BATFE

Illinois Gun Dealers Under Legislative Attack

Here’s the latest anti-gun “end-around” being attempted in the state of Illinois. From the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action website Monday:

Last week, state Representative Kathleen Willis filed House Amendment 8 to House Bill 1016, another anti-gun amendment that seeks to over-regulate gun dealers and impose restrictions that could potentially force gun stores to close. House Bill 1016 has been sent to the House floor and could be considered at any time. Your NRA-ILA continues to outright oppose House Bill 1016 and any anti-gun amendment proposed. Please continue to contact your state Representative and politely urge them to OPPOSE House Bill 1016.

The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) licenses and closely monitors all FFLs and strictly enforces any violations of federal law. HB 1016 goes far beyond federal law in its mandatory regulations and red tape imposed at the state level that it would almost assuredly force the closure of most firearm dealers, and prevent prospective owners from opening new ones. This legislation seeks to create so many department divisions, anti-gun 5-member licensing boards, and licensing fees that dealers would be forced to close through oversight by anti-gun appointees or would be priced out of business…

The NRA-ILA offers opponents of HB 1016 a way to take action via their website here.

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

Share

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

Wednesday, November 30th, 2016 Firearms, Government, Gun Rights, Hunting, Legal, Self-Defense, Shooting Sports Comments Off on Illinois Gun Dealers Under Legislative Attack

Signs Of The Time, Part 85

Monday at lunch I finally got the chance to read my Sunday paper. From the Chicago Tribune “Perspective” section, in the part entitled, “Voice Of The People”:

Do not allow silencers

I cannot believe that there is serious consideration to permitting gun silencers to be used by gun owners in Illinois. Anyone with an ounce of common sense will recognize that guns with silencers are the weapon of choice for assassins, terrorists and murderers. What would happen if a nut entered a school and starting shooting randomly with such a weapon? No noise to alert the rest of the teachers and children?

Two things came to mind when I saw the above:

1. The author has quite an imagination.

2. Yet another argument leaning heavily on emotion (plea for “common sense” is often a giveaway), but devoid of facts.

Emotionally-driven arguments. Very much a sign of the time.

But now the facts on this subject.

An ABC7 Chicago I-Team Investigation recently looked into suppressors as legislation legalizing such devices has been introduced in the Illinois House (HB0433) and Senate (SB0803). Chuck Goudie reported on the ABC7 website on April 30:

Silencers used by criminals on TV and in movies; this is how most people know of the device.

Sponsors of a bill to make them legal in Illinois say the Hollywood interpretation is pure fiction…

A 2007 study found silencer use in crime is rare…

(Editor’s note: Bold added for emphasis)

“Guns with silencers are the weapon of choice for assassins, terrorists and murderers.”

Whatever you say.

And all those “assassins, terrorists and murderers” will be lining up for silencers if they’re legalized in Illinois, right?

As I blogged back on February 11:

Firearm suppressors (or sound suppressors and silencers as they’re also known) are highly-regulated in the United States. J. Guthrie reported on the Guns & Ammo website back on May 13, 2012:

If you lived in Scotland, they would be required for hunting. If you lived in Finland you could saunter down to the local gun shop and buy one over the counter—one more reason to like Finland. In the U.S., suppressors are regulated by the National Firearms Act and you have to first make sure they are legal in your state, fill out a federal form and send it, a couple of photos and some fingerprints into the BATFE for approval. Once approved—the process can take six or seven months—the BATFE sends you a little stamp and some paperwork and you can take possession of the suppressor from you dealer. There are legal considerations for interstate transportation and transferring the suppressor too…

Just like most felons don’t acquire their firearms lawfully, neither will they be obtaining suppressors legally- particularly in a highly-regulated environment like the one that currently exists.

Fears of a proliferation of legally-manufactured, lawfully-obtained suppressors among the bad guys in the “Land of Lincoln” are unfounded.

As for the “Voice Of The People” on these devices? I sure as hell hope it isn’t.

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

Source:

Goudie, Chuck. “Are Gun Silencers A Threat To Safety?” ABC 7. 30 Apr. 2015. (http://abc7chicago.com/news/are-gun-silencers-a-threat-to-safety/689952/). 18 May 2015.

Share

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

Tuesday, May 19th, 2015 Crime, Europe, Firearms, Gun Rights, Hunting, Propaganda, Signs Of The Time Comments Off on Signs Of The Time, Part 85

Proposed Ban Of Common AR-15 Rifle Ammunition Suspended

In case you haven’t heard the latest about that proposed ban on common M855 ball ammunition (or SS109 as it’s sometimes referred to) for the AR-15 semi-automatic rifle, the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action reported on their website yesterday:

Fairfax, Va. – The National Rifle Association (NRA) was instrumental in stalling the Obama Administration’s initial attempt to ban commonly used ammunition for the most popular rifle in America, the AR-15. The announcement that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) will suspend its proposed framework to ban M855 ammunition validates the NRA’s assertion that this effort was nothing more than a political maneuver to bypass Congress and impose gun control on the American people.

“Today’s announcement proves what we have said all along — this was 100% political. President Obama failed to pass gun control through Congress, so he tried to impose his political agenda through executive fiat. But every gun owner in America needs to understand Barack Obama’s hatred of the Second Amendment has not changed,” said Wayne La Pierre, Executive Vice President of the National Rifle Association.

Chris Cox, Executive Director of NRA-ILA criticized the dishonest campaign to ban this common ammunition: “The lies used to justify the ban were shameful. This proposal was never about law enforcement safety – it was about the Obama Administration’s desire to pander to billionaire Michael Bloomberg and his gun control groups. Since they haven’t been able to ban America’s most popular rifle, they are trying to ban the ammunition instead.”

Since the BATFE announced its plan to ban commonly used ammunition less than a month ago, the NRA rallied its five million members and tens of millions of supporters across the country in strong opposition. In addition, the NRA worked with congressional leaders in both the U.S. House and Senate to oppose this misguided proposal.

“The NRA would like to thank House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and House Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman John Culberson for leading the fight against this unconstitutional attack on our Second Amendment freedoms,” continued Cox. “This was a significant victory for our five million members and tens of millions of supporters across the country.

“Make no mistake, this fight is not over. We will remain vigilant and continue to fight against President Obama’s attempt to dismantle the Second Amendment,” concluded LaPierre.

To view the congressional letters to BATFE, along with the Member signatures, click here and here.

To view recent op-ed in the Daily Caller by Chris Cox on the proposed ammunition ban, click here.

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

Share

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

Wednesday, March 11th, 2015 Ammunition, Firearms, Government, Gun Rights, Hunting, Self-Defense, Shooting Sports Comments Off on Proposed Ban Of Common AR-15 Rifle Ammunition Suspended

Latest On Proposed Ban Of Common AR-15 Rifle Ammunition

Back on February 16, I blogged about the push by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) to ban common M855 ball ammunition (or SS109 as it’s sometimes referred to) for the AR-15, a semi-automatic rifle incredibly-popular with America’s shooting community. The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) charged on February 13:

In a move clearly intended by the Obama Administration to suppress the acquisition, ownership and use of AR-15s and other .223 caliber general purpose rifles, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives unexpectedly announced today that it intends to ban commonplace M855 ball ammunition as “armor piercing ammunition.” The decision continues Obama’s use of his executive authority to impose gun control restrictions and bypass Congress…

Earlier today, I tuned in to the Mrgunsngear Channel on YouTube.com, and noticed Mrgunsngear had uploaded a video this weekend in which he discussed the latest developments going on with the proposed ban of “the second-most common ammo sold for the AR-15”:


“Is M855/SS109 5.56 Banned Already?
**Edit—Update With Current Latest Info At End…”
YouTube Video

Personally, I suspect the proposed (current?) ban is simply more “backdoor” gun “control” coming out of the White House. Remember what I wrote back on May 31, 2011:

This report comes after a recent Washington Post piece that was published on April 11th by Jason Horowitz in which President Obama is alleged to have said his administration was working on gun control “under the radar.” Horowitz wrote:

On March 30, the 30th anniversary of the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan, Jim Brady, who sustained a debilitating head wound in the attack, and his wife, Sarah, came to Capitol Hill to push for a ban on the controversial “large magazines.” Brady, for whom the law requiring background checks on handgun purchasers is named, then met with White House press secretary Jay Carney. During the meeting, President Obama dropped in and, according to Sarah Brady, brought up the issue of gun control, “to fill us in that it was very much on his agenda,” she said.

