Category Archives: Gun Rights

UNODA – Small Arms and Light Weapons

This is where Obama is going with the Small Arms Treaty. Check out this language from the United Nations:

If national law enforcement officials were able to trace small arms back to their last legitimate owner, who might then be held accountable, this would form an effective measure against illicit trade and diversion. For that purpose, it is essential that the weapon be marked upon production and import, and that appropriate records be kept. Existing stocks should also be marked.

via UNODA – Small Arms and Light Weapons.

PoliceOne’s Gun Control Survey: 11 key lessons from officers’ perspectives

So Barry and his Media want us the believe law enforcement wants the public disarmed of “assault” weapons and “high-cap magazines.”

Really?

Here is a “REAL” survey of law enforcement. The first point (just to entice you to read the rest):

1.) Virtually all respondents (95 percent) say that a federal ban on manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds would not reduce violent crime.

via PoliceOne’s Gun Control Survey: 11 key lessons from officers’ perspectives.

Mission Impossible? Manchin aims to make NRA members allies on background checks – Washington Times

He says the NRA is putting out misinformation. Really? This statement quoted below is an absolute lie. This guy is a lying sack of you know what. I’ve read the proposed legislation and have posted about it.

There is NO WAY all it does it what he says below:

Mr. Manchin plans to “go to every gun show” he can to convince doubters of the bill’s merit.

“All I’m trying to do is keep a crazy person who’s been found mentally incompetent through a court and to keep a person whose already been convicted of a crime from buying a gun at gun show or online,” he said. “That’s all.”

via Mission Impossible? Manchin aims to make NRA members allies on background checks – Washington Times.

The Problem Was With the Gun Legislation – Room for Debate – NYTimes.com

Excellent words from Dave Kopel:

Senators vote on actual bills, not poll questions. Yesterday, they never had a chance to vote on a pure bill about background checks.

The base bill on the Senate floor used model language from Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York. Besides gun sales, it also applied to temporary and innocent transfers — like letting your spouse borrow your gun for a few hours to take it to the target range. The expansive language would have felonized almost every American gun owner — and that’s not a concept that has 90 percent support.

Although a gun control measure may garner wide approval, a very large fraction of the public that favors the measure does not expect it to reduce crime.

The Manchin-Toomey substitute avoided the temporary transfer problem. But it was hastily drafted in secret, and seriously miswritten. For example, the language, which claimed to outlaw federal gun registration, would actually have legalized one form of registration that is currently banned: building a registry from the sales records that firearms dealers are required to send to the government when they retire from business.

Although President Obama is personally popular, his emotional bullying about Newtown had little effect, since everyone could see that neither the Schumer legislation nor the Manchin-Toomey bill would have made any difference there; the killer’s mother acquired her guns in a state that already had very strict gun laws, and she recklessly left them available to her son, despite his obvious mental illness. Background checks were irrelevant.

For decades, pollsters have observed that although a given gun control measure may garner wide approval, a very large fraction of the public that favors the measure does not expect it to reduce crime. They approve the control with an apathetic “Why not?” Support for gun control is often broad but shallow.

President Obama’s post-election embrace of gun control and of Mayor Bloomberg drove National Rifle Association membership from four million to five million in a few months. The N.R.A. is not the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill because Wayne LaPierre is the most charming man in town. The N.R.A. wins Congressional votes because it represents millions of Americans who have repeatedly shown that they heed the words of the late Charlton Heston, to “vote freedom first.”

via The Problem Was With the Gun Legislation – Room for Debate – NYTimes.com.

10 of the biggest problems with Toomey-Nanchin bill

Ten Really Important Problems with the Toomey-Schumer-Manchin Sell-out

via Problems II – Gun Owners of America:

The following addresses the top ten problems that Gun Owners of America has with the Toomey-Schumer-Manchin draft.

(1)  First of all, it’s pretty clear by now that the goal of Obama and Schumer is, in the words of the Brady Campaign, to put “points on the board” so they can maintain their momentum for more gun control demands.  Mark Glaze of Mayors Against Illegal Guns said on MSNBC that they would be back with new demands “the day after” background checks are signed into law. So, now that we are on the verge of winning, why, in heaven’s name, would Pat Toomey try to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory, hand a “win” to Barack Obama so he can credibly say he “broke the back of the gun lobby,” invigorate fundraising for anti-gun groups in 2014, let red state Democrats who are up in 2014 off the hook, and create a platform for unending gun control demands that will resume the day his bill is signed into law?

(2)  SECTION 102, Finding 3:  “Congress believes the Department of Justice should prosecute violations of background check requirements to the maximum extent of the law.”

COMMENT:  You understand that 18 U.S.C. 922(d)(3) and (g)(3) make a person a prohibited person if they are “an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance,” right?  And you understand this would subject every gun owner who smokes marijuana (medical or otherwise) to a ten-year prison sentence (under 18 U.S.C. 924(a)(2)), right?  And you understand that records of medical marijuana use, drug diversion programs, etc., are in the possession of many state governments and are, technically, required to be turned over to the FBI under the NICS Improvement Act of 2007, right?  So are you still so enthusiastic about throwing 20,000,000 gun owners in prison for ten years for smoking pot — not to mention the thousands upon thousands of military veterans who have also been thrown into the NICS system without any due process whatsoever?

(3) “SEC. 112.  IMPROVEMENT OF METRICS AND INCENTIVES.”

COMMENT:  This section pretty well gives Eric Holder unfettered discretion to demand any information from the states which he, in his unilateral discretion, chooses to demand.  And he would do this, not by threatening to take away funds under this act, but by threatening to withhold already-existing 505 funds.  For anyone who thinks this is innocuous, consider this:  Under section 922(g)(3)’s prohibition of guns for any “user of … any controlled substance,” the AG could demand medical marijuana records, diversion records, and arrest records.  Under 922(g)(4), he could demand Medicaid, Medicare, and IDEA records of persons with PTSD, ADHD, and post partem depression.

18 USC § 926A – Interstate transportation of firearms | Title 18 – Crimes and Criminal Procedure | U.S. Code | LII / Legal Information Institute

Current law on interstate transportation that would be messed up with the Toomey-Manchin bill.

Here’s how.  The current law lets you drive through a state with the gun in your trunk or locked container if you don’t have a trunk.  The new law says, no… you don’t get to drive through the state IF you intend to commit a crime that is punishable by more than a year.  On the surface, that seems right.  The problem is, just driving through Mass. without a gun permit is a crime punishable by two years.  Hence, the federal protection falls away!

Thanks Dave Kopel for this careful reading!

Here is the current law:

Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, That in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver’s compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console.

via 18 USC § 926A – Interstate transportation of firearms | Title 18 – Crimes and Criminal Procedure | U.S. Code | LII / Legal Information Institute.

The “Pro-Gun” Provisions of Manchin-Toomey are Actually a Bonanza of Gun Control

From Dave Kopel…

The Toomey-Manchin Amendment which may be offered as soon as Tuesday to Senator Reid’s gun control bill are billed as a “compromise” which contain a variety of provisions for gun control, and other provisions to enhance gun rights. Some of the latter, however, are not what they seem. They are badly miswritten, and are in fact major advancements for gun control.

Read more at:  The Volokh Conspiracy » The “Pro-Gun” Provisions of Manchin-Toomey are Actually a Bonanza of Gun Control.

School: Americans Don’t Have Right to Bear Arms | FOX News & Commentary: Todd Starnes

This is the most stunning thing I have seen so far from liberals…

On Monday his social studies teacher gave students a worksheet titled, ‘The Second Amendment Today.’

“The courts have consistently determined that the Second Amendment does not ensure each individual the right to bear arms,” the worksheet states. “The courts have never found a law regulating the private ownership of weapons unconstitutional.

The worksheet, published by Instructional Fair, goes on to say that the Second Amendment is not incorporated against the states.

“This means that the rights of this amendment are not extended to the individual citizens of the states,” the worksheet reads. “So a person has no right to complain about a Second Amendment violation by state laws.”

via School: Americans Don’t Have Right to Bear Arms | FOX News & Commentary: Todd Starnes.

BROWN: Resisting the nibbling at Second Amendment – Washington Times

This is a nice piece on gun rights. Here is my favorite:

Would you consider the right to free speech to be infringed if you had to obtain a permit to say what you wanted? What if there were entire cities or states where you were not allowed to practice your religion? What if you had the right to trial by jury only when you paid a federal excise tax? Why are these things acceptable when applied to the Second Amendment?

via BROWN: Resisting the nibbling at Second Amendment – Washington Times.

Man faces 3 years in jail for pulling ‘unlicensed’ gun on burglar inside his home

New York insanity: Burglar enters your hours. You grab your bodyguards gun and scare the burglar off. Police arrest you.

Clearly, the guy should have instead posted a sign reading: “burglar free zone”

A Manhattan millionaire faces three years in jail for drawing an unlicensed gun on a burglar inside his home.

George Bardwil, who owns linen company Bardwil Home, was in his E Street apartment when an intruder came into his home in January, The Daily Mail reports.

Mr. Bardwil, 60, threatened the intruder with a loaded .40 cal Sig Sauer. The man fled and Mr. Bardwil called the police.

After showing the cops footage from his home surveillance cameras, they arrested him under suspicions of owning an illegal firearm.

The businessman’s lawyer, Michael Bachner, told the New York Post that the gun is legally registered to the defendant’s bodyguard.

“There’s no dispute that George was being burglarized,” Mr. Bachner said. “George had been the victim of multiple burglaries, and the DA’s office concedes that it was used in self defense.”

via Man faces 3 years in jail for pulling ‘unlicensed’ gun on burglar inside his home – Washington Times.

Denied: Gun Store Owner Refuses to Hand AR-15 over to Mark Kelly

Ha! The leftist shill gets a taste of his own medicine…

Diamondback Police Supply owner Douglas MacKinlay has halted Mark Kelly’s attempted purchase of an AR-15 over concerns that Kelly was not in fact buying the gun for himself, and therefore could not have passed question 11a of the NICS background check form 4473.

You’ll recall Kelly’s AR-15 had been on hold for 20 days because it was a trade-in firearm, and during those 20 days Kelly has not been shy about the fact that his plan was to buy the gun and give it to someone else all along.

Gun store owner Doug MacKinlay has now released this statement:

While I support and respect Mark Kelly’s 2nd Amendment rights to purchase, possess, and use firearms in a safe and responsible way, his recent statements to the media make it clear that his intent in purchasing the Sig Sauer 5.56mm rifle was for reasons other than his own personal use.

A refund of the purchase price was sent to Mark Kelly “via express mail” on Thursday of last week.

via Denied: Gun Store Owner Refuses to Hand AR-15 over to Mark Kelly.

Schumer’s background-check bill will require full gun registration

For anyone thinking that expanding background checks is innocuous… All to capture a tiny percentage of gun transfers…

Schumer argues expanded background checks are unenforceable unless sellers or gun dealers who perform the checks are required to keep records.

via Schumer moves ahead with background-check bill as discussions stall – The Hill.

$500 Reward for Ratting Out Gun Owners in People’s Republic of New York | Right Wing News

Wow… Check this out:

Known as the “Gun Tip Line”, New Yorkers can call a toll free hotline to alert police if they believe someone they know has an illegal gun. The call would be picked up by state police and local law enforcement would be notified if the tip seemed reliable.

If there was an arrest the tipster would receive as much as $500.

“This initiative seeks to turn neighbor against neighbor and use their own tax dollars to pay for the $500 rewar

via $500 Reward for Ratting Out Gun Owners in People’s Republic of New York | Right Wing News.