Uncategorized

NRA To Toomey And Manchin – Nope!

April 10, 2013 by

If Senators Toomey and Manchin thought their little attempt at bi-partisan gun control would fly with the NRA, they were mistaken. The NRA-ILA released the statement below regarding the Manchin-Toomey proposed bill.

Fairfax, Va. – Expanding background checks at gun shows will not
prevent the next shooting, will not solve violent crime and will not
keep our kids safe in schools. While the overwhelming rejection of
President Obama and Mayor Bloomberg’s “universal” background check
agenda is a positive development, we have a broken mental health system
that is not going to be fixed with more background checks at gun shows.
The sad truth is that no background check would have prevented the
tragedies in Newtown, Aurora or Tucson. We need a serious and meaningful
solution that addresses crime in cities like Chicago, addresses mental
health deficiencies, while at the same time protecting the rights of
those of us who are not a danger to anyone. President Obama should be as
committed to dealing with the gang problem that is tormenting honest
people in his hometown as he is to blaming law-abiding gun owners for
the acts of psychopathic murderers.

 TheHill has a little more on this here.

Uncategorized

Toomey & Manchin – The Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act

April 10, 2013 by 6 Comments

I didn’t get to see the press conference at 11am. However, the following is the joint release that Sen. Pat Toomey and Sen. Joe Manchin are putting out. They are calling this bill “The Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act”.

As with everything, the devil is in the details. One of the keys will be how transfers are defined. Will it be transfer as in transferring ownership or the Bloomberg desired redefinition. If it is the latter, this bill needs to die a quick death with plenty of pain for both Toomey and Manchin. Remember these are only the publicized details of the bill and not the actual language

The only two things I really see that I like within this bill is that a concealed carry permit from any state will substitute for a NICS check and that interstate sales of handguns will now be permitted by dealers. I am presuming that the latter means you or I can go into a gun shop in another state and buy that custom 1911 that has been sitting in the dealer’s second hand case. While I can currently use my NC CHP for a purchase, the concern I’d have about this provision is letting the Feds get involved in defining the requirements of a CCW.

I still think Pat Toomey is a damn fool for even getting involved in any of this and should have let the Democrats shoot themselves in the foot with gun control.

Bottom Line: The Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act would require states and the federal government to send all necessary records on criminals and the violently mentally ill to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The bill extends the existing background check system to gun shows and online sales.

The bill explicitly bans the federal government from creating a national firearms registry, and imposes serious criminal penalties (a felony with up to 15 years in prison) on any person who misuses or illegally retains firearms records.

TITLE ONE: GETTING ALL THE NAMES OF PROHIBITED PURCHASERS INTO THE BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM

Summary of Title I: This section improves background checks for firearms by strengthening the instant check system.

  • – Encourage states to provide all their available records to NICS by restricting federal funds to states who do not comply.
  • – Allow dealers to voluntarily use the NICS database to run background checks on their prospective employees.
  • – Clarifies that submissions of mental health records into the NICS system are not prohibited by federal privacy laws (HIPAA).
  • – Provides a legal process for a veteran to contest his/her placement in NICS when there is no basis for barring the right to own a firearm.

TITLE TWO: REQUIRING BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR FIREARM SALES

Summary of Title II: This section of the bill requires background checks for sales at gun shows and online while securing certain aspects of 2nd Amendment rights for law abiding citizens.

  • – Closes the gun show and other loopholes while exempting temporary transfers and transfers between family members.
  • – Fixes interstate travel laws for sportsmen who transport their firearms across state lines in a responsible manner. The term “transport” includes staying in temporary lodging overnight, stopping for food, buying fuel, vehicle maintenance, and medical treatment.
  • – Protects sellers from lawsuits if the weapon cleared through the expanded background checks and is subsequently used in a crime. This is the same treatment gun dealers receive now.
  • – Allows dealers to complete transactions at gun shows that take place in a state for which they are not a resident.
  • – Requires that if a background check at a gun show does not result in a definitive response from NICS within 48 hours, the sale may proceed. After four years, when the NICS improvements are completed, the background check would clear in 24 hours. Current law is three business days.
  • – Requires the FBI to give priority to finalizing background checks at gun shows over checks at store front dealerships.
  • – Authorizes use of a state concealed carry permit instead of a background check when purchasing a firearm from a dealer.
  • – Permits interstate handgun sales from dealers.
  • – Allows active military to buy firearms in their home states.
  • – Family transfers and some private sales (friends, neighbors, other individuals) are exempt from background checks

 TITLE THREE: NATIONAL COMMISSION ON MASS VIOLENCE

Summary of Title III: : This section of the bill creates a commission to study the causes of mass violence in the United States, looking at all aspects of the problem, including guns, school safety, mental health, and violent media or video games.

