Category Archives: Gun Rights

Advocates for Flagrantly Violating the Constitution

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

We suggest an unlikely source of continuing power, after Bruen, for states to disarm individuals they deem dangerous: qualified immunity. Qualified immunity shields state officers from monetary liability for many constitutional violations. In short, unless a previous case “clearly established,” with high factual particularity, that the officer’s conduct was unconstitutional, the officer does not pay. Thus, a state law enforcement officer may, after Bruen, confiscate an individual’s firearm if the officer deems that person too dangerous to possess it. The officer’s justifications may conflict with the federal courts’ understanding of Bruen or the Second Amendment—perhaps flagrantly. But unless a previous, authoritative legal decision examining near-identical facts says so, the officer risks no liability. And because each individual act of disarmament will be unique, such prior decisions will be vanishingly rare. The result is a surprisingly free hand for states to determine who should and should not be armed, even in contravention of the Supreme Court’s dictates.

Guha Krishnamurthi
University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law
Peter Salib
University of Houston Law Center
Qualified Immunity as Gun Control
July 5, 2023

This looks to me like a conspiracy to violate rights and perhaps other crimes by Krishnamurthi and Salib. Can’t they be satisfied with the current violations of the constitution?

If violating the constitution, and openly admitting they know it is unconstitutional, becomes pervasive I could see the response become correspondingly unlawful.

Another Shot Fired at Ferguson

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

The Magazine Ban is a complete prohibition on commerce in ammunition magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds. The Supreme Court has three times answered the specific question of what historical traditions of firearms regulation can possibly support modern day bans on certain types of “arms.” Those cases establish that states can only ban arms that are “dangerous and unusual.” Magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds are neither.

Joel B. Ard
Ard Law Group PLLC
Attorneys For Plaintiffs
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Via SAF MOVES FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN WASH. MAGAZINE BAN CASE:

The Second Amendment Foundation today filed a motion in U.S. District Court for summary judgment in its challenge of Washington State’s ban on so-called “large-capacity magazines” in a case known as Sullivan v. Ferguson.

Progress is slow, but we are firing some powerful “ammunition” in our legal war.

I just wish we were in a position to use 18 USC 242 in this fight. Until we are, we will always be doing battle with the forces of evil over this issue.

Small Arms are Toys so Ban Them

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Are you honestly trying to argue you’re going to fight the ARMY (an actual well-regulated militia) with your little small-penis-overcompensation toys?

on POST as SOMETIMESFUNNY @ZTVComedyNews
Tweeted on April 3, 2023

It’s not only another Markley’s Law Monday, it is another science denier!

This is an interesting assertion. Our small arms, such as AR-15s, are “toys”. So, this guy wants them highly restricted and/or banned. If they are mere toys, then what is the point of banning them?

Don’t try to debate people like this. You can’t have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.

From Adam Piersen @AdamPiersen in the replies to this tweet:

image

From Michael Winter @Winterborn123 in the replies to this tweet:

image

From Michael Winter @Winterborn123 in the replies to this tweet:

image

From DissidentRexy @DissidentRexy in the replies to this tweet:

image

Cherry Picked Data

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

The second amendment is not sacred. It is failed policy.

In the over 200 years since it was added to the constitution, it has become obsolete and dangerous.

Every year you cling to it, tens of thousands of Americans die horrible deaths.

PeteGreenburg @petegreenburg
Xeeted on August 2, 2023

Assuming this is earnest and rational belief and not a deliberate lie or emotions is if they based the assertion upon only the criminal activity associated with firearms while ignoring the benefits. This is known as cherry picking the data.

In any case, the thing to take away from this even with SCOTUS unanimously agreeing in the Heller decision that the Second Amendment protects an individual right there are still people who insist no such right exists. Never let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take away your guns.

NFA and GCA Will be Gutted

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Because of the Bruen decision we are going to see every gun law challenged, The NFA and GCA will eventually be gutted. I don’t think there will be a complete removal of both but they won’t look anything like they do now after @gunpolicy and GOA get done.

Scott Wilburn (@ScottWilburn138)
Tweeted on August 2, 20237

A persuasive argument can be made for this. If you are in a rational universe. I am far from convinced of the rationality of our legal system, let alone the entirety our country, world, and beyond.

