The Polite Society Podcast will again be broadcasting a live feed of both days of the Gun Rights Policy Conference. This year the live feed will go out over Facebook Live from the Polite Society Podcast page.
The page is here.
A complete compilation of the day’s events will be re-broadcast by Matt of Geeks, Gadgets, and Guns. I will post the link to that when it is available.
As a reminder, you can find the full agenda here.
The 2017 Gun Rights Policy Conference starts this evening in Irving, Texas. For those that don’t know, it is sponsored by the Second Amendment Foundation and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. And what could be a better way to start this conference than a win in the US Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in the Wrenn case.
The Court of Appeals has refused to hold an en banc review of Wrenn v. DC which is a win for gun rights in the District of Columbia. The Wrenn case invalidated the District’s requirement that a citizen show “good reason” in order to obtain a carry permit. The question is now whether the District of Columbia will appeal this to the United States Supreme Court. The last time they appealed such a loss in a gun rights case was in DC v. Heller and we know how that turned out for them.
From SAF on their win in DC:
BELLEVUE, WA — The U.S. District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has turned down a request from the city for an en banc hearing on the concealed carry case of Wrenn v. District of Columbia, amounting to a strategic win for the Second Amendment Foundation.
According to the court, not a single judge on the court requested a hearing. Earlier, a three-judge panel had ruled in favor of plaintiffs Brian Wrenn and SAF. The case challenges the District’s carry permit policy that requires citizens to provide a “good reason” to be issued a permit. The Appeals Court struck down that requirement.
“Ten years ago, Washington D.C.’s political leadership tried to extinguish Second Amendment rights before the Supreme Court,” noted attorney Alan Gura, who represents the plaintiffs. “The result was D.C. v. Heller, a tremendous victory for the rights of all Americans. With the court of appeals again confirming the people’s right to bear arms, Washington, D.C.’s politicians must once again ask themselves whether it makes sense to keep resisting our fundamental rights.”
Gura successfully argued both the 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller case and 2010 McDonald v. City of Chicago case before the U.S. Supreme Court. Both cases dealt directly with Second Amendment issues. Heller affirmed that the amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms, and McDonald incorporated the Second Amendment to the states via the 14thAmendment.
SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb was delighted with the court’s decision not to grant the en banc hearing.
“We are grateful,” Gottlieb observed, “that the court has shown considerable wisdom, and this should help advance the effort to assure reasonable concealed carry for District residents. It represents one more advancement in our effort to win firearms freedom one lawsuit at a time.”
The victory comes on the eve of the 32nd annual Gun Rights Policy Conference in Dallas, Texas. The event is co-sponsored by SAF and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
The agenda for the 2017 Gun Rights Policy Conference which starts on Friday evening in Dallas was announced yesterday. I am honored to be asked to speak again on the use of new media to promote gun rights. Paul Lathrop, host of the Polite Society Podcast, will also be on the same panel with me. Our fellow co-host Rachel Malone who is now the operations director of the Republican Party of Texas will be speaking on women in the gun rights movement.
You can find the full agenda here.
As a reminder, it is FREE to attend the Gun Rights Policy Conference and you come home with a stack of books and a ton of knowledge. So if you will be in the neighborhood of the Westin Dallas Fort Worth Airport, take advantage of it.
David Codrea reports that yet another of Mayor Bloomberg’s Illegal Mayors has resigned after pleading guilty. This time it was Patterson, NJ Mayor Jose (Joey) Torres who plead guilty to criminal conspiracy for using city workers to perform work on city time at a warehouse owned by his family.
However, former Mayor Torres was not just any old member of MAIG. As David reports, Joey Torres was one that got special recognition.
When he was mayor of New York City, Bloomberg actually called Torres out for special recognition in a “State of the City” address:
“Today, we’re joined by the mayor of Paterson, Jose (Joey) Torres. Mayor Torres, New York City offers its deepest condolences to you and your city. And we’ll also join you in working to bring sanity to gun policy in our nation. Next week, more than 50 mayors from across the country — who are part of our coalition of Mayors Against Illegal Guns — will gather in Washington, D.C., to take up this challenge.
“And I’m happy to say that Mayor Torres will be with us. Our goal will be getting Congress to overturn a wrong-headed law — one that blocks access at the local level to federal data that would let us hold gun dealers accountable for illegally selling to gun traffickers. Mayor Torres and I have a simple message for Congress: It’s time to take ideology out of crime-fighting and time to give mayors — the people who are responsible for policing our streets — the tools we need to protect our citizens.”
In other words, not content to disregard the Bill of Rights in their own ruined corners of the Republic, they’re intent on imposing their edicts everywhere, in Everytown, bending everyone to their will. And as for that “wrong-headed law” Bloomberg and Torres sought to overturn? If they do, they’re likely to screw things up and get people killed:“Both BATFE and the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) oppose release of trace data. In fact, BATFE has fought for years in the federal courts to keep trace records confidential, because they contain information (such as names of gun buyers) that could jeopardize ongoing investigations—not to mention law enforcement officers’ lives.”
The “wrong-head law” was the Tiahrt Amendment which put limits on the release of BATFE firearm traces.
When you think about it there are a couple of reasons as to why these mayors are so anti-gun. First, they want to do everything they can to minimize challenges to their power. Second, given their level of criminal misconduct they probably think most people are like them and shouldn’t have a gun.
Grass Roots North Carolina issued an alert this weekend urging people to contact the GOP members of the NC congressional delegation regarding the Hearing Protection Act and the SHARE Act.
I’ve urged readers to do the same in earlier posts. A little extra encouragement to the representatives is always welcome.
Silencers are great for protecting your hearing …
… and reducing noise as a courtesy to those around you,
but silence is never good when it comes to leading your representatives in DC …In a potential leap forward for Second Amendment principles, the
Hearing Protection Act of 2017,
which would deregulate suppressors, is about to go the House floor for a vote and your representative needs to hear from you.Encourage
GOP RepresentativesBelow, see how you can easily email and
phone your GOP United States Representative and tell him or her that
now is
the time to stand up for the Second Amendment. Actually, it’s always the
time to stand up for the Second Amendment, but this bill certainly
gives them the opportunity to go on record as pro-gun. This is where
Second Amendment campaign rhetoric gets put to the test. Use the links,
phone
numbers and the copy/paste text provided below to contact your
representative regarding this matter—if your representative is a
Republican. If
you don’t know who your representative is, CLICK HERE to find out—look for “Find Your Representative” at the upper-right portion of the page and plug in
your zip code.You are free to phone some of the other representatives on the list as well. It can only help.
IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED!
- EMAIL YOUR GOP REPRESENTATIVE IN WASHINGTON. Below, find links to the representatives’
respective online contact forms.- PHONE YOUR GOP REPRESENTATIVE. Below, find the representatives’ phone numbers. Phone them,
and use the ‘Phone Message’ text below to make clear your expectations as a North Carolina gun owner.If you don’t know who your
representative is: CLICK HERE to
find out. Look for “Find Your Representative” at the upper-right portion of the page and plug in your zip code.CONTACT
INFORMATIONGeorge Holding (R-Raleigh): 919-782-4400, Contact Form
Walter
Jones Jr. (R-Farmville): 800-351-1697, Contact Form
Virginia Foxx (R-Winston- Salem): 828-265-0240, Contact Form
Mark
Walker (R-Greensboro): 336-626-3060, Contact Form
David Rouzer (R-Benson): 910-253-6111 Contact Form
Richard
Hudson (R-Concord): 704-786-1612, Contact Form
Robert Pittenger (R-Charlotte): 704-362-1060 Contact Form
Patrick
McHenry (R-Cherryville): 828-327-6100, Contact Form
Mark Meadows (R-Asheville): 828-693-5660, Contact Form
Ted Budd
(R-Advance): 336-998-1313, Contact FormDELIVER THIS
MESSAGE
Phone Message:Hello, I am calling today to express my support for the Hearing
Protection Act of 2017. Passing this bill would be a much needed, great
step forward for Second Amendment principles, and also a great
opportunity for
representatives like [REP NAME] to live up to the GOP’s pro-gun
platform. Please tell the representative that he/she should be
encouraging House
leaders to move this bill to the floor, and I expect him/her to vote YES
on this bill. I will be monitoring the representative’s actions on this
matter through alerts from Grass Roots North Carolina. Thank you very
much.Copy/Paste Email Message:
Suggested Subject
(where applicable): “Vote YES on Hearing Protection of 2017”Dear Representative,
I am writing to express my full
support for the Hearing Protection Act of 2017. Passing this bill would
be a much needed step forward for Second Amendment principles, and also a
great opportunity for representatives like you to live up to the GOP’s
pro-gun platform. As a constituent, and a gun owner, I expect you to
encourage House leaders to move this bill to the floor, and when it’s up
for a vote, I expect you to vote YES. I will be monitoring your actions
on this matter through alerts from Grass Roots North Carolina.Respectfully,
I received an email from Robin Lloyd of Americans for Responsible Solutions (sic) today. She lists herself as the Director of Government Affairs which I assume to mean head lobbyist. The email is below and I’ve highlighted sections. As many readers know, this group has had a real hard-on about the Hearing Protection Act since the beginning. The HPA was rolled into HR 3668 – the Sportsmen’s Heritage And Recreational Enhancement Act or the “SHARE Act”. The House Committee on Natural Resources reported it out on Monday, September 18th.
John –
I wanted to write with a quick, but promising, update on the gun lobby’s efforts to pass legislation deregulating the sale of firearm silencers.
After last week’s committee hearing and vote, it looked like the vote on final passage before the entire House was going to happen before the end of the month.
But the grassroots pushback is working, and some moderate Republicans in the House are hesitant about voting on this as they consider their own re-election prospects.
Can you imagine what a sea change it would be for the future of the gun debate if the House of Representatives, with an overwhelming Republican majority, was afraid to vote on and pass this bill? It would totally and completely reshape the future of this debate. So we have to keep up the pressure:
Chip in $3 to help Gabby, Mark, and Americans for Responsible Solutions stop legislation that would deregulate the sale of firearm silencers from ever becoming law.Gosh, John, it wasn’t long ago that the shoe was completely on the other foot — that the gun lobby’s allies used to try and force people who generally opposed commonsense solutions to reduce gun violence to take “tough, pro-gun” votes.
We are winning. The future is ours on this issue. But only if we all continue to make our voices heard.All my best,
Robin Lloyd
Director of Government Affairs
Americans for Responsible Solutions
We are in a war for our firearm civil rights. We know it and they know it. Propaganda is part and parcel of war and the email above may just be that. Shocking as it may seem, gun prohibitionists have been known to lie and this well could be another of their big lies. They have been lying about suppressors since Day 1 so why should this be any different. Even the Washington Post awarded them 3 or 4 Pinocchios for their claims about suppressors.
It could also be just an effort to rally their base and bring in more dollars. There is nary an email from this group that doesn’t ask for money.
Nonetheless, despite having a history of being lying b@$%@rds, they could actually be correct about some moderate Republicans (aka RINOs) wavering on this bill due to the pro-gun rights elements contained within it. While the bill is on the Union Calendar, that doesn’t say when it is scheduled to be brought to the floor of the House for a vote. Thus, we need to keep calling our representatives and demand that they vote for this bill. If you are represented by a RINO, put it to them hard.
Find your representative here.
We also need to put pressure on the Republican leadership to stand firm and to bring the bill forward.
Contact Speaker Paul Ryan’s office here and urge him to bring the bill forward.
Both sets of links will also give you phone numbers — use them!
One final suggestion: if you’ve bought a suppressor or filed a Form 1 since 2015, you will get your $200 back. You might hint to the congressional office that you are looking for a place to spend that money or even, cough, cough, donate it.
To put things into perspective, imagine if Congress or any state legislature passed a bill stating that all the key research data on abortions would, by law, be given to researchers with the National Right-To-Life Committee and that any other requests for this same public health data would be approved only at the discretion of the White House. Do you think the media would jump on the issue with both feet? Moreover, how quickly would lawsuits be filed seeking injunctions by groups like the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, and the National Abortion Rights Action League?
That is essentially the case in California with a bill (SB 536) sitting on Gov. Jerry Brown’s desk concerning the data about gun violence restraining orders. It automatically is available to well-known anti-gun researcher Dr. Garen Wintemute and his Gun Violence Research Center. All other requests for this same research data would be at the discretion of the California Department of Justice. This is the same DOJ that was headed by virulently anti-gun rights Attorney General Kamala Harris (D-CA) and is now headed by equally anti-gun rights Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D-CA).
Does anyone think this DOJ would allow the data to go to Dr. John Lott and his Crime Prevention Research Center?
Gun rights activists in California are rightly upset and wary of this bill. They are asking Gov. Brown to veto the bill. The release from the Firearms Policy Coalition on the bill is below:
Bill Promoting Unequal Access to Public Data is on Gov. Jerry Brown’s Desk
SACRAMENTO, CA (September 20, 2017) — Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) is asking Governor Jerry Brown to veto Senate Bill 536, a measure which provides unequal access to data for the
purpose of researching Gun Violence Restraining Orders (GVRO).SB 536, by Senator Richard Pan (D – Sacramento), requires the Department of Justice (DOJ) to make information relating to GVROs that is maintained in the California Restraining and
Protective Order System or any similar database available to researchers affiliated with the University of California Firearm Violence Research Center. It does not, however, require DOJ to make the same data available to other organizations for the purpose
of research.“While we do appreciate a passing thought given to others whose research may benefit from this data, to state that such access is ‘…at the discretion of the department…’ places all
other requestors at a significant disadvantage,” said Craig DeLuz, Spokesman for Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC).“This allows the DOJ to pick favorites with sensitive data that is needed to hold the research center accountable.”
