Sean Sorrentino of An NC Gun Blog was the featured guest on Triangle Tactical’s podcast this past week. He and Luke discussed the New York Boycott, restaurant carry in NC, SB 124, and concealed carry statistics for North Carolina.
I am a big fan of podcasts and rarely even listen to the radio when I drive anymore. I’m glad to find another North Carolina based gun podcast to add to my podcast listening rotation. The Triangle Tactical podcast is available on iTunes and Stitcher Smart Radio.
With apologies to Oscar Wilde, for Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) there is a topic that dare not speak its name. That topic is gun control and the Second Amendment.
Sen. Manchin gave an interview to The Journal of Martinsburg, WV that was published on Sunday. At the top of the interview was the following editor’s note:
Editor’s note: This question and answer session was permitted under the condition that The Journal would not ask questions regarding gun control legislation or the Second Amendment, as requested by the senator’s staff.
Given that Manchin was elected to a full six-year term in 2012 and won’t be up for re-election until 2018, I find this all rather strange. You must wonder what the good Senator has to hide.
His staff is now denying that they made the topic off-limits. They just said he wouldn’t answer questions on gun control or the Second Amendment.
The way I see it is that it is irrelevant whether the topic was off-limits or that Manchin would just refuse to answer the question. He still is hiding. He’s backtracked a good deal from the earlier positions he took in January. If I were a resident of West by God Virginia, I’d be demanding answers as a constituent to just where Manchin stands now on gun control. He owes his constituents an honest answer and it looks like he is doing everything in his power to avoid doing that.
H/T Instapundit
There are currently two bills before the North Carolina General Assembly that would keeping pistol purchase permit and Concealed Handgun Permit data private. They are HB 17 which deals with confidentiality and restaurant carry and SB 28 which deals strictly with confidentiality.
Two weeks ago, the Senate Judiciary II Committee held hearings on SB 28. This bill is strongly supported by both gun rights groups such as Grass Roots North Carolina and the NC Sheriffs Association. On the other side is the NC Press Association which wants to keep this data as a public record and accessible through freedom of information requests.
Below is a report on the hearing from the NCSA Weekly Legislative Report dated February 22nd.
Gun Permit RecordsThe Senate Judiciary II Committee had a lively deba
te this week but didn
‘t vote on a bill that
would exempt pistol purchase permits, concealed
carry permits, and pistol sales records from
disclosure under the public records law. Under Senate Bill 28, the information would be available
only upon request of law enforcement
agencies or by court order, while exempting it from the Public
Records Act. The legislation wouldn’t apply to
long guns and other rifles because those weapons
don’t require purchase permits.The bill sponsor, Senator Stan Bingham, said th
e measure was aimed at reducing gun thefts.
He argued that criminals may target homes wher
e they know there are guns for the taking. Gregg
Stahl, Director of Government Relations for the
N.C. Sheriffs’ Association, told the legislative
committee that sheriffs across the state have also
heard from residents w
ho don’t own guns who fear
they would be targeted for thefts
as well. “The list of gun owners
also tells us where there are no
guns,” Stahl said.Opponents argued that they had seen no data to suggest that criminals are using public
information about gun ownership to help commit crimes. John Bussian, a lobbyist for the N.C. Press
Association, told the committee that he was opposing “yet another government records secrecy bill.”
Some of the best media reporting across the count
ry on the flow of arms, he said, has been done
using the types of records that the bill would exempt from the Public Records Act.But others, including lobbyists for the N.C. Ri
fle and Pistol Association and the N.C.
Firearms Dealers Group, supported the bill. Michael
Mann of the Rifle and Pi
stol Association said he believed there was “no legitimate reason” for anyone to have access to detailed information about
gun owners. Professional burglars, he said, look for items they can steal and dispose of quickly,
such as cash, jewelry and guns.
The Charlotte Observer has noticed this fight. They published a long article on it along with an editorial opposing this bill. I will have more on that in a later post.
As to the pistol purchase permits themselves, I’d like to see them eliminated. They are a relic of Jim Crow laws in North Carolina. The permit was instituted in 1919 and was a way to allow racist sheriffs to keep handguns out of the hands of blacks.
