Gun Control

50 posts
Civil Rights Ordnance

Remington Settles

Remington Arms has reached a $73 million settlement with families who lost relatives in the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook elementary school in Connecticut. Their attorneys first brought this back in 2014 as a wrongful-death lawsuit.

Since then, Remington filed for bankruptcy twice. In 2020, it was broken up and the pieces were sold off to cover outstanding debt. Vista Outdoors bought the trademark, which they use to market ammunition.

My initial worry about this lawsuit was that it was an attempt to get around the PLCAA. Gun control advocates have been trying to do that through targeted litigation for quite some time.

But contrary to the headlines, Remington has not been found liable. That’s the whole point of a settlement like this. Chances are, Vista just wants to get out from under this cloud.

Civil Rights

Build Back Better and Gun Control

There’s a great deal of hand-wringing about the idea that there are secret gun-control provisions in Biden’s spending bill. Gun Owners of America have been spamming social media outlets in an attempt to use this for fundraising. Problem is, it’s a complete lie.

The relevant language starts on page 65. It proposes $2.5 billion in spending over a ten-year period for the following:

(…) to support training, technical assistance, research, evaluation, and data collection on the strategies that are most effective at reducing community violence and ensuring public safety

Notice there is no mention of guns or any kind of gun regulation. If the language about “community violence” sounds familiar, that’s because it is. This is Operation Ceasefire finally being implemented on a national level, and that’s a good thing.

The program was initiated in Boston in the mid-1990s, and it exceeded its stated goals in reducing juvenile homicides. Police unions declared it the Boston Miracle, and it was implemented in several other major cities.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Biden Falls Back on the Classics

We’re living in the late 1970s again. Inflation is on the rise, gasoline prices are spiking, and we’re seeing a dramatic rise in violent crime. We have a President who has no ideas worth bringing to the table, so he’s falling back on the old standby: gun control.

In remarks made today, he called for a reinstatement of the so-called “assault weapons” ban and crackdowns on gun dealers. Neither of these things will have an impact on violent crime, and the worst part is, he knows it.

His first claim is this:

For folks at home, here’s what you need to know: I’ve been at this a long time and there are things we know that work that reduce gun violence and violent crime, and things that we don’t know about. But things we know about: Background checks for purchasing a firearm are important; a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.

Continued...
Civil Rights

H.R.1446: Enhanced Background Checks Act of 2021

Democrats have thrown a few feeble pitches with gun-control legislation this session, but those were never expected to get far. This is the one they’ve actually been gearing up for. They’ll sell it as a “moderate” measure, and they’ll probably use the phrase common sense quite a bit.

It’s actually quite dangerous. This is the relevant language:

not fewer than 10 business days (meaning a day on which State offices are open) has elapsed since the licensee contacted the system, and the system has not notified the licensee that the receipt of a firearm by such other person would violate subsection (g) or (n) of this section, and the other person has submitted, electronically through a website established by the Attorney General or by first-class mail, a petition for review

Right now, if you try to buy a gun and your background check gets delayed, the government has 3 business days to review it.

Continued...

Civil Rights

First Shot Across the Bow

On Sunday, the White House released a statement by President Biden calling for new gun-control laws. Predictably, he claims this will “end our epidemic of gun violence.” There is no such epidemic. Homicides with firearms are the lowest they’ve been since the early 1990s.

The actual proposal?

(…) requiring background checks on all gun sales, banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and eliminating immunity for gun manufacturers who knowingly put weapons of war on our streets.

None of these measures has ever been shown to have any effect on homicide. None of these measures would have ameliorated the tragedy at Parkland, which he seeks to exploit here. In fact, he personally admitted that just a few years ago.

So, I’m confused. No, really. The thing is, this guy traditionally gets stuff done on gun control. He wrote the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, which we know as the “assault weapons ban.”

Continued...

Civil Rights

H.R.127 – Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act

So we have a new President, and he has a history with gun control. He was instrumental in the writing and passage of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, and it’s safe to assume he’s going to bring his clout to bear on the issue.

As such, it’s understandable that people are worried, but we don’t need to go jumping at shadows. Case in point: Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee’s annual gun bill. It’s a grab-bag of bad ideas and ludicrous restrictions on lawful behavior.

It’s also doomed to failure. Notice the complete lack of cosponsors. Now go back to the same bill from the last session. No cosponsors there, either. It never even made it to committee. Jackson has a history of drafting preposterous gun bills to enhance her personal brand, but they never go anywhere.

Why? Because she’s just not a player on the issue. When it’s time for the Democrats to give a serious push on the issue, it’ll carry the endorsements of Schumer, Durbin, and Feinstein.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Gun Control: the Current Situation

Gun control advocates have long been coy about their actual agenda. They’ve given the public platitudes about “compromise” and “reasonable regulation,” and they’ve taken pains to assure us that “nobody’s coming for your guns.” Then Beto O’Rourke went and spilled the beans on live television. He wasn’t jumping the gun. He was just dumb enough to say it out loud.

In doing so, he conveniently left the door open for Joe Biden to step in with his own plan, which he’s claiming to be moderate in comparison. It’s not.  Under the Biden scheme, anyone owning an “assault weapon” will have two choices: sell it back to the government or register it.

I’m not clear how I can sell something back to the government when they never owned it in the first place. I can guarantee that any such “buyback” will only offer a fraction of most weapons’ value, which raises certain 5th Amendment concerns.

Continued...

Civil Rights

The One about the CDC and Guns

2 comments

One of the canards we keep hearing from gun-control advocates is that the CDC is somehow banned from doing research on gun violence, and that this is a contributing factor to the problem. President Obama used it, Secretary Clinton used it, and the media has latched on to it since Newtown.

The problem is, it’s an absolute lie. The CDC can do all the studies they want. However, if they want to do advocacy, they don’t get federal funding to do so.

Their crusade against guns (particularly handguns) started in the 1970’s, but things reached a head in 1993 with the publication of Arthur Kellerman’s “Gun ownership as a risk factor for homicide in the home” study, which despite being easily and soundly debunked, was published and repeated like crazy among the media and gun-control advocates. Any time you hear “you’re X times more likely to get shot if you own a gun,” it’s a reference to this study.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Lies, More Lies, and the Liars Who Tell Them

1 comment

This has been a tough week for gun-control advocates.  We had the worst mass shooting in American history, and they just couldn’t seem to exploit it.  They had a cute filibuster in the Senate, and they got the vote they wanted.  Problem is, it didn’t go the way they wanted.

The plain fact is, the general public doesn’t consider gun control a pressing issue.  We all grieve at the horrors of Newtown, Aurora, and Orlando, but gun-control advocates would have us believe they grieve even more.  The rest of us just don’t feel it as much as they do, and anyone who suggests their hasty “solutions” might be defective gets labeled as stupid, bigoted, or lacking in conscience.

And let me tell you, nobody has more conscience than a bunch of progressives craving attention.  So, this week, John Lewis decided to stage a sit-in on the floor of the House of Representatives.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Hickenlooper Goes on the Defensive

The headline reads, “Colorado governor tries to apologize for gun control measures, blames staff, then curses.” That’s actually a pretty good summary of the situation. Video of his statement is here.

You may recall that 55 of the 62 elected sheriffs in Colorado brought a suit to challenge the constitutionality of the gun-control bills Hickenlooper signed last year. You may also recall that state Senators Morse and Giron were ousted in a historic recall election over those bills, and that Senator Hudak resigned just as she was about to be recalled.

Now, when he has to save face, he tries to spread the blame and claim he just didn’t realize what a “kerfuffle” his signature would cause. Really? Does the fact that Michael Bloomberg bent him over a metaphorical barrel to sign them not suggest there might be some friction? Does the fact that the bills passed along strict party lines not imply some dissent?

Continued...

Civil Rights

Connecticut Already Considering an Amnesty

Compliance rates for the gun and magazine registry in Connecticut are much lower than expected. This comes as little surprise, since post offices closed early the day before the January 1 cutoff and most people wait until the last minute to meet deadlines like this. In an effort to salvage some credibility, the state is already considering an amnesty and a second chance at registration, less than a month after the original deadline.

Historically, such schemes have met with little success. Canada and Australia should be considered as test cases. There was little reason to expect better results in Connecticut.

Before we start with the mah cold dead hands claptrap, let’s bear in mind that Governor Malloy didn’t seize power in a coup. Nor was the legislature who wrote this law appointed by some shadowy star chamber. The people of Connecticut voted for these people, and this should be an abject lesson that local and state elections matter.

Civil Rights

Twenty Years with the Brady Act

1 comment

Yep, it was 1993. Sarah Brady is making a big deal of the anniversary. Dianne Feinstein has an op-ed running today in which she takes credit for everything short of rescuing puppies from a burning orphanage. It’s a shame it’s full of half-truths and outright lies.

Let’s take them one by one.

Background checks on gun purchases work. The law has stopped more than 2 million convicted felons, domestic abusers and individuals with serious mental illnesses from purchasing firearms.

A cursory review of the data shows that one has to do real violence to the numbers to even imply such a thing. The rate of erroneous denials is 94%. Furthermore, the few that might have merit are almost never referred for prosecution. Either the Brady Act is hopelessly broken in its implementation, or someone is lying.

Civil Rights

Gun Control: No Longer a Safe Bet

Last month, Colorado State Senators Giron and Morse were recalled from office by a grassroots campaign. The underlying issues were their support for three gun-control bills and their refusal to listen to constituents on the matter. Despite a massive amount of outside financial and political support, neither Senator was able to hold their seat.

A third recall, this one for Denver Senator Evie Hudak, is now building steam. This time around, Governor Hickenlooper is asking Michael Bloomberg and other sympathetic interests to stay out of the fray.

The question is, why? According to Hickenlooper, Coloradans are suspicious of “outside influences.”

A more likely explanation is that he’s realized those “outside influences” aren’t much help and may be a liability. The last round of recalls proved that Michael Bloomberg’s money and clout weren’t as potent a safety net as he’d promised earlier this year.

Bloomberg himself has taken a rather cavalier tone on the issue, stating:

What do you mean we lost?

Continued...
Civil Rights

Colorado: The Morning After

Everyone’s scrambling to interpret the consequences of last week’s recall elections in Colorado. Ousted Senator Angela Giron went on CNN last Thursday and tried to play the voter suppression card before Brooke Baldwin cut her off. It was obvious that Giron was utterly blindsided by the results.

She refuses to accept that her vote for hasty and onerous legislation had anything to do with it. Arrogance towards her constituents? Nah. This was a conspiracy by the NRA and the Koch brothers. I kid you not.

Governor Hickenlooper tried to play down the importance of the vote, claiming “outside money coming in is generally not welcome.” Does he mean the ~$350,000 from the NRA to support the recalls or the ~$350,00 coming from Michael Bloomberg to oppose them? I guess the $2 million in other contributions to Morse and Giron doesn’t count as “outside money” either.

Gun owners won because they did the work.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Colorado Recall Successful

2 comments

Colorado Senator Angela Giron and Senate President John Morse have been successfully recalled in Colorado. Republican Bernie Herpin will be taking Morse’s place. I’m happy to say I called this one wrong.

This recall election was about one thing: gun control. The Colorado legislature capitalized on the emotional impact of the Sandy Hook shooting to push several onerous bills before cooler heads could prevail. HB 1224, restricting ownership of magazines holding more than 15 rounds, led to Magpul pulling their operations out of state and taking $92 million out of the economy.

A bill mandating that nearly all private transfers be processed through licensed gun dealers has also proved problematic. Dealers are not allowed to charge more than $10 to do the paperwork and process the background check. As such, most are refusing to perform the service. The end result? Private transfers are all but impossible.

We’re witnessing a vital piece of history here.

Continued...

Civil Rights

How the Other Side Lives

1 comment

Dave Workman found a policy document outlying strategies for gun-control advocates [pdf file]. It’s very much worth taking the time to read.

Back in 1993, I sat on the panel of a gun-control debate for a local TV station. The guy on the other side of the table actually said, “you can try to trip me up with the facts, but the only real fact is that we need these weapons off the streets.” The crowd loved it.

They’re still using the same tactics.

Always focus on emotional and value-driven arguments about gun violence, not the political food fight in Washington or wonky statistics. (…) We should rely on emotionally powerful language, feelings and images to bring home the terrible impact of gun violence. Compelling facts should be used to back up that emotional narrative, not as a substitute for it.

The paper advises advocates to refer to the issue as “gun violence” rather than “gun control,” and to advocate for “stronger” gun laws rather than “stricter” ones.

Civil Rights

HR 1565: Universal Background Checks (Again)

It’s back. This is the House version of Schumer’s background-check bill. It has 109 co-sponsors.

The Brady Campaign is already urging their members to text representatives on the matter, and we need to make our voices heard.

This is less likely to get passed in the House than it ever was in the Senate, but it’s not a good idea to leave anything to chance at this point. The form below will send correspondence on the matter directly to your congresscritters.

Civil Rights

How Gun Control Lost

Following the defeat of the post-Newtown gun-control push, the invective is flying fast and loose. “Guilt,” “shame,” and “cowardice” are the words of the day. How this sort of rhetoric is supposed to win sympathy on the Hill is beyond me.

S. 649 is still up for consideration, but without the Toomey/Manchin amendment, it’s going to be even less appealing to lawmakers. Harry Reid changed his vote at the last minute so he can bring the bill back to the floor for reconsideration, but at this point, the momentum is gone. They blew it.

Continued...

Civil Rights

S. 649: Defeated for Now

First, the good news. The Manchin/Toomey amendment to S. 649 was defeated in the Senate by a 54-46 vote. The only way the bill was ever going to have a chance at passage was with that amendment, so it’s safe to say it’s dead.

John McCain voted “yea.” Harry Reid waited until the very end to cast a “nay” vote. Some lady shouted “shame on you” from the rafters, and the President is calling the NRA liars (epic meltdown here). So, business as usual.

A look at the votes for various amendments is interesting. Feinstein’s Assault Weapons Ban 2.0 failed, but only by a 60-40 margin. That means the issue isn’t quite dead yet. On the other hand, the Cornyn amendment to enact nationwide CCW reciprocity won by a 57-43 margin.

The margin on the Manchin amendment is better than I expected, but still short of what I’d have liked to see. 

Continued...

Civil Rights

S. 649: 11th Hour

Senate Democrats spent much of the last two days scrambling to rally the votes for their gun-control bill, but without much success. While there are still amendments to be debated, Majority Leader Harry Reid has called an end to the stalling, and it looks like a vote will be taken tomorrow at 4:00 PM.

Of course, Feinstein’s still trying to shoehorn her Assault Weapons Ban into the bill, and Lautenberg’s pushing his magazine ban. Neither of those help its chances.

On the Republican side, Senator Toomey seemed to be avoiding contact with the press, and the mood seemed dour. Dean Heller was expected to cross the aisle, but he issued a statement today saying he won’t be voting for the bill. Mike Johanns of Nebraska has also refused to support it, and despite (or perhaps because of) some pretty manipulative comments by Mark Kelly, Jeff Flake appears disinclined as well.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Wavering Optimism

Today, the Supreme Court declined to hear Kachalsky v. Cacase, a challenge to New York’s arbitrary restrictions on issuing carry permits. I had high hopes for this one, but there are other potential candidates.

First is the Woollard case. We had a favorable ruling in the District Court, but it was overruled by the 4th Circuit last month. A rehearing is still a possibility.

The 7th Circuit’s decision in our favor in Moore v. Madigan still stands. That creates a split among the Circuits, which begs hearing by the Supreme Court, but they may be biding their time. Illinois still has to hash out a workable law, and while Attorney General Madigan seems reluctant to appeal, Governor Emmanuel most likely will. Still, we may not get a case heard this session.

On the legislative front, S. 649 appears to be gaining traction and support in the Senate, thanks to the odious Manchin/Toomey “compromise.”

Continued...

Civil Rights

Appeasement

The Senate agreed Thursday to move forward on debate over S. 649, also called the Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013. Contrary to what you may have heard, nothing has been passed. At the moment, they’re hammering out the details. Amendments will be suggested, there will be debates, and it might go back to committee. After all of that, it heads to an uncertain fate in the House. It’s going to be awhile.

At the moment, we really only have the broad outlines of the bill. Yes, the proposed text is available, but that’s going to change quite a bit.

Of particular note is a “compromise” amendment proposed by Senators Toomey (R-PA) and Manchin (D-WV). Its title is the Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act.

Sounds harmless, right? Well, so did the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, and look where that got us.

Civil Rights

Tools vs. Intent

15 students have been injured in a stabbing spree at Lone Star College in Texas. This is exactly why we need universal background checks and registration of firearms.

Think I’m being facetious? Nope. Adam Lanza resorted to theft and murder to get his guns. Such a system would not have deterred him. James Holmes was able to pass the NICS check because he hadn’t done anything to get himself on the radar. Jared Loughner also passed because the Pima County Sheriff’s Office had declined to charge him for the death threats he’d made.

Universal background checks aren’t going to stop mass shootings any more than they are bombings or stabbings. Perhaps a ban on knives might stem the tide?

Civil Rights

Cowardice

Connecticut’s Senate has approved a draft of their new gun-control law. It’s now off to the House, where it’s expected to pass. As with New York, Colorado, and Maryland, this is a poorly-considered rush job, to be passed while emotion over Sandy Hook can be exploited and before voters can have a chance to give it careful consideration.

Naturally, many folks are dismayed by this. In our system of government, the people have the right to protest and have their voices heard. Many did just that at the capitol in Hartford today.

But there’s no law that says politicians have to listen, and in fact, Governor Malloy has chosen to avoid the capitol altogether. His security detail claims that they’re concerned for his safety. The threat?

Malloy would have had to walk through a raucous crowd of gun protesters who chanted “read the bill!” at lawmakers who passed by in the halls.

Continued...
Civil Rights

H.R. 1369

I was wondering how long it would take them to trot this sickly pony out. Sponsored by Carolyn Maloney, HR 1369 would mandate a $10,000 fine for firearms owners who fail to maintain liability insurance.

It shall be unlawful for a person who owns a firearm purchased on or after the effective date of this subsection not to be covered by a qualified liability insurance policy.

There are two rationales behind this. The first is that firearms liability policies will be expensive, and in many places, impossible to get. This will have a chilling effect on gun ownership.

The second is to set gun owners up for strict liability if their guns are used in a crime, even if the gun was stolen or otherwise out of their control prior to its misuse.

I don’t see much likelihood of passage, but it’s still a good idea to voice your opposition to your elected officials.

Civil Rights

Colorado Follows New York

Colorado Governor Hickenlooper has signed all three of the gun-control laws that landed on his desk. The first consequence will be the imminent departure of Magpul Industries from the state. From their FaceBook page:

We have said all along that based on the legal problems and uncertainties in the bill, as well as general principle, we will have no choice but to leave if the Governor signs this into law. We will start our transition out of the state almost immediately, and we will prioritize moving magazine manufacturing operations first.

The bill to which they’re responding is HB 1224 [pdf], which bans all large-capacity magazines.  As defined in the bill:

“Large-Capacity Magazine” means: a fixed or detachable magazine, box, drum, feed strip, or similar device capable of accepting, or that can be readily converted to accept, more than fifteen rounds of ammunition or more than five shotgun shells.

Pump shotguns are excepted so long as the tubular magazine does not exceed a capacity of 28 inches.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Feinstein’s Last Hurrah

Negotiations are still underway in the Senate for a unified package of gun-control bills to be introduced next month. One conspicuous piece of legislation that will not be part of it is S. 150, Dianne Feinstein’s revised Assault Weapons Ban.

Majority Leader Harry Reid excised S. 150 in a meeting on Monday. His rationale was,

Right now her amendment, by the most optimistic measures, has less than 40 votes. I am not going to put something on the floor that can’t succeed.

Does that mean it’s dead? No. Feinstein can still reintroduce it as an amendment to another bill. Though it’s doubtful she’ll get the votes for it, she’s sworn to bring it to a vote one way or another.

What’s becoming obvious is that Reid has an eye on the 2014 midterms, and he’s feeling the heat. He can push a more “moderate” bill to appease the Democratic base while pointing out that he opposed more “extreme” bills like S.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Pass It to See What’s in It

Charles Schumer had been in talks with Tom Coburn to introduce S. 374, also known as the “Protecting Responsible Gun Sellers” Act.

Those talks fell through, and Schumer chose to forge ahead with his own version, now entitled the “Fix Gun Checks” Act. If that sounds familiar, it’s the same bill he introduced last year, which was read on the floor but died in committee.

As I mentioned last week, we didn’t have the text of the bill because it was being written in committee. Now we do [pdf]. It passed as an amendment by a 10-8 margin, with the vote being along purely partisan lines.

Read on for a synopsis.

Civil Rights

The Sequester and Gun Control

A whole slew of budget cuts took effect on Friday. I’m a little peeved that NASA’s losing another $970 million. The beleaguered ATF will be taking a $60 million dollar hit, which would conceivably hamper their ability to enforce all those new gun-control laws folks keep proposing. Additionally, the FBI is losing $480 million, at least some of which is going to have an impact on NICS background-check processing. Expect delays.

Frankly, the whole thing reminds me of Gingrich’s boondoggle in 1995, but I don’t think the current President has the savvy to turn it to his advantage in the manner than Clinton did.

It goes without saying that this is going to be the political headliner for the near future. As such, the push for gun control in Congress is going to fade from public view and lose momentum.

That doesn’t mean it’s over, though.

Civil Rights

Yo Joe!

So I’m having a little trouble following Joe Biden’s logic. He’s the President’s point man on gun control legislation, and he’s the author of the original Assault Weapons Ban. He should at least stick to the program when he’s talking to his own base, but he let this chestnut slip on Thursday:

Nothing we are going to do is fundamentally going to alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that we will bring gun deaths down.

Well Joe, I already know that. So why are you wasting our time with this?

Civil Rights

The New York Problem

Tomorrow, we’ll hear all about the ad Michael Bloomberg paid to air during the Super Bowl. It was a typically manipulative affair narrated by children over a faltering version of “America the Beautiful.” The only point made was that the NRA once supported instant background checks, and that those checks should be expanded to cover all firearms sales.

The omissions are what interest me. Gone from their argument is the call to ban military-pattern rifles and limit magazine capacity. Weren’t these the very things they said we needed to do to prevent tragedies like Sandy Hook from happening again? Apparently, those supposedly dire issues have been sidelined for the sake of political expediency.

Perhaps they’re noticing their diminishing relevance in the public consciousness. Circling the wagons around one specific issue may seem like a sound move, but it’s too late.

Case in point: last month, Governor Cuomo strongarmed a bill through the legislature that will leave New Yorkers virtually disarmed, and he did it without giving them any chance to register their opposition or concerns.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Hyperbole

I’m on the Brady Campaign’s mailing list. It’s a long story, but nobody there has figured out that Pynchon Voltaire isn’t my real name yet. Anyhow, they sent this out today in response to the Senate hearings:

We support President Obama’s comprehensive plan to prevent gun violence. His legislative plan – which includes measures such as universal criminal background checks for all gun buyers – can immediately reduce gun injuries and deaths across America.

That’s a pretty big promise to make, and it’s an impossible one to keep. Of course, they really don’t have to worry about it, since the general public tends to forget such things quickly.

But I’m not the general public. That sounded very familiar, but I couldn’t place it. I’m grateful to Robb Allen for finding it:

The Brady bill will make the streets of America so safe that our nation’s police will not even need to carry guns anymore.

Continued...
Civil Rights

First Day on the Hill

Today was the first round of Senate hearings on new gun-control initiatives. Ostensibly, it was about “gun violence,” but we all know better.

Wayne LaPierre’s testimony is here. He’s dropped much of the vitriol, which is good.

His points:

  • expanded background checks won’t work because we’re not prosecuting criminals who try to buy guns now
  • semiautomatic firearms are the most common choice for self-defense and hunting by the law-abiding
  • we need better mental health reporting to the NICS database
  • armed school security is already common and practical
  • even the DOJ under Clinton admitted that the 1994 AWB had no measurable effect on violence or crime

(On that last item, Senator Grassley asked Dave Kopel about the 1994 ban, to which Kopel repied, “it was tried with great sincerity … but it didn’t seem to save any lives that the researchers could find.”)

There was audible hissing during LaPierre’s speech. Feinstein groused about the ideological balance, and has promised her own round of supposedly impartial hearings.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Now He Gets Cranky…

The President is coming to the realization that the Republicans don’t want to play ball on gun control. As usual, he gets snippy when it looks like he’s not going to get his way. Those 23 executive orders didn’t amount to much, and it appears that’s all he’s going to be able to manage.

From an interview with the New Republic:

The House Republican majority is made up mostly of members who are in sharply gerrymandered districts that are very safely Republican and may not feel compelled to pay attention to broad-based public opinion, because what they’re really concerned about is the opinions of their specific Republican constituencies.

Way to build a consensus there. Being concerned about the opinions of their constituencies is what we expect from our elected representatives. I didn’t elect my legislators so they could take guidance from an editorial page.

Since he can’t strong-arm what he wants, we get mealy-mouthed rhetoric about compromise.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Feinstein’s Charity

Govtrack and Thomas haven’t posted it yet, but the full text of Dianne Feinstein’s proposed Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 is posted here. It appears to be numbered S. 150.

The list of prohibited weapons is pretty much what we saw on Thursday, and the list of weapons she deigns to let us keep begins on page 23. We would be granted the privilege to keep historic “assault” rifles like Garands and M1 carbines so long as they don’t have folding stocks or extended magazines. Beyond that, it’s more or less deer rifles and turkey guns. On her reasoning for this, she had this bit of sage insight:

Military-style assault weapons have but one purpose, and in my view that’s a military purpose, to hold at the hip, possibly, to spray fire to be able to kill large numbers.

How very conciliatory of her to leave a few crumbs on the table for the lowly civilians.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Now the Bad News

1 comment

Senator Feinstein proposed the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 today. There was a big ceremony in which she had a clergyperson speak, and she trotted around with guns that are illegal to possess in the District. I bet there was cake and everything.

Though we haven’t seen the actual bill yet, we’ve seen the list, and it’s bad. For Pete’s sake, she wants to ban the Linda Carbine. Outside of Hawaii Five-0 (the one with Jack Lord’s magnificent hair, not the new one), I think I might be one of six people in the western hemisphere who’s ever even handled one.

You know, even though I don’t care for remakes, I’d probably watch the new version just to see Grace Park run around on the beach. For some reason, she won’t respond to my phone calls, emails, fan letters, or the poetry I scrawled on her driveway. Her eyes say yes, but her bodyguards and lawyers say no.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Whimper, Not Bang

The President outlined his agenda for gun control this morning. The media calls it “sweeping.” That’s not the adjective I’d use.

He wants limits on magazine capacity, a ban on “assault weapons,” and universal background checks. Those things require legislation, for which the chances look pretty grim. Even Harry Reid and Steny Hoyer have gone on the record as being pessimistic on the matter, no matter how many gruesome pictures Joe Manchin wants to run on the evening news.

So, that leaves Executive Orders, of which the President has proposed 23. Most are harmless, a couple are potentially troubling, and a couple have real merit.

None, of course, would have prevented the tragedy at Sandy Hook.

Civil Rights

Dark Day for the Empire State

The New York Assembly has passed the NY SAFE Act of 2013. It’s on its way to Governor Cuomo’s desk, where it will quickly be signed into law.

I have to admit, I thought this was too extreme to pass. I was wrong.

One of the main provisions was that handgun magazine capacity would be limited to 7 rounds for civilians. A 10-round limit is one thing, but a 7-round limit pretty much bans every semiautomatic service pistol in the state. It flies in the face of the Supreme Court’s Heller decision, and I’m astounded to see that passed.

Republican Senator Dean Skelos had this to say on its passage:

It is well-balanced, it protects the Second Amendment. And there is no confiscation of weapons, which was at one time being considered.

So New Yorkers are being spared the indignity of outright confiscation in favor of a simple ban.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Feinstein’s Boondoggle

So, here’s the draft for Dianne Feinstein’s new gun control bill.

We’re looking at a ban on 120 specific weapons, as well as a ban of “certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one or more military characteristics.” I’m guessing STANAG 2324 rails will be one of those “military characteristics,” which will pretty much cover most modern handguns. She also made sure to add thumbhole stocks to the list of banned features (I can’t say I’ll particularly miss those).

The interesting part is the clause for grandfathering. Under her bill, I’d be able to keep pre-existing specimens of banned firearms, but I’d have to register them through the NFA. Who covers the payroll for that? We’re talking about millions of weapons.

And for what? I’d be surprised if we had anything close to the compliance rates of similar initiatives in Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom, all of which were around 20%.

Continued...

Civil Rights

And Here We Go

It’s one day after Christmas, and we’re off to the races. Carolyn McCarthy is pushing to get her high-capacity magazine ban out of committee, where it’s been wallowing in obscurity since January of 2011. Bobby Rush is trying to revive the Blair Holt gun registration bill, as he’s done every year since 2000.

I don’t give either bill good odds of progressing, but if you’ve got a Representative on the Judiciary Committee, it’s worth dropping them an email. If yours is a Democrat, it’s even more important, since most of those on the committee have a history of supporting gun control.

In other news, Dianne Feinstein is proposing a national buyback program on so-called assault weapons. In case you’re not familiar with the idea, several major cities offer financial incentives for gang members and drug dealers to turn their guns in for gift cards or pittances of cash.

Never mind that those initiatives are a big expense to taxpayers and that they don’t work.

Continued...