----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not yet a VCDL member? Join VCDL at: http://www.vcdl.org/join
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL's meeting schedule: http://www.vcdl.org/meetings
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviations used in VA-ALERT: http://www.vcdl.org/help/abbr.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Sen. Northam invokes Virginia Tech to call for tighter gun restrictions
2. Boston manhunt shows importance of 2nd Amendment rights
3. The Boston manhunt and the MSM's gun control blind spot
4. When quasi-celebrities attack: Jay Mohr blames Boston attack on the 2nd Amendment
5. Background checks amount to 'new tax on guns,' Coburn insists
6. Conservative commentators rap mainstream media's gun control coverage
7. Illinois Dems revolt against gun control
8. Obama's United Nations backdoor to gun control
9. New York's 'assault weapon' registration to begin
10. SCOTUS: Let stand New York's strict gun control [Video]
11. 52% disapprove of Obama's handling of gun control
12. Bloomberg: If you sell a gun to your son, 'there's something wrong in your family'
13. ABC poll: Americans believe that guns make homes safer
14. Lumberton, TX woman shoots robber/rapist terrorizing residents
15. Who needs an AR-15 for home defense?
16. Who needs an AR-15 for home defense?, Part II
17. Why one cop carries 145 rounds of ammo on the job
18. Busch Brewing heir resigns long-time NRA membership
19. Who needs a gun at the 7-Eleven?
20. Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act
21. RT OpEd: Yes, the government should take your gun away
22. Rape prevention
23. Guns in America [Slideshow]
24. Is your mayor a member of MAIG?
25. Women and guns: Stereotypes and double standards
26. OpEd: The United States of the NRA?
27. Philly police: M16 fully-automatic assault rifle is unaccounted for
28. Denny's anti gun?
29. Gun-friendly cigar shop welcomes concealed carry permit holders
30. Error in item #11 (VA-ALERT: Update 4/20/13)?
**************************************************
1. Sen. Northam invokes Virginia Tech to call for tighter gun restrictions
**************************************************
Senator Northam, a Democrat candidate for Lt. Governor, is calling for gun control: bans on semi-automatic rifles, standard capacity magazines, and universal background checks. No thanks.
Walter Jackson emailed me this:
--
From The Daily Press: http://tinyurl.com/cmf4xec
From Todd Allen Wilson
April 17, 2013
State Sen. Ralph Northam, D-Norfolk, used the sixth anniversary of the mass shooting at Virginia Tech Monday to launch a campaign to ban assault weapons and require universal background checks on firearm purchases in the commonwealth.
Northam, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for lieutenant governor, teamed up with families of Virginia Tech victims to propose what he calls a comprehensive plan to stem gun violence.
Northam started an Internet campaign asking people to pressure Gov. Bob McDonnell, Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli and "their successors" to back the proposal.
Northam's proposal includes:
- A ban on assault-style weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines.
- Universal background checks on all firearms purchases in the state, which includes closing the "gun show loophole."
- Increasing the number of mental health professionals in the state and providing better access to services.
- Calling on schools and pediatricians to give guidelines to parents on how to limit their children's access to violent video games.
Northam invoked Virginia Tech and the December mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., as well as his experience as a military doctor and pediatric neurologist to make his case.
"As a veteran of the U.S. Army, I have seen what military style weapons do to the human body while caring for our troops in Operation Desert Storm," Northam said in a press release. "As a pediatric neurologist, I have sat at the bedside of children who have been shot and I've told parents that their children will not survive. We need to get military-style assault weapons off our streets so schools and communities are safe for our children.
"The families of gun violence victims deserve action to honor the memory of their loved ones. If Washington, D.C., does not reauthorize the assault weapons ban with universal background checks, we will here in Richmond."
Northam's effort may be quixotic as measures to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, along with requiring universal background checks, were quickly defeated in a House of Delegates subcommittee in January.
The governor, lieutenant governor and attorney's general offices are up for grabs this year as well as all 100 House seats.
While Democrats may pick up one or more of the statewide offices in November, they are unlikely to win enough House seats to take back the majority in that chamber, where they hold just 32 seats.
Should Northam or his rival for the Democratic nomination for lieutenant governor, Aneesh Chopra, win the office it would give Democrats the tie-breaking vote in the evenly divided Senate. But that may not even be enough to get Northam's proposals through the state's upper chamber as some Democratic senators have been reluctant to support gun control measures.
But family members of Virginia Tech victims supporting Northam's efforts said it's time for the commonwealth to adopt stricter gun laws.
"Six years is too long to wait while more families are enduring the same tragedies we experienced at Virginia Tech yet our nation has been paralyzed on the issue of gun violence," said Andrew Goddar, whose son Colin survived being shot at Virginia Tech. "Sen. Northam is stepping up to pass comprehensive reform and we need others to join us to pressure our leaders to support an end to gun violence. It's time."
**************************************************
2. Boston manhunt shows importance of 2nd Amendment rights
**************************************************
It was sad seeing the people in Watertown going under what was effectively martial law, as they were forbidden to leave their homes. It was sad watching the Watertown citizens accept having the police pointing guns directly at them (with friends like that, who needs terrorists?), being run out of their own homes, and having their homes unlawfully searched.
While I understand the Massachusetts police wanting to go home safe and sound, pointing a gun at everyone else is NOT the way to do it. We pay the police to put their lives on the line to protect society as a whole. We do NOT pay them to endanger society! The safety of the citizens comes first, followed very closely by the safety of the officers. The Massachusetts police have it backwards. Welcome to a police-state, folks.
An entire city shut down because of a single teenager with a bomb. The terrorists everywhere must have had a good belly laugh. The message that Massachusetts sent to those terrorists is most unfortunate for America.
Walter Jackson emailed me this:
--
From Breitbart.com: http://tinyurl.com/c4ud6kq
By Mike Flynn
April 19, 2013
Friday morning, the entire city of Boston was put in lockdown. Residents were warned to "shelter in place," meaning staying locked in their homes, answering only to uniformed law enforcement personnel. Hundreds of police swarmed through the city, tracking a violent terror suspect who is possibly armed with explosives with a clear intent to kill. The situation is a reminder of why millions of Americans cherish their right to own guns to protect themselves and their families.
Gun control advocates mistakenly assume Americans cherish their 2nd Amendment rights because of either a cultural anachronism or an affinity for hunting. The left looks at gun control as a debate over which guns Americans "need." They often argue, for example, that Americans don't "need" a 30-round magazine to hunt deer. That's true, but the debate isn't about "needs", it is about rights.
The 2nd Amendment is not built on a foundation of hunting, but, rather, the ability to protect one's life and property. The manhunt in Boston today shows the very real threats that occasionally enter our lives. In a situation like Boston, seconds count, while the police are minutes away.
Hopefully the second Marathon bombing suspect will be apprehended today without additional loss of life. Moreover, let's hope that no one has to try to defend themselves against the suspected terrorists. Gun control advocates, though, would be wise to reflect on the unfolding events to understand why many of us "cling" to our guns.
The world can be a very dangerous place.
**************************************************
3. The Boston manhunt and the MSM's gun control blind spot
**************************************************
MSM = Main Stream Media.
James Durso emailed me this:
--
From The American Interest: http://tinyurl.com/bv5gmh9
By Walter Russell
April 19, 2013
We wrote about the MSM's inability to grasp the politics that caused the gun control bill to fail in the Senate this week. The aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing illustrates the divide.
Millions of Americans listening to the bulletins on the developing manhunt were either glad they had guns in their homes or thought seriously about getting them. Yet for many professional journalists, and maybe especially those in the Acela corridor in the Northeast, this reaction is incomprehensible.
Put simply, millions of Americans don't want to depend only on the police for protection. They think about the inevitable interval between calling 911 and the arrival of the cops, and they don't want to wait helplessly for the good guys to arrive. Events like this one reinforce deeply held public beliefs about the dangerous world we live in and the limits of the state's ability to protect the people from the bad guys.
This may not strike enlightened and well credentialed Acela liberals as sensible or rational, but that's not the point. Without understanding the visceral belief that many Americans have, that their "right to bear arms" is about self defense and the right to take care of your own when the State fails you, it's impossible to understand the politics of gun control in the United States.
The chances of getting 60 votes in the Senate for serious gun control remain slim to none.
**************************************************
4. When quasi-celebrities attack: Jay Mohr blames Boston attack on the 2nd Amendment
**************************************************
EM John Pierce sent me this:
--
From monachuslex.com: http://tinyurl.com/cuw7ur5
By John Pierce
April 17, 2013
Aging comedian/actor Jay Mohr managed to generate some publicity for himself on Monday by exploiting the Boston Marathon explosions to push his anti-Second Amendment agenda.
Mohr, who those from my generation might remember from Tom Cruise's hit 1996 film Jerry Maguire, and younger readers might remember from absolutely nowhere, sent his first clueless tweet Monday night.
"What bothers me most about today is that we're getting used 2 it. ENOUGH. 2nd amendment must go. Violence has 2 stop. Culture MUST change."
When questioned on the connection between the Second Amendment and the Boston explosions, he just kept digging.
"The 2nd Amendment lends itself to the CULTURE of violence we are living in."
Later, when he continued to be flooded with comments from gun owners taking him to task, he commented that he was "[a]mazed at [the] pro gun responses" and wondered "Where are u maniacs coming from?"
That's right folks ... to the elites in New York and Hollywood, your rights contribute to a culture of violence and you are 'maniacs' for daring to speak up when liberals call for your rights to be stripped away.
If his comments upset you as much as they did me then perhaps you might like to join me in contacting his employer. Mohr has a sports radio program on Fox Sports Radio called Jay Mohr Sports.
I am guessing that either of the following executives would love to hear from sports fans who are upset by Mohr's words.
Dan Metter, Senior Vice President & Director of Talk Radio Sales
Email: dmetter@premiereradio.com
Telephone: (212) 445-3926
Craig Hawkesworth, Vice President of Interactive Sales
Email: chawkesworth@premiereradio.com
Telephone: (972) 455-6267
Let them know that it is probably not a good idea to keep someone on the payroll who considers more than half of their viewers to be violent 'maniacs'.
**************************************************
5. Background checks amount to 'new tax on guns,' Coburn insists
**************************************************
From The Washington Times: http://tinyurl.com/blhyl44
By David Sherfinski
April 15, 2013
The deal senators have struck to expand firearm background checks to all Internet and gun show sales will drive up prices for consumers, weapons retailers say.
Manufacturers say the deal, which is the crux of the gun bill that senators will begin debating this week, also includes language that gives background checks for sales at gun shows priority over in-store purchases ˘ something their top trade group says is unfair.
Under current law, background checks are required for sales only by licensed retailers. The director of the top trade group for gun retailers said expanding checks to include Internet and gun show purchases will drive up prices and push business to federally licensed firearms retailers, who in many cases will perform the checks for private sellers.
"You're going to have a lot more people paying a lot more money," said Andrew Molchan, director of the Florida-based Professional Gun Retailers Association Inc.
If background checks are required for all sales, he said, federal licensees could effectively corner the market, set their own transaction fees and pass the costs on to consumers.
"If they have to do [the background checks], that means they have to pay," he said. "In the real world, a lot of people are going to raise their prices."
As the Senate begins its debate, gun control advocates' hopes for a broader ban on semi-automatic weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines have faded. That has left background checks as the centerpiece of the fight.
Proponents argue that tightening the system to include more transactions can help keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, but opponents say the paperwork requirements could lead to a national gun registry.
Sens. Patrick J. Toomey, Pennsylvania Republican, and Joe Manchin III, West Virginia Democrat, tried to combat those fears in their background-check proposal by specifically outlawing federal attempts to keep a registry and including stiff prison sentences for violators.
But Sen. Tom Coburn, an Oklahoma Republican who was part of the negotiations with Mr. Toomey before dropping out of the talks, said the record-keeping provisions in the deal are too onerous and amount to a "new tax on guns."
"Instead of rerouting all commerce through federally designated persons that will charge a $30 to $50 and up to a $125 fee, creating a new de facto tax on guns, my plan would allow a consumer-friendly website or concealed carry permits to be used for verification, allowing law abiding gun owners the freedom to easily and safely transfer firearms," he said in a letter to Senate colleagues.
Under the Toomey-Manchin amendment, concealed-carry permit holders are allowed to forgo background checks, according to Mr. Toomey's office, which began an email blitz Friday touting reasons why the amendment "is good for gun owners."
The Toomey-Manchin amendment also calls for up to 15 years in prison for any government official who tries to use the background checks to create a gun registry.
"Here's the current law. Current law says if you go to a gun store, you have to have a background check," Mr. Manchin said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union." "And the gun store keeps it. If you go to a gun show today and you're a licensed dealer, you still do the same thing. We're treating everybody the same."
One complication is that the Toomey-Manchin deal specifically directs the FBI to complete an instant background check request from a gun show before finishing any pending check elsewhere.
"Why is the Second Amendment right of a buyer at a gun show superior to that of a paying customer of a gun shop?" said Lawrence Keane, senior vice president and general counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade group for gun and ammunition manufacturers. "Prioritizing gun show checks would delay checks for gun shop owners all across America on the busiest sales days of the week."
The effects of the proposal are not clear. Since the Newtown, Conn., school shooting rampage in December, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System had eight of its 10 busiest days through March 31, and all of the top 10 weeks for background checks have occurred since December.
**************************************************
6. Conservative commentators rap mainstream media's gun control coverage
**************************************************
From Newsmax.com: http://tinyurl.com/c8x73uj
April 19, 2013
Conservative commentators are going after mainstream media outlets for what they view as biased coverage of the gun control vote this week.
Some media outlets lashed out strongly at Congress - mostly Republicans - for rejecting an amendment on expanded background checks, which essentially doomed the overall gun control bill.
The New York Daily News published photographs of the 46 senators who voted against the background check provision with their phone numbers, suggesting that readers call them to register dissatisfaction. The paper had run a series of page-one stories going after legislators who oppose more gun control.
"It's clearly biased and unmistakably ideological. These outlets can do what they want, but nobody should kid themselves about what they're doing," New York Post columnist John Podhoretz told Politico.
Bill Kristol, editor-in-chief of the Weekly Standard, told the news service: "I guess the liberal media get annoyed when Senators listen to their constituents and think for themselves, rather than doing the media's bidding."
Gun control supporters who favored the background check amendment have said polls indicate that 90 percent of the public supports the idea of expanding checks to gun show and online sales.
"First of all, 90 percent of people saying they favor background checks is not the same thing as saying they favor Manchin-Toomey [the amendment]," Podhoretz said.
"But more importantly, look back at the provisions of the [Republican] Contract with America in 1994. Every single one of those provisions had 70 percent support in public surveys. I don't remember the media taking up those provisions because they represented the will of the people."
**************************************************
7. Illinois Dems revolt against gun control
**************************************************
I wonder if the Virginia Democrats are going to wake up and smell the coffee, too, next year.
From Breitbart.com: http://tinyurl.com/dy432db
By Mike Flynn
April 18, 2013
Democrats enjoy a supermajority in the Illinois House of Representatives, holding 71 seats to the GOP's 47. On Wednesday, the same day the US Senate voted down gun control legislation, powerful Democrat Speaker Michael Madigan tried to push a restrictive gun control measure through his chamber. The result was an open revolt by downstate Democrats, with almost half the Democrat caucus joining the GOP to kill the measure. The bill went down 31-76, a rare defeat for the legendary Madigan.
Illinois is currently the only state in the country which doesn't allow its citizens to have a concealed-carry gun permit. In December 2012, a federal appeals court struck down the state's ban on concealed-carry permits, effectively ordering the state to enact the gun rights' permit. The state is under a court-ordered deadline to pass the legislation.
On Wednesday, Dem leadership in the House moved legislation that would put severe restrictions on concealed-carry permits. It would provide that local law enforcement officials "may issue" permits, a provision that would allow local officials to effectively deny citizens in a particular jurisdiction a permit. "Must issue" permits, as long as certain criteria are met, conform more to our 2nd Amendment rights as local officials are not given the power to deny the permits.
My first political job was in the Illinois legislature a life-time ago. Madigan, who is Chair of the IL Democrat party and father to state Attorney General Lisa Madigan, was Speaker then, as well. He is among the more shrewd and calculating political power-brokers in the country. He almost never loses a floor vote.
It is possible, however, that he orchestrated the vote to allow his members from outside Chicago to vote against the measure. It wouldn't be the first time he allowed the defeat of a progressive policy to protect members of his caucus.
Either way, the Democrat revolt on the gun control measure shows the bad politics around the issue. Even while Obama embraces gun control at the federal level, Democrats in his home state reject them. Unlike Obama, they have to face voters again.
**************************************************
8. Obama's United Nations backdoor to gun control
**************************************************
Linsay Trittipoe emailed me this:
--
WSJ opinion piece by John Bolton today on how Obama is going after guns through the UN Small Weapons Treaty
From The Wall St. Journal: http://tinyurl.com/bo9834k
By John Bolton & John Yoo
April 14, 2013
Even before his most ambitious gun-control proposals were falling by the wayside, President Obama was turning for help to the United Nations. On April 2, the United States led 154 nations to approve the Arms Trade Treaty in the U.N. General Assembly. While much of the treaty governs the international sale of conventional weapons, its regulation of small arms would provide American gun-control advocates with a new tool for restricting rights. Yet because the Constitution requires that two-thirds of the Senate give its advice and consent to any treaty, Second Amendment supporters still have a political route to stop the administration.
Like many international schemes, this treaty has seemingly benign motives. It seeks to "eradicate the illicit trade in conventional arms and to prevent their diversion to the illicit market," where they are used in civil wars and human-rights disasters. The treaty calls for rigorous export controls on heavy conventional weapons, such as tanks, missiles, artillery, helicopters and warships.
Yet, as with many utopian devices, the treaty fails the test of enforcement. Some of the world's largest arms traffickers either voted against the agreement or abstained. The U.S., quite rightly, already has the world's most serious export controls in place, while nations such as North Korea, Syria, Iran, Russia and China will continue to traffic in arms with abandon.
But the new treaty also demands domestic regulation of "small arms and light weapons." The treaty's Article 5 requires nations to "establish and maintain a national control system," including a "national control list." Article 10 requires signatories "to regulate brokering" of conventional arms. The treaty offers no guarantee for individual rights, but instead only declares it is "mindful" of the "legitimate trade and lawful ownership" of arms for recreational, cultural, historical, and sporting activities." Not a word about the right to possess guns for a broader individual right of self-defense.
Gun-control advocates will use these provisions to argue that the U.S. must enact measures such as a national gun registry, licenses for guns and ammunition sales, universal background checks, and even a ban of certain weapons. The treaty thus provides the Obama administration with an end-run around Congress to reach these gun-control holy grails. As the Supreme Court's Heller and McDonald cases recently declared, the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right "to keep and bear Arms" such as handguns and rifles. Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce remains broad, but the court's decisions in other cases even last year's challenge to the Affordable Care Act remind us that those powers are limited.
International treaties don't suffer these limits. The Constitution establishes treaties in Article II (which sets out the president's executive powers), rather than in Article I (which defines the legislature's authority) so treaties therefore aren't textually subject to the limits on Congress's power. Treaties still receive the force of law under the Supremacy Clause, which declares that "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land."
Some have argued over the years that this difference in language between laws and treaties allows the latter to sweep more broadly than the former. In Missouri v. Holland (1920), Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes followed this logic to declare that no "invisible radiation from the general terms of the Tenth Amendment" applies to the Treaty Power. Congress could win greater favor from the courts for gun-control measures, or President Obama could issue executive orders for a gun registry and background checks, on the claim that he is implementing the treaty.
Missouri read the treaty power broadly under the Supremacy Clause at a time when the courts gave Congress's powers short shrift, but the decision was fundamentally mistaken. The Supremacy Clause referred to treaties "made under the Authority of the United States" not to expand their scope but to grandfather in existing agreements such as the Peace Treaty with Great Britain. In Reid v. Covert (1957), a plurality of justices agreed that the treaty power could not undermine the Bill of Rights, rightly trying to close the huge loophole that Missouri had erroneously opened.
The attempt to advance gun control through the Arms Trade Treaty might surprise average Americans, but not liberals, who have been long frustrated by the Constitution's limits on government. Gun-control statutes, like any others, have to survive both the House and the Senate, then win presidential approval. It is far easier to advance an agenda through treaties, unwritten international law and even "norms" delivered by an amorphous "international community."
Opponents of capital punishment have used treaties to press the Supreme Court to stop the death penalty in Texas. Women's rights groups advocate an international convention that would achieve the goals of the failed Equal Rights Amendment. And supporters of bans on "hate speech" invoke international norms to defeat First Amendment objections. There also is an international legal doctrine that during the period when a country has signed but not yet ratified a treaty, it must take no measures that defeat the treaty's object and purposes. Under some liberal theories, this would allow the president to put some measures of the new arms treaty into effect by executive order.
Fortunately the Framers required that the president submit all significant international agreements to the Senate, which must consent to the treaty with the same supermajority needed to send a constitutional amendment to the states or to override an executive veto.
The Senate should block this latest effort to evade the Constitution's controls on federal power. There could be no greater justification for senators to exercise their veto over treaties than the cause of protecting the individual liberties of Americans including the right to bear arms.
**************************************************
9. New York's 'assault weapon' registration to begin
**************************************************
Will the New York gun owners become sheeple or will they say "no" to an unconstitutional registration scheme? If they allow their guns to be registered, it will be only a matter of time before New York comes to confiscate them.
From myearthlink.net: http://tinyurl.com/a97ysqu
By Michael Virtanen
April 15, 2013
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) Key measures of New York's tough new gun law are set to kick in, with owners of guns now reclassified as assault weapons required to register the firearms and new limits on the number of bullets allowed in magazines.
As the new provisions take effect Monday, New York's affiliate of the National Rifle Association said it plans to head to court to seek an immediate halt to the magazine limit.
Gov. Andrew Cuomo calls those and other provisions in the state's new gun law common sense while dismissing criticisms he says come from "extreme fringe conservatives" who claim the government has no right to regulate guns.
"Yes, they are against it, but they are the extremists and the extremists shouldn't win, especially on this issue when it is so important to the majority," Cuomo said in a radio interview Wednesday. "In politics, we have to be willing to take on the extremists, otherwise you will see paralysis."
New York's new gun restrictions, the first in the nation passed following December's massacre at a Connecticut elementary school, limit state gun owners to no more than seven bullets in magazines, except at competitions or firing ranges.
The new regulations in New York commence as the U.S. Senate prepares to debate expanded gun legislation and weeks after Connecticut joined Colorado in signing into law tougher new gun restrictions.
The New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, the state's NRA affiliate, has a pending federal lawsuit against the new provisions. It plans to ask a judge Monday for an immediate halt to the magazine limit. The new registrations, required over the next year, will be the group's focus later.
The law violates the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens "to keep commonly possessed firearms" at home for self-defense and for other lawful purposes, the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association said in court papers. It is advising members to obey the law in the meantime.
"We are lawful and legal citizens of New York state and we always obey the law," association President Tom King said. "It's as simple as that."
State Police planned to post forms on their website for registration starting Monday. Owners of those guns, now banned from in-state sales, are required within a year to register them. Alternatively, they can legally sell them to a licensed dealer or out of state by next Jan. 15.
Rich Davenport, recording secretary of the Erie County Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs, said their nearly 11,000 members are united in opposition to the law, which he considers a hasty, illogical and emotional response to the Newtown, Conn., school shooting. He also questioned likely compliance with the registration requirement.
"I'm guessing it'll be pretty low," said Davenport, a longtime hunter. He said that even though he's not personally affected by the registration provision, "I'm offended as an American."
The toughest part of the new statute -- banning in-state sales of those guns newly classified as "assault weapons" -- immediately took effect Jan. 15. The new classification related to a single military-style feature, such as a pistol grip on semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines. Other listed features include a folding or thumbhole stock, bayonet mount, flash suppressor, or second protruding grip held by the non-trigger hand.
It requires owners to register an estimated 1 million guns previously not classified as assault weapons by April 15, 2014, though law enforcement officials acknowledge they don't know exactly how many such guns New Yorkers have.
The assault weapon definition also applies to some shotguns and handguns. They include shotguns that are semi-automatic, or self-loading, and have another feature, such as a folding stock, a second handgrip held by the non-shooting hand or the ability to accept a detachable magazine.
Also covered are semi-automatic pistols that can take detachable magazines and have another feature, such as a folding or thumbhole stock, a second handgrip and a threaded barrel that can accept a silencer.
Many county boards in New York have passed resolutions urging at least partial repeal of the law while warning that new registration requirements would be a costly burden on them.
Herkimer County Clerk Sylvia Rowan said Thursday she had received no registration forms for those guns. "There's a lot of confusion on this," she said.
Rowan noted that she had received few formal requests filed from the holders of the county's 12,000 pistol permits to exempt their information from public disclosure, something else authorized under the new law.
Passed Jan. 15, a month after the school shooting in Newtown, Conn., the statute originally banned magazines with more than seven bullets effective April 15. Connecticut officials said that shooter Adam Lanza used a semi-automatic Bushmaster AR-15 and five 30-round magazines to kill 20 children and six adults in minutes.
However, acknowledging that manufacturers don't make seven-bullet magazines, the Cuomo administration and New York lawmakers amended their law on March 29, keeping 10-bullet magazines legal but generally illegal to load them with more than seven bullets.
The new Colorado bill, signed into law last month, bans ammunition magazines that hold more than 15 rounds.
**************************************************
10. SCOTUS: Let stand New York's strict gun control [Video]
**************************************************
The Supreme Court lets down gun owners.
From CNN: http://tinyurl.com/ctwmy2d
By Bill Mears
April 15, 2013
Washington (CNN) -- The Supreme Court on Monday let stand New York's strict gun control law, rejecting an appeal from a group of gun owners.
At issue was whether the Constitution's Second Amendment provided a broad individual right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense.
New York's Penal Law 265.03(03) bans possession of a firearm in public, either openly or concealed, unless someone can show "proper cause" to secure a carry permit. Such proper cause has to be more than just a law-abiding citizen's desire for self-defense.
Since the high court refused to intervene, the state law stays in place.
A group of Westchester County residents, supported by the Second Amendment Foundation, sued and lost in the lower federal courts. The Supreme Court in 2008 affirmed an individual right of law-abiding citizens to have a handgun in the home. In this case, the issue pivoted to what weapons are allowed in public.
The case is Kachalsky v. Cacace (12-845).
**************************************************
11. 52% disapprove of Obama's handling of gun control
**************************************************
I think it is much higher than that.
From Breitbart.com: http://tinyurl.com/c3pqu69
By John Nolte
April 17, 2013
The only polls the media seem interested in reporting on are those that back their ongoing culture war against the NRA and Red State gun owners -- especially those misleading polls that show 80 to 90% of the American people favor tightening background checks.
Polls the media coordinate to cover up, though, are much more telling, especially the one released today showing that 52% of the American people disapprove of Obama on the issue of gun control.
Buried five paragraphs into a Wednesday Associated Press article
Just over half the public - 52 percent - expressed disapproval in the new survey of how President Barack Obama has handled gun laws. Weeks after the Newtown slayings, Obama made a call for near universal background checks the heart of his gun control plan.
Hot Air's Ed Morrissey adds:
This comes from the same poll that gives Obama a 49/43 approval rating on immigration, so it's not merely the result of an outlier sample. Furthermore, while Democrats have been obsessing over gun-control proposals that would have had no impact on the incidents exploited by them in the push, the rest of America has been left wondering about their priorities.
Another poll the media is ignoring is this one from Gallup showing that only 4% of the public believes gun control is an important issue.
**************************************************
12. Bloomberg: If you sell a gun to your son, 'there's something wrong in your family'
**************************************************
No, clearly Bloomberg is the one that has "something wrong" with him. (I did love that recently a pizza restaurant owner in New York refused to sell His Majesty a second slice of pizza, as the owner said it was his opinion that a second slice would not be good for Bloomberg's health. Bloomberg lost it at being denied and denied publicly. ;-) )
From cnsnews.com: http://tinyurl.com/c47jqqh
By Elizabeth Harrington
April 15, 2013
(CNSNews.com) - If you sell a gun to your son, "there's something wrong with your family," says New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
In a radio appearance on Friday, Bloomberg, a gun control activist and co-chair of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, praised the legislation that is now moving forward in the Senate. The bill would require universal background checks for most sales of firearms, including those online and at gun shows.
"The only thing it would not cover is if you sold a gun to your son, for example," Bloomberg told radio host John Gambling. "Number one, I don't know how we would ever enforce that if it were the law. So to make a big deal about that's carved out, so what? It doesn't change anything."
"Number two, I would argue if you want to sell your gun to your son, maybe you have a problem in your family," he said. "Why don't you just give-I don't know if you should have a gun or not, but if you have a commercial transaction of $100 with your son, there's something wrong in your family.
"It's just not something where everybody's pulling together in the same direction," Bloomberg said. "So that's the only thing it leaves out."
Bloomberg said he would be satisfied with the Senate bill, which includes initiatives for school safety and stricter penalties for gun trafficking, although he wishes it also had included a ban on so-called 'assault weapons.'
"It would be great if we could get rid of assault weapons, but that's just not going to happen at the moment," he said. "So let's do this."
On Thursday, the Senate voted 68-31 to open debate on the gun control package, as an attempted filibuster by a group of Republicans led by Senators Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah) failed to muster enough Republican support to succeed.
Bloomberg said those who ultimately vote for the legislation (S.649) are voting to "save your life."
"I don't know that you want to have a victory lap, but those Senators-and House members if we get to that-that voted for this should have a big smile on their face," he said. "They did something to save your life and your kids' lives, and make this country a lot better."
"And I will be out there, you can rest assured next November a year from now, saying look these are the people that voted...that's when you say this person voted to save your life, this person voted to let people with criminal records and mental problems have a gun and potentially take your life," Bloomberg said.
**************************************************
13. ABC poll: Americans believe that guns make homes safer
**************************************************
Walter Jackson emailed me this:
--
From Breitbart.com: http://tinyurl.com/cdpawb8
By Awr Hawkins
April 19, 2013
By a margin of 51 to 29, Americans believe having a gun in the house makes the house safer.
When the question was asked to those with guns in their houses, the affirmative response jumped to 75.
The percentage of Republicans who believe a gun makes the house safer was 71, while among Democrats the percentage was 34.
Moreover, the poll found that those who believe a gun in the house makes the house safer "prioritize gun rights over new gun control laws by [a] 2 to 1 [margin]."
These responses represent a complete reversal from the same poll taken in 2000, in which people responded 35 to 51--giving the edge to the position that a gun in the house made the house less safe.
