Was This Intended Or Unintended?

Where you place paragraphs in a story makes a difference and can lead to different interpretations of your argument. Today's Wall Street Journal provides an excellent example of it in a story on the flaws of the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System. The story is in the Southeast paper edition of the Journal but does not appear online. The only thing online is an infographic on the failures of the system.

Consider this paragraph.

And then there are private sales. Background checks aren't always required when sales are made by private sellers, those people who make only occasional guns sales from private collections.

It was immediately followed by this paragraph.

Several mass-shooters have purchased guns they shouldn't have been able to buy. 

The story by Ashby Jones then goes on to give examples of how both the Virginia Tech mass-murderer and the Sutherland Spring First Baptist mass-murderer were able to obtain their weapons, though prohibited persons, after passing a FBI NICS check. The story does detail how the Virginia court and the US Air Force had failed to submit the records for inclusion in the FBI's databases.

By placing the second paragraph immediately after the paragraph on private sales, the reader is at first led to believe that the mass-murderers obtained their firearms from a private seller which we know was not the case.

If that second paragraph had added "due to the failure to submit disqualifying records to the NICS database" or "even though they passed background checks", then it would be understood that the killers obtained their firearms due to a failure of the system and not due to the negligence or greed of a private seller.

Is this a case of unintended juxtaposition? Is it a case of tight editing for brevity in the second paragraph? Or is it, more problematically, a case of using the structure of the story to convey an argument for so-called universal background checks.

I don't know but I do know that the wrong impression is initially given by the structure of the story.

If this came from the New York Times or the Washington Post I would say it was intended to mislead. Since the Wall Street Journal tends to be more neutral on firearms issues, I could go either way. Nonetheless, this is a case of the mainstream media, intentionally or unintentionally, pushing the narrative for universal background checks which is wrong.

The Sky Is Not Falling For Gun Sales

Gun sales in 2012, 2015, and 2016 were so high as to be outside the norm. They were at least one, if not two, standard deviations from the long term average. We know much of the difference was driven by outside events such as the Newtown murders and the widely-assumed probability that Hillary Clinton would succeed Obama as president. What we are seeing in 2017 is a return to the norm but at a higher level.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation just released their adjusted-NICS figure for December 2017. The figure of 1.6 million NICS checks was down 12% from the prior year. That said, it still was the 5th highest December for the adjusted NICS checks on record.

Elsewhere, I've read that 2017 was the fourth highest year on record for gun sales as measured by the NSSF adjusted NICS checks. In terms of unadjusted NICS checks, it was the second highest year on record after 2016.

It is important to remember that NICS checks in and of themselves do not have a one-to-one correlation with gun sales. There can be more than one firearm on a single Form 4473. Likewise, carry permits from states like North Carolina and Texas substitute for NICS checks. Finally, many states use the NICS system for their original and continuing checks on those that they've issued carry permits.

I will be heading to the SHOT Show which begins in two weeks. I will be reporting regularly on what I'm seeing and what I'm hearing. I am particularly interested in the tenor of conversations I have with dealers.

New One-Day NICS Check Record Set

A new one-day NICS background check record was set on this year's Black Friday or the day after Thanksgiving. USA Today reports the FBI processed 203,086 background check requests on November 24th. This compares to 185,713 checks last year which had been the previous all-time one-day record.

According to FBI records, four out of the five highest days have been Black Friday. This includes the years 2017, 2016, 2015, and 2014. The outlier was the Friday before Christmas 2012. This was two days after then-President Obama said he planned to submit new gun control legislation to Congress in the aftermath of the shootings in Newtown, CT.

As I always caution, while NICS checks are a stronger indicator of firearm sales, there is not a one-to-one correlation between check and a firearm purchase. A check could be used for the purchase of more than one firearm. Furthermore, in many states, concealed carry permits substitute for the NICS check on a purchase. Finally, NICS background checks are used by some states as part of the carry permit process though I think it probably could be assumed that few of Friday's checks were related to carry permits.

NICS Checks Down For June

The National Shooting Sports Foundation adjusted figure for June 2017 shows a 10.9% decline from the same month in 2016.

From NSSF:

The June 2017 NSSF-adjusted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) figure of 1,016,213 is a decrease of 10.9 percent compared to the June 2016 NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 1,140,088. For comparison, the unadjusted June 2017 FBI NICS figure 1,888,266 reflects an 11.1 percent decrease from the unadjusted FBI NICS figure of 2,123,334 in June 2016.

