assault weapon bans

New ‘Responsible Body Armor Possession Act’ Legislation Coming?

At the end of last week I pointed out the new “Assault Weapons Ban of 2017” legislation that was introduced in the U.S. Senate on November 8.

Not really surprising considering the recent mass shootings in Nevada and Texas.

Another proposed ban that wouldn’t be shocking is a new “Responsible Body Armor Possession Act” bill, “justified” via initial reports of the Nevada and Texas shooters both possibly possessing ballistic protection at each crime scene. The Associated Press reported back on October 9:

Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo says the shooter at a Las Vegas concert who killed 58 people fired at fuel tanks near the Mandalay Bay Hotel from which he was shooting.

Lombardo also says Stephen Paddock had personal protection equipment in his room.

(Editor’s note: Bold added for emphasis)

And from Doug Poppa over on The Los Angeles Post-Examiner website on November 9:

Stephen Willeford was at home less than a block away from the First Baptist Church when his daughter ran in telling him that there was gunfire coming from the church.

Willeford immediately went to his gun safe, removed his AR-15 rifle, a box of ammunition and an unloaded magazine and ran out of the house barefooted, loading up the magazine with several rounds as he headed for the church.

When he approached the church, he said he saw Kelley, who was wearing a tactical helmet with a visor and ballistic armor, heading to his truck with a handgun in his hand.

Kelley opened fire on Willeford who was using a neighbor’s truck as cover.

Willeford, who is an NRA certified firearms instructor said he knew when he saw Kelley’s ballistic armor that he had to aim for Kelley’s side which was exposed between the Velcro straps that pulled the front and back of the ballistic armor together.

(Editor’s note: Bold added for emphasis)

While Paddock’s “personal protection equipment” may not turn out to be body armor (not sure if the American public will ever be privy to that information), taking into Stephen Willeford’s shooting background, it does sound like Devin Kelley could have been wearing a bullet-resistant vest/plate carrier (if what The Los Angeles Post-Examiner reported is true). Even if it turns out neither individual had body armor, the potential remains for a new ban being proposed. Consider the following from the Loadout Room website concerning the push for the original Responsible Body Armor Possession Act of 2014:

In support of this bill, it has been claimed the mass killers who carried out the shootings in Newtown and Aurora were wearing body armor during their crimes. Initial press reports falsely described the shooters wearing body armor. One was wearing a ‘fishing vest’ and the other a mall ninja type load bearing vest. Neither killer had any type of ballistic protection.

Should new legislation seeking to ban “enhanced” body armor be introduced, I can’t say for sure what kind of reception it will get in Congress. The same goes for the “Assault Weapons Ban of 2017” (especially after what just happened in California).

Survival And Prosperity will be watching, however.

By Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (www.survivalandprosperity.com)

Sources:

“Las Vegas sheriff: Shooter fired at nearby fuel tanks.” Associated Press. 9 Oct. 2017. (http://www.kolotv.com/content/news/Las-Vegas-sheriff-Shooter-filed-at-nearby-fuel-tanks-450144573.html). 14 Nov. 2017

Poppa, Doug. “Three heroes emerge amidst the tragedy in Texas.” The Los Angeles Post-Examiner. 9 Nov. 2017. (http://lapostexaminer.com/three-heroes-emerge-amidst-tragedy-texas/2017/11/09). 14 Nov. 2017.

Miller, Mark. “My Body Armor, My Choice: Member of Congress Introduces a Bill to Ban Body Armor for Civilians.” Loadout Room. 9 Sep. 2017. (https://loadoutroom.com/thearmsguide/body-armor-choice-california-congressman-introduces-bill-ban-body-armor-civilians/). 15 Nov. 2017.

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Guns & Ammo Publishes ‘Best States For Gun Owners 2015’

Yesterday I happened to come across an article entitled “Best States for Gun Owners 2015” on the Guns & Ammo website. Keith Wood wrote Tuesday:

For the third consecutive year and first time in print, Guns & Ammo presents our assessment of each state’s gun laws in a format that ranks them from worst to first for gun owners…

G&A has conducted a thorough review of each state’s laws and considered initiatives pending in state legislatures. Every effort has been made to create a ranking system that is fair, equitable, accurate and objective. States were ranked numerically in each of five categories: right-to-carry, right to own “black rifles” (i.e., firearms possessing a tactical appearance), presence of the Castle Doctrine, subjects relating to the National Firearms Act (NFA) and a catchall miscellaneous column…

Interesting. Considering the amount of activity in the state recently as it concerns gun rights, I was real curious to see where Illinois ranked on this list. From the piece:

43. Illinois

Illinois has gone from one of the worst states for gun owners to “not so bad as long as you don’t live in Chicago” these last few years. The state’s “shall issue” concealed carry permit system is up and running for both residents and nonresidents, and the sky did not fall. Illinois’ Firearm Owner’s Identification, or “FOID,” requirement remains in effect for all residents wishing to touch a firearm or ammunition except for those possessed by nonresidents in accordance with state law. Suppressors are not permitted in Illinois, though a bill to change that is currently before the legislature. Short-barreled rifles are not allowed. At the point of sale, there is a three-day waiting period before picking up a handgun, and a 24-hour waiting period is applied to all long guns. The state has strong use-of-force laws, and all tactical rifles are legal outside of municipalities such as Chicago and Highland Park…

To expand on that bit about “all tactical rifles are legal outside of municipalities such as Chicago and Highland Park,” Don Babwin reported on The State Journal-Register (Springfield, Illinois) website back on July 20, 2013:

According to the Illinois State Rifle Association, at least 16 municipalities – including Chicago – enacted ordinances banning or regulating assault weapons. Every one of them was in the Chicago metropolitan area. Around 30 other municipalities took up the issue but voted down the bans.

The list of towns that took action includes places such as Evanston, Highland Park, Hazel Crest and Calumet Park…

So that’s Illinois. How about north of the state line where I pursue the bulk of my outdoor activities (when I have the time, that is)? From the article:

25. Wisconsin

Life improved markedly for gun-owning Wisconsin residents when former Gov. Jim Doyle was replaced by Gov. Scott Walker. Wisconsin’s hard-won CCW law gets good marks for strong reciprocity and very limited “gun-free zones.” The state has a Castle Doctrine statute on the books and doesn’t restrict NFA items or tactical-looking firearms. A bill to repeal the state’s 48-hour waiting period on handgun purchases was recently signed by Gov. Walker, yet another step forward for gun owners. Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke is about as outspokenly pro-gun as it gets, which is a rare thing in a major metro area…

Nearby Indiana, by the way, actually placed 16th in this year’s rankings. Nice job.

Where does your state fall in the 2015 list? Head on over to the Guns & Ammo website here to find out.

Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (www.survivalandprosperity.com)

Source:

Babwin, Don. “By deadline, few Illinois towns pass assault weapons bans.” The State Journal-Register, 20 July 2013. (http://www.sj-r.com/article/20130720/News/307209909). 23 July 2015.

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Project Prepper, Part 32: Security First

Back in Project Prepper, Part 9 (dated February 27, 2013), I talked about the 6 “innate survival needs” that my preparedness efforts for this series of posts would focus on. Jack Spirko of The Survival Podcast (the originator of this list of needs) had “Food” at the top. I wrote:

My gut feeling tells me right now I should be focusing on “Security” before other needs. Why’s that? Because this latest push for more gun “control” that’s going on in America right now could end up limiting my access to a number of tools and other accessories that I could use to construct an effective security setup.

The push for more gun “control” in the wake of the Newtown, Connecticut, school shooting was substantial. And certain firearms, ammunition, and accessories fast became scarce. That being said, federal legislation calling for ammunition magazine and gun bans did not become law. Even so, the availability of certain items (.22 LR ammo comes to mind here) is still affected here at the beginning of 2015.

Regrettably, I believe that another mass shooting on the level of Newtown will happen again here in America. After which, there will undoubtedly be another significant push for gun “control,” and shortages of certain guns and ammo will take place once again. Taking into consideration that I also suspect firearm availability/ownership will be seriously curtailed when the nation’s “financial reckoning day” arrives (along with major civil strife), readers might understand why I’ve made “Security” my top “innate survival need.”

Now, gun “control” is a phenomenon that I am all too familiar with. When I wrote Project Prepper, Part 9, I was living at “ground zero” for gun “control” in America at that time- Chicago, Cook County, Illinois.

Regular readers know that I’ve since moved out of the city and to the suburbs.

However, I still reside in Cook County (for the time being, at least), and as such, am subject to its considerable firearm restrictions.

Despite the setbacks of 2013 and last year, anti-gun sentiment remains strong in the county and in this part of the state. While the relentless push for more gun “control” has been somewhat quiet after the November 2014 election and through the holidays, activity will no doubt pick up again soon. And the next time a major mass shooting takes place in America, I expect legislation banning particular semi-automatic firearms and ammunition magazines to be introduced in the Illinois General Assembly probably before the smoke has even cleared. Trust me- it’s ready. While such a state-level ban wouldn’t mean a whole lot to me (Cook County already has an “Assault Weapon” Ban and 10-round ammunition magazine restriction in place), who’s not to say the County goes even further in the wake of such a tragedy and attempts to ban the future acquisition/possession of semi-automatic firearms, for example? Maybe there won’t even be a grandfather clause, and all semi-autos would now be illegal?

Yep. “Security” remains numero uno on my list of “innate survival needs.”

Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (www.survivalandprosperity.com)

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Would Illinois Governor-Elect Bruce Rauner Ban Assault Weapons?

When Pat Quinn was Governor, Illinoisans knew where he stood on so-called “assault weapons.”

With incoming Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner, it’s just not that clear.

So much so I wonder if after a major mass shooting or terrorist attack on U.S. soil and the political winds were blowing in that direction, Governor Rauner would sign off on an “assault weapons” ban.

Think that’s far-fetched? Consider what I wrote back on March 2:

The four Republican candidates for the office- State Senators Bill Brady, Kirk Dillard, State Treasurer Dan Rutherford, and businessman Bruce Rauner- were recently given campaign questionnaires by the Associated Press, in which gun rights was one of the topics.

According to the AP, two of the four candidates may support a ban on so-called “assault weapons.”

From last Tuesday:

In a campaign questionnaire for The Associated Press, the four candidates — state Sens. Bill Brady and Kirk Dillard, state Treasurer Dan Rutherford and businessman Bruce Rauner — all said gun rights need to be protected but that some public safeguards should exist.

The four differed over assault-style guns — high-capacity weapons that have been used in some of the deadliest mass shootings. They currently aren’t illegal statewide, and a proposed statewide ban backed by Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn was pulled from consideration last year in Springfield…

Dillard, of Hinsdale, and Rauner, of Winnetka, both left open the possibility they would support a ban. Rutherford, of Chenoa, and Brady, of Bloomington, oppose such a ban…

(Editor’s note: Bold added for emphasis)

I added later in that post:

So what about Rauner? The Associated Press did think his questionnaire answer was “more vague” than Dillard’s.

Turning back to their piece:

Rauner gave a more vague answer, saying he supports background checks that keep guns away from criminals and people with mental illness.

“Going beyond that requires a very careful balance between promoting public safety and protecting constitutional rights,” Rauner wrote…

Unless Kirk Dillard and Bruce Rauner actually come out and say they are against a state AWB, I would chalk them up as possibly being in support of an “assault weapons” ban if the political winds were blowing in that direction.

(Editor’s note: Bold added for emphasis)

There’s also this from Michelle Manchir on the Chicago Tribune website on October 15:

Rauner would not say whether he supports an assault weapons ban during a debate Tuesday night, instead saying that the “most important thing we can do with guns is to make sure we keep guns out of the hands of criminals and (the) mentally ill.”

On Wednesday, Rauner reiterated that point at a Little Village event where he sipped coffee with Latino clergy and leaders invited by his campaign.

“Pat Quinn has been a failure on crime. Keep the guns away from criminals and the mentally ill and then the real answer for crime is to make sure that the American Dream and opportunity is available to young people in our neighborhoods,” Rauner told reporters when asked whether not speaking out for an assault weapons ban could cost him votes in some segments of the electorate…

(Editor’s note: Bold added for emphasis)

Manchir concluded then-gubernatorial candidate Rauner was “back-and-forth on guns.”

A number of Illinois owners of so-called “assault weapons” might feel they’re safe from any ban with Bruce Rauner now at the helm of the state.

But if I had one of these military-pattern semi-automatic long guns in the state, I’m not so sure I would.

Then again, when you consider what (who) the alternative was on November 4…

By Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (www.survivalandprosperity.com)

Source:

Manchir, Michelle. “Quinn hits Rauner on gun control.” Chicago Tribune. 15 Oct. 2014. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/chi-quinn-hits-rauner-on-gun-control-20141015-story.html). 5 Nov. 2014.

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, November 5th, 2014 Crime, Firearms, Government, Gun Rights, Health No Comments

Cook County Tells Rest Of Illinois: Enact More Gun Control

Last Thursday, I blogged about a gun “control” referendum that was to appear on Cook County (Illinois) voter ballots on November 4. It said:

Shall the Illinois General Assembly enact the Illinois Public Safety Act (Senate Bill 3659) which would require universal background checks for firearm transfers and prohibit the sale and transfer of assault weapons, assault weapon attachments and high capacity ammunition magazines?

As of an hour ago, with 3,690 of 3,742 precincts reporting, the results so far show:

“Yes”: 1,024,722 votes (86.6%)

“No”: 159,028 votes (13.4%)

So there you have it. Cook County voters have spoken, and they overwhelmingly want more gun “control” for the entire state.

Too bad the referendum is non-binding. And it’s not like the rest of the “Land of Lincoln” gives a crap what “Crook County” thinks.

Still, I suspect Governor Quinn might bring it into play the next time a mass shooting or terrorist attack on American soil with a significant number of casualties occurs.

Oh, that’s right.

He gone.

By Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (www.survivalandprosperity.com)

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Oak Park And Cook County Referenda For More Gun ‘Control’ In Illinois, U.S.

Here’s the latest from “ground zero” for gun “control” in the United States. Voters in Cook County and Oak Park (Cook County, Illinois) will have the opportunity to vote on the following referenda in next week’s election. For Cook County voters:

Shall the Illinois General Assembly enact the Illinois Public Safety Act (Senate Bill 3659) which would require universal background checks for firearm transfers and prohibit the sale and transfer of assault weapons, assault weapon attachments and high capacity ammunition magazines?

And for Oak Park Township voters:

Shall the Federal Government enact legislation requiring universal background checks of criminal and mental health history records for all transfers of ownership or possession of firearms, including transfers which occur at gun shows, over the internet and privately, as a step toward preventing the ownership or possession of firearms by criminals and those with serious mental illnesses, and as a step toward preventing gun trafficking altogether?

Regarding that Cook County referendum- I understand its primary purpose (along with other referenda appearing on the November 4 ballot) is to energize Democrats to vote in this mid-term election.

As for that Oak Park referendum- Your guess is as good as mine. I’m going to go with making a statement, seeing that both referenda are non-binding.

I will say this though. After the next mass shooting or terrorist attack on American soil with a significant number of casualties, expect the results of both (should voters “approve” them) to be trotted out by various politicians pushing more gun “control.”

By Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (www.survivalandprosperity.com)

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Illinois Governor Pushes Ban On ‘Assault Weapons,’ ‘High-Capacity’ Ammo Magazines

As Democratic lawmakers can’t figure out why shootings and murders have erupted with renewed vigor in Chicago this summer (hints: bare-bones Chicago Police Department, gun-related laws already on the books but not enforced, and shooters not going to jail or for too short a stint), they’ve resorted to pushing more gun “control” laws on law-abiding constituents who have had nothing to do with the outbreak in violence. From a press release on the Illinois Government News Network website Sunday:

Governor Quinn Fights for Stronger Gun Laws Across Illinois
Congresswoman Kelly Joins Governor to Urge General Assembly to Pass Illinois Public Safety Act and Take a Stand Against the Violence

CHICAGO – Governor Pat Quinn, joined by Congresswoman Robin Kelly, today visited the site a recent fatal shooting in Chicago’s Morgan Park neighborhood to urge legislators to stand with families and communities and take action against gun violence. The Governor pushed passage of the Illinois Public Safety Act, legislation that would ban the sale or delivery of assault weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines in Illinois and require background checks for the transfer of guns. Today’s action is part of Governor Quinn’s agenda to make Illinois neighborhoods safer.

“The recent epidemic of violence in Chicago is unacceptable and we must join together to fight back,” Governor Quinn said. “Public safety is government’s foremost mission and Illinois should not wait any longer to act. There are too many victims of a war being waged on our streets, a war fueled in part by the availability of deadly, military-style assault weapons that have no purpose other than killing.

“We must work together to protect the lives of those we love and stop what’s happening in our communities. I urge the Illinois General Assembly to take a stand and pass this legislation that will save lives and protect communities.”

The Governor today was joined by Congresswoman Robin Kelly who recently released the Kelly Report on Gun Violence in America, the first-ever Congressional analysis of the nation’s gun violence epidemic that offers a blueprint for ending the crisis.

Senate Bill 3659 – the Illinois Public Safety Act – was introduced during the recent spring Legislative session by State Senator Dan Kotowski (D-Park Ridge) and supported by Governor Quinn. It bans the possession, delivery, sale and purchase of assault weapons, large capacity ammunition feeding devices such as magazines or clips, and .50 caliber rifles and cartridges in Illinois. Valid Firearms Owners Identification Card (FOID) holders who possess any of these devices at the time the law is enacted would be allowed to keep them, but could not transfer or sell them except to a family member. The legislation also requires background checks for the transfer of firearms except to a family member or at a gun show…

(Editor’s note: Bold added for emphasis)

Of course, the bad guys won’t obey what’s stipulated in the Illinois Public Safety Act if it becomes law. But here’s what’s really messed-up about the bans the Democrats are pushing.

According to Federal Bureau of Investigation statistics, so-called “assault weapons” and .50 caliber rifles are rarely used in crimes- particularly murders- around the state of Illinois.

From Table 20, “Murder by State, Types of Weapons, 2012” on the FBI’s “Crime in the U.S. 2012” web page (last year I could find pertinent data available for):

Illinois (“limited supplemental homicide data were received”)
Total murders (“Total number of murders for which supplemental homicide data were received”): 509
Total firearms: 439
• Handguns: 429
• Rifles: 4
• Shotguns: 2
• Firearms (type unknown): 4

439 firearm-related murders in Illinois in 2012. With a rifle (type unknown) definitely used in only 4 of those homicides.

Ban “assault weapons” and .50 caliber rifles. Yeah, that will solve the rampant violence.

Something tells me these Democratic politicians are trying to dupe voters into thinking they can end the ongoing carnage in this election year with such legislation.

Not going to happen, as the so-called Illinois Public Safety Act doesn’t even come close to getting to the root of the problem.

See “hints” above.

You can read that entire press release on the IGNN website here. And that 2012 FBI report table here.

By Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (www.survivalandprosperity.com)

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Survival And Prosperity
Est. 2010, Chicagoland, USA
Christopher E. Hill, Editor

Successor to Boom2Bust.com
"The Most Hated Blog On Wall Street"
(Memorial Day Weekend 2007-2010)

Happy Thanksgiving

PLEASE RATE this blog HERE,
and PLEASE VOTE for the blog below:



Thank you very, very much!
Advertising Disclosure here.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
Emergency Foods Local vendor (Forest Park, IL). Review coming soon.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
Legacy Food Storage Review coming soon
ANY CHARACTER HERE
MyPatriotSupply.com reviewed HERE
ANY CHARACTER HERE
Buy Gold And Silver Coins BGASC reviewed HERE
ANY CHARACTER HERE
BulletSafe reviewed HERE
ANY CHARACTER HERE
BullionVault BullionVault.com reviewed HERE
This project dedicated to St. Jude
Patron Saint of Desperate Situations

Categories

 

Archives