Nearly two dozen counties in Virginia have declared Second Amendment Sanctuary status ahead of Democrats taking control of the state legislature ...
from
Saturday, November 30, 2019
Statement from Adam Lange, Candidate for C&I GOP State Committeeman
Army veteran starts petition, proposes local city as Second Amendment sanctuary
SCOTUS has the 2nd Amendment in its sights—and gun groups are thrilled
Is Macron Right? Is NATO, 70, Brain Dead?
Opinion
USA – -(Ammoland.com)- A week from now, the 29 member states of “the most successful alliance in history” will meet to celebrate its 70th anniversary. Yet all is not well within NATO.
Instead of a “summit,” the gathering, on the outskirts of London, has been cut to two days. Why the shortened agenda?
Among the reasons, apprehension that President Donald Trump might use the occasion to disrupt alliance comity by again berating the Europeans for freeloading on the U.S. defense budget.
French President Emanuel Macron, on the 100th anniversary of the World War I Armistice, described NATO as having suffered “brain death.” Macron now openly questions the U.S. commitment to fight for Europe and is talking about a “true European Army” with France's nuclear deterrent able to “defend Europe alone.”
German Chancellor Angela Merkel, whose nation spends 1.4% of GDP on defense and has relied on the U.S. and NATO to keep Russia at bay since the Cold War began, is said to be enraged at the “disruptive politics” of the French president.
Also, early in December, Britain holds national elections. While the Labour Party remains committed to NATO, its leader, Jeremy Corbyn, is no Clement Attlee, who took Britain into NATO at its birth in 1949.
Corbyn has questioned NATO's continued relevance in the post-Cold War era. A potential backer of a new Labour government, Nicola Sturgeon of the Scottish National Party, is demanding the closing of Britain's Trident submarine base in Scotland as a precondition of her party's support for Labour in Parliament.
Also present in London will be NATO ally Turkey's President Recep Erdogan.
Following the 2016 coup attempt, Erdogan has purged scores of thousands from his army and regime, jailed more journalists than any other authoritarian, purchased Vladimir Putin's S-400 missile system as Turkey's air defense, and ordered the U.S. forces out of his way as he invaded northern Syria, killing Kurdish fighters who did the bleeding and dying in the U.S.-led campaign to crush the ISIS caliphate.
During the Cold War, NATO enjoyed the widespread support of Americans and Europeans, and understandably so. The USSR had 20 divisions in Germany, surrounded West Berlin, and occupied the east bank of the Elbe, within striking distance of the Rhine.
But that Cold War is long over. Berlin is the united free capital of Germany. The Warsaw Pact has been dissolved. Its member states have all joined NATO. The Soviet Union split apart into 15 nations. Communist Yugoslavia splintered into seven nations.
As a fighting faith, communism is dead in Europe. Why then are we Americans still over there?
Since the Cold War, we have doubled the size of NATO. We have brought in the Baltic republics of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania but not Finland or Sweden. We have committed ourselves to fight for Slovenia, Croatia, Albania, and Montenegro but not Serbia, Bosnia or North Macedonia.
Romania and Bulgaria are NATO allies but not Moldova or Belarus.
George W. Bush kept us out of the 2008 Russia-Georgia clash over South Ossetia and Abkhazia. And Barack Obama refused to send lethal aid to help Ukraine retrieve Crimea, Luhansk or Donetsk, though Sen. John McCain wanted the United States to jump into both fights.
In the House Intel Committee's impeachment hearings, foreign service officers spoke of “Russian aggression” against our Ukrainian “ally” and our “national security” being in peril in this fight.
But when did Ukraine become an ally of the United States whose territorial wars we must sustain with military aid if not military intervention?
When did Kyiv's control of Crimea and the Donbass become critical to the national security of the United States, when Russia has controlled Ukraine almost without interruption from Catherine the Great in the 18th century to Mikhail Gorbachev in the late 20th century?
Among the reasons Trump is president is that he raised provocative questions about NATO and Russia left unaddressed for three decades, as U.S. policy has been on cruise control since the Cold War.
And these unanswered questions are deadly serious ones.
Do we truly believe that if Russia marched into Estonia, the U.S. would start attacking the ships, planes, and troops of a nation armed with thousands of tactical and strategic nuclear weapons?
Would NATO allies Spain, Portugal, and Italy declare war on Russia?
In 1914 and 1939, in solidarity with the mother country, Britain, Canada declared war on Germany. Would Justin Trudeau's Canada invoke NATO and declare war on Putin's Russia — for Estonia or Latvia?
Under NATO, we are now committed to go to war for 28 nations. And the interventionists who took us into Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Yemen want U.S. war guarantees extended to other nations even closer to Russia.
One day, one of these war guarantees is going to be called upon, and we may find that the American people were unaware of that commitment, and are unwilling to honor it, especially if the consequence is a major war with a nuclear power.
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”
The post Is Macron Right? Is NATO, 70, Brain Dead? appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/37WKjSD
via IFTTT
Bloomberg Bought Virginia Legislators to Introduce Confiscatory Gun Ban
Opinion
Fairfax, VA – -(Ammoland.com)- Michael Bloomberg’s bought and paid for Virginia legislators have wasted no time introducing legislation that would make the Old Dominion’s gun laws worse than those of the billionaire’s home state of New York.
