Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘gun control’

In yesterday’s Senate Judiciary meeting, Senator Creigh Deeds’ SB1382 was reported out of committee and rereferred to Senate Finance and Appropriations. This is the new version of a so-called “assault weapons” ban. It has absolutely no chance of getting out of the House of Delegates, which currently has a slight pro-rights majority, but it gives us a glance of what is in store for gun owners if the Democrats regain complete control of Virginia government after the 2025 statewide elections. What do they consider an “assault weapon”? The below is from the bill:

“Assault firearm” means any:

  1. A semi-automatic center-fire rifle or pistol which that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material and is equipped at the time of the offense with a magazine which will hold more than 20 rounds of ammunition or designed by the manufacturer to accommodate a silencer or equipped with a folding stock with a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 10 rounds;
  2. A semi-automatic center-fire rifle that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine and has one of the following characteristics: (i) a folding, telescoping, or collapsible stock; (ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the rifle; (iii) a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand; (iv) a grenade launcher; (v) a flare launcher; (vi) a sound suppressor; (vii) a flash suppressor; (viii) a muzzle brake; (ix) a muzzle compensator; (x) a threaded barrel capable of accepting (a) a sound suppressor, (b) a flash suppressor, (c) a muzzle brake, or (d) a muzzle compensator; or (xi) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (x);
  3. A semi-automatic center-fire pistol that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine and has one of the following characteristics: (i) a folding, telescoping, or collapsible stock; (ii) a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand; (iii) the capacity to accept a magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip; (iv) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the pistol with the non-trigger hand without being burned; (v) a threaded barrel capable of accepting (a) a sound suppressor, (b) a flash suppressor, (c) a barrel extender, or (d) a forward handgrip; or (vi) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (v);
  4. A semi-automatic shotgun that expels single or multiple projectiles by action of an explosion of a combustible material that has one of the following characteristics: (i) a folding, telescoping, or collapsible stock, (ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the shotgun, (iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine, (iv) a fixed magazine capacity in excess of seven rounds, or (v) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (iv); or
  5. A shotgun with a magazine that will hold more than seven rounds of the shortest ammunition for which it is chambered. An “assault firearm” does not include any firearm that is an antique firearm, has been rendered permanently inoperable, is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action, or was manufactured before July 1, 2023.

This bill bans the most popular firearms, both pistols and rifles, that are currently made in America. While you would be able to keep the firearms you currently own, you would not be able to purchase one manufactured after July 1, 2023. As I said, this bill is going nowhere beyond the Senate. But if gun owners don’t vote their rights in future elections, this is our future in Virginia, and we can’t guarantee that the Supreme Court will bail us out of the mess we create.

Read Full Post »

Joe Biden said the quiet part out loud on Thanksgiving when he said “The idea we still allow semi-automatic weapons to be purchased is sick. Just sick. It has no socially redeeming value. Zero. None. Not a single solitary rationale for it except profit for the gun manufacturers.” The White House later walked back the comment to say Biden meant so-called “assault weapons”. This focus on the most popular rifle in America avoids a very important fact. Rifles of all kinds are rarely used in crime, and especially modern sporting rifles. Sure, when they are used in a mass shooting the media focuses like a laser beam on the firearm, but that doesn’t change the fact that they are still used rarely.

But as an op-ed in the New York Post said over the weekend, “Biden’s focus on semiautomatic weapons is ignorance manifest“.

Hat tip to Gun Facts for the graphic.

Read Full Post »

Last week, President Joe Biden called for banning all semi-automatic firearms.

Number two, the idea — the idea we still allow semiautomatic weapons to be purchased is sick.  It’s just sick.  It has no, no social redeeming value.  Zero.  None.  Not a single, solitary rationale for it except profit for the gun manufacturers.

Biden seems to think that the polls have shifted in his direction with the recent spate of shootings:

But with an eye toward positioning himself and his party for 2024, Biden believes public opinion has shifted in Democrats’ favor on certain key social issues, said the aides, speaking on the condition of anonymity to describe internal strategy.

Today, Cam Edwards over at Bearingarms.com writes about how the White House won’t say if Biden will accede to the wishes of the gun ban lobby and ban modern sporting rifles:

Most of those guns purchased by responsible Americans are precisely the semi-automatic firearms that Biden believes should be illegal for the average citizen to own and possess, but if Congress won’t provide him with the votes needed to impose his ban his friends in the anti-gun movement are already suggesting another idea; banning them through an administrative order

I’m not really sure why Biden thinks the public is on his side on this one. Last week, a Gallup poll released shows a nine-point drop in support for stricter gun laws since the same survey was taken in June. It also showed a three-point increase in the number of Americans reporting they have a gun in the home. While a majority of respondents report supporting stricter gun laws and having no gun in their home, the gap none-the-less has shrunk significantly. Stephen Gutowski at The Reload wrote of the poll results that the rising trend of gun ownership combined with weakened support for more gun control could make passing new restrictions more difficult at the national and state levels.

Virginia’s General Assembly convenes in January. We will see what if any new legislative proposals come from the Democrats, which still control the State Senate. 2023 is also an election year with the entire assembly up for re-election.

Read Full Post »

Cam Edwards at Bearingarms.com shares a new poll that supposedly shows “wide support” for requiring background checks on all gun sales.  It’s part of this article where he asks a simple question related to so-called “universal” background checks.   These polls never seem to dig down beyond the surface and the generic “should all gun purchases require a background check”.  They never ask the question that Cam asked.

Do 84-percent of Americans think a person should go to federal prison if they transfer a firearm to their neighbor who’s afraid of her abusive ex showing up at her door? Do 84-percent of Americans think that it should be crime to sell a gun to your cousin without a background check, but legal for you to sell a gun to your aunt without one?

Most people support in the affirmative the generic question about background checks because they already know that most gun sales require a background check.  But, if these pollsters were to dig down into the issue and ask the question the way Cam does, you would probably get a much different answer. And, we need to remember, unlike the bill that passed the Virginia General Assembly last year that specifically said “sales”, the bills winding their way through congress use the term “transfer” which has a much broader meaning under federal law than the word “sales”.

There is other news in that poll though.

Democrats on Capitol Hill have a narrow advantage over their Republican counterparts on the topic, with 44 percent of voters trusting them over congressional GOP lawmakers on gun policy, while 38 percent trust Republicans more.

It is the narrowest split of trust on a number of issue they polled.  They break it down for us and we learn that the gun issue is way down on the list of priorities for those surveyed:

The move on Capitol Hill — which is not likely to move forward in the Senate as long as the chamber’s legislative filibuster remains intact — comes after Democrats advanced legislation to address the pandemic, a subject 2 in 3 voters believe Congress should prioritize. By comparison, just 28 percent of voters said gun policy should be a “top priority,” roughly the same share who said Congress should elevate the passage of a bill to reduce inequality or provide relief to Americans with student loan debt.

Make sure you are contacting your elected officials and let them know you oppose additional restrictions on your rights.

Read Full Post »

Gun rights advocate and writer Dave Workman laid out in an article posted last week at Ammoland five reasons why  Biden’s gun control proposal will fail to do what he claims they will do.

With the launch of their frontal assault on firearms rights via H.R. 8 and H.R. 127, Capitol Hill Democrats have made it clear they are not interested in facts or the “common sense” their gun control campaign perennially claims to represent, and instead provided all the justification necessary for a hard-hitting pro-rights ad campaign by a grassroots gun rights organization now heading into its second week.

Ammoland News did some homework and found five clear reasons—call them examples—why gun control fails and will always fail; the proof routinely ignored by gun prohibitionists whose ultimate goal, according to Second Amendment activists, has never been violent crime reduction but unilateral public disarmament.

The article then provides five examples of felons caught in possession of firearms, something that is illegal then says:

Each of these cases underscores why gun control is inherently and irreversibly doomed to failure, says the Second Amendment community. Criminals do not obey gun laws. They never have and never will.

We need every gun owner engaged to stop these bills.  Contact your representative today.

Read Full Post »

Bloomberg’s gun control mouth piece The Trace reports this morning that a group of Democratic Representatives in Congress has sent a letter to Biden urging him to appoint a gun control CZAR. Of course they call it a “gun violence” czar. In the letter, the group cites the “record level” of gun ownership as one of the reasons that the country needs this new appointee. Folks, every pro-rights group including the NRA, Second Amendment Foundation, and the Firearms Policy Coalition, is pointing out that Biden is going to do something, it’s just a matter of when. If you are not a member of all of the groups mentioned, as well as your state firearms association and other state groups, you need to do it now. For all of the talk about the NRA and their bankruptcy etc, I know personally that NRA was very active during the 2021 Session of the General Assembly as were the Virginia Shooting Sports Association (VSSA), VCDL, and this year a representative of the Liberal Gun Club even spoke during committee meetings. Don’t let anyone tell you NRA isn’t doing anything because they are and they still need our support because more times than not, they were the first ones called on to speak in committee meetings during the just completed Legislative session.

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

Townhall.com reports that a group of 11 Catholic groups have come together to purchase stock in Smith & Wesson. The group purchased 200 shares, the minimum number required to for shareholders to demand reports from the company.  Now, they want the gun manufacturer to provide a report that details what the company is doing to promote “gun safety measures” and “produce safer gun and gun products” like they did at a Ruger stockholders meeting earlier this year at a company stockholder meeting.

James Debney, the President and CEO of American Outdoor Brands Corporation, the parent company of Smith & Wesson responded:

“Unlike a bonafide investor, this proponent purchased just 200 shares, the bare minimum needed under SEC rules to place an item on the proxy with the sole objective to push an anti-firearms agenda, designed to harm our company, disrupt the local sale of our products and destroy stockholder value,” Debney said Thursday during a conference call with investors, Guns.com reported. “This proponent will gladly sacrifice its investments and yours to achieve its political objectives.”

Last night, Second Amendment Attorney Guy Relford talked with NRATV’s Dana Loesch about this latest move by the gun ban lobby to attack our rights.

 

Read Full Post »

Apparently, gone are the days when Democrat candidates for Governor in Virginia try to appeal to gun owners to get elected.  Remember when then candidate Mark Warner had outdoor enthusiast Sherry Crumley and strategist Mudcat Sanders help him build “Sportsmen for Warner”?  He successfully ran away from his past of strong support for three-day waiting periods for the purchase of firearms, opposition to shall issue concealed carry, support for the Clinton gun ban, and successfully kept the NRA from openly endorsing his Republican opponent.  He went on to sign 17 substantive pro-rights bills while Governor, had no vetoes, and earned an “A” rating from the NRA in his 2008 U.S. Senate Race.

Even Tim Kaine, who used taxpayer money to send buses of supporters to the 2000 “Million Mom March” as Mayor of Richmond, tried to reach out to gun owners and reassure them he was not supportive of new gun control.  His term for Governor was not as friendly to gun owners as Warner’s as he vetoed several good bills that gun owners would have to wait for Governor Bob McDonnell to sign.

Terry McAuliffe, began the move away from appealing to gun owners, though seemed to think touting his purchase of a shotgun early in the 2013 campaign meant he supported firearm freedom.

This year, Lt. Governor Ralph Northam and former Congressman Tom Perriello are falling all over themselves to be the most anti-rights candidate.  Perriello has completely flip flopped on his position related to firearm freedom where he was endorsed by the NRA in 2010, only to now call them a  “nut-job extremist organization.”  UVA political scientist Larry Sabato told NBC News recently that Northam may actually be to the left of Perriello on guns and other issues.

This election is vitally important to Virginia gun owners.  The individual elected this November will sign into law the next legislative redistricting maps.  If the next Governor is anti-rights, you can be sure he will demand a redistricting map that will help elect more candidates that are supportive of his position on key issues.  Those maps will be law for 10 years.  Virginia gun owners must get involved now to elect pro-rights candidates for Governor, Lt. Governor, Attorney General, and the House of Delegates.  In the case of the Governor’s race, that most assuredly will not be a Democrat.

Read Full Post »

That is the title of a forum that was held at the Heritage Foundation yesterday.  With the passing of Justice Antonin Scalia, author of the majority opinion in the landmark Second Amendment case, District of Columbia v. Heller, appears to be more in danger than ever.   Hillary Clinton has said more than once that the Court got it wrong and she will appoint a justice that will assist in overturning it.  Three distinguished individuals discussed whether gun control measures are effective at preventing violence or do they end up doing more harm than good as well as whether gun control restrictions constitutional.  The three panelists were:

John Lott
Author of The War on Guns: Arming Yourself Against Gun Control Lies

Nelson Lund
Professor, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University

David Clarke, Jr.
Sheriff, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »