“America has a gun problem,” they said.

We‘ve had the gun control narrative screamed at us like crazy for over a decade. Americans cannot be trusted with firearms & would likely “shoot first” in all kinds of situations, especially those they perceive as threatening. 1/

And definitely those that involve minorities. Trigger happy & whatnot. The gun situation is obviously highly dangerous, right? Well American cities are knee deep in protests, riots, & destruction. Yet shootings in response are crazy low. 2/

If ever there was a time such irresponsible, gun wielding Americans would go nuts, it would be now. And yet…that’s not the case. Thousands have taken to their businesses & streets armed to deter, but few have needed to or been willing to engage their firearms. 3/

What is going on? If it was a gun problem & reckless American problem, would we not have bodies piling up? We don’t, because what many of has said repeatedly is true. Use of lethal force is the LAST resort & even in the face of chaos & destruction, we are hesitant to use it. 4/

If the media & Dem narrative about guns & their owners were true, it would be a fucking bloodbath. Yes, people are deterring looters with armed defenders. Yes, the suburbs are doing the same. But no one is willy nilly shooting people, even bad actors. 5/

Even all those Bubba MAGAs who are “muh rebel flag, muh gun” wielding racists, who we were told would are dangerous af & would shoot POC without provocation, are not rounding up their boys to do…anything. 6/

If a lot of this is truly white supremacist infiltration & they intend to fuel the mayhem, why would they not be loading trucks armed with their AR-15s to go intimidate & impose their will? To gun down abusers & get their own kind of justice? 7/

All of this completely betrays the anti-gun argument that citizens cannot be trusted with foreakrs. It’s amazing how so many blue checks & others, once shitstorms came to their neighborhoods, are admitting that they are now looking into armed self defense. 8/

“Just call 911.” Welp, they are overwhelmed & telling people to fend for themselves given the current strife. “Just call the police.” The same police you have deemed racist & inadequate? “Only police & military should be armed.” How is that working out, y’all? 9/

No. You are the only one that is responsible for and can be held accountable to your family, friends, & property. Do what you must. I hope you are armed. fin/

 

Louisiana: Package of Pro-Gun Bills Heads to the Governor’s Desk

Four pro-gun bills have been passed by the Louisiana Legislature and will now be sent to the desk of Governor John Bel Edwards for his signature.

House Bill 746, sponsored by Rep. Ray Garofalo, allows those who lawfully possess a firearm to carry concealed for self-defense during a mandatory evacuation under a declared state of emergency or disaster.

House Bill 781, sponsored by Rep. Blake Miguez, establishes that firearms and ammunition manufacturers, distributors, wholesalers, suppliers, and retailers are “Essential Businesses” that shall not be prohibited from conducting business during a declared disaster or emergency.  HB 781 further prevents law-abiding gun owners’ rights from being infringed during proclaimed curfews.

House Bill 140, sponsored by Rep. Blake Miguez, prevents local authorities and municipalities from imposing restrictions to prohibit the possession of a firearm.  Preemption legislation is designed to stop municipalities from creating a patchwork of different laws that turn a law-abiding citizen into a criminal for simply crossing a jurisdictional line.

House Bill 334, sponsored by Reps. Bryan Fontenot, Blake Miguez and Charles Owen, authorizes a concealed handgun permit holder to carry a concealed handgun in a church, synagogue, mosque, or other similar place of worship, with permission from church leadership.

Anti-gunners Quiet as Armed Citizens Protect Businesses, Communities

These armed citizens showed up to provide security to a store in Minneapolis during the disturbances over the death of Gerald Floyd. (Screen snip, YouTube, The First)

Gun prohibition lobbying groups have been noticeably silent in the wake of reports from around the country that armed citizens are fighting back against rioters and looters exploiting the death of Minneapolis resident George Floyd, turning out to protect their neighborhoods, and business districts.

When a South Philadelphia gun shop owner fatally shot a man trying to break into his store early Tuesday morning, WCAU News reported it happened “amid heightened looting concerns.”

The fatal shooting might be a warning to a criminal element that has hijacked public demonstrations over the Floyd incident, for which four Minneapolis officers have been fired and one has been charged with third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter. Instead of peacefully protesting, criminals and anarchists have looting and pillaging across the map, leaving large metropolitan areas in shambles, if not ashes, and now it appears some good people have had enough and they are visibly arming to fight back.

Sheriff Grady Judd of Polk County, Florida stated publicly, “The people in Polk County like guns, they have guns, I encourage them to own guns… And if you try to break into their homes to steal, to set fires, I’m highly recommending they blow you back out of the house with their guns.”

In Lynchburg, Va., armed citizens have been providing volunteer security to a restaurant in their city, according to WSLS.

