<![CDATA[Gun Rights]]>

Column: Texas abortion law could bite right in the butt

March 28, 2022 by Tom Knighton Leave a Comment

The controversial Texas abortion law, SB8, doesn’t actually ban abortion. It does mean people can make money by filing lawsuits against abortion providers, though.

For a lot of people on the right, this was a winning proposition. It was a way to get around the courts that have argued abortion is constitutional.

However, as a column at the LA Times points out, it can be used against the right as well. It’s titled, “Column: Love Texas’ SB 8 because you hate abortion? Wait until a copycat law comes for your gun rights.”

For months now, the federal courts have aided and abetted an outrageous attack on the rule of law.
With judges’ willing participation, abortion opponents have succeeded in the most brazen deprivation of constitutional rights since Jim Crow. They’ve accomplished this reprehensible feat with an unprecedented and tortuous abortion-ban enforcement scheme that is itself a separate offense against the Constitution.
At the next opportunity, the Supreme Court should invalidate this scheme, which is tantamount to open season on constitutional protections in blue and red states alike.

Now, beyond the title, gun rights aren’t actually mentioned. However, we already know that California is considering its own scheme to go after gun makers and sellers in a similar manner.

That’s bad.

However, it should also be remembered that there are differences between the abortion industry and the firearm industry. For one thing, abortion doesn’t actually show up in the Constitution. Roe vs. Wade was decided based on interpretation of what the constitution covers, but it’s never explicitly protected.

Guns, well, they are.

Further, the anti-gun left kind of blew their chances on this one ages ago. They tried to bankrupt the firearm industry long before the Texas abortion law was ever a thing through their own laws. We got the Protection of Lawful Commerce of Arms Act as a result.

That also means the PLCAA should, in theory, prevent such lawsuits from going forward. State law cannot trump federal law.

So, that means there will be difficulties in implementing such a measure focused on the firearm industry.

Yet that doesn’t mean they won’t try. Look at the Remington lawsuit that was recently settled with the families of Sandy Hook victims. Remington did nothing wrong and I really believe a court would have found that to be the case. Yet that settlement has emboldened the anti-Second Amendment crowd, much as how passing a gun-focused version of the Texas abortion law.

They will pass such a law and it will be used. In fact, I expect the first lawsuits to be filled immediately after the law goes into effect.

It’ll be up to the courts to put the hammer down on this nonsense.

However, there’s a lesson here for everyone to consider. What you do can and will be done unto you when it comes to laws. Do you think you found a novel way around the Constitution? Congratulations, but should you follow through with that? Picture what you’d do if the other side came up with such a thing.

People need to start thinking more long-term on some of this stuff, because our gun rights will be impacted by this.

Polymer80 defends itself from criticism

March 28, 2022 by Tom Knighton Leave a Comment

Polymer80 is perpetually under fire. After all, they make a product that’s pretty much designed to get around ATF regulations. It’s bound to piss some people off just because they exist.

However, with all the rhetoric about so-called ghost guns, there have been few in the media willing to reach out and get Polymer80’s take on the whole situation.

It seems NBC News actually did.

Los Angeles has been a hot spot for ghost guns, experts say. Last year, the Los Angeles Police Department recovered 8,661 firearms. Of those, 1,921 — or more than 22 percent — were ghost guns.
And, according to data from the LAPD included in a recent court filing, 1,722 of those ghost guns — almost 90 percent — were made from kits produced by a single company: Polymer80.
Nevada-based Polymer80 is one of the largest manufacturers of do-it-yourself ghost gun kits in the country. But that success has also put the company in the crosshairs. Apolinar and Perez-Perez sued the company last year. Their suit — which alleges Polymer80 acted negligently and violated firearms laws — follows cases brought by the city of Los Angeles and by Washington, D.C., which also accuse the company of disregarding state and federal gun laws.
A lawyer for Polymer80 said after the raid that it was cooperating with the investigation.
Reached by phone, Polymer80’s president, Loran L. Kelley Jr., emphasized that the company hasn’t been charged with any crime and disputed ATF’s allegations that the company’s ghost gun kits qualify as firearms that are regulated under federal law. He declined to comment on the pending civil lawsuits, citing advice from the company’s attorneys.
“Polymer80 is a law-abiding company,” he said. “Always has been. We’ve always been aboveboard.”
He added, “It’s a legitimate company catering to a sector of the market that has nothing to do with a criminal element.”

Here’s the thing, I don’t find that difficult to believe.

Yes, criminals appear to be embracing these types of guns, but there are a few facts that reports like this always seem to ignore.

First, Polymer80 is far from the only way to get an incomplete receiver. I mean, you can just 3D print a receiver these days, which means even if they shot the company and any other companies down, people will still be able to build firearms.

Second, let’s not forget that it wasn’t exactly difficult for bad guys to get guns before Polymer80 started up.

Notice how little of this really includes any context. They talk about 80 percent of homemade guns found by the LAPD, but there are few actual numbers that can present how big of a problem this is. Or now big it’s not.

That’s just par for the course with any discussion of unserialized firearms, I’m afraid.

Look, Polymer80 hasn’t broken the law so far as anyone can tell. The ATF took issue with them selling a full kit, but the requirements have never been about whether a receiver can be assembled into a gun readily after completion. Either the receiver is a gun or it’s not. If it’s not, it shouldn’t matter what else is sold with it.

The truth is that a lot of law-abiding citizens want these kits and the ATF really only has itself to blame for it.

After all, who is trying to digitize all past records, thus creating a de facto database of gun owners? I mean, I can’t imagine why a law-abiding citizen might want a gun that doesn’t go through with the whole paperwork thing that could easily be used to disarm American citizens.

No one trusts the government to preserve our right to keep and bear arms because the government has made it clear that they can’t be trusted. So, Polymer80 provides people with a means of having a gun that can’t show up on the radar.

But that genie is out of the bottle, so it’s time to get over it and start looking for an actual way to reduce crime.

Hampton Roads Black Caucus member talks gun education

March 26, 2022 by Tom Knighton Leave a Comment

The last time I heard anything from a member of the Hampton Roads Black Caucus, it was someone saying that gun buybacks were really about showing the community that they cared, not in actually accomplishing anything.

He was honest, at the very least. Yet another member of the group is speaking up, but this time he’s talking gun education.

He was a former gang member and drug dealer. Then, he spent 25 years in the Navy before becoming a firearms instructor in Virginia Beach.
Joel Jones, who runs Strong Arms Gun Club and serves as a member of the Hampton Roads Black Caucus, is speaking up after the senseless deaths of two 25-year-olds struck by bullets in Downtown Norfolk after an argument broke out over a spilled drink.
“It’s not knowing the law that’s gonna get you in more trouble, not for things we know,” Jones said.
Jones spends his days teaching gun safety, training and education.
“Virginia is an open-carry state, meaning you can openly carry a firearm displayed or concealed carry with a permit,” he said. “You are allowed to carry a gun in a bar or restaurant.”
Something he says some people may forget or not know — the law states you can’t drink while having a firearm on you.

Truth be told, Jones isn’t wrong. A lot of people only know part of the law, if that.

Worse, people will “learn” what they can and can’t do from their buddies. As a Navy man myself, Jones will recognize the term “sea lawyer” just as well as I do, but other groups have their own version. Barracks lawyers, jailhouse lawyers, and so on, all are people who talk an awful lot about the law but rarely show any evidence of knowing more than their peers despite their confidence.

When it comes to gun education, that can be a huge mistake.

“But Tom, isn’t that kind of what you do?”

Yes and no. I discuss laws all the time, sure, and how they’re applied, but I also link other sources, address those, and try to support my arguments with evidence.

Further, I’ve got an editor (Hi, Cam!) who can, will, and has told me I’m wrong on something. As a married man, I’m used to this so I don’t get my ego shattered over it, but it also keeps me from straying into the realm of fantasy.

The random guy trying to give you “gun education” doesn’t have that.

Think about the tactical advice you’ve heard at the gun store for a bit. Yeah, carry with a chamber empty, you only need a shotgun for home defense, all of that nonsense. Now, remember that these people are also offering up legal advice.

I’m not a lawyer, but they’re absolutely clueless.

Jones is right that the stuff you don’t know may well get you in trouble. It’s imperative that you get some actual training as to what you can and cannot do with a firearm lawfully in your state.

As for drinking with a gun, even if it’s legal, don’t do it. I shouldn’t have to tell you this, but apparently, some people don’t know, so just knock it off and don’t mix alcohol and firearms.

March For Our Lives puts body bags on National Mall

March 25, 2022 by Tom Knighton Leave a Comment

March For Our Lives was founded in the aftermath of Parkland. To hear gun control advocates and the media tell it, they were going to change the debate forever.

Well, they haven’t.

Oh, they make a lot of noise and the school walkout made some headlines, but like a lot of the hype didn’t match reality.

Since their founding, they’ve tried a few protests to…I don’t know. But they tried another one.

Activists with the March For Our Lives organization brought a grim message to lawmakers in Washington, D.C. Thursday.
On the four-year anniversary of the March For Our Lives rally, activists placed over 1,100 fake body bags to spell out “Thoughts and Prayers” at the National Mall.
It has been four years since thousands of people protested in D.C. to demand action on the gun violence epidemic in the wake of the 2018 school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.

As Shakespeare said, “It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

Oh, using the body bags to spell out “thoughts and prayers” is them pretending they’re clever. However, what they forget is that there are two sides to the debate, and those of us on this side will argue that we’re saving lives too.

Part of me would love to sneak up and rearrange the bags so they spell “gun control kills” just to make that point.

But March For Our Lives is nothing if not oblivious to the fact that their preferred narrative isn’t universally accepted. Honestly, this effort is exactly the kind of preachy nonsense we’ve come to expect from the David Hogg crowd.

See, what they’re taking issue with is that after a shooting, people offer thoughts and prayers, but then don’t pass gun control. For them, it’s the only possible solution that can even be considered.

It’s a myopathy that permeates the gun control movement so completely that it becomes virtually impossible to engage in any kind of debate. You either agree with them or you’re intentionally complicit in any and all crimes against humanity.

For the guys who like to talk about nuance, they sure don’t comprehend it here.

Yet when you look at the homicide rate throughout the 20th century, you’ll find that the rate didn’t exactly go down following the passing of the Gun Control Act in 1968. Instead, it started skyrocketing, reaching a peak in the 1990s that only really started going down after states began liberalizing their gun laws.

If gun control were an unmitigated good and the only possible solution, as March For Our Lives members would have us believe, then how can that be the case?

That would involve them looking at the subject from a distance beyond their nose so as to get a better view of it. They’ve been told gun control is the answer so now they’re going to tell everyone else it’s the answer and they’ll do it by arranging body bags because they think making lawmakers feel guilty will override the facts.

I’d tell March For Our Lives to do better, but I don’t think they’re capable of it.

South Dakota eliminates fees on carry permits

March 24, 2022 by Tom Knighton Leave a Comment

While constitutional carry is the Holy Grail of gun rights these days–and a number of states have embraced them–there are varying degrees of laws regarding the carry of firearms. From “may issue” to constitutional carry, there’s a lot that can happen.

In South Dakota, Gov. Kristi Noem just signed a bill that just went beyond constitutional carry in and of itself.

South Dakota Republican Gov. Kristi Noem on Tuesday signed legislation that repeals all concealed carry permit fees in the state.
“Three years ago, I took a bold stand by signing constitutional carry into law to ensure there were no barriers between South Dakotans and their rights,” Noem told Fox News Digital. “This week, I took the step to remove a financial barrier. It shouldn’t cost you a penny to exercise your Second Amendment rights. Government exists to protect our rights, not profit from them.”
The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action said the measure, Senate Bill 212, “reduces the cost of South Dakota carry permits to $0.”

Now, South Dakota already has constitutional carry. What the bill does is remove the fee for permits, which means those who wish for a permit due to reciprocity can do so without having to pay for it.

It looks like a small thing, but it’s really not.

The thing is, this could also be one of those degrees between “may issue” and constitutional carry. Imagine a state that’s not ready to pass constitutional carry, but considers a bill like this instead. It still removes a burden from law-abiding citizens, it just does it in a different order.

Hell, my first instinct when I saw the news was to think that’s what South Dakota had done–I’d forgotten they’d passed constitutional carry back in 2019. In fairness, a lot has happened since then.

Still, this is a great move that a lot of other states should follow up on.

There’s no reason people should have to pay a fee just to exercise their basic Second Amendment rights. While the permit shouldn’t be required, it still is in a slight majority of states. As such, people still need permits, which can be costly.

South Dakota’s new measure eliminates that burden. They’re not treating gun owners as a money tree they can just pull cash from year after year, and that’s an incredible change of pace.

Now, for every other state to pass this, whether or not they do it before or after constitutional carry is irrelevant in my eyes. They just need to do it.

Of course, not all will and we all know those who are least likely to pass something like this.

The funny thing is that I can’t imagine a single valid argument they can present against it. Especially as we know they’d never tolerate quite the same fees for protests–fees exist for protests, but they’re generally either minor or serve more like a fee for services incurred by the protest.

Unfortunately, I’m unsure just how many states will follow South Dakota’s lead. I just know it won’t be enough.