Posts Tagged ‘anti-gun idiocy’

Homeless woman’s stun gun a right-to-bear-arms case

Posted: November 29, 2014 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , ,
0

BOSTON — Jaime Caetano was beaten so seriously by her former boyfriend that she ended up in the hospital. So when a friend offered her a stun gun to protect herself, she took it.

Caetano, who is homeless, never had to use it but she now finds herself at the center of a Second Amendment case headed to the highest court in Massachusetts.

The Supreme Judicial Court is being asked to decide whether a state law that prohibits private citizens from possessing stun guns infringes on their right to keep and bear arms. In an unusual twist, the court is also being asked to examine whether the Second Amendment right to defend yourself in your own home applies in the case of a homeless person.

Police found Caetano’s stun gun in her purse during a shoplifting investigation at a supermarket in 2011. She told police she needed it to defend herself against her ex-boyfriend, against whom she had obtained multiple restraining orders.

During her trial, Caetano, 32, testified that her ex-boyfriend repeatedly came to her workplace and threatened her. One night, she showed him the stun gun and he “got scared and left me alone,” she said.

She was found guilty of violating the state law that bans private possession of stun guns, devices that deliver an electric shock when pressed against an attacker.

In her appeal, her lawyer, Benjamin Keehn, argues that a stun gun falls within the meaning of “arms” under the Second Amendment. Keehn wrote in a legal brief that the state’s ban “cannot be squared with the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.” He also argues that self-defense outside the home is part of the core right provided by the Second Amendment.

Massachusetts is one of five states that ban stun guns and Tasers for private citizens, said Eugene Volokh, a constitutional-law professor at UCLA who has written extensively about Second Amendment issues. The devices are used by law-enforcement agencies around the country.

http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2025125177_stungunxml.html

‘Progressives’ with environmental objections to guns silent on amnesty impacts

Posted: November 28, 2014 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery, anti-gun idiocy
Tags: , , ,
0

Why would an environmental impact study be required for administration action authorizing possession of guns in national parks, but not for action authorizing the presence and activities of millions of foreign nationals?

Why would an environmental impact study be required for administration action authorizing possession of guns in national parks, but not for action authorizing the presence and activities of millions of foreign nationals?

MVM is hiring. The government contractor is seeking qualified nationwide transport specialists on behalf of the Department of Homeland Security to escort “Unaccompanied Children” by ground and air.

The company, boasts of “provid[ing] specialized services to both public and private sector clients. From protecting the children of King Hussein of Jordan, to supporting U.S. Embassies throughout the world, MVM has performed with distinction.” That distinction, especially for a “secret contractor” that has been embroiled in controversy, is no doubt enhanced by a leadership that includes politically-connected former careerists from the Secret Service and the U.S. Marshal’s Service.

The thing is, transporting these children, sheltering them, feeding them, clothing them, bathing them and dealing with the waste they generate will all have an environmental impact, and while seemingly negligible compared to the totality of things, that’s added to the millions of heretofore illegal aliens already in the country now empowered to stay, and to those on their way, attracted by seeing “migrants” who came before them rewarded for lawbreaking. Their long-term impact as an aggregate on the environment and on the resources needed to provide energy, sustenance and disposal, can hardly be considered negligible. Nor can the immediate and continuing impact of environmental destruction left in their wake.

http://www.examiner.com/article/progressives-with-environmental-objections-to-guns-silent-on-amnesty-impacts?CID=examiner_alerts_article

The Eight Dumbest Anti-Gun Political Statements of All Time

Posted: November 27, 2014 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery, anti-gun idiocy
Tags: , , ,
0

California Attorney General Seeks En Banc Review of Ninth Circuit’s Denial of her Request to Intervene in Peruta Case

Posted: November 27, 2014 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , ,
0

Today, November 26, California Attorney General (AG) Kamala Harris filed a request for en banc review of the Ninth Circuit’s denial of her request to intervene in the NRA supported case of Peruta v. San Diego, which produced a landmark decision striking down as a violation of the Second Amendment San Diego County Sheriff William Gore’s policy of refusing to issue licenses to carry firearms in public unless an applicant could demonstrate a special need for one.

The AG’s latest request comes after the Court denied the AG’s and several gun ban advocacy groups’ requests to join the case once they learned Sheriff Gore had decided not to further appeal the case.  The anti-gun rights groups have also filed a similar request for en banc review of the Ninth Circuit’s denial of their requests to intervene in the case.

If Harris is successful in overturning the Court’s order and is allowed to intervene in the Peruta case, all Ninth Circuit judges will then vote on whether to re-hear the Peruta case itself before an 11 judge en banc panel. If they decide to do so, the panel will either uphold the current decision supporting the Second Amendment or overturn it. The court could, however, simply vote not to rehear the case, thereby allowing the three-judge panel decision to stand.

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/state-legislation/2014/11/california-attorney-general-seeks-en-banc-review-of-ninth-circuit%E2%80%99s-denial-of-her-request-to-intervene-in-peruta-case.aspx

Obama’s DREAMer poster girl portends nightmare for gun owners

Posted: November 26, 2014 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , ,
0

“President Obama’s action is personal for me‏,” the subject of a Monday White House distribution list email signed by “Astrid Silva, DREAMer,” declares. “President Obama’s action on immigration offered me the chance to give back — to do right by the law, and contribute to this country that has given me so much. And his actions last week will give that opportunity to so many people who are Americans in their hearts, but not on paper.”

“Scripture tells us that we shall not oppress a stranger, for we know the heart of a stranger –- we were strangers once, too,” the president sermonized from Exodus in last week’s announcement on executive actions in which he “granted” special privileges to criminal aliens not available to legal immigrants who follow the rules, spending time and money to do things lawfully. When you’re a “progressive” with the self-anointed power to bypass the representatives of the people, the “wall of separation” only blocks infidels.

The administration’s “legitimate news media” partners were quick to pick up on all the right talking points to help spread the word. International Business Times talked about Silva’s “inspiring life story” and how Harry Reid was moved by her “heartfelt letters.” MSNBC did a sympathetic and supportive profile on the “passionate activist for immigration reform.” The Washington Post told readers how “A number of people [from Silva’s Dream Big Vegas activist group] burst into tears after the president mentioned her.”

Makes you feel like joining them, doesn’t it? Assuming anecdotes and emotional manipulation by a cynical politician and seasoned propagandists are all we need know about “the heart of a stranger”?

Is there a way to learn more?

Not from Silva’s Twitter account, unfortunately. Her Tweets are protected. For someone the nation is supposed to adopt and embrace with feel-good liberalism and tear-welling, sob sister sympathy, a lot of direct information about her seems to be “protected” as well, meaning we need to make inferences based on the company she keeps.

Problematically, the dreambigvegas.org link she posts doesn’t work. But fortunately, now that USA Today (a Gannett publication!) has given Astrid a chance to come out of the journalistic shadows, we learn she is also “the immigrant organizer for the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada.”

Now we’re getting somewhere. And talk about the company they keep. It’s almost like the Community Organizer in Chief had an imperial agenda besides bringing us all together in Kumbaya harmony.

We would be nowhere without all the PLANistas who fight everyday for reform and will continue to fight until there is a pathway to citizenship for all 11 million. We are ready for this fight.

No kidding.

You don’t say.

And what do the Reconqui… uh… PLANistas think about gun rights?

They’re stumping for so-called “background checks,” that is, for the billionaire-funded confiscation-enabling registration fraud. Even gun owners in their ranks are all for more mandates and controls, like “Left-leaning political activist Launce Rake,” who opposes Constitutional carry.

