FBI and ATF in a Lover’s Quarrel?

ATF Agents IMG ATFHQ-IG Public Domain

U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- The subject of any of the three-letter agencies as of late has left a bit of a nasty taste in many freedom-loving peoples’ mouths. Whether there are rumors of not doing proper investigations or evidence of illegal actions, the alphabet soup of executive stormtroopers in the United States have not been making any friends. Yes, there are plenty of great rank and file agents, peace officers, etc. that work for this wonderful country (and the people). However, the leadership, lack of transparency, and overt favoritism to leftist ideals do not paint a pretty picture. What would the “big guy” have to say about favoritism?

What if we were to bring forward some interesting correspondence that popped up in a lawsuit? How about a bit of a lover’s quarrel between the FBI and ATF? That’d be juicy, wouldn’t it?

The lawsuit is still active, with injury claims being called moot, because the ATF just folded in the cited instances. The two agencies, FBI and ATF, failed to come to some sort of an “agreement” during their “who’s got a bigger” contest, leaving the ATF slightly cuckolded in the corner.

Umbert et. al. v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et.al. involves multiple applicants that sought NFA items. The applicants seeking relief were all caught up in the NICS system with the FBI recommending a denial concerning the issuance of any NFA tax stamps. Things got murky when they tried to appeal.

During the application process, the ATF relies on the recommendations that come from the FBI NICS check. The nuance here is that the FBI only makes recommendations in these cases to the ATF. They do not make a decision, as would be the case of regular firearm purchases. The FBI is only giving the ATF their results and has no skin in the game. But what happens when there is a denial by the ATF and an applicant wants to appeal that decision? There basically is no suitable appeal process for those seeking relief in these situations.

Looking at a Statement of Facts document that’s part of the suit, there’s some very interesting information included. There are two letters from the FBI to Mr. Curtis W. Gilbert, Deputy Assistant Director, Enforcement Programs and Services at the ATF. The two letters basically tell the ATF they need to tend to their own house and that the FBI is not responsible to do their dirty work.

Excerpts from the 2019 Letter:

This letter is in response to your June 19, 2018 Memorandum regarding the processing of National Firearms Act (NF A) appeals by the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Division’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Section. The FBI previously stated that the NICS Section is not responsible for processing NF A appeals. In response, you stated that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) “has neither the legal or regulatory authority to process appeals for the correction of erroneous NICS system information as this authority is clearly and unambiguously provided to the FBI.”

Further, you stated that A TF processing of NI CS appeals would be violative of both the NICS Regulations and, likely, the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). On this point, the FBI does not disagree, as the FBI Director is the designated system manager of the NICS. See 28 C.F.R. § 25.3. However, it is the position of the FBI that ATF NFA transfers do not fall within the purview of the NICS provisions of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 (Brady Act); (now codified, in part, at Title 34, United States Code (U.S.C.), Section 40901) therefore, application and analysis of the NICS Regulations (Title 28, Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.), Section 25.1-25.11) seems unnecessary. In fact, it is the position of the FBI that the processing of any A TF work 1, to include NF A appeals by the NICS Section, pursued due to the denial of a transfer based upon the results of a NICS background check, runs afoul of Federal Appropriations laws and the Anti-Deficiency Acts.2.3

Appeals of NFA denials are not NICS appeals as set forth in the Brady Act.

While the Brady Act provides both administrative and judicial remedies for any person denied a firearm, this process is limited to those persons the NICS has denied a firearm under subsections (s) and (t) of Section 922 of the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), as amended, (18 U.S.C. §§ 921-931). See 18 U.S.C. § 925A and 34 U. S.C. § 4090l(g). In addition, the remedies set forth in the Brady Act are limited to transfers where “licensees” have contacted the NICS prior to a GCA transfer of a firearm. As defined in 34 U.S.C. § 40901(j)(l), the tenn “licensee” does not include the ATF or ATF Director. It is the position of the FBI that A TF NF A transfers do not fall within the purview of the NICS provisions of the Brady Act.

Yes, they just go told they’re on their own. The letter(s) should be read in full, which is near poetry to the eyes of freedom-loving Americans. The FBI points out the failures in the law and further, the ATF.

From a 2020 letter on the same subject:

Notwithstanding the above, for the reasons detailed in the CJIS Division’s June 3 letter, the CJIS Division continues to belive that it is better for the ATF to process all ATF checks itself. The FBI continues to make the search of its systems and the results available to the ATF to perform this work. If, during the processing of a background check or an appeal, the ATF identifies a record in need of updating, the FBI will work with the ATF to ensure the appropriate processes are followed based on the respective FBI system and the owner of the record.

The defendants in the case have moved to moot it. From the attorney representing the plaintiffs, Stephen D. Stamboulieh’s, Memo in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for a Summary Judgement, he notes that those seeking relief were “granted their certificates to purchase their firearms. This essentially mooted those cases, yet it is apparent that the issues underlying the present action are evading review and are repeating day in and day out.” He caps off what further relief is being sought in his conclusion of the same document.

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs pray that their Motion for Summary Judgment is granted, and that the Court orders Defendants to stop shifting the burden to Plaintiffs to prove a negative, process their appeals, correct their records, and transfer the firearms to the respective Plaintiffs.

The burden should always fall squarely on the shoulders of the government to prove someone’s “guilt” or in this case, ineligibility to purchase or possess a firearm, and or NFA item. Regardless of a quarrel between agencies, the US Government, as a whole, needs to get its house in order on this subject, and not give waste to further delays. In delaying the issuances of any certificate that states the eligibility to purchase a firearm and or NFA item, a person’s rights are being infringed upon. It’s going to only be a matter of time before the subject of suppressors being protected under the Second Amendment becomes more mainstream and guarded as such judicially.

As for now, let’s sit back and revel in knowing that the ATF and FBI might be having a seven-year itch, with one getting the cold shoulder from the other. Couldn’t happen to a nicer agency.

