The NRA along with 3 VA residents have filed suit against Fairfax VA for banning guns in public parks. IMG NRA-ILA
U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- The National Rifle Association teamed with three Virginia residents and filed a lawsuit on Friday against Fairfax County for their unconstitutional ban on firearm possession in parks and in areas adjacent to certain events.
“The ban on firearms in parks and on trails in Fairfax County is dangerous and unconstitutional,” said Amy Hunter, spokeswoman, NRA. “While all of us hope that parks are safe and beautiful havens, the reality is that assaults, sexual assaults and other violent crimes can and do occur at parks. Furthermore, parks are some of the few places people can go during the COVID-19 pandemic, and law-abiding people should be able to defend themselves and their loved ones should the need arise. These parks are vast and have isolated locations. Because Fairfax County cannot guarantee individual safety, people should be able to take the necessary precautions.”
There are 23,584 acres of parks and 334 miles of trails in Fairfax County. Since 2014, there have been many crimes in Virginia parks, many of them gang-related. Some of the more serious headline-grabbing crimes include murder, kidnap, sexual assault, assault and a horrific decapitation.
The lawsuit, LaFave v. County of Fairfax, also challenges the prohibition on possession of firearms in places adjacent to permitted events and events that require a permit but do not have one. Examples of such events include a concert or a protest held in Fairfax County. Currently, if a person carrying a firearm comes upon one of these events, they are banned from carrying that weapon anywhere “adjacent” to the event. The term “adjacent” is unclear and leaves otherwise law-abiding gun owners unclear on where they can and can’t be, and where the line is that puts them in danger of prosecution.
“The bottom line is that Fairfax County is placing the burden of their laws on law-abiding residents and not on criminals,” concluded Hunter. “This needs to change.”
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
More anti-gun laws introduced in Connecticut. IMG NRA-ILA
U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- Since the start of the 2021 Legislative Session, the Connecticut General Assembly has seen the introduction of multiple firearm-related bill proposals. A few of those measures have been outlined below.
Pro-gun Legislation: HB 5077 – An Act Limiting Orders Related to Firearms and Ammunition During a Civil Preparedness or Public Health Emergency (Rep. Craig Fishbein)
Prohibits the Governor or any municipality from restricting lawful possession of a firearm or ammunition during a civil preparedness public health emergency.
SB 544 – An Act Prohibiting the Municipal Regulation of Firearms (Sen. Robert Sampson)
Prohibits municipalities from adopting ordinances and regulations to regulate firearms.
Anti-gun Legislation: HB 5531 – An Act Establishing a Tax on Ammunition (Rep. Jillian Gilchrest)
Establishes a tax on the purchase of ammunition by a business (for sale at retail). The measure specifies a 2 cents per round tax on rounds .22 caliber or less and 5 cents per round for all other ammunition. This is an egregious measure that would place undue financial burden on law-abiding gun owners and create a de facto tax on the exercising of one’s Second Amendment rights.
SB 125 – An Act Limiting Multiple Handgun Purchases in a Thirty-Day Period (Sen. Will Haskell)
Prohibits anyone from purchasing more than one handgun within any 30-day period. SB 125 unconstitutionally restricts the Second Amendment rights of Connecticut citizens who are legally allowed to purchase and possess firearms for personal use.
Your NRA-ILA will continue to monitor these anti-gun bills and keep you updated on any changes or hearings that come up. Be sure to stay-tuned to NRA-ILA Alerts, and encourage your friends, family, and fellow gun owners to do the same!
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
It has been a long day. You’re hungry, so you pull over to buy some food from a well-known sandwich shop. It is dark outside, but a number of people are still eating and ordering food. Two of the customers inside the sandwich shop begin to argue. One of them pulls out a knife. That is when lots of people leave the shop.. except you. You shout for the man to stop. You’re there when the man with the knife stabs the other customer. Now you run to your truck and grab your gun. You run back inside and order the attacker to stop. He stops the attack and retreats. You hold the attacker at gunpoint until the police arrive.
Police disarm and then arrest the knife-wielding attacker. EMTs take the wounded victim to the hospital. From there, the victim is flown by helicopter to University Hospital. You have your Texas license to carry, and you show it to the police. You tell the police what you saw. The attacker had 29 prior arrests. This time he is charged with aggravated assault. The Kerrville police department called you to say thanks.
Comments-
An ordinary day turned into a shocking emergency in seconds. Fortunately, our good guy responded quickly and probably saved a man’s life. We can look at what the armed good guy did and think what we might do in his place.
Before the event turned violent, the good guy tried verbal commands to diffuse the situation. He established that the unarmed victim did not start the fight. Our good guy ran to get his defensive tools after the attacker stabbed his victim several times. When he returned with his gun, the defender again tried verbal commands. This time they worked. The armed defender did not press the trigger since there was no longer an immediate lethal threat to an innocent person. Our good guy also gave a statement to the police.
Like most news stories, there are a lot of things we don’t know. We’ll fill in some of the unknowns and think about what we should do if this happened to us.
Some people don’t think this was a lethal situation because the attacker only had a knife. Almost 1500 people were murdered with a knife in 2019 according to the FBI. That is far more than were killed with long guns, and few people ask if a shotgun is a lethal tool. The victim was stabbed three times and required immediate treatment at a well-equipped hospital in order to save his life.
While I consider a knife to clearly be a lethal tool, I’m not as confident about intervening on behalf of a third party. The story describes a repeat offender who had a history of violence. Most states allow a third party to use lethal force on the behalf of another person if that person is justified in defending themselves. In this case, it appears that the victim was innocent and had the right of self-defense. There is no perfect answer, and the actions you failed to take can haunt you as surely as the things you did wrong.
Most of us would act to protect a friend or family member from an armed stranger. I’d want to do it as soon as I saw a lethal, unavoidable, and immediate threat. That is why we carry a firearm on our body. Perhaps the victim would not have been stabbed or would have been stabbed fewer times, if the defender had his gun, his defensive tool, at hand.
We have to give the defender a great deal of credit. He recognized that things had changed by the time he came back with his gun. The immediate threat was passed even though there was now a wounded man who needed attention. We have to be able to articulate why we needed to press the trigger. Fortunately, the threat had passed.. sort of.
We still have a man with a knife and a bleeding victim on the floor. That poses a huge dilemma. The man with the knife is still a threat, though not an immediate lethal one. Also, a person with a knife can move a considerable distance before we can stop him with a firearm. The attacker might die from a gunshot wound, but we might die from a knife wound as well. No one wins a tie. We want to be far enough away from the attacker that we can stop the threat before he reaches us. Fortunately, a firearm works at a distance.
Time is working against us, and there is a lot to do. Shout for the customers watching from outside the shop to call the police. If the physical situation allows it, you’d like someone to treat the wounded man while you wait for the police and EMTs. You don’t want the people applying first aid to be hurt by the attacker. Nor do you want the victim do die due to lack of treatment. There are arguments on both sides. Now is a good time to think about what you should do.. and have some sympathy for law enforcement officers who face this situation more often than we do.
The EMTs won’t advance to treat the injured until they are sure the scene is safe. Nor should you. Ideally, you can separate the attacker and the victim. Then, someone else can get the victim to a position where he can receive first aid. Lots of us have trauma supplies in our cars and trucks. If you were one of the bystanders outside the sandwich shop, then you could lend a hand until EMTs arrive. We are more likely to use our trauma treatment training than our firearms training.
Now, let’s worry about you. You are standing there with a gun in your hand and the police are about to arrive. The person talking to the dispatcher should tell you when to put away the gun, but it doesn’t hurt to ask.
There are a few great reasons to have your carry permit. The first is that you can have your gun, your defensive tool, with you when you need it. The second reason is that your holster gives you a place to put your gun as the police arrive. Then again, if the police say to drop your gun, then open your hands and let it hit the floor. As they sort things out, the police usually recognize that a guy or gal wearing a holster and carrying a concealed carry permit is one of the good guys. Stay still and give them the time they need.
I bet you know when you had your last firearms training course. When was the last time you practiced trauma care?
Rob Morse highlights the latest self-defense and other shootings of the week. See what went wrong, what went right, and what we can learn from real-life self-defense with a gun. Even the most justified self-defense shooting can go wrong, especially after the shot. Get the education, the training, and the liability coverage you and your familydeserve, join USCCA.
Iowa RKBA Constitutional Amendment has good Chance in New Legislature, iStock-884220838
U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- Barring further misadventure, the Iowa Right to Keep and Bear Arms (RKBA) constitutional amendment will be presented to Iowa voters in the general election scheduled for 8 November 2022.
The amendment passed the Iowa Senate 29-18. It passed the House 58 to 41. The votes were on strict party lines.
The Senate approved the resolution Thursday afternoon in a 29-18 vote along party lines after about two hours of debate. Hours later, the House voted 58-41, also along party lines, to pass the same measure. Both chambers are controlled by Republicans. Every Republican present voted in favor of the amendment, while every Democrat was opposed.
There were a few members which were not present for various reasons.
Republicans control both houses of the Iowa legislature. There are 32 Republicans and 18 Democrats in the Iowa State Senate. There are 59 Republicans and 41 Democrats in the Iowa House of Representatives. There was on Republican in the House which was not present, and three Republican senators who were not present. Their absence did not make a difference in the outcome of the vote.
Sec. 1A. The right of thepeople to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The sovereign state of Iowa affirms and recognizes this right to bea fundamental individual right. Any and all restrictions of this right shall be subject to strict scrutiny.
Both Democrats and Republicans were willing to pass a constitutional amendment. The Republicans insisted the amendment actually protect the RKBA, by including the provision for strict scrutiny.
Other states, such as Hawaii, have the same language as the US Constitution, but the amendment in Hawaii has not prevented severe infringements on the RKBA in Hawaii.
Hawaii requires registration of firearms, special permission to purchase firearms, and refuses to allow open carry of firearms or to issue concealed carry permits to virtually all members of the public.
