2016 will usher in a fresh wave of assaults on Second Amendment rights

posted at 5:31 pm on December 30, 2015 by Jazz Shaw

Matt covered the ongoing mess in Virginia earlier this morning, where the reciprocity issue for gun permit owners is being essentially tossed on the trash heap, but I’m sorry to say that their story is only the tip of the iceberg. Having lost the battle of public opinion on the importance of Second Amendment rights and losing repeatedly in the courts at the federal level, gun rights opponents have been crafting new strategies to chip away the constitutional rights of gun owners at the state level. (This is traditionally the line of attack where they’ve enjoyed the most success.) Since the Democrats want to score big points with the gun grabbers in their base and there’s a big election on the horizon, you can count on these stories making the news all year long.

One of the first – and more interesting – assaults is taking place in California this week to ring in the new year. Promoted as an effort to curb gun violence committed by the mentally disturbed, family members of gun owners will be able to ask a judge to summarily suspend any citizen’s Second Amendment rights for a period three weeks if they feel that he might be a danger to others. (Washington Times)

Proposed in the wake of a deadly May 2014 shooting rampage by Elliot Rodger, the bill provides family members with a means of having an emergency “gun violence restraining order” imposed against a loved one if they can convince a judge that allowing that person to possess a firearm “poses an immediate and present danger of causing personal injury to himself, herself or another by having in his or her custody or control.”

“The law gives us a vehicle to cause the person to surrender their weapons, to have a time out, if you will,” Los Angeles Police Department Assistant Chief Michael Moore told a local NPR affiliate. “It allows further examination of the person’s mental state.”

This is a fairly clever approach by the anti-gun lobby because it ties in to the one area where there is broad agreement between both sides of the gun control debate. Everyone is concerned over legitimately insane, dangerous persons having access to firearms, and that’s the lever being applied with this new legislation. The obvious problem with it is the same as we’ve seen with all other private reporting protocols. It’s true that you might wind up taking some weapons away (briefly) from a potentially dangerous, unstable person, but the net immediately becomes so wide that it’s open to rampant abuse. When New York passed the odious Safe Act in 2013 it allowed for reporting of “potentially dangerous” gun owners and the state’s list of individuals stripped of their rights quickly swelled to the tens of thousands. Anyone with a grudge in California can now pick up the phone and make a claim resulting in the cops coming to confiscate guns in a matter of hours. After that, the burden falls on the gun owner to prove that they’re not crazy in order to get them back. (This is essentially the exact opposite of how things are supposed to work, where the burden of proof should be on the government to establish that you are crazy before suspending your rights.)

Out in Washington state there’s a completely different approach being taken in Seattle, and it has thus far survived one round of court challenges. There is a major new tax going into effect on the purchase of all guns and ammunition which is ostensibly being levied to fund gun-violence research and prevention. (Yahoo News)

On Tuesday, King County Superior Court Judge Palmer Robinson ruled that a new tax on guns and ammo would go into effect on Jan. 1, in a case gun rights activists brought against the city. Robinson’s decision aligned with City Council’s unanimous vote in August, approving a tariff of $25 per gun and 2 or 5 cents per round of ammunition for sellers.

In the eyes of NRA members — the plaintiffs, alongside the Second Amendment Foundation and the National Shooting Sports Foundation — Robinson’s ruling flouted the law. But during the case’s hearing, a lawyer defending the city testified that the levy is perfectly kosher. The key is the difference between taxation and regulation, the Seattle Times reported.

Attorney William Abrams stated, “Taxation is to raise revenue, and cities have broad powers to raise revenue through a variety of taxes.”

The tax is also being described as a path to make gun dealers pay for the damage they have caused. That’ a chilling argument to see being successfully made in a court of law, but we can expect a lot more of it this year.

If this one survives a challenge all the way to the Supreme Court it’s going to spell trouble for Second Amendment supporters around the nation. Rather than trying to restrict the purchase and ownership of firearms, Seattle is looking to just make it harder for anyone to be able to afford to do so. To accomplish their goal, they’re jacking up the price on all firearms and ammunition in the form of a tax. Can they do it? Well, the states have been able to tax whatever they like for a long time and do so at rates which vary wildly. Look no further than tobacco and alcohol taxes for examples, along with other “sin taxes.” Of course, you don’t have a constitutional right to smoke or drink beer, so there may be an argument to be made here, but gun sales are already taxed the same as virtually any other product. This might be a tough battle to fight.

Going back for a moment the the declared reason for the tax, we’re going to be seeing a renewed push for the phony idea of “gun violence research and prevention” data collection. The Washington Post recently ran a long op-ed from former GOP congressman Jay Dickey and Mark Rosenberg, former director of the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the CDC. In it, they plod through the usual litany of complaints over evil Republicans stopping the Center for Disease Control and Prevention from “researching” gun violence. They use the long discredited comparison to studying car accidents to help develop new requirements for safety belts and child car seats, while saying, look! We haven’t banned cars yet!

This is an obvious red herring, of course. There were many factors in automobile accidents which weren’t well understood in the fifties and sixties and new safety features were not only needed, but well within our grasp from a technological standpoint. There isn’t any real mystery left about guns… if you point one at someone and fire it they’re going to be struck by a bullet. We’ve got a pretty solid grip on what bullets do to people. Making guns “safer” through technology brings us back to the revolving door of the “smart gun” discussion which is still a long way from being viable, assuming it ever will be.

The entire demand for gun safety research is a smokescreen to provide some sort of pseudo-science support behind the effort to ban gun ownership. Don’t be fooled by it for a minute and don’t ease up the pressure on Congress to keep the existing ban on such “research” in place. Oh, and just to put some icing on the cake, New York has introduced a new bill to limit the amount of ammunition you can buy to twice the capacity of the firearm every three months. Welcome to Amerika!

GunProtestNRA


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

I should really find some good news stories to write about. Maybe something about steak.

Jazz Shaw on December 30, 2015 at 6:00 PM

I got new underwear for Christmas. That is a good feel story.

HonestLib on December 30, 2015 at 6:07 PM

Just because they feel good to you does not make them a “feel good” story to the rest of us.

I, for one, have no intention of feeling them.

There Goes the Neighborhood on December 30, 2015 at 11:25 PM

Bump

H. R. 4269 Subtitled: To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes.

LegendHasIt on December 30, 2015 at 9:50 PM

Schadenfreude on December 30, 2015 at 11:25 PM

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/4269/text

Feature this Jazz!

Schadenfreude on December 30, 2015 at 11:26 PM

Keep these quotes in mind when the national Socialist Left pretends they don’t want to ban and Confiscate guns:

“Yes conservatives, we want to take away your guns…” March 24, 2012 Dailykos

MSNBC’s Ed Schultz Talks Gun ‘Confiscation’ December 15 2012

“Ban, seize semi-auto weapons” State Rep. Dan Muhlbauer, D-Manilla December 19, 2012

“Turn in your guns” Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) December 19, 2012,

Mr. Cuomo, speaking on WGDJ-AM, said: “Confiscation could be an option.” December 20, 2012

How to Ban Guns: A step by step, long term process December 21, 2012 Dailykos

Pro-gun advocates angry over N.J. lawmakers’ hot-mic comments – Democrats
Loretta Weinberg, Sandra Cunningham and Linda Greenstein “We needed a bill that was going to confiscate, confiscate, confiscate” May 10, 2013 The Star-Ledger

“If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States, for an outright ban, picking up [every gun]… Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in.” Diane Feinstein on Gun Control “Turn ‘Em All In!” Published Jan 18, 2013

“Time is overdue to repeal the Second Amendment” December 28 2014 Wisconsin gazette
“A couple of decades ago, Australia had a mass shooting similar to Columbine or Newtown. And Australia
just said, well, that’s it — we’re not seeing that again. And
basically imposed very severe, tough gun laws.” Obama June 10, 2014

“You say gun control doesn’t work? Fine. Let’s ban guns altogether” LA Times May 28, 2014

Stop the insanity: Ban guns” January 7, 2015 Tallahassee Democrat

“We know that other countries, in response to one mass shooting, have been able to craft laws that almost eliminate mass shootings. Friends of ours, allies of ours — Great Britain, Australia, countries like ours. So we know there are ways to prevent it.” Obama October 01, 2015

