View Full Version : The Rebellion: The Gun Control Non-compliance Trend
Doc Safari
07-18-19, 16:37
This article is written from the perspective of the state of New Mexico, where I live, but it's a great article on why the rebellion against gun laws will ultimately carry the day.
Enjoy.
https://reason.com/2019/03/04/defiance-will-kneecap-new-mexico-gun-law/
New Mexico is the battleground for the latest confrontation between politicians determined to impose legal restrictions on the right to acquire and own the means of self-defense and people unwilling to obey such laws. The state's governor is publicly feuding with county-level officials who, responding to grassroots anger at the proposed gun measures, vow noncompliance if they become law.
The evidence from similar spats in other states suggests that government officials are once again poised to have their impotence demonstrated by people eager to disobey dictates from above.
Mandatory background checks for most gun transfers, court-ordered seizures of firearms, and the denial of self-defense rights to those convicted of domestic violence offenses feature in the bills moving through the state legislature. The measure requiring background checks for all gun transfers, except between close family members and cops, seems to have excited the greatest opposition.
"The gun-related measures have drawn opposition from all but a few of the state's 33 county sheriffs," the Albuquerque Journal notes. "In addition, at least 24 counties have passed 'Second Amendment sanctuary' ordinances in opposition to the legislation pending at the Roundhouse." The Quay County resolution, as an example, dedicated county officials "to support decisions by our Sheriff to not enforce any unconstitutional firearms law against any citizen."
In response, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, a Democrat, slapped back at what she called "rogue sheriffs throwing a childish pity party." That's probably not the sort of language likely to win over the rebellious, largely rural residents to whom county officials are catering.
Confrontations of this sort in other states—including Colorado, Washington, and even New York—resulted in the kneecapping of intrusive firearms restrictions. And comprehensive background check (CBC) laws in Colorado, Delaware, and Washington produced an increase in such checks only in Delaware, researchers from the University of California-Davis reported in a study published in 2017 in Injury Prevention.
"One plausible explanation for our findings is low compliance in our study states," the researchers wrote, continuing:
In Washington, there was a well-documented public "I will not comply" rally at the state capital, at which firearms were openly transferred between private parties without background checks. There were also gun shows where non-compliance was encouraged and public calls from profirearm organisations to not comply with the state's new CBC policy… Many county law enforcement officials in Colorado reportedly stated they would not enforce its CBC law, and some retailers were declining to process background checks for private party transfers.
In each state, noncompliance was a result of widespread local opposition to the law. Spurred by their communities, sheriffs in Washington also refused to enforce the background check requirement, and more than half have vowed to ignore new gun laws passed last year. And the rebellion among Colorado sheriffs, who are elected to office there as in most states, came in response to local sentiment of the sort that turfed-out lawmakers who supported gun restrictions.
Which is to say, the "low compliance" in both Colorado and Washington was the result of grassroots defiance, with local officials following their rebellious constituents, not leading the way.
Interestingly, local defiance of state and federal gun restrictions appears to reflect a desire for freedom from unpopular legislation that extends across the political spectrum. The specifics of the laws to be defied vary from place to place, but the desire to be left unmolested by other people's rules seems nearly universal.
"The 'Second Amendment sanctuary county' concept … was borrowed from activists who for several years have convinced some local governments to declare themselves 'sanctuary cities' for undocumented immigrants — meaning local law enforcement won't help federal officers arrest those whose only crime is being in the country illegally," according to the Santa Fe New Mexican.
Definitions of "sanctuary cities" vary, but "there are over 200 jurisdictions, including some of the largest in the country, that refuse to honor [Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)] detainers," ICE Director Sarah Saldaña told Congress in 2015.
In the absence of registration lists of guns and gun owners, which don't exist in most of the United States (and failed from popular defiance in New York, as mentioned above), the background checks causing so much fuss in New Mexico depend entirely on voluntary compliance. If only two people in a jurisdiction oppose such requirements, those two can safely buy and sell guns to each other so long as they conduct their transactions out of sight of law enforcement.
Expand the population of eager scofflaws and you're bound to see widespread noncompliance, as in Colorado, New York, and Washington.
Nobody is complying with any mandatory background check in my area when it's private party sales. The gun dealers in rural New Mexico haven't received any instructions from Santa Fe regarding NICCS checks when it's only for the State. They're not receiving the gun for the transfer into their bound book for the transfer between individuals. Worthless law.
