Month: March 2013

Uncategorized

S. 374 – Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013

March 7, 2013 by 1 Comment

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) introduced S. 374 – the Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013- on February 25th and it will be voted for in the Senate Judiciary Committee today. The text of this Orwellian sounding bill is below. If you read it closely, it seems to be missing something. That something is the action component to go with the so-called findings part of the bill.


S 374 IS

113th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 374

To ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system and require a background check for every firearm sale.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

February 25, 2013

Mr. SCHUMER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national instant criminal background check system and require a background check for every firearm sale.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013′.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress makes the following findings:

(1) Congress supports and respects the right to bear arms found in the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

(2) Congress supports the existing prohibition on a national firearms registry.

(3) There are deficits in the background check system in effect before the date of enactment of this Act and the Department of Justice should make it a top priority to work with States to swiftly input missing records, including mental health records.

(4) If the citizens of the United States agree that in order to promote safe and responsible gun ownership criminals and the mentally ill should be prohibited from possessing firearms, it should be incumbent upon all citizens to ensure weapons are not being transferred to such people.

END

The introduction to the bill calls its a bill to require all prohibited persons be listed in the NICS database AND to require a background check for all gun sales. So the question remains where is the action component of the bill. The
bill as written reads like a Senate Resolution minus a whole bunch of
whereas’s.

The devil is always in the details and I expect the devil to be at play with this bill. What will the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee add to this bill today and what will be added as amendments on the floor of the Senate assuming that this bill, as expected, moves out of committee?

In my opinion, the innocuous sounding text of the bill plus the missing action component makes this a dangerous bill. I see it is a vehicle sponsored by one of the most notorious gun prohibitionists in the Congress to saddle us with gun control that we don’t want or need.

Uncategorized

GOA On The Senate Judiciary Bill Mark-Ups

March 7, 2013 by

The Gun Owners of America have sent out a notice about the bills that will be voted on in the Senate Judiciary Committee tomorrow. While they mention S. 443, I’m wondering if this bill will be substituted for the S. 54 which is on the agenda. I don’t always agree with GOA but I think are correct about S. 443 being more dangerous than S. 150 which doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of being enacted.


Senate “Deal” Would Impose
Even More Gun Bans
Gifts, gun raffles and multiple sales of guns would be effectively banned

Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee will mark up four bills arising out of the Newtown tragedy:

* The Feinstein bill — which would ban millions of shotguns, rifles, handguns and magazines that Americans can legally own — but which will probably die on the Senate floor.

* The universal gun registry — which may also die on the Senate floor — unless a last-minute deal with Sen. Tom Coburn brings it to life.

* Legislation by Barbara Boxer, which throws away $100,000,000 on school safety studies, but doesn’t immediately mention guns.

* And, currently the biggest danger, the Leahy-Gillibrand-Kirk bill, which has ominously been labeled a “gun trafficking” bill.

In regard to this latter piece of legislation (S. 443), the bill is being sold inside the Beltway as a bipartisan “compromise” because anti-gun Senator Mark Kirk (R-IL) is a cosponsor of it.

But S. 443 would dramatically threaten to put gun owners in jail with horrendously long sentences for the most minor of infractions.

Essentially, the bill would impose a 15-year prison sentence for “negligent multiple sales by a dealer,” “negligent gifting” or “negligent raffling.”

Increasingly, there are more and more individuals who are “prohibited persons” for non-violent reasons — for instance, they smoke marijuana or they are military veterans suffering from maladies such as PTSD.

But if S. 443 is passed, any person who sells to such prohibited persons two or more firearms … or gives them a firearm as a gift … or raffles a firearm (where they are the recipient) … does so only at the considerable risk of spending 15 years in a federal penitentiary.

You don’t need to know the person is a prohibited person under either example. Nor does the recipient need to know they’re a prohibited person.

In fact, you don’t need to do anything more than plan (“conspire”) to transfer the gun. In addition, the recipient doesn’t need to be on the NICS list to be a prohibited person.

Not only that, under section 4 of the bill, if you even “intend” to sell a firearm to a person who turns out to be a marijuana smoker — or one of the prohibited military veterans suffering from PTSD — you become a prohibited person yourself.

Go here to read the entire analysis of S. 443.

When all is said and done, this bipartisan “compromise” is as bad as the Feinstein gun ban (S. 150).

ACTION: Click here to demand that your U.S. Senators oppose the Leahy-Gillibrand-Kirk bill (S. 443).

Uncategorized

Tough Tiddlywinks, Mr. President

March 7, 2013 by 2 Comments

After the Senate Republicans successfully filibustered Caitlin Halligan’s nomination for the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, you knew that Obama would release some self-serving accusing the Republicans of obstruction. Unlike in many other things the White House did not disappoint us here. Their statement is below:


Statement by the President on Republican Filibuster of Caitlin Halligan

I am deeply disappointed that despite support from a majority of the United States Senate, a minority of Senators continues to block the nomination of Caitlin Halligan to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Nearly two and a half years after being nominated, Ms. Halligan continues to wait for a simple up-or-down vote. In the past, filibusters of judicial nominations required “extraordinary circumstances,” and a Republican Senator who was part of this agreement articulated that only an ethics or qualification issue – not ideology – would qualify. Ms. Halligan has always practiced law with the highest ethical ideals, and her qualifications are beyond question. Furthermore, her career in public service and as a law enforcement lawyer, serving the citizens of New York, is well within the mainstream.

Today’s vote continues the Republican pattern of obstruction. My judicial nominees wait more than three times as long on the Senate floor to receive a vote than my predecessor’s nominees. The effects of this obstruction take the heaviest toll on the D.C. Circuit, considered the Nation’s second-highest court, which now has only seven active judges and four vacancies. Until last month, for more than forty years, the court has always had at least eight active judges and as many as twelve. A majority of the Senate agrees that Ms. Halligan is exactly the kind of person who should serve on this court, and I urge Senate Republicans to allow the Senate to express its will and to confirm Ms. Halligan without further delay.

Liberal and progressive also had to jump in and express their displeasure according to BLT: The Blog of the Legal Times. Of course these are the same groups that pushed for filibusters of Republican court nominees when the Republicans held the Senate majority.

Washington’s progressive court-watching groups decried the block of what they call a highly qualified nominee for a 11-member court that has four vacancies. Alliance For Justice President Nan Aron said in a statement “urging Republican senators to rise above partisanship is like urging three-pack-a-day smokers to ‘just say no’ to tobacco.”


“The vote today also makes clear that the recent agreement to ‘reform’ Senate rules really was no agreement at all, but rather a blank check for continued obstruction,” Aron said. “We believe the Senate majority needs to reconsider the terms of this agreement, and revisit serious rules reform.”


The People For the American Way (sic) said it was a political strategy to keep Republican-appointed judges dominating the court.


“Let’s call the filibuster of Halligan what it is: a politically motivated attempt to keep President Obama’s nominee off the second highest court in the country,” PFAW Vice President Marge Baker. “The court continues to be dominated by far-right Republican-appointed judges who have pushed an extreme right-wing agenda on issues including environmental protection, workers’ rights and public health. This is not a coincidence.”

What a bunch of whiners. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Obama do a recess appointment of Halligan sometime in the future.

Uncategorized

Senate Judiciary Committee Votes On Gun Control Tomorrow

March 7, 2013 by



The Senate Judiciary Committee will have an executive business meeting tomorrow morning at 10am. There are a number of items that should be of concern to those concerned with the Second Amendment and gun rights.

The first item on the agenda is a confirmation vote on six nominees for US District judgeships. Of particular concern is Kenneth John Gonzales to be a District Court judge for the District of New Mexico. Gonzales is currently the US Attorney for New Mexico and the man behind the egregious prosecution of the Reese family of Deming, NM on charges of arms smuggling. They have already been found not guilty on 24 out of 28 charges and are seeking dismissal of the other four charges due to prosecutorial misconduct.

