Uncategorized

Uncategorized

Oh, Canada

July 1, 2013 by 1 Comment

Today is Canada Day. It marks the uniting of the British colonies of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick with the Province of Canada (which included both Ontario and Quebec) into the Dominion of Canada on July 1, 1867 by way of the British North America Act of 1867. It is Canada’s national holiday.

So on this Canadian holiday I thought it appropriate to look again at the seizure of resident’s firearms in the Province of Alberta.

The RCMP announced on Sunday that they would start returning some of the firearms seized from residents of the town of High River.

An RCMP news release says that owners of guns that were seized should call police, and that an officer will call them back to make arrangements to have the weapons picked up.

The Mounties said earlier that they took the guns as officers searched homes in High River’s flood zone to look for flood victims, pets and anything that might pose a threat to returning residents.

Any guns were removed from homes because they were not properly stored, said Staff Sgt. Brian Jones, who added that no charges are planned.

“There is no indication of that at this point in time. That wasn’t the reason. That wasn’t the intention,” Jones said about the gun seizures.

The Prime Minister’s Office has now gotten involved in this affair. Prime Minister Stephen Harper is a resident of Alberta. His Canadian Parliament riding of Calgary Southwest adjoins the riding in which High River is located.

The move to take the weapons was condemned by the Prime Minister’s Office, who said the Mounties should focus on more important tasks such as protecting lives and private property.

Harper’s criticism of the RCMP’s move brought criticism itself.

Darryl Davies, a Carleton University criminology professor, considered the condemnation from the Prime Minister’s Office to be highly inappropriate.

“It’s completely and utterly inappropriate for the PMO to issue operational instructions to the RCMP,” Davies said Sunday.

Have we arrived at a point in Canada where the PMO can interfere in criminal investigations as well?”

Davies said he thought it must be embarrassing for the RCMP to be admonished by the PMO in the media, and that it undermines the force’s credibility and impartiality.

Davies, who has long criticized the RCMP himself, is also a strong proponent of gun control. He is on record as favoring the banning of all semi-automatic firearms. Davies also served as the Senior Communications Officer on Firearms, Communications Branch Department of Justice. Thus, I think Davies’ criticism in context is more about his anti-gun beliefs than anything to do with political interference with the RCMP.

Unlike the United States where the Constitution is a single document with a number of amendments, the Canadian Constitution is an amalgamation of Acts of Parliament from both Great Britain and Canada. In 1982, Canada passed the Constitution Act, 1982, which contained the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It can be said that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is their equivalent to our Bill of Rights – with exceptions. While it speaks of things like freedom of association and “the right to life, liberty, and the security of the person”, the one thing it does not guarantee is a right to keep and bear arms. Moreover, property rights are not mentioned. Much of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms concerns itself with language rights, the rights of “aboriginal people”, and the education rights of linguistic minorities.

So while we often think of our neighbors to the North as just like us but more polite, legally they have a much different system in which things like property rights and the right to keep and bear arms are treated much differently. That said, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Conservative government probably respect both of rights more so than the current Obama administration.

Uncategorized

Two New Shooters

July 1, 2013 by 6 Comments

During our recent trip to the Myrtle Beach area, we took an afternoon excursion to a shooting range in Murrells Inlet. I had planned the trip as part of the “things we did at the beach” this year. I had remembered that there was a range near where we were staying from past trips to the area. Checking with all parts of the family in advance, I got an enthusiastic response from everyone. Thus, in addition to the pool toys and beach hut, we brought with us an assortment of pistols ranging from my Sig P238 to my Daewoo DH-40 with three various 9mm pistols in between. I also dug into my ammo stash so we wouldn’t have to buy ammo at the range.

Coastal Sports and Range in Murrells Inlet is a very nice gun store with an excellent, well-lit, 5-bay indoor range. When we got there, store manager Woodie Pitts greeted us warmly, discussed the range rules, inspected all my pistols and ammo, and helped us pick out targets. We also rented a Beretta Neo and a Ruger 22/45 for the new and newer shooters to use. The rangemaster Michael Wiestling went over the operations of both pistols with everyone before we entered the range.

After donning our hearing protection and safety glasses, we went into the range area. It was separated into the five shooting bays and a glassed-in room where the non-shooters could watch. While there were nine of us in the party, only seven had originally
planned to shoot. The Complementary Spouse’s older daughter Wendy said
she didn’t feel comfortable shooting but did want to watch. That would change.

