Category: Business

Could Industry and Political Pushback Kill the EPA’s Electric Truck Plans?

It’s a well-established fact that the Biden administration thinks that electric vehicles are the solution to everything. (Ring around the collar? Buy an EV. Troubles in the bedroom? Buy an EV. Thinning hair? You get the picture.) So it shouldn’t surprise any of us that the administration has decided that what the trucking industry needs most is a great big transition to electric trucks.

Last month, we reported about how the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is looking to follow California’s lead in declaring war on diesel vehicles. At the time, many in the trucking industry expressed their dismay at the EPA allowing California to hold the rest of the country hostage regarding overblown climate concerns.

“By granting California’s waiver for its so-called ‘advanced clean trucks’ rule, the EPA is handing over the keys as a national regulator,” Chris Spear, CEO of the American Trucking Associations, said at the time. “This isn’t the United States of California, and in order to mollify a never satisfied fringe environmental lobby by allowing the state to proceed with these technologically infeasible rules on unworkable and unrealistic timelines, the EPA is sowing the ground for a future supply chain crisis.”

The EPA proposal includes more stringent regulations on trucks beginning with the 2027 model year, even more regulations beginning in 2028, and tightening those regulations even more beginning in 2032. And, of course, the agency wants all new trucks to be zero-emission vehicles (in other words, battery-powered) starting in 2045.

The trucking industry and outlets that cover logistics have been quick to decry the EPA’s proposal. Freightwaves pointed out how detrimental the electric truck mandate could be for the industry.

“Cost has been emphasized as a big impediment. A new all-electric costs over $400,000 today, versus a new diesel truck in the $150,000 range,” notes the FreightWaves report. “In addition, charging times are too long, which eats into federal hours of service rules. The batteries weigh a lot — which puts early adopters at a disadvantage with other carriers in the amount of cargo they can haul and still be in compliance with highway weight limits.”

Naturally, trucking companies and suppliers would pass on those additional costs to consumers, and the weight limits and long charging times could put even more strain on the supply chain. Another one of the most crucial factors is that some states are already having trouble with their electric grids keeping up with the strain of more electric passenger vehicles. What would a switch to electric trucks do to these power grids? What would the switch do to drivers?

“I’m intrigued by a lot of technology, and I’m not opposed to the move toward electric vehicles,” Joe Rajkovacz, director of governmental affairs for the Western States Trucking Association told FreightWaves. “But to make a mandate on a truck buyer that will potentially leave him stranded on the road because there’s not enough juice in the grid to power his vehicle doesn’t make sense.”

GOP lawmakers and conservative activists have made their concerns known, too:

Rep. Pat Fallon, R-Texas and chair of the House Oversight Committee’s subcommittee on energy policy and regulatory affairs, stated during a May 17 hearing that “Republicans are not anti-EV. They are however deeply concerned by the Biden administration’s apparent attempt to hijack the auto industry, strangle consumer choice, and determine what products are best for the American people in setting timelines.”

At the same hearing, Rep. Chuck Edwards, R-N.C., pointed out that last year the U.S. Supreme Court “slapped EPA down” in West Virginia v. EPA for overstepping its authority in regulating power plants. “Isn’t EPA doing the exact same thing with these proposed EV rules?”

Steve Bradbury of the Heritage Foundation replied that the EPA’s plans to regulate trucking are “remarkably similar” to the overreach that led to the Supreme Court ruling, adding that “At issue are matters of life, liberty, and prosperity, and they are fundamentally political in nature. That is exactly why, under our constitutional republic, it is for Congress, and Congress alone, to make the monumental decisions that EPA is purporting to take upon itself in these proposed rules.”

Democrats reply that the administration’s handouts and tax breaks are sufficient to help the trucking industry transfer over to electric trucks — because the Democrats think handouts solve everything. Is this pressure from the GOP and the industry enough to put the brakes on the proposal? We can be sure that they’ll give it their best shot.

Cook County judge dismisses city’s lawsuit against Gary gun shop

A Cook County judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by the city against a Northwest Indiana gun shop in a brief hearing Thursday.

The city filed the lawsuit against Westforth Sports, located in Gary, Ind., in April 2021, alleging the shop repeatedly violated federal gun laws, often resulting in criminal charges against straw purchasers. The city further alleged that the shop’s owner, Earl Westforth, ignored warnings from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives about suspicious purchases at the store.

