution and he, along with many sheriffs
from across the country, are becoming increasingly upset with
encroachments on the Constitution, especially those upon the Second
Amendment.
He stated that he is a supporter of
the Second Amendment and believes that American citizens have the right
to bear arms — unequivocally.
(snip)
"The focus should be to find out where the bad guys are getting their
guns illegally," he said. "We should be investing our money into going
after them and leave the good guys alone."
John Lott: US one of Lowest Female Homicide Rates in World
It seems doubtful that Bloomberg’s Moms Demand Action could even make
this comparison across all countries. The UNODC data allows you to
break down murders by the sex of the victim and by whether firearms are
used, but it doesn’t allow one to simultaneously identify homicides by both the sex of the victim and the method of murder.
]
So let’s breakdown homicides by the victim’s gender. Moms Demand Action’s claim doesn’t make much sense as one shouldn’t compare the number of homicides since that doesn’t account for differences in population size. There are a lot of small population countries. It would make much more sense to compare homicide rates. This figure from the UNODC shows that the US has one of the lower female homicide rates in the world.
More Here
So let’s breakdown homicides by the victim’s gender. Moms Demand Action’s claim doesn’t make much sense as one shouldn’t compare the number of homicides since that doesn’t account for differences in population size. There are a lot of small population countries. It would make much more sense to compare homicide rates. This figure from the UNODC shows that the US has one of the lower female homicide rates in the world.
More Here
Tuesday, May 27, 2014
DOJ Intimidates Banks to drop Ammunition Suppliers, Firearm Sales, Surveillance Equipment and Coin Dealers
Here is a list of businesses claimed to have been targeted with operation "Choke Point". The administration characterization of "high risk" seems to translate into "Those I do not like." These "High Risk" merchant categories are listed on an fdic.gov site:
|
|
Some of these companies/activities will be offensive to some. Others will be astonished that they are included on a list of activities to be targeted for extra-legal punishment through pressure from government regulators. None of this is aimed at people who are breaking laws. In fact, that is the whole point of operation "choke point"; to go after people who are operating legally, but doing something that higher ups in the DOJ do not like or approve of.
Some of them, taken together, are positively chilling: ammunition sales, firearms, surveillance equipment, coin dealers? It is almost a laundry list of "progressive" bigotry, that much of the country finds acceptable. The list above is from 2011, and appears to focus mostly on Internet sales.
It is a classic case of the authoritarian use of power by the government to crack down on individuals that they do not like, even though no crime was committed.
This article explains how the pressure is applied:
According to The Hill, the DOJ encourages banks and third party payment processors to drop these high-risk clients by “flooding payments companies that provide processing service to those industries with subpoenas, civil investigative demands, and other burdensome and costly legal demands.” The American Banker reveals, in their timeline of Operation Choke Point, that the subpoena flood started shortly after Operation Choke Point’s inception in March 2013. The subpoenas went to banks and payment processors large and small: Everything from the $343 million-endowed National Bank of California to the $220 billion-endowed PNC Financial Services Group. By fall of 2013, the Justice Department had pressured some banks into settling with the government. The DOJ used these settlements as a template to further strongarm other banks into compliance. The DOJ is targeting 30 high-risk industries, as labeled by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in 2011, in a report titled “Managing Risks in Third-Party Payment Processor Relationships.”The article goes on to tout BitCoins, a digital currency, as a way to work around these regulatory intimidation tactics.
These tactics show how government power is extralegally applied.
©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch
John Lott Interview
Breitbart News previously reported that economist John Lott will establish the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC), an initiative to produce studies focused on the relationship between firearms and crime. Lott is largely funding CPRC with donations from individuals who support his mission. Just one month after launching CPRC's campaign on the crowdfunding site Indiegogo, Lott has already exceeded $30,000 in donations.
The financial success of Lott's campaign suggests that Americans are hungry for accurate information regarding guns and crime, amid a mainstream media that often vilifies firearms and those who own them.
The CPRC is currently the most successful campaign in the education section on Indiegogo and has more than double the number of funders than the other trending education campaigns. Lott's project is additionally the third trending campaign in the education section.
More Here
Firefighter receives minor injury from burning Ammunition
Firefighters have known for years that burning small arms ammunition produces a very low level of danger to firemen. This is from the SAAMI paper, "Facts About Sporting Ammunition Fires":
Ammunition fired in the open, not enclosed in a gun's chamber, discharges with such inefficiency that the projectile will not even penetrate an ordinary fiberboard shipping container panel at very close range. When not strongly and tightly confined, smokeless propellant powders burn relatively slowly and do not explode as we know they do when fired in a gun. Pressure within a cartridge case must build up to several thousand pounds per square inch to cause the cartridge to discharge as it does in a gun. Unless it is tightly confined, as in a gun chamber, no ammunition shell case will withstand the growing pressure of gases generated by burning propellant powder without bursting before the bullet or shot is expelled with violence or velocity.Casings propelled by this type of action would likely have to impact exposed skin or eyes to have any effect. Actual injuries from such fires are so rare as to make the news, even if the injury is so minor as to normally go unreported. Thus, this news from sandiego.com:
A firefighter was struck by a casing fragment and sustained a minor injury, Rodriguez said. He was treated at the scene and released back to duty.Treated at the scene and released. This sounds like a band aid to me. Firefighters, as government employees are carefully monitored; injuries are required to be reported because of the potential for workman's compensation and potential pension effects. To be treated at the scene and released means that the injury was exceedingly minor.
©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch
Update: As a wise friend reminded me, there are not enough details to let us know what really happened. I have never heard of unconfined ammunition exerting enough force to "fragment" cases; the "fragment" is not identified, and it is only an on scene report.
One Internet forum source reported that he had experience of a fragment that barely punctured the skin at a range of less than five feet from a .22 rimfire case. He concluded that any other cases were too sturdy to fragment.
Monday, May 26, 2014
The Isla Vista shootings
In their usual brain-dead way, liberals are blaming the shootings on an inanimate piece of metal -- a gun. That the shooting was actually done by a person seems to have escaped them. For anyone who is able to think, however, what made the person concerned do what he did is surely the crucial question. And the plain fact that he had long been psychologically unwell -- to the point of having undergone therapy several times -- is an obvious thing to point to.
But his ability to convince the police that he was a 'perfectly polite, kind and wonderful human' indicates that he was not too bad. Given different circumstances he might have made something of himself. So what were the circumstances that led him down the wrong road? I think that is fairly clear. Modern Left-based ideas of child-rearing and education teach that everyone is a star and everyone is entitled to win and have all they want without effort. And it is certainly clear that Elliot Rodger did have a strong sense of entitlement. He thought that success should come to him rather than feeling that its lack was his problem and that should go out and work for it.
If he had had an old-fashioned Christian upbringing, however, he would have learnt that man is a fallen and imperfect creature who has to work for his blessings and must be thankful for what he has.
In short, Leftist nonsense pushed a fragile man over the edge; A Christian upbringing might have saved him and his victims.
I reproduce below two things: An account of the terrible loss that this badly guided man inflicted and a commentary on the claims that more gun control is needed. That three of the victims were knifed to death may undermine the anti-gunners a bit, though. Do we need knife control as well? It may be noted that in Britain, where only blacks and farmers have guns, fatal stabbings are common -- but even the British have not attempted knife control, though it is talked about.
Father of Veronika Weiss, shooting victim, speaks
When Bob and Colleen Weiss learnt that their daughter may have been a victim in the Isla Vista shooting rampage, they immediately got in their car late on Friday night and drove from their home in Thousand Oaks, California to Santa Barbara.
But once they arrived in the Santa Barbara County coastal community around midnight, authorities were unable confirm whether 19-year-old Veronika Weiss was among those killed. It was hours before they heard back from sheriff’s officials.
"It was 4 o'clock in the morning and Veronika's not a 4 o’clock in the morning type of girl," Bob Weiss said in an interview on Sunday. "I'm not a fool. I knew what happened."
After a student riot broke out in Isla Vista in March, Veronika called her parents and told them, "I'm safe in my room. Don't worry about me."
This time she didn't call. They used her "Find my iPhone" app and her phone was in the middle of one of the crime scenes, her dad said.
Bob Weiss said his daughter was wise and mature beyond her years. He said he would go to her for advice sometimes if he was having a problem with her brothers, Cooper, 17, and Jackson, 15, or even a minor argument with his wife.
Weiss said his daughter was always a tomboy. She played four sports in high school, which is a rarity. She participated in cross country, baseball, swimming and water polo and she earned straight A's. Her strength was maths.
Starting at age six she loved playing softball, he said. Later she played baseball. He said she was the only girl out of 500 players in the Westlake baseball league.
"She was tough," he said. "She was a big strong girl and she was tough."
On the water polo team at Westlake High School, which she graduated from, the coach always put her as the defence player against the top scorer on the opposing team.
He said she always organised events for her circle of friends. He described her friends as nerds and serious students. They would study every Friday night and it was not unusual for her to spend Sundays working on her advanced maths work. "She loved it," he said.
He said many of her friends went on to other prestigious schools such as Princeton and she wanted to go to the University of Washington. But the out-of-state tuition and financial situation made that prohibitive.
"She would always wear her purple and gold University of Washington sweatshirt," he said.
"She wanted to be a financial wizard, and use her high aptitude with complicated math."
He said her mother and grandmother belonged to the tri-Delta sorority so it makes sense that she would join it too at UCSB. She didn't know many people at the Santa Barbara campus but the sorority gave her a built-in circle of friends, he said.
He described her as being gregarious. She liked to laugh a lot, he said. She was loud and "she made everybody else laugh".
"She was happy all the time," he added.
She graduated high school with a high, 4.3 grade point average.
He said she would sometimes visit him at his office in Newbury Park. She would just come over spontaneously and bring him lunch and they would eat together. "Who does that? How many high school kids are thoughtful like that and want to spend time with their parents?"
Veronika and her parents had just gone snowboarding together two weeks ago. That was their last trip together. They had planned to spend Sunday together. Bob Weiss and his wife had planned to drive up to Santa Barbara to take her to lunch and go shopping.
He said he doesn't know what happened on Friday night but he does know that Veronika would have put herself in harm's way to help her friends or even the young man who shot her. "She always reacted to a situation quickly. She always wanted to help. She was very courageous."
"She will be an inspiration to me every day of my life," he said.
"There was never a day I wasn't proud of her. Never a single day."
SOURCE
Elliot Rodger is Proof that Gun Control Doesn’t Work!
By now, you have probably heard about the recent mass-shooting in Isla Vista, California.
First of all, I want to express my condolences to the victims and their families. This kind of senseless violence is absolutely deplorable and could shock everyone's conscience, regardless of political affiliation.
Unfortunately, the gun control advocates are at it again, arguing that if Federal and State gun control laws were just a little stricter, this tragedy could have been avoided. This couldn't be farther from the truth!
It didn't take long to get a statement from the shooter's family. Alan Shifman, the lawyer representing the family, announced that they were "staunchly against guns," support gun-control laws, and would devote the rest of their lives to stopping tragedies like this from happening again… In this press release, the family blamed the NRA and gun culture in America for allowing their son to arm himself.
Really? They are blaming the NRA because their liberal son bought three guns over a period of months and chose to indiscriminately shoot people? Is it just me, or does it seem like the family is blaming everyone except their own son?
Residents of California know how ridiculous it is to blame the state’s gun control laws. California's gun laws are the strictest in the nation and still, for a deranged and plotting teen who flew under the radar, they did nothing to stop him from arming himself. This shooting is a textbook example of how no amount of gun control laws can stop an individual hell-bent on causing harm to people.
Elliot Rodger was also able to buy all three of his handguns legally, which in California is no easy task. A prospective gun owner has to jump through a number of hoops before they are allowed to take ownership of a gun, let alone three.
If Elliot Rodger bought his weapons from a gun store, which is likely, he would have had to submit to a thorough background check that ran his criminal history, mental health history, and even the applicant's fingerprints. This costs $25. Then, the gun buyer has to wait exactly ten days before he or she is allowed to actually take ownership of the firearm (providing they passed the background check). This operates under the assumption that waiting 10 days to take ownership of a pistol will stop “crimes of passion.”
California also has a law prohibiting the purchase of more than one handgun a month, meaning that Elliot Rodger's would have to have built his collection of handguns over a three month period.
California prohibits citizens from carrying a loaded gun on their person or in their car unless they demonstrate an impossible to meet "good cause." Elliot Rodger broke the law when he took loaded pistols into his car.
California and Isla Vista also have laws against indiscriminately discharging firearms into crowds of people. Elliot Rodger, like other violent criminals, disregarded this law.
At every step of the way, gun control laws failed to stop Elliot Rodger from committing these murders. Even if they were successful at stopping Rodger from arming himself, the fact the first few victims were actually stabbed to death shows that this type of hatred will always find a tool to commit the crime.
Gun control advocate are chomping at the bit to introduce a piece of legislation that would have “prevented” the shooting. But the entire premise of putting words on a piece of paper to deter deranged killers is ludicrous. Elliot Rodger broke a plethora of gun laws. Suggesting that one more would have made a difference is ridiculous.
The only reason you aren't seeing gun control advocates like Dianne Feinstein calling for more gun control measures is because this happened on a weekend. You can rest assured that come Monday morning, these Liberals will be out in force trying to take away YOUR Second Amendment rights because of the actions of a liberal, disturbed young man in Commiefornia.
SOURCE
Sunday, May 25, 2014
MI:Detroit motorists under siege in 'Carjack City'
To avoid becoming a victim, security guard Greg Champion wears a handgun on his hip whenever he's pumping gas.
"I don't want to surprise you," Champion said. "I want you to know I'm armed, and I want you to know I can defend myself, and I want you to go somewhere else."
More Here
"I don't want to surprise you," Champion said. "I want you to know I'm armed, and I want you to know I can defend myself, and I want you to go somewhere else."
More Here
Dave Workman: Guns & Ammo Rates Washington in Bottom Third
Guns & Ammo magazine yesterday posted an
on-line rating of where the states stand on gun rights, and
surprisingly Washington, where well-financed anti-gunners complain that
the laws need to be tightened, is in the bottom third, while Oregon and
Idaho are ranked No. 29 and 30, respectively.
The best state for gun owners is Arizona, where it is legal to carry openly or concealed without a permit, where all carry permits are honored, and where it is legal to own full-auto firearms and there are no magazine limits. Washington, meanwhile, is rated 39 out of 51, including all the states and the District of Columbia.
More Here
The best state for gun owners is Arizona, where it is legal to carry openly or concealed without a permit, where all carry permits are honored, and where it is legal to own full-auto firearms and there are no magazine limits. Washington, meanwhile, is rated 39 out of 51, including all the states and the District of Columbia.
More Here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
