Category: Gun Rights

No Mr. Biden, the “Assault Weapon” Ban Didn’t Reduce the Number of Killed Police Officers

Another day, another lie by a politician. Mr. Biden, who some believe holds some kind of power, put his foot in his mouth by claiming more police officers were killed after the original “assault weapon” ban was lifted:

“There were fewer police being murdered, fewer police being outgunned when the assault weapons ban, in fact, was in existence,” Biden said.

Except such things weren’t in existence :

Well the ban went into effect in 1994. It expired in 2004. But last year — eight years after the ban expired — was actually the second safest year for police officers in America since the early 1960s. The safest year since the early 1960s was 2009 — also well after the assault weapons ban expired. The 2001 terrorist attacks were of course an anomaly. There was also an isolated spike in 2007. But as you can see from the graph below, on-the-job police officer fatalities have been in steady decline since the late 1970s. The assault weapons ban doesn’t appear to have affected the trend either way.

Nothing about this is surprising. Biden is a politician and therefore a likely liar and rifles are seldom used to commit murder.

The Appropriate Response to Gun “Buybacks”

Zerg539 sent me another great story via Twitter. The Seattle Police Department decided to setup its first gun “buyback” in 20 years. I put the phrase buyback in quotation marks because the name is an exercise in Orwellian doublespeak. Buying something back implies you originally owned it but, with the exception of some police surplus guns, the Seattle Police Department never owned the firearms they’re trying to buy. Therefore calling it a gun buyback is incorrect, it’s really a gun acquisition. Thankfully local gun owners decided two could play at that game:

Police officers in Seattle, Washington held their first gun buyback program in 20 years this weekend, underneath interstate 5, and soon found that private gun collectors were working the large crowd as little makeshift gun shows began dotting the parking lot and sidewalks. Some even had “cash for guns” signs prominently displayed.

Police stood in awe as gun enthusiasts and collectors waved wads of cash for the guns being held by those standing in line for the buyback program.
People that had arrived to trade in their weapons for $100 or $200 BuyBack gift cards($100 for handguns, shotguns and rifles, and $200 for assault weapons) soon realized that gun collectors were there and paying top dollar for collectible firearms. So, as the line for the chump cards got longer and longer people began to jump ship and head over to the dealers.

This is the appropriate response to gun buyback programs. State operated gun “buyback” programs are an exercise in using tax money to purchase firearms from unsuspecting individuals (the programs primarily target criminals who want to dispose of crime guns, since the police outright state that no attempt to trace the firearms will be made and that the firearms are destroyed, and those who inherited firearms and are ignorant of their true value). The best way to demonstrate the state’s attempt to rip off gun owners is to offer a better price for firearms. If the state says they’ll give $200 for “assault rifles” you need only offer a little more than $200, unless the rifle is scrap metal, in which case you let the state buy it. I’m glad to see the act of gun owners swarming state “buybacks” continues to increase in popularity.

Perhaps It’s Time Gun Companies Started Their Own Bank

It appears that the gun control advocates have found a new way to strike at gun stores. Several gun stores have noted trouble processing credit card transactions. Early last year Bank of America caused some headaches for firearms manufacturer McMillian:

Bank of America is alleged to have advised McMillan Fiberglass Stocks that, because it now manufactures firearms, its business is no longer welcome. The bank has denied the allegation. It’s quickly becoming a case of “he said/he said,” with some gun owners expressing skepticism, others accepting the report as true.

Last week a Tennessee gun dealer said they were also having problems with their credit card processor:

A Williamson County gun dealer recently learned a credit card processing company no longer wants to do business with him.

“We go through all the hoops and all the steps and at the end of the day it’s still a struggle to get the same services anybody else would,” said Nick McMillan.

Whether these previous issues have been due to pressure from gun control groups is unknown but Rahm Emanuel, the new kind of Chicago, is openly urging banks to cease doing business with members of the firearms industry:

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, moving to take a lead role in the gun control debate, is turning up the pressure on banks that do business with firearms manufacturers.