“I just want you to know that we are working on it,” Brady recalled the president telling them. “We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”

In the meeting, she said, Obama discussed how records get into the system and what can be done about firearms retailers. Her husband specifically brought up the proposed ban on large magazine clips, and she noted that even former vice president Dick Cheney had suggested that some restrictions on the clips might make sense.

“He just laughed,” Sarah Brady said approvingly of the president. Both she and her husband, she emphasized, had absolute confidence that the president was committed to regulation.

(Editor’s note: Bold added for emphasis)

“We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”

That’s how this administration is going to roll, especially after those gun and ammunition magazine ban setbacks at the federal level post-Newtown.

That being said, gun “control” supporters will be ready to breach the “front door” with the next major mass shooting/casualty event. Readers may recall my February 18 post about the Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act (bans ammunition magazines accepting more than 10 rounds) already introduced in the U.S. House and Senate (H.R. 752 and S. 407, respectively).

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

Share

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

Monday, March 9th, 2015 Ammunition, Crime, Essential Reading, Firearms, Government, Gun Rights, Hunting, Main Street, Self-Defense, Shooting Sports Comments Off on Latest On Proposed Ban Of Common AR-15 Rifle Ammunition

NRA: BATFE To Ban Common AR-15 Ammo

It was only a matter of time. Several weeks into the new year, and the gun “control” crowd is off-and-running again. There’s been a number of developments lately, but here’s one that seems to be really worrying American gun owners- particularly those possessing the popular AR-15 rifle. From the website of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislation Action (NRA-ILA) this past Friday:

In a move clearly intended by the Obama Administration to suppress the acquisition, ownership and use of AR-15s and other .223 caliber general purpose rifles, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives unexpectedly announced today that it intends to ban commonplace M855 ball ammunition as “armor piercing ammunition.” The decision continues Obama’s use of his executive authority to impose gun control restrictions and bypass Congress.

It isn’t even the third week of February, and the BATFE has already taken three major executive actions on gun control. First, it was a major change to what activities constitute regulated “manufacturing” of firearms. Next, BATFE reversed a less than year old position on firing a shouldered “pistol.” Now, BATFE has released a “Framework for Determining Whether Certain Projectiles are ‘Primarily Intended for Sporting Purposes’ Within the Meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(c)”, which would eliminate M855’s exemption to the armor piercing ammunition prohibition and make future exemptions nearly impossible.

By way of background, federal law imposed in 1986 prohibits the manufacture, importation, and sale by licensed manufacturers or importers, but not possession, of “a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely . . . from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium.” Because there are handguns capable of firing M855, it “may be used in a handgun.” It does not, however, have a core made of the metals listed in the law; rather, it has a traditional lead core with a steel tip, and therefore should never have been considered “armor piercing.” Nonetheless, BATFE previously declared M855 to be “armor piercing ammunition,” but granted it an exemption as a projectile “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes.”

Now, however, BATFE says that it will henceforth grant the “sporting purposes” exception to only two categories of projectiles:

Category I: .22 Caliber Projectiles

A .22 caliber projectile that otherwise would be classified as armor piercing ammunition under 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(B) will be considered to be “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes” under section 921(a)(17)(C) if the projectile weighs 40 grains or less AND is loaded into a rimfire cartridge.

Category II: All Other Caliber Projectiles

Except as provided in Category I (.22 caliber rimfire), projectiles that otherwise would be classified as armor piercing ammunition will be presumed to be “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes” under section 921(a)(17)(C) if the projectile is loaded into a cartridge for which the only handgun that is readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade is a single shot handgun. ATF nevertheless retains the discretion to deny any application for a “sporting purposes” exemption if substantial evidence exists that the ammunition is not primarily intended for such purposes.

BATFE is accepting comments until March 16, 2015 on this indefensible attempt to disrupt ammunition for the most popular rifle in America. Check back early next week for a more in-depth analysis of this “framework” and details on how you can submit comments.

How to comment – from the BATFE

ATF will carefully consider all comments, as appropriate, received on or before March 16, 2015, and will give comments received after that date the same consideration if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given except as to comments received on or before March 16, 2015. ATF will not acknowledge receipt of comments. Submit comments in any of three ways (but do not submit the same comments multiple times or by more than one method):

ATF email: APAComments@atf.gov

Fax: (202) 648-9741.

Mail: Denise Brown, Mailstop 6N-602, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, 99 New York Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20226: ATTN: AP Ammo Comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denise Brown, Enforcement Programs and Services, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice, 99 New York Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20226; telephone: (202) 648-7070.

Permission has been granted by the NRA-ILA to reproduce the above.


“BATF to ban M855/SS109 ammo”
YouTube Video

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

Share

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

Monday, February 16th, 2015 Ammunition, Government, Gun Rights, Hunting, Political Parties, Self-Defense, Shooting Sports Comments Off on NRA: BATFE To Ban Common AR-15 Ammo

Illinois Bill Would Legalize Firearm Suppressor Use

“By definition, the primary role of a suppressor is to reduce the overall sound signature of the host firearm to hearing safe levels. They do so by trapping the expanding gasses at the muzzle and allowing them to slowly cool, in a similar fashion to car mufflers. Their muffling capabilities intrinsically make them a hearing protection device for both the shooter and those around them.”

-American Suppressor Association website

Illinois firearm owners might be interested in the following. Brian Brueggemann reported on the Belleville News-Democrat website last Friday:

Hunters and other shooting enthusiasts would be allowed to have silencers on their guns under a bill filed in the Illinois legislature.

The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Brandon Phelps, D-Harrisburg, said gun owners want silencers for a simple reason: to avoid hearing loss.

“There are a lot of veterans, a lot of hunters and shooters, who have suffered hearing loss,” Phelps said.

Phelps acknowledged that gun opponents are likely to challenge the bill.

“I’m used to that. They said that about concealed-carry — they said everybody was going to be running around shooting each other, like the wild west,” Phelps said. “That’s the movies.”

Firearm suppressors (or sound suppressors and silencers as they’re also known) are highly-regulated in the United States. J. Guthrie reported on the Guns & Ammo website back on May 13, 2012:

If you lived in Scotland, they would be required for hunting. If you lived in Finland you could saunter down to the local gun shop and buy one over the counter—one more reason to like Finland. In the U.S., suppressors are regulated by the National Firearms Act and you have to first make sure they are legal in your state, fill out a federal form and send it, a couple of photos and some fingerprints into the BATFE for approval. Once approved—the process can take six or seven months—the BATFE sends you a little stamp and some paperwork and you can take possession of the suppressor from you dealer. There are legal considerations for interstate transportation and transferring the suppressor too…

The suppressor legislation sponsored by Phelps is Illinois House Bill 433 (you can check on its status here). State Senator Bill Haine (D-Alton) has filed the same bill in the Senate.

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

Sources:

Brueggemann, Brian. “Bill would allow Illinois gun owners to use silencers.” Belleville News-Democrat. 6 Feb. 2015. (http://www.bnd.com/2015/02/06/3649514_bill-would-allow-illinois-gun.html?rh=1). 11 Feb. 2015.

Guthrie, J. “G&A Basics: How Suppressors Work.” Guns & Ammo. 13 May 2012. (http://www.gunsandammo.com/gear-accessories/suppressors/ga-basics-how-suppressors-work/). 11 Feb. 2015.

Share

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

Wednesday, February 11th, 2015 Firearms, Gun Rights, Health, Hunting, Legal, Shooting Sports Comments Off on Illinois Bill Would Legalize Firearm Suppressor Use

White House ‘Fact Sheet’ On New Gun ‘Control’ Initiatives

“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

-Rahm Emanuel, then-chief of staff for then-President-elect Barack Obama, Wall Street Journal CEO Council, November 19, 2008

While many Americans are distracted by the possibility of American military intervention in Syria, U.S. President Barack Obama has announced new gun “control” initiatives. From the White House website today:

FACT SHEET: New Executive Actions to Reduce Gun Violence

Today, the Obama administration announced two new common-sense executive actions to keep the most dangerous firearms out of the wrong hands and ban almost all re-imports of military surplus firearms to private entities. These executive actions build on the 23 executive actions that the Vice President recommended as part of the comprehensive gun violence reduction plan and the President unveiled on January 16, 2013.

Even as Congress fails to act on common-sense proposals, like expanding criminal background checks and making gun trafficking a federal crime, the President and Vice President remain committed to using all the tools in their power to make progress toward reducing gun violence.