National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea and the Firearms Coalition’s Jeff Knox have been doing yeoman’s work in covering this case since the beginning. Here are a couple of their latest reports. The Tea Party of Luna County (NM) has been on the case since the beginning as well.

Based on the prosecution’s behavior under Gonzales, I and many others feel he is unfit to sit on the bench. David Codrea is urging that people contact Sen. Chuck Grassley R-IA) to make their opposition known.

The other major items on the Judiciary Committee’s agenda are votes on four gun control measures.

II. Bills

S.150, Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 (Feinstein)

S.54, Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013 (Leahy)

S.374, Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers Act of 2013 (Schumer)

S.146, School Safety Enhancements Act of 2013 (Boxer)

Given the composition of the committee, I really have no expectation that they won’t pass these measures. The only question is whether any Republican votes for any of these measures.  I would hope not but there is no guarantees. Sebastian has a good post up today about the risk of letting gun controllers have any victory. In my opinion, a party line vote is about the best we can expect in the Senate Judiciary Committee and would count as a win.

It’s time to tell the Republicans on the committee that we expect them to hold the line. Contact info is available here.

Uncategorized

Vote On Anti-Gun Nominee Caitlin Halligan (Updated)

March 6, 2013 by 6 Comments

Just like a bad meal keeps repeating on you, so too does Obama’s nomination of Caitlin Halligan to be a judge on US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit.

Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has scheduled a vote tomorrow morning to invoke cloture on the Republican filibuster of Halligan. From the Blog of the Legal Times:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) filed paperwork late Monday to try to defeat a Republican filibuster of Halligan, currently the general counsel of the Manhattan district attorney’s office. Reid will need help from some Republicans, since it takes 60 votes to break the block. If the filibuster is ended, Halligan then would need only 50 votes to be confirmed.

Reid spoke on the Senate floor Tuesday morning, using the 1991 confirmation vote of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas as an example of why Halligan and every judicial nominee should get a confirmation vote without having to overcome a filibuster.

“I was very troubled with Justice Thomas, who was then a circuit court judge, and a decision had to be made by me and many others: should we allow Justice Thomas an up-or-down vote,” Reid said. “The decision was made, yes, he should.”

“He barely made it,” Reid said of the 52-48 vote. “It would have been so easy to stop that nomination, but it would have been the wrong thing to do. As bad as I feel he has been as a jurist, that doesn’t matter.”

The Senate refused to invoke cloture on her nomination in 2011. She was renominated again in 2012 but time ran out on her nomination then. President Obama again renominated Halligan for the third time in January of this year.

Halligan has been opposed by every gun rights organization due to her actions against gun rights while serving as the Solicitor General of New York under then NY Attorney General Eliot Spitzer. She currently the General Counsel in the New York County District Attorney’s Office serving anti-knife DA Cyrus Vance, Jr.

I would urge you to either email or call your two senators ASAP asking them to oppose Halligan’s nomination.

UPDATE: The Washington Post reports that Halligan was again successfully filibustered. The motion to invoke cloture on her nomination only received 51 votes or 9 short of what was needed. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) was the only Republican to vote for cloture.

The Library of Congress’ Thomas page is not showing the results of the roll call vote yet. If Halligan only got 51 votes, this would seem to indicate that some Democrats either didn’t vote or voted against her.

UPDATE II: The roll call vote stats have been posted on the cloture motion.  While no Democrats voted against the cloture motion, it appears that eight senators – four Republicans and four Democrats – did not vote.

YEAs —51
Baldwin (D-WI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Coons (D-DE)
Cowan (D-MA)
Donnelly (D-IN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)		 Gillibrand (D-NY)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Heinrich (D-NM)
Heitkamp (D-ND)
Hirono (D-HI)
Kaine (D-VA)
King (I-ME)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Murkowski (R-AK) 		Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)
NAYs —41
Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Cruz (R-TX)		 Enzi (R-WY)
Fischer (R-NE)
Flake (R-AZ)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Heller (R-NV)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johnson (R-WI)
Kirk (R-IL)
Lee (R-UT)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY) 		Moran (R-KS)
Paul (R-KY)
Portman (R-OH)
Reid (D-NV)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rubio (R-FL)
Scott (R-SC)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Toomey (R-PA)
Wicker (R-MS)
Not Voting –
8
Crapo (R-ID)
Hatch (R-UT)
Johanns (R-NE)
Udall (D-CO)		 Johnson (D-SD)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Uncategorized

