bearingarms--2020-10-06--Is Right To Armed Self-Defense Obsolete?

Even most anti-gunners I ’ ve interacted with agree that people have a right to defend themselves .
They may have strange ideas as to what that may or may not entail–ideas often born out of ignorance , either willfully held or not–but they tend to accept we have a right to defend ourselves .
On some level , most of them don ’ t argue that we have a right to use weapons to defend that life , though some think we should use a bad or knife or something .
However , it seems that many people believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Gun control advocates argue that to the extent the Second Amendment ’ s right to keep and bear arms was meant to ensure people can defend themselves , that concern is anachronistic in modern times when we have professional police .
I couldn ’ t help but notice that this past Summer the police , often on direct orders from mayor and public safety chiefs , often stood by while looting and rioting gripped American cities .
This abdication of basic policing responsibilities rather weakens the argument that people should just rely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defund the police .
So I decided to write an article about it , which is forthcoming in the Georgetown Journal of Law and Public Policy .
In the article , I describe the argument that the right to armed self-defense is obsolete , go into the most detail of anything published thus far about this past Summer ’ s violence and the anemic law enforcement response , and then provide examples of individuals and groups that countered the violence with armed self-defense .
David Bernstein , who wrote the above , makes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ difference between peaceful protestors and those who perpetrated violence on our cities ’ streets .
I tend to believe that if the protestors had a problem with violence , they should have either left or stopped it , but I don ’ t know that Bernstein and I disagree on that .
Not that it matters , of course .
At the end of the day , though , I ’ m more worked up by the idea that anyone can seriously think that armed self-defense is an outdated and obsolete concept .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ at Bearing Arms , you ’ ll find countless examples of armed citizens defending either their life or the life of another with their weapons .
Each of these corresponds to a situation where someone would likely be either killed or seriously injured had armed self-defense not have taken place .
To call such a concept obsolete is to completely ignore the myriad of examples that we have showing that armed self-defense is still needed .
I ’ m honestly baffled that anyone could seriously argue that it ’ s not needed .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ who want to make a duty to retreat the law of the land , or who want to hamstring citizens who opt to carry a gun to defend human life , either .
Even most of those who advance those issues don ’ t try to argue the right to self-defense with a weapon is obsolete .
I suppose they might think it , but they know better than to make that claim in anything approaching a serious manner .
The question I have is just how prevalent is that thinking ?
With @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because if it does , we ’ re in for difficult times ahead .
And let ’ s be honest , stupid ideas leave academia all the time .

Even most anti-gunners I’ve interacted with agree that people have a right to defend themselves. They may have strange ideas as to what that may or may not entail–ideas often born out of ignorance, either willfully held or not–but they tend to accept we have a right to defend ourselves. On some level, most of them don’t argue that we have a right to use weapons to defend that life, though some think we should use a bad or knife or something.
However, it seems that many people believe the right to armed self-defense is obsolete.
Gun control advocates argue that to the extent the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms was meant to ensure people can defend themselves, that concern is anachronistic in modern times when we have professional police. I couldn’t help but notice that this past Summer the police, often on direct orders from mayor and public safety chiefs, often stood by while looting and rioting gripped American cities. This abdication of basic policing responsibilities rather weakens the argument that people should just rely on police, as do calls to defund the police. So I decided to write an article about it, which is forthcoming in the Georgetown Journal of Law and Public Policy. In the article, I describe the argument that the right to armed self-defense is obsolete, go into the most detail of anything published thus far about this past Summer’s violence and the anemic law enforcement response, and then provide examples of individuals and groups that countered the violence with armed self-defense.
David Bernstein, who wrote the above, makes care to note that there is a difference between peaceful protestors and those who perpetrated violence on our cities’ streets. I tend to believe that if the protestors had a problem with violence, they should have either left or stopped it, but I don’t know that Bernstein and I disagree on that.
Not that it matters, of course.
At the end of the day, though, I’m more worked up by the idea that anyone can seriously think that armed self-defense is an outdated and obsolete concept.
If you look through the archives here at Bearing Arms, you’ll find countless examples of armed citizens defending either their life or the life of another with their weapons. Each of these corresponds to a situation where someone would likely be either killed or seriously injured had armed self-defense not have taken place.
To call such a concept obsolete is to completely ignore the myriad of examples that we have showing that armed self-defense is still needed. I’m honestly baffled that anyone could seriously argue that it’s not needed.
I’m not talking about those who want to make a duty to retreat the law of the land, or who want to hamstring citizens who opt to carry a gun to defend human life, either. Even most of those who advance those issues don’t try to argue the right to self-defense with a weapon is obsolete. I suppose they might think it, but they know better than to make that claim in anything approaching a serious manner.
The question I have is just how prevalent is that thinking? With luck, it never leave academia, because if it does, we’re in for difficult times ahead.
And let’s be honest, stupid ideas leave academia all the time.


bearingarms--2020-10-06--Breaking: McCloskeys Indicted On Felony Charges

Word broke late Tuesday that Mark and Patricia McCloskey , the St. Louis couple who became national news after they displayed firearms and pointed them at protesters who had trespassed into their private street during a march back in June , have been indicted by a grand jury in St. Louis , Missouri .
According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch , the couple aren ’ t just facing felony charges of unlawful use of a weapon , but are also accused of tampering with evidence .
Lawyer Joel Schwartz said he was told a grand jury indicted his clients on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weapon and evidence tampering .
He said he had no details .
A St. Louis court clerk said the indictment was filed Tuesday but that she was not authorized to provide a copy .
“ I am not surprised that the grand jury indicted them but I ’ ll certainly be interested in what was presented to the grand jury , ” said Schwartz , who plans to request a transcript or recording of the proceedings if such records were made .
A spokeswoman for Circuit Attorney Kimberly M. Gardner could not be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Louis judge postponed the McCloskeys ’ morning court appearance until next Wednesday .
I ’ ll be very curious to see the allegations of evidence tampering , given that even St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner hadn ’ t publicly accused the couple of that particular crime .
Instead , it was Gardner ’ s office that was accused of taking apart and reassembling the gun wielded by Patricia McCloskey in an attempt to show that it was “ readily capable of lethal use.
” It could be that the evidence tampering charge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we ’ ll have to wait until the indictment is unsealed to know for certain .
In the meantime , the formal indictment now puts Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt back in the spotlight .
Back in July , Schmitt filed a motion to intervene in the case , calling the prosecution of the couple “ extraordinary ” and arguing that the state ’ s Castle Doctrine protected the actions of the couple .
Missouri Governor Brad Parson has also stated that he would pardon the pair if they ’ re convicted in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Parson up for re-election in November , there ’ s no guarantee that either will be in office when and if the case against the McCloskeys go to trial .
Next month ’ s election , which is already a high stakes contest for gun owners across the country , just got even more important for the McCloskeys themselves .

Word broke late Tuesday that Mark and Patricia McCloskey, the St. Louis couple who became national news after they displayed firearms and pointed them at protesters who had trespassed into their private street during a march back in June, have been indicted by a grand jury in St. Louis, Missouri.
According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the couple aren’t just facing felony charges of unlawful use of a weapon, but are also accused of tampering with evidence.
Lawyer Joel Schwartz said he was told a grand jury indicted his clients on felony counts of unlawful use of a weapon and evidence tampering. He said he had no details. A St. Louis court clerk said the indictment was filed Tuesday but that she was not authorized to provide a copy. “I am not surprised that the grand jury indicted them but I’ll certainly be interested in what was presented to the grand jury,” said Schwartz, who plans to request a transcript or recording of the proceedings if such records were made. A spokeswoman for Circuit Attorney Kimberly M. Gardner could not be reached. Earlier Tuesday, a St. Louis judge postponed the McCloskeys’ morning court appearance until next Wednesday.
I’ll be very curious to see the allegations of evidence tampering, given that even St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner hadn’t publicly accused the couple of that particular crime. Instead, it was Gardner’s office that was accused of taking apart and reassembling the gun wielded by Patricia McCloskey in an attempt to show that it was “readily capable of lethal use.”
Assistant Circuit Attorney Chris Hinckley ordered crime lab staff members to field strip the handgun and found it had been assembled incorrectly. Specifically, the firing pin spring was put in front of the firing pin, which was backward, and made the gun incapable of firing, according to documents obtained by 5 On Your Side. Firearms experts then put the gun back together in the correct order and test-fired it, finding that it worked, according to the documents. Crime lab workers photographed the disassembly and reassembly of the gun, according to the documents. Patricia McCloskey and her husband, Mark McCloskey, have said the handgun Patricia McCloskey waved at protesters was inoperable because they had used it as a prop during a lawsuit they once filed against a gun manufacturer. In order to bring it into a courtroom, they made it inoperable. Their attorney, Joel Schwartz, confirmed to 5 On Your Side that the McCloskeys intentionally misplaced the firing pin on the gun and that it was in that condition when Patricia McCloskey waved it at protesters and turned it into their former attorney Al Watkins. “It’s disheartening to learn that a law enforcement agency altered evidence in order to prosecute an innocent member of the community,” Schwartz said.
It could be that the evidence tampering charge is related to that firearm, but we’ll have to wait until the indictment is unsealed to know for certain.
In the meantime, the formal indictment now puts Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt back in the spotlight. Back in July, Schmitt filed a motion to intervene in the case, calling the prosecution of the couple “extraordinary” and arguing that the state’s Castle Doctrine protected the actions of the couple. Missouri Governor Brad Parson has also stated that he would pardon the pair if they’re convicted in the case, but with both Schmitt and Parson up for re-election in November, there’s no guarantee that either will be in office when and if the case against the McCloskeys go to trial. Next month’s election, which is already a high stakes contest for gun owners across the country, just got even more important for the McCloskeys themselves.


bearingarms--2020-10-06--Can Rural PA Swing The Keystone State For Trump?

A new Monmouth University poll of Pennsylvania has Joe Biden up by twelve points over President Donald Trump , but New York Post and Washington Examiner columnist Salena Zito tells me that the Keystone State is still up for grabs .
Zito sat down with me for a few minutes on Tuesday to talk about how the elections are shaping up across the state , including in southwestern Pennsylvania , where a number of local officials have recently left the Democratic Party and have joined the GOP .
As Zito explains in her latest column , a number of counties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually seen huge growth in the number of registered Republicans over the past ten years .
In 2008 , there were nearly double the number of registered Democrats over Republicans in Westmoreland County and James Albert was one of them .
He had already been elected district judge as a Democrat for over a dozen years , and he would vote for Barack Obama that cycle and again in 2012 .
Albert first served his community as a local police officer , and then as a county detective and a deputy sheriff before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out of retirement this past year and won the race for sheriff as a Democrat .
Now there are more registered Republicans in Westmoreland County , and Albert is one of them .
It is a decision he says he took seriously as he watched his party of birth leave less room for his pro-life and pro-Second Amendment values with each passing year .
When the party started walking away from supporting law enforcement , Albert had had enough .
“ What really convinced me , ” he says , “ was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ witnessed these riots where we saw the looting of businesses or arson attacks or the destruction of property , as well as assaults on innocent citizens and attacks on law enforcement … Then , David Dorn was killed.
” Dorn , a retired police officer , was fatally shot during looting in St. Louis in June .
Albert ’ s not alone .
Fayette County Sheriff Mike Custer also recently switched his party affiliation , though he admitted to Zito that the last time he voted Democrat in a presidential election was when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Zito says the erosion of support for the Democratic Party in Pennsylvania ’ s pro-gun coal country is real , and it could be the difference between victory and defeat for the Trump campaign .
The calculation Biden seems to be making is the same one Hillary Clinton made in 2016 : Run up the numbers in Philadelphia and suburban collar counties , plus Allegheny County , and hope the rural vote remains unenthused .
Those areas are more populated , but you never really know how many Alberts and Custers out there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how many pro-meteor people are going to stay home .
To be sure , Zito isn ’ t predicting that Trump will be able to pull it off , but if he does win the state of Pennsylvania ( something that Zito believes we won ’ t likely know until close to Thanksgiving ) , he ’ ll have gun owners in small towns and rural parts of the state to thank .
Cam Edwards has covered the 2nd Amendment for more than 15 years as a broadcast and online journalist , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lifting : Grow Up , Get a Job , Start a Family , and Other Manly Advice '' with Jim Geraghty .
He lives outside of Farmville , Virginia with his family .

A new Monmouth University poll of Pennsylvania has Joe Biden up by twelve points over President Donald Trump, but New York Post and Washington Examiner columnist Salena Zito tells me that the Keystone State is still up for grabs. Zito sat down with me for a few minutes on Tuesday to talk about how the elections are shaping up across the state, including in southwestern Pennsylvania, where a number of local officials have recently left the Democratic Party and have joined the GOP.
As Zito explains in her latest column, a number of counties in that part of the state have actually seen huge growth in the number of registered Republicans over the past ten years.
In 2008, there were nearly double the number of registered Democrats over Republicans in Westmoreland County and James Albert was one of them. He had already been elected district judge as a Democrat for over a dozen years, and he would vote for Barack Obama that cycle and again in 2012. Albert first served his community as a local police officer, and then as a county detective and a deputy sheriff before running for district judge. He came out of retirement this past year and won the race for sheriff as a Democrat. Now there are more registered Republicans in Westmoreland County, and Albert is one of them. It is a decision he says he took seriously as he watched his party of birth leave less room for his pro-life and pro-Second Amendment values with each passing year. When the party started walking away from supporting law enforcement, Albert had had enough. “What really convinced me,” he says, “was the past few months as the country has witnessed these riots where we saw the looting of businesses or arson attacks or the destruction of property, as well as assaults on innocent citizens and attacks on law enforcement … Then, David Dorn was killed.” Dorn, a retired police officer, was fatally shot during looting in St. Louis in June.
Albert’s not alone. Fayette County Sheriff Mike Custer also recently switched his party affiliation, though he admitted to Zito that the last time he voted Democrat in a presidential election was when Bill Clinton was running. Still, Zito says the erosion of support for the Democratic Party in Pennsylvania’s pro-gun coal country is real, and it could be the difference between victory and defeat for the Trump campaign.
The calculation Biden seems to be making is the same one Hillary Clinton made in 2016: Run up the numbers in Philadelphia and suburban collar counties, plus Allegheny County, and hope the rural vote remains unenthused. Those areas are more populated, but you never really know how many Alberts and Custers out there are going to show up — or how many pro-meteor people are going to stay home.
To be sure, Zito isn’t predicting that Trump will be able to pull it off, but if he does win the state of Pennsylvania (something that Zito believes we won’t likely know until close to Thanksgiving), he’ll have gun owners in small towns and rural parts of the state to thank.


bearingarms--2020-10-06--The Right To Carry Revolution Nears The 20-Million Mark

As Americans have embraced their Second Amendment rights by the millions this year , the number of concealed carry holders has grown as well , though not as quickly as you might think .
According to the latest figures from the Crime Prevention Research Center , there are now 19.48-million Americans with their concealed carry license , which is up 4.4 % compared to 2019 .
Dr. John Lott , the founder and president of the CPRC , joins me on today ’ s Bearing Arms ’ Cam & Co. to crunch the numbers , starting with the fact that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or just a hair below if it weren ’ t for the fact that many jurisdictions have either restricted the ability to apply for a concealed carry license or stopped accepting applications altogether over the past few months .
As I noted earlier today , residents in Pittsburgh , PA are currently being told that they can apply for their license in March of 2021 , while Philly residents are facing a year-long wait to exercise their right to bear arms .
Lott says that the growing number of constitutional or permitless carry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impact on the number of concealed carry licensees .
The CPRC reports that the number of residents in Arkansas and Oklahoma who are licensed to carry is now less than 10 % of residents , which Lott attributes to the fact that a license to carry is no longer needed in those states ( though residents wanting to carry in most other states will still need a concealed carry license that ’ s recognized ) .
Despite those factors , the number of concealed carry holders still grew by about 820,000 people over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CPRC ’ s research , and Lott says that five states ( Alabama , Florida , Georgia , Pennsylvania , and Texas ) now have more than 1-million license holders .
In fact Florida now has more than 2-million concealed carry holders , and it ’ s worth noting that since the state adopted “ shall issue ” concealed carry in 1987 , the state ’ s violent crime rate has declined by almost 66 % ; from 1,024 violent crimes per 100k people to 378 violent crimes per 100k in 2019 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ dropped dramatically ; in 1987 it stood at 11.4 per 100k , while in 2019 it was 5.2 per 100k .
Lott also notes that in states that keep track of the demographics of concealed carry holders , women now make up 26.4 % of all licensees , and in the seven states that have data dating back to 2012 , the number of female license holders has grown more than 100 % faster than the number of men who are licensed to carry .
The increasing diversity of concealed carry holders is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that have detailed data on the race and gender of license holders .
In Texas , Lott says the number of black women who obtained their concealed carry license between 2002 and 2019 grew nearly 400 % compared to white males .
Data from Oklahoma data during the same time period indicates that the increase of licenses received by Asians and American Indians was more than twice the rate for white residents .
Be sure to check out the entire interview with Dr. Lott above , which also touches on his new op/ed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ war on the firearms industry that Democrats are likely to wage if they take control of the White House and Congress in the November elections .
And stick around after the interview for more news , including an armed citizen in South Carolina who defended himself from a trio of home invaders , and a suspected looter in Chicago who was out on probation for a gun offense when he allegedly helped to break into and steal from seven different stores back in early August .

