Chronicling the depravities of the State.
I have some good news to report for a change. High Bridge Arms, whom I mentioned yesterday, was granted their conditional use permit and can continue selling firearms in San Francisco as soon as November.
Thanks goes to Say Uncle for providing this information.
I’ve mentioned governor candidate Tom Emmers on here several times so far but have spoken little about his main opponent Mark Dayton.
Well it’s about time I got off of my lazy ass and posted some information on Dayton when it comes to the right to keep and bear arms. During a debate Emmers asked Dayton about his National Rifle Association (NRA) ‘F’ rating:
Tom Emmer: I do. I do. Ah, Senator Dayton you talk about deathbed conversions. Ive explained why I do the things I do. Ah, if you could just explain to me and everybody else here in the state of Minnesota, how is it that you can have an F rating from the NRA and you can sit up here and tell us that you’re gonna defend sportsmen’s rights, you’re gonna defend my right and my children’s right to hunt and fish in this state when you got an F from the NRA? Have you had one of your own ah, deathbed conversions? Well, we wont call it deathbed, but one of your own conversions that you’re sharing with us today?
Fair enough question. Dayton attempting to be a master of spin decided to make the following rebuttal:
Mark Dayton: Well, I had a D rating from the NRA in 1982 when I ran for the Senate. I had a two- an A rating in 2000. There were two principal votes you can look em up ah, when I was a Senator. One was ah, banning Cop Killer bullets. And, ah, one reason that I have the endorsement of the Minneapolis Police and Peace Officers Association, Representative, is because I respect the law enforcement men and women. I was on a ride-along last week to, as Ive been several times with a police officer in St. Paul. And those guys wear bulletproof vests every time they go out there. Men and women. And anybody who wants to go out there and see them put their lives on the line to protect us.
Dayton claims that he received his ‘F’ rating because he voted for a ban on “cop-killer bullets.” The funny thing is there is no such thing as “cop-killer bullets” do I did some digging. Since I’m willing to put a tremendous amount of work into avoid work I found somebody else who already did the digging for me. On the Let Freedom Ring site a great post was written going over what Dayton actually voted on to receive his ‘F’ rating.
He voted for an amendment to the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act presented by the late Ted Kennedy. The amendment would have given the Attorney General the right to ban rifle ammunition he considered armor piercing:
SEC. 5. ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION.
(a) EXPANSION OF DEFINITION OF ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION.–Section 921(a)(17)(B) of title 18, United States Code, is amended–
(1) in clause (i), by striking “or” at the end;
(2) in clause (ii), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
“(iii) a projectile that may be used in a handgun and that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be capable of penetrating body armor; or
“(iv) a projectile for a centerfire rifle, designed or marketed as having armor piercing capability, that the Attorney General determines, pursuant to section 926(d), to be more likely to penetrate body armor than standard ammunition of the same caliber.”.
In summary if the Attorney General determines a rifle cartridge to be more likely to penetrate body armor than “standard ammunition” he could label it armor piercing and make it a prohibited. That’s a damned side different than banning “cop-killer bullets.”
I did some additional searching to see what else came up and I found a few interesting things. Apparently at one time he was against registration but later was for some registration and licensing (namely of handguns). He also voted against legislation that would protect firearm manufacturers from lawsuits placed against them claiming said manufacturers are responsible for gun violence (kind of like suing an automobile manufacturer because somebody killed another person will driving under the influence).
Finally Dayton is for laws that prohibit firearms the possession of firearms within 1,000 feet of school property. Anybody who’s read this site or any other gun blog for any length of time knows that “gun-free zones” are ineffective and should be renamed “defenseless easy prey zones.” There is a reason many mass shootings occur on school grounds, the attackers know everybody there is unarmed and therefore easy prey.
Mark Dayton isn’t good on guns. He’s stated he owns firearms and is pro-hunting but hasn’t made any statement (that I’ve found) about being pro-self-defense, pro-right to carry, or in favor of castle doctrine (which his main opponent Tom Emmers is in favor of). I guess that’s yet another reason I won’t be voting for him.
High Bridge Arms is the only gun store left in hippie central known as San Francisco. For five decades they’ve sold guns at their location but now, seeing an opportunity, a few people from the neighborhood are doing everything they can to deny the owner’s permit renewal (in San Francisco apparently you need a permit to sell firearms, who would have guessed). There’s a hearing today on whether or not the permit will be renewed but I just have to roll my eyes at a few of the comments made by those interviewed:
“We just want to see something in that space the neighborhood could use,” Ross said. “A dry cleaners, a restaurant, a bar. We’d take anything where people go to be part of a community.”
Being High Bridge Arms has been in business for five decades it seems the neighborhood is finding plenty of use for the store. You want a place where people can be part of a community? Try a gun store. The clientele at gun stores are generally part of the gun owner and shooting community. What community do people going to a dry cleaner or a restaurant belong to? You also have to love the fact that those who oppose the store are cowards unwilling to talk:
“I’ve never had anyone who opposed our shop walk in and introduce themselves to me,” he said. “It’s not like I’m doing something morally objectionable or unconstitutional.”
If you don’t like how the shop is being run maybe you should go in and have a chat with the owner. Wait I forgot we’re talking about Hippyville where the only thing those concerned have against the store is the fact that they cell firearms. Here’s some more ignorance:
“Aside from being opposed to a gun store, we don’t really think a gun store supports the neighborhood,” she said. “Now we finally have an opportunity to say guns don’t belong in the neighborhood. He can do it, there’s no doubt. But it would be nice for him not to be there anymore.”
It doesn’t support the neighborhood? Really? I didn’t realize the owner was delinquent on his taxes. Actually now that I think about it this story isn’t about problems with the tax collectors so it seems the owner is paying taxes, which support the neighborhood. The shop also provides jobs and apparently drums up enough customers to stay in business for half a century. What more can you ask for? I guarantee you that no other business that moves in there is going to do anything else to support the neighborhood.
I would also argue that guns belong in every community. How else are you doing to defend yourself? Oh that’s right you’re local police department have magical teleportation devices that allow them to respond instantly to a call about a breaking and entering.
You also have to appreciate the underhanded insult. “He can do it, there’s no doubt. But it would be nice for him not to be there anymore” roughly translates into, “I have an irrational hatred of guns and therefore I fucking hate the owner of that store and wish him dead. He can do what he wants but if it were up to me I’d nail him to a damned cross and murder his friends and family!” Hm, my translator seems to have fritzed out at the very end there but that’s basically what is being said.
The National Rifle Association (NRA) are challenging the ban on 18-20 year olds being prohibited from purchasing handguns from a federally licensed dealer:
The NRA is challenging federal laws that prohibit law-abiding Americans eighteen through twenty years of age from legally purchasing a handgun through a federally licensed firearm dealer. The case was filed Tuesday evening in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas Lubbock Division. James D’Cruz of Lubbock, TX is the plaintiff in this case.
Good on them. I’ve always found some things odd in this country. Take for example being an adult, in this country you are legally considered an adult at 18 years of age. Alas being an adult doesn’t mean you’re quite ready to be treated as such. In most states you can’t legally purchase or consume alcohol until you’re 21 and you are prohibited from purchasing a handgun from a federally licensed dealer until you reach the same age.
Strangely enough when you turn 18 you’re old enough to join the military where they often issue you handguns. Hell, at 18 you’re old enough to join the civilian police force who are issued handguns as well. Yet, even if you join military or a police force, you still can not legally go to a gun shop and purchase a handgun until you reached 21 years of age. Doesn’t make much sense does it?
I’m glad to see the NRA challenging this one.
Glorious news denizens of Chicago! The High Priest Douche Bag himself, Mayor “Dumb Fuck” Daley, isn’t going to run for re-election. Daley has been an outspoken opponent to civil rights from day one and had done everything in his power to keep the people of his city disarmed (except for the criminals of course). Well it seems he’s going to end is own reign of terror over the city leaving the door open for another contender.
Make sure you pick somebody who isn’t a complete fuckwit.
Australia is going for the gold today as they’ve landed on this site’s front page twice. New laws are being pushed in Australia that will require toy guns be licensed as real ones. Oh, and because there is no limited to stupidity this law will also involved other things:
The proposed changes will also impose restrictions on the ownership of laser pointers, tougher penalties for selling items such as crossbows, bullet proof vests and knuckledusters without the appropriate licence, and stricter rules on firearm storage. In certain circumstances, religion will be a lawful excuse for carrying a knife and police who take their service-issue firearms home will be exempted.
Be careful with those dangerous laser pointers, you could put somebody’s eye out with it. We also must appreciate that the police are like you and me only better so they are exempt from this legislation.
Well it appears the open-carry ban and long-gun registration bills were finally killed and buried in California. Good work California gun owners at working to keep what little rights you have remaining.
I was really curious though how that state was planning on paying for a long-gun registry when they don’t have any money. That would have made for some interesting logistics.
Via to the NRA-ILA I learned that the California Senate voted down the open carry ban. Of course the vote missed the majority needed by one and this is only a temporary victory:
Monday’s 20-16 vote fell one short of the majority needed, but the Senate will reconsider the measure Tuesday.
I very liberal friend sent me this article. It’s titled Why Liberals Should Love the Second Amendment and goes through five basic reasons why self-proscribed liberals should fight for the second amendment.
Basically it boils down to the fact that liberals like to think of themselves as the ones who fight for civil rights and the right to keep and bear arms should be treated equally to every other right. It also presents to good counter arguments to the standard anti-gun rhetoric often spewed. I think it’s a really good read for liberals for obvious reasons and a good read for conservatives because it gives good argument points. It also shows that gun rights is not a single partisan issue.
I mentioned that the Minnesota Legislators had a rather misleading gun related question on their questionnaire at the State Fair this year. I went to the State Fair yesterday and just thought I’d have you some time. The questionnaire is located in the back of the Education Building (if you take a right when entering the fair through the Snelling Avenue entrance it’s something like the second or third building). It’s pretty easy to spot since it’s on the center of the back wall with a big sign that says Minnesota Representatives or something along those lines.
Anyways have fun at the fair and remember to take a few minutes to find that questionnaire and fill it out.