“Rapper Cory Gunz – born Peter Pankey Jr. – was arrested in the Bronx Saturday when cops found he was carrying an unregistered Taurus .9mm handgun, police said.

He was arraigned in Bronx Criminal Court Sunday night on charges of criminal possession of a loaded firearm.

His father, rapper Peter Gunz, posted the $30,000 bail.

Here is the part where we are sort of confused… see the quote from Cory:

“This was a big mistake on my part,” Gunz told The Daily News early Monday morning after getting out of jail. “I didn’t have any intentions of harming anyone or committing a criminal activity. So many young people look up to me and I need to fight though this.”

So was the gun part of a fashion or style statement – gun for Gunz? The law isn’t about intentions in this case. The crime was also committed already for mere possession, and Gunz should have known this fact. But it gets more bizarre reports the paper:

Cory Gunz and his dad recently started a campaign called “Gunz Against Guns” where they speak at schools across the Bronx to steer kids away from the deadly weapons, Peter Gunz said.

Now the real question is whether Cory – being semi-rich and famous – will get the same treatment as the two tourists to New York City? Personally we do see a difference in these cases. The tourists in question legally possessed their respective guns but broke the law by bringing them to New York City – believing they could legally carry their firearms.

Cory Gunz however has not only spoke out against guns, but must have known that he was in possession of an illegal firearm in the first place.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dAGDywbeVA

Martin Luther King, Jr. kept guns at home for personal protection.

He applied for but was denied a permit to carry a concealed firearm. He was concerned for his personal safety, as are a lot of Americans.

With constitutional carry, a law-abiding American citizen could carry a concealed firearm without government authorization.

About John Snyder:
Named the Gun Dean by Human Events, “the senior rights activist in Washington” by Shotgun News, a “champion of the right to self-defense” by The Washington Times, and “dean of gun lobbyists” by The Washington Post and The New York Times, John M. Snyder has spent 45 years as a proponent of the individual Second Amendment civil right to keep and bear arms as a National Rifle Association editor, public affairs director of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, treasurer of the Second Amendment Foundation, and founder of www.GunRightsPolicies.org.

A former Jesuit seminarian, Snyder is founder/manager of Telum Associates, LL.C., founder/chairman of the St. Gabriel Possenti Society, Inc., a director of Council for America, and serves on the boards of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and the American Federation of Police & Concerned Citizens. He is also the author of the book Gun Saint. Visit: www.GunRightsPolicies.org

]]> http://www.firearmstruth.com/2012/martin-luther-king-guns-and-constitutional-carry/feed 0 http://www.firearmstruth.com/2011/merry-christmas-and-happy-holidays http://www.firearmstruth.com/2011/merry-christmas-and-happy-holidays#comments Sun, 25 Dec 2011 09:17:32 +0000 FirearmsTruth http://www.firearmstruth.com/?p=9574

Merry Christmas from FirearmsTruth

Thank you to all our readers on this day of giving thanks! God bless and Happy Thanksgiving.

…it is hard to believe that any office of the Holder Justice Department would undertake a sensitive operation involving the nation of Mexico without first seeking Mexican cooperation. If contrary to policy such an operation was contemplated, it is hard to believe that any senior official in the department would have allowed it to proceed.

And yet Fast and Furious had a two-year run while Mexican officials were allegedly kept in the dark.

Where were Mr. Holder and his top aides during this time?

And yet it seems like Eric Holder will continue to dodge the issue and the media might likely continue to blame Bush.

Blame Bush. It has been almost three years since President Obama took office, yet he still blames Bush for the bad economy. Now the Obama administration is following the same strategy to get out of the “Fast and Furious” mess.

Lott also noted that this “Blame Bush” strategy is very much in the works:

The Obama administration has also tried to show the practice originated in the Bush administration during 2006 and 2007 under operation “Wide Receiver.” After all, it is what Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer argued just last week. When Breuer testified last week, he confessed that he had learned about “gun walking” tactics as far back as April 2010, but it wasn’t the Obama administration’s “gun walking” that he confessed to learning about, it was a program run briefly during the Bush administration.

So how did this happen and why? Lott is not alone in his thinking. First he noted:

What is really missed by all this is the utter failure of gun tracing programs. The problem isn’t really that the Obama administration simply screwed up the tracing plan. Few guns move from the U.S. to Mexico and just as drug cartels bring in drugs from other countries, they can bring in the weapons that they need to protect those drugs. Mexican drug cartels aren’t getting their machine guns, grenades, and rocket launchers from the United States.

