Renewed calls for gun control laws spur sales

WASHINGTON — Renewed calls for more restrictive gun laws, following a succession of fatal shootings in the United States, immediately appear to be generating a boost for the gun industry.

Newly released August records show that the FBI posted 1.7 million background checks required of gun purchasers at federally licensed dealers, the highest number recorded in any August since gun checks began in 1998. The numbers follow new monthly highs for June (1.5 million) and July (1.6 million), a period which spans a series of deadly gun attacks — from Charleston to Roanoke — and proposals for additional firearm legislation.

While the FBI does not track actual gun sales, as multiple firearms can be included in a transaction by a single buyer, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System's numbers are an indicator of a market upswing in the face of growing anxiety about access to guns.

"Whenever there is a call for gun control, sales increase,'' said Larry Keane, general counsel for the firearm industry trade association National Shooting Sports Foundation. "Unfortunately, this is a pattern that repeats itself.''

USA TODAY

Gun control measures debated in wake of Roanoke journalist killings

The summer trend is not on par with the panic buying boom that followed the 2012Newtown massacre, which jump-started state and federal campaigns for a host of new firearm measures. During the months that followed the Connecticut attack, which featured new calls for an assault weapons ban and expanded background checks, apprehensive gun buyers emptied the shelves of dealers across the country. Yet, the recent uptick represents a similar buying pattern that dates to the uneasy period before 1994 adoption of the assault weapons ban. (That ban expired in 2004.)

Virginia Del. Patrick Hope, a Democratic member of the state Assembly who proposed an expansion of background checks following last month's shooting deaths of two journalists near Roanoke, said the stockpiling of weapons represented an "over-reaction.''

Via: USA Today

Continue Reading.....

Hate and Anger are not mental Illnesses

This week we have suffered additional senseless and tragic shootings of innocent people here in America.

This past Wednesday, Vester Flanagan II (aka:  Bryce Williams) executed two former co-workers from WDBJ-TV in Roanoke, VA.  Flanagan had a history of anger issues mostly stemming from his being both a black man and gay.  It appears his anger continued to grow over several years and between multiple jobs.  He had reached a point where common sayings or items and street names were viewed as racial attacks and taunts against him.  His hate grew right along with his anger and this week it reached a boiling point.

It has been reported that he considered the following as racial attacks:  seeing a watermelon on top of an ice chest at work, someone stating that it was time to “go into the field” before going out on location for their job, and someone saying the name of a street “Cotton Lane”.  He had filed a discrimination suit against another former employer claiming he was harmed due to being gay.  When that was dismissed and it was shown that there are other gays at the same employer, he changed the suit to racial discrimination.

Flannigan approached, after what appears to have been a planned attack, reporter Alison Parker and her cameraman Adam Ward while they were conducting a live interview of another person (all white) out in public for the morning show on the station.  He had taken issue with each of these two while he worked at the station, prior to being fired over his anger.  Video footage has been made public from not only the cameraman but also the shooter, who filmed the attack.  The shooter walked up and stood slightly behind and to the left of the cameraman.  The three people standing in front of him were all absorbed in the interview and did not notice him.  He pulled out his semi-automatic pistol and aimed it at Alison.  Then, it appears that he noticed that Adam had directed his camera away from the two ladies and was shooting a scene to the side.  Flanagan lowered his gun and waited for the cameraman to get the ladies back on camera before raising the gun again and beginning to shoot.

Via: Canada Free Press

Continue Reading....

Ex-Va. Gov. Bob McDonnell can't remain free during appeal, court rules

May 12, 2015: Former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell navigates a group of cameras as he leaves the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals after a hearing the appeal of his corruption conviction in Richmond, Va. (AP)

RICHMOND, Va. –  A federal appeals court on Thursday refused to allow former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell to remain free while he appeals his public corruption convictions to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The decision means McDonnell will probably have to report to prison within the next several weeks. Meanwhile, he has 90 days to ask the Supreme Court to review his case.

McDonnell said in a statement that he was "saddened by the court's decision today to deny me freedom while I pursue vindication."

"I am innocent of these charges and will petition the U.S. Supreme Court for a grant of bond," McDonnell said.

McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, were convicted of doing favors for a wealthy businessman in exchange for more than $165,000 in gifts and loans. Bob McDonnell was sentenced to two years in prison; his wife to one year and one day. They have remained free on bond while they pursued separate appeals in the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The appeals court last week refused to reconsider a three-judge panel's unanimous ruling upholding Bob McDonnell's convictions but said nothing about his bond status. McDonnell asked the court to state in writing that he can remain free while he seeks Supreme Court review. Prosecutors opposed the request, arguing that McDonnell should begin serving his term now that the appeals court has finished with the case.