Out in Washington State, armed citizens have appeared to provide voluntary security to a Bonney Lake gun shop, a commercial district in downtown Snohomish and businesses in Kirkland, located northeast of Seattle. These appearances have not been designed to incite violence, but to deter people intent on committing violent acts. So far, it appears to be working. Credible threats of mob violence in Kirkland and Snohomish haven’t materialized.

Through it all, anti-gun-rights organizations have been remarkably silent. The exception came Monday from anti-gun billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety, which tried to portray their gun prohibition crusade as a battle against racism.

“The deaths of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, David McAtee, and the countless other murders of Black people in the United States that don’t make headlines are beyond heartbreaking,” Everytown’s fund raising message begins.

“For generations, Black and brown communities have been dying at the hands of all forms of racism and white supremacy, and have also been the disproportionate victims of gun violence – including by the police,” the narrative continues. “The racist and senseless murders we’ve seen across the country are horrific and inexcusable, as are the President’s reckless, racist, and incendiary calls for additional violence.

“Our mission to end gun violence is linked to a crisis that is centuries older – systemic racism,” the gun control group’s message contends. “Black lives matter, and we must do everything in our power to dismantle anti-Black racism and white supremacy. We are learning from and listening to Black and brown led organizations across the country. We are supporting organizations – particularly those led by Black people and other people of color – committed to ending gun violence and the impact of racial injustice.

“In solidarity with the organizations leading the fight against racism and white supremacy,” the message declares, “we ask, if you are able, to support groups that are working locally at the intersection of racial justice and gun violence prevention…”

But not a peep about armed citizens exercising their Second Amendment rights to discourage looters and rioters; their silence, some activists suggest, is deafening.

Melissa Denny, owner at Pistol Annie’s Jewelry & Pawn in Bonney Lake, Wash., a community southeast of Tacoma, posted on Facebook that armed volunteers had appeared at her business.

Meanwhile, it appears, no similar volunteer effort has been mounted by the Seattle-based Alliance for Gun Responsibility.

As noted recently by AmmoLand News, Nicholas Murray Butler, once president of Columbia University, observed in 1931, “The vast population of this earth, and indeed nations themselves, may readily be divided into three groups. There are the few who make things happen, the many more who watch things happen, and the overwhelming majority who have no notion of what happens.”

Armed citizens are literally making things happen by preventing things from happening, while the reaction from the gun control lobby has been crickets.

Savage Beating During Dallas Riot Illustrates Why We Defend Second Amendment.

Gun control activists don’t really see the point of guns, at least for the most part. Quite a few will work to curtail your ability to purchase a gun but have no qualms about owning them themselves. It’s different when they buy guns, after all, because they’re all good and pure and stuff.

However, they will often question you about why you have a gun, whether you’re carrying at the moment or whether it’s your AR-15 at home in the safe.

“Why do you think you need something like that?” they ask.

Well, because stuff like this can happen (some might find the following video disturbing):

I’ve personally seen this video, which comes from a riot in Dallas over the weekend, from a couple of different angles. This was reportedly a man who was trying to protect his business from looters, and we see how that worked out for him.  Some reports claim he had some kind of a bladed weapon, like a machete, but all seem to agree that he didn’t have a firearm.

It’s my understanding that, despite appearances to the contrary, the individual pictured here survived.

That said, it’s absolutely awful what we’re seeing all over the country right now. What happened to George Floyd was an absolute tragedy and from what I’ve seen, it never should have happened.

However, how does this help?

Unfortunately, if people don’t have the means to defend their property and, more importantly, their own lives, some predatory jackwagons are going to do what they want in a case like this. It’s important to note that rioters don’t actually care all that much about George Floyd. Oh, their outrage may have brought them out to what were supposed to be protests, but that’s not what it became about. It became about seeing how much they could take from people who had nothing to do with any of this.

Yet, let’s imagine if that man in the video had been armed with an AR-15. With a 30-round magazine, he’d have clearly been able to engage any and all of his attackers. Likely, though, he wouldn’t have needed to. Instead, the rioting turdnuggets would have seen the weapon and decided to look for an easier target.

While that sucks because it means someone else is going to be victimized, it’s also the best you can do. If every store owner had an AR-15 handy during a riot, I somehow suspect that looting would become a relic of the past.

Let’s just call it a hunch.

Well, maybe they’ll go into vapor lock?


Trump’s Mere Mention of the Second Amendment Sent Progressives Off the Deep End

During President Donald Trump’s nationwide address on Monday evening, he announced his intent to use all federal resources to help stop the rioting and looting that’s taking place across the country. He also mentioned that he would protect the rights of law-abiding citizens, including the right to keep and bear arms. Naturally, progressives and those who hate the Second Amendment were up in arms over the mention of the Second Amendment….

Here’s what these folks fail to understand: the Second Amendment is there to protect our freedoms, including our First Amendment rights, but it’s also there for self-defense.


Oh, they understand that alright. They just don’t like the idea that people they disagree with and don’t like can tell them where to go and what to do with their brand of politics…and make it stick.


