Tag Archives: assault weapons

More firearm stories that will never make the national news

By Doug Book, editor

Each year there are countless defensive firearm uses in the U.S. and few if ANY will be reported by the “mainstream” media. For when an average citizen uses a gun to defend life, liberty or property, the firearm becomes indispensable and its owner, often a hero. And that is not a story which fits the media meme that guns are either useless or dangerous when not in the hands of law enforcement.

But a disapproving media aside, things like these  DO happen:

1.) A week ago, a Fort Wayne, Indiana homeowner answered a knock at the front door only to have five masked criminals (at least 2 of them armed) burst into the house. One ran upstairs, right into the barrel of a waiting pistol held by Chris Torres. Carrying a crowbar, the thug—Nathan Simmerson—managed to barricade himself in a bathroom!

In the meantime, just as Simmerson’s downstairs associates had forced 3 family members to the floor, one of them yelled to Torres, “Get the AR 15!” Upon hearing this, the 4 thugs  bolted through the door and were gone, leaving their comrade in the bathroom to fend for himself. He was soon tackled trying to escape and is in police custody.

So not only are “assault weapons” scary to look at, now it seems they’re even scary to HEAR about! (1) Does anyone believe CNN will congratulate the nation’s AR makers on their weapons’ new-found “versatility?”

How about for having potentially saved 4 lives?

2.) In California, the eldest of four siblings fought off multiple attackers who attempted to break into his home. Though shot a number of times himself, the 22 year old managed to kill one of the criminals and wound another as the remaining assailants sped away. Also home at the time were the victim’s sister and younger brothers who were not injured. The young hero came through surgery  and is on the mend. (2)

3.) Two weeks ago the CEO of Jack in the Box restaurants made the brilliant decision to turn his fast food chain into a nationwide “Gun Free Zone.” 

Intimidated by various claims from the left wing group “Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America,” CEO Leonard Comma began enforcing the long ignored “no firearms” policy of Jack in the Box by posting signs which warn employees and customers to “leave their guns at home” when coming to Jacks. (3)

Since implementation of the new policy—complete with the “No Firearms” sign at each franchise location—Jack in the Box restaurants have been held up 3 times; twice in Houston and once in Nashville. Customers were shot in Houston and Tennessee. A second Houston holdup featured 4 masked individuals who leisurely robbed the restaurant and its customers. (4)

But give Jack in the Box credit for at least getting one thing right. Offering the company’s reasons for implementation of the new, anti-gun  policy, Brian Luscomb, vice president of corporate communications stated: “The presence of guns inside a restaurant could create an uncomfortable situation for our guests and employees and lead to unintended consequences.” 

That was some truly exceptional insight on the part of Mr. Luscomb. For it’s a safe bet that employees and guests–especially those who were shot–had indeed been made “uncomfortable” by the “…presence of guns inside [the] restaurant,” especially as those guns were in the possession of criminals thanks to the new no firearm/no self defense policy implemented for employees and customers. 

And one certainly hopes the restaurant considers the shooting of customers in two cities to be “unintended consequences” of Jack’s new “Gun Free Zone” edict. Unintended yes; unexpected, not so much. Just another example of “common sense” gun control at its finest. (6)

By the way, the principle claim used by the Moms Demand Action group which apparently frightened CEO Comma into immediately yielding to their demands consisted of the groups’ assertion that a number of men carrying rifles had entered one of the restaurant locations and scared employees so badly that they hid in a store freezer. Of course, the NY Times printed this claim just as it had been provided the newspaper by Moms!

A short time later, however, the group Open Carry Texas helped prove the story to be an out and out lie. The Times printed a brief retraction. (5)

Armed private citizens may have prevented as a many as eight killings during the past week or so. Yet concerns of Jack in the Box CEO Comma that self-defense could result in an “uncomfortable situation” may be responsible for the use his own, defenseless customers as clay pigeons. 

Terribly complicated stuff, isn’t it Senator Feinstein.

Sources:
1.) http://www.guns.com/2014/05/24/armed-homeowner-fends-off-five-masked-intruders/   

2.) http://gunssavelives.net/self-defense/video-man-shot-multiple-times-but-wins-gunfight-against-multiple-home-invaders-to-protect-siblings/    

3.) http://weaselzippers.us/187008-jack-in-the-box-robbed-at-gun-point-for-third-time-since-guns-were-banned-from-store-two-weeks-ago/   

4.) http://gunssavelives.net/blog/video-third-armed-robbery-at-jack-in-the-box-after-restaurant-asks-customers-to-leave-guns/ 

5.) http://twitchy.com/2014/05/10/open-carry-texas-helps-debunk-story-that-terrified-jack-in-the-box-employees-locked-themselves-in-freezer/

6.) http://nocera.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/09/the-gun-report-may-9-2014/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_php=true&_type=blogs&_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=2

After the Bundy debacle, will government use murder to reassert its dictatorial authority?

by Doug Book,  editor

What steps will our federal and state governments take to reassert their dictatorial authority over a people who have become far too confident in an ability to defy their superiors? Will Barack Obama quietly authorize assault and battery, even the murder of a few unimportant Americans in order to intimidate an annoying, freedom seeking public back into line? 
                                                                 
According to the terms of New York’s Safe Act, April 15th was the final day by which “Assault Weapons” were to be registered with the state. But of an estimated 1-2 million rifles which have made paper felons of Empire State owners, it is believed that just 3,000-5,000 had been registered by the deadline; about one quarter of 1%. And New York gun owners are not just refusing to obey Governor Cuomo’s unconstitutional firearm statute, they are openly DEFYING it, burning their registration forms for all to see.

Some 85% of gun owners in Connecticut have also refused to arrange for the eventual confiscation of their AR 15′s. Of an estimated 300,000 to 400,000 “assault weapons” believed to be in the Constitution State, just 50,000 have been registered in accordance with that state’s new gun law.

Last week, the worth, purpose and importance of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms were at last placed on full display before the American people. Neither Barack Obama or any future president can erase the image of armed cowboys, ranchers and Militia members forcing federal mercenaries to back down and end the forcible theft of land and cattle from an American citizen. What an unmitigated disaster for those long dependent upon intimidation to manipulate a people and enable state and federal thieves to confiscate the property, money and liberty of the powerless.

From the beginning of the year culminating in last week’s rout of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) enforcers, the cause of gun confiscationists and the arrogant pride of government officials have been dealt a series of very public and damaging blows, not only by a determined band of patriots in the desert, but also by the millions of gun owners who have chosen to defy the authority of legislators and law enforcement.

Neither the federal or state governments can afford another embarrassing display of weakness when confronted by a public which challenges their power and authority, whether by refusing to register firearms or threatening to use them. It is imperative that the next confrontation end with state or federal officers enjoying at least the same margin of gratification by which BLM forces were humiliated at the Bundy ranch. The question is, to what lengths government goons will be permitted to go to win the next match by the mandatory K.O.?

The BLM had only 30-40 well-armed individuals at Bunkerville. Expecting the American public to express little or no interest in the fight, why send more? But as hundreds poured into the area, there were soon 1000+ patriots of which 80% or more were armed. The BLM was caught flat-footed in a fight it was too late to win.

The next target of government greed or contempt will be immediately greeted by a massive show of force. Should it again be the Bundy ranch, hundreds of federal mercenaries will arrive, suddenly and without warning. They will be supplied with every amenity, from assault vehicles to helicopter gun ships. It will be an overwhelming display of power designed for just one purpose–the intimidation of the American people; especially any who might one day be tempted to interfere with the course of “justice.”  Cattle will be killed or left to their own devices, the family will be manhandled and frog-walked to waiting federal transportation and anyone accidentally on or near enough the property to record events will have their video equipment/telephones confiscated. The operation will be quick, painful and recorded only by the most trusted of media allies.

And yes, commanders will be given the authority to authorize firing at any target deemed a danger or hindrance to the mission. Playtime is over for the Obama Regime and its legions of corrupt bureaucracies. The American public must learn to respect their betters and surrender to their demands.

However, after a few innocent bodies have fallen, the Obama Administration will be taught the resolve and tenacity of the American people. It will be a costly education.

Sources:

http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2014/04/threeper-report-from-bunkerville-nv.html

http://bearingarms.com/cowboys-and-communists/

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/13/federal-agency-pulls-back-in-nevada-ranch-standoff-but-legal-fight-remains/

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/02/mass_defiance_in_connecticut_against_assault_weapon_registration_law.html

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/04/up-to-one-million-new-yorkers-fail-to-register-assault-weapons-by-todays-deadline/

Smart Gun Technology: The new way to confiscate firearms from the law abiding

by Doug Book, editor

According to the terms of a New Jersey law passed in 2002, smart gun technology “…will be required in all new handguns sold three years after the state attorney general determines a smart gun prototype is safe and commercially available.” Safe and commercially available. Notice that lawmakers have said nothing about effective, reliable or affordable. Add the fact that “weapons used by law enforcement officers would be exempt” and New Jersey’s politicos have revealed the extent of their contempt for the safety and the 2nd Amendment rights of the state’s gun owners.  (1)

And when Garden State politicians eventually pass a law requiring that “smart” technology be included in rifles and shotguns they will have implemented a far more effective method of gun control than lifelong gun grabbers Diane Feinstein or Chuck Schumer could ever have imagined. For as every weapon sold (and no doubt, permitted) in the state will feature a microchip of some sort, law enforcement will have the ability to disarm any NJ resident by simply “turning off” the chip which makes the weapon function.

Writing for Newsmax, Lowell Ponte makes the sobering point: “If you will soon be permitted to own or carry only firearms with a computer chip that turns them on, understand that those weapons can potentially be rendered inoperative at a distance in a variety of ways, such as degaussing cannons, compact electromagnetic pulse generators and other electronics-neutralizing devices.” (2)

Irish smart gun manufacturer TriggerSmart “…has [developed] technology that would render guns inoperative if they approached electronic markers — for instance, near a school.” (2) The Limerick-based company has also developed a mechanism which can block the function of a trigger on an “assault weapon” “…by a command sent from an aircraft, satellite, mobile-network tower or radio station.” Won’t it be comforting to find that your trigger has been blocked by your favorite radio station just as you’ve leveled your AR 15 at a pair who have broken into your home! (3)

Though gun owners are rightly skeptical of the reliability of smart guns, their greatest fear must be the misuse by a tyrant of mechanisms designed to render their weapons inoperable. Only some 15% of Connecticut “assault weapon” owners have been foolish enough to register their rifles with the state in accordance with the new gun law. If mistrust of government has reached such a level with owners of standard firearms, how can gun control zealots expect the American public to purchase weapons which government officials can “turn off” as they see fit?
                       
Clearly a market must be created, or rather forced upon those who are unwilling to appreciate what lawmakers consider to be in the public’s best interest. In this case that will be a “safer” gun.  Odd, isn’t it, that it will also result in safer tyrants!

Sources:

(1)  http://www.foxnews.com/story/2002/12/23/new-jersey-smart-gun-legislation-enacted/

(2) http://www.newsmax.com/LowellPonte/Smart-Guns-Second-Amendment/2014/02/24/id/554357/

(3) http://www.economist.com/news/technology-quarterly/21590764-arms-control-new-technologies-make-it-easier-track-small-arms-and-stop-them

Additional reading:

http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/23/technology/smart-guns/

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2014/03/19/Smart-gun-technology-has-promise-but-needs-to-be-reliable-police-say/5001395178358/

http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/03/smart_guns_a_dumb_choice.html

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/robert-farago/nj-smart-guns-sale-2017/

 

Will Connecticut choose to ignore or make war against 300,000 gun registration scofflaws?

Doug Book,  editor

To date, a reported 50,016 people have guaranteed the eventual confiscation of their firearms by obeying the “Assault Weapons” registration requirements of Connecticut’s new gun law.

But according to a 2011 study commissioned by the Connecticut Office of Legislative Research it is estimated that more than 300,000 additional weapons have NOT been registered, their owners refusing to relinquish either their semi-auto rifles OR their liberty to Connecticut lawgivers. (Given recent record sales years that 300,000 could today be 400,000 or more.)

So in spite of the threats of Connecticut’s left-wing politicos to imprison those with the courage to defy unconstitutional legislation, the overwhelming majority of gun owners in the Constitution State have effectively told their elected officials to shove it. 

And it’s this wholesale repudiation of unjust legislation that spells disaster for lawmakers in Connecticut as it will for like-minded  legislators throughout the nation. For it has always been the case that compliance with enacted legislation is essentially voluntary. Police are capable of dealing with the small minority who refuse to obey statutes against murder or robbery. But law enforcement does not have the resources to handle millions or even the 300,000 plus who have refused to register their guns according to the demands of a dangerous state government.

And dangerous is the word, for governments dedicated to the enforcement of legislation believed by the people to be unfair and illegitimate “…will be stuck in a pattern of escalating brutality and declining legitimacy.” It is governance by intimidation, dispensed by arrogant, unthinking politicians who have effectively declared war on the people they were elected to serve.

From Governor Dannel Malloy to Under Secretary for Criminal Justice Mike Lawlor, Connecticut officials have put themselves in a Jackpot. With bluster and threat they expected American gun owners to behave like sheep and willingly surrender their rights and eventually their guns. Only liberals could fail to know that such expectations were doomed from the start; that intimidation would never, ever succeed.

And now they have to choose between enforcing a detested law on a resolved populace, outright repeal or just looking the other way as though their kneejerk statute never really existed. The smart choice would be repeal. But the left are incapable of retreating on such an important agenda item as gun confiscation. After all, it’s not as though THEY will be looking down a barrel one day. That’s left to police and goodness knows politicians consider them as expendable as any other commoner.

To liberals, the important thing is that the law is on the books. Eventually some lunatic will pick out another gun free zone and murder a few dozen defenseless people. With any luck, maybe a Day Care center! And then the left can begin their assault against the law abiding with fresh ammunition!

