gun control – Page 11

Andrew Cuomo admits that he done [expletive deleted] UP with NY’s 10-round magazine ban.

Governor Cuomo did this epically, admitting that the restrictions on magazine possession that he pushed through and signed into law earlier in the year are too flawed to exist, and need to be repealed.

“There is no such thing as a seven-bullet magazine. That doesn’t exist. So you really have no practical option.” – Andrew Cuomo

So why the [expletive deleted] did you sign it in the first place, you jumped-up, bed-hopping imbecile?

Moe Lane (crosspost)

PS: This [expletive deleted]-head wants to replace the aforementioned impractical law with one that would only make it illegal to load more than seven bullets into a magazine. Just in case you were thinking that I was being unkind by calling Andrew Cuomo an ‘imbecile.’

Meet John Hickenlooper, now-endangered Democratic Governor of Colorado.

By the way: all of this takes effect on July 1, 2013. Plan accordingly, Coloradans.

I’m calling Gov. Hickenlooper endangered for a reason: he just made a rather poor life choice. You see, the fellow bowed to pressure from East Coast liberals and signed into law today an effective firearms ban masquerading as a “high capacity magazine ban.” John Hickenlooper is apparently just self-aware enough to realize what problems this is going to cause him down the line: “[Hickenlooper] said his office later today will release a “signing statement” to try to explain how the bills, particularly one that limits ammunition rounds, should be interpreted.”

If you’re explaining, you’re losing. And here’s why Hickenlooper is explaining:

Continue reading Meet John Hickenlooper, now-endangered Democratic Governor of Colorado.

Colorado county sheriffs: we will not enforce the legislature’s new gun control laws.

Which, by the way, they can actually do:” Colorado police chiefs and sheriffs have local control and prioritizing how laws are enforced is their prerogative.” They’re elected officials, too; they can’t be fired, only voted out of office/recalled. Anyway, here’s some Colorado sheriffs being explicit about things: I’ll add more if/when they come in.

Weld County Sheriff John Cooke: “The sheriff told the [Greeley Tribune] that he and other county sheriffs “won’t bother enforcing” the laws because it won’t be possible to keep track of how gun owners are complying with the new requirements.”
El Paso County Sheriff Terry Maketa: “Maketa said his office keeps records of every concealed carry permit holder in the county as required by law, but he would never share it. He said he would destroy the database if anyone tried to get their hands on it and would intervene if government agents started arresting county residents for exercising their constitutional rights.” El Paso County, by the way, is the most populous county in Colorado (yes, even larger than Denver County, which does not have an elected sheriff).

Continue reading Colorado county sheriffs: we will not enforce the legislature’s new gun control laws.

Anti-gun groups given access to White House, but not input?

Everybody else is unloading on this, so I might as well:

The White House knew its post-Newtown effort would require bringing key gun control groups into the fold. So the White House offered a simple arrangement: the groups could have access and involvement, but they’d have to offer silence and support in exchange.

The implied rules, according to conversations with many of those involved: No infighting. No second-guessing in the press. Support whatever the president and Vice President Joe Biden propose. And most of all, don’t make waves or get ahead of the White House.

Continue reading Anti-gun groups given access to White House, but not input?

Democratic Colorado senator Evie Hudak to rape survivor: “Statistics are not on your side.”

Remember: only liberal women/minorities get to be treated like human beings.

Quick background here: essentially, Colorado Democrats have decided to respond to recent criminal mass murders by legislating bans on high-capacity magazines, banning concealed carry, taxing legitimate gun purchases, and requiring background checks before private transferal of firearms. And, oh, yes, Colorado Democrats also want to make gun manufacturers liable for crimes committed with those guns, but that’s scheduled for later… what’s that? How would any of this stop a crazy lunatic from mass murder? Oh, that’s easy: it won’t. But it will make a bunch of legislators with Ds after their names to feel a little less scared at night, which is apparently more important.

Anyway, I will give Democratic state Senator Evie Hudak this much: she at least had sufficient lingering human empathy to not want to make too much eye contact when she uncomfortably denigrated the testimony and feelings of a rape survivor who DARED insist that concealed carry might have stopped her rape.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RgXsCnrYZGY#!

I’m not giving Hudak very much slack at all, mind you: that was pretty filthy stuff that the state senator said. But, you know: the old white men who run the Colorado Democratic party have spoken, and it’s the job of women like Senator Hudak to hold down the fort. Or shoulders. Continue reading Democratic Colorado senator Evie Hudak to rape survivor: “Statistics are not on your side.”

Magpul ready to flee Colorado gun-grabbing laws.

I’m pretty sure that Magpul is not bluffing, here:

Colorado’s largest and most profitable manufacturer of high-capacity ammunition magazines has vowed to leave the state if lawmakers pass a measure banning the devices — a move officials with the company say could cost hundreds of jobs and upward of $85 million in potential spending this year.

Magpul’s threat has Democratic lawmakers scrambling to strike a balance that remains true to their goal of limiting the number of rounds a magazine can hold without frightening off businesses.

…and I don’t think that there’s an actual balance to be struck, either. The loss of Magpul’s hundreds of jobs (and $85 million’s worth of business per year) won’t cripple Colorado, but neither does Magpul need to stick around and operate in a state run by provincial yahoos who can’t comprehend that not everybody is as scared of guns as is the average Democratic legislator. Particularly since more than one state is actively offering to help Magpul with the relocation*: “As the debate unfolds, states have made overtures to Magpul, including offering to pay their moving costs. The company won’t name the states, but Wyoming and Texas have expressed interest in netting the $85 million the company projects it will spend in Colorado next year in payments to suppliers, subcontractors and service providers.” Continue reading Magpul ready to flee Colorado gun-grabbing laws.

Democrats about to ban shotguns in Colorado?

This is what happens when people who do not know anything about guns try to write restrictive laws on gun ownership: they lack the experience – or perhaps ability – to know when they’ve messed up. Short version: the legislature decided to ban those evil, evil high capacity magazines again. Small problem: Democrats apparently think that history started in 2008, because they didn’t bother to look up certain implications from the federal ‘assault weapons’ ban:

A pump or semi-automatic shotgun is the gun most hunters in Colorado use. It’s a gun state Sen. Greg Brophy, R-Wray, says could be banned under a bill that’s already passed the House and Gov. John Hickenlooper says he’ll sign.

[snip]

Brophy points to a section of the bill that defines a high-capacity magazine as one capable of accepting or — that can be readily converted — to accept more than 15 rounds or eight shotgun shells.

“This is where shotgun shells go inside this tube here,” Brophy showed Boyd, “You can screw this part off the top and screw on an extender to this tube to allow it to hold more than eight rounds. It is readily convertible, which by definition in the bill, makes the whole thing a high-capacity magazine.”

Continue reading Democrats about to ban shotguns in Colorado?

QotD, Maryland Gun-Grabbing Legislators Should Worry About This Quote edition.

Short version: Beretta makes guns in Maryland. Maryland is dominated by liberal Democrats. Liberal Democratic legislators hate and fear guns. Maryland is about to express that hatred and fear via inappropriate legislation. Beretta is contemplating getting the hell out of Maryland – and taking all those taxable jobs and all those taxable sales with it.

The quote:

“All I can tell you is, Mr. Beretta said, ‘There always seems to be a problem with Maryland.’ ”

Ayup. There always is. It’s called the Maryland Democratic party. Sorry to put it that bluntly; but I’m starting to get tired of gun-grabbing ideologues who think that the answer to them being weak is to ensure that it doesn’t matter that anybody else is strong.

(Via Twitchy)

Before everybody starts bloviating about Goodlatte…

…please be advised that, translated into English, what this Roll Call article is saying is that new Judiciary Chair Robert Goodlatte wants to:

Have the administration explain how existing laws are being enforced with regard to gun control. The answer to that is, by the way, “damn inconsistently:” Congress routinely passes laws that it would be suicide for the executive branch to consistently enforce, but having those same laws can come in handy when you need a reason to throw somebody in jail.
Have the administration “crackdown on gun traffickers, or “straw purchasers,” who illegally buy firearms for those who may not do so.” The problem there for the administration, of course, is that they’d have to start with the Attorney General and work their way down.
‘Fix’ the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, which nobody actually wants to fix because the only way to fix it is to demand a lot of personal information from millions of people who like to punch holes in pieces of paper. And, hey, it’s up for renewal this year!

Via Instapundit. I admit readily that the last point is something to keep track of, if not actually watch like a hawk. But there’s less in this article than it appears.

OfA already starting to waste its ad budget?

So I hear that OfA (they’re Organizing for Action this nanosecond, right?) has decided that they felt like spending “close to six figures” in online ad buys to try to convince the following legislators to go along with the President’s vaguely plotted-out prelude to gun-grabbing:

Susan Collins

Kelly Ayotte

Patrick Meehan

David Valadao

Bill Young

Erik Paulsen

Jim Gerlach

Michael G Fitzpatrick

Buck McKeon

Gary Miller

David Joyce

Jeff Denham

John Kline

Daniel Webster

Robert Pittenger

Barack Obama

Mike Coffman

…Oh, dear. I somehow managed to include the name of the President himself in that list. I wonder why I did that?

Susan Collins	62%
Kelly Ayotte	60%
Patrick Meehan	60%
David Valadao	59%
Bill Young	58%
Erik Paulsen	58%
Jim Gerlach	57%
Michael G Fitzpatrick	57%
Buck McKeon	56%
Gary Miller	55%
David Joyce	54%
Jeff Denham	54%
John Kline	54%
Daniel Webster	52%
Robert Pittenger	52%
Barack Obama	51%
Mike Coffman	49%

Oh, right, because I had looked up all the popular vote percentages (rounding up) from the last election of each candidate being targeted, and was using Barack Obama’s 51% in 2012 as a baseline. Although ‘baseline’ may not exactly be the right term, in this context; it’s practically the floor. Judging from that list, Rep. Coffman may or may not have to sweat a vote on background checks; but I somehow suspect that OfA isn’t going to otherwise particularly get any bang for its buck.

Not that it needs to. OfA has always been about fueling the ego of Barack Obama; and now that he has won re-election… well, if you want to believe that OfA is now a bunch of ninja grassroots activists prepared to sweep the Right’s leg that’s your privilege. Can’t say that I’m too impressed with their ability to move the Democratic downticket, though.