**************************************************
14. Lumberton, TX woman shoots robber/rapist terrorizing residents
**************************************************
Deborah Anderson emailed me this:
--
This story come from the Texas GOP Vote website. Thankfully, one woman was armed and ready to defend herself, so she shot one REALLY BAD guy as a result -- and, while all 3 really bad guys fled the scene, they were soon apprehended by Lumberton police. Had this woman not been armed, the story most likely would've had a different ending about yet another victim falling prey to this group of robbers/rapists. Chalk up another victory to an armed citizen!
Blessings,
Deborah Jane Anderson
From Texas GOP Vote: http://tinyurl.com/d5674eu
By David Bellow
April 8, 2013
A woman in Lumberton, TX shot and stopped a robber Sunday morning before sunrise. This was not just any robber. This robber was part of a group of men who had gone on a crime spree over the past 2 weeks in Beaumont's West End and now in Lumberton. Around 3AM yesterday morning, this group of armed robbers sexually assaulted and robbed at gun point a woman in Lumberton. After the robbery and sexual assault (at the corner of Raider Lane and Village Creek Parkway near the middle and primary schools), the group of 3 black males from Beaumont tried to attack another woman at her home on Dennis Drive in Lumberton. This time though, the woman was exercising her Second Amendment rights, and she pulled out her handgun and shot one of the criminals. All three men were quickly apprehended soon after by the Lumberton Police Department. The man shot, Scott Allen Wills Jr, is still in the hospital, but is expected to recover. As I write the article, the Hardin County Jail says they have not booked the other two men, Malik Washington and Ariel Malveaux, so they are still in the custody of the Lumberton Police Department.
This attack is just another example that proves the importance of having a Constitutional right to bear arms. The quiet community of Lumberton was also shown that we are not as safe and quiet as we used to be anymore. There are some in Lumberton who want the city to grow into a bigger city instead of just a bedroom community so that we can bring more money into the city. Well, with the growth and desire for more money, we can expect to see an increase in crime as well. It is funny how people will move out of a bigger city to get away from problems, but then they turn around and want all the amenities a big city has to offer, and next thing you know, the problems we moved away from have been brought right into out backyard.
So what happened Sunday morning in Lumberton? I found out about this shocking series of events from Kel Lindsey who posted the following message on his Facebook wall:
"This morning in my own back yard, two black males robbed and sexually assaulted my sister in law. They held her at gun point and demanded money from her, they made her drive them to a store and take money from an ATM. By the grace of God they brought her back alive and they fled on foot. These two pieces of shit then proceeded to rob another house in our neighborhood and were met with a joyous sound of a gun being brought to bare. As this humanless pile of shit lays clinging to life, I hope one more good person will now arm themselves against this violent and corrupt society so that scum will know that they cannot get away with this shit anymore. Good people with guns stop bad people with guns. amen."
I contacted Kel to confirm the details. As you can see from the Facebook post above, Kel is a big supporter of gun rights and was glad that at least one of them was stopped by a woman exercising her right to bear arms.
**************************************************
15. Who needs an AR-15 for home defense?
**************************************************
How about when FOUR bad guys break into your home? What do you say about the Mr. Biden? Do you sttill think a two-shot shotgun is the answer to self-defense? You go first: let's see your Secret Service detail reduced to one agent with a double-barrel shotgun.
Terry McKenna emailed me this:
--
From The Washington Post: http://tinyurl.com/cqypbs8
By Caitlin Gibson
April 16, 2013
Loudoun family held captive in home-invasion robbery
A Loudoun County family was held by four intruders during a home-invasion-style robbery Tuesday morning, according to the Loudoun County sheriff's office.
The four intruders - two white men and two black men- entered the single-family home in the 13400 block of Loyalty Road in Taylorstown about 11 a.m. and used a weapon to hold the family against their will, authorities said.
The victims were a family of five: a couple, their adult daughter and their two young grandchildren, according to Liz Mills, spokeswoman for the sheriff's office.
No one was hurt during the robbery, Mills said, and no information was immediately available about what type of weapon was displayed.
The four intruders took items from the home and then left, sheriff's office officials said. After the intruders left, the family ran to safety and contacted authorities, according to the sheriff's office.
Mills said the investigation was ongoing, and declined to provide further details on what items were stolen. She said investigators were trying to determine whether the robbery was random or targeted. The robbers tried to conceal their identity, Mills said.
Loudoun sheriff's deputies were canvassing the vicinity Tuesday afternoon, and authorities cautioned residents to expect an increased law enforcement presence in the area.
Taylorstown is a rural community southeast of Lovettsville, near the border of Loudoun and Frederick counties.
Anyone with information regarding this case or who saw anything suspicious in the area is asked to immediately call the Loudoun sheriff's office at 703-777-1021. Callers wishing to remain anonymous are asked to call Loudoun Crime Solvers at 703-777-1919. If the information provided leads to an arrest and indictment, the caller could be eligible for a cash reward of up to $1,000, authorities said.
**************************************************
16. Who needs an AR-15 for home defense?, Part II
**************************************************
From Myfox8.com: http://tinyurl.com/crbfq3h
By Ryan Sullivan
April 13, 2013
FAYETTEVILLE, N.C. - Two men who attempted to invade a Fayetteville home early Friday morning died after a gun fight with the homeowner, according to WTVD.
WTVD reports the exchange of gunfire happened shortly after 3:30 a.m. at a house in the 7500 block of Levi Road.
Both suspects fled the scene after the exchange, WTVD reports.
According to WTVD, one of the suspects, 20-year-old Xavier White, was later found shot on Martha Court. He was taken to Cape Fear Valley Medical Center, where he later died, the station reports.
The second suspect was found dead around 5:45 a.m. along the shoulder of the roadway in the 5400 block of South Sumac Circle, WTVD reports. The second suspect's name has not been released.
The homeowner was also wounded in the exchange, the station reports. The homeowner's name has not been released, either.
No other details were immediately available.
Fayetteville police are investigating the incident and ask that anyone with further information would call them at (910) 433-1856 or Crimestoppers at (910) 483-8477.
**************************************************
17. Why one cop carries 145 rounds of ammo on the job
**************************************************
Sometimes 7-shots, like New York is now limiting citizens to, is not nearly enough.
From PoliceOne.com: http://tinyurl.com/d3mp6xa
By Charles Remsberg
April 17, 2013
Before the call that changed Sergeant Timothy Gramins' life forever, he typically carried 47 rounds of handgun ammunition on his person while on duty.
Sgt. Timothy Gramins who fired 17 .45-cal. rounds into a hell-bent suspect before putting him down offers these lessons learned from his extraordinary fight for his life:
Today, he carries 145, "every day, without fail."
He detailed the gunfight that caused the difference in a gripping presentation at the annual conference of the Assn. of SWAT Personnel-Wisconsin.
At the core of his desperate firefight was a murderous attacker who simply would not go down, even though he was shot 14 times with .45-cal. ammunition - six of those hits in supposedly fatal locations.
The most threatening encounter in Gramins' nearly two-decade career with the Skokie (Ill.) PD north of Chicago came on a lazy August afternoon prior to his promotion to sergeant, on his first day back from a family vacation. He was about to take a quick break from his patrol circuit to buy a Star Wars game at a shopping center for his son's eighth birthday.
An alert flashed out that a male black driving a two-door white car had robbed a bank at gunpoint in another suburb 11 miles north and had fled in an unknown direction. Gramins was only six blocks from a major expressway that was the most logical escape route into the city.
Unknown at the time, the suspect, a 37-year-old alleged Gangster Disciple, had vowed that he would kill a police officer if he got stopped.
"I've got a horseshoe up my ass when it comes to catching suspects," Gramins laughs. He radioed that he was joining other officers on the busy expressway lanes to scout traffic.
