From Gun Buy-Back to Gun Show

June 30, 2013

This past weekend, a group known as "1 Million Moms Against Gun Control, INC", with the help of a local delegate and cooperation from the local mayor and police chief in Laurel, Maryland, effectively turned a so-called gun "buy-back" into a 'gun show', allowing citizens to purchase others' unwanted firearms instead of them going to the "buy-back" program and later being destroyed.

Check them out at https://www.facebook.com/1millionmomsagainstguncontrol, https://twitter.com/1MMAGC (@1MMAGC)  and http://www.1mmagc.org/.

Some of their Facebook posts about the recent event in Maryland and their broader intent are below.

===
June 27, 2013

1 Million Moms Against Gun Control, INC

***MARYLAND***

We, along with the help of Delegate Smigiel from Maryland, have the approval and authority to counter the Laurel Police Department Gun Buyback this Saturday. Here is the announcement from the Laurel Police Department.

"Mayor Craig A. Moe and Laurel Police Chief Richard McLaughlin announce a Gun Buy-back/Turn-in which will be funded and operated by the City of Laurel. The City of Laurel and Laurel Police Department, with support from A New Life Church of Christ of Laurel and Prince George’s Chapter of the NAACP, have scheduled the Gun Buy-back/Turn-in for Saturday, June 29, 2013 between the hours of 9am and 1pm at the Laurel Armory which is located at 422 Montgomery Street, Laurel, Maryland 20707. The City will be offering Visa Gift cards in exchange for any unwanted Firearms voluntarily turned in for disposal and destruction during the Gun Buy-back/Turn-in program. Participants remain anonymous, no questions asked."

We're turning this "gun buyback" into a "Gun Show"

Looking for a cheap firearm?
Looking for collectors firearms?

Those wishing to pay a fair market value for a firearm may attend the gun buyback program at the above location and purchase the firearm through one of several FFL's that we have contacted and will have present during the hours above.

FFL Will take possession of the firearm until the required background check, which is already in place, is complete and approved. FFL is authorized to release on the 8th day after the paperwork is turned in by the FFL.

Go Get Your Gun. We the People!!!

===
June 29, 2013

1 Million Moms Against Gun Control, INC

**ATTENTION**

We are seeking gun buybacks to turn into legal gun shows!
If you hear of any "Gun Buyback" programs or events happening in your area, let us know!! Send the information to heatherm@1mmagc.org

We want to turn them into "Gun Shows" so public sales are possible! (In accordance with all state laws)

We need you to be our eyes and ears so if you hear of one, please send us as much information on it as possible, time, date, location etc.

1 Million Moms Against Gun Control, INC

1MMAGC would like to thank Mayor Craig Moe and the Laurel Police Department for allowing us to counter their buyback and allow citizens to outbid for some wonderful antique and historic firearms.

Laurel Police were very respectful, and professional at all times, and Delegate Mike Smigiel was able to pick up a Circa 1925 Colt .380. Another woman was able to purchase her first firearm, ever.

A good amount of unwanted guns were either turned in or sold to law abiding citizens who would give them a good home. I am sad to say that a few pieces of American History were lost to the scrap heap, but overall I think its was an example of how Law Enforcement and the gun rights community can work together to achieve a common goal.

===
So-called gun "buy-backs" are not new. Several cities have held them this year. Opposition to them is also not new and has taken multiple forms from written criticism to grass-roots efforts by opportunistic citizens to make private purchases instead allowing functional firearms to be destroyed. 1MMAGC is the first group I've heard of that is attempting to do this in an organized fashion. Good for them and let's hope they're successful in their future efforts.

This June 2013 article is about 2 individuals who privately purchased firearms in competition with a Cleveland, Ohio 'buy-back' program: http://www.guns.com/2013/06/18/private-citizens-and-police-compete-to-gain-guns-in-cleveland-gun-buyback-video/

In January 2013 the grass-roots effort was much larger with dozens of private purchasers: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/28/private-buyers-invade-seattle-gun-buyback-offer-cash-for-firearms-that-would-otherwise-be-destroyed-by-police/

Here is some of the criticism of the effectiveness of these 'buy-back' programs. One of these is a study from 2004, the other an article from 2013. There are MANY other criticisms of these programs but much of their messages echo what's written here.

"The theoretical premise for gun buy-back programs is that the program will lead to fewer guns on the streets because fewer guns are available for either theft or trade, and that consequently violence will decline. It is the committee’s view that the theory underlying gun buy-back programs is badly flawed and the empirical evidence demonstrates the ineffectiveness of these programs."

National Research Council: Firearms and Violence, A Critical Review (2004): http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10881&page=95
http://nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10881

"Spread across tables or piled high into overflowing stacks, all those weapons reinforce the notion that trading cash for guns works. It gets guns off the street, organizers say, and makes the city safer.
The problem, according to years of research, is that it does neither."

"Researchers who have evaluated gun control strategies say buybacks – despite their popularity – are among the least effective ways to reduce gun violence."

"several studies over the years have examined the weapons retrieved during buybacks and the level of gun violence in the months after the events.

Most reached the same conclusion: The guns collected usually aren't the type used in crimes, and the impact of the buybacks on crime was "not statistically significant." "

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/12/gun-buybacks-popular-but-ineffective/1829165/

This final article is very biased against a particular so-called gun 'buy-back' that took place in Phoenix, Arizona. It's kind of a long, tedious article and I think much of it is just noise - barking up the wrong tree(s) - but intermixed in the noise are some excellent points and criticisms, including whether such programs are actually huge violations of federal, state and local law! If you're interested in the topic, you might appreciate spending the time to read this article.

http://www.ammoland.com/2013/06/largest-straw-purchase-of-guns-in-history-goes-uninvestigated/#ixzz2XhUisXbC

===
Related blogs:
http://us2ndamendment.blogspot.com/2013/06/from-gun-buy-back-to-gun-show.html
Firearms Blog Collections
Toy Gun Exchange
Recovering Confiscated or Relinquished Firearms

First Boulder Airlift, now this. Magpul comes through for Colorado customers, again.

June 30, 2013

Magpul has come through for its Colorado customers again!

With the new restrictive gun control laws taking effect July 1st, including one that limits magazine capacity to 15 rounds but grandfathers larger capacity magazines owned prior to the new law taking effect, Magpul gave away 1,500 30-round magazines to Colorado residents for free. The giveaway took place yesterday at the "A Farewell to Arms" festival in Infinity Park in Glendale.

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_23547501/colorados-magpul-give-away-1-500-30-round#ixzz2XQRAQWDy

According to this Washington Times article, "The highlight of the event came as a Magpul helicopter landed near the field, dropping off boxes of magazines along with keynote speaker Dana Loesch, a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host based in St. Louis." They have their own helicopter? Cool!

It also lists the quantity of magazines as 20,000 but includes both free and price discounted magazines. With 5,000 people in line for them I think it's fair to say that Colorado now has 20,000 additional 30-round magazines in the state in addition to the ones owned prior to December 2012 and those purchased in a mad rush since December 2012 after the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting and the gun control mania that has swept the nation.

Right, all those magazines now in consumers' hands will somehow be distinguishable from the ones purchased from out of state starting tomorrow. Of course they won't. This law is anything but "common sense" or "reasonable" and is unenforceable, as stated by Colorado county sheriffs, 55 of 62 of whom have filed a lawsuit opposing it.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/30/magpul-floods-colorado-ammo-magazines-2-days-gun-l/

Earlier this year, after the legislation was passed, Magpul announced "Boulder Airlift", a special program wherein Colorado residents living outside of Denver could order Magpul magazine products and receive preferential treatment. At the time there was huge demand for Magpul's "standard capacity" magazine products, especially with capacities of 15 rounds or more, and Magpul wanted to ensure Colorado firearms owners would have access to their products before the Draconian laws took effect.

http://www.magpul.com/colorado.html

http://www.slickguns.com/product/magpul-operation-boulder-airlift-1495

Magpul has plans to leave Colorado due to these new laws.

Thanks again, Magpul.

===
July 1, 2013

A few more details here about Magpul's "standard capacity" magazine give-away and discounted pricing, featuring magazines with capacities of more than 15 rounds.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57591800/colorado-gun-laws-go-into-effect-facing-immediate-backlash/

===
Related blogs:
http://us2ndamendment.blogspot.com/2013/06/first-boulder-airlift-now-this-magpul.html
Firearms Blog Collections
Colorado Firearms Blogs

"Gun Control Exodus" of Firearms Companies

Gun Hotlines Offering Bounties or Rewards

June 27, 2013

Did New York Governor Andrew Cuomo start a trend with his gun bounty program?

I previously commented on a program there involving an anonymous hotline that offers a $500 bounty to informers of illegal gun possession. This year the program is often attributed to the January 2013 "Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement (SAFE)" law but it's actually been in existence for 1-2 years already. It was so well used that police didn't know it existed, literally. It's gained much more attention since SAFE was passed and reportedly is now advertised on billboards.

It appears this didn't originate in New York though. This January 2013 article briefly describes a similar program from Newark New Jersey Mayor Cory Booker. Booker's program pays $1000 though. I guess New Jersey's guns are worth twice as much as New York's, or maybe they perceive having twice the problem in New Jersey that New York does, or maybe they're twice as rich, or maybe the price of a New Jersey "snitch" is twice that of a New York "snitch".

"...the mayor says in a television commercial. “There is a small group of people in our city that thinks they can walk around with guns. It is unacceptable. But we can’t just wish this would stop. We can’t just hope this will stop. We as individuals have to do something about it.” " That "walk around with guns" thing, that's called the 2nd Amendment to our US Constitution and it's described as "bear arms" and it's PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE and lawful under our constitution!

" “So we have a program in our city right now that’s completely anonymous and we will give you cash,” he continues, “$1,000 to anyone who calls our anonymous tip line. Give us the information about who is carrying a gun and we don’t even have to have a conviction. We arrest that individual and simply get that gun off the streets.” " Yeah, that can't and won't be abused. They pay informers for an ARREST, NOT  CONVICTION! Who pays for a false arrest or one where the charges are later dropped? The innocent citizen exercising their right to "bear arms" and taxpayers!

===
Integrity check: After writing this post I watched the 2:42 video embedded in the article of Mayor Booker promoting this program. His presentation seems honest enough and the program does seem focused on criminals with guns. With so much anti-gun-mania since Newtown I have to admit skepticism and bias in support of 2nd Amendment and gun rights. I still worry about abuse of a program like this. Even perhaps with only good, lawful intentions, too many lawful firearms owners have been heavily, financially victimized by anti-gun government programs and officials. There NEEDS to be protection for the innocent that does NOT involve months or years of bureaucracy, lawsuits, and rights infringement and WITHOUT financial penalty!
===

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/07/cory-booker-offering-1000-reward-for-info-on-illegally-owned-guns/

And it's not just New York and New Jersey. In May 2013, Florida lawmakers also approved a program. This one isn't gun specific but there's a hotline ("snitch" line) for people to report others to government authorities. Is it more or less concerning when it's described by Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw as "We want people to call us if the guy down the street says he hates the government, hates the mayor and he’s gonna shoot him,"? There have been other, harsh, descriptions provided by others. That "shoot him" part seems reasonable, if it's perceived as a legitimate and imminent threat, but others are focusing on the "hate" part and concerned about abuse of a 'service' like this.

"“What does it hurt to have somebody knock on a door and ask, ‘Hey, is everything OK?’”" What does it hurt? Really? This kind of 'community concern' has, in 2013, resulted in multiple government agencies teaming together for coercion, attempted violation of people's rights, attempted firearms registration / confiscation, and threatening to remove a child from the home where no abuse or negligence had taken place and no law was broken.

Why is this necessary anyway? And why does it need a separate $1M in funding? Don't we already have something called the "911 emergency" line and "police non-emergency" numbers? If it's not distinctly different, like trying to capture 'government haters', then why does it even exist?

At least this one appears to not offer 'bounties' or rewards that incentivize people to abuse it.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/15319-florida-snitch-line-urges-citizens-to-report-neighbors

===

Related blogs:

http://us2ndamendment.blogspot.com/2013/06/gun-hotlines-offering-bounties-or.html

Firearms Blog Collections

Gun CONFISCATION Blogs
New Jersey Firearms Blogs

New York's Bounty for Reporting Illegal Guns

Michael Bloomberg Attacks Democratic Senators

June 26, 2013

Two weeks ago a headline appeared, "Rough week for Bloomberg". It focuses on the Bloomberg-funded Mayors Against Illegal Guns' (MAIG) failure to obtain their desired outcome in Nevada very recently. "The AP called it, “a significant defeat for New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s gun control advocacy group, Mayor’s Against Illegal Guns, which spent hundreds of thousands of dollars working to get the bill passed." "

While that short article was heartening to read, it wasn't nearly rough enough for him or MAIG.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/06/14/rough-week-for-bloomberg/

But it's gotten worse for "Big Mike" since then. So what's been happening in Bloomberg's tyrannical world of gun control? I'll comment on some here and other issues in following posts.

He started by writing hundreds of wealthy, campaign contributing, New York political donors and asking them to withhold all 'gifts' from the 4 Democratic senators running in 2014 who opposed the gun control legislation that failed in the Senate earlier this year. This is significant because "No state is more essential to the party’s fund-raising: Sitting Democratic senators and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee raised $30.4 million from New York donors in 2012". Bloomberg's message - 'don't support the people who don't believe what I believe or support my agenda'. It doesn't matter to him that they might have been driven by the voices of their constituents, or by their oaths to uphold the Constitution of the United States including its 2nd Amendment which "shall not be infringed," or by their own beliefs. Bloomberg blames the "gun lobby" and opposing Democratic senators and wants them removed. Bloomberg, an Independent, doesn't care what party they belong to. He only cares that they didn't vote the way he wanted them to. He knows that the Republican senators who voted against gun control and are running in 2014 are less politically vulnerable than the Democrats, so he's not targeting them, at least right now The ironic thing, as pointed out in this article, is that the Democrats' agenda most closely matches with Bloomberg's and Democratic leaders are now critical of Bloomberg for his aggressive stance against their party members and his national gun control tactics, fearing that his opposition will jeopardize Democratic control of the Senate and also judging that his tactics are ineffective in furthering gun control across the nation. Essentially, Bloomberg, through his aggressiveness, could shoot himself and the gun control agenda in the foot, pun intended.

"In an interview, Mr. Bloomberg said he believed gun deaths had reached such a state of crisis that he needed to force the issue." That's an interesting statement since the data irrefutably shows that gun-related crime and deaths have been on a downward trend for 20 years and are near all-time lows.

"Mr. Bloomberg said voters would reward the senators if they heeded the public — which broadly favors background checks — instead of the National Rifle Association and other groups opposed to the legislation." There's still no acknowledgement here, of course, that the huge majority of voters are supporting "background checks" without having ANY idea what's hidden in the details of the various legislative proposals and that they're anything but "common sense" or "reasonable".

In any context his statement, "That’s what democracy is all about", is a real gem considering he seems to think democracy is really about him spending huge amounts of money, abusing power, manipulation, and ultimately getting his way about extending for a mayoral term beyond the term limits of New York City (NYC), cigarette smoking, retail sales of soda, gun control, taxi / cab operations in NYC, etc.

Democratic criticism of Bloomberg includes "Privately, Democratic senators and aides complain that the shaming, scolding tone of some of Mr. Bloomberg’s ads is counterproductive. The mayor’s group has accused senators who voted against background checks of betraying their constituents and distorting the facts on gun control, an antagonism that many Democrats fear will only make the “no” votes firmer.", "“In Alaska, having a New York mayor tell us what to do? The guy who wants to ban Big Gulps?” Mr. Begich asked incredulously. “If anything, it might help me” ", and more.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/12/nyregion/bloomberg-urges-no-gifts-to-democrats-who-blocked-gun-bill.html?_r=0

In another article is written, "Bloomberg has been out for blood running ads against Democrats who didn’t vote for those measures. But it turns out, Bloomberg’s efforts to unseat anti-gun control Democrats are backfiring." and "Schumer suggests Bloomberg’s targeting of pro-gun Democrats for their votes against gun-control legislation is unproductive. “Frankly, I don’t think Bloomberg’s ads are effective,” Schumer said. “The Mayor of New York City putting ads against people in red states is not going to be effective.” " Let's hope they're right about backfiring and lack of productivity.

http://bearingarms.com/mike-bloombergs-gun-control-message-backfiring/

In yet another article, this Bloomberg supporting author think he's focusing on the wrong things, acknowledging that gun control wouldn't even be a national debate right now if it weren't for the Newtown tragedy last December. Apparently, Bloomberg is also pushing a $20 billion plan for NYC to improve its flood protection in the wake of Hurricane Sandy. The author thinks Bloomberg should be fighting gun control within NYC limits and "carbon-related global warming" or "climate change" on a more global scale.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113461/bloomberg-wrong-focus-gun-control-instead-climate-change#

===
Related blogs:
http://us2ndamendment.blogspot.com/2013/06/michael-bloomberg-attacks-democratic.html
Firearms Blog Collections

More New York "SAFE" Opposition - From Counties

June 26, 2013

Does anything look out of balance with these New York state maps? They show OVERWHELMING county opposition to Governor Andrew Cuomo's gun control "Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement (SAFE)" law that he and other gun control advocates rammed through the legislature early in 2013. This website has links to the individual county resolutions: http://www.nysaferesolutions.com/

===
Related blogs:
http://us2ndamendment.blogspot.com/2013/06/more-new-york-safe-opposition-from.html
Firearms Blog Collections
Gun CONFISCATION Blogs
New York Firearms Blogs
More New York "SAFE" Opposition - From Sheriffs
Injunction Against New York Governor Cuomo's "SAFE" Gun Control Law
Demonstration Against New York's "SAFE" Law

Bacon bullets? This is a bad idea.

June 26, 2013

Bacon bullets? Okay, "pork-laced" or "pork-infused" bullets? This is a bad idea. Gun rights / gun control is already controversial enough for its inherent issues. There's no need to throw more fuel on an already roaring bonfire with accusations of hate and everything else this could be interpreted as.

"With Jihawg Ammo, you don’t just kill an Islamist terrorist, you also send him to hell. That should give would-be martyrs something to think about before they launch an attack. If it ever becomes necessary to defend yourself and those around you our ammo works on two levels,” the company said in a press release earlier this month."

http://bearingarms.com/ammo-manufacturer-creates-pork-laced-bullets-to-fight-terrorism/

===
Related blogs:
http://us2ndamendment.blogspot.com/2013/06/bacon-bullets-this-is-bad-idea.html
Firearms Blog Collections

Gun Control Taxation of the 2nd Amendment

June 25, 2013

Emily Miller of the Washington Times wrote this article, "New taxes penalize gun owners, threaten Second Amendment". It covers some of the topics and creative attacks on our 2nd Amendment rights that I've commented on in the past but also has 1 or 2 I wasn't aware of.

The Good:
* introduced legislation on June 13 that would make it illegal for states and municipalities to raise taxes or fees on firearms and ammunition
* would also prevent raising taxes in order to pay for background checks

The Bad:
* Chicago started the movement late last year by enacting a $25 tax on new firearm purchases
* In February, Rep. Linda T. Sanchez, California Democrat, and 26 of the most uber-liberals in the House introduced a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code to create an excise tax of 10 percent on any concealable gun in order to empower Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to establish a firearms buy-back grant program.
* Massachusetts is considering a 25 percent excise tax on all firearms, ammunition and parts as part of its overall gun-control agenda.
* Nevada Assembly is moving on a bill to impose a $25 tax on each gun and 2 cents for each round of ammunition sold by a dealer.
* Connecticut legislators proposed this year a 50-cent sales tax on ammunition.
* Washington state is considering a proposal to tax every firearm sold at retail at $25 (lowered to $15 if the buyer springs for a gun safe or gun lock) and 1 cent on each round of ammunition.
* Maryland and Connecticut, both of which are proposing raising taxes on ammunition by 50 percent. Alcohol, which is not guaranteed by the Constitution but leads to more deaths than firearms, is the only other item in the Free State that is taxed higher than the 6 percent sales tax, but it is only 9 percent.
* A bill introduced in New Jersey proposes a 7 percent levy on ammunition sales.
* The California Assembly is considering a bill to impose a 5-cent-per-round levy on retailers for “the privilege of selling ammunition.”

"The Constitution says ‘shall not infringe’." "When you place this outrageous tax on the sale of ammunition and firearms, it’s intended to curtail those rights." Yes, it does and, yes, it is.

"These costly measures disproportionately affect lower-income people, who often live in higher-crime areas. Along with other costly mandates, such as maintaining liability insurance, these restrictions would likely be overturned as unconstitutional by the courts.

“This is no different than a poll tax — but on the Second Amendment." " Yep.

"These anti-gun politicians are clearly trying to unduly burden the exercise of the Second Amendment by pricing firearms and ammunition out of reach of many law-abiding Americans." No doubt.

Is there any doubt that there is a serious attack on our 2nd Amendment rights or about how serious and widespread it is? Gun control advocates are pushing their anti-gun agenda far, far beyond the limits of "common sense" or "reason".

Those gun buy-back programs they want firearms owners to fund... they serve no practical purpose whatsoever. The numbers are small. The people turning in firearms are not criminals. They're not removing guns from the "streets", they're removing them from circulation. Most have never been used in crime or ever would be. People who own firearms and don't want them any more can always sell them or, if they don't want them in circulation, drop them off at their local police department. There's no reason to incentivize them with public funds or by burdening gun owners, except to punish gun owners for exercising their constitutional right.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/25/taxing-the-second-amendment/

===
Related blogs:
http://us2ndamendment.blogspot.com/2013/06/gun-control-taxation-of-2nd-amendment.html
Firearms Blog Collections