Still, I know that if we do not try it is certain to not happen. So, I’m donating money every month to FPC and SAF. My goal is to have machine gun shooting sports in high schools in less than ten years.

Manage Your Expectations to be Consistent With Reality

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

For years, the ATF allowed unrestricted use of the braces, invented for use by handicapped target shooters, but under Biden moved to ban or regulate them. The White House claimed they are “weapons of war” though only two “mass shootings” have involved the guns, which are typically used for target shooting and hunting.

An estimated 3 million to 20 million are in use, and making the changes could cost owners a total of some $2 billion over 10 years, said the court.

The ATF rule kicked in this year and the agency gave owners a few months to comply and skip the tax. But just about 250,000 decided to register their guns, a far worse compliance rate than expected.

Paul Bedard
August 2, 2023
Judges pistol-whip Biden ATF over gun grab overreach

So, between 1% and 8% registered their guns. Whoever expected more than that is severely out of touch with reality. That is typical in the U.S. and Canada, and probably elsewhere as well.

No Correlation

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Illinois, with its restrictive gun laws and comparatively low gun ownership of 22 percent, had 414 mass shootings and a per capita rate of 3.6 mass shootings per million people.

Washington, D.C., despite not being a state, was included in the study and the researchers were shocked to find that the district had the highest rate of mass shootings per capita at 10.4 shootings for every one million people. This is despite the fact that the country’s capital has some of the strongest gun control laws in the nation.

For states, Louisiana had the highest rate of mass shootings per capita at 4.3 shootings per million people – less than half the per capita rate in Washington, D.C. despite the lax gun laws and 52 percent gun ownership.

Hawaii and North Dakota had zero mass shootings from 2014 to 2022. They are followed by New Hampshire, Vermont and Wyoming, which all had one each, Idaho with two and Maine with three.

Arsenio Toledo
July 28, 2023
Study proves there is NO CORRELATION between gun control laws and mass shootings

I’ve been saying, essentially, the same thing for almost 20 years. That the politicians don’t care about the facts should be used as evidence at their trials.

Violent Criminals are Their Allies

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Zero tolerance doesn’t apply to stopping criminals. The Biden administration reserves that focus for the firearm industry.

Larry Keane
Senior vice president for government and public affairs for the National Shooting Sports Foundation
July 27, 2023
ATF has shut down nearly 2,000 gun stores since the implementation of its new “zero tolerance” policy

This is not news to most of us:

They are just being more blatant about it.

The Phallic Symbol is Unattainable

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

The phallic symbol is unattainable, yet firearms and, consequently, violence are used to promote white masculinity. Gun advertisements use phallic imagery and language that promotes toxic masculine ideals. Due to the demographics of gun owners, the majority of the consumers of these products are white men. These advertisers know their market well and accurately demonstrated the anxiety white men have in a world where they feel a loss of rights and/or privileges. By using imagery of the phallic symbol, the advertisers have used their consumers’ fears and anxieties in order to sell more firearms, which, in turn, can at least partially demonstrate the white male gun owner’s identity.

Jenna Bergman
August 11, 2021
Firearms and the Phallus: Using Guns to Reclaim Masculinity

It is not only another Markley’s Law Monday, it is another science denier!

And it is not just an attempt at a snarky comment on Twitter. This is an article in the Columbia Political Review. It is Columbia University’s undergraduate multi-partisan political magazine with a circulation of about 8,000.

It is such gibberish that I gave serious consideration to the hypothesis it is satire. I have since dismissed that hypothesis.

Once you see it, you can’t unsee it.

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Government, almost by definition, DOES restrict our freedoms. Those polled aren’t wrong in the least for seeing it that way. The constant struggle is keeping this necessary evil contained to the minimum required for a functioning society.

Orgs like Everytown are part of a broad spectrum of authoritarian social engineers. They want people to be docile, preferably stuffed into cities, owning nothing, and restricted to a narrow Overton window of acceptable opinions and lifestyles. The Chinese social credit system is their model.

Guns are a threat to this (as is free speech, which is why that is also a target for them). Not even really guns themselves, but the individualist ideas they can awaken simply by accepting the natural right to bear arms. Because once you accept the natural rights framework, the Bloombergian government dystopia they want is unacceptable.

Notice how the very same people who want to ban guns also tend to want social media to censor more speech, want the government to tax everything they declare undesirable, want to punish thought crimes with a widening net of “hate speech” restrictions that shutter the Overton window, and constantly find new things they want banned.

This is also why they insist on federal gun laws. They know Boise or Manchester are doing just fine with minimal gun control laws, which drives them insane. It proves the problem in their violent cities is their own fault, and not due to gun rights. The authoritarians can’t allow such counterexamples to exist.

Control, control, control. Once you see it, you can’t unsee it.

Kostas Moros @MorosKostas
Tweeted on July 28, 2023

Right Wing Bias of Corporate Media

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

The right wing bias of corporate media is nuts.

David Hogg
Tweeted on July 26, 2023

Delusions are often functional. Especially for anti-gunners like Hogg.

Others have things to say on this topic as well.

A Good Start

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Suing the ATF is our love language.

Gun Owners of America @GunOwners
Tweeted on July 21, 2023

I am a little lukewarm on this. I would say, it is my like language. Prosecuting and convicting them? That is my love language.

Catch-22 for Gun Owner Rights

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

The Supreme Court granted cert in this case, and it is worrisome. (1) Mr. Rahimi is quite a violent person; (2) if there is any prohibited person category that is likely to fail “text, history, and tradition” standards, it is the one for those subject to civil DV restraining orders. So this is the acid test for Bruen and its standards.

David Hardy
July 11, 2023
Supreme Court case: US v. Rahimi

I’ve been wondering if SCOTUS would “flinch” on this. If they stick to their guns the anti-gun people will gain a tremendous amount of political capital and really be able to sling their poo at SCOTUS and gun owner activists. If they fold and carve an exception to “text, history, and tradition” for people with a history of domestic violence it will be a significant flaw that will likely be exploited by the courts to justify almost any gun control law.

The Super Safety

Posted on by

I love it when people drive trucks through the cracks of illegal gun laws:

Via Hoffman Tactical @HoffmanTactical.

Proud of Being an Effective Liar

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Proud to have had a hand in getting CMT to reject this racist and violent song…

Shannon Watts @shannonrwatts
Tweeted on July 18, 2023

As a side note, she has blocked my primary Twitter account. I had to use a different account to copy the quote.

The song is neither racist or criminally violent. But Watts has never been known for her adherence to the facts. That she is proud of it demonstrates she is proud of her work as a professional liar.

Try That in a Small Town

Posted on by

So according to the big town folks this is a racist song:

As Tennessee lawmakers, we have an obligation to condemn Jason Aldean’s heinous song calling for racist violence.

Justin Jones
State Rep. Democrat
July 19, 2023
Jason Aldean’s ‘Try This in a Small Town’ is shameful. Naturally, it’s the right’s song of the summer

By lyrically and visually equating meaningful rallies condemning police brutality to violent crime, Aldean is shamelessly touting how much he—and this country, quite frankly—devalues Black life.

Candace McDuffie
July 19, 2023
Jason Aldean’s ‘Try That in a Small Town’ Is the Racist Anthem White Folks Have Been Waiting For

My take on it is that it is only racist if you believe violent crime is almost exclusively the domain of the targets of the racism. I suppose Jones and others could be right about that. I just know that twice as many people in prison identify as Democrats as all other political affiliations combined.

Hence, my take on Jones opposition to the song is that it is not really about racism and he knows it. He is opposed to the song because it expresses opposition to the people who vote for him.

Gun Rights Policy Conference

Posted on by

I have been to this event three times. The event itself is free. Your travel expenses and time are your only costs.  Highly recommended:

Dear Second Amendment Activist,

On behalf of the Second Amendment Foundation Board of Trustees and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Board of Directors, I am thrilled to invite you to the 38th Annual Gun Rights Policy Conference (GRPC) in Phoenix, Arizona, September 22-24, 2023, as we plan the ROAD TO LIBERTY. 

With the recent rash of draconian anti-gun legislation, the courts ignoring the SCOTUS Bruen and Heller decisions and the critical 2024 elections, now is the time to come together and plan the winning strategy for our Second Amendment civil rights VICTORY!

