Guns

[goldenvalley]

Apr 29, 2021 15:41:59 GMT LFC said:

Apr 29, 2021 13:06:55 GMT goldenvalley said:

Competent at what?  Hitting the intended target?  That doesn't make me feel better.

If it's a proper training abd certification (note the word "proper" which carries a lot of weight in this context) then safe gun handling is THE major topic. The marksmanship part is actually pretty trivial. I suspect a number of people who hardly ever shot could, with just a little coaching, fire a group that's tight enough. These courses aren't there to help you compete. They're there to ensure you can handle your firearm safely and shoot well enough to be safe.

Unfortunately I view the open carry types as having visions of being a hero in their head. (There are exceptions like store owners who do it to make people think twice about attempting a robbery but those are small use cases.) The training required to handle a firearm in an emergency situation is completely different, more intense, and vastly longer. If you're out of shape and waddling around with a pile of extra weight on your belly then you probably aren't mobile enough to do it competently.

The concealed carry folks don't also have that vision?  I suspect at least some of them do.  A number of high school friends of mine in Illinois are just sure they can handle just any situation they might find themselves in.   Considering many of them live in a rural area, they aren't likely to encounter a real bad guy doing bad things.  It is just a vision.

And time for an anecdote.  In Iowa many years ago my friend's mother arrived at her farm house to find that an actual home invasion was in process and her husband was tied up in the kitchen. She saw it through the window as she stepped on her back porch.  She picked up a shot gun they kept on the porch (to protect their chickens from coyotes), unloaded it, and walked in.  She bluffed the invader out of the house.  When asked why she unloaded, she said "Well I was worried that this guy would somehow get the shotgun away from me and I didn't want me or my husband to get shot."  

[LFC]

Apr 29, 2021 16:41:02 GMT goldenvalley said:

The concealed carry folks don't also have that vision?  I suspect at least some of them do. 

No doubt some of them do but I think the vast majority bordering on all of the open carry people have this fantasy. I would expect they're also more prone to flashing their gun, drawn or not, to intimidate and threaten people that they're just pissed off at which in itself is a crime. Think George Zimmerman who created a conflict situation and then claimed stand your ground. Ditto the assholes in Georgia that chased a black runner in a pickup truck. Or 17-year old vigilante wannabe Kyle Rittenhouse. The shelter in place i.e. "stand" part of stand your ground gets ignored way too often.

[HockeyDon]

Apr 29, 2021 15:41:59 GMT LFC said:

If it's a proper training abd certification (note the word "proper" which carries a lot of weight in this context) then safe gun handling is THE major topic. The marksmanship part is actually pretty trivial. I suspect a number of people who hardly ever shot could, with just a little coaching, fire a group that's tight enough. These courses aren't there to help you compete. They're there to ensure you can handle your firearm safely and shoot well enough to be safe.

Don't kid yourself. The training and certification are simply something to be tolerated. Don't believe for a second that the yahoos wanting wild west everywhere will take the lessons of the training and stop walking around with one in the chamber, stop waving it around, stop displaying their macho-ness, nor stop itching to use it on some perceived enemy.

[LFC]

Apr 30, 2021 12:15:34 GMT HockeyDon said:

Apr 29, 2021 15:41:59 GMT LFC said:

If it's a proper training abd certification (note the word "proper" which carries a lot of weight in this context) then safe gun handling is THE major topic. The marksmanship part is actually pretty trivial. I suspect a number of people who hardly ever shot could, with just a little coaching, fire a group that's tight enough. These courses aren't there to help you compete. They're there to ensure you can handle your firearm safely and shoot well enough to be safe.

Don't kid yourself. The training and certification are simply something to be tolerated. Don't believe for a second that the yahoos wanting wild west everywhere will take the lessons of the training and stop walking around with one in the chamber, stop waving it around, stop displaying their macho-ness, nor stop itching to use it on some perceived enemy.

Those people exist but I know multiple people who have their conceal carry permits who don't have a hero complex. We used to have a "problem child" (actually an adult) on the street and my wife was looking at being allowed to carry because we had issues with him. Trust me, she's not interested in a gunfight. The open carry folks? They want to show off their big swinging ... gun. As I said other than a very limited use case it's all about intimidation and "Look at me!" I don't trust them to be responsible, not even a little.

