With the anniversary of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting coming up, it’s been oddly quiet on the Democratic side. To quote New York resident Aaron Weiss, the “dead children battle cry” is far louder and more frequent the closer the anniversary dates come. We still wait on the answer to why the cry, by the way. Why they stopped is more easily answered.
The Democratic senators had their fun with promoting anti-gun politics up until January 2014, but we’re now watching their ride on Hurricane “Sandy Hook” swing a u-turn on them . As the pendulum swings, we’re watching the Midterms creep up on the country. In other words, all that talk of restricting access firearms and related items having failed is backfiring now . And, just as the pro-firearms groups are assisting with their downfall, but also the anti-firearms groups. The politicians who wished to ride through the storm quietly have and will inevitably be promoted by groups like Gifford’s Americans for Responsible Solutions and Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety, in some manner. These groups’ have their own agendas and goals, and they will not be silenced in their endeavors. Though, Gifford’s is failing to make the elections about guns… in her favor.
After the fiasco that was the proverbial 2013 Federal Assault Weapons Ban, we watched push-back on the state-level. To nobody’s surprise, historically restrictive states became more-so during the 2013 season, but according to one source, there were far more pro-firearm laws enacted by the time of the first Sandy Hook anniversary. The big headliners for the anti-firearms coalition, however, were Connecticut’s “Child Safety” law, New York’s SAFE Act and Colorado’s LCM restriction law.
The exodus of manufacturers, which came over time, was initiated by Magpul’s “Boulder Airlift” campaign after they decided to boycott and move from their home state. But, not before their Airlift “dropped” magazines to the people of Colorado and used the money to force out two local politicians and cause one to resign. They ended up moving to Wyoming and Texas. Governors offered incentives to companies seeking new grounds to plant roots in, and other companies told offending states and their police departments that sales would cease because of the restrictions being applied against law-abiding civilians (NYPD’s desire to purchase Serbu Firearms .50-caliber rifles).
“If you don’t like it: pound sand. It’s your own damn fault.”
The result, for the anti-firearms coalition and states, was as many as one-hundred and fifty firearms manufacturers boycotting sales to restrictive states’ police departments, thirty major firearms manufacturers relocating South. Another big win for the Second was the entirety of the United States allowing some sort of concealed carry permitting, including the District of Colombia. Illinois was also opened up and saw the murder rate drop immediately. More on both of those cases here. California also saw some good news out of Peruta vs. San Diego and Orange County has seen a lot of permits approved, so far.
Connecticut and New York also saw massive non-compliance to the registration and re-registration demands from the politicians. Twitter, Facebook and online firearms communities were ablaze with photos and videos of registration documents in various forms of destruction and wearing various slogans, including the popular “FUAC!” (Fuck You, Andrew Cuomo!), in New York. The push for control by anti-firearms groups and politicians also kick-started a number of new fronts and initiatives in the firearms community during this period, as well. The “we’ve compromised, now it’s their turn!” mindset really is leading the pack in reasons for current legislature pushes made by these groups.
The groups that came to be include;
Armed Citizens United: The ACU’s mission is to provide the highest level of legislative support across the entirety of suppressed firearms rights. This includes removing Gun-Free Zones, the Hughes Amendment of the GCA and the NFA and carry permit requirements for open and / or concealed carry in all states — replacing the latter with Constitutional Carry laws.
NFA Freedom Alliance: The NFAFA’s mission is to provide assistance at the state and federal level to ease restrictions on all aspects of the items regulated by the National Firearms Act (NFA) — these items include machine-guns, suppressors, short-barreled weapons and Any Other Weapons (AOWs). The NFAFA’s first bid is to see all 50-states pass “Shall Certify” legislation for NFA items. Similar to Shall Issue CCW rulings in over forty-states presently.
ShallNot.org: Another of the groups set to push for a rollback of unconstitutional firearms restrictions, set by the Federal level, is ShallNot. The simplest part of what the Second Amendment’s text to include is the phrase “shall not be infringed” and that is made abundantly clear by this group. The group’s statement of goals can be found here.
Notable initiatives after the Democrat’s ‘Push’, they stood firmly in the way of adding armed faculty and staff by the NRA (even though they called for something to be done), and the call for the removal of Gun-Free Zones by Students for Concealed Carry on Campus. Students are very tired of being herded around the “slaughter fields” when they are legally allowed to defend themselves nearly everywhere else in their local area. Also, with the ability to take classes online, some probably have signed up to avoid having to go anywhere near the “Law-Abiding Disarmament Zones”.
The results from the operations that the ATF committed to are still transpiring as I write this. The information regarding Project Gunrunner and deaths of U.S. Border Patrolmen backed the ATF into a corner. It brought on questions on whether they should be defining and regulating civilian rights. Later, items from the private sector — notably pushed by SIG-Sauer — brought on court brawls and fouled-up determination letters. The former brought on the war for suppressors and the latter allowed an arm brace to be shouldered like a stock, but on a pistol platform, without it being defined as an SBR. “What’s the point to laws against short-barrel weapons again,” was asked many times. More on Title-II firearms includes the new Hollis v. Holder: an effort to abolish the National Firearms Act and 922(o).
In short, it’s going to be very bad for many of the officials who voted for the firearms control legislation from nearly two-years past. This time has shown a number of things. Using dead children and their families as political props is outrageous. Prejudice against firearms owners, being referred to as “intimidating rednecks” is intolerable and has been proven wrong, thanks to many sources such as ColionNoir, and student and female concealed permit applications. Furthermore, attacks like these and oath-breaking used to be seen as treason, resulting in the penalty of death. They should be grateful for merely losing their political positions and the rest better learn a wise lesson…
Attacking individual sovereignty and Constitutionally-covered rights was not and is not worth it.
We will see how it plays out Tuesday, but there are indicative polls already to show for.