Category: RKBA

College Students Know More About Firearms–and Rights–than Gun-Grabbing Politicians

In a matter of days, lawmakers in Virginia could pass some of the most radical gun control bills in the nation, the impact of which will be felt across the country.

As a recent college graduate who founded Students for Trump from my freshman dorm room, I remain active on college campuses today as co-chair of Turning Point Action. Everywhere I go, I meet young people who are closely following events in Richmond. Many of them are genuinely scared police are coming for their guns. During our lifetime, we’ve watched lawmakers chip away at our rights, and we are here to say, “Not today, Gov. Northam. Not today.”

Like many in my generation, I didn’t grow up with firearms. I was introduced to them in a high school ROTC program, which focused heavily on the Constitution. I learned the basics of firearms and self-defense. Perhaps more importantly, that class taught me the Second Amendment guarantees all the other rights in the Constitution.

As I visit with college students across the country, I am struck by how informed and educated they are about their rights. We may be young and inexperienced, but we know what’s going on around the world. In Hong Kong and Venezuela, we watch governments oppress their unarmed citizens. In our own country, we watch as state and local politicians exploit tragedies to pass more gun control laws. We watch New York billionaire Michael Bloomberg buy his way into power and influence across the country………..

Young people are fed up with politicians who exploit tragedies to push more failed gun control schemes. We’ve spent our youth watching politicians chip away at our rights. We will not stand idly by and let this continue. My generation is engaged, energized, and willing to stand up and fight for our rights in Virginia, and around the country. We are not only watching and listening to everything unfolding in Richmond, we engaged in this fight. Many of us are proud to be part of the NRA’s new student group, Students For 2A. We will never let a tyrannical government take away our rights.

Virginia Beach to hold special session to consider “Second Amendment Constitutional City” resolution.

The Virginia Beach City Council will hold a pair of special sessions next week to discuss — and vote — on becoming a “Second Amendment Constitutional City.”

“The City Council hereby expresses its strong support for the rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms and urges the members of the General Assembly and the Governor to take no action which would violate the freedoms guaranteed by either the Virginia Bill of Rights or the federal Bills or Rights,” reads a draft of a resolution requested by Mayor Bobby Dyer, Vice Mayor James Wood and Council members Jessica Abbott, John Moss and Rosemary Wilson.

The council is set to discuss the resolution at 4 p.m. Jan. 6 in the council’s conference room. After a short break, the council will reconvene at 6 p.m. in its chambers for a formal vote.

The previously unscheduled meetings, which Dyer called for on Monday, come amid a push by newly-empowered Democrats to pass gun control regulations.

Earlier this month, hundreds of people flooded Virginia Beach City Hall to ask the council to resist the proposed legislation. The crowd, which was advocating for a Second Amendment Sanctuary ordinance, was so large on Dec. 3 that police blocked the front doors of the building before the regularly scheduled 6 p.m. meeting even began…………..

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.

U.S. Gun Sales Near Record High as Violent Crime Rate Drops
Gun-related crimes fell 68 % and violent crimes 48.6 % in the same period that more guns were sold in the U.S.

Violent crime dropped by 48.6% in the U.S. in the same period that saw the record number of arms purchases: 423 million firearms, according to recently released data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.

Firearms-related accidents alone declined 68 percent between 1986 and 2018, a period in which U.S. citizens purchased 8.1 billion rounds of ammunition.

“These figures show that the United States has a strong desire to continue buying firearms for lawful purposes,” Joe Bertozzi, president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, told American Military News.

“The continued popularity of guns demonstrates that Americans have a keen interest in protecting themselves and their homes,” he added.

American citizens have the right to defend themselves. They have been able to counteract crime as opposed to what is happening in Latin American countries where the hyper-regulation of arms has granted a monopoly to law enforcement, state security forces, and criminal groups that act above the law, such as organized crime groups.

Caracas, Venezuela, which lost the right to carry arms under Hugo Chavez, is the most striking example of the city with the most homicides. Now Mexico, with more than 100 homicides per day and the second most violent city in the world, Acapulco, is living through the most violent year in its history and shows how the rigid law restricting the bearing of arms leaves the law-abiding citizen vulnerable.

Meanwhile, in the United States, more and more citizens have legal access to firearms. More than 25 million people registered in 2019 to carry guns in the US.

According to the FBI, 202,465 people registered to buy weapons on the biggest selling day. The gun registry process involves authorities corroborating whether the person has a criminal record.

This was the second-highest figure in history. The highest was in 2017 when 203,086 people filed their information for review in a single >
Both historical dates coincided with “Black Friday,” which falls on the last weekend of November, the day when there are massive discounts across the country.

Compared to last year, there was an 11% increase in domestic sales. At the end of November 2018, there were 182,093 registered arms buyers. As Christmas and New Year approaches, the numbers continue to rise.

In rural states like North Dakota, the number of buyers increased by up to 20%. According to Cody Schuh, owner of Shooters Inc., the political climate always contributes to a spike in sales. But he says this year was noteworthy. People not only stocked up on ammunition but also bought new rifles and pistols.

“Now we’re beginning to see that individuals buy weapons because they want to be safe without being told to do so by the state,” Schuh said.

It should be noted that the figures show the number of buyers, not the number of weapons. In October of this year alone, 1.2 million firearms were sold in the USA, 10.8% more than in October 2018.

Also, in October, the FBI reported that it reviewed the profiles of 2.4 million potential buyers, the highest record in a given month. In October last year, it was 2.3 million.

According to Small Arms Analytics and Forecast, 1.1 million firearms were sold in the U.S. in September of this year, 11% more than in September last year.

The U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to bear arms and overthrow an abusive government with a militia.

“What this tells us is that Americans vote with their wallets when it comes to the ability to exercise the Second Amendment,” said Mark Oliva, director of public relations for the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

Oliva says that this phenomenon is interesting, because contrary to the will of politicians who openly demand to restrict the Second Amendment, citizens are supplying themselves with weapons.

The Second Amendment to the Constitution speaks of the right of every American citizen not only to bear arms but to arm a militia if the government abuses its power and exceeds its functions.

Oliva considers FBI data to be the most accurate barometer when measuring arms sales and argues that this is not just a whim or coincidence but a “meaningful investment.”

He argues that U.S. citizens choose to invest their hard-earned money to exercise their rights, unlike the politicians seeking to restrict their ability to defend themselves.

The Democratic Party wants to remove Trump from power, but to deprive citizens of the right to rise against a tyrannical government.

For example, the Democratic Party demands greater control when carrying arms and has the backing of at least 150 companies that demanded greater control before the Senate. But sales show that millions of people disagree.

The irony is that the same party that seeks the removal of President Trump, whom they consider to be abusing his power, is the one that wants to deprive citizens of the ability to remove a tyrant from power.

This reflects the actions of the Democratic Party. They demand that the high and mighty state be the one to remove Trump from power, not “the people” they claim to represent.

Meanwhile, those with a more libertarian or conservative political orientation refuse to give more power to the state, much less to take away their right to self-defense.

For history has shown that every tyranny is established once it disarms its citizens. This is what happened in Cuba through Fidel Castro’s speech “Guns? For what?”

Sixty years later, Cuba is still run by the same family. Twenty-five million people in the U.S. showed with their weapons that they are not willing to risk the same thing happening in their country.

They are safer both from crime and the possibility of the emergence of tyranny. That is why they are literally in charge of their self-defense.

Virginia’s Second Amendment attack

By WALTER WILLIAMS

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.

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.

Second Amendment Sanctuaries Started in 1774

The capture of Virginia’s legislature by Democrats, who also command the executive branch, has unleashed a spate of bills to criminalize millions of law-abiding gun owners and send them to the penitentiary. The most radical proposal, Senate Bill 16, would make it a felony to possess an ordinary semiautomatic rifle with harmless features like an adjustable shoulder stock, a flare launcher, and a muzzle device to reduce kick.

Reflecting trends in states as diverse as Colorado, Illinois, New Mexico, and Washington, where politicians have declared a war against gun owners, about half of Virginia’s counties have declared themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries. County governments and elected sheriffs pledge not to enforce unconstitutional diktats that violate the right to keep and bear arms.

Sanctuary places are the darling of “progressive” jurisdictions determined to hide and harbor criminal aliens from federal immigration authorities. Progressives now accuse officials of being “vigilantes” for seeking to protect American citizens from imprisonment for exercising their constitutional rights.

Spearheading the war on Virginia gun owners is Gov. Ralph Northam, best known for his gig in blackface or Klan attire, and for calmly endorsing post-delivery abortion, that is, infanticide. To divert attention from the backlash, he is moving to criminalize all sorts of innocent conduct that has been lawful in the Commonwealth since Jamestown was settled in 1607.

It’s as if “the Redcoats are coming” again. Northam’s counterpart in 1774 was Lord Dunmore, the last royal governor, who took measures to disarm “disloyal” Virginians led by Patrick Henry. The patriots were arming and organizing themselves into independent companies to protect their rights.

None other than George Washington formed the Fairfax Independent Militia Company. “Threat’ned with the Destruction of our Civil-rights, & Liberty,” wrote George Mason, the volunteers pledged that “we will, each of us, constantly keep by us” a musket, six pounds of gunpowder, and 20 pounds of lead.

That was a lot of ammo. There’s a parallel here to the “large capacity” magazines that Northam wants to ban. And there’s an irony that Fairfax County is now the center of the blue wave that supports Dunmoresque gun bans.

The rest is history. In 1775 the Redcoats marched to seize colonists’ arms at Lexington and Concord and the Americans repulsed them. The inhabitants of Boston were ordered to turn in their guns, which were seized by British General Gage. The Continental Congress cited this perfidy in the Declaration of Causes of Taking Up Arms.

Nothing like that will happen today. Counties that have declared themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries make clear their dedication to use all lawful means to protect their constitutional rights. Law-enforcement authorities have scarce resources and must choose how to allocate them. Work to solve murders and robberies, or track down gun owners because they have rifles with those oh-so-deadly pistol grips or adjustable stocks? That’s a no-brainer.

But those who support filling the prisons with law-abiding citizens just because they have, for instance, a rifle that will also shoot flares — which is nothing more than a distress signal — should remember our history. The Second Amendment was adopted to prevent exactly those kinds of infringements……………..

 

Second Amendment sanctuaries reflect the will of people who value the Constitution

As leftist politicians continue to threaten the constitutional rights of law-abiding Americans, citizens are standing up for themselves.

Dozens of counties in California, Colorado, Illinois, Rhode Island, Texas and elsewhere have voted to become “Second Amendment Sanctuaries,” declaring that sheriffs in those counties will not enforce gun-control legislation that violates the Constitution.

In New Mexico, 29 of the state’s 33 county sheriffs signed a resolution earlier this year opposing sweeping gun-control bills proposed in the state legislature. Most recently, Virginia made headlines as more than 40 counties joined the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement that is sweeping the nation.

A February NPR article noted that “professional discretion is a constant feature of policing,” as law enforcement officers do not have the time nor the resources to enforce every single law every time one is broken. It is customary for police to decide which laws are a priority and whether pursuing lawbreakers to the full extent of the law is worthwhile. In the case of extreme gun laws, sheriffs have expressed several concerns: the laws are ineffective and unenforceable, they put police officers at increased risk, and they infringe on the Second Amendment rights enshrined by the Constitution.

“(Senate Bill 8, a background check bill) … does nothing to protect citizens and is unenforceable,” the New Mexico Sheriffs Association wrote in a letter earlier this year. “We also oppose House Bill 83 (a red flag gun-confiscation law), as it violates due process and puts law enforcement in a more dangerous situation and does nothing to protect citizens. This bill could disarm the very people trying to defend their lives and personal property.”

There is concern that the sanctuaries undermine the will of the people (though such concern was notably not expressed when counties declared themselves sanctuaries for illegal immigrants); however, sheriffs are elected officials. Sheriff Bob Songer of Klickitat County, who has vowed not to enforce Washington state’s Initiative 1639 — a package of gun-control laws — told NPR, “As an elected sheriff and a constitutional sheriff, I believe it violates the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and, more specifically, violates the Washington state Constitution.”

