Month: December 2013

Tabs are filling up toward the end of the week, so time for some news:

NY District Attorney indicts a homeless man because the NYPD can’t shoot straight. When you look at the stats, they really can’t hit anything at all. This is what happens when you destroy your civilian gun culture. You also destroy the ability of your police officers to shoot.

Joe reminds us that they once only cared about handguns. That was true until they realized they weren’t making any progress on that front. A lot of these groups changed their names not because they were trying to hide their agenda, but because they realized there was more traction to be had trying to ban scary looking rifles.

Commonwealth Court has cancelled oral arguments in the Erie case regarding preemption in Pennsylvania. They will decide the case as briefed. Josh Prince says there’s not too much that should be read into it.

An open letter to anti-gun politicians, activists, and citizens. I think we can get all those things without having to give anything up if we play our cards right, and are willing to be patient.

NSSF’s lawsuit against their new gun laws has been dismissed based on standing. Seems they violated procedure to pass the law, but NSSF doesn’t have standing to bring suit. Who does? Does anyone?

Women are the holy grail of the gun rights movement. Women are more likely to get involved in the political fight than men, and more women vote than men.

A random thought on arbitrary enforcement. Everyone commits, on average, at least three federal felonies a day. I think we’re already at the point where we’re all living free only by the good graces of the people who run things. That has to change, but people have to become aware first.

These polling results would seem to go against conventional wisdom that support for gun control in urban areas is a fore drawn conclusion. They’ve been losing ground even there since Newtown:

“Demographically speaking, the drop in support for stricter gun laws is mostly based on where people live, with a 10-point decline in the Midwest and a 15-point drop in urban areas having a lot to do with the overall decline nationally,” CNN Polling Director Keating Holland said.

“Two-thirds of people who live in big cities supported stricter gun control laws in the weeks following Newtown; now that figure is down to a bare majority. And while support for new gun laws is down in all regions of the country, it has fallen further in the Midwest,” Holland added.

The poll indicates that majorities in the Northeast and the West still favor stricter gun control, but majorities in the South and Midwest now oppose it.

That’s very interesting that support has fallen even for urban dwellers, but it’s also not surprising that urban dwellers are fluctuating more than non-urban dwellers, since most of them probably don’t have a dog in the fight from their point of view. It’s also interesting that the places with the most strict gun laws have the largest amount of people who want them to be more strict.

I attribute the majorities in the Northeast and West (let’s not mince words here, that’s California and the few other urban centers Californians have moved to and ruined) who still support gun control to be a result of those areas having largely succeeded in destroying civilian gun ownership, and destroying the gun culture. What makes people go back and forth is knowing people who shoot, talking to people who shoot, and generally having some exposure to the culture. That’s why I keep stressing the idea that we can’t just write off other states because it’s not our state. For approximately 1/3rd of America, population wise, we’ve lost. We can never regain it without the assistance of the federal courts. Once that number hits 1/2, and probably sooner, the game will be over for us.

Breitbart: “Congressional Study: Murder Rate Nearly Halved from 1994 as Gun Ownership Soared” It’s almost like more guns != more crime. Not just nationally either. It’s almost like when ordinary people can more easily arm themselves, the criminals no longer feel they can rule the streets.

The UFA extension, that only takes the expiration date out another 10 years, has passed the House on a voice vote, meaning no one objected enough to call for a recorded vote. That’s basically the equivalent of it passing unanimously. I agree with John that renewal was a fore drawn conclusion. It’s Schumer’s games that we need to be prepared to fight on. Now they have a choice: they can either pass the House extension, or be seen playing political games with renewal, in which case nothing gets passed and the UFA expires.

Roll Call has an article about it here. NRA has issued a release stating that expansion of the UFA is not what’s up in the House right now, and they will oppose any expansion.