Category Archives: gun control

New York Wants To Force All Gun Owners To Buy A Million Dollar Liability Policy

New York state is still busily chipping away at gun rights and now they’ve introduced Obamacare for guns.

https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/kxt7bzhb5or01.jpg?itok=yPKwmTQ_Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,

Legislators are hard at work trying to force every gun owner in the state (who isn’t a cop or active military) to purchase and maintain a minimum $1 million liability insurance policy.

§ 2353. FIREARM OWNERS INSURANCE POLICIES. 1. ANY PERSON IN THIS STATE WHO SHALL OWN A FIREARM SHALL, PRIOR TO SUCH OWNERSHIP, OBTAIN AND CONTINUOUSLY MAINTAIN A POLICY OF LIABILITY INSURANCE IN AN AMOUNT NOT LESS THAN ONE MILLION DOLLARS SPECIFICALLY COVERING ANY DAMAGES RESULTING FROM ANY NEGLIGENT OR WILLFUL ACTS INVOLVING THE USE OF SUCH FIREARM WHILE IT IS OWNED BY SUCH PERSON. FAILURE TO MAINTAIN SUCH INSURANCE  SHALL RESULT IN THE IMMEDIATE REVOCATION OF SUCH OWNER’S REGISTRATION, LICENSE AND ANY OTHER PRIVILEGE TO OWN SUCH FIREARM.(source)

Hmmm…privilege? I had no idea it was called constitutional privileges. I’m going to have to go back and fix some articles really quickly where I called them “rights.”

New York wants to make it impossible to own a gun. Although the bill clearly states it’s been read twice, it’s rife with grammatical errors, almost to the point of illiteracy. (I italicized them for ya.) But I digress. Under the heading “Justification” the bill states:

Injury and death by gun has increasingly become a problem in U.S. and in New York State. In the wake of recent mass shooting incidents in Aurora, Colorado and Newtown, Connecticut; there has been a nationwide attention on gun control and public safety.

According to FBI Crime Report, there were 445 firearm murderin New York in 2011 and 517 firearm murder in 2010. However, there is little attention on the economic impact these shootings have on the victims and their families.

This legislation establishes and requires gun-owners to obtain and maintain liability insurance policy prior to such ownership. By having this insurance, policy in place, innocent victims of gun-related accidents and violence will be compensated for the medical care for their injuries.

In such cases where the gun was stolen, the original owner is typically not liable unless the weapon was stolen through negligence on the part of the owner.

This insurance policy will also serve as an incentive for firearm owners to implement safety measures in order to conduct the activity as safely as possible and only when necessary.

This isn’t the first time recently that New York has proposed something outrageous.

In December of last year, they proposed a bill that would require anyone in NY who wanted to buy a gun to turn over their internet search history and their social media passwords. Seriously. According to Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams, “A three-year review of a social media profile would give an easy profile of a person who is not suitable to hold and possess a firearm.”

Previously, I wrote:

Applicants to purchase a gun would be required by law to turn over their social media passwords to accounts like Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat, and Instagram, and they’d have to allow police to see a year’s worth of their searches on a year’s worth of searches on Google, Yahoo, and Bing.  As well, anyone renewing their permit for a pistol would be subject to this invasive investigation.

Now, for those of you sitting there saying, “That’s fine, I don’t use social media and I use Duck Duck Go or StartPage” this is great – for now.

How long do you think it would be before other outlets like blogs where you comment or these different search engines are added to the list of things that are searched? Trust me, if it gets passed, this is a greasy slide straight to the bad place. (source)

If you wondering what they’d be looking for, wonder no more.

Police would be required to look for evidence the applicant searched for or used racist or discriminatory language, threatened the safety of another person, inquired about or alluded to an act of terrorism, and, finally, “any other issue deemed necessary by the investigating officer.” (source)

How arbitrary is that? It’s basically down to whether the officer likes you and your beliefs our not.

Think for a moment about how much the investigating officer’s bias would come into play here. In some ways of thinking, people who say “all lives matter” are considered the epitome of racism even when taken out of context.

And what about a couple of women talking about a breakup using heated language in a conversation about the ex who has become the enemy? Are they really going to act on it or are they just blowing off some steam?

Then I think about my search history regarding terrorism – I’m a blogger, for goodness sakes. My search history is a dark place.  What if you’re researching what kind of gun you want to buy and you’re looking up things like “stopping power” or some other thing the anti-gun folks consider “scary” that is a completely legitimate question in reality?

And “any other issue deemed necessary” is just far, far too broad to provide any comfort whatsoever that the investigations would be fair and impartial. All of this is completely subjective. Anyone with a dark sense of humor, regardless of their sanity or upstanding citizen-ness, is going to be in for a hard time. (source)

It’s all just another paver on the highway to total gun control.

If you think this is crazy, stay tuned. It’s just going to get worse.

Source: ZeroHedge

Advertisements

Kamala Harris Vows As POTUS To Impose Sweeping Gun-Control Plans Via Executive Actions

Monday night’s CNN Town Hall was one of the first opportunities for the top Democratic presidential contenders to come together and share their views on allowing child rapists, terrorists and murderers to vote, and other formerly radical policies that have somehow found their way into the Democratic mainstream.

https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/Screen%20Shot%202019-04-23%20at%205.41.51%20AM.png?itok=JY5gDyF6

As each candidate vied to outdo one another, California Sen. Kamala Harris, widely rumored to have the party’s implicit backing as the “establishment choice” in a widening field of nearly two dozen candidates, boldly declared that she would take executive action to force federal agencies to write new rules on gun control should Congress “fail to act”. Continue reading

Judge Issues Partial Stay in CA ‘High Capacity’ Mag Ban

Epic legal effort allowed California residents to purchase high capacity magazines during a seven day window for the first time in nineteen years.

***

U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez issued a partial stay in the judgement against California’s “high capacity” magazine ban.

https://media.breitbart.com/media/2019/04/SJM-L-MILGUN-0111_2-640x480.png

A brief history on rulings associated with this ban is helpful:

  • On June 29, 2017, Breitbart News reported that Benitez blocked the implementation of California’s “high-capacity” magazine ban two days before it was to go into effect. He noted that the ban could not survive the test of Supreme Court’s District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) ruling. He noted “When the simple test of Heller is applied … the statute is adjudged an unconstitutional abridgment.”
  • On July 17, 2018, a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld Benitez’s ruling by a 2-to-1 vote, but sent the case back to Benitez for reconsideration.
  • On March 29, 2019, Breitbart News reported that Benitez again ruled against the ban, issuing an order barring California Attorney General Xavier Becerra from enforcing the ban.
  • On April 2, 2019, Breitbart News reported that Becerra was requesting a stay on the March 29 ruling, pending outcome of appeal.

Benitez has now issued a stay on the March 29, 2019, ruling, effective at 5 p.m. on April 5, 2019, while subsequently upholding the June 29, 2017, ruling as a means of protecting individuals who purchased “high capacity” magazines between March 30 and April 5.

The case is Duncan v. Becerra, No. 2:17-cv-56-81 in the U.S. District Court for Southern California.

Source: AWR Hawkins | Breitbart

NZ Confiscations Begin: Police Going to Gun Owners’ Homes, Jobs… One Gun Owner Dead

https://cdn0.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/AP_19081144449716.jpg

According to members of New Zealand’s largest firearm forum, Kiwi police are starting to go to gun owners’ places of employment, homes, and even visiting gun ranges in an attempt to gather information and get gun owners to relinquish their firearms.

Police are apparently trolling social media for leads on newly-prohibited firearms.

Additionally, it appears that New Zealand’s crackdown on semi-automatic long guns has claimed its first victim. According to Stuff which appears to be the New Zealand equivalent of The Patch . . .

A former Russian soldier who feared going back to prison tried to call his son before dying of a suspected suicide following a three-hour standoff with police.

The family of 54-year-old Troy Dubovskiy told Stuff he was sought by police after his property in the Christchurch suburb of St Martins was searched on Tuesday.

Police acted on information from the public.

His son posted a photo of him wearing a Russian Army Helmet and posing with an airsoft rifle on social media.

Dubovskiy’s 16-year-old son, who Stuff has decided not to name, said police searched the homes of his father, mother and grandparents after someone reported a photo the teen made his profile picture on Facebook five days ago.

The photo, which he first posted to Facebook several years ago, shows the teen holding a replica rifle and wearing a Russian helmet. The teen used the equipment along with his father while playing Airsoft, a team sport where people shoot each other with pellets using replica guns.

The boy’s father was a veteran of the Soviet and later Russian Army and spent time in Afghanistan and Chechnya while assigned to a special forces unit.

Upon a search of the residence, police found an 8mm blank pistol, an airsoft rifle, and a SKS carbine. The SKS is now illegal under the country’s new ban.

Source: by Luis Valdez | The Truth About Guns

Colorado AG: Sheriffs Who Will Not Enforce Gun Confiscation ‘Should Resign’

https://media.breitbart.com/media/2019/03/Colorado-Attorney-General-AG-Phil-Weiser-AP-640x480.jpg

Colorado Attorney General, Phil Weiser (Socialist-D) said sheriffs who refuse to enforce gun confiscation laws “should resign” their posts.

Democrat lawmakers are pushing a red flag law that will allow a court to issue confiscatory order empowering police to go to a gun owner’s home and take away his firearms. As of March 12, 2019, ten Colorado counties had declared themselves “Second Amendment Sanctuaries” to signal that they would support their sheriffs in refusing to enforce the confiscation law.

Numerous sheriffs have subsequently taken a stand against the red flag law, and the Colorado Sun quotes AG Weiser saying those sheriffs “should resign.”

Weiser said he expects the law to be challenged in court, where he believes it will be upheld. Once upheld, he said sheriffs will be obligated to enforce it.

https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2018/09/1862/1048/18_AP18104722258880.jpg?ve=1&tl=1

But Weld County Sheriff Steve Reams sees it differently. He told Fox News, “If you pass an unconstitutional law, our oaths as commissioners or myself as the sheriff — we’re going to follow our constitutional oath first.”

Logan County Sheriff Brett Powell said, “It’s time we quit trying to put lipstick on a pig and start funding our mental health facilities, instead of trying to take the rights from our people.”

Source: by AWR Hawkins | Breitbart News

***

The Real Resistance: Washington State Sheriffs Refuse To Enforce Unconstitutional Gun Laws

https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/sheriff_0.jpg?itok=VYZTJ_la

The refusal of law enforcement officers to enforce the new restrictions plays into a longer history of so-called “constitutional” sheriffs

New Zealand Bans Guns After Mass Shooting; All “Military-Style” And “Assault Rifles” Outlawed

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced the “first tranche” to reforms on gun laws – beginning with the immediate ban on the sale of semi-automatic and ‘assault’ rifles, six days after attacks on two mosques in Christchurch left 50 people dead. Notably, accused gunman Brenton Tarrant – specifically hoped his attack would lead to the restriction of gun rights

https://www.abc.net.au/news/image/10908460-3x2-940x627.jpg

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern (ABC News)

“On 15 March, our history changed forever. Now, our laws will too,” said Ardern. “We are announcing action today on behalf of all New Zealanders to strengthen our gun laws and make our country a safer place.”

“The effect of this will mean that no one will be able to buy these weapons without a permit to procure from the police. I can assure people that there is no point in applying for such a permit,” she said, adding “In short, every semi-automatic weapon used in the terrorist attack on Friday will be banned in this country.”  

The ban will apply to all firearms currently defined as “Military Style” or “Semi-Automatic” (MSSA), defined as a semi-automatic firearm – including shotguns – capable of being used with a detachable magazine that holds more than five rounds.

https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/1533370684913_0.jpg?itok=XxGtLd_S

Guns which are not affected by the ban include semi-automatic .22 caliber rimfire firearms with a magazine holding no more than 10 rounds, as well as semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns with a non-detachable tubular magazine holding no more than five rounds

Ardern also announced a gun buyback scheme that will cost between NZ$100 million and $200 million (between US$69 million and $139 million), depending on the number of weapons received.

Anyone who keeps their guns after an amnesty period which has yet to be announced will face fines of up to $4,000 and three years in jail – which is less jail time than a New Zealand resident could receive for downloading or sharing a video of the Christchurch attacks.

As far as “Tranche two,” Ardern said “There is more to be done and tranche two will look at issues around licensing, issues around registration, issues around storage. There are a range of other amendments that we believe do need to be made and that will be the second tranche of reforms yet to come.”

Currently in New Zealand: 

· There are 245,000 firearms licences

· Of these, 7,500 are E-Category licences; and 485 are dealer licenses

· There are 13,500 firearms which require the owner to have an E-Cat licence, this is effectively the known number of MSSAs before today’s changes

· The total number of firearms in New Zealand is estimated to be 1.2-1.5 million

That said, Ardern told reporters that she has no idea how many assault rifles are in New Zealand. The police minister followed up, saying: “It’s part of the problem. The prime minister gave a figure for the buyback [$100m – $200m], the reason there’s such a large gap is we have no idea.”

Source: ZeroHedge

***

Graham Wants Passing Firearm Confiscation Laws To Bring Democrats And Republicans Together

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) says firearm confiscation laws portend a way that Democrats and Republicans can “come together.”

https://media.breitbart.com/media/2019/03/Lindsey-Graham-640x480.jpg

CNN reported that Graham has long supported red flag laws, which allow a court to issue firearm confiscation orders for individuals deemed a threat to themselves or others.

House Democrats have already passed legislation during this Congress to criminalize private gun sales and extend the instant background check for firearm purchases. They are now pressing for $50 million in annual funding to bring academia into the gun control push.

The Democrats have also been vocal in their support for gun confiscation laws, and this is where Graham believes the left and right can come together.

He told CNN, “I haven’t really looked at the House package, but this is to me the area where we can come together.” Graham has scheduled a March 26 Judiciary Committee hearing on the confiscation orders.

California, Illinois, and Florida all have gun confiscation orders via red flag laws. California’s law did nothing to prevent the November 7, 2018, Borderline Bar & Grill shooting in which 12 innocents were killed. The law in Illinois did not prevent the February 15, 2019, shooting at Henry Pratt Company, where five innocents were killed. And the Florida law did not stop the August 26, 2018, shooting at Jacksonville Landing or the January 23, 2019, shooting at SunTrust Bank in Sebring. A total of eight innocents were killed in the two Florida shootings.

CNBC noted that Graham’s willingness to “[hold] a hearing on gun control is … a remarkable development in the GOP-dominated Senate.”

Source: by AWR Hawkins | Breitbart