Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Charlie T Waite

Super Moderators
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Charlie T Waite

  1. With solid pro-Second Amendment majorities in the North Dakota Legislature, a new bill has passed that will outlaw so-called gun “buybacks” subsidized by taxpayers. Many studies have shown that such programs fail to make a positive impact on crime and may even provide an opportunity for criminal gangs to offload unwanted firearms and raise money for new guns. Instead, their only real purpose is to be an expensive spectacle suggesting that anti-gun politicians are “doing something” to stop violence.Republican state Rep. Luke Simons says that gun “buybacks” send a message to children that “government is buying evil guns to get them off the street.” North Dakota is not the first state to pass such legislation, with Kansas and Indiana already prohibiting “buybacks” funded with taxpayer dollars.
  2. You hear the same call for action in the wake of almost every tragedy involving a firearm: “We need background checks,” the gun haters say. “It’s a cure-all that will wipe out all such crime in our country.” So about 20 years ago, the anti-gun crowd no doubt whooped when the National Instant Criminal Background Checks System (NICS) was created. “Finally, we’ll have no more crime involving guns,” they said. But the gun-control crowd is overlooking one thing: Criminals don’t obey the law. If they did, they wouldn’t be criminals in the first place. It should come as no surprise, therefore, that a 2019 report by the U.S. Sentencing Commission (USSC) shows that when someone who has committed a crime with a gun in the past is released from prison, that individual is more likely to become a repeat offender compared to an inmate who served time for an offense that did not involve a firearm. Not only that, but those who had used guns during the commission of a serious crime also ended up back in the justice system more quickly. The U.S. Sentencing Commission is an independent agency in the judicial branch of government created by the Sentencing Reform Act (SRA) of 1984. Congress enacted the SRA in response to widespread disparity in federal sentencing, ushering in a new era of federal sentencing by creating the USSC and promulgating federal-sentencing guidelines. The new USSC study shows that 68 percent of felons involved in crime with a firearm were back in custody within the eight-year period of the study. The median time on the street before they were back in the system was 17 months. Criminals who didn’t use firearms posted a 46-percent recidivism rate, and they were out for a median span of 22 months. As further proof that background checks are fallacious, consider this. Criminals themselves admit they don’t typically go through normal channels to get a gun. A U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) study confirmed more than half of those incarcerated for crimes involving a gun acquired the firearm through back channels. The main source was the underground market—which was the supply line for 43 percent of criminals. Some 25 percent said they got a gun from a family member or friend; 7 percent said they found it, and 6 percent said they had stolen it. Only 7 percent said they purchased it under their own name. Background checks are nothing more than a smoke-and-mirrors approach. Rather than reducing the incidence of violent crime, the NICS system has merely added cost and a layer of bureaucracy to the lawful purchase of firearms. Like most of the so-called solutions gun haters devise, background checks have done nothing but make it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to exercise their Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms.
  3. By By Steve Straub - The Federalist Papers Opinion Page. Published August 8, 2019 at 10:58am This restaurant’s new sign has gun control supporters going crazy, but those who know the truth realize this is one of the safest places to bring your family for a meal in the country: Would you feel safe taking your family to a restaurant with a sign like this? What Democrats never seem to understand is that Americans will NEVER support gun control. The Democrats and the media would have you believe that the country is in the middle of an epidemic of mass shootings led by white supremacists. Democrats and the media would also have you believe that the only possible way to stop this epidemic is to immediately suspend the Second Amendment and confiscate all semi-automatic weapons. Nothing could be further from the truth. While the three mass shootings that have occurred over the past several weeks are indeed horrific and tragic, they do not represent an “epidemic” of mass shootings. In fact mass shootings that affect innocent and random people are exceedingly rare in our nation of almost four hundred million people. Consider these facts about mass shootings via American Greatness: Fact: There were 387 deaths from mass shootings in the United States in 2018 (defined as four or more shot—not necessarily killed—at one time). Of those, most were regular criminals as we expect to see in gang-related drive-bys, bar fights, and a strangely large number of shootings at parties (like this one). About 100 deaths were the result of the random, psycho-killer shootings that dominated news coverage for days and weeks at a time. Mercifully, those are quite rare. But that’s not the impression we are given by the news coverage. Fact: There are more privately owned guns in the United States than ever before and the number of murders has been declining for decades and has been at or near a multigenerational low for several years. More guns, less crime. Fact: There were 660 murders in Chicago in 2017. That’s nearly twice the number from mass shootings in the whole country and six or seven times the number murdered by random psychos mass-shooters. Chicago has some of the strictest gun control in the country. Maybe it’s not the guns. Fact: There are between 1.2 million and 1.5 million defensive uses of guns per year in the United States. How many more murders, rapes, thefts, and assaults would there be without armed citizens? Fact: There were more than 70,000 opioid deaths last year. That’s 4.5 times the total number of murders and 700 times the number of people killed by psycho mass-shooters. Yet, liberals want to enact far-reaching gun control laws and prevent Americans from defending themselves. One hundred random deaths of innocent bystanders by mass shooters is by any measure a horrific loss of life, and devastation to countless families. Yet in a country of 400 million people, it is hardly a crisis that requires millions of innocent gun owners, who have never committed any crime, to lose their rights. Democrats famously refuse to let any crisis go to waste, but calmer heads must prevail during a time of high emotion. If any additional laws are needed to prevent mass shootings are needed they should be carefully deliberated in a slow and methodical process using facts, not hyperbole and emotional appeals. That said I personally cannot imagine any law that would deter a criminal bent on causing harm. The only thing that can stop a person like that is a good guy with a gun.
  4. The legendary Professor Alan Dershowitz, professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, and one of the most famous legal minds in the world — and a dedicated liberal — speaks out on "red flag laws:" "Red Flag laws run the risk of setting a dangerous precedent. If the government can take your weapons based on a prediction today, what will prevent it from taking your freedom based on a prediction tomorrow? That is not a far future concern. The United States arrested more than 100,000 Japanese-Americans during World War II based on wildly exaggerated predictions of sabotage. States are also unlocking punished sexual predators even after they complete the sentence based on predictions of return. (The best predictor of future violence is past violence, so sexual predator laws may have fewer false positives.) Criminal defendants – who have a right to presumption of innocence – are often denied bail based on predictions that they will flee or commit further crimes. So the danger of going from red flag encroachment to red flag prevention is real. We should be careful about denying individual rights based on dubious predictions. The Red Flag laws will be worth trying as a firearm remedy if they remain limited to the temporary confiscation of weapons pending a substantial review of the process. But when the government starts removing some rights for security, all rights are at risk." The story was behind the Washington Post paywall, but here is an open link...this is important information for us all!
  5. Hawaii processed over 18,000 personal/private firearm permit applications in 2018—up 9.9 percent over the previous year, according to the state Department of the Attorney General. “Firearm registration activity increased dramatically over the course of the 19 years for which these data have been systematically compiled and reported. From 2000 through 2018, the number of statewide permit applications annually processed increased by 178.5 percent, the number of firearms annually registered leaped 216 percent, and the number of firearms annually imported rose 203.8 percent,” according to report statistics. The number of permits in 2018 involved a total of 43,033 firearms registered throughout the year—which also was an increase with 3,000 more firearms than in 2017. “Just over half (21,960, or 51 percent) of the firearms registered during 2018 were imported from out-of-state, with the balance accounted for by transfers of firearms that were previously registered in Hawaii,” the report noted.
  6. According to figures from the Fresno Police Department and California’s Bureau of Firearms, residents in Fresno County have the most concealed-carry permits for firearms in the entire state—over 17,000 licenses. About 17 of every 1,000 residents in Fresno County are licensed to carry concealed firearms, noted a recent article in the Fresno Bee. Statewide the statistics indicate that there is an average of only 3 licenses per 1,000 residents. The place with the next highest amount of residents with concealed-carry licenses is Orange County, with just over 12,000 licenses. Orange County is located in Southern California between Los Angeles and San Diego.
  7. On Monday, August 12, the California Legislature returns from the Summer recess and will be considering firearm- and hunting-related bills in both the Senate and Assembly Appropriations Committees. Monday, August 12, the Senate Appropriations Committee is scheduled to consider AB 1254 and AB 1669. Please click the TAKE ACTION BUTTON below to contact the members of the committee and urge them to OPPOSE AB 1254 and AB 1669. Assembly Bill 1254, sponsored by Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-54) would prohibit the ability to hunt, trap or otherwise take a bobcat except in specified circumstances including depredation permits. Assembly Bill 1669, sponsored by Assembly Member Rob Bonta (D-18), would raise the fees paid by consumers when purchasing firearms. The DROS account has generated a massive surplus at times, so much so that tens of millions of dollars that have been utilized to fund other DOJ programs including a $24 million dollar loan to the Armed Prohibited Persons System (APPS) just a few years ago. This legislation appears nothing more than an effort to put more cost constraints on gun owners to foot the bill for the massive cost pressures the legislature has put on DOJ in recent years including ammunition background checks and long gun registration to name a few. Wednesday, August 14, the Assembly Appropriations Committee is scheduled to hear SB 172. Please use the TAKE ACTION BUTTON below to contact the committee and urge them to OPPOSE SB 172. Senate Bill 172, sponsored by Senator Anthony Portantino (D-25), would expand California's existing storage laws.
  8. On August 9th, New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu kept his previous promise to not make changes to existing firearm laws by vetoing the three anti-gun bills sent to his desk by the General Court. Please click the “Take Action” button below to thank Gov. Sununu for protecting Second Amendment rights in New Hampshire with his vetoes of House Bills 109, 514, and 564. House Bill 109 would have essentially banned the private transfer of firearms, with very limited exemptions. It would have employed a broad definition of "commercial sales" that would have required private individuals, such as collectors and hobbyists who attend gun shows to trade firearms among each other, to conduct their transfers through Federal Firearm Licensed (FFL) dealers. The exemptions in the bill for private individuals not attending gun shows were so narrow and this definition of "commercial sales" was so broad that they were effectively useless. House Bill 514 would have delayed Second Amendment rights by requiring a three day waiting period (excluding weekends and holidays) before an individual could receive firearms that they purchased. There would have been limited exemptions, such as for those who have completed the 16 hour hunter safety course and were seeking to buy a long gun. House Bill 564 would have prohibited law-abiding citizens carrying firearms for self-defense from going on school grounds except when picking-up or dropping-off students and only if the firearm remained in their vehicle. This would have burdened law-abiding citizens by requiring them to unnecessarily handle firearms that are already securely holstered and leave them in their vehicle when exiting. In addition, the exemption to leave firearms in vehicles would not have extended to going on school grounds for other purposes, such as attending events, filling out school paperwork, or meeting with school officials. Parents would have had to deviate from their normal routes to secure firearms at home or to park off-campus. Again, please click the “Take Action” button above to thank Gov. Sununu for protecting Second Amendment rights in New Hampshire with his vetoes of House Bills 109, 514, and 564.
  9. Yes but they are doing it again, and the results are almost the same, but so far more of a leaning towards 2A in all but the most liberal areas.
  10. We want to express our deepest sympathies to the families and victims in El Paso and Dayton. As always, the NRA will work in good faith to pursue real solutions to the violence we witnessed this past weekend. Real solutions save lives – televised, choreographed spectacles don’t. In support of this goal, we appreciate the need for honest and open dialogue on how to stop these horrific murders. As a group that has advocated for Second Amendment freedoms for almost 150 years, we stand for only the safe and lawful use of firearms. Sadly, El Paso and Dayton were not the only communities affected by gun violence last weekend. According to press reports, in the city of Chicago, there were 32 separate shootings, 52 wounded, and seven deaths in the city’s worst weekend for gun violence this year. In a grim scene recreated in urban centers across America, it was another 48 hours of murder and mayhem. Chicago is on pace for nearly 3,000 people shot and over 500 killed this year. The point is, addressing violence in our society is an extremely complicated issue – violence tears at the fabric of our communities every day in unthinkable ways. There are many factors that contribute to these tragedies. There are no soundbite solutions to this problem. Rather, a number of thoughtful steps must be taken to achieve positive outcomes. Unfortunately, aspiring presidential candidates immediately took to the airwaves this past weekend to politicize these tragedies, and to demonize the NRA and its 5 million law-abiding members. We all know the truth: the answers we seek lie far beyond statements neatly packaged for TV programs and the political campaign trail. We must identify what is at the root of the problem. We must invest in law enforcement, demonstrating a real commitment to the job they do to protect us, and we must prosecute those who commit crimes with a gun under the federal gun laws to the fullest extent possible. It is the NRA's long-standing position that those who have been adjudicated as a danger to themselves or others should not have access to firearms and should be admitted for treatment. But, there needs to be real evidence of danger – and we cannot sacrifice anyone’s constitutional rights without due process. Finally, we must commit to more advanced, robust security measures – using layers of protection to help prevent violence in places where madmen might roam. The NRA has been at the forefront to protect children, with a completely free-of-charge program that assesses school security and advises how each school can be hardened and secured. It is not enough anymore to simply say that “we need more background checks.” Considering both suspects in El Paso and Dayton passed them, that is rhetoric for billionaire activists and campaign rallies – not a call for constructive progress. The vast majority of gun sales, including internet and gun show sales, are already subject to background checks. In fact, none of the current background-check proposals would have prevented these tragedies. On behalf of our five million law-abiding members, the NRA’s commitment today, as always, is to identify and support measures that will confront violence with real solutions. There is no place in our society for the unhinged lunatics who commit these evil acts. We must not let their ungodly behavior effect the unity we share – or the constitutional freedoms in which we all believe.
  11. Never before has such a comprehensive survey of law enforcement officers’ opinions on gun control, gun violence, and gun rights been conducted.
  12. On Monday, July 22, CRPA with support of NRA, filed a motion requesting an injunction against enforcement of California's recently implemented ammunition laws. The injunction is part of the case Rhode v. Becerra, filed in April of 2018, where lead Plaintiff and gold medal Olympian shooter Kim Rhode and other Plaintiffs have asked the court to halt enforcement after a dubious roll out of the new law on July 1st. The entire system has been shown to be an unconstitutionally excessive burden on law-abiding gun owners with little to no law enforcement value. California ammunition retailers were given little if any guidance from the state explaining the procedures for processing ammunition sales, amounting to mass confusion throughout the state. If the court grants the Plaintiffs’ request, it will prohibit California from enforcing its ammunition sales restrictions while the Rhode case is fully litigated. A hearing on the Plaintiffs’ request is currently scheduled for August 19. A decision is expected sometime thereafter. NRA and CRPA thank Able’s Ammo of Huntsville, Texas, and Ammunition Depot of Boca Raton, Florida, for their continued support of the Rhode lawsuit and support in filing the request for an injunction. NRA and CRPA would also like to thank the countless individuals and businesses who reached out, as well as the following California ammunition retailers who supported Monday’s filing by providing declarations regarding the effect California’s ammunition sales restrictions have had on their businesses: Turner’s Outdoorsman (27 state-wide locations) LAX Ammunition OC (Huntington Beach) Norco Armory (Norco) Foothill Ammo (Shingle Springs) Guns, Fishing and Other Stuff (Vacaville) Royal Loan (San Diego) Mosquito Creek Outfitters (Placerville) Discount Gun Mart (San Diego and Santee) Continue to check your inbox and the California Stand and Fight webpage for updates on the Rhode case as well as other issues impacting your Second Amendment rights and hunting heritage in California.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.