Relying on cops to protect you when they’re trying to keep rioters from looting and literally burning down cities, it’s up to you to protect yourself, your family and your property. Even when there aren’t massive riots taking place across the country, it can take cops minutes, sometimes even hours, to arrive to a person’s call for help (depending on where they live and how well-staffed their police and/or sheriff’s department is).

DEAR RIOTERS AND LOOTERS

Dear rioters and looters:

No, I’m not addressing demonstrators. There’s a difference, even if the mainstream media can’t bring itself to say so.  If you want to peacefully demonstrate, no problem. You know who you are. Some of you have already held back The Others, or tried to, and in at least one instance I know of have saved a cop who was cut off from his team-mates and surrounded by an angry mob of The Others.

I’m addressing The Others – the rioters, the looters, the destroyers. There are strong indications that Antifa is involved, though I can’t say they’re entirely responsible. But you heartfelt demonstrators are the ones they’ve made into cat’s paws and puppets with their instigation to violence, and if you go along with them you’re shaming yourselves and everything you’re trying to stand for.

No one can seriously believe that looting and burning stores, often owned by hard-working black people for whom their business is their only livelihood, is doing anyone any good.  But, looters and arsonists and destroyers, if all you care about is yourselves…well, let’s talk about that.

The police have held back thus far (I write this on the first of June). It’s partly political correctness on the part of local government leaders, and partly the reluctance of police to use force, whether you choose to believe that or not.  But the time will come, if you continue, when even the most pusillanimous leader will say, “Enough is enough.” And that’s when the shooting will start coming your way.

Read the following. https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/antifa-warns-alert-f-the-city-tonight-we-move-into-the-residential-areas/ .  The source quoted is not the only one of The Others to publicly express that sentiment.  For your own good, hear me.

The Mood of the Courts today is that human life has a greater value than “mere property.” I and virtually all other past and present cops I know share that belief. It’s why you haven’t been shot down in the streets yet as you would have been by now in so many other countries.  But, understand this:

When you start attacking homes – occupied dwellings – the rules change. Arson of occupied dwellings is what the law calls a “heinous felony against the person,” and ordinary citizens are allowed to shoot you to stop you from doing it. You’ve gotten away with breaking into stores that were closed for the safety of their employees and customers, but if you try to do the same to people’s homes, that’s “violent and tumultuous entry of occupied dwellings.” It’s “home invasion.” And when you start doing that, the people who live there are authorized by the law to shoot you to death in defense of themselves and other innocent parties.

Enough.

For you genuine, non-violent protesters: you’ve made all the points you’re going to make without turning the rest of the nation against you. If you haven’t already, please harken to the words of Atlanta’s African-American mayor, Keisha Lance Bottoms.

Thank you. And please, understand, what I’ve written here is not a threat.

It’s a well-intentioned warning.

The Cluebat of reality strikes again, but I’ll bet the idjit still votes demoncrap.


Since the M16 selective fire version is pretty much out of the reach of the average person these days, the AR-15 is what I call the current place holder of ‘The American Rifle’.
Yes, I’ve got other rifles, including an M16, but my consideration is that the current iteration of the standard issue rifle/carbine is what everyone should have one (1) example of in their inventory, and if you can’t figure out why, please look up the word – logistics – and think a bit.


Last Night We Saw Why Americans Own 16+ Million AR-15s

As televisions and computers showed a fourth day of protesters turned rioters Saturday, looting and destroying property, it was readily apparent why Americans own 16+ million AR-15s.

When Robert ‘Beto’ O’Rourke was still vying for the Democrat nomination–and pledging to come take away your AR-15–Breitbart News spoke with the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) about what a Herculean task that would be. After all, the AR-15 is the most popular rifle platform in America.

NSSF shared their calculations with Breitbart, showing an estimated 16= million privately owned AR-15s in the U.S.

You cannot be blamed if you thought the number was closer to 250 or 300. Moreover, you cannot be blamed if you thought the 300 AR-15 owners were toothless, old, white, racists living on some isolated, off-the-grid piece of property deep in the heart of the South.

But as it turns out, AR-15s are owned by black people and white people, and by all skin colors in between. And there are WAY MORE than a couple hundred in circulation.

On August 31, 2018, Breitbart News reported more than nine million AR-15s were manufactured for sale in the U.S. under Barack Obama alone.

And on May 30, 2020–at the height of the Minneapolis rioting–Breitbart News reported on black business owners standing guard with AR-15s outside their properties.

And AR-15s are not just for men. On November 4, 2019, Breitbart News reported on a pregnant Florida woman who used an AR-15 to kill an alleged home intruder while her husband was under attack.

So when Joe Biden and other Democrats demonize AR-15s as “assault weapons” and campaign on taking them from the American people or at least ending their sales, remember the feelings you have right now; the feelings of wanting a tool you can keep in your house to protect your family in times of civil violence and unrest. And also remember those black business owners and that pregnant Florida woman, who saved her husband’s life.

Again, there are over 16 million privately-owned AR-15s in this country and after last night–after watching the wanton destruction and violence in city after city–perhaps you better understand why Americans own them.

Colorado Democrats’ gun reform agenda is latest COVID casualty

Colorado House Rep. Tom Sullivan had a gun bill drafted and ready to introduce before the 2020 legislative session even started in January.

But now, his legislation requiring lost or stolen firearms to be reported is headed toward the chopping block, along with nearly 300 other bills claimed by the coronavirus pandemic.

Sullivan, an Aurora Democrat, isn’t giving up on House Bill 1356 or another bill on secure storage of guns because he made a promise to his supporters that he would get them through this year. But he also sees the writing on the wall. With only three weeks to get a budget and essential bills passed, Colorado House Democratic leaders say there isn’t time to debate changes to gun laws this year.

“I had said at the beginning of the session that the session would be a failure if I couldn’t get a single Republican to vote on either of the two bills,” Sullivan said. “It would be more of a failure if I don’t even get either of those bills to see the light of day.”

Sullivan’s bill would have required individuals to report lost or stolen firearms to law enforcement within 48 hours. The first offense would draw a fine and the second a misdemeanor………….

The gun loss or theft bill, along with the gun storage bill, House Bill 1355, were assigned to the House State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee where they are expected to be postponed indefinitely, or killed.

The secure storage bill would make unlawfully storing a firearm a misdemeanor. This would apply to guns stored where a minor can access them without permission from their parent and those stored in the residence of a person who isn’t allowed to have a firearm.

The Second Amendment is helping defend small businesses in the Minneapolis riots

The city of Minneapolis is burning.

Much of the media’s attention has rightfully focused on how the protests-turned-riots undermine the justified outrage over George Floyd’s cruel death at the hands of the police, and the unacceptable arrest of CNN reporters who were trying to cover the developments.

At the same time, these troubling developments should provide a renewed appreciation for the importance of the Second Amendment and how the right to self-defense uplifts minority groups in particular.

During the riots, many minority-owned Minneapolis businesses have unfortunately been looted or destroyed. In response, a number of responsible, law-abiding citizens, both black and white, have exercised their Second Amendment rights to protect their businesses.

“It’s about damned time some heavily armed rednecks stood with fellow citizens,” one pair said. “These guys are out here with machetes and shattered windows trying to keep looters out of their business because cops can’t get in here. And so, you know, I figure, before there were cops there were just Americans … so, here we are.”

“Justice for Floyd, and I hope they stop looting at some point,” the men, who are both white, finished. Behind them, you can see minority business owners engaged in similar self-defense posturing.

In a second video from the scene, we specifically see armed, law-abiding black men deployed peacefully outside their minority-owned businesses to protect them from looters and rioters.

These are just two examples of many.

So, despite all the dark news, it’s worth remembering that the right to self-defense protects all Americans, not just white Christian Republicans, as some gun control activists would have you believe. In fact, gun control actually has a deeply racist history. All of this is worth remembering the next time so-called champions of minorities start calling for restrictions on the Second Amendment.

 

The Real Dangers of So Called ‘Tough On Crime Bills’

USA – -(AmmoLand.com)- Recently, GOA has been asked about bills such as H.R. 2837 that purport to “get tough on crime” by authorizing extended terms of imprisonment for offenses that involve firearms; irrespective of whether or not the offense was violent or possessory in nature. Gun Owners of America (GOA) has opposed bills of this sort for decades because they violate the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

However, what is truly unfortunate, is that some firearms owners think this type of legislation might be a good idea.

Many gun owners who diligently follow this issue, probably remember “Project Exile” which began in Richmond, Virginia in the mid-1990s with the stated goal of prosecuting those who commit “gun crimes” in Federal Court instead of the state court. The potential penalties for violating Federal law are generally harsher than state penalties.

Some gun owners reflexively supported “Project Exile” because after all, it was going after criminals — or was it?

There is now a new and updated “Project Exile” called “Project Guardian” and based on press releases issued by the US Department of Justice — “Project Guardian” is being used across the country. It is essentially the same anti-gun program with a catchy new name.

GOA’s long-standing position is that most people who were prosecuted under “Project Exile” were not violent criminals, but people who were caught up in the bureaucratic maze of anti-gun laws which are, at their core, unconstitutional intrusions on freedom. These programs significantly increase the likelihood that an otherwise law-abiding person will go to federal prison for committing a victimless, non-violent, technical violation of the law. And in many cases, gun owners will be confused because the technical “crimes” that gun owners will violate are actually legal activity in many states and at the federal level.

