Good luck with that . . . Can We Redesign The Way We Talk About Gun Control In America?
Fred Dust, partner and global managing director at the design company Ideo, also suspects that Americans’ common baseline on issues of gun control is more extensive than surface tensions would indicate. A distilled version of the conversation around gun control tends to pull in two directions: On the one end, there are the 18% of Americans who believe gun laws should be less strict; on the other are the 52% who are pushing for more restrictions like background checks for purchasers and a licensing process for sellers. But the two camps, Dust believes, share more common ground than they realize.
What’s preventing them from collaborating across their beliefs is the polarized structure of the conversation. The gun control “debate,” he says, forces people to chose a side, rather than emphasizing the need for consensus. Would we be able to make progress on the issue if we started talking about it not as something one side could win, but as an issue where we’re looking for consensus?
What could possibly go wrong? . . . Conservatives urge ammunition monitoring: Stockpiling should be red flagged
Radio talk show host and TV commentator Hugh Hewitt is among a growing number of conservatives calling for monitoring the stockpiling of large-capacity ammunition feeding devices similar to how Sudafed is controlled.
Hewitt calls for photo IDs and records of purchases on firearm ammunition following the Oct. 1 shootings in Las Vegas that left 58 dead and 489 people wounded.
“If people buy a lot of ammunition in a short period of time, this should trigger a red flag with law enforcement,” said Hewitt on the NBC “Meet the Press” show on Oct. 8.
Monitoring ammunition stockpiling would be a way to let stockpilers know that law enforcement is keeping an eye on them. However, no guns or ammunition would be confiscated.
Nexbelt “The Belt With No Holes” Introduces New & Improved PreciseFit Gun Belt
Nexbelt’s “New & Improved” Gun Belts feature a unique ratcheting system called Precise-Fit that allows the wearer to adjust his or her belt in 1/4 inch increments instead of the normal 1 inch adjustment that a traditional belt with a pin/buckle system allows.
This ability to “fine-tune” a belt in ¼ inch increments not only provides unprecedented comfort, but is especially important for those practicing concealed or open carry.
SSDD . . . CBS/AP Help Push Self-Defense Coverage For Lawful Gun Owners As “Murder Insurance”
If you want to understand why the media is so distrusted by Americans, then looking at CBS’s report about the NRA’s attempts at helping those with legal bills after they lawfully use their firearm in self-defense is a perfect example.
On Thursday, CBS released an Associated Press report detailing “Guns Down,” a gun-control group, whose stance on the NRA’s “Carry Guard” is that it’s actually “murder insurance.”
AP interviewed Igor Volsky, a guy who likes to paint the NRA as racist, and claimed the NRA was pushing this insurance by scaring NRA members into thinking a brown person was going to get them at any moment.
This will surprise precisely no one . . . No, Most U.S. Gun Owners Don’t Stockpile 17 Or More Guns
The results of the survey are not consistent with data from other sources, and the Newsweek article states, “The number of gun owners has declined since 1994, from around 25 percent to 22 percent of the population, according the Harvard/Northeastern survey.” This is factually incorrect. The number of gun owners has increased because the U.S. population has increased.
The “news” outlets that received press releases from the researchers are The Trace and The Guardian. Both oppose gun ownership. Further, at least a few of the researchers have expressed strong anti-gun sentiments in public. Let’s look at each of these factors in greater detail.
Why, it’s almost as if gun control laws don’t really work where criminals are concerned . . . How did the Edgewood shooter get the gun?
Now that police have apprehended Radee Prince, the man accused of killing three co-workers, injuring two others and later shooting a sixth man on Wednesday, we may get some answers about what would lead someone to unleash such a murderous outburst. Mr. Prince had been accused of workplace violence and threatening behavior before, and he reportedly had a dispute with the Delaware man he is accused of shooting later on Wednesday morning. Whatever the explanation is, it is certain to be unsatisfactory. Nothing but madness could prompt such evil.
But one question for which we should be able to get a concrete answer is how he got the gun. He should not have been able to.
Mr. Prince was convicted in 2003 of 15 counts of third-degree burglary and was sentenced to 25 years in prison with all but two suspended. Under federal law, anyone convicted of a crime punishable by more than one year in prison is ineligible to purchase a firearm.
Who says a woman can’t dress attractively and carry firearm? Or three?
“’Guns Down,’ a gun-control group, whose stance on the NRA’s ‘Carry Guard’ is that it’s actually ‘murder insurance.’”
I actually do have murder insurance. It’s on my hip right now.
And may you (or any other lawful POTG) never have need to file a claim on that policy…
First of all, Guns Down is stupid. NRA/USCCA/etc will not honor a claim if they believe that a defensive gun use occurred unlawfully. They all have clauses in their contracts that state that they themselves are the arbiters of what is an unlawful gun use for their purposes, and, indeed it would be stupid for them to waste money on a lost case.
Beyond that, though, is how the NRA entering the industry has poisoned the term “gun insurance”. Couple years back, Cali and other states were debating requiring gun owners to carry liability insurance to pay off their “victims” if they happened to shoot someone. But at the same time, they don’t believe in protecting the law-abiding gun owner from potential financial ruin through an “insurance” program.
I’ll be honest- I don’t have carryguard or USCCA or any other legal defense “insurance”. The price seems high in proportion to the risk, and I’d be ruined with or without it if something bad occurred. But to call it “murder insurance” just because the NRA is in the business is precious.
ammo control is the step i have expected the gun control crowd to take for years. i can already the the arguments “the second amendment on says keep and bear arms, it doesn’t say anything about ammunition!””our forefathers never imagined individuals having thousands of rounds!”. The bad part is i can see multiple judges agreeing with these arguments
What is ARMS?
Anything that a man wears for his defense, or takes in his hands, or uses in his anger, to cast at or strike at another. Co. Litt. 1616, 162a; State v. Buzzard, 4 Ark. 18. This term, as it Is used in the constitution, relative to the right of citizens to bear arms, refers to the arms of a militiaman or soldier, and the word is used in its military sense. The arms of the infantry soldier are the musket and bayonet; of cavalry and dragoons, the sabre, holster pistols, and carbine; of the artillery, the field-piece, siegegun, and mortar, with side arms. The term, in this connection, cannot be made to cover such weapons as dirks, daggers, slung-shots, sword- canes, brass knuckles, and bowieknives. These are not military arms. English v. State, 35 Tex. 476, 14 Am. Rep. 374; Hill v. State, 53 Ga. 472; Fife v. State, 31 Ark. 455, 25 Am. Rep. 556; Andrews v. State, 3 Heisk. (Tenn.) 170, 8 Am. Rep. 8; Aymette v. State, 2 Humph. (Tenn.) 154. Arms, or coat of arms, signifies insignia, i. e., ensigns of honor, such as were formerly assumed by soldiers of fortune, and painted on their shields to distinguish them; or nearly the same as armorial bearings, (q. v.)
Law Dictionary: What is ARMS? definition of ARMS (Black’s Law Dictionary)
http://thelawdictionary.org/arms/
notice nothing is said about ammunition for these weapons
Hugh Hewitt may have just jumped the shark.
This seems like a serious issue of infringement and pre-crime.
It will work pretty much like the banking laws regarding cash transactions. They will set a limit beyond which you will be “targeted”. People will buy just below that limit. Frequently.
And all that totally ignoring the fact that such a scheme is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, the very antithesis of the purpose for the Second Amendment which was to provide protection FROM the government. Now he is proposing that government have the authority to investigate if you buy too much ammunition? Next it will be to watch people who buy too many guns. But how many are too many, and what gives the government the authority to decide that number?
Barring other indicators and evidence of potential criminal activities, credible evidence, this is not within the government’s authority.
Any business entity that supports or assists in this effort in any way needs to be black-flagged as working with the enemy.
“They will set a limit beyond which you will be “targeted”. People will buy just below that limit. Frequently.”
Yup. Say you buy 1 box a week (50 rounds) of 9mm.
Year one, 2600 rounds socked away. After a few years, you’ll have quite a stash on your hands.
What they will need to do is, a reportable ammo registry with mandatory spent brass turn-in.
And imagine how draconian it will get when they decide they need to eliminate ‘loopholes’.
The way I see it, the real battle for the 2A will be gun registration of any form. Registration *always* leads to inevitable confiscation.
I’d be very curious to learn Justice Clarence Thomas’s view on the Constitutionality of gun registration laws.
Because *that* is where our gun rights will stand or fall…
In the late 80’s, you could get a concealed carry permit in Spain.
Once a year You could buy 50 rounds of Ammunition for your one and only carry gun, but only if you turned in last years box of 50 spent brass.
I think its headed that way too. I was afraid they’d get around to this. I’m kind of angry about it.
But what will I do for the rest of my firearms, they all aren’t the same Caliber.. or even measure by caliber.
Ask ol’ Hughie how he’d like it if proposed legislation was stipulating that a church could only have so many members and that new congregates had to be screened, approved and monitored. People need to stop throwing the c word around like they know what the fuck it means.
This. A Shit ton of conservatives love to say how much of a conservative they are yet don’t really grasp the very basic consepts of the political theory.
Right? WTF go read some Locke, Montesquieu, Cicero and Aristotle.
In those days, “conservative” was one who supported, believed in, guarded the rights and privilege of the ruling class (or monarch). It was “liberals” who championed rights of men, and limits on authority.
Mr. Hewitt is not a fiscal conservative (term as used today), is not a balanced budget supporter, is not a rights of man evangelists. He is an “accommodationist”, at best. The veritable wolf in sheep’s clothing. From years of listening, I conclude Hewitt is an establishment character who believes in big government, but run more efficiently by “conservative” elites. He is comfortable with the idea that government should be a central figure in everyone’s life. He reluctantly caved into the notion that Trump would win, but Hewitt would have preferred one of the other seventeen who lost. Hewitt knowingly conflates “conservative” and Republican; hopes you don’t notice.
Still haven’t figured out that Conversativism is just as Statist and authoritarian as modern Liberalism?
Two sides to the same coin.
One of the main reasons most 2A supporters are still snowed. They actually believe conservative politicians are their saviors.
Just look at all the Trump worship out there.
^This
There’s nothing statist about conservatism. Good grief.
Now, if you actually meant Republicanism, as practiced by the GOP, then you’re on to something.
“Just look at all the Trump worship out there.”
You must be of the “liberal” mindset. No one else would ever confuse Trump for a “conservative”. Trump never claimed the label.
Sent his show an email asking that, but I doubt I’ll hear back.
“Sent his show an email asking that, but I doubt I’ll hear back.”
Maybe you will receive a response. Have sent four emails to talk shows over the last 30yrs; never a response, but they keep reading alleged listener emails on air.
Makes you wonder.
Restrictions, flagging and even bans on the purchase and ownership of ammo, specifically due to the wording of the 2A isn’t a new idea.
Those ideas have been publicly espoused on the internet for at least a decade and I’ve lost count of the people who’ve told me that ammo isn’t covered by the 2A.
Hewitt just stole a prog position from 10 years ago and called it his own.
“I’ve lost count of the people who’ve told me that ammo isn’t covered by the 2A.”
Yeah, annoying as hell.
The 1700s analogy would be claiming freedom of the press doesn’t cover the movable metal type the hand press uses…
And yet the progs have claimed that in court, as well, at least insofar as web-only press is concerned.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/10/17/remember-its-illegal-to-possess-wikileaks-clinton-emails-but-its-different-for-the-media-says-cnns-chris-cuomo/?tid=a_inl
Seems like paper would be a better equivalent in this analogy.
“Hewitt just stole a prog position from 10 years ago and called it his own.”
That’s not exactly new among “conservatives” in the public arena, though. A lot of them aren’t necessarily against the change that is happening (single-payer, gun control, gay marriage, abortion, immigration, etc), or at least want to be on “the right side of history”, but think that the change is happening too quickly.
That’s one reason why you see all of these compromises from the Republicans in the house/senate that do what the Democrats want, but to a lesser degree than the Dems had hoped.
There’s fairly few people who honestly try to operate on principles.
This is a good thing, to some degree, since it increases our representation in legislative bodies, but it’s also the reason that the GOP can’t pass any bills that actually change anything for the better, but rather find themselves slightly retarding changes for the worse.
“…but it’s also the reason that the GOP can’t pass any bills that actually change anything for the better, but rather find themselves slightly retarding changes for the worse.”
Yes, this is the game. The two major parties have the same goal, one wants it today, the other a bit later. Death of the republic is the end game.
I sent my Congressman an email telling him to oppose such a thing and gave him talking points for why telling others why it is such a bad idea.
California has already taken that step. Beginning January 1, 2018, ALL ammunition must be purchased in a face to face transaction with a licensed ammunition vendor. Citizens can still purchase from on-line vendors, but that ammunition MUST be shipped to a California licensed ammunition vendor for processing (and for which the vendor can charge a “small fee” for storage and handling, as well as processing the required paperwork). At the time of transfer, the purchaser MUST provide photo ID and a thumbprint, as well as name, address, and telephone number, which the vendor will record, along with the amount and caliber/gauge of all ammunition sold. The vendor then runs a check of your name against the APPS (Armed Prohibited Persons System) to see if you are prohibited from owning guns. At least weekly, the vendor must submit, electronically, a report to the DOJ submitting all of the collected information on each buyer and each purchase. It is a misdemeanor to bring ammunition into the state without processing the ammunition through a vendor.
