AzCDL Makes It Easy To Write Congress About Gun Control

The Arizona Citizens Defense League has set up a letter generator that makes it easy to send a letter opposing new Federal gun control measures to both your senators and to your congressional representative. The beauty of their letter generator is that it works no matter where you live in the United States.

From AzCDL:

A madman opened fire on a crowded Las Vegas concert. Politicians are blaming you and the guns you own for his actions. It’s far past time to stop giving up ground.

Senator Feinstein has filed a bill to ban “bump fire stocks” simply because the shooter installed them on some of his firearms. Don’t fall for this misdirection.

Complete the information below and click the “Submit” button to be taken to the pre-written letter to your Senators and Representative telling them to stand up for your Second Amendment rights. You may send it as is or edit as you see fit. It only takes a few mouse clicks to make a difference. Don’t wait, contact them right away! Those that want to disarm you are not hesitating.

It takes time to compose a letter – or at least it does for me. It is much easier to edit a pre-written letter than to write one yourself. The key thing here is volume. Congress needs to be inundated with letters, faxes, and emails from our side. If you don’t think the gun prohibitionists aren’t doing it, then it is time for you to emerge from under that rock.

Here is the link:  AzCDL Letter Generator

I don’t care if you’ve already sent letters or called your Senator’s office. I’ve done that and I’ve also used the AzCDL letter generator. Now just do it.

Feinstein’s S.1916 – Automatic Gunfire Prevention Act

This past Wednesday, October 4th, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) introduced S.1916 – Automatic Gunfire Prevention Act – in response to the Las Vegas mass casualty event. As of today, the bill has 38 co-sponsors. All the co-sponsors are Democrats with the exception of Bernie Sanders who is still listed as an Independent.

The operative part of the bill reads:

(v)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), on and
after the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment
of this subsection, it shall be unlawful for any person to
import, sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, a trigger crank,
a bump-fire device, or any part, combination of parts,
component, device, attachment, or accessory that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semi-
automatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle
into a machinegun
.

The prohibition would not apply to any agency or department of the United States or to those of any state or local government. The full text of the bill is here.

As I’ve said many a time when it comes to legislation, the devil is in the details. More importantly, it will be in how the courts and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives choose to interpret any part, etc. that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semi-auto rifle.

I foresee that items like the Franklin Armory binary trigger systems would be banned under this bill even though not explicitly named. Where I think it will get dicey is with springs and drop-in triggers. Will a stronger trigger return spring or a lighter hammer spring be considered items that function to accelerate the rate of fire? Would anything that makes for a smoother and/or lighter trigger pull fall under the rubric of this bill?

Indeed, would using a rubber band from an office supply store (or that your mail is banded with by the USPS) be prohibited by this bill? SayUncle has a number of examples of bump firing without using any of the explicitly banned items.

I attended the local gun show yesterday. In my 3 hours there, I saw only one person with a Slide-Fire stock. I don’t know if he had just bought it or had it with him to sell.

Bump fire stocks are novelty items in my opinion. I don’t have a need for one nor do I intend to buy one. That said, I think this bill needs to be killed. No bill introduced within days of a serious tragedy is meant to address the problems behind the tragedy. They are strictly to make political hay. This bill in particular is meant to stick it to the gun culture. The all encompassing weasel words after trigger crank and bump-fire device are so open for interpretation that you won’t know what is legal and what is not. That is just not good legislation.

H/T Tiffany Johnson for the link to the bill’s text.

And They’ll Respect Us In The Morning

There are those great lies we all know. Things like “the check is in the mail”, “I’m from the government and I’m here to help you”, and “I’ll respect you in the morning.” I’d to add another that is quickly becoming all too obvious in the post-Las Vegas mass casualty event hysteria: “I’m a Republican, I respect the Second Amendment, and if you vote for me, you can be assured I’ll never vote for a gun control bill.”

Consider these comments from North Carolina Republican congressmen. All of these comments were published in the Raleigh News and Observer yesterday.

Rep. George Holding (R-NC-2)

“This is a way to circumvent the law, existing law, by sloppily converting a semi-automatic weapon into an automatic weapon. I think we ought to look at getting rid of those,” Holding said Thursday. “You’re purposely trying to circumvent the law.”

Rep. Mark Walker (R-NC-6).

If somebody, just like any other avenue, is circumventing that law, then I think it’s something we should take a look at it. My first impulse is that could be a problem,” said Rep. Mark Walker of Greensboro, who is chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee.

“At the same time, we don’t want to get to a place where any law we pass out of this House … targets more the law-abiding citizen then the criminal. We want to make sure that we’re protecting our society.”

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC-11). Meadows is also chair of the House Freedom Caucus which makes this doubly disturbing. (I met Mark for the first time at a gun show. He needed gun owners then to win in the primary runoff.)

Meadows said ATF may be able to change a rule or regulation that could solve the problem. The federal government allowed the sale of “bump stocks” in 2010.

“What enforcement capabilities are already in statute as it would relate to this? Is there a need for additional legislation?” he said.

Rep. Walter Jones, Jr. (R-NC-3)

Rep. Walter Jones, a Republican who represents much of eastern North Carolina, said he hasn’t had much time to study the “bump stock” issue. He planned to look into it this weekend.

“I have a very great concern about all the shootings and the killings of the American people,” Jones said. “I am concerned, deeply concerned, but I don’t know what the next step should be.”

The statement by the NRA on bump fire stocks will be used by Republicans to give themselves cover. My problem with their statement is that it looks like pre-emptive surrender on a firearm accessory that has been already approved by the BATFE.

While that statement may just be a delaying tactic as Sebastian contends, I still think the optics of it are bad. Few people will actually parse the statement to see what the NRA actually said and will assume incorrectly that they are for a ban on bump fire stocks. As I wrote on Thursday, “However, if bump fire stocks are banned now what is to say that other gun parts such as adjustable stocks or standard capacity magazines won’t be banned later. If you open the door to the ban on one thing, don’t you open the door to the ban of anything firearm related?”

It is a slippery slope. Our opponents recognize this and it is a feature to them. As House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told a reporter, “”They’re going to say, ‘You give them bump stock, it’s going to be a slippery slope.’ I certainly hope so.”

In the meantime, call, write, and fax your senators and representatives. They need to hear from you now in very clear and unambiguous terms. Links for the four Republicans quoted are above. You can find your representative by putting in your zip code here.

FPC Repudiates Proposed Bans Semi-Auto Firearms And Accessories

The Firearms Policy Coalition, unlike the NRA, is refusing the cave to those who call for a ban on bump fire stocks. The FPC is a coalition of state level gun rights groups that is a 501(c)4 grassroots, non-partisan, public benefit organization. Being as they are based in California, they have seen first hand the various incremental attacks by the gun prohibitionists.

From the FPC:

Firearms Policy Coalition Statement Repudiating Proposed Bans on Semi-Automatic Firearms and Accessories, Including “Bump Fire” Stocks

SACRAMENTO, CA (October 6, 2017) — Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) has issued the following statement concerning calls for new bans and regulations on firearms and firearm accessories:

In depraved acts of self-centered posturing, politicians who do not respect our Constitution are leveraging the recent tragedy in Las Vegas to push for more unconstitutional bans and restrictions on common, semi-automatic firearms and their accessories. These important Second Amendment-protected instruments are purchased, possessed, and responsibly used for lawful purposes by millions of Americans across our great nation.

Just as blogs and websites are protected by the First Amendment, and the Fourth Amendment’s shield against unreasonable searches and seizures applies to advanced devices like an iPhone, so too are modern semi-automatic firearms like AR-15s and their appurtenances protected by the Second Amendment.

History shows that gun control is a one-way ratchet, with so-called “compromises” resulting only in more laws that affect law-abiding people and fewer ways to exercise Second Amendment rights. And there is no textual, circumstantial, or emotional exception to the Constitution’s guarantee that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Law-abiding gun owners will not be bullied by killers or politicians, nor will we give up fundamental individual liberties at the shrill cries of Marxist Democrats or unprincipled Republicans, wealthy Hollywood elitists, the alt-left news media, or billionaire-backed Astroturf groups.

All unconstitutional laws are unjust, illegitimate, and offensive to the rule of law—even if they are enacted in response to a very real tragedy. FPC opposes all restrictions on the acquisition, possession, carry, and use of common, semi-automatic firearms, ammunition, and accessories by law-abiding people.

Whatever the conversation our country might wish to have about the evils found in human nature, and whatever questions we as a society might have about how to better address those moral and cultural deficiencies, no legitimate answers will be found in additional emotion-driven gun control laws that undermine our American system of ordered liberty.

FPC calls on House Speaker Paul Ryan, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and every member of Congress to pass important legislation to protect and advance the Second Amendment rights of law abiding people without further obstruction or delay. That is the job they were elected to do.
/i>

He Had Me At Mil-Spec Butter Knife

This is something to share with all your gun-hating friends who know nothing about firearms. Tell them they need to share far and wide to show the world just how easy it is to make any firearm full auto. In this case, the guy shows how to make a Sig run at 2,000 rounds a minute and an AR run at 70,000 rounds a minute.

Of course this is a satirical video but do Shannon Watts and her coterie of “I support the Second Amendment but…” friends know this? Probably not which makes it even more imperative that we encourage them to share it. As that great Southern philosopher Forrest Gump once said, “Stupid is as stupid does.”

Is The NRA Making A Grand Trade Or Merely Punting?

Bump fire stocks have come under increased scrutiny since the mass casualty even in Las Vegas where it appears the killer used them in his violent rampage. There have been bills introduced as well as increasing calls for them to be banned. They were originally approved by BATFE during the Obama Administration when it was concluded that they did not convert a semi-auto firearm into a full-auto firearm.

This afternoon the NRA released a joint statement from Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox which called upon BATFE to re-review bump fire stocks and to subject them to additional regulations.

(FAIRFAX, VA) – The National Rifle Association today issued the following statement:

“In the aftermath of the evil and senseless attack in Las Vegas, the American people are looking for answers as to how future tragedies can be prevented. Unfortunately, the first response from some politicians has been to call for more gun control. Banning guns from law-abiding Americans based on the criminal act of a madman will do nothing to prevent future attacks. This is a fact that has been proven time and again in countries across the world. In Las Vegas, reports indicate that certain devices were used to modify the firearms involved. Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations. In an increasingly dangerous world, the NRA remains focused on our mission: strengthening Americans’ Second Amendment freedom to defend themselves, their families and their communities. To that end, on behalf of our five million members across the country, we urge Congress to pass National Right-to-Carry reciprocity, which will allow law-abiding Americans to defend themselves and their families from acts of violence.”

This statement leads to the question of the day: is the NRA trading a bump fire stock ban for national right-to-carry reciprocity or are they merely punting in the face of opposition to them from even some in the GOP who had been supportive of gun rights?

The NRA has always engaged in realpolitik in recent years. This may be a case of appearing to be willing to deal on the regulation of one gun-related item in exchange for loosening another. If so, they are trading a novelty item for something rather substantial. My only fear is that they could get out-maneuvered by trying to placate the gun prohibitionists on this one item.

I don’t care about bump fire stocks. I’m never going to buy one or put one on my AR.  However, if bump fire stocks are banned now what is to say that other gun parts such as adjustable stocks or standard capacity magazines won’t be banned later. If you open the door to the ban on one thing, don’t you open the door to the ban of anything firearm related?

UPDATE: Chris Cox of the NRA-ILA went on Fox’s Tucker Carlson Tonight to explain the NRA’s position and to call for national carry reciprocity. I’ll let you make the call whether it is a good idea or not.

Official Statement On Decision Not To Appeal Wrenn Case

As reported earlier today, Karl Racine, District of Columbia Attorney General, has decided not to appeal the Court of Appeals decision in Wrenn v. DC. His official statement is below:

WASHINGTON, D. C. – Below is a statement from Attorney General Karl A. Racine regarding his decision, in consultation with other District leaders, not to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for a writ of certiorari to review the decision in Wrenn v. District of Columbia and Grace v. District of Columbia by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit:

“Public safety is, and has always been, my paramount concern. I continue to believe the District’s ‘good reason’ requirement is a common-sense, and constitutional, gun regulation. However, we must reckon with the fact that an adverse decision by the Supreme Court could have wide-ranging negative effects not just on District residents, but on the country as a whole.

“In consultation with Mayor Bowser, Chairman Mendelson, Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Allen and multiple stakeholders, and after careful consideration, we reached consensus that abiding by the D.C. Circuit’s ruling was the wisest course of action to protect public safety in the District and nationwide. Therefore, I have decided not to appeal to the Supreme Court.”

Background
A loss in the Supreme Court could affect similar gun regulations in other jurisdictions – including in nearby states like Maryland, New Jersey, and New York. The proliferation of guns in those places can have spillover effects for the safety of District residents.

While the good-reason requirement will sunset upon the D.C. Circuit’s issuance of its mandate effectuating its ruling, the rest of the District’s reasonable regulations on who may obtain a permit to carry a concealed firearm and the circumstances in which one may carry in public remain in place.

The Office of Attorney General has issued a FAQ regarding eligibility for obtaining a DC concealed carry permit. They are still going to make it as hard as possible to obtain but if you have a clean record and no mental health issues then you should qualify.

DC Won’t Appeal In Wrenn Case

It is being reported by District of Columbia new station WTOP that the Attorney General of DC has decided not to appeal the Court of Appeal’s decision in Wrenn v. DC. The decision overturned the District’s “good reason” requirement to obtain a carry permit. The last time the District of Columbia lost in a major Second Amendment case they appealed. That case was DC v. Heller.


From WTOP:

After days of consulting with the mayor’s office and city council members, D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine has reportedly decided not to fight a ruling that effectively strikes down the District’s strict law that makes it difficult for gun owners to get concealed carry permits.

Sources told WTOP’s broadcast news partner NBC Washington that Racine made the decision not to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court and will formally make an announcement later on Thursday.

