“The Powerful Understand the Need to Be Protected”

Dan Bongino is a former Secret Service agent who served Presidents Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama. NRA TV just released a very interesting short video with him talking about protecting these men and other high and mighties.

As he says:

“What’s fascinating about Chicago is, when you get these dignitaries, these VIPs, these Hollywood types, these mayors, senators, congressmen, local alderman, city council folks, they all have armed guards. They’re good. Don’t you worry. Those tools of protection are there for them. But the citizens? They all get thrown to the wolves.”

Yep. You are responsible for protecting yourself.

Which is more dangerous?

There is a movement among some politicians to reduce the voting age from 18 to 16. Some municipalities have actually done this. I even read an editorial from a University of Kentucky law professor stating that students from Parkland High School show why this is a good idea. It doesn’t matter that this students are being scripted, used as props, and are coached what to say.

In a free society, I think having immature, easily swayed young minds pull the voting lever is a recipe for disaster. As Michael Bane said the other day, think Lord of the Flies.

Yet these same politicians and pundits want to raise the age at which one can purchase any long arm to 21 years old.

You tell me which is more dangerous.

I know what I think.

What They Really Mean

Since the Parkland High School shootings, you have heard all manner of politicians from the president on down saying that we need to raise the age to buy a semi-automatic rifle to age 21. They along with the media have painted a picture that wants you to believe one thing when the reality is totally different.

I was 18 when I purchased my first firearm. It was a Ruger 10/22 similar to the one shown in the meme. I paid $55 for it at a long ago closed discount store called Best Products. I used my savings from mowing lawns and my job as a school bus driver.

How To Destroy Business Using Twitter

Enterprise Rent A Car provided an affiliation group discount to NRA members for car rentals. As you can see from the tweet below, that ends effective March 26th as they kowtow to an organized campaign from the gun prohibitionists.

In case you are wondering what are the Enterprise brands, they are Enterprise, Alamo, and National car rentals. I have used all three in the past. Any future rentals will be with a company that has a bit more spine.

If the Enterprise conglomerate is this wimpy in the face of the anti-gunners, imagine how well they’d stand behind you if you got into an accident at which you weren’t at fault.

As a final aside, I find it illustrative that @mamabear64 uses a Stalinist style icon of Hillary as her avatar.

UPDATE: Well, you can add Hertz, Avis, and Budget to the list.

Wrap Your Head Around This Logic

My friend Charlie Foxtrot made a comment on a prior Quote of the Day that I thought was especially relevant considering the way young high school students are being used for props by the gun prohibitionists. With his permission, I’ve made a meme out of it. I think he’ll like it.

Contradictory logic seems to be prevalent in the recent debates – if you can call media driven propaganda, debates – over firearm policies and how to protect school children.

Firearms Restraining Orders In NC? No, Thank You!

Rep. Marcia Morey (D-Durham) who was appointed to fill an empty seat in the North Carolina House of Representatives is proposing the establishment of firearms restraining orders a’la California. Though Morey is a former judge, it seems she sees no problem in adopting something flies in the face of due process.

Grass Roots North Carolina sent out an alert on this yesterday asking that gun rights supporters email every Republican in the NC House and demand an end to this.

From GRNC:

GUN CONFISCATION
COURTS TO BE PROPOSED
You read that right. Rep. Marcia Morey (D-Durham), a former judge, whose April appointment to the NC House filled a vacant seat, is looking to turn North Carolina into California—but not regarding sunshine and fad diets. In short, Morey will be proposing the establishment of “firearm restraining orders” (FROs) in our state. An FRO would be issued as a result of an “exparte” (emergency) hearing, where a judge can authorize the seizing of a private citizen’s guns where no crime has been proven (no guilty verdict delivered), and in fact, even where no arrest has taken place. Most likely, the proceedings will be allowed to take place even in the absence of the accused. This means the accused citizen cannot face his accusers, nor defend himself through counsel or otherwise. This is a serious violation of fundamental Constitutional due process rights.

A First Amendment Analogy
One could liken an FRO hearing, and subsequent confiscation, to accusing a reporter of so-called “hate speech,” and then, once the accusation is made, an emergency hearing is held without the presence of the accused reporter. The hearing could result in a ten-day gag order being placed on the reporter, barring the reporter from speaking (or reporting) until a primary hearing. So, the reporter’s First Amendment rights are suspended—absent any due process! In the case of Second Amendment rights, even if the accused’s firearms are returned after ten days, there is nothing to prevent the police from having registered them with the BATFE. Moreover, the accused will still be out thousands of dollars spent on the ensuing legal defense—that is, only if the accused can afford it in the first place.

No Pretense, Just Straight-up Confiscation
FROs are not a foot in the confiscatory door. There is no pretense here. FROs blatantly and aggressively kick that door down, and once FROs are in place, the valid reasons for establishing an FRO against an individual will surely loosen. At first, perhaps close family members and a few others very close to a person may be able to point a finger and “report” him. That’s bad enough, but be sure, the already Orwellian rules surrounding FROs will surely expand. It’s likely that, eventually,virtually anyone in a person’s sphere will be able to accuse a person and begin the unconstitutional process of having the accused’s legally owned firearms forcibly confiscated. Does this sound like a free country to you, a free state?

Will Republicans Protect the Citizenry?
As of now, we don’t know how the Republican majority in Raleigh will react when asked to establish a gun confiscation mechanism. We do know that there is always danger that politicians will stick a finger in the air and just “go with the flow,” as the anti-gun crowd aggressively pushes to not “let a crisis go to waste.” There is real danger here. We need to inform our representatives that we will not allow them to rescind our Constitutional due process rights. Free, law-abiding citizens are to remain free, and we will not tolerate being punished for the crimes of another.

Below, see how you can contact your representatives to let them know you won’t tolerate the establishment of extra-Constitutional laws in our state.



IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED!
    • EMAIL REPUBLICANS IN THE NC HOUSEClick here,then here, and then here. Check your default email program after clicking each link. Each time, an email should have been automatically generated for you. Simply add your name to the bottom and hit “send.” If the email(s) were not generated, or were not generated properly, simply use the copy/paste email lists provided below, and the copy/paste text provided under ‘Deliver This Message.’
  • PHONE YOUR NC REPRESENTATIVEUse this link to find your representative. Tell him or her that you expect them to actively and vocally stand against any legislation that would establish extra-Constitutional “Firearms Restraining Orders,” kangaroo courts setup to strip citizens of gun rights without due process.
CONTACT INFO
Republican NC House copy/paste email *list(s)
Jay.Adams@ncleg.net; Dean.Arp@ncleg.net; John.Bell@ncleg.net; Hugh.Blackwell@ncleg.net; John.Blust@ncleg.net; Jamie.Boles@ncleg.net; Beverly.Boswell@ncleg.net; John.Bradford@ncleg.net; Bill.Brawley@ncleg.net; William.Brisson@ncleg.net; Mark.Brody@ncleg.net; Dana.Bumgardner@ncleg.net; Justin.Burr@ncleg.net; Mike.Clampitt@ncleg.net; George.Cleveland@ncleg.net; Jeff.Collins@ncleg.net; Debra.Conrad@ncleg.net; Kevin.Corbin@ncleg.net; Ted.Davis@ncleg.net; Jimmy.Dixon@ncleg.net; Josh.Dobson@ncleg.net; Nelson.Dollar@ncleg.net; Andy.Dulin@ncleg.net;Jeffrey.Elmore@ncleg.net;   John.Faircloth@ncleg.net

Carl.Ford@ncleg.net; John.Fraley@ncleg.net; Holly.Grange@ncleg.net; Destin.Hall@ncleg.net; Kyle.Hall@ncleg.net; Jon.Hardister@ncleg.net; Kelly.Hastings@ncleg.net; Cody.Henson@ncleg.net; Craig.Horn@ncleg.net; Julia.Howard@ncleg.net; Pat.Hurley@ncleg.net; Frank.Iler@ncleg.net; Linda.Johnson2@ncleg.net; Bert.Jones@ncleg.net; Brenden.Jones@ncleg.net; Jonathan.Jordan@ncleg.net;Donny.Lambeth@ncleg.net; David.Lewis@ncleg.net; Chris.Malone@ncleg.net; Susan.Martin@ncleg.net; Pat.McElraft@ncleg.net; Chuck.McGrady@ncleg.net; Allen.McNeill@ncleg.net; Tim.Moore@ncleg.net; Bob.Muller@ncleg.net;
 
Gregory.Murphy@ncleg.net; Larry.Pittman@ncleg.net; Larry.Potts@ncleg.net; Michele.Presnell@ncleg.net; Dennis.Riddell@ncleg.net; David.Rogers@ncleg.net; Stephen.Ross@ncleg.net; Jason.Saine@ncleg.net; John.Sauls@ncleg.net; Mitchell.Setzer@ncleg.net; Phil.Shepard@ncleg.net; Michael.Speciale@ncleg.net; Bob.Steinburg@ncleg.net; Sarah.Stevens@ncleg.net; Scott.Stone@ncleg.net; Larry.Strickland@ncleg.net; John.Szoka@ncleg.net; John.Torbett@ncleg.net; Rena.Turner@ncleg.net; Harry.Warren@ncleg.net; Sam.Watford@ncleg.net; Donna.White@ncleg.net; Linda.Williams@ncleg.net; Larry.Yarborough@ncleg.net; Lee.Zachary@ncleg.net

*Spam filters or email program limitations may cause the need to send more than one email, to cover the entire list of representatives. If required in your case, the list above is split into three pieces, for your convenience. 


DELIVER THIS MESSAGE
Suggested Subject: “Protect Due Process, No to Firearm Restraining Orders”  
Dear Representative:

I am writing because I’ve just been informed of the horrifying proposal that Rep. Morey is preparing to introduce. I understand Rep. Morey would like to establish “Firearm Restraining Orders” (FROs) in our state. FROs are simply mechanisms for bypassing constitutional due process protections in order to confiscate firearms, at whim, from accused persons who have not been convicted of any crime. Not only can one’s firearms be confiscated based on accusation alone, FRO hearings can also be held without the presence of the accused. To say this is unacceptable is an understatement.