You can see that graphically below:

However, if you study that graphic and read the numbers you should realize that the sky isn't falling. It is the second highest June on record and the NSSF-adjusted NICS number is still over 1 million checks. Gun sales are probably down from last summer when it appeared that anti-gun Hillary Clinton was going to ride into office after defeating what the media and the experts considered a weak and absurd Republican nominee. Of course we know now that she was the weak candidate and that Donald Trump wasn't that weak of a candidate.

As with all reports of NICS figures it should be remembered that they do not have a perfect correlation with firearm sales. In many states a carry permit substitutes for a NICS check. Moreover, the NICS check system is also used by many states for permit background checks and rechecks. The NSSF allows for these checks and rechecks when making their adjustments to the reported monthly NICS figures.

NICS Checks Resume Upward Path

The National Shooting Sports Foundation has released it latest adjusted-NICS data. The March 2017 adjusted-NICS checks have resumed their upward path that had been on hold since the election of Donald Trump. The adjusted-NICS checks had shown a year over year increase for the same month in the prior year throughout 2016 until the month of December when it showed a sharp decrease from the prior year. This also held true for the months of January and February 2017. The drop has been attributed to the end of panic buying in anticipation of new gun control measures from a President Hillary Clinton.

You can see this trend in the graphic below:

The numbers as reported by NSSF are as follows:

The March 2017 NSSF-adjusted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) figure of 1,356,929 is an increase of 5.2 percent compared to the March 2016 NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 1,289,670. For comparison, the unadjusted March 2017 FBI NICS figure of 2,422,749 reflects a 3.4 percent decrease from the unadjusted FBI NICS figure of 2,509,065 in March 2016.

The first quarter 2017 NSSF-adjusted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) figure of 3,693,502 is a decrease of 10.8 percent over the 4,139,791 figure for first quarter 2016.

Even with this quarterly drop as compared to the prior year, March 2017 still was the second highest March on record.

NICS data is more indicative of trends than an actual one-to-one sale of firearms. This is due to certain states using the NICS check system for CCW permit background checks and permit rechecks as well as the exemption from a NICS check for holding of carry permits from certain states like North Carolina.

Senate Will Vote On Overturning Social Security Administration's NICS Ban Tuesday

Last year, in response to a Executive Memorandum signed by then President Obama, the Social Security Administration engaged in a rule-making that would impact those retirement and disability recipients who needed help with the management of the finances. A final rule was released late in 2016 that would add these people to the NICS prohibited list. The number of people impacted is estimated at about four million recipients.

It should be noted that these individuals need help managing their finances. They have never been adjudicated mentally deficient. I come across people on a daily basis who could use a trustee to manage their finances even though they are otherwise smart, capable individuals.

The House of Representatives passed House Joint Resolution 40 on February 2nd that disapproved this rule issued by the Social Security Administration.

The resolution reads:

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Social Security Administration relating to Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Social Security Administration relating to Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (published at 81 Fed. Reg. 91702 (December 19, 2016)), and such rule shall have no force or effect.

The Brady Campaign sent out a text alert this morning saying that the Senate will vote on Senate Joint Resolution 14 on Tuesday. This is the Senate's portion of the disapproval of the SSA rulemaking. They were urging their supporters to contact their Senators to "protect Brady background checks."

S.J.Res. 14 is sponsored by Sen. Chuck Grassley and has 29 co-sponsors. I was disappointed to see that neither of North Carolina's senators was on the list. Nonetheless, we have the votes to overturn this rule if all the Republicans stick together.

I would urge you to call or email your senator to express your approval for this measure. The Capitol Switchboard is at 202-224-3121. You can also go to this page to get the direct number and/or email for your Senator.

There is a lot of "fake news" and misinformation being put out in opposition to this resolution so it is vital that you call.

New SSA Regulation May Be Overturned

The recently adopted Social Security Administration regulation that would report some seniors and disability recipients as mentally deficient to the NICS system will come under review by Congress. That regulation deemed that anyone who required a trustee or custodian to manage their monies to be mentally deficient. The NRA reports that Congress will now review this regulation under the Congressional Review Act with the aim to overturn it.

This is good news and I would hope that they review the similar policy or regulation at the Department of Veterans Affairs.

From the NRA-ILA:

Fairfax, Va. – The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) today scored a victory when Congress agreed to review, and likely revoke, a final rule by the Obama administration that would blindly strip law-abiding Americans of their Second Amendment rights.

“Congress's decision to review the Obama administration's back-door gun grab is a significant step forward in protecting a fundamental constitutional right for law-abiding gun owners,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director, NRA-ILA. "The NRA has been fighting this unconstitutional government overreach since it was first discussed and we look forward to swift congressional action."

Last year, the Social Security Administration finalized a proposed rule to ban certain recipients who use a representative payee from owning firearms. This ill-conceived action affected the most vulnerable in America and stripped them of their right to keep and bear arms without due process.

The NRA immediately opposed the Obama administration's efforts when the proposal was first announced in summer of 2015. The NRA has fought every step of the way to ensure that social security recipients are not stripped of their rights without due process of law.

Today, we learned that Congress will review the Obama administration's unconstitutional ban under the Congressional Review Act (CRA). CRA allows Congress to dispose of any actions an outgoing administration initiates in its last six months. This final rule falls under that time frame, and the review process is expected to move forward in the House and receive a vote as early as next week.

Imminent revocation of this egregious government action marks the culmination of the NRA's diligent efforts on behalf of its members and law-abiding gun owners.

"This is a new era for freedom-loving Americans and the NRA is excited to begin work with our pro-Second Amendment president and Congress to ensure that law-abiding Americans' constitutional rights are respected," concluded Cox.

The NRA thanks congressmen Sam Johnson (R-TX), Ralph Abraham (R-LA) and Steve Scalise (R-LA) for their work on this effort. It would also like to thank Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) and leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) for their leadership on this issue.

This Should Infuriate Everyone

The Department of Veterans Affairs has a policy of reporting those veterans who require help managing their finances to the FBI's NICS System. Those reported are placed upon the prohibited persons list and will get a decline if they should try to buy a firearm from a FFL. This program has been going on for awhile and impacts those that have a fiduciary manage their finances.

But what if you are a veteran managing your own finances? How can anyone assume that you are mentally deficient and thus should be denied your Second Amendment rights?

Attorney Joshua Prince is now representing a veteran who does indeed manage his or her own finances but was turned down when he or she tried to purchase a firearm. I'll let Mr. Prince fill in the blanks. (The highlighting is mine.)

In my client’s situation, he handles all of his own finances. The VA does not dispute this. Rather, when I finally got a representative from the VA on the line, she informed us that the VA, on its own initiative, placed him into “supervised direct payment status”. When I inquired as to what “supervised direct payment status” was, the representative stated that it is where the veteran handles his/her own financial affairs but they “watch the veteran’s financial accounts.” While the VA contended that they sent out a letter about this status being imposed on my client, my client never received such a letter and they acknowledged that it does not mention anything about the loss of the veteran’s Second Amendment rights, but that the VA has been imposing such since 2013.

No due process is provided. The representative acknowledged that my client never received a hearing and that the determination that my client was incompetent was made solely by a VA official reviewing his case. She stated that he could have appealed the determination when he received the original letter, but the time has since past to appeal. Remember, this is the letter that my client never received and which makes no mention of the loss of one’s Second Amendment rights…

While they have reluctantly agreed to send my client copies of the putative letter that they allegedly previously sent, they refused to provide his entire file, even at my request. This is the new Veteran Affairs Administration, folks. We now treat our illegal immigrants with more respect and benefits than our own veterans. This is an absolute disgrace and the VA’s policies and procedures need to be immediately reversed. Of course, we’re all aware that such is unlikely if former Secretary Clinton is elected…

This veteran was put on "double, secret probation", was not informed of it, and now has one of his or her enumerated rights being denied. Regardless of where you stand on gun rights, this veteran served our country. He or she deserves at the bare minimum the due process of law guaranteed under the Constitution. That they are being denied this due process should infuriate everyone.

Another Record Month For NICS Checks

The National Shooting Sports Foundation released their adjusted-NICS checks report this week. It marks the 17th straight month with year over year increases compared to the same month in the prior year.

From NSSF:

The September 2016 NSSF-adjusted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) figure of 1,156,961 is an increase of 7.9 percent compared to the September 2015 NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 1,071,945. For comparison, the unadjusted September 2016 FBI NICS figure of 1,983,596 reflects an 11.0 percent increase from the unadjusted FBI NICS figure of 1,786,743 in September 2015.

