Virginia pro-gun rally reveals extremist tactics

On Thursday, the FBI arrested three men, Patrik J. Mathews, 27, Brian M. Lemley Jr., 33, and William G. Bilbrough IV, 19, with firearms charges, and they had plans, an official said, to attend a Virginia pro-gun rally. This followed Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam’s declaration of a temporary state of emergency after authorities learned that extremists hoped to use the anti-gun control rally planned next Monday — Martin Luther King, Jr. Day — to incite a violent clash.

Richmond is on high alert in anticipation of violence that may still occur. The rally is expected to draw thousands of armed activists from across the country. On Thursday, a circuit court judge upheld Northam’s temporary ban on firearms on the grounds of the Capitol under the state of emergency, in effect from Friday night until Tuesday.
These arrests add to mounting evidence that a decades-old and violent white-power movement is alive and well, perhaps even gaining strength. White power is a social movement that has united neo-Nazis, Klansmen, skinheads, and militiamen around a shared fear of racial annihilation and cultural change. Since 1983, when movement leaders declared war on the federal government, members of such groups have worked together to bring about a race war.
The Justice Department says the three men arrested had ties to the violent white supremacist paramilitary group The Base and according to the New York Times one also had military-level explosives expertise, two carried an assault rifle they built themselves. All of these are strategies that call back across decades. Targeting MLK Day, in particular, is an old gambit — white power activists opposed the creation of the holiday and have used it for decades as a day to mobilize disaffected fellow travelers and provoke violent clashes.
On GPS: What motivates white power activists? 02:20
But the events of this week also offer encouraging new developments. The silver lining is that Thursday’s arrests came before these alleged extremists could attend a rally where they or others with guns could commit a violent act.
While there are other examples of FBI agents intercepting these groups and individuals in time, I have found in my research that they are relatively rare. That the men were apprehended by the FBI in concert with official action from the governor of Virginia to declare a state of emergency, thereby shutting down the attempt of militia groups to storm the Capitol, shows that authorities have learned from the horrific August 2017 violence in Charlottesville and are taking this movement’s deadly threat to democracy seriously.
Further, a judge acted expeditiously to turn back a challenge from rally organizers to Northam’s temporary ban on firearms, which the Virginia Supreme Court upheld on Friday night. The white power movement has often capitalized on a lack of coordinated response from law enforcement, politicians, and courts, but this week, there is hope of all of these institutions working together to confront the threat.
Silver linings aside, it will take many, many more instances of coordinated response to stop a movement generations in the making. In more than a decade of studying the earlier white power movement, I have become familiar with the themes of underground activity that are today clearly drawing from the earlier movement. In the absence of decisive action across multiple institutions, a rich record of criminal activity and violence will continue to provide these activists with a playbook for further chaos.
Although some on social media have noted with surprise the presence of a Canadian citizen among those arrested, such transnational membership has long characterized white power organizing. The Order, a white power terrorist group that robbed armored cars and carried out assassinations in the US in the 1980s, had Canadian members, as did the major white US-based separatist organization Aryan Nations.
The homemade assault rifle authorities described may have been meant to circumvent gun regulations. In the 1980s, white-power activists made their own land mines and hand grenades and learned how to adapt semi- to fully-automatic weapons.
The Base, furthermore, is what experts call “accelerationist,” meaning that its members hope to provoke what they see as an inevitable race war. They have conducted paramilitary training in the Pacific Northwest. Both of these strategies date back to the 1980s, when the Order trained in those forests with hopes of provoking the same race war.
One of the men arrested Thursday was formerly a reservist in the Canadian Army, where he received training in explosives and demolition, according to the New York Times. This kind of preparation, too, is common among extremists like these. To take just a few representative examples, in the 1960s, Bobby Frank Cherry, a former Marine trained in demolition, helped fellow members of the United Klans of America to bomb the 16th Street Birmingham Baptist Church, killing four black girls.
An Army and Green Beret veteran, Frazier Glenn Miller, was in military service for 20 years before his dishonorable discharge. He then carried out a campaign to militarize the white-power movement and conducted paramilitary training in the woods of North Carolina. He declared war on the government, went underground and then reemerged in 2014, when, in Overland Park, Kansas, he shot and killed three people at a Jewish community center and an assisted living facility. In 2015, he was sentenced to death.
Gulf War veteran Timothy McVeigh, lauded as a hero by today’s paramilitary white-power groups, used his Army training to plan and carry out the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing as part of the white power and militia movements. The attack, the deadliest domestic terror, killed 168 people.
Let me be clear: It’s extremely unusual for veterans to break their oaths of induction by seeking to become domestic terrorists and therefore enemies of the very democracy they swore to protect. But those who do take that path have operationalized an entire groundswell — across decades — by sharing tactics, training, munitions expertise, and more with other white power activists.
And this movement doesn’t see violence as the end goal of activism — mass violence is instead meant to awaken others to join the cause.
Continued and deliberate attempts at mass violence, wrought by a movement that plans more of the same, will not end on their own, or simply wane with inattention. This movement has benefited from decades of misunderstanding and half-measures, when more decisive arrests might have made a real difference in saving lives.
This news out of Virginia shows that there is a real social benefit when people direct their attention to these events — and sustain the public conversation about the presence of a renewed white-power movement and what it means for our society.
Credits to CNN

Colt says it’s going to stop selling AR-15 rifles to the public, but gun-control advocates shouldn’t celebrate

AR 15

When the Colt gun manufacturing corporation announced in September that it would stop producing its AR-15 semiautomatic rifle for sale to the general public — to focus on handguns and military production — some gun-control advocates declared victory, saying the move would help limit the availability of assault weapons in the US.

 The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence counted the news among “recent victories.” Celebrity gun-control activists Michael Moore and Debra Messing also trumpeted Colt’s move as progress toward eliminating the weapons from public circulation.In fact, the evidence indicates their celebrations are probably premature.

