Anti-Gun Folks – Page 17 – Shall Not Be Questioned

Harrisburg & The Great American Outdoor Show’s Showdown

Merriam-Webster defines extortion as “the act or practice of extorting especially money or other property; especially: the offense committed by an official engaging in such practice.”

The mayor of Harrisburg who has made clear that he hates NRA and its members went to the press whining that NRA isn’t engaging in pay-for-play for hosting the Great American Outdoor Show in his town.

As part of the deal with the county to host the show, NRA did agree to support regional grants in accordance with the typical rules of the NRA Foundation’s policies and by-laws. Just like your local Friends of NRA banquet gives at least 50% of the money to regional grant requests, the Great American Outdoor Show program is following the same model.

Harrisburg’s mayor is fuming that NRA is holding true to the agreement and his city isn’t the automatic, pre-determined grant winner every year. Apparently, NRA did make the offer to fund a smaller grant this year, but the Mayor threw a hissy fit when he learned they wouldn’t agree to make that a set fund for him annually in direct violation of the NRA Foundation’s by-laws. So, he seems to have rejected their grant offer.

The city officials are fuming since they thought the cash would pad their budgets each year, and now they learn that other worthy area entities in need will benefit. This will not stand for Mayor Eric Papenfuse and Police Chief Thomas Carter who believed they would be the exclusive beneficiaries of the grant request process. As it is, NRA already pays somewhere around $200,000 in amusement taxes to the city and school district. Plus, the city gets the tax revenue from the millions brought in by vendors, hotels, eateries, and other sales associated with the event. But that’s not good enough.

So, when the Mayor and Police Chief were angered to learn that the rules and by-laws wouldn’t be bent to hand the cash to them, they demanded a bigger payoff in other forms. They wanted to increase the rate that NRA would have to pay for off-duty police officers to assist with the event. Since the rate was apparently agreed to be on the low side, NRA offered to pay more, working up to a 33% increase over the next three years. This was not acceptable to the City, and the mayor demanded an immediate 67% increase. Since the rate the Mayor wanted apparently wasn’t remotely market rate compared to even larger cities, NRA has now turned to the county and departments from other cities who will likely gladly take the money. Harrisburg now loses $10,000 in fees associated with that deal.

However, that wouldn’t stop officers from taking vacation time to work the NRA show, something that has apparently been done with the support of the department for nearly 30 years. Since Harrisburg has now declared war on the Great American Outdoor Show, the Police Chief is banning his officers from taking vacation during that period so they can’t earn extra money from the huge event. He’s also going to mandate overtime to more patrolling to try and keep them away.

While the behavior may not meet a legal criminal definition of extortion, it sure does seem to me like the quotes in the article by the mayor and police chief fit the spirit of the dictionary definition of the term.

Obama’s “Town Hall”

Because I don’t have cable, I had to watch President Obama’s “Town Hall” forum 10 minutes at a time on “CNN Go” free trial, so I missed a lot of it. Based on what I did see, I think the forum was a lot less stacked toward the gun control side than I expected it to be. Obama was asked some hard questions, which he not so delicately danced around. Overall, I don’t think things went all that well for him.

He did an awful lot of describing serious federal crimes as “loopholes,” perhaps channeling Joan Peterson’s “if it happens, it’s legal” philosophy. But unlike her, he knows better. This was his normal schtick of throwing out half-truths and outright lies to low-information types, while absolutely enraging people who actually understand this stuff.

Why Have the Dems Become so Gun-Ho for Gun Control?

Bob Owens did a tweet string that explains the motivations behind the Dems embracing gun control. I agree that philosophical progressives are terrified of an armed citizenry, because such an idea runs counter to technocratic central planning, but I view most politicians as opportunists, rather than die hard ideologies. There’s two reasons the Dems are so crazy for gun control today.

One is the Democrats mounted a comeback strategy that culminated in retaking Congress in 2006 largely by running “blue dog” candidates that were good on guns and could win in their local districts. The theory was that the gun vote could deliver a lot of single issue voters, and would therefore help Democrats hold their seats. NRA issued a lot of endorsements to blue dogs in the 2010 election, despite taking a lot of crap from their members. They bent to the will of their members and pulled Harry Reid’s endorsement largely because he voted in favor of Sotomayor and Kagan. The blue dogs were laid to waste in the 2010 election. Democrats took the lesson, rightly or wrongly (I would argue wrongly), that there was no use chasing gun votes, since they weren’t reliable for Democrats.

The second reason the Dems are so gung-ho for gun control in 2016 is because of the vast sums of money that Mike Bloomberg’s bringing to the table. He’s not necessarily bringing all that money in for guns, but you can bet when a big donor is willing to dump a million bucks worth of ad buys into a state-level race, even of those ads aren’t on guns, politicians will start dancing that donor’s tune on gun control if they know that’s a big issue for him.

The older I get the less I think politics has really anything to do with political philosophy and reason. Sure, there has to be enough of that for the chattering classes, but for the most part it’s really just a bunch of hucksters, grifters, and opportunists vyingÂ for media timeÂ in order to manipulate poorly informed people they are worth coming out for and checking their name in the box at the next election. The people who are good at that win elections, and the people who suck at it lose.

What keeps me from becoming completely jaded is that I do believe it’s possible for motivated groups of people to play this game, manipulate the manipulators, and come out ahead. What will make the Democrats listen on the gun issue? A motivated group of people (it would probably only take a million nationwide) willing to be visible in the Democratic coalition and willing to withhold their votes and money solely on the issue of gun rights. If we had that, they’d start to listen.

Why I’d be Angry at Obama if I Favored Gun Control

The positive reaction of the gun control crowd to Obama’s executive orders frankly astonishes me. It would seem that Elliot Fineman of the National Gun Victims Action Council is the only group that’s willing to see this for what it is. When you don’t have a seat at the table, what have you got to lose, really?

Headlines like this are now spread all over the media, “Obama closes gun background check loopholes with executive action.” I can point to dozens of other stories talking about how Obama is now requiring background checks at gun shows and with Internet sales. The media has fallen for this maneuver hook, like and sinker. It’s not surprising, because understanding the truth requires knowing a thing or two about federal gun laws, a topic with which most non-gun people have little or no familiarity.

Word is spreading like wildfire that Obama closed these background check loopholes, when in reality all he did was have Loretta Lynch wag her finger and issue vague threats of prosecuting people selling guns for being engaged in the business without obtaining an FFL. As Volokh Conspirator Jonathan Adler pointed out at the WaPo, “In other words, it is â€” as the document says â€” a guidance, and not a substantive rule. It has no legal effect.”

People are being deceived into believing there’s been substantive reform on background checks. That can only serve to dampen enthusiasm among the general public for further measures, “Didn’t Obama fix this problem? It was all over the papers.”

President Obama may have done himself a tremendous favor, in terms of pleasing certain parts of the Democratic base who will cheer these headlines, completely unaware this represents no substantive reform, but he’s done the gun control movement no favors. If I had to bet, the gun control groups probably realize this, but are concerned about the consequences of not seeming to enjoy their bone. Beggars can’t be choosers.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch Clarifies FFL Rule

I suspect President Obama is hoping for ignorant crap like this from the media to make it look like he’s really doing something:

BREAKING: Obama moves to require background checks for guns bought from dealers online, at gun shows.

â€” The Associated Press (@AP) January 4, 2016

This has always been the law if you have a Federal Firearms License, and it’s always been illegal to be selling guns for “livelihood or profit” without first obtaining an FFL. The new EOs change nothing in that regard. But we do have some guidance from the Attorney General that indicates the Administration may indeed try to prosecute marginal cases it previously would not have:

Lynch insisted Monday that the new guidance on the gun show loophole sets “clear, definitive standards” for anyone who wants to sell firearms. However, the new guidance does not include a specific number of guns that must be sold to qualify as a dealer, since existing law does not specify a number.

However, court rulings have set a precedent that says a person could sell as few as one or two guns and still be considered a dealer, depending on the circumstances. For instance, Lynch explained, if an individual sells a gun clearly for profit, or if they buy and sell a gun kept in its original packaging, they may be considered a dealer.

“It’s important to note the hobbyist and collector exception is still there,” she said. Now, though, dealers can no longer “hide behind that.”

The ATF will engage in a “business educational initiative” in the first part of 2016, Lynch said, to help gun dealers, hobbyists and collectors understand the new guidance. This effort will target gun shows, flea markets and online dealers. Lynch added, “We will be looking for those individuals who seek to avoid registering.”

How many of you have a big tupperware bin full of “original packaging?” I certainly do. A few of my rifles just came in a case. Is that “original packaging?”

So this is not to be part of any rule change, but merely a policy decision to prosecute “gun dealers, hobbyists and collectors,” under the “new guidance.” Rather than change the rule, they will use the current vague rule to send “hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.” Though, in this case, it’s not mere harassment, but an intent to imprison.

They know if they don’t put the dampers on the growing gun culture, their dream of destroying the Second Amendment will never be realized.

Following the Money

John Richardson takes a look at how much money Bloomberg really donated to Mark Herring’s campaign. We knew it had to be a lot, because that kind of favor doesn’t come cheap, even if your an anti-gun Democrat.

Lo and beholdÂ the top donorÂ to his campaign for Attorney General was none other than Independence USA PAC. They gave $1,292,417 of in-kind donations to his campaign. The money went for media production and advertising buys. To put this into perspective, the next two highest donors gave approximately half this amount each. The only candidate to get more money from that PAC was Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D-VA).

Not all Bloomberg’s money for gun control funnels through Everytown. If you want to understand why Dems are going so hard on this issue, it’s because Bloomberg is paying them to. 1.3 million in a state race is a lot of moolah. Unfortunately, democracy can be bought, folks. The only counter for this kind of cash is grassroots energy for pro-gun candidates.

You’d Think Illegal Mayors Would Have Taught Them Something

As soon as I saw the buzz that Bloomberg’s Everytown was partnering with the NBA, my first thought was, “Professional athletes: yet another class of people with much higher rates of criminality than concealed carry permit holders.” Well, before I could work out any numbers, Dave Hardy was there with the scoop: “350 NBA players who have been charged with criminal acts. A simple search turns out 28 players with gun charges.”

Sounds like a great idea, guys. I was kind of missing the almost daily stories about mayors getting arrested, indicted, and then having them quite often be MAIG mayors. They took that fun away from us. Thanks for giving it back!

UPDATE: Oh yeah, this is going to be a riot.

Virginia Move Part of Coordinated Campaign

If you don’t think this is part of a coordinated campaign by the left, probably organized through the White House, I have news for you:

Conduct an annual review of concealed-carry permit reciprocity agreements with other states and rescind those agreements with states that fail to meet certain standards

Remember, this is from December 15. Seems some Dems have been listening. Don’t expect this move in Virginia to be the last move. There’s probably more to come. Get ready.

The First Shoe Drops: Virginia Reciprocity

We know that yesterday Administration officials told us they were coordinating with state officials to see how many ways gun owners could be screwed over. Well, the first shoe to drop seems to be by shredding most of Virginia’s reciprocity agreements, including with Pennsylvania. After the Democratic Attorney General Mark Herring closes open season on Virginia’s gun owners, the only states left with reciprocity will beÂ West Virginia, Michigan, Oklahoma, Texas and Utah.

I would note that Virginia code is pretty specific about what makes states eligible for reciprocity, and provides that the Attorney General and State Police shall enter into agreements. It provides no mechanism by which agreements can be withdrawn from once agreed upon. To me that leaves the door open for a lawsuit.

It’s going to be a rough year for us. They are going to try to screw us any way they can. This is probably just the beginning. Folks, if we don’t hit these people hard come next November, we’re going to be in a metric shit-ton of trouble. The current GOP clown show of a primary (not even speaking of the clown show in Congress) doesn’t offer me much optimism. Mark Herring has to lose his next election. All stops must be pulled to defeat him if he runs for re-election in 2018.

What’s happening here is not about public safety, it’s about sticking it to a politically disfavored group any way they can think of. It’s about punishment for defying the will of this Administration. Some of my liberal Dem-voting readers might not be interested much in gun voting, but the time is fast approaching where you’ll have to decide how much you really care about your gun rights.Â How many people who have been carrying in Virginia for years on the current agreements not going to get the word and end up in prison? That’s probably the idea. You will be made to pay for your defiance, and they don’t care how many lives they ruin in the process.

From a practical standpoint, I’d note that Virginia issues non-resident permits. They are not hard to get. I plan on applying for one. I do not intent to let a petty, spiteful tyrantÂ like Mark Herring disarm me.

Former NRA-A-Rated Ohio Governor Flips on Guns

Ted Strickland got high marks from NRA during his tenure as Governor, but now that he’s running in a Dem primary he’s changed his views to back gun control.

â€œTedâ€™s views about gun violence and gun safety have been deeply influenced as a result of the multiple horrific incidents of gun violence that our country has suffered, and particularly after the Sandy Hook tragedy (in Connecticut).

â€œJust like many Americans, after Sandy Hook, he called for a reassessment of laws in order to help keep Ohioans and all Americans safer,â€ Bergstein said.

Yeah, I’m sure running in a Dem primary where Bloomberg money can be had has nothing at all to do with his election year conversion of the issue. Remember folks, politicians are rank opportunists. Don’t believe a Republican’s support on this issue is any less shallow. Politicians pursue what they feel is in their best interests, and like it or not, Bloomberg and Obama have convinced Dems that supporting gun control is in their best interests. Remember these wise words from Milton Friedman: