Category: Cult of Gun Control

My first post as a Virginian

OK, I am not a Virginian, yet, but will be early next month, and it seems people like me are drawing the scorn of the Cult of Gun Control. Bearing Arms ha s a piece today that shows just how low the opinion of people who grasp liberty is among gun control zealots who are really bent out of shape because counties in Virginia are making clear they will not enforce any new draconian gun control measures the left is dreaming of passing

I think strategically, this was a bad move by gun control advocates. If, as they claim, these Second Amendment Sanctuary resolutions are meaningless, it would be far better to ignore them than attack the movement as a “fairy tale” led by “a traveling circus of AR-15 toting white men”, which is exactly what Lori Hass, the executive director of the Virginia Coalition to Stop Gun Violence has done in a column for the Roanoke Times newspaper. For something that’s supposedly not a threat to her gun control agenda, she sounds awfully bothered.

The handful of counties in Virginia that have passed these symbolic gestures are mostly rural, conservative areas. They have been bombarded with Van Cleave and his followers, armed to the teeth demanding sanctuary from policies that are supported by 90% of Virginia citizens. Requiring universal background checks or establishing an Extreme Risk Protection Order in Virginia will do nothing to infringe on the rights of law-abiding, responsible gun owners in the Commonwealth. All of the bills in the governor’s package presented this past summer have been upheld by courts across the country.

None of them have been upheld by the Supreme Court, though the Court certainly hasn’t heard every challenge to a gun law that’s come before it. More importantly, Haas is wrong when she says that universal background checks and a red flag law won’t infringe on the rights of legal gun owners. That’s exactly who these laws target. It’s criminals who illegally possess firearms that are ignored by virtually every one of Ralph Northam’s proposals.

Haas also conveniently leaves out bills that would turn Virginians into felons if they hang on to their semi-automatic rifles. As the National Shooting Sports Foundation points out:

Virginia Democrat State Sen. Richard L. Saslaw, who represents portions of Alexandria, Fairfax County and Falls Church, all suburbs of Washington D.C., sponsored S.B. 16, which would prohibit the sale, transfer and possession of so-called “assault firearms” and certain magazines. Violating the measure would be a state felony.

The text of the proposed legislation goes further than the states with the strictest of gun control laws. If passed, Virginia’s lawmakers would instantly turn lawful owners of America’s most popular-selling centerfire rifle into instant felons, unless they dispossess themselves of their legally purchased modern sporting rifle. There are way more than 16 million modern sporting rifles in private ownership in America. While the exact number of these popular rifles in Virginia isn’t known as state-specific estimates don’t exist, it’s important to note there is no proposed grandfather clause to exempt the likely several hundreds of thousands of rifles already in legal possession or even to register them.

In short, Saslaw and his ilk seek to replace natural rights with their “values”. And, as Cam Edwards notes those values certainly do not include self-defense

State Sen. Dick Saslaw, who represents a blue district in the D.C. suburbs of Fairfax County, has introduced SB 18, a gun control bill that not only imposes universal background checks on firearms transfers, but makes it a “Class 1 misdemeanor for any person knowingly to authorize a child under the age 18 to use a firearm except when the person is under the supervision of an adult.”

When I was in Amelia County last night, I heard several folks in the crowd talking about their kids not being able to go hunting or plinking on their own property if this bill passes, and by my reading, that’s exactly right. In fact, the bill would prohibit juveniles from being able to access a firearm in self-defense, even if you’ve taught your daughter how to use a firearm and believe she’s responsible enough to use one if necessary. If she’s home alone, she better not have access to a gun. If she uses one in self-defense against a burglar, Sen. Saslaw wants the state to argue that the girl would’ve been better off not being able to protect herself, and to charge mom and dad with a misdemeanor.

Miscreants like Saslaw and Hass do not believe in liberty in any meaningful form. They are of the left, and, as such are Collectivists. Collectivists, are, of course, the mortal enemies of Individualism, which embraces natural rights. No natural right is more essential than a right to self-defense. Thus, no natural right more is detested by the left than that right. This is why we cannot sacrifice such a right, or any portion of it on the false altar of “common sense legislation”. Never forget this folks. 

Did I ever tell y’all that the left constantly redefines things

The left has no bigger fantasy than to disarm Americans. And, they constantly use scary words, like “assault weapons”, and “weapons of war” and “high-capacity magazines” to scare the uninformed so that they will embrace gun control. Recently, they have ramped up their rhetoric to include calling for the banning of “military style weapons”. Increasingly we hear the left call for banning such weapons, and even for forcing Americans to surrender such weapons. The problem is what they say are “military style weapons” are really firearms that tens and tens of millions of Americans own, and that millions of Americans legally carry every day. Enter Joe Biden

From the Seattle Times:

While saying he supports the Second Amendment, Biden called the absolutist arguments of some gun-rights supporters “bizarre.” Noting people can’t own machine guns or bazookas, Biden said, “Why should we allow people to have military-style weapons including pistols with 9-mm bullets and can hold 10 or more rounds?”

These are not “military style weapons” They are commonly owned, and carried, and used hundreds of thousands of time annually by Americans to defend themselves. Yes, Biden and the rest of the left are lying, and they know it. It is all a means to an end. The end of your liberty.

The folly of gun control exposed

This story from Bearing Arms illustrates how many times gun control,laws make places like schools less safe

Santa Clarita was a tragedy, but I think we can all agree that it could have been much worse. With “only” two dead, it wasn’t another Parkland by any stretch of the imagination, much less a Virginia Tech which is still the most deadly school shooting in American history. As it was, though, it was bad enough. Two children are dead. That’s a tragedy by any measure.

Part of the reason it wasn’t worse was because there was an armed response. Off-duty police officers carrying firearms were at the school when things started and they jumped into action.

Had this happened in Connecticut, however, those cops would likely have been felons for doing what they did.

A school shooting in Santa Clarita, California took the lives of two students and injured several others Thursday November 14th.  But it could have been much worse.

Three off duty police officers that were on the scene dropping off their own children, didn’t think twice before running into the chaos. Response time was within 16 seconds. These officers are credited with saving lives for immediately rendering first aid to students that had been shot. They are heroes.

But in Connecticut, those off duty officers would be considered criminals. In accordance with Connecticut general statute Sec. 53a-217b, Possession of a weapon on school ground is considered a Class D felony.

And yes, this law applies to Connecticut’s Law Enforcement officers.

If the off-duty officers had a firearm on their person, and entered school grounds to assist in this type of incident, they could potentially be charged with a class D felony.

Tom Knighton has some very good thoughts and please go read them. Think of how much worse that incident might have been. And all because of laws meant to deter school shootings. Laws that were not passed with such intent, but intents are not the same as results.

Catholic Bishops not really digging self-defense

Fools! Nothing in religion requires taking away people’s ability to defend themselves. H/T Bearing Arms

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is meeting in crime-ridden Baltimore, Maryland for its fall assembly, and one bishop used the setting to call for a dialogue between rural gun owners and urban residents. What Bishop Frank Dewane is really asking for, however, is for rural gun owners to bend their knee and accept all kinds of infringements on their right to keep and bear arms in the name of public safety.

He pointed to the need to address gun violence, which has ravaged many urban centers, while acknowledging the legitimate concerns among responsible gun owners of losing access to firearms for hunting or, in some cases, protection.

Since 1975, the USCCB has issued a series of statements and pastoral letters addressing gun violence. Individual bishops, in their capacity as chairmen of USCCB committees, have sent letters to Congress outlining the conference’s concern that lives are being needless lost because of the widening availability of guns, including military-style weapons.

However, Dewane’s call goes beyond legislative efforts and appears to open the door for church leaders to seek a common ground in addressing gun violence.

“Human life is sacred … and we need to approach this with the full strength of our teaching,” he told the assembly.

Bishop Dewane also said the USCCB is not seeking a total limit to handguns, but would welcome broader background checks and some limits on gun ownership.

Bishop Dewane should take a close look at Maryland’s gun control laws and see how well they’re working in Baltimore. Back in 2013 the state passed the Maryland Firearms Safety Act, and homicides in Baltimore have been climbing ever since, from 235 murders in 2013 to more than 300 homicides per year ever since. The Firearms Safety Act wasn’t some minor gun control law; in fact it contained everything that gun control activists had asked for, including an “assault weapons” and magazine ban, a licensing requirement to own a handgun. It hasn’t worked.

Why should gun owners, rural or not, roll over and support these laws that make it harder to legally exercise a right, but don’t do a damn thing about addressing drug and gang-related violence driving the crimes?

Of course, the left never focuses any energy on anything like punishing criminals, longer sentences for violent crimes, etc. Their first, and really only aim is to target gun owners.

The very real danger in red flag laws

Remember this new Marxifornia law that allows pretty much anyone to “red flag” gun owners

The state’s “red flag” law, meanwhile, will now allow almost anyone to petition courts to take away someone’s firearms.

The law currently allows law enforcement and family members of troubled individuals to ask the courts to issue a “gun-violence restraining order” that takes away their firearms, but the measure signed Friday by Newsom adds teachers, school administrators, employers and co-workers to the list of those who may petition the courts to remove guns.

Assemblyman Phil Ting (D-San Francisco) authored the bill after school officials said they had raised concerns about the behavior of the Parkland shooting suspect before he allegedly went on a rampage in February 2018.

“Thoughts and prayers are no longer enough,” Ting said Friday. “With school and workplace shootings on the rise, it’s common sense to give the people we see every day the power to intervene and prevent tragedies.”

This is where the Cult of Gun Control would love to take “red flag laws”, because it would allow an all out assault on gun owners. It would destroy due process, and would pave the way for even more inane laws. And, for those who would cast a doubtful eye to my theory, consider this

An 84-year old retired police officer, military veteran, and school crossing guard in Massachusetts has had his firearms seized and was fired from his job after someone overheard a conversation at a diner and reported him as a threat to the local school.

Stephen Nichols says he was talking with a friend at a local restaurant on Martha’s Vineyard when the subject of the local school resource officer came up. Nichols was upset that the officer, in his opinion, was “leaving his post” by going to get coffee at a nearby convenience shop instead of remaining on campus to protect students, and said that somebody could “shoot up the school” in the officer’s absence. Based on nothing more than that simple remark, Nichols’ life was turned upside down and the Tisbury police have a lot of questions to answer.

Nichols said the waitress made a complaint to Tisbury Police about what she overheard and on the strength of that, Saloio and another officer relieved Nichols of his crossing guard duties while he was in the midst of performing them and subsequently drove to his home and took away his firearms license and guns.

“He came up and told me what I said was a felony but he wasn’t going to charge me,” Nichols said of Saloio.

The confiscated guns were later turned over to Nichols’ son-in-law, Nichols told The Times.

Asked if he was given a letter or any paperwork for the seizure of his license, Nichols said,

“No he just told me to hand it over so I took it out of my wallet and handed it to him.”

Nichols says never received any receipts acknowledging the seizure of his firearms either, and notes since he obtained his Massachusetts firearms license in 1958 he’s never had any issues until now.

This also points out the danger of forcing people to have a “license” to own firearms. And it illustrates the perils of useless gun control measures that not can be, but will be used against law-abiding Americans

The left chirps about stopping “gun violence” takes it easy on thugs who carry illegal guns

Zendo Deb has a story that will make any sensible person very angry, especially law-abiding Americans that own firearms. 

More on Chicago’s recipe for more crime. Rapper “G Herbo” gets probation in gun case.

If you make something less expensive, you will see more of it. In this article, CWB Chicago looks at Cook County’s continuing efforts to make gun crime less expensive.

Rap star Herbert “G Herbo” Wright reached a plea deal with prosecutors who accused him of having a handgun in a limo near State and Roosevelt in February 2018. Two other men in the vehicle were also charged with having guns.

Wright and prosecutors struck a deal in which the rapper pleaded guilty to one count of misdemeanor carrying a firearm while prosecutors dropped four felony gun charges. Judge Matthew Coughlan sentenced him to two years probation, nine days time served, and levied a fine of $494.

Criminals, carrying ILLEGAL firearms get their wrists slapped. Meanwhile the same criminal coddling miscreants demonize lawful gun owners and demand we cede our liberty to the state. Here are two more story from the link above

Prosecutors said surveillance video captured images of Ricardo Ortiz pulling out a handgun in the garage at 240 East Illinois in August 2018. He allegedly fired the weapon at a security camera and then into the garage, striking a 20-year-old man in the abdomen, according to court records. The victim recovered from his injuries and identified Ortiz as the shooter, police said.

Ortiz was on second chance probation for burglary at the time of the incident. He also had pending cases for theft, narcotics, and probation violation. He repeatedly failed to appear in court and had been put on and taken off electronic monitoring in the months before the Streeterville incident.

In a deal with prosecutors, Ortiz received a sentence of one year with 499 days credit for time served in the gun case. Judge Timothy Chambers also sentenced him to concurrent terms of two years for manufacture-delivery of cannabis, two years for a burglary in Justice, Illinois, and three years for possession of fentanyl.

With time served and an anticipated 50% credit for good behavior, his parole date is set for Feb. 2, 2021.

Enough to make you scream isn’t it? How do those “prosecutors” sleep at night? Try this one folks

Prosecutors accused 22-year-old Gerald Hunley of shooting at people in the 800 block of North Cambridge on June 9, 2018. He was a registered gun offender at the time due to a previous gun violation.

Hunley reached a deal with prosecutors in which he pleaded guilty to aggravated unlawful use of a weapon while the state dropped two counts of aggravated discharge of a firearm, two counts of being a felon in possession of a weapon, and three other felonies.

Judge Catherine Haberkorn sentenced him to six years in prison with 443 days credit for time served. With an anticipated 50% sentence reduction for good behavior, Hunley will be paroled in July 2021.

More stories at the links and here is the ugly truth about the recent mass shooting in Kansas City from Cam Edwards at Bearing Arms

A man accused of orchestrating a mass shooting at a bar in Kansas City, Kansas last weekend could have been sentenced to nine years in prison for trafficking in contraband while behind bars, but a Kansas judge gave the murder suspect probation instead. Hugo Villanueva-Morales is still on the run after allegedly opening fire in a private bar Sunday, killing four people and wounding five more along with an accomplice, but he shouldn’t have been on the streets in the first place.

Villanueva-Morales was a violent felon serving time for aggravated robbery when he went before a judge last year on charges of trafficking contraband while behind bars. The judge in the case could have sentenced him to nearly a decade in prison, but decided on probation because he decided the criminal had “accepted responsibility.” As it turns out, this isn’t the first time Judge Michael Gibbens has caused an outry because of his decisions.

The story gets even more maddening, go read it all.

Your Marxist Moron of the Day

Edward Stack is the CEO of Dicks Sporting Goods,  and, it would seem, a virtue signalling  fool as well

Dick’s Sporting Goods CEO Edward Stack wants you to know he is not anti-Second Amendment. He is, however, against having his stores associated with any more mass shootings.

So, he took guns off the shelves.

And, to keep them off the streets, he destroyed them. Lots of them.

“I said, ‘You know what? If we really think these things should be off the street, we need to destroy them,’” Stack said in an interview with CBS News.

Reality #1 evil people commit evil acts. Evil people. And no amount of bumper sticker mentality will change that

He turned the $5 million of AR-15s he had in stock into scrap metal.

Then, following the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Parkland, Stack learned the shooter purchased a shotgun from one of his stores. It’s then, he said, that he had enough. He changed store policy, limiting firearm purchases to people over 21 years old.

He said the move has cost his company about $250 million.

Reality #2 making laws or rules that punish good people does nothing to change the behavior of bad people.

Stack said he isn’t expecting to change the world, just to do his part to save a life.

“So many people say to me, you know, ‘If we do what you want to do, it’s not going to stop these mass shootings,’” he told CBS. “And my response is, ‘You’re probably right, it won’t. But if we do these things and it saves one life, don’t you think it’s worth it?’”

Surely! Of course if we banned stairs in homes, or climbing trees, or swimming, lives could be saved. If we mandated everyone wear a helmet all the time we would save some lives. What if we banned cars? Or designed them to be unable  to exceed 25 MPH? That would save at least one life right? Hey, why not ban anyone from ever eating solid food, thus preventing choking! That would save some lives right? 

Yes, all of those ideas would be seen as moronic. But Stack’s Folly is even more foolish

Stack himself admits that no, his “look at me and how much I care” stunt will not stop any mass shootings, and he admits it will hurt his business. Yet, he persists digging in the Pit of Eternal Stupidity! And yes, doing something that you yourself admit will not solve the issue you are so concerned with solving is the epitome of stupidity!

Dicks, of course has every right to sell what they wish, and, I have every right to not shop there. But the idiocy of embracing policies and laws that will do nothing to stop evil people from slaughtering innocents is the height of foolishness.