This is contrary to much of what has been made in the media that 70, 80 or even as much as 90 percent of guns used in Mexico come from the United States. Of course as we’ve also noted, it is hard to figure out where those machine guns, grenades and rocket launchers were coming from. It certainly wasn’t gun shops in Texas. We can see this, our friend John Lott and many others can see this. So why did outlets such as The Washington Post and Christian Science Monitor stick with those 70, 80 or 90 percent figures for so long?

And Lott asked another good question:

Why would the Obama administration not trace the guns? Why would they not inform Mexican officials about the program? One hopes that it was sheer incompetence combined with a desire to stonewall any investigation, but the fact that people knew that the guns weren’t being traced raises questions even about this plan.

Finally, Lott noted something we have long considered too. It is one that bears repeating, even if it sounds a bit crazy:

The only other possibility — deliberately increasing the number of guns sold to increase the share of crime guns in Mexico from the United States and thus generate support for more gun control — is conceivable if only because “Fast and Furious” started at the same time that Obama began his campaign falsely claiming that most Mexican crime guns came from the United States.

This does sound “out there,” but again consider that President Obama – before he was POTUS – has been very anti-gun. He voted for gun control when he was in government in Illinois and was a pro-gun control U.S. Senator. But to get to the White House he had to cool it a bit. However, he has since said to Sarah Brady that he was working on gun control but “under the radar.” Is Fast and Furious part of that “under the radar.” And is he only being quiet on gun control in the run up to next year’s election? Time will tell, but voters should know these facts.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzK3iBPWtL0

Bringing the truth about the Second Amendment to college campuses nation wide.

This summer Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) introduced S. 1249, the Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act.

This bi-partisan legislation would give states greater flexibility in using their Pittman-Robertson funds to establish safe recreational shooting areas.

More specifically, the legislation would help facilitate the construction and expansion of public target ranges, including ranges on federal land managed by the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management.

A companion bill, H.R. 3065, was introduced in the House last week and may soon be heard in the Environment and Public Works Committee. NSSF supports this legislation and encourages its members to contact their legislators and urge them to back this pro-shooting measure.

About NSSF
The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the trade association for the firearms industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of more than 6,000 manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations and publishers. For more information, log on to www.nssf.org.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ec667Esbjec

Katie Pavlich from Townhall.com and Matthew Boyle from The Daily Caller join Cam Edwards in studio for a Fast and Furious Roundtable

The paper offered this thought:

“A gun, by any other name, is just a gun. Unless it’s a Glock semi-automatic pistol raffled off by Republicans in Pima County, which just happens to be the same county where Democratic U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and 19 other people were shot, six of them killed. Then it’s an outrage. Or so we’re supposed to believe. The 24-hour news cycle, the blogosphere and the Twitterverse erupted last week when Huffington Post pointed out that the Pima County Republican Party was raffling off a Glock 23 pistol, saying it’s the same pistol that Jared Lee Loughner used Jan. 8 to shoot Giffords in the head. It’s not the same. Loughner used a Glock 19.”

The paper also noted that Giffords owned a Glock and asks, where is the outrage. But this editorial also tries to suggest that conservatives have false outrage:

“Consider the fake fury by conservatives over the ATF Fast and Furious scandal, an attempted sting operation by federal agents who allowed ‘straw buyers’ to legally purchase thousands of assault rifles from Arizona gun dealers so that the guns could be tracked to Mexican drug cartels. The ATF lost track of many of the guns and one of those guns ended up at the shooting scene where smugglers killed Border Patrol agent Brian Terry. Conservatives say they are outraged about it and are desperately trying to pin the scandal on President Obama. But in the three years prior to Operation Fast and Furious, several newspapers had written investigative stories about Mexican drug cartels smuggling tens of thousands of legally purchased American guns into Mexico.”

We think this outrage is a little different, because it is the facts that are a problem. Yes, we should be outraged if guns are being illegally smuggled into Mexico, but part of the outrage is because the media cited numbers from the ATF – numbers used over and over still to this day by groups such as the Brady Campaign – that suggest more guns are coming from the United States than actually are. This is outrageous.

But maybe there is enough outrage to go around.