Biden Pledges To Defeat National Rifle Association

H/T Bearing Arms.

All I can say is Slow Joe The Gaff Machine Biden better bring his “A” game to the fight with the NRA.

Former Vice President Joe Biden is the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination for president. That’s not surprising since he’s a former vice president and was part of the Obama administration, which Democrats seem to view as a positive for some insane reason. However, if he wanted to keep that status, he’s going to have to beat the anti-gun war drum.

Luckily for him, he was ready to do just that.

Former Vice President Joe Biden pledged on Tuesday to “defeat the National Rifle Association” as part of his 2020 campaign promise to fight for school safety.

“As President, he will secure passage of gun legislation to make our students safer, and he knows he can do it because he’s defeated the National Rifle Association twice before,” Biden’s plan, released on Tuesday, read.

It stated part of the plan to “defeat” the NRA included supporting legislation that banned “assault weapons” and high-capacity magazines.

His plan came after a slew of school shootings that prompted Democrats to call for gun control laws. Biden’s planned seemed more moderate than other 2020 candidates’ — specifically Sens. Cory Booker, D-N.J., and Kamala Harris, D-Calif., — in that he focused on working through Congress rather than substantially expanding executive authority in the ways others proposed doing.

Of course, Biden didn’t mention that we had an “assault weapon” ban for a decade and it accomplished jack squat.

He should know. He was part of the Congress that passed it. He was also there when the measure sunset and discussions were had about possibly renewing the law. It was pointed out then that the law didn’t do anything.

At the time, anti-gunners pointed to a decrease in the crime rate and tried to claim credit for it. The problem was, the crime rate had been dropping for years before the “assault weapon” ban and continued at the same rate after the ban went into effect. Further, that crime rate continued to drop after the ban sunset.

In other words, it didn’t do a damn thing.

Now, either Biden knows this, in which case he’s pandering, or he doesn’t, which means he’s an idiot. Of course, pandering doesn’t preclude stupidity.

If there’s at least one good thing about Biden’s proposals, it’s that he’s acknowledging the limits of executive power. If we’re going to get saddled with federal gun control laws, they have to come through Congress. That’s how the Constitution lays out the legislative process. Congress passes laws, the president signs and enforces those laws. Presidents don’t get to make them up on their own.

Further, as noted in the quote above, Biden’s proposal is less bombastic, more moderate. That’s likely to play better with moderate members of the Democratic Party, voters who are feeling more and more alienated by the liberal extremism that’s taking hold of it. These are voters who don’t like “assault weapons” typically but also aren’t interested in radically changing the firearm landscape.

Not that what Biden is proposing is any better. Gun control is gun control, and we don’t need any of it.

It should be interesting to see what role gun control plays in the primary process. We’ll learn an awful lot about the hearts and minds of Democrats in the process.

Texas Approves Disaster Carry Measure, Houston Chief Angry

H/T Bearing Arms.

This measure will cut down on looting in Texas during a natural disaster.

   Any bets Houston Police Chief Art Acevedo is a butt-hurt DemocRat?

In the wake of a disaster, life can be tense.

It wasn’t all that long ago when my hometown was devastated by Hurricane Michael. We went days without power or telephones. While our cellphones worked, charging them could be challenging. There was no way to call for help if we needed it. What’s more, the bad guys in the area knew it as well.

The state of Texas has had its own experience with such disasters, having dealt with Hurricane Harvey which caused horrific devastation. Texas got hit a whole lot worse than we did, as we all know.

Now, Texas has passed a law allowing open and concealed carry without a permit for a week after a disaster area is declared. The measure will allow people who may not have a permit to carry a firearm as needed to protect life and property in the chaotic aftermath of something like another hurricane.

It seems that not everyone is thrilled with the development.

Houston Police Chief Art Acevedo on Monday blasted a bill that would allow people without a handgun license to carry pistols in public — openly or concealed — for a week after a disaster is declared.

“We experienced one of the worst disasters in Texas history during Harvey,” Acevedo wrote. “This bill wasn’t needed then and isn’t needed now. This will embolden 20,000+ gang members & will not help LE [law enforcement]. Let’s hope it isn’t signed.”

Gun control advocates and several lawmakers have raised similar concerns about House Bill 1177, which is headed to the desk of Republican Gov. Greg Abbott for approval after narrowly passing in the Texas Senate on Sunday.

Of course, it should be noted that Acevedo isn’t a friend of the Second Amendment. Earlier this year, Acevedo lashed out at elected officials after four Houston police officers were shot. He wanted the state to pass gun control and, of course, it won’t.

Acevedo is hardly anyone worth listening to when it comes to firearms.

The truth of the matter is, those 20,000 plus gang members Acevedo is worried about? They’re going to be carrying guns either way. They’re carrying guns now without a permit, so how would a disaster change that? Those up to no good will continue to be up to no good regardless of the rules in place.

Now, I agree with Acevedo that it won’t necessarily help law enforcement. It’s not meant to.

It’s meant to help people who have no way to contact law enforcement. It’s intended to help people who are knee-deep in a disaster who don’t have time for law enforcement to arrive. Response times can be slowed significantly in a community where trees may be covering roads. Even in the best of times, the police are only guaranteed to get there in time to draw chalk around your body, and we’re not talking about the best of times here.

So no, this isn’t about helping law enforcement. It’s about helping everyone else during a time when they damn sure can’t count on law enforcement saving them, despite those individual officers’ best hopes and wishes.

Acevedo can be upset, but Abbot needs to sign the bill if he hasn’t already by the time you’re reading this. A bill like this can help a whole lot of people, people who Acevedo would rather see hurt.

Complaint Filed Against Jackson Township Police Dept. For Violating NJ Gun Laws

H/T AmmoLand.

It is clear that Jackson Township Chief of Police Matthew Kunz is in violation of the law and he needs to be terminated.

Opinion by Alexander Roubian, NJ2AS

Complaint Filed Against Jackson Township Police Dept. For Violating NJ Gun Laws
Complaint Filed Against Jackson Township Police Dept. For Violating NJ Gun Laws

New Jersey – -(AmmoLand.com)- Regardless of what anyone thinks about the Second Amendment, we should all agree that the job of law enforcement is to uphold and enforce the law. Many law enforcement officers do just that. Some, like Jackson Township Chief of Police Matthew Kunz, have decided to place their personal feelings and agenda above the law and the Constitution.

Our citizen advocates have alerted us that Chief Kunz is arbitrarily requiring firearm applicants to submit their fingerprints for a handgun permit if it has been more than two years since they last provided them. Chief Kunz is brazenly not following New Jersey state law, administration code and guidelines and undermining the Second Amendment freedoms of the people he exists to serve and protect. And we are going to hold him accountable.

On May 21, the New Jersey Second Amendment Society (NJ2AS) filed a formal complaint to Ocean County Prosecutor Bradley Billhimer and the New Jersey Attorney General’s office, urging them to investigate the Jackson Township Police Department for violating state law and take action. You can read the complaint to the NJ Attorney General by clicking here, and click here to read the complaint to the Ocean County Prosecutor. It is intolerable for law enforcement to break the law and we need your help to hold Mr. Kunz accountable.

New Jersey law (NJ Statutes Annotated 2C:58-3, NJ Administrative Code 13:54-1.4 or in the New Jersey State Police Firearms Applicant Investigation Guide) is clear about the process for obtaining a firearms identification card and handgun permit. You can read a complete summary here, but the basic process is:

  • Fill out the STS-33 application,
  • Consent to a mental health background check,
  • Provide two references, and
  • Submit fingerprints once.

In fact, the law includes clauses specifying that applicants “need not be fingerprinted again” and “no additional requirements” shall be imposed. We clearly spelled out the law and rules in our complaints, something Chief Kunz swore he would uphold.

For some Jackson Township residents, being forced to undergo additional fingerprinting may just be the latest outrage of exercising their Second Amendment rights in the state of New Jersey. But for others the additional requirement may be a life-and-death delay on their ability to protect themselves.

Low-income residents may not be able to afford the $52+ average fingerprinting cost. Others may not be able to take time off work to make a fingerprinting appointment. But hey, as one of the highest paid Chiefs in New Jersey, with a salary of over $200,000, that is pocket change for Chief Kunz.

 Jackson Township Chief of Police Matthew Kunz
Jackson Township Chief of Police Matthew Kunz

Regardless of how much of a burden it imposes, Jackson Township’s requirement is simply not required and added to deter people from exercising their constitutional right. If Chief Kunz merely required applicants to touch their nose in order to obtain a permit, it would be illegal.

Sadly, Chief Kunz is the latest in a long line of New Jersey bureaucrats who think they are above the law and who are limiting the constitutional rights of their citizens to obtain a firearm and defend themselves.

And we are going to hold him accountable. Will you help us?

Want to go even further and stand up to bureaucrats like Chief Kunz? Join the New Jersey Second Amendment Society by clicking here and count yourself among thousands of patriots across the state. New Jersey bureaucrats can try to bully us, but we have strength in numbers. Please join today and help us expose the bullies and hold them accountable.


About the New Jersey Second Amendment Society:

New Jersey Second Amendment Society – Our mission is to promote the free exercise of Second Amendment rights within the community and Legislature of New Jersey, to New-Jersey-Second-Amendment-Society-Logoeducate the community regarding the enjoyable, safe, and responsible use of firearms, and to engender a sense of camaraderie and fellowship among the members and their families. Visit: www.nj2as.org

Maryland: Governor Hogan Vetoes Legislation to Repeal Handgun Permit Review Board

H/T AmmoLand.

Bravo Governor Larry Hogan(R-MD)for this bold Pro-Second Amendment veto.

 

Fairfax, VA – -(Ammoland.com)- Last Week, Republican Governor Larry Hogan vetoed House Bill 1343 /Senate Bill 1000, legislation to repeal the Handgun Permit Review Board.

House Bill 1343 /Senate Bill 1000 sought to remove citizen oversight regarding the appeals process for Maryland wear and carry permits.

Current law allows individuals who are denied a wear and carry permit to file an appeal to the Handgun Permit Review Board, a group of five members of the public appointed by the Governor.

HB 1343 /SB 1000 would dissolve this board, thus removing all public oversight, and make all appeals be filed through an administrative office.

Thank you to NRA members who continued to contact their legislators in opposition to this legislation. Also, thank you to those legislators who voted in opposition to SB 1000, and to Governor Hogan for vetoing the bill and preventing the repeal of this important review process.

Maryland Republican Governor Larry Hogan
Maryland’s Republican Governor Larry Hogan

National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)

About:
Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org

Let Anti-Gun Convenience Store Chain President Put His Money Where His Mouth Is

H/T AmmoLand.

It is time to let the people at Plaid Pantry we are going to boycott them because of this clerk being fired for self-defense.

 

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “A would-be robber of a convenience store brought a hatchet as a weapon. He ran when the clerk pulled out a gun,” CBS affiliate KOIN 6, Portland, reported Friday. “The president of Plaid Pantry told KOIN 6 News the stores have a zero tolerance for weapons and the clerk is no longer employed there. He said employees are trained to de-escalate robbery situations to avoid injury.”

Really?  And that’s not the only question that deserves answers.

First of all, just saying “the president” insulates him from personal feedback for his obnoxious arrogance. Who the hell is this guy?

Per the Wikipedia entry for the 108-location privately owned convenience store chain, the President and CEO is Jonathan Polonsky. With such a policy in place, we can assume he speaks for Executive Chairman William C.”Chris” Girard Jr. and CFO Brent Chadwick. Those reaping the highest rewards demand low-level employees to be helpless and alone in the face of on-the-job danger. They do so from the relative safety of corporate offices, so they deserve to own the resulting personal reputations for putting the bottom line above the lives of human beings working for them.

We know the industry has been forced to install security cameras, but as we see in this case, that didn’t deter the hatchet-man from attempting an armed robbery. He was counting on the clerk being “trained” to give attackers what they want. But what if what they want is your life?

Shall we review some recent headlines from the past few days?

We could keep going with this but the point is made. The stores were lit, surveillance cameras were deployed and the clerks were presumably just as “trained” as Plaid Pantry’s front line fodder. Yet despite it all, the attackers weren’t “de-escalated.”

What worked at Plaid Pantry was an armed clerk. And note, as with most defensive gun uses, the situation was peaceably resolved without firing a shot. Thanks to an armed citizen, as is so often the case, violence was deterred. The attack was de-escalated.

And that leads to some further questions:

What does “give ‘em what they want” training consist of? How extensive is it?  How many hours of instruction do employees receive? What are the credentialed qualifications of those teaching it?  Have any of the instructors or course designers ever personally “de-escalated” an armed assailant? Have Polonsky and his fellow captains of convenience? What evidence exists to demonstrate the effectiveness of such training as being the main factor in “de-escalating” sociopaths?

That’s what they are, you know.  Who else would be so twisted they would threaten the life of another person over the contents of a cash drawer? And that’s the most important point: It’s not the cash being threatened, it’s the life. The money merely represents the value put on that.

Still, if Jonathan Polonsky, Chris Girard, and Brett Chadwick are so confident their way is the best way, they’d go a long way toward convincing others they believe their own BS if they would contractually obligate themselves to the employees they expect to put their lives at risk.  Will they acknowledge a legally-binding special relationship with those they require to be disarmed, assume responsibility for their personal safety and protection, and admit and accept liability should they fail in that duty? For real money commensurate with the loss?

Or is this simply a matter of it being ultimately cheaper if everybody takes their chances and not wanting to assume the risk of a DGU gone wrong? The answer to that acknowledged risk is real firearms training, by the way.  But then, that costs money, and we’re only talking clerks here, right?

Plaid Pantry is taking a well-deserved thumping over at its Facebook page right now, but don’t expect real change to come about. We’re talking Portland here, where the populace elected an anti-gun mayor who allows Antifa to run wild on the streets. That customer base doesn’t care. And even if we’re not confining ourselves to such areas, you don’t see enough of an economic fuss made by gun owners to effect change at national companies like 7-Eleven or Circle K.

About all we can expect in this case is what gun owners are used to by now—control our own decisions. That, for me, means placing conviction over convenience and having zero tolerance for retailers that insist otherwise. Still, it would be nice to find out more about the fired clerk,  let him know not everyone disapproves of his actions, and maybe help the guy find another and a better job.

 

 

Louisiana Legislators Make Strong Stance In Defense Of Second Amendment

H/T Bearing Arms.

Louisiana Legislators are making their state more Second Amendment friendly.

Louisiana has a lot of guns. They also have a lot of homicides, unfortunately.

These two facts aren’t necessarily related, but anti-gunners routinely conflate them as if correlation automatically equals causation. Still, it’s brought up by Louisianan anti-gunners as evidence that more gun control is needed in the state.

Luckily, lawmakers aren’t buying it. Instead, they’re heading in another direction.

The Louisiana House on Tuesday passed proposals that would expand the state’s reach over local regulation of gun control and boost existing “stand your ground” laws, indicating a momentum of gun legislation in the state.

The House voted 68-30 to support a bill by Rep. Blake Miguez, R-Erath, which would eliminate the authority of local governments to prohibit the possession of firearms in certain businesses and public buildings.

On the House floor, Miguez contended that the current law is “a patchwork of regulations [that] confuse those trying to follow the law.” Gun law should be consistent around the state, he added.

“A good guy with a gun always stops a bad guy with a gun,” Miguez said.

Indeed.

If there’s a pro-gun criticism to be made, it’s that the new law doesn’t go far enough. While it does bar local governments from creating new gun-free zones, it stops well short of preemption of local laws. For example, there’s still a mandatory reporting law in New Orleans. That’s something that can trip up a recently arrived resident of the Big Easy.

The flip side is for folks like me to remember that Rome wasn’t built in a day. These draconian anti-gun laws didn’t spring up overnight. It’ll take time to remove them all.

Further, some people are uncomfortable with what has been done. Doing more might well have jeopardized the effort completely. Once these new laws are in place–assuming it passes in the Senate–and the homicide rate does anything short of increasing, it’ll be far easier to pass additional repeals of draconian gun control regulations or outright preemption.

That’s clearly what’s motivating this effort. The truth is, no amount of money being spent on law enforcement will combat a high homicide rate, but what will is empowering ordinary citizens to act in both their own self-defense and in defense of others. Bolstering the state’s Stand Your Ground law is another good thing being accomplished here.

Louisiana residents have a right to want safety. The problem is that the government can’t provide it. They’ve tried for decades and failed. Now, it’s time for the government to get the hell out of the way and empower the citizens to take care of themselves. That’s likely to be far more effective.

Bad guys know to avoid police uniforms. It’s harder to avoid ordinary citizens who are bound and determined to be neither a victim nor a statistic. They’re willing to fight rather than capitulate to the demands of a thug. Empower that and the criminals can’t account for it. They’ll start reevaluating their life choices…assuming they aren’t the types that have to learn the hard way.

Now There’s Irrefutable Proof: Arming School Staff Keeps Kids Safe

H/T BarbWire.

Israel armed their teachers over 40 years ago and have not had a school shooting.

We arm bank guards to protect the money the same for armored cars and their contents high-end jewelry stores have armed guards.

So why not have armed guards of some sort in our schools be it the teachers being armed or hiring veterans to patrol our schools to protect our most important assets our children?

In the latest two horrific school shootings, one at a STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) high school in Highlands Ranch, CO, and the other at a college in Charlotte, NC, two courageous students lost their lives as they tackled the shooters to stop the slaughter.

Never again should another precious young person with his whole life ahead of him need to die as a first responder.

Now we know they don’t have to because armed and willing school staff can keep them safe. This is the take-away from a new study from the Crime Prevention Research Center after analyzing nearly 20 years of comprehensive data from reliable, respected sources including the National School Safety Centers (NSSC) report, “School Associated Violent Deaths” and the Washington Post’s database of school shootings.

The report’s conclusion:

Trending: Normalizing Sin Has Consequences

“There hasn’t been a single mass public shooting in any school that allows teachers and staff to carry guns legally. Since at least as far back as January 2000, not a single shooting-related death or injury has occurred during or anywhere near class hours on the property of a school that allows teachers to carry.”

What a shocker for leftist billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety and their herculean effort to terrify parents into pressuring politicians to pass more anti-gun laws. It’s time the thousands of gullible moms in his sister organization, “Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense” change their name to “Moms With Common Sense Demand Schools Allow Concealed Carry by Staff to Protect Their Kids.” Yeah, like that’ll happen.

Here’s more unwelcome news from the Crime Research study for Bloomberg and his gun-grab cronies:
“Ironically, there is not one mass public shooting this century that would have been stopped by universal background checks, even with a perfectly enforced law.”
And that’s not all. None of the tragic school shooting events over nearly two decades could have been prevented by any of the gun control laws proposed or currently on the books, including magazine capacities or age restrictions.

There is not a single case of what the gun-phobic fear-peddlers constantly warn us about: no teacher shot a kid for mouthing off, no student wrestled a gun from a teacher, no janitor’s gun accidentally going off and hurting a student. None, zero.

More gun laws won’t work because psychotic, hate-propelled child-killers won’t obey laws designed to stop them from murderous rampage. The two teen shooters at the Colorado STEM school defied a slew of state anti-gun laws by breaking into a parent’s locked gun cabinet for weapons. Mentally disturbed high schoolers also can’t seem to read those “GUN FREE ZONE” signs no matter how large they are.

I live in Douglas County, where courageous 18-year old engineering student Kendrick Castillo was shot and killed on May 7th as he rushed one of the shooters, a classmate. Two other brave young men, Brendan Bialy and Joshua Jones, also charged the shooter and luckily escaped.  Eight students were wounded, some injuries were serious.

On Tuesday, May 14th, a week after the tragedy, the Douglas County Board of Education held a meeting where students, parents and citizens offered their ideas. They included the usual: metal detectors, only one door where every student would enter into the school, more armed School Resource Officers (SROs) onsite, and more mental health personnel to counsel troubled students. And, of course, more millions in tax dollars to fund it all.

I challenged the board to schedule a public town hall where Independent Women’s Forum Fellow Laura Carno could explain to parents, school administrators, and students the FASTER Colorado program she leads that trains and arms school staff. FASTER is an acronym for Faculty/Administrator Safety Training and Emergency Response.  In Colorado, 150 willing school staff in 30 Colorado school districts have been trained by the program’s active duty law enforcement officers with SWAT experience.  All armed staff are volunteers, and most already have their concealed carry permits.

The FASTER Colorado training and emergency first aid program is offered free or at minimal cost to school districts, paid for by donations.  Over 20 states now allow school staff concealed carry in hundreds of schools.

Following every one of these terrible tragedies, the shocked and grieving community tries to figure out a way to end the violence. The universal cry is “how could this happen here?” Desperate parents, grandparents, and officials try to come up with some hope to comfort their sorrowing hearts and their children’s fears.

But the awful truth is that every one of these proposed solutions will fail. The attacks almost always take place at high schools with thousands of kids. The STEM school has over 1800 students.  It would be a shooter’s dream to have them gathered en masse outside the school, waiting to file through a metal detector. They would be a huge target, ducks in a shooting gallery easily mowed down by any drive-by psycho. How convenient for a murderer looking for a big score.

The one-door theory falls apart because a school must have many exit doors to satisfy fire codes and other emergencies.  The shooter only needs an inside collaborator or two to open an exit door for him. Once inside, he hands his buddy another gun and the two (or three or four) killers are off and running

School Resource Officers (SROs) are cited as another panacea; after all, they’re well-trained actual police officers. But at Parkland, Florida, a single deranged teenager shot to death 14 students and three teachers while the SRO cowered outside the school in fear, soon joined by a number of newly-arrived deputies who also failed to run to the gunfire, shirking their sworn duty.

The other problem with SRO’s is the typical high school. With anywhere from 1,000 to over 3,000 students, these schools are just too big and their layouts too maze-like for one or even two or three SRO’s to cover. Just locating and reaching the shooters takes too much precious time. The 1,800 STEM students were lucky to have a police substation just a half mile away, enabling a wave of deputies to reach the scene in only moments. Most schools don’t have police so close, and even with this proximity the shooters had enough time to murder one student and wound eight.

But what about giving the students more mental health resources?  Douglas County School District recently hired 75 new school counselors but there’s no evidence that either of the shooters came to them or anyone else for counseling.

And is it really likely that any severely troubled kids would confide their violent urges and seething hatreds to a school counselor, knowing they would certainly be reported to police? These teen shooters don’t have “normal” teen problems.

The 16-year-old STEM suspect is a biological girl “transitioning” to boyhood, likely with the aid of puberty-blocking drugs that can induce mental health problems like depression and suicidal thoughts.Her illegal immigrant father had been sentenced to two years for felony menacing of her mother and had been deported three times but kept returning  to the U.S. He’s currently in Mexico.

It’s reported that both the shooters took drugs. The 18-year-old had ranted about his hatred of Christians, spray- painted F*** Society on his car and put the satanic symbols 666 and a pentagram on the roof. Not typical teen angst.

Both shooters are described as bullies, but it’s not been revealed whether or not these disturbed young people had been disciplined at the school, or if their bad behavior was simply ignored. According to the older shooter’s social media posts, he was anti-Trump but a big fan of Barack Obama.

The study also points out:

“from January 1998 through May 2018, 42 percent of mass public shooters were seeing mental health care professionals before their attacks. In only one of those cases had the killer previously been identified as a danger to others. We can’t foresee every attack, so what’s our backup plan when violence does occur?”

This definitive study from the Crime Research Prevention Center proves there is no rational justification for the gun-phobic opposed to well-trained volunteer staff carrying concealed guns to protect students and themselves. Those who continue to oppose armed staff and insist on more useless gun-control laws are not only irrational; they’re endangering our children’s lives.

Citizens in Douglas County and across the nation need to show up in large numbers and demand their school districts approve arming school staff. None of them will probably ever need to use their guns because these attacks are relatively rare, compared to the millions of children attending schools. But they’ll be ready.

Even more than the guns themselves, the deterrent is uncertainty – the would-be shooter doesn’t know who is armed and where they are. And these killers want to kill as many children as they can before they can be killed.  Think about it. Parents, rather than that “Gun Free Zone” sign outside the school as you drop your child off, wouldn’t you like to see a sign like this:

“ATTENTION : Please be aware that the staff at this school is armed and will use whatever force is necessary to protect our students” ?

As seen here at Townhall. Posted here with permission.