Michael was a great help in not only explaining how the range controls worked but in working with the less experienced shooters. While I was getting the ammo and guns set out in two of the bays, he was providing the less experienced shooters instructions on grip, trigger control, and sight picture. Our party had three experienced shooters and four relatively new shooters.

While my niece and nephew had shot handguns before, my sister-in-law Cindy had not and wanted to experience it. She strongly believes everyone should have some exposure to gun safety and at least know enough about guns to safely unload one. As you can see below, she went beyond that. Before the range time was over, she had shot both .22’s, her sister’s M&P, and my Sig P238.

Cindy with Beretta Neo

 My niece Grace who had shot before likewise got to shoot both .22s and one of the 9mm pistols we brought as did her brother Grant.

Grace with Beretta Neo

While all the afternoon was good, in my opinion the best moment came when Wendy turned to the Complementary Spouse and said, “I think I’d like to try it.” And try it she did.

Wendy with Beretta Neo

With help from the rangemaster Michael and her Uncle Larry, Wendy not only shot the .22 pistols but tried her hand at shooting the 9mm pistols. Like the former athlete she was, Wendy took instruction well and did great.

Wendy shooting Ruger SR9 with Larry coaching

Like I said earlier, we arrived with seven shooters and left with eight including two first-time shooters. I think the smile on Laura’s face below captures just how much fun we all had.

If you are taking a trip to the Myrtle Beach area and want to take in some shooting, I can highly recommend Coastal Sports and Range. They were great and have a really nice gun store to boot.

Uncategorized

New Maps Of The Battle Of Gettysburg

June 30, 2013 by 1 Comment

Tomorrow marks the 150th anniversary of the start of the battle of Gettysburg. The battle here marked the turning point in the War Between the States (or American Civil War). Confederate forces under General Lee never again ventured into Northern territory after this battle.

On the second day of the battle, General Lee ordered an attack on the left wing of the Union line. Erroneous scouting reports said that there were no Union forces on either Big or Little Round Top. Lee, in essence, started the attack with erroneous information and with what he himself could see of the Union Army.

A team led by geographer Anne Knowles of Middlebury College has created new interactive maps of the battle and the battle terrain for the Smithsonian Institute to commemorate this anniversary.

Knowles had this to say in an interview about the project:

“Our goal is to help people understand how and why commanders made their decisions at key moments of the battle, and a key element that’s been excluded, or just not considered in historical studies before, is sight,” Knowles said.

Long before the advent of reconnaissance aircraft and spy satellites, a general’s own sense of sight — his ability to read the terrain and assess the enemy’s position and numbers — was one of his most important tools. Especially at Gettysburg, where Lee was hampered by faulty intelligence.

“We know that Lee had really poor information going into the battle and must have relied to some extent on what he could actually see,” Knowles said.

The geographer applied GIS to find out what Lee could see and what he couldn’t.

To reconstruct the battlefield as it existed in 1863, researchers used historical maps, texts and photos to note the location of wooden fences, stone walls, orchards, forests, fields, barns and houses, as well as the movement of army units. High-resolution aerial photos of the landscape yielded an accurate elevation model. All of it was fed into a computer program that can map data.

Lee is believed to have surveyed the battlefield from a pair of cupolas, one at a Lutheran seminary and the other at Gettysburg College, both of which yielded generally excellent views.

But a GIS-generated map, with illuminated areas showing what Lee could see and shaded areas denoting what was hidden from his view, indicates the terrain concealed large numbers of Union soldiers.

 A screen cap of this map showing what Lee could and couldn’t see is below. The gray areas indicate what was hidden from Lee’s sight by the topography of the battlefield as he looked down from Seminary Ridge.

I think the Smithsonian has done a great service with these interactive maps as they lead to a greater appreciation of the decision making by both Confederate and Union generals at this battle. The interactive map can be reached here.

Uncategorized

A Pet Peeve

June 29, 2013 by 1 Comment

I have this pet peeve.

My jaw clenches and my teeth grind every time I hear a politician or a media sort say that so-and-so is a “lifetime member” of the National Rifle Association. I sincerely doubt what they mean is that the person in question has been an annual member of the NRA from an early age and has renewed said membership continually over the years. What I presume they mean to say is that the person is a Life Member or one of its more expensive variants of the NRA.

Some examples:

From the Huffington Post – “Elaih Wagan, 3-Year-Old Texan, Honored By NRA As Youngest Lifetime Member”

From Politico in describing the Manchin-NRA battle:

For Manchin and his top aides, the dispute with the NRA has become increasingly personal. Manchin’s chief of staff, Hayden Rogers, a lifetime NRA member, has let his membership to the group lapse. Rogers even pulled the pro-NRA sticker off his own truck.

