Saturday, September 26, 2015

No Surprises in Troll-Haven

S.F.’s last gun shop to lay down its arms - SFGate:
(September 25, 2015)
The owner of High Bridge Arms, Japan-born Masashi Takahashi, is shutting down the 63-year-old store, employees said Friday, as city leaders consider yet again whether to toughen restrictions on gun sales.
San Francisco .. "Baghdad By The Bay" .. has driven its last bastion of freedom to its knees, and bowed its head, and driven it out of business.

I do so hope those horrible hoplophobes are happy with destroying a family business which never broke a law in its 63 years of existence.  (Name me one Head-Shop in the Fillmore District which can make the same claim?)

That's the thing about the Liberal Establishment:  they like what they like, and what they don't like .. they hound to death.

Smoke pot?  They like it.
Illegal Immigrant?  They like it. (even if their favorite boys kill folks, they're committed!)

Suspect who was deported multiple times pleads not guilty in fatal shooting of San Francisco woman

Sell a legal product .. a GUN?  Oh, they don't like that at ALL!  (Of course, their favorite illegal immigrant who STOLE a gun gets a free pass because .. FRISCO.)

Cheap Shot!

Man shoots self in genitals, lies to police:
(USA TODAY: September 25, 2015)
A convicted felon who accidentally shot himself in the penis was arrested after police say he lied about how the shooting happened.

Donald Anthony Watson was admitted to the Avera McKennan emergency room about 1:30 a.m. Sept. 6 for a gunshot wound to his penis, according to an arrest affidavit.
When questioned by police, the 43-year-old said he was shot by “a black guy (who) tried to rob” him while he was taking out the trash at his apartment.

Victim later admitted that he shot himself in the  umm ummm while lying in bed playing with his "gun" (victim not specific in this area, but apparently very accurate in other senses of the term).

Okay, it wasn't really "Appendix Carry"
Two days after the surgery, Watson was re-interviewed about the shooting. He told officer he was examining the gun, placed it in his pocket and the gun discharged striking him in the penis. He refused to tell officers who was selling the gun and where the gun is now.
Watson was then arrested on charges of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, possession of firearm by drug offender, false report of a crime to law enforcement and false report of information to law enforcement.
Hasn't the man suffered enough?

I have too much ... pride ... to indulge in any of the obvious smirking puns which come to mind.

Except (of course) for the title.

Missoula City Council poised to tackle gun control

Missoula City Council poised to tackle gun control | Missoula Local News -
(September 24, 2015)
An ordinance under consideration by the Missoula City Council is taking heavy fire from gun rights advocates.
Sponsored by Council Members Bryan von Lossberg, Marilyn Marler and Emily Bently, the draft ordinance aims to close a loophole that allows private transactions and gun transfers to happen without a background check. Licensed firearms dealers are required to run a check on gun buyers, but there is no federal or state law that requires the same check for private parties.
(H/T: The War On Guns)

We just suffered through this kind of  bastard legislation in Oregon, and I hope that the good folks in Missoula (and Montana in general) will find the wisdom to give the ordinance the sound trouncing it so richly deserves.


Well, not just because (a) criminals will not observe it; and not just because (b) it will make criminals of honest citizens who recognize the ordinance for the intrusive kind of needless governmental oversight it is, and refuse to comply with it.   These are only third level reasons why this kind of ordinance (or "law") is to be avoided.

The real problem is that it is tantamount to Registration ... which is the first step toward confiscation of private firearms, and that's the reason why it seems to attractive to liberals ("They Who Do Not Want To Take Your Guns").   The only way the law can be enforced is if they register the serial number of the firearm, and enter it into a database. That way every change of ownership can be traced.  

Just in case they want to .. oh, I don't know ... check up on you from time to time to see if you still have the gun you bought.  And if you can't produce it, and if you haven't filed a report of stolen property, then you the buyer will be fined ... or jailed.  Because you have obviously sold the gun, but didn't follow the "ordinance", so you are now a criminal.

What if you sold a gun and it is later used in a felony?  Well, you sold the gun to a felon; that makes you and accomplice before the fact.  You must know that there is a movement afoot to enact laws which make a seller liable for 'bad actions' involving a firearm which you have sold.  Even though you followed the law as best you could (more on that later), and should not be liable for the bad-actions of the buyer --- you might just end up doing hard time in the pokey for not insuring that you are selling to an "honest person".

These are some of the secondary reasons why this is a Bad Law.

Lets talk about the PRIMARY reason why this is a not-good thing:  it is registration, which leads to confiscation.   And brother, if Big Brother knows you have a gun, he can take it away from you or throw you in jail (see above) .. or both.

So what do you, as the seller, need to do to obey the law?  Why, you do an NICS  (National Instant Check System) check on the buyer.

Just one problem:  Only licensed dealers are authorized to use the NICS system.  So you and your buyer need to traipse before a dealer (in person) and have him run the check.  For which he will charge you something between $40 and $100 dollars .... and plan on the $100 charge, okay?

It's official: Oregon is UNDER-GUNNED!

US States Gun Ownership Compared To Countries - The Firearm Blog:
This infographic is a real eye opener as far as the number of guns in states like California which compares best with China! Check the graph to see how your state compares with which country around the world!
 (H/T:  and special thanks to The Firearm Blog)

Personally, I'm just a little insulted that Oregon's 'gun ownership' is compared to "England and Wales".


Hell, I've got more firearms than Wales does!  (Is it Buy A Gun Day again already?)
The comments in the original piece (again, check the link to Firearms Blog) shows that many of their readers feel that their states are under-valued, as well!

Also check the Firearm Blog webpage for a table of population and owned guns.  No, I have no idea where they got their statistics ... but it's still fun to look at.

It's a proud moment for most of us.  Except: really ... New Mexico compares to Belgium??

Monday, September 21, 2015

“62 million more”: Another BIG DHS ammunition purchase has come to light | The Crux

“62 million more”: Another BIG DHS ammunition purchase has come to light | The Crux:

In 2013, following concerns about the DHS buying large quantities of several different types of ammunition, weapons manufacturers noted that the feds may have been attempting to control the ammunition market by forcing manufacturers to hold back stock from general sale.
 “If they periodically do this in increments, they’re going to control how much ammo is available on the commercial market,” a weapons manufacturer told Michael Savage, adding that the contracts with bullet manufacturers stipulate that everything made goes to the government as the number one priority before it is allowed to enter the commercial market.
 In March 2013, Californian Congressman Doug LaMalfa and 14 of his House peers wrote a letter to the Department of Homeland Security demanding to know why the federal agency was buying so many rounds of ammunition and whether the purchases were part of a deliberate attempt to restrict supply to the American people.

Just in case you have not been informed of this before.

A lot of ammunition has been purchased or ordered or 'reserved' by U.S departments over the past 30 months (see details at the link):

TOTAL                           2,118,002,000
That’s enough ammo to kill around 30% of the world’s population.

Sunday, September 20, 2015

Cause and Effect: You're Not In Kansas Any More .. you're in MISSOURI

Missouri’s lax gun laws makes it too easy for criminals to be armed | The Kansas City Star:
(by Mary Sanchez, September 18, 2015)

The question is, how did a felon get the gun? Pretty easily in Missouri or Kentucky was the point made by Kentucky chapters for Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, which is affiliated with Everytown For Gun Safety. Both Missouri and Kentucky have lax gun laws. Even people with serious records wouldn’t be flagged during many  gun sales. ,,, Studies have indicated a connection between when Missouri repealed its gun permit system in 2007, eliminating background check requirements for private handgun sales, with a doubling of the number of guns winding up at crime scenes. Loosening up the rules for the good guys who want guns also loosens the rules for the bad guys who want guns. It’s that simple.
I question Mary Sanchz's statement that eliminating gun permits doubled the number of "guns crime scenes".   Her statistics may in fact be accurate, but to ascribe that increased statistic to local (state) recognition of the Constitutional Rights of her fellow citizens is wrong-headed.

The rejoinder is obvious, and Ms. Sanchez meets that head-on.

Well, almost:
 And yet, calls for evaluating gun ownership are always met with a dismissive response. It’s the reply that says: Criminals don’t abide by the law anyway, so don’t bother thinking that gun regulation will affect them? But why make it easier for them? This is what the legislators fail to grasp. Their intention is to stoically protect the Second Amendment. They give credence to conspiracy theories that believe any tracking of guns sold or backgrounds checked will open the door to federal troops confiscating America’s firearms.

You cannot eliminate crime by punishing honest, respectable people.  The only effect is to turn them into, essentially, assumed criminals without any evidence that they have bad intentions.

Mary, you do have a Crime Problem in Missouri.  We've watched your state turn into a shooting gallery over the past several years.

But that isn't caused by the Constitution.  It's caused by societal factors which your state  is unable, to address.   Nobody is pointing the finger at you; we know that these societal ills are endemic to today's social environment, where we try to make it right for poor people by making it more difficult for people who don't share their problems. As in: people who own guns legally are responsible for the crimes caused by people who own guns illegal

Why do people who should not be allowed to buy guns from private persons still get to do so?  It's a two-part question:

  1. People who have guns don't want their guns to be registered, because it leads to confiscation.  There's an entire huge body of discussion behind that, but it's still true ... historically.
  2. People who own guns and sell them privately do NOT have access the the National Instant Check System, which registered gun dealers do. AND By The Way .. there is no such thing as an non-licensed dealer.  Not in America.   We're either a Dealer, or we're a Private Citizen.  Don't ask me why, I'm not sure .. it should be possible for a private person to call into the NICS system and ask if Joe Blow who wants to buy their gun is legally permitted to do so, but we can't.  So blame it on the NICS, on Congress, on the President ... blame it on the Bossa Nova, but don't blame it on honest private citizens. 

So why is there so much gun crime in Missouri today, if not because of private gun sales?

Single parent homes; low income; dearth of honest jobs; and an entire segment of society that thinks it's admirable to break the law because the criminals they see on the streets have expensive cars, while honest people have to walk to work.  (IF they can find work!)   These are the conditions which lead to violence .. they're not the cause of violence.

Neither is the possession of a firearm a cause of violence.  Still, it is not a "condition of violence", either.  Millions of people own firearms and do not break the law, do not harm their neighbors, do not undermine the economic viability of their neighborhood.

And your presumption of guilt without rational justification isn't helping, Mary.  You're just letting your emotions cloud your thinking.  You think that there's too much violence in your state, and you are correct.  But you also think it's because "It's Too Easy For Criminals To Be Armed".

You have made the rhetorical assumption that Cause and Effect can be determined by your outrage.  In truth, it's much, much more complicated than that.

By conflating gun violence with gun ownership, you not only do a disservice to the millions of law-abiding gun owners who do not deserve to be the object of your outrage, but you distract our attention to the true progenitors of violence in our neighborhoods, in our cities, in our states and in our country.