Blaming “Assault Weapons” for Pittsburgh Shooting Took Longer then I Expected

Well it has begun, the blaming of “assault weapons” for the gym shooting in Pittsburgh. Via Says Uncle I came across this story. Apparently after throwing in a bid for Delaware senator Joseph Sestak is howling for a reinstatement of the “assault weapons” ban. From his mouth to our ears:

“As we continue to see the effects of the violence in our state and nation, we must enact legislation banning assault weapons with the necessary sense of urgency,” said Sestak. “The senseless shootings of so many innocent victims during an aerobics class in Allegheny County, and of the three police officers in Pittsburgh this past April, are heartbreaking reminders that we must immediately address the loss of the common-sense ban earlier this decade.”

Notice anything strange here? Maybe this part of the article will sum it up:

n a release Thursday, Sestak pointed to an Aug. 4 shooting in Allegheny County, where George Sodini, 48, of Scott Township, used two 9 mm semi-automatics and a .45-caliber revolver to kill three women and wound nine others in an aerobics class before taking his own life.

Hmm, something isn’t quite right here. I’m not quite sure what it is though. Oh yeah that’s it! None of those listed guns fall under the “assault weapons” category. So let me get this straight Mr. Sestak wants to become a United States senator and he’s starting his campaign with lies almost immediately. Most people trying to get an office at least pretend to tell the truth right away.

Likewise his idea to solve a problem is to completely ignore the problem and enact a totally unrelated law. Wow I can picture him on the senate floor demanding we enact a law that would stop or allow abortions in order to fight illegal immigration. With logic like that who needs enemies to fuck up the country?

How the Anti-Gunners Fight, Dirty

Another story I pulled from the NRA ILA. This time it’s an article in the Gun Rights Examiner that talks about the anti-gunner’s strategy.

This article is titled “New anti-gun strategy: Demonize CCW holders.” This sums up the anti-gunner’s strategy perfectly. Since they can’t fight with facts they fight with emotions and bigotry. Accusations such as more guns means more crime and armed citizens killed 44 people in a span of two years are made left and right. This except for the article really hit home though:

Nowadays, about the only form of acceptable overt social bigotry is against gun owners. The gun bigots argue that when one person with a gun does something heinous, all gun owners are expected to bear responsibility, and surrender their rights as though it would undo the crime.

This is quite true. If you say something that could be even remotely construed as bigotry you will have almost everybody throwing you against the wall. Just look at how Obama’s critics fight, they try to tag his opposition as racists. They do this because they know once a group are labeled racists nobody will listen to them. During the democratic presidential nominee race if you spoke against Hillary Clinton her supporters would accuse you of being sexist. Being a bigot against people of different religions, sexual orientations, races, creeds, ideals, and anything else is unacceptable. But bigotry against gun owners is perfectly acceptable.

If that’s not hypocrisy I don’t know what it.

Two Classes of Gun Owners

I found a good link off of the NRA ILA page. An article in the Newton Kansan says there will always be two class of gun owners, those who obey the law and those who do not:

No matter how many bills are considered in Congress, there always will be two distinct camps of gun-owners in America.

There will be responsible citizens who abide by the law, and there will be criminals whose actions will not be guided by the law. That’s just the way it is.

Truer words could not be spoken. No matter who many laws controlling guns are enacted there will be people who will ignore them. For instance felons can’t legally own guns in this country yet many felons have guns. It is illegal to shoot somebody with a gun outside of self defense situations yet there are people who do it. Making further laws isn’t going to help curb violence since those who will commit violent acts will also ignore laws claiming to curb it.

This article also talks about the recent national carry amendment:

We’re not sure of all the hullaballoo, however. Currently, if a Kansas gun-owner obtains a permit for concealed carry, that same permit allows them to carry in a number of other states, as well. If the same person obtains an identical permit from Utah, that permit covers the rest of the 48 states already allowing concealed carry.

So all this measure would have done was eliminate one of the two permits needed and, in the process, simplified the process. It wouldn’t have changed the fact each state — and each local jurisdiction, for that matter — can set its own rules for concealed carry. In some places, one has to have a gun in the trunk. Others allow it in the glove compartment.

Although claiming having a Kansas and Utah permit will allow you to carry in all 48 states that have carry laws. Some states won’t let you carry regardless of the permit you hold, that’s one problem national reciprocity would have cured. But he is correct in the fact the amendment would have gotten rid of the need to hold multiple permits. I currently have a Minnesota and New Hampshire permit. I need the New Hampshire one to travel to Wyoming through South Dakota. Furthermore I will have to obtain either a Utah or Florida permit to travel to many other states.

The amendment would have also allowed each state to continue enforcing their own set of rules. For instance New Mexico could still disallow carrying more than one gun (unless they overturned that particular law in recent history).

The massive number of gun laws are impossible to keep up on. I find that ironic since the Brady Bunch always say there are only a handful of gun laws on the books. If I travel to Wisconsin I can’t carry my gun unless I do so openly. On top of that the police will probably still arrest me and once I get in my car the gun is considered concealed and I must disarm again. When I disarm I must follow Wisconsin’s laws dealing with transporting a firearm. It’s a mess.

The truth of the matter is there shouldn’t be any laws controlling guns because we have a constitutional right to bear arms that is stated not to be infringed. Well I can tell you first hand there are a lot of infringements against that right, far more then against any other right.

Media Bias and Health Care

We all know the media is bias on the Health Care Bill. We also know they are bias against gun owners. So when they can combine the two things get really nasty. There are a couple stories of people brining guns to various town hall meetings on government controlled health care (often called health care reform). The media is in a tirade about armed people trying to scare opponents into submission. In fact there is this article from the biased Huffington Post that is full of enough lies to convince you that’s all they had.

Reports indicate that “Tea Partiers” are also carrying concealed handguns into these events — yet few in the media have commented on the distorted view of the Second Amendment that is driving this call to arms.

So now we’re all tea partiers? That must be their new derogatory slang for those of us who describe to the ideas of liberty. Second of all there is no call to arms, there are people legally carrying guns for self defense at a place where people of opposing views may be willing to resort to violence.

The problem is that there are already a substantial number of well-armed Americans who believe our democratically-elected government has become oppressive. Indeed, last week Tea Partiers at a town hall meeting in Tampa, Florida, heckled Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL) with repeated chants of “Tyranny!” Far from furthering democracy, however, these individuals have made important debate impossible, thereby limiting the political rights of all those who disagree with them.

Really? Screaming tyranny and believing, justifiable, that the government no longer works for them is somehow a bad thing? Not everybody involved in these tea parties are licensed carry holders anyways and no mention has been made about any of them having guns. This is a problem when the article is titled “Handguns and Health Care Reform.” This would be akin to me going off on a rant about the Mexican gun canard in this post.

And the pro-government health care people have made debate impossible by not allowing the other side to be heard. All the Obama town hall meetings that are televised never have questions form people against government controlled health care. The people against this bill are screaming because if they don’t they won’t be heard.

And this part is golden:

This year has already been marred by a series of horrific shootings involving individuals who hated our government and believed they had a constitutional right to strike against it: Richard Poplawski in Pittsburgh, James von Brunn in the District of Columbia, Scott Roeder in Wichita, Gilbert Ortez, Jr. in Texas, etc. With tensions escalating at town halls across the country, the overwhelming majority of Americans who wish to peacefully exercise their First Amendment rights must speak out against the violent, insurrectionist philosophy that has corrupted the Second Amendment.

Funny none of those mentioned people were striking against the government as far as I know. They were shooting innocent people. If they tried to kill a member of government then you can say they were using a belief that they could strike against the government.

There is no insurrectionist philosophy corrupting the second amendment. There are people who believe the government has become corrupt and also believe in the second amendment. But the second amendment isn’t being used exclusively, or even primarily, for insurrectionists. People legally carry guns are exercising their second amendment right, and when they speak at meetings they are also exercising their first amendment right.

I love how the anti-gunners try to paint a picture of violence over the second amendment and its supporters. These lies are the weapons of a coward who has no real argument against the object they oppose.

Microstamping Failing in California

I found some hilarious news on the NRA ILA site dealing with the Peoples Republic of California. Apparently that fancy microstamping law isn’t doing so well. Not only has California’s Attorney General not signed it into law but nobody is working to implement it. And why hasn’t the Attorney General signed the law? For good reason:

The microstamping process was invented 15 years ago by Todd Lizotte, a New Hampshire engineer who patented the process under the trademark NanoMark Technologies. Because the technology was available nowhere else, the Legislature required the attorney general to certify that it was available “to more than one (gun) manufacturer unencumbered by any patent restrictions.”

That hasn’t happened yet.

“We’re continuing to review the legislation, but the certification requirements have not yet been met,” Christine Gasparac, the attorney general’s press secretary, said last week.

The relevant patents are not yet in the public domain, Gasparac explained.

“Nothing can move forward until the patent issue has been resolved,” she said.

The patent system is a bitch, huh? Too bad and so sad.

This is bad news for the Brady Bunch. If they can’t get this crap done in Communist California you can’t get it done anywhere. Furthermore I’m still waiting to hear how stamping the casings of a cartridge are going to help police track the shooter. First of all there are no spent casings from revolvers and spent casing from pistols can be picked up. Likewise the microstamping device can be filed off and most importantly most of the guns used in crimes or stolen and hence the trace will come back to the original owner not the criminal who used the gun. On a side note I wonder if this technology has been tested on steel and aluminum cased ammunition.

Correlation vs. Causality

You know how the Brady Bunch love to claim how the “assault weapons” ban lowered gun related deaths? Well they determined this through statistics which can be nothing more than lying through numbers. How did they lie? Simple they used a correlation to determine causality. I saw this article on Says Uncle that shows the correlation between the “assault weapons” ban and various weapons used in homicides.