SB 16, introduced by Sen. Richard L. Saslaw, would create a total ban on commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms, like the AR-15. Even worse, the ban would even extend to common firearm parts. The restrictions included in the proposed legislation does not grandfather current owners. The legislation is clearly designed to be firearms confiscation, as current owners would be forced to dispossess themselves of their property or face a felony conviction.
Saslaw’s legislation provides,
It is unlawful for any person to import, sell, transfer, manufacture, purchase, possess, or transport an assault firearm.
Otherwise law-abiding gun owners found in possession of an “assault firearm,” even one they purchased prior to the ban, could be convicted of a Class 6 felony. A Class 6 felony is punishable by up to 5 years imprisonment.
The legislation lays out several criteria by which a firearm would be defined as an “assault firearm.” This includes,
- A semi-automatic centerfire rifle with a fixed magazine with a capacity greater than 10 rounds.
- A semi-automatic centerfire rifle with a detachable magazine that has one of the following characteristics:
(i) a folding or telescoping stock; (ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the rifle; (iii) a thumbhole stock; (iv) a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand; (v) a bayonet mount; (vi) a grenade launcher; (vii) a flare launcher; (viii) a silencer; (ix) a flash suppressor; (x) a muzzle brake; (xi) a muzzle compensator; (xii) a threaded barrel… or (xiii) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (xii)
- A semi-automatic centerfire pistol with a fixed magazine capacity greater than 10 rounds.
- A semi-automatic centerfire pistol with a detachable magazine that has one of the following characteristics:
(i) a folding or telescoping stock; (ii) a thumbhole stock; (iii) a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand; (iv) the capacity to accept a magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip; (v) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the pistol with the non-trigger hand without being burned; (vi) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; (vii) a threaded barrel… or (viii) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (vii);
- A shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
- A semi-automatic shotgun with one of the following characteristics:
(i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a thumbhole stock, (iii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the shotgun, (iv) the ability to accept a detachable magazine, (v) a fixed magazine capacity in excess of seven rounds, or (vi) any characteristic of like kind as enumerated in clauses (i) through (v).
With this definition, SB 16 would outlaw America’s most popular rifle, the AR-15, along with countless other rifles, pistols, and shotguns that Virginians use for hunting, target shooting, and self-defense.
A knowledgeable firearms owner will take a look at the ridiculous definition and realize that such ham-handed legislation must be born out of petty vindictiveness or a complete ignorance of firearm technology, as there is no logical public safety rationale.
For example, the legislation is so broad that it would ban hunting guns like the Mossberg 935 Turkey shotgun for its “pistol grip.”
The ban would prohibit the possession of guns like this Model SP-10 Magnum Thumbhole Camo due to its thumbhole stock.
The ban would also capture guns such as this version of the Browning BAR Mark II Safari hunting rifle, as it has a detachable box magazine and a muzzle brake.
Moreover, the “any characteristic of like kind” language that appears after each list of prohibited features introduces an unacceptable vagueness into the definition of what does or does not constitute an “assault firearm.” Law-abiding gun owners would be forced to prophesy just how a court might interpret those unclear provisions.
As bad and senseless as the prohibition on certain firearms is, the proposed ban on firearm parts truly shows how Michael Bloomberg is cashing in on his political investment.
The legislation provides,
“Assault firearm” includes any part or combination of parts designed or intended to convert, modify, or otherwise alter a firearm into an assault firearm, or any combination of parts that may be readily assembled into an assault firearm.
This passage would appear to make all of the firearm parts listed under the various feature tests in and of themselves “assault firearms” and therefore prohibited. As the individual part is treated as an “assault firearm,” possession of such a part would be punishable in the same manner as a prohibited firearm, as a Class 6 felony.
Many firearms are modular. For instance, the same muzzle brake or flash suppressor could be used to turn a semi-automatic firearm into an “assault firearm” under the bill’s definition, or it could be used by a hunter or precision rifle shooter on their bolt-action rifle.
In recent years the popularity of the AR-15 platform has led to the adoption of AR-15 parts in other types of firearms. An example of this trend is the Ruger Precision Rimfire rifle. The firearm is a bolt-action rimfire rifle that accepts an AR-15 pistol grip. As the pistol grip part is a prohibited feature on a semi-automatic rifle that can accept a detachable magazine and is designed for use on a prohibited AR-15, the mere grip itself could be banned under this legislation.
SB 16 also bans the importation, sale, and transfer of standard capacity firearm magazines that are designed to hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. Many handguns commonly-owned by law-abiding citizens for concealed carry come standard with magazines that would be banned. Otherwise law-abiding gun owners who violate the magazine provision could be found guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. A Class 1 misdemeanor is punishable by up to a year in jail.
All Virginia gun owners must organize to fight against Bloomberg-backed gun confiscation in the Old Dominion. In the coming days NRA will keep gun owners apprised of the latest developments in Richmond and the actions necessary to defend the right to keep and bear arms. In the meantime, please sign up to volunteer to help defeat this and other terrible legislation.
