Thursday, November 26, 2009

The "Terror Gap".

The newest scheme being pushed is the closure of the "Terror Gap". As marketed by the gun-controllers, this will "Prevent Sales Of Guns To Terror Suspects". And what is a "Terror Suspect"?

Ted Kennedy was a "Terror Suspect". So are countless other people who have done absolutely nothing. The closing of the Terror Gap is essentially the elimination of due process. People who have committed no crime will be denied their Second Amendment rights. They will not be notified if they are on the list. They cannot petition the government to know if they are on the list. Most of the people on the list will never know they are on the list.

If the gun controllers really have a problem with suspected terrorists buying guns, why not do the intellectually honest thing and arrest them? If you can't trust someone to buy a gun or ride on a plane, you can't trust them to buy gasoline, a moving van, or a bag of fertilizer. You can't trust them to walk free, period. So arrest every person on the list, put them on trial, and use our system of due process to determine whether they should walk free with all their rights intact or stay locked up.

I don't endorse the above, because I think the concept of "secret watch lists" is completely useless in preventing terrorist acts (See: Fort Hood). But at least it would show that the gun controllers are actually concerned about potential terrorists and not just guns (as usual).

Friday, November 20, 2009

This is why you lock them up. Part II

A tragic shooting in Money Mike's backyard: Bronx girl, 15, shot in head walking home.

Naturally, this will be followed by cries for Common Sense® gun control, all for The Children® of course. But what won't be discussed is the criminal histories of those responsible for the shooting:

- 14 arrests since Dec. 2002
- Charges include: weapons possession, harassment, grand larceny, burglary, assault and endangering the welfare of a child.
- In April 2006, Taylor allegedly pushed his ex-girlfriend into a wall, grabbed her hair and bit her back. Her young children were home and saw the attack. He left girlfriend’s apartment, but returned and kicked and banged on door.

- No prior arrests

- Nine arrests since Feb. 2007
- Charges include: weapons possession, menacing, drug possession and sale, gang assault
- In July, armed with a handgun, he allegedly threatened his aunt, Zelita Mighty, and told her: “I’ll make one phone call and all this will be smashed up.”

- Six arrests since May 2005
- Charges include: assault, menacing, harassment, grand larceny, robbery, drug possession and sale
- In October, he allegedly told a cop who asked him and friends to disperse from a scene: “F--- you. I’m not leaving.” He then resisted arrest, swung at the cop, caused a cut and swelling.

- Five arrests since Sept. 2007
- Charges include: weapons possession, drug possession, gang assault, robbery, drug sales.

Excluding, Gentles who has no record, none of these people should have been walking free. The most law-abiding among them still had 5 arrests and all them have records of assault. And these are all arrests within the past 7 years. That means on average, each of these criminals is being arrested twice a year.

There is a serious problem in a system where a person can be arrested nearly twice a year for 7 years and still walk free. Had all of the responsible parties been locked up for a minimum of 5-10 years after their third arrest, this shooting would have never occurred.

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Jim Darnell: Zumbo II

The original article has been nuked, but its ghost remains in the Google cache..

I’m a strong Second Amendment rights person. I stand against fire arms registration and government control and confiscation of our guns. But I strongly feel that the firearm manufacturers of our country are making a big mistake in producing the AR-15 sporting rifles.

And he goes on to describe how the AR-15 is such a scary looking weapon.

These modern sporting rifles are inflammatory in looks — they don’t look like modern hunting rifles. They are military in looks. They look like they were produced to kill men, not deer.

And my reply to him is, "And?" A lot of the Fudd-types forget that one of the many uses of a firearm is to kill people. As a "strong Second Amendment rights person", he should realize that the Second Amendment is not about hunting.

Granted, the new AR-15’s are compact, light, rugged and accurate. They make excellent hunting rifles. The problem is their inflammatory looks.

And? If someone is inflammed by the looks of someone else's property, that's a personal problem.

I don’t think the argument is valid. After WW II, crazy terrorists weren’t running through the streets firing 1903 bolt action Springfields into the air.

No Arab terrorists were on the daily newscasts blasting people with the semi-automatic Garand after WW II.

It’s the AK-47 and its long history with revolution, riots and terrorism that’s the problem.

Well, it looks like the terrorists won in Jim Darnell's world. They have sufficiently terrorized him into fearing inanimate objects. And why pick on Arab terrorists? What about those American terrorists who blasted people with their Garands?

So why endanger our Second Amendment rights by manufacturing and defending a modern hunting rifle that has such an inflammatory design? It plays right into the hands of the anti-gun movement. They love the looks of the AR-15. It’s easy to enrage the average American against such an “assault rifle.”

Because the Second Amendment is a right, not a privilege. There is no obligation to appease those who would deny you any portion of that right. Just as we do not kowtow to the insecurities of racist bigots to avoid endangering our Fourteenth Amendment rights, neither should we kowtow to the antigun bigots to avoid endangering our Second Amendment rights.