That last story evidently took place at Clark County Shooting Park, the locale that prompted NRA’s Wayne LaPierre to call earmarked pork-bringer Harry Reid “a true champion of the Second Amendment.” And speaking of that tie-in, we can return to another of Astrid’s passions, Dream Big Vegas, or at least to their Twitter feed, which while not updated for a while does have a most curious post, at least as far as this column is concerned.

http://www.examiner.com/article/obama-s-dreamer-poster-girl-portends-nightmare-for-gun-owners?CID=examiner_alerts_article

More Guns for Gabby, While Vets Lose Theirs

Posted: November 25, 2014 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , ,
1

We all know that Gabby Giffords was injured in a murderous attack by a deranged Democrat activist. We know that she suffered serious brain trauma and needed more than a year to regain even partial mobility and speech. We also know that she has staged a remarkable recovery becoming the figurehead of a gun control operation started by her husband, Mark Kelly. Rep. Giffords and Capt. Kelly often point out that they are not anti-gun and make show of buying, owning, and shooting guns.

Since we know all of that about Gabby Giffords, let me tell you about someone you don’t know; or maybe you do. We’ll call him Larry to protect his privacy. As with so many working-class American gun owners, Larry is a patriot, and when others were burning draft cards, he volunteered for the US Army. He suffered a traumatic brain injury from grenade shrapnel in Vietnam and, like Gabby, had to relearn simple things like walking, talking, and feeding himself. He never completely recovered, and the couple made due with Larry’s small disability pension and what his wife earned cleaning other people’s houses. One of his few joys has been getting out into nature and hunting – for the solitude he finds, and for meat – or just tinkering and plinking.

Age and health issues caught up with Larry’s wife a few years ago, putting the family in crisis. Larry’s VA benefits advisor told them that they could get more help from the government based on problems Larry was having managing their money. By agreeing that Larry was unable to handle his financial affairs, and having his wife appointed fiduciary for him, his disability payment would go up by an extra thousand dollars a month.

The couple grasped at the opportunity. A few weeks later I got a tearful call from Larry and his wife, looking for my advice. A letter had arrived from the VA informing them that Larry’s disability status was being upgraded. Then the letter said that Larry’s name would be forwarded to the FBI for inclusion in the National Instant Check System as someone who is “mentally incompetent,” and that he would be prohibited from possessing firearms or ammunition. The VA advised that all firearms and ammunition in the home must be removed, and that ever allowing Larry to have access to a firearm or ammunition would be a federal felony.

No one suggested that Larry is a danger to himself or anyone else. No one suggested that he is violent or unstable, or that anyone in the world will be safer or better off if Larry is not allowed to have access to firearms, but in order to get the help they needed, Larry must lose his right to arms for the rest of his life

http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/more-guns-gabby-while-vets-lose-theirs

Tallahassee Democrat Calls For Handgun Ban, Repeal of 2nd Amendment

Posted: November 25, 2014 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , ,
0

On November 22 the Tallahassee Democrat called for the repeal of the Second Amendment and a total ban on handguns and “assault rifles.”

For those who respond by saying that taking guns from law-abiding citizens will only leave them in the hands of criminals the Democrat says, “That’s a chance worth taking.”

The anti-Second Amendment piece was written by Democrat columnist Gerald Ensley, who argues that attacks like the one at FSU on November 20 prove the need for repealing the Second Amendment and banning certain categories of guns.

Ensley wrote:

I’m not talking about gun control. I’m not talking about waiting periods and background checks. I’m talking about flat-out banning the possession of handguns and assault rifles by individual citizens. I’m talking about repealing or amendment the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/11/23/Tallahassee-Democrat-Calls-For-Handgun-Ban-Repeal-of-2nd-Amendment

Scott Walker trial balloon from NRA director ignores amnesty danger

Posted: November 24, 2014 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , ,
0
Scott Walker shakes hands with Democrat challenger Mary Burke. While the two may have differed on guns, their agreement on amnesty means the long game is in her favor.
Scott Walker shakes hands with Democrat challenger Mary Burke. While the two may have differed on guns, their agreement on amnesty means the long game is in her favor.
Photo by Darren Hauck/Getty Images

On the surface, Scott Walker seems like a gun owner’s dream candidate for president. The Wisconsin governor is backed by the National Rifle Association, which lauds his signing into law concealed carry and castle doctrine legislation. The “On the Issues” political leadership website notes Walker opposes restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms.

