Category: Politics

Call your senators and representatives at 202-224-3121 and let them know that you won’t abide by any vote for gun control, no matter how “reasonable” they think it might be.

Tell Weak Republican Legislators to Just Say NO to Biden’s Gun Control!

As the Biden administration and the new, Democratic-controlled Congress settle into their respective roles, discussions about gun control laws are shifting from theory to reality, and GunVoters need to be aware and prepared, and they need to keep holding the feet of their elected servants to the fire on these issues.

As I have said previously, it’s very likely that President Biden will use Executive Orders to limit and restrict firearms and firearm accessories in various ways, but it’s likely that he’ll wait until he gets his attorney general pick in place first.

That pick is Judge Merrick Garland. Republicans and supposed “pro-gun” Democrats, should strongly oppose his confirmation, if for no other reason than Garland’s disingenuous and evasive answers during Senate hearings regarding his thoughts on possible gun control laws and their enforcement.

On the legislative front, we’ve all heard about the outrageous, blatantly unconstitutional gun control proposals put forward by Rep. Shiela Jackson Lee (D-TX), Bobby Rush (D-IL), Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY), and others.

These proposals call for bans on certain types of guns, certain sizes of magazines, registration of guns and gun owners, and other draconian measures. Their proposals are the same warmed-over hash of gun control and prior restraint we’ve seen from that side for most of the past century. They generate a lot of noise and tend to capture a lot of attention, but the reality is that they have very little chance of being passed out of the US Senate. Democrats hold a majority based solely on Vice President Kamala Harris’s tie-breaking vote. These bills will require more than a simple majority for passage, though, so while they serve as good reminders of what Democrats would pass if they could get away with it, they don’t pose an immediate threat.

The most significant threats are those few that are seen as less extreme, such as HR 8, banning private firearm transfers, and HR 1446, extending the NICS delay period from 3 to 10 business days. Both of these bills are holding hearings as this column goes to press. HR 8 has 232 cosponsors, which includes the entirety of the Democratic contingent in the House, along with 5 Republicans. HR 1446 currently has 91 cosponsors, all Democrats.

There’s also a dangerous “Red Flag” proposal, which would help fund state efforts to institute Extreme Risk Protection Orders, confiscating firearms from people with nothing more than a pretense at due process.

The current version of this dangerous proposal was introduced by nominal Republican Senator Marco Rubio of Florida. It currently has only 3 cosponsors – 1 Republican, 1 Democrat, and 1 Independent.

These bills are not just direct threats to gun owner rights, they also constitute a serious threat to Republican hopes of ever regaining majorities in the House and Senate.

Continue reading “”

[Virginia Goobernor] Northam Signs Concealed Carry Training Bill, Effective Immediately

U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- March 11th, Governor Ralph Northam signed House Bill 2310. The measure allows individuals who completed online firearms training prior to January 1^st, 2021, but were prohibited from appearing in person at their circuit court clerk’s office due to COVID restrictions, to apply for a concealed handgun permit through April 30^th, 2021.

This bill went into law immediately upon Gov. Northam’s signature. Individuals who previously contacted their clerk are eligible and should keep their documentation. Again, the provisions of this bill only apply through April 30^th, 2021.

As an enlisted Marine, I worked with officers like this for 8 years.

Stuffed shirts with no constitutional authority to limit your arms have no place on our streets. We must take bold action to point at them, laugh in their faces, and tell them where they can shove it. https://t.co/sUNyPhpq0r

— Robb Allen (@ItsRobbAllen) March 2, 2021

Why More Gun Control Laws Will Not Produce More Positive Results

Our Gun Control Laws Are Already Producing The Maximum Positive Effect Possible, More Laws Aimed At Law Abiding Buyers Will Not Help – And Will Actually Hurt!

The law of diminishing returns applies to almost everything.  Taking twice as much medication will not always produce twice the effect.  Doubling the number of employees will not always result in twice as much production or sales.  In fact, in both examples, there is a point at which adding more medication or employees will not produce any increase at all.  The medication increase may fail because the body can only be stimulated to a certain point at which it reaches the maximum possible effect.  Increasing the number of employees will only increase production as long as there is space and equipment for the additional employees to work.  The law of diminishing returns not only says that returns will reduce as the “solution” is increased – it says that at a certain point, increasing what was a positive action in the beginning will produce no effect at all or even make things worse.

We have reached that point with gun control laws in the United States.  The reason is simple: The most that regulation of the legal market in guns can do is push criminals into the illegal market and we are already at this point.  Consider this study done by the US Department of Justice and released in January 2019:

When a criminal, or an otherwise law abiding citizen, is unable to obtain a gun through legal channels, they face a choice: Decide not to buy a gun, or find a black market dealer or other illegal source.  That’s why regulation of the legal gun market reaches a point where more laws will produce no more effect.

Continue reading “”

With House Passage, What’s Next For Background Check Bills?

Now that the House, as expected, has approved a pair of gun control bills dealing with background checks on firearm transfers, the measures are headed over to the Senate. On today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co we delve into Wednesday’s floor debate on H.R. 8 and H.R. 1446 as well as taking a look at the prospects for passage of the gun control bills on the Senate side of the Capitol.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, wasting little time and taking advantage of the opportunity to preen in front of the cameras, said shortly after the House vote that he plans on bringing both bills to the floor of the Senate.

“In the past, when they sent it over to us last time, it went into [fomer Senate Majority Leader] Mitch McConnell’s legislative graveyard,” Schumer said during a press conference Thursday. “The legislative graveyard is over. H.R. 8 will be on the floor of the Senate, and we will see where everybody stands. No more hopes and prayers, thoughts and prayers. A vote is what we need, a vote, not thoughts and prayers.”

“Certainly hundreds of thousands — maybe millions — of people walking the streets today because we passed [the 1994 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act] would be dead,” Schumer, who authored the Brady Act requiring background checks on all U.S. firearm buyers, said during the briefing.

He continued: “But when we passed the law, little did we know, it had some loopholes in it that we didn’t know at the time. We didn’t know there would be an internet, so we didn’t prohibit internet sales without a background check.”

That’s an incredibly dumb comment for a couple of reasons. First, the Internet was actually a thing back in 1994, though we were restricted to dial-up back then.

The issue isn’t online sales of firearms, because every retail gun sale already has to go through a background check, whether online or in-person. What Schumer is really talking about are private transfers of firearms, and those too were a thing back in the 1990s.

Continue reading “”

Washington State: Pair of Anti-Gun Bills Fail to Pass Before Legislative Deadline

[On Tuesday], two anti-gun measures were not brought up on the floor before the official deadline to pass. Senate Bill 5078 and House Bill 1283 failed to get passed out of their chamber of origin and are considered dead for the session.

Senate Bill 5078, bans the manufacture, possession, sale, transfer, etc., of magazines that “are capable of holding”, or hold more than, 17 rounds of ammunition (the substituted bill increased the restricted count from 10 to 17). This includes conversion kits or parts from which any such magazine may be assembled. These so called “high capacity” magazines are, in fact, standard equipment for commonly-owned firearms that many Americans legally and effectively use for an entire range of legitimate purposes, such as self-defense or competition. Those who own non-compliant magazines prior to the ban are only allowed to possess them on their own property and in other limited instances, such as at licensed shooting ranges or while hunting. Prohibited magazines have to be transported unloaded and locked separately from firearms, and stored at home locked, making them unavailable for self-defense. Any violation of this measure is a gross misdemeanor punishable by a maximum of 364 days in jail and/or a fine of up to $5,000.

House Bill 1283 could cause the lawful open carry of a firearm to become a felony offense. While the substitute measure removes certain language from the original measure that triggered the felony charge if an individual “felt threatened,” the substance of the bill remains the same.

Which is the same question asked of them for many years:
What makes you believe that another law will suddenly make a criminal stop violating all the other laws they’ve been violating?
Since it won’t, as demonstrated by past performance of the criminal element from the dawn of history to date, what they want isn’t about stopping criminals from committing crimes, but controlling the populace.

A Simple Question For Democrats About Universal Background Checks

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her anti-gun allies are moving forward with votes on a pair of gun control bills dealing with background checks for firearm purchases, armed with a new poll showing broad support from the electorate when it comes to requiring background checks on all sales of firearms. A new Morning Consult poll finds that 84-percent of respondents backed the idea when they were asked, though I suspect that if the question had been worded a little differently we might have seen a very different result.

Do 84-percent of Americans think a person should go to federal prison if they transfer a firearm to their neighbor who’s afraid of her abusive ex showing up at her door? Do 84-percent of Americans think that it should be crime to sell a gun to your cousin without a background check, but legal for you to sell a gun to your aunt without one? I highly doubt it, but that’s exactly what H.R. 8 would require if it were to become law.

We’re gonna hear a lot of talk from Democrats in the next few days about the popularity of universal background checks, but the fact is that most Americans simply don’t know about the details of the Democrats’ proposals and how they could impact legal gun owners.

Beyond the polling, however, I have a serious question for the supporters of H.R. 8, and I hope that Republicans in the House press their anti-gun colleagues for an answer.

How will this bill prevent any illicit private transfer of a firearm? 

Democrats claim that H.R. 8 will stop criminals from getting a gun, but have you noticed that they never actually explain how the bill will do that?

“If you are a criminal, you are a felon, you are deranged, well by God you shouldn’t have access to a weapon, that’s what this bill does. It has the support of about 90% of Americans,” Illinois Democratic Rep. Cheri Bustos said.

Bustos says one bill would close the so-called “gun show loophole” by making it illegal for unlicensed persons to transfer firearms to someone else without a background check.

