Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for December, 2013

The Hill has this story on how gun control advocates are touting “gains” in the states while the push for federal gun control stalled.  The thing is, with the exception of Colorado, all of those “gains” came in states that were already unfriendly to the rights of law abiding gun owners.

In the year following last December’s deadly shooting spree in Newtown, Conn., that state — along with California, Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey and New York — enacted major reforms, the groups said.

That’s what Brady Campaign’s President, Dan Gross, called a “year of tremendous growth and momentum.”

And worse, for the gun ban groups to be crowing so loud about the gains they have made, the Brady Center’s new document grading the states on gun control note that only 10 states have an “A” or “B” grade based on their gun control laws.  Thirteen states get passing ( 7 Cs, 6 D ) grades – but Brady certainly can’t be happy with the laws in most of those states. Over half of the states have a Brady failing grade , meaning they are truely firearm friendly states (Virginia is one of the states with a “D”).

So, with Terry McAuliffe running openly supporting more gun control, is it likely Virginia will join the states that passed gun control in 2013?  Not if the House of Delegates has anything to do with it.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

For the last year, at least at the federal level, the target of the gun ban lobby has been so-called “assault weapons.”  But everyone knows that most crime is committed with handguns so why the focus on rifles? Only those who have been truely honest have pointed out that fact. Michael B. Greene, a developmental psychologist and senior fellow at the Rutgers School of Criminal Justice has finally stepped up to the plate and mentioned what the gun ban lobby surely thinks, but is too timid to propose.  From NJ.com:

First, based on the facts, we need to refocus on handguns rather than assault weapons. Second, we need to focus on strategies to reduce straw purchases.

His strategy?  National handgun rationing – i.e. a national one handgun a month law.  And, he even went a step further:

We need to place restrictions (yes, there’s that evil word again) on the purchase of ammunition for handguns, the perishables in the gun business. We can restrict the purchase of ammunition to those who are licensed or eligible to purchase guns (as Connecticut has done). We can also impose a limit on the number of handgun bullets that can be purchased at any one time. And we can impose high taxes on ammunition. Such taxes could be used to implement effective violence-reduction strategies — strategies that are needed to supplement efforts to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

Greene believes the recent Supreme Court rulings of Heller and McDonald allow for such infringements on our rights.  Greene points out, Connecticut has already passed limits on ammunition access.  And, it has already had a negative impact on hunters.  So much for “we won’t do anything to your hunting guns.”

Hat tip to The Gun Wire.

Read Full Post »

That’s my reaction to this story in the Politico about Gabby Giffords setting up another gun control PAC called Rights and Responsibilities PAC.  She already has one, that she set up earlier this year.  The new one is where she is transferring her money from her old congressional account which she has closed.  Why not just put the funds in the original PAC?

Read Full Post »

Colion Noir responds to the NFL declining a Super Bowl Ad from Daniel Defense.

Please note, the NFL is a business and can approve and deny ads as it sees fit.  But, considering some of the other things it condones and ads it allows to run, and the fact that Daniel Defense sells items in addition to firearms sand therefore meets the NFL’s criteria for advertising, the NFL’s decision is just a little hypocritical in my humble opinion.

Read Full Post »