Fierce Patriots

Conservative Political News

  • Subscribe

<![CDATA[Brady]]>

Gun control groups react to Biden executive order

by Leave a Comment

It’ll come as no shock at all that gun control groups are celebrating President Joe Biden’s latest executive order. It’s kind of their reason for existing, after all.

The new move comes as the Biden administration has been forced to recognize that they’re simply not going to get the levels of gun control the president wants. That means activists aren’t getting what they want, either.

This order is an attempt to come a bit closer, at least in theory.

But what are they saying?

Well, here’s what Everytown had to say:

Everytown for Gun Safety and its grassroots networks, Moms Demand Action and Students Demand Action, released the following statements as President Biden today announces new, lifesaving executive actions ahead of a visit to Monterey Park, California to honor the lives of the 11 people killed and nine injured in the January mass shooting during a Lunar New Year celebration.

“President Biden’s executive order today is a home run for public safety,” said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety. “This is the latest example of President Biden’s leadership on gun safety and we’re proud to stand with him as he takes robust action to help close the gun seller loophole — which will significantly expand background checks on gun sales, keep weapons out of the hands of dangerous people, and save lives.”

“President Biden continues to deliver meaningful action to save lives from gun violence,” said Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action. “Our grassroots army helped pass the first federal gun safety law in a generation and we’re now proud to support this Administration fully implementing the law and using every tool in their disposal to keep our families and communities safe.”

The President is issuing an executive order today, directing the Attorney General to maximize the number of background checks on gun sales by clarifying the definition of what it means to be “engaged in the business” of selling firearms. Closing this gun seller loophole has been a key Everytown priority for implementation of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA).

The next step is for the Attorney General and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) to quickly take the President’s clear, strong directive and turn it into action. Enforcement guidance and substantive rulemaking should make clear that anyone who offers a gun for sale at a gun show or pursuant to an advertisement — including online ads — is presumptively engaged in the business of selling guns and needs to run background checks. This clarification would accomplish the President’s goal, be legally permissible, and tackle the commercial marketplaces that are the source of firearms for felons, domestic abusers and gun traffickers that are seeking to avoid background checks. The proposed regulation would go through the notice and comment rulemaking process in order to carry the full effect of law.

Notably, the Executive Order also directs the Executive Branch to effectively use Extreme Risk (or “Red Flag”) laws and expand existing federal efforts to promote secure storage of firearms. It helps hold the gun industry accountable by directing the release of hard-to-access information about rogue gun dealers that have violated the law and encouraging the independent Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to issue a public report analyzing how gun manufacturers market firearms to minors and exploit military imagery to market their products, echoing petitions currently before the FTC filed by Everytown. And it directs federal agencies to determine how to better support the survivors of gun violence following a mass shooting.

I’ll get into this whole “hold the gun industry accountable” thing in a moment.

It’s unsurprising that Everytown would applaud gun control, no matter how little it may be. Like I said, that’s their reason for existing in the first place.

And they’re far from the only ones. Here’s Brady’s take:

President Joe Biden today announced several executive actions that would, among other things, expand use of the Brady Background Check system, improve awareness and increase use of extreme risk laws, and increase gun industry transparency and accountability. Brady for years has urged the federal government to release gun store inspection reports and violation data.

Brady President Kris Brown stated:

“These orders show yet again that the Biden Administration is working to explore every avenue they have to meaningfully address gun violence in ways no president has ever done before. President Biden’s executive orders will go a long way in preventing tragedies that kill over 40,000 people in America each year.

“While we ultimately can only achieve universal background checks through legislative action from Congress, President Biden’s announcement today gets us closer to that reality than any other President that has come before. The majorities of Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and gun owners alike support expanding Brady Background Checks for gun purchases. And because robust data shows background checks work — including by preventing mass shootings, gun suicide, and more — we know the President’s measure will save countless lives.

“Additionally, releasing records of gun industry violations will shine a light on licensed dealers and manufacturers that are unable or unwilling to follow the law, ensure that dangerous sellers are held accountable for their actions, and provide researchers and journalists important data on gun industry compliance and malpractices. For years, Brady has fought for – and won – the release of these records under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Yet we have long advocated for ATF to cut through the red tape of the FOIA process and proactively and routinely release these inspection reports to the public. We are thrilled that President Biden has instructed ATF to do just that.

“We applaud the Biden-Harris Administration for their leadership and commitment to addressing the gun violence epidemic.”

Again, we have this idea that this will somehow “hold the gun industry accountable.” Never mind that the firearm industry is one of the most regulated industries in the nation, with only the pharmaceutical industry giving them a run for the title.

They’re accountable.

What this order does is, well, nothing. Nothing at all.

Not with regard to anything we might agree is an actual problem, at least.

Oh, I’m sure gun stores might find their name up on a website and get blasted as violators of the law, but let’s be real here, if they were truly violating the law, they’d have lost their license. What we’ll see are people who make some clerical errors–either because of staffing issues, dyslexia, or just being human–while the actual criminals are still running around selling guns without even pretending to do it lawfully.

Absolutely brilliant.

But groups like Everytown and Brady don’t give a fig about them. They continue to remain focused on licensed dealers, despite their stated desire to reduce “gun violence,” most of which comes from guns obtained illegally in the first place.

Then we have the directive to the FTC, which the groups are also celebrating. I’m going to tell you outright that yes, the gun industry uses military images to sell guns. Want to know why? Because it works. Grown men, such as myself, respond to that imagery. We buy guns in part because of that imagery.

“But they’re marketing to kids.”

Even if that were true, and it’s not, it wouldn’t matter because kids can’t buy guns you silly twits. While kids might want them, it takes a lawful adult to actually get one. It doesn’t matter how badly the kid wants it, either.

Seriously, this is running long enough and I’ll be surprised if anyone is still reading after the migraines induced due to eye-rolling at the gun control crowd’s nonsense. Let’s just say that we’re going to be addressing just about every aspect of this crap in the coming days and weeks, because stupid cannot remain unanswered.

Anti-gun activists melting down over “pause” on merchant codes for gun stores

by Leave a Comment

The gun control lobby is taking the news that companies like Visa and Mastercard have hit the “pause” button on their rollout of new merchant category codes for gun stores about as well as you’d expect. That is to say, there’s a lot of frothing at the mouth and complaining that the companies are “caving to the gun lobby”, as well as dubious claims that these codes would actually be helpful at identifying potential violent criminals and preventing them from carrying out their crimes.

That last claim is something that companies like Visa and Mastercard have disputed all along; not because they’re spineless tools of the gun lobby, but because these merchant category codes aren’t designed or meant to identify a particular purchase, much less determine if its “suspicious” in nature. As Visa’s outgoing CEO Al Kelly told Time in January:

I’ve heard from everybody. I don’t think there’s a senator or member of the House or attorney general in the United States I haven’t heard from. I’m telling them that we will follow the law. Guns are allowed in the United States and we would fully expect that anybody who wants to buy a gun should be able to buy that that gun provided all the other checks are done. On top of that, we’re telling them that we don’t collect [that level of data] for consumers. So if [Visa’s Chief Communications Officer] K.C. Kavanagh goes into a gun store and buys three thermoses and a tent, and you go in and buy a rifle and five rounds of ammunition, all I know is you both went to the same gun store. I know what gun store, I know when you went, and I know how much money you spent. But I don’t know what you bought.

I don’t think the code was necessary. But it doesn’t matter; the code is in place. It’s now an international standard and we adopt international standards.

Apparently not, at least if states threaten to fine companies that do use the codes. That’s ostensibly the reason for Visa, Mastercard, Discover, and American Express all halting efforts to implement the MCCs, but Kelly and other industry executives had also been pretty clear in their statements that the codes aren’t the valuable public safety tool anti-gun activists have made them out to be. In the wake of the decision to halt work on implementing the codes, anti-gun activists are now all but blaming credit card companies for any and all future mass shootings.

“It is shameful to hear reports that credit card companies Visa and Mastercard have caved to the gun lobby’s transparent political ploys. If true, Visa and Mastercard are choosing political expediency over American lives. Make no mistake, Americans will continue to suffer and die as a result of this deadly decision. Having a dedicated process to flag troubling and suspicious firearms purchases, like they already do to detect other fraudulent purchases, is a common-sense strategy for companies to save lives and prevent the next mass shooting,” said Brady President Kris Brown. “We urge Visa and Mastercard to correct their course immediately. The choice they have now is clear: adopt this new tool at their disposal to prevent gun violence, or drag their feet while gun violence devastates our communities across the country. Every delay of action results in more lives needlessly taken.”

