B.L.U.F. H.R.2814 has been passed out of committee and will be voted on in the house shortly. It repeals the PLCAA and has some other nasty in it.

If you have the right to keep and bear arms but nobody will make or sell you arms, does the right still exist?

There are people that want only criminals and the government to have arms. They exist and they have been working at removing guns and other arms from The People for many many years.

Every gun control law starts with “for the good of the people we have to restrict them.”

The first(?) federal attack on gun ownership was the NFA. The congress knew it was unconstitutional to limit the right of the people to keep and bear arms so they made it to expensive to own certain classes of firearms. They then prosecuted people for failure to pay a tax, not for owning an NFA weapon. Over time the penalties increased. An entire new class of NFA items, destructive devices, was added to the NFA.

Today you can’t own an NFA item without government permission unless you are a criminal.

The NFA was augmented with the GCA and other laws over time.

The people of these United States responded with a “hell no” and continued to buy, sell, manufacture guns. More people participate in firearm related sports than ever before. More people own guns for protection than ever before.

In response to Americans refusing to give up their rights, the gun control groups found a new method, “lawfare” Lawfair is using the courts to attack people without an intention of winning the case. “The process is the punishment.” To put it another way, they were going to sue the gun industry, from top to bottom, right out of existence.

What this meant was that gun stores, manufacturers, trainers and anybody else associated with the gun industry was suddenly subject to lawsuits.

Some animal uses a gun he bought to kill a fellow gang banger and the store he bought it from got sued. Some asshole shoots up a school and the manufacturer of the gun used gets sued.

At every point in the supply chain lawsuits were happening.

Congress, both Democrats and Republicans, responded by passing the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. The PLCAA, in short, said that you can’t be sued if somebody else uses a gun to commit a crime.

Animal buys gun from FFL and then shoots up a school, he’s responsible, not the FFL. In general cases brought in violation of the PLCAA are dismissed before the prices get out of hand.

That changed after Sandy Hook. The plaintiffs looked for a way around the PLCAA and found one. The manufacturer of the firearm used in the shooting could be sued for their advertisements, not for making or selling the firearm.

The case was settled out of court when the insurance companies paid up rather than fight the case.

A number of states have started adding laws that make it easier to sue FFLs and manufacturers for doing lawful commerce.

Yesterday the House Judiciary Committee voted out H.R. 2814 which would repeal the PLCAA.

Schiff’s Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act co-sponsored by Reps. Dwight Evans (D-Pa.), Jason Crow (D-Colo.), and 70 other House members, would repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act to ensure the gun industry – including manufacturers, sellers, and interest groups – is not shielded from liability when it acts with negligence and disregard for public safety. The bill would allow civil cases to go forward against irresponsible actors in state and federal courts – just as they would if they involved any other product – and give victims of gun violence and their families their day in court. The bill would also incentivize responsible business practices that would reduce gun injuries and deaths.
— Schiff Bill to Repeal Gun Industry Liability Shield Passed Out of Committee

Back in November of 2021 some asshole went on a murder spree at Oxford High School. The little shit killed four students before being taken into custody.

As part of the investigation it was found that his parents purchased the gun he used for him.

The prosecution is claiming that the parents committed involuntary manslaughter.

[Judge Cheryl] Matthews concluded the prosecution had presented enough evidence to proceed with the involuntary manslaughter charges against the [redacted], who are accused of ignoring the mental health needs of their son, buying him a gun instead of getting him help, and failing to notify the school that he had access to a gun when they were summoned to the office over a violent drawing he had made on the morning before the shooting.

The defense is arguing that the prosecution is attempting to get the courts to legislate from the bench. They are arguing that they had secured the gun and had no idea that their son was planning to go on a murder rampage.

Unfortunately we hear way to much about the backgrounds of these murdering assholes. They mostly come from fatherless families. They have unstable home lives. They are often known for being antisocial or having violent tendencies. They are almost always “known to law enforcement.”

The prosecutors want to make it a crime to not predict how a child will act. What parent would willingly have a firearm in their home if they even remotely considered that their child might use a firearm for criminal purposes?

The goal of the gun rights infringers is to make it to costly to carry, to costly to sell or manufacture firearms, to costly to own a firearm. At the same time they are actively working to paint every gun owner as a crime waiting to happen.

The Detroit Free Press does a fairly balanced article on the appeal of the assholes parents.
[Parents] ask appeals court to toss case: Our son did this, not us

"Climate activist" attached themselves to the road in Berlin.

George Soros is proud ?????‍? pic.twitter.com/n3cE64Z01y

— ??? KC ??? (@KCPayTreeIt) July 20, 2022

The news says that she glued herself to the street with cement.

Cement has very alkaline and is known to cause severe chemical burns.

It is also exothermic as it cures.

She has the potential to really damage her hand with this dumb stunt.

Anyone stupid and ill informed enough to do this isn’t worth listening to.

The heroics go beyond Eli Dicken, apparently his girlfriend contributed too.

‘Good Samaritan’ identified in Greenwood Park Mall shooting; called ‘hero’ by his girlfriend’s family

As police rushed shoppers at Greenwood Park Mall to safety Sunday evening after a mass shooting, 19-year-old Shay Golden’s grandmother was getting frightening calls and texts on her phone.

She didn’t want to share her name publicly, but she did want to share with 13News what she calls heroic actions by her granddaughter and especially her granddaughter’s boyfriend, 22-year-old Elisjsha Dicken, of Seymour.

Shay took action too, her grandmother says, despite her terror.

She helped a woman she saw laying on the ground, who’d been shot in the leg.

“She’s been in nursing school for two years. She said she took her coat off and put a tourniquet around it and waited,” her grandmother explained. “She jumped in and went into action, yeah, and it’s just her adrenaline mode to just do that.”

Of course the focus has been on Dicken’s quick action and incredible shooting but tending to the wounded and doing bleeding control is critical to keep the body count low.

Both of them saved lives that day.

Experts impressed by armed bystander’s response at Greenwood mall shooting

A new timeline from Greenwood Police show it only took 15 seconds for the Greenwood mall shooting to come to an end.

Police reviewed surveillance video that showed the moments the suspect left the food court bathroom to the time Eli Dicken pulled out his gun, aimed and took out the threat.

Autopsy results also revealed the suspect was hit eight times from about 40 yards away. Police say Dicken fired 10 rounds.

Those numbers are impressing many gun experts and owners.

“What impressed me the most, compared to your average civilian shooter, was not the number of rounds fired, not the hit rate, not the time, but the distance,” said Mark Welter, retail manager for Indy Arms Company.

Welter and another instructor tested it out to see if they could do it. They put a target 25 yard out, which was the farthest it could go.

“That was seven seconds to draw and get off 10 rounds in 25 yards and I’m low on a lot of them,” Welter said after he finished shooting.

Police said Dicken had no police training or military background. He told them he learned to shoot from his grandfather.

So WTHR Indianapolis found some shooting instructors who couldn’t reproduce what Dicken pulled off.

The lesson here, of course, is practice more.

And I’m absolutely certain his grandfather would be proud of him, using the skills he taught to save lives.

As everything seems to be falling apart, it’s getting diceyer out there.

It’s good to know that they’re are still good Samaritans with skills out there.

Strive to be one yourself.

Carry everywhere and make sure you have a tourniquet on you.

Wake up and smell the coffee! Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz slams woke leaders for ‘abdicating their responsibility’ to fight crime causing his chain to shutter 16 profitable stores because of assaults on staff – with MORE closures to come

The CEO of Starbucks is shuttering 16 profitable stores nationwide over disruptions that he’s blamed on the cities’ woke leaders for ‘abdicating their responsibility’ to fight crime.

Howard Schultz said ‘America has become unsafe’ after he announced that 16 stores will close in several left-leaning cities across the country because staff are being attacked and reports of drug use at the popular cafés.

Schultz warned that this is ‘just the beginning’ of store closures and said there ‘would be many more’ as staff fear for their own safety amid a rise in crime, homeless and people with mental health issues.

In two leaked video excerpts of Schultz speaking at an internal meeting, shared by Ari Hoffman of KVI-AM talk radio in Seattle, Schultz said he was shocked to hear that one of the primary concerns of their retail partners is their ‘own personal safety.’

The reported disruptions include drug use by paying customers and, more often than not, members of the public – who often take advantage of the company’s open bathroom policy, which allows nonpaying patrons to use their facilities.

As a result, the bathrooms have in large part devolved into dens of debauchery, regularly used by vagrants and homeless to do drugs and engage in other illicit behavior.

Well, well, well, isn’t it the consequences of Schuktz’s own actions.

He implemented the open bathroom policy after Starbucks was bullied by Wokies online.

He has openly supported all of these Woke politicians and Woke bail reform and drug decriminalization policies.

He supported and donated to the people he now blames for making these cities unsafe and causing him to close stores.

I honestly believe that Starbucks shareholders should demand Schultz be fired for helping cause this mess with his PAC.

Diving into the leftist cesspit of NPR is not my favorite read. Today they surprised me with a balanced article. Not fully but not tilted so far left that the deck chairs are tumbling into the sea.

You write, this court is not ideologically motivated, which, of course, is hard for some people to accept because they just produced what can easily be seen as Republican outcomes on abortion rights, gun laws and climate regulation. Granted, some rulings have gone the other way, but the big ones all went one way in rapid succession. What’s the case that those rulings are not ideological?

CURT LEVEY: Well, the case is that the court – if they wanted to decide all cases with a conservative outcome, they could have, and they didn’t. Conservatives were very unhappy with their decision about the Remain in Mexico policy. They turned down a vaccine mandate case from New York. So the court could’ve been 100% conservative outcomes. And it wasn’t. And if you look at why, it’s because it’s a textualist court. Some people like to call it originalist. I prefer the term textualist, but they’re often used in the same way. If you want to understand why they ruled one way on guns and another way on abortion, it’s because the Constitution contains an explicit Second Amendment that guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, whereas the Constitution – not only does it not contain a right to abortion. It doesn’t even contain a general right to privacy.

They interview with Curt Levey, a member of the Federalist Society, isn’t gotcha, isn’t nasty, it is very matter of fact and does bring up good points.

Read the entire thing over at NPR:
Is the Supreme Court majority ruling on the law or their personal preference?

While the report claims this the shooter claims it was a prank gone wrong. It sounds more like homicide to me. Not sure which level.

It seems that the owner of a gun store bought a replica BB gun (airsoft?) and put it in the display case. He then claims he accidently picked up the wrong gun, pointed it at an employee as a prank and pulled the trigger.

The firearm was loaded and he killed the employee.

Any prank that starts with a firearm is a bad idea. Any prank that starts with a replica firearm in a situation where it is likely to be perceived as a real gun is a bad idea. Any prank that violates the four safety rules is a bad idea.

What the hell was going on that there was a firearm in a display case with a live round? At all of my LGS, even the ones I don’t like, nothing goes back in the case until it has been cleared. My LGS takes the firearm out of the case, clears the weapon, shows me that it is clear, passes it to me, I clear the weapon. We continue to follow the four rules. We follow the same procedure handing it back and it doesn’t go back into the case until it has been cleared and wiped down.

But OSHA is treating this as a safety violation: “The business failed to furnish a place of employment which is free of recognized hazards which may cause death or serious physical harm.”

Documents: OSHA fines SC gun store after employee killed during ‘prank’ gone wrong