Gun Rights News Roundup

Articles, news stories, and op-eds of interest to gun owners:

[D.C.] Op-ed by the NRA's Wayne LaPierre on the coming storm:

Barely 100 days into the new Obama-Biden administration, ominous storm clouds are already gathering over your most fundamental right as a free citizen: Your right to own a gun to protect yourself, your family and your freedom.

Betraying all their campaign promises to protect your right to keep and bear arms or your freedom to hunt, the Obama administration has put its chess pieces in place and set in motion its strategy to do just the opposite.

Throughout the West Wing, they’ve appointed a cabinet composed of some of the most experienced and politically effective gun grabbers Washington, D.C. has ever seen.

Meanwhile, powerful members of the U.S. Senate and House have admitted that gun bans remain a top objective, but only “when the time is right.” Which really means “when some awful tragedy conveniently captures national attention.”

Yes, Barack Obama had an extensive and extreme anti-gun voting record as an Illinois senator. Yes, he called for gun bans during the Democratic presidential primaries. But once he won his party’s nomination, Obama reversed that spin and spent millions showering key states with flyers promising voters that he would never try to take their guns. But after winning the presidency, those pro-freedom showers dried up overnight. ...

Howard Nemerov asks: Does the Violence Policy Center represent the people?:

In order to justify their political agenda, gun control organizations often claim that “most Americans” support various restrictive laws. For example, Mayors Against Illegal Guns published a report last year stating:

Nearly 60 percent of Americans favor stricter gun laws. A majority of Americans, 59 percent, believe that the laws covering the sale of guns should be made more strict than they are currently. This is very similar to the 56 percent of Americans who said so in a January 2007 poll conducted for Mayors Against Illegal Guns. A third of the public, 33 percent, think that gun laws should be kept the same, and only 7 percent believe that they should actually be made less strict.

With such polling numbers, it seems reasonable that gun control organizations should have large, active membership, just like the National Rifle Association with its “nearly four million members.”
...
The question is: Does Violence Policy Center actually represent the public’s views?

One way to determine if an organization has true public support is to see if they garner a certain amount of membership dues. For example, if an organization’s total annual revenues is $1 million and $750,000 of that came from membership dues, then one can reasonably conclude that since dues represent 75% of revenue, the organization represents part of the public. Further, if annual dues are $25, then the organization has about 30,000 members. ...
...
In the beginning of this section, the concept of public support was in part defined by evidence of membership dues being paid to an organization that claims to promote beneficial public policies. Violence Policy Center’s tax returns included a section entitled “Schedule A, Part IV-A: Support Schedule.” It includes a line item for membership fees.

For the years 2000 through 2006, the total membership fees received was $0. ...

Congressman Tom Tancredo pens an op-ed on the U.S.'s "iron river of guns" to Mexico:

The Mexican Ambassador to the United States, Auturo Sarukhan, appeared on a CBS news program recently and repeated a lie we have heard for many months about the violence in Mexico. The ambassador says Americans are to blame for the violence wrecked on his country by the Mexican drug cartels because “most of the guns confiscated by Mexican police can be traced back to the United States.” That is not true, but the way that claim has been accepted by American politicians and the mainstream media raises suspicions about a hidden agenda.
...
We can easily understand Mexico's reasons for preferring the 90% number to the more accurate 17%. Mexico does not want to openly discuss the many other sources of advanced weapons being used by the drug cartels. Thousands of advanced weapons and tons of military equipment are stolen from its own military and state police. Weapons are smuggled across its southern borders from Guatemala and by boats landing on its 8,000 miles of coastline, weapons that often originate in Venezuela, Colombia, and Nicaragua, or from purchases in Eastern Europe. But it is easier for a Mexican politician to blame the U.S. than to explain his own government’s failure to police its borders, its ports of entry and its military installations.

Did the Mexican ambassador mention that over 100,000 soldiers have deserted the Mexican army in the past seven years and that many of them took their weapons with them and joined the cartels? ...

NRA exposes anti-gunners' misleading on gun shows:

Last week, in a typically misleading move designed to bolster their political agenda rather than reduce violent crime, the Brady Campaign released a report calling for background checks on "all gun sales in America, including at gun shows." The Brady report was intentionally designed to correspond with, and bolster, a "gun show loophole" bill (S. 843) introduced this week by fanatical anti-gun Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ). In fact, the Brady report was released at the press conference Lautenberg held earlier this week.
...
The bill is not about gun shows. Rather, S. 843 is a solution in search of a problem; numerous government studies have determined that gun shows are an insignificant or miniscule source of firearms misused in crime. For instance, a 2000 Bureau of Justice Statistics study, "Federal Firearms Offenders, 1992-98," found only 1.7% of federal prison inmates obtained their gun from a gun show. Similarly, a 1997 National Institute of Justice study reported less than 2% of criminals' guns come from gun shows. ...

[D.C.] Bill would mandate sale to public of fired military brass:

For four days in March, gun owners across the country were up in arms about a Department of Defense decision to not resell its spent brass casings.
The DOD sells more than 100 million used casings a year -- in .223 and .308 variants -- to businesses such as Georgia Arms, near Atlanta, which in turn reloads the cartridges and sells them to the public.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz says the decision not to resell was made intentionally by the Obama administration, and he plans to introduce legislation to ensure it doesn't happen again.

It was "a concerted effort by this administration to short the supply" of ammunition, said the 3rd District Republican who views it as back-door gun control.

Georgia Arms co-owner Larry Haynie agrees. He said he was told by government officials that it was a clerical error.

"Hell no," he said when asked if he believed that. "That's just the government catch-all right there." ...

Dave Workman praises Montana governor's signing of "Stand Your Ground" law:

Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer this week signed into law a new self-defense statute that will “steal the thunder” from gun prohibitionists who invariably whine that armed citizens might “take the law into their own hands.”

The new statute squarely puts the law in the hands of the citizens, by plainly stating they have no duty to retreat if attacked in a place where they have a right to be. The law also allows armed citizens to use force or threaten the use of force when he or she reasonably believes an attack is about to occur, or to stop an attack already in progress.

There is also a section on citizen’s arrest, and one that codifies the legality of open carry.

It is a gun prohibitionist’s nightmare, but for the armed Montana citizen – or anybody visiting the Big Sky Country – it may just be the best news they’ve had this year. ...

[California] SAF and others sue state over "approved gun" roster:

The Second Amendment Foundation, The Calguns Foundation and four California residents today filed a lawsuit challenging a California state law and regulatory scheme that arbitrarily bans handguns based on a roster of “certified” handguns approved by the State. This case parallels a similar case filed in Washington, DC, Hanson v. District of Columbia.

California uses this list despite a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court last summer that protects handguns that ordinary people traditionally use for self-defense, and a recent ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that the Second Amendment applies to state and local governments. The California scheme will eventually ban the purchase of almost all new handguns.
...
“The Glock-21 is the handgun I would choose for home defense, but California has decided the version I need is unacceptable. I was born without a right arm below my elbow and therefore the new ambidextrous version of the Glock-21 is the safest one for me. The identical model designed for right hand use is available in California, but I can’t use it,” said plaintiff Roy Vargas.

Added SAF founder Alan Gottlieb, “The Supreme Court’s decision is crystal clear: Handguns that are used by people for self-defense and other lawful purposes cannot be banned, whether the State likes it or not. California needs to accept the Second Amendment reality.”

Co-counsel Jason Davis remarked, “The California Handgun Roster has always been about making the possession of handguns for self defense more difficult by imposing arbitrary and unconstitutional restrictions that limit choice and increase the cost of exercising a fundamental right.”

Joining plaintiffs Peña and Vargas are Doña Croston and Brett Thomas. Doña Croston’s handgun would be allowed if it were black, green, or brown, but her bi-tone version is supposedly ‘unsafe’ merely based on color. “I didn’t realize that my constitutional rights depended on color. What is it about two colors that makes the gun I want to purchase ‘unsafe’?”

Brett Thomas seeks to own the same model of handgun that the Supreme Court ordered District of Columbia officials to register for Dick Heller. However, that particular model is no longer manufactured, and its maker is no longer available to process the handgun’s certification through the bureaucracy.

“There is only one model of handgun that the Supreme Court has explicitly ruled is protected by the Second Amendment and yet California will not allow me to purchase that gun,” said Mr. Thomas. ...

[Idaho] Boise Rescue Mission raffles Evil Black Rifle to raise funds:

When Nampa gun store owner Roberta Regnier offered a chance to win an AR-15 rifle for anyone who brought in two cans of food, she got 7,000 entries and collected 10 tons of food for the Boise Rescue Mission.

The winning ticket was drawn on April 15.

The raffle piqued so much interest that Regnier's Alpha Omega Services is doing another one - the shop's third - this time for a new, 1927-style Tommy gun.

Other businesses are catching on.

Sheepdog Ammo in New Plymouth donated 1,000 rounds of ammunition to Regnier's raffle. ...

Winchester earns record amount due to ammo sales boom:

CLAYTON, Mo. - A run on ammunition helped trigger record quarterly earnings for its Winchester Division in East Alton, Olin Corp. said Tuesday.

Olin's overall first-quarter 2009 net income was $46.7 million, or 60 cents per share, which compares to $37.3 million, or 50 cents per share, in the first quarter of 2008. Sales in the first quarter of 2009 were $400.6 million, compared to $399.1 million in the first quarter of 2008.

Winchester first-quarter 2009 sales were $132.9 million, compared to $110.8 million in the first quarter of 2008.

"Winchester achieved the highest level of quarterly earnings in its history, reflecting the continuation of the stronger-than-normal demand that began in the fourth quarter of 2008," Joseph D. Rupp, chairman, president and chief executive officer, said in a conference call with investors. ...