2013 – Page 38 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Beating You With Your Own AR

I don’t generally use my ARs for home defense. Most of the time they stay in the safe. But that’s not because I think they are unsuitable. When I have kept an AR handy for home defense, I’ve generally kept it with a loaded magazine, bolt in battery on an empty chamber. This guy thinks an AR is useless for self-defense, because he’s such a badass he’ll just be able to take your gun and beat you with it:

â€œI need an assault rifle and 20 round clips to defend my homeâ€

Bullshit. First of all who in the hell are you defending your home from? The Taliban? Unless you are sitting in a chair at your front door, magazine in, round chambered and safety off, you are not going to shoot a damn thing. So in reality, if I had broken in, by the time you got up, got the gun out and started loading it, I would have taken it from you and beat you to death with it.

And by some miracle, you got it loaded, and actually shouldered it to fire, you are going to miss because I will be too close for it to be effective unless your plan is to watch in awe as the bullet passes through the wall when you miss me and you kill your neighbors SUV.

We’re often accused of being chest-beating neanderthals, but who is doing the chest beating here? I half expect him to proffer Joe Biden’s advice about double barreled shotguns next. I get tired of these self-proclaimed self-defense “experts” opining on topics they know little about. I sincerely doubt your average SWAT team, which tends to practice entering homes with considerably more equipment and training at their disposal than your average home invader, would feel confident knowing their suspect was sitting inside the house with a loaded AR, ready to shoot whatever comes through the door. Better hope that door goes down on the first strike with the battering ram, and you get extraordinarily lucky and catch him taking a dump on the toilet or something.

I’m fairly certain knowing that, surrounding the house, and convincing the suspect to come out peacefully would be the preferred option over entering the house. I’m definitely sure they would not bet money they could get in the house and beat the suspect with his own AR before he could start launching bullets their way.

We Do Police Our Own

It’s interesting to listen to gun control advocates describe gun shows as largely a Wild West kind of atmosphere where anything goes and no law actually exists. It seems quite at odds with what I have experienced spending many days camped out behind various volunteer tables working at gun shows.

Today, I heard about a dealer who was, on one hand, doing a great job of policing his own sales. On the other hand, he was apparently a jerk about it and just lost future customers over a pretty innocent mistake.

See, it was a father-son team from New Jersey. The father is a longtime gun owner who is fully up-to-date on all required paperwork, and even has a pistol purchase permit waiting to be used. The son just came of age, but is facing usual delays of getting everything he needs processed. Shocking from New Jersey, the state where gun ownership is really only legal under exceptions to the laws.

Anyway, the son found a rifle he wanted at the show, and the father asked him if he wanted it bad enough for the father to buy it and then later sell it to him through another documented transaction once he can finally be a New Jersey-approved gun owner. The dealer over heard this, and apparently got very bitchy about it. He refused the sale. I don’t really understand why he apparently also bitched out the two guys for making a pretty common and honest mistake of assuming that a dealer is really only prohibited from selling to someone who is going to give it away or sell it to a criminally prohibited person. The father made clear to his son that the firearm would not be available to him until they could lawfully sell it between the two of them, so they assumed that the dealer wouldn’t have an issue with it.

The dealer still has the gun and hasn’t lost anything at all in this interaction. Yet, rather than using the opportunity to make it a teachable moment on the law and maybe offering up a business card to the duo in order to encourage future business once the son does have his paperwork, the dealer got an attitude and just blew off the chance to sell guns to two men in the future.

So, good job on the dealer for following the law. Bad job on being polite while educating people who clearly have no criminal intent on their misunderstanding.

One thing to add about today’s show: There were many, many women there buying guns all on their own.

Time to Give Starbucks a Break: 2013 Edition

There’s always a risk when bringing this issue up of summoning the drama llama, but I can’t help but think Starbucks Coffee has shown sufficient resolve to follow the laws of the respective states with regards to carry that dragging the company further into this issue may very well be unproductive. I think that goes double if people start dragging AR-15s into Starbucks to show their appreciation. This kind of stuff is Folsom Street FairÂ for the gun rights movement, in neighborhoods across the country instead of being confined to San Francisco with all the other weird. I am not opposed to showing Starbucks some love, I’ve even encouraged it in the past, and participated myself, along with a lot of other people. I just believe if we’re going to show appreciation, it would behoove us to leave the rifles at home. To be honest, I think even pistol OC, if done to make a point (and not just because you do it) probably isn’t helping Starbucks remain comfortable with their decision.

At this point, I think if Starbucks reverses its policy, we have no one to blame except ourselves. We’re already seeing hints this may be getting pushed too far by our own side. Last year, when this issue heated up again, I thought our side was working too hard to help the antis keep the issue alive. I think the best way we can help Starbucks is not to fan the flames. Keep spending your money there, and when the antis make noise, drop a note to corporate saying you’re a regular customer, and you appreciate their decision to follow state law on firearms.

No Post Friday

Sorry for the lack of posting. I just haven’t had the time due to work, and Bitter is busy working a gun show this weekend trying to sell banquet and raffle tickets for our Friends of the NRA committee. I’m behind with reading and posting. I might get some content up later tonight or tomorrow if there’s time.

Christie Signs Some Gun Bills

Alert from ANJRPC quoted below. Not too surprising considering Christie’s general disdain for civil liberties, as was recently expressed. But if he vetoes the worst of it that’s at least something. I also think there’s a better chance of winning on the terror watch list issue in Court than most other things:

This afternoon, Governor Christie announced that he signed 10 of the gun bills on his desk.Â Â Two of those bills are helpful to gun owners, six are neutral in their impact on gun rights as a result of amendments based on gun owner input, and two were opposed by gun owners.

Three other horrific anti-gun bills – the worst of the bills that made it to the Governor’s desk -have not yet been acted upon by Governor Christie: the Sweeney “centerpiece” FID bill, the fifty caliber ban, and the trace data bill that would require the State Police to violate federal law.

It is critical that the Governor’s office continue to hear from gun owners on the three bills that have not been acted on yet.Â Â Please do your part and keep urging the Governor to veto these bills.Â Â Please call the Governor’s office ASAP atÂ 609-292-6000, write him atP.O. Box 001, Trenton, N.J. 08625, orÂ send an emailÂ using the online contact form.

The 3 anti-gun bills on which the Governor has NOT yet acted are:

S2723Â – the awful Sweeney “omnibus” bill, which throws out existing FID cards and replaces them with either a privacy-invading driver license endorsement or other form of ID; suspends Second Amendment rights without proof of firearms training; ends private sales between background-checked licensed gun owners; effectively creates a registry of ammunition purchases and long gun sales; and imposes a 7-day waiting period for handgun purchases.

A3659Â – the fifty caliber gun ban, which in its final versionÂ bans firearms that shoot centerfire cartridgesÂ of any caliberÂ that attain a muzzle energy of 12,000 ft-lbs. or greater.Â Â Though limited grandfathering has been added in response to gun owner concerns, the firearms must be registered, cannot be passed down to heirs, and owners will be civilly liable for damages if the firearm is used in a crime.Â Â Additionally, the bill has been amended specifically to prevent anyone with a pending order for these firearms from taking possession of them.

A3797Â -Â Mandates that the State Police publicly disclose confidential ATF gun trace data in violation of explicit federal law limiting that data to law enforcement use only. This is an attempt by frustrated gun banners to circumvent the federal Tiarht Amendment, so that idiosyncrasies of the ATF’s trace system can be exploited and manipulated to falsely suggest that law abiding citizens are a source of “crime guns.”Â Â ATF has opposed similar efforts to circumvent confidentiality, which could compromise ongoing investigations. Note: a conditional veto by the Governor removing just the offending parts of A3797 would be sufficient.