Building on the 23 Executive Actions the President and Vice President Unveiled Last January

• Last December, the President asked the Vice President to develop a series of recommendations to reduce gun violence. On January 16, 2013, they released these proposals, including 23 executive actions. With the first Senate confirmation of an ATF Director on July 31, 2013, the Administration has completed or made significant progress on 22 of the 23 executive actions. The new executive actions unveiled today build on this successful effort.

Closing a Loophole to Keep Some of the Most Dangerous Guns Out of the Wrong Hands

• Current law places special restrictions on many of the most dangerous weapons, such as machine guns and short-barreled shotguns. These weapons must be registered, and in order to lawfully possess them, a prospective buyer must undergo a fingerprint-based background check.
• However, felons, domestic abusers, and others prohibited from having guns can easily evade the required background check and gain access to machine guns or other particularly dangerous weapons by registering the weapon to a trust or corporation. At present, when the weapon is registered to a trust or corporation, no background check is run. ATF reports that last year alone, it received more than 39,000 requests for transfers of these restricted firearms to trusts or corporations.
• Today, ATF is issuing a new proposed regulation to close this loophole. The proposed rule requires individuals associated with trusts or corporations that acquire these types of weapons to undergo background checks, just as these individuals would if the weapons were registered to them individually. By closing this loophole, the regulation will ensure that machine guns and other particularly dangerous weapons do not end up in the wrong hands.

Keeping Surplus Military Weapons Off Our Streets

• When the United States provides military firearms to its allies, either as direct commercial sales or through the foreign military sales or military assistance programs, those firearms may not be imported back into the United States without U.S. government approval. Since 2005, the U.S. Government has authorized requests to reimport more than 250,000 of these firearms.
• Today, the Administration is announcing a new policy of denying requests to bring military-grade firearms back into the United States to private entities, with only a few exceptions such as for museums. This new policy will help keep military-grade firearms off our streets.

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

Source:

“FACT SHEET: New Executive Actions to Reduce Gun Violence.” The White House. 29 Aug. 2013. (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/08/29/fact-sheet-new-executive-actions-reduce-gun-violence). 29 Aug. 2013.

Share

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

Thursday, August 29th, 2013 Firearms, Government, Gun Rights, Hunting, Military, Political Parties, Self-Defense, Shooting Sports Comments Off on White House ‘Fact Sheet’ On New Gun ‘Control’ Initiatives

Questionable Ipsos/Reuters Poll About Gun Rights And Regulations

Questions abound concerning an Ipsos poll on gun rights and regulations that was recently conducted for Thomson Reuters. From the Ipsos press release this morning:

Washington, DC – These are findings from an Ipsos poll conducted for Thomson Reuters from April 9th-12th, 2012 about gun rules and regulations.

• The NRA is a reasonably popular organization. Unsurprisingly, favorability towards the NRA is stronger among Republicans but a majority of Democrats have a favorable attitude towards the organization.
• As comparison points, we also asked about the NAACP, ACLU and AARP. AARP has the strongest favorability rates of the four organizations. Favorability towards the ACLU and NAACP are both strongly influenced by partisan ID.
• Americans are broadly supportive of restrictions or regulations on gun ownership.
• Only 6% say there should be no or very few restrictions on gun ownership.
• 62% oppose allowing people to bring a firearm into a church, workplace or retail establishment.
• 91% support background checks for gun purchasers.
• 69% support limiting the number of guns a person could purchase in a given time frame.
• 74% support laws limiting the sale of automatic weapons.
• However, Americans are also broadly supportive of a number of pro-gun laws including:
• Majorities support concealed carry laws and allowing the use of deadly force, both in homes and public places.
• Framing this discussion, Americans remain concerned with crime and are concerned about what is to be done about it.
• Almost half of Americans think crime rates are going up in their communities.
• Significant majorities do not think police can stop all crime from happening
• As a consequence, large majorities believe regular people need to step up to prevent crimes (leading to the Trayvon Martin incident).

I’m surprised the poll asked about automatic weapons (i.e. machine guns, according to actual survey question) as opposed to semi-automatic firearms. Machine guns are already highly restricted for law-abiding citizens. I wrote back on June 6, 2011:

According to the well-known firearms resource website GunCite.com, which focuses on a “comprehensive presentation of gun control and Second Amendment issues; analysis of firearms statistics, research, and gun control policies”:

It has been unlawful since 1934 (The National Firearms Act) for civilians to own machine guns without special permission from the U.S. Treasury Department . Machine guns are subject to a $200 tax every time their ownership changes from one federally registered owner to another, and each new weapon is subject to a manufacturing tax when it is made, and it must be registered with the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in its National Firearms Registry.