About NRA Institute for Legislative Action:
Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org
The post Bloomberg Bought Virginia Legislators to Introduce Confiscatory Gun Ban appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/2OBXa4E
via IFTTT
Public Pulse: No support for Omaha police?; Shirts, ties and sweatshirts; No expensive suit needed
Friday, November 29, 2019
Let's Give Red Flag Laws a Try, with Abortion
Moorhead Hosts Annual Gun Show
Rants and raves
Appeal Filed after NY AG Rejects FOIL to ID Investigated ‘Ghost Gun’ Companies
U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- An appeal was filed Friday by this correspondent to the New York Office of Attorney General after its office rejected a Freedom of Information Law request to identify 16 companies Attorney General Letitia James is investigating for allegedly violating the state’s “ghost gun” law.
Since the companies affected could be “subject … to disgorgement, restitution, and penalties of up to $5,000 for each violation,” and since New York citizens who dealt with these companies are also at legal risk, AG James’ reported contention that she would not make them known “for fear of directing them business” should not override the public’s right to know. That the rejection was then “justified” under the excuse that it is for law enforcement investigations and judicial proceedings only makes the rejection all the more unsupportable, especially since the companies know who they are and disclosure of their identities, with no other information, can in no way jeopardize state actions.
The refusal instead indicates not only a lack of transparency on the part of Attorney General James and suggests arrogance and a legal vendetta by someone with the power to prosecute based on a political agenda. If allowed to stand, forget guns. What other issues involving citizen rights will the State be able to pursue while confidently hiding behind a cloak of in-your-face nondisclosure?
Here’s my appeal:
November 29, 2019
Kathryn Sheingold
Records Appeals Officer
State of New York
Office of the Attorney General
Division of Appeals and Opinions
The Capitol
Albany, New York 12224Re: Freedom of Information Law Appeal, Reference # G000679-092619
Dear Ms. Sheingold:
I hereby appeal the November 1, 2019 denial of access regarding my request, which was made on 09/26/2019 and sent to NYS OAG FOIL Request Center via the NYAG website's online request form. This appeal is being filed today to meet the State’s Nov. 30 deadline.
The records that were denied include the names of the 16 online “ghost gun” companies ordered by Attorney General Letitia James to cease and desist New York sales, and if applicable, the person the order was directed to the attention of. (See Sept. 23 press release.)
The Attorney General was cited in the press saying “James did not identify [the companies] for fear of directing them business.”
I maintain as I said in my FOIL request:
I am a journalist covering firearms-related issues whose work has appeared for decades in national magazines and internet sites. My readership and I have a legitimate interest in knowing which companies have received orders that include the potential for criminal prosecutions.
In rejecting my request, Assistant Attorney General Abisola Fatade asserted:
Please be advised that the records that respond to your request are exempt from disclosure and have been withheld pursuant to:
• New York Public Officers Law § 87(2)(e), because the documents requested were compiled for law-enforcement purposes and would, if disclosed, interfere with law-enforcement investigations or judicial proceedings.
I don’t believe a blanket law enforcement exemption would apply to this. As the United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit held in Crooker v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms, 789 F.2d 64, 66–67 (D.C. Cir. 1986):
[T]he Supreme Court underscored: ” [T]he amendment of Exemption 7 was designed to eliminate ‘blanket exemptions' for Government records simply because they were found in investigatory files compiled for law enforcement purposes.”
And
In Campbell v. Department of Health and Human Services, 682 F.2d 256 (D.C. Cir. 1982), this circuit reiterated that the 1974 Congress did not authorize “blanket exemption” for “all records relating to an ongoing investigation.” Id. at 259. We referred to the “congressional intent to heighten or refine agency attention to FOIA requests,” and we stressed: “If an agency may withhold any document merely because it relates to a pending investigation, the 1974 version of Exemption 7(A) would apply to everything properly placed in investigatory files, yet Congress plainly mandated a focus upon records, not files.”
Furthermore, by withholding the names of the companies, important information is being withheld from citizens who it appears are at legal risk. I hope your office can see that if the intent is to establish compliance with the law, decisions made by those citizens should be informed. I maintain that it is in the public interest to make that information known, and that should take precedence over the reportedly stated intent of AG James not to “direct business” to companies engaging in business that is lawful in other jurisdictions.
As required by the Freedom of Information Law, the head or governing body of an agency, or whoever is designated to determine appeals, is required to respond within 10 business days of the receipt of an appeal. If the records are denied on appeal, please explain the reasons for the denial fully in writing as required by law.
In addition, please be advised that the Freedom of Information Law directs that all appeals and the determinations that follow be sent to the Committee on Open Government, Department of State, 41 State Street, Albany, New York 12231.
Sincerely,
David Codrea
[Address redacted]
I will, of course, follow up on this when I receive a response and will determine then if further action is necessary.
About David Codrea:
David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.
The post Appeal Filed after NY AG Rejects FOIL to ID Investigated ‘Ghost Gun’ Companies appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/2XZwhed
via IFTTT
The Need For Effective Civil Disobedience
Virginia/United States – -(AmmoLand.com)-When advocacy fails, Second Amendment supporters are then faced with the hard choice: Do they comply with laws that are clearly unconstitutional, or do they disobey them? Civil disobedience is a grave step to take: Those choosing that path are risking a criminal record by defying unjust laws – and make no mistake about it, laws like semi-auto bans are unjust on both the constitutional level, as well as based on the facts.
The proposed gun ban in Virginia is one of the most egregiously unjust bans we have seen. It clearly warrants civil disobedience.
It should be kept in mind that civil disobedience is a tool, and like all tools, it must be used properly to be effective. In essence, it is telling the government that it stands at grave risk of completely losing the consent of the governed. Such a loss of consent in the 1763-1776 timeframe led to the Revolutionary War.
Done properly, civil disobedience can turn a country’s attitude around on an issue. See the Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s and 1960s. That worked because it made people question the actions of the government – and it should be a model for Second Amendment supporters. When people saw the unjust laws being enforced, they were shocked and horrified at what was done in their name, and that generated support for the efforts of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
That said, civil disobedience can also be easily screwed up, and poorly-thought-out or executed civil disobedience can set a cause back for decades. There are many ways to screw it up – especially on Second Amendment issues. Yeah, shouting, “Molon Labe” and “From my cold, dead, hands” can be viscerally satisfying… but it also will lead a soccer mom freaked out about her kids’ school being shot up to support the type of harsh crackdown that could send things spinning out of control.
One thing that is going right when it comes for laying the groundwork for civil disobedience on Second Amendment issues is the establishment of “Second Amendment sanctuary” jurisdictions. Their sample ordinance is a good starting point for the discussion by laying out the legal argument against gun bans in particular.
But also, getting these ordinances passed at the county level can do three things: First, by putting local governments on the record against, it will put the state and federal governments on notice – especially if the county governments send copies of the ordnance to lawmakers. More than a few local officials think about higher office – and a lawmaker receiving a sanctuary resolution will want to keep that in mind, especially since local officials will have some campaign infrastructure already set up.
Second, such ordinances will also create manpower problems for the enforcement of anti-Second Amendment legislation. Take Virginia, for example. The Virginia State Police has 2,118 sworn personnel. They have to cover 95 counties and 38 independent cities. Now if they cannot count on local law enforcement to help enforce a gun ban, actually taking guns becomes harder without the local knowledge.
Also, it complicates a call-up of the National Guard. That officer Ralph Northam may count on to lead a platoon of infantry or military police to augment the state police for confiscation may well be the author of a sanctuary ordinance. He could not only declare that we wouldn’t follow an illegal order, he’d explain to his men why it is illegal.
Third, and most importantly, they not only draw a red line as to where the consent of the governed would end, and why it would end, they also provide a path to resolve the situation without resorting to more drastic measures. All they have to do is repeal the unjust laws. That said, the alternative is for the consent of the governed to be withdrawn. In 1776, that led to the Revolutionary War. In 1861, it led to the Civil War. No rational or sane person wants to see a third such instance in this country’s history.
The one thing missing from these ordinances is the fact that they do not explicitly point out that Ralph Northam, Andrew Cuomo, and Michael Bloomberg (just to name a few people) are seeking to punish millions of people for crimes and acts of madness that they did not commit. Americans feel a sense of revulsion at the thought of people being wrongly punished. If anti-Second Amendment extremists like Bloomberg and Northam can successfully be painted as people who do that, civil disobedience will have a much better chance of succeeding.
Make no mistake, civil disobedience is a grave step to take.
It is one step short of completely revoking the consent of the governed – with the dire consequences of such a revocation. Should this step become necessary, Second Amendment supporters have the obligation to work as hard as they can to effect change through peaceful measures.
About Harold Hutchison
Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.
The post The Need For Effective Civil Disobedience appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/2Dvgsm6
via IFTTT
WNBA owner could be Kemp's pick for US Senate seat for Georgia
Georgia's GOP governor to defy Trump pick for US Senate seat after 'tense' White House meeting
Last Word on 2nd Amendment sanctuaries , Nov. 30
McHenry County Deputy recorded intimidating grieving Mother for question posted to Facebook
Norton vice mayor: City council to vote to become Second Amendment sanctuary
Democrats Between a Rock and a Hard Place
Opinion
USA – -(Ammoland.com)- Is it just me, or has it also occurred to you that Democrats, in this all-important year leading up to the 2020 election, rarely talk about policy issues? They are exclusively focused on removing President Donald Trump, and they only discuss policy during their somniferous debates.
In the Democrats' defense, their mainstream media bosses cover nothing but Trump and Trump crucified. Also, some Democratic Party leaders probably realize that their ideas don't fully resonate with the people and so it is in their interest to keep the focus on Trump.
But to their surprise, it seems they have made a grave tactical error in putting all their rotten eggs in the impeachment basket. Polls indicate their strategy has backfired, especially among independents and particularly in the swing states.
Perhaps people are sensing that the Democrats are focused more on Trump than on solving the nation's problems.
Only if you believe — as do the Democrats' leftist base and Republican never-Trumpers — that Trump is the nation's major problem will this myopic approach likely appeal to you. Most people, however, aren't neurotically obsessed with Trump and still care about the economy, the border, abortion, guns, foreign policy, and other issues.
But let's step back a minute. Is the Democrats' decision to fixate on alleged Trump corruption just a matter of strategy, or could it be just as much an organic development flowing from the same extreme mindset that drives their policy agenda? Could it also be that they are so convinced of the superiority of their ideas that they think they don't have to spend as much time selling them? Even though some Democratic Party leaders are nervous, they are prisoners of their base and their media masters.
I believe the radical leftist ideology thus dominating the Democratic Party leads to the left's malice toward Trump, which actually has far less to do with his so-called coarseness than with his steadfast and mostly successful opposition to the party's policy agenda.
Leftists aren't used to losing these days. Everywhere they look, their ideas appear to be dominating. People with contrary opinions are being muzzled and shamed throughout our culture. Anyone remotely within their orbit who strays from their orthodoxy is forced to repent and apologize for their heresy.