Of the 25 Counties of 33 in this State which became Sanctuary Counties, mine (San Miguel) is not one of them. However, you have to go thru a Sanctuary County (Harding) to reach my ranch headquarters because my 16 mile driveway in half-way in Harding County. I have an 8 mile easement for my driveway in a Sanctuary County.
As I have said before, rural America will hold out longer than the cities, and in New Mexico, a lot of the cities are just refusing to comply. The county my 25,000 acres occupies is 4,736 square miles in size, with only 28,000 people in total, mostly in Las Vegas and a few other smaller towns.
New Mexico is defiant against a lot of government controls. Even the hippies in their "Earth Ship" off-grid homes outside of Taos are funny about the government.
Averageman
07-18-19, 18:35
You arbitrary decided to make me a criminal without me having committed a crime while according to our Constitution, I'm a citizen with the right to arm and defend myself?
So now you expect my compliance?
Bat crap crazy.
Illinois gets a bad rap, mostly because of the dems in Cook County, but the rest of the State is very supportive of our constitutionally protected civil rights. The 2nd Amendment Sanctuary County” movement started in Effingham County. As of April, 64 of the 102 counties in Illinois have passed resolutions refusing to enforce any additional gun restrictions on individuals that are signed into law in Springfield. While it’s largely symbolic, it is a start.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190719/0384379ea167f1a42a444c1880a58e71.jpg
Thats my kind of non compliance!
The lunatic/criminal/treasonous politicians in DC and around the country can say what they want, and write what they want on fancy paper, but if the people charged with enforcing those bogus, flawed, unconstitutional laws simply refuse, the politicians got nothing. Mass non-compliance from the citizenry certainly helps too.
This is why I wish ALL gun owners would join the NRA. Or if you don't like the NRA, how about GOA? There are 150 million guns owners. If we ALL simply say FU to all the government bodies all over the country there ain't nothin' they can do about it. What are they going to do? Put 150 million people in prison? If only a few dozen people say FU, then they will be made an example of to scare the rest into compliance. If the majority of gun owners AND all the local LEO refuse to comply, by the millions, it simply doesn't matter what the A-Holes say, write down, or pass as fake laws.
Great topic. Great thread.
We have folks prattling online how they’re scared of the ATF boogeymen for running a vfg on pistols let alone anything else related NFA related and yet sanctuary gun laws are going to save the republic?
It’s good to see local government pushing back for sure so to that extent its positive.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Look at this one in San Diego:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/07/16/san-diego-city-council-guns-must-be-locked-or-disabled-in-homes/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=down-range&utm_campaign=20190718dr
Yeah... Umm... This is already settled case law in Heller v. DC. Enforcement of such an ordinance would be wholly unconstitutional, so it's a perfect example of when willful and open non-compliance would be not just appropriate, but one's duty.
I fully expect many more unconstitutional laws to be passed and that will give rise to even further use of willful non-compliance as a response. The left has all but eroded the foundations of our legal system, so it's only a matter of time before many more citizens simply dismiss it. That's the problem with making everyone a criminal by fiat. You run the risk of having your bluff called.
Billetdog, true in theory. Sadly we have decades of local LEOs already enforcing bad gun laws. What exactly would change without a dramatic overhaul of police culture, unions, and “I’m just following orders” and “I have a family to feed”? You already know the Bloomberg money would clean house to get those cops who would brutally enforce those laws.
Doc Safari
07-19-19, 14:17
We have folks prattling online how they’re scared of the ATF boogeymen for running a vfg on pistols let alone anything else related NFA related and yet sanctuary gun laws are going to save the republic?
It’s good to see local government pushing back for sure so to that extent its positive.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There is a Yin and Yang aspect to this. No one wants to be the first one on the dance floor, yet everyone knows the dance is underway. There's a tension between complying with the law enough to stay out of trouble versus realizing that the law has gone too far and your property and liberty are threatened just for you being you.
If non compliance is the form of rebellion needed, then I am all for it. Maybe it will spread to other BS.....like voter fraud.
titsonritz
07-19-19, 15:04
This is going on all over my area...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WECw0fDkZFo
https://www.oregonfirearms.org/counties-pro-gun-ordinances-proclamations-resolutions-letters
RobertTheTexan
07-19-19, 15:48
Nobody is complying with any mandatory background check in my area when it's private party sales. The gun dealers in rural New Mexico haven't received any instructions from Santa Fe regarding NICCS checks when it's only for the State. They're not receiving the gun for the transfer into their bound book for the transfer between individuals. Worthless law.
Of the 25 Counties of 33 in this State which became Sanctuary Counties, mine (San Miguel) is not one of them. However, you have to go thru a Sanctuary County (Harding) to reach my ranch headquarters because my 16 mile driveway in half-way in Harding County. I have an 8 mile easement for my driveway in a Sanctuary County.
