Saturday, February 16, 2013

Reasonable Gun Laws - Counter Punching

WND commentator "Molotov Mitchell" makes a lot of good, logical points in this video:

He got me thinking about our political fights more in the sense of a street fight or gun fight. He really has a good point: if we sit here and just write or call our legislators over and over, the absolute best we can hope for is not lose any more rights. We will never get any more rights. 

I've written on this topic before and part of this will come from two posts: here and here, along with some new thoughts.

Let's start here: any adult with normal rights can walk into a sporting goods store in most places and walk out with a shotgun or a rifle with no waiting period. But if they wanted to buy an AR-15 or a Mossberg 500 from the factory or a store in another city, why does it have to go through a local FFL's hands? Why can't anyone order a rifle or shotgun from an online gun store, or even an kind of "online superstore" and have it shipped to their house?  It was sold by an FFL that did the NICS check, so why does another one have to get involved?  It used to be that way, until the GCA of '68.  What advantage is there to society from shipping it to an FFL?  It's not like the second FFL prevents someone from stealing it in transit - that's on the shipping company.  It does nothing but give money to local FFL holders. All they can do is look at the buyer's ID - which can be done digitally with encryption when the purchase is made. 

This is the opposite of the current drive to make every sale of every used firearm go through an FFL.  I think the whole FFL system is obsolete, a remnant of the way things worked in the 1930s, and does nothing that couldn't be achieved a dozen other ways.  All it does is keep FFLs and BATFE paper wonks employed.  I want our side to push back on the whole system.

We should push for, at the Federal level, complete concealed carry reciprocity across the country.  Illinois needs to be dragged, kicking and screaming into the modern age.

There's also a silly hodgepodge of waiting periods for a handgun.  In some places it's 3 days, in others, 5 days.  Most places in Florida will waive the wait if you hold a concealed carry permit.  If there's a waiting period, why can't you order a pistol from Bud's (for example) and wait 3 or 4 days for UPS to deliver it? Again, an FFL is shipping it, why does it need to go to another one?  With today's computer security, you could verify age, do a NICS check - anything the local shop can do - online. The whole idea of that 3 day wait was a "cooling off" period, so a hothead doesn't go buy a gun in a moment of anger and then go kill someone, but I personally have a hard time believing there were large numbers of that sort of crime anyway.  It's an extension of the ban on Saturday Night Specials, which (as far as I can tell) only had the effect of removing cheap, reasonably functional guns from people who couldn't afford better ones, and caused some smaller arms companies to either fold or change their product line.  Another penalty on the poor.  But, fine, we'll play your infantile waiting game -- now how does waiting 3 days to pick up a gun in your city differ from waiting 3 days to get it delivered by UPS or FedEx?

Why are silencers - glorified mufflers - regulated as if they were machine guns?  Why are we required to have a muffler on a car, motorcycle or lawn mower, but we're required to not have one on a gun?  I'll tell you why: Hollywood.  They created this illusion that a silencer reduces the 155 to 160 dB of a gun shot down to a barely audible, and it just isn't so.  Silencers should be completely deregulated - not even the $5 "any other weapon" class - over the counter at your local store.  This one actually is for the children.  And for anyone who moves next door to gun ranges or clubs and gets disturbed by the sounds.

We should eliminate postal restrictions against mailing of firearms. We can ship them via UPS, or FedEx, why not USPS?  Don't they need every penny of revenue they can get?

Get rid of the stupid “sporting purpose” tests for firearms. The Heller decision makes it very clear that the Second Amendment isn’t about duck hunting. This particularly affects imports. Unless it as part of some trade war it makes no sense that guns and ammo which are perfectly legal to manufacture and own inside the U.S. can't be imported.  Not that trade wars make much sense, either. 

Get rid of the stupid laws against on short barreled rifles and shotguns. This only made sense when there were plans to ban handguns (originally part of NFA 34). The idea that a shotgun barrel 18.05" long is fine, but one that's 17.95" is some sort of killer monster weapon is just silly.  It's there simply to create law violations.  It's also one of their most enforced laws - probably because it's really easy to measure barrel length.

Note there's almost perfect inverse relationship between the number of guns in private hands and murder rate, across the globe.  More guns really does mean less crime.  
 (found at 90 Miles From Tyranny)


  1. Hi GB,
    There is/are no such thing as......"Reasonable Gun Laws!!!!!!"......Got That??? I know you do, what more can I say??

  2. I'm having trouble seeing any real correlation between the two maps. That seems to be just as reasonable an argument against restrictions as the inverse correlation that's commonly suggested - if there's no detectable effect, after all, what's the point of restriction?

    I also find it hard to believe that places like Somalia and Afghanistan - places with wars going on - are really green.

    I think it's funny how certain issues cause certain people to flip their normal positions. I've seen people who are reasonably liberal on vice issues suddenly promoting absurdly draconian punishments for victimless gun crimes (like having the wrong rifle in your safe or the wrong paperwork for an ammunition purchase). I've even seen one person propose that if someone else uses your gun in a crime you, as the owner, should be 'shot in the face.' That's right - capital punishment for being the victim of a theft! These aren't trolls, these are the regular commenters at Volokh.

    1. With some exceptions, it's inverse correlation. Areas that are light green for guns (lowest numbers) are the darkest colors for murders (highest numbers). There are exceptions, like China - but I'm not sure I trust their reporting. A friend worked there for a while within the last year, and reports of finding hacked and mutilated bodies was common. Another area where the inverse relation doesn't hold is some of North Africa. Again, I suspect accuracy. Places like Mali are "countries" only in the loosest sense. I don't see any places that are high in both gun ownership and murders.

      It's always tough to extrapolate across very different cultures, so you have to keep that in mind, too.

    2. I was thinking the same thing about cultures; there's a lot more to this question than guns.

  3. Here is a solution to the gun registering and probable confiscation to follow. Find another gun owner with a gun like yours, preferably someone unknown to you. Sell him your gun and buy his. Then when the registration is required you can legally and honestly say you no longer have the gun, you sold it and you don't know the name of the buyer. The newly acquired gun is now under the radar and your prior gun that may have been known to the gun grabbers is gone.

  4. We need to keep the pressure on those politicians who have taken of their mask and exposed themselves as a gungrabber. Show up at their town hall meetings, write and call them expressing your feelings. Push for a recall, an impeachment, etc. Search for unrelated mistakes or crimes they may have committed and encourage your local paper to investigate. Lets vote them out. Be thankful they stood up for what they are now lets vote them out. Let's harrass them out of office (politely no threats or name calling, just stay on their case forever). Vote against the 2nd amendment and I will never support you no matter what else you might support that I agree with, but more then that I will work for your opponent and work actively against you. Don't forget who these guys are, make a list of all these politicians who vote against the constitution. Don't let them hide.

  5. No.

    No concealed carry laws - anywhere.

    No FFLs - anywhere.

    No licensing of manufacturers

    No backgroun checks.

    No restrictions on anything

    A right is not a priviledge

    Rights may not be suspended, limited, restricted, modified, interpreted.

    A right depends on no one for its existence, its' expression, its' exercise.

    First rule of constitutional interpretation:

    Your rights do not come from government

    Take the offensive


    1. Oh, I'm completely fine with most of that. I think the FFL system is a dinosaur that needs to go extinct, along with the BATFE. But, offhand, I'd say less than 2% of the country would support us on that. You can be sure that if you tried to do that with legislation, every FFL in the country would lobby congress on how important they are.

      So tell me: are there any boundaries? Should felons be allowed guns? As punishment for certain crimes, we take away people's rights. Certainly putting someone in jail takes away several rights. In itself, that may be wrong, but it will be in the first arguments you get. If a felon has had their rights restored, fine, I'm good with what you say. I mean while their rights are removed.

      We have an administration that wants felons, in prison to vote. I say if you can vote, you can have a gun.

      What about the mentally ill? Not mildly neurotic, I mean full-tilt schizophrenic, hearing voices, can't distinguish reality type mentally ill. And if the guy in the straight jacket talking to air molecules doesn't get one, where do you draw the line?

      And, yes, I know that felons or anyone who doesn't mind breaking laws have no problems getting guns; I'm speaking in the sense that laws might mean something.

    2. A vote is a gun, or at least it's a hand on a gun.

    3. YES - ex felons (emphasis on EX) should have full restoration of rights, otherwise they are merely slaves - and we are ONE LAW away from becoming same.

      Lunatics - can lunatics drive a car? Buy gasoline? Own a knife? Become el presidente?

      The problem is not in lunatics possessing a firearm, the problem is RETURNING THE LUNATIC TO THE STREET - again, and again.

      The constitution, and the Bible do not contain any get off free provision for lunacy - it is another invention of the judiciary.

      It does not matter one whit that <2% of the masses go along - or not.

      Stop compromising. Push back.

      Aiming for perfection and falling somewhat short is far preferable to targeting mediocrity, and accepting even less.


  6. Several months ago I asked my soon to be new federal senator if he would carry bills to repeal NFA, GCA and most of the McClure Volkmer 'firearms protection act'.
    He had no idea what I spoke of but he is a 'rising star'...Good luck to us all