The Gun Violence Research Center at UC Davis was created in 2016 by legislation that amounted to a sole source contract with Dr. Garen Wintemute, a gun control advocate who has been
producing anti-gun research for decades. Under SB 536 that same biased researcher will have unfettered access to key research data, while others will be required to get special approval from DOJ.“This measure ensures that only those that are ideological similar are going to have access to the data that supports this publicly funded research,” notes DeLuz. “If public data,
collected by public employees, using public tax dollars to study a public policy is to be made available to anyone, it should be public.”SB 536 is now on the desk of Governor Jerry Brown, awaiting his signature or veto.
It is amazing how far gun rights and carry rights have advanced in the Badger State since I first started blogging in 2010. Back then, Wisconsin residents had limited open carry rights due to an advisory ruling by then-Attorney General J. B. Van Hollen in 2009. They were one of two states that did not allow any form of concealed carry.
That began to change in late 2010 thanks to a ruling by a county circuit judge who ruled that the ban on concealed carry was unconstitutional. That, however, only applied in a limited area of Wisconsin. It was not until July 2011 when Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) signed SB 93 that concealed carry became a reality in the state. Moreover, the bill that Gov. Walker signed provided for shall-issue concealed carry.
Fast forward a few years and now the Senate Judiciary and Public Safety Committee passed out a bill that would allow constitutional or permitless concealed carry in the state.
From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinal:
The Senate Judiciary and Public Safety Committee signed off on the bill 3-2, with all Republicans for it and all Democrats against it. The wide-ranging legislation would also allow people to carry Tasers without training or permits and would allow felons to carry muzzle loaders.
Sen. Van Wanggaard (R-Racine), the chairman of the committee, said Senate Bill 169 would make the public safer and ensure Wisconsin’s policies are the same for carrying weapons openly and concealed. Wisconsin has long allowed people to openly carry guns without training or permits.
“Quite honestly, I think I would rather have an individual that can lawfully possess a firearm and is carrying it, (and) I’d rather have them carrying it concealed because I think it creates a lot less tension when you’re in a group of people,” Wanggaard said.
“If they’re there for a lawful purpose and they’re carrying it for personal protection, they’re not going to be the problem. The one that’s going to be the problem is the dirtball that has one that’s illegal and they’re going to use it to conduct crime.”
According to the article, the Democrats on the committee oppose it because they believe there still should be some level of government regulation. While Sen. Wanggaard, the committee chair, believes it will pass both the Senate and the Assembly, there is some question as to whether Gov. Walker will actually sign the bill.
Walker was asked about the constitutional carry legislation back in June and he had this to say at the time as reported by the Wisconsin State Journal.
“I think the law we have right now is a good law. I’m comfortable with that,” Walker told reporters when asked about the bill. “The people that talk to me about it say they like where it’s at. Obviously we’re one of the last states to have concealed carry and people said the world was going to come to an end who were the critics. It hasn’t. We’re one of the larger number of permits in the country and it works well that way. … What I’ve heard from folks is they are happy with the law as it is.”
Even if the legislation passes, the existing permit system would remain in place for those residents who wanted a permit so that they could carry in other states that recognized the Wisconsin permit.
Kudos to all those in Wisconsin who have fought in the trenches for gun rights in the state for so long. Their efforts have brought the state from virtually no carry to the cusp of constitutional carry. To quote Arthur MacArthur, that native son of Wisconsin who won the Medal of Honor for his exploits at the Battle of Missionary Ridge, “On, Wisconsin!”
The charging handle seems, on the surface, to be one of those parts of an AR15 that doesn’t matter that much. You can spend a lot more on a charging handle but the $12 aluminum mil-spec charging handle will work just fine most of the time. By comparison, a gritty mil-spec trigger has the potential – and some would say the probability – to impact your accuracy with the rifle.
I will admit to not having given it too much thought. I have a couple of blem BCM charging handles and just ordered a Radians Raptor charging handle because I got a good deal on it. Then this morning I watched the video below by Ian McCollum and Karl Kasarda of InRange TV about their What Would Stoner Do project.
They have given it much more thought than I had and brought up points I hadn’t considered about charging handles. I very well may consider the Geissele the next time I find them on sale. Given I use their triggers perhaps I should also be using their charging handle on some of my ARs.
Safety is paramount when dealing with firearms. If either of these recalls effect you, please stop using the product and follow the manufacturer’s instructions for returning the product for upgrade or replacement.
First, for the person who assembles their own AR15 comes this from American Outdoor Brand’s Battenfield Technologies subsidiary. It is the AR15 lower parts kit (Item #110114) sold prior to September 12, 2017 and marketed under the S&W M&P label. It only applies to the lower parts kit and not to factory assembled S&W M&P-15s. The hammer in the kit is missing a pin due to a packaging error.
Here is a picture of the hammer involved and the steps you need to take to remedy the issue.
Remedy/Action to be TakenDO NOT ASSEMBLE A RIFLE USING THIS M&P15 COMPLETE LOWER PARTS KIT. IF YOU HAVE ALREADY DONE SO, STOP USING THE RIFLE IMMEDIATELY.Any unintended discharge of a firearm has the potential to cause injury. We are asking all purchasers of the M&P AR-15 Rifle Lower Parts Kit Complete to refrain from assembling a rifle using the hammer from the kit. If you have already done so, immediately stop using the rifle until corrective action can be taken.To facilitate this repair, please contact Battenfeld Technologies, Inc. at the number below to arrange for the return and replacement of the M&P AR-15 Rifle Lower Parts Kit Complete, or the hammer only from the kit.When you return the hammer, we will replace it with a new part at no cost to you. Your hammer will be returned as quickly and efficiently as possible. Remember, while you are awaiting the replacement hammer, any rifle assembled with an M&P AR-15 Rifle Lower Parts Kit Complete should NOT be used. The lower receiver should be disassembled and the rifle should be stored unloaded and with the safety in the SAFE LOAD/UNLOAD position.Please do NOT return firearms or receivers to Battenfeld Technologies, Inc. Firearms or receivers received by Battenfeld will be returned to sender WITHOUT remedial action. The M&P AR-15 Rifle Lower Parts Kit Complete with the replacement hammer will be identified as Item #1085634.For hammer-only replacements, you should note a J pin as shown in the photo below. This J pin is confirmation that your hammer has been replaced.Consumer Contact:To arrange for the replacement of the hammer, email us at recall110114@btibrands.com or call us at (877) 416-5167. Your hammer will be returned as quickly and efficiently as possible.IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS RECALL, PLEASE CONTACT BATTENFELD TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AT (877) 416-5167.
The second recall comes from SIG and involves a limited number of their SIG716, SIG516, and SIGM400 rifles which may have an improperly heat-treated hammer in the trigger assembly.
Newington, NH (September 15th, 2017) – SIG SAUER, Inc. has determined that a limited number of rifles in the SIG716 DMR®, SIG516® Carbon Fiber and SIGM400® Predator models were built with a two-stage SIG SAUER trigger that may have an improperly heat-treated hammer. Over time this could result in a trigger malfunction creating a significant safety hazard. SIG SAUER is issuing a mandatory recall to replace the hammer and trigger assembly in these specific rifles. This recall does not affect any military or law enforcement rifles or any SIG MCX®/SIG MPX® products.
SIG SAUER will correct any of the affected firearms at no cost to the customer.
To determine if a specific firearm is affected by the recall, go to https://www.sigsauer.com/support/safety-center/rifle-safety-warning/ and utilize the serial number identifier and visual inspection instructions.
If you are a customer who is affected by the recall, stop using the firearm immediately and follow the instructions on the website or call SIG SAUER Customer Service by dialing 603-610-3000, option #1. Have the rifle’s serial number available.
To reiterate on both recalls, if you own either of the products involved, stop using them now and contact the manufacturers involved.
UPDATE: In an absurd posting, the Bloomberg-financed, anti-gun “news service” (sic) The Trace criticizes SIG over their safety warning and recall. They contend that SIG is “keeping gun owners in the dark” by just saying it can cause a “trigger malfunction” due to the improper heat treatment of the hammer. The Trace wants SIG to go into chapter and verse over what a trigger malfunction might cause. They point to the safety warning (probably mandated by the Consumer Product Safety Commission) issued by Takata on their air bag recall.
I think the average firearm user recognizes that they are a) using a tool that can have deadly consequences if misused, b) that a trigger malfunction is not good, and c) you don’t mess around with trigger malfunctions.
by 
