Georgia Rustled a Lot of Jimmies With Its New Gun Rights Bill

Nathan Deal, the governor of Georgia, recently signs a pretty sweeping gun rights bill:

Gov. Nathan Deal signed legislation today that would vastly expand where Georgians can legally carry firearms, a proposal that has drawn heaps of praise and scorn from outside groups.

“People who follow the rules can protect themselves and their families from people who don’t follow the rules,” said Deal, adding: “The Second Amendment should never be an afterthought. It should reside at the forefronts of our minds.”

It’s nice to see the people of Georgia have better legal options available for their self-defense. But what’s really entertaining about the signing of this bill are the number of anti-gunner jimmies that it rustled. Let’s start with Warren Summers, the chief of police of Norcross, Georgia:

Picture this: It’s a pleasant summer day. The kids are out of school, and you’ve decided to take them to the local park. You’re sitting on a park bench in the shade, watching them play, when you suddenly notice a man dressed in a heavy winter coat approaching the playground.

As he scurries past you, you notice a handgun strapped around his waistband. Alarmed? You should be. Who is this man, and why is he armed at your children’s playground? Concerned enough to call the local police?

I find it ironic that a police officer is trying to make people who carry handguns near schools sound sinister. That’s exactly what cops do. Most of us who live in larger metropolitan areas don’t know the cops personally so we don’t know if they are level-headed individuals or violent psychopaths. If you’re concerned about a stranger without a badge carrying a gun near a school then you should be equally worried about a stranger with a gun and a badge carrying a gun near a school. Or you could be a sensible human being and realize that a vast majority of us are nonviolent so assuming every stranger you see is maleficent is a pretty paranoid attitude.

Slate, always a great source of hysterics, took it’s usually sarcastic tone when discussing the signing of the bill:

The problem in Georgia isn’t that you can’t own a gun. The problem, you see, is that once you do own a gun you can’t take it absolutely everywhere you want to. But what to do about those pesky restrictions on where you can, and cannot, pack heat? Problem solved. On Wednesday, Georgia Governor Nathan Deal signed a bill that doesn’t cramp gun owners’ gun-toting style so much by vastly expanding where firearms can be legally carried in the state.

That actually was a problem and will remain a problem as the bill didn’t eliminate all gun-free zones. ThinkProgress (can you tell I was searching through well-known anti-gun websites for blog fodder) almost disappointed me but then redeemed itself in the last paragraph:

The provision authorizing guns in bars is especially likely to result in an uptick of violence. According to Washington State University Sociology Professor Jennifer Schwartz, “40% of male [homicide] offenders were drinking alcohol at the time” of their offense, and about one in three female offenders were also drinking.

Let me first point out that Minnesota allows permit holder to carry firearms into bars. You can even legally have a drink so long as your blood alcohol level stays below .04%. Guess what? Our state’s bars haven’t turned into murder zones. In fact permit holders in this state committing murder or manslaughter is only .542 per 100,000 versus 1.78 per 100,000 of the general population. So the concern that allowing permit holder to carry in bars will cause an increase in violence is nothing more than fear mongering. I also applaud ThinkProgress for including a link to a totally irrelevant study. 40% of male homicide offenders may have been drinking but that doesn’t mean they were permit holders, drinking at a bar, or otherwise fall in the demographics that ThinkProgress is trying to demonize.

My next stop in the search for rustled jimmies was Salon. Unlike ThinkProgress, Salon delivered up front:

This probably won’t come as news to Salon’s readers in the state of Georgia, but it turns out it’s way, way, way too hard in the Peach State for one to procure and go everywhere with a gun. So the state Legislature, keeping its eyes firmly fixed on the real issues that matter, is on the verge of remedying this grave injustice by eliminating seemingly every single law regulating firearms in Georgia (which, considering this is Georgia, might not be quite as much work as it seems).

So much impotent sarcasm. We can see that the mere fact that Georgia tends to lean towards gun rights really upsets the staff at Salon. But the real gold was found towards the end:

As if all of that weren’t enough, MoJo reports that the bill would also so broaden the state’s SYG regulations that even a person using a gun he does not legally hold would be allowed to claim a SYG defense.

Oh. My. God. This bill enables people to use whatever tool they have at hand, regardless of whether or not they legally hold it, to defend their life? What a travesty! How dare somebody be allowed to legally defend themselves with something they don’t legally hold! Seriously, that paragraph was probably the best find in my search for rustled jimmies. It packs so much stupidity into such a small paragraph.

I really enjoy it when pro-gun rights legislation passes because it really, really upsets people who think everybody has a moral duty to die at the hands of a violent criminal instead of defending themselves. When somebody subscribes to such a cockamamie idea I relish seeing them not get what they want.