For example, carrying a gun without a license is perfectly lawful in seventeen states and under federal law. Possession of a magazine that holds more than ten cartridges is perfectly lawful in a majority of states and under federal law, as is the possession of “hollow-point ammunition,” which is perfectly lawful under federal law and in every state except New Jersey.

All of this begs the question: Are those convicted of violating these laws truly felons or are they victims of anti-gun, unconstitutional intrusions on freedom by states like New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and other freedom-hating locales?

What about someone who is charged with dealing guns without a license? It is undisputed that individuals are free to sell-off their private property — including firearms. However, ATF has for decades, refused to say how many guns sold in private transactions constitute dealing without a license. How can an honest person follow the law if the enforcers of the law refuse to provide guidance?

H.R. 2837 even included this language, which seems to go after violent criminals but could also ensnare law-abiding gun owners in a trap:

“any group of convictions for which a court referred to in section 922(g)(1) imposed in the same proceeding or in consolidated proceedings a total term of imprisonment not less than 10 years, regardless of how many years of that total term the defendant served in custody.”

Many of the offenses described above carry a prison term of fewer than 10 years, but due to the language in the above example, it provides anti-gun judges with an incentive to impose consecutive, rather than concurrent sentences for possessing more than one magazine or hollow point cartridge. These offenses are strictly possessory offenses, meaning there was no violence and no victim other than the sensibilities of the leftists who enacted and enforce these laws.

Finally, this article would not be complete if I didn’t mention the case of Bruce Abramski, Jr. whose “straw purchase” conviction was upheld by the United States Supreme Court. What is particularly galling about this case is that Mr. Abramski purchased a firearm and passed the background check. Then because his uncle, Angel Alvarez, was a resident of a different state, Mr. Abramski, complied with federal law and turned the pistol over to a Pennsylvania FFL for ultimate transfer to Mr. Alvarez, who also passed a background check. If this were a true “straw purchase” Mr. Abramski would have merely handed the pistol over to Mr. Alvarez. The government’s position was that the transaction was a straw purchase because Mr. Alvarez paid for the gun. Yes, Mr. Alvarez did pay for the gun, but as the late Justice Antonin Scalia said in his dissent:

“The Court makes it a federal crime for one lawful gun owner to buy a gun for another lawful gun owner. Whether or not that is a sensible result, the statutes Congress enacted do not support it—especially when, as is appropriate, we resolve ambiguity in those statutes in favor of the accused.”

Prior to the Abramski case, it was widely understood that a “straw purchase” only occurred when a person who was legally eligible to purchase a firearm did so and then turned the firearm over to someone who was prohibited from owning arms. That did not happen in the Abramski case.

When considering issues that can cause Americans to lose their freedom it is important to understand that there are two types of laws. Those which are malum in se refer to acts that are evil and wrong in and of themselves. Murder, rape, and assault are all examples of conduct that is malum in se. Other laws are malum prohibitum which means they criminalize victimless conduct that a legislator or bureaucrat dislikes. These include activities such as carrying a gun without a license, possessing hollow-point ammunition, possessing a magazine which holds more than a predetermined number of cartridges or even helping a relative — who is not a prohibited person, to obtain a handgun.

Gun owners and legislators need to be very careful when they say, “just enforce the existing laws” because in many cases, the existing laws were vigorously opposed by gun owners when they were moving through the legislative process. Only later, after they have been in effect for a few years, they are used as the vehicle to unconstitutionally disarm American Citizens in the name of “getting tough on crime”. This is exactly what happened in the Abramski case and will continue to happen if gun owners don’t stop asking for existing laws to be enforced.

Gun owners should instead demand that unconstitutional laws be erased from the statute books. Gun Owners of America will continue to be a leader and push for repeal of unconstitutional laws and the defeat of bills which treat firearms, rather than predatory criminals as the problem.

*Gasp* Horrors! Permitless Concealed Carry for Tennessee.


Tennessee lawmakers consider bills lifting Second Amendment restrictions

NASHVILLE, Tenn.–Several bills under consideration in the Tennessee General Assembly aim expanding certain Second Amendment rights.

At the top of the list on Wednesday is HB 2661, a bill which allows a person to carry a handgun in a concealed manner without the need for a concealed carry permit.

Under the bill, a person who legally owns a firearm could conceal carry the weapon, even at parks, venues of higher education, and other areas where concealed carry permit holders are allowed to carry.

Governor Bill Lee has previously supported legislation supporting concealed carry without a permit, stating in February he supported protecting the right of Tennesseans to bear arms.

“The Second Amendment is clear and concise and secures the freedoms of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms,” Lee said. “I am pleased to announce Constitutional Carry legislation today that will protect the Second Amendment rights of Tennesseans, while also stiffening penalties on criminals who steal or illegally possess firearms.”

