NAACP head calls for gun grab, ban on AR-15s
Apparently ignoring the important role that modern firearms played in helping African-Americans to gain their civil rights throughout their long struggle for equality, the president and CEO of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP0), Derrick Johnson, reportedly called for a national gun confiscation program in a syndicated column through Black Press USA on Mar. 5.
Comparing recent school shootings to the violence and discrimination black students faced after the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court decision, Johnson wrote that “fear and terror still exist in our children’s classrooms” because of the “National Rifle Association and the politicians [sic] that support them.”
“Given the disproportionate damage gun violence is having on our communities, the NAACP has advocated for sane, sensible laws, to help eliminate or at least to decrease the damage and death caused by gun violence. Requiring universal background checks on all gun sales and transfers, banning military-style, semi-automatic assault guns, enacting tough, new criminal penalties for straw purchasers and gun traffickers, and allowing the Center for Disease Control to research gun violence as a major public health issue are just a few of the reasonable steps lawmakers could take to stem the tide of gun-related deaths in neighborhoods across the nation,” Johnson wrote.
Smart gun advocates use school shooting
No one wants a tragedy to go to waste, particularly not the gun grabbers who will exploit every shooting headline to promote their cause. But how smart guns can help prevent another school shooting in unclear to us at TGM.
However, Margot Hirsch, president of a group that has been promoting smart gun development and marketing, seems to find some public relations traction in the Feb. 14 Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Florida, suggesting that “gun safety technologies are among the bi-partisan responses that are gaining traction (as a result of the shooting), as seen in the historic four state Regional Gun Violence Research Consortium where Connecticut Governor Murphy called for “meaningfully propelling things like smart gun technology.”
Huh?
More police shortfalls in Bay State slaying
The failing of local and federal law enforcement in following up on warnings about Nikolas Cruz, who has admitted to the mass shooting at the Broward County, FL, school is not the only example of failure to finalize an investigation of a suspect before he commits mayhem.
The Boston Globe reported recently that police records on Winchester, MA, slaying suspect detail odd, threatening behavior by Jeffrey Yao, who has been arraigned on murder charges and attempted murder after allegedly stabbing a woman to death and attempting to stab a man to death in the Winchester Public Library.
Winchester police repeatedly brought Jeffrey Yao to the hospital for psychological evaluations over the past several years before he allegedly erupted in violence in February.
The records chronicle Yao’s frequent encounters with police and his wide variety of unsettling, odd, and threatening behavior. He appeared to be suicidal and asked people to kill him. The records hint at treatment Yao was receiving but do not detail how the mental health community handled him.
In one telling incident in late 2016, Yao came to the Winchester Police Department himself, complaining that his therapist was threatening him and that “chemicals coming through the vents in his home” were making him sick.
Police reported the encounter to Yao’s doctor. In a sign of how familiar the troubled young man was to Winchester police, supervisors were asked to tell their officers at roll call “that Jeffrey Yao may be off his meds.”
Winchester Police Chief Peter MacDonnell said he believes the long record of police interactions with Yao “will create some kind of dialogue on mental health in our society.”
“This situation shows maybe we need to do more,” he said.
Apparently someone should do more when the warning bells go off.
NYPD still hoards data in 46-year-old murder
Courtroom action opened in early March in Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Law lawsuit against the NYPD in New York State Supreme Court. Under state FOIL laws, Judicial Watch sought records, a final report and a key audio tape of a 10-13 “officer in distress” call made in the 46-year-old Phillip Cardillo murder case. The NYPD had told Judicial Watch to go to hell.
Instead, Judicial Watch went to court.
Cardillo, an NYPD patrolman, was gunned down in a Nation of Islam mosque in Harlem in 1972. The NYPD claims the Cardillo case, after more than four decades, is still “active and ongoing.”
Judicial Watch argued that, on both the facts and the law, the case is closed, and that the public has a right to the information.
The NYPD took an absolutist position on the Judicial Watch request—absolutely not. The NYPD claims the tape is part of an active and ongoing investigation.
Retired NYPD detective Randy Jurgensen was in the courtroom as an observer. Jurgensen has played a central role in the Cardillo case for decades. He arrested Cardillo’s alleged shooter, and later wrote “Circle of Six,” a powerful memoir of the case that prompted then-Police Commissioner Ray Kelly in 2006 to direct the NYPD Major Case Squad to take another look at the Cardillo killing.
Jurgensen worked with Major Case on the re-investigation and says the inquiry was closed around 2012. Since then, there has been no substantive and material activity on the case—although the NYPD now claims otherwise.
Forty-six years is a long time. And it’s fair to ask, why is Judicial Watch seeking information now? What is it all about? And why is the NYPD resisting disclosure?
The short answer is that the NYPD has a well-documented bias against transparency and disclosure, according to Judicial Watch. It’s embarrassed by its past bad behavior in the Cardillo case and does not want it dragged back into the public eye.
CA county weighs ban on gun shows
On March 6, the Santa Clara County, CA, Board of Supervisors was schooled to hold a public meeting to discuss a proposal by Supervisor Ken Yeager to prohibit the sale and possession of firearms on county property. If such a proposal were enacted, it would have the effect of prohibiting gun shows from operating at any county-owned fairgrounds.
In response, attorneys for NRA and CRPA have filed a joint-opposition letter highlighting the superfluous nature of the proposal, as California law already generally prohibits the transfer of firearms from occurring at gun shows. The letter also serves to dispel the many myths perpetuated by anti-gun advocates regarding gun shows by providing the Board with a comprehensive summary of the restrictions applicable to gun show promoters and vendors in California.
Sales restrictions may violate Oregon discrimination law
Retailers seeking to make a “statement” in response to the high school shooting in Florida by not selling firearms to people under age 21 may find themselves in conflict with state law in Oregon.
According to Willamette Week, a western Oregon publication, the Beaver State’s anti-discrimination laws could be a major obstacle to such retailers as Fred Meyer and Walmart. There are 17 Fred Meyer stores that sell firearms in Oregon, the newspaper reported, and a retired judge in Lane County told a reporter that state statute prevents discrimination based on race, gender, religion and age. So long as the victim of discrimination is an adult, the newspaper said, “They can’t be barred from anything that is available to the public.”
The gun prohibition lobby began pushing for age restrictions on the purchase of so-called “assault rifles” in the wake of the Feb. 14 shooting in Parkland, FL. That’s because the alleged killer legally purchased a rifle when he was 19 years old, which is legal under federal law.
In Oregon, the newspaper said, the law “says that any person over 18 can buy a firearm, (so) the stores that refuse to sell guns to 18, 19 and 20-year-olds could face legal challenges.”
The retired judge, Jim Hargreaves, told the newspaper that he applauds the stores for “making at least some attempt” to curb violent crime. But good intentions may not trump state statute.
He suggested that the Oregon Legislature could change the law, but individual retailers can’t simply make up their own rules.
Registration open for enhanced CMP National Matches
Registration for the Civilian Marksmanship Program’s (CMP) 2018 National Trophy Pistol and Rifle Matches opened March 1. The annual event, held at the Camp Perry National Guard Training Base since 1907, has undergone significant changes for the July 2018 season – presenting new matches never before offered by the CMP and reclaiming traditional matches missing from the Camp Perry soil in recent years.
After months of development, the CMP has proudly brought smallbore back to the ranges of Camp Perry. Making a debut on the CMP’s smallbore schedule is a 3×40 with iron sights and an any-sights match, a 3×20 team match and prone events. Scoring will be administered in collaboration with Shooters Technology, using a mobile application that will transmit target images via cell phone to the Orion scoring system and allows scores to be compiled before competitors even return from hanging targets down range.
Also new to the CMP schedule is a three-day series of long range events for teams and individuals. Long range matches will be fired at 1,000 yards and are open to match rifles, service rifles or Palma rifles.
Introduced at last year’s Nationals, the CMP will again host its own Cup Matches, which include a 4-man team event and a 2000 Point Aggregate event which will feature a cash prize based on the average 2-day score.
Many other clinics, camps and firing school opportunities, taught by CMP staff members and qualified professionals, will also be available throughout the National Matches. Whether an experienced shooter or firing a shot for the first time, those wanting to enhance their shooting proficiency should consider attending, either as a competitor or an observer.
For more information or to register, log onto www.TheCMP.org.
Poll shows guns in homes make people feel safer
With the nation in an uproar about gun rights versus gun control, a recent Rasmussen poll revealed that a majority of people with guns in the home feel safer.
The survey results said 61% of Americans who have guns in the home “feel safer knowing it’s there.”
Perhaps not surprisingly, 44% of the survey respondents say “they or someone in their household owns a gun.” Oddly, 51% of those surveyed still think it is too easy to buy a gun in the United States today, although it was far easier to buy a firearm 25 years ago.
The poll results came as video of the Tulsa, OK, gunfight between Tina Ring and her daughter, Ashley Lee, and a shotgun-wielding suspect made the national news. The pair was working in a liquor store when the robber walked in. As he moved out of view of the security camera, Lee grabbed two guns from under the counter, armed her mom and when the suspect came around the end of the counter, that’s when things lit up.
Several shots were fired and the suspect was hit at least once.
Readers of the Tulsa World were not sympathetic toward the suspect. One even wrote that Lee and Ring should “use a caliber that starts with a 4.” This refers to big-bore handguns in .44- and .45-caliber.
The Rasmussen survey was taken Feb. 19-20 and involved 1,000 American adults. It has a +/- 3 percentage point margin of error.
With renewed attention to gun control (not gun “safety” or “reform”), there is a potential for increased gun sales after a year of what some people consider lethargy in which earnings are down, or have at least leveled off. Still, last month’s Shooting, Hunting and Outdoor Trade (SHOT) Show was busy and even upbeat according to some who were there. If the push on greater restrictions starts gathering momentum, history suggests that so will new gun sales.
DOJ enters into settlement over Fast & Furious documents
The Department of Justice (DOJ) has entered into a “conditional settlement agreement” with the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform concerning the release of additional documents related to the controversial Operation Fast and Furious, conducted by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) during the Obama administration.
This “gun walking” scheme was exposed when two rifles related to the case turned up at the scene of a fatal shootout between suspected drug smugglers and Border Patrol agents. During that exchange of gunfire in December 2010, agent Brian Terry was fatally wounded.
That incident literally blew the lid off of the operation, which one ATF official called a “perfect storm of idiocy” while testifying under oath before the House committee in 2011 when it was chaired by Congressman Darrell Issa (R-CA). TGM’s predecessor, Gun Week, covered the scandal for more than two years.
Originally uncovered by the late Mike Vanderboegh, a “citizen journalist” and blogger, and author David Codrea, the scandal ultimately was covered by former CBS investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson, reporters from Fox News and the Los Angeles Times, leading to hearings before the Oversight committee.
In a telephone conversation, Codrea told Liberty Park Press that after so much time has passed, he is concerned that “it will end up being much ado about nothing.”
“I am afraid,” he said, “that all we’re going to see is sound and fury signifying nothing.”
He would like to see the Oversight committee convene more hearings and see some of those involved testify under oath.
Former Attorney General Eric Holder was held in contempt of Congress for refusing to turn over thousands of subpoenaed documents, which were withheld after former President Barack Obama tried to keep them from the committee by declaring executive privilege. A federal judge ultimately ruled the documents had to be turned over.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a statement: “The Department of Justice under my watch is committed to transparency and the rule of law. This settlement agreement is an important step to make sure that the public finally receives all the facts related to Operation Fast and Furious.”
During the operation, between 2,000 and 2,500 guns were allowed by ATF in Phoenix to fall into the hands of criminals both in Mexico and the United States, many of them winding up with Mexican drug cartel gunmen. Guns linked to the operation have occasionally turned up at crime scenes south of the border.
Several ATF agents were reassigned or retired as a result of the scandal, although nobody was ever prosecuted or fired.
And there is no evidence that any Mexican drug criminals were ever brought to justice, which was the alleged original purpose of the Fast and Furious operation.