He was scarcely up to highway speed when he spotted a lone male black driver in a white Pontiac Bonneville and pulled alongside him. "He gave me 'the Look,' that oh-crap-there's-the-police look, and I knew he was the guy," Gramins said.
Gramins dropped behind him. Then in a sudden, last-minute move the suspect accelerated sharply and swerved across three lanes of traffic to roar up an exit ramp. "I've got one running!" Gramins radioed.
The next thing he knew, bullets were flying. "That was four years ago," Gramins said. "Yet it could be ten seconds ago."
With Gramins following close behind, siren blaring and lights flashing, the Bonneville zigzagged through traffic and around corners into a quite pocket of single-family homes a few blocks from the exit. Then a few yards from where a 10-year-old boy was skateboarding on a driveway, the suspect abruptly squealed to a stop.
"He bailed out and ran headlong at me with a 9 mm Smith in his hand while I was still in my car," Gramins said.
The gunman sank four rounds into the Crown Vic's hood while Gramins was drawing his .45-cal. Glock 21.
"I didn't have time to think of backing up or even ramming him," Gramins said. "I see the gun and I engage."
Gramins fired back through his windshield, sending a total of 13 rounds tearing through just three holes.
A master firearms instructor and a sniper on his department's Tactical Intervention Unit, "I was confident at least some of them were hitting him, but he wasn't even close to slowing down," Gramins said.
The gunman shot his pistol dry trying to hit Gramins with rounds through his driver-side window, but except for spraying the officer's face with glass, he narrowly missed and headed back to his car.
Gramins, also empty, escaped his squad - "a coffin," he calls it - and reloaded on his run to cover behind the passenger-side rear of the Bonneville.
Now the robber, a lanky six-footer, was back in the fight with a .380 Bersa pistol he'd grabbed off his front seat. Rounds flew between the two as the gunman dashed toward the squad car.
Again, Gamins shot dry and reloaded.
"I thought I was hitting him, but with shots going through his clothing it was hard to tell for sure. This much was certain: he kept moving and kept shooting, trying his damnedest to kill me."
In this free-for-all, the assailant had, in fact, been struck 14 times. Any one of six of these wounds - in the heart, right lung, left lung, liver, diaphragm, and right kidney - could have produced fatal consequences..."in time," Gramins emphasizes.
But time for Gramins, like the stack of bullets in his third magazine, was fast running out.
In his trunk was an AR-15; in an overhead rack inside the squad, a Remington 870.
But reaching either was impractical. Gramins did manage to get himself to a grassy spot near a tree on the curb side of his vehicle where he could prone out for a solid shooting platform.
The suspect was in the street on the other side of the car. "I could see him by looking under the chassis," Gramins recalls. "I tried a couple of ricochet rounds that didn't connect. Then I told myself, 'Hey, I need to slow down and aim better.' "
When the suspect bent down to peer under the car, Gramins carefully established a sight picture, and squeezed off three controlled bursts in rapid succession.
Each round slammed into the suspect's head - one through each side of his mouth and one through the top of his skull into his brain. At long last the would-be cop killer crumpled to the pavement.
The whole shootout had lasted 56 seconds, Gramins said. The assailant had fired 21 rounds from his two handguns. Inexplicably - but fortunately - he had not attempted to employ an SKS semi-automatic rifle that was lying on his front seat ready to go.
Gramins had discharged 33 rounds. Four remained in his magazine.
Two houses and a parked Mercedes in the vicinity had been struck by bullets, but with no casualties. The young skateboarder had run inside yelling at his dad to call 911 as soon as the battle started and also escaped injury. Despite the fusillade of lead sent his way, Gramins' only damage besides glass cuts was a wound to his left shin. His dominant emotion throughout his brush with death, he recalls, was "feeling very alone, with no one to help me but myself."
Remarkably, the gunman was still showing vital signs when EMS arrived. Sheer determination, it seemed, kept him going, for no evidence of drugs or alcohol was found in his system.
He was transported to a trauma center where Gramins also was taken. They shared an ER bay with only a curtain between them as medical personnel fought unsuccessfully to save the robber's life.
At one point Gramins heard a doctor exclaim, "We may as well stop. Every bag of blood we give him ends up on the floor. This guy's like Swiss cheese. Why'd that cop have to shoot him so many times!"
Gramins thought, "He just tried to kill me! Where's that part of it?"
When Gramins was released from the hospital, "I walked out of there a different person," he said.
"Being in a shooting changes you. Killing someone changes you even more." As a devout Catholic, some of his changes involved a deepening spirituality and philosophical reflections, he said without elaborating.
At least one alteration was emphatically practical.
Before the shooting, Gramins routinely carried 47 rounds of handgun ammo on his person, including two extra magazines for his Glock 21 and 10 rounds loaded in a backup gun attached to his vest, a 9 mm Glock 26.
Now unfailingly he goes to work carrying 145 handgun rounds, all 9 mm. These include three extra 17-round magazines for his primary sidearm (currently a Glock 17), plus two 33-round mags tucked in his vest, as well as the backup gun. Besides all that, he's got 90 rounds for the AR-15 that now rides in a rack up front.
Paranoia?
Gramins shook his head and said "Preparation."
**************************************************
18. Busch Brewing heir resigns long-time NRA membership
**************************************************
I don't drink, but if I did I'd be resigning from drinking anything with the name Busch on the label.
From Newsmax.com: http://tinyurl.com/cfckdta
By Sandy Fitzgerald
April 19, 2013
The heir to the Busch brewing family's fortune Thursday resigned his lifetime membership to the National Rifle Association because of the powerful group's opposition to background checks for all commercial gun sales.
Adolphus Busch IV, in a letter to NRA President David Keene, wrote: "I fail to see how the NRA can disregard the overwhelming will of its members who see background checks as reasonable," the Huffington Post reports.
Busch's resignation came the day after the Senate rejected a bipartisan bill to expand background checks, along with numerous amendments to a pending gun control bill. The NRA, the capital's most-powerful lobbying force, opposes all gun control measures.
"The NRA I see today has undermined the values upon which it was established," Busch said. "Your current strategic focus clearly places priority on the needs of gun and ammunition manufacturers while disregarding the opinions of your 4 million individual members."
Busch joined the NRA in 1975, but said the group has moved in a direction he does not agree with.
ÙOne only has to look at the makeup of the 75-member board of directors, dominated by manufacturing interests, to confirm my point. The NRA appears to have evolved into the lobby for gun and ammunition manufacturers rather than gun owners," he said in his letter to Keene.
He noted that the NRA's stand against universal background checks reverses a position it took in 1999 following the shootings at Columbine High School in Colorado. Busch also said he can't comprehend how the NRA's opposition to a ban on assault weapons ban and high-capacity magazine's advances its vision of gun safety.
**************************************************
19. Who needs a gun at the 7-Eleven?
**************************************************
A CHP holder bravely stepped in to save a 7-Eleven employee and got shot in the face.
Bill Hine emailed me this:
--
From NBC12.com: http://tinyurl.com/bkcfkfz
By Mike Valerio
April 15, 2013
COLONIAL HEIGHTS, VA (WWBT) - Police are investigating a shooting at a 7-Eleven in Colonial Heights.
People spent most of the night into the early morning cleaning up, after an attempted robbery.
All the employees at the store on Boulevard and Sherwood are ok, but first responders took one person to VCU Medical Center.
According to Sgt. Rob Ruxer, a customer with a concealed handgun tried to stop the robbery in progress.
He was shot in the face, and taken to VCU Medical Center. The man, whose identity has not been released, is now in stable condition.
Police were on the scene within minutes of the shooting, wasting no time collecting evidence inside the store.
The 7-Eleven is now re-opened.
**************************************************
20. Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act
**************************************************
Roger Tweedy emailed me this:
--
Philip:
One of the amendments voted on by the Senate Wednesday evening, April 17, was Senator Burr's Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act. It was Burr Amdt. No. 720 to S. 649. I do not know why the media did not report on it as the other amendments were. The Senate rejected the amendment 56 for and 44 against. All 44 votes against the amendment were Democrats to include our Senator Warner and Senator Kaine.