Other bills being considered by committees in the Tennessee General Assembly are HB2536, which allows for civil suits to be filed against a person or government which “infringes upon a person’s right to bear arms” and requires the person or entity to “be liable for actual statutory damages, punitive damages, attorney’s fees, and court costs.”

HB2298 and HB2102 also pertain to the Second Amendment, although they each focus on the ability of those with concealed handgun carry permits to carry at higher education campuses and public parks in the state.


Of course, they’re ‘wary’. But any crims out there to take on the police aren’t going to care about a piddly permit law anyway.


Law enforcement wary of proposed bill for people to carry a handgun without a permit

……… yesterday, Memphis Police Director Mike Rallings and the Shelby County Crime Commission addressed this bill at the general assembly.

“With masks and guns, it almost would appear to be the wild wild west, and I definitely do not want that Memphis, and I don’t want that for the state of Tennessee,” Rallings said.

Rallings spoke out against a bill that would allow open and concealed carrying of a handgun for people 21 and older without a permit outside their home or personal property.

“Do you think if this legislation is passed that it would endanger the lives of the men and women on your force,” said Representative Bo Mitchell, Nashville.

“Yes,” Rallings said.

The bill passed 16 to 7 and will advance to the house finance committee.

It would also increase the crime of theft of a firearm from a misdemeanor to a felony.

First-Time Gun Buyers Explain How Coronavirus Changed Their Politics

Scott Kane went 38 years without ever touching a gun. That streak would have continued had it not been for the coronavirus. In March, fearful of the harassment his wife and child experienced over their Asian ancestry, Kane found himself in a California gun shop. His March 11 purchase of a 9mm would have been the end of the story, were it not for a political standoff over shutdown orders and background checks. Now Kane, a former supporter of gun-control measures and AR-15 bans, is frustrated by the arduous process that has denied his family a sense of security. The pandemic has made the soft-spoken software engineer an unlikely Second Amendment supporter.

“This has taken me, a law-abiding citizen with nary an unpaid parking ticket to my name, over a month,” he told the Washington Free Beacon. “Meanwhile Joe Bad Guy has probably purchased several fully automatic AK-47s out of the back of an El Camino in a shady part of town with zero background checks.”

Receipts reviewed by the Free Beacon show Kane first purchased a firearm on March 11 from Sportsman’s Warehouse in Milpitas, Calif. Santa Clara County shut down the shop before Kane’s 10-day waiting period was complete. No end date was given for the order, but a California law giving buyers just 30 days to pick up a gun remained in effect. Kane was stuck in a legal limbo that only grew worse.

Unable to do business, the store went belly-up in May. Kane had no way to pick up his gun. He started the process over again at another store in a neighboring county. He returned home with a Springfield XD 9mm and a biometric safe on April 29, 50 days after he first passed a background check and paid for a gun.

“I’m seriously thinking of running for office or something,” Kane said. “This state’s gun laws are insane.”

Kane is not alone. An influx of new gun owners has the potential to permanently alter the politics surrounding guns in the United States. If industry estimates are correct, millions of Americans across the country have become first-time gun buyers since March. If the experience changes their minds about the ongoing debate over gun control it could tip the balance of political power toward pro-gun activists and politicians.

It is not that the new buyers were unaware of the politics of gun control. Several new gun owners who spoke to the Free Beacon—some of whom requested anonymity citing safety concerns—generally leaned toward enhanced restrictions, their positions informed mostly by major news stories. But as they have become more personally invested in the debate, they find themselves more skeptical of gun control. Brian, a 40-year-old Floridian, used his savings to buy a Smith & Wesson M&P Shield in March after being laid off—the experience changed his entire approach to Second Amendment issues.

“In the past, I wasn’t against owning a gun. However, I did think that we had suffered enough as a country from school shootings, and something needed to be done. I was for stricter gun laws—no ARs, close the gun-show loophole, better mental health regulations, etc.,” he said. “I would now oppose stricter gun laws.”

While all of the first-time buyers who spoke to the Free Beacon cited safety concerns stemming from the pandemic as their top reason for buying a gun, some said the politics of the moment played a significant role in their decision. But they held differing and even opposing viewpoints on which politicians concerned them the most—suggesting the group of new owners represents a fairly diverse political spectrum……….

This reduces municipal power to make places ‘gun free zones’


Louisiana House Bill 140

Louisiana-2020-HB140-Engrossed.pdf

Present law limits a political subdivision’s authority to enact certain ordinances or regulations involving firearms. In this regard, present law prohibits a governing authority of a political subdivision from enacting any ordinance or regulation that is more restrictive than state law concerning the sale, purchase, possession, ownership, transfer, transportation,license, or registration of firearms, ammunition, or components of firearms or ammunition.

However, present law further provides that this provision of present law does not apply to the authority of political subdivisions to prohibit the possession of a weapon or firearm in certain commercial establishments and public buildings.

Proposed law removes this exception from present law, prohibiting any governing authority of a political subdivision from enacting any ordinance or regulation that is more restrictive than state law concerning the possession of a weapon or firearm in certain commercial establishments and public buildings.

 

First-Time Gun Buyers Explain How Coronavirus Changed Their Politics

Scott Kane went 38 years without ever touching a gun. That streak would have continued had it not been for the coronavirus. In March, fearful of the harassment his wife and child experienced over their Asian ancestry, Kane found himself in a California gun shop. His March 11 purchase of a 9mm would have been the end of the story, were it not for a political standoff over shutdown orders and background checks. Now Kane, a former supporter of gun-control measures and AR-15 bans, is frustrated by the arduous process that has denied his family a sense of security. The pandemic has made the soft-spoken software engineer an unlikely Second Amendment supporter.

“This has taken me, a law-abiding citizen with nary an unpaid parking ticket to my name, over a month,” he told the Washington Free Beacon. “Meanwhile Joe Bad Guy has probably purchased several fully automatic AK-47s out of the back of an El Camino in a shady part of town with zero background checks.”

Receipts reviewed by the Free Beacon show Kane first purchased a firearm on March 11 from Sportsman’s Warehouse in Milpitas, Calif. Santa Clara County shut down the shop before Kane’s 10-day waiting period was complete. No end date was given for the order, but a California law giving buyers just 30 days to pick up a gun remained in effect. Kane was stuck in a legal limbo that only grew worse.

Unable to do business, the store went belly-up in May. Kane had no way to pick up his gun. He started the process over again at another store in a neighboring county. He returned home with a Springfield XD 9mm and a biometric safe on April 29, 50 days after he first passed a background check and paid for a gun.

“I’m seriously thinking of running for office or something,” Kane said. “This state’s gun laws are insane.”

Kane is not alone. An influx of new gun owners has the potential to permanently alter the politics surrounding guns in the United States. If industry estimates are correct, millions of Americans across the country have become first-time gun buyers since March. If the experience changes their minds about the ongoing debate over gun control it could tip the balance of political power toward pro-gun activists and politicians.

It is not that the new buyers were unaware of the politics of gun control. Several new gun owners who spoke to the Free Beacon—some of whom requested anonymity citing safety concerns—generally leaned toward enhanced restrictions, their positions informed mostly by major news stories. But as they have become more personally invested in the debate, they find themselves more skeptical of gun control. Brian, a 40-year-old Floridian, used his savings to buy a Smith & Wesson M&P Shield in March after being laid off—the experience changed his entire approach to Second Amendment issues.

“In the past, I wasn’t against owning a gun. However, I did think that we had suffered enough as a country from school shootings, and something needed to be done. I was for stricter gun laws—no ARs, close the gun-show loophole, better mental health regulations, etc.,” he said. “I would now oppose stricter gun laws.”

While all of the first-time buyers who spoke to the Free Beacon cited safety concerns stemming from the pandemic as their top reason for buying a gun, some said the politics of the moment played a significant role in their decision. But they held differing and even opposing viewpoints on which politicians concerned them the most—suggesting the group of new owners represents a fairly diverse political spectrum.

Aaron Eaton, a former Army MP and current sewer company technician in Alabama, said the increasingly hostile stance many in the Democratic Party have taken toward gun ownership helped push him to make his first purchase.

“I figured now’s the time to buy before, God help us, a Democrat becomes president again,” he said. “Then I would probably never get that chance again. The only view that has changed, and solely because I got into politics because of Donald Trump, is [what I think of] the stance Democrats have regarding guns. I do not find it funny how Democrats are trying to interpret the Second Amendment.”

Andrew, a federal contractor who, along with his wife, bought a Heckler & Koch VP9 on March 21 in Virginia, said the state’s Democrat-controlled legislature pursuing a package of gun-control laws this winter in the face of unprecedented opposition directly contributed to his purchase. He said he and his wife are currently considering buying a number of other firearms they worry state Democrats will try to ban—or even confiscate—in the next legislative session despite those bills being defeated in the last session.

“These are just the first two purchases—sidearms—and when things settle down, we’ll likely get into long guns too,” he said. “We know we want a shotgun and an AR (or similar) platform before the progressives in the Virginia legislature ultimately prevail (as I expect they ultimately will) in tightening up regulations on ownership.”

Kane, on the other hand, said his gun-buying ordeal hasn’t moved him closer to supporting the president but has moved him to consider the California Republican Party—perhaps even as a candidate.

Brian from Florida said he was concerned less about the gun debate and more about President Trump’s competence in handling the coronavirus outbreak. “I’m just concerned, as is my wife, about what the future holds,” he said.

For others, the coronavirus has not changed their views on gun control or either political party. Instead, it pushed them to make a purchase earlier than they otherwise would have or act on pro-gun views they’d already held. Jake Wilhelm, an environmental consultant in Virginia, said he had “always been a staunch 2A supporter.”

