As if we didn't know, Obama & Biden are of the "It doesn't work,

but if we do it HARDER then it'll be great!" school:
Jim Baker, the NRA representative present at the meeting, recalled the vice president’s words during an interview with The Daily Caller: “And to your point, Mr. Baker, regarding the lack of prosecutions on lying on Form 4473s, we simply don’t have the time or manpower to prosecute everybody who lies on a form, that checks a wrong box, that answers a question inaccurately.”
After Biden met with every gun-bigot group around for days, the NRA got 5 freakin' minutes to present their stuff.  And got the above crap in return.

In 2010, prosecutors considered just 22 cases of information falsification, according to a 2012 report to the Department of Justice by the Regional Justice Information Service. Forty additional background-check cases ended up before prosecutors for reasons related to unlawful gun possession.

In all, prosecutors pursued just 44 of those 62 cases. More than 72,600 applications were denied on the basis of a background check.

“We think it is problematic when the administration takes lightly the prosecutions under existing gun laws and yet does not seem to have a problem promoting a whole host of other gun laws,” Baker told TheDC.



It seems our current run-out-of-England journalist has a bit of a past on the subject of self-defense he probably doesn't want to talk about:
In 2004 Morgan penned an op-ed for the Evening Standard headlined “I can’t be liberal on burglars,”in which he said he said a series of home invasions and robberies at his home made him wish for a gun. Britain, which had banned all guns, had seen a rash of break-in burglaries, one of which took the life of financier John Monckton.
If Monckton “had killed one of those burglars while defending himself … then he would now be facing a jail sentence for manslaughter or even murder,” Morgan wrote. “No part of my liberalism allows me to deem this fair.”
Well, that's because it's NOT fair.
Morgan added that he would have no compunction about killing a burglar who posed a threat to him or his family.
But he thinks we should be disarmed. Fucking hypocrite.


Speaking of dirtbag journalists, the Journal News has caved, but they're trying to pretend that's not what they did:
;”… While the new law does not require us to remove the data, we believe that doing so complies with its spirit …”
As the man says,in a pigs ass; two burglaries reported(so far) to be connected to their map, they're probably huddled with lawyers, terrified that next it'll be someone raped or murdered and connected to this.  Not to mention the heat, which they really don't like, for being such assholes.


While you're over at GPNY, look at what the Democrats REALLY wanted to do.
And if you're in that misbegotten state, don't forget that the Stupid Party was involved in helping Howler Cuomo pass this piece of crap.


The bad gun formula at the root of an assault weapons ban raises a basic worry. The formula says we are not attacking gun ownership. We only want to ban the limited category of guns that are used by criminals or madmen.  But there is no such limited category. Criminals and madmen will use whatever guns they can get, and those guns will give them full reign over helpless people as was grotesquely demonstrated in Newtown, Connecticut.

No, no, the President will repeat, we are only after a narrow category of very high risk guns. But that is demonstrably false.  The bad gun formula already has reached well beyond “assault weapons”.


 I'd heard about King having guns around before; if you haven't here's a look at the situation.