You can see it graphically in the chart below:

 September 2016 also marks the highest September in the past 17 years.

The adjusted NICS checks subtract out the NICS checks that are used by many states for carry permit checks and rechecks. States such as Connecticut and Illinois use the NICS database for their checks.

It should also be noted that in many states such as North Carolina and Texas a carry permit substitutes for a NICS check. While the retail purchaser must file out a BATFE Form 4473, a NICS check is not run.

Depending upon how close the election is in October and the likelihood of Hillary Clinton winning, I would not be surprised to see another record month for October. If Clinton wins, God forbid, then Katie bar the door.


This post was co-written by John Richardson and Barb Richardson

Highest July On Record For Adjusted NICS Checks

The National Shooting Sports Foundation released their adjusted NICS checks numbers for July 2016. Let's just say upfront that all the gun control talk coming from Democrats is having an impact. It's just not the one they want.

From the NSSF Bullet Points:

The July 2016 NSSF-adjusted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) figure of 1,210,731 is an increase of 27.9 percent compared to the July 2015 NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 946,528. For comparison, the unadjusted July 2016 FBI NICS figure of 2,187,190 reflects a 37.6 percent increase from the unadjusted FBI NICS figure of 1,589,462 in July 2015.

As you can see in the graphic below, July 2015 had been the highest on record as well and it just overwhelmingly eclipsed.

The next graphic shows the year over year results by month. For the last twelve months, the adjusted NICS checks numbers were greater than the same month in the prior year.

As always, NICS checks are not a perfect correlation with gun sales as many states use the NICS System for carry permit purposes and as a CCW is accepted in lieu of a NICS check in many states such as North Carolina and Texas.

December NICS Checks

The National Shooting Sports Foundation released their adjusted NICS checks for December 2015 on Monday. Let's just say that if I had an investment that went up that much I'd be ecstatic! Compared to December 2014, the NSSF-adjusted NICS checks rose 37.6%. This wasn't the highest December on record - that was December 2012 - but it missed hitting the all-time December high by only about 2,000 checks out of over 2.2 million.

The December 2015 NSSF-adjusted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) figure of 2,235,560 is an increase of 37.6 percent compared to the December 2014 NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 1,624,524. For comparison, the unadjusted December 2015 FBI NICS figure of 3,308,199 reflects a 43.7 percent increase from the unadjusted FBI NICS figure of 2,301,386 in December 2014.

You can see the increase graphically below. Look at December 2015 and December 2012 in particular. Both months saw a tremendous surge in anticipation of more gun control coming from the Obama Administration. People were buying firearms while the getting was good.

The firearms industry and those that hold Ruger, Smith & Wesson, and Vista Outdoors stock are probably saying, "Keep talking big guy".

On The HIPAA Exclusion

Someone at the Department of Health and Human Services jumped the gun earlier today on the Executive Action on the HIPAA exclusion to the states on mental health records. The screen cap below is from Google cache thanks to a post on Arfcom. It was put up and then taken down soon after posting.

The final rule is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on Wednesday, January 6th. The full 56 page rule is now online and can be examined here.

The rule summary states that the following are persons subject to the GCA 68 mental illness prohibition.

Among the persons subject to the Federal mental health prohibitor established under the Gun Control Act of 1968 and implementing regulations issued by the Department of Justice (DOJ) are individuals who have been involuntarily committed to a mental institution; found incompetent to stand trial or not guilty by reason of insanity; or otherwise have been determined by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority to be a danger to themselves or others or to lack the mental capacity to contract or manage their own affairs, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease.

This seems to me to expand the 18 U.S. Code § 922(d)(4) prohibition which only states "has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution". Other lawful authority is very broad and does not seem to take due process into account. If they are indeed expanding the legal definition, I fully expect that this will be challenged in the courts as it well should. While no one wants a truly mentally ill or defective person to have a firearm, this is a real slippery slope in my opinion.

Setting The Hook

Watching Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) questioning a governmental official is a thing of beauty. It is like watching a master angler letting the fish nibble the bait and then suddenly setting the hook. The fish is hooked and wondering just what the heck just happened.

This past Thursday, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee's Subcommittee on National Security held a hearing on "Terrorism and the Visa Waiver Program". The lead witness was Kelli Ann Burriesci, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. She heads the Screening Coordination Office. Part of her office's job is to facilitate transfer of information from the FBI's Terrorist Screening Database to the TSA's No-Fly List.

