Advertisements
Home

WHAT IF AN NRA MEMBER HAD KILLED KATE STEINLE?

1 Comment

H/T Keep And Bear.

If Jose Inez Garcia Zarate was a member of the N.R.A. and was freed by a jury the left would have lynched him and the jury.

On July 1, 2015, Kathryn Steinle was shot and killed by an illegal immigrant in San Francisco.

Kate was walking with her father and friend when a bullet struck her in the back of the head. The 32-year-old was rushed to the hospital, where she died about two hours later.

Jose Inez Garcia Zarate fired a .40-caliber handgun three times, and one of the shots he fired is what killed Kate. He first claimed he was shooting at a sea lion and then said he fired the shots accidentally after finding the gun.

On November 30, 2017, our justice system completely failed Kate, her family, and the rest of the nation when they acquitted the animal. He was found not guilty of murder and manslaughter.

Zarate had no business being in the United States to begin with, and he certainly did not deserve to skate free of a murder charge after he killed an American woman.

This is where I raise the question: What if Kate’s killer had been an NRA member? Would the Democrats have finally given a dang?

Would the pathetic animal have been slapped with numerous charges, with murder and manslaughter included? Was it not enough that the killer was here illegally, had been deported five times already, and convicted of multiple felonies?

If Zarate had been a gun-toting member of the NRA, he would have been strung up and skinned alive by Democrats!

Reasons like this are exactly why Trump and millions of Americans want a border wall and travel bans. We can’t rely on the court system to rightfully punish criminals and murderers.

Now, more than ever, it is important to practice your 2nd amendment rights and conceal carry a firearm. While being armed would now have saved Kate, it could save many others.

 

Advertisements

Do Laws Like ‘Stand Your Ground’ And ‘Castle Doctrine’ Prevent Your Potential Arrest?

1 Comment

H/T Bearing Arms.

This exact situation is why I signed up for NRA Carry Guard.

The worst has happened. For whatever reason, you’ve been forced to fire your gun in self-defense and now you’re waiting for the police to arrive. Your hands are shaking from the adrenaline coursing through your blood system. Your spouse looks at you with concern, which stands to reason because you’re wide-eyed and trembling like a Hollywood producer at a sexual harassment press conference.

The police arrive and start talking to you. You know the law. You live in a Stand Your Ground State and you had no choice. You tell the officer what happened.

Before you know it, you find yourself thrown up against a car and your arms are torqued behind your back. Another office starts reading you your Miranda Rights and all you can think is, “What’s going on? There are laws to protect me!”

There are, but Miguel at Gun Free Zone said it well a couple of days ago:

This is a quick one. I want people who understand that even if there is a law saying you are doing something legal, specially with guns, it does not mean you will not be arrested or sued in civil court. Ask any lawyer worth his/her salt.

Now, will you be convicted of something horrible? Probably not. Not if you’re in the right. As you said, there are laws to protect you.

However, what those laws do is protect you from being convicted or having to fork out a settlement to the would be attacker’s family. It doesn’t prevent the process from taking place.

An anti-gun community in a pro-gun state may well have a police chief and a portion of officers who believe you had no business carrying a gun, or that you must have been looking for trouble by being armed in that part of town at night, or whatever. They arrest you, regardless. The DA is an elected official, and he’s anti-gun too, so he’s just chomping at the bit to take down a horrible vigilante.

The judge looks at the case months later and throws it out. “The law clearly states that the defendant had no duty to retreat, and the prosecution has no evidence that he is in any way responsible for what happened. Case dismissed!”

That is blessed news, but let me tell you that any legal proceeding is expensive as hell. You’re going to pay out a lot of money. It’s either that or risk a public defender.

Yeah…I’ve known some public defenders and even counted one or two as friends, but public defenders have a reputation as an option of last resort for a reason.

And as for lawsuits, well…those are expensive as hell too, and they can be filed by anyone for pretty much any reason. Think about all the gun companies that get sued after a shooting despite a law explicitly against it. Do you really think that Carl Criminal’s family won’t file a lawsuit in a heartbeat?

While many states have laws that are designed to protect you, it may still take time to get to that point. Tens of thousands of dollars can be dropped before you ever see the inside of a courtroom.

So what do you do?

Well, I’m not a lawyer, I have never played one on TV, and I didn’t stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but here are some simple thoughts.

Lawyer Up

After you call the police, call an attorney. While the attorney will expect to be compensated for their time, it’ll still be a lot less than if you have to pay him to get you out of jail or deal with criminal charges.

If the police arrive before the attorney, politely explain that you’re waiting for your attorney to arrive and will be happy to answer their questions when he gets there.