“Effective Gun Control – A National Semi-Auto Ban” Monday Oct 05, 2015 Dailykos

“In the Australian example, as I recall, that was a buyback program.”…..“I think it would be worth considering doing it on the national level” Hillary Clinton October 16 2015

“A gun-free society” The Washington Post October 2015

“Yes, They Want to Take Your Guns Away” The Daily Beast November 2015

“End the Gun Epidemic in America” The New York Times December 5, 2015 [First Front Page Editorial In 95 Years]
“We don’t need gun control. We need domestic disarmament” Huffingtonpost December 7,2015

“declare these arms contraband and confiscate them” Rolling Stone December 9, 2015

“It’s Time to Ban Guns. Yes, All of Them” New Republic December 10, 2015

Torcert on December 31, 2015 at 1:12 AM

And the answer will still be no.

Laura Castellano on December 31, 2015 at 3:22 AM

Poll taxes were declared unconstitutional under the 14th amendment equal protection clause because of adverse effect on poor, etc denying them their right to vote because of lack of money.
These firearm, ammo taxes, etc also disproportionally affect poorer folks ability to exercise their second amendment right.
Hmmm….maybe there should be subsidies for low income folks.

NHElle on December 31, 2015 at 6:06 AM

I’m the NRA! There’s an NRA sticker on the back window of my 1987 VW Vanagon Westfalia Syncro, along with a Lapua sticker and of course Montana plates. Yeah, I’m weaponized…

claudius on December 31, 2015 at 9:24 AM

I hope Obama takes executive action on guns before he leaves….that would cement his legacy

nonpartisan on December 30, 2015 at 5:39 PM

…at the bottom of a lake.

Now go away loser sock puppet. Shouldn’t your handlers be focusing on actually producing articles instead of agitating readers for clicks?

dominigan on December 31, 2015 at 9:51 AM

In California near where I used to live those gun laws sure are paying off! Check the comments!

http://patch.com/california/watsonville/men-robbed-one-shot-leaving-gun-range-6c4224fc

claudius on December 31, 2015 at 9:58 AM

Hm, so in the mind of a liberal, there is an absolute constitutional right to have a gay marriage, but not to bear arms, even though that one is explicitly written in?

Yep, just like there’s no right to Free Speech if the liberal doesn’t like what you have to say…

EasyEight on December 31, 2015 at 11:50 AM

And in another display of cognitive dissonance, liberals hate and distrust police officers, but by disarming the law abiding citizenry only the police whom they hate and distrust will be legally armed!!

EasyEight on December 31, 2015 at 11:51 AM

When the commies disarm you, you will become a slave of the state. Guaranteed. And when that happens, dumbalock and aintlivingfree will be the first to be enslaved. And do not even begin to think that the GOPe is going to defend your constitutional rights. They are as much your enemy as the commies. One is a socialist party, the other a communist party. Either way, you are screwed.

Maybe a good third party ticket would be Trump/Webb.

they lie on December 31, 2015 at 1:32 PM

2016 will usher in a fresh wave of assaults on Second Amendment rights

Cool. Happy new year everyone.

Tlaloc on December 31, 2015 at 3:21 PM

When the commies disarm you, you will become a slave of the state. Guaranteed.

they lie on December 31, 2015 at 1:32 PM

You should take Red Dawn off of repeat.

Tlaloc on December 31, 2015 at 3:22 PM

You should take Red Dawn off of repeat.

Tlaloc on December 31, 2015 at 3:22 PM

You are really the useful tool…if it comes to this I hope you enjoy concentration camp showers…jerk.

NJ Red on December 31, 2015 at 3:40 PM

You are really the useful tool…if it comes to this I hope you enjoy concentration camp showers…jerk.

NJ Red on December 31, 2015 at 3:40 PM

If our government ever tries to put us in concentration camps I only hope someone captures your attempt to stop them with your shotgun for darwin award purposes.

Hint- militias are not effective battlefield forces anymore. If you want to be armed against your government learn to hack. That makes you a much bigger threat than any number of guns.

Tlaloc on December 31, 2015 at 4:05 PM

If our government ever tries to put us in concentration camps I only hope someone captures your attempt to stop them with your shotgun for darwin award purposes.

Hint- militias are not effective battlefield forces anymore. If you want to be armed against your government learn to hack. That makes you a much bigger threat than any number of guns.

Tlaloc on December 31, 2015 at 4:05 PM

What a colossal imbecile you are.

ShadowsPawn on December 31, 2015 at 4:43 PM

What a colossal imbecile you are.

ShadowsPawn on December 31, 2015 at 4:43 PM

Learn from Iraq. It was a nation awash in guns but when it came to fighting the US military guns were a terrible choice. In stand up fights the US military steamrollered the guerrillas, how could they not? A real military has air support, space assets, naval support, and much better equipment all around. The insurgent’s best (as in most effective) weapon was the IED.

Tlaloc on December 31, 2015 at 5:23 PM

Tlaloc on December 31, 2015 at 5:23 PM

You continue to show what an imbecile on the subject that you are. Please, keep making a fool of yourself, its quite entertaining.

ShadowsPawn on December 31, 2015 at 7:01 PM

The insurgent’s best (as in most effective) weapon was the IED.
.
Tlaloc on December 31, 2015 at 5:23 PM

.
The IEDs would have been less effective if it were not for the stupid ROEs, our guys (and gals) were limited to.

listens2glenn on December 31, 2015 at 8:18 PM

Attempted gun confiscation would result in the genocide of progressives.

Younggod on January 1, 2016 at 9:11 AM


Tlaloc on December 31, 2015 at 5:23 PM

You are a collossal imbecile. You really thnk that our citizen soldiers, who have families of their own, are going to obey unlawful orders to attack us? You are sadly mistaken. The government should be very afraid should that day ever come because the turrets will surely turn on THEM/YOU. You are a traitor as much as those you support and you will would be among the first to die. Idiot.

HomeoftheBrave on January 1, 2016 at 9:20 AM


Younggod on January 1, 2016 at 9:11 AM

Not genocide, just fertilizer for the Tree of Liberty. Bring it.

HomeoftheBrave on January 1, 2016 at 9:21 AM

Come and get the guns, if you dare.

The well-regulated militia will be waiting for you.

JackM on January 1, 2016 at 10:52 AM

A real military has air support, space assets, naval support, and much better equipment all around. The insurgent’s best (as in most effective) weapon was the IED.

Tlaloc on December 31, 2015 at 5:23 PM

========================================================

For the government to take my gun, it will have to send a liberal to my house to grab it from my hands, bringing said liberal well within range.

Not much use your space assets, naval support, blah,blah,blah…

JackM on January 1, 2016 at 11:03 AM

This is the best story about steak I’ve seen in years.

fossten on December 30, 2015 at 6:03 PM

It sure looked to me like he pulled that steak out of her purse. A good indication that she shoplifted it.

Hammie on January 1, 2016 at 11:58 AM

Hint- militias are not effective battlefield forces anymore.

Tlaloc on December 31, 2015 at 4:05 PM

Hint- you shouldn’t really opine on matters of which you are ignorant. (Of course, that would shut you up entirely….)

GWB on January 1, 2016 at 2:54 PM

I’ve noticed my local paper; ‘The Arizona [Red] Star’ is dishing OpEds that are directed for gun control.
First by a vocal Rep turned Gimmedat slamming the NRA. A few days later, the County Prosecutor does a push for extra background checks.
Call me paranoid but I’ll wager big money that is ALL BEING ORCHESTRATED by King Putt; Bloomberg; Tom (Kill Coal) Styer (sp) and the rest of the running dogs.
Lame Ducks gotta quack.

Missilengr on January 1, 2016 at 3:21 PM

I hope Obama takes executive action on guns before he leaves….that would cement his legacy

nonpartisan on December 30, 2015 at 5:39 PM

Indeed. Of course, the legacy he is cementing is as an abject failure.

History will not judge this fool lightly.

deadrody on January 4, 2016 at 11:03 AM

Comment pages: 1 2