The video below shows Gowdy questioning Burriesci. The first two minutes are setting the stage for Gowdy's question where he sets the hook. That question is at 2:50 in the video. While excerpts of this questioning are out there, I think it is instructional to watch Gowdy's questioning before he begins to set the hook.





Gowdy's key question is “Let me ask you another question about the terrorism list, what process is afforded a U.S. citizen before they go on that list?”

Burriesci's answer is that there is no process afforded a citizen before they are put on the list but only a process after they get on the list. This is just the answer Gowdy wanted and as a prosecutor in a prior life he knew he was going to get it.

It only gets better after that.

Gowdy's point, of course, is that the denial of due process with regard to an enumerated right such as the Second Amendment is, by its very nature, unconstitutional.

Those who would use the No-Fly list, the Terror Watch List, or the FBI's omnibus Terrorist Screening Database as the basis to deny a citizen's rights under the Second Amendment - or any civil right for that matter - are playing a dangerous game. That many Democrats and gun prohibitionists are doing it to score political points makes it unconscionable.

A NICS Check Two-Fer

The FBI's NICS checks marked two milestones on Black Friday, November 27th. First, it had the highest recorded number of NICS checks on record for the day after Thanksgiving which is otherwise known as Black Friday. Second, and more importantly, it surpassed the previous one day record total for NICS background checks set on December 21, 2012.

From the NSSF's Bullet Points:

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) reports that it processed 185,345 transactions on Nov. 27, Black Friday, making the day the highest Black Friday ever and the highest day in NICS history. The highest previous day was Dec. 21, 2012 with 177,170 background checks. For the entire Nov. 26-29 2015 four-day Black Friday period 368,774 checks were completed, a 9.9 percent increase over the 335,555 checks conducted over the corresponding 2014 4-day period.

While the number of NICS checks are indicative of the number of firearm sales transactions, they are not perfectly correlated. For example, concealed carry permits in many states are taken as a substitute for the NICS background check. Thus, the actual number of firearms sold could be even greater than the number of checks reported.

Many factors probably are coming into play here. First, the ISIS attacks in Paris are still fresh in the minds of many people. I know my fellow Polite Society Podcast co-host Gary Daugherty has reported a significant rise in the number of people contacting him to take the Illinois concealed carry class. Second, the Democrats have decided the gun control is a winning issue for them and have gone all in on it. Finally, President Obama has said he wants to make gun control one of his primary focuses in his last year in office.

September NICS Checks Hits Record Levels

There seems to be a strong correlation between what comes out of the mouths of anti-gun rights politicians and rising NICS checks. Both President Obama and semi-presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton have recently said they admire the Australian model. Translated this means the confiscation and destruction of those firearms they don't like which is the majority of firearms out there.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation reported their adjusted NICS checks for September yesterday along with the third quarter 2015 statistics. Suffice it to say, they hit records for the highest month and highest quarters on record.

The September 2015 NSSF-adjusted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) figure of 1,071,945 is the highest September on record for the 17-year-old system, with an increase of 4.7 percent compared to the September 2014 NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 1,024,272. For comparison, the unadjusted September 2015 NICS figure of 1,786,743 reflects a 23.4 percent increase from the unadjusted NICS figure 1,447,485 in September 2014.

The third quarter 2015 NSSF-adjusted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) figure of 3,050,432 is the highest third quarter on record – a 7.8 percent increase over third quarter 2014.

You can see this graphically below:

What impresses me about these statistics is that they have surpassed similar periods in 2013 which was the immediate post-Newtown surge. Beyond the political rhetoric I'm not exactly sure what is responsible for this growth. The attendance at the local gun show this past weekend did not seem extraordinary and the number of AR15s for sale seemed to be down. However, on a personal note, I did get a message from one of the Complementary Spouse's cousins asking for help in purchasing a firearm. He noted that he'd never owned a firearm but felt he should be armed.

As always, these NSSF-adjusted NICS checks do not have a direct correlation with sales. Several states use the NICS system for the issuance and continued inspection of concealed firearm permits. Moreover, the CCW permits from many states can be used as a substitute for a NICS check. This said, the adjusted NICS checks do show sales trends and they seem to be trending up again.

Second Highest Number Of NICS Checks On Record

The National Shooting Sports Foundation released their adjusted NICS checks for August 2015 yesterday. After hitting an all time high for a July in the previous month, the NSSF adjusted NICS checks were only the second highest on record for the the month.

The August 2015 NSSF-adjusted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) figure of 1,031,959 is the second-highest August on record for the 17-year-old system, with an increase of 4.3 percent compared to the August 2014 NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 989,337. For comparison, the unadjusted August 2015 NICS figure of 1,735,911 reflects a 12.8 percent increase from the unadjusted NICS figure of 1,538,347 in August 2014.

The previous high had been set in August 2012.

 Looking back to 2012 to see what might have made it the highest month, I find stories regarding an AWB for Illinois, the George Zimmerman-Trayvon Martin case, and the UN's Arms Trade Treaty. Project Gunwalker aka Operation Fast and Furious had finally started to make the news as well.

While August is traditionally one of the slower months, we are also starting to see a trend of year over prior year increases starting up again.

As always, it should be noted that NICS checks do not have a perfect correlation with sales. Many states use them for checking on concealed carry holders. Moreover, in many states such as North Carolina, a CCW takes the place of having to run a NICS check. However, as a general indicator of the direction of sales, the adjusted NICS checks are quite adequate.

Highest July NICS Checks On Record

The National Shooting Sports Foundation adjusted NICS checks for July 2015 were just released today. They show the highest numbers for a July on record.

According to the release from the NSSF, there were 946,528 checks as adjusted. This was a 15.9% increase over July 2014. Going back to the July 2013 numbers which were the highest for July until now, the NSSF reported 855,259 checks as adjusted. Thus, July 2015 represented a 10.67% increase over the 2013 figure.

While 2014 was a bit of mixed bag, it appears that 2015, for the most part, is starting to show increases over the prior year's statistics.

It is important to note that NICS checks are not a perfect correlation with gun sales. States such Iowa, Michigan, and Kentucky use the NICS system for background checks on both new and existing concealed carry permits. Moreover, in a number of states such as North Carolina, a concealed carry permit is accepted in lieu of running the NICS check.

NRA Corrects The PolitiFact Intern

PolitiFact weighed in on the criticism of the Social Security Administration's proposal to report 4.2 million recipients to the NICS database as "mentally defective" because they have a named fiduciary to handle their money. They rated this "false" on their Truth-O-Meter saying, "Obama has not made a sweeping move to disarm gun-owning senior citizens, as these websites claim. We rate the claim False."

The problem with letting interns handle something like this is that they often don't dig deep enough. The other problem is that there really isn't any accountability as the intern will be returning to school in a few weeks.

NRA Fact Checks Politifact on Social Security Administration Gun Grab

A recent Politifact article attempted to fact check news reports about the Obama Administration’s effort to strip the gun rights of millions of Americans who receive social security and disability benefits who also have a representative payee – someone who handles their finances.

Politifact failed to consult the most relevant source of all for their story, federal law, as a result, they got it wrong.

Politifact’s website identifies the writer as a “Politifact intern.”

The following Politifact claims are FALSE:

“The new policy would not ban all Social Security Administration (SSA) recipients from owning guns. Rather, it would only affect the small fraction who are deemed mentally incompetent, and who are thus are barred from purchasing guns under the law.”

“The policy would not take away guns from people who already own them. There is no indication that this policy would take guns away from people who already own guns. Rather, the policy would affect the ability of some mentally incompetent people from buying new guns.”

The facts:

·         Social Security Administration recipients who have a representative payee have not been deemed “mentally incompetent.” That is not a legal term recognized in federal law as it relates to prohibitions against acquiring or possessing firearms.

·         The federal prohibitions against acquiring or possessing firearms apply to those “adjudicated as a mental defective.” 

·         Under the proposed new policy, individuals who have representative payees would lose the right to possess any guns they might currently own and would be prohibited from purchasing new firearms.

·         The term “adjudication,” refers to a determination made after a judicial-type process that includes various due process protections. In no case does the federal law describe or contemplate the type of prohibition by bureaucratic fiat exercised by the SSA in developing its guidelines for those with “representative payees” assigned to their accounts.

·         The SSA’s representative payee system is not the type of process envisioned by federal firearms statutes.