And here is a picture, just for you Jim Darnell:

Looks like it's time to give up your inflammatory looking terrorist deer rifle.

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

City Sees Assault Weapons Increase on Streets.

And what is the city in question?

The gun-free, utopia of Chicago of course.

That in itself isn't so unexpected. We all know that gun control doesn't work and that the unattended consequence of increased restrictions on firearms is almost always an increase in the illicit trade and use of firearms.

What's particularly troubling is the way the story is reported. NBC Chicago engaging in the same hatchet job reporting CNN was caught in years ago: Talking about assault weapons while showing video of fully automatic weapons.

View more news videos at:

Either NBC Chicago is intentionally confusing the public, looking for high ratings, or they are just plain idiots who can't do basic fact checking. I personally think it's a combination of all the above. This doesn't excuse the ATF though. They should know better, but then again, they've never been on the side of honesty or integrity.

Either way they make Josh Sugarmann proud.

Friday, November 6, 2009

A Brady Flip Flop.

From the Brady Campaign Blog:

While some of our friends on the other side of the gun violence prevention issue can be forgiven some, er, irrational exuberance over yesterday’s election results, the reality is a little more mundane.

For better or worse, guns didn’t play a prominent role in the outcomes of any of the four high-profile races yesterday

What? Wait a minute. Isn't this the same Brady Campaign that was absolutely giddy, to the point of even gloating, over the election of Barack Obama, even though guns didn't play a prominent role in the outcome of his election?

Yep. That's them.

Lie #21: "...the fallacy that mass shooters will avoid venues where people are likely to be armed."

From the VPC via Gun Grabbers:

This shooting also demonstrates the fallacy that mass shooters will avoid venues where people are likely to be armed or that mass shooters can be stopped easily by armed individuals.

Perhaps Scott Vogel watches too many action movies or plays too much Grand Theft Auto, but in real life, soldiers don't walk around military bases armed. Military bases are just like any other large, federal institution. They are "Gun Free" Zones. Very big "Gun Free" Zones, where people are told to disarm before entering. Using my nearest military base as an example:

  • Unauthorized possession/transportation of firearms, dangerous weapons or fireworks/explosives onto military installations is a federal crime.
  • Concealed carry of firearms under the Oklahoma Self Defense Act is strictly prohibited while on the installation.

So try again, Scott Vogel. A shooting at a military base does not "demonstrate the fallacy that mass shooters will avoid venues where people are likely to be armed or that mass shooters can be stopped easily by armed individuals." If anything, it demonstrates the fallacy of the "Gun Free" Zone.

Lie #20 : This is how they will spin it.

It was only a matter of time before the Brady Campaign used the Fort Hood shooting to push their usual lies.

Brady Campaign: Fort Hood Killer Reportedly Chose “Cop Killer” Handgun

While no police officer has reportedly been killed by a suspect armed with a Five-Seven, it may now have taken the lives of U.S. soldiers. Today, several news sources are reporting that it was the Five-Seven that Nidal M. Hasan used in his shooting attack at Fort Hood in Texas Thursday.

Isn't this rich? A "cop killer" gun that they're not even sure has ever killed a cop.

I'd also like to ask Peter Hamm how a gun can be "designed to fire bullets through body armor." It's ammunition that determines if a bullet can penetrate body armor. Not the design of the gun.

The 5.7x28 mm round fired by the FN Five-Seven is essentially a high velocity .22 caliber rifle round similar to the .22 Hornet in ballistics. In it's consumer form, it cannot penetrate body armor. FN Herstal does make armor piercing ammunition in 5.7x28, but it is only available to law enforcement and military.

In early 2005, Brady Campaign staff purchased the weapon at a Virginia gun dealer and test-fired it. The bullets successfully penetrated a police Kevlar vest.

And as for the Brady Campaign's test firing of the gun at a kevlar vest, they fail to disclose the fact that the 5.7x28's design is that of a rifle round. By the nature of their design, all centerfire rifle rounds will penetrate the soft kevlar vests worn by law enforcement officers. That's because kevlar vests are not body armor. They are not designed to stop rifle rounds regardless of what kind of gun they come from. That makes the FN Five-Seven no more of a "cop killer" than any other handgun chambered in a rifle caliber or any other weapon that fires the 5.7x28 round.

Thursday, November 5, 2009

How will they spin it?

A soldier kills 12 people and injures dozens others at Fort Hood. How will the gun controllers spin this into a reason to further erode your rights?

They often say that only police and military should have access to certain types of firearms as if a uniform gives the wearer some sort of superhuman level of self-control. Time after time they are proven wrong. Sometimes with deadly results. Today was no exception.

Canada moves a step closer to scrapping it's long gun registry.

MPs vote to abolish long-gun registry.

Conservatives argue the registry has been a billion-dollar boondoggle, although a 2006 study by the auditor general found that eliminating the long-gun portion of the registry would only save taxpayers about $3 million a year.

That's a lot of money for roughly a 50% compliance rate.