Category: Gun Rights

Bloomberg’s Posse is a Little Screwed

So the NRA has a fact sheet on Bloomberg’s posse calling themselves the Mayors Against Illegal Guns. In this fact sheet is a list of mayors who have quit that is pretty long. Under that is a list of people who are not actually mayors of the localities as the group advertises. I count 28 names under that section which is quite a few incorrectly added names to their member role sheet.

This list is very complete and even has a section for mayors in the group who were convicted of crimes. I must say if Bloomberg wants to use his deceptively named group to attack the NRA he better start an offensive quickly. The NRA is curb stomping them with facts, which we know anti-gunners have a hard time with. Then again I think Bloomberg’s biggest failure here was the name he selected for his group. Although it did help initial membership by claiming it was against illegal guns as the groups true purpose is exposed many mayors are leaving. Don’t deceive your base membership, they won’t like it.

The NRA certainly is doing a good job with the fact sheet alone and pointing out the futility of Bloomberg’s posse and their crusade against guns.

Shocking Story of the Day Gun Buybacks Don’t Stop Violence

I know the title of the article is already making you shit your pants in confused hysteria. Bear with me because this news comes from the child hating NRA but it looks legitimate. Studies have found out that gun buyback programs don’t actually stop violence.

Of course we in the gun community already figured this out because of one fact that crops up with this guy buyback programs:

“It’s highly unlikely that a person who would use guns for violence would turn them in,” said Gary Kleck, a Florida State University criminology professor who studies gun control.

Wait a minute you mean criminals not only will break the law but won’t turn in their tools when asked and given a cheap gift certificate? Truly shocking. Of course the local Sheriff chimed in:

Sheriff’s spokesman Dave Bristow concedes that would-be criminals are unlikely to surrender their guns. But he said the program might collect a gun that otherwise would one day be used in a crime.

“We’re trying to do something here that’s proactive,” he said. “Whether or not it works, how can you tell?”

So even he admits criminals probably won’t turn in guns, just law abiding citizens. And of course they are the ones we need to disarm after all because they may defend themselves. Of course he leaves a cop out in saying we can’t tell if it will work or not. But being Chicago has annual gun buybacks and one of the highest number of homicides in the country I think we can say pretty easily it doesn’t work. His further logic astounds me:

At a buyback event in May, the sheriff’s office collected 77 guns. Bristow said most of the guns were turned in by senior citizens. “Who’s to say that someone wouldn’t commit a burglary and steal that gun and then use it in a crime?” he said.

OK so you want people to turn in their guns because a criminal may steal them and use the stolen merchandise to commit a crime? In that case you should hold a car buyback program because some criminal may steal somebody’s car and use it as a getaway vehicle during the committing of a crime. If you have a burglary problem in your city maybe you should either work to stop that or let citizens take care of burglars themselves via their guns. Of course non-functional guns aren’t a threat but they get turned in:

A 2001 report on youth violence by the U.S. Surgeon General’s office says, “There is some evidence that most of the guns turned in are not functional and that most persons turning in guns have other guns at home.”

So really you aren’t getting functioning guns off of the street. After all why would somebody turn in a valuable gun for a pidley $50 to $100? Be we know gun buybacks aren’t about stopping violence at all but political imagery. Apparently we’re not the only ones:

Kleck said officials continue to hold buybacks because it allows them to look like they are reducing gun-related crime without angering people who support gun rights. “It’s a politically cost-free way of seeming to do something about the violence,” he said.

Yup it’s a method to show you’re doing something without actually doing anything. See hiring more police and having more patrols costs money. Giving out $50 to $100 per firearm costs relatively nothing in comparison. So what is the smart thing to do? Spend money on a solution or play security theatre? Well according to Manatee County in Florida the former.

No the NRA aren’t Bullying Children

Man you just have to love the mainstream media, you always know where they stand. I’m not sure if any of your heard but Florida has been looking into changing their state bird from the mockingbird. Well NRA board member Marion Hammer, a fan of the mockingbird, has been working hard to ensure things remain the same.

Likewise Florida let school children vote on a new bird. So the mainstream media is making it sound as if the NRA is not only directly fighting the change of the state bird but is also hating on children.

The problem is, as Sebastian on Snowflakes in Hell points out, neither accusation is true. See if you are member of an organization you can also do things independently of that organization. For instance I’m a member of the company I work at. According to the mainstream media that would imply my entire company is fighting for gun rights which isn’t true. See I’m working independently from the company that employs me. Just because one member of an organization does something doesn’t mean the entire organization is working with them.

Of course being the media is so anti-gun they love nothing more than making accusations against the big bad evil NRA who now also hate children.

Maybe Drunken Carrying is a Problem in New York

A few posts ago I mentioned Bloomberg was getting his knickers in a bunch over a non-issue, which is people drunkenly carrying firearms in New York. Well I found a good post on Snowflakes in Hell that adds legitimacy to Bloomberg’s hysterics.

William Powell is a 15 year veteran of the Queens (as in Brooklyn not Britain) police department. Well he was out and about off duty while drunkenly carrying a firearm which he accidentally shot off blowing a hold through his friend’s car. Of course guns don’t just go off unless you’re playing with them:

“He was wasted drunk,” said a source. “He said he was adjusting his gun and it went off.”

And here we’re always told police are the only ones responsible enough to carry a firearm. Some responsibility there.

The Truth About Bloomberg’s Posse

The truth is Bloomberg’s deceptively named group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, is just that deceptively named. I found a great story via the NRA ILA about one such mayor who was deceived.

Mayor Ernie Wiggins doesn’t remember signing up for the organization. He did sign up for their mailing list but didn’t remember actually lending his name to the organization:

“I’ll be honest when I say I don’t recall signing up for the coalition’s membership and obviously I didn’t realize what it was all about,” Wiggins said.

He said he originally signed up to be on the coalition’s e-mail list to follow its information, but did not agree to become a coalition member.

Additionally:

“Frankly, I don’t recall if I responded to the e-mails when they e-mailed to ask me if I wanted to continue to receive the e-mails,” Wiggins said. “All of a sudden I am a member of this organization, and frankly on the surface the organization sounds innocent, who’s not against illegal guns?”

That’s exactly the point I want people to realized. The name of the organization is far different than their mission. Having a group named Mayors Against Illegal Guns seems to imply the group is against just that, illegal guns. The problem is Bloomberg is using his group to attack guns in general regardless of legal status. I’m sure many members of the group don’t even realize this fact and that’s why we need to let them know.

And letting them know is key. Mayor Wiggins left due to request by rights minded citizens of the NRA:

“I do respect local people who are members of the National Rifle Association who have asked me to remove my name from the membership, and I have done so,” Wiggins said.

If we don’t let the listed members of that group know the truth behind the organization they’re supposedly members of they may never find out. It’s out job as activists to give information to other people, especially those who need it most.

Keep up the good work everybody, we’re slowly whittling away at Bloomberg’s posse. If we keep this up he won’t have enough rich elitists to put up any kind of real fight against the rights of American citizens.

Bloomberg Being Hysterically Stupid Again

Mayor Bloomberg is at his anti-gun rhetoric again. Snowflakes in Hell takes a look at Bloomberg’s accusation that carrying a gun while intoxicated is equally as dangerous as driving while intoxicated. From the blog:

Is it though? In 2006, 13,470 people were killed in alcohol related motor vehicle accidents. If you factor in other drugs, that number increases by about 7600 to 21,047. In 2006, there were a total of about 642 accidental deaths from guns. Even if you include intentional deaths from guns, that number only rises to the same level as the number of alcohol related traffic fatalities. That’s without even controlling for alcohol or other impairing substances being a factor. Clearly this is not as large a public safety issue.

Now I’m not advocating carrying a gun while drinking, in fact I’m against that exact act. But to compare drinking and driving which kills equally as many people as the total number of homicides with firearms each year to something that kills so few relatively is hysterics at best. This claim is being made in Mayor Bloomberg’s push to enact three new gun laws. The first of these is:

Carrying a licensed gun with a blood alcohol content above 0.08 percent — the legal limit for driving — would be punishable by a year in jail and a fine of up to $10,000.

I guess this would make some semblance of sense if people beyond the select elite few could actually carry guns in the state of New York. Remember New York state is a may issue state and New York city is unwilling to issue permits to almost anybody besides the politically well connected. Hence this really is a non-issue in New York city at the moment.

Possession of any ammunition that can piece cops’ bulletproof vests would be a felony carrying a minimum sentence of one year.

Let’s look at the law regarding the manufacturing of armor piercing ammunition shall we:

(a) It shall be unlawful –
…
(7) for any person to manufacture or import armor piercing
ammunition, unless –
(A) the manufacture of such ammunition is for the use of the
United States, any department or agency of the United States,
any State, or any department, agency, or political subdivision
of a State;
(B) the manufacture of such ammunition is for the purpose of
exportation; or
(C) the manufacture or importation of such ammunition is for
the purpose of testing or experimentation and has been
authorized by the Attorney General;

So really possession of armor piercing ammunition is also a non-issue since manufacturing it for civilians is a no-no. That means the armor piercing ammunition that is currently out there is the only armor piercing ammunition that will every be available in this country. Purchasing from a limited supply of something rare is exceedingly expensive, hence it’s self controlled. This law is bullshit being presented to build up fear among the populace that people are using armor piercing ammunition to kill police officers.

Knowingly putting a gun into the hands of a child would rise to a three-and-a-half-year minimum sentence.

Does this include a parent taking their child hunting or to the range while the child is under adult supervision? That’s a pretty big deal. Might want to mention an exception for that if it exists.

Another Bloomberg Posse Member Bites the Dust

Man good news abound today. From the NRA ILA I see Seattle’s anti-gun mayor Greg Nickels has lost in the primaries. That’s another Mayors Against Illegal Guns crony out of the picture. I have to say Bloomberg certainly picked a deceptive enough name for his organization but apparently common sense is winning out and gun abolishment isn’t a popular idea in this country.

Bloomberg’s Group Looses Another One

Good news from the NRA ILA. Mayor Marlene Anielski of Village of Walton Hills, Ohio has left the deceptively named Mayors Against Illegal Guns. Apparently she was unaware of the organizations true objective, to stop firearm ownership in America, and has resigned membership upon learning it. Furthermore she and her husband are both life members in the NRA.

Good on you Mayor Anielski for leaving the group. And good on both you and your husband for being life members in an organization that isn’t deceptive about what it does.

When Health Care Meets Firearm Registration

Britain has yet another trick up it’s sleeves to use against those few remaining gun owners in Britain. The British Medical Association wants to tag the health records of those few who have firearms in Britain. For those of you unaware there are means of owning a long gun or shotgun in Britain if you are willing to jump through enough hoops and the police OK you.

This latest pile of bullshit strives from the following:

Last August Bank Holiday Mr Foster killed his wife and 15-year-old daughter before setting fire to their home at Maesbrook, near Oswestry, and killing himself.

It emerged at the inquest into the deaths that Christopher Foster had been suffering from depression and had mentioned suicidal thoughts to his GP.

The British government wants it’s citizens completely disarmed, that’s apparent. They have abolished handguns and most long guns. The problem is there are some means of getting certain long guns. An easy way to do that is to link a gun registry system with a health care system.

See since Foster was suicidal this opens the door to say all gun owners are potential sufferers of depression and suicidal tendencies. After all anybody can become depressed at some point in their life. Likewise a suicidal person can decided to take some people with them. Guns are a method of doing it but so is blowing up your car, burning down your home after dousing it in kerosene, stabbing people to death, and even suffocating sleeping people with pillows. The point is there is no way you can take away all the potential weapons a murdering asshole can use.

The scariest part of this though is it puts doctors in a position to determine if you can continue owning your firearms. Think about it for a second. You have an anti-gun doctor and he sees you own firearms when he looks at your medical record. He knows all that needs to be done to take away your firearms is a call to the police saying you are suffering from depression. Instantly your firearm licenses are revoked. Similarly it’s not hard to say somebody is suffering from depression, anybody can be considered depressed.

Of course the anti-gun pricks in Britain love this idea. Just ask Chrissie Hall the spokesperson from Infer Trust a group that says to offer support for people affected by gun violence (which should be impossible in Britain since they have such strict gun laws and a complete ban on handguns and an almost complete ban on everything else):

Anything that makes life safer for individuals who live in a house where there is a weapon, Infer Trust would be keen to support.

Anything? ANYTHING? A-n-y-t-h-i-n-g? Well fuck they must be all for cutting off the hands and feet of everybody in Britain since punching and kicking is often used as a weapon, many times to kill. Knives are weapons so we should probably tag the medical records of anybody with a knife in the house. Large sticks can be used as weapons to, better tag the medical records of those who have trees in their lawn of any size. Cars to are used as weapons thats another tag to add to medical records.

Of course somebody has some common sense there yet. The mental health charity Mind doesn’t agree with this (not for all the right reasons but at least they aren’t agreeing):

Spokeswoman Katie Prior said: “The link between violence and mental health problems is often grossly exaggerated. Any tragedies that do occur are terrible, but it’s important to recognise that such cases are rare.”

She said people with mental health problems were extremely unlikely to be dangerous: “In fact, research shows that they are are more likely to be the victims of crime than the perpetrators.”

Wait what’s that most people with mental problems aren’t violent? They are more often the victims of crimes? No shit Sherlock. Most people who suffer from depression never commit suicide and of those who do very few of them try to take others with them.

Another problem is trying to link gun owners with mental illnesses. Claiming that medical records of gun owners need to be tagged because they could be depressed is akin to saying gun owners are a special breed of people who are more likely to be mentally fucked up.

Then you just have to love this statistic:

After the inquest into the deaths, Christopher Foster’s estranged brother, Andrew, spoke publicly about his relationship with his brother and the need for greater control over the issuing of gun licences.

He said he had done some research into the subject: “There are 27,000 licensed gun holders in West Mercia alone and 25% will be treated for depression.

“That means 6,500 gun holders are suffering from depression and yet there is no communication between doctors and the police for people who are feeling suicidal.”

I wonder what qualifies as research in his mind. Maybe he did some Google searches like the Violence Police Center is known to do. Either way without a source these numbers are beyond useless. But rest assured they will be cited.

Fuck the British government. Why the Hell the citizens didn’t revolt when the government started taking their arms is beyond me. The first step of a fascist government is to disarm the populace.