Category: RKBA

ATF FFL DEFINITION EXPANSION ISN’T JUST UNCONSTITUTIONAL. IT’S UNFEASIBLE.

The Biden administration is forcing the federal agency charged with overseeing the strictly-regulated firearm industry to tighten a vice grip on private gun owners, claiming if they privately sell guns and offer to sell more, they’re “engaged in the business.”

This is just the latest salvo from President Joe Biden, who declared from the debate stage in 2019 that the firearm industry is “the enemy.”

Now, as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is snuffing out firearm retailers at a record pace due to an unrelenting attack of historically-high firearm license revocations under the guise of its “zero-tolerance” policy, the administration has unilaterally proposed an expansion of the definition of who is required to obtain a dealer’s license and therefore run a National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) verification to transfer a firearm. Recall, failing to obtain a dealer’s license when required by law is a crime.

This latest gambit does more than exceed the ATF’s statutory authority. It’s an unfeasible requirement. There is no way ATF could keep up with another 328,000 federal firearm licensees.

President Joe Biden continues to barrel around Congress to generate unconstitutional laws when Congress stands against him trampling on citizens’ rights. That’s after conceding he’s powerless to do anything without Congressional action.

Unilaterally Making Law and Criminals

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland announced the proposed rule that would redefine who qualifies as “engaged in the business” and would require a federal firearms license (FFL) and run a NICS background check when selling or transferring a gun, as well as to maintain all the required records and paperwork. This is a thinly-veiled attempt to create a universal background check scheme – which even the Department of Justice (DOJ) has admitted would necessitate a federal firearm registry to work. That’s forbidden by federal law.

The irony is, Congress clarified the “engaged in the business” definition in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA). Congress made a one-word change to the “engaged in the business” definition by removing the word “livelihood” the courts had effectively read out of the statute. The law still defines a firearm dealer as, “a person who devotes time, attention and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business to predominantly earn a profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms, but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms.”

Continue reading “”

ATF Proposes Significant Overhaul of “Personal Collection” Definitions

The newly proposed regulations by the ATF aim to dramatically revise key terms such as “personal collection,” “personal collection of firearms,” and “hobby.” These revisions have the potential to significantly impact how the agency regulates firearms sales and ownership. Historically, there have been exemptions for individuals involved in occasional sales or trades of firearms, either to augment their own collection or as a hobby. This existing language was left untouched by the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which became effective in June 2022. However, the ATF is citing this act to introduce these sweeping changes.

Legal Information Institute:

(C) as applied to a dealer in firearms as defined in section 921(a)(11)(A), a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business to predominantly earn a profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms, but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms.

The proposed changes would significantly narrow these exemptions. According to the new rule, “personal collection” would be limited to firearms acquired for study, display, or recreational activities like hunting and target shooting. Notably, firearms acquired primarily for self-defense or with the intent of resale for profit would be excluded from the definition of a “personal collection.”

E. Definition of “Personal collection,” “personal collection of firearms,” and “personal firearms collection”

Specifically, this rule proposes to define “personal collection,” “personal collection of firearms,” and “personal firearms collection” as “personal firearms that a person accumulates for study, comparison, exhibition, or for a hobby (e.g., noncommercial, recreational activities for personal enjoyment such as hunting, or skeet, target, or competition shooting).” This reflects a common definition of the terms  “collection” and “hobby.”85 The phrase “or for a hobby” was adopted from 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(21)(C), which excludes from the definition of “engaged in the business” firearms acquired “for” a hobby. Also expressly excluded from the definition of “personal collection” is “any firearm purchased for resale or made with the predominant intent to earn a profit” because of their inherently commercial nature. 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(21)(C).

This shift in language could put people at risk of being classified as “firearms dealers,” even if their activities were previously considered a hobby under the old rules. Furthermore, individuals who occasionally sell or trade firearms for personal reasons, such as needing money or wanting to change their collection, would find themselves in a precarious position under the new definitions.

It’s worth noting that these proposed changes were not ratified by Congress and could have far-reaching implications. They appear to exclude self-defense as a legitimate reason for owning firearms, a purpose which has been constitutionally protected under the Second Amendment.

