Wait. What?

Gun control group: Foiled Boehner plot ‘wake-up call’ for background checks

A leading gun control advocacy group said Wednesday that it hopes a foiled plot by an Ohio bartender who authorities say threatened to murder Speaker John A. Boehner is a “wake-up call” for congressional Republicans to approve legislation tightening gun-purchase background checks.

There's just one little inconvenient truth:

The bartender, Michael R. Hoyt, told authorities that he was Jesus and that Mr. Boehner was the devil and that he blamed the congressman for getting fired from his job before he had a chance to put something in his drink, according to an affidavit.

Got that? A nutjob threatened to poison the Speaker of the House, so that means we need background checks. Of course. Obviously those evil guns poisoned that poor man's mind and made him threaten Boehner.

Now, there is something there, in that the man did own at least two firearms and obviously was not right in the head. But you know what? That's not a gun thing. That's a mental health thing. A background check isn't going to stop someone that's bugnuts crazy but not getting help - and since this troubled man's mother already took away his rifle (after he blasted a hole in the floor), it seems like he needs help.

Look, I get it. It is kinda scary that someone so unhinged is just out there, walking among us. This dude needs help, and I really do hope that he gets it now that he's brought attention to himself. Background checks, however, aren't going to fix this. Unless he's been involuntarily committed, he'll pass a background check. We need to take a long, serious look at mental health in this country and see about making some serious fixes.

Except that doesn't fit in a soundbite. And it's hard. And it involves making actual decisions - i.e. is this guy really bug nuts crazy or just a little weird; is this something that requires a straitjacket and lithium squirted down the throat with a turkey baster or perhaps just a counselor and some muscle relaxants? Hard questions, ones we have been studiously avoiding for many decades now.

But yeah, magic thinking, implement background checks and this all goes away. Riiiiight.

That is all.

Another dispatch from...

(image courtesy of Robb Allen)

Standards of the Double Variety...

We saw a fair bit of news about the two people shot dead by a teenaged skateboarder in Maryland. How come another tragic story with a higher body count gets ignored?

NYC stabbing suspect of wife, 2 daughters snapped after seeing photos of her with another

NEW YORK – New York City prosecutors say a 29-year-old man hugged and kissed his two young daughters before stabbing them to death and killing their mother.

Prosecutors say Miguel Mejia-Ramos rifled through his wife's phone and Facebook page on Sunday night and snapped when he saw an image of her with another man. Prosecutors say he grabbed a knife and stabbed 21-year-old Deisy Garcia to death, then killed 2-year-old Daniela and 1-year-old Yoselin.

Burn in hell, you monster.

I love my kids more than life itself. I would sacrifice myself if it meant saving them, and I would do it gladly. I would also kill to save them, and I will stand before a judge, jury, and the face of G-d Himself unrepentant about my actions if they were committed to save my kids. The thought of consciously doing harm to them is so incredibly foreign to me that I literally cannot even consider how someone could do it.

As far as I can see, there's two possibilities. Either the person accused of the killings is mentally ill (and there's a decent case for that to be made regardless), in which case more [certain tool] control wouldn't have worked, or he's a psychopath of the highest order. Also, again, in which case more [certain tool] control wouldn't have worked.

And because he used a different tool, he doesn't push an agenda, so no one gives a rat's ass about those two kids.

That's wrong. I don't care which side of the debate you're on. You can't claim that a mass shooting is a tragedy because of the young lives lost yet ignore two little girls brutally murdered by their own father simply because he didn't use the correct tool. It's all a tragedy. The tool used doesn't matter. Focusing on the tool is short-sighted and will not change a damn thing. And they know that. And the ghouls will go on dancing in the blood of the innocents - but only certain innocents - and claim that we need more [tool type] control.

Those of us who believe in freedom and personal responsibility are horrified by all acts of violence towards our children, not just the acts committed with a certain tool.

That is all.

CSPV

Ed sent this one in. I'm still trying to figure it out.

Masked man robbed Quincy Domino's, smashed pickaxe into wall, police say

Quincy Police say they have identified the masked man wielding a pickaxe when he allegedly robbed Domino's Pizza on Sunday.

According to police, the man entered the restaurant at 61 Hancock St. at 1:01 a.m. Sunday. The assistant manager told police the suspect was wearing a gas mask and was carrying a pickaxe.

I don't know about the rest of y'all, but that's the way *I* eat Domino's pizza... 

Now, we need to know some specifics. Was this a high-capacity pickaxe? Did it conform to the Approved Pickaxe roster? Was it perhaps a pre-ban pickaxe? Does Massachusetts need a digging implement ban? 

Doesn't that sound idiotic? Some gleef picks up a tool and misuses it, so we're going to pass a bunch of laws about what kinds of tools are legal and what aren't. Does that make any sense to anyone? Yet when that tool is a firearm, all common sense goes out the window because ZOMG EVIL GUNS!!!1111

Punish the person misusing the tool, not the inanimate object.

That is all.

Well Done!

Soldier puts out arsonists' blaze at crowded Seattle nightclub on New Year's Eve

SEATTLE – The quick thinking of a U.S. Army staff sergeant likely helped prevent a fire inside a Seattle night club from becoming a tragedy during New Year's Eve celebrations.

Seattle police say 750 were people celebrating in the club Neighbours when an arsonist poured gasoline on a carpeted stairway and set it ablaze.

Now, imagine if those quick-thinking and fast-acting servicemen hadn't been at that night club. Happy Land, anyone? Fire - especially in a place packed with people all celebrating (and a number under the influence - can be a fast killer. The fire at the Station Night club in RI killed 100 people - and was the fourth-deadliest nightclub fire in US history. Think about that for a second - that means that there have been three more nightclub fires with higher death tolls. The fourth-deadliest fire killed more than three times as many people as the worst shooting.

The forces against freedom like to pretend that firearms are the only way that someone can wreak havoc upon large numbers of people. They do this because they want to ban the civilian ownership of firearms, not because then genuinely care about stopping violence. They only care about the tool used, not the end result, because firearms represent freedom, dangerous dangerous freedom. Free people - armed - people are hard to control. People that depend on the government for everything, including their own defense, are easy.

Fortunately, we're seeing through their charade more and more each day.

That is all.

Another dispatch from...

(image courtesy of Robb Allen)

Freedom Takes Many Forms...

Sometimes, it takes the form of pieces of plastic and metal.

This arrived at the house Saturday. I ordered them from Brownells last week, pretty much just because I could. It was funny, really. I entered the order, got the "we received your order" auto-e-mail from Brownells, and didn't think too much about it. The next day, I got a "there's a problem with your order" e-mail - the address they had in the system linked to my account was in MA, so these naturally tripped the "we can't ship this to you" message.

I sent a message to the contact person explaining that I had moved; within a half hour she had e-mailed me back, apologized for the delay (!!!), and changed my address in the system. Less than 15 minutes later the order was processed, and within the hour I got a notice that it had shipped. That's service right there, folks; but I digress.

Anyways, this order showed up Saturday, and I couldn't resist showing off. I took the picture above, "TwitFacetagrammed" it (that's TheBoy's term for it), and was was amused by the reaction. My MA compatriots were jealous (and happy for me); still others were congratulatory. The response that struck me came from Tamara, who commented that she had to read it a few times to see what was about (I posted the picture with the tagline "Because I can!").

Don't even get me started on how silly this is. How I was excited that I was not prohibited from purchasing a legal item any more. How these items look exactly like items I owned in Massachusetts, but only because they were over a certain age. My good friend Weer'd penned it perfectly when he called it the "Numbers game" - a ten round magazine is okay, but an eleven round magazine isn't; a twenty year old magazine is okay, but a nineteen year old one isn't.

Now that I am no longer subject to the insane laws of Massachusetts, something as simple as a new standard capacity magazine (AR-15s routinely ship with 30-round magazines from the factory, so they are standard capacity. The 10-round magazines sold to ban states like MA are diminished capacity...) is an emblem of my newly found freedom. Next up, I think I might put a collapsible stock on my Bushmaster. Or maybe even a bayonet lug...

Enjoy what freedoms you have, folks...

That is all.

Oh, This Is Gonna Be GOOOOOOD...

#1 Blogdaughter sends in another story illustrating why I'm glad to be from Massachusetts, rather than in Massachusetts. This is going to get ugly, and it's going to get ugly for the enemies of freedom.

Incoming Boston mayor, police clash over AR-15 proposal

Boston police are clashing with the city's incoming mayor over a proposal to arm some officers with AR-15 rifles.

Mayor-elect Martin Walsh came out against the plan over the weekend. The Boston Police Department had been pushing for a limited number of officers to carry the high-powered rifles, in light of recent mass shootings as well as the Boston Marathon bombing earlier this year.

Please, please, PLEASE, Mayor Walsh, please pick this hill to die on. Please make this a rock-solid cornerstone of your administration, that Boston PD not be allowed to carry AR-15 style rifles. Please, make the stance that the police are no longer special, protected classes. Please. I beg you. AR-15 style rifles are so dangerous that not even police should have them, yes. So are magazines with capacities of more than 10 rounds, now that you're thinking about it...

You see, I want law enforcement on board with the forces for freedom. For too long, they've been getting exemptions from the onerous gun laws passed, from being allowed access to new machine guns to carrying magazines in excess of 10 rounds during the Clinton ban, to using AR-15 pattern rifles when many want to ban them completely. It's time that being a law enforcement officer NOT exempt one from the laws that govern us all.

Because once the rank-and-file start feeling the effects of the various gun control efforts, it won't take long for all those FOP endorsements to dry up...

That is all.

Amazing!

I had two amazing things happen this past weekend. While out running errands with #1 blogdaughter, we happened to go into WalMart for a few items. We meandered by the ammo counter, because hope springs eternal and what should we happen across?

Yes, that really is what you think it is. 9mm bulk ammo, back in stock. The downside, of course, is that it's gone up in price. Again. I remember buying this same bulk pack in the mid-2000s for less than half what I paid for it this weekend. And it's still cheap compared to other prices I've seen for 9mm.They also had quite a bit of reasonably-priced .223 Rem, some 7.62 NATO, and .45 ACP in both steel and brass cases.

The second amazing thing that happened was that I wasn't asked for any ID to purchase this ammunition. This is a very rare occurrence - I had it happen once last year when I was in Colorado, and perhaps once or twice in northern NH and the few times I've bought ammo in Maine. Most of the border towns in NH will ask for a MA LTC to insure that you're legal, not because of legality but for store CYA purposes.

But yeah, there I was, buying ammo with no ID, just like a real American...

That is all.

Confuzzled...

Fresh off the BLNN is a story that has me shaking my head in puzzlement...

Pennsylvania teen charged in rape, beating of nun

A Pennsylvania teen has been charged in the rape and beating of a retired nun in the parking lot of a Roman Catholic church.

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports Andrew Bullock, 18, of Aliquippa confronted the unidentified, 70-year-old nun Friday outside St. Titus Church, located near Pittsburgh.

18 years old and his victim was 70. No weapon used other than his hands, but he did manage to dislocate her jaw. This is the brave new world the gun control mafia would foist upon us, where the weak are at the mercy of the strong. They wish to rid the world of firearms, resulting in a "might makes right" environment. Actually, that's not true - they're perfectly fine with the police and military having guns.

Apparently being for gun control means you have to disavow all knowledge of history, banana republics, and human nature.

There's another issue here, too. The concept of someone being "unarmed" is something that really needs to be changed. This budding sociopath was hardly unarmed - he managed to savagely beat someone nearly 4 times his age using nothing but his hands. He's an unarmed child according to the media - at least if you follow the playbook out of Florida. Had the 70 year old woman been accompanied by her 72 year old brother armed with a 1911, who shot the attacker, would we be treated to yet another sob story about a child injured by gunfire?

The gun control crowd can keep their utopia where septuagenarians are at the mercy of the strong - I want no part of it.

That is all.

Remember, Cars Are Different...

Woman dies after vehicle drags her 3 miles down Massachusetts road

(CNN) -- The man accused of hitting a woman with his vehicle and dragging her for more than three miles near Foxborough, Massachusetts, pleaded not guilty to several charges at his arraignment Tuesday.

The woman, Kanchanben Patel, 58, was killed, the Norfolk County District Attorney's Office said.

The man was accused of "using a hotel room illegally" which I can only assume means he sold drugs or stolen goods in the room - or consorted with a prostitute in the room. He was confronted, left the hotel, and in his haste to get away, struck several parked cars before running over two women in a crosswalk, one of which he dragged for three miles before dislodging her body.

This woman is dead no different than had she been a bystander shot in a drive-by shooting. Yet, because it was an automobile "accident", this scumbag will most likely get charged with something like vehicular homicide or something, get a slap on the wrist, and serve a term measured in months if not weeks. You know, because cars are magically different when their deliberate misuse causes death.

Remember, cars are different than guns BECAUSE GUNS.


That is all.

Only Way To Be SAFE...

SAFE Act stance helps Howard win 3rd term as Erie County sheriff

Four words that he uttered at a news conference last May helped Timothy B. Howard win a third term as Erie County sheriff.

The words were “I won’t enforce it,” and Howard was talking about the SAFE Act, a controversial new state firearms law that has outraged gun owners.

But wait. I thought that "90%" of Americans favored tough gun control like the SAFE Act? How on earth could someone - in New York of all places - actually WIN an election by stating outright that he would not enforce a gun control law? If gun control was such a winning proposition, shouldn't that sheriff have found himself out of office by a crushing margin? I mean, in New York of all places?

Now, I know. NY State != NYC. Much like MA != Boston. Not everyone that lives in NY state is a raving anti-gun loon, but what you hear coming out of NY centers almost exclusively on NYC, with a teeny bit coming out of Albany. Still, that a Republican sheriff who openly opposed the SAFE Act to the point of refusing to enforce it could win over a Democratic challenger, well, that's got to rattle more than a few cages...

Or, just maybe, gun control isn't the winning strategy that some tout it as being...

That is all.

Wait. WHAT?

Calif. gov. vetoes semi-automatic rifle ban

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed a bill Friday that would have imposed the nation's toughest gun ownership restrictions on Californians, saying it was too far-reaching.

The legislation would have banned future sales of most semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines, part of a firearms package approved by state lawmakers in response to mass shootings in other states.

I had to read this story three times to make sure I had it correct. The Governor of CALIFORNIA vetoed a gun control bill? Because it was "too far-reaching"? California, where they have banned all lead ammunition for hunting; where AR-15s have to have fixed magazines; where permits to carry firearms are "may issue" and are handed out capriciously and arbitrarily. I didn't think it was possible to come up with a gun control bill too onerous for California. Governor Brown vetoed more than a third of the firearms bills brought across his desk - 7 out of 18.

It would be interesting to find out why Governor Brown vetoed the measures he vetoed. I suspect that some part of it was because of the legal challenges that those measures would have faced - a ban on all semi-automatic rifles is a pretty significant infringement on the Second Amendment rights of Californians, and in the wake of Heller, McDonald et al it'd be almost certainly challenged in court. I wonder, though, if the events in Eastern California (a.k.a. Colorado) might have been on Governor Brown's mind - nothing like a round of firings to wake up the idiots...

In either case, this is a glimmer of hope from one of the darker corners of Mordor...

That is all.

Another dispatch from...

(image courtesy of Robb Allen)

Actions... Consequences...

Heh. Another story to bring a smile to your face on a Friday...

2 GOP state senators sworn in after Colorado recalls

WASHINGTON – Two Republicans were sworn in Thursday to replace the Colorado Senate Democrats they defeated in historic recalls over new gun restrictions.

Former Colorado Springs Councilman Bernie Herpin and retired Pueblo police officer George Rivera took the oath of office in front of a Senate packed with Republican lawmakers and other supporters in the gallery. They were greeted with loud cheers and applause.

Oh, let the rationalization begin:

"I leave the legislature with no regrets," said Morse, who held the Democrats' top-ranking position in the chamber as Senate president. He noted that a neighborhood in his district has a high-rate of gun deaths, and that he "served families who expect, at a minimum, that we will prevent criminals from getting guns."

So you introduced a measure that limited the capacity of the magazine that Colorado residents could legally own? Help me out here, John. How does making a 16 round magazine illegal "prevent criminals from getting guns"? I'm trying to see the connection. The problem isn't that they can get standard capacity magazines - and when an AR-15 ships with a 30 round magazine from the factory, that's the standard capacity. The problem is the revolving door justice system that slaps them on the wrist for even violent crimes. It's not the guns.

But you know that.

It's just so darn *easy* to go after the guns, isn't it? A lot of people don't know anything about them, and only "know" what they see on the nightly news or in Hollywood, where every gun can launch a bad guy back through a wall and "cop killer" bullets from a handgun can go through two inches of plate steel. You blather on about how easy guns are to get, then pass a meaningless magazine capacity restriction and require private sales to go through a licensed dealer - steps that do not address the criminal misuse of firearms. We don't need new laws, we just need you to enforce the laws that are already on the books. Like, you know, it being illegal for a felon to possess a firearm at all.

But you know that.

You were grandstanding and you got caught, plain and simple. You saw that sweet, sweet MAIG money and you forgot who you represented - you went for meaningless soundbite rhetoric that only affects honest people, and they called you on it. You can blame the NRA for the recall all you want - it was grassroots effort in Colorado that put the recall to a vote, and it was the people of Colorado that voted to kick your keister to the curb. You wrote off the calls and letters you received as unimportant, and you chose poorly. And now your seat is occupied by a member of the opposition party who will at least pretend to care about second amendment issues...

There's a lesson to be learned in all of this - but you won't learn it...

That is all.

Another dispatch from...

(image courtesy of Robb Allen)

Encouraging...

Brad_in_MA sends in an encouraging story for all of us on the side of freedom...

Guns are the new golf: Taking clients to the range

When Natalie Snyder wants to win over a business client, she hits the range, but probably not the kind you think.

Snyder, a vice president at the real estate brokerage firm Transwestern, spent time as a member of the National Skeet Shooting Associations’ Junior All-American team as a teenager. Gun clubs, she said, create a great environment for networking and developing new business.

There's a discussion on the "upscale" gun clubs being built in Texas, as well as how going to the range is a new way of breaking the ice with clients. I find it interesting that this is not an NRA publication but a business journal - it's hard to deny this is a real, tangible thing. It is an intriguing concept; I'm a little concerned that it's just a fad like cigar bars were in the 1990s, however. While it seemed for a while that you couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting a trendy cigar bar, it didn't take long for the fad to pass and the support dry up and blow away.

With that said, however, it is very encouraging that more than a few people see the recent upswing in firearms ownership and awareness as something worth investing money into. I think the idea of an "upscale" gun club is a fantastic idea - one of the ways to attract new shooters is to *not* have their first introduction be a dingy, dusty, poorly ventilated, unheated cinderblock range or spartan outdoor field. We do with what we have available, of course; if I had the option of a comfortable, heated/cooled indoor range with excellent ventilation and better sound deadening I'd much rather bring a new shooter there than an outdoor gun range in Texas in August or New England in January...

Anything that brings new folks into the fold is a good thing, IMHO...

That is all.

We Need Laws To Stop People From Breaking Laws...

Shakin' my head here, folks...

2 men charged in mass shooting at Chicago park

CHICAGO (AP) — Two men have been charged in a mass shooting at a Chicago park that wounded 13 people, including a 3-year-old boy, but neither suspect is believed to have been a triggerman, according to police.

Byron Champ, 21, and Kewane Gatewood, 20, are charged with attempted murder and aggravated battery with a firearm in the shooting Thursday night at Cornell Square Park on Chicago's southwest side, police said late Monday. The suspects' home towns were not revealed.

Okay, so they caught two of the three men responsible. That's the good news. That's about the only good news. Here's the part that just made my head swim:

"To truly address violence for the long-term we need state and federal laws that keep illegal guns out of our communities and provide real punishment for the criminals who use them," McCarthy said. He said the shooting highlighted a need for a three-year mandatory minimum sentence for illegal gun possession and truth in sentencing for gun crimes in Illinois.

You ALREADY DO HAVE THOSE LAWS. It is ILLEGAL for a felon to possess a firearm ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL. Those laws exist. They have been on the books longer than the people responsible for the shooting have been alive; quite possibly longer than their parents have been alive. It's the second part - the punishment - that's sorely lacking, and that's what those of us on the pro-freedom side have been saying for DECADES. Don't pass new laws, just enforce the ones we have.

Here's a great article: Chicago, Los Angeles, New York Prosecuted Fewest Federal Gun Crimes. Imagine that. Three crime-ridden cities in liberal states with very restrictive gun laws, and they're the worst at actually prosecuting Federal gun crimes. Go figure. And the response to rising crime rates? ASSAULT WEAPON BAN! Because we need ANOTHER law on the books that these places WON'T prosecute violent repeat felons for breaking.

It's a disturbing trend. We see rising crime rates as urban areas simply refuse to do their jobs and protect people from criminals. They blame the nebulous "gun lobby" and laughably claim that we need more laws - all the while ignoring the laws on the books and letting violent criminals skate on serious charges. Lather, rinse, repeat; act shocked when criminals continue to be criminals and find guns despite bans and laws; hurt the good people instead. Billy Banger doesn't give a hairy rat's ass that the 15 round magazine in his stolen Glock is illegal; however to a law-abiding gun owner mistakenly shipped that same magazine (which has happened here in MA), they are instantly a felon through no fault of their own.

And when the new laws predictably fail to reduce crime, why, that's proof we need more, right?

That is all.

Wait. WHAT?

Stretch sent this in. Assuming that this report is correct as written, WTFF?

Navy Yard shooting: Swat team awaits answers

The Capitol Police tactical response team was told by a supervisor to leave the scene instead of aiding municipal officers, sources told the BBC.

Meanwhile, the department has installed a new leader of the elite unit. No reason has been given for the decision.

So, let me get this straight. In the middle of an active shooter scenario, the SWAT team was told to ... cool their heels? The folks best equipped and trained to deal with an active shooter were sidelined in favor of, what, exactly? Officers on the scene were overwhelmed and asking for help, and the response was to tell the SpecOps guys to stand down? Really? Every small town in America has a SWAT team at the ready that gets used to serve parking ticket subpoenas, yet when there's a shooting incident in gun-free Washington DC the rapid response guys are sent away?

And why are we hearing about this through the BBC? I would think that the tactical tommies being told they weren't needed while people were getting killed would be big news, no? I'd sure hate to think that the media is deliberately sandbagging this story because it makes the police - who they will not hesistate to tell you to call rather than carrying a firearm, mind you - look inefficient and clownish. We won't even go down the rabbit hole of wondering *why* on earth the SWAT team wasn't used during a mass shooting in Washington DC.

It's really hard to listen to President Obama tell us that "something must be done" when we can't and won't use the tools that are already in place. Police in several different locations reported dealing with Alexis in the months and years leading up to the event, yet he was never declared ineligible to own firearms - or even losing his security clearance. When the shooting started, the people best equipped and trained to handle it were specifically told not to engage - on what planet does this make sense? It's difficult to believe that petty politics or internecine squabbling led to unnecessary delays in police response that might have cost lives.

Too many questions that will most likely never be answered - except for more calls for gun control...

That is all.

Yes, They Really *DO* Want To Take Your Guns Away...

Obama says fight for gun laws 'ought to obsess us'

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama on Sunday memorialized the victims of the Washington Navy Yard shooting by urging Americans not to give up on a transformation in gun laws that he argued are to blame for an epidemic of violence. "There is nothing inevitable about it — it comes about because of decisions we make or fail to make," Obama said.

Reprising his role of the nation's consoler in chief after yet another mass shooting, Obama issued a call to action on gun control measures that failed to pass earlier this year and show no new momentum in the wake of last week's rampage at a military installation just blocks from the Capitol.

Now, the Washington Navy Yard shooting was accomplished by a pump-action shotgun. This is technology that is rapidly approaching 150 years old, and has not been included on any gun control measure proposed in the past, oh, *ever*. Magazine capacity was not an issue. Removable magazines were not an issue. Bayonet lugs were not an issue. President Obama wants us to "obsess" over gun control based on a firearm that is one of the most ubiquitous in American culture, the pump-action shotgun.

Earlier this weekend, he spoke at a Congressional Black Caucus Foundation dinner and blamed the recent shooting in Chicago on the easy availability of guns:

"We fought a good fight earlier this year, but we came up short and that means we've got to get back up and go back at it because as long as there are those who fight to make it as easy as possible for dangerous people to get their hands on a gun, then we've got to work as hard as possible for the sake of our children. We've got to be ones who are willing to do more work to make it harder."

We're talking about gangbangers here, folks, in the only state in the union without some form of legal carry for firearms. I will bet $100, payable to Michael Bloomberg himself, that the people responsible for the shooting in Chicago were either too young to legally own a firearm or already legally prohibited from owning a firearm. Possibly both. Yet President Obama stands before a group and claims that our lax gun laws are responsible for the shooting? Hogwash.

 

It's the complete and utter lack of anything even remotely resembling enforcement of the gun laws we have that's partly responsible. It's a "thug culture" that values "respect" far more than human life that's partly responsible. It's generation after generation that have grown up under the benevolent dictatorship of government assistance, leading to endless free time and no concept of personal responsibility that's partially responsible.

Making it harder for me to get a pump-action shotgun isn't going to stop the next whackamole from deciding to check out in a blaze of glory. Forcing a 10-round magazine capacity limit on manufacturers isn't going to stop gangbangers from gunning each other down in record numbers. I do have to hand one thing to President Obama, though. He's using the complete and utter failure of "gun free zones" to say we need more gun laws and saying that Chicago's draconian gun laws are too lenient. He's finally admitted what the gun control movement has been working for all along.

They're coming for your guns. All of them.

That is all.

Even MOAR Gun Control!

From Chicago, yet again...

13 wounded in late-night attack on Chicago park

CHICAGO (AP) — A 3-year-old boy who was among 13 people wounded in a late-night attack on a southwest Chicago park was alert when he arrived at the hospital and was apparently doing well, his family and friends said early Friday.

The attack late Thursday in the city's Back of the Yards neighborhood left three victims, including the boy, in critical condition. The others were reportedly in serious or fair condition.

Thirteen people shot, yet there's nothing on the news, is there? It's partially because no one was killed, but partially because, as the story states:

"They've been coming round here looking for people to shoot every night, just gang-banging stuff. It's what they do."

It's so commonplace that it's "just gang-banging stuff". Think about that. In Chicago, IL, where there is still no legal carriage of loaded arms outside the home, gang bangers routinely go out looking for people to shoot. One more law isn't going to change this. Ten more laws isn't going to change this.

It would be a very interesting exercise indeed to track the number of people arrested for gun crimes in Chicago and compare it to the total time served. It would also be interesting to note how often the charges for carrying firearms in violation of the law are prosecuted as well as felon in possession, etc. I would hazard a guess that these charges are thrown out in the vast majority of cases or plea bargained away.

There's more involved than just ZOMG GUNS R BAD. What does it say about a culture where driveby shootings are commonplace? What does it say that, despite common drive-by shootings, people still bring their toddlers to a park at 10 o'clock at night? Knowing that this is gang turf where shootings are frequent, you still bring a young child there late at night? But yeah, blame the guns. Blame the NRA. Say that the children of NRA members should be shot. Whatever you do, ignore the societal problem that we are facing.

Blaming guns is a lot easier than facing hard truths about the failed "wars" on drugs and poverty...

That is all.

Needs MOAR Gun Control!

Fresh off the BLNN is this little gem:

FBI: Chicago officially America's murder capital

Statistics released by the FBI earlier this week show that Chicago passed New York as America's murder capital in 2012 despite the Windy City only having a third of the Big Apple's population.

The FBI recorded 500 murders in Chicago in 2012, up from 431 in 2011. New York reported 419 murders in 2012, down from 515 the year before.

Chicago, where until very recently the legal ownership of a handgun was illegal. Where, even right now, it is illegal to carry a firearm outside of one's home or business in any manner other than unloaded and locked in a case. More murders than NYC, even though NYC has 3X the population. WTG Chicago! You represent for the gun control movement!

Now, here's something to think about. In the article, the statistic is given that 69% of all reported murders were committed with a firearm. Assuming that trend holds more or less across all areas, that means that out of Chicago's 500 murders, around 350 are committed with a firearm. In a state with (at present time) no provision for the legal carrying of arms. In a city that until three years ago banned the possession of handguns.

And yet the solution to Chicago's gun violence? Why, of course, more gun control! Do it again, only harder! Make guns more illegaller to carry! You know, at some point you've got to think that these people aren't complete morons. They have got to know that no new gun control will ever work - because it's a criminal issue, not a tool issue. However, criminals with guns are of no concern to politicians - armed criminals stick to inner cities, and politicians have armed bodyguars (most often with badges).

We'll leave it as an exercise to the reader what the true aim of gun control really is...

That is all.

In Which I Piss Off EVERYONE...

*Sigh* OGNTSA.

Starbucks Takes Stand on Firearms, Open Carry

Howard Schultz, Starbucks chairman, president and CEO on Tuesday, Sept. 17, posted the following open letter regarding customers bringing firearms into Starbucks locations:

Dear Fellow Americans,

Few topics in America generate a more polarized and emotional debate than guns. In recent months, Starbucks stores and our partners (employees) who work in our stores have been thrust unwillingly into the middle of this debate. That’s why I am writing today with a respectful request that customers no longer bring firearms into our stores or outdoor seating areas.

I'm conflicted on this, I really am. I support open carry wholeheartedly and have practiced it when possible/practical/legal. I have no problem with anyone who wishes to open carry as long as they're doing it safely and legally. I also understand that by letting our opposition define the issue, we're fighting a losing battle. By pretending that open carry is only okay in certain situations by certain people, we're letting them box us out.

It's the sad predictability of the "in-your-face" factions that carry rifles around (Tam's comment about "'Battle of Fallujah' reenactors' club meeting" hits the mark perfectly IMHO) and the response that has me shaking my head. What did y'all think was going to happen when you walked into a trendy urban coffee shop full of hipsters with a rifle on your back? Did you think the latte-sipping Apple fanboi was suddenly going to be seized by divine inspiration, tear up his Brady membership, and suddenly convert to the Church of John Moses Browning (PBUH)?

Those in the OPEN CARRY BECAUSE 'MURICA camp sometimes use the "Gay Pride" analogy - that it took waaaay over-the-top marches in order to focus the conversation on gay rights and acceptance; that those "in the closet" would have remained so their entire lives if not for brave members of their ranks who were willing to risk ridicule, personal danger, and worse to shine light on the inequality of treatment they received by society. There's a fair amount of truth to this line of thinking, however there's one very important piece missing: the media - who still shape opinions in this country - were 100% behind the gay-rights campaign.

The media is 100% opposed to anything that furthers gun rights. Getting all "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" at an open carry rally isn't going to win friends and influence people. It's going to guarantee that the media actively seeks out the worst representative of the group to interview - and let's face it, in *ANY* group there's bound to be one or two people you just don't want in front of a camera. While I understand that not everyone can be as awesome an ambassador for open carry as, say, #1 blogdaughter, it would go a long way towards normalizing open carry if folks saw more people like her openly carrying and less of the 'Battle of Fallujah' reenactors' club. Folks want over-priced, bitter coffee when they go to Starbucks, they don't want political theater.

And, lastly, I swear to all that is holy and to John Moses Browning Himself (PBUH) that if this screws up open carry before I get to Virginia there will be hell to pay...

That is all.

UPDATE: TL/DR: Go read Robb's excellent post...

So, Let Me Get This Straight...

Because the shooter at the Washington Navy Yard had a manually-actuated shotgun - the kind specifically exempted from the Assault Weapons Ban - we need to bring back the Assault Weapons Ban?

We need to ban high capacity magazines because he used a shotgun with a fixed tubular magazine?

Or is it the fact that he bought his gun through an FFL, meaning that we have to close the gun show loophole?

Or that his mental health status was never reported to authorities? Not only would this have made him ineligible to buy a firearm, but it would have revoked his clearance?

Heck, had he been prosecuted for any of the gun-related crimes he committed - shooting out someone's tires? Blasting a hole in the apartment above him? - he could have been ineligible.

The law-abiding, non-fruitcake portion of gun owners (99.9999999%) is going to take it in the shorts because gun control failed on pretty much every aspect of this story?

I know the forces against freedom are desperate, but I didn't realize they were *this* desperate if they want to hang their gun control dreams on this shooting...

That is all.