Target's Request That Stores Be Gun Free Misses the Bullseye

Apparently Target has not had enough to do in dealing with one of the greatest data security breaches in history.  Now, they have decided to create some more excitement by insulting lawful gun owners and possibly creating a physical security breach in their stores. 

Here is the the July 2, 2014 announcement from Target.

"Target Addresses Firearms in Stores"
Every day at Target, in everything we do, we ask ourselves what is right for our guests? We make all of our decisions with that question in mind. Questions have circulated in recent weeks around Target’s policy on the “open carry” of firearms in its stores. Today, interim CEO, John Mulligan, shared the following note with our Target team members. We wanted you to hear this update from us, too.

The leadership team has been weighing a complex issue, and I want to be sure everyone understands our thoughts and ultimate decision.

As you’ve likely seen in the media, there has been a debate about whether guests in communities that permit “open carry” should be allowed to bring firearms into Target stores. Our approach has always been to follow local laws, and of course, we will continue to do so. But starting today we will also respectfully request that guests not bring firearms to Target – even in communities where it is permitted by law.

We’ve listened carefully to the nuances of this debate and respect the protected rights of everyone involved. In return, we are asking for help in fulfilling our goal to create an atmosphere that is safe and inviting for our guests and team members.

This is a complicated issue, but it boils down to a simple belief: Bringing firearms to Target creates an environment that is at odds with the family-friendly shopping and work experience we strive to create.

Now, Target stores are private property, so Target is well within its rights to ask that guns not to be brought into their stores, but this is a bad business move.  To appease some irrational hoplophobic customers, Target is angering others by treating gun owners like deviants.  At the moment, we still have a Second Amendment in America, and, in states where that right is acknowledged, people are allowed to legally carry firearms.  Trying to curb these rights has the potential to alienate a great number of people Target needs as customers.  Given Target's business struggles lately, they do not have the luxury of alienating large groups of people.

Target is also being myopic by creating policies that are unfriendly to gun owners.  A gun owner could very well stop a horrible crime from occurring in a Target store.  Also, is it a good idea to publicize to the criminals of the world that Target may be a place that is likely to not be protected by armed people?  Additionally, how likely is it that a crazy person will honor Target's polite request and not bring a gun into a Target store?  In a sense, Target is making itself an actual target for armed criminals. 

Also, surely Target must have realized this maneuver is likely to actually encourage gun owners to protest Target policies by walking around their stores with guns just to make a point.  This whole policy is just a bad plan.  Given the poor management decisions being made at Target, it is no wonder the company has been having financial problems.  Perhaps Target's goal is to become the next Kmart.     

By the way, here is another thought.  Target, if you do not like gun owners, you should have not made your logo a giant red bullseye.  Seriously.

Oakwood Apartments Demands All Residents Give up Guns

If you ever needed proof the anti-Second Amendment people are unwise, here it is.

The Oakwood Apartments in Castle Rock, Colorado, under the Ross Management Group, has a new policy. After October 1, 2013, residents are not allowed to have firearms on the premises, including inside of their own apartments. Even current renters are not allowed to keep their firearms. Current renters must either dispose of their weapons or move. Those who do not comply with this gun ban face forcible eviction.

Now, the apartment complex is a business. As the owners of the property, they have a right to regulate what happens on their property. So, if the owners foolishly want to ban guns, that is their right to do so. That issue may not be that simple, however. This particular complex offers tax credit housing. If this business is being supported with tax-payer dollars, this creates a Constitutional issue. If tax dollars are supporting this complex, then the owners have no right to restrict the practice of Constitutional rights. (Note the President of Ross Management Group is Deborah Ross Weseloh. She is a Democratic Party donor.)

The idiocy behind this policy illustrates just how naive the whole gun control crowd is. Under this anti-gun policy, only the people who follow rules will obey it and dispose of their guns. So, only the people who follow the rules will be the ones without weapons. Since criminals do not follow rules, the criminals will still have guns, and they will have a huge advantage over the unarmed residents.

Look at this through the eyes of a criminal. If you were going to commit crimes, would you rather commit those crimes in a place where any resident might have a gun, or would you prefer to target a place where you know the residents are very likely to be unarmed. With this ridiculous ban on guns, the Oakwood Apartments has now made the complex an attractive target for criminals. Who would want to live in a place that criminals would see as an easy target? Maybe, to save everybody time, the residents of the Oakwood Apartments should just hand over their guns directly to the criminals who will be robbing them in the future.

If you have any concerns about the anti-gun policy of Oakwood Aprtments, contact them.

Oakwood Aprtments
559 Oakwood Drive
Castle Rock, CO 80104

Tel: (303) 688-5080
Fax: (303) 660-5409


Ross Management Group
4251 Kipling St, Suite 405
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033

Tel: (303) 860-7885

-----------------------------------------------------------

UPDATE 8/8/13: The Oakwood Apartments gun ban has been thrown out. This is probably due to bad publicity. The important thing to remember is that they tried it.

The Douglas County Housing Partnership owns the Oakwood Apartments, which was purchased with federal funds and continues to be supported with tax dollars from an array of government sources. The Ross Management Group will not be allowed to impose the gun ban they wanted to implement.

The Police Loophole

The Police Loophole is maintaining a list of the growing number of firearm companies who are rebelling against encroachments on the Second Amendment by placing restrictions on the government agencies and employees that are passing laws that infringe on civilian gun ownership. See the Nice (and Naughty) list at  www.thepoliceloophole.com.

Obama Using ATF to Pass Gun Control Under the Radar

When Barack Obama told Sarah Brady he was pursuing gun control "under the radar," people began to wonder exactly what he meant. Now, we have a specific example of how a President can abuse his power, overstep his authority, and circumvent the system to enact his own special gun laws.

Under the Obama administration, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives, commonly known as the ATF, has unilaterally passed a new rule that requires firearms dealers in Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas to report to the ATF sales to an individual of multiple semiautomatic rifles, greater than .22 caliber, with detachable magazines during any five-day period. The stated purpose of this new law is to limit the flow of firearms from the Untied States to Mexico.

This new rule essentially amounts to a new federal gun-control law; however, it was passed without a single vote in Congress. Barack Obama knew he could never get this sort of gun-control law through both houses of Congress, so he just created the law through executive authority and got in through the backdoor.

One of the most problematic features of this new gun law is that is does not apply equally to all states. American citizens who live in Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas are now subject to more federal gun restrictions than those citizens in other states. Since the federal government cannot impose federal laws on specific groups of people, this law is unconstitutional.

We may not have to spend a lot of time worrying about the uneven application of this law on the southern border states, however. If the ATF gets away with this law, they are bound to expand it to more states. Eventually, the Obama administration will argue the law was so effective in curbing illegal gun sales in Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas that the gun smugglers have started using buyers in states like Colorado, Nevada, Oklahoma, Utah, etc. Then the ATF will expand the law to other states. Eventually, the law will probably apply to Alaska too. Do not be surprised if Barack Obama and the ATF start claiming people are buying guns in Alaska, putting them on boats, and sailing them down the Pacific coast to Mexico.

A ridiculous part of this new rule is the "greater than .22 caliber" clause. Nearly all firearms, except .22s themselves, are greater than .22 caliber. The ATF probably threw in this clause to give the illusion the ATF is concerned only with high-powered rifles. In reality, this law going after just about any rifle caliber. For example, the ATF has always been very aggressive about targeting, AR-15s, the civilian version of the M16. Standard AR-15s fire .223 (similar to 5.56 NATO). Even though the .223 round is only moderately powerful, when compared to most rifle rounds, the ATF probably set the power threshold so low for this law so they could include AR-15s.

Also note that the ATF is specifically mentioning "detachable magazines" and "semiautomatic" rifles in the rule. This is just code for "assault weapons." The ATF simply does not like people have assault weapons, and those are the first weapons they would abolish if given the chance. That is what they are pursuing with this rule. This rule is what will set the stage for eventually placing stricter controls on the types of guns the ATF does not like.

The most egregious element to all of this ATF reporting business is the hypocrisy. The Obama administration is claiming that too many firearms are ending up in Mexico, but the ATF's "Fast and Furious" program was deliberately allowing actual working firearms to be transferred to Mexican gangs. Obama and the ATF are out panicking everyone about how many US weapons are ending up in the hands of gangs in Mexico when our government was just caught intentionally allowing--and even encouraging--those weapons to flow into Mexico as part of a organized effort. You just can't make this stuff up.

ATF Fast and Furious Whistleblower Fired in Retaliation

After twenty-four years of service, ATF agent, Vince Cefalu has been fired after being one of the leading forces in the exposure of one of the stupidest and most ill-conceived sting operations in the history of America. The ATF claims its "Fast and Furious" program was supposed to track weapons flowing from the United States to Mexico by encouraging gun dealers to sell weapons to suspicious gun buyers who might smuggle the weapons to Mexico. The real intent, however, was most likely to set the stage for tougher gun laws in the United States by building a case that American weapons end up in the hands of violent drug cartels.

Read the whole story at the link below.
"Project Gunrunner Whistleblower Says ATF Sent Him Termination Notice"

ATF-Mexico Fast and Furious Sting Was About Gun Control

Under the direction of the Department of Justice, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (commonly known as the ATF) has greatly embarrassed itself with an ill-conceived program that allowed weapons to flow illegally from the United States and into the hands of violent drug cartels in Mexico. The program was named Fast and Furious and ran from 2009 to 2011. The ATF claims they were trying to track the weapons in an effort to expose drug cartel networks, but all they really did is arrest some criminal nobodies and allowed the drug cartels to acquire arms illegally.

Some innocent people were killed by criminals using the illegally smuggled weapons. Most notably, US citizen and border patrol agent, Brian Terry was killed in an Arizona border shoot-out involving these weapons.

This whole operation was truly a debacle, a massive failure, and a disgraceful incident that has resulted in needless deaths of innocent people. The ATF is trying to defend itself by stating they were trying to take some short-term losses to gain greater ground in the international drug war, but there are some problems with that position.

Why should the ATF care so much about tracking weapons flowing out of America? Certainly, the ATF has an interest in gun smuggling, even when the weapons are leaving, but why would they run such a risky program that actually placed working weapons in the hands of violent criminals? Furthermore, why is the ATF worrying about the operations of drug cartels in a foreign country? Fast and Furious accomplished very little, and anyone who looks at the program objectively can easily see that there could have been no reasonable expectation that anything could have been accomplished. The operation and its goals just do not make sense.

The reality is the ATF's Fast and Furious program was about providing concrete evidence that guns are being purchased in the United States and going directly into the hands of the cartels in Mexico. If the ATF can provide overwhelming evidence that substantial quantities of weapons are being purchased in the United States for sale to Mexican cartel thugs who are using those weapons to commit murder, the evidence can be used to push for stronger gun laws in the United States.

Imagine what an effective argument the ATF could make in favor of greater intrusions on the Second Amendment if they could demonstrate gun sales in American are ultimately aiding violent criminals in other countries. The ATF could use the data to call for an all-out ban on assault rifles and greater regulations of handguns. They could also make a very effective argument to place limits on the quantities of weapons US citizens can buy.

Fast and Furious was not about exposing Mexican drug cartels. Fast and Furious was about the ATF collecting evidence to erode your Second Amendments rights. Fortunately, the ATF failed in their mission, and this botched operation has been exposed. Unfortunately, this cruel and aggressive attempt to build up ammunition against the Second Amendment has resulted in the spilling of innocent blood on the soil of America and Mexico.

United States Government Will Use Mexico Violence to Expand Gun Control

As the drug cartels continue to war with the Mexican government, a group of innocent people have found themselves in the crosshairs. The governments of the United States and Mexico are claiming that many of the weapons used by the cartels (maybe 80%) are being smuggled into Mexico from America.

The governments are alleging United States citizens who are using their clean records to purchase guns and transfer them to traffickers who smuggle guns into Mexico. Of course, many of these guns end up being used in crimes.

As you may have guessed, the governments of the United States and Mexico have decided to fix this problem by infringing on the Second Amendment. These governments want to put more intensive controls and supervision on gun purchases by innocent Americans. The U.S. government could go after the smugglers, but they are choosing to cast a wide net and go after general gun purchasers. Those who legally purchase two or more guns in a five-day period and live near Mexico are being placed under special scrutiny.

Instead our rights being violated, why can't Mexico do more to control their borders? We in America, have to deal with all of those drugs and aliens pouring across our borders. Why can't Mexico handle their own business and keep the guns out?

By the way, Mexico keeps complaining about how their cops are outgunned by the cartels, but we keep seeing these videos of Mexican government employees, destroying AK-47s, AR-15s, etc. that were seized from the cartels. If the Mexican cops are so outgunned, why don't they just use the weapons they seize from the raids on cartels? Better yet, why don't the Mexican cops just capture those weapons at the border and use the guns while they are all shiny and new?

The solutions are pretty obvious. It is insane that law-abiding U.S. citizens should be asked to sacrifice their Constitutional rights to make things easier on cops in a foreign country.

Barack Obama Officially Has Gun Rights in His Sights

Look at what is on the official White House Web site. This is Barack Obama's official plan for gun legislation. It is tucked away in his Urban Policy agenda.

Address Gun Violence in Cities: Obama and Biden would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent.

We should assume this statement is carefully worded. Breaking down each part of this statement, one could assume the paragraph expresses the following goals.

• national database of gun serial numbers
• traceable, serial-numbered ammunition linked with a national database of sales data
• ban of high-capacity (>10) magazines for all weapons
• heavy regulations on semi-automatic weapons
• heavy regulation on handguns
• enhanced background checks
• increased waiting periods for gun purchases
• mandatory, built-in electronic gun locks, which require a microchip or PIN to fire the weapon
• outlawing all private person-to-person gun sales
• permanent ban of all weapons deemed to be assault weapons
  

The scariest term in Obama's gun policy is commonsense measures. Any time someone uses the word commonsense to support his position, you can be sure he has some radical plans that he cannot support with logical arguments. If something is presented as commonsense, the presenter is establishing there is no reason for debate.

Your Second Amendment rights are in serious jeopardy. All it will take is one big school shooting for the Democrats to feel obligated to start banning weapons. Hopefully, nothing like that happens, but it probably will. When it does, look for the most egregious and brazen violation of Second Amendment rights in American History. Once these rights are gone, they may never return.

Obama Lied to America About Control

When Barack Obama got elected in November 2008, people across America began to get concerned about the loss of their gun rights. In the weeks after the election, gun stores were filled with shoppers. Guns were flying off the shelves and gun prices increased to match the increased demand. Barack Obama, apparently aware of the Second Amendment worries, came out and said that gunowners have nothing to worry about.

On February 25, 2009, Attorney General Eric Holder announced the Barack Obama administration plans to pursue a new assault weapons ban. Chairman Obama has been in office just a few weeks, and he has already gone back on his promise to gunowners. In fact, gunowners do have something to worry about. They have a lot to worry about. The Obama administration is openly admitting it intends to violate the Second Amendment.

Even worse, in the fall of 2008, when Obama assured gunowners their rights were not in jeopardy, he knew full well he was going to attack their rights in 2009. He was just simply pacifying gunowners to slow down the rate of gun sales. He probably did not like the idea of people stocking up on weapons before he could have a chance to ban them. Now that Obama finally has the opportunity to ban the guns, he is starting to reveal his intentions.

Even if you do not care about your Second Amendment rights, you should be alarmed by this sort of brazen lying. If Chairman Obama will lie to us about gun rights, he will lie to us about anything. What rights do you cherish? How can you trust Obama not to trample on them?