Category: RKBA

Root of Mass Shootings Pandemic Is Not Gun Access

Growing up in rural South Carolina on my family’s farm, I developed a love, appreciation, and, most importantly, a respect for firearms.

To this day, I remain a collector of firearms and a supporter of the American right to keep and bear arms as enshrined in the Second Amendment. I was taught that safety is paramount to gun ownership, so I have always encouraged responsible gun ownership and use for all Americans.

With that being said, I have noticed a disturbing trend in our country: an ever-increasing number of shootings and gun-related deaths.

And while the quick response from some, namely the left-wing mainstream media and liberal politicians, is to ban weapons and become more restrictive, it appears to me that we have serious mental health and poverty issues contributing to gun violence. I don’t believe that banning guns will result in any significant decline in shootings attributed to these two categories.

In the United States, since January 2021, we have had 195 mass shootings, with 245 people dying and approximately 731 wounded, according to the Mass Shooting Tracker.

While it’s important to acknowledge that there is not a universally accepted definition of what constitutes a “mass shooting,” these numbers are staggering. They are some of the highest numbers in the industrialized world.

Let’s contrast 2021 with when I was growing up, when mass shootings simply weren’t a problem. I believe that this is the direct result of the era and the family structure: Parents were involved in their children’s lives and children were taught discipline and respect.

By and large, members of my generation were raised in households with two parents, and we were taught how to deescalate and talk things out when problems arose. Today, that no longer seems to be the case.

We have a moral and social failing in our country that has caused an increase in mass shooters, predominantly young men. One has to pause to think about what’s different today from 30 or 40 years ago. It certainly isn’t guns, because it’s harder to get guns today than it was in the past, when you didn’t have to go through nationalized background checks. When I was growing up, you could purchase a firearm with no questions asked, yet we didn’t see so many mass shootings.

America’s young men are struggling with mental health issues or are broken and living in poverty with single mothers struggling to survive. Many of them are clearly crying out for help, and we owe it to them to listen.

Continue reading “”

BLUF:
Compared to nearly the entire rest of the world, people in the United States have retained the ability to choose to be legally armed or unarmed. Most people in the USA want to keep the option. Nearly all the rest of the world does not have it.

The Case for More Guns, Learn to Think Like The Sheep Who Chose to Be Unarmed

U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- People in the gun culture often express amazement about people who want them disarmed. They ascribe the desire to hostility and malice. It may be true for a minority of those who actively wish for a disarmed population.  A significant number, likely a majority, have made a voluntary decision to be unarmed.

It is important to know your opponent and to understand their motives.

Three years ago, this correspondent wrote an essay on how to understand people who want a disarmed population. It was popular but did not appear on AmmoLand News at that time.

I have updated the essay for current conditions.

There Is An Easy Way To Understand People Who Wish You To Be Unarmed.

It takes a little discipline. You may have a little mental discomfort, but it is not particularly difficult.  For the ability to understand the other side, assume you have deliberately chosen to be unarmed.

Choosing to be armed is more difficult. It requires action. It requires training. It requires an investment in money and time. You think about unpleasant realities and plan for unpleasant possibilities. You devote time and money to be armed. A higher level of responsibility is required.

Once you internalize the decision to be unarmed, arguments on the other side become understandable. The voluntarily unarmed people we are attempting to understand are those who have moved from the decision to be unarmed, to the policy statement “guns are bad”.

Guns are Bad
Guns are Bad

Armed people have a power advantage over unarmed people. People do not want others to have a power advantage over them. It makes them uncomfortable. To prevent this, the voluntarily unarmed often want everyone else to be unarmed.

Continue reading “”

Saul Cornell has always been a elitist political hack when it comes to gun control.

Preamble he says?

He’s trying to make people believe ‘A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state’ somehow overrides ‘the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed‘ and thus only the military & the national guard – the elistist/anti-civil rights, wanna-be gun controller’s current definition of ‘militia’ – have a right to have guns.

Of course common English sentence diagraming, taught in grade school, confirms he’s lying.

But – again – Preamble he says?

Well, I’ve got one for him. One that I think he believes he can evade through general ignorance due to the lack of civics education:

PREAMBLE TO THE BILL OF RIGHTS

“THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its (the Constitution’s) powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.”

