Category: RKBA

An Open Letter to Those Who Would Do Away With the Second Amendment

The fallacy that by severely restricting the sale and ownership of firearms as a means of curbing violence in America is easy to discredit, in fact, we need look no further than across our southern border.

Did you know that there is only one gun store in Mexico, guarded by armed military personnel? And it takes months of paperwork to even have the chance to buy a gun.

If you are not law enforcement or military you are lucky to procure a .22. The common people in Mexico have about as much chance of being adequately armed, enough to protect themselves and their families, as they are of winning the lottery.

And even if they are able to jump through all the hoops, getting ammunition is another steep mountain to climb.

In other words, the rank and file citizens of Mexico – for the most part – are not armed and have no hope of being armed.

Now, that is not to say there are not plenty of guns in Mexico. The dope dealers and cartels have an abundance of guns of any and every caliber they want, in fact, the paramilitary security forces the cartels use to enforce their will are about as well-armed as a combat soldier in the field.

Now how were these guns obtained in a country with one gun store and such impossible requirements to buy firearms?

The black market, of course.

Unfortunately, many of them are purchased in the United States, a fact that is seldom – if ever -mentioned or maybe even known, by the gun control crowd and something strict border security and shutting down rogue gun dealers could help curtail.

So, in essence, we can say that with the exception of law enforcement, military and a handful of people who can either bribe or game the system, practically all the guns in Mexico are illegal.

Now, let’s look at what effect such ultra-restrictive gun laws have had on crime.

Between 2000 and 2012; 215,000 people were murdered. In 2012 Mexico had a murder rate of 21.5 per 100,000. In 2018 there were 33,341 murders and it is expected, when the 2019 statistics are complete the number will be even higher.

Violent incidents, armed robbery, etc… increased from 5.2 million in 2017 to 6 million in 2018.

One of every 10 women in Mexico has been a victim of sexual assault ranging from groping to rape and there are 120,000 rapes a year, one every four minutes making Mexico the number one nation for sexual violence.

Nearly 1,200 kidnappings happened in Mexico in 2018.

Mexico is among the most popular sources and destinations for international child abductions and has one of the least effective systems of protecting and returning internationally abducted children within its borders.

Politics in Mexico are, and basically always have been, as crooked as a barrel of fish hooks and as corrupt as a mafia horse race.

There is simply so much money generated by the drug trade that by means of buying off or intimidation the drug cartels do practically anything they want to without fear of official intervention.

Some of the most gruesome murders of the century have been committed in Mexico, mass graves, grisly, hideous show murders as warnings to informers, politicians and law enforcement officials who refuse to cooperate.

So now we arrive at the crux of my article.

What have all these super stringent gun laws done to protect life in Mexico?

If you will be honest, you’ll have to admit that it has done the opposite.

It has armed the criminals who have no regard for any law and will obtain weapons by whatever illegal source available to them while leaving the law-abiding citizen without the means to protect themselves.

This policy has created and encouraged the rise of the powerful cartels, who, for all practical purposes, control the country.

Now, the most important question of all.

Do you not understand what happened in Mexico and do you not believe that the same thing, or something very similar, could happen in America?

Can you not see that when you take away the means of protection from law-abiding people, it is not going to reduce the gun population among the criminal element one half of one percent.

In fact, it emboldens them.

It has been proven over and over that about the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, and no matter how vehemently self-serving politicians may contest this, the fact, and it is a fact, remains irrefutable.

In fact, the next time you see Bernie, Uncle Joe, Elizabeth or any of the other anti-gun candidates, ask them “If good guys having guns is bad, why do you always have armed security with you?

What do you think?

Pray for our troops our police and the peace of Jerusalem.

God Bless America — Charlie Daniels

Hero Jack Wilson Will be Awarded “Governor’s Medal of Courage”
While Democrats are memorizing Iranian terrorists Republicans are rewarding American heroes.

While Democrats are memorizing Iranian terrorists Republicans are rewarding American heroes.

Governor Greg Abbott will present the “Governor’s Medal of Courage” to the brave man who stopped a gunman during a deadly shooting at a church in North Texas last month.

On Monday, January 13th Gov. Abbott will host Mr. Wlson at the Governor’s Mansion to present him with the Governor’s Medal of Courage. The medal is given to civilians who display “great acts of heroism by risking their own safety to save another’s life.”

It is the highest award given to civilians by the Governor and nobody deserves it more than Jack Wilson.

 

Virginians Are Warning Of Civil War, But This Isn’t New

Things are tense in Virginia, to say the least. With Democrats having complete control of the state government, Governor Ralph Northam sees a golden opportunity to hammer gun rights activists in his state. After all, he needed a gun control win to completely overshadow the blackface scandal that plagued him for months, and he didn’t get it.

Now, somehow, he’s got the legislature and he’s going to make it so no one even thinks of “Coonman” anymore.

Unfortunately for him, though, there are those in the state that are warning that things may well get beyond Northam’s control and the usual suspects are freaking out over it.

Thousands of Virginia residents have shown up at meetings across the state to try to block Democrats from enacting new gun laws, with some gun rights supporters openly discussing violent resistance and civil war.

The backlash to gun control in Virginia is being fueled by conspiracy theories and misinformation, and some observers worry that the escalating rhetoric may spark violence.

