Thanks to a recent court case revoking the “good cause” provision of D.C.’s concealed carry permitting process, Hell’s getting frosty. The resolutely, obstinately, relentlessly anti-gun New York Post has posted an editorial by Seth Lipsky that calls for the liberalization, make that reform of New York’s City’s “may issue” concealed carry [non]licensing procedure. The headline – DC loss for gun control puts New York City’s laws at risk – is a head fake worthy of Marshawn Lynch. Check this out . . .
“Seventeen years ago, I was raped,” an anonymous author reveals in Why guns on campus will not make women safer at wagv.org. “I had a gun in my purse.” Not to diminish the author’s pain or anguish, not to place the blame on anyone or anything but her rapist for the assault, but off-body carry is not ideal in any situation. I try very hard to conceal in a way that I KNOW I can get to the gun before a criminal can lay hands on me. And while nothing is sure in this life, it’s surely better to have a gun, a chance to defend yourself with a gun, than not. There. Story over. But it goes on, Here’s her description of the incident [paragraph breaks added] . . .
Dustin Doyle writes:
Lots of exciting things are happening in Minnesota politics. www.gocra.org www.facebook.com/gocra and www.mngopac.org www.facebook.com/mngopac have most of the details. We passed five firearms bills out of the House and Senate, including a controversial suppressor bill. They are now part of an omnibus bill and can’t be line-item vetoed. Our governor is threatening a veto of the whole omnibus which would force a special session of the legislature which just adjourned at midnight a hour ago for the year. This would entail . . .
There are two groups of people that have a very great deal in common, yet few would think to compare them. Both groups walk about with targets on their backs, yet both are denied their Second Amendment right to protect their very lives. Domestic and international terrorists have targeted both groups in recent years, and some members of both groups have been killed. When they’ve died, the mainstream media have almost universally proclaimed the solution to be more gun control, bigger government and more taxpayer funds spent. Intelligence has been developed and continues to be developed clearly indicating that the targets on their backs are growing larger and more numerous every day; terrorists are anxious to attack what they rightly see as soft targets . . .
I recently spent some low-quality time in a “gun-free zone”: three trips to my local hospital in two days. Even though I was incapacitated, with IV tubes hanging out of my body, I had a hard time coming to terms with the fact that I had left my preferred mode of self-defense behind. As I lay in the hospital bed listening to the beeps of the machines pumping antibiotics into my veins, I thought about why I’d willingly disarmed. The giant sign on the door proclaiming “NO WEAPONS ALLOWED” wasn’t what stopped me . . .
In a unanimous decision drafted by Justice Elena Kagan, the Supreme Court ruled Monday in the matter of Henderson v. United States that federal law does not bar a convicted felon from transferring his firearms to a third party, provided that the court is satisfied that the recipient won’t allow the prohibited person to use them or direct their use . . .
Those of you who live in eastern seabord states are probably very aware of the practice those states use requiring concealed carry license applicants to show a “good reason” why they need to carry a gun. That requirement has enabled law enforcement agencies to grant or deny carry licenses on a whim, often denying them to all except the rich and famous. Such a provision was enacted as part of Washington D.C.’s new court mandated concealed carry licensing law, but now a federal judge has ruled that the practice of requiring a “good reason” is unconstitutional and issued an injunction against that part of the law . . .
As I never grow tired of saying, if the anti-second amendment crowd didn’t have bad arguments, they’d have no arguments at all. A blog called Addicting Info published an article written by someone named Sarah containing the following excerpt, which showed up in my news feed this morning. I hesitate to call this a leftist blog, since it appears to be little more than a partisan screed for the Democratic Party, and I’ve known some leftists who have at least made an attempt to feign intellectual integrity; partisan operatives less so . . .
NEW YORK, May 14, 2015 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Today a broad coalition of leading organizations, cultural influencers, community members and activists unveiled “Wear Orange” (www.wearorange.org), a new campaign that will amplify existing efforts to reduce gun violence in America. To help honor the 88 Americans whose lives are cut short by gun violence every day — and the countless survivors whose lives are forever altered by shootings each year — the coalition has designated June 2, 2015 as the first annual National Gun Violence Awareness Day. On this day, campaign partners invite everyone who agrees we can do more to save American lives from gun violence to do one simple thing: Wear Orange . . .
In the video above, the jefe of the Campaign to Stop Gun Violence opens his mouth and confirms his ignorance on Constitutional law, guns and gun control. But not just intentionally. Ladd “Pro-Gunners Fear FEMA Camps” Everitt demonstrates a breathtaking lack of command of the facts of the matter. For example, at 29:45 (yes I listened that long…you’re welcome), Everitt admits that New York’s post-Newtown SAFE Act went too far . . .
National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) press release [via ammoland.com]:
National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) this week learned that United Parcel Service (UPS) had changed its policy regarding the shipment of firearms suppressors. New policy states that UPS will no longer ship suppressors, even between licensees. NSSF is working with UPS executives to determine what prompted the enforcement of this unwarranted policy. We are unaware of any thefts or losses that would explain the shipping company’s sudden decision to enforce a prohibition against shipment. NSSF will keep you apprised of developments. Separately, NSSF is also working with the U.S. State Department to achieve a change policy to allow export of suppressors.