While the new rule is meant to standardize definitions, it grants the ATF greater flexibility in interpretation, potentially altering long-established norms in the regulation of firearms. Critics argue that these changes seem designed to narrow the scope of acceptable reasons for firearm ownership, thereby curtailing individual freedoms protected under the Second Amendment.

 

Missouri has state preemption of any and all gun control laws, except they let cities ban open carry if a person doesn’t have a concealed carry permit. Strange, but that’s how permitless carry worked out when the different bills were combined and passed.

Gov. Mike Parson criticizes Kansas City’s new gun rules: ‘You can’t supersede state law’

Missouri Gov. Mike Parson spoke to KCUR’s Up To Date about the case of Kansas City Police officer Eric DeValkenaere, the expansion of I-70, the 2024 gubernatorial race, and Kansas City’s new gun ordinances.

Criminal justice advocates across Kansas City have speculated that Gov. Mike Parson might pardon Eric DeValkenaere, the former Kansas City Police detective who was convicted in 2021 for killing Cameron Lamb.

Parson told Up To Date’s Steve Kraske that he hasn’t sat down to discuss a potential pardon. He said that the legal process has to work out before he comes into play — DeValkenaere is currently appealing his conviction.

“It’s been unfortunate,” Parson said of the speculation. “I think a lot of people got spun up by that, elected officials up there are kinda claiming that. But the reality of it is that I haven’t had a conversation about that.”

Parson also criticized the new gun laws recently passed by Kansas City Council, outlawing certain modified firearms and prohibiting the transferring of weapons and ammo to minors.

“You can’t supersede state law, just like I can’t supersede federal law. I wish I could sometimes, there’s lots of things I’d like to change,” Parson said. “The reality is that it needs to go in front of the General Assembly or needs to be voted on by the people to make those changes.”

In 2021, Parson signed into law the “Second Amendment Preservation Act,” which penalized law enforcement for enforcing federal gun restrictions. However, that law was ruled unconstitutional.

New Data Says You Stopped Mass Murder Most of the Time

We live in a media driven culture. We also have government agencies putting out biased reports that serve their political masters. It is rare that the media even questions the agency reports. That wouldn’t matter, but many of us confuse media headlines with facts. I’ve seen people on Facebook say that there were hundreds of “mass shootings” this year and that our children are not safe in school any longer. They are wrong, and you stop mass-murder most of the time.

Please let me pose a different question.

If an ordinary citizen stops mass-murder and the mainstream media refuses to report it, did it really happen?

According to the FBI, the answer is almost always, “No!”

I am a data geek and I love to explore the deeper questions around public events. For example, how do we define “mass-murder”, and has that definition changed? How are the murderers stopped? It turns out that you get wildly different answers depending on subtle changes in the questions you ask.

Continue reading “”

Bottomless Demand: Americans Added Another 1.1 Million Firearms to Their Safes in August.

Another month — 49 consecutive, to be exact — with 1 million or more gun sold in August. Because of Despite the Biden administration’s ongoing War on Guns, Americans have show exactly zero inclination to curb their desire to purchase firearms for every lawful purpose from hunting, plinking and competition to personal and home defense. May it ever be thus.

The NSSF’s Mark Oliva said . . .

August’s NSSF-Adjusted NICS figure of over 1.1 million shows us, once again, that the desire for lawful firearm ownership is far from over. Americans, literally by the millions, are investing in exercising their Second Amendment rights. This has happened every month for more than four years continuously.

While the Biden administration proposes rules to infringe on fundamental American rights and certain governors, attorneys general and district attorneys general and district attorneys refuse to lock up criminals that prey on communities without consequence, Americans are sending a clear and unequivocal message that their personal safety, and the free exercise of their rights, is non-negotiable.

Here’s the NSSF’s press release . . .

The August 2023 NSSF-adjusted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) figure of 1,117,824 is a decrease of 13.1 percent compared to the August 2022 NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 1,286,816. 

For comparison, the unadjusted August 2023 FBI NICS figure 2,047,515 reflects a -16.4% percent decrease from the unadjusted FBI NICS figure of 2,450,616 in August 2022.

August 2023 marks the 49th month in a row that has exceeded 1 million adjusted background checks in a single month.

Please note: Twenty-four states currently have at least one qualified alternative permit, which under the Brady Act allows the permit-holder, who has undergone a background check to obtain the permit, to purchase a firearm from a licensed dealer without a separate additional background check for that transfer. The number of NICS checks in these states does not include these legal transfers based on qualifying permits and NSSF does not adjust for these transfers.

The adjusted NICS data were derived by subtracting out NICS purpose code permit checks and permit rechecks used by states for CCW permit application checks as well as checks on active CCW permit databases. NSSF started subtracting permit rechecks in February 2016.

Though not a direct correlation to firearms sales, the NSSF-adjusted NICS data provide an additional picture of current market conditions. In addition to other purposes, NICS is used to check transactions for sales or transfers of new or used firearms. 

It should be noted that these statistics represent the number of firearm background checks initiated through the NICS. They do not represent the number of firearms sold or sales dollars. Based on varying state laws, local market conditions and purchase scenarios, a one-to-one correlation cannot be made between a firearm background check and a firearm sale.

ATF’s proposed definition of “personal collection” of firearms is missing something

The ATF’s proposed rule expanding who is “engaged in the business” of selling firearms is being lauded by anti-gun groups like Giffords, which says the rule “moves us closer to universal background checks than we’ve ever been,” while the National Shooting Sports Foundation is panning the new proposal as yet another example of executive branch overreach by the Biden administration.

Under the proposed rule, anyone that so much as attempts to sell a privately owned firearm for a profit could be deemed by the ATF to be an unlicensed firearms dealer, even if the sale doesn’t take place or no profit is gained. At the same time, the agency maintains gun owners won’t be deemed “engaged in the business” of selling firearms if they make only “occasional sales to enhance a personal collection, or for a hobby, or if the firearms they sell are all or part of a personal collection.”

While the ATF declined to define “occasional sales”, it has attempted to define the term “personal collection”, and I couldn’t help but laugh and roll my eyes when I saw it.

Personal collection, personal collection of firearms, or personal firearms collection.

(a) Personal firearms that a person accumulates for study, comparison, exhibition, or for a hobby (e.g., noncommercial, recreational activities for personal enjoyment, such as hunting, or skeet, target, or competition shooting). The term shall not include any firearm purchased for the purpose of resale or made with the predominant intent to earn a profit.

Notice anything missing from the reasons why someone would accumulate personal firearms? Yep, the ATF has ignored the single biggest reason why people purchase a gun: self-defense.

Continue reading “”

When criminals can’t tell who’s armed, and it’s extremely easy to carry concealed, they tend to be less criminal.

Estimating The Effect Of Concealed Carry Laws On Murder: A Response To Bondy et al. Carlisle Moody & John R. Lott

“We find that the effect of right-to-carry laws on murder is negative but not significantly different from zero in the year of adoption. However, the effect becomes negative and statistically significant in the following years.

This suggests that it takes time for people to get permits and start carrying guns, and that it takes time for the effects of this to be felt on crime rates.”

 

Random Thought of the Day

Anti-gun people spend a lot of time telling others how afraid of being shot they are for themselves and “the children”. In other words, they spend a lot of time thinking about dying by gunshot. They project that fear onto gun people saying, “What are you so afraid of that you need a gun?”

That is markedly different than my thought patterns. I think about protecting myself and other innocent people by being proficient with a gun. I almost never have a fear of being a victim of a criminal attack.

Antigun people think about dying by gun. Gun people think about protecting life by gun.

Now in Effect: Texas Second Amendment Financial Privacy Act

AUSTIN, Texas (Sept. 1, 2023) – Today a Texas law goes into effect that prohibits financial institutions operating in the state from requiring a credit card merchant code to track the purchases of firearms and ammunition.

Rep. Matt Schaefer and Rep. Candy Noble introduced House Bill 2837 (HB2837) on Feb. 24. Titled the Second Amendment Financial Privacy Act, the law prohibits a financial institution operating in Texas from requiring or assigning a firearms code, which is defined as “any merchant category code approved by the International Organization for Standardization for a firearms retailer, including Merchant Category Code 5723.”

The law now limits the merchant codes that can be assigned to the sale of firearms, firearm accessories, and ammunition.

“For the purposes of the sale of firearms, ammunition for use in firearms, and firearms accessories, a firearms retailer may provide a firearms code to a payment card issuer or payment card network and may only use or be assigned a merchant category code for general merchandise retailers or sporting goods retailers. Any agreement or contractual provision to the contrary is void.

Continue reading “”

Saturday is Constitutional Carry Day in Nebraska!

On Saturday, September 2nd, constitutional carry and statewide preemption laws will take effect in Nebraska. Thanks to the significant victories from this year’s legislative session, law-abiding citizens can exercise their Second Amendment right to carry firearms for self-defense without unnecessary government interference and can exercise their rights freely across the state without having to navigate a patchwork of local gun control ordinances.

The NRA is grateful to Senator Tom Brewer for championing this legislation and all the Nebraska state legislators who fought for these laws to pass. We also thank all of our members and other Second Amendment advocates whose vigilance made this victory possible.

We encourage you to stay engaged, support pro-Second Amendment candidates, and be prepared to defend our rights whenever necessary. Together, we can continue making strides in protecting our cherished heritage and ensuring that future generations enjoy the freedoms bestowed upon us by our Founding Fathers.

The DailyKos (a rabid anti-gun pub) gets pwned by one of its own

Citizens Have An Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms Unconnected With Service In a Militia

The Second Amendment speaks of two separate groups the Militia and the People. If the right to keep and bear arms was meant ONLY to apply to the militia it would read “The right of Militia members to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Or, it would read “The power of the States to maintain armed militias shall not be infringed.”

It reads “The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”  It calls for a “Well-regulated Militia” and not a well regulated populace, and all other references to “The People” in the Bill of Rights are also rights of individual citizens.

 The Federal government, the States and their officials hold powers not rights.  For example, Amendment IV “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated…”  Amendment X “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Article. I. Section. 1. “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” Article. II. Section. 1. “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.” Note that they read powers and not rights.

Held:

1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a
firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for
traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
Pp. 2–53.

(a) The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but
does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative
clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it
connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22.

This decision wasn’t reached in a vacuum.  The vast majority of law review articles dealing with the Second Amendment conclude that it protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms.  In fact, when Dr. Lawrence Tribe, the widely published Constitutional Law scholar, author of the Constitutional law textbook that is standard in many if not most of our nation’s low schools, and strong supporter of gun control, announced that he would conduct a study of the Second Amendment.

Citizen disarmament zealots, their organizations, their media allies, and their apologists were elated for they believed that at last a well respected Constitutional law scholar would finally proclaim that the Second Amendment applies only to the Militia and not individual citizens.

In the end they were disappointed.  Like the Supreme Court Dr. Tribe determined that the framers of the Constitution intended that the Second Amendment confers the right of individual citizens to keep and bear arms unconnected with service in a Militia.

Frequently Debunked Crackpots Claim the AR-15 is Worthless for Self-Defense

When the young paste-eaters at Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun propaganda factory, known as the Trace, team up with the stodgy window-lickers at the Gun Violence Archive to produce a story about the utility of the AR-15 platform as a modern self-defense tool, it’s hard not to get too excited.

It’s like watching two freight trains headed toward each other on the same track. You know the results are going to be cataclysmic. None of these halfwits have ever heard a shot fired, much less one fired in anger, or especially one fired to good effect. They know less about what makes a reliable home defense weapon than I do about man-buns, skinny jeans, or avocado toast.

We have debunked the Trace and the Gun Violence Archive so often it’s getting old. The kids at the Trace masquerade as legitimate journalists when, in fact, they’re nothing more than highly paid anti-gun activists. The GVA purports to track gun crimes and maintain a list of mass shootings, but their data is collected from media, and even social media sources, and their stats are so inflated they’d have you believe a mass shooting occurs nearly every time someone draws from a holster. When the two anti-gun nonprofits combine for a story, it’s bound to be something as bereft of facts as it is poorly written, and to that standard their most recent collaboration does not disappoint.

A story published Tuesday asks: “How Often Are AR-Style Rifles Used for Self-Defense? Supporters of AR-15s, often used in mass shootings and racist attacks, say they’re important for self-defense. Our analysis of Gun Violence Archive data suggests otherwise.”

The story was written by one of the Trace’s senior fabulists, Jennifer Mascia, who is “currently the lead writer of the Ask The Trace series and tracks news developments on the gun beat.” Mascia has also led the Trace’s hilarious we’re journalists, not activists, propaganda campaign on social media.

Mascia reportedly searched the GVA’s data for “assault weapon,” which she said the GVA defines as “AR-15, AK-47, and all variants defined by law enforcement.” Of course, there’s no mention of whether the weapons were capable of select-fire and, therefore, actual assault weapons. She started with 190 incidents, which she whittled down for various reasons. The results: “That left 51 incidents over a nine-and-a-half-year span in which legal gun owners brandished or used an AR-style rifle to defend life or property. That averages out to around five per year.”

To be clear, I trust Mascia’s findings about as much as I trust the GVA data that produced the results. The whole story is GIGO – garbage in, garbage out.

It is noteworthy that the firearms “expert” whom Mascia found to further beclown herself – who wrote in a CNN story that the AR is the last gun he’d recommend for self-defense – is none other than former Washington D.C. police officer Michael Fanone. He’s the officer who cried a lot before the January 6 Commission – the one with the beard who cried a lot, if that helps jog your memory.

The network must have liked the cut of his jib. Fanone is now a CNN contributor and hawking a new book: “Hold the Line: The Insurrection and One Cop’s Battle for America’s Soul.” (Nancy Pelosi highly recommended it.)

Since he’s so afraid of the AR platform, I can’t help but wonder what weapon Fanone, or for that matter, Mascia, would recommend for home defense. If I had to guess, it probably has two barrels, a wooden stock and exposed hammers.

I’m somewhat familiar with the AR myself, which is why I trust it to defend my hearth and home. It’s light, accurate, and deadly, which is exactly the point, and something we should stop making allowances for.

Despite the exhortations of Bloomberg’s activists or crybaby ex-cops, an AR-15 is exactly what I want when The Bad Man comes a-calling.

BLUF
“The numbers indicate if we didn’t have gun-free zones, we would have more people stopping these attacks,”

Over 60% of ‘active shooters’ stopped by ‘good guy with a gun’

A large percentage of “active shooter” incidents are thwarted by armed citizens who sometimes don’t even fire their weapons, but those cases are no longer counted under President Joe Biden’s pro-gun control policies.

According to just-released data from the Crime Prevention Research Center, 41% of active shooting incidents were stopped by armed civilians.

Outside of so-called gun-free zones, which bar the legal carrying of firearms, over 63% of active shooting cases were ended by an armed civilian, according to the center.

The new data from John R. Lott Jr., the former Justice Department senior adviser for research and statistics, are his latest to challenge undercounting and bias in government reports on shootings and back up efforts by Second Amendment and police groups to encourage people to carry firearms.

Continue reading “”

This judge has it backwards and I’d say purposefully. The goobermint has to submit evidence that the weapons are not in common use for self defense, (impossible by the way, so that’s why the judge pretzeled it)  not the plaintiffs

Federal judge upholds Conn.’s assault weapons ban for 2nd time in a month

For the second time in less than a month, a federal judge has upheld Connecticut’s assault weapons ban by denying an injunction seeking a temporary halt to the enforcement of the ban as part of a lawsuit challenging the state’s gun laws.

In a 14-page ruling issued earlier this week, U.S. District Judge Janet Bond Arterton said the assault weapons banned by the state are not “commonly” used for self-defense, which would classify the firearms as protected under the Second Amendment.

“Plaintiffs are correct that the Second Amendment provides them with the freedom to choose a firearm . . . ‘that is not dangerous and unusual’ and that is normally used for self-defense,” Arterton said. “However, until they submit evidence that supports a finding that the assault weapons in the challenged statutes meet those requirements, they cannot show a likelihood of success on the merits of their Second Amendment claim.”

She had denied a similar injunction requested by the National Association for Gun Rights, which is also suing state officials to revoke the ban, on Aug. 3. Her ruling this week marks the third time since June that Arterton has upheld the state’s assault weapons ban.

Attorney Cameron Atkinson, one of three lawyers representing the plaintiffs, three people including two former state correction officers and two gun rights advocacy groups, said they will appeal the most recent ruling.

“The District Court did exactly what the Supreme Court told it not to do (in other rulings),” Atkinson said Wednesday. “We’re very confident that the ruling will be reversed on appeal.”

Continue reading “”

Frequently debunked crackpots claim the AR is worthless for self-defense
The Trace teams up with the Gun Violence Archive and hilarity ensues.

When the young paste-eaters at Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun propaganda factory, known as the Trace, team up with the stodgy window-lickers at the Gun Violence Archive to produce a story about the utility of the AR platform as a modern self-defense tool, it’s hard not to get too excited.

It’s like watching two freight trains headed toward each other on the same track. You know the results are going to be cataclysmic. None of these halfwits have ever heard a shot fired, much less one fired in anger, or especially one fired to good effect. They know less about what makes a reliable home-defense weapon than I do about man-buns, skinny jeans or avocado toast.

We have debunked the Trace and the Gun Violence Archive so often it’s getting old. The kids at the Trace masquerade as legitimate journalists when in fact they’re nothing more than highly paid anti-gun activists. The GVA purports to track gun crimes and maintain a list of mass shootings, but their data is collected from media and even social media sources, and their stats are so inflated they’d have you believe a mass shooting occurs nearly every time someone draws from a holster. When the two anti-gun nonprofits combine for a story, it’s bound to be something as bereft of facts as it is poorly written, and to that standard their most recent collaboration does not disappoint.

A story published Tuesday asks: “How Often Are AR-Style Rifles Used for Self-Defense? Supporters of AR-15s, often used in mass shootings and racist attacks, say they’re important for self-defense. Our analysis of Gun Violence Archive data suggests otherwise.”

The story was written by one of the Trace’s senior fabulists, Jennifer Mascia, who is “currently the lead writer of the Ask the Trace series and tracks news developments on the gun beat.” Mascia has also led the Trace’s hilarious we’re journalists, not activists, propaganda campaign on social media.

Mascia claims her story was a response to a reader’s question: “Many gun owners claim to buy assault-style rifles for defense. So how many documented cases are out there where someone actually defended themselves with an assault-style rifle?”

Mascia reportedly searched the GVA’s data for “assault weapon,” which she said the GVA defines as “AR-15, AK-47, and all variants defined by law enforcement.” Of course, there’s no mention whether the weapons were capable of select-fire and therefore actual assault weapons. She started with 190 incidents, which she whittled down for various reasons. The results: “That left 51 incidents over a nine-and-a-half-year span in which legal gun owners brandished or used an AR-style rifle to defend life or property. That averages out to around five per year.”

To be clear, I trust Mascia’s findings about as much as I trust the GVA data that produced the results. The whole story is GIGO — garbage in, garbage out.

It is noteworthy that the firearms “expert” whom Mascia found to further beclown herself — who wrote in a CNN story that the AR is the last gun he’d recommend for self-defense — is none other than former Washington D.C. police officer Michael Fanone. He’s the officer who cried a lot before the January 6 Commission — the one with the beard who cried a lot, if that helps jog your memory.

“I’m more familiar with the gun than most people: I own one. And one thing I know for sure is that this weapon doesn’t belong in the hands of the average civilian,” Fanone wrote of the AR platform in the CNN story.

The network must have liked the cut of his jib. Fanone is now a CNN contributor and hawking a new book: “Hold the Line: The Insurrection and One Cop’s Battle for America’s Soul.” (Nancy Pelosi highly recommended it.)

Since he’s so afraid of the AR platform, I can’t help but wonder what weapon Fanone, or for that matter, Mascia, would recommend for home defense. If I had to guess, it probably has two barrels, a wooden stock and exposed hammers.

I’m somewhat familiar with the AR myself, which is why I trust it to defend my hearth and home. It’s light, accurate and deadly, which is exactly the point, and something we should stop making allowances for.