The data shows that after 1994 firearm related deaths did go down (actually it started in 1993). The Brady Bunch use this as definitive proof that the “assault weapons” ban worked. Too bad for them correlation doesn’t imply causality. If you hit the link and check out the graphs you’ll notices that deaths by stabbing and suffocation as well as a few others also started dropping in 1994. This would lead to two possible reasons when in relation to the “assault weapons” ban. The first explanation is if the ban worked for firearms than there must have been equal bans on stabbing weapons and objects used in suffocations. The other explanation is there is a reasons other than the Brady Bill that caused the drop.

The second explanation seems more likely considering after the ban sunset in 2004 there was no dramatic increase in firearm related deaths. This is why the definitions of correlation and causality are so important. The anti-gunners lie through knowingly using research (for them that constitutes a Google search) numbers incorrectly.

Mexico Wants U.S. To Reinstate “Assault Weapon” Ban

From the NRA ILA comes an article on ABC news. During the North American Leaders conference Mexico will be urging the United States to reinstitute the improperly named “assault weapon” ban.

I would like to see the assault weapons ban reinstated – it’s not philosophical, it’s because of what we have seen on the ground…There is a direct correlation between the assault ban and expiring in 2004 and the numbers – simply the sheer numbers – of assault weapons that we seize in Mexico…We are both cognizant of what can and cannot be done right now – we will softly, diplomatically…continue to say that this is an important issue for us but I think the real perspectives of this moving on Capitol Hill these days are slim to say the least.

So let me get this straight because of our law expiring Mexico is having an issue with American purchased semi-automatic military lookalike rifles? Right. I’m sure the drug cartels in Mexico are purchasing semi-automatic AR-15 rifles from America and smuggling them back as opposed to left over stockpile of fully automatic rifles and grenade available for much cheaper in Central America.

Maybe if these dumb asses would get rid of the corruption plaguing their own government and do a half assed attempt at security their borders they wouldn’t have to worry about us. Then again they need somebody to point the finger at to cover up their own government’s sheer incompetence and the United States is the internationally recognized evil leader in the business of being evil.

Thanks to no National Concealed Carry the Pittsburgh Shooting Wasn’t as Bad

From Joe Huffman’s blog we have a quote from the Brady Bunch father Paul Hemke (I don’t directly link to the Brady Campaign site, you’ll have to navigate though Huffman’s blog) has decided to speak up. His assessment of the Pittsburgh shooting is that thanks to the defeat of the national carry reciprocity Mr. Chickenshit (not Hemke but the Pittsburgh gym shooter) couldn’t carry in other states. To quote the letter:

Two weeks ago, gun violence prevention organizations helped defeat a bill in Congress that would have allowed this killer to carry his loaded weapon almost anywhere in the country.

How this is relevant I’m not sure. First of all Mr. Chickenshit was in his own state so national reciprocity wasn’t an issue at all. Second of all if he was going to leave the state to murder people I highly doubt he would decide the only travel to a state that recognized his permit. Third L.A. Fitness has a policy that prevents people from carrying their legally permitted weapons in so obviously Mr. Chickenshit didn’t care about breaking a law against carrying his gun anyways. Finally if he’s brining this up because it would have increased Mr. Chickenshit’s length of time in prison for violating a gun control law it’s irrelevant since the guy offed himself anyways.

I guess I understand the fact that Hemke is trying to make it appear as if his organization is doing something in the desperate hope that somebody will support them against the big, mean, and nasty NRA. Sorry Hemke but arguing with lies and irreverent information isn’t going to win you many supporters.

People Getting Knickers in a Bunch over Lawful Commerce

Uh oh there is lawful commerce afoot and people aren’t happy. Eastside Harley-Davidson has a promotion running where you will receive a $500.00 voucher if you purchase a new bike.

I love how it’s OK with people when the federal government gives them cash for turning vehicles which get lower fuel milage but the second a voucher for a gun (voucher people, not an actual gun) is given away it’s all of the sudden a horrible event.

To get the story straight the $500.00 voucher is for Wade’s Eastside Guns so people have to take the voucher there, pick out a gun, fill out the paper work, go through the NICS, and finally get the gun. Hence this is no different that purchasing a gun at any store except if you bought the Harley you also get a gift certificate. But I guess we know lawful commerce is a scary thing if it isn’t under government control.

Anti-Gunners Already Exploiting the Gym Mass Murder Tragedy

Wow I was reading Days of our Trialers and see it didn’t take the anti-gunners long to start exploiting a tragedy. Paul Helmke wrote a short article about the mass murder. In it he’s mostly whining that nothing is being done to stop these types of tragedies. But he closes with this line:

It’s obviously too easy for dangerous people to get dangerous weapons in this country.

Yes that’s obviously the only reason a disturbed man who was plotting the mass murder of women for nine months went on his rampage. I’m sure he would have stopped and decided not to go on his murder spree if he had to break the law to obtain those guns. After all murder is one thing but violating gun control laws, that’s pretty major.