Of course, by that time another 150,000 AR 15s will have found their way to Connecticut residents.

Makes you wonder why liberals don’t work on separating guns from criminals rather than from the rest of us.

Sources:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/02/mass_defiance_in_connecticut_against_assault_weapon_registration_law.html

http://bearingarms.com/connecticut-gun-group-issues-ultimatum-to-government-molon-labe-or-repeal/

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/ct-cop-who-wants-to-kick-in-doors-confiscate-guns-suspended-not-before-spilling-the-beans-on-what-gun-registration-is-all-about_032014

http://benswann.com/connecticut-sends-letter-to-unregistered-gun-owners-to-surrender-firearms/  

http://www.publiusforum.com/2014/01/28/millions-high-capacity-magazines-disappear-connecticut/

http://www.infowars.com/surrender-your-firearms-connecticut-tells-unregistered-gun-owners/

http://www.infowars.com/connecticut-gun-owners-revolt-refuse-to-register-firearms-magazines/

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/13/tens-of-thousands-of-connecticut-gun-owners-may-be-staging-a-massive-act-of-civil-disobedience/

Americans may soon be permitted to RENT guns but not own them

by Doug Book,  staff writer

The widely anticipated senate bill soon to be introduced by gun-banner extraordinaire Diane Feinstein will do far more than eliminate “assault weapons” (AW’s) and “high capacity” magazines.

According to a summary on the senator’s website, concealed carry license holder Feinstein–who proposed an outright ban on all handguns while packing her own for self-defense—will demand that owners of guns affected by her legislation: pay a $200 fee for EACH banned weapon owned; submit pictures, fingerprints and register AW’s with the ATF; have local law enforcement attest to the owner’s identity and specify the address at which each weapon will be kept.

But the NRA reports that the senator intends to go much further than bans or registration. For assessment of an acquired draft of Feinstein’s bill reveals a provision demanding that guns defined as assault weapons be immediately turned over to the federal government upon the current owner’s death.   

Under existing Federal Firearm Legislation, owners of AW’s are permitted to sell their weapons outright, modify them or pass them along to heirs. But not anymore. For should Feinstein’s bill become law, AW’s will be grandfathered into the possession of their current owners and “…[will] remain with [that] …owner until [his] death, at which point they [will] be forfeited to the government.” (1)

In short, our political ruling class would literally appropriate millions of “assault weapons,” rent the freshly acquired firearms back to their original owners and then seize them after those flagrantly cheated individuals have died. 

It is a very clever scheme of mortality-based confiscation!

Registration of the appropriated weapons will be conducted according to the National Firearms Act of 1934, the law which among other things, regulates ownership of machine guns and silencers. Fortunately the $200 per weapon fee has historically been charged only on the transfer of a weapon rather than on a yearly basis. But of course those banned, “high capacity” magazines must also be taken into account—and taxed.

Feinstein’s bill has yet to be completed, though she has vowed to read it on the Senate floor by January 3rd. Given the massive, nationwide dissent and bitter animosity which would surely result should the contents of the bill be published in an open and honest form, it’s possible that, like ObamaCare, congress will have to pass the legislation before the American public finds out what’s in it.

One thing is certain–gun owners will acquire many new responsibilities while preserving very few rights.

For example, Feinstein and Co. might demand holders of “assault weapons” purchase some form of renter’s insurance in order to protect themselves from legal responsibility should a gun be stolen and used in a crime. Naturally, the legal responsibility would be levied either by Congress itself or one of its partners in crime—the ATF comes to mind. After all, it would be a swell way to pick up a few bucks while encouraging a “pre-demise” weapon turn-in by owners who wish to avoid legal exposure or the expense of congressionally mandated insurance coverage.  Imagine the required purchase of an “ATF-approved” policy at $500 per year per weapon. A protection racket to make even Capone blush!

Will the Feinstein bill succeed? Almost certainly not. But consider how much closer it will likely come to passage now than a year ago. And what will happen after the next brutal murder spree deliberately facilitated by the left and its “gun-free zone” legislation?  And the next and the next?

Feinstein’s legislation reveals what the left is determined to achieve, sooner or later and by any means necessary. Those who wish to remain free must be prepared to do anything necessary to defeat them.

(1) http://cms.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2012/feinstein-goes-for-broke-with-new-gun-ban-bill.aspx

(2) http://www.recguns.com/Sources/IIG4.html

Additional reading on “assault weapons” and the Feinstein bill:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/sen-feinstein-unveils-sweeping-gun-control-agenda/

http://guncite.com/gun_control_gcassaul.html

http://www.examiner.com/article/handguns-rifles-magazines-sen-feinstein-wants-them-all