Support for Second Amendment Sanctuaries Grows as Virginia Democrats Push Gun Control
Counties and Cities Throughout Virginia Established Second Amendment Sanctuaries in Response to Gun Control Measures. Will Indiana Follow Suit?

Liberal calls for stricter gun legislation and increasing concerns that the Federal government will infringe on Americans’ Constitutional right to own a firearm are prompting conservative citizens to take action on the local level.

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

The Founders’ language seems clear, yet liberal anti-gun activists consistently argue that their interpretation of the Second Amendment empowers them to pass and enforce oppressive gun legislation that hinders the individual’s right to carry and own the firearm of his or her choice. As a result, support for the establishment of Second Amendment sanctuaries as an effective countermeasure to the gun control movement is on the rise.

The establishment of Second Amendment sanctuaries unofficially began in the state of Virginia, where a Democrat-controlled state government previously attempted to confiscate its citizens’ guns, prompting multiple counties and cities to push back and assert they would impede and resist the state’s attempts enforce unconstitutional gun laws against lawful citizens.

Taking a cue from Virginia, Second Amendment sanctuaries were quickly established in an astonishing number of counties and cities across the country.

Score another one for the Constitution. The freedom of the individual had persevered once again, and liberals now had a new grievance to scream at the sky.

As far as the state of Virginia was concerned, the matter appeared settled. But with liberals, nothing is ever settled – except for the science of global warming, apparently.

Now the Democrats have regained control of the Virginia state legislature, Governor “blackface” Northam has announced intentions to reintroduce restrictive gun measures in the upcoming legislative sessions.

WIBC’s Hammer and Nigel spoke with “Gun Guy” Guy Relford about the renewed push for gun control measures in the state of Virginia, the challenge and potential legal consequences of Second Amendment sanctuaries, and why Hoosiers are unlikely to see the establishment of Second Amendment sanctuaries in counties and cities throughout the state of Indiana.

Giuliani Claims He’s ‘More Of A Jew’ Than George Soros: Liberals Freak (But He’s Right). 

And he never worked with Nazis to confiscate Jewish property

In the latest issue of New York Magazine, former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani said he was more of a Jew than George Soros. While it is true that Soros is a Jew by birth and the former may is Catholic, there is truth to what he is saying. After all, Rudy is a good friend of the Jews, and Soros is what is commonly called a self-hating Jew (I call him a Jew-hating Jew because he doesn’t hate himself).

“Don’t tell me I’m anti-Semitic if I oppose him,” he said. “Soros is hardly a Jew. I’m more of a Jew than Soros is. I probably know more about — he doesn’t go to church, he doesn’t go to religion — synagogue. He doesn’t belong to a synagogue, he doesn’t support Israel, he’s an enemy of Israel. He’s elected eight anarchist DA’s in the United States. He’s a horrible human being.”

When CNN reported about Giuliani’s statement, it emphasized that Soros was a holocaust survivor–true. They were trying to infer that because he was a Holocaust survivor doesn’t mean he is pro-Jewish and Jewish caused today. They also reported the ADL’s Jonathan Greenblatt said Giuliani’s attack on Soros was anti-Semitic. However, despite its mission for the past decade, or so, the ADL’s first priority has been progressivism and the Democratic Party. That is why I recommend that donors to the ADL give to  StopAntisemitism.org instead, or if they wish to give to the Democratic Party, send the money directly and cut out the middleman.

Virginia’s Second Amendment attack

Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam apologized for his medical school blackface stunt, but he will have much more to apologize for if he signs into law a bill that attacks Virginia residents’ Second Amendment rights.

The measure is Senate Bill 16, which would ban “assault” firearms and certain firearm magazines.

Since Democrats have seized control of Virginia’s General Assembly, they are likely to push hard for strict gun control laws. Those laws will have zero impact on Virginia’s criminals and a heavy impact on Virginia’s law-abiding residents who own, or intend to own, semiautomatic weapons for hunting or their protection.

As a friend once explained to me, “I carry a gun because I can’t carry a cop.”

I am proud of my fellow Virginians’ response to the attack on their Second Amendment rights. Firearm owners in the state have joined with sheriffs to form Second Amendment sanctuary counties. That means local authorities will be required to protect Second Amendment rights in the face of any attempt by Virginia’s General Assembly to abrogate those rights.

Eighty-six counties – over 90 percent – in the Virginia commonwealth have adopted Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions. Spotsylvania County’s Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to approve a resolution declaring that county police will not enforce state-level gun laws that violate Second Amendment rights.

Sheriff Chad Cubbage said, “Be it be known that the Page Sheriff hereby declares Page County, Virginia, as a ‘Second Amendment Sanctuary,’ and that the Page County Sheriff hereby declares its intent to oppose any infringement on the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.”

Culpeper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins made a vow during a Board of Supervisors meeting, where the board unanimously agreed to declare the county a Second Amendment constitutional county, to “properly screen and deputize thousands of our law-abiding citizens to protect their constitutional right to own firearms.”

In an attempt to appease residents’ resistance, Northam suggested there would be a ban on only the sales of semiautomatic rifles. He would allow gun owners to keep their current AR-15s and similar rifles as long as they registered them. Otherwise, they must surrender the rifles.

I’d urge Virginians not to fall for the registration trick. Knowing who owns what weapons is the first step to confiscation. Northam further warned, “If we have constitutional laws on the books, and law enforcement officers are not enforcing those laws on the books, then there are going to be consequences, but I’ll cross that bridge if and when we get to it.”

Some Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill say that local police who do not enforce gun control laws should face prosecution and even threats of the use of the National Guard.

Virginians must heed the words and capture the spirit of their two most distinguished residents, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, who wrote the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions. These resolutions referred to the federal government, but are just as applicable to state governments in principle.

They said: “Resolved, That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government … and whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force.”

Too many Americans view the Second Amendment as granting Americans the right to own firearms to go hunting and for self-protection. But the framers of our Constitution had no such intent in mind. James Madison, in Federalist Paper No. 46 wrote that the Constitution preserves “the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation … [where] the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”

Thomas Jefferson wrote: “What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.”

Similar quotations about our Founders’ desire for Americans to be armed against the possible abuses of government can be found at https://walterewilliams.com/quotations/arms/.

Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University.

 

What We Learned from the Bloomberg Effect in Virginia

There is a lot we can learn from the recent elections in Virginia. Democrats now hold the majority in both houses of the legislature, the offices of Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General and Secretary of state.

To touch the obvious highpoints-

  • Money talks. When your local representative is elected to office because billionaire Michael Bloomberg bought his victory, then the representative doesn’t speak for you. He speaks for Bloomberg.
  • Politicians who take large campaign contributions can propose disastrous laws so long as the contributions continue. Bloomberg’s political contributions becomes essential while the local results of legislation becomes superfluous.
  • News outlets accept money to run campaign advertisements. Beyond their personal biases, the media’s commercial incentives further distort their ability to report honestly on an election.
  • Big-government politicians in both parties want more government so that political payoffs continue. These politicians have no use for limited government and free citizens.

All elections have consequences. Unusual elections have unusual consequences. Even before they took office, the Virginia Democrats advanced Bloomberg’s agenda.

  • Virginia Democrats proposed to outlaw zoning for new single-family homes and thus to punish the people who live outside the dense urban centers that make up the core Democrat constituency. Living in your own home is now racist.
  • Virginia Democrats proposed to disarm honest citizens in and near the state capital. Democrats don’t trust the people who elected them.
  • Virginia Democrats proposed to disarm adults under 21 years of age. That means you could be a young police officer and carry a gun when you’re on duty, you could also be old enough to be married and have children, but you wouldn’t be old enough to buy a gun to protect your family when you’re off duty. Only a true believer thinks that makes sense.
  • Democrats proposed to outlaw firearms in common use for the last hundred years. In the name of “freedom and democracy”, they want to outlaw the tools that gave us our freedom and democracy. Honest gun owners across the state said they would not comply. Police officers and Sheriff’s deputies also said they would not comply.
  • Virginia Democrats proposed to illegally use the National Guard to go door to door and forcibly confiscate firearms from honest gun owners. That is how you start a civil war.

If gun control laws in other states are a guide, then these gun prohibition laws would not apply to the legislators themselves. If I’m wrong and the laws apply equally to our rulers, then Bloomberg’s money can buy a full time security detail for every Democrat legislature and their family.

You, on the other hand, are on your own.

The publicly stated rationale is that these power-grabs are for “the public good” and to reduce “gun violence”. If this bigotry against gun owners runs true to form, then in the name of public safety we’ll ask the police to disarm honest citizens who are less danger to the public than the police. In the name of public safety, we’ll establish more “gun free zones” where criminals hunt for disarmed victims. The mainstream media will publish the gun-prohibition talking-points but ignore that crime has fallen while gun ownership has soared.

There is some good news as well. Today, we have the alternative media and it is harder than ever to fool all the people all the time. Unfortunately, you still have to get off the couch to vote once you’re informed about the issues.

Today, we have the alternative media and it is harder than ever to fool all the people all the time.

Talking points are easy and progress is hard. Actions to reduce urban violence would be to reverse Democrat regulation and let industry make more jobs. We’d stop the government programs that destroy our families. We’d end the disastrous drug-prohibition laws that turn our Democrat-controlled cities into war zones as immigrant drug gangs fight for turf. That won’t happen because this contest is about political power rather than being about violence or prosperity.

Prohibition is a foolish and dangerous quest. I’d respect billionaire Bloomberg if he tackled our ruinous drug prohibition scheme, but instead, Bloomberg chose to assaults our individual right of self defense. Drug lords would probably attack Bloomberg if he tried to make drugs legal. I think Bloomberg judged that honest gun owners in the US were safer scapegoats for failed Democrat policies. I hope a wise judge will stop Bloomberg’s foolishness before too many of us are hurt or killed.

On the plus side for liberty, billionaire Bloomberg created a hundred thousand activists who might change the next elections in Virginia. Looking across the state, there were over 90 meetings to establish second-amendment sanctuaries in December. 112 local governments voted to ignore unconstitutional infringements on the right to bear arms.

2A Sanctuary in Virginia

We’ve seen the second-amendment sanctuary movement spread into other states. Why don’t you go to your county board and start a sanctuary county where you live.

1775…again?

When people desperately trying to avoid a fight are left no choice but to fight, they are often the fiercest fighters imaginable.

The reason being an explosion of righteous anger – of berserker fury – directed at the bullies who will not leave them be.

Governor “Coonman” Northam of Virginia is such a bully.

He intends to rescind the current, ancient and long-acknowledged legal right of Virginians who aren’t criminals to possess more than single shot rifles and pistols – by criminalizing anyone who does possess them. These newly minted “criminals” will then be required to turn in their formerly legal firearms to the government or be subject to Hut! Hut! Hutting! by armed government workers sent by the Coonman to enforce his criminal acts.

This is a recipe for 1775.

Another bully – Thomas Gage, the British military governor of Massachusetts – attempted a “Coonman” in that year, which lit the fuse of what became the Revolutionary War. He sent armed government workers – Redcoats – to confiscate the weapons of the colonists – who had finally had their fill of being bullied. These long-ago AGWs eventually gunned down several colonists on the village green at Lexington.

Word of the massacre spread and the people rose in response, fighting back with whatever means available, harrying the column of armed government workers as it made its way back toward Boston, some 18 miles away.

The fury incited by that long-ago “Coonman” was subsequently described by himself:

“These people show a spirit and conduct against us they never showed against the French . . . They are now spirited up by a rage and enthusiasm as great as ever people were possessed of and you must proceed in earnest or give the business up. A small body acting in one spot will not avail, you must have large armies making diversions on different sides, to divide their force. The loss we have sustained is greater than we can bear. Small armies cannot afford such losses, especially when the advantage gained tends to do little more than the gaining of a post.”

Eight years later, those furious colonists finally succeeded in getting the bullies off their backs – permanently.

They probably never imagined that homegrown bullies even worse than “Coonman” Gage would eventually arise to torment them.

The current “Coonman” may not realize just how very tired the people are of being bullied – and how willing they are to fight, if a fight is forced upon them.

The “Coonman” feels confident. He has the full weight and force of the government and all its means at his disposal. He has legions of armed government workers available to enforce his writ.

But he hasn’t got the fury – and that is something he ought to reckon with, before it it is too late.

If this thing starts, it will not end until one or the other side is no longer capable of fighting. It will be no-quarter-given. It will be awful.

But it will be righteous.

And it may be necessary.

 

Signature Gathering to Repeal Gun Control Measure Turns Ugly in WA

An ambitious grassroots effort to repeal a gun control initiative passed by Washington State voters in 2018 allegedly turned ugly over the weekend when one of the highest profile volunteer signature gatherers was apparently the victim of verbal attacks by two different men outside a major sporting goods outlet, when both of them made remarks that could be interpreted as threats.

Jane Milhans, a veteran rights activist, certified firearms instructor and president of the Tacoma Rifle & Revolver Club—who also is a home invasion survivor—told liberty Park Press one of the men actually asked her, “Do you want me to shoot your now, or later?”

According to Milhans, when two other volunteers confronted the man a few minutes later, he apparently denied making the statement and drove away.

Apparently the police were not called.

West Milford NJ Declares Itself A ‘2nd Amendment Sanctuary’

WEST MILFORD, NJ – West Milford has become one of the first towns in New Jersey to declare itself a “sanctuary” for law-abiding gun owners.

A non-binding resolution, which was approved unanimously on Dec. 4 by the township council, designates the Passaic County community a “Second Amendment/lawful gun owner sanctuary township.”

Click here to read the full resolution.

According to the resolution, the township opposes gun control, “gun safety” legislation, and “red flag laws,” whether state, federal or local. It also “opposes further interference with, or abridging of, the rights of lawful gun owners.”

West Milford, the resolution says, “supports the rights of lawful gun owners to lawfully use firearms; to defend themselves, their loved ones and other innocents; to lawfully hunt to provide sustenance for their families; and to lawfully participate in shooting sports up to and including Olympic sports.”

It also criticizes “red flag laws” that have been adopted by more than a dozen states, including New Jersey.

“Gun control laws, including a plethora of current proposed legislation, are not evidence-based legislation called “gun safety” legislation or ‘Red Flag Laws,’ factually have nothing to do with teaching or promoting the safe and lawful use of firearms,” the resolution said.

Rachel Alexander: Liberals Want Sanctuary Cities? We’ll Have Second Amendment Sanctuary Cities.

You’ve heard of sanctuary cities. Sounds great, doesn’t it? Cities that protect people. But who do they protect? Illegal immigrants from deportation or prosecution. They ignore federal immigration law. These cities undermine the federal effort to protect our country by guarding our borders.

But here’s a twist. Now cities and counties declare themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries. Conservatives have taken a page out of the progressive playbook. Localities pass resolutions vowing not to enforce gun control laws that violate the Second Amendment. They believe that many laws violate the Constitution’s clear language.

And increasing numbers pass these. It’s become a serious movement. Over 80 counties and cities across Virginia have adopted them. Because you now what? If the lawless progressives can do it, so can Constitution-loving conservatives.

 

Danger and Opportunity in 2020

The year 2020 is going to rank as a very important one for Second Amendment supporters. The 2020 elections are going to be very high stakes. Then, there is that Supreme Court case heard earlier this month. That means that 2020 poses the potential for great danger and yet, there could also be great opportunities with regards to our rights.

The elections have obvious dangers and opportunities. The election, of course, risks seeing pro-Second Amendment lawmakers voted out. On the flip side, they can also be the chance to replace anti-Second Amendment lawmakers. If Second Amendment supporters are successful in the latter, then changes to bring things closer to the ideal become much more achievable.

