Murphy’s Litmus Test, LA Gangs’ Ghost Guns and a Second Amendment Extremist – TTAG Daily Digest

Chris Murphy Supreme Court Pick Gun Control Litmus Test

courtesy dailykos.com

CT-Sen: Chris Murphy (D) Makes Gun Control Laws A Litmus Test On Trump’s SCOTUS Nomination

Bless his heart. He thinks his vote actually matters. As if he’d vote for any nominee Trump names . . .

For the most part, the Supreme Court has declined to hear (Second Amendment) cases, including one challenging the assault weapons ban passed in Connecticut shortly after Sandy Hook.

That could change — dramatically — with Trump’s pick to replace Anthony Kennedy.

Here is the truth: This pick could reopen a number of challenges to existing gun violence prevention laws, and it could open up potential challenges to new gun laws passed and signed into law by a new Congress and new president.

Actually, he doesn’t. This is just a crass, transparent fundraising letter meant to spook the horses back home.

Gang Member Ghost Guns Illegal Untraceable

courtesy latimes.com

L.A. gangs stockpile untraceable ‘ghost guns’ that members make themselves

So you’re telling us that criminals are breaking the law in order to arm themselves? In California? . . .

A small arsenal of weapons that authorities seized from gang members during a six-month undercover operation lay across the tables at LAPD’s Hollywood station Thursday.

It’s not unusual for the Los Angeles Police Department and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to grab high-power weapons during these types of sweeps.

But these AR-15-style semiautomatic rifles and pistols were different — homemade, untraceable “ghost guns” without the traditional serial numbers, built from parts purchased over the internet.

Authorities said they are seeing more gangs turn to homemade guns as it becomes more difficult to acquire real ones.

Shocking moment man shoots driver in the face with an air pistol at POINT BLANK range in furious row over a car

Not really sure why he didn’t floor it as soon as he saw the gun. He’s lucky he didn’t lose an eye. Or worse . . .

This is the shocking moment a man films himself being shot in the face at point blank range over a row about a car.

The footage shows the victim Quintin James Lander arguing with the alleged gunman on a quiet residential street in Peterborough, Cambridgeshire on Tuesday.

The recording begins with the man asking ‘are you going to shoot me?’ as the they argue about his car being smashed.

Capital Gazette Shooting Concealed Carry Gun Laws

courtesy baltimoresun.com

Gun laws won’t prevent another mass shooting, but conceal carry would

Still a few level-headed Marylanders left . . .

The Sun correctly states that “Police arrived on the scene almost immediately.” But five people still lost their lives! The flaw is the reasoning of people who think that the police can protect them from heinous criminals. What could have prevented or lessened this terrible tragedy? Only one thing — a good guy with a gun.

Consider for a minute that the maniac who committed this crime started off by shooting out the glass in the front door. Anyone in that room was instantly alerted to the trouble, possibly before the first victim was shot. Anyone in that room with a gun could have stopped the aggressor before he completed his violent acts. There are about 300 million guns in the US — almost one for every citizen. With Maryland’s population of around 6 million, and assuming equal distribution, that’s about 6 million guns in Maryland. Even discounting the national average by 75 percent, there could be 1.5 million guns in Maryland. There is no law that can protect you from 1.5 million guns that are available to people who would use them to harm you.

Judge Thomas Hardiman Supreme Court Second Amendment Extremist

courtesy washingtonpost.com and AP

Thomas Hardiman, possible Supreme Court nominee, seen as ‘Second Amendment extremist’

The more we read, the more we like him . . .

In the wake of mass shootings that have divided the country on the issue of gun control, President Trump is considering nominating to the Supreme Court an appellate judge who has argued that Americans have a constitutional right not only to keep guns at home — as the high court has ruled — but also to carry them in public.

U.S. Appeals Court Judge Thomas M. Hardiman has also written that convicted criminals, including some felons, should be able to recover their right to own and carry guns, as long as their crimes were not violent.

