Category: RKBA

Biden’s call for gun control smacked down by reality

President Joe Biden, like many gun control advocates, wasted no time at all in calling for Congress to enact new legislation in the wake of the latest shooting in Sacramento. In their minds, another mass shooting could only mean gun control was needed and needed swiftly.

However, as we now know, reality slapped the president in the face.

In the immediate aftermath of a mass shooting in Sacramento, California, that killed six and injured 15, President Joe Biden echoed a familiar sentiment among Democrats: “We must do more than mourn; we must act.”

Of course, Biden was specifically calling for further restrictions on Americans’ second amendment rights as an answer to the country’s ongoing surge in violent crime.

“We also continue to call on Congress to act,” the president said in a statement. “Ban ghost guns. Require background checks for all gun sales. Ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Repeal gun manufacturers’ immunity from liability.”

But new revelations from law enforcement quickly discredited Democrats’ broad claims that gun regulations would have prevented the deadly incident. Instead, it appeared that, if anything, a tougher stance from law enforcement was due.

First, news broke that one of the suspects in the shooting, 27-year-old Smiley Martin, is a dangerous career criminal who was granted early release from prison only weeks before the shootout occurred — in spite of pleading and warning from the county’s district attorney. The other suspect, 26-year-old Dandrae Martin, also has a criminal record.

Then on Wednesday, police in Sacramento reported that at least five suspects and “two groups of men” were involved in the shooting. They added that it had become “increasingly clear that gang violence is at the center of this tragedy.”

See, this is what they get for jumping and calling for regulations before we know anything.

Don’t get me wrong, even if this had been exactly what Biden and his crowd thought it was, I’d still oppose gun control, but at least we’d be looking at things that had some degree of bearing on what happened.

Instead, we get the same blanket pronouncements and the advancement of still more gun control policies that have been on the table for a while–all of which exist in California, it should be noted.

Biden and others pushed that narrative, confident that it wouldn’t be challenged, which was idiotic. This is California, which has all the gun control laws they’re talking about, and what good did it do?

I mean, one of the shooters had a weapon that was illegally modified to be full-auto–that violates federal law as well.

Didn’t help, now did it?

Time and time again, gun control jihadists do this. They jump at the opportunity to push their agenda without waiting for all the facts.

Usually, they screw up things like calling for an assault weapon ban, saying how it’s needed to stop a mass shooting like the one that just transpired, only for us to learn the shooter used a handgun. Things like that.

This time, though, it’s not even a mass shooting as we tend to think of it. It was gang warfare and at least one of the shooters was free because of policies explicitly backed by Democrats.

It’s kind of hard to make pronouncements about how Republicans are making people unsafe when one of the alleged killers is only free because of Democrats.

President Biden would have done well to simply offer his sympathies to the families of those killed, then said we need to wait and learn exactly what happened before we try and figure out how to address it. However, that’s not his MO and it never has been.

Which is why reality treated Biden like he was Chris Rock and he’d just joked about Reality’s wife’s hair.

Missouri Self-Defense Bill Advances from Senate General Laws [Committee]

….the Senate General Laws Committee voted 4-1 to pass House Bill 1462, to reduce areas where law-abiding citizens are left defenseless. It will now advance to the full Senate for further consideration. Please contact Senate President Dave Schatz and the Senate Majority Floor Leader Caleb Rowden, and ask them to schedule HB 1462 to be heard on the floor.

House Bill 1462 repeals arbitrary “gun-free zones” that do nothing to hinder criminals, while leaving law-abiding citizens defenseless. It removes the prohibition on law-abiding citizens carrying firearms for self-defense on public transit property and in vehicles. This ensures that citizens with varying commutes throughout their day, and of various economic means, are able to exercise their Second Amendment rights and defend themselves.

The bill also repeals the prohibition in state law against carrying firearms for self-defense in places of worship. This empowers private property owners to make such decisions regarding security on their own, rather than the government mandating a one-size-fits-all solution.

Observation O’ The Day

I don’t think a surge in gun ownership and a political shift away from gun-control was what George Soros had in mind when he urged the Philly District Attorney to release criminals back on the street. Things don’t always go as planned. By the way, there is an impeachment effort to remove the Philly District Attorney, the same attorney that Soros funded. –Rob Morse

Philadelphia gun permit applications continue to increase amid crime wave
Data shows permit applications increased 539% from 2020 to 2021.

PHILADELPHIA (WPVI) — Gun shop owners continue to see an increase in gun sales, particularly when it comes to new gun owners and people applying for gun permits for the first time.
Sebastian Stelmach is the co-owner of Double Tap Shooting Range and Gun Store in Philadelphia’s Holmesburg neighborhood.

