gun control

Uncategorized

And In A Case Of Being In Washington For Too Damn Long…

January 18, 2011 by

Six-term U. S. Senator Richard Lugar (RINO-Indiana) called for a reinstatement of the expired (and failed) Assault Weapons Ban this weekend. In doing so, Lugar becomes the first Republican senate member to call for more gun control after the Tucson shootings.

Lugar, who faces re-election in 2012 and is known for sometimes crossing party lines to vote with Democrats, said Congress should reinstate a ban on assault weapons following the shooting in Tucson, Arizona, that killed six people and critically wounded Democratic Representative Gabrielle Giffords. He acknowledged such action was unlikely in the current political environment.

“I recognize the fact that the politics domestically in our country with regard to this are on a different track altogether,” he said. He noted that sales of ammunition soared following the attack, possibly on fears that Congress might react by restricting its availability.

Appropriately enough, he made this call for more gun control in an interview with Al Hunt on Bloomberg Television. His comments come near the 5 minute mark in the video below.

While Richard Lugar may have been Richard Nixon’s “favorite mayor” when he was mayor of Indianapolis, let us not forget that it was under Nixon’s watch that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms was spawned. Nixon was no friend of gun owners and neither is Lugar. It is time to retire this out of touch dinosaur.

UPDATE: HotAir’s Allahpundit has some thoughts on why Lugar threw this tidbit out to Al Hunt. Hopefully the first one, that he plans to retire, is the correct one.

Uncategorized

Helmke On ABC’s Topline

January 17, 2011 by 1 Comment

Paul Helmke was a guest on ABC New’s Topline webcast on Friday. The interview with Helmke starts at about the 4:22 mark.

The best part of the interview was when Jonathan Karl asks Helmke, “Why have you guys been losing this debate for so long?” Helmke never answered the question and admitted their high watermark for gun control was in the first two years of the Clinton Administration.

Unlike most media interviews, Helmke is not let off easily. Karl notes that the 111th Congress seemed the most pro-NRA in his memory even though it was so Democratic. He later questions Helmke on his insistence that the public want more gun control saying “47% (of a poll) is a mandate for more gun control?”

When Helmke says that the Democratic Caucus is more favorable now towards gun control because those Democrats “who played footsy with the NRA lost”, Karl responds that while they may be more pro-gun control there are a lot less Democrats than before.

Uncategorized

McCarthy Unveiling Her Ban On Standard Capacity Magazines.

January 14, 2011 by

Politico has the story on Carolyn McCarthy unveiling her new bill to ban standard capacity magazines. You can read the draft bill in the post before this here.

I feel bad for Mrs. McCarthy that she lost her husband in a shooting. Heck, I even feel bad for her that she has arthritis in her fingers (see the swollen knuckles) as I know how painful that can be. However, I have no use for any one who would politicize a tragic event caused by a madman whether on a train on Long Island or at a Safeway grocery store in Tucson.

Uncategorized

Ackerman Introduces His Bill: HR 263

January 14, 2011 by

Gary Ackerman introduced his bill yesterday that, in his words, would require recently unlicensed gun dealers to conduct background checks as they disperse their inventory. However, the Government Printing Office only has the title and no text for the bill as of this morning.

H.R.263
Latest Title: To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to restrict the ability of a person whose Federal license to import, manufacture, or deal in firearms has been revoked, whose application to renew such a license has been denied, or who has received a license revocation or renewal denial notice, to transfer business inventory firearms, and for other purposes.

Sponsor: Rep Ackerman, Gary L. [NY-5] (introduced 1/12/2011)
Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 1/12/2011 Referred to House committee.
Status: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

From the article in The Hill, Ackerman has introduced this bill in every session for the past few and it has gone nowhere. It was also endorsed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

UPDATE: The text of the bill is now available.

H.R.263 — Fire Sale Loophole Closing Act (Introduced in House – IH)

HR 263 IH

112th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 263
To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to restrict the ability of a person whose Federal license to import, manufacture, or deal in firearms has been revoked, whose application to renew such a license has been denied, or who has received a license revocation or renewal denial notice, to transfer business inventory firearms, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 12, 2011
Mr. ACKERMAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

——————————————————————————–

A BILL
To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to restrict the ability of a person whose Federal license to import, manufacture, or deal in firearms has been revoked, whose application to renew such a license has been denied, or who has received a license revocation or renewal denial notice, to transfer business inventory firearms, and for other purposes.