Attorneys for Westforth Sports filed a motion to dismiss last year. They argued that the lawsuit should be dismissed because the city’s allegations concerned transactions between Westforth and residents of Indiana.

“Where the matter is one of specific personal jurisdiction, the question is simple: does Plaintiff prove that the alleged straw purchase transactions arise out of or relate to Westforth’s contacts with Illinois? Absent such, Plaintiff has not met its burden, and the case must be dismissed,” attorneys for Westforth wrote in support of the motion last year. “Plaintiff has neither alleged nor provided evidence of any such customer being a ‘straw purchaser’ or otherwise involved in any alleged third-party criminal trafficking activity at the heart of its claims against Westforth.”

A 2017 report issued by the Chicago Police Department stated that Westforth Sports was the third-largest supplier of guns used in crimes in Chicago. The department said that, between 2013 and 2016, 2.3% of all crime guns recovered in Chicago originated at Westforth.

In a statement issued after Quish’s ruling, Westforth attorney Timothy Rudd said “the Court properly found that Constitutional due process does not allow an out-of-state firearms retailer to be hauled into court in Illinois unless the claims against it arise out of or relate to the retailer’s own contacts with the state.”
The city was represented by attorneys from Everytown Law, Mayer Brown LLP and the city’s Law Department.

Alla Lefkowitz, Everytown Law’s senior director of affirmative litigation, said that during discovery, the city “found significant additional evidence of wrongdoing by Westforth that is specifically targeted at Illinois.”

“The City has not yet had an opportunity to review the decision, but fully intends to press on with its case against Westforth after studying the Court’s ruling and deciding on the best path forward,” Lefkowitz said in a statement.

Burgeoning burger battle: Agriculture really bugs Lurch and the Left

The globalist cabal desperate to remake the world to their specifications is throwing a hissy fit at the moment, worthy of any 2 year old in the aisle at WalMart.

As citizens around the world start to rouse themselves from near economic ruin and the erosion of every standard of living norm accepted for the past decades imposed on them as a result of climate change induced hysteria, the WEF members and cult adherents are starting to panic. If “the end is nigh” rhetoric was bad before, now that their chances of pulling the whole scam off are starting to recede like the floodwaters that never inundated the coastlines, they are blasting away at full trumpet.

Witness that sonorous toned, equine faced poseur of our own, who jets about the world self importantly in pursuit of achieving global accord for ever stricter climate related restraints on every aspect of the peasantry’s lives. John Kerry, our so-called U.S. climate envoy, outdid himself this week in attacks on the everyday life of the little people he flies over on his way to Gstaad or Paris.

He went after farming.

Cutting greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural production is essential to the global fight against climate change, U.S. climate envoy John Kerry said on Wednesday.

Agriculture generates 10% to 12% of greenhouse gas emissions globally, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The food system as a whole – including packaging, transportation, and waste management – generates a third of global emissions, according to a 2021 study published in the academic journal Nature Food.

“We can’t get to net zero, we don’t get this job done, unless agriculture is front and center as part of the solution,” Kerry, the special presidential envoy for climate, said at the AIM for Climate summit in Washington.

And he let rip with the de rigeur EMERGENCY trope.

“This sector needs innovation now more than ever,” Kerry continued Wednesday. “We’re facing record malnutrition at a time when agriculture, more than any other sector, is suffering from the impacts of the climate crisis. I refuse to call it climate change anymore. It’s not change. It’s a crisis.”

Continue reading “”

Actually that doesn’t matter so much as long as I can be armed.

Move over Uber and Lyft; new rideshare app offers armed drivers

If  you’re a regular reader here at Bearing Arms, you’ve seen or heard me talk about Uber and Lyft’s driver (and passenger) disarmament policies that force contracted drivers to go unarmed in order to stay in the good graces of the companies. Even when drivers have been forced to use their gun in self-defense, they’ve been quickly cut loose from Uber and Lyft because they dared to have their legally-carried firearm with them while they’re doing a dangerous job.

Given the large number of carjackings, murders, and other targeted crimes against rideshare drivers, I find it unconscionable that these companies are putting drivers at risk by demanding they get behind the wheel without the means to defend themselves from an attack, and I refuse to use either platform until their policies change.
Admittedly, it’s easier for me to take that stand since I live in a rural area and have little need for a rideshare service to begin with, but I know that there are plenty of other gun owners out there who try to avoid these companies whenever possible.

Now we may soon have another choice, at least for those gun owners and Second Amendment supporters who live in New York and Atlanta. A new rideshare app called Black Wolf has just launched, and company founder Kerry KingBrown says riders can choose to have an armed driver behind the wheel if that’s what they prefer.

“Who are mostly on the news getting robbed, getting raped? The average person,” Brown told Atlanta News First. “What I’m creating is a necessary evil. It’s a necessity.”

In the week since it has launched, there have been some 80,000 downloads, according to Atlanta First News.

“Every Black Wolf App vehicle comes equipped with GPS Tracking and Live-streaming technology that allows our riders to share with their loved ones,” the company says on its Facebook page.

The app, which utilizes real-time data to let others know of the riders’ locations, charges a premium rate to ride with a driver who is armed.

Riders pay a base rate of $50 for an unarmed driver in addition to $1.75 per mile. A driver who is packing heat would set a rider back $60 as a base rate followed by a rate of $1.75 per mile.

The Black Wolf ride sharing app requires drivers to pass a background check and undergo training on how to handle a firearm as well as de-escalation.

Brown, a Long Island native, aspires to bring the service to the Big Apple — but New York City’s strict gun laws could complicate those plans.

He said that he is looking to enter the New York City market with help from a “connection” — a detective in the NYPD who has his own security company and provides training for drivers.

Brown acknowledged the strict gun laws that make it difficult to obtain a permit to carry a firearm.

It’s definitely going to be a challenge to bring Black Wolf to the Big Apple, but Brown has already launched a fleet of fifteen vehicles in Atlanta. The service may be more expensive than an UberX or a Lyft ride, but Brown is banking on the idea that many riders would prefer to have some extra security while they’re on the road.

I’ve reached out to Black Wolf and hope to bring Kerry KingBrown on Cam & Co in the near future to talk more about the company and his plans. It sounds like a worthy addition to the rideshare companies that are already operating, and a huge step forward for driver (and passenger) safety.

AGs ask court to dismiss Mexico lawsuit claiming U.S. firearms industry is responsible for cartel violence

(The Center Square) – A Mexican government lawsuit blaming American firearm manufacturers for cartel violence is bogus, 20 Republican attorneys general argue. In a new brief filed with the First Circuit Appeals Court, they asked the court to dismiss the case.

Last September, Chief District Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV, presiding over the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, dismissed Mexico’s lawsuit filed against several U.S. gun manufacturers. The defendants include Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc.; Barrett Firearms Manufacturing, Inc.; Beretta U.S.A. Corp.; Glock, Inc.; Sturm, Ruger & Company, Inc.; Witmer Public Safety Group, Inc., D/B/A Interstate Arms; Century International Arms, Inc.; Baretta Holdings Spa, Glock Ges.M.B.H; and Colt’s Manufacturing Company, Llc.

The Mexican government is seeking $10 billion in damages for cartel violence in a country where guns can only be purchased legally at one gun store in Mexico City run by the Mexican Army. In 2018, the store sold 38 firearms on average, a day, compared to an estimated 580 weapons smuggled into Mexico from the U.S., the Los Angeles Times reported.

Mexico’s lawsuit isn’t a new claim. In 2016, the former Mexican president also argued that cartel firearm trafficking was “strengthening the cartels and other criminal organizations that create violence in Mexico,” the Times reported.

Law enforcement officials have explained to The Center Square that Mexican cartel violence is perpetrated through the illegal purchasing and trafficking of firearms, largely financed through human and drug trafficking and smuggling across the U.S.-Mexico border. People and drugs are trafficked and smuggled north; illegal weapons, cash and other contraband move south, officials have explained.

The AGs argue, “Mexico advances a legal theory that is unsupported by fact or law.

“On the facts, American gun manufacturers are not responsible for gun violence in Mexico. Rather, policy choices by the Mexican government, policy failures in the United States, and independent criminal actions by third parties are alone responsible for gun violence in Mexico,” they state in the brief.

Continue reading “”

April 2023 Sees Slight Increase in NSSF-Adjusted NICS Background Check

NSSF Adjusted NICS Data.
(Photo: NSSF)

The April 2023 NSSF-adjusted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) figure of 1,369,296 is an increase of 0.7 percent compared to the April 2022 NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 1,359,908. For comparison, the unadjusted April 2023 FBI NICS figure 2,616,729 reflects a 3.3 percent increase from the unadjusted FBI NICS figure of 2,534,057 in April 2022.

April 2023 marks the 45th month in a row that has exceeded 1 million adjusted background checks in a single month as well as the 3rd highest reported figure for April.

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.

Continue reading “”

Welcome to the Club: Car Makers Getting the Same Treatment Gun Makers are Used To

The same antigun politicians who want to sue members of the firearm industry for crimes they didn’t commit are now trying to blame automakers for when the cars they make are stolen.

Welcome to bizarro-land, where commonsense and logic don’t apply. In the inverted world these politicians concoct, criminals aren’t responsible for their crimes. Gun makers should have predicted that the firearms they produced would be stolen, illegally sold on the black market, traded among convicted felons and used in subsequent crimes. Now, these same politicians say automakers should have expected their cars would be stolen by criminals and that’s the fault of the automakers.

Not the criminals. Not those who actually steal the property of others and victimize innocent people. Those individuals couldn’t possibly be at fault. Just ask Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison.

AG Ellison blamed Kia and Hyundai for a spike in car thefts and even opened an investigation to determine if those companies didn’t include “industry-standard, anti-theft technology” in their cars’ designs.

“Kia and Hyundai vehicles might as well have a giant bumper sticker that says ‘steal me’ on them,” AG Ellison said in early March.

Alliance for Automotive Innovation is the automaker trade association and to them, all we can say is welcome to our world, where politicians blame you for the crimes committed by others, seek to destroy your industry through frivolous litigation and oh yeah… their rules are all made up.

Continue reading “”

REGULATORS SEIZE FIRST REPUBLIC IN SECOND LARGEST BANK FAILURE IN U.S. HISTORY:

Early on Monday, regulators seized the San Francisco-based First Republic Bank and agreed a deal to sell its deposits and most of its assets to JPMorgan Chase, preventing further spiral in the banking industry.

Three of the four largest-ever U.S. bank failures have occurred in the past two months. First Republic Bank, which as of April 13 had $229.1 billion in total assets and $103.9 billion in total deposits, is the second largest bank to go under in U.S. history, behind only Washington Mutual, which went down in 2008. First Republic has been struggling since the failures of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and New York-based Signature Bank in March.

Investors and depositors were growing increasingly worried the bank would not survive because of its high amount of uninsured deposits — that is, deposits over the FDIC-insured limit of $250,000. First Republic also had high exposure to low-interest loans. A focus on wealthy clients on both coasts allowed First Republic to grow into one of the biggest banks in America. Large deposits funded low-rate mortgages to wealthy home buyers.

The bank lost $100 billion in deposits in a March run following SVB’s collapse. First Republic struggled to cope with the declining situation until eleven of America’s biggest banks deposited $30 billion into its coffers. That gave the bank breathing room and it tried to turn itself around. First Republic planned to sell off unprofitable assets, including the low interest mortgages, and it also announced layoffs of a quarter of its workforce.

The quarterly report, however, sent investors into panic. With the stock price in freefall and the bank poised for further spiral, regulators considered intervention necessary.

“As part of the transaction, First Republic Bank’s 84 offices in eight states will reopen as branches of JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, today during normal business hours. All depositors of First Republic Bank will become depositors of JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, and will have full access to all of their deposits,” explained the FDIC in a statement Monday.

“The resolution of First Republic Bank involved a highly competitive bidding process and resulted in a transaction consistent with the least-cost requirements of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act,” the agency added, estimating the cost to the Deposit Insurance Fund to be about $13 billion. The agency is sharing losses on First Republic’s loans.

The FDIC seriously considered a bid from at least one smaller bank — namely, PNC Financial Services, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Both First Republic and Washington Mutual are now substantially owned by JPMorgan. Chairman and CEO Jamie Dimon was instrumental in earlier efforts to rescue First Republic. JP Morgan was one of the eleven banks to intervene in March and Dimon was pushing for additional steps to be taken.

“Our government invited us and others to step up, and we did,” explained Dimon in a statement. “Our financial strength, capabilities and business model allowed us to develop a bid to execute the transaction in a way to minimize costs to the Deposit Insurance Fund.”

“This acquisition modestly benefits our company overall, it is accretive to shareholders, it helps further advance our wealth strategy, and it is complementary to our existing franchise,” Dimon added.

