There is No Emergency Shutdown of the Second Amendment

Give someone power if you want to see their character. Unfortunately, the usual characters have revealed themselves during the Wuhan virus epidemic. Government officials asked citizens to limit their contact with others in order to slow the spread of the virus. Some government officials went well beyond that. They closed roads, released jail inmates, refused to arrest or prosecute suspects, closed gun stores, and refused to process firearms applications. It is precisely during such an emergency that we need government officials to stay within their authority.. and not one inch beyond.

Lots of us wanted a firearm after we saw criminals released from jail and law enforcement refuse to respond to calls. We increased the rate of firearms sales up to four fold, and up to eight fold for sales of ammunition. The instant background check system run by the FBI was overwhelmed. State agencies added weeks of delays to complete a firearms transfer..if the state bothered to process the applications at all.

The sheriff of Los Angeles County, CA told stores to close. The mayor of LA said they would shut off water and power to stores that stayed open. The county council, the lawyer who advises LA county officials, told the sheriff not to close gun stores or he would face lawsuits. The sheriff rescinded and then reinstated his order to close stores. As predicted, he was sued by four human rights organizations within hours. Sheriffs in Pennsylvania and New York said they would not process concealed carry firearm applications. Officials in New Jersey and Illinois simply stopped processing the permits required to purchase a firearm.. and they were sued.

The order to close gun shops and the refusal to process state required firearms paperwork is a significant confession on the part of these law enforcement officials. They are saying that they are more important than you are, that they should have guns and you shouldn’t. Many of these government officials were quickly sued for violation of civil rights under color of law. Government officials don’t have the power to suspend the constitution and violate civil rights. They exceeded their authority.

Idaho took the Wuhan crisis to heart and expanded the segment of people who have a right to carry concealed without a permit. Called “permitless carry”, that right only applied to state residents. Soon in Idaho, permitless carry applies to all legal US residents who may legally possess a firearm. Sensible government officials also extended the expiration dates for concealed carry permits just as they had for existing drivers licenses that could not be renewed during the quarantine. If only all government officials were that smart.

The lesson is clear. If it is too dangerous for a government official too to sit at their desk and process paperwork, then it is a state of emergency. The state has admitted that it can not fulfill its obligations to honest citizens. Under those emergency conditions, permits should not be required for citizens with a clean criminal record to own, transfer, or carry a firearm. We’ve used that same relief valve during hurricanes, wildfires and earthquakes when civil government ceases to exist. Your rights and your safety take precedence over the convenience of a bureaucrat.

That lesson sounds obvious, but some politicians are blinded by their bigotry against honest citizens protecting themselves. Now we know the officials who don’t trust us, and in whom we should not place our trust. We gave them power, and they revealed the shortcomings in their character.

N.J. POLICE TEST POSITIVE, QUARANTINED; ‘WHY WE SUED TO OPEN GUN STORES’: SAF

BELLEVUE, WA — Published reports that some 700 New Jersey police officers have tested positive for the coronavirus and are quarantined underscores the importance of the Second Amendment Foundation’s lawsuit to require the state to open gun stores, the group said today.

“This is exactly why the Foundation lawsuit to force New Jersey to re-open gun stores during this emergency is so important,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “People need to be able to obtain the means of self-defense in times such as these. This is why the right to keep and bear arms is essential.”

The revelation by acting State Police Superintendent Col. Patrick Callahan came Saturday during a daily press briefing on the COVID-19 outbreak.

“This stunning report should surprise nobody,” Gottlieb said, “because police interact daily with scores, if not hundreds of people. It would defy odds if none became infected, and assurances by the authorities that they still have the manpower to respond to emergencies don’t mean much to people when crimes are happening right now and police are several minutes, or longer, away.

“Gov. Phil Murphy needs to understand the Second Amendment wasn’t written for duck hunters,” he observed. “The right to keep and bear arms is enshrined in the Constitution to assure every citizen has the means to defend himself or herself when help may not arrive in time, or maybe not arrive at all.

“We’re praying for the quick recovery of all those stricken Garden State police officers,” Gottlieb said, “and hoping for the safety and good health of all men and women in law enforcement. But in the meantime, we will press our lawsuit to assure that all citizens can defend themselves and their families during this time of crisis.

“Phil Murphy has around-the-clock protection,” Gottlieb noted, “but average citizens do not enjoy that luxury. The governor needs to lift his closure order now, and we will press our lawsuit to make sure he does.”

Truckers Call for Second Amendment Right Nationwide During Emergency

Washington D.C. – A trucking group sent an emergency request to the United States Department of Transportation (DOT) on Friday urging leaders to take immediate action to help interstate truckers better protect themselves.

The Small Business in Transportation Coalition (SBTC) says urgent action is needed to ease restrictive state and local gun laws amid the unprecedented statewide orders arising from the COVID-19 pandemic.

On Thursday, California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, ordered all non-essential businesses to shut down and all non-essential travel to be restricted under threat of civil penalties.

