The National Shooting Sports Foundation has started to put out a lot of videos with instructional tips. This one with Gil Ash makes a lot of sense about how to “slow down” the speed of the bird or clay pigeon. He uses the analogy of merging on to the highway. If you are standing still and looking at the cars whizzing by, they look like they are moving fast. However, if you are moving at a speed close to the other cars, everything seems to be moving slower.
Doug Koenig knows a thing or two about pistol shooting. In this video for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, Doug talks about what he considers the proper grip for shooting.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation has announced that they plan to file suit challenging the legal authority of the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives under the Gun Control Act of 1968 to force FFL’s in the four Southwest border states to report multiple sales of certain semi-automatic rifles.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) – the trade association for America’s firearms industry – announced today that it will file a lawsuit challenging the legal authority of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) under the Gun Control Act to compel 8,500 federally licensed firearms retailers in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas to report the sale of two or more semi-automatic rifles larger than .22 caliber and capable of accepting a detachable magazine that are purchased following an FBI background check by the same individual within five consecutive business days.
At the time Congress authorized the reporting of multiple sales of handguns it could have required it for the sale of long guns, but it did not. ATF is clearly exceeding its lawful authority under the Gun Control Act. Current ATF Acting Director Ken Melson himself has previously questioned ATF’s legal authority to impose this new requirement.
“While we encourage all retailers, not just those along the southwest border, to continue to cooperate with ATF and report any suspicious activity, this is the proverbial ’slippery slope,’ “ said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “If ATF can require this record keeping and reporting requirement of law-abiding retailers in these four states simply by sending a letter demanding the information, than there is no record or report ATF can not require of any licensee, anywhere in the country for as long as ATF wants. They simply need to send a letter demanding it,” said Keane.
Operation Fast and Furious confirms what ATF has always maintained, that retailers are a vital source of information for law enforcement in combating illegal firearm trafficking. These retailers routinely report questionable transactions to authorities, including ATF. Throughout the Fast and Furious congressional investigation, it was suggested that federally licensed retailers were the original source of information that gave rise to the operation and retailers allowed ATF special agents to stand behind the counter of their shops so that they were better able to observe the transactions.
Even if ATF had the legal authority to require sales reporting for long guns, it is an ill-considered policy that will actually make it more difficult for retailers to cooperate with ATF. Illegal firearms traffickers will simply alter their schemes to avoid and evade the reporting requirement. For example, traffickers could simply recruit more “straw purchasers” and have them illegally purchase firearms from multiple licensees, or simply move their illegal trafficking activities to other states where the reporting requirement does not exist.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation is reporting that their adjusted NICS check figures show the 13th straight month-over-month increase in the NSSF adjusted NICS figures.
The June 2011 NSSF-adjusted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) figure of 679,840 is an increase of 12.8 percent over the NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 602,908 in June 2010. For comparison, the unadjusted June 2011 NICS figure of 1,157,714 is an increase of 16 percent over the unadjusted NICS figure of 998,262 in June 2010.
The figures are adjusted to drop out those checks which can be attributed to CCW background checks as used by states such as Utah, Kentucky, and Iowa among other things.
The NSSF graphic below shows the pattern in adjusted NICS checks for the month of June for the past 10 years. This past June was a definite improvement over the prior two years and is the high watermark for the past ten Junes.
Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Charles Schumer (D-NY), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) issued a so-called report on Monday blaming American guns for the violence in Mexico. Frankly, I think it was timed to draw media attention from the Gunwalker hearings that started that afternoon.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation has responded to that report and takes apart their numbers. Rather than showing 70% of guns being traced from Mexico to the U.S., it actually shows a decline in the number of American firearms being traced by Mexican authorities.
Anti-Gun Report Shows DECLINE in Number of US Firearms Being Traced to Mexico
June 15, 2011
By Larry KeaneOnce again anti-gun legislators are attempting to misrepresent firearm tracing data, though this time, with declining numbers and a public wary of political posturing, it may just backfire on them.
A report (“Halting US Firearms Trafficking to Mexico“) released Monday by a trio of anti-gun senators including Diane Feinstein (D-CA), Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) appears to show the number of firearms that have been recovered in Mexico and traced to the United States as actually declining in recent years from an unsubstantiated 90 percent to, now, an unsubstantiated 70 percent.
