Good reason to own a gun

Michael Bloomberg is his own worst enemy:



Exactly how would that creep get in in the first place if he knew she was waiting inside with a 12-gauge loaded with buckshot?

That didn't take long

The antis must be running scared...

SPECIAL ALERT UPDATE - YOUR ACTION REQUIRED RALLY AGAINST CONCEALED CARRY CANCELLED BY ORGANIZERS As announced in earlier ISRA alerts, anti-gun State Representative Laura Fine along with the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence and the Cook County State's Attorneys Office, planned to hold a "public meeting" to attack concealed carry.  The meeting was to be held the evening of Wednesday, January 22, 2014 at the Glenview Police Station. The ISRA has just learned that the organizers of the meeting have postponed the event until a date to be announced later.  We suspect that the organizers will reschedule after they have found a venue spacious enough to accommodate the large number of law-abiding firearm owners who will turn out for the event. Once the new date and location of the meeting are announced, the ISRA will notify you by way of an alert. In the mean time, DO NOT show up at the Glenview Police Station Wednesday night. We are sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused you.

Forward this email This email was sent to wkuenk@aol.com by isranotices@isra.org |   Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy. Illinois State Rifle Association | PO Box 637 | Chatsworth | IL | 60921 They probably finally realized what a PR disaster their "public meeting" would be if they allowed the "public" in...

Alert for Illinois freemen

They never stop...

URGENT ALERT - YOUR ACTION REQUIRED ANTIGUNNERS TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETINGS ATTACKING CONCEALED CARRY YOU MUST ATTEND TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT Gun-grabbing State Representative Laura Fine will be holding a so-called "Public Meeting" on Wednesday, January 22, 2014 in Glenview, Illinois.  Joining Fine in organizing the meeting is the extremely anti-gun Cook County State's Attorneys Office along with the state's most radical gun control organization, The Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence (ICHV). Fine claims that this meeting is for the purpose of answering questions the public might have about concealed carry.  In reality, the organizers plan to use the meeting to frighten the public and spread lies about the impact of concealed carry on public safety.  Fine and the other organizers plan to use this meeting as a recruiting session for ICHV and as a platform to launch efforts to REPEAL CONCEALED CARRY during the 2014 legislative session coming up this spring. DON'T BE FOOLED - Rep. Fine, the ICHV and the Cook County State's Attorneys Office want to strip you of your right of self defense, and then come take your guns away. ARE YOU GOING TO STAND BY AND LET THE GUN GRABBERS TAKE WHAT IS RIGHTFULLY YOURS? Of course not.  That is why you must stand up now and defend your rights!  That is why we must flood Fine's "Public Meeting" with solid supporters of the 2nd Amendment! 3 THINGS YOU MUST DO TO HELP PROTECT THE FUTURE OF CONCEALED CARRY AND PRESERVE ALL YOUR GUN RIGHTS 1.  Attend Rep. Fine's "Public Meeting" on concealed carry.  The meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, January 22, 2014, 7:00 PM, Glenview Police Station, 2500 East Lake Street, Glenview.  Please plan on being there at 6:15 to make sure that you get a seat.  In the past, the gun grabbers have been known to close the doors early to stifle pro-gun voices.  Be sure to wear NRA or IGold hats and t-shirts to the event.  If you see the media there, approach them and tell them that you are a law-abiding firearm owner and that you strongly support concealed carry and the right to keep and bear arms.  The gun controllers on the panel will surely attack the Second Amendment and your right to keep and bear arms.  It is very important that you vigorously defend your rights and enthusiastically support your fellow gun owners when they speak out in defense of our Constitutional rights. 2.  Pass this alert on to all your friends and family members...tell them to show up at the meeting as well. 3.  Post this alert to any and all Internet bulletin boards or blogs to which you subscribe. REMEMBER: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 7:00 PM  (Please be there by 6:15) Glenview Police Stateion 2500 E. Lake Street Glenview, IL

Forward this email This email was sent to wkuenk@aol.com by isranotices@isra.org |   Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy. Illinois State Rifle Association | PO Box 637 | Chatsworth | IL | 60921

The NRA on the Wicked Witch's new gun ban

I'm going to give Diane Feinstein her own acronym - WWOTW.

Here's some of what the NRA knows about her latest wet dream:

Feinstein Goes For Broke With New Gun-Ban Bill

Some of the changes in Feinstein's new bill are as follows:

• Reduces, from two to one, the number of permitted external features on various firearms.  The 1994 ban permitted various firearms to be manufactured only if they were assembled with no more than one feature listed in the law. Feinstein’s new bill would prohibit the manufacture of the same firearms with even one of the features.
   
• Adopts new lists of prohibited external features. For example, whereas the 1994 ban applied to a rifle or shotgun the "pistol grip" of which "protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon," the new bill would drastically expand the definition to include any "grip . . . or any other characteristic that can function as a grip." Also, the new bill adds "forward grip" to the list of prohibiting features for rifles, defining it as "a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip." Read literally and in conjunction with the reduction from two features to one, the new language would apply to every detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifle. At a minimum, it would, for example, ban all models of the AR-15, even those developed for compliance with California’s highly restrictive ban.
   
•  Carries hyperbole further than the 1994 ban. Feinstein's 1994 ban listed "grenade launcher" as one of the prohibiting features for rifles. Her 2013 bill carries goes even further into the ridiculous, by also listing "rocket launcher." Such devices are restricted under the National Firearms Act and, obviously, are not standard components of the firearms Feinstein wants to ban. Perhaps a subsequent Feinstein bill will add "nuclear bomb," "particle beam weapon," or something else equally far-fetched to the features list.

• Expands the definition of "assault weapon" by including:
  
  • Three very popular rifles: The M1 Carbine (introduced in 1944 and for many years sold by the federal government to individuals involved in marksmanship competition), a model of the Ruger Mini-14, and most or all models of the SKS.
     
  • Any "semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds," except for tubular-magazine .22s.
     
  • Any "semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches," any "semiautomatic handgun with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds," and any semi-automatic handgun that has a threaded barrel.
     
• Requires owners of existing "assault weapons" to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act (NFA). The NFA imposes a $200 tax per firearm, and requires an owner to submit photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), to inform the BATFE of the address where the firearm will be kept, and to obtain the BATFE’s permission to transport the firearm across state lines.
   
• Prohibits the transfer of “assault weapons.” Owners of other firearms, including those covered by the NFA, are permitted to sell them or pass them to heirs. However, under Feinstein’s new bill, “assault weapons” would remain with their current owners until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government.
   
• Prohibits the domestic manufacture and the importation of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The 1994 ban allowed the importation of such magazines that were manufactured before the ban took effect. Whereas the 1994 ban protected gun owners from errant prosecution by making the government prove when a magazine was made, the new ban includes no such protection. The new ban also requires firearm dealers to certify the date of manufacture of any >10-round magazine sold, a virtually impossible task, given that virtually no magazines are stamped with their date of manufacture.
   
• Targets handguns in defiance of the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects the right to have handguns for self-defense, in large part on the basis of the fact handguns are the type of firearm “overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose.” Semi-automatic pistols, which are the most popular handguns today, are designed to use detachable magazines, and the magazines “overwhelmingly chosen” by Americans for self-defense are those that hold more than 10 rounds. Additionally, Feinstein’s list of nearly 1,000 firearms exempted by name (see next paragraph) contains not a single handgun. Sen. Feinstein advocated banning handguns before being elected to the Senate, though she carried a handgun for her own personal protection.
   
• Contains a larger piece of window dressing than the 1994 ban. Whereas the 1994 ban included a list of approximately 600 rifles and shotguns exempted from the ban by name, the new bill’s list is increased to nearly 1,000 rifles and shotguns. Other than for the 11 detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles and one other semi-automatic rifle included in the list, however, the list appears to be pointless, because a separate provision of the bill exempts “any firearm that is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action.”

There's more analysis of the bill at the link. Suffice it to say she's delusional if she thinks that this is in any way going to pass in the House.

Feinstein's latest wet dream

She wants to ban everything, "grandfather" what's out there with universal registration and fingerprinting - well, read it for yourself. I've put my comments in line.

Stopping the spread of deadly assault weapons

Stay informed

In January, Senator Feinstein will introduce a bill to stop the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices.
To receive updates on this legislation, click here.

Press releases

• Feinstein to Introduce Updated Assault Weapons Bill in New Congress, December 17, 2012
• Feinstein Statement on Connecticut School Shooting, December 14, 2012

Summary of 2013 legislation

Following is a summary of the 2013 legislation:

Let's start out by preventing any new stuff from ever being available to future generations. This should make it easy for the next round of genocide. Thanks,biatch.

• Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:
• 120 specifically-named firearms
• Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one military characteristic
• Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds

Then, let's continue what didn't work before, but let's do it harder:

• Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:
• Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test
• Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test
• Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans

Of course, we need to ban those big magazines:

• Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds. 

Repeat the old lie about "hunters" and "sporting purposes":

• Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:
• Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment
• Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes and
• Exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons

Personally, I've never seen a gun that wasn't manually operated. How about you?

Maybe she's looking ahead to mentally-controlled firearms - sorta like they did with the "plastic gun" ban, now that 3-D printers are getting common.

 

Now, for some teeth. Universal registration, just like in the Wiemar Republic:

• Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:
• Background check of owner and any transferee;
• Type and serial number of the firearm;
• Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
• Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and
• Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration

A pdf of the bill summary is available here.

Effectivenness of 1994-2004 Assault Weapons Ban

Now, let's review history after a little makeover in the Ministry of Truth:

Following are studies that have been conducted on the 1994-2004 Assault Weapons Ban:

• In an Urban Institute study for the Department of Justice (pdf), Jeffrey Roth and Christopher Koper find that the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban was responsible for a 6.7 percent decrease in total gun murders, holding all other factors equal. They write: “Assault weapons are disproportionately involved in murders with multiple victims, multiple wounds per victim, and police officers as victims.”
• Original source (page 2): Jeffrey A. Roth & Christopher S. Koper, “Impact Evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994,” The Urban Institute (March 1997).

Of course, the "Urban Institute" is totally unbiased and scientific.

• In a University of Pennsylvania study (pdf), Christopher Koper reports that the use of assault weapons in crime declined by more than two-thirds by about nine years after 1994 Assault Weapons Ban took effect.
• Original source (page 46): Christopher S. Koper, “An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003” (June 2004).

Once you define something to NOT be an "assault weapon", of course the use of that evil thing drops. Only problem is, the number of shootings with NON-"assault" weapons goes up to make up the difference - or worse.

• In a Washington Post story, reporters David Fallis and James Grimaldi write that the percentage of firearms seized by police in Virginia with high-capacity magazines dropped significantly during the Assault Weapons Ban. That figure has doubled since the ban expired.
• Original source: In Virginia, high-yield clip seizures rise. By David S. Fallis and James V. Grimaldi, Washington Post.
• In a letter to the editor in the American Journal of Public Health (pdf), Douglas Weil and Rebecca Knox explain that when Maryland imposed a more stringent ban on assault pistols and high-capacity magazines in 1994, it led to a 55 percent drop in assault pistols recovered by the Baltimore Police Department.
• Original source (pages 297-298): Douglas S. Weil & Rebecca C. Knox, "Letter to the Editor, The Maryland Ban on the Sale of Assault Pistols and High-Capacity Magazines: Estimating the Impact in Baltimore," 87 American Journal of Public Health 2, Feb. 1997, at 297-98.

I wonder who these people are. Check this out: http://junksciencearchive.com/news/guns.html

• A recent study by the Violence Policy Center finds that between 2005 and 2007, one in four law enforcement officers slain in the line of duty was killed with an assault weapon.
• Original source (pages 6-7): Violence Policy Center, "Target: Law Enforcement—Assault Weapons in the News," (Feb. 2010).
• A report by the Police Executive Research Forum finds that 37 percent of police departments reported seeing a noticeable increase in criminals’ use of assault weapons since the Assault Weapons Ban expired.
• Original source (page 2): Police Executive Research Forum, "Guns and Crime: Breaking New Ground by Focusing on the Local Impact," (May 2010).

It's always good to get data from reliable sources. The VPC in particular will never fail to provide the requisite numbers on demand - just give them the requirements, and their crack team of professional statisticians will roll out whatever results prove the point they want proven.

Sort of like the fed's Bureau of Labor Statistics that can always be relied upon to "look on the bright side of life"

Assault weapons in the news

• NRA misleads on assault weapons (Salon, Dec. 26, 2012)
• "Dems to push for more sweeping assault weapons ban" (Washington Post, Dec. 20, 2012)
• "A conservative case for an assault weapons ban" (Los Angeles Times, Dec. 20, 2012)
• "Obama Vows Fast Action in New Push for Gun Control" (New York Times, Dec. 19, 2012)
• "Trying, again, to ban assault weapons" (Los Angeles Times, Dec. 17, 2012)
• "Stop the sale of assault weapons" (San Francisco Chronicle, Dec. 17, 2012)
• "Reason to Hope After the Newtown Rampage" (New York Times, Dec. 17, 2012)

Illinois' proposed gun ban

Here it is - Quinn's wish list.

