I’ve heard it said a picture is worth a thousand words, so this is going to be a really really long column! There have been all kinds of pity memes going around lately, many of them dealing with citizen control and on Fakebook and other social media sites people are sharing and swapping them around like baseball trading cards. Back when there was baseball…and trading cards worth trading.
So here we go, I have a few, very few for me links I am putting in to relevant stories that in my mind apply to the meme.
We shall start with what set off the latest round of calls for citizen control. The Uvalde killer who has been labeled in the corporate (biased) media as “bullied”. As per usual, they have it bass akwards.
HE was the bully, and pro-tip? Anyone, and I mean anyone, who walks around with a bag of dead cats he’s beaten to death is not normal. This is why we have animal cruelty laws.
Now does this sound normal to you? And that was a really nice truck his grandma had as well. Looked very expensive. I feel very sorry for her, she tried to help the kid and he shot her then stole her really nice truck.
I have other questions.
How DID the shooter get all that gear? He had a minimum wage job.
So now the hue and cry to get rid of “assault weapons”.
You say potato, I say potato, it’s the same rifle.
But it seems that our (in their minds) rulers have inconsistent ideas about who lawful gun owners should be. For instance, take Ukraine.
Ukraine gets rocket launchersBiden Will arm our enemies however.
Oh, well, good to see where the priorities of American politicians are, right? Because they aren’t with U.S.!
Then you have exceedingly stupid politicians and even dumber talking heads on the corporate (Pfizer sponsored) media yammering on about how The Second Amendment was never meant to include modern weapons. And that might be a fun column to do in the near future. But for now, WWGWS
What would George Washington say?
Ah George, we need you now!
Fine
We can do it your way.
So then there is the talk about mandatory buy backs and confiscation. Doesn’t it seem odd a burgler is pushing to have law-abiding citizens disarmed? It’s almost like he wants to make it a “safer work environment”…for criminals.
Beta male hypocrisy
And about trusting the government to keep us safe? HAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAAHHAHAHAHA and more.
Universal background checkWaco Tx
But if it’s really really about preventing death…
Gun death vs Vax death
But since I want to end this column on a happy note:
I’m not sure why The Gun Feed just picked up this 2017 story. But so long as they have, let’s look at some judicial stupidity. It never hurts to be ready to argue the next — inevitable — infringement case.
Assault Weapons Not Protected by Second Amendment, Federal Appeals Court Rules
“Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war,” Judge Robert King wrote for the court, adding that the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller explicitly excluded such coverage.
First, the assertion that HELLER “explicitly excluded” Second Amendment protection of “assault weapons” is such a gross misstatement of the decision that I can only consider King’s claim to be a blatant, intentional lie.
If it is indeed the case, as the District believes, that the number of guns contributes to the number of gun-related crimes, accidents, and deaths, then, although there may be less restrictive, less effective substitutes for an outright ban, there is no less restrictive equivalent of an outright ban.
HELLER found that less restrictive measures than an outright ban must be considered. Note especially that HELLER overturned the District’s outright ban on handguns. For the terminally clueless, they’re were specifying strict scrutiny.
At least dissenting Judge William Traxler got it.
“For a law-abiding citizen who, for whatever reason, chooses to protect his home with a semi-automatic rifle instead of a semi-automatic handgun, Maryland’s law clearly imposes a significant burden on the exercise of the right to arm oneself at home, and it should at least be subject to strict scrutiny review before it is allowed to stand.”
Yes; strict scrutiny, to weigh whether any lesser restriction than an outright ban would suffice to meet the government’s alleged interest.
But let us turn our attention to the other factor that King and the Fourth missed.
MILLER, 1939
The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. ‘A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.’ And further, that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.
Required. And “common use” — note that the short-barreled shotgun test in question in MILLER specified common military use, not sporting use — would seem to apply to 20 MILLION AR-pattern weapons of the sort this very Court called “weapons of war.”
Common, militia-suitable arms.
It appears to me that ten injustices on the Fourth Circuit needed to be impeached; for sheer incompetence, if not outright malfeasance.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
Texas Congresscritter Sheila Jackson-Lee is generally good for entertaining stupidity, and this is no exception.
Jackson Lee: There Was ‘Seismic Increase of Carnage Across America Using Automatic Weapons’ after Assault Weapons Ban Expired
Jackson Lee said, “I have committed, over the years, having introduced bills dealing with the ban on assault weapons post-2004, as you well know, Ayman, that’s when it ended. And we saw the seismic increase of carnage across America using automatic weapons. And in the instance of Buffalo and the instance of Uvalde, having gone there on Sunday, meeting with and just listening to the sheer desperation of families and children. That was an AR-15 as well.”
I’m sure even the most casual TZP reader caught the main problem, but let me take this a point at a time.
I’ll start with that skyrocketing use of “automatic weapons, known legally as machineguns. Happily for us, TZP tracks machinegun use, so the data I want is readily available.
Right off, I hope you noticed that machinegun use is pretty darned rare. The next thing to notice is that prior to the misnomered “assault weapon ban” (it banned zero existing firearms) in 1994, there had been ONE reported machinegun use since 1981.
Next, note that after the “AWB” expired in 2004 there… huh, zero machine uses for the next 13 years.
That doesn’t look like much of a correlation between the AWB expiration and automatic weapon use. But do take a look between those red lines indicating when the AWB was in effect.
Three machinegun uses.
Lessee… virtually no machinegun uses prior to the ban, a “jump” (kinda statistically meaningless really, seeing as how small the samples are) during the ban, and a drop to nonexistent use once the ban expired. If I suffered a traumatic brain injury and turned into a Dimocrat, I’d probably think that the “assault weapon ban” caused machinegun use.
Heck, if I were a Dimocrat, I’d probably think the AWB caused machineguns.
But on to the point that probably had folks muttering before all that. I had recently had cause to revisit the “Assault Weapon Ban” of 1994. It didn’t address automatic weapons — machineguns — at all.
It shall be unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon.
Machinegun use “increased” (though it didn’t) post-AWB? Jackson-Lee might as well have noted that US egg production increased post-AWB. At least that actually happened. But showing a cause and effect relation between the two might be a little difficult.
But Jackson-Lee’s real point is in that final sentence.
That was an AR-15 as well.
It was actually a Daniel Defense DDM4, not a Colt AR-15 (how many people realize that “AR-15” is a registered trademark of Colt?), but we understand that she’s attempting to “smear” all AR-pattern rifles as “automatic weapons”…
“The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.”
The lie lives on. Along with this classic repeated by Jackson-Lee.
So, there’s a gathering around recognizing that assault weapons kill. They killed 19 children and two teachers.”
The known psycho wielding the rifle (singular) killed those people, with a rifle.
100+ million people with tens of millions of AR-pattern firearms DID NOT.
But blame the 0.000005% of inanimate objects for the actions of <0.000001% of gun owners.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
If you’re border patrol agent Jacob Albarado, you can borrow a shotgun from the barber who is giving you a haircut and go save your wife and daughter who are being held hostage at Uvalde’s Robb elementary school. And you’ll be saving a whole lot of other people in the process as well.
If you’re Sheriff Grady Judd of Polk County, you spend time keeping your county safe and crime free and then training others to protect school children. It’s interesting that after the FL legislators passed a bill putting additional safety measures in place that Broward County, home of Marjorie Stoneman Douglas, was the last school to put them in place. But Sheriff Judd speaks straightforward, and hopefully his flame will light many candles.
And these are all amazing things, G-d can use any person anywhere to accomplish a miracle. But sometimes the miracles are so earth shattering, so ground breaking that normal sane humans can’t help but see the hand of G-d.
The 28th of Iyar (this year 29th May) we celebrate Yom Yerushaylim, Jerusalem day celebrating the reunification of Jerusalem in 1967. This was a miracle straight from the hand of G-d. While it cost much in the way of lives, the cost was far less than anticipated.
This is a really good backstory video with lots of excellent footage and maps showing the areas involved. It’s under 10 minutes. It opens with the famous words from Mordechai (Motta) Gur “”הר הבית בידינוThe Temple mount is in our hands! Every time I hear that tears well up and sometimes they run down. Only G-d. If you’re one person and you’re Motta Gur? Well then. And it has horses in it.
One person? If you’re only one person and you’re Rabbi Shlomo Goren, you can capture Hevron with your driver. But he must have had angels riding with him after having blown his shofar on the Temple Mount, eh? If you’re only one person and you’re Rabbi Goren, amazing!
So after all that time, all that fighting all the loss of life, to regain the site of the Holy Temples, the place where G-d chose for his temples and you’re Moshe Dayan? Well, then you give it away.
Dayan’s first act on the Temple Mount, only a few hours after IDF Chief Rabbi Shlomo Goren blew the shofar and gave the Shehecheyanu blessing beside the Western Wall, was to immediately remove the Israeli flag that the paratroopers had raised on the mount.
Dayan’s second act was to clear out the paratroop company that was supposed to remain permanently stationed in the northern part of the mount. Dayan rejected the insistent pleas of the head of Central Command, Uzi Narkiss, who tried to prevent him from taking this measure. Narkiss reminded Dayan that Jordan, too, had stationed a military contingent on the mount to maintain order, and that long ago the Romans had done the same, deploying a garrison force in the Antonia Fortress that Herod had built near the mount. But Dayan was not persuaded. He told Narkiss that it seemed to him the place would have to be left in the hands of the Muslim guards.
Better to be Uzi Narkiss. Uzi may not have gotten it done, but he tried. But even for him, it wasn’t about G-d or religion, more culture or tradition I guess.
But Dayan wasn’t done.
Dayan, just a few hours after his first public announcement to the Israeli people about the holy places and particularly the Temple Mount, succinctly stated: “We have returned to the holiest of our places, never to be parted from them again….We did not come to conquer the sacred sites of others or to restrict their religious rights, but rather to ensure the integrity of the city and to live in it with others in fraternity.”
Typical leftist thinking. If we play nice, others will play nice with us.
Dayan’s most significant act on the Temple Mount, which sparked controversy over the years and was widely criticized, was to forbid Jewish prayer and worship there, unlike the arrangements that emerged at the Machpelah Cave in Hebron where there is also a functioning mosque.7 Dayan decided to leave the mount and its management in the hands of the Muslim Wakf, while at the same time insisting that Jews would be able to visit it (but not pray at it!) without restriction. Dayan thought, and years later even committed the thought to writing, that since for Muslims the mount is a “Muslim prayer mosque” while for Jews it is no more than “a historical site of commemoration of the past…one should not hinder the Arabs from behaving there as they now do.”
Because for him it was no more than a historical site, Dayan was a Kibbutznik, born and raised on a communist Kibbutz. His parents were not religious, he wasn’t and his children weren’t. For him that’s all it was. And when people lack G-d, and a relationship with the creator it keeps them from seeing the true beauty and value in the things G-d inspired or created himself. And that’s how Dayan came off the tracks.
It’s why we have people now that don’t see the beauty in the differences in men and women, how the two can compliment each other. It’s why people can’t comprehend that while there are viruses, he also put things out there that can cure them other than worshipping at the alter of the Golden Fauxi with his golden needle. At least I believe that.
In freedom people are allowed to have different opinions and freely debate idea.
But like Moshe Dayan, children today aren’t taught to recognize things of value, like freedom. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom to defend yourself and your family, freedom from medical tyranny. Those freedoms come from G-d. And if you don’t believe or accept there is a creator of the universe? Well, then.
G-d miraculously reunited Jerusalem, in his way, at his time. Which at the time looked like the tiny baby state of Israel was bound for destruction.
I pray he will unite our country, but not at the expense of freedom. Not because the bat rabid left have won the battle. I pray that he send Moshiach now, yesterday.
You see, I believe Moshe Dayan’s decision has consequences that affect our world even today. I can not help but wonder, had he not committed his act of idiocy, in my humble opinion, how different would our world be today?
5 “I will give them in My house and in My walls a place and a name, better than sons and daughters; an everlasting name I will give him, which will not be discontinued.
6 And the foreigners who join with the Lord to serve Him and to love the name of the Lord, to be His servants, everyone who observes the Sabbath from profaning it and who holds fast to My covenant.
7 I will bring them to My holy mount, and I will cause them to rejoice in My house of prayer, their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be acceptable upon My altar, for My house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples.
8 So says the Lord God, Who gathers in the dispersed of Israel, I will yet gather others to him, together with his gathered ones.
We are all just one person, but sometimes one person is enough. Sometimes many of the “just one persons” unite together, and I can not help but believe when we unite together to be a force of good, G-d will bless our efforts. But whether working alone or with others, be a force for good. May many people the world over wake up to the knowledge of G-d.
Israel and America, countless battles and whether it was the Battle of Bunker Hill or the Battle of Ammunition Hill, we can not let the sacrifices have been for nothing. Teach your children what they won’t learn in school,teach them to appreciate living in a moral G-dly country. And may both return to that soon.
This is well worth a few minutes of your time. A tip of my Stetson to fellow writer, Y.B.
“Who will say on this network or any other network in the next few days, ‘It’s time to repeal the Second Amendment?’”
Bad idea, Lardo Calrissian.
You can’t repeal the Second Amendment, any more than you can repeal any of the other nine. It was a package deal, you see, an absolute prerequisite to ratifying the main body of the Constitution. Repeal one, you repeal them all. Do that, and you repeal the whole Constitution — and with it, any legal authority that the government has to exist (let alone repeal the Second Amendment).
— Alexander Hope
That comes from chapter five of Hope, by Aaron Zelman and L. Neil Smith. The style makes me think that particular passage was penned by Neil (and it seems like he had a stand-alone essay to the same effect), but I don’t believe Aaron would have let that go into their co-authored novel unless he agreed with it.
As a casual student of history, who has read much about the ratification of the Constitution, I also agree.
Lose one, lose them all. Lose it all.
I suspect that Moore, and most Dims currently in DC — and far too many Repugnicans, as well — would be happy to lose the few remaining Constitutional limits on their power. They don’t particularly care about “legal authority;” just power.
The problem is… if our wanna-be tyrants are no longer restrained by that pesky Constitution, neither are the people.
The people pissed off at senseless bans, and illegal ballot drop boxes, might just decide that turning to constitutionally-enabled courts — who already defecate on individual rights at the slightest provocation — really isn’t necessary.
Voting out scumbags, and voting in new replacement scumbags who promise to use KY while screwing us? Why bother with that discarded constitutional process? Wouldn’t high-velocity lead be cheaper and faster? Not to mention proactively educating would-be replacements.
Court-blessed “constitutional” takings of property? Get rid of the Constitution and former property owners might resort to ex-constitutional re-takings, enforced with ropes and lamp posts.
Lose one, lose them all. Moore himself might want to consider the ramifications of chucking his First Amendment protections to defame folks for a buck. The people might decide, lacking that lost constitutional recourse, to go bowling for lying documentarians.
Get rid of the Constitution, and the people’s pretend recourse… and they might stop pretending they do.
Maybe the tyrants will be counting on the out-numbered police to prop up their post-Constitution regime. How many officers would continue to be willing to do that once they’ve lost “constitutional” sovereign immunity, and the people know it?
Perhaps the Constitution has only been an illusory paper restraint on government. But it has been a potent symbolic restraint on the people, preventing them from eliminating abusive politicians and government agents out of hand. I do not truly comprehend the willingness — nay, the eagerness of the Left to go there, to surrender that protection, given the likely consequences.
We’d be starting from scratch, with new rules written by the survivors.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
That’s only at the federal level, Escobar. I suppose it’ll come as a shock to your tiny, ill-informed — yet somehow still legislating — pseudo-mind that every state, territory, federal district, civilian and military installation has their own additional.
Individual counties, cities, and towns pile on their own laws and regulations.
I think we may have just a few regulations on guns.
If you wish to contact Dimwit Escobar, to explain the statutory and regulatory facts of life to, you can contact her office HERE. Be aware that Escobar is one of those tyrannical types who likes to vote on national legislation, but is grossly afraid of national feedback. Her contact form requires you to enter a ZIP+4 within her district to pass “Go.”
79901-1443 should work, for those of you affected by her idiocy but not resident in her district.
Have fun.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
Buffalo shooting: Extreme risk protection orders could help stop Ohio mass killings| Rogers
There is a statutory remedy that can authorize preventive actions against warned mass shootings: extreme risk protection order laws. They allow law enforcement and sometimes family members to petition a court for an emergency order to deprive the dangerous individual of access to guns.
“Red flag” laws. Everyone’s — especially this alleged Yale graduate, past attorney, and adjunct law professor — favorite due process deprivation to stop something that might happen, maybe, sometime.
But at least Douglas Rogers tries to back up his claim with case law.
Sort of. Specifically…
There is no legal prohibition against extreme risk protection orders.
The Supreme Court “has recognized, on many occasions, that where a state must act quickly, or where it would be impractical to provide pre-deprivation process, post-deprivation process satisfies the requirements of the Due Process Clause.
That sounds definite, eh? Take a closer look. Rogers didn’t actually cite the case from which he’s quoting, but it didn’t take much of a search to find that language in Gilbert v. Homar, 520 U.S. 924 (1997). SCOTUS found:
In the circumstances here, the State did not violate due process by failing to provide notice and a hearing before suspending a tenured public employee without pay. Pp. 928-936.
Wait. Suspension without pay is on an equal level with confiscation of property (firearms)?
Look at some facts of the case:
“respondent was arrested by state police and charged with a drug felony.”
Sufficient evidence to support probable cause to believe that a crime had been committed.
“Petitioners, ESU officials, suspended him without pay, effective immediately, pending their own investigation.”
Suspended without pay. Not fired, not fined. Based on a probable cause arrest.
Compare that to the typical “red flag” “extreme risk” order”
A complaint that someone might pose a threat in the future. Not an allegation that a crime had been committed.
Property, in the form of firearms, is taken.
As the Court noted, suspension without pay based on a probable cause arrest was a temporary inconvenience; no money was taken, just new payments suspended (for a period when the respondent wouldn’t be working to earn that pay).
A red flag confiscation order, based on a a wild guess rather than a committed crime, results in the taking of property. More specifically, it’s the taking of constitutionally-protected — Second Amendment — property, without due process.
I’m seeing some significant differences between the scenarios, Rogers. Perhaps a better SCOTUS citation on the actual taking of property would be Truax v. Corrigan (1921);
“The due process clause requires that every man shall have the protection of his day in court, and the benefit of the general law, a law which hears before it condemns” […] “a law which operates to make lawful such a wrong as is described in plaintiff’s complaint deprives the owner of the business and the premises of his property without due process and cannot be held valid”. (emphasis added)
Hearing first, then taking.
I fear for the clients of attorneys taught by this former adjunct law professor.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
He thinks it’s a problem with those lawfully carrying firearms.
If you are allowing people to carry guns, the good guys are no longer able to be distinguished from the bad guys because if you have a bad day, and you have a gun, that bad day can elevate to an argument.
There’s a tendency that people believe if they got a gun, ‘Why have it, if I’m not using it?’ That’s just the mindset of carrying a gun.
The problem here isn’t honest folks carrying guns. It’s Mayor Adams,
Adams believes that carrying a gun for defense means you’re suddenly going to snap, to start shooting because you’re having a bad day.
Projection is the process of displacing one’s feelings onto a different person, animal, or object. The term is most commonly used to describe defensive projection—attributing one’s own unacceptable urges to another.
Here’s a reality check, Mayor; cash it:
Those people who go to the trouble of lawfully carrying a firearm for defense rarely “snap.” Based on personal experience, conversations with other carriers, reading, and firearms classes, the opposite is the case.
We aren’t carrying because we hope to kill someone. If I can make it through my life without ever having to do that, I’d be happy.
Because we know from education and training that actually firing a gun anywhere but a range, or hunting, can bring down a load of legal and moral pain, we are more likely to attempt to deescalate a situation, rather than default to Kill ’em all; let G-d sort ’em out.
We carry defensively because we value life, even that of a scumbag… up to the point that such a creature forces us to prioritize one life over his.
I’ve been carrying firearms, professionally and personally, for over forty years. Not once have I ever thought He’s annoying me. I have a gun. Why not just put the bastard out of my misery?
I have been in situations where the thought Oh please don’t make me draw has gone through my mind.
But Mayor Adams seems incapable of that mindset, or even granting that someone else might have that I-don’t-want-to-shoot-anyone mindset.
That appears to leave Adams with the Oh, g-d; I’m gonna kill someone mindset. He knows it, and assumes everyone else is like himself.
On an intellectual level, I’m curious as to how he can live with that sort of self-loathing. But, really, I don’t want those sort of destructive — of self and others — thoughts in my head.
I suppose this is why people like Adams can support no-due process “red flag” laws, and other forms of victim disarmament. They know damned well that they themselves should probably be red-flagged and disarmed. For cause.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
And this is just one of the many reasons why. I keep seeing crap about the Buffalo shooter illegally “modifying” his Bushmaster XM-15 rifle (when some dumbass isn’t calling it an “AR-15” which happens to be a Colt trademark). Case in point:
Buffalo shooting suspect learned to modify his gun on YouTube. The videos are still online.
The 18-year-old suspected of targeting and fatally shooting 10 Black people in Buffalo, New York, wrote in what are believed to be his online journals that he learned how to illegally modify his rifle by watching YouTube videos. The suspect appeared to link to the videos in Discord chat logs, and the videos were still available on YouTube as of Thursday evening — five days after the shooting.
The advocacy group Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund called on YouTube to remove these videos, saying that they violate YouTube’s community guidelines banning videos that show how to install gun accessories like high-capacity magazines.
Since thus far the only “modification” I’ve heard about is that he had 10+ round magazines, I was very curious as to exactly how he “modified” the rifle. What do the supergeniuses at Everytown say?
Based on a review of the shooter’s writings and public news reports about the weapon used in the shooting, the shooter may have watched this video to equip his Bushmaster rifle with an Anderson Manufacturing magazine release after removing the Mean Arms MA Lock in violation of New York’s assault weapons regulations.
Ah. So Everytown believes the chumbucketmight have removed the magazine lock and installed a conventional magazine catch so that he could swap out magazines in a normal manner.
I’ll pause for a moment, to see if you can spot the problem with that. It’s possible you won’t, if you live in neither New York… nor California.
All “assault weapons” are not created equal. Except in a few jurisdictions that have defined the term in law, it’s meaningless. For instance, In Georgia there is no such thing as an “assault weapon.”
In California, the powers-that-be decided that you should not be able to swap magazines normally. There, an AR-pattern rifle must be equipped with a magazine lock that makes normal operation impossible. So if the Buffalo, New York scumbag wanted to travel to California, purchase a California-compliant rifle, and modify it to allow normal mag swaps, he might want to remove an MA Lock and replace it with an AA mag release.
But New York does not ban mag releases, as California does (I’m open to correction, if someone can find such a restriction in the law). They just say you can’t insert a magazine with a capacity greater than 10 rounds.
So the Buffalo bastard would have zero reason to “modify” his rifle by removing a feature not there in the first place, and replacing it with a feature it already has.
The Everytown dimwits assumed that As California Goes, So Goes the Country. If California requires something then surely every other state must do the same, right?
Nope.
It is possible that the Bushmaster the shooter purchased was California compliant as well as New York compliant. The manufacturer/distributor could have simplified production by combining the worst of both states, just so they wouldn’t have complicate their production lines with two products, each with limited appeal. To date, I have not seen a picture of the specific firearm used; I don’t know if it was dual-compliant.
But that doesn’t make the Cal-required mag lock the law in New York. In NY, installing a normal mag release would not be an “illegal modification.”
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
“At this point, in this closely-divided Congress, do you see any appetite right now to take up, once again, the idea of an assault weapons ban in this country?”
The question was clearly a pre-planned softball for the half-witted Dim. The scumbag reportedly used a NY SAFE Act-compliant Bushmaster XM-15 rifle; a non-“assault weapon.”
The ditz still flubbed it.
We need to do something about making sure that bad guys don’t get their hands on handguns.
The context was the Buffalo shooting. He did not use a handgun; it was a NY SAFE Act-compliant Bushmaster XM-15 rifle.
And we need to make sure that these assault and automatic weapons don’t get in the hands of bad guy
One more time, moron: It was not an “assault weapon.” It was not an automatic weapon (something even NY Gov. Hochul could figure out).
And now we enter the Twilight Zone. Picking up where she left off…
And we need to make sure that these assault and automatic weapons don’t get in the hands of bad guys, and sometimes, bad women. Because, again, I’ve been rabbit hunting.
-blink- Um, what? Let’s simplify that.
We need to get guns out of the hands of bad women because I’ve been rabbit hunting.
Aaaall righty, then.
So now I come to the questions I think Garcia should answer.
1. Are you on drugs?
Because you sound like you’re on drugs. And not prescription goodies. On the other hand…
2. If you are not on drugs, should you be? (The prescription sort, this time.)
3. If neither recreational nor prescription pharmaceuticals were involved, is your stupidity natural or the result of an accident?
I could add a fourth question prompted by this:
Handguns, in my view, are not for hunting. They’re not for protection. I think handguns are, frankly, for killing people.
Oddly enough, I have never killed anyone with a handgun. I even bought one large-bore handgun specifically for hunting. I have used a handgun for defense. So…
4. Are my non-killing handguns defective, and should I demand refunds?
The first three questions were submitted to Garcia’s office. They did not respond to multiple emails.
Go figure.
Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
Jews. Guns. No compromise. No surrender.
Password Reset
Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.
