Why the Sudden Push for Gun Control?

Glenn Reynolds says:

Because when people are talking about gun control, they’re not talking about Obama’s many failures, ranging from the failures of vetting and counterterrorism that may have led to the San Bernardino attacks themselves, to Obama’s foreign policy debacles in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, to how the #BringBackOurGirls hashtag campaign against Boko Haram accomplished nothing, to how Putin is running wild in Eastern Europe, to Obama’s plans to import more poorly-vetted refugees from Muslim countries that foment terror or the still-anemic economy that has left far too many Americans unemployed or underemployed despite years of “recovery.”

Those are all things that the Obama Administration — and the Hillary Clinton campaign — don’t want to talk about.

I think he may have missed something.

Remember Solyndra? $535 million in loan guarantees up in smoke?

Heard about Solana? A solar power station built here in Gila Bend, AZ? The Dept. of Energy under Obama guaranteed $1.45 billion in loans for that project. And now the parent company, Spain’s Abengoa, is on the brink of bankruptcy.

But wait! It gets better!

In addition to the $1.45 billion for Solana, the Dept. of Energy also guaranteed another $1.2 billion loan for the construction of the Mojave solar power station in California – also an Abengoa project.

So $2.65 billion in loan guarantees – almost five times more than the Solyndra debacle – and another solar power pipe-dream flushes down the toilet. In an election year.

Let’s talk about gun control, instead.  Oh, and climate change.

The media – Democrat operatives with bylines.

Interesting Information from the Trenches

My favorite local Merchant O’Death reports:

So, three days after the shooting in San Bernardino and we still have ARs on the shelf. As a matter of fact, we have sold a whopping total of TWO ARs and have put one on layaway. No other type of “assault rifle” has left the shop. I have yet to sell a single hi-cap mag for any type of long gun. Still have plenty of .223/5.56, .308, 7.62X39, 9mm, .40, .45ACP, .380 auto, .38 Special…..hell, we have a lot of everything except .22LR and .22 Mag.

We have been really busy the last three days for sure. I would attribute that to the usual hustle and bustle of the coming holiday but I know better. I have yet to hear a customer say “I want to get my husband/wife/boyfriend/girlfriend a gun for Christmas….” Judging by some of the purchases I have no doubt that some of the firearms being bought are to be stashed under the tree. Most of them are obviously being purchased to be stashed in purse or pocket.

Compact, concealable handguns are making a mass exodus along with spare magazines/speed loaders and the attendant ammunition. The majority of the buyers are older folks, men and women, couples and singles The usual “tacti-cool” crowd are noticeable by their absence. A large proportion of the buyers are inquiring about CCW classes as well as basic firearms handling courses and public ranges.

While there is no sense of hysteria among our patrons, there is an increasing amount of concern being voiced. Not so much about the political climate but more about the fact that the shooters in California had links to terrorists organizations in the Middle East. I do sense a bit of shock in a lot of folks as if they have finally realized that the threat is very real and not just something that happens “over there”.

I would imagine that the SAR show in Phoenix this weekend is doing a land office business. I’ll be interested to see what Monday brings. I do believe that POTUS is going to address the nation tomorrow regarding the recent event. This should be stunning….

I wonder if Tam is seeing similar things in Indiana.

ETA, 12/10/15:  The Washington Post reports:

Read the whole thing.

How About “No.” Does “No” Work for You?

So much for “nobody wants to take your guns.”

Seems the New York Times, Paper of (making up the) Record, found it worthwhile to put an op-ed on its front page for the first time in forever.  The topic?  Banning “assault weapons” – oh, wait, I’m sorry – “End(ing) the Gun Epidemic in America.”  Excerpt:

It is a moral outrage and a national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed specifically to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency. These are weapons of war, barely modified and deliberately marketed as tools of macho vigilantism and even insurrection.

As was the Brown Bess musket, the 1903 Springfield, and now the AR-15. Your point?

Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens.

Considering that our fellow citizens in Connecticut, New York and California won’t even register them, I think your idea of banning them is a complete non-starter.

So, how does “NO” work for you?