New Panthers defend 2nd Amendment rights, want pawn shop shut down. Thumbnail for the video titled "New Panthers defend 2nd Amendment rights ...
from
Tuesday, June 30, 2020
Three Republican candidates square off for Maine's 2nd Congressional District
Rep. Scott Tipton ousted in Colorado GOP primary
New laws Wednesday include changes on the highway for 'slowpokes'
Facebook bans accounts linked to anti-government US 'boogaloo' movement
TSSAA: Football, girls' soccer seasons delayed due to state of emergency extension
Three Republican candidates face off for 2nd Congressional District
TBI investigating officer-involved shooting in Johnson City
John Hickenlooper wins Colorado primary for key US Senate seat
Scott Tipton trails challenger in early results as Colorado's 3rd Congressional District voters pick ...
New Panthers defend 2nd Amendment rights, want pawn shop shut down
You're Wrong About the 1st Amendment
North Carolina speedway owner offers 'Bubba Rope' for sale
New Panthers defend 2nd Amendment rights, want pawn shop shut down
Here are the new laws that take effect July 1
Store Clerk Returns Fire, Kills Alleged Armed Robber
The end of Fayetteville's economic future
Missouri Gov. Defends Armed Couple: 'Totally Within Their Rights'
Communist Revolution Continues, USA Morphs into Venezuela ~ VIDEO
Opinion: Patriots Stay Armed. Stay Dangerous.
Ft Collins, CO –-(Ammoland.com)- “Pacifism is merely cowardice, masquerading as ‘piety’” ~ Farnam
NYPD is on the ropes. NY Comrade and Mayor Bill de Blasio just gutted $1 Billion from the NYPD police department budget. Ditto for Chicago PD, Atlanta, Baltimore, Seattle. All have mayors who are openly Communists and who naturally do not want their police interfering with ANTIFA/BLM violence.
NYC’s mayor's budget cut from NYPD’s budget, which will destroy the once great Department. I hope liberal Democrats living in NYC, and who voted for this Communist clown, are enjoying all this.
In 2014, BHO unsuccessfully undertook the creation of his own private army of nationalized thugs. Today in an attempt to revive that effort, Democrats in Congress are proposing “nationalizing” our fifty state police academies so as to “standardize” use-of-force policy.
“Federalization” of individual state troopers will logically follow.
By destroying our historical statues and monuments, the left relentlessly erases our national history, simultaneously abolishing our First Amendment rights of Americans to speak of our history.
It’s fairly easy to predict the more violently-enforced censorship that is coming next:
- New restrictions on books you can buy, new restrictions on religious services, restrictions on access to “unapproved” library books (the alternative is to watch as the entire library is burned down), more restrictions on internet websites. AmmoLand News will become a prime target. Facebook Page content, ever-harsher, personal attacks on the left’s detractors.
Any and all who freely exercise their First Amendment rights are branded by Democrats and the media as “racists” and are targeted for physical violence.
The DNC, under approval by Joe Biden's silence, has now declared that even celebrating Independence Day on the 4th of July is “racist.”
ANTIFA is organized internationally. With the unconditional support of Congressional Democrats and their mainstream media lackeys, they adhere to the same violent playbook used by Communist revolutionaries throughout the past Century.
Second Amendment rights apply only to ANTIFA.
There is nary a word of commendation from Democrats concerning ANTIFA’s freely-exercised armed terrorism, including several never-to-be-solved murders! Simultaneously, the rest of us are piously told that we “don’t need guns,” and shouldn’t have them.
As the USA thus morphs into Venezuela, know and understand that there will be no “going back to the good old days” of overflowing grocery stores, 24/7 electricity, gas for your car, private-sector jobs, retailers, unrestricted cell-phone service, uncensored communication, relentless technological innovation, unlimited opportunity, our blessed “Land of Plenty,” all the accouterments of capitalism and individual freedom.
Communist revolutions invariably bring about universal squalor, sordid/abject poverty, violent oppression, debased subjugation,
… and are, without fail, “one way.”
“Their titles are legitimate. Their children are not!” ~ From “Come Along with Me,” from the 1953 Broadway Musical Production, “Can-Can” Original version sung by Hans Conried.
/John
About John Farnam & Defense Training International, Inc
As a defensive weapons and tactics instructor John Farnam will urge you, based on your own beliefs, to make up your mind in advance as to what you would do when faced with an imminent lethal threat. You should, of course, also decide what preparations you should make in advance, if any. Defense Training International wants to make sure that their students fully understand the physical, legal, psychological, and societal consequences of their actions or in-actions.
It is our duty to make you aware of certain unpleasant physical realities intrinsic to the Planet Earth. Mr. Farnam is happy to be your counselor and advisor. Visit: www.defense-training.com
The post Communist Revolution Continues, USA Morphs into Venezuela ~ VIDEO appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/38egdKA
via IFTTT
VA Background Check Expansion Push Ignores Reality and Less-Intrusive Alternative
U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “An Alexandria nonprofit is working to get every state to improve its background checks on gun purchasers, and Democratic lawmakers are taking notice,” a sympathetic ALXNow promotional piece masked as a news report asserts. “Safer Country was founded in 2019 by Alexandria attorney Paul Alan Friedman with the mission of taking firearms away from dangerous people. Friedman said that progress was made in the general assembly’s last session, but there is a ways to go.”
Naturally “Democrat lawmakers are taking notice.” It’s not like they have any real solutions to catastrophic problems resulting from their policies, so blaming guns is a surefire way to divert the public’s attention and increase the power of the state.
