Louisiana homeowner kills man defending his home

IBERIA PARISH, La. (KLFY) — One person is dead and two others are wanted fugitives after a homeowner shot and killed a man in an attempted home invasion Tuesday night, authorities said.

The Iberia Parish Sheriff’s Office said Wednesday deputies responded to a call at about 10:30 p.m. Tuesday in the 9000 block of Old Jeanerette Road. Upon arrival deputies found a deceased male inside the home.

Police said the deceased male had entered the home with two other men and fired his gun at the homeowner, and the homeowner shot the intruder. The two remaining suspects fled the home and are still at large.

The name of the deceased is being withheld at this time pending investigation and notification of family, authorities said.

As Oregon’s Gun Litigation Diverges, a Collision is Inevitable

The legal fight over Oregon’s gun-control ballot initiative is headed in two different directions, but the paths will eventually have to crash back into each other.

In the wake of Measure 114’s adoption last month, gun-rights advocates filed multiple lawsuits against the permit-to-purchase and magazine ban provisions at the state and federal levels. They argued both provisions are unconstitutional under the right to keep and bear arms protections in the United States Constitution and the Oregon Constitution, especially under the standard articulated by the Supreme Court in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen. But they got different results at each level.

Harney County Judge Robert Raschio issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against the entirety of the law. U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut delayed implementation of the permit-to-purchase requirement for a month at the request of Oregon officials, who admitted they couldn’t create the system before the deadline but declined to issue a TRO

The judges’ reasoning were in stark contrast to one another. While they both agreed that requiring a permit to buy a gun that was effectively unobtainable violates the right to keep and bear arms, and the requirement would have to be blocked, at least in the short term, they differed on everything else. It’s possible either judge could change their mind, but they both seem pretty convinced of their initial conclusions. It’s more likely higher courts, likely the United States Supreme Court itself, will have to settle the contradictions in their approach–if not in this specific case, at least more generally.

Judge Immergut found Measure 114’s ban on the sale and use of magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds, with limited exceptions, is not unconstitutional. She argued the Second Amendment does not protect the magazines because they are not “necessary to the use of firearms for lawful purposes such as self-defense” since magazines that hold fewer than ten rounds can be used in their place.

“While magazines in general are necessary to the use of firearms for self-defense, Plaintiffs have not shown, at this stage, that magazines specifically capable of accepting more than ten rounds of ammunition are necessary to the use of firearms for self-defense,” Immergut 

“As noted above, the ‘corollary… right to possess the magazines necessary to render… firearms operable’ is ‘not unfettered.’ Instead, the right is limited to magazines that are necessary to render firearms operable for self-defense and other lawful purposes.”

Continue reading “”

Well, I have seen – unsubstantiated – reports that the bureaucraps at ATF have sent their proposed braced pistol regulations to the Whitehouse for SloJoe’s puppet master’s input. The time frame mentioned is from 2 to 7 days until published in the Federal Register, so we shall see in a week or so.

Cue the shocked meme…..

BREAKING: New Twitter Files Dump Exposes Blacklists, Secret Cabal Censoring High-Profile Conservatives.

Independent journalist Bari Weiss took to Twitter on Thursday night to unload a second trove of internal memos and documents exposing how Twitter officials silenced the voices of prominent conservatives on the platform. Radio host Dan Bongino, Stanford professor Jay Bhattacharya, and activist Charlie Kirk were among those Twitter censored or blacklisted, along with the popular “Libs of TikTok” account.

“A new #TwitterFiles investigation reveals that teams of Twitter employees build blacklists, prevent disfavored tweets from trending, and actively limit the visibility of entire accounts or even trending topics—all in secret, without informing users,” Weiss, a former New York Times reporter, wrote. “The authors [of the Twitter Files] have broad and expanding access to Twitter’s files. The only condition we agreed to was that the material would first be published on Twitter.”

Continue reading “”

The Dry Fire Primer Paperback

Dry fire – practicing without live ammunition – is an essential tool for every gun owner who wants to learn how to handle their firearms more proficiently. It saves time and money while remaining an effective training method whether you are interested in guns for a hobby, for self-defense, or for competition. While there are many books that describe specific dry fire regimens, they don’t always give you the information you need to use them best. That’s where The Dry Fire Primer comes in. It bridges the gap between “I’ve heard of dry fire” and “I’m going to be a dry fire maniac and use it to its greatest potential.” Whether you’re brand-new to dry fire or just feel like you could be getting a bit more out of it, this book is for you.