Colt has said that it didn’t act as a result of political or popular pressure, but rather because the company has so many contracts with military and police agencies that it doesn’t have capacity to make rifles for the civilian market. In addition, a number of other companies make rifles similar to AR-15s and are selling plenty of them to the public. An industry trade group estimates that more than 16 million of them are owned by US citizens.

The gunmaker’s move is, therefore, a tacit acknowledgment of how prevalent AR-15s and comparable weapons are in the US It’s not a response to concerns that too many of them are potentially available to would-be mass shooters.

A flooded marketplace

AR 15
AR-15 rifles on sale at a gun show in Oaks, Pennsylvania, October 6, 2017. 
Joshua Roberts/Reuters

Assault weapons — AR-15s and others — have been used in some of the grisliest US gun massacres in recent years, including Aurora, Colorado and and Newtown, Connecticut in 2012; Orlando in 2016; Las Vegas in 2017; Parkland, Florida in 2018; and El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio in 2019.

Colt’s AR-15 is a close cousin of military rifles such as the M-16 and M-4. All are relatively lightweight, powerful and capable of accommodating large ammunition magazines, typically containing 30 rounds. The more ammunition, the more rounds a shooter can fire quickly before having to stop and reload.

Unlike the military variants, which can unleash short bursts or a stream of bullets with each trigger pull, AR-15s and other civilian large-capacity rifles fire only a single shot at a time. They are classified as semiautomatic because they automatically reload, but the shooter has to pull the trigger each time he wants the gun to fire.

Colt’s AR-15 patents expired decades ago, and today there are numerous imitations available. They’re often referred to generically as “AR-15-style” rifles or assault weapons. It’s also legal and relatively easy in more than 40 states to buy semiautomatic variants of other large-capacity military-style weapons, such as the AK-47, originally a Soviet design.

It’s possible that by suspending AR-15 sales, Colt hopes to distance itself from the carnage connected to the use of assault weapons.

More likely, though, the company is still recovering from its bankruptcy proceedings in 2015 and 2016, and wanted to drop an unprofitable product line, which it refers to as “modern sporting rifles.”

Not a matter of ideology

ar 15
A Connecticut State Police firearms officer with a Bushmaster AR-15 rifle, the same make and model of gun used by Adam Lanza in the Sandy Hook School shooting, January 28, 2013. 
AP Photo/Jessica Hill, File

The company’s announcement of the change made no reference to mass shootings and went out of its way to say Colt remains “committed to the Second Amendment,” which guarantees Americans’ right to bear arms.

Colt CEO Dennis Veilleux’s reasoning was clear in his statement that “the market for modern sporting rifles has experienced significant excess manufacturing capacity” and as a result, “there is adequate supply of modern sporting rifles for the foreseeable future.”

The National Rifle Association’s “Shooting Illustrated” blog said some gun owners assumed Colt’s “halt in civilian rifle production had anti-gun motives.” But the NRA said the problem was lack of consumer demand for Colt-made AR-15s, which were often hundreds of dollars more expensive than similar models from other companies. Colt noted that the company will continue to focus on civilian handguns and military rifles.

From the evidence, it appears Colt’s decision was different from other corporations’ actions, which clearly responded to concerns about mass shootings.

Walmart, for example, stopped selling military-style rifles in 2015. In August 2019, after a shooter with an AK-47-style rifle massacred 22 people at an El Paso Walmart, company CEO Doug McMillon urged Congress to consider restoring an assault-weapons ban that was in effect from 1994 through 2004.

Walmart isn’t the only major gun seller recently to limit sales of certain firearms. Dick’s Sporting Goods stopped selling military-style semiautomatic rifles and large-capacity magazines in 2018.

Colt’s retreat on the AR-15 should not be seen as a signal of a breakthrough in the gun debate or a change of heart within the firearm industry. Sales of new Colt-made AR-15s may come to an end, but there are plenty of assault weapons available to the public, among whom may be potential mass shooters.


Credit to Business Insider

Trump and Republicans don’t hate gun control because of the NRA. They just love guns.

President Trump And Other Notable Leaders Address Annual NRA Meeting

President Donald Trump gestures to guests at the NRA-ILA Leadership Forum at the 148th NRA Annual Meetings and Exhibits on April 26, 2019 in Indianapolis.Scott Olson / Getty Images file

Credit to NBC News

Trump says gun control negotiations are “going very slowly”

President Trump contradicted reports that the White House is moving forward with a legislative package on gun control, saying in an interview with Fox News anchor Ed Henry Thursday that negotiations on the issue are “going very slowly.”

“No, we’re not moving on anything. We’re going very slowly in one way, because we want to make sure it’s right. We want to — we’re doing a very careful job,” Mr. Trump said.

The White House was initially expected to announce a proposal to curb gun violence this week after  consulting with Republican and Democratic senators over the last few weeks. A source familiar with the discussions told CBS News that a formal rollout is more likely to occur after the United Nations General Assembly next week.

Several proposals that House Democrats want to see in legislation, including universal background checks, are off the table for the White House, the source also said. The White House and Attorney General William Barr have been working with Senators Joe Manchin, Pat Toomey and Chris Murphy on a background check bill modeled after legislation proposed by Manchin and Toomey in 2013.

In the wake of two mass shootings in a 24-hour period in August, Mr. Trump said he would be willing to support “strong background checks,” although he later backed away from that statement.

In the Fox News interview, Mr. Trump also slammed Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke, who has called for a ban on assault weapons and a mandatory buyback for any assault weapons currently possessed by gun owners.

“Part of the problem that we have is because of Beto O’Rourke’s statement about taking away guns,” Mr. Trump said. “A lot of Republicans and some Democrats now are afraid to do anything, to go down that slippery slope. A lot of people think this is just a way of taking away guns and that’s not good, because we’re not going to allow that.”

Mr. Trump reiterated that he is a “strong believer in the Second Amendment.” The president, who in 2018 boasted about his willingness to stand up to the National Rifle Association, had this to say when asked whether he would go against the NRA’s wishes with regard to gun control policy:

“I am, if it’s not going to hurt a good, solid, great American citizen from keeping his weapon because they want that and they are entitled to that.  We have a Second Amendment.  I don’t want to have crazy people have guns. I don’t want to have bad people have guns, but we’re going to do nothing to hurt the Second Amendment, and what we want to do is see if we can come up with a compromise, and that’s what we’re working on.”

In her weekly press conference, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that she has prayed for Mr. Trump and his safety, and said that she “pray[s] he will open his heart to safety of American families as well.”

She also faulted Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for not bringing gun control legislation passed in the House to the Senate floor.

“This is not even obstruction, it’s abandonment of your responsibility as a leader of the Senate of the United States,” Pelosi said.


Credit to CBS News

Gun Legislation that Amends ‘Brady Bill’ to be Added to Concealed Carry Reciprocity bill (HR 38)

Article credited to OutdoorHub:



Gun Legislation that Amends ‘Brady Bill’ to be Added to Concealed Carry Reciprocity bill (HR 38)

OutdoorHub Reporters

21 hours ago

Iraqveteran8888, who you’ve probably seen in his meltdown videos, posted the following message on his Facebook account after the House Judiciary Committee’s actions on concealed carry reciprocity and background check legislation:

[Read More]

FBI remove thousands of wanted fugitives from gun control database

Article credited to Independent:


FBI remove thousands of wanted fugitives from gun control database

Criminal background check lists ban criminals from purchasing guns in the US

Ruger handguns at a National Rifle Association annual convention in Houston, Texas Getty

[Read More]

NRA Hasn’t Rated Pro-Gun Roy Moore vs Pro-Gun Control Doug Jones (We Will)

Article credited to Breitbart:



NRA Hasn’t Rated Pro-Gun Roy Moore vs Pro-Gun Control Doug Jones (We Will)


by AWR HAWKINS29 Nov 201769

The NRA has not rated pro-gun Republican Roy Moore vs. pro-gun control Democrat Doug Jones in the race for the Alabama U.S. Senate seat, so Breitbart News is rating the two men for voters who are curious as to where the candidates stand on the Second Amendment.

To begin with, Doug Jones is not only open to more gun control but is actually supportive of more gun control.

On November 21 Breitbart News reported that Jones’ support of gun control might not be readily apparent to potential voters because Jones stayed mum on where he stood. But he uttered enough bits and pieces about his positions that clear pro-gun control positions came into focus. For example, he told the Washington Post that expanding background checks to gun shows “would be helpful.”

Jones did not point to even once incident where a mass public attacker acquired his guns at a gun show. Rather, he simply blew the dog whistle for leftists via the Democrats’ age-old war on gun shows.


Jones’ willingness to expand background checks is simply an outgrowth of his overarching belief that the Second Amendment is limited. The Alabama Political Reporter quoted him saying, “We’ve got limitations on all constitutional amendments in one form or another.” Again, this is same phraseology other leftists use when they seek to justify infringing on those rights of which it is written, “Shall not be infringed.” Gun control Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), for instance, said similar things when he told told Rachel Maddow, “The Second Amendment is not an absolute right, not a God-given right. It has always had conditions upon it like the First Amendment has.”

But wait–there is more. Politico recently gave Jones the opportunity to convince voters that he did not want to take their guns and Jones pivoted, focusing instead on another part of the question.

The bottom line is that Jones is another pro-gun control Democrat who varnishes over his liberal positions by assuring everyone he is pro-hunting, although the Second Amendment is not about hunting. Rather, it is about defending our lives and liberty from a tyranny within or without our borders. And this is where Roy Moore comes in. On September 12 he told Breitbart News that national reciprocity for concealed carry should be passed immediately and on September 25 he told an audience, “We’ve got to uphold the Second Amendment.”

He added, “You know, they say that guns are bad; that they kill people. Well I know a lot about guns–I’m the one that used guns in combat. I know what guns do…[But] guns don’t kill, people kill. [You could say] cars kill, are we going to get rid of our cars? Are we going to get rid of our knives?”

Moore lifted a concealed carry revolver in the air in two separate campaign events to show that he and his wife do more than just talk about carrying guns, they actually carry them.

And the differences between Moore and Jones are even clearer when one considers that Moore opposes the very gun controls Jones supports. For example, on September 20 Breitbart News reported that “Moore opposes an expansion of background checks for gun purchases. He views an expansion of background checks as a ruse by which the left can secure government-mandated firearm registration.”

It is clear that Moore understands the insidious nature of expanding background checks, be that expansion at gun shows or to all private sales. He sees that the end of such an expansion is gun registration. Moreover, Moore opposes an ‘assault weapons’ ban and a ‘high capacity’ magazine ban, two bans that are being feverishly pushed by the Democrat Party to which Doug Jones belongs.

So rating these two candidates is not so hard. Moore is absolutely pro-Second Amendment, which includes being for concealed carry and self-defense while opposing the various infringements on liberty being pushed by the Democrat Party. On the other hand, Jones is absolutely pro-gun control, which includes supporting an expansion of background checks and viewing the Second Amendment as limited, therefore open to government regulation.

A victory for Moore means Republicans gain a strong pro-Second Amendment vote in the Senate. A victory for Jones means Sens. Chris Murphy (D-CT), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) get another pro-gun control vote, which bolsters their push to restrict to the Second Amendment.

AWR Hawkins is the Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and host of Bullets with AWR Hawkins, a Breitbart News podcast. He is also the political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at


Gun Control Advocates Shoot Massive Hole Right Through Their Own Liberal Narrative

Article credited to The Daily Caller:



Gun Control Advocates Shoot Massive Hole Right Through Their Own Liberal Narrative


Ryan Salmon fires an assault rifle at the Lynchburg Arms & Indoor Shooting Range in Lynchburg, Virginia, on October 20, 2017.
(Photo: JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images)

In the wake of the most recent U.S. mass shootings in Las Vegas and Sutherland Springs, Texas, anti-gun proponents on the Left have renewed their calls for stricter gun control measures. But a new study shows that such legislation could do little to curb gun violence.

[Read More]

Gun Control Agents Are Shooting Blanks

Article credited to The Western Journal:


Gun Control Agents Are Shooting Blanks

By Allan Erickson


It is not about protecting us!

Sen. Dianne Feinstein is at it again, trying to ban AR-type rifles, errantly calling them “assault rifles.” This comes at about the same time former Vice President Joe Biden declares the hero of Sutherland Springs, Texas, should not have been able to acquire the AR-15 he used to confront the church shooter.

Describing an AR-15 as an assault rifle is political terminology conjured up to promote gun control. AR does not stand for “assault rifle” or “automatic rifle.” It stands for ArmaLite rifle, a semi-automatic weapon with a 30-round magazine.

[Read More]

The Gun-Control Legislation That Even Republicans Like

Article credited to The Atlantic:


The Gun-Control Legislation That Even Republicans Like

The Gun-Control Legislation That Even Republicans Like

Bipartisan support is still no guarantee that a bill to strengthen the federal background-check system will pass.

Senator Chris Murphy
Senator Chris Murphy heads to the House chamber on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on June 22, 2016, to show support for the sit-down protest, seeking a vote on gun control measures.Alex Brandon / AP

Republicans and Democrats have found gun legislation both sides agree on. But that doesn’t mean it will pass.


In the wake of mass shootings in Nevada, Texas, and California, Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, an outspoken advocate of gun control, introduced a bill to strengthen the federal background-check system for gun sales. Debates over gun control on Capitol Hill nearly always give way to inaction in the face of Republican opposition. But Democrats aren’t alone in supporting this new legislation: It is also backed by Republican Senators John Cornyn, the second highest-ranking Republican in the Senate, Orrin Hatch, Tim Scott, and Dean Heller.

The legislation doesn’t call for expanding restrictions on gun purchases; it’s meant to stop people from buying guns when they were never supposed to be able to in the first place. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS, relies on state and federal officials to report mental-health and criminal-conviction records that legally bar individuals from purchasing firearms. But those records don’t always make it into the system.

After a gunman killed 26 people in Sutherland Springs, Texas, earlier this month, the Air Force conceded that it failed to report the shooter’s prior domestic violence conviction, an action that if it had been taken might have prevented the purchase of the firearms used in the shooting. The new legislation is intended to make sure that something like that never happens again.

Any Republican who decides to back the legislation can argue that they just want existing laws to be enforced. And it looks like the GOP won’t have to fear backlash from the gun lobby. “We applaud Senator John Cornyn’s efforts to ensure that the records of prohibited individuals are entered into NICS,” Chris Cox of the NRA said in a statement. “The National Rifle Association has long supported the inclusion of all legitimate records in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.” The National Shooting Sports Foundation, a trade association for the firearms industry, put out a statement on Thursday in which it “praised U.S. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) for his leadership” on the bill.

Gun-control advocates support the bill too, and say it’s evidence that common ground between Republicans and Democrats in the gun debate is possible. “This is both parties affirming that there are people that we believe should not have access to guns, and we want to make sure that the system is set up in such a way that we prevent access to guns for those people,” Christian Heyne, the legislative director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, which supports the legislation, said in an interview. “This is a real, genuine effort from people who couldn’t be further from each other on the other side of the aisle.”

In addition to Senators Murphy, Cornyn, Hatch, Scott, and Heller, Democratic Senators Richard Blumenthal, Dianne Feinstein, and Jeanne Shaheen are also co-sponsors.

But bipartisan support is still no guarantee that the legislation will actually move forward in Congress or ever be enacted. For that, it needs the support of the Republican congressional leadership. In response to a request for comment asking if Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has plans to advance the bill, a spokesman for McConnell said, “We’re reviewing it.”

There are countless examples of a debate over guns flaring up in Congress in response to a mass shooting, only to stall out not long after. Some Republicans in Congress expressed a willingness to consider a ban on “bump stocks,” a device that enables semi-automatic weapons to fire faster, after 58 people were killed in Las Vegas, Nevada, in what has been called the worst mass shooting in modern U.S. history. In mid-October, Republican Representative Carlos Curbelo and Democratic Representative Seth Moulton introduced a bill to ban the use of bump stocks. Weeks later, the legislation had stalled.

Legislation doesn’t always stall out though: In the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shooting in 2007, Republicans and Democrats came together to pass a bill to improve the federal background-check system after it was discovered that the shooter had a history of mental-health problems that should have barred him from buying a gun. The NICS Improvement Amendments Act, a measure similarly intended to strengthen the background-check system, was later signed into law by Republican President George W. Bush.

Of course, just as the legislation passed in the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shooting has not fixed every problem with the federal background-check system, it’s possible that the current legislation under consideration wouldn’t end every instance where relevant records fail to end up in the national system.

The bill contains a number of provisions designed to ensure that records are reported, including a system of incentives and penalties designed to prevent gaps in the system. States could tap into federal-grant preferences if they implement plans to upload records, while federal agencies would be denied money for political appointees if they fail to report necessary background information.

Po Murray of Newton Action Alliance, a group formed after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, killed 20 children in 2012, said that she “applaud[s] the bipartisan effort” and “agree[s] that NICS needs to be fixed,” but that she wanted Congress to pass other gun laws as well to reduce mass shootings, gun homicides, and suicides.

The Murphy-Cornyn legislation proposes changes that fall short of the full roster of reforms that advocates want to see made to the background-check system, including the implementation of universal background checks to cover private and online sales. Senator Murphy introduced legislation in October that would expand background checks for private sales. That bill currently has no Republican co-sponsors, though polling indicates that a majority of Americans support universal background checks.

The recent shootings in Las Vegas and Texas are now being counted as two of the five deadliest mass shootings in American history. That might increase pressure on Congress to do something.

“We’re always concerned that momentum can be lost,” said Robin Lloyd, the director of government affairs for Giffords, the gun violence prevention organization founded by former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. But Lloyd added that the recent tragedies “may be the catalyst for moving something like the Cornyn-Murphy bill over the finish line.”

[Read More]

Opinion  Once again, now is not the time to talk about gun control

Article credited Las Angelas Times:



Once again, now is not the time to talk about gun control

FBI and local law enforcement officials investigate the shooting at Rancho Tehama Elementary School on Nov. 14. (Elijah Nouvelage / AFP/Getty Images)

To the editor: Thank God it was a human and not a gun that killed and injured more people in Northern California on Tuesday. The person (not the gun) also apparently tried to get into a school for more mayhem. (“As gunman sprayed school with bullets, quick action prevented mass bloodshed,” Nov. 15)

Now is definitely not the time to discuss gun regulation, as we are too busy organizing our prayer memorials. Thanks to our president and his fellow Republicans for allowing us to have the weapons to shoot back at these disturbed individuals.

Gallup poll: Majority of Americans now favor more gun laws

Article credited to Politico:
A concealed carry class instructor is pictured. | Getty
Support for increasing legislative checks on guns was particularly high among women and non-white Americans. | Getty

Gallup poll: Majority of Americans now favor more gun laws

A majority of Americans support passing new gun control legislation, according to a new Gallup poll released on Thursday — marking the first time a majority of those surveyed has expressed such a view since Gallup started tracking the issue in 2000.

[Read More]

Senate Dems Pushing for Ban on ‘Assault Weapons’ & Bump Stocks

Article credited to OutdoorHub:


Senate Dems Pushing for Ban on ‘Assault Weapons’ & Bump Stocks

OutdoorHub Reporters

Senate Democrats, headed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, (Calif.) are seeking to ban semi-automatic rifles.

According to The Hill, around two-dozen Democrats introduced the bill on Wednesday that would officially ban semi-automatic rifles, high-capacity ammo magazines, along with bump stocks.

“We’re introducing an updated assault weapons ban for one reason: so that after every mass shooting with a military-style assault weapon, the American people will know that a tool to reduce these massacres is sitting in the Senate, ready for debate and a vote,” Feinstein stated.

Here are the major components of the bill.

Key provisions

  • Bans the sale, manufacture, transfer and importation of 205 military-style rifle by name. Owners may keep existing weapons.
  • Bans any semi-automatic rifle that accepts a detachable ammunition magazine and has one or more military characteristics including a pistol grip, a forward grip, a barrel shroud, a threaded barrel or a folding or telescoping stock. Owners may keep existing weapons.
  • Bans magazines and other ammunition feeding devices that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, which allow shooters to quickly fire many rounds without needing to reload. Owners may keep existing magazines.

Exemptions to bill

  • The bill exempts by name more than 2,200 guns for hunting, household defense or recreational purposes.
  • The bill includes a grandfather clause that exempts all weapons lawfully possessed at the date of enactment.

Other provisions:

  • Requires a background check on any future sale, trade or gifting of a weapon covered by the bill.
  • Requires that grandfathered weapons are stored using a secure gun storage or safety device like a trigger lock.
  • Prohibits the transfer of high-capacity ammunition magazines.
  • Bans bump-fire stocks and other devices that allow semi-automatic weapons to fire at fully automatic rates.


Michigan Bill Aims to Allow Teachers to Carry Concealed Guns in Schools

Article credited to OutdoorHub:



Michigan Bill Aims to Allow Teachers to Carry Concealed Guns in Schools

OutdoorHub Reporters


Michigan lawmakers have voted to let people with extended training – including teachers – carry guns inside churches, schools, as well as other places that were previously banned.

According to WLNS, the bills got the OK on Tuesday, and were fast-tracked to the Senate on Wednesday.

Proponents of the bill say these designated gun-free zones are a “target-rich environment” for mass shooters. On the other side, those opposed say authorizing guns in those areas make them less safe.

The full Republican-led Senate is expected to vote on the measure Wednesday. The bill is anticipated to be changed to close a legal loophole that lets CPL holders openly carry firearms in gun-free zones.

On gun control, Mr. President, keep our city’s name out of your mouth

On gun control, Mr. President, keep our city’s name out of your mouth

[Read More]

Desert Tech is Now Shipping the Multi Caliber MDR Rifle Ideal for Law Enforcement and Hunting

Article credited to Outdoorhub:



Desert Tech is Now Shipping the Multi Caliber MDR Rifle Ideal for Law Enforcement and Hunting

OutdoorHub Reporters

21 hours ago

The MDR was designed to be one of the most compact, adaptable and user-friendly semiautomatic rifles available.  Many unique features set the MDR apart from other rifles. The MDR is also ideal for police and other enforcement agencies, as well as self-defense and hunting.

[Read More]

What’s wrong with gun control? The same thing that’s wrong with immigration restrictions.

Article credited to Learn Liberty:


What’s wrong with gun control? The same thing that’s wrong with immigration restrictions.


Blog post featured image


A common argument for restricting immigration to the United States and other developed countries — maybe even the most plausible one — runs like this. Opening the borders will bring in people who will consume more public services than they pay for in taxes and who will vote for more statist politicians who support those public services. The result will be less freedom for everyone in the long run. Therefore, many conservatives say, immigration control is a regrettable but necessary step to securing freedom.

[Read More]

Gun Rights vs Gun Control


Gun Rights vs Gun Control

  • U.S. gun ownership: 88.8 per 100 people

  • Pro-gun rights money
    to Trump: $969,138
    to Clinton: $48,013

  • Pro-gun control money
    to Clinton: $1,100,698
    to Trump: $1,984

See contributions from gun control and gun rights groups to members of Congress, as well as current NRA data

The fatal shooting in October 2017 at a Las Vegas music festival, which killed 58 concertgoers and injured hundreds more, is the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history.

Only 16 months earlier, a gunman armed with a handgun and a semi-automatic rifle murdered 49 people and injured 58 at an Orlando nightclub in what was then the country’s worst mass shooting.

The horrific attack came less than six months after a man and a woman opened fire at a San Bernardino, California, social services center, killing 14 and injuring 22.

And with each mass shooting — from Columbine to Sandy Hook; Fort Hood to Virginia Tech — the national debate over gun ownership renews.


A couple embraces following a shooting that killed multiple people at a social services facility on Dec. 2, 2015 in San Bernardino, Calif. (David Bauman/The Press-Enterprise via AP)

Despite the outpouring of grief and sympathy that followed the San Bernardino incident on Dec. 2, 2015, the very next day the Senate rejected a bill to tighten background check requirements on would-be gun buyers — just as it did in 2013, shortly after a lone gunman killed six adults and 20 children at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.

Whether 2017 will be any different remains to be seen. In fact, the issue of how to strike a balance between gun rights and public safety has been a political hot potato for years, and one that Congress has dealt with gingerly — too gingerly, in the view of groups favoring tighter firearms regulations.

The political climate of 2017 would hardly seem auspicious for action on the issue. Republicans generally oppose any type of gun control legislation — only four of 54 Senate Republicans voted in favor of the 2015 background check bill — and the GOP controls Congress until at least 2019. President Donald Trump pledged to protect Second Amendment rights if elected in 2016.

Trump’s predecessor, Barack Obama, made 14 televised statements following a mass shooting and supported multiple gun control bills during his eight years in office.

In June 2016, Democrats mounted a successful filibuster that forced Senate Republicans to vote on four gun control proposals — none of which passed.

A .44 caliber political issue

The last major piece of gun control legislation to make it into law was the assault weapons ban, which passed in 1994 as part of a larger crime-related bill approved by Congress and signed by then-President Bill Clinton. But the ban, which applied to the manufacture of 19 specific models of semi-automatic firearms and other guns with similar features, expired in 2004, and repeated attempts to renew it have failed.

84% of Americans

support expanding background checks to include private firearm sales and purchases at gun shows, including a majority of Republican respondents. (Source: Pew Research Center, June 2017)

Some Democrats thought their support for the assault weapons ban cost them control of Congress in the 1994 midterm elections. Whether or not that’s true, there’s little question that the politics of gun ownership have swung to the right. Republicans largely oppose gun control, and Democrats are split, with some lawmakers cautious about going against the views of more conservative constituencies, especially in rural districts.

That was true among the 2016 presidential candidates. Eventual Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton contrasted herself with Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont on the issue of gun control during their primary-season debates. And after nine people were killed in a shooting at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Oregon, Clinton promised she would take executive action as president to expand background checks. Sanders, though historically more sympathetic to the gun rights cause, reacted strongly the day after the San Bernardino shooting with a series of tweets calling for universal background checks, closing the “gun show loophole” and renewing the assault weapons ban, among other proposals.

Gun money to 2016 presidential candidates*

Candidate Gun Rights Gun Control
Bush, Jeb (R) $32,065 $6,900
Carson, Ben (R) $168,452 $6,953
Chafee, Lincoln (D) $0 $1,000
Christie, Chris (R) $7,050 $1,000
Clinton, Hillary (D) $48,013 $1,100,698
Cruz, Ted (R) $518,272 $2,566
Fiorina, Carly (R) $73,192 $500
Gilmore, Jim (R) $16,950 $0
Graham, Lindsey (R) $95,366 $0
Huckabee, Mike (R) $52,051 $0
Jindal, Bobby (R) $13,200 $0
Johnson, Gary (3) $10,305 $2,000
Kasich, John (R) $36,740 $9,741
Lessig, Lawrence (D) $0 $637
McMullin, Evan (I) $0 $0
O’Malley, Martin (D) $2,000 $5,740
Pataki, George (R) $0 $0
Paul, Rand (R) $243,502 $0
Perry, Rick (R) $48,550 $0
Rubio, Marco (R) $251,729 $3,950
Sanders, Bernie (D) $14,392 $117,965
Santorum, Rick (R) $121,792 $0
Stein, Jill (3) $260 $2,000
Trump, Donald (R) $969,138 $1,984
Walker, Scott (R) $39,510 $0
Webb, Jim (D) $500 $2,000
*Career numbers not including any funds raised for state-level campaigns. Based on data released by the FEC as of May 16, 2017

Those measures would likely pass muster with the Supreme Court despite challenges that would surely follow based on the Second Amendment — “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” In 2008, the justices struck down Washington, D.C.’s blanket ban on handgun ownership. The decision confirmed that individuals, and not just the police and military, have a constitutional right to own guns, but the ruling was a narrow one, applying only to a person’s right to keep a gun at home for self-defense. It didn’t imply that guns can’t be regulated in a number of ways.

Still, despite highly publicized mass shootings, no gun control measures have made it through the House and Senate in recent years.