A quick look at the Safer Country “leadership” tells us much. Executive Director Friedman “was elected to serve as a Joe Biden Delegate,” and President Boyd Walker “was a Delegate to the 2016 Democratic National Convention and is a former member of the Alexandria Democratic Committee Executive Board.” Is this where we call in the ETrade Baby?
And naturally, they’re asking for money. The group only got its IRS ruling in 2019, so no financial data is available yet to look at
It’s very name though, is a denial of reality, meaning the promise of a safer country through infringement of the right to keep and bear arms is not possible, as well as a direct contradiction of the Founders' wisdom. What Friedman and his kind never seem to grok (or do, but admitting it would spoil the trick) is that the problem is with “dangerous people.”
We know that anyone who can't be trusted with a gun can't be trusted without a custodian. It's not just a saying, it's true. Not that “the law” keeps anyone determined to get a gun from doing so, as weekend homicide stats from Chicago or Baltimore continually remind us. And remember that mass killings that racked up the highest death tolls, 9/11, the Oklahoma City bombing, and the Happyland Dance Club fire, were all committed without guns. Of relevance, author Robert J. Kukla made an astute observation in his 1973 classic, Gun Control, equating the release of the chronically violent from prison with opening the cage of a man-eating tiger and expecting a different result.
Citizen disarmament fanatics like those at Safer Country would compel loss of rights without due process, and the only ones who would comply would be the “law-abiding.” And as prohibition attempts have shown us, it only makes things more lucrative for Capones and cartels to seize and control black markets with deadly ruthlessness – that and further incentivize government corruption.
Background check prior restraints (that’s what they are) are a misdirection from true goals anyway. The gun-grabbers are well aware of a report from DOJ’s National Institute of Justice that concluded:
“Effectiveness depends on the ability to reduce straw purchasing, requiring gun registration…”
The “experts” agree. Unable to show a reduction in so-called “gun violence” in the most restrictive states, those who couldn't fudge the data enough to get the results they want now say we need to expand the disarmed citizen pool with “age” restrictions, and have the government permit and license a “privilege” to even own a gun. Gee, I wonder where that door leads.
And what can government do – without true due process – once it has registration lists? (Yes, the president’s backtracking on this has not escaped me. He at least has the motivation to be “persuaded.”)
If the grabbers were really serious about using background checks to prevent “legal” gun transfers and had no ulterior motives, they’d be advocating for something like BIDS, the Blind Identification Data System:
“In BIDS, the word ‘blind’ refers to the fact that the government cannot detect who is attempting to buy or has bought a firearm and thus cannot add this person's name to a registry of gun owners. Nor can gun dealers randomly view a list of persons who have been denied the right to buy, own, and use firearms.”
While there’s no denying that BIDS would greatly reduce the risk of confiscations, I won’t endorse it. It’s still a prior restraint.
That said, here’s where BIDS could prove a very useful tool to expose the antis and what they’re really after: If the “commonsense gun safety law groups” truly only want background checks, why would they not promote a system like BIDS, which creates none of the potential registration dangers that create such strong gun owner opposition? So the question for anti-gun groups pushing “background check” edicts is “Why not BIDS?” After all, they say the reason they want background checks is to stop dangerous people from buying guns.
As usual, they’re lying.
The truth is in the forum poster graphic, above. Democrats and their apparatchiks intend to use such edicts to, in their own words, “remove guns from people who are believed to pose an extreme risk…” In other words, they haven’t even been charged with a crime, let alone convicted, or removed to where they can harm no one.
One great thing about this country: You can believe in just about anything. But that doesn’t give you the right to impose those beliefs on others and to lay claim to rights that aren’t yours to give or to deny. The wrongness of this is probably nowhere better illustrated than by the words of an insane tyrant in Lewis Carroll’s absurdist classic, Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland:
“‘No, no!’ said the Queen. ‘Sentence first — verdict afterwards.’”
They would impose such madness on their countrymen under the force of arms and con us into believing doing so makes us all safer.
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 VA Background Check Expansion Push Ignores Reality and Less-Intrusive Alternative appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/2YPk8e1
via IFTTT
Letter: I vote on issues, not style, not personality or even character
Virginia's new laws on LGBT rights, guns and abortion reflect state's political makeover.
Below The Radar: Freedom Financing Act
United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- We have discussed the threat that corporate gun control poses to our Second Amendment rights multiple times. One of the threats is when companies like Salesforce have attempted to leverage their products to force companies to go along with infringements on our right to keep and bear arms. In many ways, the fight for our Second Amendment rights has now expanded to the boardroom and cubicle.
That said, the biggest threat is the financial blacklist. If banks, credit card companies, and credit unions refuse to do business with Second Amendment supporters or the firearms industry, any legal battle won at the Supreme Court can be rendered meaningless.
The good news is that there is legislation that can shut off the financial blacklist. Representative Roger Williams (R-TX) has introduced HR 2079, the Freedom Financing Act. This legislation pretty much tells major banks, credit unions, and credit card companies that they cannot discriminate on the basis of “reputational risks.”
This is an important phrase. The term “reputational risk” has invoked by Andrew Cuomo when he began abusing financial regulations to silence the National Rifle Association. With the passage of this legislation, Cuomo’s campaign would be rendered toothless. That alone would be an important win and could allow the NRA to sort out its internal issues without existential threat.
