One Kroger store manager in Ohio wasn’t about to be intimidated by Moms Demand Action.
One Kroger store manager in Ohio wasn’t about to be intimidated by Moms Demand Action.
Reacting to a photograph of a man standing at a checkout with a handgun holstered upon his hip, mom-who-demands-action Joyce Ward asks, â€śWhy werenâ€™t the police called immediately?â€ť And â€śwhy,â€ť Ward continues, â€śwasnâ€™t he shot by the police for having a weaponâ€ť? Fellow poster Lisa McLogan Shaheen has a similar inquiry, wondering, â€śWhy hasnâ€™t someone called 911 so the cops can gun him down?â€ť Others go a little further, proposing that they might help their cause along if they were actively to bring about an altercation. â€śEvery time I see someone with a gun in a store I will call 911,â€ť Jennifer Decker vows, â€śtheyâ€™ll get tired of that right quick!!!â€ť Even that plan is too limited for Ann Marie. â€śJust call the police every time you see someone with one,â€ť she counsels, â€śthe police will get sick of it eventually or have a run in with one of these clowns and then things will change.â€ť
[ . . . ]
There is no kind way of putting this, Iâ€™m afraid: Ultimately, what we are seeing on the fringes of the gun-control movement is the suggestion that American citizens be â€śSWATtedâ€ť for their choices â€” that, in the name of a political disagreement, one party calls the cops on another and, under false pretenses, puts them in harmâ€™s way. Is this reconcilable with â€ścommon senseâ€ť change?
It is always the liberals who advocate for the death of ideological opponents.
Mayors against gun violence. Moms against gun violence. French Poodles against gun violence. The list is endless. Nope, not quite:
A New York City district attorney has founded a coalition of 23 prosecutors from around the country aimed at combating gun violence nationwide.
The group, Prosecutors Against Gun Violence, is a non-partisan and independent coalition that will work on policy and prosecutorial solutions to gun violence.
And, of course, it always makes it seem (to the media) as if there are groups that support gun violence. Actually, there are; street gangs. But they’re the ones least likely to do serious jail time.
A gun control group in Nevada is running a signature drive to force a ballot initiative with the goal to require background checks on all gun sales, including private ones. From the Reno Gazette-Journal:
The source links given by Nevadans for Background Checks do not lead to any independent research on gun background checks, but lead solely back to statements by a gun-control advocacy group that are unsupported and ignore conflicting evidence. That said, one of the claims â€” that â€śmillionsâ€ť of guns were sold in 2012 without background checks â€” is likely true.
Stricter gun background checks may be helpful in reducing gun violence. They may not. But using vague source citations and flawed evidence does not help make oneâ€™s case.
Truth meter: 3 (out of 10)
Read the whole thing because there’s a pretty good fisking given to most of the claims by Nevadans for Background Checks.
They’re finally discovering that so-called “assault weapons” are not the problem:
While many gun control groups still officially support the assault weapons ban â€” “we haven’t abandoned the issue,” as Watts said â€” they’re no longer actively fighting for it.
“There’s certainly a lot of public sentiment around high capacity magazines and assault weapons,” Dan Gross, the president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said in an interview this summer. “It’s easy to understand why people feel so passionate about it.”
But, he said, “when you look at this issue in terms of the greatest opportunity to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people and prevent gun violence, background checks are a bigger opportunity to do that.”
Bloomberg’s umbrella group, Everytown for Gun Safety, has also deemphasized an assault weapons ban. A 10-question survey the group gave to federal candidates to measure their stances on gun policy did not even ask about a ban.
[ . . . ]
While assault weapons do appear to be used more frequently in mass shootings, like the ones in Newtown and Aurora, Colorado, such shootings are themselves rare events that are only responsible for a tiny fraction of gun homicides each year. The category of guns that are used in the majority of gun murders are handguns.
Much more at the link.
Not that I know what the fuck a “Panera Bread” is, but now I guess I never will.
I mentioned a few weeks ago that Kroger was — for the moment — standing firm in following state laws about whether shoppers could open or conceal carry in their stores. Let’s see how they stand up to this:
Moms Demand Action is launching its first ad campaign against a corporate gun policy.
The group, a campaign of former New York City Mayor Michael Bloombergâ€™s Everytown for Gun Safety, is running print and digital â€śhomepage takeoverâ€ť ads in half-a-dozen newspapers criticizing the gun policy at grocery retail chain the Kroger Co. The chain defers to state and local laws for its policy on whether customers may carry guns in its stores.
The six-figure Moms Demand Action campaign will feature print and digital ads in USA Today, the Cincinnati Enquirer, Columbus Dispatch, Detroit Free Press, Detroit News and Houston Chronicle. Print-only ads will run in the Tennessean.
I’m not sure how effective those ads will be. Tennessee? Texas? People enjoy their gun rights in states like that. Detroit? The police chief there is URGING residents to arm themselves!
At NRO, Frank Miniter examines what the billionaires contributing to gun control groups hope to accomplish, and the playbook they’re using:
In a section labeled â€śOverall Messaging Guidance,â€ť the guide gives its number-one â€śKey Messaging Principleâ€ť: â€śAlways focus on emotional and value-driven arguments about gun violence, not the political food fight in Washington or wonky statistics.â€ť It further explains this strategy by saying, â€śItâ€™s critical that you ground your messaging around gun violence in prevention by making that emotional connection.â€ť Its second key principle is: â€śTell stories with images and feelings.â€ť The guide says, â€śOur first task is to draw a vivid portrait and make an emotional connection. We should rely on emotionally powerful language, feelings and images to bring home the terrible impact of gun violence.â€ť They realize theyâ€™ve lost the rational and empirical debates about what really stops gun violence and instead want the debate enflamed by emotion.
That’s ever the way, of course; you can’t win the argument with rational facts, so legislate by emotions.
They did so in a letter, stating that they simply follow or allow what local and state law allows. I really do believe that concealed carry is the way to go. Not everyone agrees with me, and for them:
So far, Kroger seems to being doing right by its customers. They have yet to cave to Bloomyâ€™s intimidation tactics. Kroger has done exactly what a non-partisan business should do: They told a bunch of activist liberals that if guns are that big of a problem, the appropriate action should be taken with the city council, state legislature, or federal lawmakers. Not their local purveyor of milk and produce.
The key there is, “so far,” since we’ve seen other large chains cave after a time.
Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen has donated $500,000 to a campaign seeking to expand background checks on gun sales in Washington state.
His Aug. 11 donation to Initiative 594 was made public when it was posted on the stateâ€™s Public Disclosure Commission website Monday afternoon. Campaign manager Zach Silk said the campaign is grateful for Allenâ€™s support.
Other big names have made large donations to the campaign, including former Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and his wife, Connie, who have given $580,000, and venture capitalist Nick Hanauer, who has given nearly $400,000 and has pledged an additional $530,000.
Initiative 594 would require an NICS instant background check be performed for any sale or transfer of a firearm except between family members.
I’m not against requiring background checks per se, but there needs to be some other exceptions to laws such as this. For instance, if friends are at the range, or are hunting, and one wants to tryout another’s gun, it’s ludicrous to require that they stop by a gun store or police station and (besides paying money) undergo a background check. Further, there ought to be a “known to me” exemption for sales between friends. I guess it all depends on how these proposed laws define the word, “transfer.”
From a surprisingly even-handed piece from NBC News, the jury is still out:
With new groups, a revamped strategy, more money and unprecedented collaboration, the gun control movement has made headway. Organizations like Everytown for Gun Safety, the group backed by former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, say they are moving the needle.
â€śNow, for the first time in our countryâ€™s history, there is a well-financed and formidable force positioned to take on the Washington gun lobby,â€ť said Shannon Watts, founder of gun control group Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, speaking at an Everytown event on Capitol Hill in May.
Whether that is possible remains to be seen.
In 2012, according to the article, pro-gun groups raised $285 million dollars more than anti-gun groups. Now, with cash infusions from the likes of former NYC Mayor Michael Blowhard, as well as Gabby Gifford’s PAC, that disparity is shrinking.
A gun-control group committed to universal background checks was the third-largest spender on lobbyists at the Vermont statehouse this quarter, outspending many of the biggest corporate interests in the Green Mountain State.
Gun Sense Vermont, a recently formed group that bills itself as an â€śindependent, grass-roots organization started by Vermonters,â€ť spent $39,000 for lobbyists for the quarter ending July 25, according to records kept by the Secretary of Stateâ€™s Office.
Not bad for a group claiming only 200 or so members. Obviously the money is coming from Bloomberg or someone like him. Oh, and — of course — Gun Sense Vermont is headed by a flatlander from Connecticut.
The Second Amendment: A Biography, by Michael Waldman, will no doubt be received with great favor by the liberal media. A reviewer, in this Providence Journal article, makes clear that he himself favors gun control. Nonetheless, he does point out:
Waldmanâ€™s case for gun regulation, then, is well-presented, but would have been much stronger had he avoided reducing gun supporters to sloppy stereotypes, and, worse, not giving their viewpoint the slightest credence. While rightfully deriding the National Rifle Association for abandoning its traditional moderation to become the dystopia-mongering jingo troupe of today, he largely stops there, likely deliberately. If his point that gun rights must be refracted through the problems of this century, not the 18th, is well-taken, that will entail looking beneath his simplified â€śboys with toysâ€ť summation of gun-rights advocates to acknowledge that beneath the â€śFrom-My-Cold-Dead-Handsâ€ť charades their side has a sound logic of its own. The two sidesâ€™ positions may be mutually exclusive, but such are the quandaries of democracy.
Recently, a Vermont woman was released from a psychiatric facility following a voluntary commitment. The next day she purchased a handgun and the day after that, she killed herself. Naturally, some gun control groups are trying to capitalize on the incident:
Although Vermont lawmakers say theyâ€™re willing to talk about waiting periods, the issue doesnâ€™t appear to be a high priority. More attention, they said, appears to be going toward background checks.
Most acts of violence, especially suicide, are associated with impulsiveness, said Lindsey Zwicker, a staff attorney for the [Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence]. A waiting period is meant to curb those acts.
However, Zwicker said, she is not aware of any hard evidence that waiting periods actually reduce violence or suicides.
â€śWith a mandated waiting period, it would at least provide a cooling-off period, provide an opportunity for someone to seek help, allow them to reconsider, but we canâ€™t say for sure what effect it would have,â€ť Zwicker said.
So, there’s no hard evidence, but let’s pass a law anyway. In the meantime, someone who might fear for their life — from an abusive ex-spouse for instance — would not be able to obtain the ready means to protect themselves during that same waiting period.
A student being stalked by a madman is refused permission to CCW. From Fox News:
Woolrich says she inquired about obtaining a permit to carry a concealed weapon in California and learned that the minimum age to get one is 21, though exceptions can be made under special circumstances. She says the Sheriffâ€™s Licensing Division told her she could qualify, and she learned the same exception can be granted in New Hampshire, where Dartmouth is located.
But Dartmouth administrators told her she was â€śabsolutely notâ€ť allowed to carry a weapon on campus. She says she tried to plead her case and was told to speak with several campus officials, all of whom provided little to no help.
â€śThereâ€™s no option. Thereâ€™s no one to go to. They donâ€™t want to hear my case,â€ť she said.
Many more details at the link.
Gun-control advocates are learning the downside of getting their way. Recently, a federal judge struck down the District of Columbia’s ban on the carrying of concealed handguns. Anti-gun forces have been losing in legislatures for a long time. Now they are finding that even where they win, they lose.
Read the whole thing.
Guns accounted for more deaths in Vermont in 2011 than motor vehicle accidents, a first-time occurrence that national gun control groups say is proof stricter laws regulating gun purchase and ownership are needed.
According to a study released this week by the Violence Policy Center in Washington D.C., Vermont had 78 gun deaths in 2011, compared to 54 fatal car accidents as reported by the Governor’s Highway Safety Program.
Except that all but four of those deaths were suicides. Now, I’m not “pro-suicide” by any means, but it’s a conscious decision by someone to take their own life — not an engagement in a criminal enterprise. Further, what kinds of gun control could prevent using them to kill themselves? Background checks? Limits on magazine capacity? An “assault weapons” ban? Even a “safe storage law” would be useless if it’s the gun owner shooting himself.
The real question to ask is, why are there so many suicides? Death by suicide is rising in almost all states. It could be the recession the country has experienced. So many people have simply given up looking for work. They lose their homes. That can cause family pressures or divorce, which leads to other mental stress issues. Drug use (both legal and illegal) is way up. There is, indeed, ample evidence that many prescription anti-depressants have the opposite effect, or cause psychosis. Banning guns won’t keep people from finding easy ways to kill themselves, nor will it solve the real problem, which is depression in so many people.
…But that doesn’t stop them from being against them.
Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn is once again calling for legislation that would ban the sale of assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines.
[ . . . ]
Quinn is specifically pushing for the passage of the Illinois Public Safety Act.
Under that proposed act, holders of Firearms Owners Identification Cards who now own assault weapons would be able to keep them. But they wouldnâ€™t be allowed to transfer or sell them â€“ except to a family member.
And, by implication, this would require registering them.
As I see it, the only solution is outlawing guns. When will we see the elephant in the room? Oh yes, there’ll be a hue and cry from the gun industry about the need to make guns so civilians can exercise their “right” to buy and own a gun.
But what about the right of the citizen to feel safe in her home, in other buildings, on the street, at work? All our levels of government seems unable to protect this right.
The guns out there now should be melted down and remade into bicycles, pots, pans, kitchen utensils, shovels, rakes, hoes, and other manual tools.
You forgot plowshares.