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 `Fire Sale Loophole Closing Act’.

SEC. 2. RESTRICTIONS ON THE ABILITY OF A PERSON WHOSE FEDERAL LICENSE TO IMPORT, MANUFACTURE, OR DEAL IN FIREARMS HAS BEEN REVOKED, WHOSE APPLICATION TO RENEW SUCH A LICENSE HAS BEEN DENIED, OR WHO HAS RECEIVED A LICENSE REVOCATION OR RENEWAL DENIAL NOTICE, TO TRANSFER BUSINESS INVENTORY FIREARMS.

(a) Restrictions- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(aa)(1)(A) It shall be unlawful for a person who has been notified by the Attorney General that the Attorney General has made a determination to revoke a license issued to the person under this chapter to import, manufacture, or deal in firearms, or to deny an application of the person to renew such a license, to–

`(i) transfer a business inventory firearm of the person–

`(I) into a personal collection of the person; or

`(II) to an employee of the person, or to an individual described in section 923(d)(1)(B) with respect to the person; or

`(ii) receive a firearm that was a business inventory firearm of the person as of the date the person received the notice.

`(B) Subparagraph (A) shall not apply with respect to a license revocation or denial determination that is rescinded.

`(2)(A) It shall be unlawful for a person, on or after the effective date of the revocation of a license issued to the person under this chapter to import, manufacture, or deal in firearms, or (in the case that the application of the person to renew such a license is denied) on or after the date the license expires, to–

`(i) engage in conduct prohibited by paragraph (1); or

`(ii) transfer to any other person (except a person licensed under this chapter or a Federal, State, or local law enforcement agency) a firearm that was a business inventory firearm of the person as of the effective date or expiration date, as the case may be.

`(B) Subparagraph (A) shall not apply with respect to a license revocation or denial determination that is reversed.’.

(b) Business Inventory Defined- Section 921(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(36) Business Inventory Firearm- The term `business inventory firearm’ means, with respect to a person, a firearm required by law to be recorded in the acquisition and disposition logs of any firearms business of the person.’.

(c) Conforming Amendment- Section 923(c) of such title is amended in the 2nd sentence by inserting `section 922(aa) and to’ after `subject only to’.

(d) Penalties- Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:.

`(8) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(aa) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 1 year (or, if the violation was willful, 5 years), or both.’.

(e) Requirement That License Revocation or Application Denial Notice Include Text of Law Prohibiting Dealing in Firearms Without a Federal Firearms License and Restricting Transfer of Firearms After Receipt of Official License Revocation or Renewal Application Denial Notice- Section 923(f)(1) of such title is amended in the last sentence by inserting `, and shall set forth the provisions of Federal law and regulation which prohibit a person not licensed under this chapter from engaging in the business of dealing in firearms or are relevant in determining whether a person is doing so, and the provisions of section 922(aa)’ before the period.

Uncategorized

Rasmussen Poll: Majority Say Stricter Gun Control Would Not Prevent Shootings

January 13, 2011 by

The Rasmussen Poll conducted a telephone poll of 1,000 American adults on January 10th and 11th. Included in the poll were questions asking about opinions on gun control.

1* Does the United States need stricter gun control laws?

2* Does the U.S. Constitution guarantee the right of an average citizen to own a gun?

3* Would stricter gun control laws help prevent shootings like the one in Arizona?

4* Does anyone in your household own a gun?

Only 29% of adults think stricter gun control laws would prevent tragedies like the Tucson shootings of Congresswoman Giffords, Judge Roll, and the others. By contrast, 62% disagreed overall and 76% of those whose household includes at least one gun owner disagreed with Question No. 3 above.

Moreover, opposition to new gun controls is at high even with the shootings in Arizona. 56% say that they oppose new gun control laws as opposed to 36% who think the U.S. needs stricter gun control. If gun ownership is factored in, both numbers rise. 76% of gun owners oppose stricter gun control while 53% of those without a gun in the house would be in favor of stricter gun control.

The previous high for opposition to new gun control was 51% in July 2010. While the gun banners are trying to score points on the Tucson shootings, people are voting with their pocketbook and buying more guns as a result – at least in Arizona.

Uncategorized

Is There Something Toxic In Long Island’s Water?

January 12, 2011 by

Something must be in the water of Long Island that causes politicians to say and do stupid things when it comes to firearms.