A black market arms dealer, for a basketball player, (instead of a former Marine) that, if it wasn’t for this, would be just another unknown.
Just name five (5) professional women’s basketball players…. Can’t, can ya?
(neither can)

Image

Democrats block potential release of documents on FBI’s secret forms used to strip gun rights

House Democrats vetoed a resolution demanding Attorney General Merrick Garland turn over records related to the FBI’s usage of previously secret forms that waived away the gun rights of Americans.

In October, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and over a dozen GOP members of Congress urged Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray to provide evidence that the FBI has stopped stripping people’s gun rights with the forms. However, a further attempt to obtain evidence by Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-GA) was quashed on Wednesday afternoon by Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee.

The resolution states that Garland would be asked to provide the House “no later than 14 days” after its passage with “a complete and unredacted form” and “a copy of any documents, records, reports, memos, correspondence, or other communication either generated or received by the office of the Attorney General that refers to information” on the forms.

In addition, Garland would be asked to provide information on “how the determination to distribute the forms was made” as well as the prior “reasoning for distributing the forms.”

Continue reading “”

The right of the people to keep and bear arms has been recognized by the General Government; but the best security of that right after all is, the military spirit, that taste for martial exercises, which has always distinguished the free citizens of these States….Such men form the best barrier to the liberties of America
— Gazette of the United States, October 14, 1789.

BLUF
Clearly, the firearms industry—from the most iconic names in firearms down to the level of small retailers and distributors—faces new legal challenges from very talented, well-funded and motivated litigators, elected officials and gun control advocates. Although some of the most iconic names in firearms have been sued, risk exists for even the smallest retailers, manufacturers, distributors and others.

Assessing and Mitigating Legal Risk: Emerging Trends and Challenges to the PLCAA

Recent developments may cause firearms manufacturers to reevaluate their business and marketing practices to lessen their legal exposure.  As we wrote previously, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) provides only limited immunity to firearms manufacturers.  Claims that the PLCAA provides blanket immunity, unique to the firearms industry, are both factually and legally inaccurate as found by multiple fact checkers, including the Associated Press and CNN.

The PLCAA does include several important exceptions, some of which are the subject of recent litigation with additional lawsuits imminent. The PLCAA negates any protection in the following circumstances:

When the transferor of a firearm or ammunition is convicted of knowingly transferring a gun or ammunition to a person who will use it in a crime. 15 U.S.C. § 7903(5)(A)(i).

When a seller negligently entrusts a gun or ammunition to someone, as was at issue in the Badger Guns case. 15 U.S.C. § 7903(5)(A)(ii). This is a crucial exception, because “straw purchases” that are not identified by sellers can subject sellers to liability.

When an industry member knowingly violates State or Federal law and the violation of law caused a person’s injury.15 U.S.C. § 7903(5)(A)(iii).

When a buyer sues for breach of warranty, such as when the product does not operate as promised or as intended. 15 U.S.C. § 7903(5)(A)(iv).

When someone is injured from the negligent design or manufacture of a product. 15 U.S.C. § 7903(5)(A)(v).

The last three exceptions are the subject of several forward-leaning lawsuits. These lawsuits seek to fit certain fact patterns within one or more exceptions to immunity and thereby to provide private parties and municipalities with viable legal claims. Such claims are, no doubt, intended to create liability for industry participants when firearms are used by third parties to commit crimes.

Continue reading “”

Oregon high court won’t let voter gun control measure begin

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — Oregon’s tough, voter-approved gun control law remains temporarily blocked after the Oregon Supreme Court declined to overturn an earlier decision preventing the measure from taking effect Thursday.

Chief Justice Martha Walters late Wednesday denied the emergency motion to intervene, filed earlier in the day by state Attorney General Ellen Rosenbaum.

The measure includes a ban on the sale and transfer of high-capacity magazines. It also requires permits, criminal background checks, fingerprinting and hands-on training courses for new gun buyers.

Harney County Judge Robert Raschio blocked it Tuesday, just hours after a federal judge ruled in favor of the law. The Oregon Department of Justice argued in an urgent filing that Raschio got it wrong.

“Magazine capacity restrictions and permitting requirements have a proven track record: they save lives!” Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum said in a statement. “We are confident the Oregon Constitution — like the Second Amendment of the U.S. constitution — allows these reasonable regulations.”

Several lawsuits have challenged the measure, which voters narrowly approved last month. The measure’s fate is being carefully watched as one of the first new gun restrictions after the U.S. Supreme Court in June struck down a New York law limiting the carrying of guns outside the home.

The Oregon measure bans the sale, transfer or import of magazines over 10 rounds unless they are owned by law enforcement or a military member or were owned before the measure’s passage. Those who already possess high-capacity magazines can have them only in their homes or use them at firing ranges, in shooting competitions, or for hunting, as allowed by state law after the measure takes effect.

It would also close a federal loophole that allows gun transfers to proceed if background checks cannot be completed quickly.

U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut delivered an initial victory Tuesday to the measure’s proponents, ruling that the ban on the sale and transfer of high-capacity magazines could take effect Thursday. She also granted a 30-day delay before the law’s permit-to-purchase mandate takes effect, but she did not quash it entirely, as gun rights advocates had wanted.

Hours later, the Harney County judge put the law on hold. In that case, Gun Owners of America Inc., the Gun Owners Foundation and several individual owners alleged that the measure violates Oregon’s constitution and sought to have it blocked while that question was decided.

Gun sales and requests for background checks soared in the weeks since the election because of fears the new law would prevent or significantly delay the purchase of new firearms under the permitting system.

Gun rights groups, sheriffs and gun store owners have sued, saying the law violates Americans’ right to bear arms. All those lawsuits were filed in federal courts except for the one in Harney County, a gun rights group said late Tuesday.

A hearing on the Harney County judge’s order is set for Tuesday.

“We are, of course, deeply troubled by the ruling that came out of the Federal Court today. We are also grateful for the opposing ruling from the Harney County Judge this afternoon,” the Oregon Firearms Federation wrote. “But no matter what, there is a long way to go.”

The Supreme Court decision on the New York law signaled a shift in how the nation’s high court will evaluate Second Amendment infringement claims, with the conservative majority finding that judges should no longer consider whether a law serves public interests like enhancing public safety, and instead weigh only whether the law is “consistent with the Second Amendment’s text and historical understanding.”

To the Editor:

In the Wednesday, November 30, 2022 Brunswick Times-Gazette, page 4; Delegate Clinton Jenkins stated that “we must…pass good, safe policy regarding guns here in Virginia.” As Delegate Jenkins well knows, it is already illegal to murder a human; it is already illegal to possess firearms in the “Gun Free Zones” existing in schools, courts, some government buildings, etc.

Exactly what “good, safe policy regarding guns here in Virginia” would Delegate Jenkins suggest? I will guess that his intention is to create infringements on the lawful exercise of the Second Amendment by honest law-abiding citizens. Why would I guess that? Mr. Jenkins tips his hand with his use of good sounding, though unenlightening words, such as “good, safe policy”.

These words, like the near ubiquitous code-words “common-sense gun legislation”, serve only to lower the suspicion of the electorate to be on guard for unconstitutional infringements on Second Amendment rights of citizens. One of the most widely implemented “common-sense gun legislation” laws was the creation of “Gun-Free Zones” which, inadvertently (I hope), created large pools of unarmed “fish in a barrel” for deranged shooters.

As a Democrat, Delegate Jenkins likely never saw an unconstitutional infringement on the Second Amendment that he didn’t like and wouldn’t support. Additionally, Mr. Jenkins is likely unaware that gun control in the United States began with the attempt to save lives (of the terrorists in the KKK, at that), by disarming newly freed slaves so that they could not defend themselves against the night riders who came to rape, beat, burn, and lynch their black neighbors.

Sir Winston Churchill once said, “However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.”

Perhaps Mr. Jenkins should research the efficacy of “Gun Free Zones”, which have had the practical effect of turning schools and government buildings into “Enhanced Victim Zones”; places where shooters are guaranteed greatly increased numbers of victims due to the implementation of these foolish policies. In the twenty-first century, gun control has the exact same effect that it did when it was first foisted upon innocent black citizens in the nineteenth century: it precludes intended victims from any meaningful defense against known evil intent on doing as much harm as possible in the shortest amount of time available without suffering meaningful retaliation.

Peter Agostnelli

Alberta, Virginia

Some of our neighbors to the North ……..

