Showing posts with label Question 1. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Question 1. Show all posts

Saturday, November 25, 2017

‘A+’-Rated John Cornyn Continues to Side with Gun-Grabbers

Informed American gun owners don’t. And pretending this bill will prevent future acts of evil in order to impose forced infringements is nothing short of fraud.


“Americans want background checks for gun sales,” Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn assured his Twitter followers Friday. He was linking to a San Antonio Express-News editorial board advocacy piece spreading poll summaries showing alternatively that either “95 percent” or “84 percent” of Americans “support universal background checks for gun sales.”


That polls may show that reflects more on the media sound bite “understanding” most being queried have of gun issues in general. When put to the test in the only poll that impacts the real world, Nevada’s Question 1 referendum, the numbers came up different. Despite similar polling and millions of dollars from out-of-state billionaires to fund an Astroturf campaign effort, the measure passed by less than one percent, being rejected in all counties except populous (and Democrat-dominated) Clark County.


The real question here is why is John Cornyn so eager to give the gun-grabbers a victory, teaming with the likes of Chris Murphy and Dianne Feinstein to “Fix NICS”? After all, we’re talking about a politician that the NRA, which gives him an”A+,” says “has always defended our gun rights in Congress!”


And it’s not like there’s any delegated Constitutional authority for the national government to impose prior restraints on firearms transfers in the first place. So why give citizen disarmament leaders something to crow about, especially since no one but a useful idiot believes expanding infringements is aimed at any but the law-abiding?


“John Cornyn knows that the Second Amendment isn’t subject to negotiation, because our right to defend ourselves is the cornerstone of our democracy,” NRA has gushed in the past. “He also knows that the extreme agenda pushed by gun control groups will make us less safe, less free and turn law-abiding gun owners into criminals for simply exercising their rights.”


So why is he helping the anti-gunners in their “baby step” quest to completely end private sales and then move on to the next stop on their “slippery slope”? For that matter, why is NRA supporting giving up any ground to people who want it all, especially since no less a source than the National Institute of Justice has concluded:


“Effectiveness depends on the ability to reduce straw purchasing, requiring gun registration…”


It’s hardly the first time Cornyn — and NRA — have come out in support of citizen disarmament measures. Due process concerns raised in this column have still never been comprehensively addressed about the mental health dragnet they both support, including:


What protections will exist to offset politically-connected anti-gun judges, politically-appointed boards, and “expert” adherents of the American Psychiatric Association’s “Position Statement on Firearm Access, Acts of Violence and the Relationship to Mental Illness and Mental Health Services.” It’s fair to ask, because APA includes in its advocacy platform registration-enabling, background checks, “smart” guns, storage requirements, “gun-free” zones, doctor-patient boundary violations, tax-funded anti-gun “studies,” all outside the scope of the training and credentialing of those making these proposals.


Also of interest – or it should be – how will rights be restored when there is no longer a compelling mental health reason to deny them? What universal appeal mechanism – affordable to all, not just to elites for whom money is no object – will exist to declare a person is once more “eligible” to keep and bear arms? What guarantees are there that the same biases that colored the disability ruling in the first place won’t reassert themselves in the “parole” process? And have we identified psychiatric evaluators, risk management administrators and insurers who will be willing to subject themselves to malpractice liabilities should a person deemed “fit” be misdiagnosed? Or will the pressure be to “err on the side of caution”?


Lest we forget, Cornyn andother “top Congressional Republicans” have also “signaled” to the media they “would be open to banning the firearm accessory that the Las Vegas gunman used to transform his rifles to mimic automatic weapon fire.”


Add to that Cornyn’s abysmal grades on immigration issues from Numbers USA. That’s directly relevant to the right to keep and bear arms – despite NRA’s deliberate indifference to the issue. That’s because all credible polls – plus real world experience in places like California – demonstrate such populations overwhelmingly support “gun control.” Open a “pathway to citizenship” and overwhelmingly anti-gun legislatures will be empowered to pass whatever infringements they want, plus ensure federal judges confirmed by the majority will uphold them.


What will A-rated Republican politicians and the “gun rights” organization that gives the green light to their defections tell us we need to give up then? And what will constituents and members who feel betrayed tell them in return?


—–


If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please make a donation to support our work.  You can donate HERE.


—–


David Codrea’s opinions are his own. See “Who speaks for Oath Keepers?”


The post ‘A+’-Rated John Cornyn Continues to Side with Gun-Grabbers appeared first on Oath Keepers.

Friday, November 3, 2017

Reporting on Nevada Gun Measure Lawsuit Perpetuates Key Misrepresentations

It’s fair to wonder if there’s an unstated political motive for a Bloomberg-backing “Second Amendment supporter” and a “gun safety advocate” to go after Adam Laxalt at the same time he’s announced his bid for governor. (Adam Laxalt/Facebook)


“Three Nevada residents are suing Gov. Brian Sandoval and Attorney General Adam Laxalt in Clark County District Court over what they allege is the state’s failure to implement a new law requiring federal background checks on private gun sales,” a Friday report by Andrew Craft of Fox News states. “The lawsuit claims the governor is stonewalling efforts to enforce it.”


So good so far. Fair and balanced as advertised. They report, we decide.


He even does a good job explaining why Nevada has not enforced the law. Nevada Firearms Coalition explained it at the time:


“[T]he recent passage of the Nevada legislation regarding background checks for private sales cannot dictate how federal resources are applied,” Kimberly Del Greco of the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services Division informed the Nevada Department of Public Safety in a Dec. 14 letter, meaning the FBI would not allow intermediaries to run background checks as required by the Act. Based on a resulting department clarification request to Laxalt on how to proceed, the attorney general concluded “citizens may not be prosecuted for their inability to comply with the Act unless and until the FBI changes its public position and agrees to conduct the background checks consistent with the Act.” (See correspondence here, posted by the Reno Gazette Journal.)


OK, so he’s got the fact and the timing right. What’s the problem?


Two that I see right off the bat, and they’re not inconsequential. The go to the heart of how the gun-grabbers identify themselves and how a supposedly objective media helps them perpetuate it:


“Dale Zusi, Vicki Delatorre, and Sydney Gordon are the three plaintiffs in the case and were instrumental in getting the issue on the ballot,” Craft writes. “Delatorre herself is a gun owner and supporter of the Second Amendment.”


No, Delatorre claims she’s a supporter of the Second Amendment, the one that ends in “shall not be infringed.”  She’s actually one of those big “but” pseudo-supporters, as in “I believe in the Second Amendment but...”


And she’s advocating for prior restraints that can’t work without another huge and dangerous infringement. Per Greg Ridgeway, Deputy Director, National Institute of Justice, in his “Summary of Select Firearm Violence Prevention Strategies”:


“Effectiveness depends on the ability to reduce straw purchasing, requiring gun registration…”


Craft’s next bit of narrative parroting: Designating Elizabeth Becker “a local gun safety advocate.”


Some of us would argue the edicts she demands makes things a lot more dangerous, and just ceding to Delatorre or Becker their own characterizations without at least addng qualifiers like “self-professed” gives credence to their side. Because what they’re claiming to be is debatable.


If  “progressive” Bloomberg citizen disarmament apparatchik Becker has any credentials in actual gun safety training, it’s a remarkably well-kept secret. Instead she’s a flack for Moms Demand Action, seeking a way to save face for gun-grabbers who incompetently (and sneakily) crafted their Question 1 ballot initiative,  effectively blowing $20M in Astroturf funding.


It’s fair to wonder if the timing of this is meant as another sneaky way to publicly attack Laxalt’s just-annouced bid for governor.


And despite all the blathering about their citizen disarmament efforts being a “grassroots effort,” my analysis from a few years back showed “Nevadans for Background Checks” to be an Astroturf front group for Bloomberg’s Everytown.


Fox News has an unfair reputation for being “conservative,” presumably because most there (with a few notable exceptions) don’t wear “progressive” sympathies on their sleeves. When its reporters unquestioningly adopt the language of the left they cease being objective chroniclers and make it fair to wonder if it’s really unintentional because they just don’t kow any better.


—–


If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please make a donation to support our work.  You can donate HERE.


—–


David Codrea’s opinions are his own. See “Who speaks for Oath Keepers?”


The post Reporting on Nevada Gun Measure Lawsuit Perpetuates Key Misrepresentations appeared first on Oath Keepers.