To become a registered owner, a complete FBI background investigation is conducted, checking for any criminal history or tendencies toward violence, and an application must be submitted to the ATF including two sets of fingerprints, a recent photo, a sworn affidavit that transfer of the NFA firearm is of “reasonable necessity,” and that sale to and possession of the weapon by the applicant “would be consistent with public safety.” The application form also requires the signature of a chief law enforcement officer with jurisdiction in the applicant’s residence.

Since the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act of May 19, 1986, ownership of newly manufactured machine guns has been prohibited to civilians. Machine guns which were manufactured prior to the Act’s passage are regulated under the National Firearms Act, but those manufactured after the ban cannot ordinarily be sold to or owned by civilians.

(Editor’s note: Italics added for emphasis)

GunCite also adds:

Twenty-five states have no further restrictions on civilian ownership of machine guns (some require registration with the state) than what is required by federal law. Other states have either placed further restrictions or outlawed operable machine guns to civilians entirely.

As existing laws mean automatic firearms are already highly-regulated for law-abiding citizens, and it’s semi-automatic guns (one trigger pull, one shot only) that are presently under attack by gun “control” supporters, in a poll about gun rights/regulation one would reasonably expect a question about limiting firearm sales to be about semi-automatics rather than machine guns.

In addition, note the following excerpt from the press release:

As a consequence, large majorities believe regular people need to step up to prevent crimes (leading to the Trayvon Martin incident)

(Editor’s note: Italics added for emphasis)

Now, the original poll question:

Regular people need to step up to help prevent crime from happening

So where did “(leading to the Trayvon Martin incident)” come from?

Scratching my head about this poll.

You can read the entire press release and access the survey data on the Ipsos website here.

Share

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

Friday, April 13th, 2012 Crime, Firearms, Gun Rights, Main Street, Political Parties, Public Safety, Self-Defense Comments Off on Questionable Ipsos/Reuters Poll About Gun Rights And Regulations

Watch The 26th Annual Gun Rights Policy Conference

The other weekend, the 26th Annual Gun Rights Policy Conference (GRPC 2011) was held around my neck of the woods at the Hyatt Regency Chicago O’Hare hotel from September 23 to 25. Regrettably, I caught some bug the night before and was more-or-less bedridden for the duration of the conference.

If you missed the event like me but wanted to be there, I’ve got some great news. You can watch both days (Friday was just registration/reception) of the Gun Rights Policy Conference on the Internet (hat tip Massad Ayoob and his Massad Ayoob on Guns blog on the Backwoods Home Magazine website).

Here’s some background from the Second Amendment Foundation website:

This year we’ll take a look at critical issues such as: city gun bans, “smart” guns, concealed carry, federal legislation, BATFE policies, legal actions, gun show regulation, state and local activity. We’ll also review the 2010 elections, discuss the 2012 Presidential race and analyze Right to Keep and Bear Arms court cases.

You can download the agenda for the conference from the SAF site here (.pdf file)

And last but not least, you can watch GRPC 2011 below, courtesy of Mark Vanderberg and Doc Wesson of the Gun Rights Radio Network:

Day 1

Day 2

Enjoy!

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, October 4th, 2011 Firearms, Government, Gun Rights, Legal, Self-Defense Comments Off on Watch The 26th Annual Gun Rights Policy Conference

NRA Responds To Obama’s Proposed Gun ‘Reforms’

As I noted Monday, this past weekend President Barack Obama penned an opinion piece in the Arizona Daily Star that argued for a number of gun “reforms.” The National Rifle Association responded to the President in a letter delivered to the White House on March 14. Here’s their reply:

March 14, 2011

President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. President:

We read your editorial submission to the Arizona Star. However, to focus a national dialogue on guns – and not criminals or mental health issues – misses the point entirely. Americans are not afraid of gun ownership. To the contrary, they overwhelmingly support the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms. The primary reason why tens of millions of Americans own firearms is that they fear violent criminals roaming the streets undeterred.

We agree with your assertion that “Americans by and large rightly refrained from finger-pointing” in light of the shooting in Tucson. In truth, the professional corps of gun control lobbyists moved with lightning speed to exploit the tragedy. These included the Violence Policy Center (“In the wake of these kind of incidents, the trick is to move quickly”), the Brady Campaign (“Gabrielle Giffords Shooting ‘Inevitable'”) and Mayors Against Illegal Guns-MAIG (“Bloomberg, Mayors Outline Steps to Help Prevent Another Tucson Shooting”). Your article contains talking points nearly identical to the ones circulated by MAIG for weeks in pursuit of its longstanding gun control agenda. In contrast, it was the National Rifle Association that avoided “playing politics with other people’s pain” with our consistent response that only thoughts and prayers for the victims and their families were appropriate in the immediate aftermath.

We also agree with your statement that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. Your record as a public official, however, is anything but supportive of the rights of law-abiding gun owners. In fact, when Congress had an opportunity to voice its support for the basic right of lawful Americans to own firearms, you refused to join a bipartisan majority of more than 300 of your colleagues in signing the congressional amicus brief to the Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller. In addition, you previously stated (and have never retracted) your support for both Washington, D.C.’s and Chicago’s handgun and self-defense bans that the Court rightfully struck down in Heller and McDonald v. Chicago. Further, you surrounded yourself with advisors who have advocated against the Second Amendment for years (Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and Rahm Emanuel, to name just a few) and you nominated Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan to the U.S. Supreme Court, one of whom has already attempted to eliminate the Second Amendment right entirely. More recently, you selected Andrew Traver to head the BATFE, despite his long-standing association with groups that support onerous new restrictions on our rights.

If you do in fact believe the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right, we suggest you demonstrate that in your policies and those of your Administration, which you have not done to date. Simply saying that you support the right to keep and bear arms is mere lip service if not put into action.

The government owes its citizens its most vigorous efforts to enforce penalties against those who violate our existing laws. The NRA has members proudly serving in law enforcement agencies at every level. Rank and file law enforcement want to arrest bad people – not harass law-abiding gun owners and retailers.

As for enforcing the laws on the books, we strongly suggest you enforce those that actually take violent criminals off the streets. To start, we urge you to contact every U.S. Attorney and ask them to bring at least ten cases per month against drug dealers, gang members and other violent felons caught illegally possessing firearms. By prosecuting these criminals in federal court – rather than state court – strong sentencing guidelines would apply and charges would not be plea-bargained or dismissed, nor would criminals be released after serving only a fraction of their sentences. This simple directive would result in roughly 12,000 violent criminals being taken off the streets every year. Surely you agree that this would be a good first step.

Unfortunately, your Administration is currently under a cloud for allegedly encouraging violations of federal law. We suggest that you bring an immediate stop to BATFE’s “Fast and Furious” operation, in which an unknown number of illegal firearm transactions were detected – and then encouraged to fruition by your BATFE, which allegedly decided to let thousands of firearms “walk” across the border and into the hands of murderous drug cartels. One federal officer has recently been killed and no one can predict what mayhem will still ensue. Despite the protests of gun dealers who wished to terminate these transactions, your Administration reportedly encouraged violations of federal firearms laws – and undermined the firearm industry’s concerted efforts to deter straw purchases through the “Don’t Lie for the Other Guy” program. We hope you agree with our belief that this burgeoning scandal merits a full and independent investigation.

There are additional steps you can take to prevent tragic events such as the Tucson shooting from occurring in the future. One of these is to call on the national news media to refrain from giving deranged criminals minute-by-minute coverage of their heinous acts, which only serves to encourage copycat behavior. If media outlets won’t show a fan running onto the field during a baseball game because they don’t want to encourage that behavior by others – surely they can listen to law enforcement experts and refuse to air the photographs, video messages, or Facebook postings of madmen and murderers.

Another step is to encourage people to report red flags when they see them. In the case of Tucson, a man clearly bent on violence was not reported to the proper authorities by those who had good reason to believe he had serious mental problems. That’s not a deficiency in our gun laws, it’s a deficiency in our mental health system – and should be treated as such.

In closing, we agree that gun owners in America are highly responsible. This is in large part due to the NRA’s 140 years of dedication to promoting safe and responsible gun ownership, an effort on which we take a back seat to no one. We welcome any serious discussion on policies that focus on prosecuting criminals and fixing deficiencies in the mental health system. Any proposals to the contrary are not a legitimate approach to the issue.

Sincerely,

Wayne LaPierre
Executive Vice President National Rifle Association

Chris W. Cox
Executive Director
NRA-ILA

You can read a .pdf copy of the actual letter on the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action website here.

Share

Tags: , , , ,

Wednesday, March 16th, 2011 Crime, Firearms, Government, Gun Rights, Legal, Public Safety, Self-Defense Comments Off on NRA Responds To Obama’s Proposed Gun ‘Reforms’
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)

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



Thank you very, very much!
Advertising Disclosure here. Ad captions last reviewed/updated 4/18/17.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
Freeze Dried Food SPRING ADDITIONAL 15% DISCOUNT (promo code- home page); Free Gift w/ Purchase; Free Shipping (domestic orders). Review coming soon.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
Family-Owned & Operated in Chicago Suburbs! SAVE 10% OFF ALL ITEMS (promo code- home page); Free Shipping (U.S. orders) & Returns. Review coming soon.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
Buy Gold And Silver Coins BACK-DATED SILVER & GOLD EAGLE SALE!; Secondary Market Silver Coin/Bar Sale (1 oz. coins, 10 oz., & 100 oz. bars); 90% Silver U.S. Dimes & Quarters Sale; U.S./World Gold Bullion Coins/Bars also on sale; Free Shipping on U.S. orders $99 and up (only $5.95 below $99!). BGASC reviewed HERE.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
BullionVault World's Largest Online Investment Gold Service taking care of $2 billion for over 65,000 users from 175 countries. BullionVault.com reviewed HERE.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
SAVE 20% OFF ALL CASE PACKS!; BUY 3-MONTH SUPPLY GET BREAKFAST KIT FREE!; Big Savings on "Deal Of The Day" page; Free Shipping on orders over $79. MyPatriotSupply.com reviewed HERE.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
bullet proof vestsWorld's First Bulletproof Baseball Cap only $129; Bulletproof Ceramic Plate (NIJ Level III Stand-Alone) only $169; Bulletproof Backpack/Messenger Bag Panel only $99. BulletSafe reviewed HERE.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
Survival Titles Save 20% SAVE 35% ON SURVIVAL TITLES! (promo code- home page); Discontinued Title Sale- Savings up to 75% Off Original Price. Paladin Press reviewed HERE.
ANY CHARACTER HERE
This project dedicated to St. Jude
Patron Saint of Desperate Situations



happyToSurvive

Categories

 

Archives

RSS Chris Hill’s Other Blog: Offshore Safe Deposit Boxes

  • Degussa Singapore Launches YouTube Channel
    It’s been some time since I last blogged about the first Asian branch of Degussa, a leading international player in the precious metals world. Degussa Singapore opened its doors at 22 Orchard Road in October 2015 and operates a safe deposit box service in addition to selling bullion bars, coins, and precious gifts. Yesterday I […]
  • Nomad Capitalist’s 5 Best Countries For Offshore Gold Storage
    Research related to Monday’s post about precious metals storage in Singapore led me to a piece published last fall by Andrew Henderson over on the Nomad Capitalist website. I’ve mentioned Andrew and his company before on the blog, but for those readers not familiar with them, Henderson is the founder and managing partner of Hong […]
  • Singapore’s ‘Strong’ Precious Metals Storage Infrastructure Anchors Trading Hub Push
    It’s no secret that Singapore has become a global leader in the storage and safekeeping of private wealth. In fact, the last mention of the Southeast Asian city-state on this blog concerned a December 12, 2016, article on the The Business Times (Singapore) website which noted privately-owned precious metals from around the world are finding […]
  • List Of Offshore Private Vaults Updated
    The list of private, non-bank vaults outside the United States (offering safe deposit boxes/lockers at a minimum) located on this blog’s sister site- Offshore Private Vaults- was recently updated. Safe deposit facilities now open for business have been added under the following countries: -Hong Kong (Royal England Safe Deposit Box Ltd.) -Thailand (Magna Carta Law […]
  • Next Degussa Numis Day To Take Place May 4, 5
    Degussa, a leading international player in the precious metals world which also offers safe deposit boxes (for customers) at branches in Germany, Singapore, Spain, and Switzerland, has just posted information about their next Numis Day (first blogged about here) at their Geneva and Zurich showrooms. From their website: The Next Numis Day We appreciate and […]