The “stay at home” order came only hours before New York governor Andrew Cuomo, on Friday, issued a similar order to residents and businesses in New York State.

“These provisions will be enforced,” Gov. Cuomo said during a news conference when making the announcement. “These are not helpful hints. This is not if you really want to be a great citizen. These are legal provisions. They will be enforced. There will be a civil fine and mandatory closure for any business that is not in compliance. Again, your actions can affect my health. That’s where we are.”

Also on Friday, Illinois governor J.B. Pritzker and Connecticut governor Ned Lamont joined the others in issuing similar orders.

Truckers are deemed “essential,” so deliveries will continue, but what about the safety of these drivers now operating in a much different and unknown environment?

Citing the statewide “stay at home” orders, the SBTC contends the safety of truckers is now being further jeopardized as the “crisis worsens.”

In an emergency email sent to DOT secretary Elaine Chao, James Lamb, president of the SBTC, argues:

With four states now having issued stay at home orders causing metropolitan areas to now be desolate, and with cities like New York and Los Angeles releasing criminals from jails, now more than ever are there significant life threatening dangers to the men and women who drive trucks as America’s supply chain first responders.

The 15,000-member SBTC is calling on federal authorities to preempt state and local laws regarding the right to carry a firearm.

Therefore, in accordance with the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, we hereby request the U.S. Department of Transportation please issue a preemption order nullifying any and all state and local laws that restrict truck drivers from carrying firearms across state lines throughout America in order to enable them to protect themselves and their cargo as they engage in interstate commerce.

As this is now a matter of life and death, please issue same forthwith.

“The SBTC through its TRUCKER LIVES MATTER campaign has sought the unfettered ability of drivers to carry firearms for self protection nationwide since its inception in 2014,” Lamb tells Transportation Nation Network (TNN).  “We have pointed to Department of Labor statistics that show the unusually high rates of murders on the road for workers in interstate transportation.”

NSSF GRATIFIED TO SEE FIREARM ACCIDENTS REACHING RECORD LOW LEVEL

NEWTOWN, Conn.—The National Shooting Sports Foundation® (NSSF®) is pleased to report that unintentional firearm fatalities reached their lowest level ever, according to the latest data from the National Safety Council’s just-released Injury Facts Report 2018.

NSSF, as the trade association for the firearm industry and leading proponent of safe gun handling and storage, applauded the report, which shows fatal firearm accidents at their lowest level since record keeping began in 1903. The firearm industry has for the last two decades provided more than 100 million firearm locking devices with new firearms sold and through its award-winning Project ChildSafe® program—the largest and most comprehensive firearm safety program in the country. The industry’s educational materials are widely distributed to gun owners by firearm manufacturers, retailers, instructors and others nationwide.

“As an industry that prioritizes firearm safety, it is extremely good news to see this record decline in gun-related accidents,” said Joe Bartozzi, NSSF’s President and CEO. “It’s gratifying to know that our industry’s gun safety efforts, including our long-running Project ChildSafe firearm safety education program, are contributing to helping save lives.”

With approximately 100 million gun owners in the country, the data demonstrates that firearms can be safely owned and used and accidents prevented as long as secure storage guidelines are followed. “Securely storing firearms when not in use is the No. 1 way to help prevent accidents, thefts and misuse,” said Bartozzi.

The National Safety Council data showed that for 2018 there were 458 firearm fatalities, accounting for less than 1 percent of unintentional fatalities from all principal causes. In the last two decades (1998-2018) accidental firearm deaths have declined by 47 percent. “Even one accidental firearm fatality is one too many,” said Bartozzi. “We’re aiming for zero, and this is great progress.”

With reports of many people purchasing their first firearm due to safety concerns over the COVID-19 pandemic, Bartozzi reminds new gun owners to use the safety device that came packaged with their new firearm when their gun is not under their direct control, to strongly consider using an additional safety device such as a lock box or lockable gun case, and to take advantage of the many gun safety resources at ProjectChildSafe.org, such as this video on the 10 commandments of firearm safety.

Also, with so many children at home because of COVID-19-related school closures, Bartozzi encourages parents to take time to have “the talk” with their kids about gun safety and to use tools such as the McGruff on Gun Safety videos and a video on how parents can talk to their children about gun safety on the Project ChildSafe website.

Learn more at ProjectChildSafe.org.

 

The freedom included being able to go to the LGS and buy what guns, ammo & whatever else you decide you need to help ensure your safety.


Why Economic Freedom Is Critical to Beating the Coronavirus

The debate in the United States over whether to move away from free markets and toward socialism may change dramatically as the latest coronavirus spreads throughout the world. That’s because in the fight against the global pandemic, we’ll likely witness one of the most compelling arguments in our lifetimes emerge in favor of free-market systems – and lives will be saved in the process.

The pandemic will demonstrate that nations with the freest markets and freest people tend to have the health care systems with the greatest capacity to handle such a crisis. Free-market incentives have produced health care systems that have better capacities in terms of beds, equipment and medical personnel to handle increased caseloads. Those incentives have also spurred innovations that have led to some of the greatest medical advances in history.

Moreover, nations with both private-sector companies that are financially incentivized to work quickly for a cure, and governments willing to remove regulatory obstacles to innovation, are more likely to develop the treatments to abate the disease or possibly even find a cure.

Countries with freer markets also tend to be more resilient in times of crisis and more capable of handling external shocks. Thanks to their free-market incentives as well as the flexibility to respond to changing conditions that comes with less government central planning, they have the widest availability of food, medicine, and other crucial necessities.

This is not conjecture. The Heritage Foundation’s annual “Index of Economic Freedom,” the latest edition of which was released just days ago, provides the indisputable data showing that citizens who live in nations with greater economic freedom have better health outcomes overall.

Economic freedom is represented by a variety of factors such as smaller, less intrusive government; lower taxes; reduced regulations on people and businesses; an environment that makes it easier for average citizens to start or operate a business; and the protection of private property rights, including protections like patents for new innovations.

The index has measured economic freedom in approximately 180 countries around the world for the last 26 years and shows that greater economic freedom has decreased poverty, created more prosperous economies, and increased positive health outcomes and life expectancies across the globe. Greater economic freedom has led to better health care systems, better education systems, a greater abundance of food, cleaner environments, and a higher quality of life for citizens.

Recently, Heritage Foundation researchers put the Index of Economic Freedom side-by-side with the Johns Hopkins’ Global Health Security Index, which measures countries’ capabilities to prevent, detect, and respond to infectious disease threats. Not surprisingly, they found a high correlation between economic freedom and health security.

Countries that Heritage ranked as “free” or “mostly free” in the economic freedom index also tended to score the highest on the health security index, while countries ranked as “mostly unfree” or “repressed” tended to score the lowest, indicating a poor ability to respond to infectious diseases.

In the coming months, we will be watching how countries across the economic freedom spectrum respond to the coronavirus pandemic. I have little doubt that we’ll see it’s the world’s freest nations that will do the best job of finding treatments and possibly a cure. Ultimately, their medical advances will be shared with all nations and used to save lives around the world.

That isn’t gloating; that is a sincere hope that such a critical demonstration of the power of economic freedom will encourage every nation to adopt more free-market approaches so that their citizens don’t just overcome this pandemic, but go on to live longer, healthier, and more prosperous lives.

It’s also my hope that some in our own government learn these lessons as well and don’t use this crisis as an opportunity to erode our personal and economic freedoms and push for spending free-for-alls. Any legislation to address the crisis must be targeted to the people who actually need it, temporary for only as long as the crisis lasts, and transparent – directed at fighting the coronavirus and aiding public health, not aiding special interests.

That is how we will emerge from this pandemic stronger than we were before.

“You can’t shoot a virus” The Crap-For-Brains Sheriff said. What-An-Idiot. He knows what people are buying guns for; Self Defense. It’s just that he can’t stand the fact the people are realizing that ‘the authorities’ aren’t going to be there when things go from bad to worse and they will have to be their own First Responders.


LA County Sheriff halts efforts to close gun stores after county counsel intervention.

The Los Angeles County Sheriff told FOX 11 on Tuesday night that enforcement efforts to close down local gun stores have been suspended after intervention from the county’s legal counsel.

Sheriff Alex Villanueva told FOX 11 reporter Bill Melugin that county counsel Mary Wickham issued an opinion that gun stores can be classified as essential businesses under the Governor’s statewide executive order.

Sheriff Villanueva everything is now in “limbo”, and added he reached out to the Governor’s office to get clarification on how gun stores should be classified, but never got a response.

Up until the legal opinion, Villanueva said a majority of gun shops were complying with his order to close down.

The Sheriff maintained that he believes gun stores should not be open to the general public right now because he feels there are too many first time buyers making panic purchases of guns they don’t know how to operate and they aren’t familiar with California’s strict laws.

“You can’t shoot a virus,” Villanueva said.

West Virginia: Gov. Justice Protects Second Amendment

Governor Jim Justice’s recent Executive Order No. 9-20 designates “firearm and ammunition suppliers and retailers” under “Essential Businesses and Operations,” exempting them from being shut down during this state of emergency. In doing so, Gov. Justice reaffirms that the Second Amendment is the law of the land while other jurisdictions are using the pandemic as an excuse to strip Americans of their fundamental right of self-defense.

In addition, Gov. Justice signed House Bill 4955 into law today. It reduces the current $75 fee for a LCDW to $25 and eliminates the fee for honorably discharged military veterans. West Virginia already allows law-abiding adults to carry a handgun to defend themselves without first having to pay fees or obtain government permission, but that ends at the state line. Many West Virginians still choose to get a LCDW in order to exercise their right to carry in other states that recognize West Virginia’s permit. This fee reduction helps ensure that West Virginians of any financial means are able to defend themselves when traveling.

Bob Barr represented Georgia’s 7th District in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003.  He now serves as President of the Law Enforcement Education Foundation based in Atlanta, Georgia.


Does The Coronavirus ‘National Emergency’ Endanger The Constitution And The Bill Of Rights?

Original copies of the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights remain on display at the National Archives in our nation’s capital. Many Americans consider that the system of government established by those documents is as strong as the pieces of parchment themselves. Quite the contrary. The system of government bequeathed to us more than 230 years ago – one of defined and limited powers designed above all else to protect individual liberty — is far more fragile than most citizens realize.

At no time is the fragility of guaranteed individual liberty more at risk than in times of “emergency;” including, as we face today, one posed not by outside human forces, but by nature. Many in our country clamor for the federal government to control virtually every aspect of dealing with the COVID-19 virus, including use of the military and virtual suspension of civil liberties (as some cities and states are already doing).

If the system of limiting government power and maximizing individual liberty as delineated in the Constitution is to continue in any meaningful degree, we need to remember that our Founders and their generation faced challenges far beyond those we face today. They knew the country they were establishing would face serious threats, including military threats from beyond our shores. They knew as well that Americans would be challenged by Mother Nature, whether by natural forces or by disease.

Yet knowing all that, the system of government they created was one of deliberately limited and defined powers and premised on fundamental pre-existing individual liberties. Our Founders clearly understood that individual liberty protected by the limitations on government power incorporated in the Constitution, could not survive if temporal challenges were permitted to justify circumventing those very restrictions.

In the intervening decades, of course, many U.S. presidents, including Abraham Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson and others, have ignored the profound and correct understanding of human nature reflected in the Constitution. Predictably, civil liberties suffered with little if any real or lasting “safety” gained in return.

Nineteen years ago, the United States faced a serious and very real challenge. Some of the measures undertaken by the federal government in response to the 9-11 attacks violated existing laws, including the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Other measures, imposed in accord with the hurriedly enacted USA PATRIOT Act, were clearly at odds with the Bill of Rights. But all such steps were justified by government officials at the time because they would “make us safe.”

Less than four years after the World Trade Centers were attacked, one of America’s oldest cities – New Orleans – was beset with a disaster not of terrorists’ making, but of nature’s wrath. Following Hurricane Katrina in 2005, officials in that city worked to disarm law-abiding citizens trying to protect their homes, families and businesses from looters and other criminals. In one of the most counter-productive government decisions in modern history, officials deliberately swept aside the Second Amendment’s guarantee of the right to arm one’s self in self-defense simply because the city faced an “emergency.”

The precedents set by those constitutionally ill-advised actions present troubling questions today for officials in our nation’s capital and in cities across the country. As I wrote in this publication just one week ago, troubling steps already have been taken that severely limit the civil liberties supposed to be protected by our Constitution as against infringement by federal, state and local governments.

Now, it appears the federal government is readying additional measures that would undercut one of our Founders’ deepest fears – use of the military for domestic law enforcement purposes.

Steps likely under consideration include further expanding exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act (the law designed to prohibit use of the Armed Forces in domestic matters), and broadening the president’s power to deploy the military to quell an “insurrection” in circumstances having nothing to do with such a domestic uprising. Additionally, federal officials may impose other clever sleight-of-hand measures to undercut the “great writ” of habeas corpus to facilitate arresting and detaining individuals for the duration of the declared “emergency.”

Whether it is these contingencies, or others creatively contrived by lawyers in Washington, none would be in accord with the principles and mechanisms mandated in the Constitution. “National Emergency” Phase Two would be even more constitutionally troubling than Phase One.

Yes, You Need a Gun During the Virus Scare..and After

You want to have a gun before you need it.
Advocates of armed defense have been saying that for decades, though recent events underlined their point.
Last month, sentencing reforms in some states effectively decriminalized theft under about $900. We saw stores stripped by flash-mobs of shoplifters.
Police refused to investigate a “misdemeanor” crime even though the total loss may be tens of thousands of dollars.

Those sentencing revisions also let more serious criminals out of jail without bail.
The revolving door of injustice spun pretty fast after that. Last week, some cities let convicted thugs out of jail because of a flu virus. States closed gun shops and promise to arrest you if you leave your home. Police in some cities refuse to respond to theft in progress due to risk from public contact. Yes, you need a gun.. and a lot more.

These recent headlines highlight an obvious fact. These events let us see that we are on our own. If we’re attacked, the police arrive after we’ve gotten to safety, after we’ve made the call to 911, and if law enforcement has personnel available to help us. It is up to us to defend ourselves and those we love until the police arrive.

That realization changed last week, but only by a matter of degree. Now we’re in the middle of a virus scare and police may or may not respond to our calls. Today, law enforcement in many cities are refusing to come to the scene of the crime if the criminal threat is gone. As you’d expect, crime increases when criminals are not pursued, arrested, jailed, charged, and prosecuted. Today, you are at a greater risk, but you were never completely safe.

Many people wanted to believe that they’d be safer if they were unarmed. Our experience with armed citizens says otherwise, and so do the recent headlines. Many people who were only vaguely aware of self-defense now see the need for a personal firearm. I’m sorry, but for many of you it is too late to become armed defenders.

First, you’d need a gun. Some states said that gun shops were “non-essential businesses” so they were told to close their doors. We’ve seen panic buying that emptied store shelves. If you wanted a gun, now you’re too late.

You thought you needed a gun, but you also need a holster, ammunition, and cleaning supplies for that firearm. Some states require a permit before you may buy a gun. Some states also stopped processing those firearms purchase permits. If you’re not ready now, then you’re too late.

You want to protect yourself and your family, but two thirds of aggravated assaults happen away from home. That means that you might need a permit to legally carry a firearm outside your front door as you walk to the mailbox. States that disregard the right of self-defense have stopped processing those concealed carry permits.

The advocates for armed defense have been warning you about these infringements for years, and now you’re too late.

You thought that owning a gun would make you safer, but a firearm is useless without the skills to use it. Fortunately, defending your family from thugs coming up the stairs doesn’t take a lot of skill. Unfortunately, it takes a lot of skill to defend your family from several thugs converging on your family between the parked cars in the grocery store parking lot at night. If you haven’t developed the skill then you’re depending on luck, and there are usually several attackers.

How did you get here? The public receives the public policies for which they voted. Now, you’re paying the price with your family’s safety. I hope you’re one of the lucky ones and no one is hurt.

I like that you want to defend your family. Now defend the right to do so. The right of honest citizens to keep and bear arms should not be infringed. This virus scare will pass, but the infringements on your rights of armed defense will remain.. until you remove them. Don’t wait until November. Secure your rights before you need them. Become politically active now, or the rights you lost will be lost forever.

Iowa State Senator Celsi is a demoncrap. Need I explain more?


Research on firearms contradicts senator; guns used in defense are a deterrent

State Sen. Claire Celsi’s anti-gun column, published in the Register’s community editions on March 17, is filled with distortion.

Her biggest whopper is that “the rate of suicides in the United States is 10 times higher than any other country on Earth.” In fact, the United States annual suicide rate typically ranks in the 30s.

She claims that the proposition that good guys with guns stop crime is a fantasy. In fact, successful defensive use of guns is more common than their use in crime. The National Academies of Science found: “Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence …. Almost all national survey estimates … of annual uses range from about 500,000 to more than 3 million …in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008. … Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was “used” by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies.”

Celsi misleads by lumping together all firearms deaths, as if accidents, homicides and suicides were the same thing, to write that “rates of death from firearms among ages 14 to 17 are now 22.5% higher than motor vehicle-related death rates.”

In fact, an apples-to-apples comparison shows that the 2018 accidental death rate from firearms among ages 14 to 17 is 0.23 per 100,000, while the accidental death rate for motor vehicles for that group is 6.48 per 100,000. The rate of death for firearms accidents among ages 14 to 17 is actually 96% lower than motor vehicle-related accidental deaths rates.

The unintentional firearms fatality rate, now 0.15 per 100,000, has declined over 94% since records began to be kept in 1903. Fatal gun accidents rank as one of the lowest causes of injury.

While the number of privately owned guns increased 92%, from 185 million guns in 1993 to 357 million in 2013, the firearms homicide rate decreased by 49%. Firearms homicides increased from 2015 to 2017, but decreased in 2018, a trend expected to continue for 2019.

There is an increase in suicides, but the problem is far more complex than the presence of firearms. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirmed that, while the number of suicides increased from 1999 to 2014, the percentage of suicides committed with firearms decreased during the same period. Assuming that each of the 24,432 firearm suicides in 2018 involved one firearm per suicide, those 24,332 guns represented less than one-hundredth of 1 percent of the 357 million firearms in America.

As for Celsi’s proposition that “good laws will keep us safer,”  economist John Lott found “stricter gun laws are associated with more total deaths from homicides and suicides.”

If someone living in one of those states with strict gun control laws is so far behind the 8-Ball that they’re trying to buy a gun now, well….stupid is not too mild a word to use about them.


No Cops to Save You, but Too Bad You Couldn’t Get a Gun to Protect Yourself

You might not have wanted a gun before, but now you do. You’ve seen the empty shelves in grocery stores. You read in the news that some police departments are taking longer to respond because of the outbreak of the Wuhan virus.

Some police departments are conserving their resources and only responding to critical incidents in progress. The whole situation sounds unbelievable until you read that unarmed shoppers in California were robbed of their groceries. That is why many people decided they suddenly needed a gun for self-protection. Some gun stores reported a five-fold increase in sales.

The Federal National Instant Background Check system reported processing three times the number of applications compared to a year ago.. if you could get a gun at all. Many citizens who wanted to buy a gun ran into our bizarre gun-control scheme and were disarmed. That wasn’t all they learned.

These gun buyers discovered that buying a gun legally wasn’t as easy as they thought. After you’ve passed your state and federal background checks, then the gun buyer must wait an additional ten days if you’re a resident of California. You’ll wait an additional 14 days if you live in Hawaii. In theory, there is only a six month wait to get a permit to purchase a gun in New Jersey, but New Jersey stopped processing applications. There, the good guys are disarmed by gun-control.

Lots of new gun buyers found out that the mainstream media lied to them. They discovered that you can’t buy a gun online. They found out that democrat politicians lied when they said it is easier to buy a gun than to buy a book. These new gun buyers crashed head-first into the 23 thousand firearms regulations we have in the US. That system isn’t easy for anyone.

In theory, these regulations prevent a known criminal from getting a gun. In practice, the bad guys get their guns the same way they get their drugs; the criminals get their guns illegally. These thousands of regulations disarmed the honest citizen who wants to obey the law.

How does disarming the honest citizens make us safer?
Millions of new gun owners and their families are now asking themselves that very question.
The practice and theory of gun-control are wildly different. Gun control laws are not designed to do what the politicians say they do. Gun-control laws are designed to put a politician in front of a camera while he reads a glowing press release. The politician slaps a wonderful sounding title on more regulations that don’t stop crime any better than the last ink-on-paper did. The news media nods with approval and refuses to ask for evidence that this charade really works. The media stays silent because their job depends on being invited to the next press release.

When this political-theater is presented to us in the news, most of us didn’t ask how gun-control was supposed to keep us safe. For millions of us, that changed last week. Today, more of us are asking that question as the recent wave of want-to-be gun owners were disarmed.

Gun-control has never stopped crime. Gun prohibition was designed to stop you from protecting yourself while pretending to make you safe. Now that you’re threatened, you are supposed to go pay a politician for an exemption, or pay so the police will protect you after you were denied the tools of self-defense.

That scheme is tried and true. It is as old as politicians and prohibition. Many citizens didn’t believe that gun-control worked that way until they saw it with their own eyes.

Now they know.. and so do you.

Arizona gun store owner says he’s ‘never seen anything like’ coronavirus gun sale surge

An Arizona gun store owner says the current surge of gun and ammunition sales amid coronavirus fears is unlike anything he has ever seen and tops the surge that followed the Sandy Hook shooting.

“We’ve never seen anything like this,” Arizona gun store owner Kyle Olsen told Breitbart News, specifically comparing this gun surge to the one following the Sandy Hook tragedy.

Oklahoma gun store owner David Stone echoed Olsen’s comments earlier this week, saying business is “booming.”

“When I say sales have been booming, it’s an understatement,” he said.

“You got to be protected for all sorts of stuff,” he said. “Seems like the world has gone mad.”

Ammo.com, an ammunition seller, reported a 68% increase in gun purchases from Feb. 23 to March 4 compared to the 11 days before that.

report suggested that Asian Americans are buying guns at an increased level due to fears of being blamed for the virus and the need to protect themselves.

“The world has never seen anything like this, and people want to make sure they’re prepared for whatever lies ahead, whether that be food shortages, government shutdown, or worse,” an Ammo.com spokesperson told CNN. “When everything around you is uncertain, having a supply of ammunition can make our customers feel safer.”

Gunfucius say;
He who already have gun and ammo can laugh in face of imperious dictator


Bay Area Closures Point to National Vulnerability on Guns and Ammo

“Bay Area orders ‘shelter in place,’ only essential businesses open in 6 counties,” the San Francisco Chronicle reported Monday. “Businesses that do not provide ‘essential’ services must send workers home. Among those remaining open are grocery stores, pharmacies, restaurants for delivery only and hardware stores.”

What about gun stores?  If we’re talking that which is essential, what is it the Founders deemed “necessary to the security of a free State”? How is that not relevant in this situation that has developed into what we are being told is a national and global state of emergency? We’ve already seen government has been utterly incapable of protecting the populace, and it appears things are only going to get worse and resources more strained. What do we do if civil order collapses, those resources are triaged and most areas are essentially left to fend for themselves?

I sent a copy of the City and County of San Francisco order to a prominent name in the “gun rights” movement with resources to file legal actions and was essentially dismissed when he replied, “since there are no gun stores left in San Francisco it is of no consequence.” I’m not going to name him here because we have enough to tackle without starting another internecine squabble and I suspect he’ll come around. Remember, we’re talking “6 counties” and the Chronicle report notes “the orders…are all similarly worded.”

There are plenty of gun shops in the Bay Area. And they are not specifically deemed “essential,” which means they interpretively fall under the closure order. The thing is, there’s not a lot out there right now to corroborate my opinion coming from either government or “news” sources, so I checked some of the websites and social media accounts for some of the stores listed at the above link.

From U.S. Firearms Company:

“Dear customers, we are CLOSED by order of Santa Clara County due to COVID-19.”

From Reed’s Indoor Range:

“Reed’s will be closed through April 7th. If you have a gun to pick-up, you will receive a call with further information.”

Reed’s also included a link to the Santa Clara County order in their post. See “Section 10.f.” for those businesses declared “essential”:

See anything missing? (Screenshot by D. Codrea)

What this means is, the Bay Area’s anti-gun (in private hands) rulers could be having an eye-rolling feeding frenzy come true and be exploiting the crisis to make sure that citizens who don’t have guns and/or ammunition stay disarmed as it worsens and turns into who knows what?

I put in inquiries to a couple of other places Tuesday night but they have not responded at this writing. I just got off the phone moments ago with one where the clerk confirmed they were affected and who referred me to his manager, who was understandably reluctant to speak to anyone from the media. You can’t blame him, the unfair way these guys are consistently treated. Another store manager, who was not willing to go on the record due to the same reluctance to talk to media, informed me not all stores are closing including his, and that they interpret the order to exclude essential businesses, of which they consider themselves.

That’s the proper and principled attitude to take, but it may not prove to be one that holds up in enforcement actions, especially in the Bay Area, so I called Santa Clara County for clarification. Their rep wouldn’t give me a direct answer and I am now waiting for him to email me a hotline number accessible from out of the area. If this article is posted before I get the information, I will update it when and if I do, but note when he found out what I wanted he couldn’t seem to hang up fast enough (and I subsequently sent them a Facebook message).

And this just in:

But after customers lined up around gun stores in several counties Tuesday — including outside the Bullseye Bishop in San Jose — San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo declared that “gun stores are non-essential.”

While some will no doubt conclude Bay Area constituents are getting just what they voted for, good and hard, we have no real assurances that the same ordered closures will not happen at the national level — especially if we start seeing increased urban violence and Astroturf disarmament zealots, control freak politicians, and the media start screaming.

Case in point, check out what the U.S. Department of Homeland Security considers to be “National Critical Functions”:

“The functions of government and the private sector so vital to the United States that their disruption, corruption, or dysfunction would have a debilitating effect on security, national economic security, national public health or safety, or any combination thereof.”

Anybody see anything in there about the Constitutional Militia, or the right of the people to keep and bear arms?  Will there ever be a time to activate “the Militia of the several States”? Before it’s too late and some of us just say the hell with it and activate ourselves out of raw survival instinct…?

Of course not—the intent is for the populace to turn to a provide-all government interested primarily in maintaining and increasing its power, even when they clearly don’t know what the hell they’re doing and opposing factions are exploiting the crisis for political advantage. That’s especially troubling considering our supposedly “pro-gun” administration is still of the official opinion, even after being publicly petitioned, that “The Second Amendment gives citizens the right to bear arms.”

The marketplace is essential to freedom. Constitutional scholar Edwin Viera Jr. has demonstrated, among other places, in his Motion for Leave to File Brief Amici Curiae to the Supreme Court of the United States in Kolbe v. Hogan:

“This reliance on a permanent private market for firearms guaranteed that most militiamen, through their own efforts, could always obtain firearms suitable for both collective and individual self-defense, and forestalled tyranny by precluding rogue public officials from monopolizing the production, distribution, and possession of firearms.”

The president doesn’t shy away from issuing executive actions on guns when they serve his purposes and he is depending on gun owners to be reelected in November. It would be more than appropriate if he ordered Homeland Security to recognize the need of the people to lawfully obtain guns during national emergencies to the point that a disruption in supply “would have a debilitating effect on security, national economic security, national public health or safety, or any combination thereof.”

Do it, Mr. President.

Unless it’s all been just words and the Second Amendment is now officially deemed “non-essential.”

‘Lets dump hundreds of criminals back on the streets’
And there are still people wondering why the lines at guns stores are as long as they are?


What Could Go Wrong? LA County Releases 600 Inmates to Combat Coronavirus

Sometimes it would be nice to have a curious press.

Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva announced Monday that his department has reduced the jail population “by more than 600 inmates” and that his deputies have been “directed to cite and release people…instead of arresting them,” if their bail would be less than $50,000. He also bragged that “countywide…arrests have dropped from a daily average of 300 to 60.”

Why would we possibly want hundreds of criminals out of jail early and to encourage deputies to NOT arrest people who are breaking the law?

Oh, Wuhan coronavirus.

“Civil rights advocates” are pouncing on the pandemic to bully law enforcement officials (some of whom don’t need to be bullied very hard, unfortunately) to reduce the jail population, “citing concerns about the mayhem a COVID-19 outbreak could create within the prison and immigration detention system, which has been criticized for lacking sufficient capacity to meet inmates’ medical needs even before the pandemic.”

Villanueva has also asked his deputies to assess people they’re going to either arrest or cite and release for symptoms of coronavirus and to obtain medical clearance before booking – a process that can take hours.

Nevertheless, Villanueva seemed pleased that he was “protecting” the criminal population.

“Our population within our jail is a vulnerable population just by virtue of who they are and where they’re located,” Villanueva said Monday at a news conference in downtown L.A. “So we’re protecting that population from potential exposure.”

A curious member of the press might ask Villanueva why the jail population is “vulnerable…by virtue of who they are.” Who are they, exactly? The only thing we know is that they are offenders who had less than 30 days left in jail. No one asked if there was any other qualification for early release, but the ACLU had an idea.

What is “enough,” ACLU? Who gets to decide whether a particular inmate’s “release would not pose a serious physical safety risk to the community,” and what are those guidelines? These individuals are not, as Johns Hopkins epidemiology professor Chris Beyrer (a scientist with a definite political bias) “being detained for not paying a parking fee or because they are poor and can’t make bail.” Since California’s solution to prison overcrowding (despite Kamala Harris’ best efforts) was to jail fewer people instead of building more prisons, no one in California goes to jail for not paying a parking fee.

There are no confirmed cases of coronavirus in LA County jails, though 35 inmates housed in three jail facilities have been quarantined. But no matter. Los Angeles officials have made the city even less safe during a explosive time by releasing hundreds of inmates and publicly proclaiming for all to hear that it’s okay to go forth and commit crimes, because there will be no consequence.

A curious press would ask some real pointed questions of the Sheriff about all of this. Here are a few:

“Is it fair for deputies dealing with a freaked-out public and a massive, mentally unstable, and potentially contagious homeless population to have the additional responsibility of being able to determine a criminal’s potential bail exposure on the spur of the moment so they can decide whether to arrest or to cite and release?”

“Is it reasonable to expect your deputies to assess those they’re arresting for coronavirus symptoms?”

“If your deputies book someone into jail whose bail ends up being under $50,000, or if they book someone who ends up testing positive for coronavirus, are they going to be disciplined?”

“What are the guidelines for releasing someone early?”

“Of the inmates who have been released, can you give us a listing of the crimes they were originally charged with – not what they eventually pleaded to?”

“Is it wise during this time of panic and hoarding to advertise that your department’s default position is to cite and release?”

“You seem pretty proud of protecting criminals, many of whom likely have a record longer than a CVS receipt if they’re actually serving more than 30 days in lockup. Where is your concern for the law-abiding people of your county?”

“When you said the jail population is vulnerable because of ‘who they are,’ what did you mean by that?”

“Are you ensuring that these inmates you’re putting out into the streets actually have a home to go to, or are you simply adding to the homeless population?”

Answers to all of those questions would be nice, but the LA Times reporters obviously didn’t ask them. Instead, they ran a piece with the headline “L.A. County Releasing Some Inmates From jail to Combat Coronavirus,” as if these people are going to pitch in and help people.

It seems that reporters are more eager to find non-existent racist messages within any Republican’s (but especially Donald Trump’s) public comments than they are about finding out finding answers to serious questions about public safety. What’s even worse is that they aren’t even curious enough to have a question.

 

I’ve always wondered why we should be so concerned about the identities of these crap-for-brains idjits. They’re always trying to gain access to and publish the names of people who have CC permits & the like. Why shouldn’t we return the favor?


‘Moms’ members getting spooked about surge of guns/ammo purchases due to COVID-19

No no no!!! This can’t happen! Moms Demand Action members are getting scared!!!! Edited out names and handles to protect their identities:

Their irrational fear of guns/ammo is exactly why they don’t understand WHY people are buying guns and ammo.

Folks are stocking up in order to PROTECT THEMSELVES AND THEIR LOVED ONES from possible looting and people looking to cause havoc during the current situation we all are facing, NOT to “shoot the virus”. These people want everyone defenseless in chaos. The people buying weapons are doing what’s necessary to safeguard their supplies and family, simple as that. More and more people are waking up and realizing it’s what needs to be done during times like this.

Better to be prepared than not to be, don’t you think? I question anyone’s true intentions who disagrees. This will all blow over, but in the meantime, let’s thank CNN, MSNBC, and other MSM outlets for creating a panic and waking some people up and getting them to realize “hey, maybe I should get a gun for protection”.

If your locality is floating the idea of gun bans/gun control due to the hysteria, the NRA put out a fantastic alert.

The majority of U.S. states now have similar laws to prevent state and local officials from using the exercise of their “emergency powers” as a pretext to infringe the right to keep and bear arms. And even in the absence of such laws, the Second Amendment still applies by its own force.
That’s why we are asking gun owners to be alert to any attempt to leverage the fear and uncertainty around the COVID-19 outbreak to assail Second Amendment rights. If you learn of any such attempt, please contact us immediately at nra.orgILA-Contact@nrahq.org, or (800) 392-8683. If possible, please include a link or reference to the proposed bill or rule in question.

Here is the list of Everytown’s/Moms Demand Action’s allied mayors and local governments, and yes, Champaign Illinois (which was in the news recently) is one of them

These people want you to not have the ability to acquire a firearm legally in order to protect yourself during a crisis. Think about that.