Alabama Supreme Court Justice Kelli Wise to the Pike County (AL) Republican Women:

After the recipients read their essays, Wise was introduced and began speaking about her passion for the rights of the second amendment.

“I’ve been a lifetime member of the NRA (National Rifle Association) since I was 21,” she shared.

One news organization that did get it right was Townhall.com. Remember the kid who was suspended for biting his PopTart into the shape of a gun (or was it Idaho)?

And what about that 7-year-old boy from Maryland who was suspended for two days because he bit a Pop-Tart into the shape of a gun? Well, as for the latter, he’s been given a Junior Life Membership in the NRA.

I know most in the mainstream media look upon the five million of us who are members of the National Rifle Association with utter disdain. That said, I still wish they would be more precise when describing those of us who are Life Members.

Uncategorized

Quote Of The Day

June 28, 2013 by 1 Comment

The quote of the day comes from a resident of High River, Alberta. That Canadian town of about 13,000 about 25 miles south of Calgary has been evacuated from the greater part of a week due to the flooding of the Highwood River. Residents there are not only angry that they are not being allowed to return to their homes but that the RCMP or Royal Canadian Mounted Police had gone house to house and confiscated their firearms.


One resident with memories of police confiscation of firearms in New Orleans had this to say:

“This is the reason the U.S. has the right to bear arms,” said Charles Timpano, pointing to the group of Mounties.

Video of the confrontation between residents of High River and the RCMP is below.

As a followup, the Solicitor General of the Province of Alberta announced today that he is working with the Mounties to assure a speedy and timely return of the seized firearms to their owners.

Uncategorized

Background Check Veto Upheld In Maine

June 28, 2013 by 7 Comments

The Maine State Legislature passed a universal background checks bill on June 19th in what was considered a surprise vote. The bill had been defeated twice before in the State Senate.

In a surprise vote Wednesday, the Maine Senate passed a bill that creates civil penalties for those who sell guns in private sales to people who are prohibited from having them.

The legislation imposes a civil fine of $500 if a gun seller does not perform a background check and the buyer is later discovered to be a prohibited person.

The bill, LD 1240, was first watered down by the Senate, but on Tuesday, the House of Representatives sent the original measure back to the Senate. The Senate approved the bill on a 18-17 vote, with two rural Democrats joining Republicans in the minority on the measure.

Fortunately for Maine gun owners, Gov. Paul LePage (R-ME) was true to his word and vetoed the bill. He said the bill only impacted honest gun owners and for that reason he vetoed the bill.

Yesterday, the Maine State House voted to uphold the governor’s veto in a 77-71 vote. The gun prohibitionists in the State House are now threatening to go to a referendum to pass the measure and cite the misleading poll number from an anti-gun push poll.

The background-check bill, L.D. 1240, sponsored by Rep. Mark Dion, D-Portland, would have created a civil violation for selling a gun to a person prohibited from owning a gun, such as a convicted felon.


It originally was a sweeping bill that would have mandated background checks before all gun purchases. His bill passed narrowly in the Legislature earlier this month, and the House upheld the veto in a 77-71 vote on Wednesday.


In his veto message, LePage said the bill was focused “on those who would choose to obey the law, and for that reason I believe it misses the target.”


“This is an issue that may need to go straight to our citizens,” Dion said in a statement after the vote. “The governor described my bill as ‘well-meaning,’ but public policy requires more than intentions, it requires action.”


Dion was referring to a potential referendum on the matter: J. Thomas Franklin, president of Maine Citizens Against Handgun Violence, a pro-gun control group, said last week that it is considering bringing a citizens’ initiative to ask Maine voters to decide on mandatory background checks in 2014.

Searching the Maine register of lobbyists, I cannot find any that represent Mayor Bloomberg’s Illegal Mayors nor any that represent other gun prohibitionist group. I am going to assume that Bloomberg didn’t employ his full court press like he did in Colorado and Nevada.

Still that a state like Maine with a long tradition of protecting gun rights would have even considered such a bill – much less passed one – is disappointing. Maine, like the rest of northern New England, is changing and, in my opinion, not for the better.

Uncategorized

The Push For Concurrence On HB 937 Continues

June 28, 2013 by 2 Comments

It appears that NC Speaker of the House Thom Tillis might be going wobbly on HB 937 and is also spreading misinformation on the position of Grass Roots North Carolina. With Tillis now an announced candidate for the US Senate to run for the seat held by Sen. Kay Hagan (D-NC), it is time to ramp up the pressure on both Tillis and the rest of the Republicans in the North Carolina House.

From the latest GRNC alert:

It has come to our attention that the office of NC House Speaker Thom Tillis has told callers that GRNC “supports” removal of the pistol purchase permit repeal from House Bill 937 and the replacement of the measure with a study commission. That is a misstatement of GRNC’s position.

With less than two weeks remaining in the legislative session, it became clear that Speaker Tillis, faced with Governor McCrory’s acquiescence to demands by the NC Sheriffs’ Assoc. to remove the purchase permit repeal, might simply kill the entire bill by bringing it to the floor and re-referring it committee, where it would languish, rather than choosing between gun owners and sheriffs.

HB 937 cannot be ‘amended’

Meanwhile, input we have received suggests that gun owners are of two minds: One faction notes that the purchase permit repeal was not in the original bill, and that the substantial gains of restaurant carry, campus carry, assemblies for which admission is charged and more should not be risked for one provision we might be able to get later. Others want us to stand strong for the repeal because other aspects of the bill primarily benefit concealed handgun permit-holders more than other gun owners.

To those who have suggested we simply “amend” HB 937 to remove the purchase permit language, however, we are compelled to note that bills are not amendable on concurrence votes. The only option is for the House not to concur, in which case the bill goes to a conference committee comprising members of both chambers. Please note: Once the bill is in conference, we have no direct control over what comes out. The single and only alternative if we don’t like what results would be to kill the bill in its entirety. It is for that reason GRNC has opposed sending the bill to conference.

GRNC strongly urges legislators to concur

In the position just sent to the NC House, GRNC continues to admonish legislators to vote for concurrence. Acknowledging that it is critical to keep the bill moving as the end of the session approaches, however, we also advised them that we will not track the vote on concurrence PROVIDED that the bill is not otherwise weakened in the conference committee. Although we cannot speak for other organizations, representatives of both the NRA and NCRPA have expressed support for the position.

Presuming the bill goes to a conference committee, here is what we will push for:

1. Keeping restaurant and campus carry and all other aspects in the bill;
2. Repeal or curtailment of the present purchase permit system; and
3. Inclusion of key legislators whom we can trust on the committee.

What GRNC will not accept

If, however, a weaker bill leaves the conference committee, any legislator who voted to send it to conference will be assessed as having voted against the interests of gun owners, which will be reflected in “Remember in November” candidate evaluations. This is intended to give the less resolute members of the Republican caucus “ownership” in what the committee produces.

In particular, there is one “deal killer” which may cause GRNC to oppose the bill: Shortening the duration for which purchase permits are valid, which is currently five years. Doing so would punish lawful gun owners for the malfeasance of the Sheriff’s Association, which has known about and refused to address the system’s flaws for decades.

IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED!

  • CALL & EMAIL YOUR HOUSE REP: Have them tell NC House Speaker Thom Tillis that he should listen to millions of NC gun owners instead of 100 sheriffs by SUPPORTING A VOTE TO CONCUR on HB 937. The fact is that sheriffs and their entrenched, highly paid lobbyist have refused to address this problem for decades. Find your House rep by CLICKING HERE or going to: http://ncga.state.nc.us/representation/WhoRepresentsMe.aspx


  • EMAIL ALL NC HOUSE REPUBLICANS: Tell them they don’t have a “get-out-of-jail-free” card to vote against gun owners. If they vote against concurrence and HB 937 is weakened in conference committee, THEY WILL BE HELD RESPONSIBLE. If they want the best and safest course of action, THEY SHOULD VOTE TO CONCUR. To email House Republicans, use the copy-and-paste email list below and either the suggested message or one of your own.

CONTACT INFO

Dean.Arp@ncleg.net, Marilyn.Avila@ncleg.net, John.Bell@ncleg.net, Hugh.Blackwell@ncleg.net, John.Blust@ncleg.net, Jamie.Boles@ncleg.net, Robert.Brawley@ncleg.net, Bill.Brawley@ncleg.net, Mark.Brody@ncleg.net, Brian.Brown@ncleg.net, Rayne.Brown@ncleg.net, Rob.Bryan@ncleg.net, Dana.Bumgardner@ncleg.net, Justin.Burr@ncleg.net, Rick.Catlin@ncleg.net, Jeff.Collins@ncleg.net, Debra.Conrad@ncleg.net, Leo.Daughtry@ncleg.net, Ted.Davis@ncleg.net, Jimmy.Dixon@ncleg.net, Josh.Dobson@ncleg.net, Jerry.Dockham@ncleg.net, Nelson.Dollar@ncleg.net, Jeffrey.Elmore@ncleg.net, John.Faircloth@ncleg.net, Carl.Ford@ncleg.net, Jim.Fulghum@ncleg.net, Mike.Hager@ncleg.net, Jon.Hardister@ncleg.net, Kelly.Hastings@ncleg.net, Mark.Hollo@ncleg.net, Bryan.Holloway@ncleg.net, Craig.Horn@ncleg.net, Julia.Howard@ncleg.net, Pat.Hurley@ncleg.net, Frank.Iler@ncleg.net, Charles.Jeter@ncleg.net, Linda.Johnson2@ncleg.net, Bert.Jones@ncleg.net, Jonathan.Jordan@ncleg.net, Donny.Lambeth@ncleg.net, James.Langdon@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, Chris.Millis@ncleg.net, Tim.Moffitt@ncleg.net, Tim.Moore@ncleg.net, Tom.Murry@ncleg.net, Michele.Presnell@ncleg.net, Nathan.Ramsey@ncleg.net, Dennis.Riddell@ncleg.net, Stephen.Ross@ncleg.net, Jason.Saine@ncleg.net, Ruth.Samuelson@ncleg.net, Jacqueline.Schaffer@ncleg.net, Mitchell.Setzer@ncleg.net, Phil.Shepard@ncleg.net, Michael.Speciale@ncleg.net, Paul.Stam@ncleg.net, Edgar.Starnes@ncleg.net, Bob.Steinburg@ncleg.net, Sarah.Stevens@ncleg.net, Michael.Stone@ncleg.net, John.Szoka@ncleg.net, Thom.Tillis@ncleg.net, John.Torbett@ncleg.net, Rena.Turner@ncleg.net, Harry.Warren@ncleg.net, Andy.Wells@ncleg.net, Roger.West@ncleg.net, Chris.Whitmire@ncleg.net

DELIVER THIS MESSAGE

Suggested Subject: “Vote for concurrence on HB 937!”

Honorable Members of the North Carolina House:

Although a campaign by the North Carolina Sheriffs’ Association to preserve sheriffs’ power and money seems destined to send House Bill 937 (“Amend Various Firearms Laws”) to a conference committee, I strongly urge you to vote against any motion not to concur (i.e. to concur with Senate changes) as the best and safest method of guarding against wholesale weakening of the bill.

I will be closely monitoring this matter via Grass Roots North Carolina Alerts.

Respectfully,

Uncategorized

A Coalition Serves Freedom Of Information Request On Bloomberg

June 27, 2013 by 3 Comments

A coalition consisting of the Second Amendment Foundation, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and Tom Gresham of Gun Talk have served a Freedom of Information Law request on the City of New York to provide all records concerning Mayor Bloomberg’s Illegal Mayors and the use of city funds to support the group. It is an effort to smoke out just how much the citizens of the City of New York are paying for Bloomberg’s pet project.

From the SAF release:

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today has filed a Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request with the City of New York for all records relating to Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns, after newspaper allegations that city resources have been used for MAIG’s gun control efforts.

SAF is being joined in the request by the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and Tom Gresham, host of the nationally-syndicated “Gun Talk.”

“It was bad enough to learn via CBS News that the MAIG website was being hosted on a city-owned server, and administered by city employees,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb, “but it also appears that a special counselor in the mayor’s office was sent to lobby in Nevada on behalf of MAIG’s gun control agenda.”

The New York Post and Politico both published reports that Mayor Bloomberg sent Christopher Kocher to Nevada, and that in an apparent attempt to conceal who he worked for, Kocher “scrubbed his City Hall e-mail address from the state of Nevada lobbying-registration Web site early this month.”

“The public has a right to know what’s been going on between Bloomberg, the city and MAIG,” Gottlieb explained. “Gun control is Bloomberg’s pet peeve, and he’s been pushing an anti-gun agenda since sending so-called private investigators on a sting operation to gun shops all over the country, which got him in trouble with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.”

“There certainly appears to be a serious problem in Bloomberg’s administration,” Gresham added. “Evidently, the mayor and his staff have a gross misunderstanding of how the taxpayers’ money should be spent, and that should not include sending New York employees around the country to lobby for Bloomberg’s pet projects.”

