Tag: Gun Rights

Such Much for No Compromise

Gun Owners of America (GOA) like to tout the line that they’re the only “no compromise” gun rights organization in the United States. As far as I can tell their main reason for existence is to bitch and whine instead of doing real work. Likewise their whole idea of “no compromise” apparently only goes so far. As Snowflakes in Hell points out the head of GOA believes gun rights only extend to American citizens:

But Gun Owners of America Executive Director Larry Pratt says the state has every right to restrict conceal and carry permits to citizens.

“If the guy wants to enjoy the full benefit of residing in the United States become a citizen. He’s been here for 30 years what’s he waiting for?,” Pratt told FoxNews.com.

Pratt says the only reason the ACLU brought the suit is to pave the way for illegal aliens to have conceal carry permits.

“They want to make it so illegal aliens have the same rights as everybody else…every little bit chipping away,” he said.

The person in question here is Wayne Smith a man who legally immigrated here 30 years ago. He’s been here legally so I really can’t see how this case will allow illegal aliens to apply for carry permits but honestly I don’t believe anybody should need a permit to carry a gun regardless of who they are. Likewise I find it disgusting that Larry Pratt would be such a hypocrite by stating his organization is “no compromise” while he’s will make compromise on things such as making a justification on why we should need to beg the state of exercise our right to bear arms. Furthermore Mr. Smith has held a carry permit for years:

The lawsuit was filed this week on behalf of British national Wayne Smith, who legally immigrated 30 years ago, and for years was able to get a concealed license. In 2002, however, South Dakota amended the law, making U.S. citizenship a requirement to carry a concealed weapon. When Smith went to renew his long-held permit last July, he was denied because he is permanent legal resident, not a citizen.

Ironically the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is the organization who is bringing up the lawsuit against South Dakota. The ACLU doesn’t have a friendly history as far as the second amendment goes but even they’re less willing to compromise on the revocation of a person’s carry permit. What does that say about Mr. Pratt? Frankly I think it says he’s a prick in the highest form.

The Impossible is Back

The Armed Citizen blog is back online with all those impossible stories of people defensively using firearms. It looks like those fuckers over a Righthaven (who are also suing our local Minnesota gun forum) didn’t end up getting the domain name which is good news for us and bad news for the anti-gunners who claim firearms are seldom ever used for defensive purposes.

New Hampshire Doing it Right

It seems New Hampshire is working hard and ensuring they’re known as the free state. Today the new Legislature convened and one of the first things to go was the stupid ban on carrying weapons into the House floor. Now people entering the House floor may carry a firearm so long as it’s concealed (display is still banned).

I’m going to wait for the anti-gunners to claim there will be blood running through the House with the lift of this ban.

Blood in the Streets

Now that the Heller case has been concluded and firearms are no longer all but banned in Washington D.C. the homicide rate must be through the roof. Blood must be flowing through the streets with the increased number of firearms. People must be cowering in fear with all the violence that has occurred because of the Heller case.

Wait… what’s that? Oh homicide rates in Washington D.C. fell by 9% in 2010? I guess the anti-gunners were wrong yet again. It’s almost as though this is no correlation between gun control laws and homicide rates.

Criticize the TSA, Lose Your Gun

The Department of Child Molestation Transportation Security Administration (TSA) are assholes and everybody knows it. Not only do they molest you when you refuse to go through their DNA shredding scanners but they also offer no security.

Yet another pilot decided enough is enough and openly criticized the TSA and pointed out some honest issues with the department’s “security” measures. The pilot is one who actually increases security as he was permitted to carry a firearm in the cockpit of the plane. “Was” is the operative word through:

The 50-year-old pilot, who lives outside Sacramento, asked that neither he nor his airline be identified. He has worked for the airline for more than a decade and was deputized by the TSA to carry a gun in the cockpit.

He is also a helicopter test pilot in the Army Reserve and flew missions for the United Nations in Macedonia.

Three days after he posted a series of six video clips recorded with a cell phone camera at San Francisco International Airport, four federal air marshals and two sheriff’s deputies arrived at his house to confiscate his federally-issued firearm. The pilot recorded that event as well and provided all the video to News10.

And that’s not all. Not only was his federally issued firearm confiscated but so was his personal carry firearm and CCW license:

At the same time as the federal marshals took the pilot’s gun, a deputy sheriff asked him to surrender his state-issued permit to carry a concealed weapon.

A follow-up letter from the sheriff’s department said the CCW permit would be reevaluated following the outcome of the federal investigation.

Did I mention this happened in Commiefornia? Nope? Well I’m sure you derived that when you read the sheriff put the pilot’s carry permit on hold and demanded the forfeiture of his personal carry weapon. Let that be a lesson to you, when you criticize the benevolence of the government they will take your shit.

Canadian Gun Confiscation

Sadly Canada never managed to abolish its long gun registry and thus any firearm you own in that country is known the the government. Many people often ask what’s the harm in the government knowing what you have unless you have something to hide? The problem with gun registration is that it leads to confiscation every single time.

Take for instance the current kerfuffle in Canada. The Canadian government has reclassified the Norinco Type 97A and are trying to confiscate them (at least they’re willing to pay $1,400 per rifle but you don’t have a choice in whether or not you’re willing to sell the gun):

Several gun owners are refusing to surrender a semi-automatic rifle that was imported from China and bought legally before the RCMP retroactively declared it a prohibited weapon.

15 97A owners are taking the government to court over the reclassification. Of course Canada isn’t the only country that reclassifies firearms on a whim, recently our own ATF decided to reclassify pistol grip equipped shotguns without a stock. Thankfully we don’t have a long gun registry so the ATF’s only method of confiscation is to visit every gun store in the country, dig through all the stores’ 4473 forms, and try to classify whether or not each shotgun sold had a pistol grip without a stock. That’s still too easy for my comfort but at least it requires some semblance of work.

Violent Crime Trend

According to the anti-gunners an increase in the number of guns on the street means an increase in violent crime. Using their logic the violent crime rate should be increasing and more states have passed right to carry laws. Strangely enough the exact opposite has happened:

The FBI is reporting a similar message nationwide for the first six months of 2010. The agency says the nation saw a 6.2 percent decrease in the number of reported violent crimes and a 2.8 percent decrease in the number of reported property crimes compared to the first half of 2009.

It seems the increase number of guns on the street hasn’t caused an increase in violent crime… interesting.

ATF Looking for Emergency Powers

Two phrase when combined scare the shit out of me; emergency powers and federal government. The ATF is look for emergency powers:

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has proposed that it be given emergency authority for six months, beginning January 5, to require about 8,500 firearms dealers along the border with Mexico “to alert authorities when they sell within five consecutive business days two or more semiautomatic rifles greater than .22 caliber with detachable magazines.” A Washington Post story reporting on the BATFE proposal described that definition as being applicable to “so-called assault weapons,” but it would also apply to many rifles that have never been labeled with that term.

The funny thing about emergency powers for federal agencies is the fact those temporary powers have a habit of becoming permanent. Likewise the number of guns going from the United States into Mexico isn’t that high. Why would drug cartels pay full price for semi-automatic rifles when they can get fully automatic AK-47s from neighbors to the south for far less? Of course the ATF has never been one to use logic nor common sense when doing anything.

I do find the last line interesting. If they’re claiming the emergency powers would only apply to “assault weapons” why not use that legalese instead of trying to term any semi-automatic rifle with a detachable magazine as an “assault rifle?”

Mexican Gun Canard Strikes Again

The Washington Post has yet another article about all the evil scary guns being trafficked across the United States border into Mexico. The problem is the problem, it’s not really what they claim it is:

To back up its assertion that the U.S. is the source of most of Mexico’s guns (“statistics . . . show that 80 to 90 percent of the weapons seized in Mexico are first sold in the United States”), the Post cites the claim that “Federal authorities say that more than 60,000 U.S. guns of all types have been recovered in Mexico in the past four years.” This is a wild exaggeration. The Post is referring to an oft-cited U.S. Government Accountability Office study which shows that, of the guns seized in Mexico and given to the ATF for tracing from 2004 through 2008, approximately 87 percent originated in the U.S.

But this number says nothing about the percentage of guns seized in Mexico that originated in the U.S., because the U.S. does not trace – because they are not of U.S. origin, and so are not submitted by Mexican authorities to the U.S. for tracing – the majority of guns seized in Mexico. According to the GAO, the number of guns seized in Mexico that have been traced back to the U.S. has ranged from 5,260 in 2005 to 1,950 in 2006 to 3,060 in 2007 to 6,700 in 2008. That is a total of about 17,000, nowhere close to 60,000.

Oh, I’m sorry did your bullshit get discredited again Mr. Anti-Gunner? We in the gun rights community seem to be making a habit of that. Then again if you didn’t lie you’d have no leg to stand on so I guess I see why you’re doing it (It’s because you’re assholes isn’t it?).

But They’ll Just Take Your Gun and Shoot You

The anti-gunners parrot it again and again, “If you carry a gun an attacker will just take it and use it against you.” They refuse to understand that such an event is rare and scenarios such as this are far more likely:

As they were trying to tie up the store owner, the 52-year-old took out a handgun from his waistband and fatally shot one of the suspects, Smith said. The store owner then grabbed a shotgun and shot and killed the two other suspects in the ensuring gunbattle, Smith said.

Well one man successfully defending his store from three thugs usually isn’t that common, the store owner was obviously exceptionally high on the awesome scale. What is more common are stories of people successfully using firearms to defend themselves than stories about criminals who taking somebody’s gun and shoot them with it.