That includes the so-called Manchin-Toomey amendment to require background checks in all commercial gun sales, including those at gun shows. The measure first buy metronidazole 500mg came to a vote in April 2013, four months after the Newtown shooting. It failed, getting only 54 of the 60 votes it needed to overcome a filibuster. The Center for Responsive Politics found that nearly all of the 46 senators who voted against the amendment had accepted significant campaign contributions from the political action committees of gun rights groups. There were exceptions to the rule, notably the measure’s sponsors, Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.). But in general, the correlation was a close one.

No senators who were in office for the 2013 vote changed their position when the provision was brought up again after the San Bernardino killings in 2015. And the second time around only 48 votes of support for expanding background checks could be found. Another bill put to a vote that day, which was sponsored by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and would have prohibited individuals on the terrorism watch list from buying guns, was rejected as well.

The votes on Manchin-Toomey seem out of step with where the public stands. The Pew Research Center found in 2015 that 85 percent of Americans, including a majority of Republican respondents, support expanding background checks to include private firearms sales and purchases at gun shows. In June 2017, Pew found that 84 percent of Americans supported it.

Reflecting the opinion of many liberal political leaders, commentators and organizations, Feinstein said in a statement that Congress “has a problem — a debilitating fear of upsetting the gun lobby.”

Guns and money

There’s no denying that much of the strength of the leading gun rights organization, the National Rifle Association, comes from its broad and passionate membership base and its mastery of grassroots politics.

But if lawmakers seem to tiptoe around gun issues, it’s likely at least in part because the NRA and other gun rights groups are loaded for bear with a seemingly limitless stash of cash ammunition.

Gun rights interests have given about $41.9 million to candidates, parties and outside spending groups since 1989, with 89 percent of the funds contributed to candidates and parties going to Republicans. And in the 2012 and 2014 election cycles, they let loose another $48 million (at least) in outside spending.

Top 20 recipients of funds from gun rights interests, 1989-2018*

Member Party Office State Total From Gun Rights Outside Spending
Gun Control Opposed
Outside Spending
Gun Rights Support
Ryan, Paul R H WI $346,497 $0 $601
Young, Don R H AK $217,976 $0 $138,853
Johnson, Ron R S WI $189,498 $20,493 $1,044,306
Cornyn, John R S TX $189,325 $0 $35,745
Thune, John R S SD $183,215 $0 $578,381
Toomey, Pat R S PA $168,260 $0 $950,835
Paul, Rand R S KY $165,976 $0 $99,955
Sessions, Pete R H TX $159,476 $0 $3,411
Rubio, Marco R S FL $158,194 $0 $1,008,030
Blunt, Roy R S MO $153,543 $0 $1,406,256
Calvert, Ken R H CA $144,466 $0 $775
Goodlatte, Bob R H VA $139,850 $0 $21,924
McConnell, Mitch R S KY $135,350 $0 $771,175
Pearce, Steve R H NM $131,750 $0 $75,450
Cruz, Ted R S TX $130,384 $0 $88,918
Burr, Richard R S NC $125,050 $0 $1,404,496
Inhofe, James M R S OK $122,100 $0 $5,258
Grassley, Chuck R S IA $113,430 $0 $266,356
Royce, Ed R H CA $111,120 $0 $80
Heller, Dean R S NV $108,515 $0 $72,311
*Career figures. Last two columns refer to outside spending. 2018 cycle based on data downloaded from the FEC, September 2017. For more information on how we calculate industry totals visit our methodology page

The NRA has provided the lion’s share of the funds, having contributed $22.9 millionsince 1989. During the 2016 election cycle, it further opened its coffers to make $54.3 million in outside expenditures, up from $27 million during the 2014 cycle.

Gun control interests, by comparison, have been a blip on the radar screen. They’ve given $4.2 million since 1989; 96 percent of their contributions to parties and candidates have gone to Democrats.

But they did unleash $8.6 million in outside spending during the 2014 election cycle, nine times as much as they spent during the 2010 and 2012 cycles combined. Americans for Responsible Solutions, founded by former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-Ariz.) and her husband, Mark Kelly, was behind $8.2 million of those independent expenditures. Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety spent $390,000.

Those figures don’t include $5.6 million in outside spending by Independence USA PAC, a super PAC backed by Bloomberg that he says supports “candidates and causes that will help protect Americans from the scourge of gun violence, improve our schools, and advance our freedoms.” The money went to support federal candidates who were in favor of gun control and attack one who wasn’t; the group had 100 percent success rate. Bloomberg gave a total of $28 million to outside spending groups during the 2014 cycle, of which $17 million went to Independence USA PAC.

In the 2016 cycle, gun control groups accounted for $3 million in outside spending versus $54.9 million from gun rights organizations, including $54.3 million from the NRA.

Top 20 recipients of funds from gun control interests, 1989-2018*

Member Party Office State Total from Gun Control Outside Spending
Gun Control Support
Outside Spending
Gun Rights Opposed
Van Hollen, Chris D S MDS2 $105,595 $0 $0
Masto, Catherine Cortez D S NVS2 $52,145 $0 $2,422,829
Bennet, Michael F D S COS1 $42,887 $0 $38,813
Schumer, Charles E D S NYS2 $22,864 $0 $0
Stabenow, Debbie D S MIS2 $21,450 $0 $95
Feinstein, Dianne D S CAS2 $19,250 $0 $0
Blumenthal, Richard D S CTS2 $18,165 $0 $55,221
Schiff, Adam D H CA28 $15,435 $0 $0
Price, David D H NC04 $13,350 $0 $0
Nelson, Bill D S FLS1 $11,577 $0 $626,122
Carper, Tom D S DES1 $10,500 $0 $0
Baldwin, Tammy D S WIS1 $9,800 $0 $326,223
Murphy, Stephanie D H FL07 $9,675 $0 $0
Durbin, Dick D S ILS1 $8,783 $0 $0
Murray, Patty D S WAS2 $8,750 $0 $6,704
Gottheimer, Josh D H NJ05 $8,373 $0 $0
Conyers, John Jr D H MI13 $8,218 $0 $0
Larsen, Rick D H WA02 $8,000 $0 $0
Esty, Elizabeth D H CT05 $7,050 $42,123 $0
Takano, Mark D H CA41 $7,000 $0 $0
*Career figures. Last two columns refer to outside spending. 2018 figures based on data downloaded from the FEC, September 2017. For more information on how we calculate industry totals visit our methodology page.

Even greater than gun rights groups’ dominance in the realm of campaign finance is their superiority when it comes to lobbying Congress and federal agencies. In 2013 alone — right after Newtown — the gun rights lobby spent $15.3 million making its case in Washington.

The following year, it spent $12 million, and in 2015 pared it to $11.4 million. The NRA accounted for $3.6 million of the 2015 number, but over the years, other groups — such as the National Association for Gun Rights, Gun Owners of America and the National Shooting Sports Foundation — have also made significant lobbying expenditures. And gun control groups? They spent just $1.9 million and under $1.7 million on lobbying in 2014 and 2015, respectively.

In 2016, gun rights advocates spent $10.6 million on lobbying versus $1.7 million by gun control groups.

– Geoff West, updated October 2017

[Read More]

Regulation Alert: Telescopic Sights Now Legal for Minnesota Muzzleloader Hunters

Regulation Alert: Telescopic Sights Now Legal for Minnesota Muzzleloader Hunters

An environmental bill recently signed by Gov. Mark Dayton made Minnesota the latest state to allow the use of telescopic sights (think scopes with magnification) during its designated muzzleloader deer hunting season beginning this year (Nov. 25 through Dec. 10). The move leaves just nine states — Alaska, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota and Washington — with regulations prohibiting them.


In Minnesota, the general bag limit for whitetail bucks is only one per year, taken by whatever legal hunting means. And the rules change regarding the use of optics came after years of political pressing, pleading and lobbying by deer hunters who view the special season as an opportunity to extend their time in the field, and want to use the latest and most efficient technology available, namely an in-line muzzleloader rifle equipped with a high-quality telescopic sight.

Rather than having a side-lock hammer that strikes an exposed percussion cap to ignite the main blackpowder or Pyrodex charge, as a traditional muzzleloader firearm does, an in-line model such as CVA’s Optima V2 or Thompson/Center Impact, locate the ignition source — typically a No. 209 shotshell primer — within the receiver where it’s protected from weather and dirt, and directly behind the powder charge. The result is a near instantaneous ignition of the main charge, which significantly improves reliability and shooting accuracy.

CVA Optima V2 Stainless
TC Impact

Traditions Performance Firearms went a step farther when it introduced its StrikeFire internal striker that eliminates the need to thumb a hammer altogether. Featured on a number of models, including the Vortek StrikeFire, the system employs a sliding striker button to cock the muzzleloader. While the StrikeFire system may be quicker and quieter than thumbing a hammer at the critical moment, as the company asserts, the main benefit of the hammerless design is that it allows the use of low-profile scope mounts, which aligns the scope’s sight-line closer to the bore.

Traditions Vortek StrikeFire

All three models mentioned here are available as a package that includes a 3-9×40 telescopic sight, making them highly accurate muzzleloaders to about 200 yards in the hands of an experienced shooter. Proponents of the rule change say this type of accuracy is necessary because a muzzleloader’s intrinsic multi-step reloading process makes a quick follow-up shot impossible.

In opposition to the new regulation was a faction of those who largely believe the designated muzzleloader season should be reserved strictly for hunting with traditional side-lock percussion cap or flintlock blackpowder rifles that rely on open or peep sights. The object and challenge, they contend, is to get close enough to the quarry to place a lead ball or bullet accurately into the vital zone. Thus, the stand-off between the two boiled down to a clash of ideals — one in which the state took no side.

Minnesota’s Department of Natural Resources viewed the situation as a social issue, explained big game program leader Adam Murkowski when he spoke with Pioneer Press earlier this year. He further noted that the regulation change isn’t expected to greatly affect hunter numbers during the special muzzleloader season, or the total annual whitetail harvest.

At this point, it’s difficult to predict whether any of the remaining states might adopt a similar attitude toward special-season use of telescopic sights. One stumbling block is that there’s disagreement over the definition. In Alaska, for example, big game hunters can’t use telescopic sights during a designated muzzleloader season, but non-magnifying illuminated reticle (red-dot type) sights are legal. In California, however, both are off limits to hunters during a special season.

Given that the special muzzleloader season in Minnesota occurs late in the year, after the regular firearms season has closed and bowhunters have already been afield for a couple of months, the state’s stance seems sound. Modern muzzleloader users and traditionalists should be able to coexist, each hunting in the manner he or she chooses.

[Read More]

NEWS : Video: Federal Premium Drops New .224 Valkyrie MSR , the Furthest Shooting Commercial AR-15 Round


Video: Federal Premium Drops New .224 Valkyrie MSR , the Furthest Shooting Commercial AR-15 Round

Why is FP so high on this new cartridge, you ask? Well, there are many reasons.

The low-recoiling .224 Valkyrie promises to be a very flat shooting cartridge, and is geared towards a target market that includes long-range precision shooters, all the way to medium-sized game and varmint control.

This is a list of planned factory loadings:

  • 100-grain Fusion MSR
  • 60-grain Nosler Ballistic Tip Varmint
  • 90-grain Gold Medal Sierra Match King
  • 75-grain American Eagle

Here’s a video that gives you some more details, but expect to hear much more about this round in future OutdoorHub articles:

New California Ammo Regs for 2018 — A Hassle for Hunters and Shooters

New laws approved by California voters and lawmakers in 2016 have the state’s 6-million-plus hunters, recreational shooters and other gun owners…

[Read More]