When Democrats won control of Virginia’s state government for the first time in 26 years in November 2019, they pledged to pass a series of standard gun control laws, including universal background checks and bans on military-style “assault weapons” and high-capacity ammunition magazines. The agenda was no surprise: state Democrats had run for office on a platform of gun violence prevention, backed by funding from national gun control groups.

…

Some of these activists have warned of violenceif Democrats push forward with gun control. Multiple Democratic lawmakers have reportedly received threats, including death threats. At heated public meetings across the state and in long social media comment threads, some gun rights supporters are openly discussing the possibility of civil war. Many have warned of the need to fight back against “tyranny” or have compared Democratic lawmakers to the British forces during the revolutionary war. “I really do think we may be on the brink of another war,” one speaker told a crowd of at least 800 people in Pulaski county, the Roanoke Times reported.

Here’s the thing, though. This talk of a civil war isn’t new. We’ve been talking about this for years as a warning that if anti-gun zealots come after our guns, they’re going to have a bad time of it.

This is nothing new.

However, it’s also important to note that we’ve also been pretty clear that there’s a line in the sand and, thus far, no one has crossed it. Right now, bills have only been proposed. Nothing’s passed and nothin’s signed. It’s just a lot of rhetoric. As long as Northam and company bear in mind that this is a topic that yes, a lot of people will go to war over, we shouldn’t have a problem.

We on this side have been clear about what will set us off. The problem is that Northam and company don’t seem to really care to listen. There’s been nothing from his side to tell Virginian gun rights activists that their concerns will be accounted for. Instead, we’re seeing a lot of “we won, you lost, suck on it.”

Yes, there are warnings of civil war, but that war isn’t inevitable. It’s up to Northam, though, to decide if he really wants to push people so far that they don’t feel they have any other choice. It’s all on him and his allies in the legislature.

It’s not too late to settle things down.

100,000 gun owners to fight new Virginia bans: ‘We’re not the problem.’

Some 100,000 Virginia gun owners who have rallied at county and town meetings for “gun sanctuaries” on Thursday began “bombarding” state Democratic lawmakers eager to use their new majority in Richmond to push through new restrictions and bans.

“Now it’s time. Now we’re going to melt down their phones, explode their inboxes on their email. We’re going to bombard them more than they’ve been bombarded,” said Philip Van Cleave, president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, which is leading the gun sanctuary movement.

On Thursday, he issued an “alert” to supporters to start lobbying lawmakers in Richmond against gun control. He said that the new anti-gun laws from Democrats are “pouring in like a waterfall.”

Later this month, his group is also organizing its annual “lobbying day” that is expected to draw dozens of buses full of supporters from around Virginia as well as from 13 states as far away as Texas, Florida, and Connecticut.

“They picked a fight with a set of people who are tired of it. We’re tired of being the whipping boy. Every time somebody shoots up a bunch of people in a gun-free zone, they come after us, and we’re tired of it. We’re fed up, and we’re not giving up any more. We’re not the problem,” he told Secrets.

Why Journalists and Politicians are Frightened by Armed Defense

Armed citizens stopped a mass murderer at the West Freeway Church of Christ. When we plain folk in fly-over country heard that the attacker was stopped quickly, most of us thought, “Praise God.” In contrast, Joe Biden said it was irrational to allow anyone to be armed at any religious institution. Some journalists said they were terrified that ordinary citizens could be armed at church.

Why is the emotional response from politicians and journalists so different from ours? We know something that they don’t know. Those of us who live in fly-over country know Armed America, and the elites don’t.

We know real gun owners-  We know real people people who own guns, rather than the two-dimensional cardboard-cutout characters portrayed by Hollywood and the media. With over a hundred million gun owners in the US, they are easy to find. Legally licensed gun owners are our friends, our co-workers, our associates, and our neighbors.

I have a news flash for Vice President Joe and the journalists. Ordinary people are armed. Millions of us carry a legally concealed personal firearm in public. Unless you live in one of the elite bubbles in the US, then you are standing shoulder to shoulder with Armed America.

We’ve seen their good judgement. We’ve met Armed America and we’ve seen their restraint. We’re not surprised to learn that individuals who are licensed to carry a firearm in public are among the most law abiding groups that sociologists can find. That makes us different from Joe Biden and Co. Most elites don’t have a friend who drives a pickup truck, much less a friend who is a licensed concealed carrier.

We know and trust our neighbors- We have a positive opinion of our neighbors, our community and our town. We formed this judgement through experience. We’ve seen our fellow citizens solve challenging problems. We’ve seen their character under challenging circumstances, like fires, earthquakes, hurricanes and floods. We’ve seen a broad segment of society rise to the occasion and do their best for themselves and for those around them.

We’re comfortable with our neighbors. The media elites are only comfortable with other elites. Select law enforcement officers can be armed, according to the elites. Select bodyguards can be armed, according to the elites. You and I, average voters, not so much.

We actually believe in “diversity:” Our circle of friends includes people of all ages, backgrounds, and races. If you want to see elitism, look at the makeup of the MSM and at our elite colleges. If you doubt me, try to find a conservative-Christian-Republican male in the Sociology Department at your local college.

Also, consider the “diversity” of the editors at the Huffington post.

Only young college-educated women need apply

We’ve seen bad people do bad things- We’ve seen what criminals do. We’ve seen their effect on our family, our neighbors, and our communities. In our world, violence doesn’t happen in slow motion at 35 frames a second on a 60 inch screen; it happens in the parking lot at the corner store after dark. Our connection to reality is stronger than a TV crime-drama where the bad guy is brought to justice in 42 minutes.

Ordinary citizens like us defend ourselves thousands of times a day. We are not the easy victims the criminals expected. The bad guy meets Armed America and runs the other way. In that way, Armed America is making me and my family safer every day,  just like the defenders did at the Church of Christ in Texas.

Armed America frightens the elites. Maybe the elites like Joe Biden had better stay home and have their food delivered by Amazon so they feel safe. Don’t tell them the Amazon driver might be carrying. That might upset Joe and the mainstream journalists.

We’ll keep that truth to ourselves.

Students for 2A Tell Anti-Gunners to ‘Come and Take It

Not even three weeks ago the National Rifle Association (NRA) conducted a soft launch of the Students for 2A group at Turning Point USA’s Student Action Summit. In just a short period of time, the newly-formed organization has gained momentum amongst college students ages 18 to 24 and garnered more than 15,000 followers across various social media platforms.

The message is simple: the anti-gun left continually launches attacks at law-abiding gun owners. They want to ban commonly-owned firearms, like the AR-15, and make universal background checks a reality. But the young adults are fighting back for their Second Amendment rights.

A montage of various students explains exactly why the organization was started.

“Every day on college campuses across America, students like me are demonized, attacked and silenced by the ‘tolerant’ left,” students in the montage explain. “But we have something they don’t have: facts. So-called ‘universal’ background checks will never be universal because criminals do not comply with the law. Despite the narrative being pushed by the anti-gun left, unintentional firearm fatalities among young people are near historic lows.”

“Americans regularly use firearms for self-defense up to over one million times per year. There has never been a more important time for students like me to speak out,” the narrators explained. “We are law-abiding Americans and we demand the freedom to defend ourselves. So let us be clear to all anti-gun extremists trying to destroy our rights: you will never succeed. We will always fight back.”

“And, by the way, my rights don’t end where your feelings begin,” the students said. “Come and take it.”

 

 

Saying gun rights only applies to a militia is like saying free speech only applies while in the process of petitioning the government

A letter was published titled “Enact gun control without repealing the Second Amendment” (Mercurynews.com, Jan. 5) implying that the right of the people to keep and bear arms was subject to being within a “well-regulated militia.”

Good thing this letter-writer isn’t a lawyer. If that were the case, your right to freedom of speech is only protected while in the process of petitioning the government for a redress of grievances.

Stay in your lane, and out of constitutional law.

Neil Stokes
Redwood City

 

Good Guys with Guns

Good Guys with Guns highlights self-defense stories where people used a firearm to defend themselves and others from violent criminals and the impact it had on their lives. The book also discusses the debate over the right to keep and bear arm

excerpt:
Here’s a challenge. Using your favorite Internet search engine, type in the words “No charges were filed” and see what happens. When the authors did this as part of our research, using Google we were advised that there were 925 million results.

Or try “No charges were filed in shooting” and one will find a more modest 30 million references. Even considering that there will be a multitude of repeat reports dealing with the same incidents, you are still talking about millions of self-defense uses of firearms. Some of these cases are intriguing and involve armed private citizens, while many involve police officers shooting suspects.

In one Ohio county, teachers now carry guns in 5 school districts

This year, school boards at Garaway Local Schools and Claymont City Schools approved the safety measure. They join Newcomerstown Exempted Village Schools, which started arming staff members in 2013, Indian Valley Local Schools (2017) and Tuscarawas Valley Local Schools (2018).

As 2019 draws to a close, the number of school districts in one northeastern Ohio county that have authorized staff members to carry guns on school property has grown to five.

This year, school boards at Garaway Local Schools and Claymont City Schools approved the safety measure. They join Newcomerstown Exempted Village Schools, which started arming staff members in 2013, Indian Valley Local Schools (2017) and Tuscarawas Valley Local Schools (2018). All are in Tuscarawas County.

Newcomerstown Superintendent Jeff Staggs continues to believe it’s a good idea.

“When seconds count in responding to a dangerous event, the faster the event is stopped more students and staff stay alive,” he said. “I’m still in favor of a highly trained armed staff along with multiple other layers in the school safety plan.

“We continue to train and tweak our school safety plan to meet the new issues that schools face every year. The sheriff’s office has been a huge help in our training program with our journey to get better at school safety.”

Garaway Superintendent James Millet agreed.

“I still think this is a valuable decision to protect Garaway students and staff,” he said. “At Garaway Schools, the safety of each and every child within this community is our district’s highest priority. We are continually examining safety measures for our school district and looking for ways to improve.

“We believe that armed staff is one way to provide a quick response and opportunity to protect people in an attack.”

He said the decision has been well-received at Garaway.

“There is not one perfect solution, but we will try to address all aspects of safety with vigor,” Millet said. “We will be adding a safety dog in January. This will provide another way to respond to an attack as well as prevent an attack by identifying weapons before they enter our school.”

A recent report by the Associated Press raised questions about the safety of arming teachers.

Experts say anyone carrying guns, including teachers, needs ongoing, intensive training to be able to handle their firearms proficiently and respond appropriately in stressful settings — and many law enforcement officers don’t even get that.

“The idea that anybody can go to Joe Smith’s School of Shooting for a day or a week and become proficient at shooting a handgun in a life-and-death situation is a little bit absurd,” Doug Tangen, firearms program manager at the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission, the state police academy, told the AP.

Shooting a gun requires psychomotor skills that must be practiced over and over, he said.

Tuscarawas County Sheriff Orvis Campbell said he believes that area educators who have been armed have the training and skills necessary to keep everyone safe.

Teachers there have gone through FASTER training, provided by the Buckeye Firearms Association. FASTER stands for Faculty/Administrator Safety Training & Emergency Response.
<
Police officers who go to a police academy receive 60 hours of training on firearms, and two days of that is in the classroom, Campbell said. By comparison, area teachers have been given three separate weeks of training.

“I put guys through one of them, and it’s very good,” he said.

“All of them are qualifying at at least the same level as every peace officer (in Ohio), and all of them have kept up so far,” Campbell said.

The staff members are required to keep their gun on their person at all times. They are not allowed to talk about it, and they’re not allow to show their weapon, even to other teachers.

He noted that all of the districts have given his office the ability to say two things — that a staff member cannot carry now because that person is not ready, and that a staff member cannot carry at all because the sheriff’s office doesn’t think the person is skilled enough.

The sheriff said arming staff is a good idea because it’s rare to hear about a teacher running away when there is a shooting.

Republican leaders vow to ‘protect’ gun rights for Missourians ahead of session

As legislators prepare to head back to Jefferson City this week, Republican lawmakers are making a point to reaffirm their aversion to taking up strong gun control legislation during the upcoming session.

Gov. Mike Parson held multiple meetings with a handful of metro area mayors this year as Kansas City and St. Louis, in particular, have grappled with an abundance of gun violence. Following a November meeting, news reports suggested the Republican governor agreed to back the mayors’ call for stronger gun control — among other things.

But in a one-pager published Saturday, Parson said he has not “supported restricting law abiding citizens’ right to bear arms.” Instead, Parson said the three big takeaways from his meetings with the metro area mayors centered on witness protection, mental health and substance abuse treatment, and “keeping guns out of the hands of violent criminals.”

“I have never wavered in my support of the Second Amendment,” Parson said. “I firmly believe in protecting Missourians’ Second Amendment rights and will continue working with federal, state, local, and community partners to protect the citizens of our state. Over the past months, we have rolled up our sleeves, gotten to work, and identified the immediate actions we can take at the state level to keep Missouri citizens safe, while still protecting their Second Amendment rights.”

Missouri Republican Party executive director Jean Evans defended Parson on a recent episode of “This Week in Missouri Politics,” noting, “Saying everything is on the table is completely different than saying, ‘I’m for gun control or I want red flag laws or I want any of those other things.’”

House Speaker Elijah Haahr and Majority Floor Leader Rob Vescovo, too, have vowed not to support policies that “infringe” on the “Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Missouri citizens.”

“Our federal and state constitutions hold the rights of gun owners sacred,” Haahr told The Missouri Times. “I take those rights seriously, as do the members of my caucus. We look forward to upholding those rights in this 2020 legislative session.”

In a lengthy December Facebook post, Vescovo said “if heavy penalties that already exist” for murder and assault “don’t effectively deter” people from committing them, then “how will any new laws produce better results, especially if they’re little more than window dressing.”

“Both gun grabbing laws and red flag laws do not get to the root of the problem, which is that criminals will still find ways to obtain weapons with these policies in place. Instead, those policies will create additional hurdles for law-abiding citizens, while those who wish to do harm will continue to obtain stolen weapons on the black market,” Vescovo said.

Several bills have already been filed by Democrats in an effort to increase regulations and hamper gun violence throughout the state. Sen. Jill Schupp pre-filed legislation that would require passing a background check by a licensed firearms dealer before purchasing a firearm; Rep. LaKeySha Bosley is championing a proposal that would highly regulate the sale of ammunition, including by requiring dealers to keep records of those who purchase ammunition and require transactions to be done face-to-face.

The legislative session officially gets underway on Jan. 8.

VA County Addresses Its 2A Ordinance “Ordering” The Militia

Most of the 115 counties, cities, and towns in Virginia that have declared themselves Second Amendment Sanctuaries have done so via a resolution, but a couple of counties have gone further by passing an actual ordinance.
Tazewell County, a beautiful and somewhat remote county (at least once you get off Interstate 81) in the Appalachian Mountains and the Cumberland Plateau, is full of Second Amendment supporters, and the county supervisors not only declared the county a sanctuary on December 3rd, it passed an ordinance “ordering” the militia in an attempt to prevent any lawfully owned firearms from being seized.

Since then, the county’s been fielding questions from residents, reporters, and others who are curious about what exactly that means. According to Southwest Virginia Today, the county’s been giving a “stock answer.”

That answer is “On Dec. 3rd, 2019, our Board of Supervisors chose to exercise some of its rights under the Virginia Constitution to order or regulate militia.  By insuring that our residents have the opportunity (1) to possess certain types of firearms, (2) to educate themselves on their use, (3) to learn common military practices, and (4) to learn basic survival skills, we hope to preserve a group of residents who could form a militia, were such a body needed.  Without these most basic elements our County would not have a group of persons from whom a militia could be drawn.  At the moment, however, the Board has not called any such militia to arms and prays that such moment never occurs.”

