Category: RKBA

People can lie all they want. I’m not disarming, and I’ll call such liars, a liar to their faces.

Lies Aimed at Disarming You

Lies come in many shapes and sizes. Some are simple exaggerations. Some are absurd falsehoods. Unfortunately, we tend to believe a bald lie if it is expressed with enough emotion. That outrage also keeps viewers watching and clicking so the press is often more interested in outrage than in the truth. A lie doesn’t become the truth if it is repeated, but the lie may help politicians get re-elected if it is repeated by enough likely voters. We need to call out every lie we see even if that means calling “respected elected officials” liars. Congressman Jamaal Brown, you lie. Representative Jimmy Gomez, you lie. You lie because you say you want to save lives, yet you pretend that more gun-control laws will actually protect our kids. That is a lie and I’ll prove it right now.

Why would politicians hide the truth behind their emotional outbursts? The simple answer is that politicians lie to get what they want. They want press coverage and campaign contributions. Democrat Congressman Jimmy Gomez of California said that Republicans should resign from office if they are not going to pass more gun-control legislation. Democrat Representative Jamaal Bowman of New York yelled at reporters that “Republicans won’t do sh-t when it comes to gun violence.” Implied is the lie that gun-control laws actually save lives, and that anyone who won’t pass more gun-control laws is either corrupt or heartless. Both claims are a lie. Maybe if their Democrat controlled cities weren’t so corrupt then there would be fewer young men shooting at each other on the streets of the congressman’s districts. I think gun control is a distraction from their many failures.

Gun-control costs lives and endangers our children in school. Before you can believe that you need to know that armed defense by ordinary citizens is common. We use a firearm to stop death or great bodily injury about 2.8 million times a year. That is over 4600 times a day. In addition, ordinary citizens with a gun prevented several million more crimes than that. Your armed neighbors probably stopped tens of thousands of murders. Armed citizens probably stopped over a hundred-thousand sexual assaults. These armed good guys stopped an immense about of harm. That is good, but our virtue doesn’t stop there.

We started to train and arm volunteer school staff a decade ago after the mass-murder at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut. We have accumulated several thousand man-years of experience with these armed volunteers. You might have missed that their efforts worked in the best possible way: their mere presence prevented attacks at their school. Let me underline that for you.

We have never had a mass-murder at a school that had a program of trained and armed school staff.

Perspective is everything when we want to understand the truth. Only one-criminal-out-of-six uses a firearm in the commission of a violent crime. Criminals use firearms about a quarter-million times each year and they violate our “gun-control” laws millions of times each year. That means that gun control is a failure. In contrast, we defend ourselves with a firearm about 2.8 million times every year. Mass murderers take about 600 lives a year. We protected hundreds of thousands of our children with armed school volunteers. If you haven’t heard it before then I’m telling you now, armed defense is much more common than the criminal use of a firearm.

Gun-control politicians say their laws disarm criminals. In fact, their 23-thousand gun-control regulations disarm far more honest citizens than criminals. Mass murderers deliberately attack us in gun-free zones where we are disarmed by law.

Politicians and the news media don’t tell us everything we need to know to make a reasoned decision. It is deadly public policy to solve a small problem by creating a larger one. We can’t save hundreds of lives by sacrificing tens-of-thousands. If we really want to save lives, then we’d repeal our gun-control laws rather than passing more of them. That won’t work for gun-control politicians who need to shout in public to get reelected. If gun-control advocates really wanted to save lives, then they would stop lying.

How many more innocent lives should we sacrifice on the altar of gun-control?

I’m giving you facts, but facts don’t matter to gun-control ideologues. For them, the ideal of gun-control is an end in itself rather than an instrumental means to save lives. Mass murders are simply an excuse to disarm more honest citizens.

I am not running for office, but I am trying to influence your opinion. Lies matter when we want to deceive. Facts matter when we want to save lives. Time and again, Democrats and Socialists in the USA have said that only Democrats care about children, and everyone else doesn’t care if kids die. I’m calling that a lie. Lives matter to me and they matter to you.

It is uncomfortable to call someone a liar but it gets easier with practice. I did it this time. I’m asking you to do it the next time you hear them lie about us.

CNN Discovers, to its Horror, How Many New and Different People Have Been Buying Guns.

