The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence: is whining again. This time it is about the people legally “open carrying” weapons in Starbucks stores. Oh my what shall we do now… legal citizens, carrying legal weapons in a business. I think everyone should buy 2 coffees a day from Starbucks (one for you and one for your gun), to show your support for their refusal to ban guns in the stores. Brady Campaign whining:
But Starbucks is refusing to prohibit the open carrying of firearms in its stores, despite protests from loyal customers. Because of Starbucks’ refusal, the Brady Campaign has teamed up with CREDO Action to tell Starbucks to keep guns out of its coffee shops. The practice of packing heat in places like Starbucks is intimidating and could be potentially dangerous to our families and communities – and it must be stopped. It’s everyone’s right to sit in a restaurant or coffee shop with their families without intimidation or fear of guns, either concealed or openly carried. Under the law, Starbucks has the right to adopt a gun-free policy, with an exception for uniformed police officers. Such a policy can easily be implemented in most cases by putting up signs at store entrances. We need to tell Starbucks to bar guns in its stores. These individuals who have been carrying guns into Starbucks have all the firepower of a SWAT team, and none of the law enforcement training.
More here: Tell Starbucks: Offer Espresso Shots, Not Gunshots.
Related posts
The 5th Amendment rights vs. police investigations (0)
Positive Gun Story… (0)
Man arrested carrying weapons at hotel where Speaker Pelosi was staying. (0)
CHL / CCW and Law Enforcement (0)
California attempts to create another felon (0)
The folks from ammunition accountability are at it again this year. Although this piece of legislation keeps dying every time it is proposed, they are trying again. There tag line of saving lives one bullet at a time is comical at best. The system has many conceptual problems, including increasing the manufacturing cost of ammunition, as well as local, state and federal agency administrative cost. The thought that one could track a criminal through a registered bullet is a little far fetched.
What makes one think if criminals steal guns, and deface serial numbers on guns, they will not do the same for ammunition?
From WND:
Group asks states to track citizens’ ammo
Organization claims it is ’saving lives 1 bullet at a time’
By Chelsea Schilling
© 2008 WorldNetDailyLegislation to trace ammunition is pending in several states, and many gun owners are concerned that it is just another attempt by anti-gun groups to violate citizens’ Second Amendment rights.An organization known as Ammunition Accountability is pushing to make coding technology mandatory across the nation. Its website claims it is a group of “gun crime victims, industry representatives, law enforcement, public officials, public policy experts, and more” who are “saving lives one bullet at a time.”
If states pass the legislation, manufacturers will be required to laser etch a serial number into the back of each bullet and the inside of cartridge casings, a patented process developed by Seattle, Wash., resident Russ Ford and his business partners, Steve Mace and John Knickerbocker.
According to Seattle Weekly, the men couldn’t find an ammunition manufacturer to agree to stamp bullets, so they hired a lobbyist to push for state legislation to require the laser coding. They launched the Ammunition Accountability website and successfully introduced bills in the following 18 states: Alabama, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee and Washington.
Related posts
Assault Weapons Ban Confusion (0)
Heller yeah… (0)
California attempts to create another felon (0)
Assault Weapons Ban…Loonacy (1)
Another one Bites the Dust (0)
While I can appreciate the need to investigate crimes, and have the utmost respect for law enforcement officers; I cannot agree with the tactics employed by the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation in their investigation of a shooting in Weleetka, OK.
Excerpt from Tulsa World article:
The OSBI agents knew the caliber of the guns used in the killings, so they merely checked with area gun dealers and pawnshops to determine who had bought or recently pawned .40-caliber Glocks.
That prompted concern Tuesday among many in the public, who noted that Oklahoma does not have a gun-registry law nor a central database of gun owners.
Tom Harris, an agent with the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in Tulsa, confirmed that.
According to Harris, most states, including Oklahoma, and the federal government do not have lists of registered gun owners.
He said the only way to get a listing of gun owners is by canvassing gun dealers or pawnshops individually to find out who bought weapons — as the OSBI did.
Harris said gun dealers — “federal firearms licensees” — have to fill out ATF form 4473 whenever a weapon is purchased. The form lists the buyer, the address and other pertinent information.
They also have to contact the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to determine whether the prospective buyer can legally purchase a weapon.
Harris said the 4473 forms stay with the gun dealers and are not submitted to any government agency. They are, however, available to law enforcement.
If a gun dealer goes out of business, the 4473 forms are stored in an ATF warehouse, he said.
Thus OSBI developed a Pseudo list of gun owners in the area with a particular make and model of pistol. These owners were then contacted and asked to volunteer their weapons for testing by OSBI. These tactics, while they may have been the only option for the OSBI, skirt on the edge of Oklahoma laws and individuals rights. In particular laws that prevent Oklahoma from maintaining a list of registered gun owners etc.
Individuals who either ignored or did not comply with the original request are now reprieving letters requesting compliance. The OSBI, should take note that individuals may ignore these requests based on the 5th amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution.
Hopefully this crime will be solved by OSBI without further trampling of individual gun owners rights.
Related posts
About (0)
Positive Gun Story… (0)
Assault Weapons Ban Confusion (0)
Man arrested carrying weapons at hotel where Speaker Pelosi was staying. (0)
California attempts to create another felon (0)
- Heller Kitty Rifle
I decided to investigate this confusion and came to the found the following:
The EXPIRED (1994-Sept 2004 enforcement period) assault weapons ban (officially know as, Federal Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) had the following restrictions:
The Federal Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 specifically prohibited manufacture and sale of:
- Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models)
- Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil
- Beretta Ar70 (SC-70)
- Colt AR-15
- Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC
- SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12
- Steyr AUG
- INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22
- revolving cylinder shotguns, such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12
In addition, the bill banned any semi-automatic rifle that can accept a detachable magazine and that also has at least two of the following characteristics:
- a folding or telescoping stock
- a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon
- a bayonet mount
- a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor
- a grenade launcher;
The bill banned any semi-automatic pistol that can accept a detachable magazine that also has at least two of the following characteristics:
- an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip
- a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer
- a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the
- nontrigger hand without being burned
- a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded;
- a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm
- Finally, the bill banned any semi-automatic shotgun has at least two of the following characteristics:
- a folding or telescoping stock
- a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon
- a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds
- an ability to accept a detachable magazine
It should be noted although the Federal ban expired in September 2004, Certain states have maintained restrictions on “assault” type weapons.
Info from NRA (Pre-Heller):
“Assault weapons” are prohibited in Connecticut, New Jersey and New York. Some local jurisdictions in Ohio also ban “assault weapons.” Hawaii prohibits “assault pistols.” California bans “assault weapons”, .50BMG caliber firearms, some .50 caliber ammunition and “unsafe handguns.” Illinois: Chicago, Evanston, Oak Park, Morton Grove, Winnetka, Wilmette, and Highland Park prohibit handguns; some cities prohibit other kinds of firearms. Maryland prohibits “assault pistols”; the sale or manufacture of any handgun manufactured after Jan. 1, 1985, that does not appear on the Handgun Roster; and the sale of any handgun manufactured after January 1, 2003 that is not equipped with an “integrated mechanical safety device.” Massachusetts: It is unlawful to sell, transfer or possess “any assault weapon or large capacity feeding device” [more than 10 rounds] that was not legally possessed on September 13, 1994 and the sale of handguns not on the Firearms Roster. The City of Boston has a separate “assault weapons” law. The District of Columbia prohibits new acquisition of handguns and any semi-automatic firearm capable of using a detachable ammunition magazine of more than 12 rounds capacity and any handgun not registered after February 5, 1977. Virginia prohibits “Street Sweeper” shotguns. (With respect to some of these laws and ordinances, individuals may retain prohibited firearms owned previously, with certain restrictions.) The sunset of the federal assault weapons ban does not affect the validity of state and local “assault weapons” bans.
The states and cities that maintained parts of the ban have caused this ban to live on. Thus the root of the pre-ban / post-ban confusion. Luckily this ban is only in certain geographic areas which have been anti-gun for some time. Perhaps with some more time and decisions out of the Supreme Court, we can get back to normal.
Related posts
Assault Weapons Education (1)
Ammunition Accountability (2)
Another one Bites the Dust (0)
Heller yeah… (0)
About (0)
There are many who think an armed citizen is a bad thing. There are an equal if not greater number of people who thing an armed citizen is a good thing. Browsing around the Internet I found an interesting perspective from a law enforcement officer.
Excerpt from Cowtown Cop
CCW permits from a law enforcement perspective
As a law enforcement professional I strongly support the right of a citizen to carry a firearm for protection of themselves and others. I believe that this is not only a right but a responsibility that should be taken very seriously. You are ultimately responsible for the safety of yourself and your family.
…
Imagine the relief when the driver hands you a drivers license and a CCW permit. Those two things tell you a lot about a person. One, I can know for certain who this person is and two, this person has subjected themselves to a criminal background check and the State has said yes, we trust you with a concealed weapon. This is probably not a bad guy here.
Related posts
Assault Weapons Ban Confusion (0)
The 5th Amendment rights vs. police investigations (0)
Man arrested carrying weapons at hotel where Speaker Pelosi was staying. (0)
Department of Interior Announces Final Firearms Policy Update (0)
About (0)
