0

I don’t enjoy fisking Mike “The Gun Guy” Weisser’s HuffPo anti-gun agitprop. Much. For one thing, the anti-gun gun dealer was civil to me on the phone when I misrepresented some of his writing (quickly and apologetically corrected). For another, he’s such an easy target. And getting easier. With each huffingtonpost.com rant, Mike puts more and more distance between himself and what most people easily identify as reality. Take this assertion in his most recent diatribe New Kansas Gun Law Isn’t Constitutional Carry, It’s Crazy Carry . . .

I happen to live in a state in which the license to own and purchase a gun is also the same license that allows you to carry a handgun concealed. There are no special requirements for CCW in my state and everyone who applies for a gun license must take a mandatory safety course which, frankly, usually consists of an afternoon snooze. Since my state actually has a licensing process, it doesn’t qualify as a “constitutional carry” state, but the practical effect is about the same.

Wow. A state with a mandatory firearm licensing system that requires both personal registration and a safety course for concealed carry is nowhere near the same as a state with Constitutional Carry. Practically speaking, any action that requires government permission (e.g. driving on public roads) is a “privilege.” Not a right.

By prohibiting infringement on keeping and bearing arms, the United States Constitution recognizes keeping and bearing arms as a right. (Ipso facto.) Constitutional Carry states are constitutional because they respect this prohibition. They do not erect barriers to the exercise of Americans’ natural and civil gun rights.

Along with the fact that most states grant CCW with minimal or no requirement for actually shooting a gun, most states define CCW licensing criteria only in legal terms. In other words, if you don’t fall into one of those ‘prohibited’ categories (felon, fugitive, dishonorable discharge, etc.), you can be legally blind or completely lack all muscle coordination and still be allowed to walk around with a gun. We require candidates for the police academy to pass a battery of physical tests before we let them, as police officers, carry guns, but we seem unwilling to exercise the same degree of caution or common sense when it comes to whether John or Jane Q. Public should be allowed to go around armed.

Tell that to the residents of New Jersey. Or Hawaii. Connecticut. Maryland. Los Angeles. San Francisco, New York City. Or any of the other parts of the United States where government regulation is a de facto ban on concealed carry. Or D.C., where onerous regulations mean just over two dozen residents are “allowed” to carry a firearm in public.

Mike knows this just as well as you or I. Yet he covers this inconvenient truth by claiming that “most states” make it easy for residents to get permission to exercise what should be their right to keep and bear arms.

And then, of course, “The Gun Guy” holds up armed police firearms training as an exemplar of the importance of “caution” and “common sense” – just days after a new report on the police response to the Boston Marathon bombing highlights the fallacy of that assertion. Again. Still.

. . . giving every Tom, Dick, Harry and Francine the ability to carry such lethality around without the slightest proof that they have the mental and physical capacity to keep that lethality under control isn’t to my mind, constitutional carry. It’s crazy carry.

Proof is there, should Weisser want it. In Vermont, Alaska, Arizona, Wyoming and now Kansas, every Tom, Dick, Harry and Francine (nice non-inclusionary names all) can carry a firearm without the government’s specific pre-authorization. While there are firearms-related crimes, they are not epidemic. Nor endemic.

But Weisser doesn’t want proof that Constitutional Carry is no threat to public order. Or, indeed, that it’s quite the opposite. He wants his readers to switch off their analytical minds and [continue to] believe that “untrained” Americans exercising their natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep arms without government supervision are a menace to society.

In truth, those who undermine, not to say infringe upon our gun rights are the real menace to society. Men like Mike “The Gun Guy” Weisser should know better. In fact, they do. And that’s the scariest “fact” of all.

Recommended For You

56 Responses to Mike “The Gun Guy” Weisser: Constitutional Carry = “Crazy Carry”

      • Here in Arizona, we have to swim through the blood in the streets because after we got constitutional carry the red stuff simply flowed… Or not… You know, because we here in Arizona are far more intelligent and capable of handling our violent tendencies than places like New York.

        • It’s true. In AZ it’s a firefight just to get to work. Do you know how many rounds i expend just to get into the parking lot? And the police are horrible! If they find your gun in a carry on at the airport, they’ll hold it for you until you get back!

          It’s the apocalypse down here.

  1. LEOs don’t pass demanding physical and mental requirements to carry a weapon. They pass them because they have to deal with and very often chase down and manhandle the crazies of the world, on a daily basis. Pretty sad when supposedly educated folks think themselves into a box.

