Category: RKBA

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

Inconvenient Truths About Guns and Gun Control

Politicians and journalists often portray fiction as fact. It is easy to be opinionated, but hard to be informed. This came to mind as I listened to Virginia Democrats tell us we’d be safer if we were disarmed. What is the truth about gun-control laws? What politicians says a law will do might have nothing to do with what the law actually does. Lives are at stake when gun-control laws fail. Saying that the next gun-control law is necessary to stop violent crime admits that the 23 thousand firearms regulations already on the books didn’t work as advertised. It is a rare politician who admits how limited the government really is when it comes to public safety.

Fortunately, we’ve lived with firearms for several hundred years. We know some things that work. Here are a few inconvenient truths I’ve found after a few decades of study.

Inconvenient Truth: Most gun-related deaths are suicides, not murders. Unfortunately, restrictions on firearms have not reduced the rate of suicide. Fortunately, informed gun owners are reaching out to other gun owners who are dealing with mental illness. Mental health treatment works. We’re changing the gun culture for the better, no thanks to the politicians.

Inconvenient Truth: Most murders with a firearm in the United States are committed by members of criminal gangs. The police know who most of these murderers are. Gun-control laws that restrict the actions of honest gun owners have not changed the actions of known criminals. Most of the young people shot with guns are gang members who were shot by other gang members. Unfortunately, some of the victims are also innocent bystanders or victims of crime. Disarming the innocent victims doesn’t stop the criminals.

Inconvenient Truth: Background checks don’t reduce the rate of violent crime. Criminals don’t buy their guns at gun shops or gun shows. Criminals get their guns the same way they get their drugs; they get them illegally from other criminals. (By the way, there is no gun-show loophole. Every law that applies outside a gun show also applies inside a gun show.)

Inconvenient Truth: Honest gun owners do not cause crime. In fact, licensed concealed carry holders are both more law-abiding and more accurate with their guns than the police. Civilians with a permit to carry a gun in public are the most law-abiding group that sociologists can find.

Inconvenient Truth: Civilian gun ownership is the most cost-effective way to reduce violent crime.

Inconvenient Truth: Owning a gun does not make you more likely to be a victim of violent crime. It is true that people who live in high-crime areas are more likely to want a firearm for personal protection. People tend to be more sensitive about personal safety when someone they know have been victims of violent crime. Gun ownership is often a response to criminal violence rather than the cause of it.

Inconvenient Truth: Criminals don’t often take  a person’s gun and hurt them with it. There are more examples of victims disarming criminals than of criminals disarming victims.

Inconvenient Truth:  A sexual assault almost never becomes a rape if the victim is armed. The armed victim is such an uninviting target that the attacker usually runs away once he sees that the victim is armed.

Inconvenient Truth: Criminals don’t fight fair. There are usually several criminals attacking a single victim. We civilians are the first victims of crime. Police are our backup and usually arrive after the fight is over.

Here is one last inconvenient truth: Politicians often exempt themselves from the laws they pass. Some politicians own guns. They must think guns are useful. Some politicians have armed security. They must think guns make them safer. If politicians don’t live by the gun regulations they want for us, then the politicians don’t believe in gun-control.

I agree with what these gun-control politicians do even if I disagree with what they say, and that is the truth.

The world isn’t safe. If you don’t believe me, then ask a policeman who deals with criminals every day. The policeman wants a firearm because he lives in a dangerous world. Unfortunately, the average criminal will victimize over 20 civilians before the policeman catches him. That is why you and I need a firearm too. We have to protect ourself and our loved ones until the police arrive, and we only call the police after we’ve been attacked. There is no doubt that self-defense is inconvenient, but I’d rather be inconvenienced now than be a helpless victim later. To make matters worse, you don’t get to pick when you might be attacked. ;-(

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.

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.

Gun Rights Groups Hit Back After VA AG Says Second Amendment Sanctuaries Have ‘No Legal Effect’

The Virginia Defense League and Gun Owners of America, the gun rights group that is spearheading the Second Amendment sanctuary movement in the commonwealth, responded to Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring’s statement that called the sanctuary resolution as having “no legal effect.”

The VDL and GOA sent a letter to their supporters and urged them to resist any unconstitutional gun control law the General Assembly passes in the new session next year.

“It is apparent that AG Herring and Governor Ralph Northam believe that Virginia localities have a duty to actively assist the Commonwealth in the enforcement of any law enacted by the General Assembly. These officials appear to believe that such blind obedience is required irrespective of whether a law violates the U.S. Constitution, the Virginia Constitution, or is manifestly destructive of the preexisting rights of the People of Virginia,” the groups wrote. “This radical view is demonstrably false, and ignores the significance of the fact that local officials are required by law to take an oath to support the federal and state constitutions above the laws enacted by the General Assembly.”

The VDL and GOA said Governor Ralph Northam and Herring are wrong in their assessment counties must always implement laws passed since they “have taken exactly the opposite legal position” when it came to sanctuary status for illegal immigrants.

Northam vetoed two bills in March that would have banned localities from becoming sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants and would have required law enforcement agency to notify federal authorities if they had illegal immigrants in their custody.

“The safety of our communities requires that all people, whether they are documented or not, feel comfortable, supported and protected by our public safety agencies,” Northam said at the time.

“Thus, three times in three consecutive years (2017, 2018, and 2019), Governor Northam used his office to support the right of Virginia’s localities to declare themselves sanctuary cities and counties, refusing to help with the enforcement of federal immigration laws, based on mere policy differences with those federal laws,” the gun rights group said.

The VDL and GOA stated there is nothing new with people not obeying illegal and unauthorized government acts, adding, “If necessary, the lower authority may even actively resist the superior authority, since the higher authority is acting illegitimately and unconstitutionally, and without legal authority.”

An overwhelming number of counties in Virginia have declared themselves as Second Amendment sanctuaries, promising to not enforce any gun law deemed as unconstitutional.

A few Virginia sheriffs voiced their support for counties becoming gun sanctuaries to Townhall, giving the movement critical backing.

“I am in favor of the Second Amendment Sanctuary. I believe we need to send a message to Richmond that our citizens will take a stance. My deputies and I take an oath to uphold the Constitution and that’s what we will do,” said Rappahannock County Sheriff Connie Compton.

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.

 

Second Amendment Sanctuary Cities For The Win.

It’s glorious how the normal people of Virginia are rising up to reject Governor Blackface … or is it Governor KKK-klothes? He can’t seem to remember which one he was in the photo, meaning he had probably donned both creepy get-ups at some point. Yay, our Democrat betters! In any case, the people are telling him, “No, we’re not letting you goose-stepping Bloomberg bots take our guns,” and it is especially glorious that the means to make this righteous commitment is a new, and not garbage, sanctuary movement.

I’ve always been an advocate of playing by the left’s new rules, and this is a great opportunity to new rules the libs good and hard. We got your sanctuary right here, pinkos.

See, the left decided that Virginia, whose northern reaches are now full of government workers and other garbage people, needed to turn blue. With tons of lib donor money and the aid of a typically inept state GOP (I know those feel here in California), they managed to just barely grab control of both houses of the legislature. With Governor Byrd-Jolson in charge, they immediately promised to do away with the Second Amendment. They announced that they were going to confiscate the citizens’ scary guns and do all sorts of other things to show those disobedient, probably Jesus-loving rubes who was boss.

Except, as Chairman Mao – who you think these dorks would appreciate more – pointed out, power grows from the barrel of a gun, not out of a mean tweet.

Instantly, everyone outside the garbage counties locked and loaded their freedom and so the Second Amendment sanctuary movement began. County after county, and many cities, all committed to resisting if the state tried enforcing unconstitutional gun laws against normal citizens. And it was beautiful. The Dems wet themselves.

Remember, these normals won’t hurt anyone who doesn’t mess with them. They work, raise children, pray, and they keep guns for the defense of themselves, their families, their communities and their Constitution. They didn’t get the memo that said they were supposed to just roll over and become subjects instead of citizens.

After all, Virginians aren’t Canadians.

Spokesperson: Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam Has ‘No Plans to Call in National Guard’

Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam (D) has no plans to use the National Guard against residents in Second Amendment sanctuary counties, according to a spokesperson.
The Los Angeles Times quoted Northam spokeswoman Alena Yarmosky saying, “[Northam has] absolutely no plans to call in the National Guard.”

The clarification of Northam’s position comes after Rep. Donald McEachin (D-VA) suggested the governor use the National Guard to force compliance with any newly passed gun controls.

The Washington Examiner quoted McEachin saying, “I’m not the governor, but the governor may have to nationalize the National Guard to enforce the law. That’s his call, because I don’t know how serious these counties are and how severe the violations of law will be. But that’s obviously an option he has.”

Northam’s decision not to call in the National Guard at this time also follows Culpeper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins’ vow to “deputize thousands” to defend gun rights.

Jenkins said:

Every Sheriff and Commonwealth Attorney in Virginia will see the consequences if our General Assembly passes further unnecessary gun restrictions. “Red Flag” laws without due process will create enormous conflict as well.

America has more guns than citizens and murder has long been illegal. At best, the proposed gun restrictions will disarm or handicap our law-abiding in their defense and possibly cause a criminal to choose another tool for evil.

Jenkins added, “If necessary, I plan to properly screen and deputize thousands of our law-abiding citizens to protect their constitutional right to own firearms.”

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.