Mathew Rosky, a North Carolinian who bought a shotgun for himself and another for his wife last month, said he believes what he always has.

“I’m generally conservative and believe the Second Amendment is clear,” he said. “If you are a citizen that is not a criminal/prohibited by law or has not been adjudicated a danger to yourself or others you should be able to own a gun if you want to.”

Still, for those who have experienced a political change of heart, the effect has been dramatic. Kane fired the first shots with his Springfield XD 9mm on May 15.

“Now I’m 100 percent converted,” he said.

He’s already begun recruiting others.

“I got one of my Asian-American friends to take the NRA basic pistol class with me,” Kane said. “Signed my wife up too for a later session so we can tag-team it. Never thought I’d be that guy taking his clueless-about-guns buddy to the gun store.”

After firing his first shots, Kane bought two more guns—a Smith & Wesson .357 revolver and a California-legal model of the AR-15 he used to think should be banned. He’s hoping this time he won’t have to wait more than two months to actually shoot them.

 

Not that we didn’t already know that, but openly admitting it is what’s really interesting.

Canadian Gun-Grabber Admits Disarmament is the Ultimate Goal

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “The government has finally moved to ban military-style assault rifles. Great. So now let’s go to the next step, a complete and comprehensive ban on the sale and ownership of all handguns,” Canadian Broadcasting Corporation opinion writer Tony Keene demands.

It’s not just “military-style assault rifles.” Per The Daily Wire:

“[T]he list of banned guns includes 10- and 12-gauge shotguns — a necessity for hunting in many of Canada’s more remote locales — hunting rifles, a BB gun, and even the website AR15.com.”

“There is no conceivable reason why an ordinary person needs to own a handgun,” Keene asserts. “No reason whatsoever.”

People who have used guns to save their lives and to stop violent criminals would disagree with Tony. So would the National Academies’ Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, which concludes:

“Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008.”

But don’t bother opinionated Tony with facts. He’s self-evidently the type of prohibitionist zealot described by libertarian novelist L. Neil Smith:

“What kind of moral cripple would rather see a woman raped in an alley and strangled with her own pantyhose, than see her with a gun in her hand?”

The kind that demands a totalitarian monopoly of violence. Tony goes on to prove it and which side he’s on.

“Those of us trained in the use of handguns (and I mean properly trained, by the police or the military, not just a weekend course at the local gun club) know that the armed amateur is dangerous,” Tony instructs, making sure to include himself as a former military reservist in the exclusive cadre of armed elites.

It seems Tony “served for more than four decades as a military reservist and took part in, and wrote about, multiple missions in Canada and abroad.” Good for him, he’s a veteran.  So was one of our country’s greatest military heroes, and he’s remembered today as Tony deserves to be for the destruction of liberty he wants to force on his countrymen.

As for “those…properly trained,” they get three tries to qualify with “policing standards”? These are them? That’s it? But Tony obnoxiously dismisses gun owners who put themselves through more demanding exercises on any given weekend as “Citizen Rambos”?

“Likewise, the term ‘shooting yourself in the foot’ is not just a metaphor,” Tony bloviates, oblivious that he has just stepped in a real-world refutation of his ignorant arrogance.  Remember DEA agent Lee Paige, the guy who claimed to be “the only one … professional enough” to carry a gun, and then did just that?

Thanks to this bit of ironic karma, the term “Only Ones,” proven fitting every day by innumerable examples, was born.

We could go on fisking this fanatic, but the rantings of someone who thinks he’s clever for comparing gun owners protective of their rights to “poison gas enthusiasts” aren’t worth the time. We know bigotry is born of ignorance, and Tony proves it yet again with his “suggested scenario” demanding:

  • A total and absolute ban on handgun sales, and on handgun ownership by private citizens. (With long prison terms for violation.)
  • Restriction of long guns to bolt-action rifles and limited-magazine shotguns.
  • Firm enforcement of minimum sentences for possession of any restricted weapon, and even more stringent penalties for anyone committing a crime with a firearm.
  • Exemptions, under strict controls, where subsistence hunting is a way of life.

We owe Tony thanks for making it clear that no, it’s not about “commonsense gun safety,” and yes, his counterparts on our side of the border really are talking about taking our guns. (Speaking of which, I also give him props for “heightened border vigilance,” but still wouldn’t mind seeing woke and triggered Canadian “progressives” attack him as a xenophobe and hater.)

“And no, it won’t take away our freedom or democracy,” Tony disingenuously concludes. “But it will make us safer.”

If by “us” he means his side, the one with the guns, then yeah.

Some will no doubt dismiss this because it’s in Canada and ask why we in the U.S. should care what they do over there. We need to be vigilant to threats as they approach because the goals of their grabbers are the same as ours. And the goals of the globalists who would rule us if we let them are to impose totalitarian disarmament edicts everywhere, in Everytown…