    • Wonder what kind of “battery of physical tests” ol’ Mikey could pass. Maybe someone should take away HIS guns…

    • Half right. It’s not just physical requirements and training. I(retired) also had to know local, state, and federal laws pertaining to my position and when/how to apply them. All this because I was given the power/mandate to restrict a person’s freedom when called for. As a civilian, I don’t have that same level of discretion under the color of law.

      • As a civilian, I don’t have that same level of discretion under the color of law.

        You were still a civilian, even before retirement.

        (Slightly pet-peevish, but important context when discussing the civil laws surrounding the exercise of a natural right.)

        • no, i think this is important. words matter, and language is powerful. i encourage people to stop differentiating between police and civilians whenever i hear them do it. police ARE civilians.

  2. I’d like to know just what the special qualifications are which are only held by 2 dozen people in D.C. Maybe related to or contributors to a political figure or two? When no one can get such a license, how did they? What I am sure of, is that if word got out how it was done, the stuff would hit the fan.

    • I hope the enbanc rehearing of Peruta in San Diego comes to the same conclusion as the 3 judge panel. I liked part of the reasoning in particular that want something like–

      To say a right is being upheld because a handful of people are able to exercise the right is not a sufficient justification for the restriction. In fact, it is an argument against it– how is a right for all citizens being respected when it is strictly reserved to a small minority of the people?

  3. Per Weisser: “…completely lack all muscle coordination and still be allowed to walk around with a gun.”

    How can anyone who completely lacks all muscle coordination even walk, much less manipulate the controls of a firearm?

    This guy is simply blowing flatulence out his ass for notoriety and money. Truth be told, it’s *all* about the money. No truth required.

    • My thoughts exactly. He purports to be a “Gun Guy” but he is willing to sell himself to HuffPo for whatever shekels they will pay. There is a word for that – “WHORE”, but that applied to this joker would be an insult to those honest sex workers who give good service for their fee. They say, “Pay me, I’ll screw you.” Weisser just says, “Screw you.”

  4. In his defense last time I toured 50 miles West into VT is was just like Escape from NY. We were dodging bullets the whole time.
    Oh, wait. It wasn’t anything like that at all. Must be because VT has uber strict gun control. Oh, they don’t?

    Well, then that would make every pundit/politico/journalo who ever uttered the phrase “blood in the streets” a big fat bullshitting liar and that can’t possibly be true so Escape from NY it is.

  5. Mike ‘the gun guy’ Weisser absolutely DOES know better. He just plays a role that gives him some perceived self-worth and also some value in his little ANTI online community. Then they can all say “well, even Mike – A GUN GUY – says that ….blah, blah, blah (insert whatever BS they’re peddling that day is)” – and they can all make themselves feel like THEY are not the ignorant extremist hoplophobes that they really are. And Mike can feel like “hey, I’m not a total loser with no friends and a pudgy head like they said in High School” lol

  6. Waitaminute…this guy’s a gun dealer?! Why? How? Why would he sell something he obviously hates so much? How could his business possibly survive selling only the types of guns he thinks civilians should own, and who the hell is buying from him? I thought he was just another anti-gunner masquerading as a “level-headed, common-sense 2A supporter.” Me head is spinning…I need to sit down.

    • I’m guessing–and honestly, just guessing–that he is pretty much failing as a gun dealer and has found this little niche for himself (playing what passes at HuffPo for a “reasonable gun owner”) to take up the slack. As ValleyForge77 said, he is just playing a role that he can actually succeed in.

  7. Anyone else notice the Greek caduceus (the symbol of commerce with 2 opposing and intertwined snakes, often confused with the medical symbol the Rod of Asclepius with one snake) over his right shoulder. This is normally depicted in the left hand of Mercury, the protector of merchants, shepherds, gamblers, liars, and thieves.

  8. This is my favorite statement from Mr. Weisser …

    most states define CCW licensing criteria only in legal terms. In other words, if you don’t fall into one of those ‘prohibited’ categories (felon, fugitive, dishonorable discharge, etc.), you can be legally blind or completely lack all muscle coordination and still be allowed to walk around with a gun. We require candidates for the police academy to pass a battery of physical tests before we let them, as police officers, carry guns, but we seem unwilling to exercise the same degree of caution or common sense when it comes to whether John or Jane Q. Public should be allowed to go around armed.

    Notice how Mr. Weisser conveniently failed to mention how several misdemeanors and felonies which disqualify a person from being able to legally own (much less carry) a handgun do NOT disqualify a person from being a law enforcement officer and carrying a handgun while on duty.

  9. Crazy (and criminal) people don’t bother with government permission slips before they decide to carry a firearm.

    Has Mikey demonstrated his “mental and physical capacity to keep [his speech] under control“?

  10. When constitutional carry became law in AZ in 2010, I remember thinking, is this really necessary, things are pretty good as it is. Except that nothing happened after the law took effect. Apparently, the people of AZ have been able to handle this extra bit of freedom just fine. As long as they remain of the mindset to live free, they can: there is no noticeable reason not to.

    • It’s not about how much freedom the people can handle. It’s about how much privilege the People are willing to let government use. Currently, that is far and away too much privilege. How much freedom the People can handle should never, ever, ever be a criteria as they are the owners of their individual freedom! smh

      • As a practical matter, shall issue wouldn’t have spread as much as it has if it had led to problems. Likewise, for constitutional carry to spread wider, it is not out of place to point out that it does not lead to more crime and that any opposition to it is purely a matter of the objector’s mindset rather than anything of substance.

  11. Some day — maybe soon — we’ll be reading interviews with Weisser’s neighbors. They will say things like “he always seemed so nice” or “we really liked his paintings of clowns.”

  12. Please stop featuring this a##wipe. Moms who hate us will still get publicity. Not Judas Quisling weisser…

  13. This guy is completely wrong.
    In ma you have to submit an application that has two personal references. You will have a background check be finger printed and photographed. Some Chiefs require anywhere from 1-5 personal letters from individuals attesting to your wonderfulness and why you should be trusted with a firearm. Some also require another letter to the chief on why you should be allowed to have a firearm.A firearms safety class. The fee is 100 bucks. Then there is the “interview”. some chiefs will interrogate you some will not. Then the wait times. this could be for the chance to pass in your paper work for the background check and/or the interview (which will include finger printing, photos, and the “talk”). These wait times can be a few days to a year for an interview. Wait time by LAW for your ltc are suppose to be no more than 90 days but is routinely violated with no recourse.
    Then after all that chiefs will also apply restrictions. First time getting a LTC? Chief doesn’t like guns? Target, sporting, and hunting restrictions are common. This means “yea you can have a gun, any gun you want, but you can’t concealed carry. You can go to the range and straight back home.
    After all that if you manage to get an unrestricted LTC it can be revoked at anytime for “discretion”. Someone see you open carrying “revoked” Pulled over and chief doesn’t like who you hang around with revoked.

    Case in point
    http://comm2a.org/images/cases/Plouffe_Complaint.pdf

  14. I saw, courtesy of Yahoo news page, Constitutional carry in Kansas was being widely derided by the leftist media. Yet none of the articles pointed to the other Constitutional states that don’t seem to have much of a problem with it either.

  15. Robert needs to ask him directly where is the evidence that shall issue results in mayhem on the streets instead just his mind.

  16. He’s on somebody’s payroll. He won’t admit it, but he founded NMCGV and had enough scratch to host a conference on gun safety with others in the works. He also wrote a book called “Good guys with guns, bad guys with guns” in which he urges his blog fans to ‘check out OUR new book’. Yet, he’s listed as sole author.
    Useful idiot or Judas goat?

  17. Imagine having to pass a competency test before exercising one’s right to vote. Or one’s press rights.

    This guy thinks he distrusts the Great Unwashed? Heh, I distrust them more. Which is exactly why my RKBA is so important.

  18. “In Vermont, Alaska, Arizona, Wyoming and now Kansas, every Tom, Dick, Harry…can carry a firearm without the government’s specific pre-authorization.”

    Also, no CC permit ever required in the unincorporated areas of Montana and Idaho. That would be over 95% of their land areas. Still no bloodshed on every trail and in every field. The smarty-pants antis fancy themselves as scientific types, yet they don’t look at any data or history of anything. What do you call such recurring, deliberate ignorance?

  19. giving every Tom, Dick, Harry and Francine the ability to carry such lethality around without the slightest proof that they have the mental and physical capacity to keep that lethality under control isn’t to my mind, constitutional carry. It’s crazy carry.

    Ah, yes. The ol’ statist mantra of requiring the individual to prove themselves to the government.

    • YES. Yes it is…I would rather see articles by firearms concierge than anything on this lowlife. I’m no fan of FC either…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *