Monday, October 20, 2014

Democrats: Gun Groups, Not Obama, To Blame For Spread Of Ebola

Liberal commentators and Democrats are blaming gun rights supporters for the spread of Ebola. Seriously.

Their so-called logic goes like this:

Republicans blocked Vivek Murthy’s nomination for Surgeon General due to his extreme anti-gun views. If there were a surgeon general in place, he would be helping to stop the spread of Ebola. Therefore, gun owners and conservatives are to blame for Ebola.

This line of “thinking” has been repeated ad nauseam throughout the liberal media over the past few weeks. First, MSNBC reporter Krystal Ball wrote: “Thanks to NRA power and Senate cowardice, we are left with no surgeon general during a time when we have Ebola arriving on our shores.”

Then, socialist filmmaker Michael Moore tweeted “did u know we don’t have a perm Surgeon General during this crisis? Obama nom Dr Vivek Murthy 1 yr ago but the NRA & Republics have blocked him”.

Now Democrat lawmakers are taking up the argument. Last week, twenty-four House Democrats issued a statement calling for Murthy’s immediate confirmation. Plenty of other commentators and propagandists have also issued statements linking gun rights advocates with Ebola.

But this whole argument has more than a few “inconsistencies.”

Republicans opposed Murthy’s nominations for many reasons beyond his opposition to gun rights. At 36, Murthy has very limited medical experience. He is best known for founding a public relations group called “Doctors for Obama” (now “Doctors for America”), which exists mostly to advocate for Obamacare.

Also, Democrats as well as Republicans killed Murthy’s nomination – eight to ten Democrats said they planned to vote against him.

Finally, there is almost nothing Murthy could actually do about Ebola. The Surgeon General is mostly a figurehead with only a few real responsibilities. The interim Surgeon General who is currently in place has been virtually invisible during the crisis.

The real reason that liberals are blaming gun owners for Ebola is that they are trying to distract from President Obama’s many failures in his handling of the epidemic. Instead of doing something actually productive – like closing off flights from affected countries in Africa – Democrats are using the threat of Ebola to play politics.

Tuesday, October 14, 2014

Allison Grimes’ Pro-Gun Act Exposed In Campaign Memos

Allison Lundergan Grimes has been making a big deal out of her support for guns throughout her Senate campaign, even releasing an ad where she shoots clay pigeons while responding to attacks from Mitch McConnell. But new campaign briefings obtained by the Weekly Standard reveal that Grimes’ support of gun rights is nothing more than scripted political theater.

The briefings, which were prepared for Grimes in advance of private meetings with the Courier – Journal and Kentucky Enquirer, begin by instructing her to emphasize her differences with President Obama on gun issues by saying things like: “we shouldn’t be banning guns based on things like their grips as a bill supported by Obama tried to do.”

After playing up her phony pro-gun stance, the memos tell her to back down — “ONLY IF PUSHED” — on issues such as “expanding the background check system” and “closing the gun show loophole”.  In other words, Grimes’ staff is telling her to say one thing to the media while telling voters something else entirely.

Luckily for Grimes, her opponent is just as big a phony on guns as she is. McConnell, despite flaunting a rifle at the CPAC conference (and having the backing of the Washington insiders in the NRA), has voted for a long list of gun control bills over the years.

It looks like Kentucky gun owners are left without a good option this November.

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

Battle Over Background Checks At Gun Rights Policy Conference

A heated dispute over background checks erupted at the Gun Rights Policy Conference last week between Second Amendment Foundation leader Alan Gottlieb and gun activist Jeff Knox.

Knox, the son of gun rights pioneer Neal Knox, challenged Gottlieb over an initiative that Gottlieb is supporting on this year’s ballot in Washington State (I-591). The measure, which Gottlieb wrote, prohibits background checks in the state “unless a uniform national standard is required”.

As Knox pointed out at the GRPC, this language leaves the door wide open for a federal background check system. After Knox asked Gottlieb to defend this portion of the bill, Gottlieb launched into a full-scale support of background checks.

Gottlieb’s argument – which he has also made in the past – is that gun rights supporters should embrace background checks because they are inevitable. Pointing to polls stating that a majority of voters support background checks, he says that gun rights supporters are only hurting themselves by opposing them.

Gottlieb’s position infuriates no-compromise gun rights activists, who see any background check legislation as the first step on a slippery slope toward a federal gun registry. At the gun rights policy conference, Knox was joined by a chorus of audience members in ripping into Gottlieb’s argument.

But Gottlieb’s support of background checks also raises questions about his true motives in promoting I-591. Since he is such a big believer on background checks, why is he sponsoring a ballot initiative that theoretically bans them in the state of Washington? Why go to the trouble of writing and promoting a law that you fundamentally don’t agree with?

The answer is simple: money. Gottlieb is promoting I-591 not because he cares so much about banning background checks – clearly he doesn’t – but because he sees the law as an opportunity to conduct fundraising for his gun rights groups. So far, he claims to have nearly $1 million. 

How much of that has he spent fighting for gun rights, and how much has he kept for himself? Is there any purpose to I-591 other than lining Alan Gottlieb’s pockets?

Tuesday, October 7, 2014

Build Your Own Rifle At Home

In a new development that is sure to anger the gun grabbers, a California company has begun selling a desktop machine that lets consumers manufacture untraceable guns in the comfort of their own homes.

The “Ghost Gunner,” which turns easily obtainable unfinished parts into fully functional rifles, is currently available for $1,399 through a company called Defense Distributed. Defense Distributed has already sold two hundred and fifty of the machines and raised the price by $400 to keep up with demand.

The founder of Defense Distributed, Cody Wilson, is a gun rights activist and the world’s “most famous digital gunsmith”. Wilson already created the first 3D printed pistol and rifle, and now he is working to make homemade gun technology widely available.

Wilson calls his machine the “Ghost Gunner” in reference to the name that gun control politicians have given untraceable firearms. The machine relies on a computer numerically controlled (CNC) mill to create a homemade lower receiver for an AR-15. The rest of the AR-15 can be easily ordered from online gun shops.

A bill to ban these weapons passed the California State Senate earlier this year before being vetoed last week by Governor Jerry Brown.

Tuesday, September 30, 2014

Washington, D.C. And The Folly Of Gun Registration

Washington D.C. has the strictest gun registration laws in the United States, forcing gun owners to re-register their guns with the city every three years or face jail time and heavy fines. Each time that a gun owner re-registers his weapons, he has to pay a fee of $13 for per gun.

As if that weren’t enough, the DC police department is now forcing local gun-owners to re-submit their fingerprints (and pay an additional $35 fingerprinting fee) as part of the re-registration process —despite the fact that each of them has already been fingerprinted.

And why is this?

The city is saying that it somehow “lost” the original fingerprints. That’s right —having already fingerprinted as many D.C. gun owners as possible, the city’s police are forcing the same people to undergo the process a second time, at their own expense, simply because it misplaced the original fingerprints.

Can everyone agree that D.C.’s gun registration program has been an utter failure?

Even if gun registration were Constitutional (which it isn’t), the incompetence of the D.C. police is proof that the government lacks the basic ability to administer an effective gun registration database.

The D.C. program was already failing miserably, even before it was revealed that the D.C. government had lost everyone’s fingerprints. Despite the threat of jail time and thousands of dollars in fines, barely a thousand guns have been re-registered since the re-registration policy was instituted in December 2013.

If the police are unable to administer it, and the people aren’t willing to participate in it, isn’t that a sign that gun registration should be scrapped?

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

Who Is Standing Up For Washington State Gun Owners?

The biggest battle over gun rights this election season isn’t in Washington, D.C. but in Washington State. Second Amendment supporters in Washington are facing off with the gun control lobby over dueling ballot initiatives — a pro-gun bill to prevent gun confiscation (I - 591) and an anti-gun bill to expand background checks (I - 594).

So far, it hasn’t been much of a fight. The anti-gun Washington Alliance For Gun Responsibility, supported by Seattle millionaires like Bill Gates and Paul Allen, has already raised more than $7 million in support of I – 594. The pro-gun side has raised only $1.3 million. The NRA — which just dropped $1.4 million in the Arkansas Senate race — has put only $191,000 into the fight.

Not surprisingly, polls show the anti-gunners pulling ahead, with seventy percent of voters favoring the background checks bill. According to gun rights activist Barron Barnett, many gun rights supporters in Washington aren’t even aware of what is going on. He recently wrote:

“I am terrified. Out of the people visiting their local gun show you would expect at least 90% [to have] heard of what’s going on. It’s more like 50%. Most have no real knowledge of either of the initiatives or their real legal impact.”

Barnett added that he feels abandoned by the NRA, writing that “the NRA is more than happy to take my money but then is no where to be found when things actually go sideways.”

With the NRA out of the picture, the fight is being led by Alan Gottlieb of the Washington State-based Second Amendment Foundation, who challenged Bill Gates to a debate over gun rights last month. But some have questioned Gottlieb’s commitment as well. Last month, the gun writer Claire Wolfe accused Gottlieb of being more interested in money and attention than gun rights, saying that he “need[s] and want[s] gun control because that’s what keeps the money and publicity flowing.”

Gottlieb was also widely criticized for supporting the Manchin – Toomey background check bill of 2013 (although he claims to have done so because the bill actually contained advances for gun rights.)

Time is running out to oppose I – 594 in Washington. One can only hope that gun groups will get their act together before it is too late.

Tuesday, September 9, 2014

Members Of Jews For The Preservation Of Firearms Ownership Oppose Merger With Second Amendment Foundation


Members of Jews For The Preservation Of Firearms Ownership are opposing the group’s merger with the Second Amendment Foundation, citing founder Aaron Zelman’s personal distrust of SAF leader Alan Gottlieb.

JFPO member and contractor Claire Wolfe revealed news of the merger on August 22nd. In a column for Backwoods Home magazine, she accused Gottlieb of being more motivated by profit than by principles, writing:
“[Aaron Zelman] despised Alan Gottlieb and saw him as an opportunist who used scary mailings to turn SAF/CCRKBA into a fundraising factory. He saw Gottlieb as a person who needed and wanted ‘gun control’ because that’s what kept the money and the publicity flowing.”
Wolfe identified Gottlieb’s support of the Manchin - Toomey gun control bill in 2013 as evidence of his willingness to compromise, pointing out that Gottlieb even boasted of helping to write the bill.

An anonymous JFPO member also accused Gottlieb of trying to gut JFPO simply to get his hands on the group’s mailing list:
“SAF is salivating at this ‘merger.’ What’s not to like? They pay a few bills, but they get a great email and snail-mail list. They probably know that there is very little overlap between SAF members and JPFO members.
But since SAF, Alan Gottlieb, and the lawyers he hires are unprincipled hypocrites, willing to compromise and toady at every turn, they don’t understand WHY there is so little overlap in membership.
The truth is, Aaron Zelman was a fanatic. In a good sense. He had a burning issue and a principled stance. He would never compromise.”
Despite these complaints, the merger between SAF and JFPO was announced on September 4th. Supporters of the deal said that JFPO had no other option. In a press release, the organization stated:
“[T]he Stalking Horse of poor cash flow was always there. We came to realize that JPFO needed one or more major supporters to break through to the next level. Many inquiries yielded nil, it became clear that the most logical and efficient solution was to ally with another 2A organization, while preserving our identity. To solve these problems, the JPFO Board of Directors sought out and elected to merge with the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF).” 
An online petition to oppose the deal currently has almost 1500 signatures.