Moms Demand Action, a group dedicated to destroying your Second Amendment rights, held a membership meeting in inside the Blue Mesa Grill in Dallas. Members of Open Carry Texas showed up to protest.
MDA later released a statement calling OCT “gun bullies” who “disagree[d] with our goal of changing America’s gun laws and policies to protect our children and families.” The statement added that the members and restaurant customers were “terrified by what appeared to be an armed ambush.”
Here’s a photo of the group that ThinkProgress ran:
And here’s what Open Carry Texas put on their Facebook page:
I would add, “Don’t believe anything you read on ThinkProgress.”
December set a record for the criminal background checks performed before many gun purchases, a strong indication of a big increase in sales, according to an analysis of federal data by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a gun industry trade group. Adjusting the federal data to try to weed out background checks that were unrelated to firearms sales, the group reported that 2.2 million background checks were performed last month, an increase of 58.6 percent over the same period in 2011. Some gun dealers said in interviews that they had never seen such demand.
“If I had 1,000 AR-15s I could sell them in a week,” said Jack Smith, an independent gun dealer in Des Moines, referring to the popular style of semiautomatic rifle that drew national attention after Adam Lanza used one to kill 20 children and 6 adults at a Newtown school. “When I close, they beat on the glass to be let in,” Mr. Smith said of his customers. “They’ll wave money at me.”
How many beautiful collector’s items have been destroyed in programs like this?
Gun advocates went on the offensive in Detroit when the police department decided to hold a gun buy-back event. They stood across the street with signs, encouraging people to sell them their guns for more money than the police were offering.
Between the activists and residents awaiting to sell their unwanted guns, stood a row of five police in the center of the street.
“The police are obviously putting a wall, a barricade, between us and the people who are in line,” Ector said. “It’s a form of intimidation.”
Ector and others said gun buyback events unfairly “demonize” guns.
We want “to send the message that guns are not evil, despite what the government and police are saying,” Ector said “Guns do not cause crime; bad people cause crime.
“There’s a lot of reasons (gun buybacks) are flat out wrong. For one, it’s not going to change anything with regards to violent crime in the city of Detroit; two, potentially you have criminals who are destroying evidence along with the Detroit Police Department.”
In the church line stood Rick Ward, 47, who was selling his grandmother’s 410, bolt-action shotgun, which has sat dormant stored at his home for years.
I wonder how many drive by shootings that 410 has been a part of. How many robberies has it been used in?
What crime will this prevent in the future?
I would love to see this kind of event spread. If I had a pawn shop, I would send reps to every one of these I could find.
Some of the guns might be junk, but there might be some collector’s items being destroyed too.
Martha Lewis says she immediately called police and woke up her daughters.
Lewis says she gave the intruder several warnings before shooting, but he wouldn’t listen.
Police say Lewis will not be charged, since she was defending herself.
“It wasn’t like, oh can I pull the trigger? It was like when should I shoot? When will he be close enough that I know I won’t miss him? That’s one of the things that was going through my mind,” said Lewis.
What would the gun grabbers have happen here?
How would they have Martha defend herself and her children?
I know you’re lurking on the site. Help me understand your logic.
Rabid leftist Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee said on the House floor she was going to tell the National Rifle Association to attend one of her meeting to talk about compromising on our Second Amendment rights:
Let’s look at her wording for a second here:
Tell the NRA to come and sit down with all of us, that this Congress can work in an effective manner, that we can begin to look at issues such as buying 6,000 rounds of ammunition on the Internet. Not against the Second Amendment, but the fact that the Internet sellers did not even have to give notice that one person was buying 6,000 rounds of ammunition. There’s not federal law on that issue. There’s not even a federal law to give notice on that issue.
We can find common ground. Something has to be done, whether it is a disturbed person or not.
Whether it’s a terrorist act, and for me this issue was a terrorist condition because of what happened.
But I want us to come together as one. We can do so and we can come together to do what is good for the American people, respect the Second Amendment, but find ways to protect the American people, whoever they are, wherever they live, from these dangers.
First, the word “tell.”
Not exactly a word someone looking to compromise uses, is it?
Tell them what again? To come to Congress so we can talk about creating a federal law that forces private businesses to report to the government the purchases of private citizens because a government busy body feels they are buying more ammunition than they need.
She upset there isn’t a federal law that mandates the reporting of legal activity.
Jackson Lee said she hoped to understand whether the NRA could agree to new rules that would require retailers to notify authorities whenever one customer is buying excessive amounts of weapons or ammo, a reference to the Colorado shooter, who is now known to have bought thousands of rounds in preparation for the shooting.
“I want an explanation on why someone can buy 6,000 rounds of ammunition on an Internet without any oversight whatsoever,” she said. “Why is there no basis of giving notice?
She wants an explanation? How about this:
I had a similar conversation recently with a person on Facebook, who couldn’t understand why a person would be allowed to own 6,000 rounds of ammo.
Here’s why: the purchase and possession of ammunition does not infringe on the rights of anyone else.
Firing ammunition into people violates their rights.
A free man should not be restricted from possessing something solely because someone else feels they don’t need it.
It wasn’t the purchase of ammunition that killed those people in Aurora. It wasn’t the amount of ammunition purchased.
It was the wanton disregard for their right to life and the taking of that life.
And murder is already illegal.
Finally, Lee said this:
“If they’d given notice to the local police, maybe someone would have knocked on the door and found out what was going on,” she said. “We can find a way to come together. This is not rocket science to determine why you’re getting 6,000 rounds.”
What reason would they have to knock on his door? Did he break a law? Would they have reason to search his apartment? And what does she think they would have had the right to do? Would they have assigned a pre-crime unit to him, or would he just be locked up?
And where’s the Fourth Amendment in all of this? Should police have the right to search your place based on your purchases?
Don’t pretend that’s too far. We both know it isn’t.
This is the slippery slope anti-gun advocates put us on when they push for a greater government role in firearm ownership.
Given the choice between dealing with problems that arise from too much freedom, and those that arise from too little, I’d prefer to deal with those associated with too much.
Giving a positive character to the old expression, “same old stuff,” this week the FBI preliminarily reported that violent crime has dropped yet again – for the 18th time in the last 20 years. According to the report, the estimated annual number of murders dropped 1.9 percent from 2010 to 2011 which, given the increase in the U.S. population during the year, would translate into a drop of between 2.5-3 percent in the per capita rate of murders.
The FBI is expected to report the final 2011 figures around the end of the summer. Assuming those figures match the current estimates, the nation’s murder rate has been cut by about 53 percent and the total violent crime rate has been cut by about 49 percent since 1991, when violent crime hit an all-time high. Stated another way, the nation’s murder rate has fallen to about a 48-year low, and the nation’s total violent crime rate has fallen to about a 41-year low.
Obviously, this is bad news on top of bad news for gun control groups. Ever since the 1970s, they have said that more guns must–as if by some law of nature–result in more crime. It’s also bad news for people who are currently trying to undermine self-defense laws that have been popularly-termed “Castle Doctrine” or “Stand Your Ground.”
Meanwhile, in Chicago, where guns are pretty much illegal:
At least seven people were killed and 35 were injured since Friday night. The youngest victim was a 16-year-old girl who died after she was shot three times in the chest Saturday evening in the Englewood neighborhood.
Ten people were shot overnight Friday, and in one hour Sunday morning, three people were killed. The latest shooting happened just after midnight Monday when a 19-year-old was shot to death on the city’s North Side.
Sean Combs received a M1 Garande for his 18th birthday.
Eager to show it off, he slung it over his shoulder and began walking to his friends’ houses to show them his rifle.
While walking through his neighborhood, a police officer stopped him and asked to see his ID. Sean refused.
The police called in more police.
Combs decided to relent and reached for his ID.
He was then arrested and charged with brandishing a firearm, disorderly conduct and obstructing an officer.
However, he had done nothing wrong. It’s legal to open carry in Michigan.
A public meeting was held in the town recently and supporters of Sean Combs came strapped:
A few Michiganders made use of their right to carry by attending a Birmingham City Commission meeting with pistols strapped to their belts, shotguns in their hands, and rifles slung over their shoulders. One of the protestors, Phillip Hofmeister, told Click on Detroit, “We understand that it’s not something that’s a part of the public norm or something you see in everyday life, but there is not a law against it.”
While nobody came out and said, the implication of the organized protest was quite clear, “If you arrested Sean Combs, why don’t you arrest us, too?”
It’s expected to be an open and shut case when Sean goes to court, considering he broke no laws. I agree with Combs’ attorney. This is just a case where the police didn’t like what Combs was doing. I’ve been there. Trust me, police usually win the initial power struggle.