Image Courtesy of Somadjinn

A farmer in the UK was recently threatened with deadly weapons by a group of gypsies that were squatting on her land. She decided to call the police to come deal with the thugs. After taking a whopping 35 minutes to send the first unit to the scene, they did not arrest a single person for the deadly threats. Instead, they interrogated the farm owner for 3-hours over the details of the situation, after which they proceeded to confiscate her lawfully-owned shotgun, stating that “they were given powers to seize guns in her possession and have done so as a sensible precaution in the circumstances” (see link below for source). Furthermore, the police also confiscated her firearms purchase license to prevent her from buying another gun. They did all of this despite the fact that she never even pulled the gun during the entire incident, and she was never charged with any crime. Ironically, many people still don’t understand why gun registration schemes are bad.

Apparently, owning a gun is a greater offense in the eyes of the British police than threatening a woman with knives and chainsaws on her own property. It is puzzling that this nation still has the nerve to insert the word “Great” before it’s title. A truly great nation would not offer police and legislative protection to criminals while throwing decent, tax-paying, law-abiding citizens under the train.

Read more about it here.

Image By Sateda

It was no surprise to me that the mainstream media has utterly ignored the shady on-going’s of a program called “Project Gunrunner” by the BATFE (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives – formerly called the ATF). The program was supposed to be designed to thwart illegal gun sales in southern states that would later be transferred to Mexican drug gangs. However, it is now doused in scandal as allegations from current and former agents arise that the BATFE may have knowingly allowed (and possibly assisted in) hundreds of guns to be illegally sold and transported into Mexico in a plot to justify their ballooning budget needs.

Apparently, being a mere tool for domestic harassment no longer carries enough political capital for the BATFE to justify it’s existence. You see, the vast majority of seized drug cartel weapons in Mexico are military-grade arms from unfriendly nations abroad, or from corrupt internal agencies within… civilian arms from US gun shops make up but a small fraction of the weapons seized, contrary to what Attorney General Eric Holder has claimed. Therefore, the BATFE found themselves to be a solution without a problem, and the minds therein decided to get creative. Much to their dismay, the foolproof plan was foiled when some of these weapons were later used in a firefight that resulted in the death of US Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in late 2010.

Recently, US Senator Charles (Chuck) Grassley (R-Iowa) called for an investigation into the matter. Hopefully, the case will make it’s way to the dissection room of the Senate Judiciary Committee before too long. Remember to keep an eye on “Project Gunrunner” in the days to come, and don’t hesitate to write to your US Senators and ask them to support Senator Grassley in conducting a full investigation on this matter. This may be just what the American people need to dismantle this useless and unconstitutional federal agency.

The Brasstard

Image By HiSKS

The poorly-conceived “ammo bill” AB962 has been struck down as being “unconstitutionally vague” by Fresno Superior Court Justice Jeffrey Hamilton. The ruling comes just days before the law would have taken effect… a law that, among other things, would ban internet sales of handgun ammo and require local ammo buyers to be fingerprinted and reported to the CA Department of Justice. Aside from being a blatent violation of an individual right to due process, this law would have been very expensive. AB962 would have cost the financially burdened State millions of dollars annually in wasted revenue to track and record lawful ammo sales, while providing no empirical benefits for crime prevention.

Image Courtesy of ILCO

We all know that money talks and pretty much everything else walks. As gun owners, there are few more effective methods at asserting our rights against would-be attacks than to deny funding to anti-gun individuals and organizations. Gun owners make up a massive portion of the US consumer market, and if we join together to boycott groups who publicly act against the Bill of Rights, we can put a major kink in their fiscal chain. Here are some links for detailed lists of anti-gun companies, organizations, and individuals. You might be surprised at just how many of the organizations you currently feed are actively fighting to destroy your rights.

NRA-ILA

Gun Owners of America

Keep up the fight!

The Brasstard

The US Supreme Court released their decision on this landmark case today, applying the 2nd Amendment to States and cities. The doors of case law have effectively been opened for waves of new litigation against excessive regional “gun control”. Here are some excerpts from the case docket…

“Chicago enacted its handgun ban to protect its residents “from the loss of property and injury or death from firearms.” See Chicago, Ill., Journal of Proceedings of the City Council, p. 10049 (Mar. 19, 1982). The Chicago petitioners and their amici, however, argue that the handgun ban has left them vulnerable to criminals. Chicago Police Department statistics, we are told, reveal that the City’s handgun murder rate has actually increased since the ban was enacted, and that Chicago residents now face one of the highest murder rates in the country and rates of other violent crimes that exceed the average in comparable cities.”

“In Heller, we held that the Second Amendment protects the right to possess a handgun in the home for the purpose of self-defense. Unless considerations of stare decisis counsel otherwise, a provision of the Bill of Rights that protects a right that is fundamental from an American perspective applies equally to the Federal Government and the States.”

“The provision at issue in this case, §1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, provides, among other things, that a State may not abridge “the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States” or deprive “any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

The majority opinion describes in-depth the historical upbringings of “gun control” and it’s discriminatory and racist roots. Of the dissenters, Justice Stevens felt that this decision would undermine a vast portion of past decisions, and Justice Breyer had apparently been living on Mars when he concluded that “there is no popular consensus that the right is fundamental”. Ironically, these two judges were born in two of the most anti-gun cities in America; Chicago and San Francisco respectively.

Here is a link to the case docket from which I derived the above quotes…

McDonald vs Chicago

As you may have heard, the FBI recently released the preliminary semi-annual crime report for Jan-June 2009. Once again, crime in America is on the decline… despite the fact that 2009 was a record year for the gun industry. Now, I realize that there are many variables besides gun ownership that determine national/regional crime rates. So, I will avoid trying to give gun owners all of the credit for making our country safer. However, with “gun control” advocates constantly insisting that more guns in the hands of citizens equates more violent crime, the contradictory evidence is quite pleasing.

Aside from being a record year for gun and ammo sales, 2009 was also a record year for new CCW/CFP permits; with most shall-issue states seeing a sizable increase in new permits granted compared to 2008. Again, in direct contradiction to the claims of the mainstream media and other anti-gun entities, the streets did not run red with the blood of babies.

Here is a link to the FBI website for more info… FBI Preliminary Crime Report JAN-JUNE 2009

We’ve seen the all-too-common portrayals of the stereotypical “gun person” on the big screen. Whether it’s the Rambo-Die Hard-Dirty Harry good guy, or the Terminator-Scarface-Corleone killer, the persona of gun people on-screen is pure fantasy. Existing in direct conflict with real gun people, Hollywood gunnies (good or evil intent aside) are all drenched in vendetta, vigilance and thirst for blood. All you have to do is visit your local shooting range to see that reality is far different than the stereotype; that most gun people are regular, honest folks with a great respect for the law, liberty, and peace…

Real gunnies come in all shapes and sizes, from working professionals to little old ladies; from ranchers to bankers. Sure, you get the occasional guy that stokes himself out in the latest Blackhawk tactical pants and shirt to make his weekly trip to the grocery store, but far more commonly you will not even notice the local heat packer. You see, we are not all a bunch of wild-west cowboys…

… most of us are regular, everyday folks…

We are not all warrior commandos, though many of us keep and bear the arms of a warrior…

Some of us are not capable of trekking the mountains of Afghanistan, though our own challenges give us the strength and desire to protect our lives and our most valued liberties.

You see, despite the picture our media paints of us, we remain a humble bunch. We understand that the numbers do not lie. We know that the bloodthirsty maniacs make up less than 1% of all gun owners in America, and that for every gun that is used to commit a murder, 156 guns are presented to prevent one, and 21,875 guns are not used at all. We know that there are more guns than automobiles in America, yet the fatality rate from the misuse of guns is less than 1/3 that of the misuse of cars. We also know that despite the small number of tragedies we suffer at the expense of this freedom, these tragedies are dwarfed by the vast and heinous catastrophes repeated throughout history with the blood of the helpless and the disarmed. These facts are the thorns in gun-control advocates’ sides, who happen to prefer to use their elitist, self-righteous zeal, and their powers in the media to portray us all as bloodthirsty maniacs.

Despite the constant barrage of attacks law-abiding gun owners have had to endure, we remain strong and united behind the common good of one of our most cherished rights. We must continue to show our friends and neighbors that “normal” people can be “gun people” too. And, we must remind would-be criminals to never pass judgement on the humble appearance of potential prey… because in today’s America, any person might be a “gun person”.

Regards,

The Brasstard

As a guy that spent most of his life in The Beehive State, the news about Utah’s Senate Bill 11 (The Firearms Protection Act of 2010) makes me proud. A growing number of states are now considering similar legislation that will effectively nullify the unconstitutional federal firearms regulations that infringe upon the rights of states, and the legitimate ownership and use of firearms and ammo by citizens.

Of course, this legislation would only apply to products that are made, sold, and used inside of state lines. It includes the clarification of the rights granted to the state through the 9th and 10th Amendment’s. The bill points out some of the restrictions currently being violated by the US Congress to only regulate interstate commerce. The bill’s text points out that firearms and ammo made and used within the state are not subject to any federal regulations. This may imply that UT gun makers could do away with background checks, serialization, and even the need for an FFL license to sell their guns and ammo commercially to local consumers.

Before you get your panties in an uproar over the lack of a background check, remember that it is still illegal for violent felons to possess a firearm in Utah. That is state law, and will remain unaffected by S.B. 11. What S.B. 11 will do is make it easier for law-abiding citizens to buy a gun for lawful use. Currently, all of the red tape and bureaucracy involved in buying a gun (or God forbid an NFA item) from a federally licensed dealer only affects those who care about the law (AKA: the dealer and the lawful consumer). Criminals on the other hand, will simply bypass the red tape via the black market, build-it-yourself, or a simple theft. Anyway, why would violent criminals be deterred by a petty weapons charge if they are not deterred by a murder charge that could carry the death penalty?

In other words, the law does not/has not/will not ever prevent or stop crimes from happening. The law can help us punish criminals after the deed is done. But then again murder, rape, and robbery will still be illegal even without gun control. The only way to prevent or stop a crime before it is carried out is by the use of force. A 10,000 page illegible legal document that’s gathering dust in the library of congress 2000 miles away will not stop a crime.

Here’s another way of looking at it… if background checks actually stopped felons from getting/using guns, we would not have a single armed felon anywhere in the USA since the passing of the Brady Bill. And if gun control actually worked, places like Mexico would be a virtual utopia of peace and tranquility. Unfortunately, the facts tell us that it’s not that simple. In reality, gun control is more closely compared to sending a firefighter into a forest fire without a fire suit, oxygen tank, hose or water, then drenching his naked body in liquid O2, and asking him to put the fire out by blowing really hard.

Back on topic…

Another perk to S.B. 11 is that federal taxes and regulations on practical accessories like sound suppressors and certain types of banned ammo would go out the door. Meaning that you could one day defend your home without risking permanent hearing damage to yourself and loved ones. You could even make your own suppressor as long at it is stamped “Made in UT”. This bill almost makes me feel like a legitimate American citizen again.

Here is an excerpt from the bill text courtesy of le.utah.gov…

Highlighted Provisions SB11:
This bill:
.    addresses the legal status of a firearm manufactured in the state for use within the
state;
.    defines terms;
.    provides that a firearm or one of various firearm-related items manufactured in the
state for in-state use is not subject to federal firearms laws and regulations;
.    exempts from in-state manufacturing some firearms and ammunition; and
.    requires certain markings on a firearm manufactured in the state for use within the
state.

The greatest part about this bill is that just under the excerpt is says “funds appropriated, NONE”. This means that implementation will cost virtually nothing to the taxpayers (a true rarity in today’s legislative world), but will open the door for new small businesses to begin serving the expanded local market. The bill passed through the state senate with a hearty 19/10 win, and the House Committee has granted a “favorable recommendation” with a 12/1 landslide on 2/8/2010. It is currently awaiting House approval before heading off to Governor Gary Herbert’s desk.

More info on S.B. 11