As Americans have embraced their Second Amendment rights by the millions this year, the number of concealed carry holders has grown as well, though not as quickly as you might think. According to the latest figures from the Crime Prevention Research Center, there are now 19.48-million Americans with their concealed carry license, which is up 4.4% compared to 2019.
Dr. John Lott, the founder and president of the CPRC, joins me on today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co. to crunch the numbers, starting with the fact that we’d likely be at 20-million or just a hair below if it weren’t for the fact that many jurisdictions have either restricted the ability to apply for a concealed carry license or stopped accepting applications altogether over the past few months. As I noted earlier today, residents in Pittsburgh, PA are currently being told that they can apply for their license in March of 2021, while Philly residents are facing a year-long wait to exercise their right to bear arms.
Lott says that the growing number of constitutional or permitless carry states is also beginning to have an impact on the number of concealed carry licensees. The CPRC reports that the number of residents in Arkansas and Oklahoma who are licensed to carry is now less than 10% of residents, which Lott attributes to the fact that a license to carry is no longer needed in those states (though residents wanting to carry in most other states will still need a concealed carry license that’s recognized).
Despite those factors, the number of concealed carry holders still grew by about 820,000 people over the last year, according to the CPRC’s research, and Lott says that five states (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Texas) now have more than 1-million license holders. In fact Florida now has more than 2-million concealed carry holders, and it’s worth noting that since the state adopted “shall issue” concealed carry in 1987, the state’s violent crime rate has declined by almost 66%; from 1,024 violent crimes per 100k people to 378 violent crimes per 100k in 2019. Florida’s homicide rate has also dropped dramatically; in 1987 it stood at 11.4 per 100k, while in 2019 it was 5.2 per 100k.
Lott also notes that in states that keep track of the demographics of concealed carry holders, women now make up 26.4% of all licensees, and in the seven states that have data dating back to 2012, the number of female license holders has grown more than 100% faster than the number of men who are licensed to carry.
The increasing diversity of concealed carry holders is also borne out by statistics in states that have detailed data on the race and gender of license holders. In Texas, Lott says the number of black women who obtained their concealed carry license between 2002 and 2019 grew nearly 400% compared to white males. Data from Oklahoma data during the same time period indicates that the increase of licenses received by Asians and American Indians was more than twice the rate for white residents.
Be sure to check out the entire interview with Dr. Lott above, which also touches on his new op/ed in the Wall Street Journal on the war on the firearms industry that Democrats are likely to wage if they take control of the White House and Congress in the November elections. And stick around after the interview for more news, including an armed citizen in South Carolina who defended himself from a trio of home invaders, and a suspected looter in Chicago who was out on probation for a gun offense when he allegedly helped to break into and steal from seven different stores back in early August.


bearingarms--2020-10-06--NSSF Issues Stern Warning Regarding Biden Presidency

By now , it ’ s safe to say that very few Bearing Arms readers are fans of Joe Biden .
I ’ m sure there are a couple here and there , of course , but half of them are trying to find stuff to complain about on leftist sites while the other half might be pro-gun .
And I ’ m not convinced most of the pro-gun Democrats are fans of Biden .
We know that Biden is bad for guns .
The NRA issued their own warning last week .
They weren ’ t the only ones @ @ @ @ @ @ @ association for the firearm industry , is shining a spotlight on former Vice President Joe Biden ’ s radical antigun campaign promise to end gun sales as America knows it .
His far-left driven agenda would end Second Amendment rights to lawfully acquire , keep and bear firearms by individuals by dismantling the Constitutionally-protected commerce in arms .
“ The single greatest threat to gun rights in America is Joe Biden .
The single greatest safeguard against his agenda is an educated and engaged voter in the voting booth , ” said Lawrence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and General Counsel .
“ Joe Biden blatantly called the firearm industry ‘ the enemy ’ from the debate stage .
His agenda to restrict the lawful means for Americans to exercise their Second Amendment right is a grave danger to our God-given rights and our civil liberties .
All Americans must understand the unconstitutional overreach he would enact to obliterate firearm businesses across America.
” The Biden-Harris gun control agenda would stamp out firearm retailers and deny their customers the ability to shop online and purchase firearms , which can only be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a face-to-face transaction after a mandatory FBI background check .
A Biden-Harris administration would end the online sale of ammunition and all gun parts , eliminating the right Americans have enjoyed since the founding of our nation to make and assemble their own firearm .
They claim to support “ gun safety ” but want to make it difficult for gun owners to repair their firearms .
Lastly , Biden and running mate U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris ( D-Calif. ) would ration the exercise of the Second Amendment by restricting law abiding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ month .
This is a constraint of which has never been considered – and would never be tolerated – for any individual right contained in the Bill of Rights .
More than 5 million Americans purchased a firearm for the first time in 2020 , based on a NSSF retailer survey .
Fully 40 percent of these new gun owners are women .
The largest increase of any demographic is among African-Americans , which skyrocketed 58 percent over 2019 .
To date , more than 13.8 million background checks have been completed for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2019 ’ s full-year total of nearly 13.2 million .
NSSF strongly opposes these unconstitutional proposals of the Biden-Harris campaign and encourages all Americans to vote on Election Day to protect their Second Amendment rights .
Of course , the Biden-Harris anti-gun agenda is beyond a radical attempt to squelch our right to keep and bear arms .
It simply must be opposed with every fiber of our being , and we must unite to stand against this threat .
And yes , Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are a threat .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s time to rally together and put an end to this threat by handing them a convincing defeat in November , sending everyone a message that our gun rights aren ’ t up for negotiation .

By now, it’s safe to say that very few Bearing Arms readers are fans of Joe Biden. I’m sure there are a couple here and there, of course, but half of them are trying to find stuff to complain about on leftist sites while the other half might be pro-gun.
And I’m not convinced most of the pro-gun Democrats are fans of Biden.
We know that Biden is bad for guns. The NRA issued their own warning last week.
They weren’t the only ones, either.
NSSF®, the trade association for the firearm industry, is shining a spotlight on former Vice President Joe Biden’s radical antigun campaign promise to end gun sales as America knows it. His far-left driven agenda would end Second Amendment rights to lawfully acquire, keep and bear firearms by individuals by dismantling the Constitutionally-protected commerce in arms. “The single greatest threat to gun rights in America is Joe Biden. The single greatest safeguard against his agenda is an educated and engaged voter in the voting booth,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “Joe Biden blatantly called the firearm industry ‘the enemy’ from the debate stage. His agenda to restrict the lawful means for Americans to exercise their Second Amendment right is a grave danger to our God-given rights and our civil liberties. All Americans must understand the unconstitutional overreach he would enact to obliterate firearm businesses across America.” The Biden-Harris gun control agenda would stamp out firearm retailers and deny their customers the ability to shop online and purchase firearms, which can only be transferred by the retailer to the customer in a face-to-face transaction after a mandatory FBI background check. A Biden-Harris administration would end the online sale of ammunition and all gun parts, eliminating the right Americans have enjoyed since the founding of our nation to make and assemble their own firearm. They claim to support “gun safety” but want to make it difficult for gun owners to repair their firearms. Lastly, Biden and running mate U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) would ration the exercise of the Second Amendment by restricting law abiding Americans to purchasing just one firearm a month. This is a constraint of which has never been considered – and would never be tolerated – for any individual right contained in the Bill of Rights. More than 5 million Americans purchased a firearm for the first time in 2020, based on a NSSF retailer survey. Fully 40 percent of these new gun owners are women. The largest increase of any demographic is among African-Americans, which skyrocketed 58 percent over 2019. To date, more than 13.8 million background checks have been completed for the sale of a firearm, surpassing 2019’s full-year total of nearly 13.2 million. NSSF strongly opposes these unconstitutional proposals of the Biden-Harris campaign and encourages all Americans to vote on Election Day to protect their Second Amendment rights.
Of course, the Biden-Harris anti-gun agenda is beyond a radical attempt to squelch our right to keep and bear arms. It simply must be opposed with every fiber of our being, and we must unite to stand against this threat.
And yes, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are a threat. That word was not chosen lightly.
It’s time to rally together and put an end to this threat by handing them a convincing defeat in November, sending everyone a message that our gun rights aren’t up for negotiation.


bearingarms--2020-10-06--Why Anti-Gunners Need The Dead To Speak For Them

As Cam noted on Monday , anti-gunners are using computer generated video of a slain student from Parkland to call for new gun control .
While the technology is new , the overall attempt isn ’ t treading new ground in the least .
See , anti-gunners have tried to use the slain to speak for them before .
How many times have anti-gunners trotted out the bereaved parent of a slain young person to tell us all about how their loved one would still be alive if not for the evils of gun ownership .
They ’ ll claim @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gun control if they still could .
But the question is , just why do anti-gunners invoke the dead to speak for them ?
The answer is simple .
The truth of the matter is that they need the visceral emotion more than anything else .
A parent talking about their child or the AI version of that child speaking out about the evils of gun ownership becomes essential because they know every parent fears losing their child on some level .
They ’ re terrified of it , so they speak to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fear and trigger the parental desire to protect our children .
They use emotion because , at the end of the day , they don ’ t really have anything more .
Oh , they have their “ studies ” that claim gun control works , but they know that we can poke so many holes in those studies that they ’ re completely ineffective at swaying people .
The same is true of many of their other arguments , all predicated on ideas that are just as easily dispelled and debunked .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And , to be fair , emotion is a vital trigger .
It ’ s one of the key ways we , as humans , make decisions .
Our emotions evolved so as to help guide our movements .
We feel fear because fear is a warning not to do something stupid , for example .
Anti-gunners play on that , try to capitalize on that , all in an attempt to create that visceral , primate-driven fear and use it to direct you to vote a certain way .
The problem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ goes so far .
After all , if someone can play on one ’ s emotions , then emotions are an unreliable determiner of the correct course of action in this day and age .
For example , fear led to herding Japanese-Americans into interment camps during World War II .
Fear led to things like lynchings and murders during the Civil Rights movement .
Fear has led to countless atrocities throughout the world .
Yet despite that , the anti-gun camp continues to try to use that fear , even going so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They want you to think about what it would be like to lose your child , but they only want you to think about it their way .
What they don ’ t want you to ask about is whether any of the teachers are Parkland would have been willing to carry a gun if allowed .
They don ’ t want you to think about why the Broward County Sheriff ’ s Office failed to prosecute the shooter in any of the numerous interactions they had with him .
They don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ someone who was obviously violent was even allowed to attend that school in the first place .
They want you afraid , but they don ’ t want you to think for yourself , otherwise you might reach the wrong conclusion , so they have their digital ghost tell you exactly what to think .
And they ’ ll do this over and over again because , at the end of the day , it ’ s all they ’ ve got .

As Cam noted on Monday, anti-gunners are using computer generated video of a slain student from Parkland to call for new gun control. While the technology is new, the overall attempt isn’t treading new ground in the least.
See, anti-gunners have tried to use the slain to speak for them before.
How many times have anti-gunners trotted out the bereaved parent of a slain young person to tell us all about how their loved one would still be alive if not for the evils of gun ownership. They’ll claim their child/wife/husband/whatever would ask us to enact gun control if they still could.
But the question is, just why do anti-gunners invoke the dead to speak for them?
The answer is simple. The truth of the matter is that they need the visceral emotion more than anything else.
A parent talking about their child or the AI version of that child speaking out about the evils of gun ownership becomes essential because they know every parent fears losing their child on some level. They’re terrified of it, so they speak to that fear, hoping to invoke that fear and trigger the parental desire to protect our children.
They use emotion because, at the end of the day, they don’t really have anything more.
Oh, they have their “studies” that claim gun control works, but they know that we can poke so many holes in those studies that they’re completely ineffective at swaying people. The same is true of many of their other arguments, all predicated on ideas that are just as easily dispelled and debunked.
So, that leaves them with emotion.
And, to be fair, emotion is a vital trigger. It’s one of the key ways we, as humans, make decisions. Our emotions evolved so as to help guide our movements. We feel fear because fear is a warning not to do something stupid, for example.
Anti-gunners play on that, try to capitalize on that, all in an attempt to create that visceral, primate-driven fear and use it to direct you to vote a certain way.
The problem, though, is that emotion only goes so far. After all, if someone can play on one’s emotions, then emotions are an unreliable determiner of the correct course of action in this day and age.
For example, fear led to herding Japanese-Americans into interment camps during World War II. Fear led to things like lynchings and murders during the Civil Rights movement. Fear has led to countless atrocities throughout the world.
Yet despite that, the anti-gun camp continues to try to use that fear, even going so far as to digitally resurrect the dead. They want you to think about what it would be like to lose your child, but they only want you to think about it their way.
What they don’t want you to ask about is whether any of the teachers are Parkland would have been willing to carry a gun if allowed. They don’t want you to think about why the Broward County Sheriff’s Office failed to prosecute the shooter in any of the numerous interactions they had with him. They don’t want you to question why someone who was obviously violent was even allowed to attend that school in the first place.
They want you afraid, but they don’t want you to think for yourself, otherwise you might reach the wrong conclusion, so they have their digital ghost tell you exactly what to think.
And they’ll do this over and over again because, at the end of the day, it’s all they’ve got.


bearingarms--2020-10-06--2A Festival Set To Draw Thousands To PA Town

Despite Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf ’ s directive that outdoor events in the state limit capacity to 250 people , a pro-Second Amendment festival is expected to bring in as many as 10,000 people to the small town of Greeley this weekend .
The Rod of Iron Freedom Festival drew 4,000 attendees last year , and organizers expect that number to double thanks to the impending election and the surge in interest in the right to keep and bear arms .
The festival itself will be held on the grounds of Kahr Arms , which offers plenty of space for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Regis Hanna says they ’ re taking steps to ensure that attendees are safe .
Organizers tout the open-carry event as a family-friendly gathering featuring patriotic displays , food and merchandise vendors and various activities , including educational seminars , self defense demonstrations , live music and a fireworks display .
The American Veterans Traveling Tribute wall will also be on display .
Hanna acknowledged the festival likely will exceed crowd size limits Wolf instituted to guard against the spread of COVID-19 .
In a statement , Justin Moon , chief executive officer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will follow safety regulations and encourage people to practice social distancing and avoid congregating in one area .
Moon did not say whether masks will be required .
Hanna thinks masks will be optional .
He said he does not believe there is any health threat because the gun shop is very large , allowing for spacing among attendees and many of the events are located outside .
The crowd also will be spread out throughout the day .
“ It ’ s not like 2,000 people are going to march in on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said .
“ There is a constant flow of people coming and going.
” As for enforcing the governor ’ s directive on outdoor crowds , local authorities say it ’ s not up to them .
Pike County Commissioner Ron Schmalze said the county is aware of the festival , but has no authority to regulate it .
“ We try to do everything in the county to comply with the governor ’ s orders , ” he said .
“ I wish we could do something but I don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If Schmalze really wanted to force the issue he could always ask the Pike County sheriff to police the festival and issue citations if the crowd grows larger than 250 people , but I suspect that would create a fierce pushback from locals .
It ’ s also possible that Gov .
Wolf could ask the state police to take a ride over to Greeley this weekend to enforce his directive , but that too comes with a political risk in the battleground state .
Of course Wolf , who ’ s no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that it ’ s worth the risk in order to look tough on enforcing his own directives .
Given the fact that the governor has allowed thousands of demonstrators and protesters , some of them violent , to take to crowded city streets in Philadelphia , Pittsburgh , Harrisburg , and Lancaster over the past few months , organizers of the Rod of Iron festival could plausibly argue that they ’ re being targeted and singled out for their support for the Second Amendment .
I think we ’ re more likely to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ criticizing the decision to hold the festival , but I doubt that the governor will do much more than that .
Whether the festival will actually draw 10,000 people to the eastern Pennsylvania town remains to be seen as well , but it looks like the weather will be perfect in Greeley this weekend , and I expect a big turnout .
For more information on the festival itself , you can check out the Rod of Iron Freedom Festival website here , which includes a list of speakers and seminars that will @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Despite Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf’s directive that outdoor events in the state limit capacity to 250 people, a pro-Second Amendment festival is expected to bring in as many as 10,000 people to the small town of Greeley this weekend. The Rod of Iron Freedom Festival drew 4,000 attendees last year, and organizers expect that number to double thanks to the impending election and the surge in interest in the right to keep and bear arms.
The festival itself will be held on the grounds of Kahr Arms, which offers plenty of space for people to roam, and festival spokesman Regis Hanna says they’re taking steps to ensure that attendees are safe.
Organizers tout the open-carry event as a family-friendly gathering featuring patriotic displays, food and merchandise vendors and various activities, including educational seminars, self defense demonstrations, live music and a fireworks display. The American Veterans Traveling Tribute wall will also be on display. Hanna acknowledged the festival likely will exceed crowd size limits Wolf instituted to guard against the spread of COVID-19. In a statement, Justin Moon, chief executive officer of Kahr Arms, said the festival will follow safety regulations and encourage people to practice social distancing and avoid congregating in one area. Moon did not say whether masks will be required. Hanna thinks masks will be optional. He said he does not believe there is any health threat because the gun shop is very large, allowing for spacing among attendees and many of the events are located outside. The crowd also will be spread out throughout the day. “It’s not like 2,000 people are going to march in on Saturday and stay all day,” he said. “There is a constant flow of people coming and going.”
As for enforcing the governor’s directive on outdoor crowds, local authorities say it’s not up to them.
Pike County Commissioner Ron Schmalze said the county is aware of the festival, but has no authority to regulate it. “We try to do everything in the county to comply with the governor’s orders,” he said. “I wish we could do something but I don’t believe we have any authority.”
If Schmalze really wanted to force the issue he could always ask the Pike County sheriff to police the festival and issue citations if the crowd grows larger than 250 people, but I suspect that would create a fierce pushback from locals. It’s also possible that Gov. Wolf could ask the state police to take a ride over to Greeley this weekend to enforce his directive, but that too comes with a political risk in the battleground state.
Of course Wolf, who’s no friend to gun owners, may decide that it’s worth the risk in order to look tough on enforcing his own directives. Given the fact that the governor has allowed thousands of demonstrators and protesters, some of them violent, to take to crowded city streets in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, and Lancaster over the past few months, organizers of the Rod of Iron festival could plausibly argue that they’re being targeted and singled out for their support for the Second Amendment.
I think we’re more likely to see Wolf issue some sort of statement criticizing the decision to hold the festival, but I doubt that the governor will do much more than that. Whether the festival will actually draw 10,000 people to the eastern Pennsylvania town remains to be seen as well, but it looks like the weather will be perfect in Greeley this weekend, and I expect a big turnout. For more information on the festival itself, you can check out the Rod of Iron Freedom Festival website here, which includes a list of speakers and seminars that will be taking place throughout the weekend.


bearingarms--2020-10-06--CA's Gun Control Laws Failing To Stop LA Violence

The state of California is pretty proud of their gun control policy .
Progressives throughout the nation look at the state ’ s laws as a model of what we need on a national level .
They argue that such gun laws would reduce crime and make all of us just that much safer .
Of course , anti-gunners always say that their policy proposals would make us safer , even if they wouldn ’ t .
Take California ’ s gun laws , for example .
So far , they ’ re not doing much to stop the rise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Police Chief Michel Moore called for calm in the streets Friday after what he called a spasm of gun violence in South Los Angeles killed four and wounded 19 wounded in the past six days as the city has recorded nearly 40 more homicides so far this year than last year .
“ This is a pace of shooting and violence that we ’ ve not seen in years , ” Moore said as he and community leaders condemned the crimes .
“ I fear , given the velocity , where is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the COVID-19 pandemic for fueling the violence because of the economic turmoil it has caused while also giving people few outlets for social contact .
He was accompanied by a group that included two city councilmembers , clergy and other leaders who called on community members to lay down their arms , come together and not be afraid to speak out if they have witnessed a crime .
“ We have so many of our young people that are dying for no reason at all , ” Bishop Grover Durham of the Good @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has got to stop .
… This is a call for a cease fire.
” Moore , who has had his department ’ s budget modestly trimmed as a result of the defund police movement , urged the City Council to continue to invest in the department .
That ’ s disheartening .
I ’ m curious what gun control laws the state of California has repealed recently .
What ’ s that ?
None ?
They ’ ve repealed absolutely no gun control laws ?
Well , that ’ s interesting .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of those gun control laws has done absolutely nothing to prevent this spike in violence in the City of Angels .
Probably because they don ’ t .
See , violence is complex .
There ’ s no single cause to violence or violent crime .
However , what we do know is that solutions as simplistic as gun control are rarely the answer .
After all , the people carrying out these crimes are rarely people buying guns lawfully .
Instead , they ’ re typically convicted felons who purchase guns from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from law-abiding citizens or purchased through fraudulent methods .
Gun control laws aren ’ t going to stop that kind of thing .
Instead , there are better options .
For all the bad press it got , broken window policing did wonders for New York and can do the same for places like Los Angeles .
Step up the efforts there and watch a lot of the problems disappear .
More gun control won ’ t solve the issue , but that ’ s likely where anti-gun lawmakers in the state will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claim it ’ s to combat this growing violent crime issue .
If anything , though , they should be going the other direction with their gun laws .
If criminals are getting guns no matter what , it ’ s past time to stop making it difficult for law-abiding citizens to obtain firearms themselves .
Until the police can get the matter in hand , citizens should be able to at least protect themselves without the state making life difficult .

The state of California is pretty proud of their gun control policy. Progressives throughout the nation look at the state’s laws as a model of what we need on a national level. They argue that such gun laws would reduce crime and make all of us just that much safer.
Of course, anti-gunners always say that their policy proposals would make us safer, even if they wouldn’t.
Take California’s gun laws, for example. So far, they’re not doing much to stop the rise of violent crime in Los Angeles.
Police Chief Michel Moore called for calm in the streets Friday after what he called a spasm of gun violence in South Los Angeles killed four and wounded 19 wounded in the past six days as the city has recorded nearly 40 more homicides so far this year than last year. “This is a pace of shooting and violence that we’ve not seen in years,” Moore said as he and community leaders condemned the crimes. “I fear, given the velocity, where is the lid on this?” … Moore blamed the COVID-19 pandemic for fueling the violence because of the economic turmoil it has caused while also giving people few outlets for social contact. He was accompanied by a group that included two city councilmembers, clergy and other leaders who called on community members to lay down their arms, come together and not be afraid to speak out if they have witnessed a crime. “We have so many of our young people that are dying for no reason at all,” Bishop Grover Durham of the Good Citizen Deeds Foundation said. “This has got to stop. … This is a call for a cease fire.” Moore, who has had his department’s budget modestly trimmed as a result of the defund police movement, urged the City Council to continue to invest in the department.
That’s disheartening. I’m curious what gun control laws the state of California has repealed recently.
What’s that? None? They’ve repealed absolutely no gun control laws?
Well, that’s interesting. It’s almost like the presence of those gun control laws has done absolutely nothing to prevent this spike in violence in the City of Angels.
Probably because they don’t.
See, violence is complex. There’s no single cause to violence or violent crime. However, what we do know is that solutions as simplistic as gun control are rarely the answer.
After all, the people carrying out these crimes are rarely people buying guns lawfully. Instead, they’re typically convicted felons who purchase guns from black market dealers, typically firearms stolen from law-abiding citizens or purchased through fraudulent methods. Gun control laws aren’t going to stop that kind of thing.
Instead, there are better options. For all the bad press it got, broken window policing did wonders for New York and can do the same for places like Los Angeles. Step up the efforts there and watch a lot of the problems disappear.
More gun control won’t solve the issue, but that’s likely where anti-gun lawmakers in the state will try to step up their efforts and claim it’s to combat this growing violent crime issue. If anything, though, they should be going the other direction with their gun laws. If criminals are getting guns no matter what, it’s past time to stop making it difficult for law-abiding citizens to obtain firearms themselves.
Until the police can get the matter in hand, citizens should be able to at least protect themselves without the state making life difficult.


bearingarms--2020-10-06--Some Of Virginia's 2A Sanctuaries Quietly Using New Red Flag Law

In the wake of the Democratic takeover of the Virginia state legislature last November , more than 100 counties , towns , and cities across the state adopted Second Amendment Sanctuary resolutions vowing opposition to unconstitutional gun control laws .
As the Virginia Mercury reports , however , law enforcement in some of those same localities are now using the new red flag firearm seizure law approved by Democrats earlier this year to take firearms from those deemed by a judge to pose a “ substantial risk ” to themselves or others .
Of at least 21 red flag cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first two months of the law ’ s existence , roughly half occurred in counties and cities that passed pro-gun resolutions after the Democratic takeover of the General Assembly in elections last November , court records show .
“ I am surprised , quite honestly , that so many have done this , ” said Philip Van Cleave , president of Virginia Citizens Defense League , who has argued the state could already take guns from people suffering mental health crises through temporary detention orders .
“ It just doesn ’ t make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it the way they are.
” In some cases , it appears as if the Substantial Risk Protection Orders are being used in lieu of prosecuting individuals for actual crimes as well or to avoid the state ’ s civil commitment laws , which require actual medical professionals evaluating the subject ’ s mental health .
Two red flag cases were filed in Colonial Heights , where the city council had passed a resolution stating that city funds should not be used to “ unconstitutionally restrict Colonial Heights citizens from bearing arms.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part of ongoing legal proceedings in the case of a man who called 911 in March , said he was thinking of killing his wife and barricaded himself in his home .
He was shot by an officer after he came to the door holding a rifle .
As a result of the incident , the man faced misdemeanor charges of brandishing a firearm and reckless handling of a firearm .
He and his lawyer consented to the red flag order , which was requested jointly with the local prosecutor .
Ashley Henderson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Colonial Heights , said the two sides negotiated a six-month red flag order as a way to “ put safeguards in place ” to protect the man and the community by “ restricting his access to firearms.
” “ Both sides found that this was the most effective way to achieve that , ” Henderson said .
Court documents indicate that man is a military veteran struggling with PTSD .
Police retrieved 13 firearms from his home .
As part of the deal , prosecutors agreed not to pursue the charges .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ be some of the biggest flaws in the red flag law .
The issue here isn ’ t that the guy owned guns that were taken away , but that he said he was thinking of killing his wife .
Not only were criminal charges dropped against the man in this case , but because the Substantial Risk Protection Orders don ’ t come with any mental health component , the subject wasn ’ t required to get any sort of psychological or psychiatric help .
In fact , after the guns were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with knives , matches , gasoline , and any number of blunt objects that he could use to harm himself or others .
In far Southwest Virginia , Scott County authorities issued a substantial risk order for an “ ex-military person ” who appeared disoriented and seemed to be struggling with mental health issues , according Sheriff Jeff Edds .
The sheriff said he didn ’ t see the new process as a significant shift for his office since the state law already banned gun possession for people ordered to undergo involuntary mental @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just extra paperwork as far as we look at it , ” Edds said .
“ Just a form.
” It ’ s not just a form if the subject of the red flag petition hasn ’ t been ordered to undergo involuntary mental health treatment , and it sounds like that ’ s the case in many of the red flag orders that have been filed .
In fact , I believe one of the biggest practical problems with the red flag law ( besides the obvious due process and constitutional concerns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawmakers to say they ’ re “ doing something ” to address those in crisis while ignoring the crisis in Virginia ’ s mental health system .
As Lauren Cunningham , the Director of Communications with the Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services , recently told Richmond TV station WTVR , State hospitals across Virginia , including Eastern State Hospital ( ESH ) , are regularly operating at 100 % of their bed census .
When all of the state hospitals are full , there may be delays in admissions to state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not denying admissions except in cases related to COVID-19 , but are delaying admissions if state hospital staff need to work to make a bed available .
We understand that this makes it incredibly difficult on local law enforcement , especially smaller departments , who may have to stay with a patient for several hours before a bed becomes available .
However , it is absolutely unsafe to leave an individual without police presence while being assessed in the emergency room , or drop an individual off before a bed has been found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in-patient beds for those individuals in the midst of a mental health crisis , which can make a red flag petition an attractive option and a workaround for law enforcement , who might otherwise be tied up for hours waiting to transport a person to a mental health facility when there ’ s no room for them .
Why go through the cumbersome process of trying to obtain a Temporary Detention Order for someone based on their mental health when it ’ s easier and faster to just take their guns through a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ person in crisis won ’ t get treatment , but at least the authorities can say they did “ something ” to address the situation .
I ’ ll be interested to see how much pushback there is to the use of red flag laws in these Second Amendment sanctuaries now that the word is getting out , but what we really need is for lawmakers in Richmond to get serious about addressing mental health in the state , rather than relying on the red flag law to mask their failure to ensure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they need .

In the wake of the Democratic takeover of the Virginia state legislature last November, more than 100 counties, towns, and cities across the state adopted Second Amendment Sanctuary resolutions vowing opposition to unconstitutional gun control laws. As the Virginia Mercury reports, however, law enforcement in some of those same localities are now using the new red flag firearm seizure law approved by Democrats earlier this year to take firearms from those deemed by a judge to pose a “substantial risk” to themselves or others.
Of at least 21 red flag cases filed in July and August, the first two months of the law’s existence, roughly half occurred in counties and cities that passed pro-gun resolutions after the Democratic takeover of the General Assembly in elections last November, court records show. “I am surprised, quite honestly, that so many have done this,” said Philip Van Cleave, president of Virginia Citizens Defense League, who has argued the state could already take guns from people suffering mental health crises through temporary detention orders. “It just doesn’t make any sense why they’re using it the way they are.”
In some cases, it appears as if the Substantial Risk Protection Orders are being used in lieu of prosecuting individuals for actual crimes as well or to avoid the state’s civil commitment laws, which require actual medical professionals evaluating the subject’s mental health.
Two red flag cases were filed in Colonial Heights, where the city council had passed a resolution stating that city funds should not be used to “unconstitutionally restrict Colonial Heights citizens from bearing arms.” One of those orders was filed as part of ongoing legal proceedings in the case of a man who called 911 in March, said he was thinking of killing his wife and barricaded himself in his home. He was shot by an officer after he came to the door holding a rifle. As a result of the incident, the man faced misdemeanor charges of brandishing a firearm and reckless handling of a firearm. He and his lawyer consented to the red flag order, which was requested jointly with the local prosecutor. Ashley Henderson, a deputy commonwealth’s attorney in Colonial Heights, said the two sides negotiated a six-month red flag order as a way to “put safeguards in place” to protect the man and the community by “restricting his access to firearms.” “Both sides found that this was the most effective way to achieve that,” Henderson said. Court documents indicate that man is a military veteran struggling with PTSD. Police retrieved 13 firearms from his home. As part of the deal, prosecutors agreed not to pursue the charges.
This case highlights what I consider to be some of the biggest flaws in the red flag law. The issue here isn’t that the guy owned guns that were taken away, but that he said he was thinking of killing his wife. Not only were criminal charges dropped against the man in this case, but because the Substantial Risk Protection Orders don’t come with any mental health component, the subject wasn’t required to get any sort of psychological or psychiatric help. In fact, after the guns were seized he was left in the home with knives, matches, gasoline, and any number of blunt objects that he could use to harm himself or others.
In far Southwest Virginia, Scott County authorities issued a substantial risk order for an “ex-military person” who appeared disoriented and seemed to be struggling with mental health issues, according Sheriff Jeff Edds. The sheriff said he didn’t see the new process as a significant shift for his office since the state law already banned gun possession for people ordered to undergo involuntary mental health treatment. “It’s just extra paperwork as far as we look at it,” Edds said. “Just a form.”
It’s not just a form if the subject of the red flag petition hasn’t been ordered to undergo involuntary mental health treatment, and it sounds like that’s the case in many of the red flag orders that have been filed. In fact, I believe one of the biggest practical problems with the red flag law (besides the obvious due process and constitutional concerns) is the fact that it allows lawmakers to say they’re “doing something” to address those in crisis while ignoring the crisis in Virginia’s mental health system. As Lauren Cunningham, the Director of Communications with the Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services, recently told Richmond TV station WTVR,
State hospitals across Virginia, including Eastern State Hospital (ESH), are regularly operating at 100% of their bed census. When all of the state hospitals are full, there may be delays in admissions to state hospitals. As always, we are not denying admissions except in cases related to COVID-19, but are delaying admissions if state hospital staff need to work to make a bed available. We understand that this makes it incredibly difficult on local law enforcement, especially smaller departments, who may have to stay with a patient for several hours before a bed becomes available. However, it is absolutely unsafe to leave an individual without police presence while being assessed in the emergency room, or drop an individual off before a bed has been found.
There simply aren’t enough in-patient beds for those individuals in the midst of a mental health crisis, which can make a red flag petition an attractive option and a workaround for law enforcement, who might otherwise be tied up for hours waiting to transport a person to a mental health facility when there’s no room for them. Why go through the cumbersome process of trying to obtain a Temporary Detention Order for someone based on their mental health when it’s easier and faster to just take their guns through a red flag order? Sure, the person in crisis won’t get treatment, but at least the authorities can say they did “something” to address the situation.
I’ll be interested to see how much pushback there is to the use of red flag laws in these Second Amendment sanctuaries now that the word is getting out, but what we really need is for lawmakers in Richmond to get serious about addressing mental health in the state, rather than relying on the red flag law to mask their failure to ensure that those in crisis get the help that they need.


bearingarms--2020-10-06--"Gun Deaths" In Young People Tied To Poverty

“ For ye have the poor always with you ” – Matthew 26:11 While the good book has a ton of truth within its pages , this is one important bit that we ’ d do well to all remember , regardless of our faith .
The poor will always be with us , no matter what we try .
Don ’ t get me wrong , it ’ s good to help the poor as best we can , but we ’ re not going to make poverty go away .
Nor will we make any of the associated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , unfortunately .
Especially since the violent deaths of many young people in this country at the hands of people with guns also appears to be tied to poverty .
Firearm deaths in children and young adults were vastly more common in the poorest versus richest U.S. counties , researchers said .
Analysis of CDC data on 67,905 firearm deaths in people age 5-24 during 2007-2016 showed the risk of dying by a firearm was more than twice as high for those living in counties with the greatest versus lowest poverty concentration after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and gun prevalence by state ( incidence rate ratio 2.29 , 95 % CI 1.96-2.67 ) , reported Jefferson T. Barrett , MD , MPH , of Boston Children ’ s Hospital in Massachusetts .
The association between poverty and youth firearm deaths was strongest for unintentional deaths ( IRR 9.3 , 95 % CI 2.31-37.3 ) , followed by homicides ( IRR 3.55 , 95 % CI 2.81-4.54 ) , and suicides ( IRR 1.45 , 95 % CI 1.2-1.75 ) , Barrett said at the virtual American Academy of Pediatrics ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ target the most impoverished counties with public health interventions knowing that is where the highest risk is , ” Barrett told MedPage Today .
“ Whether it ’ s with gun control , buybacks , community policing , or implementing community programs , these can be directed at the highest impoverished counties because they are at the highest risk.
” While they go on to try to blame the mere existence of guns in a given place for issues as well , it should be noted that the researchers controlled for gun prevalence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Well , for one thing , those who are economically disadvantages–you know , poor–are far more likely to see no way out of poverty except through criminal activity .
These are the people who tend to join gangs , after all , and gang violence is one of the biggest causes of so-called “ gun violence ” in the nation .
Further , the study didn ’ t differentiate between gang members shot and law-abiding members of the public .
In fact , I suspect the vast majority of the 67,905 fatalities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you ’ re going to lump 24-year-olds in the category as five-year-olds .
Oh yeah , I didn ’ t miss that tidbit , and that tells us a lot about what the researchers may have been looking for in the first place .
They wanted the biggest number possible and they wanted to use the group that could give that to them while also eliciting concern within the media .
After all , people will see that age range and focus on five-year-old kids , not the 18-24 group that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ criminal activity .
Frankly , none of this should be surprising .
Poor neighborhoods tend to be the rougher neighborhoods and we all know it .
The link between poverty and criminal activity is well known , as is the link between poverty and gang activity .
We also know that gang members tend to be indiscriminate with their violence , shooting innocent bystanders .
What ’ s surprising is that people with such advanced education can think things like buyback programs actually do anything .

“For ye have the poor always with you” – Matthew 26:11
While the good book has a ton of truth within its pages, this is one important bit that we’d do well to all remember, regardless of our faith. The poor will always be with us, no matter what we try.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s good to help the poor as best we can, but we’re not going to make poverty go away. Nor will we make any of the associated problems with poverty go away, either, unfortunately.
Especially since the violent deaths of many young people in this country at the hands of people with guns also appears to be tied to poverty.
Firearm deaths in children and young adults were vastly more common in the poorest versus richest U.S. counties, researchers said. Analysis of CDC data on 67,905 firearm deaths in people age 5-24 during 2007-2016 showed the risk of dying by a firearm was more than twice as high for those living in counties with the greatest versus lowest poverty concentration after controlling for demographic variables, urbanicity, and gun prevalence by state (incidence rate ratio 2.29, 95% CI 1.96-2.67), reported Jefferson T. Barrett, MD, MPH, of Boston Children’s Hospital in Massachusetts. The association between poverty and youth firearm deaths was strongest for unintentional deaths (IRR 9.3, 95% CI 2.31-37.3), followed by homicides (IRR 3.55, 95% CI 2.81-4.54), and suicides (IRR 1.45, 95% CI 1.2-1.75), Barrett said at the virtual American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) meeting. “We can target the most impoverished counties with public health interventions knowing that is where the highest risk is,” Barrett told MedPage Today. “Whether it’s with gun control, buybacks, community policing, or implementing community programs, these can be directed at the highest impoverished counties because they are at the highest risk.”
While they go on to try to blame the mere existence of guns in a given place for issues as well, it should be noted that the researchers controlled for gun prevalence in states and still found a link.
Why?
Well, for one thing, those who are economically disadvantages–you know, poor–are far more likely to see no way out of poverty except through criminal activity. These are the people who tend to join gangs, after all, and gang violence is one of the biggest causes of so-called “gun violence” in the nation.
Further, the study didn’t differentiate between gang members shot and law-abiding members of the public. In fact, I suspect the vast majority of the 67,905 fatalities were among gang members. Especially if you’re going to lump 24-year-olds in the category as five-year-olds.
Oh yeah, I didn’t miss that tidbit, and that tells us a lot about what the researchers may have been looking for in the first place. They wanted the biggest number possible and they wanted to use the group that could give that to them while also eliciting concern within the media.
After all, people will see that age range and focus on five-year-old kids, not the 18-24 group that’s far more likely to be involved in criminal activity.
Frankly, none of this should be surprising. Poor neighborhoods tend to be the rougher neighborhoods and we all know it. The link between poverty and criminal activity is well known, as is the link between poverty and gang activity. We also know that gang members tend to be indiscriminate with their violence, shooting innocent bystanders.
What’s surprising is that people with such advanced education can think things like buyback programs actually do anything.


bearingarms--2020-10-06--Rights On Hold: Gun Owners Still Facing Long Delays For Licenses, Permits

As the Great Gun Run of 2020 continues with record high sales on firearms , gun owners and those wishing to purchase a firearm in many parts of the country are growing increasingly frustrated by months-long waits to get a concealed carry license or even a permit to keep a gun in their home .
In Allegheny County , Pennsylvania , the Firearms Division of the sheriff ’ s office is now scheduling appointments in March of 2021 to apply for concealed carry licenses .
Even existing concealed carry holders are being told that they can ’ t renew their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some of those left twiddling their thumbs for months say something has to give .
“ Without a concealed carry you can ’ t go anywhere , ” said Brian Boles of Natrona Heights… Boles said there should be an easier way to get his permit because he ’ s not the only one who is struggling to get it done .
“ The Second Amendment wasn ’ t made for the gun to just be at the house , ” he said .
“ You ’ re supposed to be able to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be on your person , it could be in your vehicle .
It ’ s for your protection and I think Allegheny County is infringing on that right now.
” The head of the gun permitting division of the sheriff ’ s office says that deputies simply can ’ t keep up with the high demand , especially with the county moving to an appointment-based system in order to limit the number of people inside the sheriff ’ s office because of COVID-19 mitigation policies .
“ I understand people are frustrated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ best we can do right now and we ’ re aggressively looking for more efficient ways to do it in a safe manner , ” said Chief Deputy Kevin Kraus .
Kraus said the demand for permits is the highest his department has ever seen and they ’ re issuing more than 100 permits daily .
Before the pandemic hit people could walk in for their permits , but now it ’ s by appointment only .
“ We have appointments , one every five minutes , ” he said .
“ We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weekends on Saturday and Sunday and like I said , we ’ re aggressively seeking out options to find a solution to this and service as many people as we can.
” Kraus says the sheriff ’ s office is looking at opening up satellite locations to allow more residents to apply for their licenses each day , but it sounds like even that isn ’ t going to be enough to help meet the demand .
In Washington State , meanwhile , some residents haven ’ t been able to apply at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since many local police departments stopped taking applications in the spring .
Snoqualmie Police Department Capt .
Nick Almquist said they stopped processing first time license applications in February or March .
Part of this process includes taking several sets of fingerprints , which can only be done in person .
This became impossible after the police station was largely closed to the public in order to help slow the spread of the coronavirus .
Most police agencies across King County have taken similar measures , and backlogs of new applicants are piling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the process of contracting with a third party company to resume fingerprinting .
The company would create a portal for people to apply and pay for the license , and set up appointments with Bellevue Fingerprinting Services .
“ Like Snohomish County and Redmond and Bellevue and Kirkland have done with the same company , ” he said .
The contract is being reviewed by the city attorney .
If it ’ s approved , Snoqualmie police could begin issuing permits within three to four weeks .
Meanwhile , in Washington , D.C. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s instituted new policies to supposedly streamline the process of transferring firearms to their new owners , but some are still reporting lengthy delays in the process .
Since D.C. doesn ’ t have any gun stores , residents hoping to purchase a firearm have to shop outside of the District and then have the gun shop transfer the firearm to the MPD itself , which will then release the gun to its owner .
As the Washington Free Beacon ‘ s Stephen Gutowski recently reported , the District is wading through a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ several months .
Dick Heller , who defeated the city ’ s handgun ban in a 2008 Supreme Court case , said the department expedited one weapon transfer in July after he threatened to sue , but a second handgun he ordered in August is still stuck in limbo .
Heller said the licensed gun dealer he purchased the gun from in West Virginia struggled for weeks to make contact with MPD .
Heller still hasn ’ t been given a date for when he can pick up his new gun even after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ September .
“ It would appear that what we have again is the ‘ denial of service , ’ ” Heller told the WashingtonFree Beacon .
Not only are these delays impacting the ability of residents to exercise their Second Amendment rights , they may very well be causing some otherwise law-abiding gun owners to break the law and carry without a license based on their need for self-defense and the issuing authority ’ s inability to process applications in a timely manner .
A right delayed is a right denied , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , there are tens of thousands of Americans who should be able to exercise their right , but can ’ t because of the barriers of bureaucracy in place .

As the Great Gun Run of 2020 continues with record high sales on firearms, gun owners and those wishing to purchase a firearm in many parts of the country are growing increasingly frustrated by months-long waits to get a concealed carry license or even a permit to keep a gun in their home.
In Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, the Firearms Division of the sheriff’s office is now scheduling appointments in March of 2021 to apply for concealed carry licenses. Even existing concealed carry holders are being told that they can’t renew their licenses any sooner than that, and some of those left twiddling their thumbs for months say something has to give.
“Without a concealed carry you can’t go anywhere,” said Brian Boles of Natrona Heights… Boles said there should be an easier way to get his permit because he’s not the only one who is struggling to get it done. “The Second Amendment wasn’t made for the gun to just be at the house,” he said. “You’re supposed to be able to bear arms. It’s supposed to be on your person, it could be in your vehicle. It’s for your protection and I think Allegheny County is infringing on that right now.”
The head of the gun permitting division of the sheriff’s office says that deputies simply can’t keep up with the high demand, especially with the county moving to an appointment-based system in order to limit the number of people inside the sheriff’s office because of COVID-19 mitigation policies.
“I understand people are frustrated, but we’re doing the best we can do right now and we’re aggressively looking for more efficient ways to do it in a safe manner,” said Chief Deputy Kevin Kraus. Kraus said the demand for permits is the highest his department has ever seen and they’re issuing more than 100 permits daily. Before the pandemic hit people could walk in for their permits, but now it’s by appointment only. “We have appointments, one every five minutes,” he said. “We’ve been open the last three weekends on Saturday and Sunday and like I said, we’re aggressively seeking out options to find a solution to this and service as many people as we can.”
Kraus says the sheriff’s office is looking at opening up satellite locations to allow more residents to apply for their licenses each day, but it sounds like even that isn’t going to be enough to help meet the demand.
In Washington State, meanwhile, some residents haven’t been able to apply at all for their concealed carry licenses, since many local police departments stopped taking applications in the spring.
Snoqualmie Police Department Capt. Nick Almquist said they stopped processing first time license applications in February or March. Part of this process includes taking several sets of fingerprints, which can only be done in person. This became impossible after the police station was largely closed to the public in order to help slow the spread of the coronavirus. Most police agencies across King County have taken similar measures, and backlogs of new applicants are piling up. Almquist said Snoqualmie is in the process of contracting with a third party company to resume fingerprinting. The company would create a portal for people to apply and pay for the license, and set up appointments with Bellevue Fingerprinting Services. “Like Snohomish County and Redmond and Bellevue and Kirkland have done with the same company,” he said. The contract is being reviewed by the city attorney. If it’s approved, Snoqualmie police could begin issuing permits within three to four weeks.
Meanwhile, in Washington, D.C. the Metropolitan Police Department says it’s instituted new policies to supposedly streamline the process of transferring firearms to their new owners, but some are still reporting lengthy delays in the process. Since D.C. doesn’t have any gun stores, residents hoping to purchase a firearm have to shop outside of the District and then have the gun shop transfer the firearm to the MPD itself, which will then release the gun to its owner. As the Washington Free Beacon‘s Stephen Gutowski recently reported, the District is wading through a huge backlog of firearm transfers dating back several months.
Dick Heller, who defeated the city’s handgun ban in a 2008 Supreme Court case, said the department expedited one weapon transfer in July after he threatened to sue, but a second handgun he ordered in August is still stuck in limbo. Heller said the licensed gun dealer he purchased the gun from in West Virginia struggled for weeks to make contact with MPD. Heller still hasn’t been given a date for when he can pick up his new gun even after making contact with the department in late September. “It would appear that what we have again is the ‘denial of service,’” Heller told the WashingtonFree Beacon.
Not only are these delays impacting the ability of residents to exercise their Second Amendment rights, they may very well be causing some otherwise law-abiding gun owners to break the law and carry without a license based on their need for self-defense and the issuing authority’s inability to process applications in a timely manner. A right delayed is a right denied, and given the months-long backlogs in many jurisdictions, there are tens of thousands of Americans who should be able to exercise their right, but can’t because of the barriers of bureaucracy in place.


bearingarms--2020-10-06--Experts: Barrett Nomination Could Revolutionize Gun Litigation

Amy Coney Barrett is President Donald Trump ’ s nominee to the Supreme Court and the Senate has agreed to hold confirmation hearings as soon as possible .
That means there ’ s a very good chance that Barrett will be on the Supreme Court very soon .
We here at Bearing Arms have speculated that Barrett on the Court could be a gamechanger .
Of course , we ’ re not legal experts .
We should probably at least listen to what many of them may have to say .
Legal scholars say Amy Coney Barrett ’ s judicial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that have seen lower federal courts deliver a variety of rulings on gun rights .
Barrett ’ s adoption of what experts refer to as a “ text , history and tradition ” philosophy—which relies on the text and historic applications of the Second Amendment , rather than the applications of “ balancing tests ” of individual rights and government interest to determine whether or not a gun law is constitutional—could be revolutionary for Second Amendment cases .
“ In practice , the Court ’ s adoption of the ‘ text , history @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a lot of previously settled circuit precedent gets unsettled , ” Jacob D. Charles , executive director of Duke University ’ s Center for Firearms Law , told the Washington Free Beacon .
In 2019 ’ s Kanter v. Barr , Barrett argued in a dissent that “ all people have the right to keep and bear arms but that history and tradition support Congress ’ s power to strip certain groups of that right.
” After studying founding-era documents , Barrett concluded that nonviolent felons should not be subject to the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Mark W. Smith , presidential scholar and senior fellow in law and public policy at the King ’ s College in New York City , told the Free Beacon the approach favored by Barrett is in stark contrast to the balancing tests lower courts have employed in the past .
“ Balancing tests are favored by the liberal justices and left-leaning lower courts because they serve as an easy excuse for eliminating the right to possess and use firearms , ” he said .
“ It allows liberal jurisdictions to invoke ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and to deny constitutional rights carte blanche .
These balancing tests allow judges to pay lip service to the Second Amendment while eroding this most fundamental individual right.
” Now , let ’ s be clear .
These settled cased are those that need to be unsettled badly .
This also would play a factor in cases that involved courts basically ignoring the Heller decision on things like assault weapons .
Barrett on the Court could see assault weapon bans overturned finally and likely stop a potential President Biden from enacting most of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tests currently used by the lower courts are problematic because they ’ re not really tests , but excuses .
It ’ s a way to justify stripping Americans of their civil liberties and pretend that it ’ s constitutional to do so .
Barrett may be able to push the Court to finally address this and put an end to the anti-gun shenanigans of these liberal lower courts .

Amy Coney Barrett is President Donald Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court and the Senate has agreed to hold confirmation hearings as soon as possible. That means there’s a very good chance that Barrett will be on the Supreme Court very soon.
We here at Bearing Arms have speculated that Barrett on the Court could be a gamechanger.
Of course, we’re not legal experts. We should probably at least listen to what many of them may have to say.
Legal scholars say Amy Coney Barrett’s judicial philosophy could settle legal stalemates and disagreements that have seen lower federal courts deliver a variety of rulings on gun rights. Barrett’s adoption of what experts refer to as a “text, history and tradition” philosophy—which relies on the text and historic applications of the Second Amendment, rather than the applications of “balancing tests” of individual rights and government interest to determine whether or not a gun law is constitutional—could be revolutionary for Second Amendment cases. “In practice, the Court’s adoption of the ‘text, history, and tradition’ test would mean a lot of previously settled circuit precedent gets unsettled,” Jacob D. Charles, executive director of Duke University’s Center for Firearms Law, told the Washington Free Beacon. In 2019’s Kanter v. Barr, Barrett argued in a dissent that “all people have the right to keep and bear arms but that history and tradition support Congress’s power to strip certain groups of that right.” After studying founding-era documents, Barrett concluded that nonviolent felons should not be subject to the same gun restrictions that apply to violent criminals. Mark W. Smith, presidential scholar and senior fellow in law and public policy at the King’s College in New York City, told the Free Beacon the approach favored by Barrett is in stark contrast to the balancing tests lower courts have employed in the past. “Balancing tests are favored by the liberal justices and left-leaning lower courts because they serve as an easy excuse for eliminating the right to possess and use firearms,” he said. “It allows liberal jurisdictions to invoke ‘public safety’ without any empirical support and to deny constitutional rights carte blanche. These balancing tests allow judges to pay lip service to the Second Amendment while eroding this most fundamental individual right.”
Now, let’s be clear. These settled cased are those that need to be unsettled badly.
This also would play a factor in cases that involved courts basically ignoring the Heller decision on things like assault weapons. Barrett on the Court could see assault weapon bans overturned finally and likely stop a potential President Biden from enacting most of his gun control schemes.
The balancing tests currently used by the lower courts are problematic because they’re not really tests, but excuses. It’s a way to justify stripping Americans of their civil liberties and pretend that it’s constitutional to do so.
It’s not.
Barrett may be able to push the Court to finally address this and put an end to the anti-gun shenanigans of these liberal lower courts.


bearingarms--2020-10-07--Philly Police Commish: Gun Violence In City Is "Shameful and Sickening"

The job of a police commissioner is , ostensibly , to protect the public .
They lead the police department of a major city to combat the crime that could harm members of the city , hopefully arresting bad people before they can do bad things but at least trying to arrest them before they can do more bad things .
Unfortunately , the police commissioner in Philadelphia isn ’ t really able to do much to deal with the swelling violence in his city .
I ’ m sure Krasner is bothered by what ’ s transpiring in his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a sense of self-preservation .
If crime continues to climb , he ’ s likely to be out of a job , after all .
Oddly enough , though , there ’ s a lawsuit against the city that might actually solve some of the problem .
After all , if people could get their carry permits before 2022 , I suspect some of the issues would get resolved quick , fast , and in a hurry .
Yet we must also concede that violence is complicated .
There ’ s rarely just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s easy to blame poverty or racism or drugs , or anything else , but the truth is that any combination of those may well be in play at a given point , plus a few others I didn ’ t mention .
You ’ re not going to make it just go away with a single law .
However , it should be noted that while some may be pushing for gun control , I ’ d ask just how many of those arrested for these violent crimes obtained firearms through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that absolutely none of them did .
If any did , how many would have passed any background check because they hadn ’ t been convicted of anything before ?
That ’ s why gun control doesn ’ t actually impact crime .
The bad guys aren ’ t following any laws , much less gun laws .
Meanwhile , no one bothered to mention the backlog of gun permits for law-abiding citizens so they can protect themselves from the growing amount of crime in their city .
Funny , that .
At @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is pretty jacked up by violence right now and the commissioner is right to be concerned .
It ’ s just too bad no one in the city is really working toward a real solution .

The job of a police commissioner is, ostensibly, to protect the public. They lead the police department of a major city to combat the crime that could harm members of the city, hopefully arresting bad people before they can do bad things but at least trying to arrest them before they can do more bad things.
Seems pretty simple.
Unfortunately, the police commissioner in Philadelphia isn’t really able to do much to deal with the swelling violence in his city.
A day after six people were killed in Philadelphia, pushing the city’s annual homicide tally past last year’s total with nearly three months left in 2020, Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw and District Attorney Larry Krasner on Tuesday each publicly decried the ongoing and intensifying surge in gun violence. Outlaw, flanked by her deputy commissioners during a morning news conference at Police Headquarters, described this year’s staggering increase in shootings as “shameful and sickening.” Krasner, meanwhile, gathered a host of elected officials and citizens in Nicetown in the afternoon at what felt like an antiviolence rally. Speakers discussed topics including poverty’s intersection with crime, a need to coordinate the city and community response against violence, and stalled or blocked legislative attempts to advance gun-control measures. “Those of you who have suffered losses in your family and are dealing with the pain of loss: We hear you. We care about you,” Krasner said.
I’m sure Krasner is bothered by what’s transpiring in his city, even if just out of a sense of self-preservation. If crime continues to climb, he’s likely to be out of a job, after all.
Oddly enough, though, there’s a lawsuit against the city that might actually solve some of the problem. After all, if people could get their carry permits before 2022, I suspect some of the issues would get resolved quick, fast, and in a hurry.
Yet we must also concede that violence is complicated. There’s rarely just a single cause for it. It’s easy to blame poverty or racism or drugs, or anything else, but the truth is that any combination of those may well be in play at a given point, plus a few others I didn’t mention. You’re not going to make it just go away with a single law.
However, it should be noted that while some may be pushing for gun control, I’d ask just how many of those arrested for these violent crimes obtained firearms through a legal manner. My guess is that absolutely none of them did. If any did, how many would have passed any background check because they hadn’t been convicted of anything before?
That’s why gun control doesn’t actually impact crime. The bad guys aren’t following any laws, much less gun laws.
Meanwhile, no one bothered to mention the backlog of gun permits for law-abiding citizens so they can protect themselves from the growing amount of crime in their city. Funny, that.
At the end of the day, Philadelphia is pretty jacked up by violence right now and the commissioner is right to be concerned. It’s just too bad no one in the city is really working toward a real solution.