Stelmach says they saw a huge increase in sales of guns and ammunition during the pandemic.

“Ever since then, it’s been going up with more gun sales, new shooters, you name it,” said Stelmach.

He says his customers, including new ones, say they are motivated to buy guns out of concern for their personal protection.

“There’s been a big increase in violence throughout the city — so a lot of robberies, carjackings going on. The first thing they ask is, ‘I need a weapon for protection.’ Honestly, it’s been a lot of women, single moms,” said Stelmach.

The Action News Data Journalism team looked at the numbers and found the Philadelphia Police Department’s gun permit unit saw nearly six and a half times as many gun permit applications received in 2021 as in 2020 — a 539% increase.So far this year, they have already seen more applications than all of 2020 and are on pace to exceed last year’s number.

Continue reading “”

California’s gun restrictions are a failure

IN SUMMARY

California has the nation’s most restrictive gun laws but they have failed to stem the increase in gun ownership, the availability of illegal guns by criminals or gun violence.

Inevitably, last weekend’s horrendous fusillade of bullets on a downtown Sacramento street that left six people dead and at least a dozen wounded generated demands for new gun controls in state that already has the nation’s most restrictive firearms laws.

However, if anything, what happened just two blocks from the state Capitol underscores the folly of believing that “gun violence” can be meaningfully reduced by trying to choke off the supply of firearms – any more than the prohibition of liquor or the war on drugs succeeded.

The state’s gun laws have hassled law-abiding hunters and gun hobbyists and some are in danger of being declared unconstitutional. However, Californians already own more than 20 million rifles, shotguns and handguns and are buying hundreds of thousands more each year.

Nor have these laws prevented the lawless from obtaining weapons via theft, smuggling from other states or the illicit manufacture of untraceable “ghost guns.” Indeed, state restrictions have made the black market even more lucrative, mirroring the side effects of Prohibition and the decades-long drug war.

Initial evidence indicates that those who fired more than 100 rounds in a street crowded with bar and nightclub patrons probably were violating one or more gun laws. The two brothers that police arrested and are suspected of involvement in the mass shooting were charged with illegal possession of weapons – one for possession of an illegal fully automatic firearm.

So why, if California’s much-vaunted gun control laws have failed to choke off the supply of legal and illegal weapons, do politicians continue to claim that enacting even more will have an effect?

Some may believe it, the evidence notwithstanding, while others want to appear to be doing something about a problem because they don’t have any other answers. And those who propose and enact new gun laws are often woefully ignorant about guns or even existing laws.

In the aftermath of the shooting, Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg lamented to a radio interviewer about California’s difficulty in reducing the number of guns, saying, “You just have to go to a gun show in Reno to buy an assault weapon without a background check and come right back to California.”

Advocates of more laws often cite a “gun show loophole” but it’s a myth. Under federal law, one must be a resident of Nevada and undergo a federal background check to legally buy a gun in Reno.

Moreover, while California professes to have banned “assault weapons,” the state’s definition of them involves cosmetic features, rather than their lethality. Perfectly legal semi-automatic rifles that lack those features are available for sale everywhere in the state.

The newest effort at gun control in California, backed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, would authorize personal lawsuits against the manufacturers and sellers of illegal assault rifles or ghost guns, mirroring a new Texas law allowing suits against those who perform abortions.

The legislation, Senate Bill 1327, is just a stunt – one of Newsom’s periodic jabs at a rival state. Those who could be sued under the bill are already committing criminal acts in California and a federal law prohibits suits against manufacturers of legal firearms, including the “assault weapons” that California and a few other states purport – but fail – to outlaw.

The bottom line is this: Actor Alec Baldwin’s claims notwithstanding, guns don’t fire on their own. Someone must accidentally or purposely pull the trigger and that should be the focus of efforts to reduce violence – such as more vigorous enforcement of laws banning gun possession by felons and those under court order.

On to the Senate

Missouri House Bill 1462 passes 101-40, allowing people with legally concealed firearms on public transit.

Yesterday House Bill 1462 passed 101- 40 in the Missouri House. The bill heads to the Senate, where the NRA-ILA hopes the General Laws Committee hears it.

The bill states that law-abiding citizens with valid concealed carry permits will be able to conceal and carry firearms in previously prohibited places such as public transit and churches.

The NRA-ILA website reaches out to its readers by saying this regarding the bill:

“House Bill 1462 repeals arbitrary “gun-free zones” that do nothing to hinder criminals, while leaving law-abiding citizens defenseless. It removes the prohibition on law-abiding citizens carrying firearms for self-defense on public transit property and in vehicles. This ensures that citizens with varying commutes throughout their day, and of various economic means, are able to exercise their Second Amendment rights and defend themselves.”
The United States Second Amendment “Right to Bear Arms” is historically a hot subject between the Democrats and Republicans.

The war in Ukraine brings alive the purpose of private citizens bearing arms. Ukraine is the only country in Europe where firearms are unregulated by statute.

Ukraine has been at war since Russia invaded its borders in February of this year. The Ukrainians surprised the world with their tenacity and Ukrainian pride.

At first, being dubbed the underdogs, the Ukrainian people seemed doomed. Surprising the entire world they turned it around, and it appears Russia is starting to withdraw with the spirits of their troops broken.

When the war started, Ukrainian President Zelensky, more of a suit and tie type, responded to offers to get him out of the country safely with:

“I don’t need a ride. I need ammunition!”
Donning camo and firearms, he and most of his government, including women and members of parliament, learned to shoot and fight on the fly. The citizens of Ukraine joined their government and persevered.

The mass devastation and casualties in Ukraine, along with the horrific scenes being left behind of citizens tortured and murdered as Russians retreat, are indicative of what can and will happen. This is why people feel it is necessary to always be in a position to protect yourself.

Many say anti-gun laws protect criminals because criminals don’t file for permits. They acquire guns on the black market. Criminals are armed on public transit, just illegally. Citizens deprived of their Second Amendment rights become victims of criminals with illicitly obtained firearms.

Missourians must know the happenings in the Missouri General Assembly. Your officials can’t speak on your behalf if they are unaware of your opinion.

Change comes from involvement, and involvement is easier than you think. Click this link to email your senator your thoughts on Bill 1462.

What are your thoughts on Missouri gun laws?

If You Can’t Ban It, Overregulate It: Democrats War on Guns Continues

In 2020, my husband and I took a concealed carry course at Magnum Shooting Center in Colorado Springs. The class itself was approximately four hours and covered a number of topics related to gun ownership and safety. After the classroom instruction, we spent an hour on the range.

What surprised me about this course was that a fair portion of it included instruction on Colorado laws, and specifically, what to do if I were ever in a situation when I needed to discharge my weapon (answer, get a lawyer).

Indeed, even in cases of clear self-defense, legally owning a gun and using it to protect yourself can ruin you financially if the person you shot decides to come after you in court. What’s more, this happens regularly. Someone shoots a would-be perpetrator in self-defense, and the assailant turns around and presses charges.

If the above sounds outrageous to you, you’re not alone. But, owning a gun and using it for protection is not as straightforward as you might think. That’s because while Colorado Democrats in the General Assembly can’t outright ban gun ownership thanks to the Second Amendment, they’ve made fair progress toward making gun ownership impractical. And while Republicans are trying to safeguard Second Amendment rights, they’re facing an uphill battle. Here’s what just happened in the Colorado House of Representatives and why it matters to the overall picture of gun ownership.

Restricting Constitutional Carry

Colorado is currently considered an open carry state. That means if you’re legally allowed to possess a firearm, you can open carry it as long as it’s not in a restricted area. However, in 2021, Democratic lawmakers successfully passed Senate Bill 21-256, allowing local governments and municipalities the right to enact any gun law or regulation it wants, as long as that rule is not less restrictive than current Colorado law.

That means places like Boulder can now legally ban open carry of firearms even though open carry is legal under Colorado’s state law. And indeed, that’s what’s happening. So far, Denver is the only area to prohibit open carry, but liberal places like Boulder will follow.

In response to the above, Representative Ron Hanks (Republican, D-60) introduced House Bill 22-1033, “Constitutional Carry of a Handgun.” If it’d passed, HB 1033 would allow anyone 21 years or older who is legally permitted to own a handgun, to also be permitted to carry that weapon concealed without a concealed carry permit. In other words, if you’re 21 or older and you legally own a gun, you wouldn’t have to attend a class and then get a permit to carry that gun under your jacket. More importantly, HB 1033 would’ve repealed part of SB 256. It stated, “The bill repeals local government authority to regulate open or concealed carry of a handgun, including repealing the authority of special districts and the governing boards of institutions of higher education, as applicable.”

After Hanks introduced HB 1033 to the House, it was assigned to the House Committee on Public & Behavioral Health and Human Services. And on Feb. 8, after less than three hours of deliberation, Democrats voted to postpone HB 1033 indefinitely on a party-line vote.