JPMorgan expects the addition of First Republic to add $500 million to its net income per year, not including the approximately $2.6 billion one-time post-tax gain or approximately $2 billion of post-tax restructuring costs expected over the course of 2023 and 2024.

Illinois Gun Shops See Surge in Sales After Federal Judge Placed Injunction on Firearm Ban

A recent federal ruling by the Southern District of Illinois on a gun law had a massive impact on local gun sales, shop owners reported on Saturday.

Judge Stephen Patrick McGlynn issued a temporary injunction on Friday against the enforcement of a gun law that would ban some semiautomatic weapons, penalize individuals who carry or possess certain “assault weapons” and require citizens to register with the Illinois State Police should they possess a weapon.

McGlynn ruled that the law, which was signed in January, “did not just regulate the rights of the people to defend themselves; it restricted that right, and in some cases, completely obliterated that right by criminalizing the purchase and the sale of more than 190 ‘arms.’

Although the injunction was only in place for a day, the Chicago Tribune reported large weekend crowds in suburban gun shops.

“Within 15 minutes, we had people coming in,” said Roger Krahl, owner of RGuns in Carpentersville. “There was a line outside the door before I could open up this morning. There will be no lunch today because we’ll be going nonstop.”

Continue reading “”

NSSF PRAISES MONTANA GOV. GIANFORTE FOR SIGNING FIND ACT

WASHINGTON, D.C. — NSSF®, The Firearm Industry Trade Association, praised Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte for signing the Firearm Industry Nondiscrimination (FIND) Act. The law, HB 356, prohibits state agencies from entering into contracts with corporate banks that discriminate against the firearm industry. Gov. Gianforte signed the law at Noreen Firearms in Belgrade, Mont.

Montana’s FIND Act will prevent “woke” corporate banks with discriminatory policies against firearm industry members from collecting taxpayer dollars through state contracts. Montanans will choose to do business with those companies that do not discriminate based on an industry these corporate banks may not like or with which they disagree.

“Montana is planting the flag in the ground to say Second Amendment rights are not for sale to ‘woke’ Wall Street corporate banks,” said Lawrence G. Keane, Senior Vice President and General Counsel for NSSF. “Montana’s tax dollars will be protected from being used to fund efforts by these corporate banks that benefit from state contracts while denying essential services to firearm-related business simply because they are politically-disfavored by Wall Street. Governor Gianforte’s signature makes clear that Montanans won’t bend to corporate pressure and discrimination to diminish Second Amendment rights.”

Montana’s FIND Act will require corporate banks and financial service providers seeking contracts valued at $100,000 or greater with Montana and its municipalities to certify that they hold no discriminatory policies against firearm industry businesses. Contracts that are certified and later discovered to be out of compliance with the law will be subject to cancellation.

MICHIGAN TARGETS FIREARM RETAILERS, IGNORES CRIMINALS WITH LAWSUIT PROPOSAL

By Larry Keane

Michigan lawmakers – including Gov. Gretchen Whitmer – are toying with the idea of turning state courtrooms into political arenas for gun control instead of forcing criminals to stand before judges for their crimes.

State legislators are considering introducing a bill that would allow victim families to sue firearm manufacturers, distributors and retailers for the heinous crimes committed by criminals. Let’s say that again so it is clear. Michigan’s legislators want to allow lawsuits against the firearm industry for crimes they didn’t commit. There’s no talk about dragging murderers, thugs, gang members and other criminals into courts to face a judge to answer for their crimes. Instead, Gov. Whitmer and these state legislators are looking to score cheap political points to allow public nuisance lawsuits against firearm manufacturers and those mom-and-pop gun stores that are following federal and state laws.

This is a dangerous step that only seeks to eliminate the ability of law-abiding Michiganders to legally obtain a firearm. This notion doesn’t address crime. The intent is to run local gun stores out of business and out of Michigan. When those who obey the law can’t legally obtain a firearm, they’re being denied their Constitutional Second Amendment rights.

Continue reading “”

Aero Precision Joins In Lawsuit Against Washington’s Unconstitutional Common Weapon Ban

Tacoma, WA – Due to the passage of House Bill 1240 by the Washington Legislature and Governor Jay Inslee signing it into law on 4/25/23, Aero Precision has filed a lawsuit in conjunction with several other plaintiffs to combat this overreaching legislation, seeking a temporary and permanent injunction based on the unconstitutionality of this law.

