Victims reject deceit that guns, not people, are responsible for gun violence
When victims of gun violence and their families disavow the false rhetoric being force-fed as fact to a frightened, gullible public by gun control zealots seeking to use them for their own purposes, take notice. This happened twice last week, not as partisan rebuttals to orchestrated contrivance, but as rejections of the premise that guns, not people, are responsible.
Colorado State Rep. Patrick Neville (R-Castle Rock), a student at Columbine High School in 1999 when two classmates murdered 12 students, has proposed a bill that would allow people with a permit to carry a concealed weapon on school property.
The 1990 Gun-Free School Zones Act prohibits law-abiding gun owners and concealed-carry permit holders from carrying in a school zone. Since the act was passed, nine of the top 10 deadliest school shootings have occurred.
An April 2014 poll from Quinnipiac University found 50 percent of Colorado voters support allowing teachers and school officials to carry guns on school grounds. Men supported the measure 59 percent to 38 percent while women were opposed 51 to 42 percent.
“This bill will allow honest law-abiding citizens to carry a concealed firearm for protection if they choose to,” Neville said in a news release published by townhall.com. “But most importantly, it will give them the right to be equipped to defend our children from the most dangerous situations.”
Also last week, an Oregon woman whose sister was shot dead by her estranged husband in October 2013, responded with appalled indignation when Ann Wright, a lackey for the Michael Bloomberg-financed fringe group Everytown for Gun Safety, attempted to manipulate her into making her late sister a victim again.
Jennie Cochran was so angry, so insulted by Wright’s condescending comments about her slain sister, Jessie, that she recorded part of their conversation, which was played on Fox News on Feb. 4.
“If you felt comfortable doing so, share your story so other people would understand why we need to strengthen our gun laws,” Wright is recorded saying.
“I am actually very against it,” Cochran shot back. “I am very pro-gun, as is Jessie. So I would really hope you guys don’t use her story for anything. …because the only thing that would have saved her was a gun.”
Cochrane told the chastened Wright that more gun laws only “makes more victims,” and did not want Jessie’s story used for that purpose.
For more, go to:
FIREARMS ECOMMERCE BEDEVILED
AngelList pulls ‘GunTab,’ search for ‘PayPal for guns’ continues
AngelList, a crowdsourcing site for startups, has apparently removed the listing for GunTab, a company that aims to be the “PayPal for firearms,” less than a day after promoting it.
According to Philip Ryan of bankinnovation.com, AngelList issued an email promoting GunTab, a startup, on its contact list on Feb 1. But by the next morning, the listing “was yielding a 404 error, meaning that the page was removed from the AngelList site,” he wrote.
AngelList lists more than 430,000 companies, including 48,000 seeing investment funds. It offers investment syndicates in which startups raise money from accredited investors investing alongside prominent “angel investors.”
“That is not to say GunTab has holstered its operations,” Ryan writes, noting GunTab can be found online and maintains a Twitter feed (@useguntab), although the service has not yet launched.
GunTab, based in Austin, Texas—“where gun culture and tech culture intersect,” Ryan writes—is seeking to fill the void created when PayPal and Craigslist banned firearms listings.
“There were a few attempts to create (a “PayPal for guns”), but none were successful,” Ryan writes. “As a result, firearm e-commerce was stuck in the digital stone age. People spent years mailing personal checks to each other, waiting weeks for payment processing, and suffering from scams. That was the status quo for over a decade.
“GunTab is looking to remedy this,” he concludes, “but it seems its funding strategy now has some, er, holes to work out.”
AngelList has not stated why it removed GunTab.
For more, go to:
STATE LEGISLATIVE ROUNDUP
Key committee hearing on Vermont background check bill looms Feb. 10
Vermont gun owners are encouraged to attend the Feb. 10 state Senate Judiciary Committee hearing and anticipated vote on Senate Bill 31, which, according to the NRA, “seeks to impose restrictions on the private transfer of firearms and will do nothing to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.”
Vermont has very few gun control laws, and has among the most permissive laws in the nation regarding the purchase and open or concealed carry of firearms. It neither issues nor requires a permit to carry a weapon on one’s person, openly or concealed.
Senate Bill 31, co-sponsored by Sens. Phil Baruth, (D-Chittenden), and Claire Ayer, (D-Addison), would require background checks on all private gun sales, except those within an immediate family. The seller and the buyer would appear in person before a licensed firearms dealer to facilitate the sale.
According to analysis by the NRA, the bill will only “create undue and costly burdens for law-abiding Vermonters and is the first step towards completely criminalizing private transfers.”
Vermont is one of the safest states in the country “and SB 31 is a solution in search of a problem,” the NRA says.
Michael Bloomberg’s front fringe group, Everytown for Gun Safety and its local lackey affiliate, Gun Sense, has been lobbying on behalf of SB 31, citing flawed if not fabricated “facts,” including this: Since 1998, criminal background checks have blocked 356 domestic abusers in Vermont from buying a gun at a licensed gun dealer.
According to Gun Owners of Vermont, those 356 federal denials spanned a 17-year period, from 1998 to 2015, and were gleaned from 380,000 NICS checks.
“That is an average of 21 per year who attempted to buy a firearm legally, but were denied,” GOV said. “Even if everyone the people denied managed to obtain a firearm illegally, not one was actually used in a domestic violence situation, because that information would be singled out and used as a ‘trophy’ by Gun Sense to push their agenda.”
For more, go to:
[Vermont: Anti-Gun Bill to be Considered in Committee Next Tuesday](https://www.nraila.org/articles/20150203/vermont-anti-gun-bill-to-be-considered-in-committee-next-tuesday/ Senate approves gun bill without protection order provision; http://www.uppermichiganssource.com/news/story.aspx?id=1158726#.VNQ_6Vo7bFI/)
SAF: DC’s ‘legitimate need’ requirement constitutionally illegitimate
The Second Amendment Foundation has filed a lawsuit against Washington D.C claiming that the city’s restrictive concealed carry law, which requires people to demonstrate a “legitimate need” to carry a handgun before receiving a permit, is a violation of the Second Amendment.
“The city’s requirements to obtain a carry permit are so restrictive in nature as to be prohibitive to virtually all applicants,” SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb said in a statement published by the Washington Times on Feb. 3. “It’s rather like a ‘Catch 22,’ in which you can apply all day long, but no reason is sufficiently good enough for Chief Lanier to issue a permit.”
According to D.C’s concealed carry law, a resident must prove to the Washington Police Department that they have “good reason to fear injury to his or her person” or “any other proper reason for carrying a pistol” in order to receive a permit to carry a handgun.
“The last time we checked,” Gottlieb told the Times, “We had a Bill of Rights that applied to the entire nation, including the District. It’s not, and never has been, a ‘Bill of Needs.’”
For more, go to: