North Country Gunsplainers

Got my lesson in gun 101 this morning.

An Indian Lake man was jailed Thursday after he was found to illegally have numerous guns, including an assault rifle and illegal ammunition clips, police said.

He has at least one criminal conviction that barred him from owning weapons, and was found to have guns that included a semiautomatic rifle that was deemed an "assault" rifle as well as illegal high-capacity ammunition clips, the website showed. 

For those who are versed in gun, you'll immediately spot the error. They're magazines, not clips. I've had that pointed out to me before. Don't enjoy the refresher.

If the Post Star is going to jump the gun on an article with an extremely sensitive subject matter such as New York’s gun control, ( After all that was the main objective to this particular article ) then it really needs to pay closer attention to actually printing factual information.

It was reported that the suspect was in possession of numerous high capacity ammunition clips, ( Anything over ten rounds in NY is illegal keep that in mind )

Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but ammunition clips were never produced to hold more than ten rounds, ( the average size was between 8 to 10 rounds ) Ammunition clips are used to actually speed load a rifle with a fixed box magazine. On the other hand, an actual rifle magazine is a removable box magazine which is more commonly found on most modern weapon platforms today, and come in a wide array of sizes.

With that said, If the article actually stands true, then it’s quite obvious that the Post Star has stretched the truth yet once again, as ammunition clips in NY are 100% legal to own and use.

This entire article is just another classy attempt by the Post Star to keep yesterday’s tragic school shooting fresh on our minds and to keep pushing its Leftist agenda. - SeeksTheTruth

I have my doubts about how truthseeking he actually is. Anyway:

Thanks for all the gunsplaining on clips versus magazines. I'm sure that's a very important point.

He has at least one criminal conviction that barred him from owning weapons,

So, should this guy have possessed the guns and clips or magazines? Have his second amendment rights been trampled? He was jailed for illegal possession of guns. That makes it a news story with or without the occurrence of a school massacre. Or should this story only be reported if he had killed someone? Or not even then because it would prejudice people against innocent guns which we all know don't kill people. - KR

My Letter Gun is Empty

So, I saw this letter in the PS this morning. I don't know if I would have responded to it, but it's terrible to see something like it and realize you've used up your quota of submissions for the month (two). Starting at the end.

We need to use logic, not emotions, when responding to problems.

Well yeah, I can't disagree with that. The only thing is that it was the most illogical letter I've read in some time. 

Some people want to ban all AR-15s because of this. Some want to ban all rifles. Some want to ban all guns. 

What percentage of people want to ban all guns? .0003? So, that's pretty much a straw man. 

Suppose a very troubled teen boy drove a big black Ford F-150 with a fast engine and big tires into a crowd of school kids on the sidewalk, killing some and injuring others. (Terrorists in Europe have done this.)

I'm going to call that a red herring leading into a second straw man. 

Would the same critics want to ban scary Ford F-150s? How about all Ford trucks? Would they ban any truck with a powerful engine and big tires? How about banning all vehicles?

I'd dare say there wasn't a spot of logic in the whole letter. How do you get that F-150 into a school, church, movie theater, concert, etc. Unfortunately, his thesis was tested by a sociopath in Charlottesville with the killing of Heather Heyer. 

When it becomes an issue of mass casualties due to homicide by auto then I believe we will discuss that. In the meantime, guns are the issue. 

I Suppose It's in Poor Taste

Because of the recent shooting in Texas, but since it barely made the news I guess it's all good.

The days are growing colder, and soon millions of American hunters will pursue a time-honored tradition. They will load their automatic weapons with armor-piercing bullets, strap on silencers, head off to the picnic grounds on nearby public lakes — and start shooting.

If you do not immediately recognize this pastime as part of America’s heritage, then you are sadly out of step with the current Republican majority in Congress. On Tuesday, a House panel takes up the “Sportsmen’s Heritage and Recreational Enhancement Act of 2017,” which promises “to protect and enhance opportunities for recreational hunting, fishing and shooting.”

It's probably a waste of time to ask my congresswoman to vote against it, but what the hell. 

Changing Minds and Hearts

Yeah, probably not. PS LTTE:

     Hopefully enough time has passed so we can mention the shooting that wounded Rep. Scalise. As I write this, he is still hospitalized. We all wish him a speedy and full recovery. I also wish him and our representative a speedy change of heart.

     Mr. Scalise has received $18,900 from the NRA and Ms. Stefanik, $4000. Much has been said, in the wake of the shooting, about the lack of civility in our discourse. The NRA sells a T-shirt with an eagle clutching a rifle. The slogan is, "Because you can't fist fight tyranny." Classy. We have a healthy enough system of government and a free press to prevent tyrants from taking root. It's worked well so far and seems to still be.

     Maybe it's time for Congress to make gun policy without the aid of these lobbyists for the gun industry. Would merchants of death have been uncivil? It's past time to get rid of the Dickey Amendment prohibiting funding of the CDC to reduce gun deaths. Jay Dickey himself, before he passed, called for its repeal. How about our reps doing the very least they can to address the problem? They can do it while they wait for the white puffs of smoke from the Senate chimney portending the "new and improved" AHCA.

Virginia is for Traffickers

Time for a national gun policy.

“There’s no limit to how many guns I can go buy from the store. I can go get 20 guns from the store tomorrow. . . . I can do that Monday through Friday. . . . They might start looking at me, but in Virginia, our laws are so little, I can give guns away.” 

Elusive Elise

A couple of quick hits on Rep. Stefanik. I stole the title from a sign at the article. And I'm keeping it.

During the small protest, the group recited chants such as “What do we want? A town hall meeting! And when do we want it? Now!”

 “We don’t know what she’s doing until she’s done it,” Zeman said. “The schedule is two weeks behind.”

Things were so much better with Obama in there to run against. Weren't they Elise? 

And guns for folks who are mentally incompetent? Why not?

Boos to Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives, including our congresswoman, Elise Stefanik, who voted to rescind a federal rule requiring the Social Security department to forward the names of people mentally incapable of managing their own affairs to the Justice Department. Those people — an estimated 75,000 of them — would then be ineligible to buy a firearm. 

Way to insure you keep that "A" rating from the NRA.

Local Hero

Sadly, the city of Albany NY is now going to have to remain under the iron fist of tyranny.

A self-described "resistance fighter" who was reputedly forming a militia in Greene County boasted of his ability to kill dozens of people and attack federal buildings in Albany to combat "tyranny" in the event of Armageddon, court papers revealed Wednesday.

A big thank you to the FBI and the informant who had the courage to get close enough to this nut to make the case. 

The FBI launched the probe after learning Twiss "was forming, or had formed, a militia based in Greene County that had plans to engage in acts of violence," the document said. The FBI used an informant to pose as someone interested in joining Twiss' militia and to record Twiss. The complaint suggested Twiss had been in a prior militia but was miffed at his former militia mates.

Really? Miffed? I don want to thank Robert Twiss. He's my go-to example the next time someone pulls out that stupid "we need guns to defend against tyranny" bullshit. Yes, it's my blog and I don't have to stick in expletive like the TU does. 

That day, Twiss said he could "can get guns all day long" and was a "resistance fighter." If an Armageddon situation were to happen, he would go into the city of Albany and "take up arms" against the "tyranny," the complaint said.

While we're in Albany's finest newspaper, here's an op piece by Jeffrey Swanson. 

I am worried about seriously angry people coming to polling places on Nov. 8 carrying handguns.

As an academic who studies gun violence from a public health perspective, I rely on scientific data to characterize risk. Last year, my colleagues and I published a research study which found that 1.5 percent of adult Americans had impulsive angry behavior traits and carried guns with them in public.

Thank God I live in NY and Robert Twiss is now behind bars. 

I am not very troubled by a gun as a cultural symbol. I am concerned about a gun as a highly efficient killing device in the wrong hands. A small percentage of gun-carrying voters this Nov. 8 — about 3 out of every 200, in polling places that allow guns — will be dangerously angry people who cannot control their tempers. Some of them will have been marinating in Trump's message of fear and loathing of outsiders. They will have heard him say that the "Second Amendment people" may need to do something if Clinton wins. In a crowded queue they will rub shoulders — and maybe elbows — with neighbors waiting in the same lines who vehemently reject everything Trump says and stands for.

Guns need not be a part of a moment like that.

One of my chores online today was to look up this letter. It fits here, so what the hell. It's a Kev's Klassic from Dec 2015:

In response to Scott Graves from El Paso, I'd like to say that your love for the Adirondacks must be very shallow if being required to pay a bit in taxes and follow some restrictions on your guns keeps you from living here. If you're retired, it doesn't even seem that your income tax bill would be that high. I know there are people here who own guns and hunt. Don't believe they use AR-15s, though. Unlike Texans, New Yorkers don't make a practice of going, en masse, into restaurants bearing assault rifles. We don't have that level of insecurity.

Of course, recently a lot of folks in Texas were convinced that they were going to be invaded by the U.S. military. No, I don't get it either, but that's what they thought. So, they may have anxiety problems that are only relieved by their guns. And you know what; Gov. Abbott, Sen. Cruz and other Texas politicians did nothing to dissuade their citizenry of that notion. The governor even sent out the National Guard to keep an eye on the federal troops.

The same Texas government fought the Affordable Care Act fervently while New York was working with the federal government to implement it here. The difference shows now too. So, I'll take the "overbearing" government that works to ensure its citizens have health insurance over the one that doesn't, and is willing to allow its people to believe conspiracy theories. I'm retired, as well. I do love New York, and I'm willing to pay taxes in order to live in a sane and civilized society.

Graves' letter:

Yet another decade passes and still I hesitate moving back to my beloved southern Adirondacks. Why? I'm retired now so I certainly could go. The problems lie in the overbearing control that the state government exerts on its citizens. Your taxes are astronomical. Texas has no income tax. Your gun laws are horrifying. I buy and keep as many guns as I want in Texas including the dreaded AR-15. My Adirondacks will remain a distant memory and Texas my adopted home.

Oh how I miss thee, my beloved Adirondacks. Not enough to give up a few insignificant gun rights, tho. What a shallow love that must be. 

Time For National Gun Laws

As long as the nation doesn't go all open carry, that is. Every gun argument I've ever gotten into with a gun fetishist has come around to "what about all the murders in Chicago?" Fortunately here in NY we don't have deaths at that level. Not for lack of trying by the dealers in illegal guns.

Of the 30,606 guns found with complete transaction histories, law enforcement officials recovered 5,873 within three years of the last known recorded purchase, including 2,437 within one year.

And a hefty one-in-five guns recovered after use in crimes were recently trafficked into New York.

The low “time-to-crime” number, the report says, is a strong indication that the weapons were purchased “with the intent to be diverted to criminal use.”

In New York City, 91% of the low "time-to-crime" guns originated out-of-state, the analysis found. That's the largest percentage in the state. Long Island came in second at 58%.

I really don't mind if other states want to sell weapons and ammo in 7/11s. But, keep 'em in your state.

“The data makes one thing abundantly clear: New York’s strong gun laws are being undermined at every turn by lax laws in other states,” Schneiderman said. “Even as we work to make our streets safer, the illegal guns most often used in violent crimes continue to pour into our state.”

Editorial:

A nation of 50 states knit together through commerce is ultimately only as safe as its weakest firearm regulations allow.

Which is why Congress must, hopefully under the leadership of a President Hillary Clinton, finally require what 90% of the public supports: background checks for all gun purchases, including those at gun shows and over the internet.

And why the Senate and recalcitrant House must go further and pass Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand and Mark Kirk’s bill to make gun trafficking — moving firearms for the purpose of selling them to criminals — a federal felony.

Otherwise, firearms will continue to flow freely through the pipeline. And, contrary to the gun lobby mythologists, more guns will bring more death.

Should I?

I'm a little uneasy about putting this up. It needs to be said, tho.

Legalizing Murder

So far this is not yet legal. The NRA is working on that, though.

 A gunman opened fire on morning commuters in Houston on Monday, injuring at least six people before being fatally shot by police, authorities said.

Several of the victims suffered gunshot wounds to their extremities and a couple of the injuries was more serious, Fire Department spokesman Richard Mann told reporters.

But, are they playing their music too loud or is there some other technicality. 

Nick Julian IV lived with his parents next door to Ayala. He said he first heard the loud music while watching car shows with his father. Julian's girlfriend and her daughter were spending the night, and he didn't want the music to wake them.

Then Stand Your Ground.

"And this was all because he was playing music too loud?" the operator said.

"No, ma'am," Julian answered.

He later said: "I was completely scared for my life. I've never been in this kind of situation. I didn't know what to do, other than try to protect . . ."

"So you went over there with a gun in your hand?" the operator said.

"No, ma'am," Julian said.

"How did you have your gun on you, sir?" the operator said.

"He made threats," Julian said. "And I always have a gun on me."

Don't worry. The gun industry has your back.

A 2012 Tampa Bay Times investigation showed that the law has been applied unevenly and in unforeseen ways. People have escaped prosecution for taking a life while involved in criminal activities, for firing on unarmed persons, even when they started the confrontation that led to the shooting.

"Stand your ground" caught on. Similar laws spread to more than 30 other states.

Now it's an industry. There are subscription services that offer to advise gun owners before they have to make a life-or-death decision and provide immediate legal and financial support afterward.

If that shooter in Houston had lived, he might be on the phone to them right now.

Boston Globe bookmark. Some facts that are good, mostly not.

More Victims of the Second Amendment

I can't record everyone of these incidents, but that's what the Gun Violence Archive is for. Some stand out more than others, though. When a 14 year old girl shoots another student and then shoots herself to death it stands out.

During a press conference on Thursday afternoon, authorities said a 14-year-old female freshman student, whose name hasn't been released, turned the gun on herself after shooting another student, possibly a 16-year-old student, in the lower extremities. That student was taken to the hospital and was released.

I'm sure the college students in Texas, who are now able to walk around strapped, will be much more mature and will not commit similar acts. In my own state was another recent victim.

An upstate Assemblyman who was supposed to turn himself in to the FBI on Friday morning instead shot himself to death in a cemetery.

Bill Nojay's apparent suicide took place in front of Rochester police officer who had responded to a call to “check the welfare” of an individual in the area.

I'll give him credit. He talked the talk and walked the walk. And at least he didn't take any innocent people with him.

One year after the passage of the SAFE Act, Assemblyman Bill Nojay (R,I) is reminding his constituents to remain steadfast in defense of their Second Amendment rights. The fight to restore the right to bear arms in New York is far from over, as the legal challenge to the law is working its way through the courts, and those who voted in favor of the law have yet to be held accountable.

Condolences to the families of all victims of gun violence, self-inflicted or not.

It's Fuck the NRA Tuesday

I realized yesterday that I haven't been ranting against the NRA nearly enough lately. Take it, Dr. Friesen:

And here's a link to an article on his speech. Don't miss the "Cocks not Glocks" link. Here's a link to a Dan Thomasson column in my local today. 

Outrageous? Absolutely, and more than a little absurd, as one headline pointed out. Wonderful in its inventiveness and the stuff of brilliant satire in its delicious obscenity but not illegally so? You bet! Effective? One can only hope.

That’s what University of Texas students came up with to protest their state Legislature’s irresponsible decision to permit concealed firearms on their Austin campus over the objections of not only thousands of enrollees but also professors, the chancellor of the system and the president of its flagship institution.

Blessed be the dildo makers.

Rethinking Open Carry?

I'm pessimistic. I do believe there are people who realize that everyone at any protest could be armed and would that be a good idea?

In the chaos following the sniper attack, which killed five police officers patrolling the march, the presence of numerous armed individuals running through the streets made it difficult for officers to distinguish between suspects and marchers, feeding the misconception that there were multiple assailants at large.

You and I see that as an actual problem. Not everyone does. 

C. J. Grisham, president of Open Carry Texas, told The Dallas Morning News that “the bad guys are the ones shooting,” so it shouldn’t be hard to separate the good guys from the bad guys.

Mr. Grisham told the Associated Press that open-carry activists can prevent alarm by keeping their gun slung on their back with their muzzle pointing down and not touching it to make it clear they don't intend to be confrontational.

See how simple that is. Then there's Mayor Rawlings and Sgt. Dyer who don't see the simplicity.

"Even open carry proponents will see the common sense in restricting open carry in environments like a protest," Sergeant Dyer said.

Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings, a Democrat and a shotgun owner, also called for tightening the state's gun laws to restrict carrying rifles and shotguns to public events, including sports games and protests. "This stuff should be common sense and not driven by ideology," Mr. Rawlings said. 

Common sense is a violation of the second amendment. Sorry. 

Sense and Nonsense on Guns

You can't get much more nonsensical on the issue than Matt Funiciello.

Funiciello said both bills are an overreach of federal authority.

He said local gun boards should be elected in each municipality to determine, on a case-by-case basis, whether residents should be allowed to buy guns.

“We elect responsible people who we feel are good with their guns,” said Funiciello, a bread company owner and political activist from Hudson Falls. 

OK, first fuck that federal authority bullshit. I'm pretty sure I heard the nuts at Malheur and the Bundy Ranch spouting the same argument. Sometimes I think one of Matt's primary  news sources is Alex Jones. Fuck it, I'll just put up my comment. Why mess with perfection?

“We elect responsible people who we feel are good with their guns,”

What does that mean? All I can think of is Annie Oakley (or Sarah Palin) shooting a silver dollar out of the air. It sounds as tho non-gunowners need not apply. Illegal to be sure. That brings up that many boards wold likely skew to everyone or no one gets a gun, tho. How many blacks in the South (or Boston, to be fair) would have gotten a gun 50 or 60 years ago? Good thing there's no prejudice anymore.

Then there's, do you want to be on a board turning down a psychopath's gun application? And betting he doesn't get one anyway? Being sued might be the least of your worries.

If the board is going to make a sound decision, they're going to have to have access to criminal and mental health records, presumably. Is that a problem?

These are questions off the top of my head. I trust there are brighter people in the Derrick and Stefanik campaigns who can come up with better inquiries. Maybe even the local media can before they make an endorsement this time around.

Yes,“We elect responsible people who we feel are good with their guns.” He really said that. I know Maury Thompson and he wouldn't lie. Anyway. Matt responded in the comments. And just let me say, he's not into that whole paragraph thing. 

Reformed (and Kevin), the actual conversation I have around gun control is this ... I am a huge supporter of the 2nd amendment. Period. It's about deer hunting, yes, but it's also about King George and protecting ourselves from tyranny and fascism. And, in my book, both reasons are entirely valid and I defend them both. That said, the FBI and other federal agencies regularly give clearance for gun licenses and permits to people who should not ever have them granted (bear in mind that the majority of them are white American males - this is not really about "terrorism" at all). This is because these agencies do not KNOW the people in question. My brother, who owns many handguns, rifles and bows, had a great idea about issuing permits (and that is what Maury and I were speaking about). His idea is that we have Citizen Advisory Boards elected from the actual communities the permits will be issued in (made up of people who actually know or have access to those who know the people looking to obtain the permits). If the FBI had questioned Omar Matteen's co-workers at G4S or even just spoken with his abused wife, I'm pretty sure he would not have so easily procured the weaponry he used to kill all the people he did. In the bigger picture, we need to stop being a culture of violence and empire. The Republican and Democratic Party bills being offered are reactionary and unconstitutional. They just add many more layers to an already bloated and entirely inappropriate surveillance state and place more people on "watch lists". What they also do is absolutely nothing to decrease our gun dealing as a nation (we are responsible for 80% of the world's weaponry). These illegal bills just allow more people to be discriminated against by officially labeling them as "terrorists" ... right along with the 4 year old children and Ted Kennedy and animal rights activists who are traditionally placed on our insipid and Orwellian "watch lists" today. 

Or actually addressing the questions I had about the loony tune "local gun board" thing in the first place. So what the fuck. Double down and ask another question, I always say. 

Thank you for the response, Matt. I was looking for more details about the local gun boards because I didn't think it sounded really practical. A web search showed they had it somewhere in Michigan and ended it. It didn't use elected officials or at least ones elected for that sole purpose.

I do believe one can support the second amendment and not be an absolutist. I have talked to gun owners in the threads who are open to reasonable controls. No one wants to deprive hunters of their guns. Why discuss it? It's a big leap between having a gun for hunting and defending against tyranny and fascism. That's not a gun policy I want to hear from my representative. If it was, I'd move to Texas. I asked someone here in the threads this question and got no response. But, I'm dogged. Who gets to decide that we are being ruled by a tyrant? I remember people saying Obama was a tyrant because of Obamacare. Was that tyranny worthy of sedition? Apparently not. Were the Bundys in the right at their ranch or at Malheur Preserve?

You speak a lot about the evil that corporations do. You seem to give the NRA/Gun Industry a pass. They control gun policy in this country. That's not conspiracy theory. It's reality. Does it not concern you?

Technically, I guess I asked two more questions there. He didn't come back and answer either of them. I believe I'm going to make a special request to Mike Derrick to ask them. My final comment.

Someday I may get an answer to that question. Charges of tyranny and fascism fly too freely for my tastes. My concern is that the shooter or shooters in Dallas may have felt justified for these reasons.

This guy is the Green Party, Progressive, Fuckin' candidate for Congress in my district. Please pardon the f-bombs, but it has been an annoyingly deadly week that calls for a few. Just to bring things down a little, here's Sharay Santora:

Videos of the attack show officers running toward the gunfire to help citizens.

Sharay Santora, who was there with her children, told CNN she overheard marchers say, “They were here for us, I’m going to be there for them.”

“My children and I are going to be there for their funerals because they lost their lives protecting me and my children,” she said. 

Bless you and thank you for that, Ms. Santora. 

He's a Nut and He's Allowed to Own Guns

Do I feel good about saying that about someone who just lost his 14-year old son? Yes because he can say this:

"Every round in the gun is your responsibility. When it fires you need to stand to account for it. That's what I've spent the last two days doing, accounting for my operating error."

An operating error? I think he needs to spend the rest of his life accounting for the "operating error." Do I believe he's going to? 

The shooting has not changed his views of guns, he said. He still intends to keep them in the house and use them for self-defense of his home and family.

"I can't fix this. It's just a great loss, but thankfully we'll see him someday. I have a feeling he's on a great lake out there."

I'm doubtful. 

Matt's Gun Policy

This has been a long time coming and God was it worth waiting for.

Funiciello said both bills are an overreach of federal authority.

He said local gun boards should be elected in each municipality to determine, on a case-by-case basis, whether residents should be allowed to buy guns.

“We elect responsible people who we feel are good with their guns,” said Funiciello, a bread company owner and political activist from Hudson Falls. 

For now, I'm just going to paste the comment I left. Might come back to this.

“We elect responsible people who we feel are good with their guns,” 

What does that mean? All I can think of is Annie Oakley (or Sarah Palin) shooting a silver dollar out of the air. It sounds as tho non-gunowners need not apply. Illegal to be sure.

That brings up that many boards wold likely skew to everyone or no one gets a gun, tho. How many blacks in the South (or Boston, to be fair) would have gotten a gun 50 or 60 years ago? Good thing there's no prejudice anymore.

Then there's, do you want to be on a board turning down a psychopath's gun application? And betting he doesn't get one anyway? Being sued might be the least of your worries. If the board is going to make a sound decision, they're going to have to have access to criminal and mental health records, presumably. Is that a problem?

These are questions off the top of my head. I trust there are brighter people in the Derrick and Stefanik campaigns who can come up with better inquiries. Maybe even the local media can before they make an endorsement this time around.

Infringing Second Amendment Rights of Spousal Abusers

Oh Heavens! And 6-2 at that.

