Posts Tagged ‘firearms.gun laws’

I-594 groups seek to fight suit by gun-rights backers

Posted: February 24, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , , ,
0

The coalition that sponsored last fall’s successful gun-purchase background-check initiative wants to intervene in a lawsuit trying to overturn the state law.
By Joseph O’Sullivan
Seattle Times Olympia bureau

Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson on Monday applauded an attempt by a coalition of gun-regulation groups to intervene against a lawsuit seeking to roll back the new law expanding background checks on gun buyers.

A lawsuit filed in December by gun-rights supporters alleges Initiative 594 violates the Second Amendment and can inadvertently criminalize people because its language is too vague. Ferguson, along with the state Attorney General’s Office and Washington State Patrol Chief John Batiste, are currently named as defendants.

On Monday, the Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility, I-594 citizen sponsor Cheryl Stumbo and the local arm of former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety filed to join the defendants in the lawsuit.

“It’s my role to defend initiatives lawfully passed by the people of Washington state, and my office will do so vigorously,” Ferguson wrote in an email. “We welcome the participation of the backers of the initiative in the process.”

The move, which a judge must first approve, would allow the groups to file motions and offer a full defense of a law they campaigned hard to enact.

Approved by 59 percent of voters last November, Initiative 594 expanded background checks on gun buyers beyond the federal standard to private sales like some found online or at gun shows.

But the lawsuit lays out concerns by firearms-training groups, private security guards and inspectors, and others. Among the plaintiffs are the Northwest School of Safety; Puget Sound Security Inc.; Firearms Academy of Seattle; the Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation; and Alan Gottlieb, the foundation’s executive vice president.

In quick succession Monday morning, Gottlieb ticked off two reasons for gun-rights supporters to take heart with the new developments.

“I think the other side has now realized that our challenge has some very good merit to it,” he said. “The second thing is I think it shows a vote of ‘no confidence’ in the Attorney General’s Office in being able to defend.”

It is common for groups that have pushed initiatives to later become involved in the related lawsuits, according to Hugh Spitzer, acting professor of law at the University of Washington’s School of Law.

In this case, “it enables the proponents to supplement the arguments that the attorney general makes,” said Spitzer.

The development comes as gun-rights supporters have ricocheted between rallies and hearings at the Legislature, trying to find support to change or repeal I-594, or send it back to voters in a referendum.

But those bills appear to have died in the Democrat-controlled House. And a January rally at the Capitol against I-594 succeeded only in the banning of guns in the Legislature’s viewing galleries after armed demonstrators entered those areas.

Stumbo, I-594’s citizen sponsor and a survivor of the 2006 Jewish Federation shootings in Seattle, described the lawsuit as a frivolous action brought by the gun lobby.

“The same individuals who failed to weaken our state’s gun laws in last year’s election are now using the court system to do exactly that,” Stumbo said in prepared remarks.

In Jersey, A Flintlock Pistol Can Get You A 10-Year Jail Sentence

Posted: February 17, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , , ,
1

Where is there any justice in locking up a 72-year-old man for up to 10 years for having an antique flintlock pistol? I’m sure in the Garden State authorities can find frivolous reasons, but there really isn’t any justification for such a prosecutorial overreach.

NRA News’ Ginny Simone ventured into New Jersey to speak with Gordon VanGilder, public enemy No. 1 in Cumberland County. VanGilder is a retired teacher whose career spanned 34 years. He’s an admirer of 18th century artifacts and historical memorabilia and bought the pistol to go with his collection. The pistol featured in Simone’s report is approaching its 300-year anniversary.

Simone reported that Gordon was arrested last November while heading home after lunch. A Cumberland County Sheriff’s Deputy pulled over Gordon for a traffic violation, but wanted to search his car. Upon discovering a flintlock pistol in the glove compartment, VanGilder said that another deputy wanted to let him go since he knew the firearm was an antique. The Sheriff disagreed. VanGilder was arrested the following morning, and faces up to ten years in prison; three and a half to five years of that sentence must be served before parole can be considered.

To make things more absurd, the prosecutor in the case told VanGilder’s lawyer­–Evan Nappen–who’s in the video; that ballistics test will be run on the firearm.

This case will impact Gordon’s pension as a New Jersey educator, his ability to vote, and his reputation. He will be a convicted felon if the State of New Jersey is successful in their crusade against him.

While Gordon noted that he was probably in violation of the law, he wasn’t if he was going by the federal statute, which exempts such a class of firearms. The conflict between state and federal laws is a constitutional question. Maybe this case will settle that egregious discrepancy.

Yeah, New Jersey is still one of the worst states in the country.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2015/02/16/in-jersey-a-flintlock-pistol-can-get-you-a-10year-jail-sentence-n1957628?utm_source=BreakingOnTownhallWidget_4&utm_medium=story&utm_campaign=BreakingOnTownhall

BATFE To Ban Common AR-15 Ammo

Posted: February 14, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , , ,
2

NRA-ILA

In a move clearly intended by the Obama Administration to suppress the acquisition, ownership and use of AR-15s and other .223 caliber general purpose rifles, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives unexpectedly announced today that it intends to ban commonplace M855 ball ammunition as “armor piercing ammunition.” The decision continues Obama’s use of his executive authority to impose gun control restrictions and bypass Congress.

It isn’t even the third week of February, and the BATFE has already taken three major executive actions on gun control. First, it was a major change to what activities constitute regulated “manufacturing” of firearms. Next, BATFE reversed a less than year old position on firing a shouldered “pistol.” Now, BATFE has released a “Framework for Determining Whether Certain Projectiles are ‘Primarily Intended for Sporting Purposes’ Within the Meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(c)”, which would eliminate M855’s exemption to the armor piercing ammunition prohibition and make future exemptions nearly impossible.

By way of background, federal law imposed in 1986 prohibits the manufacture, importation, and sale by licensed manufacturers or importers, but not possession, of “a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely . . . from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium.” Because there are handguns capable of firing M855, it “may be used in a handgun.” It does not, however, have a core made of the metals listed in the law; rather, it has a traditional lead core with a steel tip, and therefore should never have been considered “armor piercing.” Nonetheless, BATFE previously declared M855 to be “armor piercing ammunition,” but granted it an exemption as a projectile “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes.”

Now, however, BATFE says that it will henceforth grant the “sporting purposes” exception to only two categories of projectiles:

Category I: .22 Caliber Projectiles

A .22 caliber projectile that otherwise would be classified as armor piercing ammunition under 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(B) will be considered to be “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes” under section 921(a)(17)(C) if the projectile weighs 40 grains or less AND is loaded into a rimfire cartridge.

Category II: All Other Caliber Projectiles

Except as provided in Category I (.22 caliber rimfire), projectiles that otherwise would be classified as armor piercing ammunition will be presumed to be “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes” under section 921(a)(17)(C) if the projectile is loaded into a cartridge for which the only handgun that is readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade is a single shot handgun. ATF nevertheless retains the discretion to deny any application for a “sporting purposes” exemption if substantial evidence exists that the ammunition is not primarily intended for such purposes.

BATFE is accepting comments until March 16, 2015 on this indefensible attempt to disrupt ammunition for the most popular rifle in America. Check back early next week for a more in-depth analysis of this “framework” and details on how you can submit comments.

How to comment – from the BATFE

ATF will carefully consider all comments, as appropriate, received on or before March 16, 2015, and will give comments received after that date the same consideration if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given except as to comments received on or before March 16, 2015. ATF will not acknowledge receipt of comments. Submit comments in any of three ways (but do not submit the same comments multiple times or by more than one method):

ATF email: APAComments@atf.gov

Fax: (202) 648-9741.

Mail: Denise Brown, Mailstop 6N-602, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, 99 New York Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20226: ATTN: AP Ammo Comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denise Brown, Enforcement Programs and Services, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice, 99 New York Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20226; telephone: (202) 648-7070.

Just As I said Was Going To Happen-After Imposing Unenforceable Laws on Washingtonians, Bloomberg Sets Sights on Nevada

Posted: February 14, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
1

From NRA-ILA

An article that recently ran in the Nevada Appeal lists the top 5 political donors in the 2014 Nevada election cycle and billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun PAC made the list.  This, in conjunction with the recently qualified ballot initiative that seeks to criminalize private-party transfers absent a background check, clearly demonstrates that Bloomberg has focused his anti-gun agenda on the Silver State.  This initiative is similar to Senate Bill 221, which was vetoed by Governor Sandoval in the 2013 legislative session.

Bloomberg’s Initiative Petition 2 (IP 2) does nothing to address the many criminal and mental health records missing from the background check system.  It instead only focuses on criminalizing private firearm transfers among law-abiding gun owners.  In 2013, just after SB 221 was vetoed, an article highlighted nearly 2,000 mental health records which would have acted as disqualifiers that were not sent to NICS.  Again this past summer, the Department of Public Safety appeared before an interim committee at the legislature requesting additional funding for staff to help input the backlog of nearly 800,000 criminal records that are also missing, some records going back 20 years.  The Department of Public Safety estimates that with the additional staff it will take about four years to fill the backlog.

Initiative Petition 2 would not keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and diverts attention and resources away from real solutions that could prevent violent crime.  If there are almost 800,000 criminal records and nearly 2,000 mental health records missing from the database, then who exactly is being entered into the prohibited possessor database?  In a state with a population just less than 3 million, an oversight of nearly 800,000 records is staggering.

The deeply flawed background check initiative contains many problems beyond an incomplete set of records.  A prime example of this would be the hunting or shooting-range exemption.  The recipient of a temporary transfer can only possess the firearm in all places where it’s legal to hunt or at an established shooting range.  For example, this would make it quite difficult to travel to your hunting location or shooting range without breaking the proposed law.  Furthermore, nothing in the initiative provides for a form of receipt or record retention by either the transferor or transferee.  In the event someone has legally transferred a firearm, how will law enforcement know if the transfer was lawful?  Is the burden on the gun owner to prove the firearm was not part of an illegal transfer?  Could this mean an ordinary traffic stop could turn into hours of turmoil attempting to track down records?  Again, IP 2 would only ensnare unsuspecting and otherwise law-abiding gun owners.

It is definitely plausible that Bloomberg’s next move would be to push for full registration in order to avoid these “problems”.  This would go hand in hand with the January 2013 report from the U.S. Department of Justice’s National Institute of Justice that concluded the effectiveness of “universal” background checks depends on requiring full gun registration, something Bloomberg and other misguided anti-gun extremists are truly after.

Earlier this week the Senate voted to uphold Governor Sandoval’s veto of Senate Bill 221. We applaud the Senate’s commitment to stand firm with the Governor, and to stand against Bloomberg and his efforts to infringe on your rights. Please call your legislators and tell them to reject Initiative Petition 2. The Legislature has until March 13th to take action on the petition. If they reject or take no action it will be sent to the 2016 ballot, if they approve the petition and the Governor signs, then it becomes law. Your legislators need to send a strong message that this deceptive and misguided effort to criminalize private firearm transfers will not be tolerated in the Silver State.

*** Judge rules federal interstate handgun transfer ban unconstitutional ***

Posted: February 12, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
1

(Reuters) – A U.S. ban on the interstate sales of handguns by federal firearms dealers to buyers from other states violates the U.S. Constitution, a federal judge in Texas ruled on Wednesday.

The ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Reed O’Connor stemmed from a challenge to the ban brought by a Texas firearms dealer and a couple from the District of Columbia in July 2014.

The federal law prohibits a dealer from transferring a handgun, but not a rifle or shotgun, to an individual who does not live in the state in which the dealer’s business is located.

“While we expect the government to appeal, we are confident that the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will agree with Judge O’Connor’s sound ruling,” attorney William Mateja, who represented the challengers, said in a statement.

Andrew and Tracey Hanson met with licensed firearms dealer Fredric Mance Jr. in Texas about buying two handguns, but did not complete the transaction because they could not take immediate possession of the weapons, according to court papers.

Federal law required Mance to transfer the handguns to a federally licensed dealer where the Hansons live, Charles Sykes in the District of Columbia, where they could complete the purchase after paying shipping and transfer fees.

The Hansons and Mance, all members of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, argued in their lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas that the ban limits consumer choices and infringes on their rights.

O’Connor found that the ban violated the second and fifth amendments to the U.S. Constitution. He also distinguished the ban from other firearms restrictions such as those that target specific people, such as felons or the mentally ill.

“As law abiding, responsible citizens, the Hansons likely do not pose the threat to public safety that motivated Congress to enact the federal interstate handgun transfer ban,” O’Connor wrote in his decision.

O’Connor said the government demonstrated a compelling interest in preventing handgun crime, but failed to show how the transfer ban alleviates the problem of prohibited people acquiring handguns by crossing state lines.

Washington state-Battle brewing between cities, state over gun-carrying law

Posted: February 11, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , ,
0

Here come the anti-gun zealots-“if they can ban guns why can’t we”

“It’s not just the gunners upset at the sudden ban on the open carrying of firearms at the state Capitol. Some cities are saying: “Hey, why can’t we do that, too?”

“When lawmakers unexpectedly banned the open carrying of guns in parts of the state Capitol recently, some gun owners were upset. But they weren’t the only ones.

Gun-control advocates were also irked. Though for an entirely different reason.

“It’s ironic, isn’t it?” said Seattle City Councilman Bruce Harrell. “We can’t as a city do what the state just did. Why? Because they won’t let us.”

When about 20 protesters went into the House viewing gallery in Olympia last month and waved around their rifles and pistols, our typically pro-gun Legislature suddenly got very uncomfortable. Both the House and Senate abruptly banned the open display of firearms in their chambers and hearing rooms (concealed carry with a permit is still OK).

“I don’t want the people who are on the floor being fearful of doing their jobs,” said Lt. Gov. Brad Owen, who runs the Senate.

That seems like kind of a no-brainer. Citizens shouldn’t be allowed to stand over elected officials with guns anymore than your boss should stand over you with one, while you work. Most state capitols don’t allow any guns inside, unless carried by law enforcement.

But because the Legislature did this by private rule, it applies only to them. Anyone is still free to sling a semi-automatic rifle over his or her shoulder and head on into a meeting of the local city council, planning commission or library board.

“What the Legislature did is the height of hypocrisy,” says Scott Missall, a lawyer for Short, Cressman and Burgess in Seattle, who works as a contract city attorney for some small cities around the region. “If it’s so obvious that guns have no place in the House or Senate, how is it any less obvious in our local city and county council meetings?”

It’s not a purely symbolic issue. In 2013, a dozen citizens armed up for some meetings of the Oak Harbor City Council, standing in the back with M1 rifles and the like while lawyers told the council it had no authority to do anything about it. State legislators can be “fearful of doing their jobs.” The rest of you just have to man up.

Seattle City Hall especially is face-palming over this. In 2008, then-Mayor Greg Nickels barred guns from the city’s public buildings and parks.

That order also covered concealed guns, so it admittedly went farther than the recent Capitol ban. But when it was thrown out by the courts, the judges said the reason was that only the Legislature can give the city the power to pass a gun restriction, which it has not done.

Harrell tried to be diplomatic about how lawmakers now are doing for themselves what they won’t let Seattle do. Gaining the “ability to regulate firearms in public places” is listed as the city’s No. 1 legislative priority this year.”

Read the rest of the anti-gun drivel  @

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2025668806_westneat11xml.html

Hundreds pack Vermont Statehouse to debate gun bill

Posted: February 11, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , , ,
1

MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) — Hundreds of Vermonters on Tuesday night debated proposed legislation that would expand background checks for gun buyers and impose other new firearms restrictions.

At a packed Statehouse, the Senate Judiciary and Health and Welfare Committee heard testimony from supporters and opponents of the legislation, though opponents in the hall and nearby rooms where video was piped in easily outnumbered supporters.

Several opponents pointed to Vermont’s rank in FBI statistics as the safest state in the country. They argued that Senate Bill 31 isn’t needed.

“If I’m being assaulted on a city street, I’d rather have a .38 on me than a copy of S. 31,” said Erika Eldred.

Read the rest @

http://news.yahoo.com/liberal-gun-loving-vermont-restrictions-face-fight-071329945.html

Bloomberg Funded “Gun Control” Push in Vermont

Posted: February 10, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , ,
0

 I’ve stated multiple times that Bloomberg and his minions,especially with Ms. Watts’ ad exec experience leading the Bloomberg funded “grassroots effort” via Mom’s Demand Action, Everytown for Gun Safety,and whatever other lobbying groups he has registered in an attempt to not draw attention to any of his known groups,or himself,are going to just check of their list state by state,and get similar BS enacted in all of them-unless gun owners start fighting back.

Via David Codrea…

A public hearing on proposed gun legislation will be held Tuesday by the Senate Committees on Health & Welfare and Judiciary Tuesday in the House Chamber of the Vermont Statehouse, Vermont PBS announced. The hearings will be broadcast live beginning at 5:30 p.m.

Vermont Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs opposes legislation it calls "unnecessary." and

© 2015 Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, Inc. All rights reserved. Used with permission.

“Members of the public interested in testifying regarding the above bill may sign up 30 minutes prior to the hearing outside the House Chamber,” PBS reported. “Each person will have two minutes to testify and the hearing will adjourn at 8:00 p.m. Due to our time frame, please note everyone may not be able to testify.”

On this evening’s agenda will be S.31, “An act relating to possession and transfer of firearms,” introduced by Democrat Senators John F. Campbell, Philip Baruth, and Claire Ayer. The bill purports to prohibit persons convicted of violent crimes from possessing firearms, to require background checks with specified government and law enforcement exemptions, and to mandate court administrators to report specified updates to the Brady Law-established National Criminal Background Instant Check System.

New edicts are “strenuously opposed by the Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs. The gun rights and shooting sports-promoting group characterized the bill as “a solution in search of a problem” in its Statement Opposing S.31.

“[T]his bill is unnecessary gun control legislation,” VTFSC declared. “[I]t was introduced for a Vermont gun control organization, with this bill inflicting needless expense and damage to the rights of good citizens.

“The Federation has long opposed laws which needlessly restrict the responsible use and ownership of firearms by peaceful citizens,” VTFSC explained. “Such gun control laws do not deter crime and only serve to slander the good character of the vast majority of firearm owners, the vast majority of which are responsible citizens.”

The gun rights group has posted an announcement on its blog presenting what it calls “facts [that] speak for themselves.” In it, supporters are urged to attend the session in person, and to “Wear orange, be polite and respectful but let us fill the House chamber.”

http://www.examiner.com/article/vermont-gun-control-push-draws-organized-opposition?CID=examiner_alerts_article

Michael Bloomberg suggests disarming minorities to ‘keep them alive’

Posted: February 10, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , ,
0

The ONLY thing Bloomberg got right was this…

“They just don’t have any long-term focus or anything. It’s a joke to have a gun. It’s a joke to pull a trigger.”

What he has wrong is it’s not the gun that’s the problem-it’s the PERSON WHO PULLS THE TRIGGER.

When you have an entire subculture of kids who aspire to be rappers,dope dealers,and gang-bangers-then THAT’s the problem,not an inanimate object that’s a tool,nothing more-nothing less.   

Speaking of tools-Shannon Watts and the rest of hizzoners minions in his bought and paid for “grassroots gun control groups” keep trying to bully store and business owners to ban guns on their premises,and continue to call for a ban on “assault rifles” despite the fact that other tools-namely blunt objects-are used to commit more homicides than ALL rifles combined-including the scary looking misnamed by the anti-gun media “assault rifle”. Just as a gun is a tool that can be misused-so are the hammers,baseball bats,and other “blunt objects” that are responsible for more homicides than all rifles are-why isn’t Ms. Watts braying about banning hammers and baseball bats?

Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg reportedly argued Friday that guns need to be kept out of the hands of minorities in order to keep them alive.

While speaking at the Aspen Institute, Mr. Bloomberg, 72, said 95 percent of murders fall into a specific category: a male minority between the ages of 15 and 25, The Aspen Times reported.

In this Sept. 16, 2014, file photo, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg smiles prior to be conferred with the Chevalier de la Legion d'Honneur by France's Foreign minister Laurent Fabius, at the Quai d'Orsay, in Paris. (AP Photo/Thibault Camus, File)

Cities need to get guns out of this group’s hands and keep them alive, the former three-term mayor said, according to The Times.

“These kids think they’re going to get killed anyway because all their friends are getting killed,” Mr. Bloomberg said, The Times reported. “They just don’t have any long-term focus or anything. It’s a joke to have a gun. It’s a joke to pull a trigger.”

Mr. Bloomberg brought up the New York Police Department’s stop-and-frisk practices, recalling a time during his last year in office when a Baptist minster in Harlem invited him to speak at their church, The Times reported.

“While I’m sitting there waiting for him to introduce me, he said to his congregation, ‘You know, if every one of you stopped and frisked your kid before they went out at night, the mayor wouldn’t have to do it,’” Mr. Bloomberg said. “And so I knew I was going to be OK with that audience.”

The former mayor spoke to a sold-out crowd Friday about a variety of topics, including poverty, education and marijuana legalization.

Mr. Bloomberg argued that Colorado’s legalization of recreational marijuana use was a terrible idea and is hurting children, The Times reported.

“What are we going to say in 10 years when we see all these kids whose IQs are 5 and 10 points lower than they would have been?” he asked. “I couldn’t feel more strongly about it, and my girlfriend says it’s no different than alcohol. It is different than alcohol. This is one of the stupider things that’s happening across our country.”

Not as stupid as the mayor’s anti-gun asshattery.

Saturday rally to illustrate new paradigm in gun rights advocacy

Posted: February 6, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
0

“Gun Owners Prepare for Arrest at WA State Capitol,” Kit Lange of The Patrick Henry Society reported Monday. “Liberty activists and gun owners organized by Liberty for All and The Patriots Stand are converging at the WA State Capitol in Olympia on Saturday at a rally meant to protest and violate new rules imposed by the legislature banning open carry in public viewing galleries.”

Lange was referring to the Our Capitol Our Rights response to politicians closing off open carry of firearms in the legislature. Armed activists will be going there this weekend to test the new rule by disobeying it.

http://www.examiner.com/article/saturday-rally-to-illustrate-new-paradigm-gun-rights-advocacy?CID=examiner_alerts_article

Older Entries
Newer Entries