Category: Politics

CCRKBA SAYS GARCIA VICTORY WAS WARNING TO ANTI-GUN LOBBY

BELLEVUE, WA – The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms today congratulated Republican Congressman-elect Mike Garcia for winning election over anti-gun-rights Democrat Christy Smith, and said the victory should serve as a warning to the gun prohibition lobby that their big bucks spending effort to fill Congress with anti-gunners is in trouble.

“There is a message in Mike Garcia’s victory,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “You can be a conservative, pro-Second Amendment candidate and win in California, a state dominated politically by anti-gun Democrats, in the legislature and governor’s office in Sacramento, and within the delegation to Capitol Hill.

“Smith’s campaign was supported by the gun control lobby,” he continued, “but dollars don’t vote, people do. And people are getting tired of far-left politics that trample on fundamental rights, especially the Second Amendment.

“Evidently,” Gottlieb observed, “the gun control crowd learned nothing from Michael Bloomberg’s disastrous presidential campaign, which revolved around his extremist gun control agenda. He spent more than $300 million and finished last, and that was among Democrat primary voters, nobody else. Now Bloomberg’s Everytown is planning to spend $60 million to flip Congress and state legislatures this fall, electing more anti-gunners.

“Garcia won on a campaign promoting American values, including the Second Amendment,” he added. “Those ideals seem foreign to the gun ban bunch, which thinks the constitution is for sale to people with the most money. Garcia’s victory this week proves otherwise, and it’s a warning that gun control is not the winning proposition far-left Democrats think it is.

“Garcia’s victory is also a message to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, that her party’s gun grabbing agenda could cost them the House this fall,” Gottlieb stated. “She couldn’t even protect a Democrat seat in her own state, which should raise alarms with vulnerable Democrats in other districts all over the country.

“And Joe Biden should also be worried,” Gottlieb concluded, “because his anti-gun-rights agenda is not going to play well in the critical battleground states, where voters are tired of being attacked by politicians like Biden who want to take away their rights.”

MI: Capitol Commission to Discuss Firearms in the Capitol on Monday!

U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)-On Monday, May 11 at 11 am, the Michigan Capitol Commission will meet to discuss the possession of firearms in the Capitol and on Capitol Square.  While the meeting notice does not state the Commission will consider banning firearms specifically, this will likely drive the discussion.  Please contact the members of the Commission and respectfully urge them not to prohibit the exercise of a constitutionally protected right by law-abiding citizens on property open to the public.

Michigan law on this matter is clear.  Local units of government are prohibited from restricting firearm possession in public.  Michigan’s firearm preemption law states in full:

“[a] local unit of government shall not impose special taxation on, enact or enforce any ordinance or regulation pertaining to, or regulate in any other manner the ownership, registration, purchase, sale, transfer, transportation, or possession of pistols, other firearms, or pneumatic guns, ammunition for pistols or other firearms, or components of pistols or other firearms, except as otherwise provided by federal law or a law of this state.”

Again, please contact members of the Michigan Capitol Commission before the Monday meeting and respectfully urge them to recognize the right of law-abiding gun owners to carry a firearm for self-defense and to oppose any restriction on the carrying of firearms in the Capitol or on Capitol Square.

May 11 meeting  agenda: http://capitol.michigan.gov/Content/Files/AgendaMay112020.pdf

Capitol Commission Contact information  can be found here: http://capitol.michigan.gov/ContactCommission

 

Louisiana: House Committee to Hear Pro-Second Amendment Bills Next Week

Next Wednesday at 1:00pm, the House Administration of Criminal Justice Committee is scheduled to hear four pro-gun bills that will benefit law-abiding gun owners in the Sportsman’s Paradise.

House Bill 746 allows those who lawfully possess a firearm to carry concealed for self-defense during a mandatory evacuation under a declared state of emergency or disaster.

House Bill 781 establishes that firearms and ammunition manufacturers, distributors, wholesalers, suppliers, and retailers are “Essential Businesses” that shall not be prohibited from conducting business during a declared disaster or emergency.  HB 781 further prevents law-abiding gun owners’ rights from being infringed during proclaimed curfews.

House Bill 140 prevents local authorities and municipalities from imposing restrictions to prohibit the possession of a firearm.  Preemption legislation is designed to stop municipalities from creating a patchwork of different laws that turn a law-abiding citizen into a criminal for simply crossing a jurisdictional line.

House Bill 334 authorizes a concealed handgun permit holder to carry a concealed handgun in a church, synagogue, mosque, or other similar place of worship.

Gun legislation added to massive public safety bill

Debate on a public safety omnibus bill that reached the [Missouri] House floor Tuesday focused heavily on gun legislation, as lawmakers proposed amendments that focus on preserving Second Amendment rights and eliminating many “gun-free zones” in Missouri.

As the penultimate week of the 2020 legislative session ramped up, lawmakers continued the end-of-session trend of adding as many amendments to bills as possible in the hopes that some of their legislation will become law.

Along with the gun amendments, many other changes to Senate Bill 600, a public safety omnibus bill, were proposed. These amendments covered a wide range of topics, including reducing Fentanyl trafficking, permitting EMTs in Missouri to honor out-of-state Do Not Resuscitate orders, allowing Missourians to kill feral hogs and more. But the proposed gun legislation sparked the most heated debate among lawmakers.

Second Amendment Preservation Act

A bill known as the Second Amendment Preservation Act, which had a whopping 86 co-sponsors, was the fourth amendment proposed to the public safety bill. The bill didn’t make it to the floor on its own, but Rep. Jered Taylor, R-Republic, said the omnibus public safety bill was “the perfect vehicle” to get it made into law.

“This bill is a pro-law enforcement bill that protects law enforcement by not requiring them to enforce federal gun laws,” Taylor said. “They still could be enforced by federal agents; we just wouldn’t be doing it on a state level.”

Rep. Lane Roberts, R-Joplin, was one of two Republicans who said they have strong support for the Second Amendment with hesitations about the bill, which also proposed penalties for police officers who decide to enforce federal gun laws.

“You will note that (the bill) creates an untenable position for police officers. It creates a conflict with their oath of office, and it essentially throws them under the bus and makes them the whipping children for this issue,” Roberts said.

Roberts also took issue with the penalties officers can face if they uphold federal gun laws.

“They can be civilly sued. They can be personally liable. They lose their license. They can be prohibited from being a police officer for the rest of their natural-born days,” Roberts said. “What has that got to do with protection of the Second Amendment?”

He also noted that asking local law enforcement not to enforce federal laws could create tensions with the federal agencies Missourians rely on and need to cooperate with.

Taylor responded by pointing out that he had dozens of co-sponsors on the bill and that current and former law enforcement officers have testified in support of the bill in the past.

“You know, the guys on the streets — the ones who are actually enforcing the laws — who would be forced to be the ones to go do the knocking and the seizure of AR-15s and AK-47s,” Taylor said. “They’re the ones that I’m trying to protect. And they’re the ones that say, ‘Absolutely, we need this.’”

Rep. Sara Walsh, R-Ashland, spoke in strong support of the bill, saying constituents have come up to her in the grocery store asking her to support it.

As the debate on the Second Amendment Preservation Act amendment came to a close, Rep. Tony Lovasco, R-O’Fallon, added an amendment to the amendment that legalized the possession of brass knuckles. As a whole, the new amendment was adopted.

Eliminating gun-free zones

Taylor also proposed an amendment to the public safety bill that would eliminate many of Missouri’s “gun-free zones,” or allow private property owners to determine whether to allow guns on the premises.

Gun-free zones are areas where firearms are prohibited with or without a permit. The bill would remove some areas from that category, including churches, bars and amusement parks. Those institutions could decide their own policies.

Taylor said mass shootings often happen in gun-free zones because people know they can carry out an attack without being stopped in a rapid fashion.

“There’s not going to be anyone there to be able to defend themselves or their family if the need were to arise,” Taylor said. He added that it takes law enforcement time to respond and said the gun-free zones make people “easy targets.”

The debate on the amendment was heated at times, but, ultimately, the elimination of gun-free zones amendment was also adopted into the public safety omnibus bill.

Laws concerning possession are a form of ‘prior restraint’ and as we have seen, are useless. It’s not what you’ve got that should matter, it’s what you do with what you’ve got that should.

---

MISSOURI HOUSE PASSES AMENDMENT LEGALIZING BRASS KNUCKLES

Lawmakers approved an amendment to a current law that if passed by Senate and signed into law, would legalize knuckles, more commonly known as ‘brass knuckles’.

The amendment that was passed is part of a larger Public Safety bill, that will be voted on by the House Chamber in the future.

It was first introduced in January by Republican Representative Tony Lovasco.

Documents from the House Session on May 5 says if signed into law, people with concealed carry permits, a valid concealed carry endorsement issued before August 28, 2013, or a concealed carry endorsement or permit issues by another state in their name can legally carry knuckles, with similar exceptions to those who are permitted to carry a firearm.

KTTS News reached out to Rep. Lovasco and this was his response.

The measure was added as an amendment during the perfection process of an omnibus “public safety” bill (SB 600). My amendment removes criminal penalties for possession of “knuckles”, and regulates the carry of them in a similar way to concealed firearms.

The amendment was accepted by the House, however SB 600 as a whole has not yet received a final vote from the chamber.

As to why I offered the amendment, I did so because it’s absurd to me that the mere possession of a piece of metal with some holes in it could result in criminal charges. There are plenty of existing statues that properly prohibit the inappropriate use of these products, and banning them entirely is unproductive and outside the proper role of government.

Regarding the timing, I brought it up during a discussion on another amendment dealing with federal gun laws and the place that personal defense has within the “public safety” category the bill was ostensibly about. Unfortunately, the omnibus SB 600 also contains measures contrary to criminal justice reform and limited government principles and that I cannot support. My effort to add decriminalization of knuckles to the bill was an effort to minimally improve a very troubled piece of legislation.”
–Rep. Tony Lovasco, District 64

A new one by Charles C.W. Cooke, editor of National Review.

---

 

Freedom Is An Issue That Stirs Voters

The American gun-control movement has long insisted that public opinion is firmly on its side, and that its aims are thwarted not by their political unpopularity but by the obstinacy of a handful of over-powerful players. What happened in Virginia at the beginning of this year demonstrates once again that this claim of public support is flatly untrue.

By now, we are well-accustomed to hearing that “Republicans!” or “the NRA!” or “extremists!” have hijacked our elections and set about destroying the prospect of meaningful “gun-safety” reforms in the United States. But, if that is true, what should we make of Virginia’s failure to push through the gun ban that the governor and others had so confidently promised?

Certainly, one cannot blame the Republican party, which fared so poorly during the last set of state elections that the Democrats were left in charge of every branch of state government. Nor can one blame the country’s pro-Second Amendment advocacy groups, which, as usual, were outspent in the state. And one cannot claim with a straight face that the Democrats did not care enough about the issue, given that they campaigned on imposing new restrictions, promised after they won that they would impose new restrictions and, at the first opportunity, tried to impose new restrictions. Could it be, perhaps, that when push comes to shove, limiting the right to keep and bear arms is a losing proposition in America?

The scale of the reaction in Virginia suggests the answer is “yes.” Gov. Ralph Northam and the Democratic legislature insisted they were going to prohibit the sale of the most-commonly owned rifle in the United States and ban and confiscate standard-capacity magazines. In return, the people of Virginia insisted they were going to do no such thing. Six cities and 91 out of the state’s 95 counties passed resolutions declaring themselves Second Amendment “sanctuaries.” In Richmond, NRA-ILA organized lobby day, where more than 2000 members met with lawmakers to voice their opposition to new gun laws. A week later a rally against the proposals drew more than 22,000 peaceful protestors. And the letters and phone calls flew in by the day. Eventually, the legislature backed down—first by pretending to water down the proposals in a number of entirely meaningless and wholly unconvincing ways, and then by pulling bills before they got out of committee.

At the heart of the gun-control movement lies a terrible misconception as to who American gun-owners are—a misconception that explains a great deal about our debates over the Second Amendment and helps to explicate what happened in Virginia. In the gun-control activists’ imagination, meaningful support for the right to keep and bear arms is a fringe phenomenon, present only among society’s oddballs and outliers, and gun owners are a small, rural, homogeneous and dangerous minority.

In reality, that support exists across the spectrum. Why? Because gun owners are half of the country. Electricians are gun owners. Bankers are gun owners. Teachers are gun owners. Stay-at-home moms are gun owners. Your neighbors are gun owners. They may be quiet about it most of the time, but, when the government tries to strip them of their elementary rights in the name of protecting them, they will break that silence in an instant and stand up to say “no.” In Virginia, it looked for a while as if all the chips had fallen in the wrong place. For the first time in decades, the Democrat Party not only controlled the entire State government, but it seemed determined to use its power to infringe upon the Second Amendment. The game was up, we were told.

And then, it lost its central attempt at a gun ban and possible confiscation.

What happened? You happened. I happened. “We the People” happened. Not today, Virginia.