Constitutional-law scholars and advocates on both sides of the gun debate say that Hardiman — who sits on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Philadelphia-based 3rd Circuit and maintains chambers in Pittsburgh — holds a more expansive view of the Second Amendment than the Supreme Court has articulated to date. His nomination and confirmation would push the court to the right, they say, making it more likely that justices would agree to hear cases challenging gun laws — and perhaps to strike them down.

comments

  1. avatar former water walker says:

    Hmmm…I like Hardiman too NOW. I am anti-babymurder but all the repubs up for consideration are pro-baby human. The SECOND is MY litmus test. Nothing else will do. Maryland is doomed…that is all.

    1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

      Agreed. The 2A is THE paramount litmus test. As long as the citizen’s RTKBA remains uninfringed, we maintain the ability to remove or remedy any unconstitutional policies or people.

  2. avatar Gordon in MO says:

    “Si vis pacem, para bellum ”

    That is one of the reasons why American Citizens own 300 million or so weapons!

    Be Prepared !

    1. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

      Gordon, a man after my own heart, I end my emails with “Si vis pacem, para bellum. Didn’t get online until 2012 and have used it since. If one read Machiavelli he basically says the same thing. He’s not the evil man some people believe him to be. His advice was how to conduct international politics, not how to subjugate your own people.

      1. avatar DaveW says:

        Tsun Tsu: The Art of War.

        I had a Korean Army Major for martial arts training. He taught to always be prepared to be attacked. If you are not prepared, you will lose. If your mind is not already set on winning an engagement, you will lose. You can never win a confrontation if you expect to come out of it with a stalemate because your opponent is already in a mindset to wipe you out.

        He also taught that you never display what you know until it is time to use it. You never display your weapon set until you are ready to use it fully. If you display these things too early, your opponent will seek a way to circumvent your strengths, such as waiting for you in a dark parking lot with a shotgun. Along the same lines, if you can safely walk away from a fight, do so. But, if backed into a corner where you have no choice, then your intent should be to kill you opponent rather than just defend yourself, up to the point where you have subdued them, and, at that point, you are free to back off and let them live. There is no reason to die over an insult.

        Finally, you should be passive. You rearrange your opponents body parts: put his left arm where his right arm was, put his right arm where his left leg was, put his left leg where his left arm was, turn his head around backwards, and put his jewels wherever you wish; and then walk away passively.

    2. avatar CC says:

      425 million at least

  3. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    Just watched John Wick chapter 2 the other night. I seriously want to watch it again and count the number of people Ted Logan killed in that movie. Maybe make a drinking game out of it.

    I have to say though, for a body count movie it was pretty good.

    1. avatar LostDown South says:

      Try “Hardboiled” from John Woo. I lost count at 250 bodies…in 90 minutes.

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        One criticism, when Laurence Fishburne gave him the 1911 with only 7 rounds, that would have been a perfect place to put a revolver in Wick’s hands. Either a 686+ (I don’t think the 7 shot GPs were out yet) or just make the price on his head $6 million instead of 7. Give him a GP 100 and have him kill 6 with the 6 rounds then beat a seventh guy to death with the empty GP. I mean, if you can kill a guy with a pencil, you surely can kill a guy with an empty GP 100. That or maybe step up to the .44 magnum…

        1. avatar anonymoose says:

          +1 for the 686+.

          Also, I never noticed how many safeties were on in that picture. It also appears that a couple of those Beretta 92s are cocked and locked (not something you can do with a factory gun).

        2. avatar John Wick says:

          Pleassseee…the 1911 is the most iconic firearm, and seven is better than six, both J.M.B. and the producers got it right.

        3. avatar Anymouse says:

          Don’t remember cocked and locked 92s. Might they have been Taurus PT92s, which have the same profile but can be cocked and locked with the frame safety. The original Beretta 92 (not current 92FS) had a frame safety, but I don’t know if it allowed cocked and locked.

