Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Gun politics in the United States’

When is Gun Control Not Political?

May 14, 2013 1 comment

When is Gun Control Not Political?

pagunblog.com ^ | 7 May, 2013 | Sebastian

Every Television Newscast Is a Staged Event…

 

Posted on Tuesday, May 14, 2013 8:03:27 PM by marktwain

When it’s “public health,” lead by meddling doctors:

To pediatricians, gun control is a public health issue, not a political one. But they’re treading a fine line, and they know it.

Read more…

» Gun Control Was – Historically – About Repressing Blacks Alex Jones’ Infowars: There’s a war on for your mind!

February 22, 2013 1 comment

Preface: I was raised to be against guns. My parents hated guns, and believed that they only lead to crime and accidental shootings.

I was raised in a blue state, and I have long been deeply influenced by leading voices for non-violence, such as Gandhi and King. So – until recently – I was pro gun-control.

mussobama

mussobama (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)

As such, I was stunned to learn about the historical background behind gun control campaigns.

The Real History of Gun Control

UCLA Constitutional law professor Adam Winkler – whose commentary has been featured on CNN, The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, The Wall Street Journal, The New Republic, and numerous other outlets, and who is a contributor to The Daily Beast and The Huffington Post – notes (via the Wall Street Journal):

[The history of gun control in America] was a constant pressure among white racists to keep guns out of the hands of African-Americans, because they would rise up and revolt.

*** Read more…

Establish a Gun Free Zone around the President; Send Secret Service Home (Now over 10,000)

December 30, 2012 Leave a comment

In a brilliant act of political satire, someone has created a petition to the white house here to create a gun free zone around the President and Vice President. All guns would be eliminated there, and the Secret Service would not have any.

 

Vice President of the United States John C. Ca...

Vice President of the United States John C. Calhoun (19th-century daguerreotype) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

 

 

If it is good enough for our children, It is good enough for the president, the logic goes.

 

I am constantly amazed that people are perfectly comfortable around someone with a gun, if the person is wearing a uniform. Remove the uniform, and the same people become very uncomfortable.

 

Read more…

“The Sullivan Act was to protect mobsters and disarm innocent civilians in New York State.”

December 25, 2012 1 comment

Bloomberg and Cuomo come from the jurisdiction where major gun control legislation was established by New York State Democratic Senator Timothy “Big Tim” Sullivan. Sullivan became known as a Tammany Hall crook intent on protecting his mobsters from prosecution and disarming innocent civilians in New York State.

mussobama

mussobama (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)

The Sullivan Act was passed in 1911 after a murder suicide shooting. The law mandated that New York residents must have police issued licenses for concealed handguns, otherwise it would be considered a felony.

Read more…

Chinese State Media Demands US Citizens Be Disarmed…

December 20, 2012 Leave a comment

The official Chinese government news agency, Xinhua, has demanded the US immediately adopt stricter gun control measures to reduce the number of firearms the US populace is permitted to possess.

 

The Chinese state-controlled media’s statement, titled “Innocent Blood Demands No Delay for US Gun Control,” is primarily focused on the Newtown tragedy in which 26 Americans were killed by a mad gunman.

 

mussobama

mussobama (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)

 

 

 

 

 

rprprprp

rprprprp (Photo credit: GunnyG1345)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Twenty of the victims were young children.The Chinese government stated, “Their blood and tears demand no delay for the U.S. gun control.”

 

In an apparent effort to restrict information to their populace, the Chinese government wrote of a number of US mass shootings but failed to mention they were either stopped by a citizen legally carrying a firearm or otherwise only occurred in the controversial gun-free zones that critics say make prime targets for madmen.

 

Read more…

Questioning “No Questions Asked” — Are Gun-Surrender Gimmicks Legal?

August 25, 2011 Leave a comment

Questioning “No Questions Asked” — Are Gun-Surrender Gimmicks Legal?

Shotgun News ^ | Aug. 19, 2001 | Jeff Knox

Posted on Thursday, August 25, 2011 5:16:00 PM by Iron Munro

For decades we’ve heard about gun turn-ins—”Gun Buy-Back” programs sponsored by churches, civic groups, and various other misinformed do-gooder organizations. The very name—buy-back—implies that guns belong not to individuals, but to the government, or at least to the people who don’t like guns. The programs have the stated purpose of “getting guns off the street,” which seems to give operators a pass from further scrutiny, even as they offer a tangible good such as a grocery store coupon or gift card in return for a gun, “no questions asked,” much like any other fencing operation. Finally someone has forced the question: Are these programs legal?

Attorney and author of the New Jersey Gun Law Guide, Evan Nappen, not only asked the question, he is offering a $5,000 bounty for anyone who can prove an affirmative answer. Nappen is specifically asking about the legality of a church-sponsored program in the state of New Jersey. As an expert on New Jersey gun laws, Nappen says he can find no provision in the state’s maze-like gun statutes that permit churches and civic groups, or the people surrendering (actually selling) the guns, to bypass the thicket of New Jersey state laws that require permits, background checks, and paperwork whenever a gun is transported or transferred.

Nappen also questions the “no questions asked” policy, and the immediate destruction of the guns, which might be stolen property, or could be evidence in serious crimes. Details of Nappen’s challenge can be seen on his web site, http://www.EvanNappen.com.

I don’t expect Evan will lose the $5,000 anytime soon. He knows New Jersey law and it is pretty clear that there are very specific requirements which are not being met in these “buy-back” programs.

Under New Jersey law, anyone wishing to surrender an illegally possessed firearm must first state their intention to do so in writing to their chief of police or the head of the State Police. The statement must include their identity. Also, while New Jersey does offer some immunity from prosecution to a person who turns in a gun in this manner, that immunity is limited to the crime of illegally possessing the gun, not to any other crimes that might involve the gun.

Further, it is a direct violation of NJ law for anyone other than a licensed dealer to purchase a firearm unless they have a special permit from the state. There is no provision for exceptions, exemptions, or special dispensations, and again, there is a requirement that paperwork be filled out which includes the name and identifying information of both the purchaser and the seller.

Anonymous transactions are not legal in New Jersey. On top of all of that there is the issue of transporting the guns to the “buy-back” location. New Jersey has draconian laws regarding the transport of firearms and there is no exception for someone going to a “buy-back.” The fact is that in New Jersey, like most other states, there simply is no provision for suspending gun control laws for the sake of anti-gun propaganda events.

Gun “buy-backs” are legally questionable even when they are conducted by municipalities or police departments. When they are conducted by private entities, there is no cover of law to be found. Not for the organization sponsoring the event, not for the people working the event, nor for the people bringing guns to the event to turn in. Just because law enforcement chooses to turn a blind eye to the infractions does not make them legal. Police may claim a need to use use discretion and common sense when they enforce the law—we’ve all seen stories of a kid’s lemonade stand shut down due to licensing or zoning issues, or when the Salvation Army is gigged for not paying minimum wage when they give a wino homeless person a few dollars for helping around the thrift store, but this goes beyond discretion.

Wholesale disregard for laws that shouldn’t exist by the very people who demanded that they be passed in the first place goes beyond the realm of sense. The New Jersey gun laws clearly infringe on the fundamental rights of citizens and are routinely used to ruin the lives of people who have no malicious intent or criminal agenda. Look up Brian Aitken for a stunning example. These are bad laws which do no good and cause great harm. They should be repealed, but until they are, they should not be ignored when it comes to the people who helped pass them.

Hollywood celebrities call for disarming the masses while they are protected by their armed bodyguards and their special dispensation carry permits. Legislators pass special exemptions and amnesty periods when they find one of their own snared in stupid gun laws. And well-meaning, peace-marching church folk call for stricter gun laws, but then expect to be able to openly defy those laws in the name of “getting guns off the street.” It’s hypocritical, it’s wrong, and they shouldn’t be allowed to get away with it.

Permission to reprint or post this article in its entirety is hereby granted provided this credit is included. Text is available at http://www.FirearmsCoalition.org. To receive The Firearms Coalition’s bi-monthly newsletter, The Knox Hard Corps Report, write to PO Box 3313, Manassas, Va. 20108. ©Copyright 2010 Neal Knox Associates—The most trusted name in the rights movement.

via Questioning “No Questions Asked” — Are Gun-Surrender Gimmicks Legal?.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,087 other followers