---

About John Petrolino

John Petrolino is a US Merchant Marine Officer, writer, author of Decoding Firearms: An Easy to Read Guide on General Gun Safety & Use and NRA certified pistol, rifle, and shotgun instructor living under and working to change New Jersey’s draconian and unconstitutional gun laws. You can find him on the web at www.johnpetrolino.com on twitter at @johnpetrolino, facebook at @thepenpatriot and on instagram @jpetrolinoiii .

from https://ift.tt/7UZX1wx
via IFTTT

Georgia House Passes Senate’s Constitutional Carry Bill

Yesterday, the House voted 100-67 to pass Senate Bill 319, the Senate’s constitutional carry bill. IMG NRA-ILA

U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- Yesterday, the House voted 100-67 to pass Senate Bill 319, the Senate’s constitutional carry bill, with substitute language previously added in the House Judiciary Committee. It will now go back to the Senate for immediate consideration.

Constitutional carry recognizes the right of a law-abiding adult who is legally allowed to carry a concealed firearm, to do so without first having to obtain government permission. This ensures that citizens have the right to self-defense without government red tape or delays. Additionally, this legislation maintains the existing concealed handgun license system, so citizens who still wish to obtain a permit may do so.

Currently, there are 24 states that already have constitutional carry. Of those, Alabama, Ohio, and Indiana joined that list just this year. Governor Brian Kemp has stated his support for constitutional carry, so the General Assembly just has to send a bill to his desk.

NRA thanks Representative Mandi Ballinger, Senator Jason Anavitarte, Speaker David Ralston, Representatives Alan Powell, Rick Jasperse, and J. Collins, Senate President Pro Tempore Butch Miller, Senator Brian Strickland, and all the cosponsors in each chamber.

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

from https://ift.tt/ZLozSnj
via IFTTT

Florida Governor Calls for Special Session; Supports Constitutional Carry

Prospects for Constitutional Carry in 2022, iStock-697763612

U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)-– On March 29, 2022, Florida Governor DeSantis held a press conference. At about 6:30 minutes, he announced he vetoed the Congressional district map put forward by the Florida legislature.  He took questions after his announcements. There was a question about other issues. Governor Desantis responded. From thefloridachannel.org, here is a transcript:

I would love to have property insurance. I would love to have data privacy. I would love to have Constitutional Carry. There’s a lot of great things. But you know we just went through a legislative session where they failed to deliver on some of those priorities, and so what I will do, I will ask the legislative leaders if there is something you can get across the finish line, and I will encourage them to do that. Because I think there is a lot of key things they could do.

That is a possibility. The initial call will just be for the Congressional map, but is absolutely possible, that when we actually convene, when they actually convene for the Special Session, that you could see additional issues raised there.

Florida Representative Anthony Sabatini tweeted that Governor DeSantis is calling a Special Legislative Session to pass Constitutional Carry:

BREAKING:

@GovRonDeSantis

is calling a Special Legislative Session to pass Constitutional Carry

The tweet by Representative Sabatini is rather optimistic, it appears. The answer to the question was at the press conference. Governor DeSantis merely stated Constitutional Carry would be a bonus; the main purpose was to have a new Congressional map. Governor DeSantis mentioned the actual proclamation had not been completed.

Here is the language from the proclamation, which was finished and signed hours after the press conference. The proclamation of the Special Session is very specific. The second paragraph seems to exclude other legislation from being passed. It is possible this is required.  The language makes it less likely any “bonus” issues will be addressed. From flgov.com:

Section 1. The Legislature of the State of Florida is convened in Special Session commencing at 12:00 p.m., Tuesday, April 19, 2022, and extending no later than 11:59 p.m., Friday, April 22, 2022.

Section 2. The Legislature of the State of Florida is convened in Special Session for the sole and exclusive purpose of considering legislation relating to the establishment of congressional districts for the State of Florida and any legal challenges thereto, including the appropriation of additional funding for pending and prospective redistricting litigation. 

From the Florida legislative website, flsenate.gov:

Special session
Special sessions may be called by Proclamation of the Governor, by Joint Proclamation of the Senate President and the House Speaker, or by members of the legislature for the purpose of considering specific legislation and shall not exceed 20 consecutive days unless extended by a three-fifths vote of each house.

The “purpose of considering specific legislation” language may or may not limit what can be done in the Special Session.

Analysis:

Could Constitutional Carry, property insurance and data privacy be considered in the Special Session?  It seems unlikely to this correspondent. The Special Session is very short. Constitutional Carry and the other issues are important issues with strong opinions.

The strong support for Constitutional Carry shown by Governor DeSantis is a significant plus. He did not have to bring the issue up at the press conference. He chose to highlight it as an important issue. However, a desire to pass it is unlikely to be enough to guarantee passage in a focused, short, Special Session.

---

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.

from https://ift.tt/ucgCxoJ
via IFTTT

Maine Senate to Vote on Sunday Hunting Legislation

The Maine Senate may hold a floor vote as early as today, on Sunday hunting legislation, LD 2014. IMG iStock-884203988

U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- The Maine Senate may hold a floor vote as early as today, on Sunday hunting legislation, LD 2014.  As amended, LD 2014 allows Sunday hunting on private property with written landowner permission, statewide.  Maine is just one of two states that does not allow any form of hunting on Sundays, due to an antiquated blue law left on the books.  Please act now!  Contact your State Senator and ask them to SUPPORT LD 2014!

CLICK HERE TAKE ACTION!

Legislative Document 2014 allows Sunday hunting on private property with written landowner permission, statewide.  Hunters provide millions of dollars to habitat restoration and conservation for healthy ecosystems throughout Maine.  Unfortunately, Maine hunters are prevented from introducing their family or friends to hunting because they are competing with organized sports and other activities on Saturday, which is often their only opportunity to hunt outside of the work week. Countless hunters stop hunting because of the lack of opportunity and accessible land, as well as time restrictions. Providing an extra day in the field, especially on the weekend, increases opportunities for those individuals to experience one of America’s oldest traditions, and increases hunter retention.

Again, please contact your State Senator and ask them to SUPPORT LD 2014!

---

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

from https://ift.tt/xH4CIaZ
via IFTTT

‘Progressive Experiments Have Failed,’ Says Frustrated County Sheriff in WA

U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- On the same day his department was honoring the memory of a deputy gunned down in the line of duty by an armed, convicted felon, another lawman in a department two counties away was allegedly shot and then run over by another convicted felon. Now Pierce County, WA Sheriff Ed Troyer is saying the community is suffering from what he called a “failed experiment.”

One of Troyer’s deputies, Dominique “Dom” Calata, was fatally wounded in an exchange of gunfire with a man wanted on assault charges earlier this month. Within hours of a memorial service for Calata, Police officer Dan Rocha was murdered in an altercation, allegedly with a man who has a long criminal history in Eastern Washington’s Tri-Cities area including multiple felonies.

That suspect, identified as Richard Rotter, is being held on $5 million bail.

Over the weekend, Sheriff Troyer posted this message on Facebook:

“At the end of our service for Dom, we learned Everett Officer Rocha was killed in the line duty. Not just police officers, homicide rates of citizens are skyrocketing. Neither of these cop killing suspects should have been out of jail. Same with the other homicide suspects in the first 3 months of this year. We are all in this together. The liberal, progressive, socialist experiments have failed. Time to stop.”

If there may be an example of the “failed experiment,” it might be Rotter, the suspect in Rocha’s killing. Seattle’s KOMO News reported, “Rotter was the subject of two outstanding warrants, including one for domestic violence assault and a hit-and-run case, both of which were filed in Benton County, according to prosecutors.”

Police in Kennewick, a city in south-central Washington, had issued an officer-safety alert for Rotter.

The Everett Herald reported Rotter was spotted “moving guns from one car to another,” which—as a convicted felon—he should not have been doing. KCPQ News said Rotter “has a lengthy criminal history including at least 18 felonies and hundreds of contacts with Kennewick Police over the years.” Talk radio hosts in Seattle were uniformly wondering how this suspect was even out on the streets with that kind of record.

In an exclusive telephone interview, Troyer suggested the way to start turning this scenario around is to lock up criminals instead of releasing them almost automatically.

But in the Puget Sound region, where Pierce and neighboring King County are located, conservatives argue that liberal policies of entrenched Democrat-majority governments have become a magnet for a criminal element.

Washington state passed both the “Three Strikes” and “Hard Time for Armed Crime” initiatives almost 30 years ago, but without enforcement, those laws cannot accomplish anything. Troyer said property crimes—everything from shoplifting to auto theft—are up, and so are homicides. In 2020, the most recent year for which data is available, the FBI Uniform Crime Report says Washington posted 298 murders, including 177 with firearms. In 2019, the state reported 194 slayings, including 135 involving guns, according to FBI data for that year.

Troyer concurred more people are licensed to carry. Meanwhile, police have been under attack and there are manpower shortages. It’s almost like a “perfect storm” with good and evil on a collision course.

A check with the state Department of Licensing earlier this month showed Pierce County has more than 76,000 active concealed pistol licenses, the second-highest number of any county in the state. In neighboring King County, the number was above 98,000. Snohomish County, encompassing Everett, has more than 68,000.

Washington has had Democrats in the Governor’s office for more than 35 years. Democrats have held the legislative majority for many years. Last year, Democrats rammed through a “police reform” bill that proved so onerous it was rolled back this year because the public is tired of rising crime and their local police being effectively handcuffed.

According to U.S. News. “Rep. Jesse Johnson, the Federal Way Democrat who sponsored House Bill 1310, said restricting the ability of police to detain fleeing suspects was unintentional. The measure signed by Inslee Thursday allows police to do their jobs while also requiring them to use no more force than necessary.”

This begs the question, “How much force is considered necessary when someone is trying to kill you?”

Troyer told AmmoLand his agency is working to address the needs of people who are truly distressed. Under his leadership, the sheriff’s department has created a program pairing deputies with social workers who can deal with mental health and other social issues. He calls this effort the “Alternative Response Team,” and it is showing promise. He has mental health professionals embedded with deputies who can be available to deal with genuine hardship.

At the same time, the veteran lawman observed, “We just can’t let hardcore felons run amok.”

With some chagrin, he noted felons aren’t supposed to have guns, but they get them, and not by buying them from local gun stores.

Troyer said there are 43 vacancies in his department, and that includes people who are on military leave. He estimated one-third of Pierce County’s commissioned deputies are also in the military, a fact he is very proud of. Slain officer Calata was one of those double-duty individuals.

“We’re going to turn the tide,” Troyer said with determination. “We’re going to start holding people accountable. Instead of complaining about what we can’t do, let’s focus on what we can do.”

Troyer said he is working with the County Executive and County Prosecutor to open the jails back up and put people, particularly repeat offenders, behind bars.

One other thing the sheriff mentioned is his steadfast belief that county sheriffs should be elected, rather than appointed.

“You don’t hear city police chiefs talking like this because they’d lose their jobs,” he observed.

In King County in 2020, voters approved a measure to make their sheriff an appointed position. Prior to the 2020 election, the Washington State Sheriff’s Association stated in a letter, “The accountability and responsiveness of an elected Sheriff is critical to public safety in our communities. Sheriffs are, and should remain, directly accountable to the people.”

But in liberal King County—the state’s most populous, and long dominated by Democrats—voters by a 62-38 percent margin, voted the other way.

---

About Dave Workman

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.

from https://ift.tt/SoAVNzM
via IFTTT

Special Session Called For Constitutional Carry In Florida!

