- Comms
- Law
- Medic
- News
- Opinion
- Threat Watch
- Training
- Warrior Tools
- Accessories
- Ammo
- Body Armor
- Books
- Clothing
- Commo
- Gear
- Handguns
- Holsters
- Knives
- Long Guns
- ACC
- Accuracy International
- Barrett
- Benelli
- Beretta
- Blaser
- Bushmaster
- Custom
- CZ
- Desert Tactical Arms
- DPMS
- FN
- Forums
- HK
- IWI
- Kel-Tec Long Guns
- LaRue
- LWRC
- McMillan
- Mosin Nagant
- Mossberg
- Para
- Remington
- Rock River Arms
- Ruger Long Guns
- Sabre Defense
- Sako
- SIG Sauer
- SKS
- Smith & Wesson Long Guns
- Springfield
- Styer
- Weatherby
- Wilson Combat
- Winchester
- Magazines
- Maintenance
- Navigation
- Optics
- Sights
- Tech
- Warriors
Archive for category Law
Democrats Targeted Gun Store In Virginia
From The Washington Times:
Democratic elected officials in Northern Virginia worked together to engineer a campaign against a Fairfax County firearms store in a bid to politicize gun violence and drum up support for a Democrat in an election Tuesday, an exchange of emails shows.
Delegate Kathleen Murphy, McLean Democrat, wrote an email to state Sen. Barbara Favola, Arlington Democrat, seeking help in shutting down the gun store. Ms. Favola was instrumental in organizing opposition to Mr. Gates’ shop in Arlington.
Â
Gun Taxes: The New Poll Tax
Posted by Brian in Law, News, Threat Watch on 6/Nov/2015 07:00
Exorbitant taxes on guns affect the poor disproportionately and are an attack on the civil rights of all Americans.
From the NRA:
H.R. 3830, otherwise known as the “Reducing Gun Violence in our Neighborhoods Act of 2015,†would impose a stiff $100 tax on every firearm sold. The resulting revenues would go to the Department of Justice to be disbursed in various initiatives meant to support mental health care, as well as “anti-violence programsâ€â€”and you’re on the same wavelength as us if you read that last bit as “anti-gun propaganda.†Not only would you get ripped off, your gun purchase would support the cause of chipping away at the Second Amendment.
Velázquez is quoted as saying, “If making guns more expensive means fewer end up in commerce, I’m happy with that result.†Her implication that hurting firearm sales is somehow accidental—simply collateral damage—is profoundly disingenuous. Indeed, ensuring that “fewer end up in commerce†appears to be the entire point behind this legislation.
Â
ACLU Suing Philly On Behalf Of Gun Owner
From Ammoland.com:
The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania and the law firm of McCausland Keen & Buckman filed a federal lawsuit today against the city of Philadelphia on behalf of Mark Fiorino, a gun rights advocate who legally carries an unconcealed weapon in public.
The suit alleges that the Philadelphia Police Department filed retaliatory charges against Fiorino after it learned that there was a YouTube recording of Philadelphia police officers threatening to shoot and screaming profanities at an unresisting Fiorino in February 2011. Fiorino was cleared of all charges in October 2011.
Photo ID Requirement For Gun Challenged By Amish Man
From Penn Live:
Andrew Hertzler claims in a suit filed Friday in U.S. Middle District Court that the requirement is a violation of his constitutional right to possess a firearm and of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
Hertzler states he is an active member of the Amish faith and community in Lancaster County with a sincerely held religious belief that prohibits photographs being taken of him.
Tom Gresham of Gun Talk on NPR
Tom Gresham sat down with John Hockenberry on his program for a short interview:
Clinton Reverses Herself on Australian-style Gun Ban
Posted by Brian in Law, News, Threat Watch on 26/Oct/2015 07:00
From Breitbart.com:
Clinton said “the [Australian] government was able to curtail the supply and set a different standard for gun purchases in the future.†She went on to say, “it would be worth considering doing it on the national level†here in the U.S.
But Monday morning, Palmieri told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell that Clinton was not suggesting firearm confiscation.
Mitchell asked: “Was [Clinton] suggesting in her town hall meetings in New Hampshire on Friday, when she said she would look into the Australian system, was she suggesting confiscation of guns?â€
Palmieri responded, “Of course not. What she was referring to is places where there have been mass shootings and the countries have done something to act on it. She has put forward a very common-sense proposal that would have background checks for everyone, that would remove the special protections the gun industry has from liability, but it’s all very common-sense measures the majority of the public supports.â€
San Fran Sheriff Failed Gun Qualification
From SFGate:
A sergeant under San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi who oversaw the department’s shooting range was transferred after he questioned whether the sheriff could take a marksmanship test in light of his domestic violence case, The Chronicle has learned.
Mirkarimi then took the test and failed it, preventing him from carrying a gun, department employees said.
Sheriff’s Department officials strongly denied Thursday night that the sergeant had been transferred because he potentially stood in the way of Mirkarimi’s being granted permission to carry a gun. They described his transfer as a budgetary move and said Mirkarimi had nothing to do with it.
The Atlantic: Gun Rights Are Racist
Public-carry advocates like to cite historical court opinions to support their constitutional vision, but those opinions are, to put it mildly, highly problematic. The supportive precedent they rely on comes from the antebellum South and represented less a national consensus than a regional exception rooted in the unique culture of slavery and honor. By focusing only on sympathetic precedent, and ignoring the national picture, gun-rights advocates find themselves venerating a moment at which slavery, honor, violence, and the public carrying of weapons were intertwined.
The authors of this piece are correct in their sense that our current gun debate has its roots in the 19th-century American South—but they managed to get the true alignment of things completely backwards. It is the modern gun control movement that is absolutely a product of racist legislators trying to deprive black Americans of the ability to defend themselves. When the Civil War ended and the Reconstruction Amendments freed the slaves and assigned them equal rights under the law, the white landowners at the top of the socio-economic ladder found themselves in a predicament. Not only were they deprived of their resource pool of unfree labor, but they now lived side by side with a black population that outnumbered them—and was about to enjoy equal access to both ballot boxes and firearms. These landowners acted swiftly to defend their dominant position. Encouraging poor whites to cling to a sense of racial identity and despise their black neighbors was part of their strategy. The other part was an explosion of new legislation that spat in the face of the Constitution’s clear intention to guarantee the rights of the former slaves.
Court Upholds NY SAFE Act
Posted by Brian in Law, News, Threat Watch on 21/Oct/2015 15:20
From Rochester Democrat and Chronicle:
The decision Monday by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit found that the SAFE Act in New York and laws in Connecticut following the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012 do not infringe on the Second Amendment, as gun-rights groups contended in their lawsuits.
“We hold that the core provisions of the New York and Connecticut laws prohibiting possession of semiautomatic assault weapons and large-capacity magazines do not violate the Second Amendment, and that the challenged individual provisions are not void for vagueness,” the court ruling states.
From American Thinker:
The SAFE (“Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement”) Act was presented to the New York State Senate and passed into law in 15 minutes. Â No debate was allowed, and senators did not have time to read the bill before voting it into law.
The SAFE Act is a complete ban on the sale or transfer of all military-style semi-automatic rifles manufactured within the past several decades. Â It is a total ban on the AR-15, AK-47, M-14/M-1a, HK G3, Steyr AUG, and many other civilian copies of military firearms. Â Prior to the passage of the law, Gov. Cuomo publicly stated that he was considering “confiscation” of existing rifles, but the final version of the law allowed existing owners to keep their rifles as long as they registered them with the State. Â Upon the death of the owner, the rifle will be confiscated; it cannot be transferred to an heir within New York State.
The full decision is here with the names of the judges attached.
Sheriff Will Refuse Gun Registration Executive Order
From Fox News:
An Indiana sheriff vowed that he will not enforce any executive actions by President Obama requiring law enforcement officers to begin registering firearms.
Elkhart County Sheriff Bradley D. Rogers made the remarks in a recent panel discussion on local TV station WNIT.
“If President Obama today said, ‘I’m creating an executive order that all sheriffs and police chiefs around this nation need to start registering firearms,’ I will disregard it,†he said.
Supreme Court May Hear Gun Ban Case
Posted by Brian in Law, News, Threat Watch on 16/Oct/2015 07:00
From MSNBC:
If the court agrees to hear the case, it would cast a shadow over similar bans in seven states. But declining to take it up would boost efforts to impose such bans elsewhere, at a time of renewed interest in gun regulation after recent mass shootings.
Gun rights advocates are challenging a 2013 law passed in Highland Park, Illinois, that bans the sale, purchase, or possession of semi-automatic weapons that can hold more than 10 rounds in a single ammunition clip or magazine. In passing the law, city officials cited the 2012 shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut and a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado.
Fourth Amendment Should Cover Your Digital Life
From Fox News:
In an era of constant political gamesmanship and gridlock, getting things done in Congress is never easy. That was never clearer than the last Congress’ failure to pass long overdue reforms to an antiquated that today threatens the very thing it was intended to protect – the privacy of Americans’ digital communications and records.
A bipartisan group of more than 270 members of the House of Representatives co-sponsored legislation with the same underlying objective — to update the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA). And yet, these bills were left to die without a vote.
Guns: U.S. vs Australia
Posted by Brian in Law, Opinion, Threat Watch on 12/Oct/2015 07:00
From National Review:
“Australia†is Obama’s preferred euphemism for that most cherished of gun-control ideals: mass confiscation of the citizenry’s weapons.
You will notice that the president doesn’t exactly spell out what following Australia’s model would entail. He speaks instead of “commonsense gun-control legislation,†“closing the gun-show loophole,†and “universal background checks.â€
But the Australian 1996 National Agreement on Firearms was not a benign set of commonsense gun-control rules: It was a gun-confiscation program rushed through the Australian parliament just twelve days after a 28-year-old man killed 35 people with a semi-automatic rifle in the Tasmanian city of Port Arthur. The Council of Foreign relations summarizes the Aussie measure nicely:
Laws on Alcohol vs Guns
From Volokh Conspiracy:
Every day, about 30 people are killed in the U.S. in gun homicides or gun accidents (not counting gun suicides or self-inflicted accidental shootings). And every day, likely about 30 people are killed in homicides where the killer was under the influence of alcohol, plus alcohol-related drunk driving accidents and alcohol-related accidents where the driver wasn’t drunk but the alcohol was likely a factor (again not including those who died in accidents caused by their own alcohol consumption). If you added in gun suicides on one side and those people whose alcohol consumption killed themselves on the other, the deaths would tilt much more on the side of alcohol use, but I generally like to segregate deaths of the user from deaths of others.
So what are we going to do about it? When are we going to ban alcohol? When are we going to institute more common-sense alcohol-control measures?
Mass Killings That Were Prevented
From Volokh Conspiracy:
Backers of laws that let pretty much all law-abiding people carry concealed guns in public places often argue that these laws will sometimes enable people to stop mass shootings. Opponents occasionally ask: If that’s so, what examples can one give of civilians armed with guns stopping such shootings? Sometimes, I hear people asking if even one such example can be found, or saying that they haven’t heard of even one such example.
1. In Chicago earlier this year, an Uber driver with a concealed-carry permit “shot and wounded a gunman [Everardo Custodio] who opened fire on a crowd of people.â€
2. In a Philadelphia barber shop earlier this year, Warren Edwards “opened fire on customers and barbers†after an argument. Another man with a concealed-carry permit then shot the shooter; of course it’s impossible to tell whether the shooter would have kept killing if he hadn’t been stopped, but a police captain was quoted as saying that, “I guess he [the man who shot the shooter] saved a lot of people in there.â€