Here is what we are talking about:

Bloomberg asserted the (recent) shooting (in New York City) made clear the importance of gun control. He added: “We had too close a brush with death tonight due to illegal guns.”

And the figures prove he’s right. Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Browne told me that about 85 percent of the gun crimes committed in New York City result from gun purchases made in Pennsylvania, Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, “states with comparatively lax gun laws.”

First question, where does Paul Browne get his information? And more to the point, how do the figures prove Bloomberg is right? This number is widely cited, but without a source. Second, what numbers of those are legal vs. illegal gun purchases? In other words, are these even legal purchases that take advantage of “lax gun laws” in the first place? This point is never made clear and is often very vague. Not exactly the facts now are they?

But the facts get even more twisted:

John Feinblatt, the Mayor’s chief policy adviser, told me that states with tough gun laws are unlikely to be the source of illegal guns. He noted that, in fighting gun crimes, two measures are vital: having universal background checks for gun sales and putting all such data in the FBI files. In the case of the Virginia Tech massacre, in which 33 people were killed, the gunman, Seung-hui Cho, had a mental history that indicated he was dangerous but , Feinblatt said, that was never passed on to the FBI. Some state laws on gun sales, he added “have loopholes like swiss [sic] cheese.”

Again, this is twisting the message and points. Seung-hui Cho’s ability to get a gun wasn’t because of lax gun laws, but rather a failing in the mental health system. But what “loopholes” are like “Swiss cheese” exactly? Would this be private sales? Even in New York private sales are legal, provided both parties have licenses to own the firearms.

But another point we’d like to make on facts. States with tough gun laws may not be the source of illegal guns, but it is hard to know for sure. Illegal guns aren’t exactly tracked the way commercial sales are tracked, so this is somewhat a vague point. It is clear that guns do change hands in New York and Illinois – as there is gun violence. Clearly an illegal black market operates and no amount of gun bans or gun control is going to destroy this black market. But that’s a fact that really pushes the issue – is it Mayors Against Illegal Guns or just Mayors Against Guns, because the way these guys talk it sounds like the latter.

It should be noted that the 30 second ad will cost some $3 million dollars – so anyone who says that the NRA pushes its pro-gun message unfairly should consider the money that these super rich anti-gun zealots are throwing at their cause.

But let’s consider some too some of the media coverage so far.

The New York Times: “During Super Bowl, for 30 Seconds, 2 Mayors Will Be on Same Side,” which offers this passage:

The half-minute ad features Mr. Bloomberg and Boston’s mayor, Thomas M. Menino, ribbing each other as they cheer for their respective teams and cities. But then they turn to the purpose of their spot, declaring that one thing they agree on is the need for stricter federal gun control laws.

The New York Post: “Mayor Bloomberg to run anti-illegal gun ad during Super Bowl”

The Associated Press via The Wall Street Journal : “NYC, Boston mayors team up in gun-control ad”

All this is interesting in the way it suggests it is about “illegal guns” and how the mayors are “teaming up” and are “on the same side,” but never notes that this is against what many gun owners want. Of course do these rich anti-gun zealots care.

It should be noted that the ad will only appear in select markets and not nationally due to rules on “cause related” ads.

But anytime one sleazy politician calls out another we think an angel get wings!

January 23, 2012

President Barack Obama
The White House
Washington, DC 20500

Dear President Obama:

When you last reported on the state of our Union, you expressed the nation’s hopes and prayers for Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and the other victims of the Tucson shootings.  This week will mark Congresswoman Giffords’ last days in Congress before she steps down to focus on her truly inspiring recovery. We hope her departure from public life will be temporary and her return will be swift.  And we hope that you will take the opportunity to address her departure, and the causes of it, in your State of the Union Address tomorrow.

Last year, 12,000 Americans were murdered with guns.  To put the death toll in perspective, imagine the entire population of a town being murdered over the course of a year.  Or a university losing its entire student body, each day bringing 34 new murders.  Surely, these events would shock Washington into action.  But the grim fact that guns are used to murder 34 people a day is barely discussed in Washington – even though the tragic reality is that many of those lives could have been saved if the federal government had fixed its broken background check system.

After the Tucson shootings, you called for a new national conversation about guns, saying “we have a responsibility to do everything we can to put a stop to the daily death toll from gun violence in America,” and that “our focus right now should be on sound and effective steps that will actually keep those irresponsible, law-breaking few from getting their hands on a gun in the first place.”  To achieve that goal, you said “we should provide an instant, accurate, comprehensive and consistent system for background checks to sellers who want to do the right thing, and make sure that criminals can’t escape it.”  We strongly agreed.

Many months later, almost nothing has changed.  Criminals and other dangerous individuals are still exploiting massive gaps in the national do-not-sell database.  These gaps facilitate the murder of 34 Americans every day. And they are at the heart of another tragic trend.  Last year, for the first time in 13 years, firearms overtook traffic incidents as the leading cause of fatalities for law enforcement officers. In 2011, 65 police officers were murdered with guns, an increase of 10 percent over 2010.  In at least 35 of these police killings, the shooter was a criminal or other dangerous person who was barred by current law from owning a gun, but slipped through gaps in the background check system.

The more than 600 members of Mayors Against Illegal Guns – representing both political parties and all regions of the country – urge you to address our broken background check system in your State of the Union address.  Our country needs your leadership – and we urge you not to let this issue fall victim of election year politics.  It is too important.  And, as polls show, more than 80 percent of gun owners support the common sense reforms you have proposed to fix our broken background check system.

Tomorrow night, when you speak to the nation about your top priorities for the year ahead, we hope you will remember the debt we owe to the families of police officers killed in the line of duty; to all victims of illegal guns; and to the 12,000 people who will likely be murdered with guns this year – unless we act.

Sincerely,

Thomas M. Menino                                                                      Michael R. Bloomberg

Mayor of Boston                                                                          Mayor of New York City

Coalition Co-Chair                                                                        Coalition Co-Chair

www.youtube.com/watch?v=24vJ4XjKv74

The hearing in Boston last Friday on the proposed anti-knife ordinance “Providing For The Licensing Of Stores That Sell Certain Knives” was a TOTAL FARCE!

We’ve coined the term “knife bigots” to describe these councilors, and others, who simply hate our freedom and our tools and staged this farciful hearing as part of their effort to railroad through this ordinance.

The only councilors at the hearing were the ordinance’s sponsors.

To spare you the agony of listening to the entire hour and 49-minute long low-quality video (can be viewed at http://1.usa.gov/sCvC13), we’ve put together an “entertaining” summary video with highlights and some commentary. This should give you some insight into their skewed view of knives and our rights. Click the image below to view the video.

Please pass along this article link or the video to your knife owner friends. This is how they view knives overseas and why we formed Knife Rights to prevent this from happening in America.

This is the Anti’s vision for knife owners in America, if we do not oppose them at every turn.

Todd Rathner, Knife Rights Legislative Director, led off the testimony opposing the ordinance, with supporting testimony from Jim Wallace of Gun Owner’s Action League (GOAL), the NRA’s Massachusetts affiliate, and a statement from American Knife & Tool Institute read by an AKTI representative. You can read Knife Rights’ official submitted testimony at www.KnifeRights.org/Boston_Statement_11-18-2011.pdf . Todd’s actual testimony was somewhat different as he responded to the preceding testimony by the Councilors and their witnesses.

Watch the video above and hear some of their more outrageous comments, such as, “No law is too onerous…when it comes to the sale of these weapons.” At one point, Councilor Michael Ross appears to be encouraging lawsuits against knife manufacturers for the illegal knife sales made by some convenience stores!

The knives that the Boston City Council is hoping to control will still be available outside city limits, over the internet, and at stores not covered by the ordinance as well as many other places. And, let us not forget the ubiquitous availability of kitchen knives in every household. The ordinance will only result in the hindrance of law-abiding citizens and penalizing honest business owners.

Please contact your Councilor IMMEDIATELY and POLITELY express your opposition to this unnecessary and discriminatory proposal: www.cityofboston.gov/citycouncil/councillors or you can call 617-635-4500 and ask for your Councilor. Additionally, you can email Mayor Tom Mennio at mayor@cityofboston.gov or call his office at 617-635-4500.

Additional details on this ordnance at: http://bit.ly/vtymHc

(Thanks to Knife Rights supporter Adam Francis of Equip 2 Endure for putting together this video.)

About:
Knife Rights (www.KnifeRights.org) is America’s Grassroots Knife Owners Organization, working towards a Sharper Future for all knife owners. Knife Rights is dedicated to providing knife owners an effective voice in public policy. Become a Knife Rights member and make a contribution to support the fight for your knife rights. Visit www.kniferights.org

As we warned, this Thursday, September 8, 2011, the Public Safety Committee of the Boston City Council will be holding a hearing with the intention of licensing the sale of knives in the city of Boston.

Below is the official stated purpose of the hearing:

That the appropriate committee of the Boston City Council hold a hearing to examine requiring the sale of knives to be licensed by the appropriate police agency that would monitor, regulate and license businesses selling knives. Representatives from the Boston Police Department, Inspectional Services Department, and other interested parties shall be invited to attend.

The meeting will be at Boston City Hall, Ianella Chambers, 5th Floor on Thursday, September 8, 2011 at 10 am.

If you are a Boston citizen, here is a link to the councilors’ webpages where you can find a link to contact them and POLITELY express your outrage: http://www.cityofboston.gov/citycouncil/councillors

We urge all Boston area Knife Rights members to contact the Boston City Council and express their opposition to this measure. Currently citizens need a license to possess pepper spray. In a year or so this measure could lead to licensing citizens to possess a basic pocket knife.