The 2 bills that HELP gun owners which the Governor has signed are:

A3788Â – Prevents public disclosure of personal information of licensed firearms owners, including name, address, and phone number.Â The legislation prevents a repeat of what happened in New York State in January, when several newspapers obtained personal information of Empire State gun owners via freedom of information requests and then published that information both in print and on the internet.Â Â Publishing personal information of gun owners jeopardizes their safety and makes them targets for gun theft, in addition to raising significant privacy concerns.

A3796Â – Addresses an anomaly in New Jersey’s “assault” firearms statute that prevents those still in possession of banned firearms from lawfully disposing of them.Â Â This bill reopens a compliance window for a short time during which banned firearms could be lawfully disposed of.Â Â Although the compliance window is too short, and the bill fails to allow for lawful disposition of banned magazines and ammunition, it nonetheless offers a limited compliance opportunity that is a temporary improvement over current law.

The 2 bills opposed by gun owners which the Governor signed are:

A3687Â – Terror Watch List bill.Â Makes it possible toÂ suspendÂ Second Amendment rights without a specified requirement of due process, based on a secret government list compiled by federal bureaucrats with no published standards, no identified procedure to correct errors, and potential for enormous abuse by those in power.Â ProponentsÂ of the bill have argued that due process is available because there is a right to appeal any permit denial under New JerseyÂ law.

A3717Â -Â Requires submission of certain mental health records to NICS without an explicit, stated requirement of due process within the legislation itself.Â Â ANJRPC has no objection to the core purpose of this legislation, but believes that the legislation needed to explicitly state that only records of persons who have had judicial due process (with a right of appeal) should be submitted to NICS. Proponents of the bill have argued that the NICS system itself, as well as New Jersey mental health law, contain independentÂ due process requirements.

The 6 bills signed by the Governor that have been neutralized in their impact on gun rights are:

S1279Â – Upgrades penalty for unlawful transfer of a firearm to a minor (specifically amended to exempt lawful instruction and training, competition and target shooting)

S2720Â – Makes records regarding the total number of FID cards and handgun permits issued subject to public disclosure (does not disclose identity of gun owners)

S2804Â – Upgrades penalty for unlawful firearms possession by felons or those engaged in serious criminal behavior.

S2430Â – Creates a study commission on gun violence.

S2468Â – Permits vehicle impoundment where felons or those engaged in serious criminal behavior are unlawfully in possession of firearms.

S2719Â – Anti-trafficking legislation (amended to prevent numerous unintended consequences to legal gun owners).

Please watch for upcoming alerts and updates, and please keep contacting the Governor’s office!

Gun Magazine Sales Up

It looks like sales of magazines for firearms are on the rise. You might assume that I mean the firearms parts that go into guns, but it’s actually the paper product that lands in your mailbox or on store shelves.

In fact, the double digit increases are pretty much the only bright spot in the publishing world, according to AdWeek.

From the highlights of the research, it looked like Food Network’s magazine was also on the rise. I’m sure the combination of rising popularity of firearms & food magazines is enough to give Mike Bloomberg some heartburn as he chows down on his dinner tonight.

An Exercise in Futility

Here’s some great advice found at Gun Nuts Media to so-called gun store “lawyers” who don’t really know anything about the law, but still use their lack of knowledge to scare off new gun owners: “shut the ***CENSORED*** up.”

Seriously, the entire post is worth a read, even though encouraging these people to shut their traps may ultimately be an exercise in futility. He highlights a story from a friend who “learned” from his local gun shop “expert” that in all circumstances, pulling a gun on anyone more than 21 feet away is a felony in Virginia. This may be news to Virginia legal experts who know nothing of this mysterious 21-foot statute.

