Posts Tagged War on Guns

Impossible Law Leads To No New Guns In California

California law requires a technology in guns that does not exist.

From San Diego Rostra:

Last year Democratic Attorney General Kamala Harris decided that a law signed by Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2007 would now be put into effect. The law requires every pistol sold by a dealer in California have a serial number on the tiny tip of the firing pin so that it imprints an identifying mark on the ejected casing of a firedcartridge. Without this, a pistol cannot get onto the “not unsafe” list. It was agreed upon at the time of passage that the law would not go into effect until the imprint technology was developed.

Anti-gun laws passed in Sacramento have already ended sales by manufacturers like Barrett Firearms and STI International. Smith & Wesson and Ruger have joined fellow manufacturer Glock and organizationsSecond Amendment Foundation and National Shooting Sports Foundation in a lawsuit against California regarding their “not unsafe” gun list scheme. The attorney heading the case is Alan Gura, who in 2008 helped win Heller vs. D.C. in front of the Supreme Court, which ruled that the Second Amendment is an individual right.

, , , , ,

No Comments

Firearms on Traveling Across States

From Herald-Tribune:

Allen is a 27-year old single mom from Philly, who had a valid pennsylvania concealed carry permit. She strayed across the border into New Jersey last year, was subsequently stopped by police, and told the officer she was armed with a .380 Bersa Thunder.

She was arrested and charged with unlawful possession of a weapon and armor-penetrating bullets.

She is now facing a three-year mandatory minimum sentence.

, , , ,

No Comments

California Congressman Wants To Ban Body Armor

Why would the government need to ban body armor unless it thought it would fight its citizens?

From Congressman Mike Honda:

Washington, DC – Congressman Mike Honda (D-CA17) today introduced the Responsible Body Armor Possession Act of 2014, which allows law enforcement to respond to active shooters more effectively. It accomplishes this by prohibiting the sale, purchase, use, or possession of enhanced military-grade body armor by anyone who is not a member of law enforcement, active duty military, or other authorized users.

“There is no reason this type of armor, which is designed for warfare, should be available in our communities except for those who need it, like law enforcement,” Congressman Honda said. “There’s nothing more dangerous than what a well-armored, unstoppable active shooter can do. This bill is common-sense and long overdue.”

The Responsible Body Armor Possession Act has the support of Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen, Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, Alameda County Sheriff Gregory Ahern, Santa Clara County Sheriff Laurie Smith, Santa Clara Chief of Police Mike Sellers, and Milpitas Chief of Police Steve Pangelinan; along with the Fraternal Order of Police, the Violence Policy Center, the Coalition for Peace Action, and Stop Handgun Violence.

Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen said, “There is an ongoing arms race between violent criminals and police officers. Let’s make sure that the men and women who stand bravely between us and the gunfire win that high-stakes race. Let’s make sure criminals and gang-bangers never walk our streets shielded with military-grade body armor and the arrogance of someone who cannot be stopped.”

 Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley said, “I commend Congressman Honda on this important piece of legislation, and thank him for his long-standing leadership in keeping our communities safe and strong.  This law will serve to combat our nation’s epidemic of gun violence and protect communities and law enforcement from mass shootings.”

“By limiting civilian access to body armor that is designed to protect against ‘law enforcement ammunitions’ and weapons that are ‘generally only used in tactical situations,’ the legislation would be an important step forward in reducing the availability of military-style gear that enables shooters to attack innocent civilians and confront law enforcement responders with a level of firepower that has no place on America’s streets,” said Kristen Rand of the Violence Policy Center.

 

, , , , ,

No Comments

Professor Says People Should Piss Themselves and Run When They See Open Carry Activists

UND Philosophy Professor advocates irrational behavior when people see guns:

The questions that concerns me now is how we bystanders should react when people come into a store with guns. There really is no legitimate way of determining intent. Even if the people with guns are carrying a sign claiming to be activists (which they do not do), they could be lying, just setting us all up for slaughter. And since there is no way to know what is on their minds, all we have are our instincts, but as we all should know, our instincts are often racist, classist, and frequently mistaken. So, what should we do?

My proposal is as follows: we should all leave. Immediately. Leave the food on the table in the restaurant. Leave the groceries in the cart, in the aisle. Stop talking or engaging in the exchange. Just leave, unceremoniously, and fast.

But here is the key part: don’t pay. Stopping to pay in the presence of a person with a gun means risking your and your loved ones’ lives; money shouldn’t trump this. It doesn’t matter if you ate the meal. It doesn’t matter if you’ve just received food from the deli counter that can’t be resold. It doesn’t matter if you just got a haircut. Leave. If the business loses money, so be it. They can make the activists pay.

Here is his response after some criticism:

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

The War on Women is Gun Control

, , , ,

No Comments

An Open Letter to President Barack H. Obama by Gun Owners of America

Dear President Obama:

As Executive Director of Gun Owners of America, Inc., and Executive Vice President of Gun Owners Foundation, and on behalf of our over 300,000 members and supporters, I respectfully bring to your attention a matter that requires your immediate action.

The official White House website includes a page1 which purports to describe key provisions of the United States Constitution. With respect to the Second Amendment, the complete description of the Second Amendment on the website is as follows:

“The Second Amendment gives citizens the right to bear arms.” [Emphasis original.]

Even recognizing that the website attempts to present only a simple summary of provisions of the Constitution, the description is highly inaccurate, and should be immediately corrected so as not to mislead the American people as to the true nature and scope of the Second Amendment. There are two separate problems with the White House website. Read the rest of this entry »

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

California To Allow Family Veto Power Over Your Rights

From the Associate Press:

California could become the first state to allow family members, licensed therapists and health care providers to petition a judge to take firearms from someone who has shown signs that they could harm others or themselves.

, , , ,

No Comments

Anti-gun Ad Makes Case For Women To Have Guns

, , , , , ,

No Comments

NY State Confiscating Guns

I thought “they” said it wouldn’t happen?

From Conservative Daily:

We learned of another incident from a post on NewYorkFirearms.com. A Nassau County man answered his front door to see a swarm of cops. He was told that the police were there to check his firearm’s serial numbers. Under New York law, the police have the authority to verify that the serial numbers registered with the State are correct. That is one of the conditions of owning a firearm. However, in this particular incident, Police entered the home without a warrant.

It was only after the safe was opened that the police informed the homeowner that this wasn’t a routine inspection… it was a confiscation order. After registering his firearms with the state, the police realized that the man had been found guilty of a misdemeanor charge FIFTEEN years ago. Not only was it a misdemeanor, but it might as well have been a lifetime ago!

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

NY Wants Information About “Suspicious” Legal Purchases

, , , , ,

No Comments

Canada Reversing Gun Control Laws

From Sun News Network:

The act would limit the powers of provincial chief firearms officers, make all firearm licences possession-and-acquisition (PAL) licences, make it easier for legal gun owners to transport restricted firearms around their home province, provide a grace period to renew expired gun licenses, make the gun safety course mandatory for new shooters, and crack down further on domestic abusers owning guns.

, , , , ,

No Comments

“The Most Dangerous Guns in America”

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

Judge Rules D.C. Gun Ban Unconstitutional

From Fox News:

A federal judge in the District of Columbia on Saturday overturned the city’s total ban on residents being allowed to carry firearms outside their home in a landmark decision for gun-rights activists.

Judge Frederick Scullin Jr. wrote in his ruling in Palmer v. District of Columbia that the right to bear arms extends outside the home, therefore gun-control laws in the nation’s capital are “unconstitutional.”

Update from Roll Call:

Though they won’t yet say how far they are willing to take their fight, District of Columbia officials plan to do everything in their power to limit the carrying of handguns in the nation’s capital, arguing that despite a court’s ruling that paves the way for more permissive laws, Washington is a unique place with heightened security concerns.

“An absolute ban on [carrying handguns] may not pass constitutional muster regardless of the judge, so we’re going to prepare by working on legislation that will pass muster” said Tommy Wells, a Democrat who represents Capitol Hill on the D.C. Council.

, , , ,

No Comments

Texas Judge Upholds First Amendment For Open Carry Group

From KDFW:

Dallas News | myFOXdfw.com

, , , ,

No Comments

Beretta Abandons Maryland For Tennessee

Beretta abandoning Maryland

Full Press Release:

Beretta U.S.A. Corp., located in Accokeek, Maryland, announced today that it has decided to move its manufacturing capabilities from its existing location to a new production facility that it is building in Gallatin, Tennessee.  The Gallatin facility is scheduled to be opened in mid-2015.  Beretta U.S.A. had previously planned to use the new Gallatin, Tennessee facility for new machinery and production of new products only.

“During the legislative session in Maryland that resulted in passage of the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, the version of the statute that passed the Maryland Senate would have prohibited Beretta U.S.A. from being able to manufacture, store or even import into the State products that we sell to customers throughout the United States and around the world.  While we were able in the Maryland House of Delegates to reverse some of those obstructive provisions, the possibility that such restrictions might be reinstated in the future leaves us very worried about the wisdom of maintaining a firearm manufacturing factory in the State,” stated Jeff Cooper, General Manager for Beretta U.S.A. Corp.

“While we had originally planned to use the Tennessee facility for new equipment and for production of new product lines only, we have decided that it is more prudent from the point of view of our future welfare to move the Maryland production lines in their entirety to the new Tennessee facility,” Cooper added.

The transition of production from Beretta U.S.A.’s Maryland facility to the Tennessee facility will not occur until 2015 and will be managed so as not to disrupt deliveries to Beretta customers.  Beretta U.S.A.’s production of the U.S. Armed Forces M9 9mm pistol will continue at the Accokeek, Maryland facility until all current orders from the U.S. Armed Forces have been filled.

“We have not yet begun groundbreaking on the Tennessee facility and we do not anticipate that that building will be completed until the middle part of 2015,” continued Cooper.  “That timing, combined with our need to plan an orderly transition of production from one facility to the other so that our delivery obligations to customers are not disrupted, means that no Beretta U.S.A. Maryland employee will be impacted by this news for many months.  More importantly, we will use this time to meet with every Beretta U.S.A. employee whose Maryland job might be affected by the move to discuss with them their interest in taking a position at our new facility in Tennessee or, if they are not willing to do so, to lay out a long-term strategy for remaining with the Company while our production in Maryland continues.”

Beretta U.S.A. anticipates that the Gallatin, Tennessee facility will involve $45 million of investment in building and equipment and the employment of around 300 employees during the next five years.

Beretta U.S.A. has no plans to relocate its office, administrative and executive support functions from its Accokeek, Maryland facility.

Media Contact:
Jeff Reh
JReh@BerettaUSA.com

, , , ,

No Comments