For a simply summary of the amendment/Act: when the Veterans Administration (VA) for any reason provides a fiduciary to a veteran they just arbitrarily submit their name to the FBI NICS database. They make no attempt whatsoever to determine if the veteran is a danger to themselves nor to anyone rest. This makes it illegal for the veteran to buy/own a gun [i.e. Personal Protection Device (PPD) to Homeland Security]. Additionally, guns are banned from the veteran's home and therefore anyone else residing with the veteran cannot have a gun on the residence. How dangerous do you think that is! It is like gun confiscation except, unfortunately, for some veterans, it is for the rest of their lives.
If you need additional info see, for example, THE HILL, "Burr's amendment to protect gun rights of veterans fails to get 60 votes" by Ramsey Cox, dated 04/17/13. Also, although uploaded on Nov 2, 2011, see youtube.com
video titled: Sen. Richard Burr on the Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act. The video contains a conversation between Cam Edwards and Senator Burr (R-NC).
Would you please inform VA-ALERT recipients of the Act? Hopefully we can put pressure on Warner and Kaine when it gets voted on again. A stand-alone bill is suppose to be voted on in May (S. 572).
**************************************************
21. RT OpEd: Yes, the government should take your gun away
**************************************************
EM Dave Hicks sent me this:
--
Another lost soul who believes in Utopia, where criminals will stop murdering, raping, and robbing if only guns were made illegal and confiscated. Yep, licensing and registration of automobiles has stopped all drunk driving, use of stolen cars in bank robberies, and accidents caused by people driving with no or a suspended license. More proof our education system is failing us.
From Roanoke Times: http://tinyurl.com/czpdkwn
By Michael Abraham
April 20, 2013
A couple of months ago, my family took a dream vacation to New Zealand, for my money the most appealing nation on Earth. The air is pristine, the water is clean, the vistas are amazing and the people are generous and friendly.
We arrived in New Zealand shortly after the Newtown, Conn., shooting tragedy, and many people we met wanted to talk about it, even more so when they learned of our close ties to Virginia Tech. I spoke at length with two policemen and one hunter.
New Zealand gun laws are amazingly sane:
Private citizens can own pistols, but they must be a member of a licensed pistol club. The pistols cannot leave the club's premises.
Private citizens can own rifles for hunting, but owners must pass a qualification test, undergo a background check and have their characters vouched for. Rifles must be registered and stored unloaded at all times in approved, locked safes when not in use. Ownership licenses are expensive.
Private citizens cannot own semi-automatic or automatic rifles.
Regular beat cops do not carry guns. Only members of the national SWAT team carry guns.
Gun violence per capita in New Zealand is about 5 percent of ours.
As the debate goes on and our nation struggles with how to curb the epidemic of violence, many of those in favor of modest proposals like universal background checks and limited-capacity magazines are quick to say, "I support the Second Amendment, and I don't want to take anybody's gun away."
Our government really should take your gun away.
Owning a gun to hunt should be a privilege, granted to our citizens in ways similar to how it is for New Zealanders.
Owning a gun to protect the citizenry from a tyrannical government is nonsensical, obsolete fantasy. Our military can put a missile into the window of any house on Earth within an hour. So forget any delusions of protecting ourselves from a totalitarian government.
Owning a gun for personal security is statistically unrealistic. Owners are more likely to be hurt by their own gun than someone else's, as a gun is used in suicides or suicide attempts 11 times as often and in unintentional shooting deaths four times as often as in self-defense.
Virginia recently eliminated its one-handgun-a-month law, on the books for 19 years. If you've got the money, you can buy as many Glocks, Smith & Wessons or Sig Sauers as you want. And America has among the highest rates of gun violence in the First World, 46 times higher than England, 17 times higher than Germany and 160 times higher than Singapore.
Yes, we have the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. We do not have the right to unlimited firepower and unlicensed use. Every right has limits.
Our problem is that we've spent the last three decades making it affordable and easy to obtain weapons of unprecedented lethality. We need to begin marching in the other direction, making guns difficult to obtain and expensive to own and use.
To own and drive a car, citizens must pass a competency test, register the car and have it licensed and routinely inspected, and obtain insurance. Why? Because cars are a potential public safety risk. How can we morally justify making it easier to buy and operate a Bushmaster .223 than a Dodge Dart?
Yes, we need other solutions, too, including better enforcement of current laws and better mental health screening and treatment, and we need to commit to paying for these things. But not talking about guns to reduce this carnage is like not talking about cigarettes if we're trying to reduce cancer deaths.
Recently, a man walked into a Charlottesville grocery story carrying a loaded semi-automatic weapon. According to the article about it, "Police restrained the man to ask him questions. They released him after they confirmed he is not a convicted felon, owned the gun legally and it was not concealed. Police say he was cooperative and did not break any laws."
Seriously.
I can't drive to the end of my block without proper licensing - and a seat belt - because of the public safety risk, and yet it is perfectly legal for anyone to parade publicly with a loaded AK-47. This is cruel, inexplicable insanity.
Substantial reductions in the millions of guns in America would make us safer and more secure, even if the government needs to buy them back and destroy them.
It's high time to show the world - and ourselves - we can get sane again.
**************************************************
22. Rape prevention
**************************************************
From joeforamerica.com: http://tinyurl.com/d33x7lw
By Joe Wurzelbacher
April 15, 2013
You like the title? Ya, I do too. Especially, GOD forbid my wife or Daughter were in harms way.(or yours)
I love the fact that there are people out there coming up with new and good ways of protecting ourselves from evil people. Police officers have said on a number of occasions "we can't protect you". That is why it is important that you learn to protect yourself. Just to let you know a whistle, even an assault whistle won't protect you.
Remember, go to your local gun range, learn how to handle a gun, that way you don't become a victim! I say this only because I really do care about your safety. I personally believe that if more people are armed, the safer you and I will be.
**************************************************
23. Guns in America [Slideshow]
**************************************************
A VCDL member emailed me this:
--
Thirty photos; VCDL is here.
From U.S. News & World Report: http://tinyurl.com/d4czguq
**************************************************
24. Is your mayor a member of MAIG?
**************************************************
Charles Phillips sent me this:
I wonder how many Virginians know that their own Mayor might be a member of MAIG?
--
From Mayorsagainstillegalguns.org: http://tinyurl.com/n2et9o
**************************************************
25. Women and guns: Stereotypes and double standards
**************************************************
James Kiser sent me this in response to VCDL Update 4/20/13 item #27, "Women defying gun owner stereotype"
--
Concerning Item 27 Women and Guns. I find it highly ironic how politicians portray women as incapable of using a firearm but want to put them into the combat arms of the military.
Jim
**************************************************
26. OpEd: The United States of the NRA?
**************************************************
This is what happens when editorialist don't have a clue about guns, gun laws, or history. Kevin Shuler emailed me this:
--
From Newsleader.com: http://tinyurl.com/d64qkmk
April 18, 2013
Never mind that near 90 percent of otherwise-polarized America supports universal background checks for those buying a gun.
Thanks to 46 spineless members of the U.S. Senate, there will be no background checks for purchases at gun shows and over the Internet. Those with severe mental illness or felony and domestic violence convictions can still get their guns.
Never mind the compromise - crafted by former-NRA favorites Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa. - only had a chance of passage because it packed little heat in the first place. Assault weapons still would have been legal. Gun sales between private citizens still would not have been required background checks, much less registration.
The pundits and the politicians tell us that Wednesday's bill failed because the NRA told some scary lies to their easily manipulated base, who then fired an intense stream of emails and calls to Congress.
And in this rare case, the pundits and the politicians are probably right. What we don't get is why.
The NRA lies. Wednesday's failed legislation would have outlawed any gun registry, yet the NRA convinced its base that extending background checks from gun shops to gun shows and the Internet would somehow lead to the big-bad government confiscating all guns everywhere.
The NRA doesn't even win elections anymore. Last November it spent millions trying to oust Obama and a combined $4 million to defeat Tim Kaine here in Virginia and other U.S. Senate candidates in Ohio, Missouri, Indiana, Wisconsin and Florida. All those candidates won. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, just 5.2 percent of the NRA's $18 million 2012 election effort resulted in victory.
But never mind all that. The NRA leadership is riding high, claiming victory because they defeated the very background checks Wayne LaPierre once supported. The NRA's rabid base can be proud that their endless phone calls and emails worked again.
Their guns are safe. Never mind that those guns were never, ever in danger.
Those who give money to the NRA - either knowing that it lies or willfully, ignorantly believing it does not - are culpable in this travesty. No legislation will end crime. But this legislation would have no doubt saved lives.
The NRA purports to be about gun safety. Perhaps that was once true, but today's NRA is about simply this: taking money from fearful gun owners for the economic gain of greedy gun manufacturers.
The NRA's base can wrap themselves in the Second Amendment with all the solemnity of a seminarian. It doesn't change the fact that they are being duped by and are part of a dishonest movement.
Most of America sees what happened Wednesday. The U.S. Senate put the NRA before country. The tyranny of a vocal, irresponsible, paranoid minority ruled the day.
Fortunately, this too shall pass. If the NRA's over-reach and dishonesty continue - and there is every reason to believe it will - we are perhaps watching the start of a slow slide to irrelevance. A dark day in December brought gun safety back to the nation's heart and mind. We doubt it goes away anytime soon.
**************************************************
27. Philly police: M16 fully-automatic assault rifle is unaccounted for
**************************************************
Maybe the city was trying to emulate Fast and Furious and gave the gun to a local drug gang?
From NBC News: http://tinyurl.com/d6mtgqv
By Dan Stamm
April 15, 2013
Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey says one of the departments most powerful weapons has gone missing.
In a press conference Monday morning, Ramsey said an M16 fully-automatic assault rifle is unaccounted for following an audit. He believes it couldn't have been taken by anyone but a police officer.
"It could be an inventory issue although we are going through everything we can and we still haven't located it," Ramsey told reporters Monday. "The biggest fear, obviously, is that it was stolen by one of my own members."
The Vietnam-era M16 rifle was stored in a deadbolted and alarmed storeroom at the Philadelphia Police Training Academy in Northeast Philadelphia.
The department received the gun and 1,355 other M16s from the federal government in 2009. The guns were being converted into semi-automatic AR-15 rifles. A regularly-scheduled audit, the first since December 2012, showed that one weapon was missing.
Ramsey found out about the missing rifle this weekend. He says he has never heard of this type of incident in the department before and that police know the rifle's serial number.
Only a few officers have access to the secured room and know the keypad combination to the room where the guns are stored, according to Ramsey. He says they're locked inside large crates on top of pallets. There is no surveillance video inside the room.
Ramsey doubts anyone besides his own officers had access to the weapon.
"This was not someone who came in from the outside to take this... there is no indication of that at all."
The commissioner talked tough about what he would do if he found out one of Philly's finest took the gun.
"I guarantee you that if it's somebody that I find out took that gun that I will do everything in my power to see to it that they get time in a federal penitentiary," Ramsey said.
Ramsey said that his department alerted the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) about the missing weapon.
In the meantime, the department is counting their M16 inventory and comparing the weapons to recorded serial numbers.
"As far as I'm concerned it's a missing weapon," Ramsey said.
As to why the department specifically have this type of rifle: "We're cross-training some of our officers for active shooter training," Ramsey said. "That's why we have these types of weapons to supplement what our SWAT Team can do."
He says that assault rifles account for only about two percent of the shootings in the city.
Ramsey says it's the responsibility of his department to maintain and care for the weapons.
In the wake of this incident, Ramsey said he has instructed the department's audit department to take a tally of "every single firearm that we have in our department."
"We do audits but I want a special audit done in this circumstance."
He also said that moving forward there will be video cameras trained on the storeroom.
**************************************************
28. Denny's anti gun?
**************************************************
Paul Meade emailed me this:
--
Sunday I took my wife, daughter & son in law (who was open carrying his firearm) out to dinner at Denny's. We had already been served our drinks when the manager came out of the back room. He stopped about 8 feet from our table and told us in a loud voice that we had to take our pistol out to our car. I told him that if our pistol had to go than we would have to go. So we got up and left. I checked for and could not find " No Firearms" posted anywhere in the restaurant.
I called the district manager and in her gun hating attitude told me they were a family restaurant and didn't welcome guns. I told her there were several family restaurants that gave discounts to gun carriers. After wasting my time talking to her. I called corporate and explained what had happened and they told me they would talk to management about our issue. It has been several days and have not heard from them. So now I am telling everyone. I will not be going back unless they change there policy against guns.
Joanne Overly District Manager 630-430-5719.
Denny's Corporate 864-597-8000.
**************************************************
29. Gun-friendly cigar shop welcomes concealed carry permit holders
**************************************************
Joseph Mancini emailed me this:
--
I've attached links to the photos of the sign welcoming lawful concealed carry permit holders to the Tobbaccology store in Bristow. The shop technically has a Manassas address, as its on the Bristow / Manassas border, right on Route 28, a few doors down from the Guns & Ammo Warehouse store.
The store address is 11001 Nokesville Road, Manassas, Virginia 20110. The phone number of the shop is 703-330-1511. Brent, the Owner, welcomes VCDL members and patriots exercising their second amendment rights.
Photos:
http://tinyurl.com/cdqgkuq
http://tinyurl.com/c5mjlck
http://tinyurl.com/bw3dpyq
**************************************************
30. Error in item #11 (VA-ALERT: Update 4/20/13)?
**************************************************
Steve Brown emailed me this in response to VCDL Update 4/20/13, item #11 "Universal Background Checks - This is the plan"
--
Toomey-Manchin does not say that private sellers of firearms through a dealer must prove they (the sellers) own the firearms. Averill's piece said the seller must prove ownership.
Toomey- Manchin authorizes the AG to promulgate rules for the transfer, and those rules do not yet exist.
Averill's claim that sellers prove ownership is therefore wrong and the reader should be told so.
[PVC: I will say this: if the sale fails for some reason, the dealer will have to run a background check on the seller before the gun can be returned. If the seller is under 21 and the gun is a handgun, he can't get it back directly. Someone else who is over 21 would have to have the background check done, receive the gun, and then return it to the seller. The law would pretty much make it impossible for someone under 21 to buy a handgun from a private seller who is not a family member for the same reason. The only way to do it is the same as above: a third-party over 21 would have to have the background check, receive the gun from the dealer, and then hand the gun over to the buyer. Yet another example of how gun-control laws make no sense. The background check in both cases would not be done on the ultimate recipient of the gun. However, such a transfer would be legal and not a "straw purchase," since the gun is being given to a person who is not prohibited from owning or possessing a firearm. Are we having fun yet?]
-------------------------------------------
***************************************************************************
VA-ALERT is a project of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.
(VCDL). VCDL is an all-volunteer, non-partisan grassroots organization
dedicated to defending the human rights of all Virginians. The Right to
Keep and Bear Arms is a fundamental human right.
VCDL web page: http://www.vcdl.org [http://www.vcdl.org/]
***************************************************************************
IMPORTANT: It is our intention to honor all "remove" requests promptly.
To unsubscribe from this list, or change the email address where you
receive messages, please go to:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=15843530&id_secret=15843530-842dc303 [https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=15843530&id_secret=15843530-842dc303]
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=15843530&id_secret=15843530-842dc303
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
No comments:
Post a Comment