The Commission would consist of six experts appointed by the Senate Majority Leader and six experts appointed by the Speaker of the House. They would be required to submit an interim report in three months and a completed report in six months.

WHAT THE BILL WILL NOT DO

The bill will not take away anyone’s guns.

The bill will not ban any type of firearm.

The bill will not ban or restrict the use of any kind of bullet or any size clip or magazine.

The bill will not create a national registry; in fact, it specifically makes it illegal to establish any such registry.

The bill will not, in any way at all, infringe upon the Constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens –

Uncategorized

Toomey, Manchin, And The Politics Of “Doing Something”

April 10, 2013 by 2 Comments

I, for one, do not understand just what the hell that Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA) thought he’d gain by entering backroom discussions on gun control with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV). Gun control legislation was dying in the Senate because red-state Democrats up for re-election in 2014 were mortally afraid of it. Toomey’s move gives them more than a bit of cover.

I’ll be in client meetings when Toomey and Manchin have their press conference at 11 am this morning. However, Sebastian and Bitter have been doing a great job of reporting on Toomey’s efforts. I suggest going there to read some more background and to keep up with the latest details.

Uncategorized

Quote Of The Day

April 10, 2013 by

Given that your tax dollars were used to fly some of the families of the victims of the shootings in Newtown down to Washington aboard Air Force One to lobby Congress for gun control, Michael Bane’s post from yesterday takes on special relevance. He examines whether victims’ families have any particular claim on “truth”. He concludes:

Yes, the words of victims have special poignancy, but what they don’t
have is any special truth. Grief drives us to look toward the heavens
and demand an answer from any nearby Deity. Grief drives us to demand a
solution to the fundamental insoluble problem, which is that the world
is as it is. Bad things happen, often to good people, and grief drives
us to…do something.

Read the whole post and keep that in mind while these families and their tragedy are being used to further the political agenda of Obama, Bloomberg, and the rest of the gun prohibitionists.

Uncategorized

It Had To Be Those Gun Shops Along The Mexican Border!

April 9, 2013 by 7 Comments

The World Tribune is reporting that thieves broke into a Kuwaiti Interior Ministry warehouse and stole the entire contents.


The Interior Ministry said thieves broke into a warehouse and stole a
huge amount of firearms and ammunition. The ministry said 20,000 U.S.-origin M-16 assault rifles and 15,000 rounds for 9mm pistols were stolen.

“There were no guards during the break-in,” the ministry said on April
7.

The ministry said the target was a warehouse of the Interior Ministry in
Subiya. The statement said thieves broke three doors and removed the entire contents of the warehouse.

Of course, one wonders where these M-16s will now show up. If it is Mexico, will the Obama Administration still blame the mom-and-pop gun shops along the Southwest border?

Uncategorized

The First Firearms Company Announces Departure From CT

April 9, 2013 by 1 Comment

PTR Industries, maker of the HK clone PTR-91, announced today that they will be leaving Bristol, Connecticut by the end of the year due to Bill No. 1160. They are still evaluating offers from other states who, in their good wisdom, want a company like PTR in their state.

In my speculation as to who would be leaving first, I should put them up higher on the list than Stag Arms or ASC. Given that all of PTR’s firearms will now be banned in the state, they were one of the strongest candidates.

From their release:


A STATEMENT CONCERNING MANUFACTURING ENCOURAGEMENT, ECONOMIC GROWTH, AND PROTECTION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF CITIZENS.

–
This past week an historic and highly controversial bill was passed by the State of Connecticut which will have far reaching consequences to the state, its citizens, and businesses. The bill we refer to is Bill No. 1160, AN ACT CONCERNING GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND CHILDRENS SAFETY. This bill purports to reduce gun violence by banning hardware responsible for less than 3% of homicides in 2011 ; and claims to increase children’s safety by restricting the ability of those most responsible for it – their parents – to defend them.