Yes, it’s easy to say, “If you did nothing wrong, why wait to talk to the police?”

However, after an event like that, it’s possible you won’t be thinking clearly. If you say the wrong thing it can cause even the most pro-gun officer to believe this might not be a case of self-defense. By speaking with an attorney first, he can help you get your story straight by asking the questions to make you think through what happened.

An attorney can also stop any unnecessary prying by any anti-gun law enforcement officers.

Get Concealed Carry Insurance

The National Rifle Association offers their Carry Guard insurance. The United States Concealed Carry Association has a similar insurance program. Both of these are designed to help you cover your legal fees in the event you’re forced to use your firearm in self-defense.

As noted previously, it’s expensive to deal with legal issues. Any legal issues. I can only imagine how bad they can be for a self-defense shooting.

Now, I’ve looked at these and my knee-jerk reaction is to say that even the low-end plans are expensive for something that, statistically, will never happen.

Then again, statistically you’re unlikely to ever have a fire in your home. You’re still insured for that, right?

I’m not going to make a recommendation as to which you should get, mostly because I’m still deciding myself. What I will say is that this is a solid idea to mitigate potential problems.

 

This isn’t a comprehensive list by any stretch of the imagination, but I’m also not a lawyer. I’m a guy who writes stuff on the internet, for crying out loud. However these are just two common sense things you can do to protect yourself. Do them.

 

 

Citizens’ right to carry firearms comes with a responsibility to do so safely

2 Comments

H/T The Kansas City Star.

While I agree that gun safety in the responsibility of all gun owners the author of this article seems to think all gun owners are irresponsible morons.

Missourians enjoy the right to own and carry firearms though the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the Missouri Constitution, and state statutes, but firearms safety should be an important part of firearms ownership for the armed citizen.

Firearm owner’s manuals provide instruction on methods to safely load, unload, use safeties, and fire a particular firearm. Professional instruction also is highly recommended.

Most firearm retailers have trained staff capable of explaining the safe operation of firearms and the National Rifle Association (NRA) has tens of thousands of reputable, certified firearm instructors across the nation.

The Lee’s Summit Police Department (LSPD) firearm instructors receive NRA instructor certification.

The National Institute of Health and NRA recommend teaching children to never touch a gun without adult supervision.

Children who might find a gun also should be taught to leave it alone and immediately tell an adult.

Teaching children gun safety early in life can remove the tempting mystique surrounding guns and actually develop children with greater respect for firearms safety.

Firearm owners should consider storing their firearms unloaded in lockable storage compartments until ready for use.

A firearm kept for home defense should be secured out of the reach of children, with extra precautions when handling.

The 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act requires licensed firearms manufacturers and dealers to provide a safety device with the purchase of a new firearm.

Trigger locks surround the trigger guard, blocking the manipulation of the trigger. Cable locks, which block the firearm’s action from loading a cartridge into the barrel, are secured with a key or combination lock.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) developed Project Child Safe, partnering with local police agencies to distribute free gun-safety devices. LSPD and many other Kansas City metro police departments participate in this program.

The Cardinal Rules of Firearm Safety provide safe handling guidelines for experts or beginners. These rules may differ slightly between various sources, but the Cardinal Rules followed by LSPD include:

▪ ▪ Treat all firearms as if they were loaded;

▪ ▪ Always keep the firearm (muzzle) pointed in a safe direction, where a negligent discharge would cause no human injury and only minimal property damage;

▪ ▪ Keep your finger off the trigger, outside the trigger guard, indexed along the frame or slide until you are on target (aiming at what you intend to shoot), and have made a conscious decision to shoot;

▪ ▪ Be aware of your target, its backstop, and what is beyond your target.

Citizens exercising their right to carry firearms should fully understand self-defense laws.

In general, Missouri Statute 563.031 authorizes deadly force only when a person “reasonably believes that such deadly force is necessary to protect himself, or herself or her unborn child, or another against death, serious physical injury, or any forcible felony.”

Being aware of your surroundings and avoiding potential threats is best.

Citizens carrying firearms are recommended to secure their firearm in a holster with at least one retention feature, and be familiar with methods to safely draw their firearm from the holster. Pocket, waistband, or other unsecured carry methods are not recommended.

Although Missouri law allows open carry of firearms, concealed carry can be more beneficial to protect firearms from threats, curious citizens, and children. Firearms left in vehicles should be locked in a secured location out of view.

Firearms are legitimately used for many purposes. Self-protection is a right extending well beyond the foundation of our nation. Hunting remains a very popular recreation shown to help balance wild animal populations. The shooting sports have seen an enormous surge in popularity in recent years.

Knowledge is the key to firearms safety. For more information, visit https://www.healthychildren.org/English/safety-prevention/all-around/Pages/Gun-Safety-Keeping-Children-Safe.aspx

SGT. AARON EVANS IS A LEE’S SUMMIT POLICE OFFICER WITH THE SPECIAL OPERATIONS UNIT AND EMERGENCY SERVICES SQUAD. HE IS A GUEST AUTHOR FOR THE HEALTH EDUCATION ADVISORY BOARD — A MAYOR-APPOINTED, VOLUNTEER BOARD THAT PROMOTES AND ADVOCATES FOR COMMUNITY HEALTH.

 

House of Representatives Considers Two Gun Bills

1 Comment

H/T AmmoLand.

We need to call our members of the House Of Representatives and urge them to vote for the National Right-to-Carry reciprocity act.

You can find our House member here.

U.S.A. –-(Ammoland.com)- After the shootings in Las Vegas, NV and Sutherland Springs, TX Congress tabled all gun bills to the dismay of many firearms owners. It appears that Congress is ready to continue forward with gun bills. This week two gun bills move forward in the House Of Representatives. The House Judiciary Committee will vote on both bills this week.

The first gun bill, which is strongly supported by all gun organizations, is a national concealed carry reciprocity bill. This bill will let any person with a concealed carry permit in one state carry their firearm in any other part of the country. It will work similar to how a drivers license works now. The Bloomberg backed group Everytown For Gun Safety has come out strongly against this proposal.

Willes LeeLtCol Willes K. Lee (ret), who is an NRA board member and President of the National Federation of Republican Assemblies (NFRA), speaking on behalf of himself said, “The Second Amendment affirms our God-given right of self-defense. National Right-to-Carry reciprocity remains the NRA, and my, number one legislative priority. It is about time Congress moved on President Trump’s campaign promise.” He then went on to say, “This is common sense legislation to make Americans safer. All the 2A community should call their congressman now. We need reciprocity, and we want to see the votes on the floor prior to the 2018 primary elections.”

The second bill is a direct result of the shooting at the First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs in Texas. Devin Patrick Kelley, 26, entered the church and killed 26 members of the congregation. A good citizen armed with an AR15 wounded the gunman and proceeded to chase Kelley as he was trying to flee the scene of the murders.

In 2012 Kelley was court-martialed by the United States Air Force on charges of assaulting his wife and child. The USAF discharged Kelley on a “bad conduct” discharge in 2014. Kelley should have never been allowed to buy a firearm under federal regulation, but the USAF failed to provide the FBI with the proper paperwork which would have prevented the sale.

This bill is supposed to close holes in the in the NICS system. The bill would implement punishments for federal agencies that do not comply with criminal reporting requirements. This bill goes as far as stopping bonuses for political appointees at the organizations that are not in full compliance with the FBI until they do meet the NICS standards.

It will also reward states that do report correctly to the NICS system. This reward would be through federal grant preferences. The attorney general will have to produce a semi-annual report on which agencies are complying and which are not.

One part of the bill that might seem scary is that it will also look at how many times criminals have used bump stocks in crimes. On the surface, this provision might seem like an anti-gun victory, but it isn’t a victory for the anti-gunners at all. After the shooting in Las Vegas, I started to look into how many crimes were committed using bump stocks. I could not find any other crime using the device outside of the horrific crime in Las Vegas.

The fact that criminals do not use bump stocks in crimes should show the feebleness of banning them as just as New Jersey is set to do via a bill (A5200) that is set to be released from a committee on Thursday. It will give the pro-gun community more ammunition to fight against the Bloomberg backed groups and their false narrative.

Both bills are expected to pass The House Judiciary Committee and move to the floor for a vote. There is no timetable for that vote.


About John CrumpJohn Crump

John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. He is the former CEO of Veritas Firearms, LLC and is the co-host of The Patriot News Podcast which can be found at www.blogtalkradio.com/patriotnews. John has written extensively on the patriot movement including 3%’ers, Oath Keepers, and Militias. In addition to the Patriot movement, John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and is currently working on a book on the history of the patriot movement and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss or at www.crumpy.com.

 

21 Gun Controls Currently Being Pushed by Senate Democrats and Their Surrogates

3 Comments

H/T Breitbarts Big Government.

DemocRats for as long as I can remember have been anti gun and anti Second Amendment.

The only exception to this was John F.Kennedy as he was a LifeTime N.R.A.member.

Senate Democrats and their surrogates in various groups are currently pushing 21 new gun controls for law-abiding citizens.

These controls range from an all-out ban on semiautomatic firearms to regulations on single shot muzzleloaders and limits on the number of guns someone can pass to a felon.

Breitbart News outlined the first nine of these gun controls on October 11. They were:

  1. Ban on Bump Stocks – Sen. Dianne Feinstein is pushing this with her Automatic Fire Prevention Act. She admits that bump stocks are an accessory—that they do not convert semiautomatics into automatics—but she wants to ban them anyway. Her bill explicitly bans any accessory that allows an increase in rate of fire in short bursts but does “not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machine gun.”
  2. Ban on Trigger Cranks – Sen. Feinstein’s bill bans trigger cranks too. Like the bump stock, trigger cranks are another novelty that gun owners can use to achieve short, rapid bursts of fire. Such cranks allow a gun owner to mimic automatic fire yet do not convert a semiautomatic gun into an automatic one.
  3. Ban on Semiautomatic firearms – Sen. Feinstein voiced support for this ban during her appearance on Face the Nation, and the Washington Post pushed for such a ban two days later.
  4. Implementation of Universal Background Checks – Sen. Chris Murphy used an appearance on State of the Union to stress that a bump stock ban is only the beginning for Democrats. They plan to follow that ban with the implementation of universal background checks, which means private gun sales would require a background check just like retail sales. Democrats claim these checks would save lives, yet Sen. Murphy and others ignore the fact that the Vegas attacker purchased his guns via background checks, as did so many attackers before him. The real reason Democrats want universal background checks is because such checks require a gun registry to be enforceable. Therefore, the implementation of such checks would immediately lead to one more gun control: a gun registry.
  5. Ban on “Assault Weapons” – Sen. Murphy also mentioned an “assault weapons” ban, suggesting it would be next in line after background checks. The Los Angeles Times called for an “assault weapons” ban as well.
  6. Ban on “High Capacity” Magazines – The Los Angeles Times also called for a ban on “high capacity” magazines, describing them as one of the most dangerous aspects of “assault weapons.” The Times points to attacks like ones on Sandy Hook, Virginia Tech, and the San Bernardino County Building as justifications for an “assault weapons” ban that contains a “high capacity” magazine ban. In so doing, the Times overlooks the fact that all three attacks—Sandy Hook, Virginia Tech, and San Bernardino—occurred in gun-free zones. This means the attackers had no threat of armed response and could take their time, reloading as often as needed. In such scenarios magazine capacity is a moot issue.
  7. Opposition to Concealed Carry – Breitbart News reported that Sen. Feinstein took time to argue against concealed carry for law-abiding citizens during an appearance on Face the Nation. Speaking of concealed carry she said, “I don’t believe it’s protected by the Constitution.”
  8. Opposition to National Reciprocity – Sen. Feinstein also voiced opposition to the national reciprocity legislation currently pending before Congress. She said, “Well, my opinion of that bill is it’s terrible. … [Do] we want every American to feel comfortable packing a concealed weapon around the country?”
  9. Australian-style Gun Ban – The Washington Post put forward the idea in an October 9 editorial.

Numerous others have flooded in since the introduction of those original nine. The newest suggested controls include regulation on single shot muzzleloaders. In fact, Gabby Giffords gun control group suggests muzzleloaders could be the next bump stock. Her group also wants gun control on “high capacity shotguns,” binary triggers, “AK and AR style pistols,” arm braces for AR style pistols, “AR pistol blade stabilizers,” .50 caliber rifles, .50 caliber ammunition, and tracer rounds for various calibers of firearms.

Giffords’ group seeks to substantiate their call for a ban on tracer rounds by writing, “Tracer rounds allow a shooter to see where rounds are tracking at night.”

Two other gun controls are being pushed by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY). The first of the two is a federal ban on firearms trafficking. She is pushing this ban although such trafficking is already clearly prohibited via ATF background check form 4473. LIBN reports that Gillibrand is also again pushing the Hadiya Pendleton and Nyasia Pryear-Yard Gun Trafficking & Crime Prevention Act, which “would make it illegal to sell purchase, or transfer two or more firearms to someone whom the seller knows, or has reasonable cause to know, is a felon or convicted domestic abuser.”

Lastly, the 21st gun control currently being pushed is regulation on so-called “ghost guns.” These are guns that are legal to manufacture at home, but require a significant amount of know-how and equipment to accomplish. The establishment media is currently pointed to two crimes committed with “ghost guns” as justification for a new federal law to regulate the sale, manufacture of the firearms.

On October 19, 2017, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) urged his Democrat colleagues to drop gun control. He worried that it will politically hurtful for those trying to get re-elected in red states in November 2018. Apparently, Schumer’s colleagues are not listening.

 

NRA Takes Shot At Ridiculous CNN Apple Spot

1 Comment

H/T Bearing Arms.

 

Several days ago, CNN released a video featuring an apple. By now, I suspect most of you are familiar with it. It was a shot at President Trump and many other critics of the network’s highly partisan coverage, but a horrible one. After all, their defense was basically, “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.”

Now, the National Rifle Association has their own shot back and the cable news network:

 

A transcript:

This is a Lemon.

Some people might try to tell you that it is a journalist.

That it is not biased.

That it retains journalistic integrity after baselessly accusing our president of inciting a civil war.

Some people might try to tell you that this is a journalist.

They might scream, journalist, journalist, journalist…over and over again.

They might put JOURNALIST in all caps.

But this is Lemon.

Its network colluded with a Democratic presidential candidate.

Its colleague gave debate questions to Hillary Clinton.

Don’t be fooled.

This is not a journalist.

This is a Lemon.

A bitter Lemon.

 

This version contains a handful of facts that CNN left out of their apple ad, such as colluding with Hillary Clinton’s campaign and cheating during the debates. If CNN wanted to be taken seriously by people regardless of politics, they should probably have avoided showing such bias during the campaign. Yes, even if Clinton’s win was a foregone conclusion.

Meanwhile, the NRA is taking on the journalistic establishment that routinely offers an anti-gun narrative. They’re hammering away at the entire media machine because it’s all complicit in presenting a biased, liberal narrative that is inherently anti-Second Amendment. They simply do not support the right to keep and bear arms, and they let that cloud their work.

And in this case, with the jab being at CNN, it makes sense to use a lemon as the fruit of choice. After all, CNN does have Don Lemon on their payroll.

Undoubtedly, some may take issue with the NRA trading barbs with a cable network, but it does make sense. The media is where most people get their information, and they’re getting awful information. Remember Steven Crowder sat down to speak to people, to get them to try and change his mind on guns, and they were so awfully and completely wrong. These are people who got their knowledge from the media, and it’s awful, yet they thought they were informed.

The media is presenting a horribly biased narrative, presenting it as the gospel fact, and trust that people will their claims of being unbiased seriously…and why wouldn’t they? People buy it because they don’t know just how biased it is. They don’t know enough about the subject to make a reasonable judgment, but they think they do.

In the process, they’re impacting the NRA and its mission to support and defend the Second Amendment. They’ve set themselves up as enemies of the Constitution.

So yeah, I get it. I understand exactly why the NRA is going after the media, and I think this is a really clever way to do it.

Gun Control Groups Pressure Underwriters to Blacklist NRA’s Carry Guard Insurance

2 Comments

H/T Breitbarts Big Government.

These uninformed asshats in guns down are trying to destroy free enterprise and harm legal gun owners when God forbid they are forced to use their firearms.

George Frey/Getty Images

The gun control group Guns Down is launching a new ad campaign aimed at portraying the NRA’s Carry Guard insurance as “murder insurance,” with the goal of getting underwriters to abandon the coverage.

Guns Down admits that the insurance is nothing new–the “United States Concealed Carry Association has been in the business much longer”–but they claim to be targeting the NRA because its insurance is “more comprehensive.”

According to the AP, the Guns Down advertising campaign “casts a spotlight on the policies and asks the two insurance companies involved with [Carry Guard] — Lockton Affinity, which administers it, and Chubb, the underwriter — to drop it.” And the Guns Down ads include “a video message from Sybrina Fulton, mother of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed teen shot and killed in 2012 by a neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman.”

Scenes of racial division appear on the screen and Fulton says, “They spend millions lobbying for laws that allow them to ‘shoot first’ and ‘stand their ground.’ But that just makes it easier to get away with murder.”

Two things need to be noted here. First, Zimmerman and the allusions to racism are straw man arguments which serve to incite anger that can then be directed toward Carry Guard, even though Carry Guard has nothing to do with Zimmerman or racism. Secondly, Zimmerman was tried by a jury of his peers and acquitted on charges of second-degree murder in July 2013. The following year, Barack Obama’s DOJ announced there was no evidence to support bringing federal charges against him either.

The shooting was done in self-defense.

AP reports that Carry Guard underwriter Chubb responded to a request for comment by saying “it provides insurance for a wide range of risks…when customers are engaged in ‘lawful activity,’ including hunting, shooting at gun ranges or when a firearm accidentally discharges. It noted that Carry Guard includes training and safety courses.”

 

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: