Gun Control

Opinion/Analysis: Bloomberg: Guns for Me, but Not for Thee

‘How do you justify pushing for more gun control when you have an armed security detail that is likely equipped with the same firearms and magazines you seek to ban the common citizen from owning? Does your life matter more than mine or my family’s or these people’s?” a Virginian named Clarke Chitty asked Democratic Party presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg during a recent Fox News town hall. It’s an outstanding question. And Bloomberg’s answer is pretty straightforward: Yes, his life is worth more than yours. “Look, I probably get 40 or 50 threats every week, OK, and some of them are real. That just happens when you’re the mayor of New York City or you’re very wealthy and if you’re campaigning for president of the United States,” Bloomberg replied. “You get lots of threats. So, I have a security detail, I pay for it all myself, and . . . they’re all retired police officers who are very well trained in firearms.” In the United States, our rights aren’t — or shouldn’t be — meted out according to status. But you’ll notice Bloomberg doesn’t really answer the question, anyway. I suspect millions of Americans who aren’t as famous or rich (very rich, in this case) live in situations in which their property and safety are threatened to the same extent. Not that it matters. Does Bloomberg propose that everyone undergo a government risk assessment before being allowed to practice constitutional rights? Probably, right? More importantly, Clarke Chitty, one suspects, has zero interest in stripping away Bloomberg’s constitutional right to own a firearm, or to hire professional armed bodyguards to protect him from legitimate threats. The former mayor of New York City, on the other hand, has spent hundreds of millions of dollars in efforts to pass laws and regulations that would leave Americans like Clarke Chitty defenseless. It’s this kind of arrogance that brought about District of Columbia v. Heller, the case affirming that the Second Amendment is an individual right. One of the first plaintiffs in that effort, Shelly Parker, was an African-American resident of Washington, D.C., who had gotten fed up with the crime near her Capitol Hill home. She attempted to rally her neighbors to clean up the neighborhood, provoking the ire of local drug dealers, who began vandalizing her property and threatening her life. “In the event that someone does get in my home,” she explained, “I would have no defense, except maybe throw my paper towels at them.” It would have been illegal for Parker, neither wealthy nor famous, to obtain a gun to protect herself. She was also in danger. Or take Otis McDonald, the retired 76-year-old of McDonald v. City of Chicago, a case that affirmed that the right of individual gun ownership extended to the states. By 2010, the neighborhood McDonald had lived in since 1971 had become infested with gangs, drug dealers, and widespread criminality. His home had been broken into on five separate occasions, so he had a legitimate reason to worry about his safety. Someone like Bloomberg might have suggested that Otis keep some paper towels handy, but McDonald wanted a handgun. At the time, Chicago had a handgun ban in place, ensuring that only criminals could own them. I suspect that McDonald was in as much jeopardy as Bloomberg. To top it off, Bloomberg then blatantly lied to the Fox crowd, claiming that “the Supreme Court said you can have reasonable restrictions, and the only restrictions which I am in favor of is to prevent us from selling guns to people with psychiatric problems, criminals, or people that are minors, OK?” Not really. If Bloomberg had any practical hope of overturning the Second Amendment, he would certainly do it. As it is, Bloomberg bankrolls major anti-gun efforts that go much further policy-wise than keeping guns out of the hands of children and people with serious psychiatric problems — both of which are already illegal, and supported by nearly everyone. Bloomberg, the presidential candidate, supports banning “assault weapons,” the most popular rifles in the country, which account for a sliver of the gun crimes in the country. Bloomberg supports stripping gun companies of “immunity” in civil lawsuits that would allow activists to hold manufacturers responsible for all criminality — a blatant attempt to put them out of business. Bloomberg supports “red flag” laws, which strip away due process for gun owners. Bloomberg supports raising the age of gun ownership from 18 to 21. Bloomberg supports federal efforts requiring every gun buyer to obtain a permit. Bloomberg wants to create a position for a federal gun czar to implement all these restrictions on the federal level. In other words, Bloomberg supports every single active effort to restrict gun ownership that exists. Well for you, not him.

Mike Bloomberg is the poster child for an elitist, self-righteous, arrogant, self-serving hypocrite.  He looks down at the rest of us unwashed peasants and tells us that we have no right to have a firearm…and yet he himself is surrounded by firearms protecting his pompous ass.  He is quite literally a little Nazi.  If you think that’s over the top, then consider this…   Not only is he short in stature….but, he would love nothing more than to register all gun owners, before ultimately having those guns confiscated.  Hitler did the exact same thing in the late 1930s in Germany.  Thanks to David Harsanyi over at National Review for that sobering assessment of that little Nazi from New York.

Joe Biden Essentially Pushing Ban on All Semiautomatic Firearms

Democrat presidential hopeful Joe Biden essentially pushed a ban on all semiautomatic firearms Thursday night during a CNN town hall. Biden talked of meeting with victims’ families after the December 14, 2012, Sandy Hook Elementary attack and also meeting with families from the February 14, 2018, Parkland high school attack. He said he committed in both instances to secure more gun control. He said: ” I made a commitment that I’m going to do everything in my power in office or out of office to get those assault weapons off the street, which I have done once already. And to get those clips that have multiple bullets in them not for sale, not be able to sell silencers, all those things.” GOP Rapid Response Director Steve Guest tweeted video of Biden making the comments: Targeting guns with “clips that have multiple bullets in them” is essentially going after all semiautomatic rifles, shotguns, and pistols. Biden made clear that he wants to ban suppressors as well.

Joe is just trying to out-liberal his competition for the Dem nomination for president in this election year.  And, part of that is pandering to the Dem base which is VERY anti-gun.  So, Joe is trying to portray himself as the most anti-gun Nazi running…even more than “mini” Mike Bloomberg who is a crazy, fascist, anti-gun Nazi.  No matter who wins the nomination on the Dem side, that person will be someone who wants to come for your guns.  Remember that..

Johns Hopkins Study: No Evidence ‘Assault Weapon’ Bans Reduce Mass Shootings

A study released by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health declares there is no evidence “assault weapon” bans lead to a lower “incidence of fatal mass shootings.” The push for an “assault weapons” ban is central to the Democrats’ gun control agenda nationally and is front and center for Democrats at the state level in places like Arizona and Virginia. According to the Johns Hopkins study, researchers”did not find an independent association between assault weapon bans and the incidence of fatal mass shootings.” Researchers did claim licensing requirements like those in Connecticut help reduce the number of mass shootings, but their study omitted the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School in which 26 were killed at the school and another victim was killed in a private home. In other words, a study which claims licensing reduces instances of mass shootings omitted one of the most often cited mass shootings in U.S. history, even though that shooting occurred in a licensing state. Moreover, John Hopkins’ criteria for licensing laws allowed them to bypass Illinois which, in turn, allowed them to sidestep the never ending gun crime of Chicago. But the study was clear there is no evidence tying “assault weapons” to a lower incidence of mass shootings.

Gee..  Imagine that…  This is the type of story you will NEVER see on CNN, MSNBC, PBS/NPR, or any other organ of the dominantly liberal mainstream media, as it totally undercuts their fascist anti-gun narrative.

Joe Biden: It Is Rational to Prohibit ’50 Clips in a Weapon’

Democrat presidential hopeful Joe Biden spoke in Hudson, New Hampshire, this week and told attendees that it is “rational” to prohibit “50 clips in a weapon.” Ryan Saavedra quoted Biden maligning the absence of “a rational policy” that makes it illegal to have “20, 30, 40, 50 clips in a weapon.” Also in Hudson, Biden intimated that gun owners who cling to their AR-15s and AK-47s are no match for the government. He made reference to gun owners who quote Thomas Jefferson’s statement on the tension that exists between free men and the rulers who wish to subjugate them, a statement that includes Jefferson’s observation that “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants.” Biden then said, “Those who say ‘the tree of liberty is watered with the blood of patriots’ — a great line, well, guess what: The fact is, if you’re going to take on the government, you need an F-15 with Hellfire missiles. There is no way an AK-47 is going to take care of you if you’re worried about the government knocking down your door.” He also stressed his belief that the right to keep and bear arms is limited, saying, “There is a Second Amendment, and you do have a right to bear arms but not an unlimited right.” He added, “The Constitution does not say anybody can own a weapon; it says only certain people can own weapons.”

Wow…  Just think, crazy ol’ Joe is a former Senator and former Vice President of these United States, and he’s saying such spectacularly, factually incorrect statements like this.  I’ve got the Constitution and the Bill of Rights right here in front of me, and NOWHERE does the Second Amendment specify who can, and who cannot own a weapon.  As for the clips comment…  C’mon..  We all know he means “rounds;” not clips.  So, on that minor gaffe, we’ll give him a minor pass.  But, he’s SO out-of-touch, and being 77, his age is showing.  Joe should have just stayed retired.  Now, he’s just making a fool of himself each time he gets on stage.  Ya almost feel sorry for him..  It’s unlikely he’ll get the Dem nomination now, and even if he somehow pulls that off, he’d get destroyed and humiliated by Trump.

Ammo Sales Surge as Virginians Anticipate Democrat Gun Control

Ammunition sales are surging as many Virginian seek to stock up ahead of a slew of Democrat-mandated gun controls for the state. WSET reports online ammunition seller AmmunitionToGo.com notes a 137 percent increase in ammo sales to Virginians now versus this same time last year. AmmunitionToGo’s Brandon Black said, “We’re now seeing a massive number of Virginia shooters stocking up on ammunition in anticipation of new laws that they believe will make it harder to purchase rounds legally.” Black noted firearm and ammunition sales are impacted by political change in a way unseen with other retail items. He said, “I doubt that any other businesses are affected as much by politics as firearm and ammunition manufacturers and retailers.” WSET reports Virginians have purchased enough ammo to take the state from simply being in AmmunitionToGo’s “top 20 markets” to being in the top five. On January 21, 2020–the day after thousands rallied for Second Amendment rights in Virginia–WJLA quoted a Democrat State Senator making clear his conviction a mandate for gun control remains. Sen. Scott Surovell (D-Fairfax) said, “We are in charge now” and “We feel like we have a mandate to do something and we are going to continue to move forward.” On the very next day the Virginia Senate took up various gun controls. Breitbart News reported those controls included a permanent ban on exercising Second Amendment rights on Virginia Capitol grounds. Stricter requirements for concealed carry permit issuance, gun storage laws, and penalties for gun owners who fail to report stolen firearms within 24 hours of the theft, are also being pushed. House Bill 961 would put in place a licensing requirement for all AR-15 owners and Democrats have made clear that the licensing process would be used to create a database of said owners.

The Democrat anti-gun, fascist Nazis are in charge in Virginia now…and they’re putting a target on the backs of law-abiding gun owners in that state.  Keep this in mind come November when we all go to the polls.  This is what happens when Democrats are in power.  They come for your guns and raise your taxes.  Unreal…

For First Time, A Colorado Judge Denies Confiscation Request Under Red Flag Law

For the first time, a judge has denied a request to take away a man’s guns under Colorado’s new red flag law. A Limon woman claimed a man who she had a relationship with threatened her with a gun and filed the request. Since the law took effect, the red flag law has had many gun owners seeing red. At least four requests have been filed since the first of 2020; CBS4 is aware of them being filed in Denver, in Larimer County and this one — in Lincoln County. Many gun owners, like Jak Gruenberg, despise it. “Red flag laws just allow for harassment of legal gun owners,” he said. The law allows guns to be taken away from those who present a danger to themselves or others. The decision is up to a judge. A woman wrote she was getting “verbal and physical threats” with a handgun from the man identified in the order. She said he had a problem with alcohol and marijuana. The judge denied the request to take his guns. “I think it’s a good thing. I think any other new law you’re going to have a lot of case law to determine exactly where the lines are,” said Gruenberg, a gun owner not associated with the case. Lincoln County is one of the many counties that has indicated it would not honor the red flag law.

This so-called “red flag law” in Colorado (and in other states) is brazenly unconstitutional on its face.  And, the fact that some local judge can arbitrarily make the decision as to whether or not they’ll sign an order to remove someone’s guns without due process should have every law-abiding gun owner in Colorado (and other states that have similar laws) terrified.  Anybody can just go into a police station and say, “so and so scares me and I think he should have his guns taken away,” and then it goes to some local judge who makes the arbitrary decision.  Crazy!!  This is the kinda crap that happens when Democrats are in power.  The raise your taxes, increase the size and scope of government, and take away your freedoms.  Unreal…

Gun control standoff heats up in Virginia as ‘sanctuaries’ grow, big votes loom

A battle over gun control in Virginia with national implications is heating up as the legislature prepares to vote on sweeping new restrictions and localities band together to defy them in growing numbers. Virginians turned out to debate the measures and other issues at public budget hearings on Thursday, less than a week before the General Assembly’s first legislative session of 2020. Both the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) and Gun Owners of America specifically warned about Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam’s related budget proposal, which directs $250,000 for the Department of Corrections to incarcerate people as a result of new restrictions. Another measure included over $4 million and 18 “authorized positions” — part of an apparent team that Second Amendment groups warn could be used to enforce an assault weapons ban. The new General Assembly is expected to vote on two bills in particular – SB 18 and SB 16 – which would ban assault weapons, raise the minimum age of purchase to 21 and require background checks for any firearms transfer. In the run-up to the session and following state elections in November, a defiant protest movement has taken shape that could influence similar movements in other states. More than 100 cities, towns and counties have passed “sanctuary” resolutions meant to flout an assault weapons ban and other proposals. According to local outlets, activists on both sides of the debate raised concerns during a hearing in Suffolk. “This is not about gun safety, public safety, or whatever you want to call it,” one speaker said, according to WTKR. “It’s about control of people based solely on a radical, political, extremist agenda.” The meeting in Suffolk was “packed,” according to WAVY, and included at least 100 speakers — although it’s unclear how many spoke about gun control.

For those of you in Virginia, be afraid.  Thank God I don’t live there…  This is a cautionary tale for the rest of us, and the importance of elections.  When Dems are in control, the raise your taxes, and come for your guns.  Keep this in mind as we head into an election cycle.  For more, click on the text above.