Michael Bloomberg Really is Arrogant

Michael Bloomberg has always been a power-hungry tyrant but his acts could always be written off with the standard “trying to do the right thing” schtick. But a an article about Michael Bloomberg’s continuing push for gun control his arrogance really showed:

Pointing to his work on gun safety, obesity and smoking cessation, he said with a grin: “I am telling you if there is a God, when I get to heaven I’m not stopping to be interviewed. I am heading straight in. I have earned my place in heaven. It’s not even close.”

I may not be the more educated man when it comes to Christianity but most of the people I know who identify as Christians don’t believe that they will be fast tracked into Heaven. Usually they state something along the lines of “When I die I will be judged by God. I only hope that I lived a life worthy of entering his kingdom.”

Mind you this doesn’t surprise me. The man is obviously a tyrant who believes he alone knows what is best for everybody else. But most tyrants are smart enough to keep their arrogance somewhat low-key.

As for his push for more gun control, whatever. He managed to rule New York City with an iron fist and an overtly violent police force. But his track record on pushing for gun control elsewhere has been lackluster. I don’t see him being able to single-handedly overcome the entire gun rights movement. After all, pride goeth before the fall.

California Senator Who Fought for Gun Control Charged with Conspiracy to Traffic Arms

Well this is an interesting story:

California state Sen. Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) — one of the state’s strongest advocates for gun control — was arrested Wednesday on charges that include scheming to defraud citizens of honest services and conspiracy to illegally traffic firearms.

[…]

Yee was reportedly at least $70,000 in debt following his defeat in the mayor’s race, and needed to settle his accounts to run for California secretary of state in 2014. To do so, Yee agreed to perform “certain official acts” for an undercover FBI agent in exchange for donations, according to the affidavit.

During one exchange, Jackson and Yee arranged a meeting between the FBI agent and an illegal arms dealer to organize the sale of a large number of weapons to be imported through the Port of Newark in New Jersey, the affidavit said. Yee discussed details about the weapons during the meeting, according to the document.

I believe Mr. Yee’s mistake in this matter was attempting to enter the arms black market. We know that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) is the game in town for illegal arms trafficking. It wouldn’t surprise me if Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) was simply doing a favor for the FBI by going after Yee.

This story is reminiscent of those stories of neoconservatives men who fought tooth and nail against legalized same-sex marriages getting caught having sex with another man. Based on his voting record it appears that Yee thinks nongovernmental individuals are incapable of owning firearms so he decided to traffic arms to, what he believed to be, nongovernmental individuals.

As Yee is a member of the oligarchy I doubt much will happen to him. He’ll probably avoid cage time and may even be able to run for office again. But this case will still be fun to watch for the irony aspect alone.

A Rare Instance of Political Honesty

Whatever you opinion of Keith Ellison is (mine is extremely low but that’s my standard view of politicians) you have to give him some credit for at least being honest:

According to Maher, who – of course – is an admitted gun owner, America is a country ruled by crazed gang of radical gun nuts. He’s terribly upset that the Constitution is standing in the way of putting an end to this, so he wants it altered.  To that end, he asked Ellison why the Democrat party doesn’t just ‘come out’ of the anti-gun closet and wage open warfare against the 2nd Amendment.

Then why doesn’t your party come out against the Second Amendment? It’s the problem.” Maher asked.

“I sure wish they would,” replied Ellison. “I sure wish they would.”

When Maher pointed out, correctly, that Democrats try to have it both ways where the 2nd Amendment is concerned;

Ellison said “You have got to check out the progressive caucus. We have come out very strong for common-sense gun safety rules.”

“Common-sense gun safety is bullshit,” Maher said.

I’ll save you the author’s commentary about all of the Democrats hating gun rights (because there are Democrats who support gun rights). The point of this post is to applaud Ellison for being honest on live television. If you’re in office and you don’t like the fact that the serfs can own firearms just say it. I get tired of all these politicians claiming they support the privilege (because if you need government permission it’s a privilege) of serfs owning firearms while doing everything they can to prevent serfs from owning firearms. Own your beliefs.

It may also surprise you (it sure surprised me) that I actually agree with Bill Maher on something. “Common-sense gun safety” (a euphemism for gun control) is bullshit. But I probably disagree with Maher on why it’s bullshit.

Making Up Victories

Mothers Demand Action (MDA) is one of my favorite gun control advocacy groups. Somehow the members of MDA manage to sound more insane than members of the Brady Campaign ever could. In addition to the rather insane ramblings made by members and over the top attempts at appealing to emotion the organization also has a habit of turning every defeat into a victory. Shall Not Be Questioned has the best example of MDA declaring victory over something that wasn’t at all a victory:

Mothers Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, an organization funded by billionaire Michael R. Bloomberg, is falsely claiming a victory for forcing a billboard company to take down a Slide Fire advertisement in Chicago.

The truth is that the manufacturer contracted for the billboard to stay up for only two months.

I’m sure you’ve seen children who have brutally lost at something only to refuse to acknowledge it. That’s what MDA reminds me of.

Facebook Does Nothing, Gun Control Advocate Declare Victory, and a Handful of Gun Rights Advocates Lose Their Shit

Moms Demand Action (MDA) has found itself unable to buy politicians so it has switched tactics to harassing companies. One of the companies on the MDA hit list was Facebook. After being the target of minor harassment for sometime Facebook decided to revise its policies regarding the posting of ads for commonly regulated goods, including firearms:

Today, we are introducing a series of new educational and enforcement efforts for people discussing the private sale of regulated items:

  • Any time we receive a report on Facebook about a post promoting the private sale of a commonly regulated item, we will send a message to that person reminding him or her to comply with relevant laws and regulations. We will also limit access to that post to people over the age of 18.
  • We will require Pages that are primarily used by people to promote the private sale of commonly regulated goods or services to include language that clearly reminds people of the importance of understanding and complying with relevant laws and regulations, and limit access to people over the age of 18 or older if required by applicable law.
  • We will provide special in-app education on Instagram for those who search for sales or promotions of firearms.

We will not permit people to post offers to sell regulated items that indicate a willingness to evade or help others evade the law. For example, private sellers of firearms in the U.S. will not be permitted to specify “no background check required,” nor can they offer to transact across state lines without a licensed firearms dealer. We have worked with a number of individuals and organizations on the development of these efforts, which will be implemented and enforced in the coming weeks. We are grateful in particular for the advice offered by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, Americans for Responsible Solutions, Sandy Hook Promise, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, and Moms Demand Action, which helped us develop an approach for the private sale of firearms. We also appreciate the feedback provided by the Facebook Safety Advisory Board.

As it did with Starbucks, MDA managed to convince another company to issue a statement of policy change that didn’t actually change anything. Now when an ad for a firearm sale is reported the Facebook system will send the poster and automated reminder to comply with relevant laws. Pages that primarily deal with the sale of firearms will be required to post a reminder for users to comply with relevant laws. Finally the Instagram app will remind users to comply with relevant laws when searching for firearm sales. In other words Facebook is reminding people that there are laws regarding firearm transfers.

The part that a few (by which I mean a very very minor number) gun rights activists have been bringing up as a bad change is the prohibition on ads that say no background check is necessary. Since intrastate transactions in many states don’t require a background check this blanket prohibition is not necessary in all cases. I don’t find this to be the big anti-gun ploy a few outspoken critics are trying to make it. Those of us who have researched firearm regulations in the United States know that the topic is incredibly complex. On top of the federal regulations there are also 50 individual states with their own lists of regulations. Facebook, being a social networking site, probably doesn’t have lawyers on hand who are experts in gun regulations. It is also headquartered in California. Therefore it’s likely that Facebook, not having the proper lawyers on hand, went with the safest option and decided to comply with California law in regards to background checks.

I highly doubt the prohibited language is a grand conspiracy. If Facebook wanted to implement anti-gun policies it could have. For example, it could have posted a prohibition against ads for aesthetically offensive firearms and standard capacity magazines. But it didn’t. Instead it did the corporate equivalent of telling MDA “There, we did something. Now shut up and go away.”

For you gun control advocates out there I’m sorry to report that you accomplished nothing. You are still free to declare victory but doing so will simply prove to the world that you’re delusional. For the handful of gun rights activists making this out to be proof that Facebook is anti-gun I’m sorry to report that it’s not. I know you have a deep need to be the victim but you’re not in this case. For everybody else I apologize for interrupting your day only to report nothing important happened. But I’m guessing most of you will agree with me that nothing happening is a good thing in this case.

So Long Piers Morgan

If you’re a douche long enough people will tire of you, which is something Piers Morgan just learned:

CNN has given up on trying to make Piers Morgan the new Larry King after a three-year run and will pull the plug on the Briton’s 9 p.m. talk show, which has been finishing far behind rivals Meghan Kelly on Fox News Channel and Rachel Maddow on MSNBC.

According to Nielsen ratings from last week, “Piers Morgan Live” was seen nightly by just 270,000 viewers nationwide and only 50,000 people in the key advertising demographic of Americans ages 25 to 54. Ms. Kelly and Ms. Maddow had, respectively, audiences of more than 2 million and 900,000 overall and more than 350,000 and 220,000 in that key 25 to 54 age group.

Not surprisingly one of the hypothesized reasons for Morgan’s low ratings is his constant banging on the gun control drum:

Conservatives especially took offense at his British-tabloid persona and his overt support for gun control, and they started a petition at the White House’s “We the People” site demanding that the administration “Deport British Citizen Piers Morgan for Attacking 2nd Amendment.”

Personally I just find Morgan to be a disagreeable person in general. He has always come off as a smug asshole to me and that alone was enough for me not to like the guy. I don’t watch CNN (or much television in general) so it doesn’t matter much to me that his show was cancelled but I certainly am not going to lose any sleep over it.

Test Firing of Liberator in Japan

I that 3D printable firearms will destroy gun control. Once individuals are able to easily manufacture firearms from their homes it will be impossible for any government to restrict ownership. But beliefs and demonstrations are two different things. Today I have a demonstration of 3D printable firearms apparently skirting gun control laws. Japan isn’t know for being a weapon friendly island. Throughout Japanese history rulers have disarmed segments of the population. Disarming people took the form of sword hunts, which eventually concluded in the disarmament of the samurai in 1876. Today acquiring a firearm in Japan is extremely difficult [PDF]. Even possessing parts of a handgun can get you into legal trouble. So seeing a Liberator pistol being fired in Japan is pretty exciting:

My understanding of Japanese weapons laws leads me to believe that the video is showing an illegal act but I’m not entirely sure as the demonstrator was willing to show his face. Either way I think this thoroughly demonstrates the viability of producing 3D printable firearms in localities with strict gun control laws. Gun control advocates will be quick to point out that 3D printable firearms aren’t yet viable, which is true today. Tomorrow will be a different story. 3D printer technology is advancing rapidly and we will see affordable printers capable of manufacturing reliable firearms in the near future. After we reach that technological achievement gun control laws will be unenforceable and thus gun control will be dead.

Poll Reveals 60 Percent of Americans Want Unicorns

Reason did a poll asking Americans whether or not they should be allowed to manufacture firearms on 3D printers:

3D printers can create a variety of items from plastic, including working guns. However, the new Reason-Rupe poll finds six in 10 Americans say Americans should not be allowed to print 3D guns. Thirty percent of Americans believe people should be allowed to print 3D guns at home.

Majorities of Democrats, Republicans, and independents agree that printing 3D guns should be prohibited. However, Democrats are more unified in their opposition with 67 percent who favor prohibiting 3D printed guns compared to 52 percent of non-partisan independents and 55 percent of Republicans. Twenty-five percent of Democrats and a third of non-partisan independents and Republicans think people should be allowed to print their own functioning 3D guns.

One cannot stop the march of advancing technology, which renders the opinions of those 60 percent irrelevant. The beauty of 3D printers is that they are devices that can be kept entirely within a home. There is no need for a separate shop that could raise the suspicion of local law enforcement. That makes enforce any laws that prohibit manufacturing a good on a 3D printer impossible to enforce. By favoring laws against manufacturing firearms on 3D printers the respondents might as well have asked for unicorns.

I’m a strong advocate of 3D printers because they enable individuals to manufacture goods from easily copied rendering files. Just as the Internet rendered censorship irrelevant 3D printers will render regulations against physical objects irrelevant.

Affordable 3D Printers Capable of Working with Metal on the Horizon

The march of technology cannot be stopped. When Solid Concepts unveiled their metal 3D printed guns people on both sides of the aisle agreed that the technology to print those firearms was cost prohibitive. As it turns out technology marches very quickly and we’re on the horizon of affordable 3D printers capable of working with metals:

So far affordable 3D printing has been more about using polymers. Yet we all know that the ‘real thing’ must be made of metal. But the price of 3D metal printers has been the major stumbling block towards making the use of this truly 21st century technology an everyday routine. That is why only wealthy scientific organizations, such as NASA, or the military can afford metal 3D printers that cost well over $500,000.

Now Professor Joshua Pearce and his team of 3D apostles from Michigan Technological University are proclaiming the era of Open Access 3D Printing, having published their “A Low-Cost, Open-Source Metal 3-D Printer,” article in the journal, IEEE Access. Practically anyone who is interested is now free to print objects and make a 3D metal printer of their own.

The team admits that this is only a beginning. The printer is quite basic, but it does print complex geometric objects, putting down thin layers of steel with its kit worth $1,500. The most important components are a small commercial MIG welder and an open-source microcontroller.

At this rate we’ll probably see a firearm printed with metal on an affordable 3D printer sometime next year. After that we can put the entire gun control debate to bed. Controlling easily reproducible goods is possible no matter how large or powerful the state is.