Special Session Called For Constitutional Carry In Florida!, iStock-884197090

U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- The loud slap you just heard wasn’t Will Smith popping Chris Rock again. Oh no, that was Florida’s Governor smacking the legislature for its failure to pass a number of bills. Ron DeSantis, the nation’s supposed favorite governor at the moment said this on March 29:

“I would love to have property insurance, I would love to have data privacy, I would love to have constitutional carry, there’s a lot of great things. But you know, we just went through a legislative session where they failed to deliver on some of those priorities,” DeSantis said. “I will ask the legislative leaders, is there something that you can get across the finish line? And I will encourage them to do that.”

Hell, don’t take my word for it. You can listen to him right here say it!

Well, guess what folks. . . The special session is scheduled to start on April 19, 2022!

Joint Statements released by Florida’s House Speaker and Senate President.

As Gun Owners of America’s Florida State Director, I need your help to make sure that Constitutional Carry passes.

Click here to complete the call to action. Let Governor DeSantis know that you fully support him on calling out the legislature for failing to pass Constitutional Carry even after he told them that he wanted it on his desk earlier this year.

Constitutional Carry’s legislative sponsor, Representative Anthony Sabatini, called Gun Owners of America today and specifically thanked us (meaning you, the members and politically active gun owners) for all the hard work that we’ve put in to make Constitutional Carry an issue that lawmakers can’t ignore. He said:

“This couldn’t have happened without the hard work you guys have put in. You guys made it an issue they can’t ignore”.

So keep up the good work and fill up the Governor’s inbox with emails from GOA’s action alert!

Luis Valdes is the Florida State Director along with being the Puerto Rico & U.S. Virgin Islands Director of Outreach for Gun Owners of America.

---

About Luis Valdes

Luis Valdes is the Florida State Director and the Director of Outreach for Puerto Rico & US Virgin Islands for Gun Owners of America. A life-long advocate of freedom and a firearms shooter, hunter, competitor, and collector. Luis is the first of his family born in the United States of Cuban Immigrants who fled Communism and who’s family saw firsthand what gun control truly results in.

from https://ift.tt/JPFLj8V
via IFTTT

Could One Policy Objective Of Sarah Brady Be Killed By SCOTUS?

Could One Policy Objective Of Sarah Brady Be Killed By SCOTUS? iStock-1055138108

United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- Supreme Court decisions can have some big effects people might not realize when a case is argued. In the case of New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, a dream of Sarah Brady’s could be wiped out.

NYSRPA v. Bruen centers around the “discretionary issue” concealed-carry permit systems, which most notably exist in New York (California and New Jersey are also notorious in that regard). Second Amendment supporters rightly disdain them, given the often arbitrary denials that come from issuing authorities. Besides, why should you have to demonstrate a need to exercise your Second Amendment rights?

Now, though, it’s time for history. Just under three decades ago, when the Brady Act was passed, anti-Second Amendment extremists unveiled the next part of their plan, what Charles Schumer called “the rest of the camel.” It was called Brady II.

Its provisions included a ban on magazines holding more than six rounds (owners of pre-ban magazines would have been placed under the provisions of the National Firearms Act), a separate “arsenal license” (in essence, treating gun collectors like criminals), and a host of other onerous provisions, including a permanent waiting period and a licensing and registration scheme for handguns.

The ultimate goal, as Sarah Brady put it in that August 15, 1993 article, was to impose “needs-based licensing” on gun owners. Just as New York, Maryland, California, New Jersey, and the other holdouts from the consensus between reasonably fair “shall issue” concealed carry states (like Virginia and Florida) or those that have taken to “constitutional carry” (like Texas and West Virginia) demand one justify a reason to have a carry permit, Sarah Brady wanted you to have to justify the purchase of a given firearm.

In essence, if you wanted a new rifle, you’d need to explain why, and some bureaucrat (or some panel) could keep you from buying that rifle if you already had some. And forget about being able to buy any sort of firearm for personal protection – as we have seen from “may issue” states, such a purchase would only be for those politically well-connected.

Well, here’s where NYSRPA v. Bruen ends that threat for the foreseeable future: If SCOTUS strikes down the requirement to justify a reason for a concealed carry permit, could any requirement that one justify the need for a specific firearm be upheld? While we’d never want to have an actual case in point, the answer is, “Probably not.”

However, Second Amendment supporters will need to avoid complacency. The best defense against seeing this policy objective of Sarah Brady’s becoming law is for Second Amendment supporters to defeat anti-Second Amendment extremist via the ballot box at the federal, state, and local levels.

---

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.

from https://ift.tt/Hu9zgN3
via IFTTT

Armed Defense as You Walk to Your Front Door in the Dark

Armed Defense as You Walk to Your Front Door in the Dark

U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- We start with this news story out of Houston, Texas and covered by the local station ABC13 KTRK-TV.

You arrive home after dark. You get out of your car and walk to the side door of your house. The door is locked, but you don’t remember locking it. You head to the front of the house to try the front door. That is when you see a man come out of your house and move toward you. He has a knife in his hands and he threatens you.

You back away from your attacker, but he can move forward faster than you can back away. You own a gun. You’re carrying concealed tonight. You present your gun and shoot your attacker one time. You continue to back up and your attacker stops chasing you. Now he falls and you call 911.

Police disarm your attacker and EMS takes him to the hospital. You tell the police what happened. You go inside your home with the police. You notice that some money is missing.

Later, you find out your attacker died in the hospital.

Comments

I chose this story because it is probably the most common defensive encounter for the armed citizen. A recent report said that slightly over half of all defensive gun uses occur on our property, but outside our home.  It is a place where many of us are armed and where criminals lie in wait. That might mean we were attacked as we stepped outside or as we arrived home and were walking up to our door.

This homeowner was armed when he returned home after dark. That may have been his constant habit. The news article also mentions a number of break ins nearby. For whatever reason, our defender’s head was up so he noticed someone coming out of his home. As obvious as that sounds, I’d like you to notice how many people have their head down and their attention on their phone as they walk out of a grocery store and try to find their car.

The defender’s attention to the world immediately around him gave him a faster response than if his attention was on his phone or on the mail he’d picked up at the curb. Those several seconds made the difference between keeping his distance and getting cut by his attacker.

For a sense of perspective, being attacked with a knife or cutting instrument is over 7 times more common than being attacked with any long gun like a rifle or shotgun. The defender’s sharpened attention was particularly valuable at night when it takes us longer to recognize what we are seeing, and to re-acquire a moving object.

This defender re-discovered what our instructor told us way back in our concealed carry class; an attacker can move forward faster than we can move backward. One way to reduce our disadvantage is to move to the side. That lets us keep our eyes on our attacker while reducing the disparity in speed.

There are other factors to consider. Leaving the hard-surface walkway might not be a good option if your yard is a mess. Snow, ice, and mud count as a “mess” too.

Many of us often have our hands full when we return home. We could be carrying a briefcase or a purse, a backpack or a few shopping bags. I have the mail in my hands at least once a day. Of course we want to drop that so we have both hands free. Like everything else, getting our hands into the fight takes practice.

Dropping things we don’t need isn’t obvious. Lots of police officers fought an attacker while carrying their notebook in their hands because the officer was holding the notebook when the fight started. They had to be taught to drop the things they don’t need. We can learn that too.

It doesn’t cost any more to go to the shooting range with a plastic shopping bag folded up in our range bag. At some ranges you can practice dropping your burden and moving to the side. At some ranges you can’t. We can always train to drop and move during dry practice at home.

The other thing we were taught so long ago is to shout. Words can do a number of things for us. Words tell the bad guy that we’ve seen him. Ignoring our words tells us about the stranger’s intent. Words also make us breathe.

I’ve seen lots of men and women who were holding their breath as they shot a stage in competition. Breathing makes us both smarter and stronger, so it is a good skill to learn.

Another advantage is that a loud shout will draw attention. It may turn some bystanders into eye witnesses. It will also turn some bystanders into ear witnesses. They can testify they heard us yell “STOP” before they heard a gunshot.

A final advantage to shouting is that the attacker might be tempted to reply. We want to shout, but we never want to talk. We want him to talk while we run away.

That said, there is a very real downside to shouting. The problem is that we’re tempted to talk. Try it for yourself in dry practice, but we can’t talk and shoot at the same time. That is why we shout one syllable commands like “NO” or “STOP” as we move and draw. Knowing when to shout is similar to knowing when to move. There is a time to move and there is a time to concentrate on presenting our firearm and pressing the trigger. There is a time to shout and a time to use armed defense.

We are in a potentially violent encounter. We can’t think or defend ourselves when we’re talking. Get someplace out of danger before you bother to talk. Also, most aggravated assaults occur when the attacker is intoxicated. Arguing with an addict is a waste of our precious attention. Just like movement and like getting our hands empty and ready to fight, shouting takes practice. Be prepared that shouting will draw strange looks at the gun range.

If our shouts didn’t draw attention, our gunshots probably will. Given my luck, my neighbors would look outside and call in a report of a man in the street holding a gun. That is another reason we want to call 911 and ask for help. We’ll tell the dispatcher where we are, what we need, and how we’re dressed. We also want to keep an eye on our attacker, and particularly on his weapon.

We want to reholster our gun when we can, but we definitely want to put our gun away before the police arrive.

I’ve written about staying at the scene, what to say to the police, the advantages of having a carry permit, and having a lawyer to call. There is always more to learn even from an ordinary defense like this one.

-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 family deserve.

---

About Rob Morse

Rob writes about gun rights at Ammoland, at Clash Daily, at Second Call Defense, and on his SlowFacts blog. He hosts the Self Defense Gun Stories Podcast and co-hosts the Polite Society Podcast. Rob was an NRA pistol instructor and combat handgun competitor.

from https://ift.tt/gtkIpaB
via IFTTT

‘Anonymous Say Something’ Campaign Shares Flaws with ATF’s Snitch Line

Might some of these “signs” have alternative interpretations that don’t warrant being anonymously reported on? (Sandy Hook Promise/Facebook)

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “We all have a responsibility to do something about gun violence,” opinion contributor Mark Barden writes in The Hill. “By speaking up to get help when seeing the potential for violence, we can save lives.”

“Speaking up” how?

“Students nationwide are leading the way,” Barden asserts. “[T]hey will be participating in Say Something Week, celebrating those in the community who are upstanders, who say something when they see warning signs. While lawmakers have failed to address gun violence, these student upstanders are helping their peers feel more connected to one another and their community.”

Barden, founder and CEO of Sandy Hook Promise, has an especially powerful voice in terms of emotional impact. His young son was one of the victims. It’s powerful not only because of the media platform he now has but also because all good people were sickened by the terror and agony the murdered children were forced to endure. We who are parents, and who treasure our children above our own lives, share heartfelt sympathy as we try to fathom the crippling anguish that he must be reliving in every waking moment, and in nightmares that we can only pray we never dream.

Our natural inclination is to want to offer comfort to someone in such pain, and decent people, who can only imagine his loss, loathe fighting back against him even as he’s bringing a fight to us. If we value our rights, though, we have to fight not against the man, but certainly against the citizen disarmament ideology that he represents.

We’re sorry for his loss, but it’s not our fault. It does not give him a claim on our rights, and it does not make the ideas he promulgates above reproach. He doesn’t want our sympathy, he wants our disarmament. And we won’t forget that the murdering monster who was the catalyst, in this case, was enabled by “gun-free” mandates that ensured he would have a defenseless victim pool where no one would be equipped to stop him. That is, until men with guns showed up, at which point the evil freak ended himself.

The “Say Something” campaign Barden is pushing won’t change that. What the slick PR professionals call “student upstanders” is basically another way of saying “informants,” and while there can be times when doing that can be lifesaving and needed, like all tools, it can be used for great good or great evil.

Kind of like guns?

To that end, Sandy Hook Promise has established a reporting system for budding “upstanders,” complete with a phone app and assurances of anonymity. They also include a professionally produced video (with no ability to dislike or comment) to “educate” on “warning signs”:

Forgotten by most is an allegation from Albert Gonzalez Films, where he posted a side-by-side comparison of his original short film from 2011 with Sandy Hook Promise’s “PSA”:

But back to the “Say Something” program. Look at the list of what they want to be reported—there’s plenty of room for subjective interpretation, in terms of what constitutes a “threat,” in term of what constitutes “bragging about weapons,” in terms of what “any other troubling situation or behavior” means, and who is troubled by it… After all, we’ve seen ludicrous and dangerous overreactions like students reported to police over Nerf guns in Zoom calls.

Sandy Hook Promise has a well-funded 24/7 “Crisis Center” to “manage the tips,” meaning if they buy what they’re being told, it won’t stop there. Then there’s the “tip form” that promises “It’s easy and completely confidential to report safety concerns to help prevent violence and tragedies.”

Is it?

Read the fine print:

“NOTE: If you provide your name and/or contact information, you acknowledge that it will be provided to assist in resolving the concern or threat you are reporting. If you deliberately provide false information or use this system to threaten or harass someone, you may be subject to criminal prosecution.”

Great. But if you didn’t provide your name, how would they know? And importantly, if someone used the “Say Something” program to victimize you, how would you know who they are to seek justice (provided you can)?

The comparisons between this and ATF’s “anonymous” tip system show as many similarities as the Sandy Hook Promise PSA and the Gonzales film, and raise the same questions about the potential for abuse, up to and including “swatting,” and relying on anonymity guarantees to get revenge.

“Say something does not [unintelligible] because when you snitch, it’s purposely intending badness upon a person, you want to do this to get them in trouble,” one empathy-exuding Illinois student insists. “But when you say something, you’re doing it to protect everyone including yourself.”

Snitching may not be her intent, but people, especially “progressives” intentionally calling in false tips to score political points is well documented, like what TikTokers did in response to the new abortion law in Texas. Yes, of course, there is a time and place for young people to be responsible citizens and stand up for what’s right, and to help when needed.

The answer is not a compulsory education system that creates a culture of alarmist teenage CIs (confidential informants). That’s especially true among young people indoctrinated into hating and fearing firearms by the predominantly leftist hoplophobes “teaching” them. If the object is to stop school shootings, the only thing that will is the one thing the people pushing “tip lines” reject via evil-enabling Second Amendment-free zones.

---

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.

from https://ift.tt/7VJUec9
via IFTTT

President Biden’s Budget Request Targets Firearm Industry

By Larry Keane

President Joe Biden is shifting blame for his party’s unwillingness to tackle spiraling crime straight to the firearm industry. IMG iStock-654405344

U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- President Joe Biden is shifting blame for his party’s unwillingness to tackle spiraling crime straight to the firearm industry. His administration released his Presidential budget request, which outlines his priorities for the coming year. At the top of the list are plans to target the firearm industry for the failures of his administration to support law enforcement.

President Biden proposes to spend $20.6 billion for the Justice Department for federal law enforcement, crime prevention, and intervention. Tucked into that spending proposal includes plans for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) to hire 140 special agents and another 160 Industry Operations Inspectors (IOIs).

Politics Over Policing

This shows the Biden administration puts the blame for rising crime at the feet of the firearm industry. This is what NSSF predicted when President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris were on the campaign trail. It was also why NSSF worked to defeat the nomination of David Chipman to become ATF director. The administration’s vision has always been to use the ATF as a tool not to regulate the firearm industry but to dismantle it.

The White House posted a Briefing Room blog to explain its gun control plans. In it, officials explain that they know criminals are responsible for surging crime, yet myopically focus only on zeroing in on firearm manufacturers, distributors, and retailers.

“Just as he did in his State of the Union Address, he will continue to call on Congress to take [sic] steps that cannot be achieved through executive action and do not violate the Second Amendment – like universal background checks, a ban on assault weapons with high-capacity magazines, and repeal of the liability shield for gun manufacturers and dealers,” The White House wrote.

The administration’s intent to hire more ATF inspectors than special agents signals that it is more interested in punishing the industry than actually going after criminals. The White House actually lays out where it believes the crimes are happening. It talks about firearms being illegally trafficked up the East Coast, destined for criminals in Baltimore and New York City. Instead of focusing on arresting, prosecuting, and imprisoning those criminals misusing firearms, Biden administration officials choose to instead wage a campaign to nullify federal firearm licensees (FFLs). They use “zero-tolerance” inspections to revoke licenses of retailers who are working diligently to adhere to laws and regulations.

Targeting Industry

The White House’s recent actions demonstrate this. At the direction of The White House, ATF inspections of FFLs have become increasingly punitive versus cooperative. That plan was announced by The White House nearly a year ago in an effort to target what it called “rogue dealers.” Minor clerical errors were once listed as “findings” that retailers could correct. That’s turning into a policy to find reasons to revoke licenses for firearm retailers for simple clerical errors in records.

Reports are now pouring in that ATF is reopening long-closed compliance inspections and threatening to revoke licenses for mistakes that did not threaten public safety.

The ATF released a letter to FFLs that “forced reset triggers” are now considered to be “machineguns,” but didn’t specify brands or models of these triggers that would run afoul of the National Firearms Act (NFA) and Gun Control Act (GCA). Little more is known about what would be considered illegal – including makes and models. NSSF is urging the ATF to provide better guidance to the industry to enable FFLs to comply and inform their customers. Rather than provide that guidance, ATF’s answer was to tell industry members – in an era of “zero tolerance” – to call ATF.

Two Proposed Rules, one to redefine frames and receivers and another to ban pistol arm braces, are in the works too. Both are problematic. The definition of a firearm frame and receiver is set by Congress, yet The White House is pushing the rule changes through the Justice Department and ATF. That sets up a legal showdown over the separation of powers and whether or not the Executive Branch can unilaterally rewrite laws without the consent of the Legislative Branch. Beyond that, there are still unanswered questions about the Proposed Rule to redefine frames and receivers. The White House contends the rule change is targeted at home-built firearms but hasn’t offered guidance as to how it would handle multiple or reprinted serial numbers on guns, manufacturing overhauls, and implementation guidance.

The administration continues to press for the repeal of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which prevents frivolous lawsuits against members of the firearm industry for the criminal misuse of a lawfully sold firearm by a remote third party. President Biden, time and again, has been debunked in his claims that the firearm industry is the only industry that receives this protection. The law, however, is nothing more than a codification of basic tort law, that the industry cannot be held responsible for the criminal actions committed by others.

Industry Prevention Efforts

The Biden administration is squandering decades of trust built between the firearm industry and the ATF. NSSF and the ATF have cooperative crime-prevention efforts including the Don’t Lie for the Other Guy campaign to educate the public that “straw purchasing” a firearm for someone else is a crime. Another is Operation Secure Store, to help firearm retailers deter and prevent firearm burglaries and robberies. The firearm industry – especially retailers – want to ensure that criminals don’t ever possess firearms illegally. They regularly work with ATF special agents to help solve crimes. These actions, though, threaten to chill that cooperative relationship.

Sadly, this was predicted. The Biden administration is scapegoating the firearm industry for its own lack of answers to address rising crime. These actions aren’t serious about anything short of the administration’s intent to dismantle the firearm industry. By doing that, they would deny the ability of law-abiding citizens to exercise their own Second Amendment rights.

That doesn’t stop crime. It only makes more potential targets for criminals.

---

About The National Shooting Sports Foundation

NSSF is the trade association for the firearm industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of thousands of manufacturers, distributors, firearm retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations, and publishers nationwide. For more information, visit nssf.org

from https://ift.tt/PUQ7stN
via IFTTT

California: Fee Hike Bill Eligible for Floor Vote

Last week, Senate Bill 918, authorized DoJ to charge higher fees for basic eligibility checks on ammunition and precursor firearm parts. IMG NRA-ILA

U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- Last week, Senate Bill 918, to authorize DoJ to charge higher fees for basic eligibility checks on ammunition and precursor firearm parts, passed out of the Senate Public Safety Committee. It is now eligible for a vote on the Senate floor. Please contact your state senator and ask them to OPPOSE SB 918.

CLICK HERE TAKE ACTION!

Senate Bill 918, introduced by Senator Anthony Portantino (D-25), increases the fee on eligibility checks for precursor firearm parts and ammunition sales. While consumers who pay for basic eligibility checks on ammunition currently, and precursor parts beginning July 1^st, won’t notice a price hike, they should. This is because CA DOJ has been charging above the statutory maximum for more than two years, as a result of their efforts to utilize creative legislative drafting to raise the cost of background checks on firearm transfers. While CA DOJ continues to overcharge consumers, they are utilizing this legislation to authorize the current, and unlawful, fee structure.

In addition, policy committees will also hold hearings for anti-gun bills tomorrow, March 30^th.

The Senate Education Committee will hear Senate Bill 906, which they rescheduled from last week, at 9:00 AM. Introduced by Senator Anthony Portantino (D-25), SB 906 makes it mandatory that parents of students disclose firearm ownership status to the schools their children attend, including how they are stored. It requires that these questions be placed on the forms used to register or enroll students, and these forms may be made available to law enforcement under certain conditions. This is one more attack on the law-abiding citizens of California, amounting to a major invasion of privacy and potential harassment.

The Assembly Appropriations Committee will hear Assembly Bill 1769 at 9:00 AM. Introduced by Assembly Member Steve Bennett (D-37), AB 1769 prohibits officers, employees, operators, lessees, or licensees of the 31^st District Agricultural Association from entering into any agreement to allow for the sale of any firearm, firearm parts, or ammunition on property or buildings that comprise the Ventura County Fair and Event Center or properties in Ventura County and the City of Ventura that are owned, leased, operated, or occupied by the District. This imposes a one-size-fits-all restriction to prevent officials from deciding how to use venues.

Again, please contact your state senator and ask them to OPPOSE SB 918.

---

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

from https://ift.tt/sDafjvV
via IFTTT

Anti-Gun Bills Hit The Rhode Island Judiciary

Anti-Gun Bills Hit The Rhode Island Judiciary, iStock-884218344

PROVIDENCE, RI –-(Ammoland.com)- On Wednesday, a slew of new firearms bills will hit the House Committee of Judiciary in Rhode Island.

The most concerning of these bills to gun owners is HB 6616 entitled, An Act Relating to Criminal Offenses – Weapons {LC3480/1}. The bill would “prohibit the sale or transfer of ammunition unless the purchaser successfully undergoes a background check. The bill is the brainchild of Justine Caldwell (D-30), who has ties to Everytown for Gun Safety.

The bill mirrors the law on ammunition in California. It treats ammo as if it is a firearm. Ammunition can be expensive, and one of the most cost-effective ways for gun owners to acquire the rounds they need for their guns is to buy it online. This bill will require the ammunition purchased online to be shipped to an FFL before being transferred to the buyer.

Ranges make a large portion of their money through ammunition sales. New shooters usually do not purchase ammo before heading to the range. If this new law is passed, instead of renting a firearm and buying ammunition to try out shooting, the new shooter will have to go through a background check. A large segment of the population gets delayed when going through a background check, which could mean a new shooter will not be able to experience target practice. That delay could turn them off from exercising their right to bear arms.

Caldwell also introduced HB 7300. This bill is entitled An Act Relating to Criminal Offenses – Weapons {LC4273/1}. This act is a proposed safe storage law. The bill would make it illegal to store a firearm unsecured. The penalty for storing an unarmed firearm would be $3000.

HB 7889 is also of concern to gun owners. This bill is entitled An Act Relating to Criminal Offenses – Weapons {LC4828/1}. The bill will ban shooting ranges within one mile of a school. This stipulation will make much of the state off-limits to ranges. The bill was introduced by Brandon Potter (D-16). Potter is a far-left legislator with a history of being anti-gun.

Another bill is aimed at preventing people from exercising their rights is HB 7764. This bill is entitled, An Act Relating to Criminal Offenses – Weapons {LC5019/1}. The act will strip away the right to own a firearm from anyone who has ever been convicted of possessing a firearm without a license. The bill was introduced by Edward Cardillo (D-42).

The proposed law doesn’t have a time limit. A person convicted of carrying a firearm without a license at 18 could be denied the right to buy a gun at age 70. The person could have a clean record other than that one firearms charge and still get their rights stripped.

Another anti-gun bill was introduced by Teresa Tanzi (D-34). HB 7457, entitled An Act Relating to Criminal Offenses – Weapons {LC4437/1} would raise the age to buy a firearm and ammunition from 18 to 21. It is currently legal for an 18-year-old to buy a rifle. This bill would change that age limit. This change will have a chilling on hunting in Rhode Island.

On Wednesday, March 30, 2022, the bills will be heard at 1 pm in the House Lounge at State House. There will be a signup sheet to testify in person.

---

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.

from https://ift.tt/yTB7s5O
via IFTTT

Armed at Home, at Work, and as you Drive

Armed at Home, at Work, and as you Drive, iStock-1085735902

U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- You probably didn’t see these stories covered by the mainstream news media, but again last week, responsible gun owners defended themselves and the people they love. Self-defense instructor David Cole joins the Self Defense Gun Stories Podcast to look at four new examples. Were these gun owners lucky, or did they have a plan?

First story- Do you have a firearm nearby at night?

It is a few hours before sunrise on a Wednesday morning. You are at home with your boyfriend and small children. You hear someone trying to enter your home. Your doors and windows are locked. You grab your gun and are out of bed when a man breaks one of your back windows and enters the home. You shout that you are armed, and the intruder leaves. You call 911. You are on the phone when the stranger breaks another window and enters your home a second time. This time he is armed. He enters your home and points a gun at your boyfriend’s head. You present your firearm and shoot the intruder. He drops his gun and you stop shooting. The attacker is your ex-boyfriend.

You and your family retreat. Police take your attacker’s gun. Emergency medical personnel declare your attacker dead at the scene. Neither your boyfriend nor your children are injured. You give a brief statement to the police. The sound of your attacker breaking the window and you shouting for him to stay outside was recorded on the 911 tape.

Second Story- Are you armed at work?

People under 21 years of age are not allowed inside, so your job is to check identification at the door of a marijuana dispensary. It is almost 8 at night when you see a stranger grab one of the dispensary employees in the parking lot. The attacker puts the employee in a chokehold and puts a gun to the employee’s head. The two want to enter the shop.

Are you robbing us, you ask?

This is a robbery, he answers.

You wait your turn and then present your firearm. You shoot the attacker. The employee drops down and then runs away. The attacker falls to the floor. You step back and make sure the attacker isn’t a threat. None of the customers or employees are injured. You and the manager call 911.

Police disarm the attacker. EMS declares your attacker dead at the scene. You show the police the parking lot security video from the dispensary and the video from the gun shop next door. You know they have video next door because you also work at the gunshop.

This is the 77th robbery at a marijuana dispensary in western Washington. 9 out of 10 robberies are by armed criminals. Some store clerks have been murdered during the robberies.

You and the other employee take a few days off work.

Rob- Third story- Are you armed as you drive for a ride-sharing company?

You are a female driver for Uber. You pull up to the downtown address to pick up your passengers. It is after midnight and you see a man push a woman to the ground. You hope that isn’t your customers, but they walk up and identify themselves. The man is extremely intoxicated and soon falls asleep as you drive.

You tell the female passenger that you saw what happened and that you are sorry. The man wakes up and slaps the female passenger. You tell him to stop and he hits you. You stop the car and tell him to get out of your car. He complies at first, but then he runs back at you.

You have your Florida concealed weapons license. You’re armed tonight. You shoot your attacker before he reaches you. Now he stops. You back up and call 911.

Police and EMTs arrive. EMS takes your attacker to the hospital with serious gunshot injuries. You tell the police what happened. The attacker is charged with assault and battery.

Fourth story- Are you armed at home late at night?

You arrive home after dark. You get out of your car and walk to the side door of your house. The door is locked. You don’t remember locking it, so you walk to the front of the house to go in the front door. That is when you see a man come out of your house and move toward you. He has a knife in his hands and is threatening you

You back away from your attacker, but he can move forward faster than you can back away. You own a gun. You’re carrying concealed tonight. You present your gun and shoot your attacker one time. You back up and your attacker stops chasing you. Now he stops. He falls and you call 911.

Police disarm your attacker and EMS takes him to the hospital. You tell the police what happened. You go inside your home with the police. You notice that some money is missing. The police don’t tell you if the robber had your money on him.

Later, you find out your attacker died in the hospital.

A discussion of each story is at the Self Defense Gun Stories podcast webpage.

---

About Rob Morse 

Rob Morse writes about gun rights at Ammoland, Clash Daily, Second Call Defense, and on his SlowFacts blog. He hosts the Self Defense Gun Stories Podcast and co-hosts the Polite Society Podcast. Rob was an NRA pistol instructor and combat handgun competitor.

from https://ift.tt/pwXQyAL
via IFTTT