·         Since 1968, federal law has barred the possession or acquisition of firearms by anyone who “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”[1]

·         The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has issued regulations that define an “adjudication” as a “determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that a person is, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease: (1) Is a danger to himself or to others; or (2) Lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs.” This includes a finding of insanity or incompetency in a criminal case.[2]

·         “Committed to a mental institution” is defined as a “formal commitment of a person to a mental institution by a court, board, or other lawful authority.” The definition makes clear that “[t]he term does not include a person in a mental institution for observation or a voluntary admission.”  The Supreme Court has held that an involuntary commitment is a serious deprivation of liberty that requires due process of law under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.[3]

·         Common reasons SSA beneficiaries request a representative payee include:

-          Individual lives far from banks and grocery stores and may wish to have a family member or friend make bank deposits and grocery purchases for them;

-          individual may not own a car and needs help with banking and shopping;

-          individual may simply want help paying bills, or

-          individual may not be good at balancing their checkbook.

[1] 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(d)(4), (g)(4).

[2] 27 CFR § 478.11.

[3] Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 418 (1979).

MDA Claiming False Victories

Moms Demand Action has never been above claiming a victory where there is none. I came across the picture below yesterday. It seemingly shows Academy Sports and Outdoor stores changing their policy because of a push from the Demanding Mommies. As I mentioned last week, they are on a campaign to get Cabela's to kow-tow to their demands regarding the erroneously named "incomplete checks."

They also posted a similar photo regarding Dick's. Now I don't care really what Dick's does because I think they live up to their name post-Newtown.

I checked the Academy Sports website to see if they had any press release regarding this. I came up empty. Likewise, I came up empty on the Everytown Facebook page. Now it gets me to wondering if they just contrived this out of thin air. So I went to that fount of all knowledge, AR15.com, and posted a message on the General Forum asking about it. Out of the 88 replies, I got this one that seems to indicate Academy policy has always been to only release a firearm when they got a definitive OK. Bear in mind that this is from a part-time employee and not a store manager.

I work at Academy part time. Its 21 for handguns and pistol grip shotguns. 18 for long guns, period. I can's even show a handgun or pistol grip shotgun to anyone under 21. But if you're 18, you can buy any long gun. Academy won't sell a gun without a "Proceed" or a CCW (at least in MS). IDK about historical data as I have only been there about 2 months.

Other comments seem to indicate that this policy probably came down from their risk management department a long time ago.

So is Academy Sports and Outdoors kow-towing to the Demanding Mommies? Probably not. They had, and have, a policy in place regarding NICS checks that was more stringent than called for by law. It's not a victory because nothing was changed when Shannon and her minions came calling. It is a policy they like but it wasn't a win.

SAF Rips Plan To Add Social Security Recipients To NICS Database

Alan Gottlieb and the Second Amendment Foundation didn't mince words when they ripped into the proposal to include those who have trouble managing their Social Security checks in the NICS prohibited person database. They make an excellent point when they say that gun control supporters will see nothing wrong with this proposal.

From the SAF:

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today responded to published reports that the Obama administration is pushing to prevent citizens collecting Social Security benefits from owning guns if they have problems managing their own affairs as proof the president wants to strip as many people as possible of their Second Amendment rights while he remains in office.

“This could possibly disqualify millions of people from owning firearms and might prevent many others from seeking help,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, himself a U.S. Army veteran. “It’s unconscionable that someone who might have problems balancing a checkbook or managing their finances would suddenly find himself or herself stripped of their right to keep and bear arms.”

The plan, according to the Los Angeles Times, “could potentially affect millions whose monthly disability payments are handled by others.” The report says this push “is intended to bring the Social Security Administration in line with laws that prevent gun sales to felons, drug addicts, immigrants in the United States illegally, and others.”

“So, let’s see,” Gottlieb observed. “The Obama administration wants to equate some Social Security recipients who own guns with felons, drug addicts and illegal immigrants. That’s not simply insulting, it’s insidious, because who knows where this could lead?

“What’s next,” he wondered. “Will they take away someone’s right to vote, claiming they’re not competent?”

Published reports estimated about 4.2 million adults are now receiving monthly Social Security benefits that are managed by someone else, designated as “representative payees.”

“What may seem reasonable to people who reflexively support any and all gun control is really just one more effort by the Obama White House to erode Second Amendment rights any way they can,” Gottlieb stated. “Taking away someone’s Second Amendment rights because they can’t manage their finances is wrongheaded and repugnant.”