Private citizen with a gun holds knife wielding attacker at gunpoint

Gun control advocates say this NEVER happens and never will…

A man was stabbed at a Lynx bus stop Wednesday morning, and a passerby held the alleged attacker at gunpoint for deputies, according to Orange County sheriff’s investigators.

via WFTV speaks to man who held stabbing suspect at gunpoint until… | www.wftv.com.

Gov. Jerry Brown Signs New Handgun Ban AB 1964 | CAL-FFLCAL-FFL

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

 

Gov. Jerry Brown Signs New Handgun Ban AB 1964

 

Democrat-authored Assembly Bill 1964 will further criminalize the sale of handguns to law-abiding, background-checked Californians.

 

ROSEVILLE, CA (July 18, 2014) — In a Legislative Update issued earlier today, California Governor Jerry Brown announced that he has signed Assembly Bill 1964 (Dickinson), a measure that will eliminate the “single shot” exemption to California’s Roster of “not unsafe” handguns.  AB 1964’s changes to section 32100 of the California Penal Code, which will go into effect on January 1, 2015, will make it virtually impossible for law-abiding residents of the Golden State to acquire a “non-Roster” handgun in common use for lawful purposes, like self-defense.

 

In an October 11, 2013, veto message for Assemblyman Dickinson’s previous handgun ban attempt, Brown said, “AB 169 would close a loophole in the single-shot exemption. That makes sense.”

 

“I wish I could say that we were shocked by the Governor’s irrational decision to sign AB 1964,” explained Brandon Combs, president of California Association of Federal Firearms Licensees (CAL-FFL). “Sadly, the status quo for elitist Sacramento politicians is to ignore the Constitution and act with blatant hostility towards our Second Amendment civil rights and sound public policy.”

 

“While we are certainly disappointed by Governor Brown’s support of AB 1964, we are also more committed than ever to fight every last attack on our right to keep and bear arms,” Combs concluded. “This is just one bill of many on our radar, and we encourage our friends in the firearms community to steel their resolve and focus on the upcoming battles in August when the Legislature reconvenes.”

 

To read CAL-FFL’s veto request and for more information about AB 1964, please visit http://www.calffl.org/2014/07/cal-ffl-asks-gov-brown-veto-handgun-ban-bill-ab-1964.

 

Gun rights supporters can oppose the remaining gun control bills by sending a letter to members of the California Legislature and Governor Brown at http://www.DemandRights.org.

 

California Association of Federal Firearms Licensees (CAL-FFL) is California’s most tenacious and complete advocacy group for Second Amendment and related rights, with over 100,000 individual supporters and members including firearm dealers, training professionals, shooting ranges, collectors, gun owners, and others who participate in the firearms ecosystem.  CAL-FFL advances the interests of its members and the general public through direct lobbying, legal actions, education, and public outreach.

 

###

 

Media Contact:

 

Brandon Combs, President
media@calffl.org | (888) 541-3040

 

 

Comments are closed.

 

Site sponsor:

Site sponsor:

 

 

 

The 5 Most Dangerous Guns in America Pictures – Pistols | Rolling Stone

Rolling Stone’s bias, ignorance, and questionable integrity continue. The latest example written by Kristen Gwynne.

In this latest installment of garbage, Kristen explains that the most dangerous guns in America are pretty much, all small arms. Specifically, pistols, revolvers, rifles, shotguns, and derringers. Not specific models. Nope just those entire classes of handguns and long guns. Yup, according to her, all guns are dangerous, evil, and should be banned.

You can read this latest edition of journalistic spooge at http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/pictures/the-5-most-dangerous-guns-in-america-20140714

GM

Idiot prankster gets a gun pulled on himself…

So this dose of stupid popped up in my feed this morning. A guy with a YouTube Channel known as ModelPrankstersTV managed to pull his prank on someone who had a gun. Toward the end of the video, one victim of the prank stroked out with his own Glock out but, did not fire. That may be dumb luck. It might be part of the script. We honestly don’t know. But the prankster wants us to tune in again to see what stupidity he’ll demonstrate next.

The problem the idiot prankster doesn’t seem to recognize is that his victim, if it really was a random person on the street, could easily have hosed him down in lead and been fully justified in doing so. Folks, we’ve got a great sense of humor but, this is reckless, criminal, and potentially fatal stupidity. It should not be encouraged.

-GM

The Rolling Stone Magazine | How to Beat the NRA In 7 Not-So-Easy Steps

It’s worth a read because one needs to know how the other side thinks. It’s enlightening and disturbing at the same time.

“Politicize Disaster, Unabashedly

This may make some progressives queasy….This isn’t complicated: Making a political issue of the tiny coffins of dead children in the wake of a school shooting isn’t just a thing that helps pass strong gun-control, it’s practically the only thing in the last quarter century that’s moved the needle on anti-gun-violence laws. Recall that the catalyst for the 1994 assault weapons ban was a 1989 school shooting in Stockton, California, that killed five kids and wounded 29 other children.

It’s not distasteful to act in the name of victims of gun violence. What’s distasteful to squander the burning anger and intense political focus that such senseless bloodshed inspires…”

via How to Beat the NRA In 7 Not-So-Easy Steps | Politics News | Rolling Stone.

-GM

American Rifleman: “We Don’t Publish Negative Reviews” | The Truth About Guns

This really should come as no surprise but, few gun magazines or websites ever publish bad reviews of guns or other equipment. Nick Leghorne of The Truth About Guns recently interviewed for a position with American Rifleman magazine and it was a significant learning experience for him.

American Rifleman magazine is printed on dead trees and mailed to subscribers. Every extra page (well, four pages actually) costs tens of thousands of dollars to print and ship. With such a steep price, any additional information printed on those pages has to be worth the expense. And in the minds of the American Rifleman staff, negative reviews don’t count as “worth it.”

via American Rifleman: “We Don’t Publish Negative Reviews” | The Truth About Guns.

Like I said, this really should not come as a surprise to anyone. It is perhaps the worst kept secret of 99% of gun publications…the articles/reviews are just filler to put between the ads that actually pay for the publication. A bad gun review assures loss of the related revenue as well as removal from the manufacturer’s T&E list which means the cost of doing such reviews is that much more expensive as you’ll have to actually buy the items you’re reviewing rather than testing them and sending them back to the manufacturer.

-GM

Like the NFA petition on SBRs before it, there is now one for suppressors (silencers).

You can see the petition here. Or at whitehouse.gov. The petition reads as follows:

WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO:

Remove suppressors as an NFA regulated item.

Removal of suppressors as an NFA regulated item would eliminate the $200 tax stamp, eliminate legality and travel issues between states, reduce hearing safety concerns related to discharging firearms, and would help people be courteous neighbors when discharging firearms.

As of this writing, the petition has 17,943 signatures. We need 82,057 more by August 5, 2014. Please consider signing it. As I’ve mentioned with the SBR petition, I do not expect a repeal of the NFA all together. But, there is a chance to at least make our voices heard on repealing parts of it. Specifically, short barrelled rifles and shotguns as well as suppressors.

-GM

HIlton Yam offers sober commentary on polymer pistol mods

“…remember that you bought a Glock or M&P because you wanted simple and reliable.” Hilton Yam via Chasing Our Tails?: Polymer Service Pistol Mods | Modern Service Weapons.

In light of all the talk of $2,500 (Salient) Glocks lately, this is a well timed post over at Modern Service Weapons. Hilton Yam is a man about guns, having used them professionally for years. If you don’t know his name from the 1911 world, you should. The few examples of his hand built master pieces that exist in the world command high prices and most will go to the grave with their owners. But in recent years, he has moved away from the venerable old war horse in favor of the Smith&Wesson M&P as well as the Glock. To that end, his comments are well worth reading.

-GM

Man who shot at cops acquitted – Houston Chronicle

An interesting outcome to say the least. On one hand, the accused claims he was just defending his home.  And that certainly can be a reasonable statement.  While I am pro cop in general, I am not so naive as to believe there aren’t occasions where shortcuts are taken or mistakes made with deadly consequences.

“He was protecting his house, he was protecting Ms. Flores and he was protecting Savannah,” he said, referencing the 3-year-old granddaughter of Flores who also was at the home the night of the October 2010 raid.

 

via Man who shot at cops acquitted – Houston Chronicle.

But there are always at least two sides to every story. It is, quite honestly, rare for police to kick in the wrong door. Let alone do it for no reason. But juries and the general public don’t always get to hear the whole story.

Though jurors never heard about the reasons for or results of the search warrant, police at the time reported finding methamphetamine, drug paraphernalia and firearms in the home.

 

via Man who shot at cops acquitted – Houston Chronicle.

 

I am all for a man defending his home. And there’s no nice way to say that I’m OK with a the fact that might potentially lead to deadly force being lawfully used against cops if they’ve busted into the wrong house. But in this case, it seems the police clearly had the right house.

I don’t know that the jury would have come to the same conclusion if they’d heard the police had conducted a buy at that same house 24 hours prior to serving the warrant.  Or that the lawfully obtained warrant did in fact produce evidence supporting charges of criminal possession and distribution of drugs. Of course, one could argue that some times, even that, isn’t always the best use of police resources. This just seems like one of those times there is no “good” outcome no matter how it shakes out.

-GM