Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists

Last month, we wrote about Chicago mayor, Rahm Emanuel who announced that his solution for gun violence in his city was for more gun control legislation – you know, the thing that Chicago has most of. They’ve run legal gun dealers out of the city and in effect made gun ownership illegal, so it’s a little hard to imagine what more gun control they could write in that city. So after another particularly bloody weekend, the mayor announced that he’ll have a gun buy-back program with the spare 1/4 million bucks that the city doesn’t have. From the Associated Press;

Buyback programs are a way to involve the community in getting guns off the streets.

However, experts are unsure how much of a dent on street violence such programs can make. Researchers have found that instead of the automatic weapons criminals use, buyback campaigns tend to net hunting rifles and old, dusty revolvers.

“They make for good photo images,” Michael Scott, director of the Center for Problem Oriented Policing at the University of Wisconsin’s law school, told the Cincinnati Inquirer in 2013. “But gun buyback programs recover such a small percentage of guns that it’s not likely to make much impact.”

Or, like Los Angeles, they can buy back some expended Stinger tubes and proclaim that they have taken a rocket launcher off the streets instead of admitting that they were conned.

Experts say gun policy, such as requirements for background checks and limits to certain high-caliber weapons, are more effective than buybacks, but only by a margin.

Yeah, except that all of the shooters in the most recent high-profile shootings all passed background checks and none of them used any “high caliber” weapons, whatever the hell that means. I think they mean “high capacity” referring to the number of rounds that a weapon can fire in a short period of time without reloading, because there have been no crimes committed with large caliber weapons…ever.

Thanks to Andy11M for the link.

The media is all a-buzz about more gun control for some reason. I guess that’s all of those journalism school graduates who want to change the world. Chief Tango sends us a link from Amazon.com’s Washington Post to an article entitled “Most gun owners support restrictions. Why aren’t their voices heard?” which concludes, falsely, that because of some mis-worded poll questions, that gun owners want more gun control;

85 percent of gun owners favor universal background checks, an idea fiercely opposed by the gun lobby. Gun owners also strongly support a federal database of gun sales, prohibiting ownership for those convicted of domestic violence and barring people with mental illness from buying guns.

Though there is less support for banning high-powered assault rifles — about 49 percent of gun owners would, vs. 64 percent of non-gun owners, according to Pew — gun control advocates are emboldened that a near majority is out of lockstep with the gun lobby.

The truth is that gun owners favor background checks. Me included. But if you get down in the weeds with your questions, you’d find that gun owners want the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) strengthened. There is no “gun show loop hole” – I’ve bought three guns at gun shows and went through the same background checks that I would have endured at a retailer’s store. There is no “internet loop hole” I’ve bought a bunch of guns in auctions and website sales, and every time the guns shipped to a retailer’s store and I went through the background checks.

The Washington Post wants you to believe that gun owners want a national gun registration process, but someone tell me how national registration prevents crime. Everything beyond background checks is just TSA-style feel good mental masturbation. It makes people feel safer without actually making anyone safer.

When someone in New York State gets shot with a 9-millimeter handgun, do the local authorities question everyone with a registered 9-millimeter for their alibi while the crime was committed? No, never. And that’s the only way that gun registration would influence crime – if criminals were afraid that they’d be caught with their registered gun. Gun registration isn’t a law enforcement tool – it’s just so the government knows where all of the guns are, if and when they decide that we don’t need them anymore. We’re only one Supreme Court Justice away from that decision, by the way.

But criminals don’t register their guns, they don’t buy their guns at a place where they’d be subjected to background checks. That’s why they’re criminals. The only people who buy their guns in accordance with the law, are law-abiding non-criminals. Anyone who says that there is easy-access to guns in this country has never gone through background checks, never bought a legal gun. Even though I had a Top Secret clearance (a spotless record) last year before I retired, there was an extra step I had to go through to buy a gun – one more phone call to the FBI than the rest of you went through. And I’d get the evil eye from the retailer because of it.

Every shooter in the last several “mass shootings” had something in their history that should have triggered a flag on their NICS check, but because the government is more concerned with keeping law-abiding citizens from buying firearms, those who should be flagged, sail right through the process. The ultimate goal of the government is to take guns away from law abiding citizens, because that’s all they can do is write laws to restrict the rights of people who obey the law. There are no laws to prevent criminal behavior, only laws to punish those who get caught.

The Washington Post reports that Chuck Schumer and his gang of gun-grabbers are ready to introduce new regulations for gun sales in the Senate.

The three-part proposal…includes closing background check loopholes for Internet and gun show sales, expanding the background check database and cracking down on the illegal gun market, according to a letter to Senate colleagues obtained by The Washington Post.

[…]

Democrats hope to expand background checks to include domestic abuse reports and prevent any gun purchases until a full background check is completed, according to the letter. The plan would also make it illegal for someone to buy a gun on behalf of someone else who is unable to buy a firearm legally.

Yeah, well, all of those things are already regulated. As I pointed out the other day, there’s a question about domestic abuse convictions on the ATF 4473 now. “Straw” purchases, the term used for buying weapons for others, is already illegal – well, unless you’re buying those weapons for Mexican cartels under the popular “Fast and Furious” program. There are virtually no loopholes in the private sales proponent, especially none that would impact crime. As I’ve said before, the FBI interviewed criminals who committed their crimes with guns and found that less than 1% of those guns were from those types of sales. More of their guns were stolen during burglaries or purchased in back alleys – that’s already illegal, too.

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) has already proposed legislation that would encourage states to report more information about mentally ill individuals to the federal background check database.

Since mental health played a large role in the past several “mass shootings” that certainly makes more sense, however “more sense” isn’t something that we’ve come to expect from gun-grabbers like Schumer.

The real reason that Democrats would even waste their time with proposing legislation that already exists is to seed the law with universal gun registration measures. Gun registration doesn’t have any real purpose other than to tell the government where the guns are when they decide that the 2d Amendment doesn’t allow for private ownership. We’re about one Supreme Court justice away from that.

In Mineola, New York, acting Nassau County District Attorney Madeline Singas last month forbade her assistant district attorneys from arming themselves even when they’re at home. She has since modified her fiat to allow them to be armed outside of their workplace, but they’re still not happy about it.

More than a dozen prosecutors have been killed in the U.S. in the last century, at least eight of them targeted in the line of duty.

[…]

The Nassau County DA’s policy didn’t appear to be common among other prosecutors’ offices in the New York City area. No counterparts in Long Island’s Suffolk County or any of the city’s five boroughs prohibit employees from owning firearms, though Brooklyn, the Bronx and Staten Island prosecutors are barred from bringing weapons into their office buildings.

Yeah, I don’t know how the absence of guns make LEOs safer. Especially in the current climate. Of course, the Associated Press sides with the DA quoting about a ADA in Waco, Texas who had a negligent discharge in his office and the bullet went through the wall to the jail next door. Well, then the ADAs need training in gun safety, not be disarmed.

Thanks to Andy11M for the link.

Hillary Clinton is glomming on to the gun issue to try and rebuild her lead in her party’s primary race. According to the Associated Press, she’s hitting all of the same tired cliches that they’ve been spouting for a decade or more.

Clinton has made strengthening gun laws a centerpiece of her presidential campaign, vowing she would use her executive power as president to expand background checks for sellers at gun shows and online and back legislation banning domestic abusers from purchasing guns.

She also backed congressional efforts to stop retailers from selling guns to people with incomplete background checks, as happened when Dylann Roof, the man charged in the Charleston church shooting, bought his gun.

“I will try every way I can to get those guns out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have them,” she told voters gathered for a pancake breakfast town hall meeting in Hollis, New Hampshire. “We need to prevent these kinds of terrible crimes that are happening.”

There are already background checks for 99% of gun show and internet sales. Domestic abusers are already forbidden from buying guns. Check out question 11(i) on the ATF 4473;

Of course, it won’t prevent someone with a conviction from lying on the form, especially if their names haven’t been flagged in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). She doesn’t really want to do anything to get the NICS fixed, because then she won’t be able to put gun confiscation on her agenda when nothing improves.

Clinton knows, like most politicians, that they can’t do anything to prevent criminals from committing crimes with firearms, so they just propose crap laws to make voters “feel” safer, you know, like the TSA does at the airport by molesting every one that comes through the line to make travelers feel safer during their flights.

Chief Tango sends us a link to the Washington Post, their editorial today which lists the fatalities of the Oregon shooting last week, under the headline “The Price We Pay” without mentioning the 120 people killed in Washington DC so far this year, all killed with illegal guns. No mention of the more than 2300 people who were shot in Chicago this year (resulting in 359 homicides before September 27th), either, or the 246 homicides in Baltimore.

By the way, Bernie Sanders weighed in on the issue while he was in Boston this weekend; “Guns should not be in the hands of people who should not have them”. I think we can all agree with that profound statement. By the way, I don’t think Democrats are going to like that Bernie Sanders has a higher rating from the NRA than Hillary. He couldn’t get elected in Vermont without voting in favor of guns.