I’ll just drop this here for future reference

I suspect the financial investigation of the VNRA by New York state Attorney General Letitia James will stop short of any finding that would dismantle the organization, or even seriously impede it in the long term. Fines, perhaps.

James will declare victory, and become less prominent on the national scene.

The VNRA will continue with business as usual, and declare victory but beg for more donations to cover the legal expenses and fines.

Burris Falls On His Blade

The Toledo Blade has been virulently anti-rights for decades. But this editorial…

To conquer gun violence, we all have a duty
Another shooting at another place of worship. A woman dead. A 19-year old boy the shooter, armed with an assault weapon. The only reason more people did not die is that his gun jammed.

1. A nineteen year-old is an adult, not a boy.

2. Authorities say he lawfully purchased the firearm, which means it wasn’t an “assault weapon” even under California’s hyper-extreme laws.

3. He reportedly fired 10 shots, which is all a lawful California-compliant POS can hold. It didn’t jam; he ran out of ammo and needed to reload.

4. The reason more people didn’t die is because Oscar Stewart and Jonathan Morales ran the coward off at defensive gunpoint.

Four sentences. Four “facts” wrong. That may be a record even for the Toledo Blade.

Not even going to read more. If Burris has to lead with lies to support his opinion, his opinion isn’t worth my time. Or yours.

[UPDATE; more inconsistencies] Good thing for Guyger I won’t be on her jury

A TV station got hold of the audio of killer Amber Guyger’s 911 call, which she placed after shooting Botham Jean in his own apartment.

Steady your nerves and listen to it.

Note that her first concern was to repeatedly set up her alibi that “I thought it was my apartment.”

Her second concern was being fired.

Please note that she appears to be talking to her victim, telling him, “I didn’t mean to,” and “Stay with me, bud.” Seemingly Jean was still alive at that point, bleeding out, else why would she be telling him to hang in there?

The problem with Guyger “reassuring” Jean is that… She wasn’t in the apartment, as she told 911.

You may recall that a witness recorded Guyger that night.

The video showed the uniformed, off-duty officer as she frantically paced the hallway outside Jean’s apartment while talking on the phone, The Dallas Morning News reported.

The hallway. Not inside the apartment as she told 911.

The hallway. Where she couldn’t possibly be talking to her victim inside the apartment.

She set up a semi-believable scenario in the 911 call which make it all look like a horrible misunderstanding. But she was unaware that a witness was recording actions inconsistent with what she was saying on the phone.

According to the video, she wasn’t in the apartment reassuring her victim. She wasn’t in the apartment putting pressure on the wounds she inflicted.

According to the video, she was out in the hallway, seemingly feeding 911 pure BS.

Added: I had to go look this up to be sure I recalled it correctly. According to the arrest warrant for Guyger:

Guyger then entered the apartment, immediately called 911, requesting Police and EMS, and provided first aid to Complainant. Due to the interior darkness of the apartment, Guyger turned on the lights while on the phone with 911. Upon being asked where she was located by emergenct dispatchers, Guyger returned to the front door to observe the address and discovered she was at the wrong apartment (#1478).

But the 911 audio shows she already knew the actual address without pause. 18 seconds into the call, as soon as asked the address, she begins, “I’m in number…” and is interrupted by the dispatcher. Guyger then states, “I;m at apartment number 1478. I’m in 1478”

No pause. No confusion. No, “Hey, this isn’t my apartment. What is the number?” None of that. Yet the warrant, supposedly based on her questioning by law enforcement claims she didn’t know where she was until asked. The call shows she already knew.

Atlanta Journal-Constipation Strikes Again

And this one might even be criminally and civilly actionable.

‘It’s just stupid’: Teens allegedly post photo to social media of gun they stole
Even though the guns remain missing, he said he’s seen one of them — it was posted on social media by the alleged teenage thieves.

OK. Just the usual “idiot criminals post evidence of their crimes.” The real story is… the story.

One post shows the teens holding one of the guns while also flashing what appears to be gang signs. AJC.com is not showing the teens since they have not been charged.

So they aren’t identifying the suspects. But they do publish a picture of the victim, so the crooks know who to retaliate against. (Amusingly, in the crime photo, they blurred out… the gun.)

It gets better. For the criminals.

Police told Channel 2 they haven’t assigned a detective to the case yet, which is why there hasn’t been an arrest.

Yes, the Urinal-Constipation actually tipped off the crooks before the police even started the investigation. They now have time to purge social media, and dispose of the guns.

Zachary Hansen and his editor should be charged with obstruction of justice, and as accessories after the fact.

The Urinal-Constipation has a long history of journalistic boo-boos.

Those are just a few relatively recent examples of the AJC’s brilliance. But they’ve been a mess since I first lived in Georgia (1989), and natives tell me they’ve been screwed up since forever.

Shilling for Rights?

TinMan on Twitter thinks I work for firearms/ammunition manufacturers, since that’s the only possible reason I could defend constitutionally protect human/civil rights.

All of you fuckers are acting on behalf of manufacturers. People don’t need bumpstocks but if they don’t have them they’ll use less ammo. Bottom line hit. Rats.

I wish they’d pay me. My “income,” such as it is, is insufficient to even paying my ISP bill.

TinMan objects to bump-fire stocks, and professes to believe that only an industry shill would think banning them is a bad idea. In hopes that he was merely uneducated on the subject, I provided a collection of explanatory links.

He either ignored it.

Rather than futilely attempt to make my points in a flurry of abbreviated-to-a-state-of-nonsense, I’ll respond here, and tweet the link to him.

Ammunition and bumpstocks advocacy is not Human Rights. Play it how you want.

But the possession and responsible use is, as explained in the Bill of Rights, and elaborated on by courts all the way up to and including SCOTUS.

But, as TinHead would have know if he’d read and attempted to comprehend the source links I gave him, the issue isn’t bump-fire stocks, ammunition or even semi-automatic firearms. It is rights. And sanity.

TL;DR, TinBrain: By fiat, Trump changed law written by Congress to arbitrarily ban something. It was bump-fire stocks this time. Maybe next time it will be designating the Democratic National Committee a terrorist organization.

In the case of bump-fire stocks, he did it by shifting the Congressionally mandated definition of “function of the trigger” to finger. Fingers are now triggers.

What’s worse, if you aren’t moving your finger, it’s an automatic trigger, which under current ATF rules makes your finger a machinegun.

If Trump can declare, without legislation, your finger to be a machinegun, he can declare Tesla electric cars to be main battle tanks (but I don’t want to give Musk any more weird ideas).

If this precedent stands, there is nothing a president cannot do by fiat, no matter how irrational. He can declare anything to be anything else. Ban anything. (And for the Republicans out there: Kamala Harris is already promising to use Trump’s bump-fire precedent to impose more gun control by fiat.)

Hmm… Let’s say Trump doesn’t like GM closing plants and moving jobs out of the country. He declares GM to be a government agency and takes over. (Or Kamala Harris similarly nationalizes everything to impose the Green Raw Deal.)

Or he might redefine “particulate emissions” to be “fairy dust” and gut federal pollution standards. Or a Dem president might declare plant food to be a world-destroying poisonous ga… oh. Wait. A Dem president already did that.

And it’s very clear that you use the term “human rights” in the most flagrant way possible.

I use “human/civil rights” in a manner consistent with the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, centuries of jurisprudence, and sanity.

For instance, the Declaration of Independence mentions a right to “life.” That implies a right to protect one’s life. Which in turn implies a right to defense, security as mentioned in the Bill of Rights (please note that in HELLER SCOTUS stated that outright). Firearms are an effective means of self defense.

Why do you need to fire any more rapidly than a current semi-auto or full auto weapon allows you to? For.. Fun? Do you need not only to shoot but eviscerate your deer? Is it not sensible that people are protected from this type of weapon? WTF do you want???

Tinny is still stuck on OMG! Shoot fast! Who needs to shoot fast?! Still hasn’t caught up the whole rights and reality thing.

And apparently he thinks bump-fire stocks not only allow you to fire faster than a semi-auto (they don’t; that is physically impossible, and is another part of the precedent of lying), but faster than an actual machinegun.

Perhaps — as I sarcastically suggested — he is a paid Bloomberg shill.

Rehabilitating the NRA?

Since I have previously made my opinion on the Vichy NRA pretty clear, I was reluctant to weigh in on the latest controversy. Two columns finally prompted me to speak up.

The starting point for all this — just in case you haven’t kept up — was Mike Spies’ report on the NRA’s financial woes. It appears to confirm many things people have warned of for decades.

Jeff Knox spoke up on the matter.

NRA’s Dirty Laundry Exposed as Pro-Gun Group Cleans House
While the NRA is a powerful communication tool between rights supporters and their elected servants and losing that central conduit would be a significant blow, it would only be a temporary setback.

Mr. Knox focuses on the apparent corruption. He’s overlooking a major point which Mark Walters touches on.

To NRA or Not to NRA
I have disagreed with the NRA many, many times over the years over many issues and no doubt I will in the future. In fact, I nearly tossed my membership a few years back when the NRA here in the state of GA refused to support the GeorgiaCarry.org effort to remove the 140-year-old ban on carrying firearms at a “public gathering.”
[…]
I’ve seen far too many posts on social media, which to me is a joke anyway, from chatroom warriors that are calling for the destruction of the NRA.

Both columns are worth reading in full, but the snippets I quoted are my point of contention.

If the VNRA BOD finally gets off its collective ass and cleans up the financial corruption, it is entirely possible to save the organization. They should not save it.

Yes, I am one of those calling for the end of the VNRA, because financial fraud is the least of the problems. That can be fixed by firing the appropriate people, suing to recover funds, and — I strongly suspect — criminally charging a few.

The real problem is how that “powerful communication tool” and money have been used.

Mr. Walters finally noticed the problem when the NRA wouldn’t help with Georgia SB308. For him, that wasn’t quite enough to make him quit, possibly because it was largely passive inaction by the organization. OK, sometimes one must pick and choose where to dedicate one’s resources. Judgement call; I’d be with Walters on this one. But what Walters didn’t notice until nine years ago is something I’ve been about for decades.

The real issue with the VNRA isn’t corruption or not doing enough to push rights. The problem is what the group actively does to violate rights. NFA ’34, GCA ’68, FOPA ’86. Everyone knows those. It shows how long the rot has existed.

They tried to keep HELLER from going to SCOTUS. They actively killed constitutional carry legislation in New Hampshire. They wrote an “assault weapon” ban in Ohio. They sabotaged an RKBA/free speech case in NH.

I could go on, but let’s skip ahead to 2017, when the VNRA called for the ATF to regulate bump-fire stocks as NFA items because they make semi-autos work like machineguns. (And despite their weasel-worded defense, I haven’t seen a single court challenge from them.)

Then there’s the VNRA’s support for no-due process ex parte protective orders.

Yes, the VNRA is politically powerful. But they aren’t using that power to advance rights. They push gun control. And then they fundraise for cash to “fight” what they imposed on us.

Arguably, the last thing the VNRA did for gun owners was sunsetting the national waiting period… by saddling us with an ineffective NICS which violates the rights of millions of innocent people while still passing thousands of prohibited persons. And making us pay for the “privilege.”

The Vichy National Rifle Association is inherently anti-gun. It sacrificed rights for political power and money a long time ago. That’s what it does. Forcing it to transparently and honestly spend gun owners’ money to violate their rights isn’t “fixing” anything.

For decades, I called on the group to change its ways, and really work for our rights. I made very specific suggestions (and never, ever once received any reply from anyone at any level). Quite a few election cycles later, it hasn’t improved. It got worse.

If reformers haven’t managed to “repair” the VNRA by now, after decades of trying, they aren’t going to succeed now. Many gun owners have an emotional attachment to the idea of the NRA, but it’s time to admit that ideal is gone.

It’s time to pull the plug.

FFLs for Everyone!

Senator Kamala “Kneepads” Harris has apparently decided to court the gun owner vote.

Kamala Harris promises swift executive action if Congress doesn’t pass gun control legislation
Harris’ pledge lays out four points. The first would mandate what the proposal calls “near-universal background checks by requiring anyone who sells five or more guns per year to run a background check on all gun sales.” The target is to classify that seller of more than five guns as a dealer of firearms.

Thanks, @KamalaHarris. Gun owners have been trying to get the ATF to quantify “dealer” since Bill Clinton’s ’90s purge of FFLs. They always refused, because setting a definite threshold reduces their ability to harass and arrest honest folks.

See, we used to have 286,000 FFLs, mostly small volume types & hobbyists. Billy Jeff didn’t like that and took away 142,000 FFLs from exactly the people Kneepads is trying to “force” to get licenses.

So… Thanks. Now we can get our FFLs and start interstate mail ordering our firearms again.

Like most ignorant victim disarmers, Harris didn’t think that one through.