Category Archives: gun control

Problems and Solutions

Once again, some asshole went on a shooting rampage in a school.

Once again, some asshole legislator is blaming the lack of new gun control laws, specifically universal background checks Preemptively Prove Your Innocence (PPYI) prior restraint on human/civil rights.

It’s true that the Santa Fe scumbag would not have been able to pass a background check, being seventeen years old, but… he bypassed any such checks by obtaining his weapons unlawfully in the first place. He stole them, from a locked cabinet. Does Douche Deutch honestly believe that if universal PPYI were in effect that an underage person intent upon mass murder to the point that he violated laws would suddenly exclaim, “Oh, darn! That would be illegal. Never mind.”?

The simple facts are that 1) 64% of murderers have prior felony convictions* prohibiting them from lawfully obtaining guns, but they manage it anyway; 2) 88% (or as high as 90.5%) of firearms murders are committed using stolen guns, which means they were obtained unlawfully; 3) criminals generally don’t obtain their firearms through lawful channels, doing so only 7% of the time. Pray tell, how does one enforce a lawful background check in an unlawful transaction?

And the touted background checks? No doubt, you’ve heard all about how checks have stopped sales to bad guys 2.5 million (or whatever number is being bandied about of late) times. The reality is that with a false positive rate of 94%, that’s actually 2.3 million innocent people whose Second Amendment rights were mistaken abridged. That’s why there have been so few prosecutions (I think 140-something was the last number I saw; not 140,000, not 1,400… 140. Nationwide.) coming from those millions of NICS denials. At last report, the DOJ still had a backlog of tens of thousands of denial challenges to process.

Prohibited folks intent upon committing crimes just bypass pesky PPYI inflicted on the innocent.

New gun control laws would target only the honest folks who aren’t committing the crimes. So such laws violate rights without even the lousy excuse of enhancing public safety.

So naturally the gun control crowd whines, “But we have a growing gun violence problem, and you aren’t offering any solutions.”

No, we don’t; and yes, I am.

First: No. We don’t. Even when you include the recent uptick, “gun violence” is a mostly solved problem already.

  • Firearms homicides are down 24% from 1993
  • The rate of firearms homicides is down 37%
  • Accidental firearms deaths dropped from 824 (in 1999) to 489 (in 2015)

School shootings?

Again, even with the recent jump — largely attributable to the media plastering killers’ names and faces everywhere, showing psychotic copycats the road to fame — school shootings have been trending downward for decades.

Violence isn’t really up. Violence reporting — thanks, 24/7 news networks, in desperate need of material to fill time slots and draw advertisers — is up. So kids (chronological and mental) who haven’t looked at the real data get the impression that schools are less safe than ever before in history.

We are safer because of honest folks lawfully arming and defending themselves. : 338,700 times per year even according to the anti-gun Violence Policy Center. Other researchers estimate defensive gun uses at 2.5 million, which recently located CDC data (suppressed for 20 years) suggest is a better estimate than the VPC’s.

But those upticks?

There are 3007 county units in the US. 54% — more than half — had no murders in 2014. 5% ( counties) provided 68% of all murders. 2% of the counties (60 counties) accounted for more than half of all murders. Care to guess where?

Would you like to narrow it down further? According to the Wall Street Journal, one-third (33.3%) of the national homicide spike in 2016 came from just five neighborhoods. In one city: Chicago.

Huffington Post narrows it down even more. Although you have to look at the FBI UCR data on victim and offender to see what they try to avoid stating outright.

A mostly solved problem; violence declining almost everywhere.

Second: But there is a more that can be done to address the still-present (if declining) problem:

1. Teaching people the things they need to function in an honest society.
2. Providing second chances and skills to those who slip and survive.
3. Providing skills and equipment to those who want to stop the real violence.

But for the gun people controlling victim disarmers, those answers are unacceptable because they reduce their control over the population.

Solved problems are a problem for them because those don’t provide an excuse to exert more control, spend more money, generate more victims from which to profit.

The people controllers suppress self-respect and self-reliance in favor of violating everyone’s human/civil rights.

And it could backfire on them.


* Recently, I’ve been checking on regional firearms murder reports. Where the offender is identified, the prior felony rate is more like 70%. When other disqualifiers are factored in — domestic violence conviction, restraining orders, felony indictment, mental incompetency adjudication — at least 90% of the murderers were already prohibited persons. That doesn’t even count the people like the Santa Fe killer, who apparently had no disqualifying record, but was under-age to obtain his destructive implements of choice.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG


Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Gun Culture Genocide

Or call it cultural terraforming. Either way, the intent is to indoctrinate children with the idea that guns are evil. John Dewey would be proud of them.

Police called to New Haven magnet school for child making toy Lego gun
School officials said a child built a toy gun out of Lego at the Jepsen Magnet School in New Haven Thursday.

School administrators called police to the school after the child made the gun and started pointing it at the other kids.

The school’s behavioral rules do forbid toy weapons, but somehow I don’t think that’s a criminal offense, even in Connecticut. So why were the police called to enforce a school rule?

To ensure that uppity kid understands that the authorities will stomp on his rights. To expect it. To accept it.

To ensure the culture of self responsibility — expressed through firearms ownership — becomes extinct, by terrifying a small child, young enough to be playing with Legos in school, with cops.

Now, I could accept some restrictions on toy guns in school. Popping off Nerf projectiles during lessons could certainly be disruptive. And you wouldn’t want a child to be beating other children with a plastic bludgeon. But neither was a case here. The child made an inert gun-shaped assembly of plastic blocks. He allegedly pointed it at other students.

Great Ghu, did they think the Legos were going to go off?

In a sane world, the teacher might have told the child, “Johnny, that’s very creative, but you should never point even toy guns at other people. And you’re disrupting class. Put that away until recess.” End of story. It would have been a good time to start the class on the basic rules of safe firearms handling.

Nope. Someone panicked. The police were called. The police responded… to a toy gun call. Even they though they had to know there was not a criminal violation.

Where’s the investigation of school personnel filing a false report with the police? That is a crime. Even in Connecticut.

Better yet…

“School leaders and local police partners were able to investigate and resolve the issue internally with use of restorative practices.

How did the police investigate the issue? Did the police question the child? Were his parents informed and present, or other adult counsel? There is a lot of court precedent for children knowing their Miranda rights and having proper representation during questioning. In a rational world, the New Haven Police Department could be in serious legal trouble for playing the school’s game.*

And then there’s the potential for a lawsuit against the teacher, and whomever else was involved in bringing in the police. If I were the parent, that would include the pricipal and school board.

Just maybe we could culturally terraform Connecticut back into respect for the Bill of Rights. And people. Even small children.


* I sent an email to the NHPD, asking for clarification on their role. I wanted to email the school, but they’ve scrubbed every active contact link for their web site (“contact us” buttons still appear, but link to nothing).


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could use the money, what with truck repairs and bills.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG



Ed. note: This commentary appeared first in TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Political Theater and Popcorn

There is quite a lot going on in Israel right now. I’ve got a couple things to cover for you. One, you may or not have heard much about the Falestinian “Great Return March”.

Now this is all kinds of theater. The goal is to put a bunch of Falestinian civilians in front and they are suppose to break down the security fence and storm into Israel where several communities lie only moments away.

It’s a topic that has come up quite a bit on some of the news feeds I get. As I’ve pointed out about this great march of “Return”, it was the Arab leaders that told them to leave, not the Israelis. And so Hamass is doing one of their fav things, citizens as cannon fodder, or human shields. Grab some popcorn.

You will see some great performances. Probably good enough to rival Hollywood, that’s why it’s called Pallywood, where the ambulances take the rioters or terrorists to where ever they need/want to go. Haven’t heard of Pallywood? Well, first you need good make up artists

then a compelling story

It’s a MIRACLE! The feel good movie of the half minute.

If you are unfortunate enough to be in a place forcing you to watch cnn or mslsd or the like, you’ve no doubt heard about the innocent Falestinian “journalist” that was shot by the big bad Israelis.

Um, no. A report from The Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center reveals….he was a TERRORIST! MAN, I did not see that plot twist coming! What’s more? Eighty percent of the Falestinians killed have been TERRORISTS! It’s like a Twilight Zone thing or something. Well, not everyone is fooled, Abu Mazen accused Hamass of “only selling illusions, trading in suffering and blood.” Huh, you’d think if Abu Mazen knew those rocket scientist at cnn or mslsd #fakenews would figure it out. It’s weird, it’s like they want to be fooled. I wonder if there is a “Invasion of the Talking Head Snatchers” movie or something? “Stepford Talking Heads”? But their rocket scientists, they’ll tell you how smart they are.

People think that most Israelis are armed and can defend themselves. Nope, biggest nope ever. You see a lot of guns on the street because of the military and those in the military but off duty. One article I recently read was talking about the strict gun control in Israel. How they are “trained”, can’t buy some of the more “deadly” guns available at Walmart, can only buy so much ammo per year. Bet that cuts into practice for proficiency. You have to show a “need” to have a gun. Luckily for Israel the illusion exists there could be a gun under every blade of grass. And perhaps when Moshe Feiglin is Prime Minister it will be. But I have to wonder, if those pieceful Falestinians knew they were going to be met by a bunch of armed pissed off Kibbutzniks and citizens shouldering some of those “more deadly weapons in Walmart” just how eager they would be to break that security fence even if they did overrun and evade the IDF.

But back to speaking of rocket scientists.

Perhaps you’ve heard of a few missiles floating around? Israel hits 50 Iranian targets in Syria after Al Qods fires 20 missiles at IDF Golan positions

And Iran is a problem, we all knew it. Well, almost all of us knew it.

Except Ganja for brains barry.

And then, The Mossad did their “thing”. The got out a lot of documents, about 11,000 of them, from Tehran on Project Ahmed, the Iranian nuclear program which Bibi revealed to the world in a broadcast saying basically, Iran lied.

WOWZA, I would think that would be shocking! But, to the world “leaders” naw, nothing to see here folks, move along. EU Foreign Policy Chief Frederica Mogherini said so, she said Iran complied. Frederica and barry really need to quit the hearty partying and listen to their opponents. Except barry sent them lots and lots of money, so maybe they aren’t opponents. Because Iran admitted they lied as well as forbidding the inspection of certain areas.

The article referred to comments made by Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of Iran’s Atomic Agency, who said during an interview with IRINN TV in Iran on August 22 that his country can return to its pre-deal enrichment level in only five days, indicating Iran has breached the JCPOA and stockpiled prohibited nuclear components.

Earlier this month, the Middle East Media Research Institute published a full translation of Salehi’s comments, showing that the situation is worse than originally estimated by experts likeas former International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors David Albright and Olli Heinonen.

This is the tone in which cnn #FakeNews covered the revelations,

Russia stood by the current deal, rejecting any push to update or change the JCPOA. France, Germany, and the United Kingdom said Netanyahu’s presentation was exactly a case for keeping the deal in place, because it provided for inspection and monitoring of Iran’s nuclear program and, if needed, sanctions.

And what about one of the central accusations of Netanyahu’s presentation, that Iran lied? It was a talking point he hit over and over, making for easy sound bites and compelling television.

Well, that didn’t surprise anyone either.

“Everybody knew that they lied. There’s nothing new about that,” Lewis said flatly.

“The Iranians had a nuclear weapons program. We knew this,” agreed Fitzpatrick.

Lewis added: “We already knew the outlines of the [Iranian nuclear] program in great detail, and all this did was color it in, sometimes in pornographic detail.”

Orwellian. They lied, so we need the agreement so they won’t lie. Huh, wow. Last year even Germany knew. German Security Officials Reveal Iran Still Working to Become Nuclear Power. Seems most of the world “leaders” know they are being lied to and a fine with it. They are annoyed President Trump is pulling out of it, and reinstating sanctions meaning no more money out of barry’s “stash”. Moshe Feiglin of Zehut has a pretty brutal assessment of it. But he is right, The Israelis have to decide if they want to win.

Uninstalling obama

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The traitor John Kerry, the #KetchupHeiress is so desperate to salvage his and barry’s legacy he is going behind everyone’s back and engaging in shadow diplomacy. Why isn’t cnn and msnbc #FakeNews covering this like they did Michael Flynn?

Oh goodie, John Kerry is here, we don’t need to worry.

Totally NOT a Bomb

 

 

 

 

 

I read a magazine article that pointed out the hypocrisy of Demoncrats demanding more gun control to keep their kids safe, while pushing for the Iranian nuclear deal which endangered Israeli children. Well, Demoncrats are good at that sort of hypocrisy.

But no worries, the UN will be there to keep things calm. U.N. To World: You Have No Human Right to Self-Defense. Thwarted by the demise of its global gun ban treaty, the United Nations declares the human right of self-defense null and void

Uh oh.

The “Peace keepers” flee

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oy Ve Vay.

I would say the Mossad uncovered a lot more than just the proof that the Iranians were lying about their nuclear program. I would say they uncovered the total apathy that the European leaders have to the one Jewish state being annihilated. Do you wonder how the Mossad pulled that one off?

Anything to declare?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Open Letter: Fudds Against Freedom

Generally, I avoid columns at HuffPo, but I clicked the link before I realized where it was (I really need to watch URLs more closely). In this case, I discovered an “open letter” from associates of the Outdoors Writers Association of America, who apparently never heard of Jim Zumbo. They want gun control.

Lots of it.

As is my habit, I wrote an email to Daniel Ashe, the bylined writer of the letter, and former FWS director (an Obama appointee). I couldn’t find an email for him, so I sent it to OWAA, as all the co-signers are affiliated with that group. I waited for a response.

-crickets- Funny how that happens when I challenged victim disarmers with facts.

As is also my habit, I’m now sharing my letter with the world.

Dear Mr. Ashe (and co-signers),

RE: An Open Letter From Hunters About Gun Reform
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opinion-ashe-guns-hunting_us_5af04b20e4b041fd2d28bd88

I’m not sure you’ve thought through your gun control proposals. Allow me to explain.

“We see the need and opportunity to frame compromise between the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms and the Fifth Amendment’s right to life and liberty.”

That would be the “nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property” part, I presume. I think you need to read the whole Fifth Amendment, rather than cherry-pick one clause:

“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

Please note that this is a set of restriction on government, meant to protect individuals from said government. Let’s focus on that partial clause you like:

“nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;”

Shall not be deprived of property without due process. Like taking, or preventing the acquisition of firearms. That’s rather important, as I hope you’ll come to understand.

“Here’s where we would begin:

“1. An age minimum of 21 years to purchase any gun;”

Any other constitutionally guaranteed rights you want to restrict? Perhaps the First Amendment right to… write? Vote? That whole Fifth Amendment thing?

“2. Anyone on the Terrorist Screening Center’s “no-fly list” may not purchase or possess firearms;”

I’m not a fan of denial of human/civil rights without due process. I think you’re advocating an 8 U.S. Code § 241 – Conspiracy against rights violation.

The problem is that politicians discovered an investigative tool (lists of suspects — many with insufficient evidence to arrest — and possible associates to be watched) and mistook it for a list of actual known bad guys. Well… they did ID the late Senator Ted Kennedy, so some of them were bad guys. But the elderly nun? The inconvenient wife who the federal worker added to no-fly to be rid of her? And several others?

“3. Anyone on Social Security disability due to mental illness may not purchase or possess firearms;”

There’s that due process — or lack thereof — problem again. Based on experience with the Obama administration, I’m guessing that you mean you want his old no-due- process rule reinstated.

“4. Prohibit new sales of semiautomatic assault or tactical-style weapons;”

Why? You never actually explain that. I’m reasonably certain that the Second Amendment doesn’t mention hunting, while it does mention arms being necessary to security and freedom. Pesky thing, eh?

“5. Prohibit new sales of semiautomatic shotguns or rifles (except .22-caliber rim fire) that can hold more than 10 rounds;”

Ditto. Not that such a limit would have deterred some of the recent school shooters (Parkland, FL, ten-round magazines; Ocala, FL, double-barreled shotgun — whoa, a hunting weapon — Dalton, Ga, revolver)

“6. Prohibit any accessory designed or mechanical modification intended a) to increase the rate at which any firearm may be discharged; or b) to increase the magazine capacity of a semiautomatic rifle beyond 10 rounds (except .22-caliber rim fire);”

Can you give me an example of such a device? Metallic self-contained cartridges raised the rate of fire over that of non-case muzzleloaders. The Revolutionary War era Ferguson rifle also had a higher rate of fire over muzzleloaders. Double-barreled shotguns can fire faster than single-shots. Polished trigger groups can increase the rate of fire (along with replacement springs and bolt assemblies).

At a guess, I suspect you have bump-fire stocks (and possibly trigger cranks) in mind. Funny thing: neither increases the rate of fire of a semiautomatic firearm; that’s inherent in the physics of the firearm’s internal parts. In fact, since a bump-fire stock bleeds off recoil energy to allow the trigger to reset for the next manual operation, that can decrease the theoretical maximum rate of fire.

“7. Mandatory and universal background checks for all firearm sales;”

There’s an idea. How about starting with the 64% of murderers with prior felony convictions who use stolen firearms 88% of the time (and even more with other disqualifying conditions like mental health adjudications, misdemeanor domestic violence convictions, unlawful residency status, and the rest)? Roughly 90% of them get their firearms from friends and family who could be presumed to be aware of their prohibited person status, and from blackmarket — i.e.- already unlawful — sales.

If you can get them to go through background checks, you might be on to something. I’m not sure how you’ll get around the HAYNES ruling on self-incrimination, though.

“8. Prohibit sales of firearms except through registered/licensed dealers (no direct private sales);”

You’ve already specified mandatory universal background checks (more accurately: a prior restraint on the exercise of a right through preemptive proof of innocence). Why also require owners/buyers to go through an FFL dealer unless you want a permanent 4473 and bound book record of who owns what? And you still have the prior felon issue; get them to buy through dealers. Such an insistence on a paper trail is why many gun owners fear you have backdoor registration in mind.

“9. Enact gun violence restraining order authorities allowing courts to temporarily prohibit a person from purchasing or possessing firearms when a family member, community welfare expert or law enforcement officer presents evidence of a threat; and”

You have a serious jones for violating due process, don’t you? Such restraining orders mandate violating human/civil rights with process coming only after the fact; UNDUE process. And if the person is so dangerous that his property must be taken preemptively, why wouldn’t he be arrested and and charged with a crime? Or do you mean that rights — like the First Amendment right to pen silly columns — should be violated without probable cause?

“10. Repeal the “Dickey ban” on scientific research in the area of gun violence and implement the Institute of Medicine’s 2013 gun violence research agenda.”

There is no such ban. The Dickey Amendment forbade the CDC to “advocate or promote gun control.” They could — and did — continue with research (as are other federal agencies). The amendment did take away certain research funding: the amount that the CDC diverted away from research, proving they didn’t need it for said research. And you seem to have missed recent legislation clarifying that: an explicit statement that such research is allowed.

“These suggestions are simple to implement and enforce.”

If they are so simple, then start with the unlawfully armed criminals before inflicting them on the folks who didn’t do it. You know, the…

“They do limit the rights of honest and law-abiding citizens, but they are responsible limitations that do not infringe the ability of Americans to hunt, shoot, or protect themselves and their families.”

They limit the rights of INNOCENT “honest and law-abiding citizens,” but ignore the prior felons who are the vast majority of the problem.

And if have to wait for government permission to purchase only less-effective defensive arms, then, yes; my right to protect myself has been infringed. I seem to recall a wise man speaking of a right delayed being a right denied.

Oh well; it’s not as if you have to run your open letter through a Federal Literature Licensee and undergo a prior restraint background check before exercising your right to speak up.

Carl “Bear” Bussjaeger
Writer, The Zelman Partisans
zelmanpartisans.com

About Us: Jews. Guns. No compromise. No Surrender.
A group of Jews and friends who stand uncompromisingly for the right to
keep and bear arms — and the entire Bill of Rights.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could use the money, what with truck repairs and bills.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG


Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Bump-Fire Rule: If you have not commented, do so

The Brady Campaign to Protect Violent Criminals plans some late comment period “ballot stuffing.” If comments mean anything — which I doubt, or this would not have been proposed — you should make sure your thoughts are known.

Pro-gun voices dominate in debate over Trump’s bump-stock ban
Of the more than 17,000 public comments received so far by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), a review by Reuters of 4,200 turned up only 10 favoring the bump stock ban. Almost all the rest criticized the proposal as heavy-handed, unnecessary or unconstitutional.
[…]
“We are rallying our members and we will be putting in a whole additional series of comments,” said Avery Gardiner, co-president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, a Washington-based group dedicated to reducing gun deaths.

“The numbers will shift,” Gardiner said.

99.762 against, with logical, legal, and constitutional reasoning. 0.238% in favor, with… feelz. Therefore it will be implemented, is my guess.

It won’t help when the gun controllers start their commenting campaign. Expect to see a lot of last minute identically-worded rants about machineguns, probably from bots.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could use the money, what with truck repairs and bills.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG



Ed. note: This commentary appeared first in TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Trump: Never?

So Trump spoke to the NRAAM…

“Your second amendment rights … will never, ever be under siege as long as I am president.

Please note that the NRA leadership has supported all these (except raising age limits to 21), too. LaPierre and Cox still seem to be there, so don’t tell me about the new Board.

“Never.” I wonder…


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could use the money, what with truck repairs and bills.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG


Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Swallowing his words

Congresscreep Eric Swallow Swalwell [CA-15] is a coward. A not-very-bright coward.

Not bright, based upon his little confiscation screed:

Instead, we should ban possession of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons, we should buy back such weapons from all who choose to abide by the law, and we should criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons. The ban would not apply to law enforcement agencies or shooting clubs.

I say he is a coward because he hides from criticism. I attempted to write to his office with some pointed questions about his grand plan to disarm America. I had to look up a zip code within his district to get past his filter (he doesn’t want to hear from nonconstituents). But because I want answers to my questions, I gave my real — non-California-because-I’m-sane — address.

Rejected. He really doesn’t want to hear from nonconstituents. I’ve written to a lot of congresscritters for other states, and this is the first time I couldn’t get through at all.  If he’s going to call for national human/civil rights violations, he should man up and take national feedback.

So if any of our readers are still trapped in his district in Occupied California, please send this to him. And feel free to give him my email address.

Mr. Swalwell,

RE: Ban assault weapons, buy them back, go after resisters: Ex-prosecutor in Congress, May 3, 2018
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/05/03/ban-assault-weapons-buy-them-back-prosecute-offenders-column/570590002/

“Instead, we should ban possession of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons, we should buy back such weapons from all who choose to abide by the law, and we should criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons. The ban would not apply to law enforcement agencies or shooting clubs.”

A few questions:

1. “Military-style semiautomatic assault weapons.” Can you name a single country on the planet that uses semiautomatic rifles as standard issue to its regular troops? It’s something of a hobby of mine, and I haven’t been able to find a nation with standard issue semiautomatic rifles since the 1990s. In fact, other than some specialty cases (snipers, for instance), semiautomatic rifles are not considered suitable for combat by national militaries. So what makes these “military-style”?

2. Darned few people are going to be willing to give up firearms, costing up to several thousand dollars, for a paltry $200-$1000. I seem to recall a Fifth Amendment that mentions something about “just compensation.” But hey, post-Kelo, who cares about justice, right?

3. Have you floated your little confiscation plan by working cops? Not political appointees, or other chairwarmers, but the working guys who would have to go kicking in millions* of doors BECAUSE the occupants are well-armed?
(* 60,000,000 is a conservative estimate of gun owners; if only 90% complied, you’d have to send your jackboots after 6,000,000 — six million — noncompliant sonsabitches with guns. When the California legislature considered this in the 1990s, the head of one police union predicted the largest outbreak of blue-flu in history.)

4. Will you personally lead an entry team on confiscation raids, or are you too cowardly to put your money where your mouth is? Put up, or shut up.

You talk a brave game, but HOW do you plan to do this?

There are, by varying estimates, 55,000,000 to 120,000,000 million gun owners in America. Estimates of the firearms they hold range from 265,000,000 to 750,000,000 — three quarters of a billion. No one knows who all those owners are, much less where. Ditto with the guns (estimates of AR-pattern rifles alone, manufactured since the end of the “Assault Weapon Ban”, are in the neighborhood of 16,000,000; just one type of “assault weapon” by the usual politician definition).

You’re from California; you should know what happened when the state merely mandated registration (not confiscation): a whopping 2.33% compliance rate. Connecticut got 13.44%.

Again using that 60,000,000 number, imagine you reverse the compliance ratios and get 90%, leaving those 6,000,000 pesky noncompliant SOBs. Heavily armed SOBs.

The FBI estimates the number of law enforcement personnel in America (local, state, federal) at 698,460. You’re outnumbered by almost 9 to 1. So you toss in all military personnel (who also tend to be gun owners… oops); active, reserve, guard…

And you’re still outnumbered by more than 2 to 1.

5. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO ENFORCE your little police state wet dream? With what?

You like the Australian example. You might note that after 22 years and multiple amnesties, the Australian government now estimates compliance at 20%. And they have more guns now, than before the grab.

6. Are you crazy, stupid, or both?

Carl “Bear” Bussjaeger
Author: Net Assets, Bargaining Position, The Anarchy Belt, and more
www.bussjaeger.org
NRA delenda est
http://zelmanpartisans.com/?p=4493


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could use the money, what with truck repairs and bills.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG


Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Nurses for Tyranny

Another weasel-worded call for repeal of the Second Amendment.

Gun rights — Constitution needs to be amended to protect the lives of our patients
We are nurses who have a vested interested in the health of the public. Each of us has many years of experience working in practice, and in teaching public health, mental health, and women’s health. Gun violence touches on all these areas.

We agree that there’s a need for gun violence research but we also think about the root cause. By definition, there would be no gun violence if there were no guns.
[…]
For us, as nurses, we notice that when we are discussing gun violence it is critical to note that gun ownership is a constitutional right — specifically enumerated and clear as clear can be.
[…]
To protect our patients, we as nurses are rising to an important recognition that the time has come to follow a constitutional approach to address gun violence. The reality is that the Constitution needs to be amended to protect the lives of our patients. And we, as nurses, believe that the time to act is now.

We need to recognize that the Constitution needs to be at the center of our conversations surrounding gun violence.

Guns are the root cause of gun violence? That’s a complete failure to differentiate between cause, effect, and method. As a more rational nurse said, “In a nurse, that’s f*****g serious.”

I hope none of those idiots are ever my nurse. Hearts are the root cause of heart disease. By definition, there would be no heart disease if there were no hearts.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could use the money, what with truck repairs and bills.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG


Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Welcome to the party, pal

Gun Owners of America finally notices the semiauto problem with bump-fire bans, and the crowd — finally — goes wild.

Let me tell you about a little-known pro-RKBA group. While GOA ignored this until a couple of weeks ago (when I started getting fundraising emails mentioning bump-fire stocks), and the National Restrictions Rifle Association actively pushed for it, The Zelman Partisans has been trying to warn you.

For months.

