Gun Laws

Science for Sale

Johns Hopkins, which used to do good work, but is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Bloomberg, has come out in favor of microstamping.

They aren’t very bright. Microstamping is useless without firearm registration, so we know that is what is next, should they even get this technology (off site PDF alert) to be passed. However, the problems don’t stop there.
  • No manufacturer has ever manufactured a firearm with microstamping. Why? A reliable way of doing it hasn’t been invented yet.
  • All you need to thwart it is a nailfile applied to the end of the firing pin.
  • As a bonus, a murderer could just scatter brass casings that he picked up from the firing range around the crime scene
  • What if the gun used was stolen?
  • What if that gun has a replacement firing pin?

That doesn’t stop the medical people at Johns Hopkins from attempting to push for things in a field where they have no experience whatsoever. They just whore out their credentials to whomever is willing to pay.

The paper touts California’s law, passed in 2007, that requires new models of handgun sold to be equipped with this unicorn technology. They don’t mention that the law was found to be unconstitutional.

Then they attempt to make it into a racial issue by claiming this:

One analysis of major U.S. cities found that law enforcement makes an arrest in only
35% of firearm homicides and 21% of firearm assaults when the victim was Black or Hispanic/Latino compared to 53% and 37% respectively when the victim was white.

You know why that is? Because in white neighborhoods, “firearm homicides” are usually solved when the cops arrive to find the shooter still standing over the decedent’s body with the gun still in his hand. Many of them are also legal self defense shootings. Contrast that with black neighborhoods, where the majority of homicides where a firearm was the means employed involve disputes over gang territory, drug deals, or simple drive by shootings. When police arrive, no one claims to have seen a thing.

A large portion of these unsolved shootings are perpetrated by guns that were recently trafficked and diverted into the illegal market.

Criminals steal guns and then use them to commit crimes? I’m shocked. Hey, explain to me how microstamping will in any way help in solving a crime involving a stolen firearm.

For example, an analysis of five years of data from the ATF found that more than 40% (528,855) of crime guns recovered by police and traced were used in a crime within three years of their initial retail sale at a licensed dealer.

Again, misleading. Used in crime? What crime? Theft? What about the guns recovered by police and not traced? This is a carefully worded statement, intended to mislead the reader.

No, this is where the conclusion leads them:

Microstamping should deter gun dealers and owners from selling or transferring their gun to someone who might commit a crime because microstamping evidence should lead law enforcement to the person who initially purchased the gun from a retail seller.

Of course, no criminal will be smart enough to replace the firing pin.

Doctors at Johns Hopkins: What does Michael Bloomberg’s dick taste like?

By Divemedic, ago

Hunter Walks in 3, 2, 1…

Hunter has been charged for being a drug user purchasing a firearm. Now that this law is going to be gone, he will walk. Who knew that Biden would rid us of more gun laws than Trump? Score:

  • Trump: 1 (bump stock ban)
  • Biden: 0 (-1 for drug user and guns, +1 for arm braces)

EDITED TO ADD: For those who say that the only reason Hunter is being prosecuted, read on. Of the 478 referrals for lying on a 4473, there were 298 criminal charges filed- that’s a charging rate of 62%. That’s high for most crimes. Among the most solved and charged felony in the US is homicide. 61.4% of reported homicides are charged. Only 14% of reported burglaries and 33% of reported rapes result in charges.

By Divemedic, ago

New Mexico

A situation is developing in New Mexico. The governor there has declared by executive order that no one can carry a weapon, concealed or open, despite having permits or whatever else state law has to say on the matter. You can read the executive order here. (pdf alert) As predicted, she is using her new found COVID executive powers from 2020 to declare a “health emergency” by noting that NM has seen an increase in violent crimes that is double the national average, while completely ignoring that this is due to the illegals flooding the state from the border that has been opened by her own political party’s lack of border enforcement.

The order only applies to public property like roads, sidewalks, and parks. Police and licensed security guards are exempt from the ban, because of course they are. Under the order, residents still can transport guns to some private locations, such as a gun range or gun store, provided the firearm has a trigger lock or some other container or mechanism making it impossible to discharge, which is in direct opposition of Supreme Court decisions.

When the press inquired as to the order’s constitutionality, she said her duty to uphold the constitution, as well as the constitution itself, is “not absolute.”

Some local police and sheriffs are refusing to enforce the order because it raises too many questions about constitutional rights.

By Divemedic, ago

An Alternate View on 2A

Penn and Teller had a show called “Bullshit” that was on CATV a few years ago. The premise of the show was attacking people with stupid opinions. They tackled the Second Amendment and gun control in one episode.

An interesting take. The phrase “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” is there precisely because the state has an armed militia, and the people may someday need to oppose that militia with arms because the state will use it as a tool of oppression.

By Divemedic, ago

ALERT: Universal BG Check EO Coming

From the GOA and from Breitbart news: President Biden is set to announce a new rule going into effect. Universal background checks will be going into effect for ALL firearms transactions. Any firearm that changes hands will soon require a background check, per a soon to be issued executive order from Biden.

How can Biden do this? A unique reading of changes made to 18 USC 921 that were made by the “Bipartisan Safer Communities Act” when Biden signed it into law on June 25, 2022. Yes, the word “bipartisan” is actually in the law’s title. The Republicans sold gun owners down the river. The law’s sponsors were none other than Florida’s Marco Rubio and Rick Scott.

Here is what the law did:

Section 12002 of the BCSA amends a subparagraph of the GCA definition of “engaged in the business” as it pertains to federally licensed firearms dealers, by striking the language “with the principal objective of livelihood and profit,” and replacing it with “to predominantly earn a profit.” As amended, the definition at
18 U.S.C. §921(a)(21)(C) reads as follows:
[“Engaged in the business,”] as applied to a dealer in firearms, as defined in section 921(a)(11)(A), [means] a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business to predominantly earn a profit with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms, but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his collection of firearms.

(text that was added is in bold, text eliminated is struck through)

By choosing to interpret it in a way that is most restrictive, this EO will direct the ATF to consider anyone who sells a firearm for more than they bought it for as being an unlicensed dealer. In one fell swoop, they have virtually eliminated all private sales. This also explains why the ATF has such a hard on for kitchen table dealers as of late. Read the entire thing here. (pdf warning)

An article released by the New York Times today is reporting that, “The regulations required to put the new law into effect — expected to be released soon — would require anyone who earns a profit from selling firearms to obtain a federal license and conduct background checks. Previously, dealers were required to join the federal system only if they derived their chief livelihood from selling weapons. Failing to register carries a penalty of up to five years in prison and $250,000 in fines.”

This is huge. In one fell swoop, the Biden administration has enacted the most sweeping change to gun control law in decades. The rules will be backed up by a renewed push to prosecute businesses that refuse to register by accessing bank records, storage unit leases, and other expenses associated with running an off-the-books gun business.

Make no mistake- if this is in fact the case, we are looking at a national firearms registry, and the only real purpose for registration is confiscation. It’s plain that the left is looking to completely circumvent Congress and will simply use executive orders and the administrative rule making process to create whatever laws and regulations that they wish, and in this case they were helped out with the help of Republican Senators.

I have said it plenty of times before- Just because the Democrats are your enemy doesn’t make Republicans your friend. Again and again, we see that Republicans only SAY that they are pro Second Amendment during election time, but then sell us down the river once they get our votes. Now they have figured out that the way to stay in power is to do what you are told. All Republicans care about is staying in power, and the writing is on the wall- play music to the tune dictated by the Left, or they will make sure you are gone. So Republicans are selling us out.

Things are going to get a lot worse before they get even worse. The year 2024 is going to be a cast iron bitch.

By Divemedic, ago

Court: 80 Percent Receivers are NOT Firearms

The Firearms Policy Coalition recently had a major victory in Federal court. On June 30, a Federal Judge in the Northern District of Texas struck down the ATF ruling that an 80 percent receiver is a firearm, and the order applies nationwide: the case is VanDerStok v. Garland. The judgement was final on July 5.

Last year, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) issued a new rule that improperly defined a range of inert objects as “firearms.” This new definition of “firearm” contradicted the text of the federal Gun Control Act. With this effort to rewrite federal regulations, the Biden administration tried to redefine tens of thousands of individuals into criminals. The FPC sued, arguing that the rule was illegal. The winning argument was that the ATF exceeded its authority.

On June 30th, Judge Reed O’Connor of the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas issued an order granting summary judgment in favor of the FPC and gun owners. This is a huge step forward. There will be an appeal from the ATF.

During the case, briefs were filed in support of the ATF by California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Washington. So there is your complete list of the 18 anti-freedom states.

On the freedom side of things, the FPC was joined by Defense Distributed, the Second Amendment Foundation, and Blackhawk Manufacturing (doing business as 80 percent arms). For now, it’s time to celebrate a major victory on behalf of the Constitution and the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Read some of Judge O’Connor’s concluding words in his opinion (note: “defendants” refers to the ATF):

In sum, there is a legal distinction between a weapon parts kit, which may be an aggregation of partially manufactured parts not subject to the agency’s regulatory authority, and a “weapon” which “may readily be completed [or] assembled . . . to expel a projectile.” Defendants contend that drawing such a distinction will produce the absurd result whereby a person lawfully prohibited from possessing a firearm can obtain the necessary components and, given advances in technology, self-manufacture a firearm with relative ease and efficiency. Even if it is true that such an interpretation creates loopholes that as a policy matter should be avoided, it not the role of the judiciary to correct them. That is up to Congress. And until Congress enacts a different statute, the Court is bound to enforce the law as written.

I agree. It is time to stop these bureaucrats from becoming a de facto legislative body.

By Divemedic, ago

Police Substations

The new hotness among governments in light of the Bruen decision is expanding places that are off limits to carrying concealed weapons. Make the entire city a special carve out of areas that are sensitive, and therefore off limits to carrying concealed weapons, and you can back door your way into a general gun ban.

It isn’t a new concept. Disney tried it by claiming that their license to import fireworks made the entire Orlando theme park complex off limits, and Universal Studios claimed that the presence of the “Digital Audio Visual Effects (DAVE)” college on the grounds of their studios made the entire theme park that was on the same property off limits to carry.

For the last several years, the one that appears to be spreading in Florida is the “Police Substation.” It works like this: a business agrees to let police sit inside of their establishment to do paperwork and take a break, and in exchange they get to put stickers on the entrance claiming that “This is a police substation for XXX police department” and viola- the business is now a police station and is thus off limits for legal concealed carry. The Lauderhill Mall is doing it– so is the Central Baptist Church in Sanford. The Westgate mobile home park in Largo has allowed police to use one of the vacant trailers on the property as a substation. Many hospitals are doing this as well. I have seen at least three of them in the past six months that have posted signs just like this.

I can’t find an answer in the statutes or in any Florida case law on this. Is a business location off limits to carry if they allow police officers to occasionally use a portion of the property as a resting or public relations base, if the property is primarily used as a business or other location, and the police are usually not there? I am writing emails to several prominent attorneys who do firearms rights advocacy to get an answer on this one. Anyone else here have any authoritative information in this?

By Divemedic, ago

Random Thought on the Second Amendment

The argument that the 2A is only for the militia is still being pushed by the anti-forces, even in light of Heller. If they won’t believe SCOTUS, perhaps they can believe the version of the 2A that was originally passed by the House of Representatives on August 24, 1789:

A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the People, being the best security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed, but no one religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person.

Note that being a member of the Militia didn’t require that a person be a member of an exclusive, limited membership military. It merely required that you be a part of the body of the people.

By Divemedic, ago