Category: Politics

New Mexico: Waiting Period and Firearms Industry Lawsuit Bills on Deck Again in Senate Committee on Wednesday!

House Bill 101 (Semi-Auto Ban & Magazine Limit Bill NOT on House Judiciary Committee Agenda for Wednesday)

On Wednesday, March 8, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold public hearings on two extreme measures that target law-abiding citizens and the firearms industry:

Senate Bill 427 by Sen. Joseph Cervantes (D-Las Cruces), imposes a 14-day waiting period on all firearm purchases, with an exception for concealed handgun licensees. Like House Bill 100, this measure will add nothing to the existing FBI background check process and will only delay your ability to exercise your Second Amendment right to defend yourself, your family and your property. This would make for the longest firearms purchase waiting period in the entire country!  For more information on this proposal, click here.

Senate Bill 428 by Sen. Joseph Cervantes (D-Las Cruces) creates a hostile climate for lawful firearm-related industries and transactions by facilitating an increasing amount of litigation and claims, with vastly increased liability exposure and civil penalties, for even minor suspected violations of the terms of an FFL or the law as the basis for Unfair Trade Practices Act proceedings. For more information on this bill, click here. This legislation was significantly amended in committee; we will report back to you on the impact these changes have on the bill and what action items need to be taken on the measure.

* Make plans to attend the committee hearing via zoom or in-person. The committee will meet at 1:30pm or upon adjournment of the Senate in Room 321 of the Roundhouse.  For public participation and to register for Zoom send an email to SJC.Zoom@nmlegis.gov. Include the bill number, that you’re an opponent and if you will be attending in person or via zoom. To attend meeting via Zoom click the following link:

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81502543362.
Meeting ID: 815 0254 3362
Zoom Call: 1-253-205-0468.

No-permit concealed carry advances in Nebraska Legislature

After years of trying to pass a bill to allow people to carry concealed guns in Nebraska without a permit, conservative lawmakers are on the cusp of doing so, thanks in part to the defection of two Democratic Omaha senators — the only Black lawmakers in the body — who cited racial disparity in enforcing gun laws in their districts.

After three days of debate, lawmakers voted 36-12 Friday to advance the bill. It must survive two more rounds of debate to pass.

While the bill would not usurp the federal requirement for a background check to buy a gun, it would allow people to carry guns hidden in their clothing or vehicle without having to pay for a government permit or take a now-required gun safety course. It also would override stricter gun laws in the state’s cities, including in the state’s largest city of Omaha, which requires a conceal carry license for anyone carrying a gun in a car — even if the gun is in open view.

It’s that Omaha law that spurred Omaha Sens. Justin Wayne and Terrell McKinney to break party ranks and support the bill.

“How many young African American and Latino kinds are affected by Omaha’s gun laws?” asked Wayne on the Senate floor. Young Black people in Omaha are often charged with gun possession violations when a gun that’s not theirs is found in a car they’re riding in, Wayne said.

The practice, known in law enforcement circles as “bumping up,” disproportionally affects people of color, he said.

“When they’re talking about bumping up kids in Omaha, they’re not talking about kids in Bennington,” Wayne said, referring to the overwhelmingly white bedroom community north of Omaha. “They’re not talking about kids in western Nebraska.”

McKinney said the creation of early gun control laws in the U.S. “was out of fear of Black people.”

“I’m not going to sit here and not try to fight for my community,” he said. “The police don’t care about Black people.”

Sen. Tom Brewer of Gordon — the bill’s conservative sponsor who has tried since 2017 to pass it — backed McKinney’s comments, citing colonial American laws that criminalized arming Native Americans. Brewer is an Oglala Lakota Tribe member and Nebraska’s only Native American lawmaker.

Currently, 25 other states have so-called constitutional carry laws that allow people to carry concealed guns without a permit. Last month, the Republican-controlled South Carolina House voted to pass that state’s own constitutional carry bill.

The Nebraska bill is opposed by the cities of Omaha and Lincoln, where the majority of gun violence occurs, and their police chiefs, who have said the measure will make their cities less safe.

Nebraska already allows gun owners to carry firearms in public view, as long as they don’t have a criminal record that bars them from possessing one and aren’t in a place — including churches, courthouses and private businesses — where guns are prohibited. To legally conceal the gun, Nebraskans are required to submit to a Nebraska State Patrol background check, get fingerprinted and take a gun safety course at their own expense.

Most bills need 33 votes to pass in Nebraska’s unique one-house Legislature. There are currently 17 Democratic lawmakers in the officially nonpartisan body — enough to successfully filibuster most bills if they all vote together.

But two other Democrats joined Wayne and McKinney in voting for the permitless conceal carry bill, including Omaha Sen. Mike McDonnell, a former Omaha firefighter union president who switched to support the measure after the Omaha police union pulled its objection to the bill. Democratic Sen. Lynne Walz, of Fremont, abstained from voting.

A spokesperson for Republican Gov. Jim Pillen’s office said Friday that the governor supports the bill and would sign it into law if it passes.

Gov. DeSantis Says He’d Like Open Carry Added to Constitutional Carry Bill

On Thursday, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) told Gun Owners of America (GOA) that he would like to see open carry added to the constitutional carry legislation currently making its way through the Florida legislature.

GOA’s Luis Valdes asked DeSantis if he would support open carry being added to the constitutional carry legislation, the Tampa Bay Times reported.

DeSantis responded, “Yeah, absolutely.”

He added, “I don’t think they’re going to do it, but I would absolutely.”

The Times noted that DeSantis spokesman Bryan Griffin did not address the GOA recording but stressed that DeSantis hopes to sign constitutional carry into law.

Griffin also observed that DeSantis referenced constitutional carry in August 2022, which is when the governor noted, “It really requires the Legislature to get it to my desk.”

Breitbart News noted that constitutional carry legislation is currently on the move in Florida, Nebraska, and South Carolina. The legislation in Florida is focused on permitless concealed carry while the legislation in Nebraska and South Carolina focuses on open or concealed.

There are currently 25 constitutional carry states in the Union. Those 25 are: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

Proposed Tennessee bill would expand concealed carry law to include all firearms

CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. (WTVC) — A new bill in the Tennessee legislature wants to change concealed carry laws throughout the state to include all firearms.

But opponents, including the Tennessee Highway Patrol, are saying the expansion is concerning for law enforcement.

House Bill 1005 seeks to change the reference from “handgun” to simply “firearm,” allowing citizens to publicly carry semi-automatic weapons.

The proposed change raise questions about criminality versus civil liberties.

Currently it is legal to carry a handgun through the streets in Tennessee.

However, this bill could change that, making it legal to carry any firearm with a permit.

“I don’t want him (motions to child) having to, you know, walk around see who’s carrying guns all over the place,” said Patrick Blackwell.

Blackwell says he worries about the example this bill could set for his child if it becomes law.

During the subcommittee meeting lawmakers say it would also include AK 47s.

“I’m reading this bill, and this would allow any individual to carry an AK 47 out front of a building and up and down Broadway. Am reading that correctly?” asked Rep. Bill Beck.

“Yes sir.”

The bills sponsor, state Rep. Rusty Grills says this would provide Tennesseans with their right to bear arms and defend themselves.

“It’s our job as legislators, in my opinion, to make sure that every Tennessean’s constitutional rights are protected,” says Grills.

But some members of law enforcement, aren’t a fan of the bill.

“The idea of someone being able to carry any kind of rifle or high capacity is a concern for law enforcement. How do we address them? They walk in this building, we’re charged with protecting it,” said Colonel Matt Perry.

Supporters of the change say the guns would still need to be purchased legally.

But that’s the problem, according to some lawmakers.

“I think that’s part of the challenge in this bill is that law enforcement will not know who has legally purchased a weapon, who has illegally purchased a weapon, if it’s an automatic or if it’s semiautomatic, if it has been modified, if it has not been modified,” says Rep. Antonio Parkinson.

WTVC asked Tennessee residents their opinion.

“I think it creates more fear and incites more fear than it offers protection,” says Kat Wright.

But David Ramsey has a different outlook on the bill.

“When you are in a place where they’re more gun friendly, you’re going to think twice before you commit a crime if you know, half the people there could be carrying a gun,” says Ramsey.

The bill recently passed through the civil justice subcommittee and is scheduled for discussion in the full committee on March first. The Senate bill hasn’t made any progress yet.

Of continuing interest to Shootists

New Mexico: Significant Action Expected on Gun Control Bills in Santa Fe on Monday!

The New Mexico House of Representatives could vote as early as Monday on HB 100 by Rep. Andrea Romero (D-Santa Fe), legislation imposing a mandatory 14-day waiting period on all firearm purchases. Contrary to the author’s claims, this legislation will not “enhance” the existing FBI background check process in any way; it will only delay your ability to exercise your Second Amendment right to defend yourself, your family and your property. Criminals do not adhere to a “cooling off” period. Please contact your State Representative and urge him or her to OPPOSE HB 100.

On Monday, February 27, the Senate Judiciary Committee will meet at 1:30pm (or after the Senate floor ends), in Room 321 of the Roundhouse to consider two anti-gun bills: SB 171 by Sen. Bill Soules (D-Las Cruces), legislation that attempts to supersede federal law and make it a FELONY to manufacture, sell, transfer, or acquire a firearm sound suppressor and other National Firearms Act items, as well as certain semi-automatic pistols, and House Bill 9 by Rep. Pamela Herndon (D-ABQ), a bill that creates back-door storage requirements by imposing criminal penalties on gun owners if a third-party minor accesses and displays, brandishes or injures someone with their firearm. Please make plans to attend the committee hearing in-person or via zoom to show your opposition to Senate Bill 171 and House Bill 9.

For public participation and to register for Zoom, send email to SJC.Zoom@nmlegis.gov. Include bill number, proponent or opponent, and if you will be attending in person or via zoom.

To attend meeting via Zoom click the following link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81502543362.
Meeting ID: 815 0254 3362
Zoom Call: 1-253-205-0468

Refer to www.nmlegis.gov “What’s Happening” for the Senate Judiciary Committee Procedures. 

Contact members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and urge them to OPPOSE SB 171 and HB 9. 

Also on Monday, February 27, the House Government, Elections & Indian Affairs Committee will meet at 8:30am, in Room 305, to consider SB 44 by Sen. Peter Wirth (D-Santa Fe), a measure banning the carrying of firearms within 100ft of any polling locations on Election Day or during early voting, even by concealed handgun licensees. These new “gun-free” zones apply not only to voters, but also to customers or patrons of shopping centers and stores that serve as polling locations. Please make plans to attend the committee hearing in-person or via zoom to show your opposition to Senate Bill 44.

You are invited to a Zoom webinar.

When: Feb 27, 2023 08:30 AM Mountain Time (US and Canada)
Topic: House Government, Elections, & Indian Affairs
Please click the link below to join the webinar: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81850374006
One tap mobile : US: +12532050468,,81850374006# or +12532158782,,81850374006# Webinar ID: 818 5037 4006

Contact members of the House Government, Election & Indian Affairs Committee.

New proposed bill introduces gun training for some Illinois politicians

CHAMPAIGN, Ill. (WCCU) — Two Illinois state senators recently reintroduced a state bill that would require some Illinois politicians to undergo gun safety training.

State Senator Neil Anderson, (R) IL 47th, reintroduced Senate Bill 2106, and State Senator Andrew Chesney, (R) IL 45th, has since co-sponsored the bill.

The bill would mandate any member of the General Assembly who wants to introduce a bill “pertaining to a firearm” to complete firearm training requirements under the Firearm Concealed Carry Act, range safety officer training, and a basic knowledge test of firearms.

Chesney says that their goal with this bill is to have those from a different perspective understand what they are trying to regulate.

“What we’ve seen when it involves second amendment regulations is that those that are proposing this don’t normally have the training to regulate it,” said Chesney. “So you start to see things that in our view are unconstitutional and maybe out of step with perhaps how the majority of people feel on the particular topic.”

Anderson said he actually introduced this bill four years ago, but re-submitted it recently as he’s seen a lot of gun misinformation.

“My ask with this legislation is that if you’re going to introduce a piece of anti-gun legislation, you should at least have the equivalent of a conceal carry permit to show that you have some knowledge of firearms,” explained Anderson.

Although Anderson doesn’t suspect this bill will pass, he hopes its introduction will bring “more common sense” to the firearm conversation.

Who Are the Real Extremists?
America’s vast lawful gun culture is the norm today, as it has long been, not the infringement inherent in gun-control activists’ dystopian worldview.

In December of 2022, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) confirmed that the state of Florida will soon improve the concealed-carry permitting system it has had in place since 1987 by adopting constitutional carry as well. In so doing, Florida would become the 26th state to get out of the way of the peoples’ right to “bear arms.” If this happens, in just a few decades, the United States will have gone from having one state with a permitless carry system in place (Vermont) to having a majority of states with permitless carry systems in place.

To those who follow this area of the law, the news that Florida is moving to add itself to the constitutional-carry list should be entirely unsurprising. Historically, Florida has often been a trailblazer in pursuit of the restoration of the Second Amendment, but, in this case, it has fallen behind the times. Indeed, to take a look at a map of constitutional-carry states is to notice that Florida is effectively surrounded. In the last few years, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas and West Virginia and have all made the switch, and they were preceded by so many other states that it is now possible to drive from Georgia to Arizona (via Montana) without ever leaving a state that hasn’t eliminated its permitting requirement.

But here’s a peculiar thing: If, for whatever reason, you were to have followed Florida’s wholly unexceptional plan solely via the mainstream press, you’d have a hard time learning any of this. Instead, you’d “know” all sorts of other things—things that, on closer inspection, turn out to be flatly false. Specifically, you’d end up thinking that Florida’s decision represented a dramatic departure from the norm. You’d end up thinking that Florida’s governor—and its legislature—were full of wild-eyed extremists. You’d end up thinking that states that abolish their permitting requirement become more dangerous as a result. Hell, if you availed yourself of the more-hysterical coverage, you might even end up worried that there were bound to be shootouts in the streets as a result of this change.

Don’t take my word for it; try it yourself. Pick up your phone, type the words “Florida constitutional carry” into Google and peruse the news articles that come up. Note the language that is used as a matter of routine: “extreme,” “dangerous,” “unsafe,” “radical.” Count the number of times that the uninformed opinion of the author is laundered through the phrase “experts say.” Observe the non-sequiturs and the lies; in particular, note the pretense that constitutional carry means that criminals are able to carry firearms with impunity, or that all regulations have been abolished. Consider how many times you are informed, as an aside, that the Second Amendment has been misinterpreted, or that it was never supposed to apply to individuals in the first instance. It’s remarkable.

It’s typical, too. Increasingly, stories about gun laws in America resemble dispatches from an alternate universe—one in which the Second Amendment does not mean what it says; in which the advent of “shall-issue” concealed carry never happened; in which permitless carry remains a fringe and untested idea; in which the massive increase in the number of concealed carriers coincided with an increase, rather than a precipitous drop, in crime; in which gun ownership remains the preserve of a handful of white men; and in which states such as Texas and Georgia, rather than states such as California and New York, are the outliers.

Contrast the manner in which the press habitually treats the gun laws of, say, Illinois or New Jersey, to how they treat the gun laws of, say, Arizona or Maine. If one were to take these various descriptions at face value, one would be forgiven for concluding that Illinois and New Jersey were “normal,” while Arizona and Maine represented outliers. But that is entirely false. Continue reading “”

Murphy Leads 47 Senators to Reintroduce Background Check Expansion Act

WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) led 47 senators, including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) on Thursday in reintroducing the Background Check Expansion Act to expand federal background checks to all gun sales. Although more than 90 percent of Americans support comprehensive background checks, under current federal law, unlicensed or private sellers are not required to conduct a background check prior to transferring a firearm. Research indicates that as many as a quarter of all gun sales in the United States may occur without a background check. U.S. Representatives Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) introduced the companion legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives.

The Background Check Expansion Act will require background checks for the sale or transfer of all firearms. This requirement extends to all unlicensed sellers, whether they do business online, at gun shows, or out of their home. Exceptions to the Background Check Expansion Act include transfers between law enforcement officers, temporarily loaning firearms for hunting and sporting events, providing firearms as gifts to immediate family members, transferring a firearm as part of an inheritance, or temporarily transferring a firearm for immediate self-defense.

Continue reading “”

North Carolina: Pro-2A Measures Pass House, State Senate

The North Carolina Senate voted 29-19 to pass Senate Bill 41, a bill that recognizes law-abiding citizens’ right to self-defense while attending a church with a school attached and, also, repeals the redundant permit-to-purchase system. The House passed, House Bill 49, a similar pro-self-defense bill to Senate Bill 41, by a vote of 77-43. Garnishing bipartisan support in the House for the self-defense bill indicates a potential override of any veto by Governor Roy Cooper, who vetoed similar legislation in 2021 and 2020.

NRA-ILA thanks the Senate leadership of Senator Danny Britt, Senator Jim Perry, Senator Warren Daniel, Senator Phil Berger, and others for fighting to protect the rights of North Carolina’s law-abiding citizens.  Also, on the House side, NRA-ILA thanks Speaker Tim Moore and Representative Jeff McNeely for their tireless efforts to advance Second Amendment freedom in the Tar Heel State.

Senate Bill 41 enables law-abiding citizens who hold a concealed handgun permit to carry a handgun to defend themselves and their loved ones when attending religious worship taking place on private property that is both a school and a place of worship, if it does not prohibit firearms. This empowers private property owners to set their own security policy, rather than the state imposing a one-size-fits-all solution. In 2019, an armed citizen in Texas defended his church against an individual. This worshiper, Jack Wilson, was able to take action because of similar NRA-backed legislation in Texas

The permit-to-purchase system was created before modern, computerized background checks existed. The federal NICS checks that licensed firearms dealers conduct are often completed in minutes. Repealing the permit-to-purchase a firearm ensures that law-abiding citizens can exercise their Second Amendment rights without this unnecessary obstacle and fee that is also a burden on law-enforcement resources.

North Carolina House passes gun bill with bipartisan support

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — North Carolina House Republicans and some Democrats passed a previously vetoed gun bill Wednesday that opponents warn could endanger children and teachers.

The House voted 77-43 to approve the measure, which would let people with concealed weapons permits carry openly or under clothing while attending religious services at locations where private or charter schools also meet.

Six Democrats joined all Republicans in voting for it, indicating a potential override of any veto by Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper, who blocked an identical bill in 2021.

Republican lawmakers and several clergy members testified this week that the houses of worship in question do not have an equal opportunity to protect congregants, compared with churches that do not house schools and are not affected by blanket prohibitions.

Supporters said gun-free religious sites could be easy targets for violent attacks, citing recent incidents of shooters targeting congregations.

Rep. Jeff McNeely, an Iredell County Republican and the bill’s primary sponsor, said the proposal would fix a loophole preventing some churchgoers from exercising their Second Amendment rights.

“They should be able to protect their selves like all other parishioners do at other churches who do not have schools on their grounds,” he said.

Under the bill, guns would not be permitted on campus during school hours or when students are present for extracurricular activities. Houses of worship could opt out by posting signs banning guns from the property.

Democratic opponents of the measure said gun owners might not understand those restrictions or could accidentally leave their weapons on campus.

“What I don’t want to see happen is a lawful gun owner leaving their gun in the classroom on a Sunday after church and that gun being found by a student on a Monday,” Rep. Terry Brown Jr., a Mecklenburg County Democrat, said during floor debate.

Another previously vetoed House bill that could receive a floor vote this week would eliminate a longstanding requirement that handgun buyers first obtain a permit from their county sheriff.

Also Wednesday, a House judiciary committee advanced a bipartisan proposal that would launch a two-year education campaign on safe firearms storage and also distribute free gun locks. It now heads to the Rules Committee.

In the Senate, three identical companion bills were combined Tuesday into a single piece of legislation that is expected to reach the floor this week. It is unclear whether the Senate will take up the stand-alone bill passed by the House or move forward with its combined proposal.

 

BLUF
Until gun-control activists and Democrat politicians are willing to get tough on violent criminals that use firearms I’ll be waiting, along with millions of law-abiding Americans, for that conversation that Representative Slotkin promises.  And I’ll be praying this nightmare will stop.

Right on script, gun control activists use Michigan State University attack to further their agenda

An almost unthinkable tragedy unfolded on the campus of Michigan State University last night. Shots rang out on campus as a 43-year old man (Bearing Arms is not naming the alleged perpetrator), believed to have no affiliation with the university, walked onto campus and as of the publishing of this article, killed 3 students and wounded 5. We make no apology for our prayers for these victims and their families. For them, a nightmare has just begun. As they awaken from that nightmare, they will want to know what happened and why.

The investigation is underway, the killer left a note near his lifeless body, a victim of his own cowardice, he took his life moments after the massacre.

 

As if an off-camera director of this nightmare yelled “action!”, gun control activists and Democrat politicians have already come out for calls to stop these campus attacks. Last night, before much was known about the attack, the assailant or the victims, perennial grifter Shannon Watts was already doing a fundraising dance on the memories of the victims. Her tweet tirade included this call for more gun control and an appeal to text her organization to join with them and joining them means acquiescing to their never-ending fundraising pleas.

Democratic Congresswoman Elissa Slotkin was justifiably angry. In a press conference with members of law enforcement and Michigan Governor Whitmer she said, “I am filled with rage.” She continued, “you either care about protecting kids, or you don’t…Please don’t tell me you care about the safety of children if you are not willing to have a conversation about keeping them safe in a place that should be a sanctuary.”

Unfortunately, it’s Democrats who refuse to engage in conversation, preferring it would seem to pass unconstitutional gun control measures, in defiance of recent rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court, and despite mounting evidence that the gun control measures they back, would have little to no impact on these attacks or in reducing overall gun violence. Why won’t they have an impact? Because they target law-abiding Americans, not the criminals responsible for most gun crimes.

Continue reading “”

Why all of a sudden this comes out now? The demoncrap PTB are stabbing SloJoe in the back to so he can be forced to not run for re-election. so Goobernor Newsome can.

Jim Biden admitted he was hired to negotiate with Saudis over a secret $140 million deal ‘because of his position and relationship’ to his VP brother Joe — who would be ‘instrumental to the deal,’ bombshell affidavit claims.

President Biden’s brother was hired to engage in secret negotiations with the Saudi government on behalf of a US construction company because of his relationship with the then vice president, legal documents claim.

Jim Biden was selected because Saudi Arabia ‘would not dare stiff the brother of the Vice-President who would be instrumental to the deal,’  bombshell affidavits obtained by DailyMail.com allege.

Joe’s younger brother Jim, 73, was at the center of a $140 million settlement negotiation between Hill International and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 2012.

According to the documents, Jim told a former senior US Treasury official working as a private investigator that he was hired to negotiate with the Saudis ‘because of his position and relationship’ to VP Joe Biden – who led delegations to Saudi Arabia at the time.

Continue reading “”

Will Oklahoma lawmakers increase firearm access? More than 100 bills are seeking just that

One bill would allow guns in parked cars on school property. Another wants to expand access to a firearm while on a boat. And one proposal would increase the area in which a person can reasonably discharge their gun in self-defense.

Four years after Oklahoma’s Republican Legislature approved “permitless carry,” removing any training or licensing requirements to handle a firearm, lawmakers have filed more than 100 bills to expand gun access even further.

With a history of being the first to pass some pro-firearm laws, including the nation’s first ban on “red flag” laws in 2020, Oklahoma’s Legislature often provides a glimpse of what gun-related policies will be a focus for gun rights groups across the nation.

“We try to be ahead of the curve in Oklahoma,” said Don Spencer, leader of the Oklahoma Second Amendment Association, a local organization that aggressively pushes for pro-gun laws.

“Right now, the big focus is on pushing back on federal government overreach or getting ahead of it, which I think you will see a lot more of.”

House Bill 1002 would allow county sheriffs to arrest federal employees who enforce laws that are “counter” to the Second Amendment, while House Bill 2643 would make Oklahoma-made firearms exempt from federal gun laws.

Those bills have not yet been scheduled for a committee hearing, but they would likely face legal challenges if passed into law.

The politics of pushing back on federal firearm restrictions are already in play in some parts of the state, including in Oklahoma and Logan counties where sheriffs recently said they would not enforce U.S. Department of Justice rulings against some gun accessories.

Continue reading “”

Virginia: House Subcommittee Voted Down Senate Anti-Gun Bills

Last week, the House Judiciary Subcommittee killed the remaining anti-Second Amendment bills. Despite efforts from the anti-gun majority in the Senate to restrict your rights, no gun control bills have advanced. The following bills were voted down by the Subcommittee:

Senate Bill 918 bans selling or carrying many firearms and magazines that law-abiding citizens commonly own for legitimate purposes, such as self-defense, competition, and recreation, with no exemption for carry permit holders.

Senate Bill 1139 requires anyone with firearms in the same residence as a minor under 18 years of age, to store them unloaded in locked containers, and store ammunition in separate locked containers. Loaded firearms may only be stored in “biometric storage device[s].” There is an exemption for firearms carried on or about the person.

Senate Bill 1181 essentially ends the centuries-old practice of manufacturing firearms for personal use by restricting certain unregulated components commonly used by hobbyists to make their own firearms, far beyond what federal law requires.

Senate Bill 1382 bans many commonly-owned firearms and magazines. Owners of banned firearms and magazines that are at least 21 years of age may continue to keep them, but they cannot sell them. Also, SB 1382 discriminates against young adults aged 18-20 by prohibiting them from purchasing many types of commonly-owned firearms.

BLUF:
Congress is not likely to ban anything, leaving Biden and his anti-gun allies frustrated, while gun rights organizations, including SAF and CCRKBA continue using the Bruen doctrine to push back against restrictive gun control laws, which history may ultimately show should never have been passed in the first place.

CBS Report Details ‘Bruen’ Impact on Restrictive Gun Control Schemes

U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- A lengthy CBS News report on the impact of last summer’s Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen indicates lingering angst among gun control proponents now faced with the daunting challenge of justifying restrictive gun laws when they may not be “consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

In the first paragraph, CBS acknowledges, “the new legal test laid out by Justice Clarence Thomas in his majority opinion has reshaped the legal landscape for firearms laws and led to uncertainty over whether measures that aim to curb gun violence can survive legal scrutiny.”

  • SAF filed a federal lawsuit challenging the recently-signed Illinois gun ban legislation, alleging it to be unconstitutional and asserting the state has criminalized “a common and important means of self-defense.” The case is known as Harrel v. Raoul.
  • SAF filed an amended complaint in its challenge of New Jersey’s revised gun permit law, adding one plaintiff and expanding its scope on so-called “sensitive places.” The case is now known as Koons v. Platkin. The case was previously known as Koons v. Reynolds. SAF was already granted a temporary restraining order by U.S. District Judge Renee Marie Bumb in Camden in that case.
  • SAF and its partners in a federal case challenging the federal prohibition on handgun sales to young adults ages 18-20 filed a reply brief supporting their motion for summary judgment in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia. SAF is joined in this case by the West Virginia Citizens Defense League and two private citizens Benjamin Weekley and Steven Brown. The case is known as Brown v. ATF.

Continue reading “”

New Mexico House narrowly passes firearm storage bill

SANTA FE — Bennie Hargrove’s twin sisters started middle school afraid to get out of the car.

Their older brother, then 13, was shot and killed 1 1/2 years ago by a Washington Middle School classmate, police say, who’d taken a handgun from home.

The family’s story was among those shared Thursday as New Mexico lawmakers passed a bill that would make it a crime, in some circumstances, to store a firearm in a way that allows a child to get it.

The House endorsed the legislation on a 37-32 vote, sending it to the Senate. Some Democrats crossed party lines to join Republicans against the bill.

“This bill is about keeping children safe,” Rep. Pamelya Herndon, D-Albuquerque, said, alluding to Bennie’s death. “We had two minors. One had access to a gun and one is dead.”

The measure triggered a combative three-hour debate in the House as Republican legislators contended the bill inappropriately targeted law-abiding gun owners. They also expressed frustration as Herndon wouldn’t offer a “yes” or “no” answer to some questions.

Rep. Stefani Lord, R-Sandia Park, said the language in the bill was too vague to give gun owners an understanding of what conduct would be illegal. She added that it could endanger someone who needs quick access to a firearm for protection.

“It’s not fair to the survivors of domestic violence who fear for their life,” Lord said.

Rep. Bill Rehm, an Albuquerque Republican and retired law enforcement officer, said the bill is particularly problematic for police officers. He said he “didn’t put up my gun” after coming home from work but that his children knew never to touch it.

“For us to legislate how the rest of the responsible citizens of the city must act because of an irresponsible person is not good policy,” Rehm said.

The proposal, House Bill 9, would make it a crime to store a firearm in a way that negligently disregards the ability of a minor to access it.

Criminal charges could be brought only if the minor later brandishes or displays the firearm in a threatening way or uses it to kill or injure someone.

It includes some exceptions to intended to protect good-faith efforts to safely store a firearm.

Adult gun owners, for example, couldn’t be charged if they’d stored the firearm in a secure container or other place a reasonable person would believe is secure; the firearm was locked and inoperable; the minor broke into the home; or the gun was used in self-defense.

Continue reading “”

MARYLAND LAWMAKERS WANT SCI-FI TECHNOLOGY TO TRACK YOUR GUNS IN REAL TIME

By Larry Keane

Someone needs to figure out what in the wide world of dystopian Buck Rogers in the 25th Century sci-fi fantasy world is going on in Maryland’s legislature. Antigun lawmakers there are advancing legislation that would require firearm manufacturers to attach RFID trackers to each and every firearm so government officials could track their whereabouts at all times.

Not only is this a clear invasion of privacy rights and Constitutional protections against illegal search-and-seizure, this is an idea that’s not even technologically possible. This is the stuff of Hollywood – and antigun politicians that don’t understand the first thing about firearms or manufacturing processes.

Maryland’s Delegate Pam Queen introduced HB 704, a bill titled, “Firearms – Tracking Technology.” The bill’s description reads:

Prohibiting a person from engaging in a certain bulk firearm transfer unless each firearm that is part of the transfer contains a certain embedded tracker; requiring a seller or other transferor who engages in a bulk firearm transfer to transmit to the Secretary of State Police certain information; providing that a violation of the Act is a civil offense and subject to a fine of up to $2500; and requiring the Secretary to establish a certain database to store information about each bulk firearm transfer in the State.

The “embedded tracker” would be required to be fixed to the firearm frame or receiver, emit unique tracking information and not be readily capable of being removed, disabled or destroyed without rendering the firearm inoperable or destroying the frame or receiver. To be clear, Delegate Queen would require that embedded tracker to emit this unique information to Maryland’s State Police for permanent storage in a state-run database. Anyone not complying with this is subject to $2,500 in fines.

Big Brother Would Watch

What this bill does would be nothing short of state authorities peering into an individual’s gun safe. The state would also know when and where a firearm would be moved – whether that’s for hunting, a day at the range target shooting or when and where an individual is legally carrying a firearm for licensed concealed carry. This bill would require firearm manufacturers to create and include these trackers on firearms. Those exercising their Constitutional right to keep and bear arms would be required to forfeit their Fourth Amendment Constitutional right to privacy and their right protecting them from illegal search-and-seizure, since the state would automatically collect and store this information in real time. This legislation would also call into question Fourteenth and Fifth Amendment protections of Due Process, since it requires the government to collect information on Americans simply exercising their Second Amendment rights. And this legislation would have a chilling effect on the exercise of Second Amendment rights as Marylanders would be less likely to lawfully purchase a firearm to avoid the invasion of privacy.

That’s not even taking into consideration the technological hurdles that would be required to meet this requirement. Makers of so-called “smart guns,” or authorized-user technology that is supposed to allow owners to fire guns through the use of RFID emitters, fingerprint recognition or passcodes or other technology, haven’t been able to produce a safe and reliable model. The Obama administration made this a priority and the Department of Justice (DOJ) couldn’t identify a working prototype that was capable of testing.

Impossible Technology

Continue reading “”

WHAT YOU DIDN’T HEAR IN THE STATE OF THE UNION SPEECH ABOUT CRATERING GUN CONTROL SUPPORT

Those tuning in to watch President Biden’s State of the Union address saw and heard a few things when he entered the U.S. House of Representatives to address Congress and the nation. There is a new Speaker of the House – Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.). He was seated next to Vice President Kamala Harris, a visual reminder of the divided government. Military generals and U.S. Supreme Court justices were in attendance, along with Members of Congress and senators.

President Biden banged the usual drum demanding to renew the Assault Weapons Ban. That’s the law he along with U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) ushered in in 1994 and President Bill Clinton signed into law that banned the sale of Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs). That ban expired in 2004 and the semiautomatic rifle has since become the most-popular selling centerfire rifle in America – with over 24.4 million in circulation today.

President Biden scolded Congress for not sending him legislation to renew this unconstitutional ban on these commonly-owned commonly-used rifles. Never mind that the U.S. Supreme Court made clear in the Heller, McDonald and Bruen decisions that any such ban is unconstitutional.

What President Biden didn’t tell the American public – and won’t – is what the rest of America is saying about any proposed ban. Over half the country doesn’t want it, according to a recent poll by ABC News/Washington Post.

Continue reading “”