The left has been further emboldened by former President Barack Obama's success at cramming many of his ideas down America's throat in his quest to fundamentally transform this nation away from its founding ideas — from identity politics to Obamacare to abortion to same-sex marriage to his war on domestic energy to an explosion of the administrative state.
It is interesting that leftists and many never-Trumpers believe that Trump supporters are a cult, robotically following their leader and mindlessly absorbing ideas of their group, when, in fact, leftists are the ones obsessed over Trump, intellectually imprisoned by their own groupthink and seeing everything through their Trump-colored lenses. They are the ones mired in their own echo chamber, largely oblivious to what makes the rest of us tick.
Proof of leftists' ideological isolation is their cluelessness about the pitfalls in pressuring Democratic Party leaders to move so far left so fast. They obviously have no idea that there are tens of millions of us out here in flyover country — and many more than you think in purple and even blue states — who haven't given up on the ideas that make this country great and exceptional.
For all their smugness about Trump's imminent demise and the superiority of their “enlightened” policy positions, they have an uphill battle going into 2020, which is partly attributable to their arrogant dismissal of the rest of the nation and partly to Trump's policy successes.
As much as they've succeeded in indoctrinating many young Americans and others, they still have a long way to go in making their case for abortion on demand up to the point of birth and beyond; open borders; free health care, education and sanctuary for illegal aliens; socialism; single-payer health care; identity politics; gender anarchy; radical environmentalism; confiscatory taxes; and the selective suppression of speech and religious liberties.
In an open and honest airing of these ideas, Democrats still cannot win national elections. Some of the party's old guard leaders realize this, which is why they concentrate on Trump, conceal their party's radicalism and have recently been trying to moderate their ideas.
But they are caught between a rock and reinforced concrete. Concentrating on Trump alone isn't working, but pivoting to their radical agenda might be even riskier, however much they try to soften it. Look for them to become even more desperate to impeach Trump, or for a bitter intramural struggle between the radical elements dominating their party and the few remaining leaders who realize that this extremism won't yet sell nationally.
About David Limbaugh
David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His latest book is “Jesus Is Risen: Paul and the Early Church.” Follow him on Twitter @davidlimbaugh and his website at www.davidlimbaugh.com
The post Democrats Between a Rock and a Hard Place appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/33unhis
via IFTTT
Conservative New York Post Writer Upset about Guns for Christmas!? ~ VIDEO
Opinion
Arizona -(Ammoland.com)- Conservative New York Post writer John Crudele wrote a column about how upset he was that a gun company dared offer its wares for Christmas. Crudele is conservative, as such things go, in New York City. He is a Donald Trump supporter and has a roughly libertarian philosophy.
I don’t have hard-and-fast rules about many things. I go by the “it is none of my business if it’s not hurting anyone” rule. You might know it as “live and let live.”
I suspect John and I would agree on many things. It takes a lot of guts to be a Trump supporter in New York City.
Unfortunately, John stepped outside his area of expertise with the column on Henry Rifles Holiday advertising. He is perfectly capable of describing his own feelings, of course. It is his unfortunate linkage of his dislike for guns with his ignorance about them which created an emotional response from many of his readers.
John thinks everyone should be “pissed off” that a gun company dares to run an advertisement of its wares with a Christmas theme.
Sure, what a Christmas gift!
I don’t care what religion you believe in or what your feelings about guns happen to be, but this particular email should piss you off. I wish there was a more eloquent way of saying that but I can’t find it right now.
Companies like this give people who don’t like guns a reason to continue their dislike for them.
Henry Repeating Arms 2019 Christmas
A little introspection might be in order. I don't know exactly why John seems to think guns should be taboo as Christmas gifts.
Many people I have met, who want a disarmed population, view guns with horror. They would hate the idea of showing guns as useful, morally neutral, desirable objects. Maybe that is what John is getting at. I am not a mind reader, nor do I know John.
I suspect he is immersed in hoplophobic attitudes in the New York metroplex. He may not know many people for whom guns are a treasured everyday implement, for whom guns are useful family heirlooms, for whom guns are associated with positive experiences throughout life.
It is probably unusual, in New York City, to remember how the gun you inherited was used by your father to feed the family when times were difficult during the Depression. It is difficult, in New York City, to understand the social bonding of entire small communities during deer hunting season.
It is difficult, in New York City, to understand the sense of accomplishment, self-confidence, and independence that comes with the mastery of the use of individual firearms. New York City has made that potential nearly impossible within its confines.
John may not know that New York City started its gun control program to disarm the victims of Tammany Hall, and was pushed by the infamously corrupt “Big Jim Sullivan“, for that purpose.
In New York City, John, your views on guns are moderate. They are not moderate in much of the rest of the country.
We both expect President Trump to be re-elected. I expect his second term will be good for almost everyone, especially Second Amendment supporters. If you ever get out to Arizona, John, I will work to arrange for friends take you to the range, to expand your shooting experience with a wide variety of guns.
My experience, with those of many others, is the best cure for those who are unfamiliar with guns, is to take them to the range. A fun time is had by all.
Merry Christmas to you, John Crudele.
About Dean Weingarten:
Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30-year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.
The post Conservative New York Post Writer Upset about Guns for Christmas!? ~ VIDEO appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/2DxjZjC
via IFTTT
Winning for Women endorses Jessica Taylor for Congress
Thursday, November 28, 2019
America, the land of total depravity
Gun Trafficking by Deputies Shows Inevitable Corruption from Gun Laws
U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “Former San Diego County sheriff's deputy, four others charged with illegal gun trafficking,” CNN reported Saturday. “Marco Garmo, 52, served as a sheriff's deputy 27 years and was the captain in charge of the Rancho San Diego Station…was charged with engaging in the business of dealing in firearms without a license, making false statements in acquisition of a firearm, obstruction of justice, aiding and abetting the possession of marijuana with intent to distribute and other offenses.”
Outrageously, per The San Diego Union-Tribune, Garmo’s activities had been known by his department and only resulted in a reprimand from Sheriff Bill Gore (formerly in charge of the attack on Randy Weaver’s family at Ruby Ridge) and a warning letter from the District Attorney, “a longtime political ally of Gore’s.” Garmo himself dismissed his activities as “truly a hobby for me, and it just got a little out of control.”
See how understanding the Sheriff and DA would be if you told them that was your “hobby.”
And the elitism didn’t stop there. Back to the CNN report, we are told:
“Many of those transactions involved ‘off-roster’ handguns, which under California law could only be sold to law enforcement officers, not members of the general public…”
That’s done under the pretext that police are the “Only Ones” who can be trusted with guns or with having special exemptions in “gun-free zones” and the like, and that “the people” the Second Amendment refers to cannot be. As a side note, that term originated with a DEA agent who told a classroom full of schoolchildren he was “the only one professional enough” to have a gun on him in their presence and then shot himself in the leg trying to holster his Glock.
For Garmo, taking advantage of his “Only Ones” exemptions reportedly did not stop there:
“Besides making a profit, Garmo sold guns to cultivate future donors for his anticipated campaign for sheriff of San Diego County…”
Presumably, over $150K from the tax cows wasn’t enough, and besides, everybody whose anybody in California “law enforcement” apparently exploits their exclusive privilege. A week-and-a-half ago, we discussed how politically-motivated top LE honchos took advantage of California’s “may issue” concealed carry permit system to reward political donors, withholding the right from the rest of the citizenry under the fraudulent guise of “commonsense gun safety.”
And it’s not like those with elite “opportunities” going the extra step Garmo is accused of are such rarities, as the “few bad apples” apologists would have us believe. It took me less than a minute to find the following cases via a search engine:
- Former Pasadena Police Lieutenant Agrees to Plead Guilty in Federal Gun Trafficking Case
- Gardena Police Officers Convicted of Illegal Gun Dealing, Selling Guns to Felons
- ATF warns Southern California law enforcement officers may be illegally selling guns
And who could forget the man more powerful than a mere “Only One,” zealously anti-gun (for everyone except those he relied on and illegally profited from) disgraced State Senator Leland Yee?
Add to that guns “reported” lost or stolen:
“An NBC Bay Area investigation into the loss and theft of police firearms uncovered more than 500 weapons have gone missing from eight different law enforcement agencies since 2010.”
While we’re at it, let’s not forget how “buyback” guns have “mysteriously” turned up at crime scenes…
This might be the place where it’s appropriate to mention California is “A”-rated on its citizen disarmament edicts by Gungrabby Gabby & Co. Yet with each new act of lawbreaking in a “gun-free zone,” we’re subjected to no shortage of useful idiots on social media demanding “Something must be done!” and how “NRA is a terrorist organization with blood on its hands!”
It’s also appropriate to mention a place that, based on its edicts, must rate an A++, Mexico. It’s not only the leading source for “sanctuary” beneficiaries,” but also where the ties and supply lines between “authorities” and narco-traffickers are so strong, some of them went off and formed their own cartel. That, of course, leads to renewed blame of “lax American gun laws” by those who are intent on positions of power in the violence monopoly they intend to impose by hook, by crook, by lies, and by force.
About David Codrea:
David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.
The post Gun Trafficking by Deputies Shows Inevitable Corruption from Gun Laws appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/33qu50l
via IFTTT
Use What We Have Going for Us in 2A Defense
U.S.A. –-(Ammoland.com)- While the First Amendment is the first line of defense for our Second Amendment rights, this defense must be effective. One of the ways to ensure the effectiveness is to keep the fight on as favorable terms as possible – and that requires an honest assessment of what Second Amendment supporters have going for us.
One of the first things we have going for us is the historical record. The opinion by the late Antonin Scalia in District of Colombia vs. Heller lays it out very well. It is a lengthy read, though. The NRA also has extensive information on the history behind the Second Amendment as well. This is one area where anti-Second Amendment extremists have very few arguments. Even claims that the damage posed by modern firearms is severe enough to permit their banning will fall short thanks to a 2016 ruling by the Supreme Court.
That 2016 ruling, Caetano v. Massachusetts, is a total of 12 pages, most of which is a concurring opinion from Justices Alito and Thomas. Indeed, walking through that concurrence can lay out a very logical argument that modern multi-purpose semi-automatics like the AR-15 are protected under the Second Amendment, simply because while they are dangerous (like any other firearm, they can take a life), they are not uncommon or unusual.
Anyone familiar with the facts about long guns, particularly the modern multi-purpose semi-automatic rifles will also note that the misuse is rare, especially with the latest data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Add to that the fact that there are some 16 million modern multi-purpose semiautomatic rifles out there, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, and the unconstitutionality of these semi-auto bans should be easy to see.
Put it this way – when you have at least 16 million modern multi-purpose semiautomatic long guns out there, and you have a combined total of 532 murders committed in 2018 with long guns – that means that only one out of every 30,075 modern multi-purpose semiautomatic long guns is being misused to take a life in either a crime or an act of madness.
Put it this way, according to some odds listed at Funny2.com, you are roughly three times more likely to earn the Medal of Honor (1 in 11,000), find a four-leaf clover on the first try (1 in 10,000), or bowl a perfect 300 game (1 in 11,500) than you are to be the victim of a homicide involving a modern multi-purpose semiautomatic long gun. In fact, you’re almost 13.5 times more likely to die from slipping in the shower (1 in 2232 chance). The fact is, the misuse of the modern multi-purpose semi-automatics are very rare.
This is the type of argument that Everytown and groups like the Violence Policy Center want to avoid – like the plague. The big reason is that if the historical and legal underpinnings were to be common knowledge, combined with the perspective provided by the data, then their agenda is pretty much dead on arrival.
You have to give Bloomberg some grudging credit, he has managed to market fear and hatred of gun owners in general. How to overcome this will require accepting some hard truths about some tactics and strategy that simply are not working, and which are likely to play into his hands.
About Harold Hutchison
Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national w
The post Use What We Have Going for Us in 2A Defense appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/33xP4hH
via IFTTT
Rockbridge Supervisors hear from public on 2nd Amendment sanctuary issue
Sheriffs Group Urges Supreme Court To Strike Down New York City Gun Rules
Will ‘Sexist’ White Males Derail Warren?
Opinion
![Elizabeth Warren Image by Tim Pierce [CC BY-SA 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)]](https://www.ammoland.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Elizabeth-Warren-Image-by-Tim-Pierce-600x323.jpg)
From the tempo and tenor of the attacks, establishment fears of Warren's success are real — and understandably so.
Two recent polls show Warren running even with Joe Biden nationally. And a new Iowa poll shows Warren in front of the field with 20%, and Biden falling into fourth place with 15%.
The danger for Democrats: While Warren is now the party's front-runner, they fear she's a sure loser to Donald Trump in 2020.
And, again, with reason. A recent poll of six battleground states, including Pennsylvania, Florida and Michigan, showed Trump beating or tying Warren in all of them except for Arizona.
Nightmare scenario: Warren wins the nomination, but when her neo-Marxist agenda is exposed, Middle America recoils in horror. The economic elite is already sounding the alarm.
Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan Chase says Warren “vilifies successful people.” Microsoft founder Bill Gates says her proposals would imperil “innovation” and “capital formation.”
Writing in The New York Times, Obama adviser Steven Rattner describes a Warren presidency as “a terrifying prospect.”
Warren would “extend the reach and weight of the federal government far further into the economy than anything even Franklin Roosevelt dreamed of (and) … turn America's uniquely successful public-private relationship into a dirigiste European-style system.”
“If you want to live in France” — where half the GDP is controlled by the regime — says Rattner, “Warren should be your candidate.”
What finally shocked anti-Warren liberals into action was her recent revelation of how she intends to pay for her “Medicare for all” plan.
Warren's plan would require at least $23 trillion more in federal spending over a decade. Other experts say the added costs could run to $32 trillion, raising the U.S. government's share of the GDP by one-half and abolishing the private health insurance plans of 156 million Americans.
“Many of America's global champions, like banks and tech giants, would be dismembered,” writes Rattner, “Shale fracking would be banned, which would send oil and natural gas prices soaring and cost millions of Americans their jobs.”
Beyond “Medicare for All,” Warren has other plans. Universal childcare and free schooling from pre-kindergarten through college and the cancelation of student loans, plus a new look at reparations for slavery.
How would President Warren pay for all her “plans”?
She would raise the corporate rate to 35% from 21%, and slam a 40% tax on the profits of companies that try to flee the country.
She would raise the capital gains tax, impose new estate taxes, raise Social Security taxes on folks with higher incomes, and confiscate 2% of the wealth of those with $50 million in assets and 3% of the wealth of those with $1 billion, every year.
Writes Politifact: “All told, we counted $7 trillion in new spending over a 10-year period, and that's without Medicare for All. On the flip side, Warren offered specific tax proposals that came to $4.55 trillion.”
Still, Warren's socialism is not what her main rivals, all white men, are zeroing in on. They've decided to play hardball.
Thursday, under a headline, “Warren Faces Accusations that She's ‘Angry,' Which Supporters Say is Sexist,” The Washington Post reported:
“Two of the leading male candidates in the Democratic presidential primary race — Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg — have escalated separate lines of attack as they attempt to counter the field's most prominent woman: Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) is antagonistic and angry.”
Warren has a “my way or the highway” approach, said Buttigieg, she is “so absorbed in the fighting that it is as though fighting were the purpose.”
Biden says Warren, who has a real shot at taking the nomination, reflects “an angry unyielding viewpoint that has crept into our politics.”
This is “treacherous,” warns the Post, “given that many Democrats remain upset over what they view as the sexist treatment of Hillary Clinton, the party's last nominee.”
The Democratic Party today defines itself as an inclusive party of women, gays, Hispanics, African Americans and other people of color.
Yet three months out from the decisive early contests of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina, the party is going into the semifinals of its contest for a leader and future president without a single person of color in the final four.
Moreover, the three white males are denigrating and piling on the woman who is the front-runner with attacks on her personality for which conservatives, if they used such tactics, would be charged with “dog-whistling” the white working class.
When one looks at the approval-disapproval rating of the president, re-election appears problematic. When one looks at the Democrats' agenda and field of candidates, the odds of Trump's re-election seem a good deal better.
This thing is by no means over.
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”
The post Will ‘Sexist’ White Males Derail Warren? appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/2OsCVq1
via IFTTT
More Revelations at Former Officer Goines Federal Bond Hearing from No-Knock Raid
Opinion
Arizona -(Ammoland.com)- There was a federal bond hearing for former Houston Police Officer Gerald Goines last week after his arrest on 20 November, 2019.
In the hearing for Goines, FBI special agent O'Neil Brown testified about more evidence found in Goines' official, but unmarked Houston Police Department car. From click2houston.com:
Brown’s testimony brought forward new revelations about the investigation into Goines’ alleged activities. He testified that Goines was involved in a sexual relationship with one of his confidential informants. This same confidential informant told investigators the drugs Goines said were purchased from 7815 Harding Street came from a different address — one unrelated to Dennis Tuttle and Rhogena Nicholas, Brown testified. Brown also said investigators discovered a stolen gun in Goines’ unmarked HPD unit and various illegal drugs, including cocaine, and ecstasy.
It appears former officer Goines had more illegal drugs and illegal guns in his car than their victims, the Tuttles had. They had only a small amount of marijuana, and a small amount of cocaine discovered in their modest home, where they had lived quiet lives for the last 20 years since they had married.
Dennis Tuttle, 59, was a medically retired Navy veteran. Rhogena Nicholas, 58, his wife, a devout Christian who emailed a prayer to her mother every day. Both were killed in the no-knock raid at their 7815 Harding Street Houston residence. based on lies from a neighbor across the street and the false “evidence” by former officer Goines to obtain the warrant.
Goines, his partner Steven M. Bryant, 46, and the neighbor, Patricia Ann Garcia, 53, were arrested on federal warrants after an FBI investigation prompted by the raid and double homicide.
In the interest of justice, it appears Dennis Tuttle fought back against the armed home invaders, who had shot and killed his dog in his living room, with virtually no warning. The home invaders were undercover narcotics police. Four officers were wounded. One of those was Gerald Goines. Goines was the lead investigator in the case.
Goines was wounded in the neck, and unable to talk. He was in the hospital for some time. The wound may have prevented him from coordinating a more extensive coverup.
It seems doubtful he would have left a stolen gun in his vehicle if he had the chance to remove it. Previous revelations by his partner, Bryant, showed there had been heroin in the car as well. Some of the heroin found in his official car might have ended up at the 7815 address if he had not been prevented from planting it there.
Authorities allege Goines lied in a search warrant affidavit when he said that a confidential informant had bought heroin at the home. But the informant told investigators no such drug buy ever took place. Goines had indicated in the search warrant that Bryant had identified heroin bought at the home. But Bryant later told investigators he had retrieved heroin from Goines' police car.
Dennis' Tuttles guns were all legal, it appears.
It has been reported that Goines was involved in over 100 no-knock warrants in the seven years previous to the Harding Street no-knock raid. His informants, in the documents used to obtain the warrants, swore guns had been seen in all of them. Mysteriously, no guns were reported as being seized by Goines, after the raids were finished. From khou.com:
Goines swore in search warrant affidavits that “knocking and announcing would be dangerous, futile,” because he claimed a confidential informant had seen a gun inside. Those claims led judges to grant no-knock warrants, which accounted for 96 percent of all the search warrants he filed in the last seven years, a KHOU 11 Investigation has found.
But in every one of the more than 100 drug cases based off those warrants, there’s no record of Goines ever seizing a gun after executing a no-knock search warrant.
The discovery of a stolen gun in Goines official car fuels speculation about what may have happened to all the guns that might have been discovered in those previous raids.
Police Chief Acevedo stated, in a recent press conference, that if you go to a random number of residences in Texas, more than half are going to have guns.
“..most houses, I would say a greater number, you would find firearms than not.”
What would the percentage be if those residences were being used by drug dealers who informants had swore had guns on the premises?
When those who wish us disarmed talk about laws to disarm the innocent, they carefully refrain from mentioning corrupt police and the black market.
About Dean Weingarten:
Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.
The post More Revelations at Former Officer Goines Federal Bond Hearing from No-Knock Raid appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/2XWuTsA
via IFTTT
Will Virginia conservatives need 2nd Amendment sanctuaries?
Elected officials not likely to risk jobs for 2nd Amendment rights
LETTER: Greene: protect the 2nd Amendment
Prof calls GOP, Fox News 'existential threats' to America
Kemp asserts Georgia Senate appointee will align with Trump policy amid reports of tensions
Wednesday, November 27, 2019
Ekstrom: Why I'm Running for Congress
Snider: Meet Me and Where I Stand on the Issues
Packed crowd as Shenandoah County leaders discuss becoming Second Amendment Sanctuary
Clay County Votes To Become 2nd Amendment Sanctuary County
Winegarner: Republican Agriculture Leader Launches Bid For Congress
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)