Emanuel is sending letters to two major financial institutions, TD Bank and Bank of America, which offer lines of credit to gun makers suggesting that they stop lending money to the manufacturers if they don’t come out for new gun restrictions.

“TD Bank currently aids the gun manufacturing industry through a $60 million revolving line of credit with Smith & Wesson, a gun manufacturer that produces the AR-15 — an assault weapon that was used by James Holmes to kill 12 people and wound 58 in a crowded movie theatre in Aurora,” Emanuel’s missive to TD CEO Bharat Masrani states. “I ask you to use your influence to push this company to find common ground with the vast majority of Americans who support a military weapons and ammunition ban and comprehensive background checks.”

Perhaps it’s time for the firearms industry to create a mutual aid organization specifically aimed at providing financial assistance to fellows in the firearms industry. If you read about the history of mutual aid you’ll learn that groups that were unable to get financial assistances from established banks would pool their resources for the purpose of creating their own system of financial assistance. The state has very strong ties with the banking industry and those ties are a weak point between the firearms industry and capital loans. Rahm is trying to exploit these ties now and it would be wise for firearms manufacturers to create a backup plan. The less dependent the firearms industry is one state control industries the better.

Feinstein’s Gun Control Legislation

The text of Feinstein’s new “assault weapon” ban is now available. I’ve only had time to skim it but some things to note is that the number of “military features” required to label a semi-automatic rifle an “assault weapon” has been reduced from the 1994’s two to one. There is also a very lengthy list of named firearms that will be prohibited and the law would require specific storage regulations for grandfathered “assault weapons.” Overall it’s a tyrants dream is probably isn’t passable in its current form. With that said the bill is likely a launching point for negotiation. In other words it’s supposed to be a bill that’s so heinous gun rights advocates will come begging for some additional freedom at the expense of others.

Not Exactly the Million Mom March

This weekend gun control advocates had their little match on Washington DC. Most news organizations seem tight lipped regarding the number of people who participated in the march but it doesn’t seem like it garnered much support:

Thousands of people have rallied in Washington DC calling for stricter gun controls as they marched from the Capitol to the Washington Monument.

Gun control advocates were only able to get thousands of attendees? That’s rather, well, pathetic. Here in Minnesota we had roughly 1,200 gun rights advocates march on the state Captiol on a cold windy winter day. It seems that gun control isn’t nearly as popular as it once was, which is good to see.

How We Got Here

Feinstein introduced here new pet gun control bill, New York passed one of the most draconian gun control bills in the country, several gun control bills are being introduced in Maine, and the rest of the country seems to be following suit. One must ask how we, as gun owners, came to this point. Isn’t the right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Constitution? Isn’t self-defense the right of all sentient beings? Don’t gun control laws go against the idea that the United States is a land of laws? How did we get here?

We got here through obedience. When the state said they were going to mandate gun owners register certain firearms gun owners threw up a bit of a fuss but ultimately registered those firearms. When the state said it was going to completely prohibit the transfer of any machine guns not registered by May 19, 1986 gun owners throw up a bit of a fuss but ultimately ceased transferring machine guns registered after the cutoff date. When the state said it was going to prohibit the sale of newly manufactured magazines holding more than 10 rounds to civilians gun owners threw up a bit of a fuss but ultimately stopped selling newly manufactured magazines holding more than 10 rounds to civilians.

The reason we’re here today is because gun owners of the past have rolled over and complied with proposed gun control laws. When the first gun control law was passed in this country gun owners should have began an active campaign of civil disobedience to make it known that no gun control laws would be respected. Sadly a precedence was set when gun owners complied with the first, second, third, and every other gun control law that has been passed in this country. Now we’re at a point where gun control laws not only have legal precedence but are socially acceptable by a vast majority of the populace. What makes matters worse is that it’s happening all over again. Gun owners have responded to the above mentioned gun control proposals by marching to state capitols, giving speeches about the importance of gun rights, holding gun rights rallies where they urge everybody to contact politicians and beg them to oppose any new gun control legislation, and offered no sign that they will actively resist any new gun control laws. Compliance is the problem because so long as gun owners are willing to comply with new gun control laws the state will continue to pass and enforce them.

