Category: RKBA

Incompetent ‘Contagious Disease’ Diagnosis for Guns a Prescription for Tyranny

“New Mexico Democratic Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham held a recent press conference to praise herself for implementing dubious gun control measures,” the National Shooting Sports Foundation reported. “‘I won’t rest until we don’t have to talk about (gun violence) as an epidemic and a public health emergency,’ the governor said.”

If a prominent politician declares an epidemic and imposes edicts and orders to enforce them, it’s fair to ask, “Where’s the science?”

“Lujan Grisham was born in Los Alamos and graduated from St. Michael’s High School in Santa Fe before earning undergraduate and law degrees from the University of New Mexico,” the governor’s official biography states. Neither her education nor her claimed career highlights show her qualified to make such a proclamation on her own, which makes it fair to ask, “Who’s advising her?”

That would be Patrick M. Allen, her New Mexico Health Department Secretary.

“In simple terms, violence, especially gun violence, behaves like a contagious disease,” Allen pontificates in his op-ed, “Tackling Gun Violence: A Public Health Challenge — DOH secretary says rapidly-spreading violence behaves like a contagious disease.”

“Imagine treating violence as if it were an infectious disease. Just as we study diseases’ origins to combat them effectively, we can apply the same approach to violence,” Allen proclaims. “How do we address gun violence as the contagious disease it is? Gun violence is a public health emergency.”

He sounds like he knows what he’s talking about, doesn’t he? The thing is, like the governor, the secretary in charge of the Land of Enchantment’s public health doesn’t have a qualified medical background, either.

Continue reading “”

GIBBON, GUNS AND GOVERNMENT

In the course of writing Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Edward Gibbon encountered Mohammed, who pursued the Jews with “implacable hatred” to the end of his life. The historian also called out Theodoric the Great, the Ostrogoth king who invaded Italy in 488 AD and “condescended to disarm the unwarlike natives of Italy, interdicting all weapons of offence, and excepting only a small knife for domestic use.” Call it an early display of the totalitarian mindset.

Wherever they hold sway, modern totalitarians disarm the people of firearms and ammunition. For details, see Gun Control in the Third Reich: Disarming Jews and “Enemies of the State,” by Stephen Halbrook. Hitler’s National Socialists used the registration records of the Weimar Republic to identify and disarm gun owners.

As Halbrook shows in Gun Control in Nazi-Occupied France: Tyranny and Resistance, the Nazis confiscated all firearms, even antique hunting rifles. That left the people vulnerable to wholesale slaughter. On June 10, 1944, four days after D-Day, troops of the 4th SS Panzer Regiment surrounded the village of Oradour-sur-Glane in central France. The attackers killed 245 women and 207 children, including six below the age of six months.

The 196 men killed included seven Jewish refugees from other parts of France. Of the 648 people murdered in the village, only 50 could be identified. The Nazis locked the women and children in the village church, shot indiscriminately, and set the victims on fire. The rest of the village was then looted and set ablaze.

As the late P.J. O’Rourke explained, this is what happens when those with all the power have all the guns. And to paraphrase inspector Claude Lebel (Michael Lonsdale) in The Day of the Jackal, be in no doubt that this is what the Biden Junta wants.

At every mass shooting, the default government response is to blame guns and make it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to exercise their constitutional right to keep and bear arms. This does not apply, however, to Muslim jihadists like “Soldier of Allah” Maj. Nidal Hasan. At Ford Hood in 2009 Hasan gunned down 13 unarmed American soldiers, including Pvt. Francheska Velez, who was pregnant. Hasan wounded more than 30 others, including Sgt. Alonzo Lunsford, who took seven bullets from the jihadist.

According to the composite character president David Garrow described in Rising Star: The Making of Barack Obama, this was “workplace violence,” not terrorism or even “gun violence,” and the mass murderer Hasan got better medical treatment than his victims. In 2014, Lunsford sought to explain his plight to the president, who declined to meet with him. The composite character did not proclaim Islamic terrorist attacks in 2015 at San Bernardino (14 dead) and Orlando in 2016, (49 dead) as cases of “gun violence.”

Of all the various forms of government in the world, wrote Gibbon, “an hereditary monarchy seems to present the fairest scope for ridicule.” The buffoonish Biden channels Obama, but the Delaware Democrat shapes up worse. On September 1, 2022, backdropped in red light with Marines at the ready, Biden targeted those who want the nation to be great as the primary threat to America. Biden’s FBI openly follows suit and in August the FBI killed Craig Robertson, a 75-year-old woodworker, for threats he had allegedly posted online.

Recall the Ruby Ridge siege of 1992, when the FBI deployed massive military force against a single family, and FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi shot dead Vicki Weaver as she held her infant daughter. That case prompted Senate hearings, but so far nothing on Robertson. Biden’s FBI shoots first and avoids questions later, so an escalation of deadly violence is not out of the question. Christmas 2023 may well be joyous, but 2024 shapes up as the year of living dangerously.

The Great Legal War Over Your Freedom

Since the U.S. Supreme Court decided New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen in 2022, the lower courts have been either trying to apply, or to resist, its directive to decide the validity of restrictions on the basis of the text of the Second Amendment and historical analogues from the time of the Founding. According to the ruling, an activity is presumed to be protected if it involves keeping and bearing arms by the people. The burden is then on the government to find historical precedents to show that a restriction is part of the nation’s history and tradition.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals applied Bruen to the federal ban on gun possession by a person subject to a domestic violence restraining order (DVRO) and found it to violate the Second Amendment. State DVROs are often issued with little pretense of an adversary hearing or are mutually agreed upon in divorces without knowledge that it evokes a federal gun ban.

The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, U.S. v. Rahimi, and a barrage of amicus briefs have been filed on both sides. Mr. Rahimi faces several state charges involving actual violence, dwarfing the federal possession charge. The amicus brief of the National Rifle Association put it this way: “Rahimi should not only lose his Second Amendment liberties, but he should also lose all of his liberties—if the allegations against him are ultimately proven true with sufficient due process. But constitutional safeguards cannot be set aside to obtain those ends.”

Consider the supposed historical analogues cited by Biden’s Justice Department and its amici—discriminatory laws disarming Catholics, slaves and “tramps”; confiscation of arms by oppressive British monarchs and by our own patriots in the American Revolution (there was a war going on, after all); and wholly irrelevant laws against gun sales to children and intoxicated persons. The Court heard oral arguments in the case on Nov. 7, 2023.

The Third Circuit, in Range v. Merrick Garland, held the federal ban on gun possession by felons to be unconstitutional as applied to a person convicted of a minor, non-violent offense.  Again, no laws in the Founding era disarmed persons who were not dangerous. The government is asking the Supreme Court to hear that case after it decides Rahimi.

When it decided Bruen, the Supreme Court directed the Fourth Circuit to reconsider its upholding of Maryland’s “assault weapon” ban in Bianchi v. Frosh. That court had held that ordinary AR-15 semi-automatic rifles are not really different from machineguns and are “weapons of war most useful in military service,” even though no military force in the world issues them as service rifles.

The Fourth Circuit got right on it, holding its oral argument on Dec. 6, 2022. A year later, crickets. Still no decision. Is it really so hard to apply Bruen’s simple tests, or would the court not like the result?

Continue reading “”

Massachusetts Assault Weapon Ban Ruled Constitutional by Judge

Massachusetts’ law prohibiting the possession and sale of some semiautomatic weapons commonly used in mass shootings is acceptable under a recent change to Second Amendment precedent from the US Supreme Court, a federal judge said Thursday.

The National Association for Gun Rights asked the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts to prevent the state from being able to enforce its law, claiming the weapons are protected under the Second Amendment because they were in common use at the time the Second Amendment was adopted.

The banned weapons “are unreasonably dangerous for ordinary purposes of self-defense due to their extreme lethality and high potential for collateral harm,” Chief Judge Dennis Saylor wrote in an order denying the gun rights group’s request to halt enforcement of the law.

This IS NOT the Bruen Standard.

The US Supreme Court held last year in New York State Rifles & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen that state governments must prove a regulation would have been consistent with the nation’s historical regulation of firearms.

Saylor’s decision helps build the jurisprudence for the types of state regulations that remain acceptable under the Second Amendment post-Bruen as many states grapple with challenges to their weapon laws. States like Illinois, California, and Connecticut have also been allowed to move forward enforcing their assault weapon bans.

“The relevant history affirms the principle that in 1791, as now, there was a tradition of regulating ‘dangerous and unusual’ weapons—specifically, those that are not reasonably necessary for self-defense,” the order said, and the current restrictions “pose a minimal burden on the right to self-defense and are comparably justified to historical regulation.”

THIS, is not the Bruen Standard either!

Saylor was not convinced that assault weapons are commonly used for self-defense, finding them “generally unsuitable” for that purpose because of their weight, size, and firepower.

“The features of modern assault weapons—particularly the AR-15’s radical increases in muzzle velocity, range, accuracy, and functionality—along with the types of injuries they can inflict are so different from colonial firearms that the two are not reasonably comparable,” the order said.

The case is Capen v. Campbell, D. Mass., No. 1:22-cv-11431, order 12/21/23.

Federal Judge Declines to Temporarily Block Key Portion of Illinois High-Power Semiautomatic Weapons Ban

A federal judge in Illinois has declined to temporarily delay a portion of the state law banning some high-power semiautomatic weapons from going into effect.

U.S. District Judge Stephen McGlynn on Friday declined a request from several gun rights groups that would have delayed the Jan. 1 deadline for residents of Illinois to register their guns that are under the ban, according to the Chicago Tribune.

According to the report, those who have guns or accessories that are included in the ban are required to file “endorsement affidavits” with the Illinois State Police on their website.

Individuals who fail to register could be charged with a misdemeanor for the first offense and a felony for any offenses after.

McGlynn wrote in his opinion that a temporary injunction would “create further delays in this litigation when the constitutional rights of the citizens demand an expeditious resolution on the merits.”

President of Federal Firearms Licensees of Illinois, Dan Eldridge, told the outlet that the issue could end up in the Supreme Court.

“There’s a lot of stuff in motion in here,” Eldridge said.

The ban, signed by Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker in January, includes penalties for individuals who, “carries or possesses… manufactures, sells, delivers, imports, or purchases any assault weapon or .50 caliber rifle.”

The law also includes statutory penalties for anyone who, “sells, manufactures, delivers, imports, possesses, or purchases any assault weapon attachment or .50 caliber cartridge.”

Any kit or tools used to increase the fire rate of a semiautomatic weapon are also included in the ban, and the law includes a limit for purchases of certain magazines.

On Dec. 14, the Supreme Court allowed the law to remain in place after the National Association for Gun rights asked for a preliminary injunction.

In November, a 7th District U.S. Court of Appeals panel also refused a request to block the law. In August, the law was upheld by the Illinois Supreme Court in a 4-3 decision.

Barrasso: The Second Amendment is Freedom’s Safeguard

WASHINGTON D.C. — U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY), chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, today blocked an attempt by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to ban so-called “assault weapons.” Senator Barrasso spoke on the Senate floor on the need protect Americans’ Second Amendment rights.

“Almost every single page of this bill adds new restrictions and new burdens on people who follow the law. It tells you what you can buy and what you cannot buy. It bans more than 205 popular rifles, shotguns, and pistols by name. I oppose any policies that jeopardize the Second Amendment rights of the people of Wyoming and across the country,” Sen. John Barrasso Wednesday on Senate Floor.

Excerpts from Sen. Barrasso’s remarks follow:

Continue reading “”

Judge Declares Most of California’s New ‘Gun-Free Zones’ Can’t Be Enforced

U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez isn’t the only Second Amendment “saint” in California who miraculously adheres to the text, tradition, and history of the right to keep and bear arms. Judge Cormac Carney has delivered a stern rebuke of his own to state lawmakers who imposed a host of new “sensitive places” where lawful concealed carry is forbidden, granting an injunction against their enforcement just a little more than a week before the state’s carry-killer legislation known as SB 2 is set to take effect.

In a 43-page opinion handed down late Wednesday, Carney described SB 2 as “repugnant to the Second Amendment, and openly defiant of the Supreme Court.” The law “turns nearly every public place in California into a ‘sensitive place,’” according to Carney, “effectively abolishing the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding and exceptionally qualified citizens to be armed and to defend themselves in public.”

Carney ruled in favor of the gun owners and Second Amendment organizations who brought the May v. Bonta and Carralerro v. Bonta litigation on every one of their challenges; granting an injunction against the following “gun-free zones” established under SB 2:

  • Hospitals, mental health facilities, nursing homes, medical offices, urgent care facilities, and other places where medical services are customarily provided,
  • Public transportation
  • Establishments where “intoxicating liquor” is sold for consumption on the premises
  • Public gatherings and special events
  • Playgrounds and private youth centers
  • Parks and athletic facilities
  • Department of Parks and Recreation and Department of Fish and Wildlife property, except hunting areas,
  • Casinos and gambling establishments
  • Public libraries, zoos, and museums
  • Places of worship
  • Financial institutions
  • Privately-owned businesses open to the public
  • Parking areas (including those adjacent to “sensitive places” not challenged by the plaintiffs)

This is the post-Bruen carry decision that gun owners have been waiting for. Carney didn’t try to play philosophical games or stretch historical analogues to the point of silliness in order to uphold these “gun-free zones.” Instead, he did exactly what the Supreme Court has instructed judges to do: look at the text of the Second Amendment, as well as the history and tradition of the right to keep and bear arms when determining whether a modern gun control restriction fits within that national tradition.

Continue reading “”

GUN CONTROL ADVOCATES WONDER WHY NEW YORKERS TURN TO THE SECOND AMENDMENT

More than half of New Yorkers now believe their state is in decline and won’t get better soon. Go figure, crime is listed as the Number 2 reason for the reported despair – behind only the cripplingly high cost of living. Recent events have led to a surge in crime leaving countless New Yorkers feeling susceptible to the violent wills of criminals.

The feelings aren’t political either, as according to a new Siena College poll there’s wide agreement among each party affiliation – Republican, Democrat and Independent – that violent crime remains a serious issue. At least 64 percent of each respective group says so.

“In assessing the severity of problems facing New York, there is, surprisingly, considerable agreement among Democrats, Republicans and independents,” Siena College poster Steven Greenberg said of the findings.

Unfortunately, there’s some bad news-good news, though, for residents of the Empire State who want to exercise their right to defend themselves with a firearm as things are likely getting a lot worse before they get any better.

Continue reading “”

Nebraska AG Deems Omaha & Lincoln’s Executive Orders Illegal

On Friday, December 15th, Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers issued a formal opinion that the gun-free zone executive orders in Omaha and Lincoln are illegal for outdoor facilities. He deemed that “municipalities lack the authority to regulate the possession of firearms and certain weapons in quintessential public spaces, such as parks, trails, and sidewalks…” and that attempting to do so is an infringement on both the Second Amendment and the Nebraska State Constitution.

Senator Tom Brewer, who championed constitutional carry and statewide preemption bill LB 77, requested an opinion on the executive orders’ constitutionality this fall, specifically pertaining to the outdoor facilities the orders regulated.

This is a significant victory for all Nebraskans, and clarifies that municipalities lack the authority to regulate carry in “quintessential” outdoor spaces. Residents in Lincoln and Omaha should contact their local elected officials to rescind these unconstitutional orders and ordinances using their contact pages. For Lincoln, please contact the city council and Mayor Leirion Gaylor Baird. For Omaha, please contact the city council and Mayor Jean Stothert.

In Tennessee, under proposed new law, you will lose your 2A rights if you take any of the medications on this list

Just in time for Christmas: terrorism is comin’ to town!

Just in time for Christmas, the FBI and Homeland Security are announcing a greatly elevated risk of “lone wolf” terrorism. Happy Holidays!

They’re a little late in contributing to the holiday spirit. Hapless FBI Director Christopher Wray has twice in the last month or so sheepishly told Congress with thousands, or tens of thousands of single, military-aged men from countries that want to kill every American, countries like China, Iran, Syria, Afghanistan and more, streaming across the totally secure border, we might have a kinda, sorta, terrorist problem, maybe. They’re even kinda, sorta admitting some of these guys might be members of the Chinese Army.

That’s tens of thousands they know about because they’ve chatted briefly with them before letting them go wherever they please by taxpayer-funded bus or jet, or they’ve seen them trotting across the border and kindly waved “bye-bye.” No one knows how many “got-aways” got away, likely as many more.

Our security establishment has gone so far as to say they’re watching some 300 undocumented persons on the Terrorist Watch List. What they’re not saying is why they allowed 300+ undocumented, TWL nabobs into the country in the first place so they would have to “watch” them. Job security? One doesn’t need to watch them so much if they’re not in the country, but that makes sense, so our security establishment doesn’t do that.

Our guardians, brilliant analysts all, are also suggesting because many of these potential terrorists are Islamists—one has to read between the lines to get that–and not fond of Christianity in all its trappings, might want to “disrupt”—helpful translation: shoot up, blow up, generally slaughter—Christmas gatherings, like church services, parades, stores, malls, that sort of thing.

Incredibly for government work, they’re on to something. We probably don’t have to fear another 9-11 style attack or attacks, though such grand gestures can’t be ruled out. With thousands of terrorists already in country, a great many more, smaller, attacks are most likely. Terror states have cooperative arrangements with Mexican drug cartels, which not only help them cross the border, but provide them with all the weapons and support they need.

Most likely are numerous attacks all across the country at churches, schools, shopping malls, theaters, sports events, anywhere Americans gather. Those attacks require only a few terrorists with small arms. Grenades and other explosives are icing on the terrorist cake. Imagine at least one such terrorist attack in every state occurring on the same day at the same time. That’s the very definition of terrorism: making people fear, making them realize the government can’t, won’t, protect them. Imagine that kind of terrorism occurring over and over again. Even a single terrorist armed with an AK—an actual automatic weapon, not a fictional “assault weapon”—can do enormous damage in little time.

The worst part is terrorists don’t need high body counts, though they certainly prefer them.  They need only do many attacks, coordinated or random, to secure the goals of terrorism.  Americans afraid to leave their homes contribute to the economic collapse the Biden Meat Puppet Administration has so ardently pursued.

One of life’s ironies is terrorists will be most likely to strike in blue cities and states, places doing their best to keep their citizens disarmed, places—and here’s deadly irony for you—most supportive of the Palestinian terrorist cause. Terrorists, domestic and foreign, prefer gun free zones, knowing they’ll have the best chance to do the most damage before the police can arrive. That doesn’t mean red states are safe, just that there’s a greater chance of armed Americans who can end an attack long before the police can respond. Foreign terrorists are certainly learning the patterns and practices of the police in their assigned target areas.

Sophisticated actors, like visiting members of the Chinese military, are more likely to be stealthy. They’ll engage in sabotage, probing to see just how and where we’re most vulnerable, though they surely have good intelligence on those vulnerabilities already.  Wouldn’t widespread blackouts on Christmas Eve add to the festivities? Wouldn’t biological agents in water supplies spice up the Christmas punch bowl? Wouldn’t a universal Internet crash be a Christmas morning surprise?

That the FBI has been very busy pursuing domestic terrorists like soccer moms, any Normal American who happened to be anywhere near DC on January 6, or the worst of the worst—Catholics—is only evidence of their staunch defense of “our democracy.”  Unfortunately for us, we’re not a democracy; we’re a representative republic. They’re protecting the people and bureaucracies that want the republic dead, just like those folks on the TWL the FBI is “watching.”

When out and about this Christmas season, bundle up, and put on your most festive Glock.  You might need it.

No. These domestic enemies need prosecution

THEY SKIPPED CIVICS
SENATOR CORY BOOKER NEEDS A REFRESHER COURSE ON RIGHTS

It’s as if the gun control crowd doesn’t want me to retire, because the Capitol Hill clown show seems to be taking every federal court rejection of extremist gun control as a challenge rather than a lesson in civics and the Constitution.

Last month, U.S. Senator Cory “I am Spartacus” Booker of New Jersey and a handful of his Beltway buddies — the “usual suspects,” of course — introduced a stinker known as the “Federal Firearms Licensing Act.” Otherwise dubbed S. 3212, it reads like the handiwork of someone who either slept through American Government in high school or skipped it altogether. The bill was read twice and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Here are the highlights:

“Except as provided in subsection (d), it shall be unlawful for any individual to purchase or receive a firearm unless the individual has a valid Federal firearm license.

“The Attorney General shall establish a Federal system for issuing a Federal firearm license to eligible individuals for firearms transferred to such individual.

“(2) REQUIREMENTS.—The system established under paragraph (1) shall require that—
“(A) an individual shall be eligible to receive such a license if the individual—
“(i) has completed training in firearms safety, including—
“(I) a written test, to demonstrate knowledge of applicable firearms laws; and
“(II) hands-on testing, including firing testing, to demonstrate safe use and sufficient accuracy of a firearm; and
“(ii) as part of the process for applying for such a license—
“(I) has submitted to a background investigation and criminal history check of the individual;
“(II) has submitted proof of identity;
“(III) has submitted the fingerprints of the individual; and

“(IV) has submitted identifying information on the firearm that the person intends to obtain, including the make, model, and serial number, and the identity of the firearm seller or transferor.”

If you liked the above, you’ll love what follows:

Continue reading “”

WOMEN TESTIFY OF SECOND AMENDMENT EMPOWERMENT TO CONGRESS

Congress heard directly from women on the need to empower women by protecting Second Amendment rights in a hearing at the U.S. House of Representatives. The hearing gave voice to women, including domestic violence survivors, of how gun control measures often make it more burdensome for women to protect themselves, even as gun control proponents continue to tell these same women that the government and police will protect them.

The House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance hosted the hearing titled, “Second Amendment Rights Empower Women’s Rights” to inform lawmakers of how gun control puts barriers in the way, or in some cases, robs women of the inherent right to self-defense. Witnesses told lawmakers of their survival stories from horrific spousal abuse. These women also explained that learning to become a responsible firearm owner not only provides them the means to protect themselves and their children while empowering them to determine their futures without fear.

“Female firearm ownership continues to grow in the United States,” said committee Chairman Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.). “Women are turning to themselves to be their own first responders.” He added that gun ownership among Black women is especially on the rise – by 87 percent according to NSSF 2021 data. “I commend these strong women, and all strong women, for stepping up to protect themselves and their families.”

Chairman Biggs noted that this increase is occurring while crime rates are still elevated and soft-on-crime policies, combined with prosecutors unwilling to apply the full strength of the law against criminals, is compelling many women to consider exercising their right to lawful firearm ownership.

“They fail to realize how more gun control only harms and impacts the vulnerable populations they claim they want to protect,” Chairman Biggs added.

The witnesses explained how life circumstances drove them to take ownership of their rights to keep and bear firearms to protect themselves and their loved ones. Some of their paths to firearm ownership began through awful abuse and threats to their lives. They shared that they were determined to never allow that experience to control them and now teach others, especially fellow women, how to lawfully and responsibly own firearms.

Continue reading “”

Bill to Ban Gun CAD Files Nears Vote In The Senate

A bill to ban computer-aided design (CAD) gun file sharing could be voted on in the United States Senate any day.

The bill reads: “It shall be unlawful for any person to intentionally distribute, over the internet or by means of the World Wide Web, digital instructions in the form of Computer Aided Design files or other code that can automatically program a 3-dimensional printer or similar device to produce a firearm or complete a firearm from an unfinished frame or receiver.”

Senate Bill 1819 is known as the 3D Printed Gun Safety Act and was introduced by Senator Edward Markey (D-MA) and co-sponsored by 28 other Democrats, including Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Chris Murphy (D-CT), and the late Dianne Feinstein (D-CA). It also has support from most of the other Democrats in the Senate.

“Let me be clear: We aren’t just talking about water pistols here,” said Co-sponsor Senate Kristin Gillibrand (D-NY). “We’re talking about real, fully operational semi-automatic firearms like AR-15 rifles and Beretta M9 handguns. Because many of the 3D printed guns are made of plastic, they can bypass metal detectors commonly used at…secure public areas. People are going into these public spaces and using these ghost guns to commit crimes, and law enforcement is finding it more and more difficult to stop them.”

The bill will prevent the sharing of gun CAD, which is hosted on sites such as Defense Distributed’s Def CAD website. The CAD files let anyone with a 3D printer print a firearm receiver. The affordability of 3D Printers that can be purchased for as little as a few hundred dollars has led to an explosion of DIY gun builders that design and print firearms. The 3D print revolution has made gun laws obsolete.

Due to the lack of action in Congress, President Joe Biden ordered the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to issue a rule banning 80% kits and changed the classification of unfinished frames to be considered firearms. The ATF rule change did not address the 3D printing of guns.

Some states have proposed radical laws to try to cut down on the printing of firearms. New York has proposed a law that would require background checks to buy a 3D printer. Anyone the government prohibits from owning firearms would also be prevented from acquiring a 3D printer.

The proposed federal law raises constitutional questions beyond just the Second Amendment. Many believe that computer code is protected speech, and this law would run afoul of the First Amendment. Many books and resources exist that teach people how to make drugs and bombs, like the Anarchist Cookbook. Some in the gun community reason if that is protected by freedom of speech, then computer code that allows someone to make a gun must also be covered by the First Amendment.

A companion bill in the House of Representatives is currently in the House Judiciary. The House bill is expected to fail due to a lack of support from Republicans. It is doubtful that the Senate bill will have enough votes for a supermajority, but the Democrats have been able to pressure the Republicans into passing anti-gun bills such as the Bi-Partisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA).

Armed mom schools Congress on booming female gun ownership: ‘Refuse to stand by’

Women are considered one of the fastest-growing groups of gun owners in the United States, and a House Judiciary subcommittee this week will examine how gun ownership “empowers women across America” as crime spirals in many areas of the nation.

The House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance will hold a hearing Wednesday morning, and a trio of female gun experts and instructors will appear to advocate for Americans’ Second Amendment rights.

Fox News Digital exclusively obtained a preview of testimony from one of the witnesses, Beth Alcazar, a U.S. Concealed Carry Association (USCCA) senior training counselor.

“I am a writer. I am an instructor. I am a doctoral candidate working toward my terminal degree in curriculum and instruction. But, first and foremost, I am a mother. And I have made a personal choice to live as a mom with a gun,” Alcazar will tell the subcommittee, chaired by Arizona Republican Rep. Andy Biggs.

Alcazar is the editor of Concealed Carry Magazine and has authored a handful of gun training documents for the USCCA, including “Women’s Handgun & Self-Defense Fundamentals” and “Children’s Firearms & Safety Fundamentals.”

She will reflect in her testimony that women across the nation have taken self-defense issues into their own hands and are refusing to become the victims of violent crimes.

“For the women who walk across a dark parking lot every night after work. For the Realtors who show houses to strangers every week. For any young women who have shadows in their past. And for moms, like me, with children in tow. I think they would all agree: They refuse to stand by, idle and helpless. They refuse to become someone’s victim. They refuse to allow harm to come to the ones they love,” Alcazar will say in her testimony.

Since the pandemic, gun sales have hit record numbers, including when an estimated 23 million firearms were sold and more than 21 million background checks were conducted in 2020. The numbers smashed records and notably spiked at the onset of the pandemic in March 2020 before jumping yet again in June of that year as protests and riots spread across the nation in response to the death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police.

Gun ownership has especially boomed among women. Between 2019 and 2021, as gun purchases exploded, about half of gun customers were women, according to the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Women were the most likely new gun owner demographic during those years, researchers found.

Alcazar said crime has spiraled and women face “violent criminals — many with evil intent,” who “are terrorizing us.” But where violence and crime lurks, an armed woman has a better chance of defending herself from the unexpected, Alcazar’s testimony explains.

“This shouldn’t be the way that we live,” Alcazar will tell the subcommittee. “But it serves as a clear reminder that law-abiding citizens should be able to defend themselves from danger at all times. And any solution to better protect ourselves, our children and our communities should start with our God-given right to self-defense.”

The mother of three’s testimony explains that, through her work training Americans on firearm safety, she has seen “firsthand, a rich diversity as scores of American women are purchasing, training with and carrying firearms in the name of female empowerment.”

“For many women, this self-defense awakening has resulted in a new source of certainty, security, responsibility and equality that we might not have otherwise had,” her testimony states.

The USCCA, where Alcazar serves as a certified instructor and senior training counselor, was founded in 2003 and provides American gun owners with training and education on firearms and self-defense liability insurance through its membership program. The group includes more than 10,000 instructors across the nation, many of whom have reported seeing an increase in women seeking gun training.

Fox News Digital spoke to a USCCA instructor in New Mexico earlier this year who said that Native American women specifically were increasingly signing up for gun safety classes in the face of crime and violence.

“Almost every week we have a Native woman or someone close to family saying, ‘I’m really interested in taking this class and picking up a firearm because you see the numbers with the missing and murdered indigenous women and people,’” Joe Talachy, a USCCA instructor and owner of Indigenous Arms 1680 Ltd. Co., told Fox News Digital this summer.

Alcazar argues that gun ownership and training have fundamentally changed her as a person and mother, and she finds peace knowing that she is her “own protector” and her “family’s first responder.”

“The more I’ve trained, the more I’ve realized that I don’t have to wait for someone else to care for me or protect me. I am my own protector. And I am my family’s first responder. And being able to keep myself and those I love safe? I don’t think there’s anything more important than that,” Alcazar’s testimony says.

The hearing is scheduled for 9 a.m. Wednesday. Geneva Solomon, owner of Redstone Firearms in Burbank, California, and firearms instructor Shirley Watral are also scheduled to testify.

Now New York demonstrates link between Second Amendment, other liberties

Last Tuesday, we criticized developments in Flagstaff, Arizona, where local officials seem to be allergic to the idea that gun shop owners, gun owners and people who champion the Second Amendment deserve to be afforded equality before the law and before the practices of the government entrusted to serve the interests of all its constituents.

Instead, leaders of Flagstaff were walking away from advertising revenue for displays at the city’s airport because of fears the courts might expect them to allow a gun shop the same opportunity to advertise as any other business.

Unfortunately a similar case has popped up closer to home — the American Civil Liberties Union will represent the National Rifle Association in a lawsuit contesting New York state’s Department of Financial Services is targeting the lobbying group with a campaign of harassment, discouraging banks and insurers from doing business with the NRA to punish the NRA for its advocacy.

“The government can’t blacklist an advocacy group because of its viewpoint,” the ACLU correctly notes, according to an article in The Hill.com, a Washington, D.C.-based newspaper.

As we alluded to about a week ago, many advocates for the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms explicitly cite fears that without an armed populace, the government will trample the broader array of rights individuals are given by God.

We understand many people feel these fears are overblown, perhaps even paranoid.

But we also cannot think of any way advocates could make the case that these fears are not overblown and are in fact quite reasonable better themselves than what the governments of Flagstaff and now New York state are doing.

In Flagstaff and throughout New York state, people who presumably wish the broader public to believe that the debate over the right to own firearms is about public safety and not about liberty are conspiring to deny their skeptics the right to advertise in a forum available to other constituents and to orchestrate punishment for exercising First Amendment rights in tandem with the banking and insurance sectors.

As much as some people may wish we could cordon off the Second Amendment from the more comprehensive need to preserve individual right, it is the very actions of those people who demonstrate that the violation of the Second Amendment will require violations of nearly all of our cherished, God-given liberties enshrined in the Bill of Rights.

White House Hosts State Lawmakers, Launching ‘Safer States Agenda’

Approximately 100 state lawmakers were invited to the White House Wednesday for the official introduction of the Biden-Harris administration’s Safer States Initiative, which reportedly outlines “key actions states should take” to “reduce gun violence.”

The White House unveiled an eight-page “Safer States Agenda,” which includes the following recommendations:

  1. Establish a State Office of Gun Violence Prevention
  2. Invest in Evidence-informed Solutions to Prevent and Respond to Gun Violence
  3. Strengthen Support for Survivors and Victims of Gun Violence
  4. Reinforce Responsible Gun Ownership
  5. Strengthen Gun Background Checks
  6. Hold the Gun Industry Accountable

Essentially, it is Joe Biden’s gun control scheme repackaged from his 2020 presidential campaign.

There is very little in the plan about holding violent criminals responsible for crimes they commit, with or without firearms. Part of the Biden-Harris proposal is aimed at funding law enforcement efforts to “hold shooters and gun traffickers accountable.”

Continue reading “”

Hunter Biden seeks dismissal of gun charges, saying law violates the Second Amendment
He’s accused of having a gun for 11 days in 2018, a period where he has acknowledged using drugs. It’s illegal for “habitual drug users” to own guns, but an appeals court has ruled that law unconstitutional.

Hunter Biden pushed back Monday against gun charges filed against him, challenging the case on multiple fronts as unconstitutional and politically motivated days after he was hit with new tax charges.

His defense attorney argued the gun case should be tossed out because an appeals court has found the law violates the Second Amendment under new standards set by the Supreme Court. Abbe Lowell also contended the charges against Hunter Biden violated immunity provisions that prosecutors agreed to in a plea deal they abandoned after Republicans slammed it as a “sweetheart deal.”

Continue reading “”

For our fellow Shootists out there:

New Mexico Governor Pushing Ban on AR-15s, Other Semiautomatics

New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) is pushing a ban on AR-15s and other semiautomatic rifles in an upcoming 30-day legislative session in her state.

The Santa Fe Reporter noted Grisham wants to do what Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM) unsuccessfully attempted at the federal level. Heinrich, together with Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ), put forward the Gas-Operated Semiautomatic Firearms Exclusion Act (GOSAFE), and it went nowhere.

Breitbart News reported the focus on the AR-15’s gas operation came some 64 years after the gun was designed to use spent gas from a shell casing to reset the bolt group and ready the gun for the next round. The rifle is still just a semiautomatic, firing one round per trigger pull just like a Glock or Smith & Wesson handgun, but the gas from a spent shell casing replaces recoil in working the action.

Grisham believes New Mexico lawmakers will be more open to banning an entire category of firearms — by highlighting gas operation, etc. — than Heinrich and Kelly’s federal colleagues were.

New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham launches an effort to confront organized crime by convening a specialized commission of local prosecutors and leading law enforcement officials, on Wednesday, May 24, 2023, in Santa Fe, N.M. (AP Photo/Morgan Lee)

The Sante Fe Reporter quoted her saying, “Let’s try that vehicle in our own assault weapons ban in New Mexico. Because one thing I have that the senator doesn’t have is I’ve got a set of lawmakers that are more likely than not to have a fair debate about guns, gun violence, weapons of war, and keeping New Mexicans safe.”

Grisham made news on September 8, 2923, for issuing an executive order to ban concealed or open carry in larger cities like Albuquerque. Her ban also prohibited licensed concealed carriers from having their guns for self-defense.

On September 13, 2023, Breitbart News reported that U.S. District Judge David Herrera Urias granted a temporary injunction against Grisham’s ban. So Grisham amended her ban on concealed and open carry, saying it applied only to carrying a gun in parks and playgrounds, and on September 15, 2023, Urias allowed it to stand.