Confirmed and invited speakers include Massad Ayoob, Stephen Gutowski, Tom & Ryan Gresham, Bob Cottrell, Mark Walters, Stephen Halbrook, Dave Kopel, Chuck Michel, AWR Hawkins, and many others. 

At GRPC, you get to network with other 2A activists and meet national leaders. This interaction is vital to developing new plans and the continuation of the successful strategies that have won recent Second Amendment victories.

There is no charge for GRPC, but pre-registration is required.  The conference will include a day and a half of the best and brightest minds in the Second Amendment field (Saturday/Sunday) and wonderful opportunities to network at a Friday and Saturday evening reception.

REGISTER NOW to reserve your spot at GRPC. 

The conference will be held at the Marriott Phoenix Airport.  We have negotiated a limited number of rooms at a special conference rate of $159.00 per night from September 21-25.  BOOK now to take advantage of this deal.? 

We are all looking forward to seeing you!

With warm regards,

Alan M. Gottlieb
Founder Second Amendment Foundation and Chairman, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

Alternate Universe?

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

Justice Frankfurter warned 80 years ago that the Supreme Court was going down a bad path by getting into the business of ranking constitutional rights, protecting some at the expense of others, and today his dissent illuminates what has gone very wrong with our current Supreme Court. In a string of cases decided by an unchecked conservative super-majority, the court has established a tiering of constitutional rights, elevating rights to religious liberty (for some), free speech, and guns over and above other fundamental rights such as equality, public health and security, and bodily autonomy.

Katherine Franke
James L. Dohr Professor of Law at Columbia University and the founder and faculty director of the Law, Rights, and Religion Project.
July 18, 2023
We’ve Entered a New Era of Tiered Constitutional Rights

Is Franke a visitor from an alternate universe and is working from a different U.S. Constitution? In my universe and reading my copy of the U.S. constitution there is no mention of “fundamental rights such as equality, public health and security, and bodily autonomy*.”

I would attribute the addition of these new rights to ignorance or poor schooling. But Franke claims she is a Professor of Law at Columbia University. If true, I find it hare to imagine she is so ignorant or poorly schooled that she did not have an accurate copy of the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and been required to read them on multiple occasions. Hence the I am forced to conclude there must be an alternate explanation.

One could claim this is a deliberate lie intended to deceive the masses. But the lie is so obvious one could not expect it to accomplish, in the best case, a cause for laughter at her expense.

Hence, my leading hypothesis to explain this outrageous misrepresentation of the words and meaning of the constitution is that she is delusional and/or is a visitor from an alternate dimension.

I also find it quite telling there is no means to leave comments on her opinion piece.

* The Fourth Amendment reference to “secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures” appears to be limited to “searches and seizers” and it would be difficult to stretch it to mean “bodily autonomy.”

Logic is an Alien Concept

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

As the Court previously explained, the issue in this case is whether ATF may properly regulate a component as a “frame or receiver” even after ATF determines that the component in question is not a frame or receiver. It may not. Logic dictates that a part cannot be both not yet a receiver and receiver at the same time. Defendants’ reliance on that logical contradiction is fatal to their argument.

Reed O’Connor
June 30, 2023
VanDerStok v. Garland

One should not be surprised the antigun people tried doing something that did make logical sense. Logic has always been an alien concept to their type.

Those 80% receivers, at least at the Federal level, continue to be legal. At the state level please seek the advice of a firearms lawyer before you post your new build on social media.

We Have the Evidence

Posted on by

They know the truth and are lying. We “knew” have known that for decades. But it is rare we direct evidence of that. Now, for this one person, we have the evidence:

Democratic St. Louis Mayor Tishaura Jones’ support of gun control is coming into question after an open records request released thousands of her personal texts, including one that argued gun crackdowns are ineffective.

“Chicago has strict gun laws as well but that doesn’t deter gun violence,” Jones texted in a group chat to her dad, Virvus Jones and advisor Richard Callow on March 21, KSDK reported.

They know strict gun laws do not “deter gun violence”. But they still advocate for strict gun laws. Therefore, you know the reason for the gun control advocacy is not a desire to reduce “gun violence”. There is some evil motivation at work.

Prepare appropriately.