The Democrats were perfectly willing to pass an RKBA amendment, as long as it had no serious effect.
The Iowa procedure to pass a constitutional amendment is long and difficult. The amendment has to pass the legislature. Then an election must occur. Then the legislature has to pass the amendment again. The amendment will then be placed on the ballot for the next election.
In 2018, the legislature passed the amendment, but the Secretary of State failed to properly publish the amendment, as required by law. This negated the 2018 vote, requiring the process to start over. The Secretary of State apologized for the error.
Iowa is one of only six states which do not have an RKBA amendment in their state constitutions. The other five states are: California, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, and New York.
Several other states have passed RKBA provisions since 1997.
No RKBA amendment, which has been presented to the people on a referendum, has been defeated in an election.
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 retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.
Massachusetts is set to introduce even more restrictive gun laws. IMG NRA-ILA
U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- Since the start of the 2021 Legislative Session, the Massachusetts House has seen the introduction of multiple anti-gun bills. A couple of the more egregious ones are outlined below:
HD 135 – An Act Relative to Universal Background Checks for Private Gun Sales (Rep. David Linsky)
Bans most firearm sales and transfers between private individuals without first paying fees and obtaining government permission. Firearm sales between friends or neighbors would not be exempted. This proposal would have no impact on crime and is completely unenforceable.
HD 136 – An Act to Require Liability Insurance for Gun Ownership (Rep. David Linsky)
Requires liability insurance for anyone who possesses, carries, or owns a firearm. The one exception is that it does not apply to someone who possesses a firearm on a temporary basis while at a licensed gun club.
Your NRA-ILA will continue to monitor these anti-gun bills and keep you updated on any changes or hearings that come up. Be sure to stay-tuned to NRA-ILA Alerts, and encourage your friends, family, and fellow gun owners to do the same!
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
CCRKBA Says H.R. 127 Gun Control Bill Is ‘Insanity on Steroids’
U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee’s H.R. 127, a gun control measure requiring gun owner licensing, psychological evaluations, retroactive gun registration, and separate licensing for modern sporting rifles is “insanity on steroids,” the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.
“Over the years,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb, “we’ve seen some astonishingly bad legislation originate on Capitol Hill, but this one takes the term ‘abomination’ to an entirely new level. One look at this bill and you wonder whether Congresswoman Jackson Lee ever heard of the Bill of Rights, which includes the Second Amendment.”
H.R. 127 would require the owner of any firearm to supply the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives with the make, model, and serial number of every gun he or she owns, and that includes guns people may have owned for years. They would also have to report the identity of any person to whom, and any period of time during which, the firearm will be loaned to that individual.
The licensing requirement mandates that the license applicant undergoes a criminal background check, and then submits to a psychological evaluation to determine whether the person is psychologically unsuited to possess a firearm. Successful licensees must show they have an insurance policy which will cost $800.
“H.R. 127 is a constitutionally-challenged monstrosity,” Gottlieb stated. “It ignores the fact that the Second Amendment protects a fundamental right to keep and bear arms, not some strictly-regulated government privilege. Government cannot require a psychological evaluation to exercise a right enumerated in the Constitution.
“Is it possible Sheila Jackson Lee skipped high school civics,” he wondered. “This legislation treats firearms owners like second-class citizens for exercising their Second Amendment rights. It’s an outrage that a member of Congress could even conceive of such a measure, much less propose that it become law.
“Instead of subjecting gun owners to such Draconian requirements,” Gottlieb observed, “maybe it’s time to require psychological evaluations of each member of Congress.”
About CCRKBA
With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (www.ccrkba.org) is one of the nation’s premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States.
Yesterday, Iowa’s Senate passed the Range Protection & Preemption Bill. IMG NRA-ILA
U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- Wednesday, both chambers of the Iowa General Assembly passed Senate Joint Resolution 7 to propose an amendment to the state Constitution affirming and recognizing the right of Iowans’ to keep and bear arms as a fundamental individual right. SJR 7 passed the Senate by a vote of 29-18 and the House by a vote of 58-41.
This has been a multi-year, multi-session effort. In the 2019-2020 General Assembly, both chambers passed a resolution calling for the amendment. Now that SJR 7 has passed during the subsequent session, the 2021-2022 General Assembly, the amendment will be on the ballot for Iowa voters in 2022. Currently, Iowa is one of six states that do not have a right to keep and bear arms amendment in their state Constitution, including California, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, and New York.
NRA would like to thank Senator Brad Zaun, and Representatives Matt Windschitl and Steven Holt for their leadership in passing SJR 7. Their efforts will help protect the rights of Iowans in the future.
If your lawmakers supported SJR 7, click the “Take Action” link to thank them.
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
North Dakota could be hearing new concealed carry laws as early as tomorrow! IMG NRA-ILA
U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- Today, the House Energy and Natural Resources Committee considered concealed permit enhancement legislation, House Bill 1450. While no vote is currently scheduled, the committee could vote to send the measure to the House Floor as early as tomorrow. Please contact committee members and ask them to VOTE YES on House Bill 1450.