Despite the exhortations of Bloomberg’s activists or crybaby ex-cops, an AR is exactly what I want when The Bad Man comes a-calling.

Violent Crime! Our Personal Safety Depends Upon Ourselves

Fewer than half of crimes in the U.S. are reported IMG Pew Research

The “deterrent value” of law enforcement is at an all-time low!

Less than half of crimes of violence in the USA are never “solved.” Of the ones that are “solved” or “cleared,” few arrests and successful prosecutions ever result.

Less than twenty percent of property crimes are ever “solved.”

Owing to the foregoing, the majority of felonies, even forcible felonies, are never reported (what’s the point?) and thus never show up on any statistics. Thus, as dismal as the crime statistics we actually have, real figures are vastly worse!

Low arrest rates are a direct result of “passionless policing” by critically under-staffed, non-supported police departments, combined with unenthusiastic prosecution by liberal, pro-criminal prosecutors, as well as mayors and city council members.

Accordingly, among VCAs (violent criminal actors) in most metro areas, there is scant risk associated with physically victimizing others, at least risk represented by law enforcement. The real risk to VCAs (particularly drug traffickers) is from the violence visited upon them by other VCAs during territorial disputes.

And, of course, there is always the risk of running into an armed “victim,” as frightened Americans continue to buy guns at increasing rates every month.

As citizens, our personal safety depends almost exclusively upon ourselves. We are no longer “protected” by police in the way we used to be, and may never be again!

Lifestyles need to be tweaked accordingly….

Team Biden Continues Two-Pronged Assault on 2nd Amendment and Small Businesses

Happy Friday, dear Kruiser Morning Briefing friends. Ertenzo felt most purposeful when adding a secret fourth bean to his three-bean salad for the annual Cornhole Club picnic.

The commie puppet masters who run Joe Biden’s brain have made no secret of their contempt for the Second Amendment and law-abiding American gun owners. They’ve had their senile mouthpiece babbling about “assault weapons” almost from the moment he was installed in the Oval Office.

Democrats don’t have a lot of luck with sweeping gun control legislation for a couple of reasons. First, they keep passing laws that make gun owners who have adhered to the law criminals overnight. These laws eventually find their way to a judge or a court that says, “Yeah…no.”

The other reason — and this is the big one — is that there are a lot of Democrats who own guns and are fond of their Second Amendment rights. Most of them are in flyover country, which is why a lot of the D.C. Dems are out of touch with reality.

Team Biden is nothing if not relentless in its pursuit of an anti-American agenda, however. Instead of the legislative process, the bureaucracy is being used to choke the life out of the Second Amendment, which Catherine wrote about yesterday:

The Biden administration, failing to get enough congressional cooperation to trample on the Second Amendment, continues its war against gun dealers.

Bingo.

As we examine the story further, it’s important to remember that Democrats have contempt for small business owners. People who can’t be forced into unionizing and stuffing the coffers of the Democratic Big Labor slush fund are useless to them.

Here’s more from Catherine’s post:

I previously wrote about how hundreds of gun dealers suddenly lost their licenses to Biden’s ATF, in what the gun industry says is a back-handed way of undermining gun rights  Some dealers informed the media that the federal government is hurting a major ally in identifying “suspicious gun buyers” by targeting legitimate gun dealers.

But the Biden administration is successfully hurting gun dealers’ business. “We were making $1 million a year, now it’s less than $100,000,” gun dealer Anthony Navarro told the Wall Street Journal. “This policy is designed to be a backdoor violation of the Second Amendment.” Now there’s the new ATF rule, also aimed at gun dealers.

I’m an Arizona resident. Rules regarding private gun sales are practically nonexistent. Both parties have to be Arizona residents and after that, YOLO. The Grand Canyon State has functioned with minimal gun laws for a very long time. My grandfather owned a gun store when I was a kid, so I know whence I speak (write). What the feds want to do now is get their fascist little fingers all over the transactions between individuals, which Ryan Petty explains at our sister site Bearing Arms:

The White House outlined that under the suggested guidelines, individuals would be expected to obtain a federal license and conduct background checks if they meet one or more of several conditions. These include frequently selling firearms shortly after purchasing them, offering guns in near-new condition, selling multiple units of the same gun model, or selling business inventory as a previously federally-licensed dealer without transferring it to a personal collection for at least one year, effectively targeting the so-called fire sale loophole. The proposed rules would establish criteria around the frequency and type of gun sales by unlicensed sellers, along with the condition of the firearms.