Once again I urge gun owners to consider civil disobedience instead of compliance. So long as gun owners are compliant they will find more and more of their guns, ammunition, and firearm accessories seized by the state. If you want to see the logical conclusion of compliance you need only look at Britain.

Not Helping

As usual Ann Coulter, psychotic neocon (but I repeat myself) extraordinaire, isn’t helping:

Ann Coulter is insisting that guns don’t kill people, non-white people kill people.

The conservative columnist on Monday told Fox News host Sean Hannity that the country had a “demographic problem” because “white populations” in the U.S. and Belgium had the same low murder rate.

“As you know, I just got back from England,” Coulter explained. “On the gun crimes, we keep hearing how low they are in Europe and, ‘Oh, they’re so low and they have no guns.’ If you compare white populations, we have the same murder rate as Belgium.”

“So, perhaps, it’s not a gun problem, it is a demographic problem, which liberals are the one are pushing, pushing, pushing, ‘Let’s add more [African-American mass murderer] Colin Fergusons and more whoever the [Muslim] guy was who shot up Fort Hood.’ Why are they coming in to begin with?”

Even though gun control has its roots in racism I think it would be wise to divorce the topic of gun control from race. Coulter’s attempt to blame demographics is absurd. Self-defense isn’t about race, religion, or gender. Everybody has the right to defend themselves.

Shootings Seem to be Rampent in Gun-Free Zones

Another shooting happened in another so-called gun-free zone:

Three people were injured as gunfire rang out during an argument at a college in the US state of Texas, say police.

A sheriff’s official said both people involved in the altercation at Lone Star College in the Houston area were wounded and taken to hospital.

A college maintenance man was also injured in the cross-fire.

These events seems to be happening with great frequency as of late. If I were a more paranoid individual I’d swear the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) decided to expand their program to arm dangerous individuals by giving firearms to violent individuals outside of the Mexican drug cartels. In all seriousness though I find it telling that these events continue to occur in state labeled gun-free zones.

The Gun Control Advocates Make Their Move Thursday

It looks like Thursday is the day the gun control advocates in Washington DC are planning to make their move:

Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s office confirmed that she will be introducing in the Senate Thursday a new version of the so-called assault weapon ban. A spokesman said the full text will be released at a press conference on Thursday.

I’m sure the legislation will make for entertaining reading material. In all likelihood Feinstein is planning to go full fascist and declare as many firearms as she thinks she can get away with as verboten devices. Until I read the text of the bill I won’t have much more to say regarding this issue.

The Root of Gun Control

Something many gun control advocates are ignorant of is the root of gun control, which is racist in nature. Early gun control laws were enacted to prevent newly freed slaves from acquiring arms and fighting against aggression from organizations like the Ku Klux Klan. These laws persisted into the mid 20th century and prevented Martin Luther Kind Jr. from acquiring a carry permit:

A recipient of constant death threats, King had armed supporters take turns guarding his home and family. He had good reason to fear that the Klan in Alabama was targeting him for assassination.

William Worthy, a journalist who covered the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, reported that once, during a visit to King’s parsonage, he went to sit down on an armchair in the living room and, to his surprise, almost sat on a loaded gun. Glenn Smiley, an adviser to King, described King’s home as “an arsenal.”

As I found researching my new book, Gunfight, in 1956, after King’s house was bombed, King applied for a concealed carry permit in Alabama. The local police had discretion to determine who was a suitable person to carry firearms. King, a clergyman whose life was threatened daily, surely met the requirements of the law, but he was rejected nevertheless. At the time, the police used any wiggle room in the law to discriminate against African Americans.

At least we can give gun control advocates some credit for overcoming their racist history and finally advocating equal punishment for all individuals. Sadly what they advocate, disarming non-state entities, prevented and, if they have their way, will continue to prevent people such as Martin Luther King Jr. from obtaining the proper means to defend themselves.