Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Barack Obama and gun control’

Looking at the “executive actions” that were basically released last night but are being officially released today, leads one to conclude that this was all bark and no bite.  Then I read this article in the Washington Post and it makes me ask, is this provision intended to catch totally innocent people trying to sell a single firearm, one single time, from their own collection?

One of the main provisions is new federal guidance requiring some occasional gun sellers to get licenses from ATF and conduct background checks on potential buyers. Rather than set a single threshold for what triggers this licensing requirement, it will be based on a mix of business activities such as whether the seller processes credit cards, rents tables at gun shows and has formal business cards.

The “processes credit cards” caught my attention.  Anyone can do that now with a simple attachment to you Smartphone that can be purchased anywhere, including from Rite Aid pharmacies or any electronics stores.  What about the son who was left a collection of firearms by his father and for what ever reason wants to sell one or more of them and decides to rent a table one weekend at his local gun show.  He isn’t in the business of selling firearms.  He isn’t going to do it again, he just wants to go where there are people that might be interested in the guns he wants to sell.

I’m not the only one asking the question whether this is all to set up the prosecution of cases they otherwise wound not have pursued.

 

Read Full Post »

Earlier today, Independence Institute Research Director Dave Kopel took President Obama to task for his comments in Paris about how no other country has mass shootings like America.  During a news conference Tuesday morning, Obama said, “I mean, I say this every time we’ve got one of these mass shootings; this just doesn’t happen in other countries.” Kopel proceeds to first discuss whether it is true that every time there is a mass shooting, whether Obama makes that statement:

In one sense, the answer would be “yes.” President Obama’s statement was in the form of: “Every time X happens, I say Y.” As a historic self-description of Obama’s own rhetoric, Obama’s statement is mostly true, but only in recent years. When President Obama was running for national office in 2007 through November 2012, he never used mass shootings to compare the United States unfavorably with other countries. Nor did he use mass murders as an occasion to make political demands for gun control. This was his rhetorical approach from the Virginia Tech murders in April 2007, through the Aurora theater murders in July 2012.

However, as President Obama explained to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in March 2012, “After my election I have more flexibility.” This was an accurate prediction, and not just about foreign relations. After winning reelection in November 2012, President Obama in December 2012 used the Newtown, Conn., murders as the basis to make gun control the primary focus of his political efforts through April 2013. He has promised that gun control will be his top priority during his final year in office. When commenting on mass murders in the United States, President Obama has repeatedly claimed that such crimes do not occur in other countries.

Thus, the President’s Dec. 1 statement is mostly accurate as a self-description of what he frequently says, at least from December 2012 onward.

Then, Kopel goes to the real question – is America the only country that experiences mass shootings with such frequency:

Suppose we accept the president’s implicit premise that “other countries” includes only the most-developed countries of the West. With this limitation, what is the accuracy of his statement that “these mass shootings; this just doesn’t happen in other countries”? Plainly false, especially considering that the president was speaking in Paris, the site of multiple mass shootings on Nov. 13 and of the Charlie Hebdo mass shootings in January.

More generally, an October article in the Wall Street Journal looked at mass shootings in 14 countries from 2000 through 2014. The article reported the research of professors Jaclyn Schildkraut (State University of New York Oswego) and H. Jaymi Elsass (Texas State University). They are co-authors of the forthcoming book “Mass Shootings: Media, Myths, and Realities,” to be published in 2016 by Praeger. All of the countries had one or more mass shootings in this period, but the United States had by far the most. In terms of per capita fatalities, the United States was fourth, after Norway, Finland and Switzerland. Another article, at the Independent Journal website, provides a “Rampage Shooting Index” for 10 countries, covering 2009-2013. Again, the United States is first in total number of incidents, and sixth in per capita fatalities. (Behind Israel and Slovakia, as well as the previously mentioned nations). Updating the index to account for 2015 would put France ahead of the United States. (French data are reported in the I.J. article, but not the Wall Street Journal article.)

Kopel goes on to point out that if what we define “developed” as meaning a member of the Organization for Economic Co‑operation and Development, then the U.S. gun homicide rate is about in the middle for “developed” countries.  Kopel closed by reminding the reader that he is not the first to point out Obama’s penchant for hyperbole:

As President Obama pointed out today, he has repeatedly made the same claim about “other counties” and mass shootings. When he did so last June, Politifact examined the issue, including the research of Professors Schildkraut and Elsass. Politifact rated the Obama claim “Mostly False.” Yet he continues to make the claim, speaking in a city with repressive gun control and which only 18 days ago suffered a horrific series of mass shootings. President Obama’s second book touted his “audacity,” and the president’s remarks today demonstrated chutzpah.

But don’t look for the sycophants in the press corps to point this out the next time Obama repeats this discredited claim.

Read Full Post »

While the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) constantly provide Obama with a show of support for his gun ban schemes, a recent survey of rank and file police show a much different story.  The NRA has used the results to make this new ad.

The vote on criminalizing private sales at gun shows and through published advertisements is today at 4:00.  Tell Mark Warner to stand with rank and file law enforcement who know what really works to prevent crime and vote no on Manchin-Toomey-Schumer.

Read Full Post »

The Hill reports that Vice President Joe Biden is contacting former colleagues on Capitol Hill on a daily basis, including GOP members, to round up support for the administration’s gun ban proposals:

Biden has already held private meetings with Republican senators including John McCain (Ariz.), Lindsey Graham (S.C.) and Johnny Isakson (Ga.), according to a senior administration official. The official added that Biden would also be spending considerable time on Capitol Hill in the weeks to come.

“There are always a lot of dark alleys on these issues, but he’s been trying to shake that all out,” the official said. “He’s making sure he’s hearing from everybody and knowing where the pressure points are.”

I’m betting that he won’t have much success with Graham and Isakson on this.  McCain is a question mark.
 
Some doubt just how effective Biden will be, as he tends to act more like a hammer than a chisel:

“His effectiveness depends on how you define his role,” said GOP strategist Ken Lundberg. “So far, his work has been to rally allies and berate opponents. In that role, he’s very effective but, as for reaching out to the other side, he’s impotent. He’s breaking no new ground and that’s probably by design.”

While the media continues to tell us that all but maybe expanded background checks is dead on arrival on the Senate Floor, the administration is at least giving the appearance that they believe they can win with enough pressure.  So we need to make sure our pressure is even more than that applied by the administration.

Read Full Post »

The Hill newspaper reports that President Obama will use the 100 day anniversary of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting to rebuild momentum for his gun ban agenda.  With Congress and recent polls indicating that few of the proposals still have support wide support, the White House is  battling the perception that the move is out of fear none of their agenda is going to pass.

Earnest also disputed the notion that Obama was pressing now over fear that momentum on a gun bill had stalled as time passed since the Newtown shooting. He noted that by the White House’s count, the president and vice president had held 20 events on gun violence since the shooting, and he said the decision to appoint Vice President Biden as the point man on the issue underscored the importance of the issue.
 
Time is not on their side.  Obama new the longer the country moved away from the shooting, the public would also move on and support for any proposals would drop with it.  That is why he wanted to roll out something within a month.  What he could not control was the timeline of Congress.  By the time the Senate takes up its bill we will be into mid to late April. 
 

Read Full Post »

President Obama says it.  Mayor Michael Bloomberg says it.  The gun ban lobby says it.  Amazingly enough, only Joe “Shotgun” Biden has been honest enough to suggest the number may not be accurate but that does not stop him from using it too.  Ask any pol trying to enact a so-called “universal” background check and they will tell you we have to do it because 40% of all firearm sales don’t undergo background checks.  The Washington Guardian is the latest to throw cold water on that argument:

The claims that gun sales made without background checks comprise “more than,” ”as many as,” ”nearly” or “about” 40 percent of all gun sales are rooted in a poll looking broadly at gun ownership in America. Sponsored by the Justice Department through a grant to the Police Foundation, the poll’s principal relevance today is as a snapshot of the way things were when it was taken — 1994.

Economist John Lott has addressed this in great detail recently:

But the high figure comes primarily from including such transactions as inheritances or gifts from family members. Putting aside these various biases, if you look at guns that were bought, traded, borrowed, rented, issued as a requirement of the job, or won through raffles, 85 percent went through FFLs; just 15 percent were transferred without a background check. 

If you include these transfers either through FFLs or from family members, the remaining transfers falls to 11.5 percent.

We don’t know the precise number today, but it is hard to believe that it is above single digits.

It’s no wonder polls show a large number of the public support background checks for “all gun purchases” because they think a lot of sales escape checks.  Which explains why Obama et al keep using the 40% number – it fits their narrative and helps mislead the public.

Read Full Post »