It’s unsurprising then, that NRA Director Grover Norquist has co-authored a piece for Reuters explaining “What makes Wisconsin’s Republican Governor Scott Walker a good choice for 2016.” But in this case, Norquist is wearing a different hat – that of president of Americans for Tax Reform, teaming with ATR’s director of state affairs, Patrick Gleason.

So what’s not to like? Don’t both issues track with greater freedom? Where’s the conflict?

Wearing that different hat, Norquist campaigned for and endorsed Bob Dold for Congress, in spite of the “Republican’s” support for restricting gun purchases and possession which was known at the time. The unsuitability of Dold’s Democrat opponent notwithstanding, NRA Director Norquist chose his priorities and endorsed a known gun-grabber who went on to accept an award from the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence.

There’s an issue besides taxes Norquist has yet another hat for: immigration. Just like Barack Obama, Norquist endorses rewarding alien nationals who have broken U.S. law by entering and remaining in this country illegally with a “pathway to citizenship.”

And Walker agrees with him. Again, per “On the Issues,” he endorses that pathway reward. He wants to increase the legal influx of foreigners as well, and has flip-flopped on an Arizona-style bill that would allow police to stop suspected illegal immigrants. And while he has also supported Arizona’s attempts to deny state benefits to illegals, his pathway policy would soon render that a moot point.

So what does that have to do with gun rights?

Data compiled by the Pew Research Center shows overwhelming preference among “unauthorized immigrants” for the Democrat party. And the Democrats, as part of their official party platform, call for “strengthening our background check system … reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole.”

“Immigration reform will add over 8,000,000 anti-gun voters to the voting rolls,” Gun Owners of America warned its members and supporters in a January 24 alert. “There may be as many as 11.5 million persons illegally in the United States … [I]f illegal immigrants were given citizenship, they would vote for liberal, anti-gun candidates by an 8-to-1 margin.”

Is it any wonder Obama’s Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson insists all illegal aliens “have earned the right to be citizens”?

The problem is, GOA is alone among national gun rights advocacy organizations to make the connection, and to insist it be a factor in determining whether or not a politician truly supports the right to keep and bear arms. Why the “gun control” groups keep quiet about illegal immigration is understandable. Those in it for the long haul, who hope and believe Americans can be disarmed within a generation, recognize that this can give them an unbeatable political majority within a decade or two, to remake the legislatures and courts and reverse all the legislative and judicial victories gun owners have gained to date. But why the National Rifle Association has avoided recognizing and warning members of this real threat, opting to avoid it altogether with a “single issue” explanation, is harder to understand.

http://www.examiner.com/article/scott-walker-trial-balloon-from-nra-director-ignores-amnesty-danger?CID=examiner_alerts_article

Pay attention to the last paragraph-why is it that only GOA is advocating for pro gun politicians to also be opposed to amnesty,and allowing illegals to remain here,and become citizens.

Anyone with just a bit of common sense knows that these “new citizens” will vote predominately Democrat-and allowing over 5 million of them to become citizens is simply adding 5 million more Democrat voters to the rolls-this is EXTREMELY dangerous to gun rights.

The ONLY reason more gun control schemes have no become law is because of the GOA and similar groups-although with JPFO being taken over by Gottleib-both they and the Second Amendment Foundation could end turning into a mini NRA,and giving up gun rights in “compromises” with lawmakers-

FUCK THAT!
We need to have pro-gun groups who do not compromise,who do not surrender ANY part of our right to keep and bear arms. No retreat-no surrender-we do not give up ANY part of our gun rights in ANY “compromise”.

Connecticut Child Advocate report on Newtown argues for gun bans

Posted: November 22, 2014 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery, anti-gun idiocy
Tags: , , , , , ,
0
Gov. Malloy's latest "report" confirms he's not interested in any information that does not promote an incremental citizen disarmament agenda.
Gov. Malloy’s latest “report” confirms he’s not interested in any information that does not promote an incremental citizen disarmament agenda.
Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images

Unsurprisingly, a report released Friday by the Connecticut Office of the Child Advocate prioritizes placing the blame for the “Shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School” on ownership of firearms, with particular emphasis on the semi-automatic kind that can accept standard capacity magazines. The “findings” are the result of direction from the Connecticut Child Fatality Review Panel “to prepare a report that would focus on Adam Lanza [and] develop any recommendations for public health system improvement that emanated from the review.”

That administration functionaries concluded impeding the right to keep and bear arms would be a “public health system improvement” is also unsurprising. An advocacy role in itself is telling, along with the office’s allegiance to Gov. Dannel Malloy though his appointment of “primary author” Sarah Eagan to head a state agency that holds powers of intervention and subpoena.

“Access to assault weapons with high capacity magazines did play a major role in this and other mass shootings in recent history,” the government polemic masked as authoritative study results declares, in the first of 13 references to the term “weapon” contained in the report. “Our emphasis on AL’s developmental trajectory and issues of mental illness should not be understood to mean that these issues were considered more important than access to these weapons or that we do not consider such access to be a critical public health issue.”

That “conclusion” is restated several times, along with several side trips obviously intended to further demonize private gun ownership.

Along with “gun-related homicides in Australia … The firearm-suicide rate dropped 65 percent,’” the advocates claim, citing a 2010 “study” in the American Journal of Law and Economics This was after meaningful gun control regulations which outlawed possession of assault weapons were passed following a mass shooting.”

Interestingly, the much-touted Australian experience is not all those with an agenda to advocate for defenselessness would have us believe. No less an authority than The British Journal of Criminology observed “The Australian situation enables evaluation of the effect of a national buy-back, accompanied by tightened legislation in a country with relatively secure borders. AutoRegressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) was used to predict future values of the time series for homicide, suicide and accidental death before and after the 1996 National Firearms Agreement (NFA). When compared with observed values, firearm suicide was the only parameter the NFA may have influenced, although societal factors could also have influenced observed changes.”

http://www.examiner.com/article/connecticut-child-advocate-report-on-newtown-argues-for-gun-bans?CID=examiner_alerts_article

Ill-conceived Washington State Background Check Initiative Already Causing Absurd Outcomes

Posted: November 22, 2014 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
0

Barely two weeks after Washington State voters approved Initiative 594 — a measure the NRA warned was “deeply flawed” — our predicted consequences are beginning to emerge.

Under I-594’s restrictive language, a person simply handing his or her firearm to another is presumptively required to broker this “transfer” through a gun dealer.  This also necessitates the accompanying background check, fee, paperwork, taxes and, in the case of a handgun, state registration.

Proponents of the initiative had assured voters that fears of this overreach were exaggerated.  Prior to the vote on I-594, Geoff Potter, spokesman for 1-594 proponents Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility, said I-594 “simply applies the current system of background checks to all sales.”

As recounted in a Washington State news report, however, the Lynden Pioneer Museum has opted to pull eleven loaned WWII rifles currently on display and return these firearms to their collector owners before the “transfer” requirement in I-594 takes effect next month.  The reason?  The law contains no exemptions for firearms loaned for museum displays, or loaned for similar educational or cultural institution study or uses.  Once the law takes effect, the firearms could not be returned to their owners without the mandatory background checks and all the logistics and expenses that entails.

The museum director in Washington came to this decision reluctantly but unavoidably.  “I read through the law about 10 different times looking for a loophole,” he said.  He found none.  Unfortunately, there is no guidance at the state level because Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson has reportedly not formed an opinion about I-594, and no authoritative interpretation of the initiative is available to the public, apart from the text of I-594 itself.  In the meantime, the museum’s attorney has stated he would welcome assurances from the state that it would not enforce the law to the detriment of the museum or the owners of the firearms on display.  To date, however, no such assurances have been forthcoming.

http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/articles/2014/11/ill-conceived-washington-state-background-check-initiative-already-causing-absurd-outcomes.aspx

Older Entries
Newer Entries