In an interview with Reuters, Songer expressed the attitude prevailing among Second Amendment sanctuary sheriffs: “Unfortunately for the governor and the attorney general, they’re not my boss,” Songer said. “My only boss is the people that elected me to office.”

These sanctuary resolutions are the last resort for voters in rural areas whose lifestyles and views are not represented by urban voters and lawmakers. As Reuters reports, the sanctuary movement “is exposing the rift between rural and urban America as much as the one between the Republican and Democratic parties, as small, conservative counties push back against statewide edicts passed by big-city politicians.”

Zach Fort, president of the New Mexico Sport Shooting Association, told Gunpowder Magazine (of which, full disclosure, I am the editor), “There’s a lot of pessimism shared by those who want to protect their gun rights right now. A lot of people think they’re being railroaded and not being listened to.”

New Mexico Sheriffs Association President Tony Mace expressed a similar frustration, “When this legislation is drafted every session, we are not invited to the table,” he told Gunpowder Magazine. “Our voices are falling on deaf ears. They’re not giving our point of view any attention at all. … If they’re not going to listen to us, then we are going to use their tactics against them. I, like the other sheriffs, was elected to protect our citizens’ constitutional rights. And that’s exactly what we plan to do.”

In sum, Second Amendment sanctuaries are sheriff-led movements. Sheriffs are elected by the people of the counties they oversee, and if the people agree with sheriffs that the Constitution remains the supreme law of the land, then Second Amendment Sanctuaries are the supreme fulfillment of the rights and freedoms the Constitution protects.

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.

Get Ready For War: FL Sheriff Warns Citizens To Arm Themselves
Most law enforcement officers suggest running, hiding, and calling 911 when violent criminals strike – not Sheriff Wayne Ivey.

What is our nation coming to? Impeaching the president when no actual crime has been committed. Taking away our Second Amendment rights. It’s so surreal. We have state governments fighting against federal agencies trying to protect us from the surge of illegal immigrants and human and drug trafficking. Politicians want to force us to give up our guns while mass shootings are becoming more frequent, and violent organizations like Antifa are gaining more power. On top of all that, you know things are critical when law enforcement tells citizens to arm themselves and be prepared for war.

Sheriff Wayne Ivey of Brevard County, Florida, has a strong message to impart in what he calls a strategy for survival. In a video, he warned citizens, “This is war, and you’d better be prepared to wage war to protect you, your family, and those around you.” The police usually recommend calling 911 in an emergency rather than fighting. But not Ivey. He suggests people be prepared; anyone with a concealed carry permit, he says, should be armed at all times.

First Line Of Defense?
“Folks, now more than ever is the time for our citizens to be prepared to serve as the first line of defense,” the sheriff warned.

Ivey’s message is strong – and a bit scary – but is he right? Some might consider his call to arms speech a tactic to alarm people unnecessarily, but when one takes into account all that is happening in the country today, he might just be right on target. We had two shootings on military bases a couple of days apart: Pearl Harbor, HI, and Pensacola, FL. If safety cannot be reasonably guaranteed at a military facility, why would anyone feel protected at a mall, a concert, or in their own home?

The 2A Resistance
The Florida sheriff isn’t the only one pulling back the reins on anti-gun policies. Local law enforcement agencies across the nation have vowed to uphold the Second Amendment, despite what state or federal officials may try to enforce. Virginia is a prime example of this resistance with 90% of the state’s counties turning into Second Amendment sanctuaries. And if that weren’t enough, Tazewell County has gone even further by approving a resolution to create a militia for the protection of county citizens and law enforcement from unfair firearm restrictions. This new policy came just days after Governor Ralph Northam, a Democrat, threatened “consequences” for refusing to enforce state gun control laws, which, according to one lawmaker from the Democratic Party, might include deploying the National Guard!

The American people have finally reached their limit, and all the aggressive pushing by the liberal left and demanding Democrats is only sending us that much faster into the next civil war.

St. Germain may soon follow Florence County as only Second Amendment Sanctuaries in Wisconsin

ST. GERMAIN – Gun store owner Jason Hyrczyk’s phone ringtone of gunfire says it all.

“It’s part of our American heritage,” said Hyrczyk, owner of Blacked Out Arms in St. Germain. “That’s why we’re different than any other country. It guarantees our freedoms.”

Hyrczyk strongly supports the second amendment, and agrees with the town board members who proposed a resolution to make St. Germain a second amendment sanctuary.

“We want to have a voice up here as well,” said St. Germain Town Supervisor Jim Swenson.

With talk about restricting gun access in the state capitol, Swenson said he and others feel left out of the political process.

“We’ll keep going forward with what the constitution states and what our belief is,” said Swenson.

Resolution SG19-12-1 was proposed by town supervisor Brian Cooper at the Dec. 9 meeting.

It states “the right of the people to keep and bear arms is guaranteed as an individual right under the second amendment.”

Debate arose at the Dec. 9 town board meeting about a how a potential future law could be at odds with the second amendment.

The resolution states “the town supports the sheriff of Vilas County to exercise sound discretion not to enforce against any citizen an unconstitutional firearms law.”

This could put law enforcement in a difficult position – should they follow their interpretation of the constitution or state law?

But Vilas County Sheriff Joe Fath has no problem with this.

“It wouldn’t have any effect on our department,” said Fath.

Fath, a resident of St. Germain, doesn’t believe Wisconsin will pass any of what he calls ‘unconstitutional second amendment laws’.

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 Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Pete 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.

Guns Are The Great Equalizers

“Be not afraid of any man;
No matter what his size;
When danger threatens, call on me—
And I will equalize!”
—Anonymous, on the virtues of the Colt revolver, c. 1875

The anti-gun movement is compelling. How could you not be when your entire argument is based on saving human life? Their objective is noble; however, their reasoning has flaws. Guns don’t simply exist to allow crazed murderers to take innocent life – they are the great equalizers for a civil and law-abiding society.

Studies have shown that there is a large range in how many times weapons are used for self-defense in America every year. Estimates range from 500,000 to 3 million defensive uses per year, affirmed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The rate of defensive uses is higher than one would likely suspect, the firearm is usually dispatched for defensive use by someone completely ordinary, and the majority of these occurrences receive little media attention.

In fact, the rate of occurrence is so high and so under-reported that The Heritage Foundation has launched a project to share some of the stories of Americans who use their weapons in a defensive manner each month. While readers may follow the link to read the rest of the November stories they shared, I wanted to share one particularly compelling story verbatim:

“Nov. 5, Genesee County, New York: A 76-year-old man used his shotgun to fend off an armed home intruder, potentially saving both his life and the life of his wife. The man responded to a knock on his door during the night, only to have the intruder force his way inside at gunpoint and tell the couple to give him all their money or else he would kill them. The intruder then ordered the couple to go into the basement, where the man thought the intruder was going to kill them. Instead, the man was able to grab his loaded shotgun and shoot the intruder in the hip, then held him at gunpoint for 15 minutes until police could arrive.”

Any loss of human life is horrific, hands down, full stop. I completely agree with the anti-gun lobby there. However, I would count myself naive if I believed that adding barriers to obtaining weapons would actually reduce the amount of gun violence we see in this country, and not simply reduce the number of law-abiding gun owners who rely on their weapons for defensive use every year.

Guns are the great equalizers of our society, the things that deter crime and allow everyone to stand on equal ground.

They are there for the elderly couple who could by no means fight off an intruder who breaks into their home.

They are there for the college student living by herself in a cheap apartment in the city.

They are there for the young mom who wants to protect her family.

And, they are there for every community and ethnicity in America that has ever felt marginalized or discriminated against. They are there to remind them that they are equals under the law, and that includes their right to defend themselves.

As Cliff Maloney, president of Young Americans for Liberty, once said, “An armed society is a polite society.” If society is to be equal and to treat one another lawfully, that equalization must begin with the right to self-defense.

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.