I am incensed that any representative in an ostensibly free state would even suggest such an ominous mechanism be established within our legal system. I assure you, citizens like me will not stand for the suspension of our Constitutional rights. I insist that you act now to put a stop to any legislation that would establish these extra-constitutional judicial bodies, which are designed to strip people of their rights based on accusations alone.

Also, I must insist that you explain to me where you stand on this issue. I must be sure that my representatives are on the side of liberty—protecting my rights—and are not willing to oppress Constitutional guarantees simply due to the current direction of political winds.

I need a response from you, and I will also be monitoring your actions on this matter through alerts from Grass Roots North Carolina.

Respectfully, 

Quote Of The Day – Editorial Version

Jim Shepherd of The Outdoor Wire had an interesting editorial today discussing the latest earnings report from Ruger along with some recent pronouncements from President Trump. After discussing the earnings report, he noted that much of the good news and bad news for the firearms industry seem to tied to President Trump.

He continues:

That’s because his announcement earlier this week that he wants a ban on bump fire stocks and other devices that increase the rate-of-fire of AR-style rifles is viewed as a politician, once again, throwing gun right supporters under the bus after wooing their support to get elected.

Indeed, candidate Trump and later President Trump could be characterized, at least until Tuesday’s announcement, as having a simple message for gun owners: “we will never, never, never infringe on our Second Amendment Rights.”

Now it may seem that our definitions on what Second Amendment protections really mean may differ significantly. For most Second Amendment supporters, any additional regulations on guns are beyond the pale. In fact, many gun rights groups have already begun to spread the word they will seek legal remedies should Attorney General Sessions make a move to place restrictions on either bump stocks or binary style triggers.

Seems a fight with the man gun owners helped put in the White House is brewing over gun rights. If that happens, Mr. Trump may learn that formerly ardent supports make the most fierce opponents.

Like Trump, gun owners don’t easily forgive- or forget- a betrayal.

We’ll keep you posted.

 Jim’s absolutely correct. Instead of kow-towing to a bunch of people that never supported him and never will support him, Mr. Trump needs to remember just who put him over the top in the battleground states. It sure as hell wasn’t members of Moms Demand Action.

The Establishment Has Spoken

The Wall Street Journal ran an unsigned editorial yesterday regarding background checks for firearms purchases. They noted the Florida school murderer was a known threat. He had been reported to the FBI, the local sheriff’s department had been called multiple times, and the school had a warning out asking to be notified if he showed up with a backpack.

The editorial then advocates for the passage of Sen. John Cornyn’s Fix NICS Act of 2017. They say this could be done quickly if only, in my words, those ideologues in the House would decouple national concealed carry reciprocity from their version of Fix NICS. While they are at they could throw in a Trojan Horse ban on bump fire stocks.

From the editorial:

The bill would tighten an imperfect background-check system and is supported by the National Rifle Association, police associations and the White House. The House passed the legislation last year, but it also added a provision requiring reciprocity for owners of concealed firearm permits across state lines. Democrats oppose the reciprocity provision, which can’t pass the Senate.


Republicans would be wise to let that reciprocity provision die and send a clean Fix-NICS bill to the Senate. The House can throw in a ban on so-called bump stocks, which let an AR-15 rifle fire more rapidly. That also has bipartisan support, and President Trump on Tuesday directed the Justice Department to propose a regulation banning bump stocks.


These ideas might not have stopped (killer’s name redacted), but then neither would the oft-proposed ban on AR-15s. He could as easily have bought handguns, which is how (killer’s name redacted) killed 32 people at Virginia Tech in 2007. But one consequence of Parkland should be a debate on how American society can deny the dangerous mentally ill access to guns of any kind. That will require a rethinking of privacy laws and state mental-health statutes.


Democrats keep saying they merely want “common sense” gun laws, not a ban, and the Cornyn bill is a test of their sincerity.

So let me get this straight so I can understand the thinking of the Establishment. If the Democrats “compromise” and support a bill that gives them virtually everything they want short of a ban on semi-automatic rifles and universal background checks, it is a “test of their sincerity”. However, this also implies that if the Republicans insist on fulfilling their promise to the American voters on national reciprocity they will be considered obstructionists.

What a masterful example of Establishment doublespeak!

The proper response by us gun rights demanding proles is not only no but hell no. Passing Fix NICS with a bump fire ban but no carry reciprocity is no compromise. It should be rightfully seen for what it is:  a willful surrender by spineless Republicans who only give a shit about gun rights when it comes to getting our votes at election time.

Quote Of The Day

Given the gun prohibitionists are hoping for a new Children’s Crusade to achieve their aim of universal disarmament (except for the government run by them), I thought this quote from Facebook was appropriate.

Just last week, Congress was calling on Tide to change the design of the Pods so teenagers would stop eating them. This week, teenagers should determine gun policy.

 With some saying that adolescence now goes into the mid-20s, I find it incomprehensible to think that we should defer to the unformed minds spouting nonsense that is merely a repetition of what they’ve been taught in the classroom and what the media wants them to say.