Bold & parenthesis are mine.

That preamble clearly states that the amendments are to declare certain things that are restricted from the government exerting its powers on them. The Bill of Rights is a list of restrictions on government, not the people, and Mr Saul Cornell knows this.

Cornell: Originalism Means Gorsuch and Barrett Should Rule in Favor of Strict Gun Control

In another of Heller’s odd intellectual moves, Scalia read the Second Amendment backwards, and in the process effectively erased the text’s preamble. To justify this unusual reading strategy, an interpretive approach that Stevens reminded his colleagues on the bench had never been done in the court’s history, Scalia cited legal treatises written decades after the adoption of the Second Amendment. Once again, to obtain his preferred result Scalia rummaged among sources written a half a century after the adoption of the Second Amendment to find evidence of the text’s original meaning.

Such a move only makes sense if one believes that nothing significant happened in American legal history between the adoption of the Second Amendment and the Civil War, a view most historians would find bizarre and erroneous. Curiously, Justice Scalia did not turn to a legal source more readily available that was written at the same time as the Second Amendment. John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and co-author of The Federalist, had ruled on this issue in 1790s.

Jay wrote: “A preamble cannot annul enacting clauses; but when it evinces the intention of the legislature and the design of the act, it enables us, in cases of two constructions, to adopt the one most consonant to their intention and design.”

Continue reading “”

Bill allowing permitless carrying of handguns advances to Texas Senate floor, where its fate remains uncertain

A Texas bill that would allow people to carry handguns without a permit quickly sailed Thursday out of a state Senate committee recently created to specifically tackle the legislation.

The move marks a significant step for the controversial proposal that for years struggled to gain momentum in either chamber of the Texas Legislature. But it remains to be seen whether the measure — already passed by the Texas House — has enough support to make it out of the Senate and to the desk of Gov. Greg Abbott.

The proposal would nix the requirement for Texas residents to obtain a license to carry handguns if they’re not prohibited by state or federal law from possessing a gun. Texans would also no longer be required to receive training before carrying a handgun in public.

Texans under current state law must generally be licensed to carry handguns, either openly or concealed. Some law enforcement officers, concealed carry license instructors and Democrats have voiced opposition to the legislation, citing safety concerns.

The Senate Special Committee on Constitutional Issues voted 5-2 along party lines to advance the measure to the Senate floor Thursday. The Texas House gave its approval to House Bill 1927 earlier this month, marking a win for gun rights activists who have for years pushed the measure at the Legislature. But the lower chamber’s approval was also a blow to some Democrats who have been fighting for gun safety measures since the 2019 massacre in El Paso.

“We cannot allow another session to come and go where we pay lip service to the Second Amendment, while failing to fully restore and protect the God given rights to our citizens,” said state Sen. Charles Schwertner, R-Georgetown, the bill’s sponsor in the Senate.

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who leads the Senate, created the special committee last week and stacked it with supporters of the permitless carry proposal. Schwertner, a strong proponent of gun rights, was tapped to chair the committee. Patrick said Thursday he is “optimistic” about the legislation’s chances of passing even though he is still rounding up the necessary votes.

“We’re gonna come out with a strong bill, and I’ll believe we’ll pass it because we brought people together,” Patrick told conservative radio host Dana Loesch on Thursday afternoon. “And hopefully it’ll be on the governor’s desk soon, and we’ll get it signed.”

Before even taking up the bill or hearing from the more than 170 people who signed up to testify, Schwertner opened the hearing by declaring his intent to advance the measure out of committee on Thursday and to the Senate floor next week.

“We’re moving with all deliberate speed on this bill now because now more than ever Texans want to make sure that their Second Amendment rights are not only protected, but restored,” Schwertner said………………..

U. OF PENNSYLVANIA CAPITULATES; APPROVES HUNTING, ARCHERY, AND SHOOTING CLUB.

PHILADELPHIA, April 29, 2021 — After more than a year in limbo, the University of Pennsylvania’s Hunting, Archery, and Shooting Club is officially a recognized student group.

Under pressure from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) and with help from FIRE Legal Network attorney Patricia Hamill, the university relented this week and processed the group’s registration.

On March 17, FIRE called on Penn to stop engaging in viewpoint discrimination and promptly recognize the club.

“We are pleased that Penn finally hit the mark,” said FIRE Senior Program Officer Zach Greenberg. “However, the approval is long overdue. It should not take a year for a university to make good on its promises to uphold students’ rights.”

Continue reading “”

WaPo/ABC poll: Enthusiasm drops for gun-control legislation — but why?

Context matters, and so does polling consistency. The Washington Post/ABC News poll taken in 2018 after the Parkland mass shooting demonstrated a peak of enthusiasm for gun-control laws, 57/34. Three years later, that has shifted sixteen points in the gap, 50/43. So what happened?……..

So why has there been such a loss of enthusiasm for gun control? We’d know better if the WaPo/ABC polling units committed to proper interval polling on public opinion, but it’s likely due to the Democratic embrace of ‘abolish/defund the police’ sloganeering and a sharp rise in crime, especially violent crime, over the past year. If we’re abolishing or rolling back police departments, then self-defense becomes even more crucial as crime rises. Democrats are trying to argue two entirely contradictory points at the same time — that only cops should have guns, and that we shouldn’t have cops……….

n.b. Texas’ legislature only convenes every other year, and then only for 140 days with the Governor having the power to call special sessions. So………..

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott Says He Will Sign Constitutional Carry Bill

Gov. Greg Abbott (R) says he supports constitutional carry for Texas and will sign legislation with a permit requirement if it reaches his desk.

On April 16, 2021, Breitbart News reported the Texas House passed legislation to abolish the requirement that law-abiding citizens get a permit from the state government before carrying a concealed handgun for self-defense.

KVUE/Texas Tribune notes when the legislation first appeared in the Senate, there did not appear to be enough support to pass it. However, “momentum” for passage of the legislation is now growing at an “unprecedented” rate in the state Senate.

Abbott is speaking about the possibility of ending the permit requirement.

On April 27, 2021, Abbott told WBAP radio that he will sign the legislation if it reaches his desk.

Abbott said, “Once the Senate passes it out, the House and Senate will convene and work out any differences and get it to my desk. And I’ll be signing it.”

Currently, 20 states do not require residents to acquire a permit before carrying a concealed handgun for self-defense: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming. (NOTE: Tennessee’s constitutional carry law goes into effect July 1, 2021.)

New Group Wants To Harness Buying Power Of Government To Push Gun Control

A new outfit called the Gun Safety Consortium is hoping to advance the gun control agenda, but not necessarily through legislation. The group, which is made up of mayors, police chiefs, and other public officials, say they want to use the purchasing power of local governments to compel firearms manufacturers to adopt policies and practices favored by gun control advocates, starting with so-called smart gun technology.

“This is a group that has decided to take local action to create a market that doesn’t exist or up until now hasn’t existed,” Toledo Mayor Wade Kapszukiewicz said.

The Gun Safety Consortium met Tuesday morning to call for smart gun technology, or innovative gun locks that will keep firearms secure, as data shows that more than half of registered gun owners in the country don’t keep their weapon locked up because they want quick access to it.

“I think any time you talk gun violence, you have to have a multiprong approach and it has to be multifaceted and this is just one of the facets of a gun prevention and gun violence initiative,” Lansing Police Chief Daryl Green said.

Quick-release gun locks or tracking technology are some of the proposed ideas.

The group hopes to use its purchasing power, made up of 31 jurisdictions — including cities, counties and individual law enforcement entities — to buy the products and encourage others to do the same.

“Government buys four out of every 10 guns sold in America, 40%, and when you combine military and law enforcement, it made sense that we could have a consumer revolution,” Cincinnati Mayor John Cranley said.

Here’s the thing; it’s not legislation that’s preventing “smart gun” tech from coming to market. It’s a lack of consumer demand. The reason why no market exists is because few gun owners are interested. What the new gun control group is hoping to do is to create an artificial demand for these products with the expectation that the industry will automatically follow suit.

Continue reading “”

6 out of 11 states that have gone from No/May Issue to Shall Issue/Permit-Less Carry since 1999 have seen their murder rates DECREASE in the years they allowed concealed carry

Source spreadsheet

The point being that there being no correlation between concealed carry and gun violence, which is significant in that it undercuts most of the rationale behind those people who want gun control.

The Right to Bear Arms: A Constitutional Right of the People or a Privilege of the Ruling Class?

This is the first scholarly study of the history of the right to bear and carry arms outside of the home, a right held dear by Americans before, during, and after the Founding period; it rebuts attempts by anti-gun advocates to rewrite history and “cancel” the Founding generation’s lived experiences bearing firearms.

The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized the individual right to keep and bear arms, but courts in states that have extreme gun control restrictions apply tests that balance the right away. This book demonstrates that the right peaceably to carry firearms is a fundamental right recognized by the text of the Second Amendment and is part of our American history and tradition.

Halbrook’s scholarly work is an exhaustive historical treatment of the fundamental, individual right to carry firearms outside of the home. Halbrook traces this right from its origins in England through American colonial times, the American Revolution, the Constitution’s ratification debates, and then through the antebellum and post-bellum periods, including the history surrounding the enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

This book is another important contribution by Halbrook to the scholarship concerning the text, history and tradition of the Second Amendment’s right to bear and carry arms.

Former Federal Prosecutor: ‘More Gun Control Laws Not the Answer’

Writing Friday at the Dallas Morning News, a former federal prosecutor reached what may have been an unpleasant realization by acknowledging, “More gun control laws would not have prevented what happened in Dallas, Atlanta or Boulder.”

Erin Nealy Cox, former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas, also stated a fact routinely lost or at least misunderstood by the press and public: “There’s no question that we need to limit access to weapons for these extremists, but contrary to the popular view that such limitations don’t exist, those of us in law enforcement know that they do.”

Translation, though Cox may not realize it, is that criminals—including people intent on doing great harm though they have no prior criminal record—do not obey gun laws.

The country does have background checks, even at gun shows. Unlike voting, gun buyers must show photo ID to exercise their Second Amendment rights.

Simultaneous to Cox’s Op-Ed in the Dallas Morning News, Rutgers political science Professor Ross K. Baker laments at USA Today that “gun control is a lost cause.”

“What kills (gun control) efforts in Congress,” Baker complains, “is the recognition in the minds of politicians that there are voters in their states and districts who are Second Amendment absolutists, whether they be the kind of people who shoot at targets for practice or those who might shoot at people because of malice or derangement.”

Continue reading “”

Gun Control Advocate Declares Movement “Lost Cause”

Rutgers University political science professor Ross Baker thinks we have too many guns in this country and not enough gun control laws. He also thinks the gun control movement that he’s a part of is a lost cause, declaring in a new column at USA Today that it stands alongside “legitimating polygamy and scrapping the national anthem for something more singable” in the pantheon of failed movements.

Obviously Baker isn’t happy about this, but he does seem to be seriously giving up on the idea that Americans are ever going to wholeheartedly embrace a gun ban agenda.

The brief flicker of hope that somehow the financial problems of the National Rifle Association, and the profligate spending of members’ dues by one its top executives, might stifle the effectiveness of the opposition to even the most modest efforts to control firearms or reduce their lethality became an iridescent dream — and seemed to prove that the organization itself was never much of a factor in blocking gun-control legislation.

As my colleague Tom Knighton pointed out recently, despite its legal challenges, the NRA hasn’t disappeared. In fact, it’s launching a $2-million campaign to defeat Joe Biden’s ATF nominee. Still Baker is on to something; the power of the NRA comes from its members, not its executives. And who are those members? Millions of American gun owners, and even if the Second Amendment organization were to be dissolved by the New York Attorney General, those gun owners aren’t suddenly going to decide that their right to keep and bear arms is unimportant to them. In fact, I’d imagine that an assault like that would end up energizing millions more gun owners to become politically active.

Continue reading “”

Gun Records Restoration and Preservation Act – A Threat To Privacy

The gun grabbing circus lead by Nanny Bloomberg’s Moms Demand Action, Everytown, Giffords, Brady United (Handgun Control Inc.), etc. would just love to see every protection for responsible gun owners abolished. Coming from none other than Senator Bob Menendez, from the freedom crushing land of New Jersey, is S. 974: Gun Records Restoration and Preservation Act. The bill’s description is a little misleading, “To repeal certain impediments to the administration of the firearms laws.” If you start to dig through what on earth this is or might be all about, you’ll be greeted by a nice pile of legalese gobbledygook, but the intent is clear; to destroy the privacy protections for gun owners built into current law and to lay the groundwork for a national gun registry.

Continue reading “”

Here’s How Montana Is Protecting Itself from Biden’s Gun Control Orders

President Joe Biden’s gun control executive orders are bad enough.

He raised even further concerns though when, in announcing these orders, he claimed that “no amendment — no amendment to the Constitution is absolute… the idea is just bizarre to suggest that some of the things we’re recommending are contrary to the Constitution.” Americans are understandably concerned then that their Second Amendment rights are at risk.

Fortunately, Gov. Greg Gianforte (R-MT) on Friday signed into law H.B. 258, which will protect gun owners in Montana from federal gun control laws.

Today, I proudly signed Rep. Hinkle’s law prohibiting federal overreach into our Second Amendment-protected rights, including any federal ban on firearms.

I will always protect our #2A right to keep and bear arms. pic.twitter.com/2xY8DeEtqf

— Governor Greg Gianforte (@GovGianforte) April 23, 2021

According to Iris Samuels with AP, the legislation “prohibits state and local law enforcement in Montana from enforcing federal bans on firearms, ammunition and magazines.”

As proof that a change in administrations really can make a difference, the former Gov. Steve Bullock had vetoed such legislation multiple times before, Samuels reported, in 2013, 2015, and 2017.

Bullock ran a failed presidential campaign in the Democratic primary and was also defeated by the Republican incumbent, Sen. Steve Daines during his senatorial campaign. As governor, Bullock vetoed a host of Republican measures, another one being born-alive legislation, which would require that babies born alive from abortions be provided medical care.

Continue reading “”

Montana Gov Is Latest to Sign State Bill Nullifying Federal Gun Restrictions

Gov. Greg Gianforte on Friday signed a bill that prohibits state and local law enforcement in Montana from enforcing federal bans on firearms, ammunition and magazines.

Supporters of the law have said it would protect the Second Amendment from stiffer gun control laws that could come from federal legislation or executive orders by President Joe Biden in the wake of several mass shootings that took place this year, including a shooting last week that killed eight people in Indianapolis.

Continue reading “”

OKLAHOMA PASSES SECOND AMENDMENT SANCTUARY STATE ACT

The Oklahoma House of Representatives just passed Senate Bill (SB 631) the “Second Amendment Sanctuary Act“ yesterday afternoon (04-20-21). Across the country more and more states are introducing legislation to uphold the 2nd Amendment and refuse any additional gun control measures from Federal, state, county and even local governments. This would mean that the state of Oklahoma wouldn’t adhere to, or enforce, any new gun control measures such as bans, buy backs, capacity limits or other restrictions that may be introduced in the future. This would include both legislation as well as executive orders. 

(SB 631) will now head to Governor Kevin Stitt’s desk for final approval and signature. Chances are better than good that the Governor will sign it and Oklahoma will join the ever growing list of states who have proclaimed themselves as Second Amendment Sanctuaries and have passed similar legislation. There was a rally yesterday (04-20-21) at the state capitol as pro Second Amendment supporters gathered to celebrate and show their appreciation to our state lawmakers for passing the bill. (SB 631) is just one of many bills Oklahoma legislators are working on to protect and uphold the citizen’s right to keep and bear arms. There’s lot of misinformation about the new bill and what it does. Here’s a quick look at what SB 631 says:

SECTION 2 (A) “The State Legislature hereby occupies and preempts the entire field of legislation by the federal government, any agency of this state or any political subdivision in this state to infringe upon the rights of a citizen of the State of Oklahoma, the unalienable right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed to them by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.”

SECTION 2 (B) Any federal, state, county or municipal act, law, executive order, administrative order, court order, rule, policy or regulation ordering the buy-back, confiscation or surrender of firearms, firearm accessories or ammunition from law-abiding citizens of this state shall be considered an infringement on the rights of citizens to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States and Article II, Section 26 of the Constitution of Oklahoma.”

Continue reading “”

Gun Control Stupidity.

Of all the infringements of our basic right to self-protection, affirmed by the second amendment of the United States Constitution, HR-127, the bill proposed by Sheila Jackson Lee earlier this year, is the most egregious, the most dangerous, and the most blatantly unconstitutional.

For starters, it would make millions of people across the nation felons overnight. Countless gun owners over the age of 18 yet under the age of 21 will be forced to turn in their legally obtained and owned firearms or otherwise become felons. Millions of other gun owners will be forced to turn in legally obtained firearms and firearm accessories or else become felons. Those few firearms left will be subject to a burdensome tax and worse will be made a matter of public record, so that no burglar will ever need to worry about which houses to violate.

Any national gun registry will make the home addresses of all peaceful, law-abiding gun owners a matter of public record. Those who wish to rob and murder in safety, those who wish to initiate violence against those who consider gun owners their political opponents, and in the event of a total war with a country able to match the military might of our own will have a list of all men and women in the country in possession of a firearm.

This is all if the bill is passed peacefully, which it won’t. People will not allow their rights to be violated especially as people from both sides of the aisle have spent a year normalizing political violence. All law enforcement officers will all be forced to resign else they be considered oath breakers and stand for eternity with the likes of Marcus Junius Brutus, Benedict Arnold, and Damien Jones the man who the sponsor of this bill, Sheila Jackson Lee, protected from accusations of sexual assault by firing the aide who reported his abuse.

Continue reading “”

While these always deserve careful attention, overreaching bills like this are usually nothing more than a combination of political grandstanding and attempts to move the ‘Overton window’ to make less draconian bills appear more palatable.

Below The Radar – Handgun Purchaser Licensing Act of 2021

United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- Bad ideas are hard to kill, especially in Congress. One of the worst has been this notion of licensing gun owners at the federal level. This was something anti-Second Amendment extremists have wanted since 1968 – and you can read how angry Lyndon Baines Johnson was that such provisions were not in the Gun Control Act of 1968.

So, for over five decades, Second Amendment supporters have thwarted this goal of our enemies (and people who wish to inflict injustice on us are rightly described as enemies), who think that treating law-abiding gun owners like criminals is the answer to the misuse of firearms. We know it isn’t, as the Brevard County Sheriff lays out. But that hasn’t stopped anti-Second Amendment extremists from trying.

While Sheila Jackson Lee drew a lot of attention with HR 127, the Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act, a number of other licensing schemes have shown up in past Congresses, and they will likely show up in the current Congress, and in Congresses in the future.

One of those bad ideas that keep turning up is the Handgun Purchaser Licensing Act of 2021, known as S 770. We covered a similar version that was introduced in 2019 by Senator Chris Van Hollen and Representative Jamie Raskin. Van Hollen is again the Senate sponsor of this assault on the dignity and reputation of those who wish to exercise their Second Amendment rights.

Van Hollen, of course, doesn’t even tell states to impose it. He instead tries to bribe them with federal grants. It’s yet another insult from these Bloomberg stooges who seem eager to cast blame for high rates of violent crime on everyone but those who are really responsible.

Here’s the truth: Less than a fifth of the states in the Union require any form of licensing scheme. If anything, the overwhelming consensus (at least, what seems to be the consensus) among the states is that there is no need to license firearms owners at all. States like New Jersey, Illinois, and Massachusetts are the real outliers when it comes to firearms ownership. Those schemes don’t stop firearms from getting into the hands of bad guys.

In addition, what was noted on the web pages of Ammoland back then still applies. This legislative proposal is pretty much asking to create tragedies like the one involving Carol Bowne. Anti-Second Amendment extremists often claim they are trying to save lives, but it was an onerous law they want to extend nationwide that cost one woman her life at the hands of her abusive ex.

Second Amendment supporters should contact their Representative and Senators and politely urge them to oppose S 770, and instead seek to override state waiting periods and licensing schemes. They also should support the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action and Political Victory Fund to ensure that the current anti-Second Amendment regimes in the House, Senate, and White House are defeated at the ballot box as soon as possible.