December Adjusted NICS – Just As Suspected

The National Shooting Sports Foundation released their adjusted NICS check numbers for the month of December and they are almost off the charts.

Above is the graph of the NSSF-adjusted NICS checks for the last 13 Decembers. The only decrease over the previous since Obama was first elected is December 2009. That probably was reflective of the surge the prior year.

Here are the numbers as reported by NSSF:

The December 2012 NSSF-adjusted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) figure of 2,237,731 is an increase of 58.6 percent over the NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 1,410,937
in December 2011. For comparison, the unadjusted December 2012 NICS
figure of 2,776,105 reflects a 49.7 percent increase from the unadjusted
NICS figure of 1,854,400 in December 2011.

December 2012 also marked the 31st straight month with increases over the same month in the prior year.

 It is important to note that NICS checks are not a perfect correlation with gun sales. States such Iowa, Michigan, and Kentucky use the NICS system for background checks on both new and existing concealed carry permits. Moreover, in a number of states such as North Carolina, a concealed carry permit is accepted in lieu of running the NICS check.

For the entire year 2012, adjusted NICS checks were up 27.7% over 2011.

Illinois AG Madigan Requests En Banc Hearing In Carry Cases

Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan announced today that she will be requesting an en banc review of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals decision in the joint cases of Moore v. Madigan and Shepard v. Madigan. This decision by the 7th Circuit would have forced the Illinois General Assembly to come up with some form of concealed carry within 180 days. An en banc review means all the judges of the 7th Circuit will review the case and not just the three judge panel assigned to the case. As I understand it, a petition for an en banc review is not automatically granted.

There had been some question on whether or not Madigan would appeal or seek an en banc review given her ambitions to succeed Pat Quinn as Governor of Illinois. Letting the decision stand would have been a bone tossed to downstate Illinois Democrats who tend to look at gun rights more favorably. I take Madigan’s petition as an indication that she feels that gun control post-Newtown is a winning proposition.

From Madigan’s press release:


Chicago — Attorney General Lisa Madigan today announced she has filed a petition for rehearing before the full U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in lawsuits challenging the Illinois laws that prevent the carrying of ready-to-use firearms in public.

The Attorney General’s petition for a rehearing “en banc” is a request for all of the judges on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to review the case after a December decision by a three-judge panel of the court held that the state laws barring carrying ready-to-use firearms in public are unconstitutional.

Madigan’s petition was filed in lawsuits brought against the State of Illinois by Michael Moore, Mary E. Shepard and the Illinois State Rifle Association, which allege that Illinois’ restrictions on the carrying of ready-to-use weapons in public violates their Second Amendment rights. The laws had previously been upheld by two separate federal district courts in Illinois.

In its December decision, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals set a 180-day deadline for the Illinois legislature to draft and enact new laws relating to carrying ready-to-use firearms in public. Today’s petition for rehearing by the Attorney General does not affect that deadline.

Madigan issued the following statement regarding her decision to seek a rehearing:

“In ruling that Illinois must allow individuals to carry ready-to-use firearms in public, the 7th Circuit Court’s decision goes beyond what the U.S. Supreme Court has held and conflicts with decisions by two other federal appellate courts. Based on those decisions, it is appropriate to ask the full 7th Circuit to review this case and consider adopting an approach that is consistent with the other appellate courts that have addressed these issues after the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark Heller and McDonald decisions.”

UPDATE: The petition from the Illinois Attorney General’s Office can be found here.

The Brady Center along with Trayvon Martin’s parents and others have filed an amicus brief in support of the Madigan’s petition. It can be found here. Frankly, I find the thought of including Trayvon Martin’s parents in the amicus brief just a trifle tacky. But then again, this is the new and improved Brady Center.

There is also an amicus brief in support of Madigan’s petition from the City of Chicago, the Chicago Board of Ed, the Chicago Transit Authority, and the Legal Center to Prevent Gun Violence (the old LCAV) which can be found here.

Snake Handling

That snake handling scene in the preview of Justified reminds of an incident involving a snake handling preacher It happened soon after I first moved
to the mountains of North Carolina. He had a little Holiness
congregation over in Canton. His day job, I kid you not, was as a wholesale bait dealer .

Our sheriff at the
time who didn’t exactly have a sterling reputation went to break up one of his outdoor revivals on the grounds that
snake handling is illegal in North Carolina. One thing lead to another and the sheriff got bit by the rattler. The sheriff made it to the hospital in time and lived. However, he did retire soon thereafter.

I guess we can thank that rattle snake for helping clean up law enforcement in Haywood County.

Oh, and that snake handling preacher who got arrested? He got bit by a rattler at a service in Greene County, Tennessee later in the year, refused treatment, and died.

Lies, Damned Lies, And Statistics

Jim Shepherd, publisher and editor of The Outdoor Wire, called out the Associated Press today for some of their reporting on gun sales. We all know that gun sales have been surging throughout the year. However, the AP would have you believe sales in Colorado and Connecticut, scenes of horrible tragedies, were off.

From the AP story “Fewer excited gun-buyers in Colorado and Connecticut”:

The government’s figures suggested far less interest in purchasing guns
late in the year in Connecticut and Colorado, where background checks
also increased but not nearly as much as most other states … Only New Jersey and Maryland showed smaller increases than
Colorado in December from one month earlier.

Sales must really be impacted there, right?

Not exactly as Jim notes:

Sounds reasonable, right? After all, these states are both reeling from the havoc caused there by crazies.

Not necessarily. While the story is accurate that the biggest surges in
background checks for gun purchases were in the South and West, the
numbers weren’t exactly insignificant in either Connecticut or Colorado.
The increases in NICS checks, and as may be implied, gun sales, in
those states were only sixty five and sixty-four percent,
respectively. Colorado’s checks frose from 35,009 in October to 53,453
in December. Connecticut went from 18,761 to 29,246 during the same
period.

It might be more accurate to say that “despite horrific tragedies, the
demand for firearms in both Connecticut and Colorado grew, although not
as fast as the red-hot markets in the South and West.”

But that wouldn’t fit the narrative, although the observation that
“background checks also tend to increase after mass shootings, when gun
enthusiasts fear restrictive measures are imminent.”

 Wouldn’t fit the narrative should be the new motto for the mainstream press when it comes to gun sales and the use of guns for self-protection.

Hey, Felons!

Do you have a “hot” gun that you need to ditch?

Did that no-good two-timing son of a bitch give you a gun to “hold” for him while he did his time?

Do you live in the Greensboro, North Carolina area?

Well then, the Greensboro Police Department have a deal for you! They’ll take that gun off your hands with no questions asked. They will even do it anonymously! The only thing they won’t do is give you any money for it. They’re calling it their “Safe Surrender” program which means you ain’t going to Central Prison.

Details below in the GPD press release:


Greensboro Police Offer Two-Day Weapon “Safe Surrender”

GREENSBORO, NC (January 7, 2013)

On January 11 and 12, the Greensboro Police Department is offering gun owners another means of removing unwanted firearms from their homes. Police employees will be accepting handguns, rifles,
and shotguns at three Greensboro churches Friday from 8 am to 3 pm, and Saturday from 10 am to 2 pm.

Participating churches are:
Saint Matthew’s United Methodist Church at 600 East Florida Street•
Bessemer United Methodist Church at 3015 East Bessemer Avenue•
Christ Wesleyan Church at 2400 South Holden Road.

The “Safe Surrender” event was inspired by Councilwoman T. Diane Bellamy-Small as a way for city residents to reflect upon the tragic events in Newtown,Conn. “Although we are saddened by the impetus for this ‘Safe Surrender’, we welcome the opportunity to take weapons off the street,” said Deputy Chief Anita Holder. This is not a buy-back program. No cash will be given in exchange for eapons. Anyone age 18 and above can turn in a weapon.

Weapons can be surrendered anonymously. There is no limit to the number of firearms a person can surrender. Once a weapon is surrendered, it will not be returned. Weapons should be unloaded and cleared when they are turned in. A police employee will receive each weapon and render it safe. Ammunition may also be surrendered. Firearms will be checked to determine if they have been reported lost or stolen. Police will make every effort to return lost/stolen weapons to their rightful owners. All other weapons will be destroyed. “This two-day program supplements our existing method of taking unwanted weapons off the street,” explained Holder.

At any time throughout the year, Greensboro residents can call the non-emergency line, 373-2222, to coordinate to turn in an unwanted firearm. Citizens who are not comfortable handling a firearm may find this to be a useful option. A sworn or non-sworn member of the Greensboro Police Department will pick up the weapon from the owner’s home.