Canadian Provinces Refuse to Assist in Trudeau’s Gun Grab

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau banned some 1,500 makes and models of military-grade “assault-style” weapons in Canada in May of 2020, shortly after the mass killings in Novia Scotia. That ban ended licensed gun owners being allowed to sell, transport, import, or use these sorts of weapons in Canada.

At that time, Public Safety Minister Bill Blair said, “As of today, the market for assault weapons in Canada is closed. Enough is enough…. Banning assault-style firearms will save Canadian lives.”

Now, Trudeau and Canada’s Liberal government are preparing to launch the mandatory buyback of the outlawed weapons, and several provinces and territories say they won’t assist in the process.

“The most strident opponents, including the United Conservative Party government in Alberta, are suggesting the Royal Canadian Mounted Police [RCMP] ‘refuse to participate,’” reported The Washington Post.

Part of the provincial government’s concern is that this gun confiscation program pushed by the Canadian federal minister in charge of the RCMP is unfunded. In a press release, Alberta’s provincial government stated that “Alberta taxpayers pay more than $750 million annually to fund the RCMP as our provincial police service. Alberta’s government expects that no tax dollars or police resources be wasted implementing a program that will not increase public safety…. Alberta is not legally obligated and has informed Ottawa it will not offer assistance.”

They also advised the commanding officer of the RCMP in Alberta that “pursuant to the Provincial Police Service Agreement (PPSA), the confiscation program is not an objective, priority or goal of the province or the provincial police service, nor is such deployment ‘appropriate to the effective and efficient delivery of police services.’ Consequently, the RCMP should refuse to participate.”

The release continued, “Despite taking this step, the federal government may still direct the RCMP to serve as confiscation agents. To prevent this from happening, Alberta will formally dispute any attempt to do so by invoking Article 23.0 of the PPSA.”

Continue reading “”

 

BLUF
A Universal NICS law will give the Left another chance at creating a list of gun owners. Another chance? Yes, as they’ve already tried it before and almost got away with it. Stephen Halbrook, attorney and firearms policy author, was involved in the NRA’s attempt to prevent Janet Reno, the AG for President Clinton, from retaining the personal data of firearms purchasers who underwent the NICS background check. Halbrook’s article, The Truth About NICS tells the story of government officials who flagrantly broke the original NICS law, which did not permit the creation of a list of gun purchasers to suit their own purposes.

Halbrook concludes, “law-abiding gun owners must stay vigilant so the tool isn’t corrupted by anti-gun actors in the future…Gun registration means gun confiscation.”

A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To Universal Gun Backgrounds Checks

USA – -(AmmoLand.com)- Everyone agrees that it is important to stop killing sprees from happening in schools or gay bars, or supermarkets.

The National Instant Check System (NICS) was supposed to stop such killers when it was implemented in 1998. Unfortunately, we are no closer to a peaceful society. After nearly thirty years, NICS is still not working as promised, despite “preventing” over 3.5 million firearms gun transactions since its inception. Few of the blocked sales turn out to be criminals; most rejections are false due to errors in the FBI data.

NICS may serve as “the fundamental cornerstone of our nation’s gun violence prevention laws,” but its proponents propose expanding NICS to create a “Universal” NICS that would eliminate supposed “loopholes.” American gun owners know this is a foolish dream. So-called loopholes will always exist for mentally disturbed people and criminals. Stricter laws cannot eliminate these loopholes because the problems aren’t legal but human. Nobody knows how to predict which mentally disturbed person will run amok in the future. Too many criminals have access to guns because their criminal records have not been entered into the NICS database. And there are many other ways of obtaining weapons without going through a NICS check.

Universal National Instant Check System (UNICS).

The proponents of Universal NICS typically avoid mentioning these problems, and American gun owners are not fooled by the so-called Universal National Instant Check System (UNICS). A NEW UNICS law could potentially, via the law, create a list of gun owners for the federal government, which would be the start of registration and confiscation. That frightens savvy gun owners and cancels any likelihood of cooperation with them for such laws.

If the flaws of UNICS are so obvious, what can we make of surveys that indicate most Americans support UNICS? The American Academy of Pediatrics, in 2022, stated that 88% of Americans, including 85% of gun owners, “favor universal background checks on sales of all weapons.”

Such survey claims should not be taken at face value. Surveys are complex, and too much can go wrong. In the right hands, they can be indicative of public opinion, but pollsters often make mistakes, and they can also use surveys deliberately to manipulate public opinion.

Continue reading “”