Here’s What Happened With Colorado’s Gun Bills (Including the ‘Shotgun Ban’)

by: the Common Constitutionalist

With the miriad of varied bills be offered up at the same time, could the gun control vote in Colorado have been an example of the Overton Window? What is the Overton Window? [Nathan Russell, Mackinac Center]  Imagine, if you will, a yardstick standing on end. On either end are the extreme policy actions for any political issue. Between the ends lie all gradations of policy from one extreme to the other. The yardstick represents the full political spectrum for a particular issue. The essence of the Overton window is that only a portion of this policy spectrum is within the realm of the politically possible at any time. Regardless of how vigorously a think tank or other group may campaign, only policy initiatives within this window of the politically possible will meet with success.

Politicians believe they are elected to do 2 things; get reelected and pass laws. I contend that if politicians present many bills at the same time, from the relatively sublime to the absurd, the seemingly less harmful bills stand a better chance of passage. Thus, taking action within that “window” appears reasonable. You be the judge.

 

DENVER (TheBlaze/AP):

Heres What Happened With Colorados Gun Bills Last Night

​QUICK LOOK:

• ​Online gun certification: ​Senate Bill 195, banning online certification for concealed carry permits and requiring people to attend classes in person — advances in Senate

• ​Liability for “assault”-style weapons: Senate Bill 196, holding manufacturers and sellers of semiautomatic weapons liable for violence committed with them — ​killed by sponsor

• ​Gun ban for domestic abusers: Senate Bill 197, banning certain domestic violence abusers from owning guns — advances in Senate

​• Limits on high-capacity ammunition:​ House Bill 1224, limiting gun ammunition magazines to 15 rounds but amended to not outlaw the “standard shotgun”​advances in Senate

​• Gun ban on college campuses:  House Bill 1226, banning concealed weapons on college campuses — ​killed by sponsor

​• Background check fee:​ House Bill 1228, requiring gun buyers to pay for their own background checks — ​advances in Senate

• Universal background checks:​ House Bill 1229, requiring background checks for all gun transfers, including private sales — ​advances in Senate

[via the Denver Post]

 Lawmakers advanced Colorado’s strictest gun proposals in recent memory, during marathon debate in a state caught between a history of horrific shootings and a Western heritage where gun ownership is a daily part of life for many. Continue Reading

Florida Lawmakers Ammo Control

Audrey Gibson Wants Everyone Buying Ammo to Undergo Anger Management Course First

Folks, the Democrats are going to extremes to rape us of our constitutional rights.  Obama has been diligently working on it since he first took office 4 years ago.  However, his efforts have ramped up since his re-election and his loyal minions are following his example.

In the latest of asinine bills being introduced into legislatures across the nation is the one just introduced by Florida State Senator Audrey Gibson from Jacksonville.  Her bill, introduced last Saturday, would require anyone in the state of Florida who wants to purchase any type of ammunition, to undergo an anger management course.  In addition, ammunition purchasers would also have to take a refresher anger management course every 10 years.  Her bill calls for a 3 day waiting period for anyone wanting to purchase a firearm.

The provision of her bill on ammunition reads:

“It is unlawful to: A) Sell ammunition to another person who does not present certification that he or she has successfully completed an anger-management program consisting of at least 2 hours of online or face-to-face instruction in anger-management techniques.  The certification must be renewed every 10 years.”

A first offense would be considered a second-degree misdemeanor, which in Florida could result in up to 60 days in jail, a 6 month probation and fine up to $500.  A second offense within a year of conviction of the first offense would be a first-degree misdemeanor.  If convicted, a first-degree misdemeanor conviction could result in up to 1 year in jail, 12 months of probation and up to $1,000 fine. Continue Reading

The Clinton Hustle

The following video is of the Rush Limbaugh TV show in 1995. It just demonstrates that it’s always the same with the left. They just leap from one crisis to another. We hear the same dire warnings now that we heard 18 years ago. Nothing ever changes with the left. The sky is always falling, unless we spend more.

Biofuel Scam

from: IBD

 

 In yet another green folly, the lawless Environmental  Protection Agency continues to fine gasoline producers for not using cellulosic biofuels in quantities that don’t exist, making only more pain at the pump.

cellulosic-ethanolLast month, a federal court dealt a serious blow to the Environmental  Protection Agency’s renewable fuels push by ruling that the agency exceeded its authority by mandating refiners use cellulosic biofuels, which aren’t  commercially available. The EPA’s lawless response in a lawless administration was to raise its requirements.

In 2005 and 2007, Congress twice amended the Clean Air Act to establish a renewable fuel standard (RFS) that included a mandate to use cellulosic  biofuels.

If refiners failed to meet the goals, the EPA could fine them. The RFS set ambitious goals for cellulosic biofuels but at least charged the EPA with reducing the requirement if production was lower than the mandate.

This the EPA simply ignored, issuing fines for failing to use this biofuel when it wasn’t even available.

As Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner points out in Politico, 2010, the first year of the mandate, the EPA projected 5 million gallons of cellulosic biofuels would be available.

In fact, there were none. Not a single gallon. In 2011, the EPA increased the mandate to 6.5  million gallons. Again, the actual amount available was zero. Undeterred, in  2012, the EPA increased the required amount to 8.5 million gallons. The actual available amount was 25,000 gallons.

ScamThis absurdity prompted the American Petroleum Institute (API) to file a lawsuit last year challenging the EPA’s rulemaking. The API petitioned the court to review the EPA’s January 2012 RFS.

On Jan. 25, 2013, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed the EPA had  exceeded its authority. “(W)e agree with API that EPA’s 2012 projection of  cellulosic biofuel production was in excess of the agency’s statutory authority,” reads the court decision.

The court further told the agency: “The EPA points to no instance in which the term ‘projected’ is used to allow the projector to let its aspiration for a self-fulfilling prophecy divert it from a neutral methodology.”

The agency’s response to the court’s ruling, Sensenbrenner notes, was to  nearly double its 2013 mandate from 8.5 million gallons to 14 million gallons.

Different from corn- or sugar-based ethanol — which have questionable benefits — cellulosic ethanol is made from wood chips, switch grass and  agricultural waste, such as corncobs.

The EPA’s requirement for 14 million gallons of the stuff is about as realistic as that trillion-dollar coin some have proposed to solve our fiscal problems.

 

 

Gun Ban, A Grand Conspiracy

by: the Common Constitutionalist

I was never much of a conspiracy buff. Those who believe there is a centralized power such as the Bilderbergs, controlling the world or secretly planning a one-world government, I thought to be kooks.

grand conspiracyI’ve always concluded that people of similar beliefs just think the same, thus come up with the same ideas independent of one another, but just appear contrived because the outcome of those ideas were analogous. I didn’t buy the notion of a bunch of bureaucrats sitting in some dimly lit antechamber plotting away, “Now your assignment is to call the senator and convince him to propose something and you call that Governor and insist he proposes something else.”

Well, I’ve begun to rethink my position and may be completely wrong but it sure seems like it could be happening just that way.

The feds know and have tried to put forth anti-gun legislation in both the House and Senate and gotten nowhere. To any progressive, this is unacceptable. It however, w1.6 billion bulletsill not deter the Marxists from attempting to control and eventually take our guns. There is always a back door, either through regulation or other means.

There’ve been many articles written about various departments of the federal government buying up billions of rounds of ammunition. Heck, I’ve published a few myself.

The latest is the 1.6 billion-ammunition purchase by Homeland Security over the next 4 to 5 years. The feds call it “Strategic Sourcing Contracts” and it is said to get them a better price, which I’m sure it does. Odd that the purchasing contract directly coincides with Obama’s second term of four years. I’m just saying.

Anyway, Homeland Security uses about 15 million rounds of ammo every year. Let’s do some quick math. 1.6 billion divided by 15 million equals a little more than 106. So Homeland wants to buy 106 years worth of ammo? That sounds reasonable.

Now, I’m a gun owner. I don’t know about you but I’m finding it increasingly difficult to purchase ammunition. Going to any local gun shop is a joke. Their shelves look like Mother Hubbard’s cupboard. Online imagazinessn’t much better. Everything is out of stock. How odd.

Companies that produce ammunition must follow a pecking order of customers. Guess who is the head pecker, as it were? You got it; the federal government. What a great way to usurp gun control legislation. With the feds buying up all the ammo a lot of good your gun will be without it. Voilà; instant gun, or ammo control.

States across the country have been testing the waters by passing numerous gun bans. The latest is the proposal in Colorado to ban high-capacity magazines. Citizens of the state are just figuring out that due to the wording of the bill, the run-of-the-mill pump action shotgun would be deemed illegal

Then there is Democrat Illinois representative, Luis Gutierrez. He is changing things up a bit. Instead of going after those scary and expensive “assault weapons”, he is proposing a ban on the production of inexpensive lower quality handguns, known to some as “Saturday night specials”. Now I haven’t seen the bill yet, but I can bet it is aimed directly at less expensive handguns, the kind that someone on a budget might only be able to afford; someone who doesn’t have $800-$1000 to spend for personal protection. I guess they’ll just have to call 911 and wait.zero-tolerance

It’s becoming apparent that one way or the other, the full spectrum of weapons will be covered. That’s the hardware portion of gun control. The software ban is in the conditioning of the population, or the collective.

We are hearing stories virtually every day of one child after another being suspended or somehow reprimanded for the most ridiculously innocent things, from eating a Pop Tart into the shape of an “L” and pretending it’s a gun, or a picture of a gun or a cut up piece of paper that vaguely resembles one.

From prekindergarten through college our children are being conditioned to have a completely illogical fear of guns. They are being taught that guns can’t protect or defend; they can only do harm.

Children and adults alike are being conditioned and trained into believing it is wrong to fight back. We must cower and wait for the “First Responders” to come save us. Young women are being told that it is better to be raped than protect themselves with a gun.

The brave high schooler that wrestled a gun away from another student gets suspended when he should receive a medal. See, he didn’t wait for “Capt. Planet”, the first responder to save the day. I was going to say Capt. America but that would be jingoistic. That young man took it upon himself and that just won’t do. I bet he’ll think twice before rescuing his fellow man captain planetand next time leave it to the professionals the way it is intended in the collective.

Maybe that’s what Obama meant when in 2008 he said, “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.” Could it be that’s what Homeland needs those 1.6 billion rounds for?

We are being assimilated into the progressive’s idea of a peaceful utopia. I for one will not succumb because I know it can’t be done. This attempt, if allowed to continue, like every other time before it, will end badly.