The yahoos who want the Wild West? There's no amount of safety training that will treat their mental illness. They need to attend sessions with a completely different type of person i.e. a mental health professional.

[LFC]

The Justice Department weighed in on the NRA's bankruptcy dodge and pretty much squashed it. I guess the concept of dodging the lawsuit file by one state through bankruptcy while keeping all your assets and running off to another state to just pick right back up didn't pass the smell test.

A Justice Department official all but quashed the National Rifle Association’s hopes at declaring bankruptcy and moving to Texas on Monday.

The U.S. Trustee, a DOJ office that enforces bankruptcy laws and which rarely takes sides in bankruptcy disputes, told a Texas federal judge that it opposed the NRA’s bankruptcy petition and that “the evidentiary record clearly and convincingly establishes” that NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre “failed to provide the proper oversight.”

“The record is unrefuted that Wayne LaPierre’s personal expenses were made to look like business expenses,” Assistant U.S. Trustee Lisa L. Lambert told federal bankruptcy judge Harlin Hale, the New York Times reported.

It’s an extremely rare rebuke from the office of the U.S. Trustee, and comes as the NRA tries to use chapter 11 bankruptcy to reconstitute itself in the gun-friendly state of Texas.

The Trustee’s remarks reportedly stunned the NRA’s attorney in the case, Greg Garman.

“I’m disappointed that I hear for the first time in closing arguments that the United States Trustee has now taken a position for which I’m expected to respond in real time, but that is what it is,” he told the judge, before trying to politicize the issue. “Your honor, we have natural enemies. This Department of Justice may not see eye to eye with the National Rifle Association, but so be it, we have done the right thing.”

In moving to Texas, the NRA would be able to evade New York Attorney General Letitia James, who sued the gun group in August 2020 alleging that its executives had systemically looted the non-profit. James is seeking dissolution of the NRA.

Lawyers for the New York Attorney General have portrayed the NRA’s bankruptcy petition as a bid to escape its lawsuit and accountability for the looting of the organization. The NRA was chartered in New York State in the 1870s, and has been located there ever since.

But at one point in the hearing, Lambert suggested that she may agree with James’ interpretation of the bankruptcy.

“The N.R.A. has stated that it is seeking refuge from the New York attorney general’s actions and wishes to change its state of incorporation,” the Trustee official reportedly said. “That can be done outside of bankruptcy. It is not a legitimate reason for filing bankruptcy.”

[LFC]

This Daily News op-ed summarizes the NRA court case.

This isn’t a sentence we get to type often, but here goes: The truth is catching up to the National Rifle Association and its boss Wayne LaPierre as they attempt to evade accountability yet again.

The welcome development came a week ago when, in an exceedingly rare move, an official with the U.S. Department of Justice Trustee’s office — the federal agency charged with keeping the nation’s bankruptcy courts on the level — sided in court with New York Attorney General Tish James and creditors looking to dismiss the NRA’s bankruptcy filing. Lisa Lambert, a lawyer with the office, agreed with James’s central claims, stating that the record “clearly and convincingly establishes” that the association’s leadership has been negligent, and that the filing is a transparent dodge sidestep consequences for self-dealing and other egregious violations of trust valiantly pressed here in state courts.

Rather than face the music in New York, where the organization has been chartered since the beginning, LaPierre would rather wash the NRA’s hands of its past, which is why he went and sought the okay from federal court in Dallas to reorganize and set up shop anew in Texas. It’s the rough equivalent of a felon seeking to evade prosecution by changing his name and address.

James rightly blew the whistle on the brazen move, resulting in a two-week trial that ended last week, with the NRA insisting that it’s already righted its ship, and the AG’s team ably presenting ample evidence, from a $360,000 consulting contract for LaPierre’s former chief financial officer to a big-bucks retainer for his personal travel agent, that it has not.

This week, weighing those piles of evidence and the stunning rebuke from the trustee’s office, Judge Harlin Hale will rule whether to let the NRA proceed with its shenanigans or force it to defend its many misdeeds. He must do the latter — and the rest of us must hope that someday, someone pries the whole truth from the NRA’s cold, dead hands.

[LFC]

The decision is in and the NRA lost their sham of a case.

A Texas federal judge rejected the National Rifle Association’s bankruptcy application on Tuesday, saying that the gun group was using the process “to address a regulatory enforcement problem, not a financial one.”

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Harlin Hale for the Northern District of Texas wrote in the ruling that the NRA had not filed for bankruptcy “in good faith both because it was filed to gain an unfair litigation advantage and because it was filed to avoid a state regulatory scheme.”

The ruling marks a big win for New York State Attorney General Letitia James. Had the bankruptcy filing gone through, it could have allowed the NRA to move its assets out of New York state and to Texas.

But now, the NRA will continue to face off against James, who is seeking dissolution of the group after finding evidence of rampant self-dealing in a multi-year investigation of the non-profit.

“Weeks of testimony have demonstrated that the NRA and Wayne LaPierre simply filed chapter 11 bankruptcy to avoid accountability,” Attorney General James said in a statement after the ruling. “The rot runs deep, which is why we will now refocus on and continue our case in New York court.”

[LFC]

This author at Vox makes the case for gun registration as being more effective at reducing gun violence and abuse than either universal background checks (IMO still a good idea) or assault weapon bans (IMO not a particularly good idea).

After a shooting in America gets national attention, the debate usually centers around a few gun control measures, particularly universal background checks and an assault weapons ban. That’s what happened after the April mass shooting at a FedEx facility in Indianapolis — with President Joe Biden calling on Congress to pass both measures.

But if America wants to make a real dent in gun violence, it might want to consider another approach: requiring a license to buy and own a firearm.

For one, the evidence on the effects of universal background checks and assault weapons bans is pretty weak. Several studies in recent years have found that universal background checks, at least on their own, don’t seem to have a big effect on gun deaths. Similarly, the research on assault weapons bans, including the national ban that Biden helped pass in 1994, found they have little effect on gun violence, largely because the vast majority of such violence is committed with handguns.

But there’s some solid evidence that a license system reduces gun deaths. A 2018 study from researchers at Johns Hopkins University found that universal background checks alone correlated with more gun homicides in urban counties, while license systems were associated with fewer gun homicides. Other studies have similarly found that license requirements lead to fewer gun deaths.

[LFC]

Texass again. Cuz if there's one thing the country needs it's unlicensed, potentially untrained, and likely unqualified people legally walking around with guns everywhere.

Texas is a step closer to allowing residents to carry handguns in public without obtaining a license or training.
The Texas legislature on Monday approved the final version of a permitless carry gun bill, sending the legislation to Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's desk for his signature.

House Bill 1927 would allow individuals 21 and older who can legally possess a firearm in the state to carry a handgun in public places without a permit.

Texas joins a handful of other conservative-led states that have passed measures this year allowing some form of permitless carry and expanded gun rights at the state level, as President Joe Biden took action to institute some limited gun restrictions and is calling on Congress to do more in the wake of high-profile mass shootings.

Once signed, the bill will go into effect in September and Texas, which has a strong gun culture, would be by far the largest state to allow its gun owners to carry weapons in public without a license.

Abbott, a Republican, has already indicated he would sign the bill once it made it through the legislature.
"I'll be signing it," he said in a radio interview on WBAP last month. "I support it and I believe it should reach my desk and we should have 'constitutional carry' in Texas."

[pnwguy]

www.kmov.com/news/caught-on-camera-texas-father-son-kill-neighbor-over-trash/article_3d0d4e08-bdd5-11e8-8dfd-df0f6ee5c441.html

These days, the GOP seeks to enable everyone carrying guns anywhere and everywhere. Bring back the Wild West! No training required. No “infringement on my rights” to have 50 AR-15’s and 5000 rounds of ammo at my house. Worship the Gun Almighty. Unless of course your skin is too dark. Then you just need to "stand your ground" and "shoot them vermin"

[RichTBikkies]

But . . but . . . in Tombstone, Arizona, in the 1880s, didn't Wyatt Earp make carrying guns illegal within the city limits?

[goldenvalley]

Jun 29, 2021 20:40:10 GMT RichTBikkies said:

But . . but . . . in Tombstone, Arizona, in the 1880s, didn't Wyatt Earp make carrying guns illegal within the city limits?

Shhhhhhhhh!  Alternative facts at work!

[jackd]

Earp was a snowflake!

[pnwguy]

Jun 29, 2021 21:40:37 GMT jackd said:

Earp was a snowflake!

He was doing his best to not get "cancelled"

[Traveler]

Jun 29, 2021 19:31:13 GMT pnwguy said:

www.kmov.com/news/caught-on-camera-texas-father-son-kill-neighbor-over-trash/article_3d0d4e08-bdd5-11e8-8dfd-df0f6ee5c441.html

These days, the GOP seeks to enable everyone carrying guns anywhere and everywhere. Bring back the Wild West! No training required. No “infringement on my rights” to have 50 AR-15’s and 5000 rounds of ammo at my house. Worship the Gun Almighty. Unless of course your skin is too dark. Then you just need to "stand your ground" and "shoot them vermin"

Those two assholes released on 25k bonds?  WTF?

[LFC]

Jun 30, 2021 13:00:15 GMT Traveler said:

Those two assholes released on 25k bonds?  WTF?

#whiteprivilege

[pnwguy]

Jun 30, 2021 13:07:13 GMT LFC said:

Jun 30, 2021 13:00:15 GMT Traveler said:

Those two assholes released on 25k bonds?  WTF?

#whiteprivilege

The state might need to try them, but don't expect a conviction.

"Didn't you hear that n*gg*r raising his voice at those white men?  That's enough reason for shooting him right there.  Plus he was fixin to marry a white woman!!!"

[LFC]

Interesting but I can't believe it will ever survive the inevitable court challenges. I don't think I could find a way to justify it constitutionally as much as I agree with the sentiment.

Just five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.

In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being forced to compensate taxpayers for the spiraling costs of gun violence. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, gun owners in California’s third-largest city will be required to take out liability insurance for their firearms, and pay an annual tax that will help fund emergency responses to gun-related calls.

In a news release ahead of Tuesday night’s vote, San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo said: “While the Second Amendment protects the right to bear arms, it does not require taxpayers to subsidize gun ownership... We won’t magically end gun violence, but we stop paying for it. We can also better care for its victims, and reduce gun-related injuries and death.”

[goldenvalley]

Jun 30, 2021 17:34:04 GMT LFC said:

Interesting but I can't believe it will ever survive the inevitable court challenges. I don't think I could find a way to justify it constitutionally as much as I agree with the sentiment.

Just five weeks after last month’s massacre at a San Jose light-rail yard that left nine people dead, the city has taken unprecedented gun-control action.

In a unanimous vote Tuesday night, San Jose’s city council approved a national first that will see gun owners being forced to compensate taxpayers for the spiraling costs of gun violence. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, gun owners in California’s third-largest city will be required to take out liability insurance for their firearms, and pay an annual tax that will help fund emergency responses to gun-related calls.

In a news release ahead of Tuesday night’s vote, San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo said: “While the Second Amendment protects the right to bear arms, it does not require taxpayers to subsidize gun ownership... We won’t magically end gun violence, but we stop paying for it. We can also better care for its victims, and reduce gun-related injuries and death.”

Local authorities are the ones to issue firearm permits so conditioning a permit on having insurance might pass muster.  Unfortunately while auto insurance is required if you own a vehicle, it isn't a condition of registering the vehicle.  It's only enforced after an accident.  The same situation might well exist in the San Jose case.

[andydp]

Jul 1, 2021 0:17:34 GMT goldenvalley said:

Jun 30, 2021 17:34:04 GMT LFC said:

Interesting but I can't believe it will ever survive the inevitable court challenges. I don't think I could find a way to justify it constitutionally as much as I agree with the sentiment.

Local authorities are the ones to issue firearm permits so conditioning a permit on having insurance might pass muster.  Unfortunately while auto insurance is required if you own a vehicle, it isn't a condition of registering the vehicle.  It's only enforced after an accident.  The same situation might well exist in the San Jose case.

The NRA had some sort of "court costs" insurance for members to tap into a defense fund in case they were charged with some sort of violation (of the laws they say are on the books anyway).  NYS made them stop seling it because it could be construed to mean a defense in of a criminal act.  

More details here:

suffolklaw.com/new-york-bans-firearms-insurance-program/

[indy]

Jul 1, 2021 12:29:47 GMT andydp said:

Jul 1, 2021 0:17:34 GMT goldenvalley said:

Local authorities are the ones to issue firearm permits so conditioning a permit on having insurance might pass muster.  Unfortunately while auto insurance is required if you own a vehicle, it isn't a condition of registering the vehicle.  It's only enforced after an accident.  The same situation might well exist in the San Jose case.

The NRA had some sort of "court costs" insurance for members to tap into a defense fund in case they were charged with some sort of violation (of the laws they say are on the books anyway).  NYS made them stop seling it because it could be construed to mean a defense in of a criminal act.  

More details here:

suffolklaw.com/new-york-bans-firearms-insurance-program/

That's pretty interesting. If the numbers in that article are accurate ($12,785,000 collected from 680 policies over about 8.25 years) and my math is accurate (12,785,000 / 680 / 8.25) those policies were costing around $2,250 a year, which is more than my homeowner's policy costs. The article also mentions there were no claims, so that's a nice float.

[LFC]

Jul 1, 2021 0:17:34 GMT goldenvalley said:

Local authorities are the ones to issue firearm permits so conditioning a permit on having insurance might pass muster.  Unfortunately while auto insurance is required if you own a vehicle, it isn't a condition of registering the vehicle.  It's only enforced after an accident.  The same situation might well exist in the San Jose case.

Interesting. Here in PA you need proof of insurance to register or renew your registration. (You can, of course, legally own a vehicle without registering it as long as you never take it on a public roadway.)

Jul 1, 2021 13:01:31 GMT indy said:

That's pretty interesting. If the numbers in that article are accurate ($12,785,000 collected from 680 policies over about 8.25 years) and my math is accurate (12,785,000 / 680 / 8.25) those policies were costing around $2,250 a year, which is more than my homeowner's policy costs. The article also mentions there were no claims, so that's a nice float.

The company knew that from the outset. The number of cases where a firearm is discharged in self-defense are actually very rare. This is the insurance version of selling freeze-dried food to preppers. It's marketing something to guard against an event with a minuscule likelihood of ever occurring.

[indy]

Jul 1, 2021 15:47:13 GMT LFC said:

Jul 1, 2021 0:17:34 GMT goldenvalley said:

Local authorities are the ones to issue firearm permits so conditioning a permit on having insurance might pass muster.  Unfortunately while auto insurance is required if you own a vehicle, it isn't a condition of registering the vehicle.  It's only enforced after an accident.  The same situation might well exist in the San Jose case.

Interesting. Here in PA you need proof of insurance to register or renew your registration. (You can, of course, legally own a vehicle without registering it as long as you never take it on a public roadway.)

Same here in Illinois.

[goldenvalley]

Looks like the gun industry is winning.  

All his life, Jabril Battle was anti-gun. Then came the pandemic, the lockdown, the shortages and a feeling that at any moment, things could blow. Battle bought a Beretta.

Drawn to last summer’s protests against police violence, Savannah Grace found herself face-to-face with a camo-clad officer’s long gun. She’d always hated guns, but went out and got a Glock 45.

In blue cities and red suburbs alike, firearms purchases soared last year — to the highest level in half a century, based on federal background checks. A striking portion of those sales went to first-time gun buyers — 40 percent, according to the firearms industry’s trade association. Other studies show first-timers accounting for more like a fifth of sales in 2020, but that’s still unusually high, retailers said.

What will happen when the gun nuts realize that people of color are buying guns?

 Sales to women and people of color rose in 2020. Firearms industry data shows sales jumping 50 percent among Black customers, 47 percent among Hispanics and 43 percent among Asian Americans, though gun ownership remains proportionately lower among those groups compared with Whites.

[LFC]

Jul 11, 2021 16:24:25 GMT goldenvalley said:

What will happen when the gun nuts realize that people of color are buying guns?

What do you mean? They keep telling us it's every citizens right to own firearms. They tell us repeatedly that "an armed society is a polite society." Are you saying you believe that they might not be telling the truth? It's not like the NRA ever objected to increased gun ownership before (*cough* Black Panthers *cough,cough*).