One in five US households bought a gun from March 2020 to March 2022, according to NORC at the University of Chicago, a nonpartisan research institution. One in 20 Americans purchased a gun for the first time during that period.

“I’m not sure the chaos is over, and I feel that a lot of people have guns and that it would be good to have,” said Shelby, echoing many Americans anxious about the uncertain state of the country. “I’m a single female. I live on my own. Why not protect myself?”

In fact, gun ownership rates among women and African Americans were rising before the health crisis, said Dr. Matt Miller, a professor of health sciences and epidemiology at Northeastern University who conducted a study with Harvard researcher Deborah Azrael.

“Sometime between 2016 and 2019, the new gun owners were more likely to be female and Black than prior to that and, whether it’s in response to feeling as though things are going out of control, the country is really divided, that’s a tempting speculation to make,” said Miller, referring to changing demographics among gun owners.

The Northeastern and Harvard study found that nearly 3% of US adults, or 7.5 million people, bought guns for the first time from January 2019 to April 2021. About half of the new gun owners were female, 20% were Black, and 20% were Hispanic. Overall, gun owners were 63% male and 73% White.

“The face of gun ownership is changing somewhat and the people who are becoming new gun owners today are less likely to be male and more likely to be non-White, more likely to be somewhat younger than existing and long-standing gun owners,” Miller said. …

Continue reading “”

Enemies, foreign….and domestic

Kinzinger: Gun Owners Should Help Dismantle the Second Amendment

By Lee Williams

SAF Investigative Journalism Project

OPINION: Adam Kinzinger is an angry and frustrated little fella.

For those who don’t remember the former Illinois Congressman, he served on the Jan. 6 House committee alongside Liz Cheney where he read from prepared scripts and cried a lot, was censured by the RNC and forced to leave Congress in disgrace, and then, of course, ended up with a job at CNN.

Today, Kinzinger has become a man without a country, of sorts. Republicans still despise him and Democrats could care less what he does, since his usefulness is at an end.

Kinzinger, who’s only 45, is struggling for relevancy, trying to find an audience that will listen to his angry rants. His memoir, “Renegade: My Life in Faith, the Military, and Defending America from Trump’s Attack on Democracy” is scheduled to be released Oct. 17, and will likely not exactly fly off the shelves.

In the meantime, the self-described renegade is trying to get back into the public eye by any means possible, and what better way to attract attention than by bashing the Second Amendment.

Last week, Kinzinger spoke at an event in Chicago that was organized by the Joyce Foundation, a private foundation with more than $1 billion in assets that is decidedly anti-gun. Barack Obama once served on their board. The event was hosted by David Axelrod, Obama’s former chief campaign strategist. Tim Heaphy, who served as the chief counsel for the Jan. 6 committee, was the other featured speaker.

“Second Amendment people should be on the front line of gun control,” Kinzinger told the left-leaning crowd.

The Chicago Tribune loved the idea, and wrote in an editorial that “those who want to see sensible regulations on gun ownership, such as background checks, age restrictions and red flag laws, should see ‘Second Amendment people’ as potential experts and allies. They know guns better than those who merely despise them.”

Sensible regulations? Experts and allies? As if …

To be clear, Kinzinger’s suggestion – that gun owners should help infringe upon the Second Amendment – may be the single dumbest idea we’ve heard since December 15, 1791, when the Second Amendment was ratified.

Granted, we do have far more expertise than the gun-ban industry – we can articulate the difference between a semi-auto AR and a select-fire “assault rifle” – but why the hell would we use this expertise to aid those who want to deprive us of the right to own weapons of our choice?

It would be like asking newspaper editors or television producers to help weaken the First Amendment, or asking lawyers for a quick way to overcome their clients’ self-incrimination protections. Like most of what Kinzinger and his gun-banning friends suggest, it makes no sense.

The only thing you can surmise about Kinzinger’s idea is that it is nothing new. The former Congressman strongly opposes our Second Amendment rights.

In May 2022, after the massacre in Uvalde, Texas, Kinzinger told CNN he would support a federal ban on “assault weapons,” which, of course, he could not define.

“Look, I have opposed a ban, you know, fairly recently. I think I’m open to a ban now,” Kinzinger told CNN. “It’s going to depend on what it looks like because there’s a lot of nuances on what constitutes, you know, certain things.” He added that he would also support additional licensing and training requirements for potential AR purchasers.

That same month, Kinzinger told ABC News that raising the minimum age to purchase a firearm to 21 was a “no brainer,” and he claimed he was a “strong defender of the Second Amendment.”

“And one of the things I believe that for some reason is a very rare thing is that as a person that appreciates and believes in the Second Amendment, we have to be the ones putting forward reasonable solutions to gun violence,” Kinzinger claimed.

Kinzinger is right in one respect; It is rare for someone who supports the Second Amendment to put forward ideas to weaken it. In fact, it’s not only rare, it’s incredibly stupid – about what you’d expect from a laughingstock of a former Congressman with plenty of time on his hands.

There is no argument. They are!

Every Firearm Can Be Used For Self-Defense! Argues the Second Amendment Foundation

BELLEVUE, WA – Attorneys representing the Second Amendment Foundation and its partners in a case challenging the Illinois semi-auto ban today filed a 36-page response to Cook County’s motion for summary judgment in a case challenging Cook County’s ban.

Joining SAF, in this case, are the Firearms Policy Coalition and three private citizens, all Cook County residents. They are Cutberto Viramontes, Rubi Joyal, and Christopher Khaya. They are represented by attorneys David Sigale of Wheaton, Ill., David H. Thompson, Peter A. Patterson, and William V. Bergstrom, all with Cooper & Kirk in Washington, D.C. The case is known as Viramontes v. Cook County. It was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in August 2021.

“Cook County has made only one argument in its motion that seems to misread the Supreme Court’s Bruen ruling from June of last year,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “The county is claiming that ‘arms’ applies only to firearms that ‘facilitate armed self-defense,’ and makes the arbitrary claim that the banned firearms are excluded from this definition because ‘there is nothing defensive whatsoever’ about them.

“Every firearm can be used for self-defense,” he added, “and either the county knows that already, or they are woefully ignorant about firearms in general, and especially the ones affected by the ban.”

SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut, a practicing attorney, noted, “The Bruen ruling made it clear that every Second Amendment case must proceed first by analyzing the text of the amendment and then examining the country’s history of firearm regulation, to determine whether the banned firearm is ‘dangerous and unusual.’ One look at the number of modern semiautomatic rifles currently owned by private citizens shows they are hardly ‘dangerous and unusual’ in any context.

“The county further argues the AR-15 is a semiautomatic version of the military M-16, which is nonsense,” Kraut continued. “All of the county’s arguments seem aimed at creating a false impression about the banned firearms, which operate no differently than any other semi-auto. The county is simply wrong in its arguments, and the motion for summary judgment should be denied.”

Why Is Concealed Carry So Important In Modern America?

Concealed carry, or the practice of carrying a concealed firearm on one’s person, is a contentious topic in modern society. Some argue that it is necessary for personal protection, while others believe that it only serves to increase the likelihood of gun violence. However, there are many reasons why concealed carry is important and can be a valuable tool for self-defense.

First and foremost, concealed carry can provide a means of self-defense for law-abiding citizens. The world can be a dangerous place, and individuals who carry a concealed firearm have the ability to defend themselves if they are ever confronted with a dangerous situation. This is especially important for those who live in areas with high rates of crime or who work in professions that put them at risk, although trouble can and is found in even the safest of places.

In addition, concealed carry can act as a deterrent to criminals. The knowledge that a potential victim may be carrying a concealed firearm can dissuade criminals from attempting to commit crimes in the first place. This can help to create a safer environment for everyone, as criminals are less likely to engage in criminal activity when they know that there is a possibility that their intended victim may be armed.

Concealed carry can also be beneficial in situations where law enforcement response times may be slow. In an emergency situation, every second counts, and individuals who are carrying a concealed firearm can act as first responders to protect themselves and those around them. This can be especially important in rural areas, where law enforcement may be several miles away and response times may be longer.

Moreover, concealed carry is an important tool for protecting one’s home and family. A firearm is one of the most effective means of self-defense against an intruder, and having a firearm readily available can help to ensure the safety of one’s loved ones.

Finally, concealed carry is a constitutionally protected right in the United States. The Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the right of citizens to keep and bear arms, and this right extends to the carrying of concealed firearms. The ability to exercise this right is important for many Americans, who feel that it is their duty to protect themselves, their families, and their communities.

Of course, with the right to carry a concealed firearm comes the responsibility to use it wisely and safely. It is important for those who carry a concealed firearm to receive proper training and to understand the laws surrounding the use of deadly force. Additionally, individuals who carry a concealed firearm must be prepared to face the consequences of their actions if they ever do use their firearm in self-defense.

In conclusion, concealed carry is an important tool for self-defense and can provide a means of protection for law-abiding citizens. It can act as a deterrent to criminals, serve as a first response in emergency situations, protect one’s home and family, and is a constitutionally protected right. While carrying a concealed firearm is a serious responsibility, it can be a valuable tool in creating a safer environment for everyone.

 

Pence Lays Out Pro-Second Amendment 4-Step Plan to Stop ‘Scourge of Mass Shootings’

INDIANAPOLIS, Indiana — Former Vice President Mike Pence told Breitbart News exclusively here at the National Rifle Association (NRA) annual gathering earlier this month he has a four-step plan that is pro-Second Amendment to combat the “scourge of mass shootings” plaguing society right now.

“I think under the Biden Administration we’ve seen a steady assault on all the God-given liberties enshrined in our Constitution—freedom of religion, freedom of speech—but there’s no question that this administration has set its sights on the Second Amendment enshrined in the Constitution,” Pence told Breitbart News. “Now more than ever people that cherish the right to keep and bear arms need their voices to be heard. We need to elect leaders who will stand by our Constitution and stand by our God-given rights. We need to be educating the rising generation on the importance of all of our Bill of Rights’ freedoms including the Second Amendment, but I think we’ve got to lean into how to address this scourge of mass shootings.”

Continue reading “”

Tennessee [Congesss]Adjourned Sine Die but Special Gun Control Session Coming

Yesterday, the Tennessee General Assembly adjourned Sine Die, and all anti-gun bills have died in committee. Despite intense pressure from Governor Lee, no “red flag” or gun confiscation bills were introduced. We want to extend our thanks to the leadership of the House and Senate for their unwavering defense of the Second Amendment and for protecting the rights of Tennesseans.

The Tennessee General Assembly did pass Senate Bill 494/House Bill 395, which was sent to the Governor’s desk for his signature. This legislation recognizes a person’s Second Amendment right, if not otherwise prohibited by law, to carry a handgun while hunting for self-defense. NRA thanks Senator John Stevens for sponsoring this piece of legislation and for his steadfast commitment to defending the Second Amendment rights of Tennesseans throughout session.

However, the fight is still ongoing. Governor Lee has stated he will call a special session to address public safety which we know from previous statements will likely include “red flag” and gun control legislation. The NRA will be there to defend the Second Amendment rights of Tennesseans. We must remain vigilant and fight against any attempts to infringe upon our constitutional rights.

HANSON V. DC: “LARGE CAPACITY” MAGAZINE BAN

I’ve only been up for a couple of hours (as I begin typing), and the news is already full of stupidity that I’ll need to address. I’ll lead off with a case challenging Washington, DC’s “large capacity” magazine ban, Hanson v. DC. The judge, one Rudolph Contreras, denied a preliminary injunction against the ban. His… reasoning is… remarkable. Or something; I’m trying to be somewhat polite.

A weapon may have some useful purposes in both civilian and military contexts, but if it is most useful in military service, it is not protected by the Second Amendment.
[…]
[Large capacity magazines] are not covered by the [2A] because they are most useful in military service.

Oddly, Contreras cites HELLER in making that point. I can’t find that argument in HELLER, which was largely about whether non- military weapons could be regulated, and how, but there is this.

It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M–16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large.

Rather the opposite of Contreras’ weasel-wording, eh? Indeed, HELLER even cites the earlier MILLER, which establishes that militarily-useful arms are protected by the Second Amendment.

In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a ‘shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length’ at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.

Having chucked decades of SCOTUS precedent already, Contreras proceeds to demonstrate an amazing lack of judicial awareness of current events and Supreme Court decisions. Now that he’s established in his own deluded mind that standard capacity magazines are not 2A-protected, he addresses whether this particular restriction of such magazines is permissable.

WARNING: If you’re drinking, swallow before proceeding, for the protection of your screen.

Continue reading “”

ABC News Accidently Admits AR-15s Aren’t as Dangerous as the Dems Pretend They Are

In their latest hit piece on Long Island’s GOP Rep. George Santos, ABC News let a little fact slip about the AR-15.
Santos co-sponsored a bill to name the AR-15 the “national gun of the United States.” ABC News stroked an article about voters protesters showing up at Santos’s office to protest the bill.
The ABC article states, “Research shows an AR-15-style rifle has been used to kill at least 226 people in mass shootings since 2012.”
If my calculator is accurate, that’s roughly 22.6 people per year, or 1.8 people per month, who have been killed by AR-15s in mass shootings.Let me open with this: one death is too many.

And now for my question: why do lefty jackpuddings regurgitate their avocado toast over AR-15s when so few people are killed by them?

Perspective

Let’s take a look at ways in which more Americans die every year than by AR-15s used in mass shootings:

  • Twenty-eight people are killed every year by lightning.
  • Roughly 2,167 Americans die annually from constipation.
  • On average, 951 people are killed by their lawnmowers while another 4,193 are killed by farm tractors and other agricultural equipment.
  • Murderous toasters kill 45 people per year.
  • Eleven teenagers die every day while texting and driving.
  • An estimated 40 people die every year while skateboarding.
  • Roughly 10,206 are accidentally strangled to death while they sleep, and for those who survive the night, another 10,386 will die every year falling out of bed.
  • As per the FBI, rifles of every variation — including but not limited to the scary AR-15 — killed 215 Americans in 2019. But another 1,533 were killed by knives, and 651 people were beaten to death by hands, fists, feet, etc.
  • In 2015, 5,051 people choked to death while eating.
  • Americans average 62 deaths per year by bees, wasps, and hornets.
What Have We Learned?

We’ve learned that if you want to cut down on needless deaths, you’re better off handing out prune juice than trying to purloin AR-15s, as we Americans are roughly 10 times more likely to die as Elvis did — on the toilet — than by an AR-15 in a mass shooting. We’re 50 times more likely to be beaten to death. We’re roughly 1,000 times more likely to be killed — either by accidental strangulation or falling — from our beds than by an AR-15.

BONUS LESSON: None of this info will help you in a debate against your liberal sister-in-law and her pink-haired, gender-uncertain boy?-partner freakshow because facts are useless against the bolshies who want us defenseless.

So why do the apparatchiks on the left want your A5-15? The same reason you want to keep it — it’s the best gun available to fight tyranny — either foreign or domestic. And with the terrifying number of military-aged Chinese men crossing the southern border, we might find ourselves fighting either, or both.

Does Colorado Show the State ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban Resurgence Starting to Fizzle Out?

Despite enjoying a recent resurgence in deep-blue states, “assault weapon” ban proponents are starting to confront the political and legal constraints to the policy’s continued expansion.

On Wednesday, the Colorado House of Representatives voted to kill a long-awaited proposal to ban the sale of dozens of semi-automatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns with certain targetted features, such as a pistol grip or telescoping stock, in its first committee hearing. Three Democrats joined the four Republicans on the committee in voting to reject the bill, as well as a proposed amendment to limit the ban to just bump stocks.

That an assault weapon ban failed to even make it out of committee in a legislative chamber where Democrats have a supermajority speaks to the tricky politics gun-control advocates still face for gun bans, even in states with trifecta Democratic control. The fact that bills to raise the minimum age to purchase firearms, impose a three-day waiting period, expand who can file a red flag petition, and impose civil liability on the gun industry all easily cleared the Colorado General Assembly this session highlights how much more difficult going after popular guns, such as the AR-15, really is.

A hardware ban is simply a different animal, politically speaking. That fact alone could do a lot to limit the ban’s potential to reach more than a handful of the most progressive-leaning states.

Continue reading “”

Kansas: Gov. Kelly Signs AG Kobach’s Permit Fee Reduction Bill

Yesterday, Governor Laura Kelly signed Senate Bill 116 into law. This NRA-backed bill eliminates the Attorney General’s $100 fee for concealed carry permits, reducing the total fee to just the $32.50 paid to county sheriffs. Reducing the fee ensures that the permit, and the benefits that it confers in exercising Second Amendment rights, are more accessible to law-abiding citizens of less financial means.

Colorado House panel kills ‘assault weapons’ ban
Four Democrats joined the Colorado House Judiciary Committee’s Republicans to indefinitely postpone the bill.

DENVER — Legislation that sought to ban so-called “assault weapons” died early Thursday morning after three Democrats joined the Colorado House Judiciary Committee’s Republicans to kill the bill on a 7-6 vote.

Shortly before 1 a.m. Thursday, Democratic Reps. Bob Marshall of Highlands Ranch, Said Sharbini of Westminster and Marc Snyder of Colorado Springs voted down the legislation along with their Republican colleagues after a pair of amendments to ban bump stocks and rapid-fire trigger activators were lost.

A subsequent vote to postpone the bill indefinitely drew one additional Democratic vote from Rep. Lindsay Daugherty of Arvada.

The nearly 15-hour hearing, which kicked off Wednesday morning, drew a 2023 record 522 witnesses seeking to testify.

The bill — sponsored by Rep. Elisabeth Epps, D-Denver — has divided the Democrats’ Gun Violence Prevention Caucus, with leading members, such as Sen. Tom Sullivan, D-Centennial, believing other measures, such as his proposal to improve the red flag law, are better solutions to gun violence.

Yes. This is the continuing gambit. That something isn’t ‘covered’ by the 2nd since it’s not an ‘arm’.

Federal judge declares “large capacity” magazines not protected by the Second Amendment

A U.S. District Judge in Washington, D.C. has declined to grant an injunction against the city’s ban on “large capacity” magazines, ruling that while magazines in general are “arms” protected by the Second Amendment, LCMs fall outside of the scope of the amendment because they’re a “poor fit” for self-defense purposes.

The challenge to the District’s magazine ban, known as Hanson v. D.C., involves four legal gun owners from D.C. who all say that they would possess and carry “large capacity” magazines in their firearms if they weren’t banned by law. The District’s prohibition comes complete with a potential three-year prison sentence, though it’s unclear how often that sentence is handed down in practice, especially with D.C. prosecutors routinely deciding to decline charges in many illegal gun possession cases.

Even though the D.C. Attorney General’s office is taking a mostly hands-off approach to illegal gun (and magazine) possession, the ban remains on the books and was defended in court by D.C. officials, who maintain that magazines aren’t “arms” at all, but accessories that aren’t protected by the Second Amendment. U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras, an Obama appointee, rejected that argument in his opinion, but agreed with the District on its fallback argument that LCM’s are most suitable for military purposes and are not used in self-defense because “because incidents where a civilian actually expends more than ten bullets in self-defense are “vanishingly rare.” From the opinion (citations omitted):

Heller specifically contemplated that “weapons that are most useful in military service” fall outside of Second Amendment protection.

Plaintiffs counter that “the Supreme Court’s precedents do not withhold protection from arms merely because they are useful in militia service.” Pls.’ Reply at 15. That may be true, but it is beside the point. Heller established that weapons that are “most useful in military service” are excluded from Second Amendment protection. “Most” is a superlative. A weapon may have some useful purposes in both civilian and military contexts, but if it is most useful in military service, it is not protected by the Second Amendment.

I’ve gotta say, that’s giving a lot of weight to Scalia’s phrase about “weapons that are most useful in military service”, especially since Contreras contradicted himself by pointing to the benefits of LCM’s for civilian law enforcement.

Continue reading “”

So Called ‘Assault Weapons’ ~ When Words Are Used Instead of Guns To Disarm Us

Let’s start off at the very beginning, following the “Yellow Brick Road,” with a few definitions and essential information for those new gun owners, non-gun owners, and anti-gun critters. Please note I’m sorry if I insult those already in the know!
Definition of the word ASSAULT

assault – verb: a violent physical or verbal attack.

Definition of the word WEAPON

weapon – noun: something (such as a club, knife, gun, etc.) used to injure, defeat, or destroy someone or something.

Definition of a RIFLE

rifle – noun: a shoulder fired firearm with a rifled bore (spiral grooves in the bore).

Definition of a PISTOL

pistol – noun: a specifically handheld firearm whose chamber is integral with the barrel.

Definition of a SEMIAUTOMATIC FIREARM

semiautomatic firearm – noun: a firearm able to fire repeatedly through an automatic reloading process but requiring the trigger to be pulled for each successive shot (a semiautomatic rifle or pistol).

Definition of a MACHINE GUN

machine gun – noun: a firearm for sustained rapid fire, or burst,  on a single pull of the trigger. (a.k.a. an automatic weapon).

Definition of the phrase ASSAULT RIFLE

assault rifle – noun: any of various intermediate-range, magazine-fed military rifles that can be set for automatic or semiautomatic fire (a.k.a. Select Fire).

So where does the infamous Assault Weapon fit into the linguistic picture? It doesn’t! It’s essentially MADE UP! Here’s a brief history:

Continue reading “”

Gun violence emergencies prompt concerns of government overreach

(The Center Square) – Across the country, there is a push to declare gun violence as a “public health crisis” and impose a “state of emergency” in response to shootings.

Proponents of the Second Amendment are concerned the emergency declarations lay the groundwork for expanded government powers, as witnessed during the COVID-19 lockdowns.

U.S. Congressmen Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., raised those fears in a recent House Judiciary Committee meeting.

“And our fellow Americans know the impact of folks up here in Washington declaring everything and anything a public health emergency,” Gaetz said during the meeting. “It means you’re more likely to be locked in your homes, deprived of your freedoms, less healthy, less safe, less secure and less able to live a truly American life.

“So know this: when the left talks about this as a public health emergency, get ready to see those enhanced authorities abused by the ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives],” Gaetz said.

In the same hearing, U.S. Rep. Cori Bush, D-MO, called for gun violence to be recognized as a public health emergency.

“In St. Louis and nationwide, gun violence is a public health emergency and common sense regulations are a necessity,” Bush said during the hearing.

Cities across the U.S. such as Flint, Michigan, Portland, Oregon, and Blakely, Georgia, have declared gun violence emergencies.

In New York, the cities of Rochester and Albany all declared a gun violence state of emergency. The state of New York declared a gun violence state of emergency in 2021.

Rochester has been under a current gun violence state of emergency since November 2021. That declaration allows the police department to shut down any commercial business that has had a shooting and is determined to be a nuisance after a review process.

The city of Rochester’s press release stated: “The Proclamation gives the Mayor broad powers to protect life and property and to bring the emergency under control.”

The state of New York gun violence emergency order gives the governor the power to “temporarily suspend or modify any statute, local law, ordinance, order, rule or regulation, or parts thereof, during a State disaster emergency if compliance with such would prevent, hinder, or delay action necessary to cope with the disaster emergency.”

The Delaware state legislature passed a resolution in March declaring gun violence a public health crisis.

And what if President Joe Biden declared a national emergency over gun violence? The White House didn’t respond to an email asking if Biden had considered such an option.

When a president declares a national emergency, there are at least 135 statutory powers that could be made available, according to the Brennan Center.

“Debate over the Second Amendment is clouded with propaganda terms intended to diminish the right of law-abiding citizens to bear arms,” said Stephen Halbrook, an expert on the Second Amendment and a senior fellow with the Independent Institute.
“Instead of criminals committing acts of violence with guns, the term ‘gun violence’ implies that the guns commit the violence.
Calling criminality with guns a ‘public health crisis’ obscures that crime is volitional and may be repressed only by taking criminals off the streets. Guns create no national ‘state of emergency,’ and recidivist violators create a state of emergency against every victim they attack.”

Texas Coordinates With ATF to Share Income of Residents for Warrantless Monitoring

Texas secretly gives its citizens’ incomes to the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF). Documents show this has led to at least one person being monitored by the feds without a warrant through the federal gun background check system. The Texas Workforce Commission (TWC) told The Epoch Times that it has written contracts with ATF  for “sharing income information” for criminal investigations. The revelation may lead to oversight by the legislature.
Texas state Rep. Briscoe Cain, a Republican, is”deeply troubled” about this coordination with the state’s unemployment agency and federal government.
“My office will be looking into whether the Texas Workforce Commission is assisting the ATF in the Biden Administration’s mission to violate the constitutional rights of law-abiding Texans,” Cain told The Epoch Times after reviewing the emails obtained by Gun Owners of America (GOA) as part of its ongoing FOIA lawsuit.
This is the third part in an exclusive Epoch Times series on the ATF giving information on innocent suspects to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for daily monitoring through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The FBI uses NICS as a database of people who are prohibited from possessing or buying guns.

Texan’s Income Exposed

In the documents, an ATF agent emailed the FBI that a person suspected of straw purchasing or firearms trafficking needed to be put into the gun background check database. The agent wrote that “per TWC,” the man’s “reported wage earnings with the State of Texas do not appear to supply the financial means to afford the firearms purchased.”
The ATF agent requested on Dec. 28, 2020, that the Texan’s gun purchases be monitored daily for 90 days. However, as previously reported, the FBI wrote to ATF that its agents could request an extension of the monitoring for as long as they wanted.
Texas’s role in the program was uncovered in the ATF’s ninth production of documents to GOA as part of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit. The 42 pages are more heavily redacted than the previous ones given to GOA. There are seven pages of blacked-out information before the source of the income of the person in Texas is shown as TWC.
“One would think that a pro-gun state like Texas would not be handing over gun owners’ confidential financial information to the federal government without a warrant or likely even without probable cause,” Rob Olson, an attorney for GOA, told The Epoch Times.

Continue reading “”

Nebraska Legislature Passes Permitless Gun-Carry

The Cornhusker State is now one signature away from becoming the 27th to adopt permitless gun carry.

The Nebraska legislature voted 33-14 to pass Legislative Bill 77 on final reading Wednesday morning. The bill would allow adults aged 21 and over who would otherwise be eligible for a concealed carry permit to carry a firearm in public without obtaining one. The bill now goes to Governor Jim Pillen’s (R.) desk, where he is expected to sign it into law.

“I am proud to support LB 77 and Nebraskans’ constitutional rights,” Pillen said shortly after the bill’s passage. “Thank you to the Nebraska Legislature for sending this bill to my desk.”

Once signed, the bill will add another feather in the cap of gun-rights advocates who have successfully pushed the policy in states across the country over the last two decades. The bill will make Nebraska the second state to adopt permitless carry this year, following Florida’s adoption earlier this month, and the 26th state to enact the policy in the last 20 years. Vermont has had the policy since its founding.

The bill’s passage led to a familiar call and response among activists on either side of the issue.

Gun-rights advocates immediately celebrated.

“With Gov. Pillen’s signature, Nebraska becomes the 27th state in America that protects the right of Americans to carry a firearm outside of their home without first asking the government for additional permission and paying additional fees,” Travis Couture-Lovelady, the Nebraska state director for the NRA, said in a press release. “Nebraska is the latest state to recognize law-abiding citizens are not the problem — criminals are.”

While gun-control advocates denounced the bill as an affront to public safety.

“Nebraska lawmakers have chosen to put politics over protecting our families,” Jen Hodge, a member of the Nebraska chapter of Moms Demand Action, said. “Over the past few weeks, tens of thousands of young people across the country, and here in Nebraska, walked out of school to demand action on gun safety by their representatives, but instead, Nebraska lawmakers are actively stripping away safety measures.”

But the bill also represents a significant victory for state Senator Tom Brewer (R.), the bill’s prime sponsor, who has tried for years to get permitless carry across the finish line in Nebraska. His 2022 permitless carry bill narrowly failed in the state’s unicameral legislature after falling just two votes short of overcoming a Democratic filibuster. However, state Republicans made gains in the chamber last November and now have a filibuster-proof majority. That cleared the way for Wednesday’s successful final vote.

“A person in Nebraska should not have to pay money to the government in order to exercise a constitutional right,” Brewer said.

While the bill would do away with permitting requirements for gun carry, it would not alter who is eligible to carry or obtain a firearm. Those, such as convicted felons, who can’t legally purchase or possess a firearm under state and federal law would not be allowed to carry under the permitless law. It also would not change where people are allowed to carry.

In addition to doing away with permitting requirements for gun carry, the bill would strengthen Nebraska’s preemption statute by removing the authority of local governments to enact gun regulations that are stricter than state law. That measure was aimed at the city of Omaha, which previously required residents to register any handguns they owned unless they possessed a valid concealed handgun permit.

If signed, the bill will take effect 90 days after the end of the legislative session.