–
As a firearms manufacturing firm, our industrial roots reach deep in the State of CT. Along with other companies in the trade, we were deeply apprehensive at the hurried process to develop new gun laws and fearful that it would generate unintended consequences for our industry. On Thursday April 4th 2013, upon reading the full text of Bill 1160, our worst fears were confirmed. What emerged was a bill fraught with ambiguous definitions, insufficient considerations for the trade, conflicting mandates, and disastrous consequences for the fundamental rights of the people of CT.

–
The magnitude of the constitutional and economic importance of this bill is such that the disregard for public input (in the final version), and the haphazard production of the legislation should be insulting to any citizen or business in CT. It should be a shock to us all that such landmark legislation could be written in one week, and seen by no one (including the rank-and-file legislators) prior to its emergency certification. Having been present in the deliberations in both legislative chambers, it was clear that a majority of our legislators had not even read the bill – and those that had read it had only a cursory understanding.

–
The process with which this legislation proceeded, along with the language that resulted gives us no confidence that this will be the last violation of our rights in our beloved home state, and we only hope that this does not set a precedent at a national level.

–
The rights of the citizens of CT have been trampled upon. The safety of its children is at best questionably improved from the day of the tragedy that triggered the events that lead us here. Finally, due to an improperly drafted bill, manufacturing of modern sporting rifles in the State of CT has been effectively outlawed. With a heavy heart but a clear mind, we have been forced to decide that our business can no longer survive in Connecticut – the former Constitution state.

–
Furthermore, we feel that our industry as a whole will continue to be threatened so long as it remains in a state where its elected leaders have no regard for the rights of those who produce and manufacture its wealth. We are making a call to all involved in our industry to leave this state, close your doors and show our politicians the true consequences of their hasty and uninformed actions. We encourage those in our industry to abandon this state as its leaders have abandoned the proud heritage that forged our freedom.

–
Although PTR has not decided upon a specific relocation site at this time, over the coming weeks the company will be actively considering offers from states that are friendly to the industry. We hope to have a site identified within the next six weeks, and hope to have our move completed by the end of this year. We plan to keep our business partners informed on the status of our move throughout this process in order to affect a smooth transition.

–
We have extended the invitation to join us in the move to all of our employees, as well as all of our vendors. We are pleased to say that we currently have commitments to move from a majority of our employees, which includes ALL of our management personnel, engineering staff and skilled gunsmiths.

–
It is our hope and sincere belief that this move will represent a step forward for the company; and that by bringing our expertise and core personnel to combine with the business friendly policies, and a motivated local labor force from a state that respects industry and the second amendment that we can expand our operations and not only maintain – but increase the quality and reputation of our products.

–
Please direct any questions or inquiries to John McNamara, Vice President of Sales, at john@ptr91.com or at our main phone number.
__________________________________________________

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

Uncategorized

Imitation Is The Sincerest Form Of Flattery

April 9, 2013 by 4 Comments

In a move that can only be considered imitating the National Rifle Association, Mayor Bloomberg and his Illegal Mayors plan to “grade” legislators on how they vote on gun control as well as their public statements.

Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the nonprofit group financed by Bloomberg (I), will unveil a scoring system Tuesday to award lawmakers grades of A through F, much like the National Rifle Association, which has derived much of its power by deploying letter rankings against politicians at election time. The group’s strategists briefed The Washington Post on the plans ahead of Tuesday’s announcement.

“For decades, the NRA has done an admirable job of tracking to minute detail how members of Congress stand on gun bills. We’ve simply decided to do the same,” said Mark Glaze, director of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, which is chaired by Bloomberg and is made up of more than 900 mayors from across the country.

 Glaze says they are trying to provide “guidance” to well-heeled donors who back gun control. The Washington Post notes that they are aiming this squarely at senators on the bubble in states like North Carolina and Montana. While their constituents do not back gun control, these senators depends on donations from states like New York and California to get elected or re-elected. This is the same threat that was used successively in Colorado against wavering Democrats.

The one thing that Bloomberg can’t imitate is the grassroots supporters of the NRA.

“The reason NRA scorecards are effective is that they have the weight of
approximately 5 million dues-paying members and tens of millions of
other supporters behind them,” NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said. In
a dig at Bloomberg, he added, “We’ll take that over the purse of one
billionaire any day of the week and twice on Sunday.”