This cements the win for carry in DC. Conversely, an appeal to the Supreme Court might have provided the opportunity to overturn negative decisions on carry such Peruta in the 9th Circuit and Kalchalsky in the 2nd Circuit. Whether or not the Supreme Court will ever take up a carry case still remains to be seen.

H/T Sebastian

Firearms Policy Coalition Statement On Las Vegas Shooting

The Firearms Policy Coalition released the statement below yesterday. I think it makes some very pertinent points about civil liberties, civic virtue, trust in government, and opportunistic politicians.

It is not a short statement meant to be a sound bite. It is a serious response that needs to be read and digested and then read again.

FPC-Logo-black-OL.png

Our hearts break for the
victims of the heinous mass murder in Las Vegas and our prayers are
with them, their families, and everyone affected by this
incomprehensible act of evil. While it is impossible to measure the
loss suffered in Sunday’s tragedy, the sting from this senseless
violence will doubtless be felt for years to come. 

We are deeply grateful for the law enforcement officers,
firefighters, paramedics, nurses, doctors, blood donors, and countless
volunteers who stood tall and delivered aid to the innocent in a time
of great need, as Americans do. 

Sadly, opportunistic politicians who prey on tragedies like this
one have already begun to suggest that our response should be to
abandon our constitutional principles in favor of policies that would
ban more guns, disarm more victims, and further expand “gun free
zones” — spaces shielded by nothing more than invisible lines and
wishful thinking. 

Such policies are not only irrational, but outright dangerous. As
every attack in what was purported to be a ‘gun-free’, ‘bomb-free’, or
‘vehicle-free’ zone proves, there is no set of laws that will prevent
evil people from monstrously plotting an effective means to harm
others. 

In a cruel and potentially dangerous irony, many—if not most—of the
same people who assert that we cannot possibly trust the government
under someone like President Donald Trump also claim that it
is only the government that we should trust to safely and
responsibly possess weapons like the most common semi-automatic rifle
in America, the AR-15. 

We know that the privileged and wealthy elite will purchase
paramilitary protective teams armed with the very firearms they so
desperately wish to put out of the reach of the common man, but the
rest of us would be left to hope and pray. 

That is why the Second Amendment’s guarantees are not a matter of
convenience, nor of need, nor even of want. The basic
human
 right to armed self-defense against unjust force
is precisely why our Founders enshrined it into our Constitution—to
protect it against the capricious nature of popular opinion, the
momentum of the mob, and those who would seek to limit it to a
watered-down, second-class privilege for some. 

Thankfully, as the Supreme Court correctly noted in the
landmark Heller decision, the “very enumeration of the right
takes out of the hands of government—even the Third Branch of
Government—the power to decide on a case-by-case basis whether the
right is really worthinsisting upon.” 

Nearly 15 years ago, the Ninth Circuit’s then-Chief Judge Alex
Kozinski aptly wrote that the “prospect of tyranny may not grab the
headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw
the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is
a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare
circumstances where all other rights have failed — where the
government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who
protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no
one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies
may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get
to make only once.” 

Every day, evil people and governments around the world employ
tools ranging from clenched fists to combat aircraft to perpetrate
unspeakable and unjustified crimes upon others. But objectivity and
reason compels us to recognize that those instruments are but the
means to the end, and not the end itself. Indeed, the span of human
history shows that such arms are also used to liberate the oppressed,
establish order and justice from anarchy, and defend innocent life
from cruel despots. 

The American people will not be bullied by killers or politicians
and neither will we cower against attacks on our most important civil
rights. We reject the notion that good, peaceable people and our basic
rights must suffer for the crimes of the wicked.
There is no more pure a victory for evil than for our society to
assault or eliminate the rights of good people in response to things
we did not do. And so a just world must hold accountable the writers
of history for their deeds, not the mere quills through which it is
written. 

We law-abiding people of America do not accept responsibility for
the evil, cowardly acts of the deranged and hateful among us, nor do
we accept blame for their unconscionable and cowardly uses of
instruments that can and do serve as instruments of self-defense and
justice. 

A great champion of individual liberties once said that if civic
virtue does not reside in the people, no constitution, no bill of
rights, no legislative body, and no court will be able to preserve our
liberties. 

That is why, in troubled and troubling times like these, we are
honor-bound to stand united in defense of fundamental, individual
liberties, in all cases, and in spite of the incalculable grief we
feel for the victims of Las Vegas as fellow human beings. 

Firearms Policy Coalition takes seriously our chartered duty to
protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, especially
the fundamental, individual Second Amendment right to keep and bear
arms 

FPC and our allies will continue fighting to defend and advance our
Constitution’s protection of fundamental human
rights.


Firearms Policy
Coalition
 (www.firearmspolicy.org)
is a 501(c)4 grassroots nonprofit organization. FPC’s mission is to
protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, especially
the fundamental, individual Second Amendment right to keep and bear
arms.