“This was an approximate 5% increase over the 175,754 received on Black Friday 2014,” Stephen Fischer, the FBI’s chief of multimedia productions, wrote to USA Today. “The previous high for receipts were the 177,170 received on 12/21/2012″ — a week after Adam Lanza killed 26 people at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.
Though the Nov. 13 attacks in Paris that killed more than 130 people were certainly on the minds of many traveling to visit their families over Thanksgiving, it’s not clear what caused the increase in firearm background checks. Notable spikes in such checks, processed through the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), are often seen on Black Friday, near Christmas and after mass shootings. Meanwhile, FBI data going back to 1998 show that the number of background checks has risen steadily since 2006.
NICS background check data. (NICS)
Indeed, before jihadists stormed a rock show in the City of Light, one spokesman for a gun industry trade group noted that October 2015 saw more firearm background checks than any previous October.
“The numbers are just out, so we have not yet had the opportunity to gather viewpoints from across our industry to provide color commentary for what continues to be year-over-year healthy firearms sales,” Michael Bazinet, director of public affairs for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, told Guns.com. “We think more individuals making the decision to exercise their right to keep and bear arms along with the rising interest in target shooting provide the underlying long-term narrative.”
Every year, after all, there are more Americans — and more and more of them, it seems, are eager to enjoy the Second Amendment. Reports have noted that new entrants to the gun market include women, millennials and those who sport assault rifles to make a political point — as some did at an anti-Muslim protest last month at a mosque in Irving, Tex.
“Assault weapons acquisition has become a form of political expression,” columnist and frequent gun-control commentator Robert J. Spitzer noted in June. “Many have noted increases in firearms sales keyed both to the election cycle, notably Barack Obama’s elections in 2008 and 2012, and to mass shootings. The very purchase of guns, and especially assault weapons, is a statement that they should remain legal and unregulated, that guns themselves are not the problem. It’s also a way to express opposition to Obama. Within the gun industry, this pattern is called ‘political sales.’”
Has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year
Is a fugitive from justice
Is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance
Has been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution
Is an alien illegally or unlawfully in the United States or who has been admitted to the United States under a non-immigrant visa
Has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions
Having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced U.S. citizenship
Is subject to a court order that restrains the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner
Has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence
Is under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year
It is important to note: A firearm background check does not equal a firearm sale. Equally important: Though laws vary from state to state and from weapon to weapon, gun transactions between private parties — like many at gun shows — generally do not require background checks.
California Law Allowing Government to Seize Legal Guns Goes into Effect January 1st
Beginning January 1, gun regulations in California will give authorities the right to seize a person’s weapons for 21 days if a judge determines the potential for violence exists.
After a shooting rampage perpetrated by Elliot Rodger in May 2014, the billwas proposed as an “emergency restraining order” option for families concerned their loved ones may act out violent urges — if they persuade a judge that loved one’s possession of a firearm “poses an immediate and present danger of causing a personal injury to himself, herself, or another by having it in his or her custody or control.”
In other words, the “law gives us a vehicle to cause the person to surrender their weapons, to have a time out, if you will,” Los Angeles Police Department Assistant Chief Michael Moore told a local NPR affiliate.
You read that right — a government-imposed time out. Now go sit in the corner, and think about what you did.
“It’s a short duration and it allows for due process,” Moore continued. “It’s an opportunity for mental health professionals to provide an analysis of a person’s mental state.” Because, as everyone knows, mental health professionals — like police — are infallible.
Rodger was 22-years-old when he launched a series of attacks around Isla Vista near the campus of University of California, Santa Barbara that left six people dead and 14 injured before he turned one of his guns on himself. All the weapons he used — three handguns and two knives —had been legally purchased. Mere minutes before carrying out his plan, Rodger uploaded a video to YouTube and circulated a 107,000-word manifesto.
How this law answers that attack on Isla Vista — with the attacker offering nothing in the way of an advance red flag about the carnage that was about to unfold — is anyone’s guess.
Even UC president, Janet Napolitano, said at the time, “This is almost the kind of event that’s impossible to prevent and almost impossible to predict.”
Seeming to ignore this major factor completely, San Diego State University professor and attorney, Dr. Wendy Patrick, told a local CBS affiliate, “[I]t’s the family members, it’s the people closest to the perpetrator who are in the best position to notice red flags.”
Second Amendment and constitutional advocates have been understandably upset by the coming law, saying further rules in a state already rife with restrictive gun laws will only serve to punish law-abiding gun owners.
“We don’t need another law to solve this problem,” asserted Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California, to the Associated Press, as reported by the Washington Times. “We think this just misses the mark and may create a situation where law-abiding gun owners are put in jeopardy.”
Study: Most Criminals Don’t Buy Guns From Gun Shows
The vast majority of criminals don’t buy guns from gun shows, according to a survey by the University of Chicago Crime Lab.
In the survey of nearly 100 detainees at the Cook Co. Jail, about 70% said they bought guns from “social connections” or corrupt cops and only a handful of them purchased guns from licensed dealers at gun shops or shows.
“Some of the pathways people are concerned about don’t seem so dominant,” said Harold Pollack, co-director of the crime lab.
The survey also revealed that AR-15s and AK-47s, often demonized as “assault rifles” by the media, are unpopular among thugs and despite Chicago’s strict gun control laws, inmates were able to get a gun within six months of release.
“Police take guns and put them back on the street,” one inmate revealed.
In other words, gun control works – at keeping criminals armed and their law-abiding victims disarmed.
The study runs contrary to claims made by New York Times correspondent Josh Barro, who promoted gun control on MSNBC Saturday morning.
“If you did something like Australia did, where you really take away massive amounts of guns that people have, reduce the rate of gun ownership substantially in society, you could have a big impact on violent crime,” he claimed, oblivious to the fact that the most violent cities in America also have the strictest gun laws.
Another survey by Rasmussen found that 60% of Americans are against more gun control in response to the latest high-profile shootings in Virginia and South Carolina.
“The fact is that criminals break the laws, and it seems the laws don’t work anyway,” Steve Watson reported. “Further infringing on the rights of those who abide by the laws will not change either of these situations.”
“Two separate polls last month, following the church shooting in Charleston, S.C., also found that the majority of Americans do not believe tighter gun laws would prevent mass shooting incidents.”
News icon calls on President & Hillary to relinquish Secret Service protection
Paul Joseph Watson – October 12, 2015
As the White House prepares more executive orders on gun control, Matt Drudge has sensationally challenged President Obama to give up his armed Secret Service protection.
During an impromptu appearance on the Alex Jones Show, Drudge also called on Hillary Clinton to relinquish her armed bodyguards.
“They’re all armed themselves, or they all have that security around them themselves. They don’t have to worry about [danger.] I challenge Hillary, take away your Secret Service. Take it away now. Take away your Secret Service; dismiss them. Have no security around you; have no guns around you, Hillary. I dare you. I dare you,” said Drudge.
“Obama, same thing. Drop your guns, Obama. Take your Secret Service away, Obama. Take it all away. Leave the White House unguarded, Obama. Let everybody know there’s no guns on the White House grounds, Obama.”
Drudge said that if either Hillary or Obama did this, within 30 seconds they would “no longer be on planet Earth.”
“So they’re asking us to drop our guns and to drop our security measures, or–or what?” said Drudge, adding that only “sick Americans” would support a move for widespread gun control.
“You can’t underestimate the sickness of the American people right now. They’re really sick. I’m more angry at the sick Americans than I am at Obama or Hillary. I’m really angry at the sick Americans,” said Drudge.
Earlier this week, the White House confirmed that Obama was preparing a series of new executive orders on gun control in the aftermath of last week’s shooting at the Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Oregon.
Without waiting for complete facts to emerge, president says he’s identified the culprit
Adan Salazar | Infowars.com – June 18, 2015
The Obama administration predictably wasted no time in demonizing firearms following a church shooting in South Carolina last night.
In a press conference littered with dramatic pregnant pauses, and absent the complete facts of the investigation, the president blamed the accessibility of guns for the shooting that took nine lives in Charleston yesterday, stating Americans have to “shift how we think” about gun violence.
“Until the investigation is complete, I’m necessarily constrained in terms of talking about the details of the case. But I don’t need to be constrained about the emotions that tragedies like this raise. I’ve had to make statements like this too many times. Communities like this have had to endure tragedies like this too many times.
“We don’t have all the facts but we do know once again innocent people were killed in part because someone who wanted to inflict harm had no trouble getting their hands on a gun.
“Now is the time for mourning and for healing, but let’s be clear: at some point we as a country will have to reckon with the fact that this type of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries. It doesn’t happen in other places with this kind of frequency.
“And it is in our power to do something about it. I say that recognizing the politics in this town foreclose a lot of those avenues right now. But it’d be wrong for us not to acknowledge it, and at some point it’s going to be important for the American people to come to grips with it, and for us to be able to shift how we think about the issue of gun violence collectively.”
Obama Loves to Attack Second Amendment
It’s interesting how the recent shooting fits so neatly into Obama’s gun-demonization agenda, dovetailing the anti-gun beliefs he’s espoused since college.
[ad]In the 2012 book Debacle, Obama is quoted telling author John R. Lott, Jr., PhD, “I don’t believe that people should be able to own guns,” while both worked at the University of Chicago Law School in 1996.
Within a month of the Sandy Hook school shooting, the Obama administration feverishly worked to implement 23 new executive order gun restrictions. One of those executive orders was to “Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.”
The government also has no problem staging their own events for exploitation when the right crisis doesn’t present itself.
Obama and his Justice Department were at the center of the Operation Fast and Furious gun-walking scandal, which saw the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives, as well as other agencies, place weapons in the hands of Mexican drug cartels in order to foment violence and blame firearms.
Obama’s speech eerily similar to Holder’s anti-gun presentation
In his speech today, Obama stated we have “to be able to shift how we think about the issue of gun violence,” echoing remarks made by his former attorney general nearly two decades ago.
While working as a U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia in 1995, former Attorney General Eric Holder spoke before a Women’s National Democratic Club about how it’s necessary to “really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way.”
“What we need to do is change the way in which people think about guns, especially young people, and make it something that’s not cool, that it’s not acceptable, it’s not hip to carry a gun anymore, in the way in which we’ve changed our attitudes about cigarettes,” Holder outlined.
Are we witnessing the “brainwashing” Holder talked about?
Watch: Alex Jones Responds To Obama’s Gun Grabbing Call
Check out reporter David Knight’s analysis of Obama’s latest attack on guns: