80% Silencers, the Political Ramifications of Mass Ownership

In the first two parts of this on home made silencers series, I wrote of how we arrived at the current situation, historically, and what exists today, in terms of the technology and legal system, for individuals to make their own silencers utilizing the ATF Form 1.

Because of the tremendous bureaucratic and monetary infringements imposed by the National Firearms Act (NFA), very few form 1’s (required to legally make your own silencer, short-barreled rifle, or shotgun) were processed as late as 1990.

It took two more years, to 2016, to more than double again, to 49,985 Form 1s per year. That was the peak, so far. Record firearms sales in 2020 lead to the prediction over 50,000 Form 1’s will be processed this year. The figures for 2019 Form 1’s have not been released at this time, but should be out soon.

About 120 times as many Form 1s are being processed each year, as were being processed 30 years ago. Entire forums on the Internet trade information on what works and what doesn’t.

Forums such as silencertalk.com are potent places for political organizing.

Analysis of the ATF figures shows about 75% of the current Form 1s are for silencers. Most of the rest are for short-barrelled rifles (SBR). SBR Form 1s have probably dropped off as pistol arm braces gained popularity.

The vast increase in the number of legal silencers is altering the political and judicial landscapes.

Such visible numbers are a sign of political and judicial strength. Second Amendment supporters have every logical argument to repeal the National Firearms Act. They do not have the political support in Congress to do so…yet.

The inclusion of silencers in the NFA may be the worst public health blunder made by the Federal Government. Tens of millions of gun owners’ hearing has been adversely affected.

Two million legal silencers are merely the start. There are about 100 million firearms owners who could benefit from owning inexpensive and effective silencers in the United States. Market saturation of silencers in the United States might top out in the area of 200 million. Continue reading “”

Is Biden Coming For Your Guns? To Quote Beto, ‘Hell Yes’ — It’s Right There On His Website.

All the focus has been on Biden’s mask use, his ridiculous rhetoric, his personal attacks on Trump, and his various Bidenisms. What we should REALLY Be looking at is his platform.

He can duck and weave in debates and townhalls all he wants, but his platform is there for all to read.

Mark Levin calls it their Manifesto. We have referenced that previously.

He picked as his running mate the furthest left Senator of the bunch, whose record is literally further left than Bernie Sanders. But we’re all supposed to blindly accept that Joe is a ‘moderate’.

He was part of legislation pushing a gun ban before, and it should surprise nobody that the guy who pledged to put Beto ‘Hell Yes we’ll take your AR-15s” O’Rourke in charge of gun policy is pushing gun confiscation.

Of course, the kind of legislation he is pushing does nothing to target the places where gun crime is a real problem… places like the mean streets of Chicago for instance.

That doesn’t stop him from demagoguing the issue. From his website:

It’s within our grasp to end our gun violence epidemic and respect the Second Amendment, which is limited. As president, Biden will pursue constitutional, common-sense gun safety policies. Biden will:

Hold gun manufacturers accountable. In 2005, then-Senator Biden voted against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, but gun manufacturers successfully lobbied Congress to secure its passage. This law protects these manufacturers from being held civilly liable for their products – a protection granted to no other industry. Biden will prioritize repealing this protection.

Get weapons of war off our streets. The bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines that Biden, along with Senator Feinstein, secured in 1994 reduced the lethality of mass shootings. But, in order to secure the passage of the bans, they had to agree to a 10-year sunset provision and when the time came, the Bush Administration failed to extend them. As president, Biden will:

  • Ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Federal law prevents hunters from hunting migratory game birds with more than three shells in their shotgun. That means our federal law does more to protect ducks than children. It’s wrong. Joe Biden will enact legislation to once again ban assault weapons. This time, the bans will be designed based on lessons learned from the 1994 bans. For example, the ban on assault weapons will be designed to prevent manufacturers from circumventing the law by making minor changes that don’t limit the weapon’s lethality. While working to pass this legislation, Biden will also use his executive authority to ban the importation of assault weapons. 
  • Regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act. Currently, the National Firearms Act requires individuals possessing machine-guns, silencers, and short-barreled rifles to undergo a background check and register those weapons with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Due to these requirements, such weapons are rarely used in crimes. As president, Biden will pursue legislation to regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act.
  • Buy back the assault weapons and high-capacity magazines already in our communities. Biden will also institute a program to buy back weapons of war currently on our streets. This will give individuals who now possess assault weapons or high-capacity magazines two options: sell the weapons to the government, or register them under the National Firearms Act.
  • Reduce stockpiling of weapons. In order to reduce the stockpiling of firearms, Biden supports legislation restricting the number of firearms an individual may purchase per month to one.

We notice it doesn’t say what will happen to someone who says that they do NOT want to participate in a government buyback. Continue reading “”

Gun Control Absent From Presidential Debate

With last night’s debate between President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden, it seemed likely that gun control would be a topic of discussion. After all, it was a driving issue during the Democratic primary, one at least two candidates decided to make a focal point of their campaigns. It was a recurring theme during Democratic debates as well.

However, now, things are different. It seems that everyone is trying to pretend that gun control was never a topic to begin with, from the gun control groups and now, even the presidential campaigns.

Oh, guns weren’t absent. It seems that gun violence was a major topic of debate. Especially in places like Chicago.

With the surge in violence we’re seeing all over the nation, that’s hardly surprising. It’s an alarming development in a year of alarming developments, to say the least. Yet this one, at least, feels like something people can turn to politicians to solve, so they have.

But absent from any mention of the debates? Gun control.

This issue that seemed poised to shape at least part of the presidential election has largely fizzled out. Oh, Biden still wants gun control and we know that if he’s elected, we’ll likely see it, but no one wants to talk about it, apparently.

Why?

Following the shooting in Marjory Stoneman-Douglas Highschool in Parkland, gun control was all anyone could seemingly talk about. It made gun control fashionable.

What’s more, gun control didn’t fade into the background like it normally does following a mass shooting. The media made it a point to push people like David Hogg in our faces to keep gun control in the foreground. It couldn’t die if the media kept focusing on it.

Then COVID-19 hit.

At that point, the media had more important things to talk about. Further, millions upon millions of Americans went out and bought guns. After all, a deadly pandemic was here. People were going to die and it wasn’t out of the realm of possibility for there to be some real problems with our supply chain. In fact, there was, and no one had any reason to believe it couldn’t get worse. What happens when people can’t get food?

For times like that, you need a gun.
Continue reading “”

It’s almost like they know it’s a losing argument, so they have to obfuscate it? Strange.


Gun Control Group Opts for Healthcare Push in Swing States

Michael Bloomberg-founded Everytown for Gun Safety is opting to push healthcare instead of new gun laws in swing states as the November election approaches.

The Washington Free Beacon reports that Everytown launched an ad campaign in Pennsylvania, Iowa, North Carolina, Arizona, and Minnesota, and there is zero mention of gun control. Instead, the ads make allegations that Republicans want to take away healthcare.

The NRA’s Amy Hunter responded to Everytown’s decision to forego a gun control push, saying, “This Bloomberg-funded organization knows Americans don’t want gun control and are less likely to vote for candidates who promise to impose it. That is why they have to engage in tactics like this — and also bribe felons to vote — to get their gun-control candidates elected. They hope these tactics will fool swing state voters but we hope voters will see right through their deception.”

On September 21, 2020, Breitbart News reported there was a 139 percent increase in ammunition sales nationwide during the first six months of 2020, when compared to the same time period in 2019. Those ammo sales were coupled with a 95 percent increase in gun sales, as compared to the same time frame in 2019.

Moreover, there was an 80 percent surge in gun sales in seven swing states. Those seven states include the five in which Bloomberg’s Everytown is forgoing a gun control push.

The new anti-Semitism


Ocasio-Cortez withdraws from Rabin memorial event after backlash
Democratic congresswoman pulls participation from Americans For Peace Now commemoration for assassinated Israeli premier, after pro-Palestinian activists call move ‘disgusting’

Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Friday withdrew her participation from an event commemorating former prime minster Yitzhak Rabin on the 25th anniversary of his assassination.

The decision, which came after backlash from pro-Palestinian activists, was confirmed to The Times of Israel by a spokeswoman for the congresswoman, a rising star in the progressive wing of the Democratic party. Continue reading “”

Ohio lawmakers pass bill making gun stores an ‘essential business’ even amid a pandemic

COLUMBUS, Ohio (WSYX/WTTE) — The Ohio Senate recently passed a bill that would ban the closure of licensed firearms dealers, even during a pandemic. Gun store owners are now behind the legislation and hope it reaches the governor’s desk. However, other groups against the bill now worry about the bill saying it could do more harm than good.

Eric Delbert, the owner of LEPD Firearms, says in the eight years he’s been running the store gun sales have never been higher.

“At the height of COVID and at the beginning of the civil unrest, we went from selling 10 firearms in a day just in a day just some days selling over 100,” said Delbert.

Governors of several states excluded licensed firearms dealers from the list of “essential” businesses. Recently, passed Senate Bill 360, backed by Republican Senate President Larry Obhof, would ban any public official from closing down gun stores, even during a pandemic……..

I wish


Some Senate Democrats Consider Boycotting SCOTUS Confirmation Hearing

At least two Democrats on the powerful Senate panel that will soon oversee the confirmation hearing for President Donald Trump’s forthcoming Supreme Court nominee remain on the fence about whether they’ll attend the televised meetings.

Senate Judiciary Committee members Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) told Newsweek they’re uncertain if they’ll participate in the several days of public hearings expected for mid-October, signaling they may boycott the confirmation process in an apparent snub to Republicans moving at breakneck pace to fill the vacancy on the nation’s highest court before Election Day.

“We’ll see,” Coons said. “My gut inclination is this is the shortest time in American history, the closest to an election—ever—that there’s been a nominee, and we’re given just two weeks to do what should take a month

Naked Power Plays
The McConnell hate is palpable right now. If you don’t think the Dems would have done the same thing if the situation were reversed, I have a bridge to sell you. They would be fools not to.

Most of politics is slinging bs. You weave a narrative for the rubes to rally around.

“Let the next President fill the seat!” “Do your job!”
“It was her dying wish!” “Mitch is a hypocrite!”

It’s all nonsense that will be repeated mindlessly by partisan cheerleaders. If the Dems had been in charge of the Senate, Merrick Garland or someone more liberal would be on the court right now, and to me that’s a consequence of losing elections. If Hillary had won and the Dems won back the Senate in 2018, no one vilifying Cocaine Mitch right now would be complaining about Schumer allowing a vote on RBG’s replacement. What surprises me is how many educated people fall for “The Narrative.”

This is raw, naked, political power, as our system is designed to allow. Anyone who thinks higher principles are involved here is a fool. Mitch McConnell is doing exactly what Chuck Schumer would be doing if the party was reversed. When the party in the White House, controls the Senate, they can put whoever they want on the federal courts without compromise. That’s how the system is designed to work. If you want a check, the party that doesn’t hold the White House needs to take the Senate. If you fail to do that, these are the consequences. Continue reading “”

They should be careful if they really want to ‘go there’. They just may walk into something that does more than bite back.


Democrats Promise to Be Sore (and Violent) Losers
They know that the media, corporations, schools, and even churches will cheer them on.

Writing in The Atlantic recently, the sober-minded commentator Shadi Hamid says, “I struggle to imagine how, beyond utter shock, millions of Democrats will process a Trump victory.” For Democrats, having failed to cope with the 2016 election, and believing the polls that show a solid Joe Biden lead, another shock Trump win would “provoke mass disillusion with electoral politics as a means of change — at a time when disillusion is already dangerously high.” And it would lead decent folks astray. They would seek remedies “outside the political process, including through nonpeaceful means,” though, “not necessarily out of hope but out of despair.”

Don’t notice the gleam in the arsonist’s eye, he’s really just heartbroken over the fate of the Biden-Harris ticket!

Given Hamid’s premises, why bother even having the election? Why not find a peaceful but extralegal procedure to make Joe Biden president right this second? We could relieve the whole nation of the suspense of what Democrats will do if once again they’ve nominated someone who can’t beat one of the most broadly unpopular political figures of modern times.

For what it’s worth, like Hamid, I’m worried about post-election violence. But my view of the causes is slightly different. Hamid says, “Losers of elections need to believe that they can win the next time around. Otherwise their incentives to play the spoiler increase.” Okay, true enough.

He also says that “the anxiety gripping the two parties is asymmetric.” Joe Biden is a moderate Democrat, he says, and therefore theoretically more acceptable to Republicans, whereas Donald Trump “represents the nativist wing of an already nativist Republican Party.” His conclusion: Biden should win for reasons of civic peace.

Now leave aside the claims of leftists, including Obama, that Joe Biden has become much more progressive in his current campaign. And let’s leave aside the question of whether Donald Trump is actually a moderate or liberal Republican on issues such as federal welfare spending. Hamid fails in his analysis because he is unwilling or unable to see things from the other side. Maybe it’s time to practice empathy.

What if the anxiety gripping the parties was asymmetric in the other direction? Conservatives don’t see politics as just a matter of elective office, but of power generally. And they notice that the major corporations, Hollywood and pop culture, academia, what’s left of mainstream media, most local institutions, the leadership class of their own movements through the years, and even their own churches are substantially to their left politically. They also notice that progressives notch major political and cultural wins even from conservative elites, and even following conservative victories.

Hamid might have noticed that conservative activism was born over “despair” of the sort he describes. It was born of the observation that even winning elections wasn’t enough to secure political victories. Instead of the Electoral College or the Senate, conservatives had to face the more inscrutable Supreme Court, which for years overturned conservative legislation and enacted progressive victories that had no chance of receiving a democratic mandate. Conservatives’ response was to double down on electoral strategies, making an explicit case that they needed to win elections to reform the judiciary. Why didn’t conservatives simply pout and threaten to abandon the democratic process altogether, as Hamid admits liberals are wont to do?

Perhaps because conservatives then, as now, knew on which side of the divide the institutional and oligarchic power landed. Progressives feel secure in making all but open threats of violence and revolution because they know that the heads of domestic security agencies are on their side, they know that the most powerful voices in media and academia are at the ready to craft apologies for their violence. And they know that their reputations will be restored or even burnished after committing violence on behalf of their causes.

The modern American conservative movement was a populist and democratic movement because it had to be. The modern Left knows where its power lies as well — with the already powerful.

He knows if he tells the truth, it’s over and he probably knows he’s not a good enough liar to get away with it if he lies, and it’s over. That’s when you wind up getting this ‘non-answer answer’ from a – one might suppose – incompetent hack, which then tells everyone the accusation is true.
On the other hand——–
A really cynical person might think that was the plan, as we’ve seen so many unforced errors in the Biden campaign to make one conclude some of his team are purposefully trying to sink SloJoe with something like ‘death of a thousand cuts’.
But that’s just me.


Be Careful What You Wish For: Gun Grabbers Worry NRA’s Successor Would be More Far More Pro 2A

Alex Yablon is a former writer at Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun agitprop generation station, The Trace. In the Slate piece quote below, he indulges in a little wish-fulfilment fantasizing about what a post-NRA gun rights landscape might look like if the New York AG succeeds in taking the gun rights giant down.

Even the ACLU concedes that full dissolution of the NRA would be wrong and highly unlikely. And Yablon concludes that any successor organization to rise from the NRA’s ashes would likely be far more doctrinaire in its support of the Second Amendment than the NRA ever was.

If [New York Attorney General Letitia] James succeeds [in dissolving the National Rifle Association], the court will direct her to find other groups who could take control of the NRA’s infrastructure, which could restart a national gun rights advocacy group. She would be bound by law to solely consider whether successor groups share the NRA’s values and are free from any taint of corruption. “The groups would have to be absolutely squeaky clean, but they could have really aggressive Second Amendment politics,” [New York Council of Nonprofits attorney Michael] West said.

Continue reading “”

Joe Biden Goes to Kenosha and Kills Off What’s Left of the #MeToo Movement

Joe Biden is leaving the basement today to go to Kenosha, Wisconsin. He is not going to survey the damage or provide solutions for business owners and residents whose lives and businesses have been destroyed. He’s not going to explain how he will support law enforcement in providing security for the law-abiding residents of Kenosha.

Instead, the centerpiece of his visit that is being promoted is his meeting with the family of Jacob Blake. Biden is going to lionize a man accused of sexual assault, who had a warrant out for his arrest, then showed up at the home of his alleged victim, and actively resisted arrest while trying to retrieve a knife from his car. He marched to the driver’s side door while officers were telling him to stop and tazed him twice to impede his progress.

