Category Archives: gun control

Homeowner’s son shoots, kills three would-be burglars

second amendment3That’s how we roll in Oklahoma…

From Fox News: Three would-be robbers were shot and killed Monday when an Oklahoma homeowner’s son opened fire on them with an AR-15, authorities said.

Wagoner County sheriff’s deputies were called to the home in Broken Arrow, southeast of Tulsa at around 12:30 p.m. local time. When they arrived, they found the three dead suspects and two uninjured residents.

Sheriff’s spokesman Deputy Nick Mahoney said the suspects entered the home through a glass back door with the intent to burglarize it. It was not immediately clear why they picked that home.

Mahoney said the suspects encountered the homeowner’s 19-year-old son, who opened fire after an exchange of words. Two of the suspects died in the home’s kitchen while a third was found in the driveway.

It was not immediately clear whether the suspects were armed, but Mahoney said the preliminary investigation indicated the shootings were in self-defense. The homeowner’s son volunteered to give a statement at the sheriff’s office.

This is very, very unusual for us [in Wagoner County],” Mahoney told the Tulsa World. “It’s not something we’re used to.”

Click for more from OKCFox.com.

DCG

Advertisements

This is Chiraq: Man posts selfie with a toddler holding a firearm

man with toddler and gun

And her finger is on the trigger. Utter madness.

From MyFoxChicago: Police are investigating a photo that was posted on social media that shows a child holding a handgun.

A concerned resident walked into the Wentworth District offices on Wednesday to report a picture someone texted him on Tuesday that shows a male holding a child who was holding an unknown model handgun, according to Chicago Police. The text message said that the photo was shared on social media.

Andrew Holmes, a community activist, said somebody showed him the photo about midnight Tuesday, and he reported it to police the next day.

“We just lost a 3-year-old boy last week who had his hands on a gun,” Holmes said. “We’re supposed to be leaders and try to keep guns out of children’s hands, yet here she is with her hands on the trigger.”

Police said it is unknown whether the gun is a firearm or a replica or whether the photo was taken in Chicago.

An Endangering the Life/Health of a Child case report was started, and the incident is under police investigation.

DCG

Shocker, not: Seattle’s gun-sale tax falls way short of projections in first year

burgess

Seattle Council President Tim Burgess, sponsor of the gun tax

Expect the progressives on the Seattle City Council to come up with another tax.

From Seattle Times: Seattle’s tax on the sale of firearms and ammunition raised less than $200,000 during its first year, according to Seattle City Councilmember Tim Burgess. The city had previously kept the revenue information confidential to protect taxpayers’ privacy, as reported in a recent Seattle Times story.

In an email sent to The Times Tuesday, Burgess wrote:

“City and state laws prohibit the city from releasing specific tax information when such information is likely to identify specific taxpayers. In this context, we can report that there were approximately 15 potential firearm and ammunition taxpayers in the city for 2016. During its first year, the firearms and ammunition tax payments received by the City were less than $200,000.”

The city is using the tax to support gun-violence research at Harborview Medical Center in Seattle. But the city isn’t spending the money until a 2015 lawsuit challenging the tax is resolved.

Burgess spearheaded the tax, which was adopted by the council in 2015 and took effect Jan. 1, 2016. When Burgess proposed the tax, he said the city’s budget office had estimated it would raise $300,000 to $500,000 a year.

Though the money from the tax isn’t being used, the research it’s intended to pay for is moving ahead, with $275,000 that the council allocated for 2016 and 2017 coming out of the city’s general fund.

DCG

Superwealthy entrepreneur Nick Hanauer decides to ‘go all out’ with property-tax levy campaign to fight Seattle homelessness

nick-hanauer3

A couple things to know about Nick Hanauer:

From Seattle Times: In his State of the City address, Seattle Mayor Ed Murray announced last week he would ask voters to approve a $275 million property-tax levy to combat homelessness. Murray cast the plan as his own, saying the city must double its homeless spending. Superwealthy entrepreneur Nick Hanauer, Murray explained, would help draw up the details.

Why Hanauer? The venture capitalist says his Seattle-based think tank brought the idea to Murray and has been working on it for the last year. “We just decided we were going to do something, and no one can stop that. And once that bus leaves the station, people can get on or get run over,” Hanauer said in an interview.

In recent years, Hanauer has backed winning campaigns to increase the state’s minimum wage and expand background-check requirements for gun buyers.

Now he has set his sights on helping the thousands of people who are struggling to survive on the streets of Seattle. “We came to the mayor and said, ‘We are throwing down on homelessness,’ ” he said. “We said, ‘We are going to take something big to the ballot.’ ”

The mayor was receptive, said Hanauer, who called the project a collaboration between his organization and City Hall. “Mayor Murray is a friend of mine, and it’s all connected,” Hanauer said. “This is not a secret plot. It’s a group of citizen activists and leaders thinking about what to do.”

The plan is to qualify the levy for the August ballot as a citizens’ initiative rather than as a city proposition by the mayor and council. The campaign would need to collect at least 20,638 valid voter signatures to do that. The measure would raise $275 million in property taxes over five years.

Hanauer says he’ll bankroll the levy campaign. “The thing that makes our contribution great is I can throw down and say I’m going to run an initiative. I can go all out,” he said.

I’m going to donate enough money to that campaign to make sure that we would win. It’s so far below the amount of money that I care about that,” Hanauer added. “It’s not a statewide campaign, so it’s not going to cost $10 million.”

Read the rest of the story here.

DCG

More and more states allow concealed handguns without permit

This news is sure to drive the gun control Left up the wall.

At least 11 states have passed laws allowing the concealed carry of guns without a permit, including Idaho, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Vermont, West Virginia, and most recently New Hampshire.

In Missouri, lawmakers last year overrode Gov. Jay Nixon’s (D) veto and passed a package of gun legislation that established a “stand your ground” law and allowed people to carry concealed handguns without a permit. Concealed-carry permits were no longer necessary in the state starting Jan. 1. The bill’s sponsor, state Sen. Brian Munzlinger (R), said: “The basis of this whole bill is that it allows law-abiding citizens to protect themselves and their families.”

A week ago, on February 22, New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu (R) signed a law that allows anyone who has purchased a licensed pistol or revolver to carry it, loaded or unloaded, on him or herself or in a vehicle. Sununu’s predecessor, Sen. Maggie Hassan (D), twice vetoed the legislation. Jeb Bradley (R), the majority leader of the state Senate, said, “We have historically allowed people to openly carry a pistol. I don’t see why you have to get a second permit if you’re a law-abiding citizen and legally entitled to own a gun.”

The New Hampshire law went into effect immediately. Previously, gun owners had to apply for a concealed-carry permit with the local police chief, who granted or denied the request. Bradley said that numerous people were unfairly denied permits, but police chiefs testified during hearings that few applications were turned down.

gun-control-72

But the permitless concealed carry is opposed by some police chiefs:

  • In New Hampshire, Portsmouth Police Commissioner Joseph Plaia, who is a member of Granite State Coalition for Common Sense — an offshoot of the gun control group Americans for Responsible Solutions founded by former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords  — said in a statement: “This bill will eliminate the state’s long-standing permitting system and prevent local law enforcement from making important determinations that help keep guns out of dangerous hands.”
  • In Missouri, St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay (D) and the city’s police chief Sam Dotson said it would make neighborhoods less safe and make it more difficult for police to do their jobs.

Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, said the passage of such laws are an “anomaly” and occur in “legislatures that have been doing the NRA’s bidding.”

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures and the National Rifle Association (NRA), 16 states have introduced legislation this year to do the same, including Colorado, Indiana, Kentucky and Texas.

The legislation has been dubbed “permitless carry” or “constitutional carry,” as proponents believe that people have a constitutional right to carry a gun with as few restrictions as possible. Gun rights advocates see the laws as the next frontier in Second Amendment rights. Jennifer Baker, a spokeswoman for the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, said, “That’s kind of the next step in expanding law-abiding gun owners’ constitutional right to self-protection. It’s where a lot of states are moving.”

Nationwide, the legislation has been contentious and has failed in states that are traditional bastions of gun rights, with law enforcement members, politicians and gun proponents arguing that the bills go too far:

  • In Montana, Gov. Steve Bullock (D) vetoed a bill allowing for the carrying of concealed guns without a permit on February 23, saying in a veto letter that the state’s sheriffs may require safety training before granting a concealed-carry permit and can deny permits to people struggling with mental illness. Equating the bill to allowing people to drive cars, fly planes or erect buildings without determining if they are eligible and able to do so, Bullock wrote: “While I will fiercely defend the 2nd Amendment rights of our citizens, I cannot support an absurd concept that threatens the safety of our communities by not providing for the basic fundamentals of gun safety or mental health screening.”
  • In South Dakota, Gov. Dennis Daugaard (R), who said he is a lifetime member of the NRA, vowed in an op-ed in the Rapid City Journal that he would veto a bill that would establish permitless carry in the state because it is “bad legislation” that could have many unintended consequences. South Dakota does not require a permit to purchase a gun and a concealed-carry permit costs $10 and requires a background check.

Source: Washington Post

~Eowyn

US appeals court upholds Maryland assault weapons ban

debbie ar15

Me shooting a “weapon of war.” Molṑn Labé.

Next stop: SCOTUS.

From Fox News: Maryland’s ban on 45 kinds of assault weapons and its 10-round limit on gun magazines were upheld Tuesday by a federal appeals court in a decision that met with a strongly worded dissent.

In a 10-4 ruling, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., said the guns banned under Maryland’s law aren’t protected by the Second Amendment.

“Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war,” Judge Robert King wrote for the court, adding that the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller explicitly excluded such coverage.

Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, who led the push for the law in 2013 as a state senator, said it’s “unthinkable that these weapons of war, weapons that caused the carnage in Newtown and in other communities across the country, would be protected by the Second Amendment.”

“It’s a very strong opinion, and it has national significance, both because it’s en-banc and for the strength of its decision,” Frosh said, noting that all of the court’s judges participated.

Judge William Traxler issued a dissent. By concluding the Second Amendment doesn’t even apply, Traxler wrote, the majority “has gone to greater lengths than any other court to eviscerate the constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms.” He also wrote that the court did not apply a strict enough review on the constitutionality of the law.

“For a law-abiding citizen who, for whatever reason, chooses to protect his home with a semi-automatic rifle instead of a semi-automatic handgun, Maryland’s law clearly imposes a significant burden on the exercise of the right to arm oneself at home, and it should at least be subject to strict scrutiny review before it is allowed to stand,” Traxler wrote.

National Rifle Association spokeswoman Jennifer Baker said, “It is absurd to hold that the most popular rifle in America is not a protected arm' under the Second Amendment."</strong> She added that the majority opinion "clearly ignores the Supreme Court's guidance from District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects arms that arein common use at the time for lawful purposes like self-defense.”‘

The NRA estimates there are 5 million to 10 million AR-15s — one of the weapons banned under Maryland’s law — in circulation in the United States for lawful purposes. Asked about an appeal, Baker said the NRA is exploring all options.

But Elizabeth Banach, executive director of Marylanders to Prevent Gun Violence, said the decision is “overwhelming proof that reasonable measures to prevent gun violence are constitutional.”

“Maryland’s law needs to become a national model of evidence-based policies that will reduce gun violence,” Banach wrote in a statement.

U.S. District Judge Catherine Blake upheld the ban in 2015, but a divided three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last year that she didn’t apply the proper legal standard. The panel sent the case back to Blake and ordered her to apply “strict scrutiny,” a more rigorous test of a law’s constitutionality. The state appealed to the full appeals court.

Maryland passed the sweeping gun-control measure after the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre that killed 20 children and six educators in Connecticut. King mentioned the massacre at the start of the ruling.

“Both before and after Newtown, similar military-style rifles and detachable magazines have been used to perpetrate mass shootings in places whose names have become synonymous with the slaughters that occurred there,” King wrote. He listed the 2012 shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado; the December 2015 shootings in San Bernardino, California; and the shootings last year at an Orlando, Florida, nightclub, where 49 people were killed and 53 injured.

King also noted that enacting the law is “precisely the type of judgment that legislatures are allowed to make without second-guessing by a court.”

“Simply put, the State has shown all that is required: a reasonable, if not perfect, fit between the (Firearms Safety Act) and Maryland’s interest in protecting public safety,” King wrote.

DCG

Washington senator insists insurance bill is not about gun control

maralyn-chase

Maralyn Chase: Fully believes in your Second Amendment rights, HOWEVER…

Attention Ms. Chase:

  1. You have a Constitutional right to own a firearm. A home or car is not a Constitutional right.
  2. You do NOT have to purchase insurance (unless you are financing in which case it is usually required). Sure, you take on higher risks and even fines yet there are plenty of people who opt out of purchasing insurance.

From MyNorthwest.com: The Washington State Legislature is considering a series of gun control measures that includes Attorney General Bob Ferguson’s assault weapon ban and a gun lock safety bill.

One senator has introduced a measure that takes on the issue a different way, requiring liability insurance before someone can buy a gun.

Sen. Maralyn Chase (D-Edmonds) says people have to buy insurance for their homes, their cars, and other items, so having it for guns makes sense to her (of course it does – she’s a democrat).

Chase insists her bill is not about gun control, but rather public and private protections.

“I fully believe in Second Amendment rights, however, with those rights come great responsibilities,” Chase said. “We see the destructive power of guns almost nightly on the news and yet we do not require gun owners to have any type of liability insurance. Requiring liability insurance may cause an irresponsible gun owner to exercise extra care in preventing firearm-related accidents, especially in tragic accidents involving children.”

Dave Workman, senior editor of thegunmag.com, doesn’t believe gun liability insurance will do anything to cut down on crime or gun related accidents. “This is one more hoop that somebody is trying to throw out there to require people to jump through before they can exercise a civil right,” he said. “If they did this, or tried to do this, the howling would be heard all the way from our Washington to Washington D.C.”

Workman says politicians can only go so far with something like this before getting a negative reaction from the public. He doesn’t believe the bill will get much traction in Olympia.

Senator Chase agrees. She admits it will be difficult to get it out of the Senate given the current political makeup. But, she says, it’s important to get the discussion started. For now, her bill sits in the Senate’s Law and Justice Committee, with no hearing scheduled.

There is one group that’s in favor of gun liability insurance — insurance companies. Insurance companies sell policies for self-defense use of guns and concealed carry. It’s even NRA-endorsed. As described in a video promoting “Second Call Defense,” the “legal aftermath of a self-defense shooting can sometimes seem worse than what causes you to use lethal force in the first place.” (See the video at the MyNorthwest.com article.)

DCG