Grass Roots North Carolina has released an analysis of the firearms-related legislation that have been introduced in the North Carolina General Assembly so far this session. Their analysis also indicates their support, opposition, or a neutral or non-position on a bill.
NC Gun Legislation AnalysisGRNC offers apologies that the intense activities surrounding state and national legislation have delayed our legislative update to members. In particular, we have been inundated with emails regarding SB 124:
“Shoot Gun From Inside/To Harm or Incite Fear.” A more detailed analysis is below, but the short answer is that although the bill does not present a danger to Castle Doctrine or lawful self-defense, it is still a bad bill as written.GRNC-initiated legislation:
We have been working hard with sponsors and leadership of both chambers to introduce legislation which will:
(1) Expand concealed carry onto campuses more completely thanany of the bills thus far introduced;
(2) Expand concealed carry into restaurants and other areas
(3) Put “teeth” into our statewide firearms preemption law, which local governments seem to think they are free to ignore;
(4) Clean up flaws in concealed handgun application procedures; and finally
(5) Two other significant advancements which we will not announce before introduction.Several of the bills have been sent to drafting and will be filed next week. We will be asking you to contact your state House and Senate reps to encourage them to cosponsor the bills as they are filed, so please keep an eye on GRNC alerts.
Senate:
SB 17: “Concealed Handgun Permits/Validity” (Bingham). This bill would stop non-resident permits from being recognized in NC. For example, a resident of Vermont, which has constitutional carry but does not issue CHPs, who gets a permit from Florida in order to carry in other states, would not be able to do so in NC.
Introduced by Sen. Stan Bingham in response to complaints by the sheriff of Davidson County that Virginia permits, issued via online procedures, were being used in his county, GRNC opposes the bill as potentially damaging our concealed handgun reciprocity agreements with other states. Additionally, while some procedures are accomplished online in Virginia, criminal background check requirements are being done.
We have met with Sen. Bingham, and he expressed that he was not interested in running a bill which would damage reciprocity, suggesting he will not push for a hearing on the bill. If it is scheduled for a hearing, we will issue appropriate alerts. Meanwhile, please contact Sen. Bingham and POLITELY express that unintended consequences mean this bill should be shelved.
SB 27: “Public School Protection/Firearm Amendments” (Bingham). Establishes a procedure for local school board to opt for armed “school safety marshals” who would apply and be trained under standards set by the school board. Due to the limited nature of the bill, GRNC takes no position at this time but could eventually support it if more extensive measures cannot be passed.
SB 28: “Gun Permit Information/No Publication”(Bingham). Removes concealed handgun permit and handgun purchase permit records from public record, preventing abuses of the information by media outlets such as those by the “Journal News,” WRAL-TV and “The New York Times.” GRNC supports the bill.
SB 59: “Armed Security Guards in K-12″(Rabin). Would establish statewide standards for armed security guards in schools. Due to its limited nature, GRNC takes no position on the bill at this time but could eventually support it if more extensive measures cannot be passed.
SB 124: “Shoot Gun From Inside/To Harm or Incite Fear” (Brunstetter). GRNC has received numerous emails from gun rights supporters opposing the bill. When it was introduced, we passed it to our “gun-friendly lawyer” network for review. Although a casual glance would suggest it undermines lawful self-defense, the “willfully and wantonly” language actually exempts such cases. For an analysis, go here. There are, however, serious problems with the bill which could criminalize otherwise lawful firearms activities. In its present form, GRNC opposes the bill.
As Sen. Brunstetter notes, the bill originated from an incident in which an individual shot televisions inside a Kernersville Wal-Mart, narrowly missing customers, but due to statutory peculiarities, could only be prosecuted under misdemeanor statutes. We had a cordial meeting with Brunstetter and staff on Wednesday to give him our requirements for the bill. He agreed to several immediately, and is reviewing others. We expect to have word this week. At that point, we will decide what further actions, if any, are necessary.