As noted in the article linked below, existing Boston law already prohibits knives with a blade two inches or longer from being sold to anyone under age 18. A number of stores were fined as a result of a recent sting operation for illegally selling knives to underage persons. There is no indication that there has been any factual connection made between violence committed with knives in the city and these retailers, or that licensing would actually help the situation any more than simply enforcing the existing law on the books.

Knife Rights has a representative in Massachusetts who will be attending this meeting, but if you live in the area and can attend as well, the stronger show of opposition we can generate, the better.

Video: www.bit.ly/p0TUmg
Article: http://bo.st/qBwsaZ

Your membership and support allows Knife Rights to oppose efforts such as this to restrict our freedoms. If you are not yet a member, please join Knife Rights and encourage your friends to join today!

About:
Knife Rights (www.KnifeRights.org) is America’s Grassroots Knife Owners Organization, working towards a Sharper Future for all knife owners. Knife Rights is dedicated to providing knife owners an effective voice in public policy. Become a Knife Rights member and make a contribution to support the fight for your knife rights. Visit www.kniferights.org

“NEW ENGLAND has a centuries-old tradition of both gun manufacturing and gun control. It shouldn’t have to pick between the two. However, at least one manufacturer is trying to force the matter. Proposals to require that guns be made suitable for micro-stamping, a technology which would allow shell casings to be traced back to the exact gun they were fired from, have been introduced in the Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts legislatures. These have drawn significant criticism from gun manufacturers, at least one of which, Colt, is threatening to move out of New England if such legislation is adopted.”

The issue here isn’t so much that the people of New England want their right to keep and bear arms preserved as much as they want to keep Colt in New England for the jobs and revenue it brings in.

The paper sees it differently:

“Massachusetts has had gun-control laws for almost three centuries, and the Connecticut River Valley has been a center of gun-making since George Washington established an armory in Springfield. There is no reason that both gun control and gun manufacturing cannot co-exist for the next few centuries as well.”

The truth is that the cries for gun control are on the rise, and in the end this could hurt Colt’s bottom line. Why should it provide jobs and revenue to a state or region that wants to kill it slowly?

“Critics of stricter controls on gun ownership and purchasing blamed black market transactions, Mexican drug cartels, and even the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives for enabling criminals to access guns without licenses, and they argued that any additional oversight could put gun ownership out of reach for lawful citizens.”

Could the media actually be coming around on this issue?

However, as noted in the story, the counter will simply increase by eight every day – since that is the statistical average. It won’t take into account those killed in gang related activities or as the result of crime. In other words a gun is bad no matter how it is used.

This is also not exactly a new billboard, and it seems that John Rosenthal had put anti-gun messages since 1995. He reportedly said that 200,000 commuters see the billboard every day. His new target is the Republican controlled House of Representatives, and he accordingly sees last November as the turning point – however, it is worth noting that the GOP didn’t actually take power until January, but can you really reason with people like Rosenthal on these points?

The Globe also noted:

“Past messages on the billboard included a mock ransom note from the NRA, declaring, ‘We have your president and Congress,’’ and another that announced, ‘Welcome to Massachusetts — You’re More Likely to Live Here’’ because the state has ‘the most effective gun laws’ in the nation.”

That latter argument is totally lost on us. The most effective gun laws in the world don’t matter to criminals. Consider that Washington, D.C. and Chicago had so-called “effective gun laws” and terrible gun crime. The point remains that criminals don’t stress over gun laws.

The Mayor is quoted in the story claiming that Massachusetts has “the strongest gun laws in the nation, but people go down South and buy these guns at shows. There’s no background checks. That’s wrong, and we’ve got to stop that.”

The article has an interesting bit of information too:

“Menino’s office cited a 2010 report that found that 64 percent of illegal guns recovered at Massachusetts crime scenes originated out of state. The greatest number of those firearms came from New Hampshire, followed by Maine, Florida, Georgia, and Vermont, according to the report by Mayors Against Illegal Guns.”

What the article fails to note is that Menino is the co-chair and one of the founders of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, hence he is citing his own group’s study.

The article also notes a bill in the U.S. Senate:

“The bill, co-sponsored by Democratic Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts, would require background checks for all firearm purchases, including private sales at gun shows and through the Internet. Federal law currently only requires background checks by licensed gun dealers.”

This is a little misleading. Internet sales require all purchases to be sent to a Federal Firearms License holder, such as a local gun shop, and this does involve a background check.

The key again is “private sales” and while this notes “private sales at gun shows,” the next step would be all private sales. That would essentially create a national database anytime guns change hands. But the question is how would this would?

Would everyone have to register their existing guns? The answer has been no, but somehow we don’t believe it.

It seems that Mr. Cameron tried to pass through security at Boston’s Logan International Airport with two vintage .22-caliber Derringers that he had bought at an auction. Apparently Cameron forgot they were in the bag, which is not really much of an excuse. It was noted that he had no ammunition for the guns.

What is troubling about this story is that he was arrested for “unlawful possession of a firearm.” This apparently because he did not have a license for the guns, which is required in Boston. This is yet another example of where gun owners face penalties for merely trying to travel with their guns.