Gun Control is Not Greater Safety

Gun Control is Not Greater Safety

Gun control is not greater safety. Everyone knows that Chicago has a problem with gun violence. It is a result which should be the expectation. The city has such strict gun control measures in place. The expectation does not match the actual… The intention of strict gun control is to prevent criminals from possessing firearms … Read more

Martin O’Malley Tells New Hampshire Audience Dems Should Run on Gun Control

baltimore-riot-police-carMartin O’Malley was in New Hampshire last week, and he thinks gun control is a winning issue for Democrats even if it hasn’t worked in Maryland, yet.

“It’s hard to measure prevention,” O’Malley said, before laying the blame for increased homicide rates at the feet of the two Baltimore mayors,  Stephanie C. Rawlings-Blake and Catherine Pugh, who were elected after he left the mayor’s office to become governor.

What’s O’Malleys winning formula? Is it the one that has turned Baltimore into the murder capital of the nation?

Read more

How Fast Can A Rifle Go From Unloded…

…to loaded?  Pretty damn fast, apparently.Gun free zones - where citizens try to run faster than law breakers can load a weapon

Two New Hampshire State Police troopers demonstrated how quickly a semiautomatic rifle can go from unloaded to loaded under a new definition in a bill up for a House vote this week. – (Union leader, Wed 1-4-12)

So with no one else lawfully armed–a policy the police, Governor Lynch, and the university folks both advertise proudly and insist they will defend–the only thing left to stop the rapid loading, unloading, and reloading of a “semiautomatic rifle” in a gun free zone would be what we call…victims. (Or running out of ammo.)

But don’t Democrats love “victims?”

Without victims they have no platform.

Read more

House Bill 29: What we have here, is failure to communicate

Upon reading the House Journal Majority report on this Bill, I am reminded of Strother Martin’s line in Cool Hand Luke, “What we have here…is failure tomonkeygun.jpg communicate…” House Bill 29, was deemed “Inexpedient to Legislate” this past week for reasons that can be best characterized as, “Bizarre.” The bill was an adjustment to the N.H. RSA 159:6-c which addresses Appeal, denial and Revocation of pistol and revolver licenses. Under current law, such actions are heard only in District Court.

In writing for the majority, State Representative Larry Gagne confusingly writes, “RSA 159:6-c was designed to allow a denial to be heard in a district court. This allows the applicant to appeal the decision of the issuing authority either pros or cons with an attorney.” I haven’t the foggiest idea what this means! The Bill has nothing to do with the particular merits of a denial or revocation of a pistol revolver license. Moreover, this bill has absolutely nothing to do with the representation an appellant has or does not have in seeking a remedy under this chapter. HB 29 deals instead with the “forum” in which a remedy is sought from denial or revocation.

Representative Gagne in reporting for the majority continues, “If the issuing authority did not follow the procedure outlined in RSA 159:c, License to Carry, the procedure then is outlined in RSA 159:6-d, which allows the applicant to file in superior court…”

Read more

Share to...