|
|
October 31, 2009 by Philip Van Cleave of the Virginia Citizens Defense League is leading a statewide effort to "out" local mayors who have become New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s lackeys in a big bucks bulldozing of their constitutional rights.
"Disgracefully, we have seven mayors in Virginia that are part of New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun coalition," he writes. "These mayors claim they are members because the coalition’s goal is to keep criminals from getting guns, but, we know better. In fact many mayors have left that coalition as soon as they realized that the Coalition wasn’t about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, but keeping guns out of everyone else’s hands, too.
"The coalition wants to close the non-existent 'gun show loophole,'" Van Cleave continues. "What the coalition really wants is ALL gun sales, including private sales, to be registered with the government. That way the government will know exactly what guns you have, making confiscation easier ..."
For more, go to: http://www.ammoland.com/2009/10/23/protesting-the-anti-gun-bloomberg-7-mayors-in-virginia/
Also, in the "we can dish it out but we can't take it" department, go to:
-- Antis Are Upset About VCDL Protesting Anti-Gun Mayors; http://www.ammoland.com/2009/10/27/antis-are-upset-about-vcdl-protesting-anti-gun-mayors/
[ Read Full Post ]October 30, 2009 by Former Georgia Congressman Bob Barr in an Oct. 26 blog-column in the Atlanta Journal Constitution warns that global anti-gun zealots are "on ethe brink of success."
"The folks at United Nations headquarters in New York City, and our 'allies' at Number 10 Downing Street in London, must be rubbing their hands with glee. Gun control groups here and abroad likewise are at last quietly cheering. Why?" he writes. "After a decade and a half of pushing unsuccessfully to secure America’s support for a legally-binding, international instrument to regulate the marketing, transfer and brokering in firearms, they are now on the brink of success. The process of formally negotiating an Arms Trade Treaty ("ATT") now has Washington’s seal of approval; announced October 14th by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton."
What would this for American gun owners, Barr asks?
" ... for Second Amendment purposes, a legally-binding instrument purporting to regulate illicit international transfers of firearms, would necessarily touch domestic activities. For example, in order to know and regulate international transfers, the UN folks would have to know what firearms were being manufactured, stocked, and purported to be transferred within each country," he writes.
For more, go to: http://blogs.ajc.com/bob-barr-blog/2009/10/26/%E2%80%9Cperfect-storm%E2%80%9D-for-un-gun-control-agenda/?cxntfid=blogs_bob_barr_blog
Also:
-- Barr-calls-UN-gun-treaty-perfect-storm?; http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m10d26-Barr-calls-UN-gun-treaty-perfect-storm?cid=exrss-Gun-Rights-Examiner
-- Gunfights then and now on significant anniversary; http://www.examiner.com/x-4525-Seattle-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m10d26-Gunfights-then-and-now-on-significant-anniversary
[ Read Full Post ]October 28, 2009 by Not surprisingly, the San Francisco Chronicle is all for legislation that requires firearms retailers to check a purchaser's identification and take a thumbprint when selling handgun ammunition. In an Oct. 5 editorial, it said the new law "would close this gaping loophole in efforts to keep our streets safe from gun violence.
"Assemblyman Kevin de Leon, the Los Angeles Democrat who authored the bill, noted that a gun without ammunition 'is like a syringe without the drug.' 'It would not stop the sale,' he emphasized, but it would provide a record that law enforcement could later check. Similar rules are on the books in Los Angeles and Sacramento, but such patchwork laws are meaningless when a criminal can readily go to a neighboring town where no questions are asked and no records are kept. In the Los Angeles area, for example, no such laws prevail in Compton's abundance of gun shops."
"AB962 also would require vendors to keep their handgun ammunition out of immediate reach of customers, similar to the requirements on the stocking of spray paints, cigarettes or cold medicine. And it would require that purchases via mail order or the Internet would have to be picked up at a dealer who would check ID and take the thumbprint.
"This bill represents a sensible attempt to control the flow of ammunition to the criminals without constraining the rights of law-abiding citizens. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger should sign it into law."
For more, go to: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/10/04/EDUP1A0DE9.DTL#ixzz0TelKTP9Y
Also:
-- Ammo controls violate our rights; http://www.andersonvalleypost.com/news/2009/oct/06/ammo-controls-violate-our-rights/
[ Read Full Post ]October 27, 2009 by A study published in New Science, a British magazine, says, "People who carry guns are far likelier to get shot – and killed – than those who are unarmed, a study of shooting victims in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, has found."
The University of Pennsylvania analyzed 677 shootings over two-and-a-half years to discover whether victims were carrying at the time, and compared them to other Philly residents of similar age, sex and ethnicity. The team also accounted for other potentially confounding differences, such as the socioeconomic status of their neighborhood.
The study found that people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher. While it may be that the type of people who carry firearms are simply more likely to get shot, it may be that guns give a sense of empowerment that causes carriers to overreact in tense situations, or encourages them to visit neighborhoods they probably shouldn't, the study speculates. Supporters of the Second Amendment shouldn't worry that the right to bear arms is under threat, however.
"We don't have an answer as to whether guns are protective or perilous," the study says. "This study is a beginning."
As of Oct. 11, the story has generated 268 comments -- most of which made much more sense than the study.
For more, go to: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17922-carrying-a-gun-increases-risk-of-get-shot-and-killed.html
[ Read Full Post ]October 25, 2009 by Weapons sellers say gun enthusiasts won’t have to bite the bullet much longer, as a nearly yearlong nationwide ammunition shortage may be winding down. "We’re seeing the light at the end of the tunnel," said DeWayne Irwin, owner of Cheaper Than Dirt, a Fort Worth store and online retailer.
Demand for guns and ammo began growing last year before the November presidential election, partly because many gun owners were concerned that President Obama and Democrats in Congress would reinstate an assault weapons ban or drastically raise taxes on ammunition, guns and firearms materials.
"It was the new politics and the fear of the unknown," said Robert Parks, store manager at the Alpine Shooting Range in Fort Worth. "That’s what triggered this. It was the not knowing if they were going to be able to purchase handguns or be taxed more."
For more, go to: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/national/southwest/view/20091004gun_retailers_aim_to_plug_yearlong_bullet_shortage/srvc=home&position=recent
Also:
-- Gun store owners report slowing sales; http://www.citizensvoice.com/news/1.308834
-- Erie area gun shops running short on ammunition; http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091004/NEWS02/310049942
-- Handgun ammo shortage has stores limiting sales; http://www.lufkindailynews.com/news/content/news/stories/2009/10/04/ammunition_sales.html
-- Firearms market sees improvement; http://www.oaoa.com/opinion/sees-37589-firearms-improvement.html
-- Ammo business exploding for ATK; http://www.sltrib.com/business/ci_13464639
-- Local Gun Owners Concerned over Ammo Shortage; http://www.fox43.com/news/wpmt-pmnews-ammoshortage-10-04-09,0,5022147.story
[ Read Full Post ]October 23, 2009 by October 22, 2009 by Bob McNitt, outdoors columnist for the Evening Sun in central New York state, offers a good reason why the media generally blows it when it comes to covering Second Amendment issues -- not only do so few "reporters" understand the U.S. Constitution, even fewer have a clue when it comes to firearms.
"Each time I read or hear the general media referring to 'assault firearms, I cringe. Why? Because many of them have little or no idea of what they’re talking about," McNitt writes. "The term 'assault weapon' is an arbitrary (and politicized) phrase used all too often by the media to describe a collection of semi-automatic firearms that outwardly only 'appear similar' to those used by the military but are not alike in actuality.
"On April 18, 2007 in an interview, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (NY), sponsor of the bill "Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007" spoke on the Virginia Tech massacre and her proposed reauthorization of the Assault Weapons Ban," McNitt continued. "Asked to explain the need to regulate barrel shrouds, one of the many provisions of the Act, she responded that more importantly the legislation would ban large capacity 'clips' used in the Virginia Tech massacre and that the class of guns chosen were those used by gangs and police killers. However, she apparently either never learned the facts or else was highly uninformed about the very firearms she was trying to ban.
"The Virginia Tech shooter did not have high capacity magazines. They were of the legal, 10-round variety. After admitting that she did not know what a barrel shroud was, an item which she was so adamant to see banned, McCarthy ventured a guess, 'I believe it is a shoulder thing that goes up.' Actually a barrel shroud is a ventilated covering attached to the barrel of a firearm that partially or completely encircles the barrel, preventing burns when the barrel gets hot from rapid or fully automatic firing.