Another instance he cites is a concealed carry class instructor who scared off his hairdresser who is sometimes alone at night with her young children from ever keeping a gun accessible. One of the tips that the hairdresser learned from her oh-so-helpful instructor is that she should not pull a gun on an armed intruder who successfully breaks into her house since it’s a possibility that even though he’s armed and has broken into a house with a woman and children home, he might not actually be there to do them harm. He might just want to steal the TV, so she should just let him do that and not get her gun.

There are other good examples in refuting these claims by so-called experts, so just read the entire thing. But I might suggest that before you do, you put a pillow on your desk because you’ll need it to cushion the blow when you want to beat your head against it – repeatedly – to make the stupid go away.

Minor Federal Court Victory

It seems shocking that it would take a federal appellate court to remind prosecutors and district judges that the prosecution should have to prove all elements of a crime in order to gain a conviction, but such is the case of US v. Fries, which essentially rules that prosecutors don’t get a pass on whether or not the parties involved in an unlawful interstate transfer had FFLs or not. They have to prove they did not. From the Annual Law Seminar Facebook page:

This case was supported by the NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund.

A win in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals involving an undercover ATF investigation at a gun show. The government carries the burden of proof in this statute.

“The plain language of Â§ 922(a)(5) clearly requires the government to prove, as an essential element of the offense, that neither the defendant nor the nonresident to whom the defendant allegedly transferred the weapon possessed an FFL at the time of the transfer.”

I say it’s a minor victory, because it just seems obvious. If this had gone the other way, the courts would have essentially rewritten the law to create a new crime that Congress did not. A minor victory, but one that avoided a major loss. What’s shocking is how many anti-gun people don’t think we have any kind of point with this stuff. The ATF and the US Attorneys can do no wrong, and there’s nothing too horrible that can be done to the American Gun Owner if it helps save the life of Just.One.Child.

Keeping the Issue Alive

The Washington Post is pretty clearly trying to keep the background check issue alive for the benefit of gun control advocates, as we head into Congress’ summer recess. It’s not just the Washington Post either.

The media is also pretty clearly already prepping the groundÂ to downplay the Colorado recalls, so it becomes a heads we win, tails you lose issue; they come out on top no matter how it goes. That’s why it’s important to follow up with more victories in 2014. The recalls are at best a message. They are right about that. The if we’re going to be rid of these new laws, the legislature will have to change hands.

Lead Meme Again

Probably one of the single biggest threats to gun rights is the attempts to ban lead ammunition over environmental concerns. Since Newtown, the issue has been relatively quiet, butÂ now the meme flies again here, and again here. It’s also being picked up by the regular media.

This is one of the biggest threats to the shooting sports, and gun rights in general, because they have a reason to essentially ban affordable ammunition for a reason that isn’t merely a desire to eliminate civilian gun possession. Additionally, again, it’s an issue where even a lot of gun owners aren’t going to understand the issues involved, especially when our opponents are lying about the alternatives being cheap, easy, and perform the same.

Most ranges these days are doing some level of lead reclamation. The mechanics of reclaiming lead aren’t complicated, and the economics favor doing it, given the high cost of copper and lead these days. But I believe it’s going to be a difficult issue over time. In this issue we face a trifecta of anti-hunting groups, anti-gun groups, and greens. We face the fact that hunters, generally speaking, can be incredibly self-destructive and quite vulnerable to divide and conquer tactics.

Especially since gun control has been failing, when pushed through traditional methods, I expect the lead issue to become a serious push moving forward. This all started because California Condors were showing up with lead poisoning, which wildlife advocates quickly blamed on lead ammunition fragments being eaten from carrion that had been shot and gutted by hunters. California moved to ban all lead ammunition from condor territory. Now they are moving to ban all lead ammunition in hunting anywhereÂ in California. Â A key thing to watch is whether lead poisoning among condor populations drops. So far, the ban has not reduced incidences of lead poisoning in condors. Nonetheless, the proffered explanation is the ban does not go far enough. Tell me if you’ve heard this one before?