As I have said before, rural America will hold out longer than the cities, and in New Mexico, a lot of the cities are just refusing to comply. The county my 25,000 acres occupies is 4,736 square miles in size, with only 28,000 people in total, mostly in Las Vegas and a few other smaller towns.
New Mexico is defiant against a lot of government controls. Even the hippies in their "Earth Ship" off-grid homes outside of Taos are funny about the government.
Rural America is the last vestige of hope in this country.
But while pondering the 16 mile driveway comment I felt it prudent to remind you of my BBQ ribs, smoked brisket, and stupendously awesome sauce skills I mentioned in the “This is how civil wars begin” thread that I bring to the table. Since that initial comment I have added the world renown Brazilian churrascaria method of BBQ to my repertoire. It does wonders in bringing out the best most natural flavors of a cut of meat. I’ve been working with some Argentinian beef, which is some of the best beef I’ve had and the results been pretty amazing.
It does bear repeating.
Doc Safari
07-25-19, 10:17
Go Ahead and Ban Our Guns, We'll Just Make Our Own (https://www.thetrace.org/2019/05/ghost-gun-california-crime/)
Ghost Guns Are Everywhere in California
Feds say nearly a third of firearms recovered in the state are homemade, unserialized, and untraceable.
Unserialized weapons, colloquially known as “ghost guns,” entered the American imagination as the creation of hobbyists and backyard tinkerers. But as they’ve grown in popularity, criminals have identified ghost guns as a way to get around California’s restrictive gun laws. This class of weapons is easy to buy, and undetectable to authorities, because they are built without the government’s knowledge.
An investigation by The Trace in partnership with NBC Bay Area, NBC San Diego, and NBC Los Angeles found that law enforcement agencies across California are recovering record numbers of ghost guns. According to the ATF, 30 percent of all guns now recovered by agents in the state are unserialized. And without a serial number, they cannot be traced in criminal investigations.
California police departments that track ghost gun recoveries are seeing a similar trend. “This is not just something for enthusiasts. This has become something for people that are actual practitioners of violence,” said Graham Barlowe, the resident agent in charge at the ATF’s Sacramento field office.
A ghost gun is a firearm manufactured outside of the traditional supply chain. It can be printed on a 3-D printer, or assembled with parts sold by the dozens of companies that create nearly completed firearms — known as “80 percent receivers,” which require no background check to sell.
Experts say the accessibility of ghost guns is aided by a cottage industry of retailers selling nearly completed firearms that require no screening to purchase.
As ghost guns proliferate across the state, lawmakers and police are scrambling to understand the scale of the problem, let alone remedy it. In 2016, the California Legislature passed a law requiring residents to register homemade weapons with law enforcement. A separate requirement outlawed the possession of unregistered ghost guns.
But records obtained by The Trace and NBC indicate that the law has had little effect. Compliance with the law is low, and prosecutors have never brought charges under the new statute.
Now California law enforcement members are encountering ghost guns being made by criminals building them in their basement, as well as organized groups churning out untraceable firepower by the hundreds. “We’ve seen machine shops where they are lining them up and and completing them in 20-minute intervals, with three or four machines going at once,” said Barlowe, the ATF agent in Sacramento.
Of course now TPTB will try to outlaw parts kits, 3D printing, etc., but I remind everyone of a universal piece of wisdom: FOR EVERY MEASURE THERE IS A COUNTERMEASURE. Happy building.
I would never presume to tell anyone to knowingly break a law. That said, every man needs to decide at what point immoral and illegal laws (oh, the irony!) should be ignored.
A freedom so heavily regulated and burdened by hundreds of laws and oversight is no freedom.
Doc Safari
07-25-19, 10:43
A freedom so heavily regulated and burdened by hundreds of laws and oversight is no freedom.
It's worse than that: The way a lot of gun regulations are written you literally might be in trouble or not depending on the current "interpretation." Take for example, pistol braces: One day it's not legal to shoulder them; the next day it is. What happens next month? Next year? That's kind of an extreme example because you'd have to be "caught in the act" of doing it wrong and probably it's not something you would ever be prosecuted for, but who knows?
I know of many here in CA who have hedged their bets, have a few registered “assault weapons” a few featureless, a few mag blocked, and a few that are completely illegal in this state. They have a mixture of commercial bought rifles and homemade ones, some with serial numbers and others without.
Most people are simply not only ignorant of all the new laws, they just don’t care to know or to comply. When you have to spend additional money to make a gun legal and then a few years later the state is saying you have to spend even more money to remain legal, most people say F that and just ignore it. Oh sure, they may have one or two guns that they know that will survive scrutiny from a cop if they get stopped along the way to the range, but I would imagine a healthy portion of semi autos in the state are in violation of one or more laws.
It's worse than that: The way a lot of gun regulations are written you literally might be in trouble or not depending on the current "interpretation." Take for example, pistol braces: One day it's not legal to shoulder them; the next day it is. What happens next month? Next year? That's kind of an extreme example because you'd have to be "caught in the act" of doing it wrong and probably it's not something you would ever be prosecuted for, but who knows?
Yes yes, you're absolutely right. And your examples underscore my beef with the opinion of the courts that "ignorance is no excuse for not knowing the law" we hear all the time in court.
With so many laws, which vary state-by-state and jurisdiction by jurisdiction, laws that even the alphabet agencies have a hard time interpreting, how can we be expected to be in compliance?
Doc Safari
07-25-19, 17:37
A recent example, where a planned confiscation fell flat on its ass (in 2014):
Press Rants Guns Should Be Rounded Up (https://reason.com/2014/02/18/round-up-tens-of-thousands-of-gun-regist/)
Round Up (Tens of Thousands of) Gun Registration Scofflaws, Rants Hartford Courant Editorial Board
...now that Connecticut's resident class of politically employed cretins has awoken to the fact that, in their state, like everywhere else, people overwhelmingly disobey orders to register their weapons, they're acting like this is a shocking revelation. They're also promising to make those who tried to comply, but missed the deadline regret the effort (proving the point of the openly defiant). And the politicians' enablers in the press are screaming for the prosecution of "scores of thousands" of state residents who, quite predictably, flipped the bird at the government.
Three years ago, the Connecticut legislature estimated there were 372,000 rifles in the state of the sort that might be classified as "assault weapons," and two million plus high-capacity magazines. Many more have been sold in the gun-buying boom since then. But by the close of registration at the end of 2013, state officials received around 50,000 applications for "assault weapon" registrations, and 38,000 applications for magazines.
Some people actually tried to comply with the registration law, but missed the deadline. The state's official position is that it will accept applications notarized on or before January 1, 2014 and postmarked by January 4. But, says Dora Schriro, Commissioner of the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, in a letter to lawmakers, anybody sufficiently law-abiding but foolish enough to miss that slightly extended grace period will have to surrender or otherwise get rid of their guns.
This, of course, is the eternally fulfilled fear of those who oppose registration of things governments don't like—that allowing the government to know about them will result in their eventual confiscation. Such confiscation, despite assurances to the contrary, occurred in New York, California, and elsewhere. Connecticut has accomplished something special, though, by making "eventual" a synonym for "right now."
You know who won't have to surrender their weapons? People who quietly told the state to **** off.
This successful example of mass defiance horrifies the editorial board of the Hartford Courant, which shudders at the sight of the masses not obeying an order that, history, tells us, never had a shot at wide compliance. According to them:
It's estimated that perhaps scores of thousands of Connecticut residents failed to register their military-style assault weapons with state police by Dec. 31….
…the bottom line is that the state must try to enforce the law. Authorities should use the background check database as a way to find assault weapon purchasers who might not have registered those guns in compliance with the new law.
A Class D felony calls for a maximum sentence of five years in prison and a $5,000 fine. Even much lesser penalties or probation would mar a heretofore clean record and could adversely affect, say, the ability to have a pistol permit.
If you want to disobey the law, you should be prepared to face the consequences.
Such shock! Such outrage!
But compliance with gun registration would have been a historical aberration. Gun restrictions of all sorts breed defiance everywhere they're introduced. About 25 percent of Illinois handgun owners actually complied when that state's registration law was introduced in the 1970s, according to Don B. Kates, a criminologist and civil liberties attorney, writing in the December 1977 issue of Inquiry. Then, when California began registering "assault weapons" in 1990, The New York Times reported after the registration period came to a close that "only about 7,000 weapons of an estimated 300,000 in private hands in the state have been registered."
Similar defiance occurred in Australia, Canada, and many European countries. People, unsurprisingly, seem to think that being armed is not a bad thing, and that governments can't be trusted.
Can't imagine why.
Here's the thing: Laws rely, almost entirely, on voluntary compliance, with enforcement efforts sufficient for a tiny, noncompliant minority. If a large number of people to whom a law applies find the law repugnant—and a majority of a group, consisting of scores of thousands of people, constitutes a large number—than the law is unenforceable, no matter how many politicians and newspaper editorial writers think it's a swell idea. Governments that try enforcement, anyway, will be stuck in a pattern of escalating brutality and declining legitimacy.
Gun registration, let alone confiscation has, always and everywhere, fallen into that "unenforceable" category. We saw the same phenomenon with Prohibition, and we've also seen it with drugs.
To insist, now, that Connecticut authorities try to chase down "scores of thousands" of gun owners (using background check records that don't actually prove they still own the forbidden firearms) displays wild ignorance of the limits of government power. It also expresses disgusting deference to authority at the expense of any respect for liberty—an immature morality that sees no good beyond obedience to rules. And, it's sheer lunacy.
And Why It Fell Flat On Its Ass (http://www.callthecops.net/connecticut-halts-plans-round-firearms-finding-cops-state-list/)
Connecticut halts plans to round up firearms after finding most cops in the state are on the list
Connecticut has been making news due to their hastily passed gun registration laws. According to some sources as few as 15% of gun owners have actually registered their firearms. News Blogs have been warning state officials are talking about mass confiscations of the unregistered firearms.
Plans for these confiscations hit a snag when a legislative intern dared to ask a question. “Who will be going door to door to take all the guns away?” asked the 21-year-old college senior.
Reportedly multiple people in the room in the most sarcastic voices they could muster said “the police”.
The unnamed intern then pointed at the list and said, “my dad’s name is on the list, and he is the police chief. I see three other names on this list of family members, all cops.”
With in hours a print off of all sworn Law Enforcement officers in the state was obtained. Comparisons of the list of gun owners who failed to comply with registration requirements and sworn LEOs showed a startling figure. Just over 68% of Connecticut cops had failed to register firearms according to the new law.
An anonymous source in the Governors office said lawmakers were dumbfounded. “Someone suggest firing all the cops who failed to register. But the reality of hiring and training that many new police officers is not practical.” The source goes on to say “Senator [redacted to protect our source] said maybe we should issue an official order to all cops to comply with registration or face termination. I mean seriously these people are a special kind of stupid to think that gun-loving cops are going to go along with this blatant violation of the 2nd Amendment.”
So now Connecticut is in little quagmire. The powers that be are making all kinds of threats, but there is no one to follow through on the threats.
So how can you send the police to confiscate unlawful weapons that were never registered when a large portion of people on the list are cops themselves? You don't. You look like an idiot who passed a law that cannot be enforced. This is how law enforcement--at least in jurisdictions where the cops are sympathetic to the Second Amendment--can actually help the cause of non-compliance.
How do they know who didn’t register? Isn’t that by definition a registry?
I know of many here in CA who have hedged their bets, have a few registered “assault weapons” a few featureless, a few mag blocked, and a few that are completely illegal in this state. They have a mixture of commercial bought rifles and homemade ones, some with serial numbers and others without.
Most people are simply not only ignorant of all the new laws, they just don’t care to know or to comply. When you have to spend additional money to make a gun legal and then a few years later the state is saying you have to spend even more money to remain legal, most people say F that and just ignore it. Oh sure, they may have one or two guns that they know that will survive scrutiny from a cop if they get stopped along the way to the range, but I would imagine a healthy portion of semi autos in the state are in violation of one or more laws.
I have seen pics of some California Compliant guns, and they are hideous. Where the pistol grip goes is some flat fin that appears to be riveted on with no means to grab hold of it, or some curved rod that connects at the back end to nothing. These guns should be called "Birth Defect Guns", like some kid born with fingers growing out of the top of his head. I could not own something like that and would smuggle what I wanted in and just keep a low profile - that means I would be a criminal, and would be proud of it.
I have seen pics of some California Compliant guns, and they are hideous. Where the pistol grip goes is some flat fin that appears to be riveted on with no means to grab hold of it, or some curved rod that connects at the back end to nothing. These guns should be called "Birth Defect Guns", like some kid born with fingers growing out of the top of his head. I could not own something like that and would smuggle what I wanted in and just keep a low profile - that means I would be a criminal, and would be proud of it.
Agreed. CA compliant AR’s are an abomination. I’d rather do without than admit to possession of such a foul beast.
Doc Safari
08-07-19, 16:49
Great Article on Worldwide Non-Compliance with Firearms Confiscation Laws (https://reason.com/2012/12/22/gun-restrictions-have-always-bred-defian/)
The article is rather long and I don't think I can do justice to it by copying and pasting only certain portions. Please read. It puts a lot into perspective.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.