Far be it from me to accuse the Greensboro Police Department of racism or anything but I find it strange that the three churches mentioned just happen to be in areas that heavily populated by minorities.

St. Matthew’s United Methodist was, according to their church history, the first Methodist Church in Greensboro established for African-Americans. It is located in a census tract that is over 95% minority. Bessemer United Methodist is located in a census tract that is 87.5% minority and bills itself as the Triad’s Native American Church. It’s pastor, Rev. Joel Locklear, is a Lumbee Indian. Finally, Christ Wesleyan Church is located in a census tract that is over 66% minority.

So why not hold it at Temple Emanuel or Our Lady of Grace or even New Garden Friends Meeting?

Well?

You Knew This Was Coming

With all the publicity that ABC News has been using to promote Diane Sawyer’s “exclusive” interview with former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords and her husband Mark Kelly, I just had a bad feeling about it. That doubled when they said Giffords and Kelly would be announcing a new initiative and had recently met with Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

I was right.

Giffords and Kelly look to become the new Jim and Sarah Brady.

They are calling their initiative Americans for Responsible Solutions. Interestingly, according to the webpage it is a political action committee. It is obvious that they mean this PAC as a cover for politicians just like the American Hunters and Shooters Association. The difference is that they evoke much more sympathy than AHSA could ever hope to do.

Giffords and Kelly say they want to propose “commonsense solutions” to “curb gun violence” (sic). Their proposals mirror some of those of Bloomberg and MAIG. They want universal background checks for private sales and they want magazine restrictions. Reading their op-ed in USA Today and the ABC News article, I don’t see any mention on banning semi-automatic rifles.

They make strong efforts to portray themselves as gun owners with Kelly noting he had recently purchased a firearm at Walmart and that they have two guns at home “in a safe”. In their op-ed they describe themselves as “a Western woman and a Persian Gulf War combat veteran who have exercised their Second Amendment rights” who aren’t out to take your guns.

I think you will see a strong effort by them to try and marginalize the NRA as being fringe or extremist.


Special interests purporting to represent gun owners but really advancing the interests of an ideological fringe have used big money and influence to cow Congress into submission. Rather than working to find the balance between our rights and the regulation of a dangerous product, these groups have cast simple protections for our communities as existential threats to individual liberties. Rather than conducting a dialogue, they threaten those who divert from their orthodoxy with political extinction.

As a result, we are more vulnerable to gun violence. Weapons designed for the battlefield have a home in our streets. Criminals and the mentally ill can easily purchase guns by avoiding background checks. Firearm accessories designed for killing at a high rate are legal and widely available. And gun owners are less responsible for the misuse of their weapons than they are for their automobiles.

Forget the boogeyman of big, bad government coming to dispossess you of your firearms. As a Western woman and a Persian Gulf War combat veteran who have exercised our Second Amendment rights, we don’t want to take away your guns any more than we want to give up the two guns we have locked in a safe at home. What we do want is what the majority of NRA members and other Americans want: responsible changes in our laws to require responsible gun ownership and reduce gun violence.

We saw from the NRA leadership’s defiant and unsympathetic response to the Newtown, Conn., massacre that winning even the most common-sense reforms will require a fight. But whether it has been in campaigns or in Congress, in combat or in space, fighting for what we believe in has always been what we do.

 Watching the interview above as well as others they have given, you have to wonder how much of this is Mark Kelly as opposed to Gabby Giffords. She has had a traumatic brain injury and has made a great recovery. That said, after such an injury I would think – and I’m not an expert – that it would have to affect the thought processes and the ability to make rational decisions in some way. Kelly does most of the talking for them while Giffords looks at him and utters a little something here and then.

Make no mistake, Giffords, Kelly, and Americans for Responsible Solutions are a threat to gun rights. They present a sympathetic face, their agenda scarcely differs from that of Bloomberg and his Illegal Mayors, and the mainstream media have signed up to be their propaganda agents.