The Second Amendment infuriates leftists because the federal government hasn’t been able to wrest control of it from the states. It’s a perfect example of how the country is supposed to work. My good friend, colleague, and “Unwoke” podcast co-host Kevin Downey Jr. once asked me if all of my guns were legal. I replied, “In this state they are.” Were I to move back to California, the story would be different.

The anti-2A crowd is fond of saying, “We don’t want to take away your guns.”

They do, of course, but until they can, they’d like to make the legal acquisition of firearms so onerous that people just give up.

Federal Court Temporarily Halts ATF’s Labeling of Forced Reset Triggers as Machine Guns

The Northern District of Texas Federal Court has issued a temporary restraining order in favor of the National Association for Gun Rights in their legal battle against the ATF. This order will maintain the current situation in the case until either September 27, 2023, or until a decision is made on the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction.

The Association cited a precedent set by the 5th Circuit Court in the Cargill case, arguing that bump stocks should not be considered machine guns. Judge O’Connor concurred, suggesting that the Association has a strong likelihood of winning the case based on existing laws.

In a 2022 communication to federal firearms dealers, the ATF had classified ‘forced reset triggers’ (FRTs) as ‘firearms’ and ‘machine guns’ according to the National Firearms Act and the Gun Control Act.

Rare Breed Triggers initiated the sale of their Forced Reset Trigger in December 2020 after extensive legal review. However, by January 2021, the ATF had started campaigns to ban these triggers. Despite the ATF’s claim that public concerns initiated this action, Freedom of Information Act requests revealed no such concerns from the public had been recorded.

Dudley Brown, the President of the National Association for Gun Rights, commented that the restraining order represents progress in refuting the ATF’s questionable redefinition of ‘machine gun’ and aims to cease the agency’s overreach towards Rare Breed Triggers.

The lawsuit’s objective is to revoke the ATF’s prohibition on FRT triggers and safeguard the owners of these triggers from undue ATF intervention.

According to existing federal legislation, a ‘machine gun’ is a weapon capable of firing multiple rounds with a single trigger action. This longstanding definition, which the ATF is purportedly disregarding, makes it clear that Rare Breed Triggers’ FRT only enables the firing of one round per trigger action.

Hannah Hill, the Executive Director of the National Foundation for Gun Rights— the National Association for Gun Rights’ legal division—expressed optimism that the temporary restraining order is a positive indicator for a future preliminary injunction that would protect all their members.

Biden Administration Proposes Plan to Expand Who Needs a License to Sell Used Guns

President Joe Biden has announced a new proposal to expand the scope of federal gun dealing regulations to cover more people who sell used guns.

On Thursday, the Department of Justice submitted a new plan for determining who must obtain a federal firearms license to legally sell guns on the secondary market. The proposed rule would set limits on how frequently an unlicensed seller could offer up guns to customers, how often they can sell the same kind of gun, and what kind of condition the firearm has to be in before the seller would be required to get a Federal Firearms License (FFL). Anybody who violates the proposed regulations and sells a gun without a license could face up to $250,000 in fines and five years in federal prison or both.

“[U]nder the proposed rule, a person would be presumed to be required to become a licensed dealer and run background checks if they meet one or more of the following criteria,” the White House said in a release. “Offer for sale any number of firearms and also represents to potential buyers that they are willing and able to purchase and sell them additional firearms; Repetitively offer for sale firearms within 30 days after they were purchased; Repetitively offer for sale firearms that are like new in their original packaging; Repetitively offer for sale multiple firearms of the same make and model; or as a formerly federally-licensed firearms dealer, sell firearms that were in the business inventory and not transferred to a personal collection at least a year before the sale, addressing the so-called’ fire sale loophole.’”

Continue reading “”