It is important to note that these percentages do not reflect the total number of firearms recovered. In fact, in a letter to Sen. Feinstein discussing this very report, ATF Acting Director Kenneth Melson admitted, “There are no United States Government sources that maintain any record of the total number of criminal firearms seized in Mexico.”
So to be clear, the 70 percent claim relates only to the very small number of traced firearms – not the total number of firearms recovered. And it’s no surprise that so many come from the United States. We have a very good system for tracing firearms through serial numbers and purchase records (some countries don’t trace them at all). Mexico recognizes this fact and submits for tracing only those firearms that it believes would likely prove trace positive.
Earlier this year a report by the independent research group STRATFOR noted that less than 12 percent of the total number of guns seized in Mexico during 2008 had been verified as coming from the United States. STRATFOR cited a June 2009 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report noting:
30,000 firearms were seized from criminals by Mexican authorities in 2008.
Of these 30,000 firearms, information pertaining to 7,200 of them (24 percent) was submitted to the ATF for tracing.
Of these 7,200 guns, only about 4,000 could be traced by the ATF.
Of these 4,000, some 3,480 (87 percent) were shown to have come from the United States.The Feinstein report follows an update to the U.S. Firearms Trafficking to Mexico Report issued by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. According to that update, Mexican authorities have submitted trace requests for “tens of thousands of firearms” to the ATF. However, the ATF has stated that many of these requests are duplicative, with some firearms being resubmitted for tracing five times or more. Moreover, the update notes that 75 percent of the firearm traces are not successful and that only eight percent lead to an investigation. Furthermore, as ATF has repeatedly stated, the tracing of a firearm (or the opening of an investigation) in no way indicates criminal wrong-doing by either the retailer or the first purchaser of the firearm.
The Wilson report also notes that most of the traced firearms were originally sold at retail more than five years earlier. The report doesn’t say how much earlier, but ATF has previously said that firearms traced from Mexico were on average 14 years old. This demonstrates that of the small percentage of guns that do come from the United States, these firearms have not been purchased recently.
Despite attempts by anti-gun legislators to utilize these reports as leverage for pushing gun control, no one should be under any illusions; the United States is no more the source of 70 percent of the weapons used by the Mexican cartels than it is 90 percent. These numbers only allege to relate to the small percentage of seized and traceable firearms submitted to the ATF.
The NSSF just released this video featuring 13-time Bianchi Cup winner Doug Koenig. I’d say his 13 Bianchi Cups qualify him to say what works in the way of a shooting stance!
The National Shooting Sports Foundation released their adjusted NICS data for May 2011 today. There was an 11.4% increase in NICS checks for May 2011 over May 2010. For the month, there were 696,947 checks as opposed to 625,763 for the prior May.
This is the 12th straight month with increases over the same month in the prior year.
NSSF adjust the NICS figures to account for states like Utah, Kentucky, and Iowa which use the NICS database for CCW application checks. Though there isn’t a direct correlation with firearms sales, NSSF says “the NSSF-adjusted NICS data provide a more accurate picture of current market conditions.”
The raw numbers can be found at the NICS website here.
The NSSF Blog had this report this morning about in-fighting between the Center for Biological Diversity and the American Bird Conservancy. Both of these groups have tried to get the EPA to outlaw lead-based ammunition as well as the use of lead in fishing tackle.
Infighting Begins Amongst Traditional Ammunition Foes
May 20, 2011 By Larry Keane View Comments
Share1
inShare.EmailShare Email
A recent article in Audubon Magazine (“Bad Shot”) notes a budding feud between the American Bird Conservancy (ABC) and the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) concerning the issue of traditional ammunition. In the article, Michael Fry, director of conservation advocacy at ABC, derides the CBD for petitioning the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to ban the manufacture and sale of traditional ammunition, shot and fishing tackle. Fry, concerned that the CBD was going too far in trying to ban all traditional ammunition, noted “It was not helpful to have the center involved.”This infighting, demonstrating that the CBD is considered extremist even amongst its allied groups, could not have come at a worse time for anti-ammunition special interests. Last week, 35 members of the American Wildlife Conservation Partners (AWCP), a coalition of the nation’s leading conservation groups, joined with NSSF in encouraging federal lawmakers to become co-sponsors of the Hunting, Fishing and Recreational Shooting Protection Act, legislation that will clarify that Congress has not given the EPA authority to regulate ammunition and its components under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
The CBD has yet to respond to the ABC attack.
Learn more about the fight to protect traditional ammunition here: http://www.nssf.org/factsheets/PDF/TraditionalAmmo.pdf
The National Shooting Sports Foundation also has a letter generator that will send either an email or paper letter to your Senators and local Congressman urging their support of the Hunting, Fishing and Recreational Shooting Sports Protection Act. As we saw with the ATF and the multi-rifle reporting requirement, numbers – not quality – count. You can access the letter generator here. It also allows you to modify the message if you so wish which is what I did.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation responded on this past Friday to a report put out by CSGV’s sister organization The Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence. The report urged municipalities to use their “buyer power” to force firearms manufacturers to adopt a set of rules that the gun control industry wants.
As I noted when it was released, gun controllers grossly overestimate the economic influence of municipalities when it comes to firearms purchases. Larry Keane of NSSF also points out below that the gun controllers forgot about the legality of their little scheme. In other words, it is illegal. Moreover, NSSF will sue if they try to go ahead and implement their little gun control scheme.
For Anti-Gun Groups It’s Déjà Vu All Over Again
April 29, 2011 By Larry Keane
The “Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence” (Ed Fund) released a “report” entitled “Buying Power” that claims to detail “an exciting new strategy to reform the gun industry.” Unfortunately for members of the gun-ban lobby, this strategy is neither new nor legal.
Here’s what the Ed Fund says:
“A city purchasing firearms for its law enforcement department can use its buyer power to create incentives for gun manufacturers to employ “countermarketing” strategies to ensure that their retailers are using all available procedures to prevent illegal firearms trafficking. Such strategies might include videotaping firearms sales, preventing the use of cell phones inside gun stores, and requiring criminal background checks for all employees who handle firearms. Gun manufacturers would be obliged to listen and change their policies to compete for cities’ business.”
Here’s what the Ed Fund should know:
In March of 2000, then-Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Andrew Cuomo and then-New York Attorney General Spitzer conspired with various mayors and local government officials to use their market purchasing power to boycott firearms manufacturers unless the manufacturers first agreed to sign an arbitrary and politically motivated list of firearms regulations entitled the “Code of Conduct.” Spitzer said, “We want every appropriate government entity to agree to purchase firearms only from companies that have signed a comprehensive code of conduct.” Spitzer said the objective of the coalition was to “…boycott gun manufacturers who fail to adhere to a new safety code.” Although Spitzer’s recruitment efforts weren’t always successful, officials of numerous cities and local governments agreed to join the boycott.
In response to this blatantly illegal restraint of trade, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), along with several members of the firearms industry sued Andrew Cuomo, Eliot Spitzer and the local government officials who agreed to the boycott. The filing of the lawsuit stopped this illegal boycott dead in its tracks, as all defendants – Cuomo, Spitzer, and the mayors – quickly disavowed the boycott (NSSF, et al v. Cuomo, et al). And much like 11 years ago, NSSF stands ready to once again take legal action against any attempt to implement an illegal boycott. No doubt such an attempt to manipulate the free market will be frowned upon by law enforcement when they learn that gun control groups now want to dictate which firearms they carry to protect themselves and our communities and base those selections on political considerations, as opposed to which firearms are most reliable and have the features desired by law enforcement.
The entire Educational Fund “report” is nothing but a rehash of the decade old factually baseless allegations made by the Brady Center and greedy trial lawyers in their failed attempts to destroy and bankrupt the firearms industry through junk lawsuits which began in the mid to late 1990s. Fortunately, these junk lawsuits failed, but not before members of the industry were forced to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to successfully defend the cases. In fact, the Educational Fund’s “report” is based largely on an article published by Professor Gregory T. Gundlach (ironically pronounced “gunlock”), who was a paid expert witness for the NAACP in its failed lawsuit against the firearms industry that went to trial before Brooklyn, NY federal court judge Jack B. Weinstein in 2003. The “advisory jury” judge Weinstein empanelled to hear the case rejected Professor Gunlach’s “expert” opinions and rendered a verdict in favor of the industry members. The “report” also relies upon an article by law school Professor David Kairys, the father of the roundly discredited “public nuisance” theory of liability underlying the failed municipal lawsuits. All that is old is new again it seems.
H/T Thirdpower
by