Uncategorized

Can You Still Hear A Suppressed Rifle From 500 Yards Away?

October 3, 2017 by 3 Comments

The answer to the title question is yes.

Rebel Silencers made an ad hoc video on the level of sound suppression on a suppressed rifle. It was done quickly and the production values are not pristine. The microphone picks up wind like nobody’s business. That said, it does a good job of illustrating that a suppressor only lowers the db level and doesn’t eliminate it.

Here was their setup. One guy shot an AR, both unsuppressed and suppressed, from a ridge about 500 yards away from the person listening. The guy listening was a shop machinist who probably didn’t have the world’s best hearing. He stood in the bed of a pickup, closed his eyes, and turned around many times so he didn’t know if was facing or not facing the shooter. He was asked to in the direction of the heard shot. He did it both times with reasonable accuracy.

Is this a perfect test under controlled laboratory conditions? Absolutely not. Does it illustrate that you can both detect the sound and the direction of the suppressed gunfire? Absolutely yes.

Those who have an axe to grind against guns and/or the Hearing Protection Act will say this video proves nothing. I would disagree and say that it shows that the average untrained person can indeed detect suppressed gunfire and that any “shot detectors” would also be able to detect the direction of the gunfire.

You know your member of Congress is under pressure from the anti-gun, anti-suppressor forces to kill the SHARE Act in the wake the mass casualty event in Las Vegas. Now is the time to make your voice heard again and again in favor of passage of these bills.

Uncategorized

The Need To “Act”

October 2, 2017 by 4 Comments

I received a text this afternoon from the Brady Campaign regarding the mass casualty event in Las Vegas. They are urging people to contact Congress and ask for more gun control. You can see the screenshot of it below.

Let’s look at what we know and what we don’t know.

Do we know the name, age, and race of the murderer?

Yes. However, I make it a policy of this blog never to grant mass murderers the pleasure of having their name become infamous. He was a white male aged 64.

Do we know the number of victims?

Yes. According to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, the latest count is 58 killed and at least 515 wounded.

Do we know why the murderer did this?

No. As far as it has been reported, there has been no manifesto, no suicide note, and no indications as to why the murderer decided to commit this evil act.

Is it terrorism related?

While ISIS has claimed responsibility for this calling it a lone wolf attack by someone who had recently converted to Islam, the FBI has discounted this. However, as Andrew McCarthy at the National Review noted, the murderer did terrorize the community.

Do we know what type of firearm or firearms he used?

No. They have been variously reported as .223 and .308 caliber rifles along with the AK-47.

How many firearms did he have?

Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo told the press officers found 10 rifles in the murderer’s room. The Wall Street Journal reports, however, the number at 18-20.

Did he have fully automatic rifles?

The best answer is maybe. He may have had a full-auto rifle or he may have had a bumpstock or GAT crank. There is debate on this and no one has reported conclusively on this issue. He was reported to have been a multi-millionaire with multiple homes and two airplanes. He could have afforded to buy legal NFA machine guns but we don’t know.

Do we know how the murderer obtained his firearms?

No. Update: ABC News reported on their evening news that at least some of the firearms were purchased from a gun store in Mesquite, NV after the requisite NICS check. They are not a Class 3 dealer.

Do we know how the murderer died?

Yes. He committed suicide as the police were breaching the door to his room.

Did the murderer have a criminal record?

No. His late father, however, was a convicted bank robber and had been on the FBI’s Most Wanted List. The father had escaped from Federal prison and did try to run down FBI agents with a car. He died in 1998.

What firearms law would have prevented this?

Put bluntly, none. The killer had a clean record and had no reported history of mental illness. He would have passed even the strictest of background checks including those required to purchase NFA items. Moreover, given his financial resources, he could have obtained any sort of weapon on the black market. A determined lone wolf with his resources will always be able to cause death and destruction. In this case it seems the killer put a good deal of planning and money into getting the right location at the right time.

Policy made in haste rarely is good policy. We should resist any and all efforts to use this tragedy as the basis for new gun control laws. The Rahm Emanuel “never let a tragedy go to waste” days should be over and they should stay over.

Ben Shapiro at the Daily Wire puts it very well in this post from earlier in the day.

Uncategorized

Video Of The 2017 Gun Rights Policy Conference By Panel

October 1, 2017 by

Matt of LFD Research has been doing really great work of putting together videos of each individual panel at this year’s Gun Rights Policy Conference.

Given their large size and the slow and costly internet at the Westin, they are going up bit by bit (no pun intended). So far he has most of the Saturday morning panels uploaded and more should be coming soon.

You can find all the videos on his LFD Research YouTube page. The link to it is here.

I am embedding the one featuring Dr. Jennifer Stuber of the University of Washington School of Public Health. Her organization, ForeFront, has partnered with SAF, the NRA, mental health professionals, gun dealers, and more on ways to prevent suicide. She, herself, became a widow at age 38 when her husband committed suicide with a firearm.

Uncategorized

Live Feed From 2017 Gun Rights Policy Conference

September 30, 2017 by

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.

Uncategorized

A Great Win To Kick Off GRPC 2017

September 29, 2017 by

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.

Uncategorized

2017 Gun Rights Policy Conference Agenda

September 27, 2017 by 5 Comments

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.

Uncategorized

Another Illegal Mayor Pleads Guilty And Resigns

September 27, 2017 by

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.

Uncategorized

GRNC On The Hearing Protection Act

September 25, 2017 by

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 Representatives

Below, 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
INFORMATION

George 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 Form

DELIVER 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,
Uncategorized

Giffords’ Group Says Moderate Republicans Wavering On The SHARE Act

September 21, 2017 by 2 Comments

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.

Uncategorized

Restricting Public Data To Ideological Allies In California

September 21, 2017 by

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.