The case was filed on 4/25/23 in the Eastern District of Washington, U.S. District Court. Plaintiffs include Aero Precision LLC, Amanda Banta (2012 Olympian Sport Shooter), Sharp Shooting Indoor Range & Gun Shop, The Range LLC, and the National Shooting Sports Foundation. The complaint is filed against defendants Robert W. Ferguson, Attorney General of Washington State, and John R. Batiste, Chief of the Washington State Patrol.

“We do not agree with this law and we do not think it is constitutional,” said Scott Dover, CEO of Aero Precision.

“HB1240 bans some of the most common firearms and parts available. It impacts the lawful ownership of products we manufacture and sell to thousands of our customers in the State of Washington. It also restricts the rights of the individuals, Aero Precision employees, who make these parts. We will fight this law in the courts and are confident in the outcome given the clear rulings in multiple Supreme Court cases, including Heller and Bruen.”

Full Lawsuit Linked Here.

Thank you all for doing your part in making your voice heard and helping in the fight to keep our Second Amendment rights intact. We appreciate your loyalty and support. Stay tuned as we will be providing information on how you can help in this fight.

Aero Precision LLC, et al vs Robert W. Ferguson, Attorney General of Washington State

About Aero Precision

Aero Precision is a firearms manufacturer based out of Tacoma, WA. Aero Precision has been in business in Washington since 1994, originally starting in the Aerospace industry. Today, Aero Precision is the largest firearms manufacturer in Washington, employing roughly 650 employees in Washington and over 200 in other areas around the US. Aero Precision manufacturers AR Parts and Components, Bolt Action Rifles, Suppressors and more.

CNN Discovers, to its Horror, How Many New and Different People Have Been Buying Guns.

One in five US households bought a gun from March 2020 to March 2022, according to NORC at the University of Chicago, a nonpartisan research institution. One in 20 Americans purchased a gun for the first time during that period.

“I’m not sure the chaos is over, and I feel that a lot of people have guns and that it would be good to have,” said Shelby, echoing many Americans anxious about the uncertain state of the country. “I’m a single female. I live on my own. Why not protect myself?”

In fact, gun ownership rates among women and African Americans were rising before the health crisis, said Dr. Matt Miller, a professor of health sciences and epidemiology at Northeastern University who conducted a study with Harvard researcher Deborah Azrael.

“Sometime between 2016 and 2019, the new gun owners were more likely to be female and Black than prior to that and, whether it’s in response to feeling as though things are going out of control, the country is really divided, that’s a tempting speculation to make,” said Miller, referring to changing demographics among gun owners.

The Northeastern and Harvard study found that nearly 3% of US adults, or 7.5 million people, bought guns for the first time from January 2019 to April 2021. About half of the new gun owners were female, 20% were Black, and 20% were Hispanic. Overall, gun owners were 63% male and 73% White.

“The face of gun ownership is changing somewhat and the people who are becoming new gun owners today are less likely to be male and more likely to be non-White, more likely to be somewhat younger than existing and long-standing gun owners,” Miller said. …

Continue reading “”

I’ve seen similar in the past. When it looks, sounds and smells fraudulent, it usually is.

Biofire won’t send out guns to journalists for testing

Smart guns are a contentious topic, to say the least, but while many in the pro-gun camp have no use for them, it’s not because their existence is an infringement on the Second Amendment. Mandating them would be, but a company making them? No.

Biofire, however, says they have one and it’s on the market right now.

The guns aren’t in shooters’ hands as of yet, of course, but they’re coming and they’re taking deposits from those interested in the weapons.

Yet when a new gun comes to market, one of the first groups to get their hands on it are gun journalists. They get firearms for testing and evaluation, which involves a period of time where the writer basically puts the guns through their paces.

Guess what isn’t happening with Biofire?

But what you can’t do is shoot the thing before you plunk down your money, nor can nearly anyone else. Biofire is not allowing independent reviews of its new smart gun, at least not anytime soon.

“In the short term, we’re not doing that kind of thing yet. We’re trying to phase in our engagement with the public on this stuff,” Amy Jasper, Biofire’s communication director said Tuesday. “We’re hosting product demos on Zoom, interviews with the CEO, and then the next thing we’ll host are some onsite range days for folks in the firearm media – allowing folks to put a few rounds through it. After that, we’ll be able to send firearms out to do whatever you want with it. It’s a phased approach.”

Jasper said the company lacks the “capacity” to allow traditional firearm reviews, even though they’re already accepting downpayments for the pistol, which she said should start shipping during Q1 or Q2 of 2024.

For now, you have to take Biofire’s word that the smart gun’s “integrated fingerprint and 3D facial recognition systems” will work as advertised and unlock the pistol when it’s needed, especially in what Mas Ayoob called “the gravest extreme.”

And that’s troubling.

See, one of the biggest knocks on Biofire’s weapon is concern that it can’t be trusted to perform. Having an event where gun writers can squeeze off a few rounds isn’t the same as allowing them to test the guns through hundreds or thousands of rounds.

While they can learn how the trigger feels, how it feels during recoil, how it feels in the hand, and a number of other factors that would go into a buying decision, it won’t tell us anything about the technology’s reliability.

Remember that this is new, relatively unproven technology, and we’re supposed to just take their word that it works as advertised?

I’m sorry, but no.

I get their concern that they don’t have the capacity, but that’s also a matter of concern for me.

To me, it suggests that they haven’t really built more than a couple of the firearms already, which suggests they might not be capable of scaling up production so as to meet any demand.

Especially since sending out guns for testing with gun journalists is a longtime practice for pretty much any firearm company. It’s part of how a gun is marketed in the first place, for crying out loud. It’s where brands first start to develop trust with potential customers.

Biofire’s inability to do that isn’t the kind of thing that should give anyone a warm, fuzzy feeling.

At best, it’s evidence that Biofire doesn’t understand the industry it’s trying to get involved in. At worst, it’s evidence they made a crap product and are hoping no one figures it out until customers’ checks clear.

NSSF APPLAUDS MISSISSIPPI GOVERNOR SIGNING SECOND AMENDMENT FINANCIAL PRIVACY ACT

NSSF®, The Firearm Industry Trade Association, praises South Dakota’s Gov. Kristi Noem for signing an Executive Order prohibiting state agencies from entering into contracts with corporate banks that discriminate against the firearm industry.

Governor Noem’s order will prevent “woke” corporate banks with discriminatory policies against firearm industry members from collecting taxpayer dollars through South Dakota state contracts. Simply put, South Dakotans will choose to do business with those companies that do not discriminate based on an industry these corporate banks may not like or with which they disagree.

“Governor Noem’s Executive Order is a significant bulwark against the ‘woke’ discrimination that threatened firearm businesses in South Dakota,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “South Dakotan’s tax dollars will be protected from being used to fund gun control efforts by these corporate banks that benefit from state contracts while denying essential services to firearm-related business simply because they are politically-disfavored by Wall Street. Governor Noem’s order is clear. The Second Amendment isn’t for sale in South Dakota.”

Gov. Noem’s order will require corporate banks and financial service providers with $100 billion in total assets seeking contracts valued at $100,000 or greater to certify that they hold no discriminatory policies against firearm industry businesses. Contracts that are certified and later discovered to be out of compliance with the Executive Order will be subject to cancellation.

Three Huge Reasons Why Electric Vehicles Will Never Dominate American Roads

Here’s the most important fact about plug-in electric vehicles (EV), courtesy of the liberal content-creators at Wikipedia in the opening sentence of their post on “Government Incentives for Plug-in Electric Vehicles:”

Such incentives “have been established around the world to support policy-driven adoption of plug-in electric vehicles. These incentives mainly take the form of purchase rebates, tax exemptions and tax credits, and additional perks that range from access to bus lanes to waivers on fees (charging, parking, tolls, etc.).” [Emphasis added]

The campaign by the Western elite in the U.S. and Europe to force everybody else to stop driving cars and trucks powered by fossil-fueled internal combustion engines and adopt EVs instead is a product of the elite’s policy choices, not ours.

No matter that hundreds of millions of Americans own and depend upon their cars and trucks to earn their livings, go where they can purchase the basic necessities of life, and visit any place they choose to go to in this vast land.

President Biden has made a regulatory policy decision that half of all vehicles sold in America will be EVs by 2030. He is spending billions of tax dollars to install half a million EV charging stations around the country to serve the anticipated explosion in demand for electric “refills.”

And federal tax credits are available to help obscure the fact that EVs remain extremely costly for consumers and offer unproven maintenance and reliability records. No wonder that, despite the immense pressure being put upon consumers to buy EVs, they still only make up about seven percent of all new-vehicle purchases.

The fact that Ford, GM, Toyota, Honda, and the rest of the world’s automakers are rushing to offer EVs throughout their model lineups is a response to the government, not consumers.

In other words, the elites in government, media, academia, woke corporations, entertainment, and non-profit advocacy communities are doing everything they can to sell EVs, but the vast majority of Americans aren’t buying. That’s the first of three huge reasons EVs will never dominate American roads.

The second reason is seen in a recent analysis by John Eichberger, executive director of the Fuels Institute, a research group backed by a coalition of energy and transportation firms.

Continue reading “”

Applause.

Missouri officials refuse to work with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, saying all federal ‘so-called’ gun laws are unconstitutional

Missouri officials in one county have refused to work with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, or ATF, claiming that the government agency is unconstitutional.

Six top elected officials in Camden County signed a letter to the ATF saying as much, according to the NPR affiliate KCUR 89.3.

“Under the Anti-Commandeering Doctrine, Camden County was the first county in Missouri, and possibly in the country, to pass an ordinance prohibiting any county employee from assisting your unconstitutional agency in violating the rights of our citizens,” Ike Skelton, the county’s presiding commissioner, said in the letter.

The population of the county is roughly 43,700, according to the latest Census figures.

The officials cited the state’s Second Amendment Preservation Act as grounds to refuse to cooperate, KCUR reported. Last month, a federal judge struck down the 2021 law, which prohibited local police from enforcing federal gun laws, calling it “invalid, null, void, and of no effect.”

Two of Skelton’s colleagues — Jeff Green, a Camden County attorney, and Tony Helms, the county sheriff — and Kendra Hicks, the county treasurer, also signed the letter, KCUR reported.

Skelton, Helms, and Hicks did not immediately respond to Insider’s request for comment on Sunday.

Skelton told KCUR he and his fellow officials were in “lockstep with this thought process.”

“Any and all federal firearms laws, so-called laws, in my opinion, and many others’ opinion, are unconstitutional,” Skelton told KCUR.

The ATF was attempting to get zoning information to process applications for four individuals trying to open gun shops in the county, the outlet reported. John Ham, the public-information officer for the ATF’s Kansas City Field Division, told KCUR that the bureau is trying to help civilians open gun stores, not prevent them from doing so.

“We use that information to put people in business, not to take people out of business,” Ham told KCUR, adding that he had never seen a county refuse to provide such information, which is required to open new gun businesses.

Ham did not immediately respond to Insider’s request for comment.

In a comment to Insider, Erik Longnecker, the public-affairs deputy chief of the ATF, said: “ATF will continue to follow federal law when issuing licenses, regulating the firearms industry, and protecting our communities from violent gun crime.”

A Normal Supreme Court
I was invited to participate last Fall on a Wisconsin Law Review symposium panel on “Is the Court out of Control?,” and I wrote up a short (12-page) article for that. I thought I’d post it in several pieces; I hope some of you find it interesting, and I also still have time to make any corrections, if need be. Here’s the first part.

[* * *]

This Symposium panel asks, is the Court out of control?
I suppose the question is: Control by whom?

Continue reading “”

New Court Case Challenges Unconstitutional FFL Requirement to Sell Guns
Basing arguments on the recent Bruen court decision, a new court case in Pennsylvania challenges the entire concept of requiring an FFL to sell firearms.

A court case out of Pennsylvania is calling into question whether the law requiring those in the business of selling firearms to have a federal firearms license (FFL) is constitutional, considering the new criteria set down by the U.S. Supreme Court in last year’s New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen case.

And despite the fact that being in the business of selling firearms has required an FFL for as long as most of us can remember, any court faithfully applying the two-prong standard as prescribed in Bruen just might not see this one the government’s way.

The case revolves around Amish dairy farmer Reuben King from Lancaster, Pennsylvania, who has been charged with dealing in firearms without a license. According to court papers, agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) purchased five firearms from King at his farm between October 2019 and March 2020. After being sent a letter informing him that he couldn’t be selling firearms without a license, King sold four firearms to undercover state troopers in late 2021 and 2022. ATF later arrested King and confiscated 615 firearms.

Rather than arguing that King didn’t sell the firearms, King’s attorney, Joshua Prince, is instead arguing that King doesn’t need an FFL to sell guns because the FFL requirement itself is unconstitutional.

Continue reading “”