Most criminals don’t get their guns through legal means in the first place, and the bill doesn’t change the fact that convicted felons and those adjudicated as “mentally defective” cannot legally buy or possess a firearm. So how exactly does this bill prevent access to a gun from those not allowed to own one?

Simply put, it doesn’t. At best it allows for a criminal charge after the fact, but even then prosecutors would face significant challenges. They’d first have to find the gun in question, trace it back to the illicit purchaser, who would then have to provide evidence that the gun was purchased without a background check from a private seller after the universal background check bill became law.

In the year after Washington State approved a universal background check measure of its own, there were a total of ten arrests and two convictions of individuals who attempted to purchase a gun when they were prohibited from doing so, but it looks like both of those convictions came as the result of background checks performed on retail sales of guns, not private transfers.

New Mexico also approved universal background checks back in 2019, and in the first year that the law was on the books there were zero arrests for conducing a private gun sale without going through a background check. Are we really supposed to believe that criminals in the Land of Enchantment simply stopped all black market sales, or does it make more sense that criminals simply continued to ignore this law just as they ignore the laws against, say, home invasion or armed robbery?

Democrats maintain that H.R. 8 will prevent criminals from getting their hands on a gun, but I’ve never heard them explain how the legislation will do that. Something tells me that we won’t get any such explanation during the debate of H.R. 8 either, but every pro-2A House member should call them out for their obfuscation and demand that they tell the American people the truth about this bill; it won’t and can’t prevent a single illicit private transfer of a firearm, and is utterly useless as a public safety strategy.

South Dakota: Two Pro-Gun Bills Head to the Governor’s Desk for Signature

Wednesday, March 3rd the South Dakota House gave final approval to a pair of pro-gun measures, Senate Bill 100 and Senate Bill 111.  These two important bills now head to the desk of Governor Kristi Noem for her signature.  Please contact Governor Kristi Noem and ask her to sign Senate Bills 100 and 111 into law.

Senate Bill 100 provides protections for gun stores, ranges, or any other entity that engages in the lawful selling or servicing of firearms, components, or accessories. SB 100 also prevents the prohibition, regulation, or seizure of citizens’ Second Amendment rights during a declared State of Emergency.

Senate Bill 111 reduces the cost for some types of concealed carry permits.

Dems Tell Manchin: Nuke Filibuster If You Want Background Checks

I take absolutely no joy in saying this, but my job is to tell it like it is and not try to blow sunshine up anyone’s backside: the gun control bills that are expected to start moving in the House this week are almost guaranteed to be approved and sent to the U.S. Senate. H.R. 8, which would impose a one-year federal prison sentence on gun owners who transferred a firearm without first going through a background check, and H.R. 1446, which would allow the FBI to delay transfers done through an FFL for ten days (and indefinitely in some circumstances) as opposed to the three-day limit currently allowed by law, aren’t going to get out the House with wide margins, but bills only need a bare majority to pass there.

It’s the Senate where things are going to get tricky for gun control legislation, since 60 votes are going to be necessary in order for the bills to pass. Joe Manchin seems adamant that he’s not going to provide the final vote necessary to nuke the legislative filibuster, but the Left is doing its best to remind Manchin that if he doesn’t, there’s no guarantee that the universal background check bill will get to Biden’s desk.

Manchin nevertheless remains as intransigent as ever on the filibuster question in general. Asked on the Hill this past Monday about the circumstances under which he’d reconsider his support for it, he yelled “Never.” “Jesus Christ!” he said to reporters. “What don’t you understand about ‘never’?” And Manchin has already seen and made peace with Republicans in the Senate killing background check expansions twice this decade—once in 2013 and once in 2015. It should be said that these failures give lie to the idea, promoted by Manchin and others, that the filibuster facilitates bipartisanship. On both occasions, checks actually won the support of a bipartisan coalition of senators, and Manchin’s bill might have passed in 2013 with a bipartisan 54-vote majority were it not for the filibuster and its 60-vote threshold. Instead of Congress passing a policy supported by the vast majority of the American people and offered up by cooperative and cordial members of both parties, Congress passed nothing.

It is likely that this will happen again. Asked about the BCEA’s chances on CNN recently, Pat Toomey was pessimistic. “It’s theoretically possible,” he said, “but I’m not aware of a significant change in heart.” Absent that change in heart, all gun legislation will be doomed—not just background checks but the rest of the proposals for Congress that President Biden ran on, including a new assault weapons ban, a ban on online gun and parts sales, and the repeal of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which shields gun manufacturers from lawsuits over the use of their guns in criminal activity. Biden wasn’t the most ambitious of the primary candidates on gun policy, but his proposals would still be the most sweeping gun control measures implemented since Biden helped pass the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and the original Federal Assault Weapons Ban as a senator in the early 1990s.