I Know Where You Can Win An AR

Aaron at the Weapon-Blog has posted his monthly list of gun contests. As Aaron noted in his email:

With all the craziness and talk of banning guns, why not take the opportunity to
win one (or two or ten)? Especially with prices inflated the way they are at the
moment…

I count at least five AR-15s, an AK-47, and a slew of handguns including a very nice custom 1911 by Volkmann Customs. There is also a Les Baer .38 Super Stinger and a SCAR 17s Heavy. If none of those meet your fancy, I guess you’ll have to settle for that Hi-Point .45. Heh!

If you enter any of the contests, take a moment and thank Aaron for this monthly service he provides.

Alan Korwin And The 51st State

Alan Korwin is an out of the box thinker when it comes to debates over gun control. His letter to the editor below illustrates that. He equates teachers to the 51st state for concealed carry. Blood didn’t run in the streets when other states got shall issue concealed carry so why, he asks, should armed teachers be any different.

Alan has given permission for this letter to circulate far and wide as well it should.

Dear
Editor,

I knew this sounded familiar — I’ve heard this whole
fear-factor argument about the danger of arming teachers against known
classroom hazards 49 times before. It played every time a state enacted a
discreet-carry CCW gun law for its citizens. It was met with the exact same
prejudice, scorn and derision.

But those blind fears about people
exercising their right to arms have been proven wrong time and again. They
were the empty paranoid rantings and bigotry of the news media, elected
officials and ignorant masses. Their wildly promoted fantasies of death and
mayhem desperately needed correction. What we got, and are getting again,
is repetition.

The sky never fell, remember? Brainless bubbas left
no pools of blood. Instead, crime dropped as millions of decent citizens
armed themselves against crime. Only Mr. Obama’s crime-riddled Chicago
holds out one state from the national tidal wave of peace.

So —
do we really need to go through the old Dodge-City nonsense again now?
Should you in the ethical media remain complicit? Are our schools’
teachers, their staffs and principals so hopelessly incompetent and without
judgment that even with training they can’t match the performance of
toothless gun-toting hicks in torn T-shirts, or even doctors, lawyers and
professionals with CCW permission slips in their wallets?

America
is not having a debate about guns, America is having a debate about
hoplophobia — morbid fear of guns. The preposterous disarm-the-innocent
proposals from the left are a false flag. Guns are good. Guns protect us.
Guns save lives. Guns stop crime. Guns are why America is still free. That
aspect of this debate is missing in your narrative.

The errant
behavior of a psychopath is not grounds to disarm or infringe upon innocent
people who did nothing. That is an irrational, sick, hoplophobic response
that cannot work, and cries out for compassion and counseling — for the
person who suggests it. You don’t want hoplophobes setting gun policy any
more than you want aquaphobes as lifeguards.

Infringing upon the
innocent to protect the innocent will not work. Denying a teacher the right
to arms is a perverse policy choice fraught with ulterior motives and is
constitutionally forbidden. Its very suggestion is a violation of
the oath of office for elected officials and should be grounds for removal
from office. Reporters should recognize this simple fact as swiftly as half
the public does. The tearful emotional frenzy incessantly whipped up by the
media does not change this.

Baby boomers universally remember
rifle teams in high schools, varsity letters awarded for competition,
bringing firearms to class to go hunting afterwards. The notion that guns
and schools don’t mix, and that gun ignorance should supplant gun education
is a modern one whose origin is murky and suspicious.

The
disarmed-teachers policy currently in place has caused grievous harm. Those
responsible for this gross denial of a specific enumerated civil right
should be identified and held accountable, and the disarmed-teachers policy
should end without delay.

Denial of human rights never advances
the cause of freedom or the human condition. It is almost as if we are
fighting the civil-rights battles of the 1960s again. A bill to reverse the
egregious discrimination against the people responsible for our children’s
safe education should be drafted and introduced immediately before further
harm ensues.

Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America
The
Uninvited Ombudsman

Quote Of The Day

The quote of the day comes from Herschel Smith who writes the Captain’s Journal blog. It is to the Republicans in Congress, especially those in the House, about what will happen if they don’t block any and all gun control measures currently being pushed.

However, the Republicans stand warned.  If – controlling the House of
Representatives – they allow new gun control measures to pass to the
President’s desk, the GOP will cease to exists as a viable political
party.  Voters are having difficulty finding differences between them
and the Democrats anyway.  Caving on gun control would seal the fate of
the GOP as a historical relic rather than a future possibility.

Read his full post. He discusses what we can expect in the next few months.