Carl Tobias, a University of Richmond law professor who closely follows the Richmond-based appeals court, said he doubts the Supreme Court will allow McDonnell to remain free.

"I think there's a chance, but it's probably a longshot," Tobias said Thursday.

Legal experts say that once the appeals court completes its review and a conviction is final, the federal probation office compiles information about the defendant's case and background and forwards it to the U.S. Bureau of Prisons. The agency analyzes the information and determines what type of programs the defendant might need — substance abuse counseling or high school equivalency courses, for example — and determines the appropriate security level and designates a prison. The agency then sends a certified letter to the defendant telling him where and when to report to prison.

The process can take a few weeks.

When the former governor was sentenced in January, his lawyers asked U.S. District Judge James Spencer to recommend that McDonnell be sent to the low-security federal prison camp in Petersburg, Virginia. The Bureau of Prisons considers judges' recommendations along with other factors, such as available space.

McDonnell's lawyers weren't immediately available for comment Thursday afternoon.

McDonnell was convicted on 11 public corruption charges. The case derailed the career of a rising Republican star who had been viewed as a possible running mate to presidential candidate Mitt Romney in 2012.

The appeals court will hear arguments in Maureen McDonnell's case in late October. Late Wednesday, she filed a brief saying the recent appeals court decision in her husband's case shouldn't mean her own appeal suffers the same fate.

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading.....

THREE STATES SET TO REDRAW HOUSE DISTRICTS

The House redistricting process, as set by the Constitution, is supposed to happen once every ten years. Ambiguous federal statutes and federal judges armed with Periclean fantasies means a few states are often forced to “redo” their Congressional maps.

Before the 2016 elections, some voters in Florida, Virginia and North Carolina will likely find themselves moved into new Congressional districts.

It should come as no surprise that the lawsuits challenging the maps in the three states were brought by the National Democrat Redistricting Trust. The organization is run by former staff members of the Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee. It is a blatant attempt to litigate what was lost at the ballot box.

In Virginia, a federal judge has ordered the legislature to redraw the 3rd Congressional District, which has been represented by Rep. Bobby Scott since 1993. The district has been a majority-black district since 1991. In the last redistricting, the GOP controlled legislature changed the make-up of the district from 53 percent black to 56 percent black. That small change apparently offended the sensibilities of a Federal judge. The legislature has been ordered to make the district slightly less majority-black.

In Florida, the Democrats claim that “politics” guided the state legislators in drawing the new districts. The plaintiffs, who, again, are national Democrats, point to the use of “mapping principles” to protect DNC Chair 

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL)

4%

 and increase the number of “safe” Democrat seats. Among the witnesses is the Executive Director of the Florida Democrat Party, who said he tried to influence the political make-up of the districts.

So, the Democrats are using the fact that they themselves tried to politically influence the make-up of the Republican-drawn districts to argue that the districts should be tossed. Unsurprisingly, a Federal judge agreed. At the heart of the issue are four House seats, two held by each party, that must be redrawn.

The state Legislatures in Virginia and Florida are currently in special session to redraw the districts. In North Carolina, the state Supreme Court is preparing to hear arguments in a similar case. It is likely that state will also have to redraw some of its districts.

In Washington, DC, where every political story is viewed through the prism of Capitol Hill politics, some pundits are conjecturing that the remapping process in these states will eliminate three GOP members who are thorns in the side of House GOP leadership.

In Florida, one of the seats that must be redrawn is occupied by 

Rep. Daniel Webster (R-FL)

63%

, a Republican who challenged Boehner in the Speaker’s race. Republican

Rep. David Jolly (R-FL)

45%

, a key Boehner ally, who occupies another seat set to be redrawn has already announced his intention to run for U.S. Senate.

In Virginia, 

Rep. David Brat (R-VA)

100%

t, who unseated Rep. Eric Cantor in a primary last year, occupies the House seat neighboring Rep. Scott’s district. 

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC)

96%

, who recently filed a petition to vacate the election of 

Rep. John Boehner (R-OH)

35%

 as Speaker, could potentially have his district redrawn in North Carolina, if the state Supreme Court scraps the existing map.

“These conservative members should definitely assume that they are enemy No. 1 on the list,” Daniel Horowitz, senior editor of the Conservative Review told National Journal. “If you’re going to redraw the maps, who’s going to be your first priority? … If the establishment could kill two birds with one stone—comply with the courts and pick off a conservative—they would absolutely take that opportunity.”

I think Horowitz sees the world too much through DC’s glasses. Having worked on redistricting, decisions have far more to do with state politics, and the ambitions of state legislators, than the drama within the federal House caucus.

The Congressional districts surrounding Rep. Scott’s district in Virginia, for example, are so Republican that tweaks to the lines are very unlikely to jeopardize Rep. Bratt or 

Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA)

60%

, who also borders Scott’s district. It is hard to envision any changes to the district lines that would make either Bratt or Forbes vulnerable in a primary, never mind a general election.

It is possible that Rep. Webster in Florida and Rep. Meadows in North Carolina face existential changes to their districts. If they do, it is likely to have very little to do with their standing in the U.S. House GOP caucus. Their political futures lay in the hands of legislators in the state capitols, not Washington.

The larger story here isn’t really about the GOP leadership in Washington. It is yet another example of how far Democrats will go to overturn the results of elections. That federal judges are even involved is testament to how freely that party feels it can ignore even plain Constitutional text.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading....

Don’t Fear The Shutdown… well, it *kind* of scans.

 

SunnyRight‏@sunnyright

From the people who brought you "The Koch Bros will hurt Republicans in 2014" comes "Attacking @PPAct will hurt Republicans in 2016"

• RETWEETS7
• FAVORITES5
• 

2:10 PM - 31 Jul 2015

More

With some clarifications, sure. First off: yes, very little that happens with a shutdown in Congress this year will have any effect on the national elections next year.  This is, of course, broadly similar to what happened in 2013: everybody who wasn’t part of the Republican grassroots (and a few of them, too) was convinced that the shutdown would do permanent damage to the GOP brand, right up to the point where Obamacare blew up in the missile silo. Technically, something equivalent has not yet happened this year.  But something will. Something always will. You can’t subject the populace to a year-plus-long rant about the inequities of the Republican party without said populace eventually tuning it out.

Second: unfortunately, you can’t really count on the Democrats being as dumb in 2015 as they were in 2013 – and they were dumb. Starting with the Democrats not taking the free gift that the GOP had offered them – there’s a bunch of former Senators and governors who wish that they had – and following with not capitalizing on even the transitory advantage the shutdown gave them. At this point somebody’s going to smugly mutter ‘Virginia,’ and I’ll mutter ‘sitting governor obvious en route to being indicted,’ and then we can all pick sides over who to blame in the Virginia gubernatorial election. I will note that, the way things were going, one more week and we would have won that race… which does not suggest that the Democrats really followed through on things. Presumably they’ve learned better. Obviously, it’s great if the Democrats haven’t, but it’s safer to assume that they have.

Third: this year’s races. A shutdown could very well affect the Kentucky gubernatorial race between Matt Bevin and Jack Conway. It probably won’t hurt Mississippi’s, given that Phil Bryant is running for re-election and he’s pretty popular. As for Louisiana’s… are we certain that a Democrat will even survive the jungle primary in the first place? – So if you do favor a shutdown of the government over Planned Parenthood funding, you should also be in favor of making sure that it doesn’t hurt Matt Bevin‘s gubernatorial bid.

Via: Red State

Continue Reading....

CITIZEN ARMED WITH AR-15 STANDS GUARD OUTSIDE VIRGINIA RECRUITING OFFICES

On July 17, a citizen armed with an AR-15 stood guard outside various military recruitment offices in Virginia.

The man said “fundamental Muslim extremism” is at war with us, but out leaders seem unable–or unwilling–“to put it in perspective and [realize] that the war is here.”

According to Fox 5, the man wishes to remain anonymous, but did shake hands with those who came by to thank him for standing guard.

He said those inside the recruitment offices were glad to see him too:

I went into each office, the ones that were open, and I was received with handshakes and thank yous. They constantly came by, and not only them, but their wives came by in tears thanking me for just being out here. They baked cookies for me and brought lunch by.

The unidentified man said the police stopped and “checked [him] out.” He said they were just “doing their duty” and “It was all good.”

He urged Americans to contact their Representatives and Senators and get the laws changed so Marines, soldiers, and other military personnel can defend themselves.

He said: “People need to call their [Representatives], they need to call their Senators and they need to change these laws that are on the books so these guys can protect themselves so a regular old citizen doesn’t have to go out and do it,” he told us.”

Breitbart News previously reported that Representative Scott DesJarlais (R-TN-4th) will introducing legislation to abolish military gun-free zones on July 20.

DesJarlais’ bill is titled the “Enhancing Safety At Military Installations Act.”

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading....

Having Trouble, Hillary? Free Tickets To Fundraiser Send Bad Message

Virginia Democrats were offered free tickets Friday to the annual Jefferson-Jackson dinner in Virginia, Hillary Clinton’s first campaign stop in the critical swing state.

In an email leaked to Business Insider, supporters of Clinton’s campaign in Virginia were given a chance to forego the $30 price for tickets to the event, as long as they provide the code included in the email. The event was intended to support democratic fundraising for the state, but Clinton’s appearance and speech are geared toward garnering support among East Coast Democrats.

An operative for a 2016 Republican candidate took a shot at the Democratic frontrunner, referencing the irony surrounding her previous PR disaster of her speech prices.

“How bad is it out there for Hillary? She’s gone from paid speeches to paying people to hear her speeches.”

This isn’t the first time Hillary has struggled to fill seats. In early June, a Clinton event in New York marketed as “just for women” switched to co-ed at the last minute, when the campaign discovered the large amount of $2,700-a-seat tickets that went unsold.

Virginia Democratic Party Communications Director Stephen Carter told Business Insider the free ticket giveaway is not reflective of poor fundraising, since the event raised more money than it has before.

He confirmed the campaign sold 2,000 tickets of the 10,000-seat Patriot Center at George Mason University. (RELATED: Hillary’s Email Claim To State Department Falls Apart)

Via: Daily Caller

Continue Reading...

Four Words That Imperil Health Care Law Were All a Mistake, Writers Now Say

WASHINGTON — They are only four words in a 900-page law: “established by the state.

But it is in the ambiguity of those four words in the Affordable Care Act that opponents found a path to challenge the law, all the way to the Supreme Court.

How those words became the most contentious part of President Obama’s signature domestic accomplishment has been a mystery. Who wrote them, and why? Were they really intended, as the plaintiffs in King v. Burwell claim, to make the tax subsidies in the law available only in states that established their own health insurance marketplaces, and not in the three dozen states with federal exchanges?

The answer, from interviews with more than two dozen Democrats and Republicans involved in writing the law, is that the words were a product of shifting politics and a sloppy merging of different versions. Some described the words as “inadvertent,” “inartful” or “a drafting error.” But none supported the contention of the plaintiffs, who are from Virginia.

“I don’t ever recall any distinction between federal and state exchanges in terms of the availability of subsidies,” said Olympia J. Snowe, a former Republican senator from Maine who helped write the Finance Committee version of the bill.

Via: NYT

Continue Reading.....

Obama’s Trickle–Down Lawlessness

What Sen. Ted Cruz (R–TX) refers to as Obama’s “pattern of lawlessness, his willingness to disregard the written law and instead enforce his own policies via executive fiat” has trickled down to the new Democrat administration in Virginia.

On Saturday, January 11th Democrat Mark Herring was sworn in as attorney general of the Commonwealth. During the ceremony Herring recited his oath of office: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge all the duties incumbent upon me as attorney general according to the best of my ability (so help me God).”

Then Herring proved he was a fast Obama study by violating that oath before he had completed his second week in office.

Then Herring compounded the offense by joining the case of the plaintiffs suing the state to overturn the ban. This is breathtakingly unethical. It’s like Zimmerman’s defense lawyer deciding George violated neighborhood watch guidelines and asking to join the prosecution team. An honorable man when presented with the choice of doing his job and defending the Constitution or “being on the right side of history” would have resigned his office, but we’re talking about Mark Herring.

By way of background the Virginia homosexual marriage ban is an amendment to the Constitution passed in 2006 by a favorable vote of 57 percent. Herring was in the Virginia Senate at the time and he voted in favor of the amendment. But you can’t hold that against him because he ‘evolved.’

But now Herring says he is relying on the precedent set by former AG Ken Cuccinelli. Except the situations are entirely different. Cuccinelli did not defend a newly passed law that allowed the state to take over failing schools, because it violated Virginia’s Constitution. Herring is saying the Constitution of Virginia is unconstitutional because it violates the Democrat party platform and makes Ellen DeGeneres sad.

Via: Canada Free Press

Continue Reading....+