The biggest prize in the 2020 election is, of course, the presidency. Donald Trump has largely been a supporter of the Second Amendment and has appointed pro-Second Amendment judges to the appellate courts. Take a good look at the front-runners to replace him. Joe BidenElizabeth WarrenBernie SandersPete Buttigieg, and Michael Bloombergare all hostile to our Second Amendment rights – and all plan to push an anti-Second Amendment agenda.

But the danger doesn’t just come from the usual laws we hear about. Several of these contenders have expressed support for a national popular vote to replace the Electoral College, including Warren and Buttigieg. All would appoint anti-Second Amendment judges. Some of these contenders have promised worse.

In the case of Elizabeth Warren, it is the weaponization of the IRS against pro-Second Amendment organizations. Oh, she says it is just the National Rifle Association, but when she has argued that the failure of gun control to pass is due to “corruption,” then could other pro-Second Amendment groups be far behind? This would be in addition to very onerous “reform” of campaign finance laws – and you can bet they would be rigging the rules to the detriment of Second Amendment supporters.

Buttigieg is no better, even as he tries to take a more moderate tone. He was an early supporter of packing the Supreme Court with as many as six new justices. How do you think those justices would rule on anti-gun legislation? Or, for that matter, on campaign finance reform? It would not be good for either the First or Second Amendments.

Yet with these dangers come opportunities. The extreme agendas that some of these candidates are pushing will make many Americans recoil. We are already seeing this in Virginia, as the initial steps of effective civil disobedience are in full swing. Already, anti-Second Amendment extremists are backing off a total ban on modern multi-purpose semiautomatic firearms.

In addition, the election will bring opportunities as well – a chance to return pro-Second Amendment leadership to the House of Representatives, a chance to add to a pro-Second Amendment majority in the Senate, a chance to get more pro-Second Amendment state lawmakers, a chance for pro-Second Amendment governors, and most importantly, returning President Trump to the White House for four more years.

With Trump coming back, and a pro-Second Amendment Senate, the continued confirmation of pro-Second Amendment federal judges would continue to reshape the courts.

These are dangerous times for our First and Second Amendment rights. However, these times are also a great chance to change the political landscape in a manner that will advance the cause of freedom. Whether 2020 will be remembered for danger or opportunity is up to us.

Second Amendment Sanctuary Movement Spreads To Kentucky.

The Second Amendment Sanctuary movement isn’t just sweeping the state of Virginia, though it’s certainly getting the most attention thanks to the sheer number of counties, cities, and towns that have adopted resolutions in advance of Governor Ralph Northam’s anti-gun agenda seeing action in the state legislature next month.

Remember, this movement actually began in Illinois in 2018 before spreading west to Washington State, Oregon, Colorado, and New Mexico. In recent months we’ve seen more Second Amendment sanctuaries take root in Texas, Florida, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and even New Jersey. Now several counties in Kentucky are leading the charge in their state………..

Will other counties in Kentucky hop on the 2A Sanctuary bandwagon? Given the amount of support we’ve seen for the movement in Virginia and eastern Tennessee, I would be shocked if the movement didn’t take off in the Bluegrass State. Expect more counties to follow the lead of Harlan and Marshall counties over the next few months.

Five More Texas Counties Pass ‘Second Amendment Sanctuary’ Resolutions

Something, something, rookie numbers, Texas

Update: The piece has been updated to reflect additional counties that were found to have adopted Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions since the time of publishing.

The commissioners’ courts in Navarro, Brown, Coleman, McCulloch, and Titus counties all unanimously voted in favor of a resolution to become Second Amendment “sanctuaries” on Monday.

“I’ve had a lot of citizens ask me about this,” said Eddie Moore, a Navarro county commissioner, “and there have been eleven counties prior to us to do this in the state of Texas. And this basically shows the commissioners’ court and the county’s support for the right to keep and bear arms, and that we will not allow county funds or county personnel to assist in the infringement of those rights.”

Moore told The Texan that he had been working on introducing and passing the resolution for about a month and a half, around the time when the movement in Texas started gaining traction.

According to Brownwood News, Brown County Judge Paul Lilly could not attend the meeting, but expressed his support for the resolution, saying, “The Second Amendment is, to a degree, the amendment that guarantees all the others. Firearms in the hands of responsible adults help assure our way of life. For this reason I am a staunch supporter of the second amendment and welcome Brown County becoming a Second Amendment sanctuary county. I couldn’t be more proud.”

While mostly in rural areas, over a tenth of all counties in Texas have passed the resolution that the local governments will not “authorize or appropriate government funds or resources” to enforce “unconstitutional” firearm restrictions.

A 2A Sanctuary State

Thanks to the work of the Virginia Citizens Defense League most everyone is now familiar with Second Amendment sanctuary cities and counties. As of yesterday, there are now 101 sanctuary cities and counties.

This is all good and well but what if you had an entire 2A sanctuary state.

It should be noted that cities and counties are creatures of the state. Under Dillon’s Rule, they only have the power to act when given an express grant by the state or if it could be implied from there. Thus, a state can take power away from local governments or even dissolve them but the converse isn’t true.

Rep. David Hardin (R-86), Assistant Majority Whip of the Oklahoma House of Representatives, has pre-filed a bill that would make Oklahoma a Second Amendment state. HB 2781 or Second Amendment Preservation Act would ban any Oklahoma state or local official from enforcing any Federal law, act, executive order, court order, etc. that would infringe on the right to keep and bear arms.

According to the Tenth Amendment Center, the bill has a very detailed definition of infringement that includes:

  • taxes and fees on firearms, firearm accessories or ammunition that would have a chilling effect on firearms ownership;
  • registration and tracking schemes applied to firearms, firearm accessories or ammunition that would have a chilling effect;
  • any act forbidding the possession, ownership, or use or transfer of a firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition by law-abiding citizens;
  • any act ordering the confiscation of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition from law-abiding citizens.

The bill allows civil suits against any one who violates the law and knowingly violated a person’s right to keep and bear arms. Very interestingly, the bill would remove sovereign immunity as an affirmative defense in such suits. (Section 7.C.)

The bill also includes provisions that would apply to federal agents who knowingly enforce or attempt to enforce any of the infringing acts identified in the law, or who give material aid and support to such enforcement efforts.

Under the proposed law, they would “be permanently ineligible to serve as a law enforcement officer or to supervise law enforcement officers for the state or any political subdivision of the state.” This would also apply to state or local law enforcement agents working with federal task forces or deputized by federal agencies.

In other words, Oklahoma law enforcement officers who cooperate with the feds in a violation of a person’s right to keep and bear arms would lose their jobs and never be able to work in Oklahoma law enforcement again, and federal agents could not work in Oklahoma law enforcement.

As the Supreme Court has ruled in Printz v. US, the Federal government cannot force state law enforcement officials to implement or enforce Federal laws. This is known as the doctrine of anti-commandeering.

While the Federal government cannot force state and local law enforcement to enforce Federal law, it can engage in partnerships with them to do so. A prime example of this would be requests from ICE to local law enforcement to hold illegal aliens who are arrested for other reasons until such time as they can be remanded to Federal custody. Likewise, for any Federal gun control law to be effective, it needs the help of state and local law enforcement.

I don’t know the likelihood of this bill passing the Oklahoma State Legislature. However, given the sponsor is part of the Republican leadership, this is more likely than if introduced by some freshman back bencher. I will keep you updated.

Government Funded ‘Gun Violence’ Research Is Really Political Propaganda

On Monday, House and Senate negotiators announced a deal where $25 million in taxpayer funds will be spent on gun violence research, $12.5 million is earmarked exclusively for public health researchers. If history is any guide, but of the rest will also end up going to public health researchers.

Headlines claimed: “Congress reaches deal to fund gun violence research for first time in decades.” The funding described as “a major win for Democrats.” While that may sound like a good idea at first glance, it wouldn’t do anything to reduce gun violence in our country.

It should go without saying that everyone opposes gun violence. But it’s important to take effective measures to deal with this problem and not simply take actions that sound appealing but won’t really save lives.

The idea behind the research funding is to have medical professionals apply tools they developed to study cancer, heart disease and other diseases and use them to study crime, accidental death and suicide. But to state the obvious, gun violence and diseases are two very different things.

The National Rifle Association – regularly demonized in the media and by many Democrats – has been blamed for preventing academics from doing research on firearms. So supporters of the spending to research gun violence as a public health issue say their bill is needed to stop the NRA from blocking vital research that will save lives.

But there’s a big problem with the argument: it’s not true.

Opponents of the Second Amendment who are eager to impose as many restrictions as possible on firearms falsely claim that a measure enacted in 1996 called the Dickey Amendment – named after former Rep. Jay Dickey, (R-AR) – barred research on gun violence to be funded by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

But in reality, here is what the reviled Dickey Amendment states: “None of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be used to “advocate or promote gun control.”

The point of that plain language is to say CDC-funded research is fine. CDC advocacy is not. So despite what gun-control zealots say, objective research based on facts is allowed under the Dickey Amendment.

The amendment came in response to top CDC officials advocating various gun control laws, such as prohibiting people from carrying concealed handguns.

Mayors Against Illegal Guns falsely claimed in a 2013 report that as a result of the Dickey Amendment “academic publishing on firearm violence fell by 60 percent between 1996 and 2010.”

But the mayors’ group measured something different: firearms research in medical journals as a percentage of all medical research.

There was no decrease in either the total number of papers or pages devoted to firearms research. But with whole new fields of medicine being developed, there was an explosion of published medical studies in other areas.

In fact, between 2011 and 2016, firearms research in medical journals has increased more than five-fold and even more since then, as former New York City Mayor and multi-billionaire Michael Bloomberg has poured untold tens of millions of dollars into the effort.

Virginia’s Second Amendment Sanctuaries: An Update

Last week I wrote about the spread of Virginia’s “Second Amendment sanctuaries” — counties, towns, and cities that vow not to enforce state gun laws they deem unconstitutional, in the wake of the Democrats’ taking control of the state government. There are a few new developments worth noting.

For starters, the sanctuaries have spread dramatically. They’re up to 93 jurisdictions — covering roughly 40 percent of the population, by my quick spreadsheet tally. That’s huge, though the biggest victory, in Prince William County, is likely to be overturned when the county board flips to the Democrats, and some of these places have passed vague resolutions in support of the Constitution rather than the more aggressive language proposed by the Virginia Citizens Defense League.

As I noted in my previous piece, these resolutions have limited legal effect; local governments are basically subordinate to state governments. But defiance like this can put political pressure on moderate Democrats — and, failing that, can force the state government to either (A) take drastic action to stamp out resistance or (B) give up and let these places refuse to enforce new gun laws, possibly ramping up state-police activity there as a replacement.

On the politics, it’s worth noting that the state Democrats have already caved on confiscating “assault weapons,” modifying a bill so that it would still ban sales going forward but would require current owners to register their guns rather than turning them in.

It’s also worth comparing this map of sanctuaries:

. . . with this one of Virginia senate districts. (Click here to see the interactive version via the Virginia Public Access Project; I chose the senate because it’s much closer politically than the house.)

If an area is blue in both maps, it’s both a sanctuary and represented by a Democrat, suggesting a senator who might experience this movement as pressure from home. Such places do exist, though often the sanctuary jurisdictions make up only a minority of the Democratic district’s population. (See, e.g., districts 1821, and 25.) However, the senate is split 21–19, so it doesn’t take a lot of side-switching to stop a bill.

Finally, on how the Democrats will respond in the event they pass new gun laws and many local law-enforcement agencies refuse to enforce them, the governor has threatened “consequences,” and other Virginia Democrats have floated everything from prosecutions of local authorities, to cutting off state funds, to National Guard deployment.

Fun times.

Referring back to:

New Inspector General Report Reveals Scandalous Lying by Obama Administration About Afghanistan War

Revealed: Hunter Biden ‘Possession of Controlled Substance’ Charge Kept Under Wraps While Father Led Drug War From Senate

Joe Biden’s son Hunter was arrested on Jersey Shore drug charges in 1988 and had his record expunged at a time when his father was pushing for the incarceration of drug offenders drawn disproportionately from minority groups.

Congressional records reveal that Hunter Biden, now 49, was arrested in Stone Harbor, New Jersey, where the Biden family has often holidayed over the years, in June 1988. Hunter Biden, then 18, had just graduated from the prestigious Archmere Academy prep school, which his father had also attended. The former vice president and his wife Jill have often been spotted on trips to Stone Harbor.

The arrest has not previously been reported. Republicans have recently highlighted Hunter Biden’s drug abuse, questioning why it was not taken into account when the lobbyist was appointed to a $50,000-a-month post on the board of the Ukraine oil company Burisma in 2014, when his father, as vice president, was the Obama administration’s lead official on Ukraine.

A year after the arrest, Joe Biden gave a speech in which he said the federal government needed to “hold every drug user accountable” because, “If there were no drug users, there would be no appetite for drugs, there would be no market for them.” He neglected to mention the drug use in his own family.

Virginia Dems Cave on Confiscation as 2A Sanctuaries Expand
Gun-rights groups unsatisfied with concession, vow to fight on

Virginia Democratic leaders abandoned their gun confiscation proposal Monday following a grassroots outpouring of opposition to gun control across the state.

Governor Ralph Northam (D.) and incoming Senate majority leader Dick Saslaw (D.) said they will no longer pursue their marquee plan to ban the possession of “assault weapons.” Instead, they will include a provision to allow Virginians to keep the firearms they already own. The reversal comes before the newly elected Democratic majority has even been sworn in, after a majority of the state’s counties declared themselves “Second Amendment sanctuaries.”

“In this case, the governor’s assault weapons ban will include a grandfather clause for individuals who already own assault weapons, with the requirement they register their weapons before the end of a designated grace period,” Northam spokeswoman Alena Yarmosky told the Virginia Mercury.
The Democrats’ backtracking may indicate a trend in the gun debate in Virginia. Gun-control advocates poured millions of dollars into successfully flipping the state legislature, but the outpouring of opposition to their agenda, even in deep blue areas, may cause some new members of the state legislature to be cautious about backing gun control. The concession is unlikely to end the fight brewing across the state, however, as Democrats still plan to pursue a ban on many new sales.

The Virginia Citizens Defense League, which has pushed counties to refuse to enforce unconstitutional gun laws, said there is “no doubt” the Democrats’ retreat was a result of the Second Amendment sanctuary movement.

“They were hoping to play that card later, but they’re playing it now because they have to find some way to slow down this whole process,” Philip Van Cleave, the group’s president, told the Washington Free Beacon.

Gun-rights groups said the backtracking is merely a political strategy designed to enact new gun bans and registration.

“Gov. Northam and the rest of Virginia’s anti-gun politicians’ idea of a compromise is to threaten hundreds of thousands of Virginians with felonies unless they submit to government control,” Catherine Mortensen, a National Rifle Association spokesperson, told the Free Beacon. “The NRA will stand with the Commonwealth’s law-abiding gun owners in solidarity to oppose gun bans, confiscations, and registrations.”

“We’ve been down this compromise road and their version of a compromise is they never give up anything,” Van Cleave said. “We are expected to give up something every time and we’re not doing it anymore. I think gun owners are tired of this and they’re gonna stand up and fight this stuff.”

The grandfather clause offered by Northam’s office had no impact on VCDL’s opposition to the bill, Van Cleave said, and the group will fight any new gun ban—whether it has a confiscation component or not.

“The problem with what his suggestion is it’s still taking away guns,” Van Cleave said. “Yeah, we get to keep our AR-15s, but what about the next generation and the generation after them? Who are we to negotiate away their rights and accept this crap?”

He did suggest they could work with Democrats on gun legislation if it targeted criminals instead of gun owners.

According to Van Cleave, there were 59 sanctuaries in the state as of Tuesday. VCDL is organizing supporters to attend 20 more meetings this week alone.