Republicans’ Hands are Tied

Over the past year, The Maverick Observer has detailed how Democrats in the Colorado General Assembly have worked to increase barriers to gun ownership. And with recent bills like HB 22-1086 successfully making their way through the legislative process (link to be included once my article is published), 2022 will end with even more bureaucratic red tape. Make no mistake, the end goal is to overregulate guns into obscurity.

Republican lawmakers like Hanks have tried to push back on these measures, but because Democrats make up a majority in both the House and Senate, and Colorado has a Democratic Governor, these efforts have almost zero chance of passing and are, essentially, dead on arrival.

If the above concerns you, you can take a number of actions. First, contact your representatives and tell them how you feel about the continued encroachments to your Second Amendment rights. Second, sign up to testify either for or against bills making their way through the legislative process. And third — and arguably the only way to enact change given the current makeup in the General Assembly — vote in November for representatives who support the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

That’s ironic.
“This doesn’t work, so we need more of it!”
California gun laws didn’t stop a shooting that happened in California.

Dianne Feinstein Calls for Federal Adoption of California Gun Laws in Wake of California Shooting

Federalizing California’s laws is the answer to preventing future mass shootings like the one that happened in California this weekend, according to one of the state’s senators.

Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) called for a collection of new federal gun laws in response to a shootout in Sacramento, California, on Sunday morning, which left six dead and a dozen injured. She said Congress should adopt universal background checks, bans on “assault weapons” and “ghost guns,” as well as an ammunition magazine capacity limit to prevent similar future killings.

“Congress knows what steps must be taken to stop these mass shootings, we just have to act,” Feinstein said in a press release.

However, all of the policies Feinstein advocated for are already law in California. The state has among the strictest gun laws in the country. It has long required background checks on private sales of used guns, banned a continually expanding list of “assault weapons,” limited the capacity of ammunition magazines to ten rounds, and outlawed unserialized firearms.

Feinstein admitted many of the details of the shooting were “still being investigated” when she issued her statement. Police hadn’t apprehended any suspects when she weighed in on a solution. Details remain limited on what happened during the shooting, but reports indicate shots were fired after an early-morning fight outside a nightclub in a crowded downtown area of the city. Three suspects with serious criminal records have now been apprehended, according to Sacramento Police,

Federal law precludes at least two of the men from possessing firearms due to their previous convictions. Additionally, one of the men has been charged with illegal possession of a machinegun, another federal crime.

Feinstein was not the only one to call for new federal gun laws in response to the shooting. President Joe Biden (D.) advocated for many of the same policies during his comments on the killings.

“We also continue to call on Congress to act,” Biden said on Sunday. “Ban ghost guns. Require background checks for all gun sales. Ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.”

The refrain has become a common response from gun-control advocates in the wake of high-profile shootings. They often argue while California’s gun laws are strong, looser laws in neighboring states undermine those policies. Advocates say federal gun laws are required to ensure criminals cannot obtain banned guns or accessories across state lines and then illegally transport them back into California.

“Of course, this isn’t an isolated event,” Feinstein said. “It’s the latest in an epidemic of gun violence that continues to plague our country. Enough is enough. We can no longer ignore gun violence in our communities.”

However, there are no reports the suspects in Sacramento’s shooting obtained their guns from outside the state. They would have been breaking federal law by obtaining them regardless given their criminal histories.

Sacramento Police are asking anyone with more information on the shooting to contact them at (916) 808-5471 or the Sacramento Valley Crime Stoppers at (916) 443-HELP (4357). They are offering a reward of up to $1,000 for information, and callers may remain anonymous.

What Gun Restriction Would Biden Pass That Isn’t Already the Law in California?

“We must do more than mourn — we must act,” President Joe Biden said on Sunday’s shoot-out in downtown Sacramento that killed six. Biden called on Congress to ban ghost guns, pass “universal” background checks, ban assault weapons, and repeated the lie that gun manufacturers have special immunity from liability.

California already has “universal” background checks. It has “red flag” laws and domestic-violence gun confiscation (often, without any real due process). It has an assault-weapon and magazine ban, deputizing citizens to enforce them. California has safe-storage laws and a ghost-gun ban. The state has a firearm-sales record and the strictest gun-dealer regulation in the nation. It empowers local authorities to further regulate firearms but not to deregulate. It has raised the allowable age even to buy a shotgun or rifle from 18 to 21. In most municipalities, concealed-carry permits are almost impossible to get.

