NRA News: Emily Miller – The Washington Times – “D.C.’s only gun source”
Cam Edwards talks to Emily Miller from The Washington Times, who is writing a series on her efforts to get a gun in Washington, DC
Newsday: Gun control always under fire
Need more proof that New York editors see the world differently than the rest of the country? This week the editors of Newsday, which is now essentially a Long Island newspaper, offered an editorial titled, “Gun control always under fire.” It is a passion-based piece with little in the way of supporting evidence for its claims.
It isn’t mentioned that crime has fallen as gun rights have increased. It didn’t mention that Chicago and D.C. had high gun crime despite strict gun control.
Instead the editors offer this thought:
“But gun-control victories can be fragile. Supporters of irresponsible legislation to allow someone with a concealed-weapons permit from any other state to carry a gun here in New York are trying again. Congress should again reject this one-size-fits-all proposal. If it became law, it would mean lax requirements in some states — for instance issuing permits without gun training or to people with violent misdemeanor convictions — could become the de facto national standard.”
Once again we must ask, what is to stop a criminal from merely carrying a gun illegally? If someone is intent on breaking the law the right to carry is going to be the least of one’s concerns. Note too that this suggests that those with violent misdemeanor convictions could get a gun, but never address felony convictions – is this because the editors believe felons wouldn’t carry guns?
Typical view for those with strict gun control and who would only wish for more.
NRA Targets San Fran Gun Control Says The Informant
KALW News “The Informant” took aim at the NRA last week, noting:
“San Francisco currently faces two lawsuits by the National Rifle Association attacking its gun control laws. The lawsuits are part of a nationwide campaign targeting local measures that restrict gun ownership.”
The article also notes that the NRA’s efforts including District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago. While this is mostly straightforward reporting it fails to note, as our friend John Lott did in a piece for FoxNews, namely that crime is down in Chicago and D.C.
In other words “The Informant” didn’t offer that key bit of information.
John Lott: Media Silence Is Deafening About Important Gun News
Our friend John Lott wrote an excellent op-ed for FoxNews.com last Friday, titled, “Media Silence Is Deafening About Important Gun News.” He essentially notes, “murder and violent crime rates were supposed to soar after the Supreme Court struck down gun control laws in Chicago and Washington, D.C.”
And have you heard about the crime rates? Probably not, because as Lott notes… they have fallen. He writes:
“Not surprisingly, the national media have been completely silent about this news. One can only imagine the coverage if crime rates had risen. In the first six months of this year, there were 14% fewer murders in Chicago compared to the first six months of last year – back when owning handguns was illegal. It was the largest drop in Chicago’s murder rate since the handgun ban went into effect in 1982.”
The media likes news on guns… but only when it is bad. There is the saying, “if it bleeds, it leads.” Sad but very true.
National Rifle Association: ATF Rewards Agents Who Ran “Fast and Furious” & Then Helped Cover It Up
From the NRA:
In what can only be described as “Washington D.C. logic,” the three BATFE agents who were responsible for the “Fast and Furious” debacle in Phoenix have been promoted.
You read that right, promoted! Not reprimanded, not demoted and certainly not fired, but given bigger jobs with more responsibility and more pay.
Each of the agents now have high profile positions in D.C. Read more
Dennis Henigan: Actually, Guns Do Kill People
Writing for The Huffington Post this week, Dennis A. Henigan, acting president of the Brady Campaign offered an editorial titled, “Actually, Guns Do Kill People.” Henigan tries to suggest that America’s loose gun laws result in more murders, thus offering the thought that guns do kill people. He uses the recent tragic camp shooting in Norway to show how these events could happen here.
But he actually makes a statement that suggests otherwise. Henigan writes:
“Norway has a restrictive gun licensing system, with a requirement that a prospective gun owner provide a written statement justifying why he or she wants one and stiff restrictions on how guns are stored.”
Now we bring this up, because the shooting still occurred. Why wouldn’t we think the same thing could happen if the United States adopted “restrictive gun licensing?” Chicago and Washington, D.C. are examples that Henigan and other anti-gun types never really mention. Both have a lot of gun crime yet “restrictive gun licensing.” Doesn’t that fact show that criminals intent on doing harm will find a way to do so?
D.C. Residents Finally Can Purchase Guns Again
Numerous outlets are noting that Charles Skyes, one of the few people in our nation’s capital who possessed a license to transfer guns into the city, will now do business at the city’s Metropolitan Police Department Headquarters. He will pay $100 a month to conduct business.
This will reportedly end the de facto ban on District residents being able to purchase handguns, but this likely isn’t the last of this story.
Washington Times Notes D.C. Residents Have Lost Second Amendment Rights
As we reported earlier this week, it is almost impossible for D.C. residents to legally obtain a firearm. The Washington Times also weighed in on the issue, noting:
“The landmark District of Columbia v. Heller case should have settled the matters like this three years ago. In its ruling, the Supreme Court smacked down D.C. gun-control measures and reaffirmed the constitutional protection for the individual’s right to own a handgun. Since then, the District has cooked up a labyrinth of pointless restrictions and rules crafted to ensure this fundamental right would rarely be exercised. The city may have gone a step too far, as it is now impossible for any law-abiding citizen to obtain a gun in the nation’s capital.”
The irony is that D.C. is no safer thanks to these laws. Criminals still have guns, and now that the one lone license holder is on a break from doing business, residents can’t purchase a gun and have it transferred to the city. So much for Second Amendment rights in the nation’s capital.
Syracuse Post-Standard Claims Gun Owners Want More Restrictions!
It is easy to write an editorial and cite numbers to make a point. The question is whether those numbers are reliable. To the Post-Standard Editorial Board it doesn’t seem to matter. In an op-ed piece titled: “Too Many Guns: Lax laws evaded as weapons flow in Syracuse,” the editors offer this thought:
“New York has strict gun laws. But unscrupulous buyers can evade background checks in states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and North Carolina, for example by enlisting straw buyers.”
The question we ask is why doesn’t Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc. have off the charts gun crime if the laws are so lax? Yet, these states don’t have the same level of crime as Chicago or Washington, D.C. – the latter cities have strict guns laws.
Then the op-ed piece offers this point:
“Polls suggest 90 percent of Americans — including gun owners — want to plug the gaps in NICS.”
What polls suggest this fact? This is sloppy even for an editorial. It doesn’t offer the source of this information, yet we know the likely source. The editorial notes the efforts of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, and this group has claimed this 90 percent number.
Yes, law-abiding gun owners do want to see that criminals and the mentality ill do not get guns, but most law-abiding gun owners don’t want to see a call on background checks for every single sale.
The editors note the “notorious gun-show loophole” in their argument, but they fail to note that many groups want to ban private sales. That would be impossible to manage, would make felons out of anyone who does something as innocent as giving their son or father a gun as a gift, and would in the end make it all too easy for the government to decide to ban guns. But after all, that is the end goal of the anti-gun crowd.
D.C. Residents Essentially Unable to Purchase Handguns
Residents of the nation’s capital have long had it hard. They technically don’t have “representation” in our government, only having a non-voting delegate in the House of Representatives, and no representation in the United States Senate. Additionally, unlike residents of U.S. territories including Puerto Rico and Guam, citizens of the District of Columbia are such to all U.S. federal taxes.
Until 1961 residents couldn’t even vote for President of the United States, and the city didn’t even have a mayor until the District of Columbia Home Rule Act of 1973.
Now residents may once again lose their right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment, which was only recently hard won. Washington’s gun ban first took effect in 1976 when private handgun ownership was banned as a way of dealing with street crime.
This was overturned in 2008 when the U.S. Supreme Court lifted the ban when ruling in Heller vs. D.C.
But there has been a catch. Residents have nowhere to buy handguns with the city of Washington, D.C. and FoxNews.com has reported that the only firearms dealer has stopped registering guns.
After Heller vs. D.C., residents could buy handguns elsewhere and had to legally transfer and register them with Charles Syke, who was charging a $125 fee. Now Syke is looking to find new office space and thus is unable to register new purchases.
The result is that the City Council, which has been looking at ways of creating a new ban, may have found it!
