Demonizing Tiahrt and the NRA

Gee. It's just shocking to learn that that a certain newspaper would demonize the Tiahrt Amendment and the NRA.

Here's something that the newspaper doesn't tell you:

The FY 2007 version of the Tiahrt amendment ensures that trace data is available to federal, state, and local agencies "in connection with and for use in a bona fide criminal investigation or prosecution" or for use in administrative actions by BATFE

That is the specific reason that DA Chisholm cannot "go fishing," as he would like to do. If there's no bona fide criminal investigation, BATFE is not allowed to release the data.

Flynn, a lefty, derides what the Fraternal Order of Police happens to support:

BATFE has fought for years in the federal courts to keep the databases confidential, because they contain information (such as names of gun buyers) that could jeopardize ongoing investigations—not to mention law enforcement officers’ lives. For example, a suspected gun trafficker could search databases for names of "straw purchasers" he had used to buy handguns, or for traces requested on guns he had sold. That information could lead him to names of officers, informants and other witnesses against his crimes

No, Ed, it wasn't "sudden." It was deliberate, and done for good reason. You may or may not care about witnesses and informants--or members of the FOP--but we do, Ed.

It's not a surprise that the Lefties: Barrett, Bloomberg, Cieslewicz (and others) formed "Mayors Against Illegal Guns." And it sounds so nice!!

The NRA and its several million members are concerned about crime. That concern led to a recent SCOTUS decision which affirmed the 2nd Amendment: every law-abiding citizen in this country is allowed to possess and carry firearms for self-protection. It's the same concern which Wisconsin allayed with its 25th Amendment.

Another purpose of the 2A, of course, is to prevent Governments (state, local, and federal) from getting too uppity. In that regard, Tiahrt is necessary and very helpful.

Chisholm: Uninformed? Milwaukee Magazine Is.

Milwaukee Magazine has a long article about the street-gun trade.

One 'take-away' from the article is that a LOT of the street guns around Milwaukee are stolen, or purchased by straw-buyers (people with no record who are intermediaries.) Shouldn't come as a shock to anyone who can add 2+2 and get 4.

Another 'take-away' is this, from DA Chisholm, moaning about the Tiahrt Amendment:

“You can’t find out where all the crime guns from Milwaukee County are coming from,” says District Attorney John Chisholm. “Even if you compile the data yourself, piece by piece, you can’t share that information with anybody or else it’s a felony offense. It’s just mind boggling.”

Interesting. Here's what the NRA says about the same bill (albeit the 2007 version):

The FY 2007 version of the Tiahrt amendment ensures that trace data is available to federal, state, and local agencies "in connection with and for use in a bona fide criminal investigation or prosecution" or for use in administrative actions by BATFE—which is, of course, the principal agency responsible for overseeing the conduct of federally licensed firearms dealers.The language and history of the Gun Control Act are clear: Congress always intended to keep this information confidential, and to allow its use only for legitimate law enforcement purposes. The firearms trace database includes information such as the agency requesting a gun trace, the location from which the gun was recovered, and the identity of the dealer and original retail buyer.

So the DA must be conducting a "bona fide criminal investigation or prosecution" to get the data. What's the big deal?

Of course, the author of the piece has more than just 'bona fide investigations/prosecutions' in mind. Here's how he phrased the Amendment's effect:

But since 2003, a federal appropriations bill rider championed by Republican Congressman Todd Tiahrt of Kansas has restricted access to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) firearm trace data. That’s right: Municipalities, law enforcement agencies and the public are barred from seeing the data.

"Municipalities" and "the public" should mind their own business. They also don't have any particular right to know who owns what jewelry or other valuables which are of interest to thieves.

Maybe the author simply forgot HOW all those guns got into the hands of criminals who shoot people: THEY WERE STOLEN!

Consider this: even if DA Chisholm were to know the trace data on every single gun used in a crime in Milwaukee (which information he can get from BATFE, legally) he will still conclude that the guns were, largely, stolen.

So what difference does it make?

None. The question is not 'where did it come from.'

The question is: who pulled the trigger?

HT: Chris and Elliot

"Mayors Against Illegal Guns" Gets Jeff Speaker

It's possible that Jeff Speaker, Mayor of Brookfield, is confused.

He's joined "Mayors Against Illegal Guns," joining Barrett of Milwaukee, Taylor of Franklin, Cieslewicz of Madistan, Nelson of Waukesha, and Deiss of West Bend.

"Mayors Against.." is a Mike Bloomberg-funded front group. The title's nice, but the agenda is not.

Bloomberg['s] ...current obsession is pushing for repeal of the Tiahrt Amendment.

...[T]his amendment, which must be passed annually, protects the privacy of everyone who buys guns at retail. It limits the disclosure of firearm trace data to law enforcement agencies working on a bona fide criminal investigation. It specifically prohibits the information from being released to lawsuit-happy mayors who are on fishing expeditions to blame their urban crime problem on the nation's law-abiding gun dealers and buyers.

Since Speaker is an ex-street cop, you'd think he'd know better. Current cops do:

[W]hat are the real views of law enforcement groups and agencies--not individuals who are old buddies of gun control supporters--on the Tiahrt Amendment?

Chuck Canterbury, national president of the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), answered that question in a recent newspaper commentary. Canterbury wrote that, "Some of America's mayors, led by Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City and Thomas M. Menino of Boston, would like you to believe that their Mayors Against Illegal Guns coalition is about fighting illegal firearms in their cities and across the country. It's not."

"The principal goal of this coalition is the repeal of language that has repeatedly been passed into law for the past several years that prevents information on gun traces collected by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) from being given to mayors pursuing civil litigation suits against firearm dealers and manufacturers."

Canterbury points out that officers working gun trafficking cases "know that releasing sensitive information about pending cases can jeopardize the integrity of an investigation or even place the lives of undercover officers in danger." That's why, he says, the FOP "has always supported language protecting firearms trace data, now known as the Tiahrt Amendment."

It's not likely that Speaker ever worked a gun-trace case; it is absolutely certain that Speaker's experience in the City of Brookfield involved a lot more radar-trapping than serious drug-gang pursuit.

But Jeff ought to know better than to climb into bed with Cieslewicz, Nelson, and Barrett on general principles.

And he ought to resign and get his membership money back.

Mayor Bloomberg vs. the Truth

Bloomberg, a Statist if there ever was one, has organized a bunch of Mayors to disseminate lies about the Tiahrt Amendment. The group includes Milk-Carton Tom of Milwaukee.

Bloomberg and his "mayors" have been claiming that the present ATFE budget rider somehow restricts ATFE from releasing trace data to local police (in fact, they're upset because it restricts releasing the data for purposes of their filing of civil suits against gunmakers, but they claim it impairs law enforcement use.)

There's another reason that the Mayors want that data: to identify gun-owners. As you will see, nothing prevents them from retaining the data once BATFE releases it...

Here's one example: "Dozens of mayors from around the country gathered Tuesday to urge the new Democratic Congress to fight crime by allowing wider tracking of illegal guns." Here's another: "When handguns with bullets that can pierce body armor showed up on the streets of New Jersey, Sen. Frank Lautenberg asked federal regulators to share data that could help local police figure out where the weapons were coming from. That information, the New Jersey Democrat was told, is off-limits....Insisting that gun trace data is an essential crime-fighting tool for cities, Bloomberg used his own funds as seed money, formed Mayors Against Illegal Guns and made repealing Tiahrt's amendment its number one issue this year."

So the BATFE had to step in and set the record straight:

Our agency routinely shares trace data with state and local law-enforcement agencies in support of investigations within their respective jurisdictions. Once a requesting agency receives law-enforcement-sensitive trace data from ATF, it becomes the agency's data to disseminate and share with other law-enforcement entities as it deems appropriate.

Let me be clear: neither the congressional language nor ATF rules prohibit the sharing of trace data with law enforcement conducting criminal investigations, or place any restrictions on the sharing of trace data with other jurisdictions once it is in the hands of state or local law enforcement. In fact, multi-jurisdictional trace data is also utilized by ATF and shared with fellow law-enforcement agencies to identify firearm-trafficking trends and leads. Additionally, nothing prohibits ATF from releasing our own reports that analyze trace-data trends that could be used by law enforcement."

Charlie Sykes speculated that Bloomberg could become the next President of the US. Anything's possible, I suppose.

But I never imagined that someone who is more explicitly Statist than Hillary Rodham Clinton would have a chance.

Guns? or Ammo?

I was asked to 'splain some commentary on guns and ammo--specifically, "who said" that there would be an ammo tax initiative from the Obama Administration.

Well, specifically, NOBODY said there would be an ammo tax initiative from the Obama administration.

But that does not mean that there will NOT be one. Moreover, an 'ammo tax' is far more likely than any other gun-control proposal, with one possible exception.

******************

Let's start at the beginning. Obama, while in the Illinois legislature, was fanatically anti-gun. Among other things, Obama voted "no" on a legislative proposal which would allow Illinois residents to possess weapons for in-home defensive purposes ONLY. While in Milwaukee, following the NIU shootings, Obama endorsed "micro-tracing" of bullets, and he has called for "child-proofing" weapons (whatever that may mean.) He has also proposed legislation which would prevent firearms dealers from operating within a 5-mile radius of schools or parks--which would force the majority of FFL's to relocate or close up.

**************

As of Friday afternoon (11/7/08), the Obama website announced the following initiatives:

--"Making the expired federal assault weapons ban permanent."

--"Repeal the Tiahrt Amendment."

--"Closing the gun show loophole."

--"Making guns in this country childproof."

And here is a screenshot of his website's (now-erased) overall gun policy.

So: where's the "ammo tax"? I'm getting there.

***************

If Obama gets "micro-tracing" through, it will amount to an "ammo tax," because the expense of micro-engraving ammo will be serious. Not because it cannot be done--but rather, because the technology required will be very expensive to design, develop, refine, and purchase/utilize. There will be additional paperwork burdens, too, which will add to the expense at the manufacturer, wholesaler, and retailer levels. This is the "exception" I mentioned above.

It will be very difficult for him to get "child-proof" weapons through Congress, largely because it will be extremely difficult to write legislation which is enforceable and which will survive the 2A. The other proposals--the AWB, Tiahrt repeal, gun-shows--will likely get through.

But none of them will have a significant impact on the purchase and use of guns.

*****************

Recalling that Obama (and many Congressional Democrats) are rabidly anti-gun, and will not be satisfied with "non-impact" measures--after all, the idea is to make gun utilization and ownership as rare as possible--the most expedient path would be to increase the cost of owning a gun. After the purchase price, the single most significant cost of gun-ownership is ammo purchases. Since nobody would seriously consider gun-confiscation, and since it will be virtually impossible to prevent manufacture and sale of guns, the remedy will be to increase the cost of ownership.

Therefore, either Obama & Co. increase the cost of guns simple, by tax or regulatory cost (child-proofing is a wonderful landmine field) OR they increase the cost of ammo.

Easiest and fastest way: increase, substantially, the existing ammo-tax, which is used for preserving/maintaining hunting and wildlife areas (and for some other purposes.)

WILL it happen? Maybe.

Is it the easiest and fastest way to make gun-ownership difficult? Yes.

It is the easiest, the most "stealthy," and the most palatable to Congressional allies.

That's why many people think that it will happen. Did Obama SAY it would? No. But his track record, and that of the (D) leadership in Congress, is clear.

You've been warned.

A little more can be found here.

The Slime in Congress

Ethics problem-list:

John Murtha, D-Pa., and Democratic members Jim Moran of Virginia and Peter Visclosky of Indiana had previously surfaced in connection with the inquiry.

The document adds the names of Norm Dicks, D-Wash.; Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio; ranking subcommittee Republican C.W. Bill Young of Florida and Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan.

That list is only about 520 members short.

By the way, Murtha, a member of the Enemies of the US list since 1995, has his own video here. F*&^ you, Congressman.

Estrogen-Laden "America" Jebbies on Guns

Evidently forgetting that the Founder of the Order was a weapons-totin' kinda guy, the EstrogenJebbies spew a few "anti" half-truths at America.

Inter alia, this hooter:

The N.R.A. endlessly repeats its mistaken interpretation of the Second Amendment, that “a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” The amendment was written at a time well before the creation of local and state police forces, when local militias did serve a purpose, but that time is long past.

So many targets, so few bullets--in just .5 graf!

For openers, what, exactly IS the "mistaken interpretation"? The bedwetter editorialist is silent. Maybe he/she doesn't know...

And while the Second mentions 'militia,' it also encompasses the right to self-defense, which happens to be enshrined in the Catechism of the Catholic Church here, here, and here. The most efficient means to self-defense happens to be guns.

One is left to wonder where anyone in their non-estrogenated mind finds "cop shop" in the penumbras, emanations, or text of the 2A, although it's possible that the author saw it there in a dream one night...

Gun shows offer an equally great loophole. Kristen Rand, legislative director at the nonprofit Violence Policy Center in Washington, told America that in most states it is still possible for unlicensed sellers to sell firearms to customers with no background check at all.

See Mayor Tom's rant, below. Also see the statistics provided by responsible authorities.

Adding to the difficulties faced by gun control advocates is a harmful legislative measure with national implications, the Tiahrt amendment. Attached to the Justice Department’s appropriations bill, it limits the use of gun-trace data to all except those law enforcement officials who are attempting to find the source of illegal firearms used in particular cases

One supposes that the editorialist should have credited Mayor Bloomberg for the quote, but he/she did not. In any case, that's a half-truth, at best.

Let me be clear: neither the congressional language nor ATF rules prohibit the sharing of trace data with law enforcement conducting criminal investigations, or place any restrictions on the sharing of trace data with other jurisdictions once it is in the hands of state or local law enforcement. In fact, multi-jurisdictional trace data is also utilized by ATF and shared with fellow law-enforcement agencies to identify firearm-trafficking trends and leads. Additionally, nothing prohibits ATF from releasing our own reports that analyze trace-data trends that could be used by law enforcement." (ATFE Director Michael Sullivan, May 2007)

Ironic humor alert!! At the bottom of the editorial, the magazine asks whether 'you agree with the content.' In their OWN website, disapproval is 80% as of this writing.

Heh.