California is home to 111 laws — not counting the thousands passed in cities and counties — that restrict “the manner and space in which firearms can be used,” according to Boston University School of Public Health. “California has the strongest gun laws in the United States and has been a trailblazer for gun safety for the past 30 years,” says Giffords Law Center. The only thing California hasn’t done is outright ban semi-automatic weapons, which is where all these incremental restrictions are meant to lead.

The Hypocrisy of Gun Control Elitists

In 2020, then-presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg was asked how he could continue to demand gun control while being protected by private guards equipped with the same firearms and magazines that he wanted to ban others from owning. “Does your life matter more than mine or my family’s or these people’s?” Bloomberg’s response, in essence, was that he was not an ordinary person. He was a celebrity and billionaire who received more threats than most people: “That just happens when you are the mayor of New York City or you are very wealthy.”

At the same time, another big-city Democrat politician known for pushing gun control on the lower orders was being shielded by a small army of police officers, presumably at the taxpayers’ expense. The Chicago Sun-Times recently disclosed that a special police security detail, Unit 544, was created two years ago to protect Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot, her home and office, and to “oversee her personal bodyguard detail.” The special unit consists of approximately 71 officers, in addition to the mayor’s existing “separate personal bodyguard detail” of 20 officers.

Both cities – ex-Mayor Bloomberg’s New York City and Lightfoot’s Chicago – are experiencing horrific surges in violent crime. The most recent “CompStat” report from the NYPD indicates rapes, robberies, felony assaults, burglaries, grand larceny, and auto thefts have all increased significantly as compared to the same time last year, and the Chicago Police Department’s (CPD) own “CompStat” contains the same dismal message.

While privileged politicians float above this wave of criminality, untroubled by threats to person or property, less exalted individuals are forced to rely on whatever police resources may be available or become their own version of Unit 544.

Last week in Chicago, for instance, a 70-year-old Uber driver, threatened by robbers who then carjacked his vehicle, had to wait 75 minutes before police could respond. Police assigned to serve the area had been drastically reduced to 261 officers, the “lowest monthly staffing level for the district since at least August 2017,” so no one was available to take the assignment until the next shift began. The problem isn’t restricted to that police district: overall, more than 660 CPD officers retired in 2021, almost double the number of retirees in 2018, and recruiting of new officers dropped during the pandemic. Carjacking reports, meanwhile, have set a new monthly record as of February 2022, up 390% from February 2019.

The impact on public safety is what makes Lightfoot’s private defense force of almost 100 officers all the more outrageous. In 2020, residents had already complained that patrol officers in areas close to Lightfoot’s home were redeployed to the mayor’s residence. It’s at odds with the mayor’s oft-used theme of “all hands on deck” to address public safety using a “coordinated and collective effort,” if scores of the deckhands are used for what amounts to private security work. And Lightfoot herself can’t pretend that police resources aren’t affected, because the creation of Unit 544 coincided with her proposal to cut the CPD budget by $80 million as part of addressing a pandemic–related citywide budget shortfall.

According to the Chicago Sun-Times, Lightfoot asserts her special police detail became necessary because in 2020, there was “a significant amount of protests all over the city, and some of them targeted [] my house.” (News reports from 2020 indicate that the protests included, ironically, calls to remove police from schools, for reforms to the CPD, and to defund the police.) A 2020 news report quotes Lightfoot defending, as well, the closing off of residential streets around her home to activists, because of threats to her safety. “[T]he situation can’t be compared to protests at former mayor Rahm Emanuel’s home given the pandemic… This is a different time – like no other.”

John Catanzara, president of Chicago’s Fraternal Order of Police, observes that “[w]hile murders are soaring, while districts are barebones for manpower, all that matters [to Lightfoot] is protecting her castle.”

Of course, it is completely reasonable for Lightfoot to take lawful measures to protect herself and her family, the same as anyone else, but her situation is arguably no more dire nor compelling than the crisis of crime faced by every other Chicago resident today.

The problem is that the mayor, and others like her, are the same anti-gun advocates who see no contradiction between demanding ever more pointless restrictions on the ability of constituents to legally access firearms for self-defense, and ensuring their own safety with assigned police bodyguards and armed security. Ordinary citizens don’t need guns because the police will protect them – even if crime climbs to levels not seen in decades and there’s upward of an hour’s wait on a 911 call.

These people would have you believe that this isn’t gun control elitism in action – it’s just that they aren’t like you and me. After all, if you don’t have bread you can always eat cake.

About that “GOP states have higher murder rates” study

I debated long and hard about giving this “study” from the moderate Democratic group Third Way even a paragraph’s worth of attention because of how shamelessly unscientific it is, but I’ve seen enough chatter about it online that I feel like I can’t ignore the problems I have with it, especially since I’m sure that gun control activists will be pointing to what Third Way has to say as evidence for the need for more gun control laws.

Let’s start with the premise for the “study,” which Third Way calls “The Red State Murder Problem” even though their own summary demonstrates that’s not exactly the issue.

  • The rate of murders in the US has gone up at an alarming rate. But, despite a media narrative to the contrary, this is a problem that afflicts Republican-run cities and states as much or more than the Democratic bastions.

In other words, what Third Way’s research shows is that the increase in violent crime beginning in 2020 was seen across the board. I don’t think there’s any disagreement on that, though it should be noted that there were also areas of the country that saw declines in homicides in 2020, including blue-state Baltimore and red-state Oklahoma City. In fact, here are the cities with the biggest increases and decreases in homicides in 2020, as reported by the anti-gun outfit Everytown for Gun Safety. Let’s start with the cities that saw the biggest murder spikes.

  1. In seven cities, the gun homicide rate at least doubled in 2020 compared to 2019: Lubbock, TX; Des Moines, IA; Fresno, CA; Vallejo, CA; Trenton, NJ; Columbus, OH; Syracuse, NY; and Milwaukee, WI.

By the way, those crack researchers at Everytown say there were seven cities where the gun homicide rate doubled, but I count eight cities up there. Third Way looked at states that voted for Trump vs. states that voted for Biden in 2020 as their “red/blue” metric, which in this case means that cities in three Trump states had double digit increases in the gun homicide rate, compared to five cities in Biden states. This completely cuts against Third Way’s hypothesis about the increase in homicides being a red state problem, but it gets even worse from there.

Continue reading “”

Like True Commies, the Democrats Create Crime Then Use Crime Stats to Take Our Guns

This Crime Wave Brought to You by Democrats

Democrats love mass shootings. It’s their best chance at taking away our guns. We saw it happen in Australia back in 1996 when some wackjob killed 35 people and Australians HANDED OVER THEIR firearms — 700,000 or so to be exact, because, you know, safety, I guess…?

As you have probably heard, a mass shooting in Sacramento, Calif., left six people dead and 15 more wounded. The story isn’t getting a ton of traction because the shooter is most likely not Muslim or white. The media loves when the shooter is a Muslim because terror attacks keep people focused on the news. Lefty media will drag out a mass shooting when the shooter is white because it backs up the lie that most mass shooters are angry, drooling white guys in NRA hats.

That’s right, a lie. As I’ve reported, 67% of mass shooters are black. Most people don’t realize that fact because the Pravda press perpetuates the myth that mass shooters are white dudes who got fired from Denny’s. When people hear “mass shooting,” they assume a white guy flipped out and blazed up a McDonald’s. Democrats want you to believe that. Sure, you heard about the Sacramento shooting, but did you hear about the 11 people who were shot the day before at rapper Big Boogie’s concert in Texas? I didn’t until just now. I’ve never even heard of Big Boogie. I wonder why the media ignored that story? Awww, we know! Let’s put it this way, no MAGA hats were recovered at the crime scene.

FACT-O-RAMA! Stalin, Castro, Mao, and Pol Pot took guns away from their people before slaughtering them. Biden wants to take your guns too. Why? Because he’s a communist and that’s what commies do.

This is how it works: the Democrats let criminals out of jail and then got rid of bail laws to keep them out. They defunded police departments nationwide. Criminals do what criminals do: they shoot people. When there is a mass shooting, Democrats say, “Look! Another mass shooting! Let’s take guns from law-abiding people!”

Continue reading “”

I used to attribute this to ignorance. No longer. This is straight up stupidity and mendacity

Warriors Coach Steve Kerr Wants Gun Laws that Already Exist in Wake of Sacramento Shooting

Golden State Warriors coach Steve Kerr reacted to Sunday’s shooting in Sacramento by pushing gun laws that already exist in California.

FOX News quoted Kerr saying, “I don’t think moments of silence are going to do anything. At some point … our government has to decide are we going to have some common sense gun laws, it’s not going to solve everything, but it will save lives.”

He added, “Despite the fact that 80 to 90% of Americans support background checks and you know, you think about all of the common sense laws we could and should put in place.”

Background checks via the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) have existed in every state since the mid-1990s. Moreover, California adopted universal background checks in the 1990s, which means every gun sale in the state–retail or private–requires a background check in order to be legal.

So the background checks Kerr is pushing already exist in California.

Breitbart News noted that President Joe Biden also responded to the Sacramento shooting by pushing gun controls that are already the law in California.

