- 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
Posts Tagged gun rights
SCOTUS Refuses To Hear Chicago Gun Ban Case
From Bloomberg:
A Highland Park resident and the Illinois State Rifle Association challenged the city’s 2013 law. They argued in their appeal that lower courts are engaging in “massive resistance” to the 2008 Supreme Court ruling that said the Constitution protects individual gun rights.
“In the seven years since that opinion was handed down, the lower courts have assiduously worked to sap it of any real meaning,” the appeal argued. “They have upheld severe restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms that would be unthinkable in the context of any other constitutional right.”
NY Times Calls For Gun Confiscation
The New York Times is following the smoke signals of the President and wants to take your guns.
It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens.
The editors at the NYT are scared by a bunch of pieces of metal. They are shaking in their boots because something looks “scary” to them. The real danger is the idea that humans can be controlled and made safer with more laws.
Here is a response to The New York Times from The Federalist.
New Gun Bill Is Gun Controlers’ Wet Dream
Posted by Brian in Law, News, Threat Watch on 26/Nov/2015 07:00
From The Federalist:
Unlike a standard criminal trial, in which a jury must decide beyond a reasonable doubt whether you have violated a criminal law, under this proposed law the government must only show a preponderance of evidence–evidence which will almost certainly be redacted–in order to strip you of your Second Amendment right to defend yourself and your family from terrorists:
In any case in which the Attorney General has denied the transfer of a firearm to a prospective transferee pursuant to section 922A of this title or has made a determination regarding a firearm permit applicant pursuant to section 922B of this title, an action challenging the determination may be brought against the United States. The petition shall be filed not later than 60 days after the petitioner has received actual notice of the Attorney General’s determination under section 922A or 922B of this title. The court shall sustain the Attorney General’s determination upon a showing by the United States by a preponderance of evidence that the Attorney General’s determination satisfied the requirements of section 922A or 922B, as the case may be. To make this showing, the United States may submit, and the court may rely upon, summaries or redacted versions of documents containing information the disclosure of which the Attorney General has determined would likely compromise national security.
Remember, you don’t have to be convicted of any crime whatsoever to end up on the terrorist watch list. You don’t even have to be charged with a crime to lose your constitutional rights under the proposed law. If this proposed legislation were to become law, some DHS bureaucrat–perhaps the type of bureaucrat who wrote earlier this year that “right-wing terrorists†pose the biggest threat to American national security–only needs to snap his fingers and add your name to the blacklist in order to immediately deprive you of your Second Amendment rights and your constitutional right to due process. You don’t even get to review the entirety of the evidence against you.
$100 Gun Tax Would Double Price of Some Firearms
From The Daily Caller:
A U.S. congresswoman plans to introduce a bill later this week that would require a $100 tax on all gun sales nationwide. If the bill is passed by Congress, the revenue made off of the tax will go toward mental health and anti-violence programs.
Democratic Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez, from New York, announced the federal legislation called “Reducing Gun Violence in our Neighborhoods Act†at NYC’s City Hall on Monday, according to the New York Daily News.
This amounts to a poll tax on self defense for poor people. Some of the cheapest guns used for self defense are right around $100 and this tax would instantly double their cost. Many other firearms used for self defense would increase by around 50%. This tax would hurt poor people disproportionately, especially those who live in crime prone neighborhoods. Is that fair?
Australia’s Gun Control Creates Black Markets
From America’s First Freedom:
…we encourage you to check out the recent coverage in Australia’s New Daily newspaper about the country’s thriving black market for firearms. Let it be said first of all that we’re fairly certain the journalist behind this series, George Lekakis, isn’t a gun-rights advocate by any stretch of the imagination. Just last week he tried to drum up hysteria about the Adler A110 shotgun—a scary gun that can shoot seven rounds in seven seconds! That’s practically a viable home-defense firearm!
National African American Gun Association
The NAAGA was just started in February.
THE GOAL OF THE NATIONAL AFRICAN AMERICAN GUN ASSOCIATION IS TO HAVE EVERY AFRICAN AMERICAN INTRODUCED TO FIREARM USE FOR HOME PROTECTION, COMPETITIVE SHOOTING, AND OUTDOOR RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES. WE ARE A CIVIL RIGHTS ORGANIZATION FOCUSED ON SELF PRESERVATION OF OUR COMMUNITY THROUGH ARMED PROTECTION AND COMMUNITY BUILDING.
Gun Control Group Wants To Redefine Gun Dealer
From CBS News:
The group’s recommendations target laws for sellers who make occasional sales versus those who are said to be engaged in the business — or rather, gun hobbyists versus gun dealers.
Its report calls for the president to codify who is engaged in the business of selling guns. Someone who sells more than 25 guns a year, it recommends, should be considered a gun dealer and subject to federal regulations.
Everytown also wants the president to define what counts as a “personal collection” of firearms. The law currently exempts gun sales from a person’s personal collection from federal checks.
Turning Citizens into Criminals
From USA Today:
This was the point of a talk by George Washington University law professor Robert J. Cottrol at a Georgetown Law School conference on guns and gun rights that I attended last week. As Cottrol noted, “Gun-control laws have a tendency of turning into criminals peaceable citizens whom the state has no reason to have on its radar.â€
Restaurant Wants Gun Owner Patrons After Robbery
From Fox News:
Art Bouvier is giving the next person who tries to rob his Indianapolis Cajun-style eatery something to think about – by dangling a 25 percent discount for pistol-packing patrons.
After a man claiming to have a gun robbed Papa Roux Saturday night, the New Orleans native announced that customers with a valid a concealed handgun permit will get a quarter off their tab. Bouvier told FoxNews.com he hopes it will send a strong signal that it’s a bad idea to pull a gun with bad intentions in his restaurant.
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.
NY Times: Self Defense is a Fantasy
From The New York Times:
This foolhardy notion of quick-draw resistance, however, is dramatically contradicted by a research projectshowing that, since 2007, at least 763 people have been killed in 579 shootings that did not involve self-defense. Tellingly, the vast majority of these concealed-carry, licensed shooters killed themselves or others rather than taking down a perpetrator.
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.
Hillary Thinks Australia’s Gun Confiscation is a Good Example
Posted by Brian in News, Threat Watch on 1/Nov/2015 07:00
From Reason.com:
When it comes to gun control, Hillary Clinton said last Friday, “Australia is a good example” for the United States to follow. That comment suggested the leading Democratic presidential candidate’s plans in this area are much more ambitious than she usually lets on—so ambitious that implementing them would require ignoring or repealing the Second Amendment.
By Monday a spokeswoman for the former secretary of state was already backpedaling, saying Clinton did not mean to endorse mass gun confiscation, a central element of Australia’s approach to firearms. But if that was not Clinton’s intent, she has an alarmingly cavalier attitude toward laws that impinge on constitutional rights: The details don’t matter as long as you mean well.
https://youtu.be/rZzCTKWK3j8