Chuck seriously believes that he can prevent people from making this simply by passing a law.
Drastic plastic
The 3-D printed plastic gun has arrived:
“… Early next week, Wilson, a 25-year-old University of Texas law student and founder of the non-profit group Defense Distributed, plans to release the 3D-printable CAD files for a gun he calls “the Liberator,” … All sixteen pieces of the Liberator prototype were printed in ABS plastic with a Dimension SST printer from 3D printing company Stratasys, with the exception of a single nail that’s used as a firing pin. The gun is designed to fire standard handgun rounds, using interchangeable barrels for different calibers of ammunition …”
Excellent!
Of course, not everyone is happy:
” … Congressman Steve Israel (D-Huntington) renewed his call for passage of his recently-introduced Undetectable Firearms Modernization Act that extends the ban on plastic firearms and includes homemade, plastic high-capacity magazines and receivers. The existing ban on plastic guns expires this year and does not clearly cover these major components … Rep. Israel said, “Security checkpoints, background checks, and gun regulations will do little good if criminals can print plastic firearms at home and bring those firearms through metal detectors with no one the wiser. When I started talking about the issue of plastic firearms months ago, I was told the idea of a plastic gun is science-fiction. Now that this technology appears to be upon us, we need to act now to extend the ban on plastic firearms.” …”
That isn’t what he is worried about. The price of quality plastic printers is still high so it is not as if people are going to start churning these things out at home in the immediate future. What Israel is worried about is what happens say 10 years down the road, when the price has gone down to where they are affordable to the masses. Cell phones have been around since the 70s, but it wasn’t until after 2000 they became pervasive. Laser sintering and microwave sintering technologies are also advancing which allow 3-D printing of metal and non-metal objects. This tech too will eventually be affordable to anyone.
At that point, what I believe will happen will be a repeat of what happened in the 90s when the government attempted to keep control of “strong” encryption and the resulting intimidation/persecution of Phil Zimmermann over PGP. That didn’t go well for the government when internet users essentially gave the feds a giant middle finger and they were forced to back down in the late 90s. Now “strong” encryption is available pretty much everywhere. I envision the same thing for printed guns.
Shameless Schumer
You have to give Chuck Schumer credit: He’s very good at being a politician. He can say the most outrageous B.S. with a straight face:
“… “One of the big changes, and one of the reasons that I am truly optimistic we will get something done, is that I am hearing support for gun safety in places I’ve never heard it before,” Schumer told the Daily News. “We’re at a turning point now, even in redder states, the broad middle is now engaged, and saying they want common sense measures,” he added …”
True, he knows the DN isn’t going to question him even though they covered his blatantly obvious astroturf rally a couple weeks ago. Objective journalists would have asked who exactly he’s been talking to considering he’s not even hearing support for gun control from real people outside his downtown Manhattan office.
Hollywood gun fight
Hollywood is concerned that there is no exemption in the SAFE Act for them:
“… Officials in the movie and television industry say the new laws could prevent them from using the lifelike assault weapons and high-capacity magazines that they have employed in shows like “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit” and films like “The Dark Knight Rises.” … Industry workers say that they need to use real weapons for verisimilitude, that it would be impractical to try to manufacture fake weapons that could fire blanks, and that the entertainment industry should not be penalized accidentally by a law intended as a response to mass shootings. “Weapons are part of our history as a culture as humans,” said Ryder Washburn, vice president of the Specialists, a leading supplier of firearms for productions that is based in Manhattan. “To tell stories, you need them.” …”
Que the Sad Trombone.
“… Gun rights activists, who are challenging the new firearm restrictions in court, have mocked the idea of a so-called Hollywood exception. “They’re saying, ‘Why are we being held to this standard when Hollywood is getting a pass, and they’re the ones who are promoting the violence?’ ” said Thomas H. King, the president of the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association …”
Exactly.
Some Republicans have come out against an exemption:
“… “My concern is why are you doing for Hollywood and others cannot do the same thing?” Skelos said in an interview today. “I don’t believe they should be treated any differently.” …”
Others are attacking the Governor:
“… Assembly Republicans on Tuesday urged the Democratic majority to reduce the $425 million in tax breaks for film productions and restore a $90 million cut to the state Office of People with Developmental Disabilities … Assemblyman Bill Nojay, R-Pittsford, Monroe County, accused Cuomo of pandering to the film industry in exchange for campaign contributions … Nojay said the state is giving $5 million for next year’s Super Bowl in New Jersey and spending $30 million to enforce the gun-control law, which Republicans have opposed …”
True, Cuomo has been sucking up to Hollywood:
“… The governor — still fresh from his victory securing marriage equality in New York — will arrive on December 2 for a reception and dinner co-hosted by Hollywood reliables Rob and Michele Reiner, Steve Bing, Katie McGrath and J.J. Abrams, Candy Spelling, Darren Star, Chris Albrecht, Kevin Huvane, and Laura and Casey Wasserman, among others …”
If he was really concerned about “gun violence” then Cuomo should call upon Hollywood to follow his lead. With campaign cash on the table that isn’t going to happen.
Why the antis lost
The antis analyze why they lost. They still do not get it.
“… We waited too long to rally the troops …”
Untrue. The problem is you have no troops, only astroturf.
“… We cannot persuade a moderate Republican Senator with Democrat activists alone …”
Possibly true, but you had lots of lamestream media supporting the lie that the public wanted more gun control.
“… We won the 2012 election by targeting, targeting, targeting …”
Obama stayed as far away from gun control as possible during the last election.
“… We rely on the online grassroots and ignore the offline grasstops. To persuade a member of Congress, we need to couple serious citizen activists with business, religious and community leaders as well as local elected officials who carry personal weight …”
In other words, you want more astroturf, not less.
“… We didn’t distribute serious talking points to our email subscribers …”
That’s only because you don’t have any serious talking points. The antis rely on ignorance, incompetence and intimidation. They have no facts to back up their position which is why neither Cuomo nor Obama wanted to have legislative debate on the bills.
“… Instead of organizing a few major events or protests we delight in encouraging everyone to stage their own, with no cohesive messaging strategy …”
You cannot have major events with only astroturf.
“… We rely far, far, far, far, far too much on the email petition …”
Possibly true, but likely not relevant due to the obvious astroturf nature of the antigun organizations.
“… When we use email to urge our activists to phone Congress, we send them to the phones with too little background information and no tips on how to lobby Republican staff …”
Possibly true, but also likely not relevant due to astroturf again. Politicians know the difference between genuine public interest organizations and phony front groups.
“… Even the best players on our team were curiously inept …”
No, they’re batshit nuts.
“… We encouraged folks from out of state to pile on …”
Irrelevant given that MAIG was only able to generate 4000 calls in support of gun control.
“… Very few groups bothered to thank the folks that supported us in the losing effort; the right was all over it, they take care to give praise when it is due …”
Irrelevant given that leftist media were slobbering all over the antis who voted.
“… The Tea Party ramped up an effort to lobby House members in the days before the Senate vote. We didn’t do crap …”
Astroturf cannot do anything but crap. Plus, the leftist media was going all out for gun control. What stopped them were real grassroots gunnies and a general public that was not interested in the gun control agenda.
H/T: SNBQ.
Bloomberg throws money at his opponents
Admitting it
An interesting admission from the Cuomo administration:
“… Cuomo administration officials strongly objected to the premise that the governor’s drop in upstate polls has anything to do with issues beyond gun control. And the notion that he is focusing on left-leaning issues is driven by the media, they insist. The Cuomo officials noted all polls showed a similar finding: His upstate numbers began going down in January after the gun bill’s passage. “It’s all guns,” a Cuomo official said …”
This is the most blunt acknowledgement I’ve seen from his camp as to the political damage SAFE has done to Cuomo. The next two questions from the media should be:
- Does this negative fallout hurt Cuomo’s rumored presidential aspirations?
- Did this negativity have anything do with the failure of the Senate to pass gun control?
“… One state lawmaker in a Republican region said constituents rarely had anything bad to say about Cuomo the first couple years. They forgave him on the gay marriage issue, said the lawmaker, speaking on condition of anonymity. But the gun control law unleashed negative feelings about Cuomo at every constituent event the lawmaker is attending these days. And the complaints center around a feeling that Cuomo needs to return to what he said would be his administration’s focus: jobs, jobs, jobs …”
This is true. Gay marriage just wasn’t that big of a deal to people regardless of their personal opinions on the issue. Guns, however, are a big deal to an activist segment of the population that most certainly is not confined to upstate, something that the NYC media refuses to acknowledge in spite of the outrage the Journal News created with their map of pistol license holders and the resulting boycott which I understand cost the paper a third of their subscribers.
Probably the most insulting thing is that Cuomo absolutely, positively will not acknowledge guns for self-defense:
“… The SAFE Act is designed to keep military-style assault weapons that have the potential to cause the greatest harm out of our communities while still respecting New York’s long tradition of hunting and sport shooting …”
He is not helping himself saying things like this.
Schumer’s plan
Even more on Schumer’s plan to resurrect gun control:
“… At a closed-door meeting on Capitol Hill this week, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) outlined a plan to bring up a new bill in the Senate “in the next three to four months,” a Senate aide said Friday. The plan includes a public relations blitz aimed at convincing some lawmakers allied with the National Rifle Association to break with the gun lobby, the aide said …”
This is in line with the antis new tactic of trying to shame legislators into support gun control. Should they be concerned?
“… supporters of the background check bill are regrouping, hoping to tap into public anger to revive the measure … A group funded by Mayor Bloomberg, Mayor’s Against Illegal Guns, arranged for supporters to make 4,000 calls to Senate offices in the last week protesting the defeat of the background check measure …”
Mayor Mike manages to generate 4,000 phone calls while we got 12,000 people to physically come to Albany, some driving 5-6 hours one way to get there. This shows the considerable difference in the level of commitment between the pro and anti side.
“… Democrats say they sense some movement already …”
Where? From the couple of dozen kooks who tried protesting outside ILA’s office this past week?
Speaking of astroturf
Speaking of astroturf, the antis tried yet another protest outside NRA’s lobbying office in D.C. It was organized by New Yorkers Against Gun Violence and an assortment of lunatic left groups.
According to The Washington Examiner:
“A generous estimation of the crowd size would have been about 100 people, including members of the media.”
FAIL.
Schumer elaborates
Sen. Schumer elaborates on his previous comments:
“… Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said the “broad middle” will continue to press for action on a measure hammered out by a pair of pro-gun senators that would expand background checks on gun purchases …”
Translation: More astroturf.
This has not gone very well so far. Because the antigunners cannot generate any significant turnout by themselves, Schumer/Obama/Cuomo have turned to traditional left-leaning groups not otherwise associated with gun control for help. This didn’t work when Cuomo tried it with the unions and Schumer’s dog and pony show with the Obama-zombies wasn’t any better.
Any details on the legislation?
“… “My own little prediction – I think we’re going to bring this bill back before the end of the year and I think you may find some changes,” said Schumer, during a breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor. “We may change the bill a little bit – but I think you may find some changes out there in the public. Lots of senators who thought it was safe to vote against it because of the intensity are not so sure anymore.” …”
Translation: Same bill, but with more B.S. marketing.