        4. avatar anonymoose says:

          Anymouse, look at that picture. There’s at least two 92s pointed at Keanu with slide-mounted safeties flipped down and the hammers back. The PT92 has a frame-mounted safety. On a 92FS, to use the safety as only a safety, you would have to replace the decocker lever mechanism in the frame with a spacer that’s intended for the DAO model. Some guy on youtube did it and the spacer is carried by Brownells, but I’m not messing with it on my 92A1.

  4. avatar DaveL says:

    So it’s now an “extreme” view of the 2nd Amendment that people have the right not only to keep, but to bear arms? Next you’ll be telling me that the First Amendment protects not only the freedom of Speech, but also of the Press.

  5. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    “Judge Thomas M. Hardiman has also written that convicted criminals, including some felons, should be able to recover their right to own and carry guns, as long as their crimes were not violent.”

    Prior to 1934 that was the case,once ones debt to society was paid they became full citizens once again and all natural,civil rights were restored.

    ‘No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”

    Thomas Jefferson

    1. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

      I think that seems like a somewhat shocking viewpoint because today’s justice system doesn’t deal appropriately with criminals that should never have access to guns any more. My suspicion is back then someone who got released wasn’t the kind of threat that gets put out on the streets every day today. Liberalism has gutted the moral fiber of this country. Plus, the village of yesteryear where everyone knew one another has become the bedroom community of a much larger shithole. Where you move about daily not even acknowledging the person next to you on a subway car.

      Evil breeds in the presence of anonymity. It has become too easy to just shrug and say who would notice? And our government has no desire to protect us from it.

      1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

        Correct,there once was such a thing as death penalty crimes,that was also a supreme court ruling

  6. avatar Jolly Roger That says:

    “Not only is Parabellum a type of gun…”

    Is it that hard to say “Not only is Parabellum the full name of 9mm…” or some variation thereof? I swear, some of these people couldn’t research enough to write a 5th grade essay.

    1. avatar Random NYer says:

      It’s not a lack of research ability, it’s a lack of any interaction with people who would know better. If you come in not knowing anything, saying a 9mm or a .45 is a type of gun might sound fine. You’d have to actually talk to someone who is knowledgeable to get corrected, and precious few people actually are. In the social circles reviewers run in, I’d imagine almost no one.

    2. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

      Yeah. When I read crap like that, the before and after story is moot.
      Dead, defunct, not believable, a lie, crap, bullsh!t,
      Just plain crap.

    3. avatar Kemikos says:

      It’s an awkward phrasing, but it’s not wrong, really. “Parabellum” was the “marketing name” of the P.08 “Luger” pistol (which is why 9mm ammunition is sometimes called “9mm Parabellum”).

      It was also the name of an early machine gun from the WW1 era.

      I mean, that doesn’t change the fact that the tweet itself was written solely for the “OMG ebil guns!!!!!” reaction, but it’s not actually inaccurate…

  7. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    As Mr. Murphy is a Communist who cares what he feels,his terminology,or thinks about any subject.

    1. avatar Alex Waits says:

      o lawd… fix your commas please.

      My brain would not translate that.

      😛

    2. avatar Huntmaster says:

      The only person in Connecticut more hated than Chris Murphy, is Gov. Dannel Malloy. Connecticut as left as it is, gives higher approval ratings to President Trump.

    3. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Title line was wrong, should be “Chris Murphy, evil POS (D) …”

      1. avatar Joe R. says:

        ahh, my work here is done.

        Thank you Larry
        ; )

  8. avatar Nanashi says:

    “Second Amendment Extremist”
    “I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!”
    “There is no substitute for a militant freedom. The only alternative is submission and slavery.”

  9. avatar Gun Owning American says:

    Make that at least 400 million now.

  10. avatar TruthTellers says:

    Hardiman is a young, White male; he’s the face of the Patriarchy. The senate will never confirm him, but he’d be great to have as a SCOTUS justice.

    Amy Barrett is going to get the appointment. She’s a woman, she’s hot, and I’d love for her to bang my gavel against her corpus juris.

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      Oh, no, she’s Catholic.
      Which was apparently good for JFK, but unacceptable in a judge, according to Diane Feinstein.

  11. avatar CZJay says:

    Don’t worry California, when you pass more laws making it “difficult” to obtain illegal weapons killings of cops will increase and other crimes will become common place. Just look south to see thousands of examples of police assassinations in countries with your favorite laws.

    I wonder how many Asian people left California and how many will eventually remain 15 years from now. I wonder how black people are going to feel when they are replaced with Mexicans. California is working real hard to make their state “white” again.

  12. avatar Sian says:

    Wow, when it’s harder for gangs to get guns, they make their own!

    Who could have predicted this!

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      I really love that news. It just goes to show you that, when your asshole neighbors who needed a job and went to work for your “government” squeeze too hard, what is displaced under pressure is even less controllable. And that societal ‘law’ is more solid than Boyle’s Law.

      Ban guns enough, and I’ll make them for your kids.

  13. avatar CalGunsMD says:

    “Adam Winkler, a law professor at the University of California at Los Angeles who has written extensively about gun laws, said that if Hardiman’s views were law, gun restrictions in states such as California, New York and New Jersey would be struck down, potentially leading to a vast expansion in legal gun ownership”

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Duh! Only thing fun about this quote is the fact this doofus is admitting, in public, that he is completely aware that CA’s gun control laws are blatantly unconstitutional, and always have been.

    2. avatar CC says:

      Winkler is hard core anti second amendment. And if you look at his writings from 20 years ago he is anti heller meaning he things any jurisdictions should be able to totally ban all guns from law abiding, background checked and even trained citizens.

  14. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    This guy needs to reread the Constitution and then BATF rules and regulations that permit s one to build a firearm for himself but cannot sell them. I’m not sure about giving them away. Gang members can get weapons the SAME WAY they get drugs, too. But, instead of worrying his ass about guns how about serious work on eliminating gangs. LA and Chitown would be good places to start, then the D.C. area and northern Virginia. Also, would a good idea to stop MS 13 at the frigging southern border.

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      you can even legally sell a few (to lawful possessors). This in itself proves that gun-law-writing asshole neighbors who needed a job were tip-toeing around the idea that preventing people from making and distributing guns is a (potential) defacto ban on you owning one (because, to force people to ‘roll their own’ would effectively keep a super-majority of the possible gun-owning citizens from owning them).

  15. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

    The most important amendment is the 2A, which enables the citizens to remedy or remove policies or people who promote anti Constitutional policies/laws. We MUST capitalize on this historic moment on the Supreme Court to nominate a judge who believes every gun control law EVER passed is an unconstitutional infringement. That should be THE litmus test.

  16. avatar Mark N. says:

    Tell me again, why is it so important to trace guns? So that the ATF has something to do? So that Big City mayors can generate bogus figures about the “river of guns” flowing into their states? I rather suspect that something more than 50% of crime guns, especially those involved in inner city gang violence, are stolen, such that it makes not a whit of difference who owned it before. and yeah, maybe you could make out the occasional straw sale–but how many of those are ever prosecuted?

    1. avatar Nanashi says:

      There’s actual, peer reviewed, journal publish, research on that subject titled “Gaps continue in firearm surveillance” (the motivation was obviously slanted, but the data doesn’t lie). That says only 14% of crime guns were legally owned.

      1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

        Link please

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Mark, hidden in there somewhere is what I consider the obvious question, which nobody ever asks, much less answers. “How much money has been spent on this ‘tracing’ crap, and how many crimes have been solved by it?” When a cop comes to a citizen’s door to accuse him of being the guy who bought the gun used in a particular crime, and receives the response “I sold that gun 30 years ago.”, do you think that cop is EVER going to go to another door with that accusation? The goal is always the same, we need to have a REGISTRY!!! Until we have it, we need to just keep doing stupid stuff like “tracing” to get people used to believing there is some rational reason for it, getting ever closer to registry and confiscation.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        “…I consider the obvious question, which nobody ever asks, much less answers. “How much money has been spent on this ‘tracing’ crap, and how many crimes have been solved by it?”

        That question has been asked, and has been answered.

        The Canadians instituted a long gun registry ‘from the ground up’.

        It cost several *Billion*, and resulted in next to zero results.

        The Canadians then shit-canned the registry.

        Thank you, Canada!

  17. avatar Bob999 says:

    When talking to leftists about police response time, I always tell them that it takes about 45 minutes for the police to respond to serious incidents at my property. I also tell them that my property is along a common route that people drive to get to the Grand Canyon, and I tell them there is no mobile phone reception. It usually pauses the conversation cold as that sinks in.

  18. avatar frankw says:

    I would caution about raising hopes too much regarding Trump’s nomination to the SCOTUS. He could still toss a ringer in to make it acceptable to the Congressional left. Never trust politicians to do what is right (no pun intended). We’ve been hoodwinked too many times to become naïve at this point.

    1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

      Sorry, but there are no “leftist ringers” on that list of 25 highly vetted federalist society’s candidates. They’ve learned their lesson on past disasters like Souter and even Kennedy to some extent. Today’s digital technology allows organizations to compile a candidate’s entire judicial history that’s indexed for immediate and comprehensive investigation. If you’ve ever seen the senate questionnaire that nominees are required to complete, they are required to submit every public speech, debate, interview and ruling they’ve ever made. The ONLY possibility of a problem is if the nominee is a relative neophyte (like Barret) or if the candidate “evolves” as they get older. The latter is impossible to defend against and the former is best to avoid because to be honest, it’s just not worth the risk. The pool to of quality candidates to choose from is just to large.

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        The pool of Constitutional Conservative judges in neither large nor TOO Large. Not even possible to be TOO large

        1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

          In context, I’m referring to the list of 25. Trump doesn’t have to choose a candidate from a paltry, unvetted list of 3 or 4 judges/candidates. Of the 25, there are many who have excellent bonafides. Put simply, he doesn’t have to take a chance or risk putting a vacillating leftist on the bench because he has excellent quality to choose from. So much so that even an otherwise conservative stalwart like Barret can be passed over because he can choose from a similar candidate, but with an extended judicial track record instead.

    2. avatar Stinkeye says:

      Trump probably isn’t dumb enough to try that. He knows that no matter who he sends up, the Democrats will paint as the most right-wing extremist imaginable. Why try to placate them, when they wouldn’t accept Chairman Mao himself, as long as the nomination came from Trump?

      For the left, the only thing that matters is denying Trump a win.

      1. avatar Ardent says:

        Here’s to hoping you’re right about POTUS; If he nominated Saul Alynski the Senate dems would portray him as too conservative, insist the sky will fall and life as we know it will end if he is confirmed. One of the nice things about the ‘Resistance’ movement is that they have removed all need for bipartisanship or even the appearance of it. They have also lost most of whatever credibility they ever had with anyone not a low information leftist syncopath. Let’s hope Trump and his people get this and use it: Nominate the most staunch conservative candidate in the running and ram them through. What other option presents? Shall we give the left ‘our’ chance at packing the court? Are the dems willing (and able) to simply leave the vacancy open…if so, for how long? Months? We have a couple of years to wait them out while they suffer from the fact and appearance of being nothing but obstructionists to an increasingly popular administration with some very popular policies. Meanwhile Trump can simply parade enough truly conservative candidates past the Senate to eventually make it rather obvious that the dems won’t confirm anyone he nominates at all…At some point that ought to yield enough leverage to force the hands of reluctant Senate republicans to confirm someone (someone suitable to us that is) on a party line vote. The votes are there…if they can be corralled and pressed into it.

  19. avatar Kameron Kennemer says:

    What the article fails to mention is that only some of the parts are purchased online. The main part of the gun called the lower is made with a 3d printer or a computer controlled cnc machine. That’s the part with the serial number. The rest is just springs, pins handles ect. Good luck banning springs pins and handles. As technology progresses it gets easier and easier to manufacture firearms at home. Anti gunners please come to your senses. It’s never going to happen, ever. I recomend you switch gears.

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email