"We treat no other constitutional right so cavalierly," said Justice Thomas in his dissent. "In construing the statute before us expansively so that causing a single minor reckless injury or offensive touching can lead someone to lose his right to bear arms forever, the court continues to relegate the Second Amendment to a second-class right." 

Lucky the US Congress doesn't treat it as a second-class right. Hard to believe that even in death, Scalia still has his hand far enough up Thomas' ass to work his mouth.

Should've gone to Chas. Pierce's first. Better late than never.

"Non-consensual touching" is nice, I think. Sonny Liston once engaged in that professionally, I believe.

Guns Abroad, Today Germany

The German gunman who took hostages in a theater was "disturbed." Undoubtedly. That's a prerequisite for such an action, I suppose. He did not have an "Islamist motive." That's reassuring.

What really interested me was the German approach to gun policy. The NRA does not have a strong foothold there from all appearances.

In Germany, anyone younger than 25 has to pass a psychiatric exam before he or she is allowed to apply for a gun license. After that, applicants must wait a year, pass tests, and explain why they want a firearm. Once the license is approved, gun owners must be included in a national registry. 

Since 2009, the year a young man who had dropped out of high school fatally shot 15 people and himself, gun owners may be required to take psychiatric tests if they display erratic behavior. Police can also make home visits to be sure owners' weapons are properly stored, although owners do not need to divulge where the keys are, according to the LA Times. 

Yes, I can just see that all passing in Congress. 

Tough gun control laws in Germany that were rigorously tightened after two ghastly school shootings in 2002 and 2009 have helped cut the number of firearm killings in half to about 50 a year, according to experts.

Germany, where gun ownership had already been treated as a privilege rather than an inherent right, made it even harder to own a firearm.

And they sing praises to Odin that they have no second amendment. 

Samantha Bee Says "Fuck the Guns"

So does Stephen Colbert. Can we elect more comedians? Al Franken could use the company of sane humans. 

Crazy Letter Wednesday

This'll be a nice easy post. First, copy and paste the rantings of Andrew Dicroce.

Radicalized Islamic terrorists attack! Why don't you try those words on Ken or just like the rest of the pathetic pandering progressive lame stream media and low life politicians all you can do is blame law-abiding Americans. I don't shrug like you, I get mad at the fact that how many of these terrorists’ attacks on our soil do we have to tolerate before people like you wake up! Oh yeah it's easy to blame the gun and of course propose another wasted law that would have done nothing to stop this attack. 

Once again we get your left wing propaganda sources that are full of …. ; here is one for yougunfacts.info. Yeah Ken that is a site that backs up their claims with actual facts, something that is sorely missing from your diatribes.

Hey Mr. Credible news source, why don't you own up or admit to using Salon.com for one of your gun control diatribes? What's the matter Ken no guts to own up to it?

One thing all your propaganda can't seem to explain away is the fact that as more Americans own guns, including the evil AR-15, somehow crime has gone down, now how can that be! It's a shame you and your ilk are more upset with law-abiding Americans than with terrorists! 

And since I've already honed my response:

Mr. Dicroce's recent letter has driven me to write. I just wish I could match his peerless rhetoric. Mr. Tingley must still be smarting from the stern dressing down he received. Ouch!

     

Just to comment on the subject he broaches, I'd like to bring folks attention to a recent initiative. A group of veterans that includes Generals David Petraeus and Stanley McChrystal have formed the Veterans Coalition for Common Sense. Their aim is to push for sensible gun policies and to reduce firearm suicides. They're a welcome entry, since we've just seen that the Senate cannot even do the least thing possible. That is, preventing those on the no-fly list from obtaining weapons.

     

I'd urge the Derrick campaign to take a look at this effort. Congresswoman Stefanik has opposed stronger background checks and recently cashed a check from the NRA. Some checks are good ones. All I know of Mr. Funiciello's views is from a February 2014 interview. In that, he stated “we need guns to defend ourselves against tyranny." I prefer we work to strengthen democracy. You're our only hope, Mike. Let's show everyone that the Democratic Party is the one that aligns with common sense. Mr. Dicroce is not going to cast his vote for you.