Category: Politics

What The Next Long-Term Fights Will Be for the Second Amendment

Second Amendment supporters have come a long way over the years. In 1982, California was having a referendum on whether to ban handguns. Now, there is a good chance that its “discretionary” carry permit scheme will be gone. There could also be a chance the Supreme Court could also wipe out semiauto and magazine bans in the near future.

Second Amendment supporters now need to answer some new questions. They are:

“What’s next?”
“How do we accomplish that objective?”
It goes without saying that financial deplatforming is the immediate threat to our Second Amendment rights, along with addressing Silicon Valley’s censorship. But what comes after that? Second Amendment supporters need to figure that out.

There will be good news. Favorable rulings in NYSRPA v. Bruen and the semiauto ban cases will make the courts a good venue to challenge other infringements. The real question will be the pace where court rulings take out anti-Second Amendment laws, and that could very well depend on how John Roberts goes.

As we discussed earlier, given the current makeup of the court, if Roberts is in the majority, he will designate who writes the opinion. But if he doesn’t, then it would be Clarence Thomas who would get to decide who writes the opinion. The retirement of Stephen Breyer will not change the balance, but his nominated replacement, Ketanji Brown-Jackson, may not be as effective an opponent as Breyer was.

The victories, though, will prompt outrage. If you think calls to pack the court are bad now, wait until massive parts of the agenda that anti-Second Amendment extremists have pushed get declared unconstitutional. Second Amendment supporters may need to look to winning general elections in order to defend against court-packing.

Despite the need to defend against efforts to pack the court, there will be changes – and the need – to take the offensive on the legislative front. For instance, it may be time to figure out how to either roll back who is prohibited or to find a way for people to remove themselves from being prohibited.

In one sense, Second Amendment supporters may be on the first steps of the path to do just that with the NICS Denial Notification Act. One thing we will need to do in order to reverse a number of dubious categories of “prohibited persons” is going to be getting the hard data on what exactly, people are denied for.

In fact, many of the battles we will face now will be slow and grueling in many ways. Oftentimes, the biggest wins at the federal level will be about what doesn’t happen. The most important victories will be the ones where Second Amendment supporters defeat anti-Second Amendment extremists via the ballot box at the federal, state, and local levels.

 

The End of the Climate Change Legend

For many years now, there has been a spirited debate about whether climate change is science, religion or even perhaps a secret route to socialism. That question remains unanswered, but we’ve now discovered with certainty that climate change is a political albatross around the neck of the Democratic Party.

The Left’s spiritual devotion to climate change has been speeding the Democrats over a political cliff this fall with likely unprecedented losses this November. The zero fossil fuels suicide pact was always an economic and political loser. More than 70% of all the energy we produce and consume in America derives from oil, gas and coal. President Joe Biden’s war on these fuel sources was sure to cause severe shortages and $5 a gallon gasoline at the pump. Didn’t Democrats learn their lesson in 1980 when Ronald Reagan won a landslide election against Jimmy Carter that surging inflation and gas prices is a surefire way to infuriate voters?

While Biden keeps saying he is doing “everything I can to lower gas prices,” he’s speaking out of both sides of his mouth — because if your goal is to get people to stop using something, raising its price is a pretty good way to accomplish that. If prices go to $10 or $15 a gallon, you can clear the highways of trucks and cars altogether, and what a wonderful world it will be.

Democrats were so enamored with their Green New Deal delusion that they failed to understand that most people aren’t as hyper-obsessed with climate change as they are. A new poll sponsored by my group, Committee to Unleash Prosperity, found that people are much more concerned about inflation and high gas prices than climate change. Moreover, the poll found that respondents’ average amount they would be willing to pay for the climate change agenda was $55 a year. Sorry, that’s the extra cost we are already spending with two fill-ups at the gas station.

Then there is the increasingly unavoidable reality that the green energy sources they fantasize about are decades away from being technologically feasible to replace old-fashioned oil, gas and coal. Even the Energy Department predicts that even with the trend toward renewable energy, by 2035, we will still be heavily reliant on oil, gas and coal for electricity production, home heating and transportation fuels.

Elon Musk, the leading champion of electric cars, reminded Biden in a recent tweet that in the real world rather than in la-la land, we are going to need oil and gas for many years to come. Today 3% of cars on the road are electric, and 95% use gas or diesel.

This brings us to yet another fatal flaw of the climate change movement. The Biden administration and its radical green allies can’t explain why getting our energy from Saudi Arabia, Iran and Russia makes more sense than Texas, Oklahoma and Alaska.

This strategy is especially pinheaded because the war on oil, gas and coal production is a big loser for the environment and increases global greenhouse gas emissions. That is because America has the strictest environmental standards. Shifting oil and gas production to Russia or Iran and shifting coal production to China and India is causing far more air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Chinese President Xi Jinping is busy trying to take over the world economy, and the last thing he or the ruling class in Beijing cares about is climate change.

Finally, Democrats should have learned from the green energy catastrophe of Western Europe. A decade ago, the French, Germans, Italians and others in the European Union moved to a renewable energy future. They slashed much of their oil, gas and coal production, shut down nuclear plants (why?) and subsidized the building of wind turbines and solar panels. It nearly bankrupted Germany as energy prices soared and factories left Europe for America and Asia. A decade later, France is back to building nuclear plants, and Germany is burning more coal than ever before and importing natural gas from Russia. Europe recently redefined natural gas and nuclear power as “clean energy.”

Going green wrecked their economies and submerged these countries deeper into the red. Unfortunately, Americans weren’t paying any attention to that failed experiment. So now Biden is repeating it. The result is likely to be the same. The Democrats’ radical climate change agenda isn’t greening the planet, and it is bankrupting our country. Voters know exactly whom to blame.

Interesting article

BLUF:
The news is full not only of stories about the New York Times fessing up, sort of, about the contents of Hunter’s laptop, but also of stories about how Hunter is likely to be indicted for tax fraud. In one sense, that is not news. I wrote about it at the end of 2020 when Hunter announced, sotto voce, that he had been informed that he was being investigated by the tax authorities. But in another sense, I suspect, that news, like the revelation from the New York Times that, what do you know, all that stuff about Hunter’s laptop was on the level, like Joe Biden’s bizarre suggestion a couple of days ago that “everybody knows somebody” who has taken nude pictures of some lover and then used them to “blackmail” the person—all that has a different valence now that the Biden Administration is seriously underwater and there are no lifelines in evidence.

The issue is never the issue. I suspect that Joe Biden is being prepped for ejection. Exactly how it will happen I do not yet know. But he is on the threshold, or possibly has even passed the threshold, where he could appear to govern. His minders understand this. They must be the ones to replace him, otherwise they themselves risk being replaced, which would be intolerable. As I say, it’s not entirely clear yet how the defenestration will take place. Obviously, Kamala will have to be dealt with first, and she will be. Look for some ground softening stories such as the Times just served up about the laptop. They won’t be long in coming

Biden’s Handlers Are Preparing to Eject Him (and Kamala)

I sense a disturbance in the force. In fact, I’ve been feeling the tremors for a while. Back in January, I wrote a column for American Greatness called “The Coming Dethronement of Joe Biden.” In it, I noted that Biden’s appalling performance as president would sooner or later—and probably sooner, given the ostentatious nature of his multifaceted failure—lead to his removal as president.

I should have added that it wasn’t Biden’s performance per se that would lead to his downfall. The problem, rather, was the way his performance was undermining his—and therefore his minders’ and puppetmasters’—political power. As Saul Alinsky, community organizer to the stars, noted, the “issue is never the issue.” Accordingly, the people who put Joe Biden in power—I cannot name them, but I know they are the same people who keep him in power—do not care about inflation, rising gas and food prices, COVID lockdowns or mask mandates, the porousness of our Southern border, the threat of war with Russia, or the myriad other issues that worry ordinary voters. I am quite certain, in fact, that the word “voters” brings a vaguely contemptuous smile to their faces.

They are not troubled by the suffering of the people, indeed, they approve of a certain amount of suffering. Suffering produces dependency; and dependency, in turn, is like an insurance policy for those who cater to it: the bureaucrats who fill the troughs that feed the populace. The point, of course, was never to end the dependency but to manage in such a way as to perpetuate and expand it. Joe Biden is an errand boy, a figurehead, in the metabolism of this great (not to say Great Society) act of political legerdemain.

Continue reading “”

The DeSantis Doctrine.

You gotta hand it to a guy who convinces Democrats to die on the hill of defending perverted groomers talking about sex with little school kids. It’s on-brand for their fellow travelers at The Lincoln Project, but you would think that Democrats actually want to win elections. But no – they want to make the schools safe for pedos, and they don’t care who knows it. But they’ll care plenty in November when parents around the country come out and vote for The Party of Not Hitting on Der Kinder.

Donald Trump has his record of achievement – economic success and peace abroad. But Ron DeSantis has the DeSantis Doctrine, sort of like the Monroe Doctrine, except instead of keeping shady foreigners out of our hemisphere, the DeSantis Doctrine keeps woke fascists out of our lives.

It was DeSantis who started the fire that burned the pyre of Democrat hopes and dreams they jumped onto in their campaign against the Florida anti-grooming statute. But that’s only his latest fight with the elite. DeSantis has been laying down the law in Florida, literally, and in a way even Donald Trump never did. At some level, Donald Trump still has some residual respect for the trappings of the elite. He’s impressed by name universities and huge corporations, and for all his much-justified complaining, he still cavorts with institutions that hate him, like the NYT. He’s not yet completely done with the institutions, but DeSantis is. DeSantis is all honey badger, laying waste and making the rubble bounce.

Continue reading “”

U.S. history shows that many times we’ve gone to war over economic ‘disagreements’ that threatened the purported value of the dollar. As an exemplar;  a close inspection of why we hammered Libya was that KaDaffy was seriously working on an African monetary unit to bypass the dollar, a new dinar, backed by gold.

BLUF:
Far be it for me to be a harbinger of too many uncomfortable predictions at once, but, as I wrote last year, I also strongly believe that China will eventually back its forthcoming digital currency with gold to further strengthen its economic and monetary posture globally.

The contrast between a forthcoming divided global economy would be stark: nations like China and Russia seem genuinely interested in the idea of sound money backed by commodities, while the United States seems preoccupied with jargon filled academic circle jerks trying to convince ourselves that debt is money that “we owe to ourselves”, to quote Paul Krugman, and that money literally grows on trees.

If given the choice between the two ideologies, where do you think the world is going to wind up?

I’m not sure we’re ready to embrace the answer here in the United States, but we better get ready to.

The Dominance Of The U.S. Dollar Is Fading Right Before Our Eyes.

Saudi Arabia joins Russia as the latest oil-backed nation to eye defecting from the U.S. dollar in favor of China’s Yuan.

It was just a couple of weeks ago that I wrote an article arguing that the economic sanctions we have cast upon in Russia, due to its invasion of Ukraine, likely mark the beginning of a period where China and Russia would bifurcate the global monetary system, leading them to eventually challenge the U.S. dollar’s reserve status.

Now, Saudi Arabia is joining the fray, further threatening to tip the balance of the global monetary scales that have kept the U.S. dollar afloat for decades.

The fact that predictions of a “new economy” and “new monetary system” only exist on fringe blogs like mine and haven’t gone mainstream given the current economic situation with Russia (even amidst our abuses of printing the dollar over the last several decades) is baffling to me.

As I noted to Andy Schectman in a recent podcast, our quality of life in the United States and our nation’s entire economy is an elephant balancing, on one leg, on the toothpick of the U.S. dollar’s reserve status.

Our quality of life relies solely in our unique ability to import the goods and services that we use and need on a daily basis, while exporting US dollars. We’ve been able to print trillions of U.S. dollars into existence over the last couple of years – monetary policy that is anything but sound, regardless of whether or not your currency has global reserve status – because of the luxuries afforded to us by the dollar’s global reserve status.

But this reserve status, and the $30 trillion in debt we have accrued and convinced ourselves we will never have to pay, quickly go from being long-term liabilities that we can theoretically ignore to current liabilities that we must address if the dollar is ever legitimately challenged.

Challenging the dollar’s reserve status would be an obvious and immediate catalyst that would flip everything we think we know about economics in our country on its head. Our monetary policy blind spots, that we have been willfully ignoring for decades, would instantly become leverage for the rest of the world.

The stage appears to remain set for this to happen. Globally, if you are an enemy of the United States, the situation hasn’t looked better to challenge the U.S. dollar, maybe ever, than it does now:

  • We have run up a mountain of debt and grossly expanded our money supply in an extremely short period of time
  • We are the most reliant we have ever been on other countries to import goods and services
  • We have a presidential administration that (1) doesn’t understand basic economics and (2) is limiting our nation’s ability to produce commodities, which act as a foundation for a country’s inherent wealth
  • We are about to enter into a economic recession
  • Inflation is setting records and is already bankrupting the middle and lower class of our nation, before even considering a potential challenge to the dollar

And while a week or two ago I was only worried about China and Russia, now that the world has been forced to pick economic sides, other nations are throwing their respective hats in the ring, too.

Saudi Arabia, which is a nation of major consequence economically due to its significant oil and gas reserves, has reportedly embraced the idea of accepting Yuan instead of dollars for Chinese oil sales.

Not unlike Russia and China’s plans to de-dollarize, that date back nearly a decade, the Saudis have been considering this idea for six years already. And not unlike Russia and China’s new economic tie-up, the catalyst for speeding up the process has been U.S. foreign policy:

Saudi Arabia is in active talks with Beijing to price some of its oil sales to China in yuan, people familiar with the matter said, a move that would dent the U.S. dollar’s dominance of the global petroleum market and mark another shift by the world’s top crude exporter toward Asia.

The talks with China over yuan-priced oil contracts have been off and on for six years but have accelerated this year as the Saudis have grown increasingly unhappy with decades-old U.S. security commitments to defend the kingdom, the people said.

The consideration by Saudi Arabia is consequential.

It shows that other nations, when forced to choose sides between the U.S. and its foes, don’t feel obligated to commit to the U.S. dollar, further undermining the world’s perception about the dollar’s strength.

Not unlike Russia, Saudi Arabia is a country that, regardless of how much its currency may “devalue” versus a fiat basket of currencies, is still backed by finite resources.

This gives the country and its currency intrinsic strength. Russia seems to understand this. In fact, just this morning, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, likely alluding to this fact, said that economic sanctions against Russia make the country “stronger”.

Saudi Arabia is now another serious name on the list of contenders who have the currency bite to back up the economic rhetoric bark of challenging the dollar.

As The Wall Street Journal notes, the Saudis have “traded oil exclusively in dollars since 1974, in a deal with the Nixon administration that included security guarantees for the kingdom.”

The U.S. dollar’s ties to oil have been crucial in helping prop up the currency’s demand globally. These ties have also helped drum up the psychological buy-in necessary for the world to collectively accept that “the next guy” is going to want their U.S. dollars.

But given the alliance between Russia and China – and the newfound alliance between Saudi Arabia and China – it looks as though that confidence game might be coming to an end right before our very eyes.

In other words, the dollar could be fading from the global picture like Marty McFly’s brother from that family photo in Back to the Future.

We may not notice it right away… …but eventually it’ll be clear.

Far be it for me to be a harbinger of too many uncomfortable predictions at once, but, as I wrote last year, I also strongly believe that China will eventually back its forthcoming digital currency with gold to further strengthen its economic and monetary posture globally.

The contrast between a forthcoming divided global economy would be stark: nations like China and Russia seem genuinely interested in the idea of sound money backed by commodities, while the United States seems preoccupied with jargon filled academic circle jerks trying to convince ourselves that debt is money that “we owe to ourselves”, to quote Paul Krugman, and that money literally grows on trees.

If given the choice between the two ideologies, where do you think the world is going to wind up?

I’m not sure we’re ready to embrace the answer here in the United States, but we better get ready to.

Seems like some politicians are more concerned with ‘civility’ than doing their job of ‘securing rights’ of the people.

Wyoming Senate takes a stand on civility

At some point during the Wyoming Legislature’s just-completed budget session, one representative walked up to another and asked why his cohort had to be so mean.

Rep. Bob Wharff (R-Evanston) was on the receiving end of that question, posed by Rep. Cyrus Western (R-Big Horn), and he recollected the exchange to WyoFile. The representative from Evanston stood his ground.

“I told him, ‘The problem is, we are fighting a battle, we are at war,’” Wharff recalled. “These people are attacking our Second Amendment rights. If we don’t stand up and push back — and I honestly believe this — if we don’t defend our Second Amendment rights, all our other rights go out.”

Continue reading “”

Anti-gun groups are being defrauded by people who are in the movement just to line their pockets.

‘Violence In Boston’ Founder Monica Cannon-Grant And Husband Indicted On Federal Fraud Charges

BOSTON (CBS) – A federal grand jury has indicted Monica Cannon-Grant and her husband Clark Grant, the founders of Violence In Boston, on more than a dozen charges for allegedly using the nonprofit for their own benefit.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for Massachusetts announced on Tuesday that Cannon-Grant, 41, and Grant, 38, both Taunton residents, are facing charges as part of an 18-count indictment.

A grand jury found the couple allegedly led a series of schemes designed to defraud Violence in Boston donors, the Massachusetts Department of Unemployment Assistance, and a mortgage lending business based in Chicago.

Federal prosecutors allege the couple intended to use charitable donations for their personal benefit.

Continue reading “”

Is the nature of gun control changing?

When you spend a lot of time studying gun control, it gets to be easy to see the same old patterns pop up time and time again. I see the same bogus statistics, the same BS arguments, the same tired rhetoric over and over again.

However, it seems that some believe that the nature of gun control in this country is starting to change.

In late January 2022, the city of San Jose, California was the first US city to require gun owners to purchase liability insurance. A recent trend in Democratic-leaning cities has led to a slew of similar laws being discussed by other cities. San Jose’s law may encourage them to wait before they join the trend. Critics of the San Jose law point to its lack of enforcement or penalties for gun owners who fail to purchase insurance and a $25 fee levied against gun owners that may prove unconstitutional. Sam Liccardo, the mayor of San Jose, suggested that the insurance mandate would encourage gun owners to have gun safes, use trigger locks, and enroll in gun safety classes, likely to reduce their hypothetical insurance bill. Gun insurance remains a nebulous, theoretical concept, so it’s unclear whether insurance agencies will offer financial incentives for gun owners to be responsible. …

San Jose’s recent gun insurance mandate has been making waves on social media, but it doesn’t tell the whole story when it comes to the evolution of laws surrounding our personal security. Not only are states like Ohio loosening restrictions on responsible gun owners, but states like Tennessee and Washington are experimenting with less restrictive, more incentive-based programs that encourage responsible ownership without burdening owners or infringing on their rights. The success of the Tennessee and Washington programs may pave the way for other innovative measures in the future. They serve as proof that you don’t have to restrict rights in order to steer citizens in a more responsible direction and keep everyone safe.

The mention to Tennessee references the measure that would waive sale tax on things like gun safes.

Unfortunately, though, the Washington measure is their mandatory storage law, which is an infringement on gun owners’ rights.

But does the overall point remain? Are gun control laws shifting to be less invasive on people’s rights? I’m afraid I can’t agree.

While Tennessee took a positive tact, Washington’s law still boils down to telling people what they must do in their own homes. We’ve continued to see gun control-supporting lawmakers pushing through more and more regulations.

Hell, we just had gun control pass at the federal level that includes a lot of problematic language.

The truth is that gun control isn’t so much shifting as expanding. They’re still trying to ban so-called assault weapons, push universal background checks, and expand the definition of domestic violence so they can deny gun rights to legions of additional people. They’re just doing a lot of other stuff.

In fact, the part about this claim that bothers me the most is that Tennessee’s measure is so not gun control that it shouldn’t be compared with some of these other measures.

An Opportunity Second Amendment Supporters Must Not Waste

It’s time for Second Amendment supporters to channel Rahm Emanuel for a moment. In fact, there is a chance to hoist the one-time Obama Chief of Staff, who urged people to “never let a crisis go to waste,” on his own petard.

Right now, if you believe polling by the Wall Street Journal, Second Amendment supporters could deliver a metaphorical death blow to the hopes of anti-Second Amendment extremists over the next few years. However, it will take a lot of hard work to make that happen, and time may not be entirely on our side.

About 20 years ago, the political home of anti-Second Amendment extremism made a bet. They thought that there was a demographic doomsday coming for their opposition. However, that bet has not quite worked out for them over the long haul. Yes, Obama did win in a landslide in 2008, and won re-election solidly in 2012 (with an assist from the IRS targeting the Tea Party), but in the decade since 2012… how have things worked out?

We’ve discussed some of the signs that their bet on demographics isn’t working out the way they hoped. The lessons from last year’s Virginia gubernatorial election should give Second Amendment supporters and pro-Second Amendment organizations a blueprint for how to carry out the outreach.

This outreach is important. As things stand right now, for many of those who voted Youngkin in 2021 (and those of a similar mind across the country), support for the Second Amendment became a “non-dealbreaker” in the face of the current situation. While that might be sufficient for the short-term, would it not be better to make support for the Second Amendment a positive among those voters who currently consider it a “non-dealbreaker” in the face of a crisis?

Blowing the opportunity that Gun Culture 2.0 is presenting would be to repeat the very mistake that those in charge of the political home of anti-Second Amendment extremism made. We know that anti-Second Amendment extremist organizations like the Brady Campaign have had regrettable levels of success in dividing gun owners, often by hijacking the concept of “responsible” gun ownership. Reclaiming that term from anti-Second Amendment extremists is crucial to defeating their “divide and conquer” strategy.

Most important, though is to be willing to reach out to the new gun owners. Like any beginner in a new sport, they will need instruction and help from those who have more experience. The process of welcoming them should start from the moment they are at their first visit to an FFL and it should have no endpoint.

There are big tasks up ahead. Second Amendment supporters have to defeat anti-Second Amendment extremists at the federal, state, and local levels via the ballot box this November and in 2024. The process starts today by not wasting the opportunity that Biden’s blunders are giving us.

Below The Radar: Stopping the Fraudulent Sales of Firearms Act

Second Amendment supporters often have to make difficult decisions. Not in the sense of Glock vs. Colt vs. Springfield Armory, but more along the lines of how to address a given piece of anti-Second Amendment legislation.

Take for instance the Stopping the Fraudulent Sales of Firearms Act, known as S 3776 and HR 6997. The legislation purports to prohibit the importation, sale, or manufacture of firearms “by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises.”

On the face of it, this seems unobjectionable. Nobody wants to be sold a firearm on the basis of misrepresentation or a false promise, right? But there are red flags when Second Amendment supporters think things through some more.

For starters, the Senate bill is sponsored by Dianne Feinstein, a long-standing enemy of our Second Amendment rights. So that is a red flag right there. Her co-sponsors include Cory Booker and Richard Blumenthal, also committed opponents of the Second Amendment.

Aside from who sponsors it, there is one other question: Who decides what constitutes “false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises?”

This is a big deal on multiple fronts. Remember how the CDC is getting back into the gun-control business? They worry that it will be used to justify censorship by Silicon Valley is big, but this legislation could add another threat.

Suppose some anti-Second Amendment extremist decides that those who advertise firearms for self-defense are making ““false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises?” That now becomes a new way to hit someone with a five-year jail term and a felony conviction.

This also is a way to “legalize” suits like the one brought against Remington over Sandy Hook. Never mind that the rifle used was stolen (after the shooter killed the rightful owner), the claim from the suit was centered around the advertising. In other words, prove there was “false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises” in the advertising, and all of the sudden, it becomes easier to sue gun manufacturers.

This is a dangerous end run around the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. Again, we need to remember what Feinstein said so long ago on 60 Minutes. She wants an Australia-style ban, but if she can’t have it, she’ll figure out what she can get legislatively (see the Age 21 Act). Or she’ll enable other attacks outside the legislative process.

What makes it doubly hard is that this bill seems very reasonable, so Second Amendment supporters have to be very careful about the optics while opposing it. After all, nobody wants to support those who sell anything (including firearms) with “false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises.”

Second Amendment supporters need to contact their Representative and Senators and politely urge them to oppose the Stopping the Fraudulent Sales of Firearms Act. Then. They need to work to defeat anti-Second Amendment extremists via the ballot box this November.

How do you know the numbers of Hispanic voters are increasingly seen as going Republican?
The lieberal media hauls out the broadest smear brush they can find.

The rise of white nationalist Hispanics.

Nick Fuentes, identified as a “white supremacist” in Justice Department filings, made headlines last week for hosting a white nationalist conference in Florida. His father is also half Mexican American.

Driving the news: Cuban American Enrique Tarrio, the former leader of the Proud Boys, a group the Anti-Defamation League calls an extremist group with a violent agenda, was arrested Tuesday and charged with conspiracy in connection to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

What they’re saying: Experts tell Axios far-right extremism within the Latino community stems from three sources: Hispanic Americans who identify as white; the spread of online misinformation; and lingering anti-Black, antisemitic views among U.S. Latinos that are rarely openly discussed.

Blah, blah, blah, blah…………

The problem is that the Michigan Goobernor is still none other than DerGrëtchënFührer herslef, and I can’t see her signing a bill into law that would diminish goobermint power.

Michigan: House Passes Pro-Gun Bills

Yesterday, the House passed House Bills 5187 and 5188, to ensure that Second Amendment rights remain protected during a state of emergency, and House Bill 4003, to reduce the penalty for law-abiding citizens who forget to renew their Concealed Pistol License in certain instances. They will now go to the Senate for further consideration. Please contact your state senator and ask them to SUPPORT House Bills 5187, 5188, and 4003.

House Bill 5187 and House Bill 5188 passed by votes of 61-40 and 62-39 respectively. They prohibit the state government from restricting the lawful carrying of firearms and ammunition, seizing firearms or ammunition, restricting firearm businesses and shooting ranges, and restricting hunting and fishing activities during a declared state of emergency, or as an emergency response to an epidemic. Further, the legislation provides legal recourse for people who experience unjust infringements.

During the state of emergency in 2020 for COVID-19, Governor Gretchen Whitmer issued an executive order for all nonessential businesses and activities to cease, which purposefully referenced an outdated list of such industries, rather than the most updated federal guidelines that designated firearm and ammunition retailers as essential. In addition, many anti-gun officials around the country, at both state and local levels of government, took the opportunity to unilaterally suspend Second Amendment rights by actively shutting down gun stores and ranges. HB 5187 and HB 5188 protect the exercise of a constitutional right from such politically motivated attacks and ensure that citizens have those rights when they need them most.

House Bill 4003 passed by a vote of 74-27. It reduces the offense of carrying a handgun on an expired CPL from a felony, under current law, to a civil fine of $330, as long as it’s within one year of expiration and the person is still legally eligible for a CPL. Permanently stripping Second Amendment rights from an otherwise law-abiding citizen who forgets to renew their CPL does not improve public safety.

[Michigan] State House Passes LaFave’s Firearms Transport Bill

The state House today passed Rep. Beau LaFave’s plan to expand the rights of gun owners to transport their firearm unmolested while on private property.

The bill would allow uncased firearms in any vehicle, including an ATV or UTV, on private land as long as they are accompanied by or have permission from the landowner or lessee.

“This is a huge win for Michiganders all over the state,” said LaFave, of Iron Mountain. “This will help keep individuals from being unnecessarily prosecuted. Right now, you can carry a loaded pistol in or upon a vehicle with a CPL, but getting caught with a .22 long rifle subjects you to three months in jail.”

“This common-sense reform does not impact public safety,” LaFave said. “The bill simply decriminalizes a statute that makes criminals out of law-abiding citizens.”

Similar legislation passed the House with the support of LaFave in 2018. That law, now Public Act 272 of 2018, allowed a bow or crossbow to be transported without a case.

LaFave said: “Michiganders are entitled to their right to bear arms, more so on their own property than anywhere else. I remain committed to protecting the Second Amendment rights of gun owners. But let’s not forget, this is also a private property issue. Nobody should face three months of jail time for transporting firearms on their own property. This is a DNR regulation that does not help public safety, and the government has no business telling you what you can or cannot do on your own land with firearms, so long as you aren’t endangering the public.”

House Bill 4078 now heads to the Senate for further consideration.

Democrat Spending Bill Contains ‘Serious Expansion of Federal Gun Control’: Gun Rights Group

Democrats’ $1.5 trillion omnibus spending package, unveiled early Wednesday, includes provisions that constitute “a serious expansion of federal gun control” according to the National Association for Gun Rights.

Specifically, the omnibus bill includes the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).

Though there is bipartisan consensus that violence against women is bad—more limited forms of the bill have passed through bipartisan votes since the first draft was introduced in 1994—more recent forms of the legislation have been controversial with Republicans for provisions relating to gun ownership.

Due to continued efforts by Democrats to include gun control measures in the legislation, the bill was last passed into law in 2013, and has faced steep opposition from pro-Second Amendment Republicans since then.

Currently, almost all firearm sales require a background check through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). Purchasers who are tagged as having a criminal background barring them from possessing a firearm are tagged in the system and are not allowed to carry out the purchase.

However, VAWA takes this system much further.

Under its provisions, the attorney general is required “to issue a notice to State, local, or Tribal law enforcement and prosecutors if an individual has attempted to purchase a firearm and been denied pursuant to the national instant criminal background check system.”

In other words, an attempt to buy a firearm while legally barred from owning one can be met with criminal investigation.

In a statement, the National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR) warned that this system is dangerous.

“Over 95 percent of all NICS denials are false positives, which means all local and state police would be required to investigate law-abiding citizens when they’re wrongly and unconstitutionally denied the right to purchase a firearm,” NAGR said.

“Make no mistake—the NICS denial reporting embedded inside the Violence Against Women Act constitutes a serious expansion of federal gun control,” said Dudley Brown, president of the NAGR. “Not only does it rapidly expand federal gun control policy, it would actually endanger women, not keep them safe.”

Continue reading “”

Rep. Jack Bergman Introduces Bill Targeting ‘Boardroom Gun Control’

Rep. Jack Bergman (R-Mich.) introduced legislation Tuesday targeting financial institutions’ use of “boardroom gun control” to stifle the Second Amendment.
In a press release sent to Breitbart News, Bergman’s office explained that the legislation, the Firearm Industry Non-Discrimination (FIND) Act, would “prevent any businesses that discriminate against firearm businesses or associations from contracting or subcontracting with the federal government – ensuring that federal funding is not used to further these harmful policies.”

Bergman noted that federal funding is tax-payer funding, then observed:

Taxpayer dollars should not benefit the bottom line of corporations actively working to erode our Second Amendment rights. While the federal government cannot and should not force mandates on the private marketplace, we must ensure we are responsibly spending tax dollars and holding those we do business with to a high standard. I’m proud to be joined by more than fifty of my fellow Members of Congress in introducing this important legislation.

National Shooting Sports senior vice president Larry Keane commented on the FIND Act, saying:

Corporations, in particular financial institutions, have been dictating public policies from boardrooms that throttle firearm businesses, which are Constitutionally protected. This bill will no longer allow those corporations to benefit from taxpayer dollars while at the same time using those funds to deny Americans their Second Amendment rights. We thank Congressman Bergman for his leadership to ensure fairness in business, reasserting Congress’s role in ensuring the federal government isn’t picking winners and losers in the marketplace based on politics, and protecting the ability of a lawful industry to compete for services without artificial and agenda-driven barriers.

Also on Tuesday, Breitbart News pointed out that Rep. Michael Cloud (R-TX) was introducing legislation to force the ATF to delete information it has stockpiled on firearm sales / transfers.

Cloud’s goal to end the compilation of data for any de facto gun registry.

New Hampshire: House Expected to Vote on Two Gun Bills Tomorrow

Tomorrow Today the New Hampshire House is scheduled to consider pro-gun House Bill 1636, and anti-gun House Bill 1151. NRA Members and Second Amendment supporters are encouraged to contact their State Representative and ask them to SUPPORT House Bill 1636 and to OPPOSE House Bill 1151.

Pro-Gun Bill:

House Bill 1636: “ATV-Carry” allows the carry of a loaded firearm on an Off-Highway Recreation Vehicle (OHRV) or snowmobile. This legislation also helps to clean up the law from when Permitless Carry was passed and a snowmobile prohibition remained. If you can carry a gun in your vehicle, or on your person, you shouldn’t have to surrender your right to self-defense simply because you’re operating a snowmobile.

Anti-Gun Bills:

House Bill 1151: imposes a ban on the open carry of firearms at various public demonstrations, including parades, marches, rallies, etc. This arbitrary ban is simply anti-gun virtue signaling that only affects law-abiding citizens, dictating how they must exercise a constitutional right, while doing nothing to improve public safety

Missouri House approves plan to allow guns on public transit

JEFFERSON CITY — The Missouri House approved legislation Wednesday that would allow people who have concealed weapons permits to carry their guns on public transportation.

The measure, which has been debated several times in recent years but has not become law, also would lower the age requirement from 19 to 18 years of age or older for a concealed carry permit.

The proposal also would remove the prohibition on the carrying of firearms in churches and other places of worship by a person with a valid concealed carry permit.

It advanced to the Senate on 101-40 vote.

Republicans who control the Legislature have worked to loosen restrictions on guns for years, resulting in Missouri being ranked 47th in the nation by the Giffords Law Center for gun safety. [an honor, I assure you]

In 2007, for example, lawmakers dumped a universal background-check law. In 2016, the Legislature repealed a law so that Missourians could carry concealed firearms without a permit in most places.

In 2021, the GOP-led General Assembly approved the Second Amendment Preservation Act, prohibiting police in Missouri from enforcing any federal firearms laws that aren’t mirrored in state law.

That law has triggered a lawsuit from the U.S. Department of Justice Department.

Opponents of the latest move said they are concerned it could open the door for extremists to attack worshipers.

“I am not anti-gun. I just don’t want to see more hate crimes,” said Rep. Maggie Nurrenbern, D-Kansas City.

The legislation also includes a provision known as Blair’s Law, which would criminalize “celebratory gunfire.” It is named for Blair Shanahan Lane, who was struck in the neck by a bullet fired from more than a half-mile away.

The legislation is House Bill 1462.