  • The Zelman Partisans Statement on Proposed Legislation to Ban “Bump-Fire Stocks” and other accessories. (October 5, 2017)
    Basically this Constitution-shredding Senator wants to redefine “machine gun” by how fast you can make something fire, rather than being designed to fire automatically as long as the trigger is depressed. Apparently Jerry Miculek is going to be outlawed.
  • Training Wheels (October 25, 2017)
    That is incorrect. An automatic weapon — a machinegun — is designed to fire multiple rounds per trigger operation. Bump-fire stocks in no way affect that operation/rounds relationship. If you put a bump-fire stock on a semiautomatic rifle, you still individually operate the trigger for each round fired. Bump-fire stocks don’t make the weapon fire faster. The theoretical rate of fire of the rifle is determined by the physics of the internal parts.
  • The fix is in: proposed rulemaking on bump-fire
    Instead of looking at mechanical function, and simple physics, in this document the ATF has adopted the media and gun controller definition of “if it’s fast, it must be a machinegun.” The intent is preordained regardless of comments.
  • Commenting Now Open: Application of the Definition of Machinegun to “Bump Fire” Stocks and Other Similar Devices. (December 29, 2017)
    Considering bump-fire stocks, and other accessories, to be machineguns would not simply regulate a physical device. It effectively outlaws the bump-fire TECHNIQUE, and even pulling the trigger faster than some arbitrary threshold.
  • That’ll be our first one-term president in a while (February 20, 2018)
    I wish I could be surprised, but even before Trump began to look like a serious candidate– well before he got the R nomination — I warned that his new-found verbal respect for RKBA was belied by a long anti-RKBA history.
  • “Stroke of the pen, law of the land. Kinda cool.”* (February 26, 2018)
    “Machinegun” is defined in statutory law. Short form: a firearm that fires more than one round per trigger operation.If that can be changed by executive order, instead of congressional legislation, then everything is a machinegun waiting for the pen-stroke.What can he — would he — do with that pen?
  • Screw Physical Reality (March 10, 2018)
    If words having meaning, this is impossible without making every semiautomatic firearm an NFA item. Please note that this redefines machinegun without offering any grace period or grandfathering for existing gear.
  • Bump-fire Banned (March 23, 2018)
    And yes; The Zelman Partisans opposes this. Accepting this is in no way a compromise. We did not get reciprocal carry. We did get a dangerous Fix NICS. And this isn’t a merely bump-fire ban; it’s effectively a ban on semiautomatic firearms (and if you think Feinstein, Schumer et al aren’t aware of that, you weren’t paying attention): parts is parts.
  • Bumping Off the Truth (March 25, 2018)
    As noted on Friday, President Trump and AG Sessions announced a coming ban of bump-fire stocks (“bump-stock-type devices,” as the rule notice so eloquently puts it); no grandfathering, get rid of it or go to prison for possession of an unregistered NFA item.
  • Theoretically Speaking (March 28, 2018)
    In every case, bump-fire stocks (and trigger cranks and “Multi-burst Trigger Activators”) are bad merely because they assist the shooter in approaching the firearm’s inherent theoretical maximum rate of fire. The semiautomatic rate of fire is the problem.Take away the bump-fire stock, crank, or multi-burp shoulder thingy, and the evil — to the gun ban bunnies — rate of fire remains.
    Does anyone reading this honestly doubt that establishing the precedent of the theoretical rate of fire being the problem is exactly what they want?
  • “Bump-Stock-Type Devices” (sic) Commenting Now Open (March 29, 2018)
    The NPRM falsely states: “Specifically, these devices convert an otherwise semiautomatic firearm into a machinegun by functioning as a self-acting or self-regulating mechanism that harnesses the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm in a manner that allows the trigger to reset and continue firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter. Hence, a semiautomatic firearm to which a bump-stock-type device is attached is able to produce automatic fire with a single pull of the trigger.”
  • Bump Stocks Matter: Banning Semiautomatic Firearms (April 2, 2018)
    If this were a move to specifically ban bump-fire stocks or trigger cranks on product safety grounds (unstable, inaccurate, etc.) you’d see a lot less opposition to it. But if you read the language of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [NPRM] (and every submitted bill I’ve tracked down so far), that isn’t what is being addressed. It is clearly and explicitly a “problem” of “rate of fire,” in that these devices — training wheels — assist the shooter in merely approaching the semiautomatic firearm’s theoretical rate of fire. (In the case of bump-fire, by using recoil to let the trigger reset, for the next manual operation.)

That’s a partial listing. You can find more.

You know what else “increases” the rate of fire? The breechloading Ferguson Rifle. Pre-measured paper cartridges. Revolvers. Bolt/lever action rifles with magazines. Slicked bolts and polished trigger groups. New springs.

Anything that improves the action.

Might I suggest joining the one pro-RKBA group that has consistently warned of, and opposed, these bans other others ignored, under-stated, or even supported them?



Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could use the money, what with truck repairs and bills.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG


Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

So Penguin, about that book

So little boss Hogg and his little Hogg sister are release a book to encourage taking rights, not privileges away from adults. Rights the little Hoggs are not even old enough to enjoy as they are still children. At least that’s how he referred to himself in his recent bullying session with Laura Ingraham.

The Hogg duo anxious to capitalize on their 27 seconds of fame have “written” a book. They must be paragons of organization. What with all the media appearance, school work and now managing to get a book released. All on their own. Amazing.

I received the following from a active TZP follower of facebook:

#NeverAgain has been the cry of the Jews for decades to remind people of the Holocaust under Nazi Germany.

Now, activist and high school student David Hogg is using the title “Never Again” for a book he is writing that will be published by Penguin Random House.

The book is about gun control. “A new generation has made it clear that problems previously deemed unsolvable due to powerful lobbies and political cowardice will be theirs to solve,” according to the preview of the upcoming book.

For anyone wishing to contact Penguin Random House about the title,

please call at 212-782-9000;

e-mail to: customerservice@penguinrandomhouse.com, RHAcademic@penguinrandomhouse.com, penguinpublicity@us.penguingroup.com, atrandompublicity@randomhouse.com, penguinpress@penguinrandomhouse.com

Should you wish to let Penguin books who have chosen to publish this know your opinion that’s how you can do so.

So thank you follower of TZP!!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail