Want a gun? Take a bullet: Take this, gutless NRA cowards — you can have a gun, once you understand the pain of being shot – Salon.com

I believe that being shot should be requirement for gun ownership in America. It’s very simple. You need to have gun, like taking selfies with pistols, can’t live with out it? Then take a bullet and you will be granted the right to purchase the firearm of your choice.

Source: Want a gun? Take a bullet: Take this, gutless NRA cowards — you can have a gun, once you understand the pain of being shot – Salon.com

This is another example of why there is no sensible discussion to be had with the other side. It’s an endless cycle and we always come back to vilifying, punishing, lampooning, and/or killing gun owners, the NRA, and manufacturers. But, it’s stuff like this and Hillary Clinton’s latest call for confiscation and the repeal of the Second Amendment that are the very reason we have said amendment.

-GM

Jury finds Badger Guns liable in shooting of two Milwaukee police officers | Local News – WISN Home

MILWAUKEE —A jury found Badger Guns negligent Tuesday in the sale of the gun used to shoot two Milwaukee police officers in 2009.

Milwaukee police Officers Bryan Norberg and Graham Kunisch were shot in the face by Julius Burton in 2009 while on duty.

The lawsuit alleged the store was negligent and should have spotted clear warning signs that the gun was being sold to a “straw buyer,” or someone who was buying the gun for someone who couldn’t legally do so.

The jurors said Badger Guns’ negligence caused the injuries of the officers.

The jury awarded Norberg $1.5 million and Kunisch about $3.5 million, in addition to $730,000 in punitive damages.

More: Jury finds Badger Guns liable in shooting of two Milwaukee police officers | Local News – WISN Home

On one hand, I certainly understand taking issue with wilful negligence and violations of the law. As much as I’d like to readily argue this is a slippery slope with respect to the liability of dealers and a stupid verdict, there’s video of one of the shooters who is a “prohibited person” telling the actual buyer exactly which gun to buy, As in, “I want that one…buy it for me.” That’s a problem. It’s a crime. And it’s a disservice to us all.

-GM

Clarkston woman charged after firing gun at Home Depot in Auburn Hills, Michigan

Tatiana Duva-Rodriguez faces has been charged with one count of reckless discharge, handling or use of a firearm in the Oct. 6 incident at the Joslyn Road store after seeing a loss prevention officer chasing after a suspect who had fled the store with merchandise.

No one was injured in the incident. Two Flint men were later arrested and charged in the theft.

According to a press release Tuesday, there are allegations Duva-Rodriguez, who is licensed to carry a concealed handgun, shot at the tires of a passing truck in the “misguided attempt to disable the vehicle to stop two reported shoplifters.”

Source: Clarkston woman charged after firing gun at Home Depot in Auburn Hills, Michigan

No, no, no! Tatiana, you’re doing it wrong! This is why we can’t have nice things. People like you getting overzealous and mucking it up for the rest of us! Just stop!

Folks, your gun is a last resort item. Using it constitutes deadly force. You cannot shoot someone just a little bit. And shooting at tires, well, even the cops don’t do that very often because it often doesn’t work and those bullets (when not if you miss) have to go somewhere…Being released into the community is usually a bad thing because there are infinity amount of personal and property loss that can occur.

Duva-Rodriguez is being charged criminally for her actions. That’s as it should be. Yes, her intentions were nobel but, her actions were reckless, dangerous and unwarranted. If you can’t articulate an imminent threat of serious bodily injury or death, the use of deadly force is not justified, period.

X Products’ Can Cannon reclassified by ATF

Some how, I just knew it wouldn’t take long for the ATF to get their panties in a bunch and with the stroke of a pen, make a bunch of folks instant felons. And that prediction came true on, of all days…September 11th. The official statement from X Products is as follows:

Can_Cannon_Production_2

Dear Customers,
We recently received a complete evaluation from the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms on the legal
status of the Can Cannon dated: August 26th, Received September
11, 2015. The evaluation of the Can Cannon as currently produced is in and of itself not a firearm and not controlled, however when placed on a rifle receiver is considered a (SBR)short barrel rifle, and when placed on a pistol (AOW)Any Other Weapon.

We are submitting a revised design to address the issues
in the B.A.T.F.E’s determination letter. We will update
our customers throughout this process.

For questions or inquiries about this matter, please email warranty@xproducts.com
A copy of the determination letter will be available on our site shortly.

Best Regards,
X Products LLC
Date: 9/21/2015