 When I start seeing Friends of MAIG banquets and fundraisers, then and only then will I believe that there is significant grassroots support for gun control. Until then, I will keep pushing my legislators to earn their “F” from MAIG.

Uncategorized

More On The Pressure To Move Out Of Connecticut

April 9, 2013 by 1 Comment

CNN actually did a rather fair story on Mark Malkowski of Stag Arms and Jonathan Scalise of ACS and the pressure they are feeling to move their companies out of Connecticut. Listen to Malkowski describe the incentives other states are offering to move. It makes you wonder just who is running Connecticut if an industry which provides so many “good” jobs is suddenly treated like an “untermensch”.

I would not be surprised to see either or both of the companies relocate out of Connecticut within the next year.

Along these same lines, Jeff Soyer of Alphecca looks at New Hampshire and why it might not be a great place to move. As he notes, the state is rapidly changing due to the influx of former residents of Massachusetts and Connecticut.

Moving a firearms manufacturing facility to another state is an
expensive proposition. If a company decides to make such a decision,
it’s going to be somewhere where that company can be assured of steady
support for their company, products, and workers. The winds of change —
slight as they might be at the moment — in northern New England states
provide no reassurance of of that.

I think he makes a good point. 

Uncategorized

Cops Don’t Think Gun Control Will Stop Mass Shootings

April 8, 2013 by 1 Comment

The law enforcement website, PoliceOne.com, conducted a survey of over 15,000 current and retired law enforcement officers regarding their attitudes towards gun control. Not surprising to those of us in the gun rights community, an overwhelming majority of cops thought gun control measures such as a new AWB wouldn’t stop mass shootings.

The NRA-ILA release on the survey is below:

FAIRFAX, Va. – PoliceOne.com released today the results of an extensive survey of about 15,000 active and retired law enforcement officers of all ranks and from departments ranging in size from less than 25 to more than 1,000.

These results strongly show that law enforcement officers do not support President Obama’s gun control agenda. They do, however, strongly support the Right-to-Carry by law-abiding Americans. The survey respondents are united in their desire for politicians to focus on keeping firearms out of the hands of the mentally ill and to reject unconstitutional gun control measures that infringe on Second Amendment rights.

“The American people, and particularly the members of law enforcement, want politicians in Washington to stop pursuing a failed political agenda and get to work fixing our broken mental health system, improving school security, and getting criminals off the streets,” said the executive director of NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, Chris W. Cox.

The following are some key findings:

  • 99 percent said policies other than an “assault weapons” ban are most important to prevent mass shootings.


  • Almost 96 percent said that a ban on standard capacity magazines would not reduce violent crime.

  • More than 91 percent stated that the use of a firearm in the commission of a crime should have stiff, mandatory sentences, and no plea-bargains.

  • More than 91 percent stated they supported the Right-to-Carry by law abiding Americans.

  • More than 81 percent said that “gun buy-backs” do not reduce gun violence.

  • 80 percent believe legally armed citizens can reduce casualties in incidents of mass violence.

  • Nearly 80 percent said that a ban on private transfers of firearms between law-abiding citizens would not reduce violent crime.

  • More than 76 percent indicated that legally armed citizens are important to reducing crime.

  • More than 76 percent support the arming of trained and qualified teachers or administrators who volunteer to carry a firearm.

  • More than 70 percent said that a ban on “assault weapons” would not reduce violent crime.

  • More than 70 percent opposed the idea of a national registry of legal gun sales.

  • Nearly 68 percent said magazine capacity restrictions would negatively affect them personally.

  • More than 60 percent said that the passage of Obama’s gun control legislation would not improve officer safety.

Click here to read the complete survey: http://ddq74coujkv1i.cloudfront.net/p1_gunsurveysummary_2013.pdf

Uncategorized

Win Free Guns And Ammo

April 8, 2013 by

If there is anything more likely to infuriate a gun prohibitionist, it would be an offer to win free guns and ammo. Fortunately for us, Aaron at Weapon-Blog likes to infuriate the prohibitionists and publishes his monthly list of contests.

This month’s round of contests has everything from custom 1911s to 500 rounds of 5.56 to AR magazines.

Go here to peruse the list. Make sure to thank Aaron for providing this service on a monthly basis. It takes some time and effort to compile all of this info.