Specifically, ABC notes that Biden will be meeting with Jacob Blake Sr. as described in this article at Heavy, the father has a significant history of anti-Semitic, anti-Christian, anti-white, and misogynistic social media posts (language warning). He also appears to be a supporter of Louis Farrakhan. And the effective leader of the Democrat Party will participate in a community meeting with this man to “bring together Americans to heal and address the challenges we face.” Irony anyone? Continue reading “”

Doesn’t mean they won’t try for more gun control, they’re just keeping their mouths shut about it as their internal polling is showing it isn’t popular.


Hawkins: Leftists Silent as Americans Choose Guns over Gun Control

As millions of Americans have poured into gun stores and set background check records for seven straight months, the normally vocal gun grabbers on the left have gone silent.

Consider the example of Joe Biden, a man who spent months on the campaign trail promising universal background checks, an “assault weapons” ban, a “high capacity” magazine ban, and even voiced support for government-mandate buybacks of certain firearms, yet did not mention gun control one time during his Democrat National Convention acceptance speech.

CNN published a transcript of the speech, and the absence of any gun control mention, much less a gun control push, is demonstrable. Continue reading “”

Trump Is Going to Kenosha, Liberals Are Having a Meltdown

There’s a reason that President Donald Trump is president and Hillary Clinton isn’t. Because he doesn’t run what he does through a PR adviser to determine whether his actions are popular or not, he actually has core policies and principles that he takes whether or not they are popular.

One of those is his decision to go to Kenosha. A White House spokesperson told reporters Saturday that Trump intends to visit Kenosha on Tuesday and will “meet with law enforcement and survey damage from recent riots.” It’s not clear yet if he will meet with the family of Jacob Blake.

That’s the right thing to do, to reassure not only the people there, but to send a signal out to everyone that he’s doing what he can, against great resistance from Democrats, to make the situation better and to give reassurance to the people that he cares not only about Kenosha but the other people affected by these riots.

Good for him. That’s why he has support on this issue, and Democrats don’t. Because Americans see him acting with actual honest outrage and concern about the riots. Meanwhile Democrats have failed to address them in Democratic cities and tried to paint them as peaceful.

Continue reading “”

Protesters stage sit-in at Portland Mayor Wheeler’s apartment complex

A group of protesters is sitting inside the lobby of Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler’s apartment complex in the Pearl District, while others stand outside.

Independent journalists on scene estimated there were about 10 people inside the lobby of the building. One of those journalists, Garrison Davis, said some of the protesters wouldn’t leave until Mayor Wheeler came out and listened to their demands, which included:

  • Reduce the Portland Police Bureau budget.
  • Commit to never voting for police budget increases again.
  • Resign.

Born and raised in Britain, Sullivan is the quintessential leftist Brit, but he is spot on that the demoncraps have gone and done it to themselves.
This just goes to show that, on occasion, even idiots can have moments of clear thinking.


BLUF:
I don’t think I’m the only one, as even the Democrats seem now to realize. And this massive blindspot is not hard to understand.
When a political party finds itself so wedded to a new and potent ideology it cannot call out violence when it sees it, then it is walking straight into a trap.

When the discourse on the left has become one in which scholars and editors and Tweeters vie with one another to up the ante on how inherently evil America has always been, redescribe it as a slaveocracy, and endorse racist books that foment the most egregious stereotypes about “whiteness”, most ordinary people, who love their country and are mostly proud of its past, will rightly balk.

One of the most devastating lines in president Trump’s convention speech last night was this: “Tonight, I ask you a very simple question: How can the Democrat Party ask to lead our country when it spends so much time tearing down our country?” 

The Trap The Democrats Walked Right Into
If law and order are what this election is about, they will lose it. 

It finally happened. We have lethal battles in the streets between the two tribes of our polarized politics. This week, a 17-year-old man, Kyle Rittenhouse, brought a rifle to Kenosha, Wisconsin, in order, it appears, to protect the businesses that were being burned down or ransacked by rioters after the police shooting of alleged rapist, Jacob Blake. In a series of skirmishes between Rittenhouse and BLM and Antifa activists on the streets of Kenosha, three men pursuing Rittenhouse were shot and two killed by the vigilante in what appears to be some kind of self-defense.

I’m doing my best to convey the gist of what happened — and there’s an excellent, detailed report of the incident from the NYT — without justifying any of it. No excuse for vigilantism; no excuse for looting, rioting and arson. Continue reading “”