In other words, the ordering of the militia wasn’t necessarily meant to lead to thousands of residents drilling on the courthouse lawn, but to make the argument that, because virtually every law-abiding resident is a member of the county militia, they need access to the type of firearm most suited for use in defense of self and county; a semi-automatic rifle. Since SB 16 in Virginia currently is written to make continued possession of legally owned semi-automatic rifles a crime, this is an attempt to protect residents from the effects of the unconstitutional law.

Note, however, that the county reserves the right to call the militia to arms, though its statement doesn’t indicate what would trigger such a response.

As the paper in southwest Virginia points out, while Tazewell County may have been the first in the state to order the county’s militia, it likely won’t be the last.

Some counties that passed just the second amendment sanctuary bill are now considering following Tazewell County’s lead and calling for a militia.  A large crowd of Wythe County residents attended its December supervisors meeting to ask for a militia to be formed and many of the speakers carried copies of the Tazewell County ordinance.

Buchanan County passed both a second amendment sanctuary and a preservation ordinance at its December meeting. That board also requested its county attorney write Governor Northam a letter demanding he resign due to his stance on gun control and abortion.

They later held a called meeting and tabled the request for the letter until new board members office take office this month. They were also asked to consider a militia ordinance this month.

The Second Amendment Sanctuary resolutions that have been passed by the vast majority of Virginia counties are the first step, not the last word in the movement. Despite tough talk from Ralph Northam and Attorney General Mark Herring, these counties don’t seem interested in backing down from their pro-Second Amendment stand.

This is How You Know That Virginia’s Second Amendment Sanctuary Movement Has Them Running Scared

This is how you can tell that the Virginia Second Amendment Sanctuary movement has them really rattled…the Washington Post pays enough attention to run drivel like this. First there’s the economic argument.

These crazy gun nuts are going to scare away all of the entrepreneurial lefties with cash — the kind of people we REALLY want here — who are fleeing New York, Illinois and California!

Then there’s the nauseating spectacle of likening the sanctuary movement — everyday citizens standing up to defend a constitutionally guaranteed civil right — to slavery and segregation.

[T]he anti-control fervor got its start in rural areas and then spread to wealthy suburban counties, including Henrico and Hanover near Richmond. “I think it reveals the deep cultural divide you have in Virginia,” political analyst Bob Holsworth told me.

The movement is dangerous, he added, because it could hurt the state economically as more high-tech firms consider moving in with more progressive-minded workers. Some may not want to locate in a gun-toting state. And it is certainly ugly, he said. “The threats that have come up are really over the top as people talk to officials,” Holsworth said.

A sad irony is that the “sanctuary” movement conjures the disturbing nullification movements of the past three centuries in Virginia. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison argued that the states have the right to ignore federal laws they consider unconstitutional.

That thinking was applied to proslavery movements, leading to the Civil War and the fight over integration in the 1950s and 1960s. Prince Edward County, for instance, shut down public schools for several years rather than desegregate.

– By Peter Galuszka in The disturbing ‘Second Amendment sanctuary’ trend in Virginia

Colorado’s Growing Second Amendment Sanctuary Movement

Virginia is not the only state where the ‘2A Sanctuary’ movement is taking off

The Delta County Board of County Commissioners’ work session on March 12, 2019, was standing room only.

Nearly 250 residents had packed into the county building in Western Colorado. Every available chair was filled, and attendees lined the wall elbow-to-elbow. To accommodate the unusually large crowd, county staff opened up a second meeting room and dialed up the internal conference line to broadcast what was being said in the main meeting room. Even with that additional space, attendees spilled out into the adjacent hallways—all attempting to jockey for a better position to listen in on deliberations.

The discussion that generated so much attention in this rural community of 30,568 started 275 miles away, in Denver: House Bill 1177 (H.B.1177), passed by the Colorado House of Representatives just 10 days prior. Officially titled “Extreme Risk Protection Orders” (ERPO), the bill would codify the seizure of firearms from citizens who are a perceived threat to themselves or others with an ex parte civil order.

Commonly referred to as a “red flag law,” this type of legislation is part of a state-by-state strategy pushed by gun control activists who were galvanized by the 2018 shooting at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Prior to the Parkland shooting, five states had some sort of red flag law on the books; not including H.B. 1177, there are now 14.

Delta County residents showed up to the hearing because they were deeply concerned about the bill’s constitutionality. When the Delta County forum opened to public comment, resident after resident beseeched the commissioners to stand up in support of their individual rights to bear arms, private property, and due process. Sporting a shirt with the words “I plead the Second” in military stencil accompanied by the profile of an AR-15, one man standing in the hallway shouted “amen” and “yes, sir,” boisterously affirming each petitioner who referenced gun rights. Not one person spoke in support of the bill.

County leadership shared their antipathy toward the legislation. Delta County Sheriff Mark Taylor, who was elected sheriff in 2018 and also served as undersheriff for the previous 16 years, was the first to speak. Visibly and audibly nervous, Taylor read a prepared statement that expressed his own opposition to H.B. 1177.

“I feel that that bill goes beyond, there’s no due process as far as enforcing that bill,” Taylor says.

After summarizing his main objections—specifically, that the legislation violates the Second, Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments—Taylor requested that the board of commissioners adopt a resolution that designated Delta County as a “Second Amendment Sanctuary County.” Taylor received a standing ovation from the audience.

What exactly constitutes “sanctuary” status for law enforcement is a point of contention throughout Colorado. Like Delta County, more than half of Colorado counties have adopted resolutions—some more strident, some more symbolic—explicitly challenging H.B.1177 and implicitly suggesting local law enforcement will not comply with the new law. Several sheriffs—predominately from rural Colorado—have publicly expressed their willingness to go to jail if court-ordered to issue an ERPO. Other sheriffs have said it is not their job to pick and choose the laws that they want to enforce.

Ralph Northam’s Losing Battle on Sanctuaries

Ralph Northam is about to make the biggest tactical mistake in Virginia since Cornwallis decided to park his army at Yorktown. With his attempt to force local commonwealth’s attorneys and sheriffs in Second Amendment sanctuaries to enforce his unconstitutional gun laws, Governor Northam is setting himself up for a catastrophic failure. In fact, there’s no way for Northam to win the fight he seems intent on picking with Virginia gun owners and Second Amendment sanctuaries

The governor isn’t being helped by fellow Democrats such as U.S. congressman Donald McEachin, who said the governor should call out the National Guard to enforce the law, or Attorney General Mark Herring, who blithely says he expects that the laws will be followed once they’re on the books.

There are also Democrats, such as Delegate David Toscano, who have been comparing the Second Amendment–sanctuary movement to the Massive Resistance movement that unfolded in Virginia in the wake of the Brown v. Board of Education decision in 1954. Massive Resistance came about after Democratic governor Thomas B. Stanley organized a state-level opposition movement to the integration of public schools in Virginia in the late 1950s. To compare it to today’s Second Amendment–sanctuary movement is to compare apples and oranges on a couple of different levels.

First of all, the Second Amendment–sanctuary movement is morally just, unlike the Massive Resistance movement of the late ’50s and early ’60s. The Second Amendment–sanctuary movement isn’t about curtailing rights, but rather about protecting their free exercise.

Practically speaking, Massive Resistance was a top-down movement, spearheaded by U.S. senator Harry Byrd and his fellow Democrats in the governor’s mansion and Virginia’s attorney general’s office. The Second Amendment–sanctuary movement, on the other hand, is a hyper-local grassroots movement that has no leader, though state-level Second Amendment groups are doing a good job of informing folks where meetings are taking place and even providing curious supervisors with examples of Second Amendment–sanctuary resolutions that have been approved elsewhere. Thousands of people show up at these board-of-supervisors meetings, and not because Philip Van Cleave or Cam Edwards or Nick Freitas or anyone else told them to be there. They’re showing up because their neighbor told them about the meeting, or they saw something on Facebook. They’re showing up and speaking out because they care.

Ultimately, it’s the people in these Second Amendment–sanctuary communities who are the last line of defense against the infringement of their rights, but thankfully we have several other defensive options at our disposal. We can even thank today’s Virginia Democrats for providing a blueprint to follow. Call it passive resistance, not Massive Resistance.

Violent Crime Dropped In 2018 As States Embraced Pro-Gun Policies

The FBI’s 2018 “Crime in the United States” report collected crime data from law enforcement agencies across America. From the looks of it, the news is good.

The FBI highlights that “[In 2018] violent crime offenses decreased when compared with estimates from 2017. Robbery offenses fell 12.0 percent, murder, and non-negligent manslaughter offenses fell 6.2 percent, and the estimated volume of aggravated assault offenses decreased 0.4 percent.”

The report noted that violent crime rates bottomed out in 2014 to their lowest point since 1970. Furthermore, the 2018’s violent crime rate was the third-lowest since 1970.

During the last three decades, America has experienced significant changes in its gun laws throughout the country. Curiously, the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban expired in 2004, which many predicted would lead to bedlam in the streets. The data proved this wrong when the FBI noted that murder rates went down by 3.6 percent from 2003 to 2004, contrary to people’s fears.

However, most of the change regarding gun policies took place in state legislatures. While some states tightened up their gun control, others relaxed gun restrictions and even implemented policies such as Constitutional Carry — which allow law-abiding Americans to carry firearms without having to obtain a government permit. Increased carry has continued into the present.

A study on the number of concealed-carry permit holders released by gun expert John Lott indicated that “In 2019, the number of concealed handgun permits soared to now over 18.66 million—a 304 percent increase since 2007. About an 8 percent growth over the number of permits since 2018.” Additionally, per capita, gun ownership increased by 56 percent from 1993 to 2013. If we had taken the media at their word, we would have expected gun crime to skyrocket. Nevertheless, gun crime continued to plummet according to the FBI, which highlighted a 49 percent decrease.

Conventional rifles like the AR-15 have been largely demonized in recent years, being portrayed as a frequently used tool for carrying out attacks. As usual, the data contradicts media assumptions. For starters, AR-15s only accounted for 173 deaths in mass shootings from 2007 to 2017. Whereas, rifles of all categories were involved in 439 deaths on an annual basis. Putting this in perspective, rifles constituted 2 percent of homicides in 2018. On the other hand, knives (11 percent), hands, fists, and feet (5 percent) and blunt instruments (3 percent) were used in more homicides than rifles.

It’s safe to say that the current gun violence debate is mostly based on hysterics and not a careful analysis of the facts. Stripping the rights of millions of law-abiding gun owners is both unethical and an invitation for criminals to prey on victims whom they know will be defenseless.

Indeed, there’s gun violence in many of America’s urban centers. Solving the problem does not require implementing gun control of any type. More local forms of policing – that target areas where criminals tend to cluster and renewed civic engagement – will do much more to stop crime than passing new gun control laws. If the political circumstances permit it, many of these areas should entertain the idea of making it easier for law-abiding citizens to carry firearms.

No matter how we slice it, increased legislation is not the quick fix to gun violence problems in America.

2019 Was a Bad Year for the “Only Cops Should Have Guns” Narrative

On December 29, an armed gunman entered the West Freeway Church of Christ in Texas and shot two members of the congregation. Within six seconds, a third member of the congregation drew a weapon and shot the gunman dead.

The events were captured on live-streamed video, with the dramatic events — in the minds of many observers — highlighting the benefits of privately owned firearms as a defense against armed criminals. Moreover, the gunman, who had a criminal history, obtained his gun illegally, and demonstrated one of the central pitfalls of the gun-control narrative: namely, that those with criminal intent are not easily restrained by laws controlling access to firearms.

Nonetheless, many media outlets were unable to bring themselves to admit that privately owned firearms in this case were the key to preventing a wider massacre. After all, had the congregation waited around for the police to arrive, it is unknown how effective a police response could have been. Nor is it clear that had the police arrived quickly, they would have immediately engaged the shooter or even engaged the right person.

These considerations were not sufficient to divert many media observers from their insistence that private gun ownership is unhelpful in situations like these. Both government agents and their media boosters continue to insist that even well-meaning ordinary citizens ought not be trusted with firearms and that what is really needed are “experts” with government-approved police training.

Elvia Diaz at the Arizona Republic demonstrated this premise well when she wrote:

The reality of Wilson’s heroism is a lot more complex. He wasn’t just an ordinary parishioner, as gun advocates may want you to believe. The church’s volunteer security team member is a firearms instructor, gun range owner and former reserve deputy with a local sheriff’s department, according to a New York Times detailed account.

In other words, he’s exactly the kind of man you want around with a firearm. But we know nothing about the at least six other parishioners who also appeared to draw their handguns at West Freeway Church of Christ in White Settlement, Texas.

And that’s terrifying.

To many people who aren’t left-leaning journalists, it is hardly “terrifying” that some other private citizens of unknown expertise were armed in the congregation. After all, these people never fired a shot once they saw the shooter had been incapacitated. None of them provided any reason to suspect they pose any risk to anyone else.

On the other hand, 2019 has provided plenty of reminders of what sort of “expertise” and heroism government-provided security forces offer.

In the spring of 2019, the parents of victims of the Parkland school shooting sued the Broward County school board and the sheriff’s office for failing to take timely action against the school shooter who killed seventeen people at the school in February 2018. According to the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, police officers repeatedly sought to protect themselves rather than the victims in the school. An analysis of communications among law enforcement officers at the site of the massacre confirmed there were “at least two times a Broward deputy urges another officer to protect themselves, not confront the killer.”

Meanwhile, 2019 provided reminders that police officers will shoot citizens dead in their own homes for no justifiable reason, as was the case with Atatiana Jefferson on October 12. According to multiple accounts the shooter — a now former cop named Aaron Dean — entered Jefferson’s private property unannounced in the middle of the night. He peered into Jefferson’s windows, and within seconds, the officer had shot Jefferson dead. Jefferson had been playing video games with her nephew.

Also, in October, former police officer Amber Guyger was sentenced to ten years in prison for unlawfully shooting Botham Jean in his own apartment. At the time, Guyger was a police officer returning home from work. She illegally entered the wrong apartment and promptly shot Jean — the unit’s lawful resident — dead.

If there is anything that ought to be “terrifying” to ordinary Americans, it is not the idea that some law-abiding citizens might be carrying firearms. The far more terrifying thought is the knowledge that some police officers are so eager to murder residents in their own living rooms.

More Guns, More Crime?

These facts will no doubt fail to derail the usual media narrative that there are too many guns and that the police — the same people who shoot residents in their homes or cower behind cars when faced with real danger — will ensure public safety through weapons prohibitions and by generally “keeping us safe.”

Fortunately, the facts certainly offer little to support the idea that more legal gun ownership is a problem in terms of homicides.

According to 2019’s gun manufacturing data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATF), total gun production and importation in the US has increased significantly over the past twenty years. If we look at total guns produced in the US (not counting those exported), added to total guns imported, we find that new gun production increased from around 4.5 million in 1998 to more than twelve million in 2017.1 Over that same period, homicide rates decreased from 6.3 per 100,000 to 5.3. In fact, after years of rising gun production, the US homicide rate fell to a fifty-year low in 2014. This correlation doesn’t prove more guns reduce crime, of course. But this relationship strongly suggests that the benefits of increased gun ownership — namely greater self-defense capability on the part of private citizens — are greater than the potential costs.

batf

Moreover, new data on homicides released in September 2019 shows the homicide rate in the US has fallen two years in a row since 2016, and is nearly down to half of the national homicide rates reported during the early 1990s.

Many states with weak gun-control laws are also among the states with the lowest homicide rates. For instance, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine — all of which have few gun restrictions — report remarkably low homicide rates. Other gun-permissive states like Utah, Iowa, and South Dakota all have homicide rates comparable to Canadian provinces, although we’re told Canada only has low homicide rates because of gun restrictions. Clearly there’s more behind the reality of violent crime than is suggested by the usual “more gun control means less crime” claims.

Many anti–private gun ownership activists continue to insist that only police officers and other government personnel ought to be carrying firearms, and that the police will protect the people from violent criminals. Yet, it’s unclear why the public ought to accept this rather strained claim. In 2019, police were repeatedly shown to endanger the public while pursuing their own safety. Meanwhile, the end of the year brought another case of private gun owners stopping a murderous gunman far more effectively than police ever could have. Nor was the Texas church case the only notable example we can recall this year. It is entirely possible, of course, that cases like these are not typical or representative examples of police behavior or what happens when armed criminals attack innocents. But there’s no denying the optics this year were bad for the pro-gun-control side. Faced with the choice of owning a gun for protection or trusting in police for protection, many apparently continue to choose the former.

  • 1.The BATF statistics exclude guns produced for military use but include guns used by civilian police forces. However, total police force weapons are estimated to total only one million. According to American Military News (quoting the Small Arms Survey) “the U.S. military holds about 4.5 million guns, and state and local police have just over 1 million.” See https://americanmilitarynews.com/2018/06/us-civilians-own-400-million-guns-compared-to-militarys-4-5-million-survey-shows/.

Alabama lawmaker prepares bill to allow deadly force in church for self-defense

BIRMINGHAM, Ala. (WBMA) – A proposed new law aims to help protect places of worship in Alabama.

One state lawmaker says he’s preparing a bill to allow the use of deadly force in church for self- defense and the defense of others.

Rep. Lynn Greer (R- Rogersville) tells ABC 33/40 he expects this year’s bill to be similar to the one he filed the past two years. But he says this year he’s been working with the District Attorneys Association and the Attorney General’s Office to improve it.

Greer expects the bill to allow a person to use deadly physical force in self-defense or the defense of another if that force is used against an aggressor committing or attempting to commit a crime involving death, serious physical injury, robbery in the first degree, or kidnapping in the first degree on the premises of a church.

Greer expects his bill to include training from sheriff’s offices for church security members, and that it would provide immunity from criminal prosecution or civil action for a person using such deadly force.

Pastor Darryl Warren believes that bill could help, as he works on security for New Saint James Baptist Church in Birmingham.

“In church, it’s disheartening to know one day we may even need metal detectors in church, but this is where we’ve gotten and it’s disheartening to know someone would come into the church and do harm in God’s house but we live in a fallen world,” said Warren.

He has a eight person security team and nine cameras installed, monitoring inside and outside.

“A third phase might even be hired security if it comes to that and then having the sheriff’s department to come in and do some training as well,” he said. “So, we want to cover all the bases we can and make the members feel as secure as they can while they’re worshiping.”

Defense attorney Ben Preston believes the law already covers the church.

“I feel you have the right to defend yourself in certain situations no matter where you’re at,” he told us.

But says adding specific language could strengthen that.

He does have concerns about what the immunity would include and who would determine who and what qualifies.

“If they’re just going to give blanket immunity, it sounds like they would never be charged period,” he said. “Which would, then they’re not being charged, they’re not bonding out, they’re not having to wait for the stand your ground hearing, waiting for the judge to decide if they’re going to prosecute.”

Preston notes that we are still waiting for the bill to be released to read the exact language and learn what will be included in the immunity section.

Pastor Warren says immunity may offer assurance to his security team.

“That they are not going to be held liable for carrying out the act of defending someone in church,” he said. “So, if you have legislation to take care of that, it kind of removes the sense of- I’m worrying about if I do this, what’s going to happen to me.”

Greer got his bill through the House in 2018, but it died in the Senate.

If his bill does make it through the House in 2020, Senator Arthur Orr (R- Decatur) tells ABC 33/40 he plans to sponsor it in the Senate.

“We should help places of worship protect themselves,” Orr told ABC 33/40.

He says the state doesn’t need to encourage reckless behavior, but that he’s looking at what could be done to still add a layer of protection.

Orr added that he’s looking at what other states have passed, including Texas.

New Tennessee Gun Law Decreases Requirements For Concealed Carry Permit

A new gun law in Tennessee will make it easier for people to obtain a  concealed carry permit.

The legislation signed by Governor Bill Lee earlier this year creates a new concealed carry handgun permit with less stringent training requirements than the traditional permit. The original permit will be known as an “enhanced” permit and keep the same eight-hour course requirement. The new handgun permit will require a ninety-minute course than can be completed online. No hands-on training is needed.

Clarksville gun store owner James Allen said the bill allows potentially unsafe gun owners to obtain a permit. He said training requirements under the new law are too lax.

“There’s no hands-on training on proper safety and how to hold a gun, how to shoot a gun and when to shoot a gun,” Allen said. “It’s a stupid law.”

State Representative Andy Holt of Dresden sponsored the bill in the House of Representatives. He said the nonrestrictive training requirements are no cause for concern because Tennessee already recognizes concealed carry permits from states including Georgia and Alabama that require no training. He also said the expansion of gun rights in the state makes all Tennesseans safer.

“At the end of the day, I still believe that more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens equates into less crime…and I’m a proponent of less crime,” Holt said.

The law takes effect January 1.