The usual - .50 cal ban, "assault" weapon ban, large magazine ban - for all Illinois residents, except, of course, the police.

If you own one of the evil things, you can keep it, but not transfer it to anyone else.

Feinstein Looks To Push Ban On Assault Rifles, High Capacity Magazines & Pistol Grips

by Tim Brown

If you recall, I wrote that within hours of Barack Obama’s re-election he was already giving the “go ahead” to pick up talks again with the United Nations concerning the Small Arms Treaty. Many were unaware, however, that a major push to ban assault weapons was being prepared just days before the election by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).

Leaks began being made public concerning the liberal Senator’s plans to reintroduce legislation banning guns that should be allowed under the Second Amendment.

++++++++++++++

I'll disagree with that last sentence - there is NO gun that "should be allowed under the Second Amendment".

The Second Amendment prohibits the government from infringing on a basic human right - it does not regulate arms in any manner.

Wounded Warriors Project anti-gun?

Sure looks like it:

http://gunsnplanes.blogspot.com/2012/11/wounded-warrior-project-rejects-gun.html

I'm pulling the ad off the sidebar.

Gun control lies

This outfit tries yet again to scare America into surrender:
+++++++++++++++

Do We Know What Would Happen To The Public’s Safety In A Country Where Only The Criminals Had Guns? Yes We Do.

Posted Feb 5 2012 by NGAC with 0 Comments

There is a country where only the criminal have guns—England.     In England handguns have been outlawed.  No one can own them.  The only guns private citizens can own are long guns (the kind used for hunting) and they can only shoot 2 bullets at a time.  Further, there are strict requirements for a private citizen to obtain a license for the long gun, including references, interviews with the applicant and people who know them.  FIREARM LICENSES ARE NOT GRANTED FOR SELF DEFENSE, WHICH IS NOT CONSIDERED A LEGITIMATE REASON FOR OWNING A GUN.  No one can have a gun that shoots more than 2 bullets at a time.  However, the criminals illegally get all the guns they want.  They can get hand guns that shoot 32 bullets at a time – in under 15 seconds—just like the Tucson murderer.

England is a country very similar to ours.  They hunt, they collect guns, and marksmanship is a big sport.  They have serious drug problems, poverty, gangs, immigration issues etc.  Because this is a country where only criminals have guns, we would expect there to be rampant gun violence – huge numbers of gun homicides and gun crime assaults.  After all, only the criminals have guns.  Even the police don’t carry guns.  England has 75 gun homicides per year.
+++++++++++++++
Notice the outright lies - the Telegraph article I refer to below mentions the police carrying machine guns. When I visited there in 1970, the Bobbies carried whistles and nightsticks. Also, the numbers are pure fiction.

Or perhaps they refer to "gun homicides" as cases where a person shot a gun and killed it?

My comment - their first one!

According to the Telegraph, gun deaths in merry old England have more than doubled since 1998

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6438601/Gun-crime-doubles-in-a-decade.html

"In areas dominated by gang culture, we're now seeing guns used to settle scores between rivals as well as turf wars between rival drug dealers. We need to redouble our efforts to deal with the challenge."

There were 9,865 firearm offences in 2007/08, a rise of 89 per cent on the 5,209 recorded in 1998/99.

Lancashire Police saw a 598 per cent increase from just 50 to 349 over the period while Staffordshire, Warwickshire and Essex all saw five fold increases.

In total, 21 forces saw offences at least double over the decade while just four, Cleveland, Humberside, Cambridgeshire and Sussex, saw the number fall.

While provisional figures for 2008/09 suggest overall firearm offences may be down on the previous year, they point to a doubling of the number of people injured or killed.

Some 1,760 gun related injuries or deaths were provisionally recorded for 2008/09, compared with 864 in 1998/99."

Yep. "Law-abiding gun owners" carrying fully automatic weapons bought on the black market. Gun control sure works just fine.

Keep on believing in your rose-colored imaginary world where if we could just un-invent the gun, all would be peaches and cream and everyone would love their neighbor. I'll keep my guns.

Screen capture:


Let's see if they allow that to remain.

Update: As of 8:45 this evening, it's still there, all by itself.
Update: 10:04 AM 2/72012 - still there - the ONLY comment so far.