FOX News quoted Biden:

Ban ghost guns. Require background checks for all gun sales. Ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Repeal gun manufacturers’ immunity from liability. Pass my budget proposal, which would give cities more of the funding they need to fund the police and fund the crime prevention and intervention strategies that can make our cities safer. These are just a few of the steps Congress urgently needs to take to save lives.

California already bans “ghost guns,” has universal background checks, bans “assault weapons,” and bans “high capacity” magazines.

Police noted there were multiple gunmen involved in the Sacramento shooting and also pointed out that the incident was preceded by a fight.

CNN quoted Sacramento Police Chief Kathy Lester saying, “We know that a large fight took place just prior to the shootings. And we have confirmed that there are multiple shooters.”

A stolen gun was recovered at the scene of the shooting.

Comment O’ The Day

Let’s pause for a moment and consider how they are simultaneously blaming “ghost guns” (i.e. home-made firearms with no known manufacturer) at the same time they want to hold gun manufacturers liable for guns being used in crimes.

Statement by President Joe Biden on the Mass Shooting in Sacramento | The White House

Today, America once again mourns for another community devastated by gun violence. In a single act in Sacramento, six individuals left dead and at least a dozen more injured. Families forever changed. Survivors left to heal wounds both visible and invisible.

I want to thank the first responders in Sacramento, and all those across the United States, who act every day to save lives. We know these lives were not the only lives impacted by gun violence last night. And we equally mourn for those victims and families who do not make national headlines.

But we must do more than mourn; we must act. That is why my Administration has taken historic executive action to implement my comprehensive gun crime reduction strategy — from standing up gun trafficking strike forces to helping cities across the country expand community violence interventions and hire more police officers for community policing.

We also continue to call on Congress to act. Ban ghost guns. Require background checks for all gun sales. Ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Repeal gun manufacturers’ immunity from liability. Pass my budget proposal, which would give cities more of the funding they need to fund the police and fund the crime prevention and intervention strategies that can make our cities safer. These are just a few of the steps Congress urgently needs to take to save lives.

Question O’ The Day. I think the answer just might be ‘Reverse Gears!‘

California has toughest U.S. gun laws. After Sacramento shooting, what else can lawmakers do?

They’ve banned high-capacity magazines and cracked down on assault weapons. They’ve made it so Californians have to pass a background check to purchase a gun and ammunition. They’ve prohibited buyers from having ammo or “ghost” gun parts shipped directly to their homes.
When it comes to gun laws, California’s legislators have passed some of the most stringent regulations in the country, checking off nearly every box on national gun control advocates’ wishlist.
A mass shooting early Sunday that left six dead and 12 wounded just a block from the Capitol — the very building where these laws were enacted — immediately prompted new calls for legislation to curb gun violence, from California elected officials and gun-control advocates across the nation.
“The scourge of gun violence continues to be a crisis in our country, and we must resolve to bring an end to this carnage,” Gov. Gavin Newsom, who’s already signed 15 gun-control laws, said Sunday in a prepared statement.
The call for action on the federal level reached as far as the White House.
“Ban ghost guns,” President Joe Biden said, expressing his sorrow for the Sacramento victims. “Require background checks for all gun sales. Ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Repeal gun manufacturers’ immunity from liability.”
But what else can California’s lawmakers do to restrict guns that they haven’t already done — and have their laws survive the inevitable challenge by Second Amendment advocates?
Even before Sunday’s shooting, Democratic legislators planned to do more. One new bill, introduced by state Senator Bob Hertzberg, D-Van Nuys, would give citizens the “private right of action” to sue gun manufacturers and suppliers. The bill, SB 1327, is modeled after an anti-abortion law enacted in Texas.
State Sen. David Min, D-Irvine, introduced Senate Bill 915, which would prohibit the sale of firearms or ammunition on state property, effectively ending gun shows on 73 state-owned fairgrounds. Previous efforts on a blanket-ban on gun shows at fairgrounds have failed.
“These are all practical actions we can take today to stop gun violence,” Hertzberg said Sunday.
But the fact is, the recent legislation pending in California is relatively modest compared to some of the sweeping reforms that gun-control advocates are demanding in other states and on the federal level — simply because most of the toughest curbs are already part of California law.

Continue reading “”

Armed school staff bill advances in Ohio statehouse

Constitutional Carry may be the biggest Second Amendment-related bill to win approval in Ohio this year, but hopefully it won’t be the last. Nearly four months after the Ohio House approved a measure that would once again allow for school districts across the state to have trained and vetted volunteer staff serve as an armed first line of defense against attacks on school grounds, the state Senate is now taking up the issue.

House Bill 99 received its first Senate hearing Wednesday in the Veterans and Public Safety Committee, with bill sponsor Rep. Thomas Hall, R-Madison Township, saying local schools need to be able to make decisions to protect students.

“At the end of the day, what we are talking about here is empowering our local schools to make the best decision for their students and educators so that our children feel safe and are safe in Ohio schools,” Hall said. “We have worked tirelessly on this bill to do our part in protecting our schools and our communities.”

For several years districts across the state were able to have armed school staff in place with no issue, but after several parents sued the Madison School District (with the help of Everytown for Gun Safety), the Ohio Supreme Court ultimately ruled that under current state law all armed school staff must undergo more than 700 hours of law enforcement training.

Under HB 99, those training standards would be dropped to a much more reasonable 20 hours, with 4 hours of annual training. Those volunteering to protect their school don’t need to waste hours of their time learning about processing evidence, defensive driving, and a host of other activities that police officers regularly perform but armed school staff members would never have cause to do. These staff members aren’t cops, and they’re not supposed to be. They only reason they’re carrying on campus is to stop a deadly attack aimed at students or staff members. Period.

The duty of those volunteers was one of the points raised in opposition to the bill by one police union in Ohio, whose representative warned that teachers may have to abandon their students if there is a threat on campus.

“If a school employee, regardless of her position, is carrying a firearm, they are considered on duty according to [the Ohio Revised Code],” Mike Weinman testified on behalf of the Fraternal Order of Police of Ohio. “When armed, the teacher’s primary responsibility is no longer teaching but an armed first responder. She will be required to abandon her students and respond to whatever threat may be in the building at a moment’s notice.”

Six school districts and two county sheriff’s departments, however, testified in favor of the bill. “Trust the locally elected officials to do their jobs and govern on behalf of the people who elected them and put them in their positions. Trust that they care for the safety and well-being of their students and staff,” Ira Wentworth, superintendent of Indian Valley Local Schools, testified. “The school boards and those staff members who are selected and volunteer to conceal and carry are not the bad guys; they are the good guys wanting to protect others from the bad guys. Put your trust in the good guys.”

There are currently thousands of Ohio educators who have undergone the three-day FASTER training course and who were already carrying on campus before the state Supreme Court decision disarmed them on the job, and as far as I’m aware of there had been no issues reported in any of the districts that had set up an armed school staff policy. Many of these school districts are rural or smaller in size, and simply don’t have the budget to have a school resource officer in every building. In some districts it might take police ten minutes or more to arrive on campus, even in the most dire of circumstances, and that’s far too long to wait for an armed response when there’s someone actively attacking the students inside the school.

HB 99 would restore some sanity to the current law, and would be a huge boost to student safety in those districts that choose to have armed school staff members in place. I’m really glad to see the state Senate start to move on this bill, and I hope that, just like Constitutional Carry, it too will soon be sent to Mike DeWine’s desk for his signature.

Observation O’ The Day
You might conclude rational thinking is outside the area of expertise of anti-gun people. The evidence does support that hypothesis.
Another hypothesis, also supported by the same data, is that they are liars who will say whatever they think will work to achieve then objectives and at least one of their objectives is to disarm their intended victims. That would be us.
—Joe Huffman

Biden Supports Gun Rights – Just Not for Americans

****

This is the same Joe Biden, after all, who orchestrated a catastrophically mismanaged surrender of Afghanistan to ragtag nomads with small arms.  Moreover, one would think that a man who came of political age during the Vietnam War would possess a better working understanding of the value of small arms in fighting off a far superior military.  Then there’s the American Revolution itself, in which patriots with small arms defeated the world’s most powerful military.

But here’s the most bizarre aspect of all.

The White House concedes that Biden personally interrupted delivery of 28 Polish MiG-29 fighter jets repeatedly requested by Ukraine in its desperate fight for survival.  According to his logic, supplying Ukrainians with deadly small arms, antitank weaponry and other deadly devices are far more effective against the Russian military than advanced fighter aircraft.   As reported by Politico, the Biden Administration determined that, “the warplanes wouldn’t materially improve Ukraine’s chances.”………

 

 

Observation O’ The Day

Post image

The largest study of modern society and firearms is in progress here in the U.S. It’s called ‘constitutional’, or ‘permitless’ carry.
So far it’s a grand success. The data seen provides such a conclusion, and really, no further study is needed.
To put it simply, self defense with firearms in the hands of common people works (for everyone but government and criminals, that is)
But since that doesn’t fit the narrative, it can’t be correct.