House Bill 1450 enhances North Dakota’s permit laws by removing certain minor violations from its list of prohibiting factors for applicants. HB 1450 would allow more individuals to exercise their constitutional right to self-defense, and committee members need to hear from you!
Again, please contact members of the House Energy and Natural Resources Committee and ask them to VOTE YES House on Bill 1450.
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
Far-left advocacy groups are pressing Joe Biden to fulfill his commitment for a “bipartisan commission to study Supreme Court reforms.”, iStock-1020504756
U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- Sworn into office with a widely-reported gun control plan just waiting to be unleashed, Joe Biden is “committed” to act on his campaign promise to create a “bipartisan commission to study Supreme Court reforms,” according to Fox News.
If the scenario plays out, it could open the door for anti-gun Democrats to pack the high court—which now has a constitutionally-friendly majority—thus derailing potential rulings that would reverse years of erosion of the Second Amendment protection of the right to keep and bear arms.
Fox News quoted an unidentified White House official who stated, “The President remains committed to an expert study of the role and debate over reform of the court and will have more to say in the coming weeks.”
According to the Fox story, “Eight progressive organizations banded together to form the ‘Unrig the Courts’ coalition to pressure Democrats to use their power to act. Their four demands are expanding the number of justices on the Supreme Court, expanding lower federal courts, enacting term limits for Supreme Court justices and improving ethics and transparency requirements for justices.”
One of those groups calls itself “Take Back the Court.” Another is “51 for 51,” a movement to grant statehood to the District of Columbia.
Why does the federal court system need “reforming?” Because former President Donald Trump was able to fill some 200 vacancies with conservative judges and three conservative justices, whose impacts are already being felt.
The best example of this is a California case, Duncan v. Becerra. Two years ago, District Judge Roger Benitez, a George W. Bush appointee, ruled that California’s ban on so-called “high capacity magazines” is unconstitutional. Last year, in a 2-1 ruling, a three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Benitez decision. The majority opinion was written by Judge Kenneth Lee, a Trump appointee. This is why, say many gun rights advocates, “elections matter.”
California has asked for an en banc hearing before a full panel. From there, the case could go to the Supreme Court. A victory could nullify magazine bans beyond California’s borders, and the Ninth Circuit ruling already poses a problem to anti-gun lawmakers in Washington who are currently pushing legislation to ban such magazines.
Biden’s threat to gun rights on the federal level and efforts to push more gun control at the state level underscores the critical nature of a campaign launched earlier this month by the Second Amendment Foundation that is now heading into a fourth week, thanks to what SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb says in a Thursday news release has been an “overwhelming positive reaction.”
The project is called “2nd Amendment First Responders,” a grassroots-oriented program designed to turn gun owners into gun rights activists. The recruiting advertisement will appear an addition 69 times during the first week of February. Since it began, the ad has run 119 times on more than a dozen networks.
“By the end of next week,” Gottlieb calculated, “our 60-second message will have been broadcast a total of 268 times, reaching millions of viewers. We’re able to extend our effort because of the growing positive response. It’s been astounding.”
The “2nd Amendment First Responder” recruitment message will continue airing on BBC America, Destination America, the Investigation Discovery Channel, American Heroes Channel, SYFY (Science Fiction), TLC (The Learning Channel), TruTV, DirecTV, Fox News, Fox Business, CNN, MSNBC, The Weather Channel, One America News Network, CNBC, HLN, Bloomberg, Dish TV, the Outdoor Channel and Sportsman Channel, SAF said.
The longer this recruiting effort continues, the more people will join. According to Gottlieb, who chatted with AmmoLand News, public support for SAF this month is twice what it was in January 2020.
“The number of new members, donors and supporters has more than doubled for this time period,” he said, “and we’re expanding staff to meet the threats against our rights. We’re excited about growing while other organizations have been reducing staff and activities.”
So, while Biden and his Democrat allies now in control on Capitol Hill are looking to press his gun control agenda, SAF is literally recruiting legions of citizen activists to stop them.
A key part of that effort, Gottlieb revealed, will be a “massive internet advertising campaign” that will soon be launched. It will reach out to millions of new gun owners who bought their first gun sometime in recent months. SAF will continue its legal action and public education efforts, thanks to this new support.
Possibly one factor in the heightened interest about SAF was the recent word from the National Rifle Association it was filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and reincorporating in Texas.
Gottlieb accused anti-gunners of “celebrating” NRA’s situation, but he warned the gun prohibition lobby and its allies in Congress and state legislatures, “Gun owners are engaging at record levels with organizations like the Second Amendment Foundation to fight back against billionaire-backed groups and politicians who are attempting to take away our rights.”
By the same measure, it would be ill-advised to consider the NRA on the ropes.
There is something else, and Biden owns it. If he does launch his so-called “bipartisan commission of scholars” to provide recommendations on “court reform” in 180 days—six months from now—he is going to be reminded of his remarks decades ago while serving as a senator from Delaware. At the time, as noted by Fox News, he dismissed the idea of “court-packing” as stupid.
“President Roosevelt clearly had the right to send to the United States Senate and the United States Congress a proposal to pack the court,” Biden said at the time. “It was totally within his right to do that. He violated no law. He was legalistically, absolutely correct. But it was a bonehead idea. It was a terrible, terrible mistake to make. And it put in question, if for an entire decade, the independence of the most-significant body … in this country, the Supreme Court of the United States of America.”
Dave Workman is a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms, and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.
FPC Supreme Court Brief: Maryland Bump-stock Ban is Unconstitutional
U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced the filing of an amicus brief with the United States Supreme Court in the case of Maryland Shall Issue v. Hogan, a case challenging the Maryland government’s confiscatory ban on bump-stock devices. The brief, authored by FPC’s Director of Constitutional Studies, Joseph Greenlee, is FPC’s third Supreme Court brief filed in the last two weeks and is available at FPCLegal.org.
In 2018, Maryland passed a law forbidding anyone to “manufacture, possess, sell, offer to sell, transfer, purchase, or receive a rapid-fire trigger activator.” A “rapid-fire trigger activator” is defined as “any device” that, when installed in or attached to a firearm, “increases” the “rate at which a trigger is activated” “or” “the rate of fire increases.” According to the law, the ban includes any “bump stock, trigger crank, hellfire trigger, binary trigger system, burst trigger system, or a copy or a similar device, regardless of the producer or manufacturer.”
Maryland Shall Issue challenged the law, arguing that the government should be required to compensate the people whom they are dispossessing. Specifically, Maryland Shall Issue argued that by dispossessing people of their property without compensating them, the State violated the Fifth Amendment’s Taking Clause, which states: “Nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Maryland Shall Issue. The court held that even though Marylanders are prohibited from continuing to possess their lawfully acquired property, because the law “does not require owners of the banned devices to physically turn them over to the Government” or “to a third party,” it is not the type of taking forbidden by the Fifth Amendment. In this sense, the Fourth Circuit determined that personal property—including “rapid fire trigger activators”—is entitled to less protection under the Fifth Amendment than real property (i.e., real estate). Maryland Shall Issue petitioned the United States Supreme Court, asking it to hear the case and reverse the Fourth Circuit’s decision.
FPC’s important Supreme Court brief supporting Maryland Shall Issue focused on the founding-era understanding of the Takings Clause and the history behind it, to demonstrate that personal property is entitled to as much protection as real property. Starting at Magna Carta (1215), FPC’s brief explains that personal property has been intertwined with the concept of liberty since Medieval England. Leading English legal authorities and philosophers, including Edward Coke, William Blackstone, and John Locke, all viewed personal property rights as essential to liberty. When the first colonists arrived in America, they brought these values with them, and immediately secured property rights through colonial charters and grants from King James I. And when the British violated their personal property rights, Americans risked their lives to defend them, ultimately leading to the Revolutionary War. After the Revolution, America’s founders intended to ensure that such property violations could never again occur—for example, by including the Takings Clause in the United States Constitution. Maryland’s taking of “rapid fire trigger activators” is precisely the type of taking the Constitution was intended to prevent.
“The plaintiffs spent their hard-earned money to purchase these items that the government repeatedly assured them were lawful,” said FPC’s Joseph Greenlee. “It is unfair for the government to now dispossess them and refuse to provide compensation. What is more, the Fourth Circuit’s decision sets a dangerous precedent for all personal property. Hopefully the Supreme Court will accept the case and restore the protections for personal property that the founders intended.”
About Firearms Policy Coalition
Firearms Policy Coalition (firearmspolicy.org) is a 501(c)4 nonprofit organization. FPC’s mission is to protect and defend constitutional rights—especially the right to keep and bear arms—advance individual liberty, and restore freedom through litigation and legal action, legislative and regulatory action, education, outreach, grassroots activism, and other programs. FPC Law is the nation’s largest public interest legal team focused on Second Amendment and adjacent fundamental rights including freedom of speech and due process, conducting litigation, research, scholarly publications, and amicus briefing, among other efforts.
The Second Amendment Foundation announced today that thanks to the continued overwhelming positive reaction to our “2nd Amendment First Responder” project iStock-697763612
U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- The Second Amendment Foundation announced today that thanks to the continued overwhelming positive reaction to our “2nd Amendment First Responder” project, we have extended our national television campaign for a fourth consecutive week, scheduling 69 more spots on more than a dozen networks.
“By the end of next week,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, “our 60-second message will have been broadcast a total of 268 times, reaching millions of viewers. We’re able to extend our effort because of the growing positive response. It’s been astounding.”
The ‘2nd Amendment First Responder’ recruitment message will continue airing on BBC America, Destination America, the Investigation Discovery Channel, American Heroes Channel, SYFY (Science Fiction), TLC (The Learning Channel), TruTV, DirecTV, Fox News, Fox Business, CNN, MSNBC, The Weather Channel, One America News Network, CNBC, HLN, Bloomberg, Dish TV, the Outdoor Channel, and Sportsman Channel.
“We’ve actually seen our public support double this month compared to January 2020,” he added. “The number of new members, donors and supporters has more than doubled for this time period, and we’re expanding staff to meet the threats against our rights. We’re excited about growing while other organizations have been reducing staff and activities.
“While anti-gun-rights extremists are celebrating that our friends at NRA have filed for bankruptcy protection,” he observed, “gun owners are engaging at record levels with organizations like the Second Amendment Foundation to fight back against billionaire-backed groups and politicians who are attempting to take away our rights.”
Gottlieb revealed plans for a “massive internet advertising campaign” coming soon in an effort to reach and involve the millions of new gun owners who bought a firearm for the first time during the past 12 months. Last year saw a record of more than 21 million background checks related to gun purchases, and an estimated 40 percent of those were “first-timers,” he stated.
“Our legal action and public education projects would not be possible without the support of gun owners and other citizens concerned about their constitutional rights,” Gottlieb said. “At a time when the ‘cancel culture’ wants to cancel the Second Amendment and people who disagree with their extremist philosophy, good citizens are standing up for their rights.
“We’re gratified to see so many women, Blacks, Asians, Hispanics and other minorities among this wave of new gun owners,” he continued. “It just proves what we’ve said for decades, that the Second Amendment is color-blind.”
“Now with perennial gun-grabber Joe Biden in the White House, and anti-gun Democrats controlling Congress,” Gottlieb stated, “Americans of all backgrounds recognize the looming threat to a cornerstone constitutional right and they’re joining the ‘2 nd Amendment First Responder’ project to stop this threat in its tracks.”
The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing, and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.
Filibuster Preservation Bought Two Years For The Second Amendment, iStock-1154438278
Washington DC – -(AmmoLand.com)- The decision by Senators Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin to keep the legislative filibuster has given Second Amendment supporters something they desperately needed: Time. The next two years will be critical, both to shift the Senate landscape and to also regain the House.
Sinema and Manchin are not the most reliable of champions. In 2018, we noted that Martha McSally was a better choice as compared to the former. The latter could have been replaced by West Virginia Attorney General Pat Morrissey. Those two races, and the failure to beat Jon Tester loom large now. Had we won, it would mean control the Senate stayed in GOP hands, and it would have been a massive check on the Biden-Harris regime.
That is not the case, though. But by keeping the filibuster, it means the Supreme Court keeps its sure 5-4 majority on Second Amendment cases (6-3 if Roberts wants to influence who writes the rulings). That means there is a chance for key Second Amendment cases, like the Duncan case, to reach the Supreme Court, and shift that landscape in our favor.
This also will halt some of the worst legislative efforts, like campaign “reform” legislation that really has silencing opposition to anti-Second Amendment politicians and legislation as its aim. Again, we have just seen that our chances of taking back Congress from those who would steal our freedoms have improved.
But more importantly, it gives us time to win a lot of the local and state elections that will dictate the course of the 2024 presidential election. These state and local races matter big-time, and in many cases, they take much less effort to win than a congressional race, much less some of the statewide races.
Here, though, is the most important thing that Second Amendment supporters now have time to do: They have time to have those conversations that can change people’s minds about Second Amendment issues. The Biden-Harris regime is, as many predicted, governing in a manner to please the most extreme elements – and this is a chance for Second Amendment supporters to capitalize on this.
The fact that we are confronting what has to be the most hostile regime to our Second Amendment rights in America’s history require we step up. To build strength for the 2021 off-year elections and 2022 midterms that will shape future elections, Second Amendment supporters should support the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action and Political Victory Fund.
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.
Virginia’s House passes multiple anti-gun laws. IMG NRA-ILA
U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- On January 27th, the Virginia House of Delegates quickly passed the anti-gun bills that they had received from committees just days prior. They will now go to the Senate for further consideration.
House Bill 2128 allows for a five business day delay to be imposed on firearm transfers. Current law allows state police up to three business days to complete background checks on prospective firearm buyers. If three business days elapse without the state police making a determination, a licensed firearm dealer may, at their discretion, proceed with a sale. Virginia’s existing three business day delay for what is supposed to be an instant background check done by computers was considered appropriate to the technology level when it was created decades ago. It is also what federal law considers appropriate for firearm dealers in other states that use the federal NICS background check system.
House Bill 2276 essentially ends the centuries-old practice of manufacturing firearms for personal use by imposing requirements that far exceed those in federal law. It prohibits private individuals from possessing certain unregulated components commonly used by hobbyists to make their own firearms. It also prohibits private individuals from possessing firearms that do not have a “serial number issued by a federal firearms importer or federal firearms manufacturer in compliance with all federal laws and regulations.” While the bill was amended to exempt pre-1968 firearms, it still bans existing home-built firearms made in the five decades since that are currently legal under federal law.
House Bill 2295 bans firearms from Capitol Square and any building or parking facility owned or leased by the Commonwealth. Last year, Governor Ralph Northam used an emergency declaration to fence-off Capitol Square and make it a gun-free zone, claiming it was necessary during a peaceful demonstration against anti-gun bills. Without that emergency declaration, Capitol Square is simply an open, publicly accessible part of the city of Richmond. Citizens regularly go there to conduct business or see tourist attractions. It is unreasonable for the law to create an arbitrary boundary for such an open area where law-abiding citizens are disarmed, while zero measures are taken to prevent criminals from entering.
Please stay tuned to www.nraila.org and your email inbox for further updates.
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 NRA is assisting plaintiffs in challenging Maryland’s potentially unconstitutional handgun qualification law. IMG NRA-ILA
U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- The plaintiffs in an NRA-backed lawsuit today asked a federal court to declare Maryland’s handgun qualification license law unconstitutional.
The current handgun qualification law requires residents in Maryland who wish to legally purchase a handgun to first fill out an application, obtain a copy of their fingerprints from a third-party, attend lengthy classroom instruction, pass a live-fire exercise, pay a $50 application fee, then wait up to 30 days for the state to process the information. Once these steps are completed, the purchaser must then follow Maryland’s additional laws and undergo another background check, pay another registration fee, and wait an additional seven business days before they can take possession of the gun.
“This law was put in place with no other purpose than to discourage, financially burden, and intimidate law-abiding people from purchasing handguns for self-defense and other lawful purposes,” said Amy Hunter, spokeswoman, NRA. “This is quite simply a background check, after a background check, after a background check. It is wasteful and burdensome. But, more importantly, it has zero impact on the criminals using illegal firearms to commit crimes. Maryland should stop restricting the rights of law-abiding people and focus on going after criminals.”
The state’s own expert witness admitted the law was created to “intimidate” law-abiding citizens from exercising their Second Amendment right to buy a handgun.
“This is an unconstitutional and wasteful law. It creates hoops that impede the average citizen’s ability to exercise their constitutionally protected right to own a handgun while not affecting the black market or other illegal venues where most criminals get their guns,” concluded Hunter.
The case is called Maryland Shall Issue, Inc., v. Hogan. It was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland.
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
Rhode Island introduces their first anti-gun ban of the year. IMG NRA-ILA
U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- Ocean State gun owners have grown accustomed to battling against a wave of gun control each session, and it appears the COVID pandemic is not going to alter that trend in 2021.
Senate Bill 73 was recently introduced by Senate President Dominick Ruggerio, and this bill would prohibit concealed carry at K-12 schools and create yet another “gun-free zone.” These artificial boundaries do nothing except create soft targets for criminals who openly focus on places where law-abiding citizens are left defenseless. It is important to remember that under current state law, no such prohibition against CCW exists for these schools. It has been this way for years, and there has never been a demonstrated problem with current law. This legislation is nothing more than a solution in search of a problem. However, gun control absolutists have unsuccessfully introduced this bill for years, and they are determined to pass this legislation.
Senate Bill 73 has been introduced, but no action has been scheduled on the bill yet. Please continue to continue to follow NRA-ILA alerts for updates on this bill and others.
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
Rate of Airline Passengers Caught With Firearms Doubles in 2020
Washington, D.C. –-(Ammoland.com)- Airlines have been hit hard with a steep drop in passengers, with Americans traveling less than they have in years due to the COVID-19 Pandemic. With fewer people in the country flying, you would think guns confiscated at airports would be at an all-time low rate, but that isn’t the case.
According to a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) press release, the agency found firearms at double the rate the agents found in 2019. TSA officers discovered 3,257 passengers carrying guns on their person or in their carry-on bags. Of these discovered firearms, flyers had 83% of these guns loaded. The rate of passengers caught with firearms by TSA agents in 2020 was the highest in the agency’s 19-year history.
In 2019, the agency recovered 4,432 firearms from flyers, but agents screened 500 million fewer passengers in 2020. The stats broke down to 5 guns per million flyers in 2019 and 10 firearms per million travelers in 2020. The TSA did not include toys, replicas, improperly checked firearms or BB guns in its stats.
“I commend our officers for their commitment to TSA’s security mission by identifying and stopping these weapons at the TSA checkpoints. Firearms are strictly prohibited on board planes in the passenger cabin,” said Senior Official Performing the Duties of TSA Administrator Darby LaJoye. “Bringing a firearm to a TSA security checkpoint poses a serious risk to TSA officer and passenger safety, and doing so may result in significant fines or arrest.”
TSA agents stopping passengers with firearms took place at 234 of the country’s busiest airports. Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (ATL) topped the list with the TSA finding 220 passengers with guns in 2020. The Georgia airport happens to be the nation’s most-used airport and is the central hub for airline giant Delta, Frontier, and Southwest airlines.
According to the TSA, local law enforcement is the one that decides if charges are filed against passengers who brings a gun to a TSA checkpoint. The federal agency will, however, make the traveler pay civil penalties for the transgression. The penalty assessed by the TSA depends on several key factors. These factors include if the traveler has been caught previously with a gun at a TSA check and how many times, they have violated the law. Each time a traveler is found with a gun at a TSA checkpoint, the penalty against the passenger increases. Also, the civil penalty lodged by the TSA is larger if the firearm is loaded.
It is not illegal for a flyer to travel by plane with a firearm, but the traveler must declare the gun at the airline check-in counter, and the firearm must be stored in the traveler’s checked bag. The firearm also cannot be loaded and must be in a TSA approved locked hard-sided case. Ammunition must be in the original box but can be in the same locked hard-sided case.
There are 8.4 million new gun owners in the United States. It might be new owners not knowing the laws governing flying with a firearm.
About John Crump
John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.
Choosing perceived citizen disarmament gains over a thorough investigation of sex abuse claims, Gabby Giffords didn’t let accusations against Joe Biden stop her from supporting him. So don’t expect her to treat accusations against Michael Pfleger any differently. (Father Michael Pfleger/Facebook)
U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)-“Two brothers on Monday detailed sexual abuse they say they suffered at the hands of the Rev. Michael Pfleger more than four decades ago, with one saying the abuse ‘destroyed my life,’” the Chicago Sun-Times reports. “But attorneys for the longtime St. Sabina Church pastor have blasted the accusations as ‘false attacks . . . motivated by greed.’”
This is a significant update to a story discussed on AmmoLand Shooting Sports News earlier in the month, naturally of interest to gun owners since Pfleger is a longtime vocal and persistent opponent of the right to keep and bear arms. By bringing forth not just one accuser, but two, the dynamics of the case and public perception of it just intensified.
It’s ironic that Pfleger has spent a career assuming his countrymen are the ones who, by default, can’t be trusted to act lawfully. Without knowing a thing about you or me as individuals, he would have the state deny us our rights simply because some, disproportionately concentrated in the area he “serves,” have proven they cannot exercise freedom responsibly.
In case of the accusations against him, we need to acknowledge a couple of things, starting with a word of caution: If Pfleger can have his reputation destroyed by anonymous accusations, what’s to stop your and my enemies from doing the same thing to us? I also note the story makes mention of statements and news conferences, but nothing about submitting formal and actionable sworn depositions that would carry criminal penalties if proven false. Add to that, so far there has been a request for money and an attorney’s hope for a settlement that will make a lawsuit unnecessary.
On the flip side, the archdiocese certainly knows who the accusers are and if their recollections track with where Pfleger was and which boys he had access to at the time of the allegations. That the older brother is reportedly “an Air Force veteran and former Texas police officer” will sway some opinions, right or wrong. That is probably not an insignificant consideration to church attorneys, especially if any thought of settling out of court is being entertained as the most expedient way out.
What’s revealing is how Pfleger supporters have gone to automatic “Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil” mode, and with no more evidence than we see here in vehemently defending their priest. They are also angrily attacking accusers who may, in fact, be telling the truth, may in fact have had their innocence stolen from them, and may in fact have suffered grievous emotional and spiritual wounds rendering them damaged goods for life.
Or they could be crazy people and opportunistic liars. We don’t know. Still, it’s fair to ask, does advocating for #MeToo only apply to some? Note Gabby Giffords, pictured with Pfleger above, didn’t let sex abuse accusations deter her from supporting Joe Biden for president.
What’s even more revealing is an excuse-making Chicago Sun-Times editorial purporting to unpack the latest developments for us. What it really does is get us to look at this as if such accusations should be analyzed through a filter of “moral relativism” that could best be described as “depraved.”
“But I will say that even if the accusations are true, if anybody has redeemed himself through a life well-lived, that would be Michael Pfleger,” columnist Neil Steinberg hideously advocates. “Father God I ask you to keep your arms around our Pastor and to give him the strength he needs to sustain his faith in you…”
Even if they’re true? Why would anyone write that?
And why would he then go back in and revise his article to take that part out without notice? So much for journalistic standards. I took a screenshot, Neil. The internet is forever:
What about the brothers, Neil? No prayers to Father God for them? Since you brought it up, why does a line from the Book of Matthew about making a big show of praying come to mind? And since we only recently heard about the allegations, what proof do you have — if Pfleger’s accusers are telling the truth — that there haven’t been more unreported incidents over the years?
You get the feeling that if the archdiocese did settle, with binding nondisclosure agreements, of course, Steinberg and the St. Sabina apologists would be quick to make the meme “Exonerated!!!” go viral while dismissing all charges as “baseless.”
There really is only one way to lawfully settle this. Conduct an exhaustive investigation. Get it into court. Get everyone involved under oath. And assign honest reporters and commentators to the case — as opposed to someone with the type of twisted worldview who would declare there’s a redemption upside to a trusted protector raping defenseless and emotionally vulnerable boys…
Right now, Pfleger is legally presumed innocent. If the brothers are proven to be lying, charge them criminally and throw the book at them. If they’re telling the truth, I’d like to say there will be one less “prohibited person” on the streets of Chicago, but the accusations predate Illinois’ statute of limitations on child sex abuse crimes elimination bill.
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.