The request was filed by SAF Special Projects Director Philip Watson, for the following information:

1. All electronic records related to Mayors Against Illegal Guns and the website MayorsAgainstIllegalGuns.org, including, but not limited to:


  • a. All electronic files saved on city servers

  • b. All Emails to or from users at the domain MayorsAgainstIllegalGuns.org

  • c. All current and former employees, officials, outside contractors, and volunteers with access to the website MayorsAgainstIllegalGuns.org

  • d. All current and former Email users and usernames that have had access to send or receive Email from @MayorsAgainstIllegalGuns.org


2. Any and all records related to Mayors Against Illegal Guns electronic files, including, but not limited to:


  • a. Emails

  • b. Any written documents

  • c. Any records describing processes for cooperation with this group

  • d. Any records describing how received communications with this group are processed

  • e. All employee pay or overtime related to cooperation or time spent with this group

  • f. Official names, titles, and contact information of all employees, officials, outside contractors, and volunteers involved with domain hosting, creation, maintenance, and communication for MayorsAgainstIllegalGuns.org

  • g. All costs incurred by the City of New York for creation, maintenance, domain hosting, and communication for MayorsAgainstIllegalGuns.org


3. Any and all records of communication since January 1, 2002 between any city official, employee, or volunteer and any gun control advocacy organization, including, but not limited to:


  • a. Mayors Against Illegal Guns

  • b. Demand A Plan

  • c. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

  • d. Center for Gun Policy and Research

  • e. Ceasefire

  • f. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence

  • g. Coalition to Stop Gun Violence

  • h. Joyce Foundation

  • i. Violence Policy Center

  • j. Legal Community Against Violence

  • k. Million Mom March

“The man is obsessed,” Gottlieb continued, “and if he’s spent so much as a dime of public money on what amounts to a private crusade, Mayor Bloomberg needs to be held accountable for that.”

Gottlieb has called on New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman to launch a full-scale investigation into the mayor’s potential misuse of public resources for his own private war on gun owners. He renewed that call today.

“If Eric Schneiderman won’t investigate Bloomberg for possible misuse of public funds,” Gottlieb said, “we will. The mayor has been acting increasingly like a self-appointed monarch, but this still the United States, not Bloomberg’s personal fiefdom.”

Given that other states and cities have strong freedom of information laws and given that there are a number of cities with a mayor belonging to MAIG, I think this provides a nice template for a grass roots effort to smoke out the use of public funds to promote gun control efforts. These politicians are like cockroaches and hate to see the light of day shone on their activities.

Uncategorized

The Farewell To Arms Festival

June 27, 2013 by 1 Comment

The group Free Colorado is holding an event on Saturday in Glendale, Colorado called The Farewell to Arms Festival. Free Colorado’s mission is to engage in targeted actions to reverse Colorado laws that imperil the rights of law-abiding firearm owners;
and ensure that no other State passes such reckless government regulation.

The event is meant to highlight the July 1st start of Colorado’s ban on standard capacity magazines. The first 1,500 attendees will receive “a free Magpul Gen M2 MOE 30rd magazine featuring either the Free Colorado or Boulder Airlift design, courtesy of Magpul Industries.”

There will be live music and an appearance by conservative talk show host Dana Loesch.

If you are in the Denver area and support gun rights, you ought to take advantage of this. More details are in the flyer below.

Uncategorized

Emanuel To Propose New AWB For Chicago

June 26, 2013 by 3 Comments

Chicago is now jumping on the bandwagon of proposing new gun laws before the Illinois concealed carry law is enacted. Mayor Rahm Emanuel has proposed a new assault weapon (sic) ban that would prohibit the sale and possession of such firearms in the city. From the report by WGN-TV below, it appears the bill will also contain a listing of such firearms and will also contain a magazine ban.

The second bill introduced will ban the carrying of firearms in student safety zones. While I am not completely familiar with the concept, it appears that they include the sidewalks students most frequently use when walking to school. This second bill sounds like even more of an intrusion upon the Second Amendment than the Chicago AWB depending on just how broadly a student safety zone is defined.

The second ordinance would make the punishment harsher for gun-related offenses in “student safety zones”.

Those zones are found near schools, buses, and parks across the city.

Anyone convicted of having a gun in a safety zone would face a fine of $1,000 to $5,000 for the first offense and a mandatory 30 days in jail.

A second offense would carry a fine of $5,000 to $15,000 and a mandatory three months in jail.

A third offense would carry a fine of $10,000 to $20,000 and a mandatory six-month jail term.

Neither bill nor its text is posted on the City of Chicago’s website as of now.