"The misleading phrase 'assault weapons' has been used primarily in relation to a specific expired gun law that was commonly known as the 'Assault Weapons Ban,' 'Clinton gun ban,' or '1994 crime bill.' On March 2, 2004, following the bill’s sunset date, it was voted down 90-8. It's worthwhile to note that The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention studied the 'assault weapon' ban as well as other gun control schemes, and found 'insufficient evidence' to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence."
For more, go to: http://www.evesun.com/news/stories/2009-10-08/8053/The-medias-assault-on-assault-weapons/
[ Read Full Post ]October 21, 2009 by In an Oct. 9 press released posted on ammo.com, Gun Owners of America issued the following warning:
"Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus has something to say to gun owners: 'Own a gun; lose your coverage!'
"Baucus’ socialized health care bill comes up for a Finance Committee vote on Oct. 13. We have waited and waited and waited for the shifty Baucus to release legislative language. But he has refused to release anything but a summary — and we will never have a Congressional Budget Office cost assessment based on actual legislation. Even the summary was kept secret for a long time.
"But, on the basis of the summary, the Baucus bill (which is still unnumbered) tells us virtually nothing about what kind of policy Americans will be required to purchase under penalty of law — nor the consequences."
For more, go to: http://www.ammoland.com/2009/10/09/obamacare-could-be-used-to-ban-guns/
[ Read Full Post ]October 20, 2009 by The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade association for the firearms, ammunition, hunting and shooting sports industry, applauded the introduction of legislation, the Recreational Fishing and Hunting Heritage and Opportunities Act (HR 3749), to greatly enhance the ability of federal land managers to provide, promote and plan for recreational uses that balance the needs and interests of all outdoor enthusiasts.
The bill, introduced by U.S. Reps. Dan Boren (D-Okla.) and Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), requires that all federal public land planners evaluate the effects that management initiatives have on outdoors activities and provide a clear analysis of how proposed actions would affect these traditional users of federal public lands.
"This legislation is key to ensuring that our hunting and shooting heritage continues to endure, even amidst continued threats from anti-hunting and anti-gun special interest groups, on federal lands," said NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel Lawrence G. Keane.
The bill specifically directs the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management to utilize the multi-use mandates in their agencies' respective land-management plans to promote sportsmen and sportswomen's access to forest and public lands.
The bill would further provide federal land managers with the authority to designate specific areas for recreational shooting.
For more, go to: http://sports.espn.go.com/outdoors/general/news/story?id=4546268
Also:
-- Should big city mayors support gun control? No; http://www.kansascity.com/273/story/1494109.html
[ Read Full Post ]October 19, 2009 by The Second Amendment Foundation on Oct. 9 warned Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels to heed the public rejection of a proposed gun ban at city parks facilities or face the consequences in court. SAF obtained information from the mayor's office that the overwhelming majority of citizens living both inside and outside the city turned thumbs down on the mayor's plan to ban even legally-carried firearms in city parks facilities. Nickels has already been advised by Attorney General Rob McKenna that the city has no authority to enact such a ban, which would be illegal under the state's preemption law.
Only 8 percent of Seattle residents commenting on the idea support it, according to figures from the mayor's office. Ninety-two percent of Seattleites who opined rejected the idea. Only 2 percent of respondents who live outside the city support the proposed ban, and 98 percent oppose the idea. Deadline for comments was last Sunday. SAF has learned that the city received 1,088 comments via e-mail, and only 44 supported the mayor's proposal. Ten more telephone comments were received, with only one favoring the ban.
"This is a crushing defeat for Mayor Nickels," said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb. "His office has argued that nobody would be prosecuted specifically for violating the ban, but only be charged with criminal trespass if they refuse to leave a facility after being told to do so. That is disingenuous.. It is still a ban and it is still a violation of state preemption."
SAF has also learned that the mayor's strategy now is apparently to have such a ban enacted by order of the director of Parks and Recreation.
For more, go to: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/saf-warns-seattle-mayor-to-heed-public-rejection-of-gun-ban-63783682.html
Also:
-- Gun Rights 101: Public comment goes heavily against Nickels gun ban; http://www.examiner.com/x-4525-Seattle-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m10d8-Gun-Rights-101-Public-comment-goes-heavily-against-Nickels-gun-ban
-- Mallahan: McGinn, all about 'opposition,' wrong for Seattle; http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/archives/181254.asp
[ Read Full Post ]
|
|