Note that “troubling” and “suspicious” are very different than “fraudulent.” A purchase made with a stolen credit card is easy enough to identify, especially if the cardholder flags the transaction for credit card companies. Who, on the other hand, defines “troubling” or “suspicious” transactions? For anti-gunners, it could be something as routine as making purchases at a gun shop several days in a row, or spending more than they think you should.

These reporting requirements were meant to highlight potential financial crimes, not to prevent violent crimes from ever taking place. Brown and other anti-gun activists make it sound like these merchant category codes are high-tech pre-crime tools, but the reality is far different.

I will say that there was one thing that surprised me in the anti-gunner’s collective statement of outrage: not one of them said anything about blue-states like California responding in kind to the red-state laws that supposedly led to the cold feet on the part of companies like Visa and Mastercard. Maybe they don’t want to tip their hands, but those efforts are almost certainly coming. Gavin Newsom loves to pick culture war fights, and if he’s going after Walgreens over abortion then it probably won’t be long before he demands credit card companies either implement these MCCs or face the wrath of lawmakers in Sacramento.

Huge: Major credit card companies halt rollout of codes for gun store purchases

by Leave a Comment

The merchant category codes demanded by gun control groups that were announced to great fanfare last fall are now in limbo after major credit card companies, including Visa and Mastercard, announced on Wednesday that they’re halting their rollout of the codes in response to a number of bills filed in red states that bar the use of the codes and promise fines for those credit card companies that use them.

The companies have never really been on board with the category code since the far-left Amalgamated Bank and gun control activists began lobbying for the International Standardization Organization to create one several years ago. The anti-gunners claim the code will help prevent mass shootings by requiring the companies to flag “suspicious transactions” at firearms retailers, but both Visa and Mastercard executives have said the codes don’t identify specific purchases, and the responsibility to flag any transactions deemed suspicious is more about reducing banking fraud and other financial crimes. At the very least, the legislation both companies referenced in today’s decision may have given the companies an easy out for a scheme they were never really on board with in the first place.

“There are bills advancing in several states related to the use of this new code,” a spokesman for Mastercard said in a statement Thursday. If passed, the proposals would create an “inconsistency” in how the code is applied by merchants and others, he said. “It’s for that reason that we have decided to pause work on the implementation of the firearms-specific MCC.”

Visa also took a pause because of the “significant confusion and legal uncertainty” the legislative proposals have created, according to a spokesperson.

…

“MCCs are one data point that would not provide any insight on specific purchases or resolve larger issues,” the Mastercard spokesman said. “We are committed to working with policymakers and elected officials to contribute to constructive solutions that address the gun violence issue, while respecting important constitutional rights and protections for lawful activities.”

In addition to the announcement by Visa and Mastercard, Discover now says it will not be rolling out the use of the MCCs as it had previously announced just a few weeks ago. American Express is also “pausing” its implementation of the MCCs for the time being, so it does look like most major companies are in agreement.

As you can imagine, gun control groups are losing their minds over the decision. Here’s a taste of Brady’s press release on the announcement:

“It is shameful to hear that credit card companies Visa and Mastercard have caved to the gun lobby’s transparent political ploys. 

“If true, Visa and Mastercard are choosing political expediency over American lives. Make no mistake, Americans will continue to suffer and die as a result of this deadly decision. Having a dedicated process to flag troubling and suspicious firearms purchases, like they already do to detect other fraudulent purchases, is a common-sense strategy for companies to save lives and prevent the next mass shooting.

“We urge Visa and Mastercard to correct their course immediately. The choice they have now is clear: adopt this new tool at their disposal to prevent gun violence, or drag their feet while gun violence devastates our communities across the country. Every delay of action results in more lives needlessly taken.” 

Remember, the codes don’t identify specific purchases. Companies like Visa and Mastercard are supposed to determine if a purchase is suspicious based on the dollar amount and the frequency of any purchases at gun shops; an utterly impossible task, at least without generating an untold number of false flags.

However, it won’t just be gun control activists huffing and puffing. Look for California Gov. Gavin Newsom to respond in some form or fashion, and we’ll probably see other blue states introduce counter-legislation (at least where the legislative calendar permits it) that would penalize credit card companies that don’t implement the MCC’s for firearm retailers. Today’s news is a very welcome development for Second Amendment advocates, but I doubt it’s the end of the story.

Media, anti-2A cite non-existent “gap” in law to push for Extreme Risk Protection Orders

by Leave a Comment

On January 31st, a 32-year old man walked into a Target store in Omaha, Nebraska carrying a semi-automatic rifle and fired off several rounds. Thankfully no one was injured, except for the shooter himself, who was shot and killed by responding police. While police haven’t said what the man’s motivation was, it sounds like it may very well have been a case of “suicide by cop”, and there’s no doubt that Joseph Jones had been experiencing severe mental troubles for years before his death.

In the last three years of his life, Joseph Jones was repeatedly sent to psychiatric hospitals because of his schizophrenia and delusions that a drug cartel was after him. The Nebraska man once lay down on a highway in Kansas because he wanted to be run over by a truck, but officers tackled him as he ran in front of vehicles. Time and time again, his family and the police took away his guns.

But Jones was able to keep legally buying firearms and law enforcement could do little. Once a deputy returned a Glock pistol to him, while another time a sheriff’s department confiscated his gun, although keeping it raised questions. Last month, Jones opened fire in an Omaha Target store using a legally purchased AR-15 rifle. No one was hit by Jones’ gunfire, but police shot and killed the 32-year-old as shoppers fled in panic.

In the Associated Press’s view, the incident “demonstrates how gun laws fail to keep firearms out of the hands of deeply troubled people, despite a national effort to pass red-flag laws in recent years.” According to that narrative, if Nebraska (or maybe Congress) had passed a “red-flag” law, then Joseph could have been legally disarmed.

Nebraska isn’t among the 19 states with a red-flag law. Also known as extreme risk protection orders, they’re intended to restrict the purchase of guns or temporarily remove them from people who may hurt themselves or someone else.

A red-flag law has been proposed for Nebraska this year, but it hasn’t received a legislative hearing yet.

“This is a kind of example screaming out for an extreme risk protection order,” said Kris Brown, the president of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. “It actually breaks my heart that that did not happen here.”

As the AP ultimately admits, however, there was another tool already available that Jones’ family could have used to bar him from lawfully purchasing or possessing a firearm, but it’s a step his family never took.

Federal law has banned some mentally ill people from buying guns since 1968, including those deemed a danger to themselves or others, who have been involuntarily committed, or judged not guilty by reason of insanity or incompetent to stand trial.

But it sets what Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives spokesman John Ham described as a “very high bar.” In order for someone’s name to be submitted to the FBI for inclusion in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, they must undergo a hearing in which they are deemed unable to take care of their personal business because of mental illness.

The law describes it as being “adjudicated as a mental defective.” Every state has a different process, but the multiple three-day involuntary commitments that Jones’ family and law enforcement records described didn’t trigger such a hearing.

A couple of years ago, Jones’ family was so desperate that they considered going through the process. They are familiar with some of the court processes because Jones’ mother also has schizophrenia, is low functioning and had to be committed to a group home.

But they decided not to pursue that because they were able to persuade law enforcement to intervene and get Jones into a mental hospital.

So why didn’t they pursue a formal adjudication after Jones was released? According to the AP, Jones was “repeatedly” in and out of mental institutions over the past three years, which means that there were multiple opportunities for the family to go through the process.

There is no “gap” in Nebraska law, despite the AP’s claims. There is a process by which someone can be adjudicated as a mental defective, and that formal adjudication would have barred Joseph Jones from lawfully owning a gun. The fact that the family didn’t pursue that adjudication isn’t an indication that a “red flag” law would be an improvement over the existing process. Frankly, it sounds to me like Jones needed more intensive mental health care than what he received, but “red flag” laws don’t typically have any mental health component to them at all. Once any lawfully-owned firearms are removed from the subject of a “red flag” order, the system considers the issue to be closed… at least until the order expires or prosecutors attempt to renew it.

This is a sad story all around, and that includes gun control groups like Brady exploiting the incident to push for a “red flag” law. Like most other states, Nebraska’s mental health system is in a crisis all its own, and if lawmakers want to “do something” in response to Jones’ actions they should work to repair that broken system instead of adding more gun laws to the books.