SB 146: “Private Schools/Firearms Amendments” (Brock, Bingham, Hise). Would enable governing bodies of private schools to authorize employees or volunteers who have concealed handgun permits and take an additional 8 hours of NRA training to carry firearms. Because this is a broader bill than the others so far introduced, GRNC supports the bill.
House:
HB 17: “Gun Permits/Restaurants & Confidentiality” (Burr, Hager, Hollo, Bell). The restaurant carry language of the bill is identical to what GRNC drafted in HB 111, which failed to pass the Senate last year. The second section removes handgun purchase permit and concealed handgun permit information from public record. GRNC supports the bill.
HB 49: “Firearm in Locked Motor Vehicle/Parking Lot” (Shepard). This bill is identical to language drafted by GRNC and others which was stripped from HB 650 in the last session and would enable concealed handgun permit-holders to keep firearms in locked motor vehicles at places of employment. GRNC supports the bill.
Summary:
This week will see the introduction of GRNC-initiated legislation, so please monitor alerts. Depending on Brunstetter’s changes to SB 124, we might also demand action on the bill.
Mark Kelly, the husband of former Congresswoman Gabby Gifford (D-AZ) and co-founder of American for Responsible Solutions, has jumped on the gun control bandwagon with both feet. Tomrrow, he will be testifying in favor of Colorado HB 1229 which would mandate background checks for all firearms sales in that state.
The news comes from Fox 31 Denver. They were alerted to it from an email put out by Ceasefire Colorado.
The group Ceasefire Colorado, in an email Sunday alerting supporters to join Kelly and Maisich at the Capitol Monday, is explicit about the high stakes of Monday’s hearing — and the potential impact of Colorado lawmakers on the national gun control debate.
“We are done with gun lobby bullies writing our laws, and we are committed to lead the way to a new perspective on responsible gun ownership,” the email states.
Maisich is Patricia Maisich who was one of the people who tackled the gunman* in Tucson and who has now become an advocate for gun control.
While Kelly will be testifying in support of the bill to expand background checks it should be noted that the gunman in Tucson passed the FBI-run NICS check when he purchased his Glock 19. Presumably, the gunman would still have passed a NICS check for a private sale.
*While many news outlets have no hesitation in publishing the names of the shooters in mass shootings, I chose not to do so. I remember their actions but I refuse to give them the publicity that they sought by their actions.
This video from SooperMexican is hilarious. It is also sad that we’ve come to the point where they might be more truth than fiction in it. I just hope my gunny Coexist bumper sticker will protect me.
First, Colorado Democrats amended their magazine ban bill, HB 1224, to allow Magpul to make but not sell magazines in Colorado. Now it seems another feature of the bill would outlaw any pump or semi-auto shotgun that could accept a magazine tube extender. You know shotguns like the Mossberg 500 and the Remington 870 which are the two biggest selling shotguns in America.
Here’s a suggestion to the Senate Democrats and Gov. John Hickenlooper – dump the bill.
Some aging boomers must have a thing for nostalgia. Otherwise I can’t think of any reason that Rolling Stone magazine is still being published because frankly I don’t know anyone who reads it on a regular basis. It was one of those things you subscribed to in college and then left behind.
That said, some people must read it because it cost Gen. Stanley McChrystal his career. Now they are trying to do the gun industry what they did to McChrystal’s career. The only problem (for them) is that their article, “The Gun Industry’s Deadly Addiction”, will have no impact on gun sales. Moreover, when you use Josh Sugarmann and Tom Diaz as authoritative sources, you have no credibility.
The thrust of the article is this: hunting is dying, gun owners are aging and white, fewer people own guns, the industry is trying to survive, they need to target new demographics, thus they are introducing more “military-style weapons” to capture that demographic.
Today, hunting guns account for less than a quarter of the market, and
the hunting industry is forecasting a 24 percent drop in revenue by
2025. Gunmakers are on the wrong side of the same demographic curves
that haunt the modern Republican Party. Its customer base is too old,
too white, too male and too Southern. According to Gallup, 61 percent of
white males in the South own guns today. Nationwide, just 18 percent of
Latinos do. “The white males are aging and dying off,” says Sugarmann.
Flooding the market with battle-ready guns, he says, “is an effort to
find one new, shiny thing to sell them.”
Using comparisons similar to the way the tobacco industry has been portrayed, Rolling Stone asserts that firearms manufacturers are trying to hook kids on guns and to seduce women into buying guns for protection. Moreover, the move to get women customers is because they are the family gatekeepers. You get the mom, you get the whole family. Of course they use the example of the shooter from Newtown, Connecticut to make their point.
To protect herself from the faceless evil that might break into her
home, she didn’t just buy a single gun – she compiled an arsenal worth
thousands of dollars and trained with her son at local shooting ranges.
“She (Nancy Lanza) was the perfect customer,” says Diaz, “the perfect manifestation of
how they want to sell guns.”
The other three targets markets according to Rolling Stone are gamers with Zombie shoots, preppers, and narco-terrorists and criminals. They call this last “market” the gun industry’s “dirtiest – and most open – secret.”
The rest of the article deals with divestment attempts by certain pension funds and big city mayors such as Rahm Emanuel. They note that the mayor of Minneapolis is in talks with other mayors to withhold firearm and ammo purchases from any gun maker that lobbies against gun control. To which I would just use the example of Smith and Wesson as why gun makers are not going to be bullied into such deals.
If Rolling Stone promotes anything, it is the tradition of yellow journalism. I guess that makes them right in line with the rest of the mainstream media. So much for being counter-culture.
Rep. Mitch Greenlick (D-Portland) is the primary sponsor of Oregon HB 3200. This bill, if passed, is a draconian gun control measure which would have drastic consequences.
From the Oregon Firearms Federation email alert:
HB 3200 not only bans most modern guns and magazines, it allows warrantless searches of your home, requires background checks and registration for a firearm you already own and as-of-yet undefined storage requirements. We say “a firearm” because even if you comply with the restrictions in this bill you may still only own one.
Section 4 of HB 3200 is the kicker. This section requires you to register your firearm and magazines owned before the bill’s passage and to undergo a new background check. It then goes on to say:
(4) A person may not register more than one assault weapon and
three large capacity magazines under this section. Additional
assault weapons and large capacity magazines must be disposed of
in the manner specified in section 3 of this 2013 Act.
(5) A registered owner of an assault weapon or large capacity
magazine is required to:
(a) Securely store the assault weapon or large capacity
magazine pursuant to rules and regulations adopted by the
department;
(b) Allow an inspector from the department to inspect the
storage of assault weapons and large capacity magazines to ensure
compliance with this subsection;
Here is where it gets really curious. Rep. Greenlick who, mind you, is the primary sponsor and the one who introduced HB 3200, disagrees with parts of the bill he introduced.
Even Rep. Mitch Greenlick, D-Portland, the chief sponsor of House Bill 3200, said the bill as introduced goes too far in not only banning the sale of these weapons but in limiting each gun owner to continue possessing just one of these firearms.
Greenlick said he also disagrees with a provision that would allow the state police to investigate gun owners who possess one of these weapons to make sure they are safely stored.
“In its current form, it’s a pretty flawed bill,” said Greenlick, adding that “I don’t think [the bill] is in play.”
As The Riddler of Batman fame would say, so riddle me this Rep. Greenlick, did you not know what was in the bill when you introduced it and, if not, why not?
Could this piece of legislation that has Oregon Ceasefire swooning be another piece of legislation written by Mayor Bloomberg and his Illegal Mayors and dropped by parachute into the hands of willing naifs in the Oregon Legislative Assembly?
Let’s just say I wouldn’t be surprised.
The quote of the day comes from Mary Katherine Ham at Hotair.com. She discusses how every bit of advice on guns from Vice-President Joe Biden could get you arrested whether it is discharging the shotgun in the air to shooting through the door.
There is an exception though.
The only person who should ever take Biden’s gun advice is David
Gregory, who is of course exempt from gun laws because he has very
important points to make.
All too sadly, I believe she is right.
by