Vendors can only display ammunition behind a manned counter. Any store that keeps ammunition on the shelf where buyers can pick it up will have to redecorate. (My local Sportsman’s Warehouse has all of its ammo on shelves on the floor.) Some stores will simply stop selling–as I expect WalMart to do. (Because of issues with recording of transactions, most if not all WalMart stores in California stopped selling guns. This ammo deal is a real nightmare.) Of course, due to the increased paperwork burden of selling ammo, prices will rise. These are features, not bugs.
Beginning July 1, 2019, no ammunition may be sold unless the purchaser presents a state issued ammunition purchaser ID, which may be obtained from the state for $50 (and a background check), good for five years. I do not know how hunters traveling here from out of state will be able to buy ammo; they technically will violate the law if they bring their ammo with them. The same is true of competitive shooters. I don’t know if there are any exceptions for these people.
No useful law enforcement purpose will be served. There are undoubtedly many people here who have thousands of rounds of ammunition, and many people who shoot regularly enough to go through a few thousand rounds in a couple of months who buy by the case. What is the state going to do? Buying ammunition is not probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed, or even that a crime may be committed. All they can do is send cops around to ask questions, questions no one is compelled to answer. And it will result in data overload; the noise will be too loud to indicate that anything is amiss. And the BGs will simply go to Vegas or Reno and toss a case of ammo in their trunk and drive back. Unless the DOJ sends cops to monitor gun shows and gun stores, who is going to stop them?
what about fruits and nuts?
This is actually contradictory to the idea of ammo quotas, as it gives incentive to buying massive quantities of ammo in one go. “Why would I pay a $15 fee for one box of 9mm, I’d better buy my year’s lot of 5 cases.”
“notice nothing is said about ammunition for these weapons”
A weapon with no ammunition is no weapon. (except in the sense, that everything is a weapon).
“Radio talk show host and TV commentator Hugh Hewitt is among a growing number of conservatives calling for monitoring the stockpiling of large-capacity ammunition feeding devices similar to how Sudafed is controlled.”
Get your head out of your a$$ Hugh. You’re good on a lot of issues, but this one will blow you up.
I’m willing to advance a consensus opinion – leave me and my guns the hell alone, and you finite have to buy or carry any if that’s your preference.
‘Would we be able to make progress on the issue if we started talking about it not as something one side could win, but as an issue where we’re looking for consensus?’
If only Neville Chamberlain could have trusted his buddy Adolf…
That vid by Dene Adams has been an incredible sales tool: I love having it bookmarked on my phone to show to the cliche female customer who I catch eyeing the pocket .380s and saying “oh! That aquamarine one will fit great in my purse!”
“Prince faced several gun charges in March 2015 in Cecil County, including being a felon in possession of a firearm and carrying a handgun in vehicle. However, the charges were dropped about three months later. It’s not clear why.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/suspect-in-maryland-office-park-shooting-is-apprehended/ar-AAtGPoR?ocid=sf
The criminal should have been locked up. They let him out 23 years early. And that is a conviction for burglary , what other crimes did he commit and get away with.
Hugh Hewitt, just another Benedict Arnold, like Glenn Beck, John McCain, Lindsay Garaham, and Patraeous. They were all secretly liberals from the start.
No they’re not secretly liberals…it’s just that conservatism and liberalism (presently defined) are the same thing.
Two sides of the same coin. Both want more government. They just want it in different ways and for different purposes. Go back and read your recent history. Every time conservatives have controlled the white house and or houses of congress it’s resulted in less freedoms, more controls, bigger government, more spending. This is exactly the same as under liberal leadership.
conservative=liberal=statism=authoritarianism
Oh Kaaayyyyy. Nailed it. Questions, anyone?
The flaw in the ammo stockpiling “issue” in comparing it to Sudafed: If I have 200 boxes of Sudafed, I’m probably making an illegal substance. If I have 200 rounds of ammunition, I’m going to the range for an hour.
Agree, but try telling that to non-shooters.
I would, but it hurts my brain too much to talk down to their level.
My (anti-gun) wife falls for that every time. “He had a thousand rounds! Why would anyone need a thousand rounds?!?” Well, dear, the kids and I shot up a thousand rounds or more the last time everyone was in town. [I didn’t tell her that I have far more than that in the garage. I just wish I had a lot more.]
My condolences on the anti gun wife. I dated a couple Antis for a while. I finally realized they probably weren’t gonna work out. College can be rough for us pro 2A. It’s hard finding someone in today’s world who’s into the same stuff we are.
Unless you became a POTG after you were already married, why would you do that to yourself?
I bought my first gun maybe 15 years after we were married. And I bought it because my son was interested, which piqued my interest. Until then, it’d been a nonissue. We live in a small semi-rural town with a very low crime rate, and virtually no one I knew, other than those that hunted, owned guns. Nor did I have any desire to carry until my wife became completely disabled and just another target, about the same time that heroin became a fairly significant issue.
And the Sudafed tracking has done wonders at reducing the amount of meth on the street right?
Substantially reduced US production. Mexico, typically, has stepped in with export of shit.
See, gov’t action costs American jobs! 😉
Made with bulk ingredients “smuggled” in from China.
Paul Revere: “The redcoats are coming! The redcoats are coming!”
Hugh Hewitt: “It’s okay! They just want our ammo!”
Actually, Lexington and Concord was mostly a run on Powder and not muskets, so that is soooo true!
They believed that they after their cannon as well. That’s why they buried them and met the British soldiers with hand arms. (I learned that when my family visited Lexington.) Additionally, Gage’s troops were confiscating arms of people going into Boston, so they were correct in being suspicious.
Have never considered Hugh Hewitt a “conservative”; he is establishment, make nice with Demoncrats, go along to get along (dangerous because he does say “the right things” before he discounts or dismisses “the right thing”. However, I do listen to his broadcasts when he has Larry Arnn on. Arnn is a central figure at Hillsdale College, and worth listening to for his knowledge of law, history of law, independence of the college from federal funds, the society founding the constitution (required course for every Hillsdale student).
I concur. A lot of these “conservative” media figures aren’t conservative, they just say what they think you want to hear. Then every once in a while the democrat in them slips out.
“…Would we be able to make progress on the issue if we started talking about it not as something one side could win, but as an issue where we’re looking for consensus?”
Again with the consensus! You don’t get to spend the last eighty-something years slowly taking away my rights and then stand there and tell me I am being unreasonable because I won’t come to ‘consensus’ with you. How about you take a great big F*^k You and piss off with your consensus and you start respecting my rights for a change. How’s that for consensus.
+1
Plenty of other countries to move to that despise gun ownership since the planet loves being treated like children and peasants.
Thank you, Chip. You warmed the cockles of my heart.
So whats A LOT of ammo? 500,1000 or 10000rounds?!? People shoot 1000rounds in one range trip. You AIN’T no conservative! I wish COULD stockpile 17guns and tons of ammo!!!
Hugh Hewitt is a supercilious and pretentious schmuck who always considers himself to be the smartest guy in the room. Which is only true when the room is the shithouse.
I’m not so sure. Shit houses often contain a wide array of insects.
Consensus and non-polarizing the debate begins with not threatening to imprison me for doing nothing wrong because I trip over some technicality or do or own something which is harming no one but allows someone with total ignorance of the situation to feel good about themselves. Now there’s a place to begin.
I just went and posted.my disapproval of Hugh Hewitts ammo idea on his Facebook. I encourage all of follow the links provided and comment directly on then original story if.possible. Here we are just preaching to the choir.
Good point. Let’s also post this article to his Facebook so he can be offered a chance to read everyone’s displeasure here.
Most gunowners would be on the stockpiling list for ammo.
In the great ammo drought , i bought ammo every time i found it.
The BATF would be overwhelmed by three counties in Florida.
LMAO. What a bunch of bull.
They’d have a hard time with Pasco alone.
> “In the great ammo drought , i bought ammo every time i found it.”
I’m pretty sure you’re doing it wrong. You’re supposed to buy lots and lots of it and when it’s cheap and plentiful, not when it’s scarce and expensive.
I used to like Hugh. Now I think he’s just another RINO.
I hope Mark Levin has now heard Hugh’s 2A view. Mark frequently uses him as a guest host and Mark is very pro 2A.
I hope Hugh just lost his side job.
I think you are mistaken. I don’t recall every Hugh the fudd filling in for Mark.
No, no mistake here. Although I haven’t listened to Mark for more than a few months, I would have never heard of Hugh otherwise. There is not much radio I listen to. (My truck radio went kaput a bit ago).
Mark had (has) a select few he lets sub for him when he has other commitments or is out.
Is a stockpile more or less than an arsenal? Where does a collection fall in the order? A buttload? Adequate? Piddly?
There has been much discussion over the last few years about what constitutes an “arsenal”, “stockpile”, “horde”, etc. The definition is the same in all cases: you have ammunition in an amount I don’t want you to have.
My goal is a “crap-ton” of guns & ammo.
‘Cuz it makes liberals cry.
Consensus implies a middle ground where both parties reach a common ground. For common ground, both parties should have adequate knowledge of the facts, the stakes (ie. big picture), and logic.
And this is where the consensus idea fails. One side is not aware of facts, isn’t interested in logic or knowledge. They just want power. So in order for there to be consensus, one side demands a sacrifice of power (aka tyranny).
And since tyranny is the opposite of liberty, I pose that there can be no consensus when one side wants to nullify another person’s liberty for personal gain/power.
Self defense insurance is nothing more than a way an individual can prearrange assistance to defend themselves from malicious prosecution, and the lawyers who put their morals in their wallets to represent the family of a dead scumbag. There are too many famous examples of malicious prosecution not to acknowledge the danger, even in an area that isn’t controlled by anti-gun politicians.
Auto insurance, business insurance, personal liability insurance are all designed to protect a person who might, one day, harm another. “Gun insurance” (as opposed to insurance providing reimbursement for loss of a gun or collection) is insurance against prosecution should you create damage or loss through negligence with a firearm, or as a result of use of a firearm in self-defense. While one’s life may be “ruined” regardless of whether “gun insurance” is in place, isn’t it prudent to provide reimbursement for legal expenses so family is not deprived of home or auto, or retirement funds?
I researched every “gun insurance” program I could find on the internet. Uniformly it seems, each one requires a trial before the trial to determine if the insurer will provide legal expense reimbursement (meaning you must exhaust your own assets first, then ask for money, or you must first prevail at trial). I want a policy that provides expenses of legal defense…while those expenses happen.
In trying to find an insurance program that will provide for legal expenses BEFORE TRIAL (I still do not know how to bold or italicize on this comment form), I learned that my homeowner insurance company will sell a personal liability policy that will cover theft of guns and ammunition, medical expenses and liability coverage even if damage results from negligent discharge, or damage injury by someone who is not domiciled in the home who creates damage, injury or liability through negligent discharge of my .22 caliber plinker.
“Murder insurance” my ass. Everyone who proposes mandatory insurance for gun owners doesn’t know a damn thing about insurance. There isn’t a policy in the land that extends coverage for intentional torts, and on top of which, the vast majority of people getting shot in this country are shot with stolen guns fired by people who are not permitted to possess them. I’d bet the insurance industry would LOVE to sell indemnity insurance to gun owners, because, except in the rare case of an accidental shooting, it would never pay out. And this idiot who claims that buying SD coverage is “murder” insurance must be of the opinion that anyone who shoots someone else, no matter how justified, deserves to burn in infamy, lose their jobs, their homes, and their savings. Give me a break!
I’m sorry TTAG but the Grinning Four-Eyes aka Hugh “Cucky” Hewitt is NOT a “Conservative”, he may fool those clowns on NBC/MSNBC telling them he’s one but he isn’t and shouldn’t be referred to as one.
I’m sorry TTAG but creepy Hugh “Smirky Four-Eyes” Hewitt is NOT a “Conservative”, he may fool those clowns on NBC/MSNBC telling them he’s one but he isn’t and shouldn’t be referred to as one.
It amazes me that there are so many shit for brains that think they are coming up with something new.
I remember back In the early 80’s FFL’s had to keep a log book on all sales of ammunition that could be used in a handgun. Any time someone bought ammunition in a caliber that could be used in a handgun, they had to prove they were 21 or older. Calibers that could be used in both handguns and long guns, you could buy at, 18 or older if you first stated it was for use in a long gun. All the information on a customers drivers license, and what caliber ammunition they purchased,had to be written in black ink in a bound A&D book. It was a pain in the ass and totally useless. It was done away with after a couple of years, I think that was a Federal requirement, but I don’t remember for sure. I was working in a sporting goods store here in in Texas!! It was as stupid as when Obama wanted anyone who sold a gun or two to have an FFL! I guess he was unaware of how hard Bill Clinton had worked to reduce the number of FFl’s!!!! Dumb shits one and all!!!!
Yes I remember, carbines in pistol calibers got real popular
How did that shooter get the gun?
Same way as the guy last year here in Austria, or the guy in Munich. Black market has anything you desire.
The funny thing here is that the guy in Austria last year, who opened fire at a concert, was banned from owning firearms, yet he attacked the concert with a Category A weapon (also illegal.) Hmm…
“…the 52% who are pushing for more restrictions like background checks for purchasers and a licensing process for sellers.”
Good news for that “52%”, then: both of those things have been on the books for decades. I guess they can stop pushing now.
FU Dunst
“What’s preventing them from collaborating across their beliefs is the polarized structure of the conversation. ” . . . That, and the fact that you FUCKING MADE THEM UP OUT OF WHOLE CLOTH”
134% of the people phsically, mentally, and spritually unable to achive breakaway velocity from the sucking gravity well of the FING POS (D) said that they know they suck satan’s ass and they can’t wait to do more in tbat capacity, but that armed citizenry really F’s with their ability to do their POS tyranny and oppression.
78% of US Citizens admit that the POS (D) are the Problem, and that they have to go. The other 22% would say the exact same thing, but they done told you enough times, and your a stupid POS whose not worth additional effort.
,agreed
Surviving here in California as a 2A supporter ain’t easy, but that video of the gorgeous woman packing heat, is just darn hot, to my reformed one time Left leaning…uh……”brain”, yeah that’s it. Happy to see this state slide further down the wall into the pig slop the legislature of Dimmocracks have created, only way is to leave this place before we all end up infected with political ideology disconnected from reality, HIV, or they send cops door to door for mandatory gun “buybacks” by following the state register of firearm owners which will come at some point. Trust the Dimms to use the next mass flag event to pass through more civil rights eviscerations.
I just watched YouTube vid of Army Honor Guard doing drill, with Washington monument as s back drop……….. All this anti-gun.( anti-American) stuff just breaks my heart, what’s happened to this country? Naked weirdos parading on Queer day. Ban Christmas can’t pray in school unless it’s to Allah. We’re doomed
I already have a limit on how much ammo I can “stockpile”. It’s called a bank account that supports four people, all shooters.
I will pray for your increased prosperity, and thank GOD with you, for blessings already received.
Amen
just as Rosa explained I am alarmed that anyone can earn $5494 in a few weeks on the internet . try this………https://tinyurl.com/y92dtooa
This is great news! I can buy a lot more ammo with extra money.
“Conservatives for Registration”
Is a 105% bullshit statement.
If they really are Conservative, they ain’t for “Registration”. And if they are “for Registration”, they ain’t Conservative. Conservatives don’t let stupid POS evil liberal progressive communist globalist global warming MFs, on the wrong side of history (and everything that’s good and right and just) and wholly opposed to Conservatives and Conservatism, define what or who we are. FIFY
Personally.. I am not to worried about required Gun Insurance.
. . I figure it is like Required training, Since the Government can’t even ask if you have a gun, everyone will have to get the insurance.
By the time the insurance companies get the numbers crunched on what costs them the most in pay out.
People will be buying guns just to get a price break from the insurance companies.
So if it’s mandatory the Feds can subpoena the insurance companies for a list of everyone who has bought the insurance and they have their “registry” or at least a list of all gun owners.
I thought the insurance for gun owners meme was a oft lauded goal of the anti’s?
Now that they know it exists they’re all up in arms about it?
Way to not look like contrarian lunatics with no direction antis. Way to go.
“Way to not look like contrarian lunatics with no direction antis. Way to go.”
Actually, they are quite consistent. As in, “Whatever I say is operative for that moment, regardless of whatever I said at another moment.”
Two different kinds of insurance. They want shooters to carry third-party liability insurance to protect the people they shoot. What they don’t get is that liability coverage does not insure when the shooting is intentional (aka attempted murder/murder), and that most people who are shot are shot by criminals who (a) shot them on purpose, (b) with an illegal gun, and (c) are barred from owning guns and won’t be buying insurance either.
They don’t care, and in fact find offensive, the thought that a shooter could buy insurance covering his legal expenses, whether from a criminal prosecution or a civil one; shooters should rot in hell, not just for shooting someone, but for owning a gun in the first place.
See? Entirely consistent!
Hugh Hewitt is a Ned Flanders in the Republican party…he predicted and wrote an entire book that Romney would be President, he also promised, on his show, I heard him say it….that Justice John Roberts would deal a death blow to obamacare…he had worked with Roberts when they were both in the Reagan Administration…..he is not one to be trusted in the street fight against democrats….he is the polite conversationalist in a battle with barbarians….the thing he proposes…..is really, really, just plain stupid. 1) It would be a defecto registration of guns, since it would eventually morph into all ammo purchases 2) even if the police had known this guy had that ammo, so what, they couldn’t have stopped what he did, since he hadn’t broken any other laws…which takes us back to 1). 3) Lots of gun owners buy ammo in bulk for the savings….now they would be criminals in the waiting as far as law enforcement is concerned 4) Let’s say you have this red flag thing…mass shooters plan their shootings 6 months to 2 years in advance, so they could go to a range, buy 3 boxes of ammo, at 50 bullets a box, shoot a little, take the rest home….and not set off the red flag as they stock pile ammo…..making hugh “Ned Flanders” hewitt one of the dumb people on our side…….
People buy ammo in bulk all the time; I don’t see how that could be a red flag.
“People buy ammo in bulk all the time; I don’t see how that could be a red flag.”
Two ways:
– bulk buying signals a person who is likely to commit mass murder
– bulk buying signals there are lots of people who are likely to commit mass murder
See how that works?
Who defines “stockpiling”? The government? How many rounds constitutes “stockpiling”? I buy in bulk to save $$, not because I intend to hurt my fellow man. Just another half-baked, knee-jerk reaction which will only limit my freedoms and solve nothing.
“Who defines “stockpiling”?
I do. The anti-gunner standard (as mentioned in a different reply) is that you (gun owner) have one more bullet than I want you to have. Then “I” get with a bunch of anti-gun friends (Shannon), and “we” declare you are stockpiling (thus are dangerous) ammunition because you have one more bullet than any of us want you to have. Then, we go to social media and become a primary source for “what America thinks”, get lots of media attention (meaning political attention), and before you know it, a single bullet must be tightly controlled by a fair and objective government.
Besides, if you aren’t doing anything illegal, don’t plan to do anything illegal, why do you care that bullets must be registered?
That blonde holding the “bitter clingers” sign is yummy! She’s just my size.
“If people buy a lot of ammunition in a short period of time, this should trigger a red flag with law enforcement,” said Hewitt on the NBC “Meet the Press” show on Oct. 8.
This one statement tells all you need to know. Hewitt believes it is the proper function of our government to know and react to anyone in the public who may present a threat to the government, federal or local. This is a declaration that “government of the people” is the only proper political arrangement.
Hows about I keep all my guns and ammo undocumented and you go eat a fromunda cheese sammich in the corner like a good little b*tch? Sound good you glitter farting fairy?
“Sound good you glitter farting fairy?”
Upon reading your comment, Hugh will be properly shamed into abandoning his business, radio show, and any public appearances.
Good job !
He has already shamed his house and should be publicly flogged. It is also not my job as a semi amateur commenter to shame him into giving up his no doubt sweet, cushy radio gig as a “professional conservative” commentator, however I am allowed to insult him in whatever manner I see fit. Should he quit his post one can only hope it will be because he has had an epiphany and realized that he has been intellectually dishonest in his pursuit to be a conservative commentator and has instead become a progressive or “leftist” commentator as evidenced by his stance on ammunition regulations.
Based on your carve out for replacing critique’s and criticism with insult, are you intellectually honest enough to be consistent? That low insults from anti-gun opposition qualify as enlightened debate?
It does matter.
I spend more time talking to anti-gun people about what dullards gun owners are because of our blog postings that look just like those of the confiscation crowd. I.E. it is difficult defend the idea that our trash talk is somehow superior because RTKBA and “asolute”, and “POTG are always right, and everyone else always wrong”.
What Hugh Hewitt’s idea would most likely mean is more dead people. How many gun owners “stockpile” ammunition? Probably most of them. (Those of us who live in New York are almost forced to since every ammo purchase has to go through an FFL making it more economical to buy in bulk.)
What is a “stockpile?” The Sandy Hook shooter did his dirty work with a few hundred rounds. Same with the San Bernardino terrorists.
And since these mass shooter types tend to plan, what’s to stop them from buying in small amounts until they have what they need? (Which in most cases isn’t all that much.)
Meanwhile, law enforcement is spending it’s finite resources tracking the Americans who takes advantage of a sale at Cabela’s leaving fewer law enforcement resources to go after actual criminals. Result? More dead people, people killed in run of the kind of crime the media and political establishment, not to mention folks like Hewitt, ignore.
Fool.
I guess I am lucky, A municipal judge in my area is an avid cowboy action shooter. Avid may be an understatement. He must live close to our gun range, Talking with him, he shoots about 40 thousand rounds a year in practice and competition.
So the Gov’t is worried about my 3000 rounds a year? Good luck with that.
Comments are closed.