But this bill doesn’t stop with securing the NRA. The bill extends security to every pro-Second Amendment group, every firearms manufacturer, and even every federally licensed dealer. Because the same “reputational risk” nonsense could be aimed at, say, a company making modern multi-purpose semiautomatic firearms or a local gun store.
If enacted into law, HR 2079 ends the potential for “reputational risk” to be used against our Second Amendment rights. But this legislation also goes further, includes language that explicitly prohibits banks, credit unions, and credit card companies from discriminating against FFLs, be they manufacturers, importers, or dealers. The bill also backs it up with civil penalties of up to $10,000. But the real teeth in the bill is the prohibition of using the Automated Clearing House Network for banks that discriminate against FFLs.
To put it mildly, this is a bill that will make a huge difference in preventing the use of financial blacklisting to attack our rights. It goes without saying that Second Amendment supporters should contact their Representative and Senators and politely urge them to support HR 2079.
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 Below The Radar: Freedom Financing Act appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/3gcTh15
via IFTTT
Slawson taking on Sheffield in House District 59 runoff
Gov. Reeves defends couple who pointed gun at St. Louis protesters
Bumpstock Lawsuit Moves Forward as FPF Files Motion
U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- Firearms Policy Foundation (FPF) announced today that it has filed its motion for summary judgment in Guedes v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, et al., asserting that the ATF exceeded its authority in redefining the term “machinegun”. The motion and other prior filings can be found at BumpstockCase.com.
The brief in support of the motion argues that ATF’s Final Rule, which redefined the term “machinegun” to include bump-stock type devices, contradicts the plain reading of the statutory definition. Additionally, the brief further argues that Chevron deference is inapplicable and constitutionally infirm.
“The government’s jigger-pokery attempt to turn lawful property into contraband and law-abiding citizens into criminals by usurping the Congress' power to enact criminal laws while eviscerating the separation of powers is beyond comprehension,” said attorney Joshua Prince of Civil Rights Defense Firm, P.C. “We are hopeful that the Court will invalidate the Final Rule and order the return of bump-stocks to those who surrendered them under protest.”
“As we continue litigating the definition of ‘machinegun,’ the government's position remains as absurd as ever. The suggestion that the ‘plain’ or even ‘best’ meaning of the definition took 80 years to discover and that generations of government experts at the Treasury and Justice Departments were too obtuse to understand such supposedly plain language does not even pass the straight-face test,” attorney Erik Jaffe of Schaerr Jaffe LLP explained. “Hopefully the court will recognize the error of that claim and invalidate the Final Rule. That result would comport with the long-standing contrary understanding of what constitutes a ‘machinegun,’ and the many legal and constitutional flaws of attempting to give ‘deference’ to an agency that denies it has or has exercised such discretion. And giving the Department of Justice such discretion to criminalize possession of lawful property that Congress itself has never prohibited would violate the Constitution in any event.”
“When it redefined the term ‘machinegun’, ATF ignored any plain meaning of what the law actually says,” commented attorney Adam Kraut. “Rather than applying the law as written by Congress, ATF conjured up imaginative interpretations of the statutory text at the direction of the President to reach a predetermined result. This cannot pass muster under any legal analysis.”
About Firearms Policy Foundation
Firearms Policy Foundation (www.firearmsfoundation.org) is a grassroots 501(c)3 nonprofit public benefit organization. FPF’s mission is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and the People’s rights, privileges, and immunities deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition—especially the inalienable, fundamental, and individual right to keep and bear arms.
The post Bumpstock Lawsuit Moves Forward as FPF Files Motion appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/3dLrgMK
via IFTTT
Three Republicans vying for Michigan's open 73rd House District seat in primary election
California: Assembly Sends AB 88 Back to Senate without a Vote
U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- Last Friday, the California Assembly was expected to vote on AB 88, the public safety budget trailer bill that was recently amended to include gun control language. The Assembly instead returned AB 88 to the Senate without taking a vote, prior to adjourning and resuming the summer recess.
AB 88 is a budget trailer bill that includes significant policy changes that, expand the definition of “assault weapon” under California's “Assault Weapons Control Act” and expedites the effective date on precursor parts restrictions.
Additionally last week, the Senate passed both SB 914 and SB 1175. Both bills have now moved to the Assembly for further consideration.
SB 914, sponsored by Senator Anthony Portantino (D-25), limits when those under 21 can purchase a long gun by requiring their hunting license to be currently valid. This means an individual who has purchased a license for an upcoming season will not satisfy the requirements of the bill. Additionally, SB 914 narrows the exemptions of loans of long-guns to minors and raises the fees the California Department of Justice can charge for eligibility checks on certain ammunition purchases and precursor parts.
SB 1175, sponsored by Senator Henry Stern (D-27), would prohibit the possession of certain African species of wildlife. The true goal of the bill is to ensure that individuals are not allowed to bring home lawful hunting trophies—even with the approval of the U.S. Government.
Continue to check your inbox and NRAILA.org for updates concerning your Second Amendment Rights and hunting heritage.
About NRA-ILA:
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 California: Assembly Sends AB 88 Back to Senate without a Vote appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/2YIXmo2
via IFTTT
NICS: Delaying and Denying Your Right to Keep and Bear Arms
By Alan M. Rice, Firearms Instructor & Spokesman, Gun Owners of America
U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)-Despite claims to the contrary by some firearms advocates, NICS has not been fixed. It is badly broken, and instead of “fixing” it, we should have a serious discussion about repealing this significant infringement on the right to keep and bear arms.
Way back in 1993 when Congress was debating what would become the Brady Law, GOA predicted that people who can lawfully purchase a gun would, at worst be denied that right and, at best have the right delayed — because contrary to the claims of politicians on both sides of the aisle, instant checks are NOT instant. Hence, GOA has consistently opposed NICS and every single misguided attempt to “FIX NICS.”
I was recently contacted by Mr. Jim McLoud who is the owner of Shooters Outpost in Hooksett, NH about the lengthy NICS delays and the problems they are causing for his business. Mr. McLoud told me that he has over $100, 000 in handguns that have been sold but cannot be handed over to the buyers because of delays in the “instant check” — delays that are averaging about a hundred transactions per week.
Some may say think that he should just hand over the gun to the buyer at the end of three business days — because that is what the law says. That would be reasonable if Mr. McLoud’s business was located in a state where the FBI handles NICS and the majority of checks are processed within a few minutes and very few are delayed. However, Shooters Outpost is in New Hampshire and the New Hampshire State
Police (NHSP) are the “point of contact” for NICS checks for handguns sold by licensed dealers in that state.
Here’s how it all works: Shooters Outpost (or any other dealer) contacts the “Gun Line” and one of two things happens. Either they are told “we will call you back,” then at some later time, the dealer is asked for the customer’s information (name, date of birth, etc.) Or NHSP takes the buyer's information on the initial call and just says “we will call you back.”
The sad truth is the New Hampshire “Gun Line” has always been operated in this grossly inefficient manner. When gun sales are not hitting record-high volumes, the call back comes anywhere from 15 minutes to a few hours. However, during busy times, the hours turn into days and in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, the days are turning into weeks. This is far from instant and completely
unacceptable.
The reason that dealers like Mr. McLoud are reluctant to transfer the gun at the end of three business days is because delays exceeding three days are now the norm instead of the exception and as the numbers increase the likelihood of a “delayed denial” increases. When this happens, NHSP asks the dealer to attempt to retrieve the handgun. Now a dealer has a used gun on his hands, and many customers expect a full refund. That is just bad business. From both the point of view of a retailer and purchaser, this is a nightmare scenario.
I contacted the NHSP to find out why there are such long delays when the FBI is able to issue an approval, denial, or delay in less than five minutes. I was told that from January 1, 2020, through early June NHSP processed about 40,000 checks, while for the full year in, 2019, they processed 59,000. They claim a 36% increase in gun sales but have not received anywhere near a 36% increase in staff. I was also told that NHSP has denied about 500 attempted purchases in 2020, some by known felons. But as we have pointed out, the real truth is that close to 95% of NICS denials are false positives.
To get further clarity, and possibly a different perspective, I spoke with Jay E. Simkin, who has held an FFL since 1983 and is an international economist. Jay told me that:
Background checks are a consumer fraud: The Federal authorities basically do not prosecute those, who being prohibited, seek to acquire firearms from a Federally-licensed dealer. Such an attempt to acquire is a Federal felony. Most states (including New Hampshire) do not prosecute those properly denied.
Simkin also said that:
“Further, with some 411,000,000 firearms in the U.S. (military items excluded) a person properly denied will get a firearm, just not from a licensed dealer in firearms.”
He went on to explain that:
A broad-based study, by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), found that: “In fiscal 2017, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives referred about 12,700 denied purchases to its field divisions for investigation. As of June 2018, U.S. Attorney’s Offices prosecuted 12 of these cases.” And the states are not doing any better, at the state level, officials from 10 of 13 selected states said they did not investigate or prosecute firearm(s) denials, some citing competing resource demands and the lack of statutes with which states prosecute as reasons.
Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6), it is unlawful for any person in connection with the acquisition or attempted acquisition of any firearm or ammunition from a federal firearms licensee to knowingly make any false or fictitious oral or written statement. Furthermore, it is unlawful to furnish or exhibit any false, fictitious, or misrepresented identification, that is intended or likely to deceive such federal firearms licensee with respect to any fact material to the lawfulness of the sale or other disposition of the firearm or ammunition. In addition, generally under 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(1)(A), it is unlawful for a person to knowingly make any false statement or representation with respect to the information required to be kept in the records of a federal firearms licensee.
GOA has been credibly informed that gun sales all across America are hitting record-high levels due to COVID-19. While you can’t shoot the virus, it is common knowledge that police departments have not been responding to calls for service due to the pandemic — which means that, in many cases, you are on your own. Then, when it looked like the pandemic was coming to an end, we saw riots and looting in
major American cities due to the behavior of a few police officers in Minneapolis. It is long-settled caselaw that a private citizen cannot sue the police for failure to provide protection services. Firearms are the great equalizer — but only if people can get them. Due to the widespread problems with NICS, it has become difficult for many would-be gun owners to become actual gun owners.
GOA has opposed NICS since its inception. And now that gun buyers are seeing first hand that what we predicted would happen is actually happening — that is, they can’t obtain a self-defense firearm in a timely fashion — the time is right to start talking to state legislators and Members of Congress about a full repeal of NICS infringements.
About Alan M. Rice
Alan M. Rice serves as a spokesman and New Hampshire State Director for Gun Owners of America (GOA), a grassroots organization representing more than two million gun owners. Mr. Rice, a firearms instructor, has been involved with protecting Second Amendment rights for over 30 years. He has a background in law enforcement as well as firearms training for police and private citizens. In addition to
fighting in the halls of Congress and in state capitols across the country to protect the right to keep and bear arms, GOA is also fighting in the courts to restore rights that have been unconstitutionally taken. GOA will not accept any restrictions on this enumerated right. Ammoland readers who would like to support our work can join GOA by visiting Gunowners.org
The post NICS: Delaying and Denying Your Right to Keep and Bear Arms appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/3icmuvb
via IFTTT
Trump hoping for Supreme Court vacancy as way to boost a flagging campaign
Oklahoma Supreme Court Invalidates Attack on Constitutional Carry Law
U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- The latest chapter in a sustained campaign to undo Oklahoma’s new constitutional carry law has ended, with a court ruling adding a fresh defeat to what has so far been an unbroken series of failures.
The war on constitutional carry in Oklahoma began, after the state legislature passed HB 2597, an NRA-backed bill to amend the “unlawful carry” crime at 21 Okla. Stat. Ann. § 1272 to allow carrying a firearm upon or about the person, or in a purse or other container, without a license. The amendment applies only to adults who are not otherwise disqualified by state or federal law from possessing a firearm and who are not carrying the firearm in furtherance of a crime. The Oklahoma House passed the bill on an overwhelming 70-30 vote, and the bill was approved in the Oklahoma Senate by an even greater margin of 40-6.
After Governor Kevin Stitt signed HB 2597 into law, opponents of the bill, including Rep. Jason Lowe (D-Oklahoma City) and Bloomberg’s Everytown/Moms, resorted to a referendum petition, Referendum Petition No. 26, State Question No. 803, seeking to repeal the law before its November 1st effective date. (Referendum petitions ask voters to approve or reject a bill of the legislature; initiative petitions ask voters to approve or reject the proposed law contained in the petition.)
Despite claims by Everytown that “permitless carry is opposed by 81 percent of Oklahomans,” the referendum proponents were not even close to meeting the necessary signature threshold of 59,320 to get the referendum on the ballot, and their petition was dismissed by the Oklahoma Supreme Court for “numerical insufficiency” on October 7, 2019.
The same day, Rep. Lowe and four other plaintiffs filed a state court lawsuit claiming that the new carry law was “invalid and void in its entirety,” and seeking a temporary and permanent injunction to prevent it from going into effect. On October 31, Judge Don Andrews of the district court denied the application. The plaintiffs’ emergency motion for a temporary injunction and stay of that order was likewise denied by the Oklahoma Supreme Court.
Early this year, Rep. Lowe introduced a bill, HB 3357, to restrict the firearm rights of Oklahomans by repealing permitless carry. Legislators were unconvinced by Lowe’s assertions that the new carry law was “a ticking time bomb, and it has been an utter disaster,” and his bill went nowhere after failing to pick up more than a single vote in a House Committee hearing in February.
Next, Rep. Lowe and two other proponents sought to restore the law as it was prior to the enactment of HB 2597 using an initiative petition, Initiative Petition No. 425 for State Question No. 809 (“SQ 809”).
The 44-page petition was filed with the Oklahoma Secretary of State in February with the objective of having the proposed measure placed before voters in the 2020 election. However, SQ 809 was not a straightforward repeal of HB 2597, as it retained some of the changes made by that law.
Oklahoma state law requires that initiative petitions follow certain rules. One of these is that voters being asked to sign must be presented with an accurate “gist” or summary of the proposal on the top margin of each signature sheet. The purpose is to prevent fraud and deceit by placing would-be signers on notice of the actual changes being sought and the practical effect of the petitioned measure on existing law.
The Oklahoma Second Amendment Association (OK2A) brought court proceedings challenging SQ 809 as noncompliant with this requirement.
The state’s attorney general, Michael J. Hunter, filed a brief also asking that the petition be struck as invalid. SQ 809’s gist, he claimed, “lacked transparency” by omitting “key provisions necessary to make an informed decision” and was “affirmatively mislead[ing]” for suggesting “that the proposed law makes changes that it does not.”
On June 23, a nine-judge panel of the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled in the matter and unanimously held that the gist of SQ 809 was legally insufficient. (One judge filed a partial dissent from the majority’s conclusion on the confiscation provision, but otherwise concurred with the remaining findings.)
The court identified several deficiencies. The use of the word “restores” in the gist was both confusing and misleading. Not only did this require potential signatories to know the law as it was prior to HB 2597, SQ 809 did not completely “restore” this prior law because it retained several aspects of HB 2597.
Further, the language of the gist gave “the false impression” that the existing law did not prohibit handguns on college, university, or technology center property, and that SQ 809 would change the law to create a “campus carry” ban. “Handguns are already prohibited on the campuses, and that will continue whether or not SQ 809 is approved.”
Another inaccurate provision referred to the confiscation of firearms. The gist stated that SQ 809 “generally prohibits confiscation of firearms during traffic stops when any person in the vehicle holds a valid handgun license.” The existing law prohibits confiscation without regard to whether anyone in the vehicle has a license. The majority found the sentence was misleading because it failed to accurately explain SQ 809’s effect on the existing law (by making confiscation easier).
The initiative petition was declared invalid and was ordered struck from the ballot. A copy of the opinion, In re Initiative Petition No. 425, State Question No. 809, is posted online at https://ift.tt/2NIFKCg.
The purpose of the legislature is to implement laws that reflect the will of the people. A brief filed on behalf of Governor Stitt in the proceedings to overturn the bill warned that:
“[a]llowing an aggrieved litigant, particularly an individual legislator on the losing side of a vote, to enjoin duly enacted state laws makes the courts an agent in thwarting the democratic process, undermining the rule of law and the separation of powers.”
Despite this latest fiasco, though, we have little doubt that the anti-gun crowd – including this “legislator on the losing side of a vote,” will continue their assault on the freedom of Oklahoma’s gun owners.
About NRA-ILA:
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 Oklahoma Supreme Court Invalidates Attack on Constitutional Carry Law appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/31ybLVM
via IFTTT
Trump will let the Covid-19 pandemic bring the US to its knees
Monday, June 29, 2020
Police protect constitutional rights of protesters but encourage responsibility
Washington, D.C. Volunteers Needed To Provide Security Escorts & Protect Monuments
Washington, D.C. – -(AmmoLand.com)- Urgent call to action for Washington, D.C. Volunteers needed to provide security escorts & to protect monuments, such as the WWII monument (which was recently defaced by anti-American idiots).
Time to STAND UP & STAND.
Contact Bill on the rules and limits for the security op. Contact Bill at 240-356-2025 or email warrior0445@mail.com
We have a duty to step up and defend our nation, our communities, our historic monuments, and our fellow Americans from this violent Marxist insurrection, intent on overthrowing our Constitution and laws.
Those of us with the training and experience to be defenders have an even greater obligation to step up. Get it done right where you live, in your home town and state. But if you can also go to D.C., we need you there.
Bill is a retired military officer. He’s squared away. He needs you to help him to provide security escorts for patriotic Americans who simply want to peaceably assemble in DC or visit our national monuments without being attacked by violent leftists. Please step up and volunteer.
If you can’t make it yourself, pleasedonate to support our efforts.
Oath Keepers are stepping up to defend police families, people under threat, businesses, homes, and monuments nationwide. Please support our efforts and more importantly please step up to help.
For the Republic,
Stewart Rhodes
Founder of Oath Keepers
About Oath Keepers:
Oath Keepers is a non-partisan association of current and formerly serving military, reserves, National Guard, veterans, Peace Officers, and Fire Fighters who will fulfill the Oath we swore, with the support of like-minded citizens who take an Oath to stand with us, to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help us, God. Our Oath is to the Constitution.
For more information, visit www.oathkeepers.org.
The post Washington, D.C. Volunteers Needed To Provide Security Escorts & Protect Monuments appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/2NDKR6D
via IFTTT
‘Decoding Firearms’ Educates on REAL ‘Gun Safety’
U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “Gun and ammunition sales soar as defund-the-police movement grows,” CNN Business reported Wednesday.
“More than 6.5 million gun-sale background checks were conducted from January 1 through April 30, according to the latest NSSF research, which showed a 48% year-over-year rise from the same period in 2019,” the report elaborates. “Firearms retailers … estimated that 40% of their sales came from first-time gun buyers.”
So it’s not just “gun nuts” adding to their “arsenals,” as the gun-grabber groups would have us believe. A significant percentage are women or are from restrictive states like California, where, feeling threatened by what they see on the news, have started discovering just what they’ve been missing.
The thing is, with all these new gun owners, the chances for negligent discharges and other bad things happening through ignorance go up. Like “Gunners’ Guru” Jeff Cooper famously observed, “Owning a handgun doesn’t make you armed any more than owning a guitar makes you a musician.”
That’s actually a maxim quoted by author John Petrolino in Decoding Firearms – An Easy to Read Guide on General Gun Safety and Use. Petrolino, a Merchant Marine Engineering Officer, writer, and NRA certified instructor, has written a gem of a book that more than lives up to the promise of its subtitle – it’s also pretty comprehensive.
‘In no way is this book to be a substitute for actual hands-on training and education…we are all in this world of learning together,” Petrolino admits. Humility from authorities can go a long way toward establishing authenticity, and that recalled nothing so much for me as an attitude conveyed to me years ago by a weapons and tactics trainer of elite military fighting personnel and civilian law enforcement tactical specialists:
“Our staff does not know it all, nor have we ‘arrived.’ We are in a constant state of learning and consider ourselves perpetual students.”
The first chapter of Decoding Firearms, unsurprisingly enough, deals with gun safety, and while Jeff Cooper’s rules are hardwired into many of us, Petrolino takes things a step further with what he terms “Always Rules” and then “Storage and Use Rules,” something those of us who have taken new shooters to the range might not think to bring up in a limited purpose setting focused on safe gun handling basics.
Skipping ahead several chapters, Petrolino relates the story of a woman who bristled at his recommendation to take a class as disparaging of her capability. Perhaps it’s conditioning after watching countless gun deployments in the movies and on TV, but shooting really does involve so much more than the simplistic “point and click interface” meme. Compare the indignant attitude of someone with an affronted ego who knows nothing to the examples set by authorities like Petrolino or by the experienced military trainer I consulted. Then consider another association of dangerous know-nothings, the gun-grab groups that have reimaged themselves as “commonsense gun safety advocates,” who are in reality presumptuous, senseless and ignorant frauds.
Noting the significant number of women now buying a gun for the first time, you don’t even have to ask yourself what makes more sense: Training where they are treated like adults making adult decisions with adult consequences and responsibilities, or the insulting disparagement of women’s capabilities exhibited by District of Columbia Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, one of 25 women in Congress who sent a letter to the National Rifle Association protesting its then-new “Refuse to be a Victim” program (from the January 1994 issue of Women & Guns magazine):
“Women are virgins when it comes to guns. It should stay that way.”
The same can be said for the danger-increasing way the antis approach children and guns: The “tools” the propagandists use are ignorance, avoidance, demonization, fearmongering, ostracism, and punishment, as opposed to development-appropriate information [I never say “age-appropriate”], guidance and hands-on training. Petrolino’s book made me recall how I introduced my sons to firearms when they were young, from having them sit with me while I cleaned them and explained what I was doing, why I had them and how they worked, to taking them to the range to watch me shoot, to teaching them to shoot for themselves, first with their own BB guns and then moving up to firearms when I deemed they were ready.
“[Y]ou can keep…firearms completely secret and hope that your child never stumbles on them,” Petrolino notes, “or you can educate your child about firearms and remove the mystery of them.”
Ignorance or knowledge: Which approach seems more like “commonsense gun safety” to you?
And there’s so much more than that, which is why it’s a good thing Decoding Firearms keeps its “easy to read” promise. The other very real safety issues the grabbers never seem to get around addressing – because they’re ignorant and unqualified – include all the various ways firearms function and operate, the different kinds of projectiles they fire, and the types of safeties and magazines. The section on loading and unloading firearms alone ought to be thrown in the face of every ass braying for “buybacks,” in essence expecting people who know nothing about guns to understand how to safely handle, unload and transport whatever kind of gun someone like a widow might have found in her husband's closet.
As for the rest, you can see for yourself other topics covered by using the Amazon “Look inside” feature. I didn’t intend for this review to be a regurgitation of the table of contents, but will note here you’ll find plenty of practical information on safely dealing with the various types of misfires, on shooting fundamentals, on personal protective equipment, on conduct at the range and understanding the types of commands you’ll encounter, and on sanitation, to ensure lead and chemical exposure are properly addressed (including a reminder if, like me, you indulge in the occasional cigar after handling guns). You'll find legal considerations. And of, yeah, Petrolino doesn’t neglect to address the one topic that's most important of all: The Second Amendment.
So: Who should buy this book? New gun owners, for sure.
And you should. It doesn’t matter if you’re not a beginner. Not all of us put the same amount of emphasis on every type of gun or every type of shooting, and it never hurts to have an extra resource. As such, it’s a valuable addition for every gun owner’s library and is a particularly useful tool to have if you occasionally take friends or family members shooting. Perhaps you’d find it helpful to loan them your copy before you take them, or perhaps you’ll want to encourage a new gun-owning friend or relative by buying them a copy of their own.
I’m actually surprised I liked it this much—I’m not a hardware guy and focus almost exclusively on rights through the lens of current cultural and legal events. I hope this review helps in getting the word out within the gun owner community and especially in generating enough interest so people will check it out for themselves.
You can obtain your own copy of Decoding Firearms from Amazon in paperback or on Kindle, and if you can’t stand Jeff Bezos’ guts, you should also be able to get it from BAM!
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 ‘Decoding Firearms’ Educates on REAL ‘Gun Safety’ appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/3dEGseo
via IFTTT
Gov. Reeves defends couple who pointed guns at protesters, says they were 'within their rights'
Slog AM: Another Fatal Shooting at CHOP, Worldwide COVID Deaths Pass 500000
2020: The Year the “You Don't Need a Gun” Narrative Died
Below The Radar: The NICS Review Act
United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- The National Instant Check System has been a point of contention among Second Amendment supporters since the passage of the Brady Act in 1993. Some view it as an infringement and a “compromise.” Others viewed it as averting a far worse situation.
It goes without saying that at a bare minimum, the system clearly needs fixes, and the Firearm Due Process Protection Act is something that should be passed as soon as possible. But anti-Second Amendment extremists have hated the National Instant Check System, too. Why?
Because, despite claims they made at the time, it was never about background checks. At a minimum, many anti-Second Amendment extremists ultimately want a “needs-based” licensing scheme. In other words, you would need to prove to the government that you needed to own a certain gun. At which point, they would deign to grant you the license to own said firearm.
So, they have their own “fixes” in mind for NICS, and they are not along the lines Second Amendment supporters would like. One of those proposing a “NICS fix” that makes things worse is Representative Carolyn Maloney, who’s introduced HR 821, the NICS Review Act.
The NICS Review Act is intended to start the process of turning NICS into a registration system. Under current law, information on transactions that have not been denied is to be destroyed within 24 hours. The intent is to preserve the privacy of Americans who choose to exercise a constitutional right. Maloney has talked about privacy before and it has been a big deal for her on other issues.
But with the NICS Review Act, she wants the FBI to hold on to data about non-denied firearms transactions for at least 90 days. That is a huge change on two counts. One, the FBI can retain the records for much longer, almost three months. That’s bad enough for all sorts of mischief, and Maloney’s long anti-Second Amendment track record points to a desire to at least enable mischief targeting our rights.
But the real slick move on Maloney’s part is that she has now made the 90-day period a floor, instead of a limit. In short, the FBI could retain the records as long as they want. This makes her bill extremely dangerous, and it is an excellent tactical move on her part. She can paint this as a minor bill, and paint opposition to it as “those Second Amendment types being unreasonable.” But combine that change with “universal background checks” and a little bad faith, and all of a sudden, you now can create a national registry of firearms transactions with the stroke of an anti-Second Amendment president’s pen.
Second Amendment supporters need to contact their Representative and Senators to politely urge that they oppose this bill. They also need to take the time and use this bill to explain to their fellow Americans why anti-Second Amendment extremists aren’t really proposing “reasonable” solutions.
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 Below The Radar: The NICS Review Act appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/3eI5g6I
via IFTTT
Last Minute Voting Guide
Church Faces Backlash for Giving Out Free AR-15 During Sunday Service
MD Illustrates Problem with Requiring Permission to Exercise Rights
U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- 2020 continues to serve up examples of why Americans should not tolerate gun control schemes that require citizens to obtain government permission before exercising their Second Amendment rights. This week, the Maryland State Police experienced what they termed a “catastrophic hardware failure” that interrupted that state’s ability to process regulated firearm purchase applications. The failure complicated Marylanders’ ability to access handguns at a time when many residents are seeking to protect themselves.
In order to purchase a handgun in Maryland, a prospective gun owner must first obtain a Handgun Qualification License. Applicants must complete a firearms safety training course and undergo a fingerprint-based background check. The application process costs $50, not including fingerprinting fees.
On top of this rigorous requirement, a Maryland resident must fill out a 77R Application and Affidavit to Purchase a Regulated Firearm. The applicant is then subjected to a redundant background, a $10 fee, and a 7-day waiting period. The private transfer of handguns is prohibited in Maryland, so all handgun transactions must be conducted pursuant to this procedure.
In a June 22 advisory memo sent to firearm dealers, the Maryland State Police explained that the hardware failure “has caused an interruption in the Maryland State Police Licensing Division’s (MDSPLD) ability to complete background investigations, specifically, for regulated firearm purchase applications (77Rs), handgun qualification license applications (HQLs) and MD wear and carry permit applications (handgun permits).” The document noted that it was the regulated firearm purchase applications that were most affected.
Fortunately, Maryland law contains a safety-valve provision for just such circumstances. MD Code, Public Safety, § 5-123 provides, “(a) A licensee may not sell, rent, or transfer a regulated firearm until after 7 days following the time a firearm application is executed by the firearm applicant, in triplicate, and the original is forwarded by the prospective seller or transferor to the Secretary.” This means that a firearm dealer may proceed with a handgun transfer on the eighth day after the dealer submitted a customer’s regulated firearm purchase application, even if the state police have not affirmatively approved the transfer.
However, in their advisory memo, the state police encouraged firearms dealers to forego the right to complete a handgun transfer – even after seven days have passed.
The memo noted, “The MDSPLD [Maryland State Police Licensing Division] encourages RFDs [Regulated Firearm Dealers] not to transfer these firearms until background checks have been completed.”
This “encourage[ment]” takes on a more mandatory character when one considers that Maryland gun dealers are subject to both federal and state licensing requirements. The same Maryland State Police Licensing Division that made the request for dealers halt lawful handgun transfers controls dealer licensing.
On June 24, the state police announced that they were “able to their database system to a fully operational status.” However, they also acknowledged a “backlog of regulated firearm purchase applications” and that “the process to complete all applications on file is expected to take several days.”
If the Maryland government holding up lawful gun transfers due to their own inability to process background checks sounds familiar, that’s because it is.
Back in 2013, at a time when both President Barack Obama and Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley were pursuing gun control, Maryland’s background check system experienced a months-long backlog. NRA filed suit against then-Secretary of the Department of State Police Col. Marcus L. Brown. The complaint sought to have the court force the state into meeting the requirement that applications be processed within seven days and to make immediate determinations on all applications that had already been in the backlog more than seven days. Further, the suit argued for the state to recognize that gun dealers be allowed to transfer firearms to purchasers whose application had been pending more than seven days but had yet to be processed.
As part of avoiding the suit, the state made clear that gun dealers are allowed to transfer regulated firearms to customers following the seven day waiting period, but prior to receiving a determination on the purchaser’s application from the state police.
A June 7, 2013 advisory memo from the state police noted, “a regulated firearm may be lawfully sold, leased or transferred by a licensed firearms dealer or other person after the seven-day waiting period, provided that the dealer or person has not received notice that the application has been placed on hold or disapproved by Maryland State Police (Public Safety Article Sec. 5-125(b)) and the dealer or person does not have actual knowledge or reasonable cause to believe that the recipient is disqualified from possessing a regulated firearm under Maryland or federal law.”
At the bottom, the problem is not that Maryland continues to “encourage” the gun dealers that they regulate to disavow their customers’ Second Amendment rights. The problem is a regime that requires permission to exercise a constitutional right. The record is clear, governments like Maryland have repeatedly shown that at times they are unwilling or incapable of granting that permission.
Consider what gun owners in other parts of the country have experienced this year. In several jurisdictions, governors and local officials ordered gun stores closed during the onset of the COVID-19 outbreak. In states that have criminalized the private transfer of firearms, this effectively cut off law-abiding citizens’ ability to exercise their Second Amendment rights. In other jurisdictions, officials curtailed or cut-off access to licenses needed to acquire firearms or exercise the Right-to-Carry. All of this occurred at a time when Americans most-needed their Second Amendment rights, as evidenced by the record-breaking number of background checks conducted through the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Check System (NICS).
The way to avoid these unacceptable scenarios is to reject firearm owner licensing and so-called “universal background check” schemes that create a prior restraint on the exercise of constitutional rights. Once such a system is in place, citizens must count on their government to act in an honest and competent manner in administering their rights. As history has made clear, this is nothing anyone should be forced to rely upon.
About NRA-ILA:
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 MD Illustrates Problem with Requiring Permission to Exercise Rights appeared first on AmmoLand.com.
from https://ift.tt/38aqjMN
via IFTTT
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)