First, we have the Queen Bee of gun control, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY-4), saying that standard capacity magazines must be banned so we don’t have a repeat of the Tucson shooting. She goes on to say that if the “Assault Weapons Ban” (sic) had still been in place fewer people might have been shot. This is despite the AWB only banned the manufacture and/or importation of new magazines. Existing magazines were easy to find and buy.

Next we have Rep. Peter King (R-NY-3) whose district adjoins Mrs. McCarthy’s. He wants to create a gun-free zone of 1,000 feet around all high-ranking government officials. No word on how this could be done nor just who is considered a high-ranking government official. Speaker Boehner has indicated he would not support such a bill.

Finally, we have news today that Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY-5) has introduced a bill to close the “fire-sale loophole.” According to The Hill, the bill would require recently unlicensed gun dealers – that is those who have surrendered or lost their FFL – to still conduct background checks on all buyers as if they were still licensed. Ackerman, the story notes, has introduced this bill every session for a number of years. He says:

“After this weekend’s tragedy, it’s clear that Congress must close troubling loopholes in federal gun control laws that let firearms fall into the hands of convicted felons, fugitives, domestic violence perpetrators and severely emotionally disturbed individuals,” Ackerman said in a statement. “Every gun sold should require a background check, period.”

The story on this bill in The Hill does say that Jared Lee Loughner purchased his firearm through a licensed dealer and would not have been prevented from purchasing it with what this bill proposes. This does not prevent NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg from endorsing Ackerman’s bill.

“Pharmacists who lose their licenses can’t sell prescription drugs to people without prescriptions, yet gun dealers who lose their licenses can sell off their inventory — without even conducting background checks,” New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said in a statement endorsing Ackerman’s bill.

As I said earlier I don’t know what is in the water of Long Island that causes politicians to say and do stupid things when it comes to firearms. One thing I do know is that all three are engaging in shameless pandering to the press and to the gun control lobby. None of these bills would have stopped the tragedy in Tucson and none will keep either criminals or lunatics from obtaining a means to injure innocent people.

Uncategorized

Rat-A-Tat Annihilators?

December 23, 2010 by

Editorials in the New York Times are known for their hyperbole when it comes to firearms. Today’s editorial entitled Cartel Gunmen Buy American goes even further. In an effort to bolster support for ATF’s proposed “emergency” and “temporary” semi-automatic rifle reporting requirement for multiple purchases, they use words like body count, carnage, war weapons, and gun lobby. However, after seeing one too many repeat showings of The Untouchables, they have outdone themselves.

…with use of high- power long guns more than doubling in the past five years as cartel gunmen turn to the rat-a-tat annihilators easily obtainable across the border.

Who writes this stuff? Moreover, who reads it without rolling on the floor laughing?

The rest of the editorial tries to make the case that “AK-47s and other battlefield assault rifles” are being sold by dealers along the Mexican border to the narco-terrorists and that it is only right-wing Republicans, cowed Democrats afraid of the “gun lobby”, and the National Rifle Association itself that stands in the way of “courageous” legislation that would make the proposed requirement law. They even ask Obama to ignore Congress and just issue an Executive Order. This, of course, would modify the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986.

We know, of course, that “battlefield assault rifles” are covered under the National Firearms Act of 1934 and require a tax stamp, background investigation, and that no new automatic weapons can be sold to non-LEO, non-military since the Hughes Amendment of 1986.  The bulk of the real automatic weapons in Mexico, if U.S. made, are coming from Mexican Army arsenals sold by corrupt and/or fearful Army officials. As for the full-automatic AKs, the fine hand of Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez and Eastern Bloc gun merchants can be seen in that.

That’s the reality of the situation which is completely and obviously ignored in this editorial.

Uncategorized

CT Again Gun Violence – Blame the Gun, Not the Person

November 28, 2010 by 2 Comments

If you listen to these videos, it is clear that instead of blaming the person committing the crime, the organizers of Connecticut Against Gun Violence and My Brother’s Keeper prefer to blame the gun. After all, it is easier to blame an inanimate object for the problem rather than a living, breathing, (supposedly) thinking human being.

The videos in the New Haven Register are not able to be embedded. Instead go here and you can also read the unquestioning story that goes along with it.

One thing the story points out is that Connecticut has some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the United States. If ultra-strict laws aren’t working, what sort of illogic propels CAGV and My Brother’s Keeper to keep asking for even more laws?

H/T Cam Edwards