Comment Of The Day

March 6, 2013 by 3 Comments

In an editorial published this evening, Investor’s Business Daily is rightly questioning the purchase of over 2,700 armored vehicles – MRAPs – by the Department of Homeland Security. They note that these vehicles were designed to resist mines and ambush attacks in Iraq.

So how does DHS say they plan to use these vehicles?

A DHS officer, Robert Whitaker, stationed in El Paso, Texas, recently proudly described the agency’s new armored toy as “Mine-resistant … we use to deliver our team to high-risk warrant services … (with) gun ports so we can actually shoot from within the vehicle; you may think it’s pretty loud but actually it’s not too bad … we have gun ports there in the back and two on the sides as well. They are designed for .50-caliber weapons.”

This is needed to serve warrants? Perhaps it might have been useful at Waco.

Uncategorized

This Is Incredible!

March 5, 2013 by 4 Comments

Tom Gresham, host of Gun Talk, arranged a deal with the NRA for Life Memberships at the reduced price of $300. The offer ran through the end of February and started in early January. The offer proved quite popular and the NRA had to set up a special toll-free number to handle the calls.

How successful was this offer? 16,630 new Life members successful! Or in dollar terms, $4,989,000 worth of membership dues.

To put this in perspective, the Brady Campaign has raised about the same amount of money since the Newtown shootings. However, it took their whole organization to raise the money as opposed to one guy who wanted to do something.

As a NRA Life Member, I say, thanks Tom!

Below is the announcement from Tom about the campaign’s success:


Mandeville, LA – In less than two months, radio and TV host Tom Gresham delivered 16,630 new Lifetime Members to the National Rifle Association, amounting to more than $4.9 million dollars in membership dues. Gresham announced a special $300 Lifetime Membership deal with the NRA on Thursday, January 10th, via Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/Guntalk, complete with a special direct phone number. The deal ended last Thursday.

“It’s incredible that we were able to send the NRA almost five million dollars in only seven weeks,” said show host Tom Gresham. “America’s gun owners obviously want to be part of the fight to not only protect, but to regain gun rights, and they are saying so with their hard-earned dollars. At a time when money is short and people are concerned about the economy, this massive response shows just how important Second Amendment rights are to the public.”

What began with a tweet, the deal was announced on Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk Radio show each week, (http://www.guntalk.com), and went out to the 55,000-plus subscribers of the Truth Squad newsletter, (http://www.guntalk.com/truthsquad ), and to the Gun Talk Media Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/guntalkmedia). Word of the deal continued to spread through email, Twitter and Facebook and in gun shops, shooting clubs, and Internet forums all across the U.S..

In its 18th year of national syndication, Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk Radio airs live on Sundays from 2PM-5PM Eastern, and runs on more than 137 stations, plus on XM (Ch. 165) Satellite Radio. All Gun Talk shows can be downloaded as podcasts at http://www.guntalk.libsyn.com and Apple iTunes, or through one of the available Apps: the Gun Talk iPhone App, the Blackberry Podcast App, and the Gun Talk App for Android on Amazon. The Gun Talk Minute on XM also airs on XM 165, 166, 168 and Fox Sports every day throughout the week. More information is available at http://www.guntalk.com.

Uncategorized

GRNC – Stop Release Of Permit Info

March 5, 2013 by 1 Comment

Grass Roots North Carolina sent out an alert this evening urging North Carolinians to write their State Representative and State Senator urging them to support SB 28 and HB 17. A number of sheriffs in the state are now refusing to release this data on public safety grounds. These bills, if passed, will make CHP and pistol purchase permit data private and not subject to the state’s version of the Freedom of Information Act.


Several NC Sheriffs refuse to give sensitive information…

According to a recent article in the “The Charlotte Observer,” several of North Carolina’s 100 Sheriffs are standing up for your rights by not releasing sensitive information associated with Concealed Handgun Permits which they feel is a breach of privacy and beyond the scope of what is required by laws covered under the Freedom of Information Act.

Citing safety concerns, some have refused requests based on concerns over the identities of victims of domestic violence who still may be in danger, as well as dangers many gun owners would face if the information was made public. Sheriff Alan Cloninger of Gaston County has sent a letter to CHP holders within his jurisdiction explaining his reasoning for not releasing private information, again citing safety concerns. North Carolina Sheriffs, along with many other law enforcement agencies are realizing that the release of such information is not only dangerous but a serious breach of public safety and privacy.

Legislative attempts to stop the pressure

Currently, there are two bills in the North Carolina General Assembly that address this important issue that you need to be aware of: SB 28 and HB 17.

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.

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.

Your voice must be heard

If left to their own discretion, politicians will cater to the loudest voices. These two Bills are important safeguards against the abuse of sensitive information. Your information should never be used as a way to sensationalize news organizations’ efforts to gain ratings as they have so many times before. They don’t care about your safety, they care about their own ratings. Your State Senators and Representatives need to know that you are watching these Bills closely, and that they have your support.

IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED!

Contact your NC State Senator and tell them to support SB 28
Contact NC State House representative and tell them to support HB 17
Support GRNC: GRNC needs your support to help combat the efforts against your rights as gun owners. Join or renew your membership! http://www.grnc.org/join-grnc/join-grnc-online
SIGN THE “STOP THE GUN BAN” PETITION: Go to: www.StopTheGunBan.org Whether or not you have already signed it, forward this to others and tell them to sign it too.

CONTACT INFO

Find your reps by going to: http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/representation/WhoRepresentsMe.aspx

DELIVER THIS MESSAGE

Suggested Subject: “Stop Release Of Permit Holder Info”

Dear : Senator or Representative,

I am alarmed at the number of requests by news organizations and others for information about me. As a resident of your district and a concerned gun owner, I find it appalling that news outlets would try to use personal and private information about me to liven up their stories in the hopes of creating a fear-driven ratings boost for them.

Two bills currently active in the North Carolina General Assembly will make information about my status as a Concealed Handgun Permit holder closed to the public eye. I urge you to support and vote for SB28 and HB17 when they come to the floor. The information that news organizations, not to mention anti-gun activists, can and will be used on a wide basis, will not only put my life in danger, but also the lives of my family members.

I cannot stand by and allow this kind of information to become public for all those who happen to ask for it. I will monitor your actions via Grass Roots North Carolina legislative alerts.

Respectfully,

Uncategorized

The February 2013 NICS Check Report

March 5, 2013 by 2 Comments

The National Shooting Sports Foundation has released their adjusted-NICS check statistics for February. Contrary to what I thought might happen, February 2013 checks were up 29.1% over the same period in 2012.

The February 2013 NSSF-adjusted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) figure of 1,634,309 is an increase of 29.1 percent over the NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 1,266,344
in February 2012. For comparison, the unadjusted February 2013 NICS
figure of 2,298,561 reflects a 32.5 percent increase from the unadjusted
NICS figure of 1,734,646 in February 2012.

This marks the 33rd straight month with increases in NSSF-adjusted NICS checks over the same period in the prior year.

I had thought perhaps low inventories might have broken this string of increases but obviously not. In retrospect, visits to both small and large gun shops in the Piedmont Triad area of North Carolina should have told me that. In the early part of February I visited two small gun stores in the Kernersville area that were packed even though the inventory was down. I also visited the Winston-Salem Gander Mountain which actually had a decent inventory. That store was also crowded.

As always, it should be noted that there is not a direct correlation between NICS checks and gun sales. This is because a few states such as  Kentucky and Iowa use the National Instant Criminal Background Check System for CCW purposes. Moreover, in a number of states such as North Carolina, a concealed carry permit is accepted as a substitute for a NICS check.