I received an email from Firearms Policy Coalition this morning:

The
State Senate Law and Justice Committee is going
to hear FIVE anti-gun bills THIS MORNING!

The
myriad of anti-2A legislation that this would bring is devastating.

1. SB 6146 would allow local mayors and city governments
   run ramshod over your 2A rights.
2. SB 6049 would ban any magazine that holds over 10
   rounds.
3. SB 5463 would hold gun owners criminally liable for a
   thief breaking into their home.
4. SB 5992 is the ridiculous “Trigger Activation Device”
   ban that would effectively outlaw most firearms accessories.
5. SB 5444 which is the crown jewel of gun control:
   Washington’s “Assault Weapons” Ban.

We need to take action on these bills
NOW!

Stop These Anti-Gun
Bills!

There’s
very little time left for us to make our voices heard and block
them!

Send
a message to your legislators and tell them to OPPOSE SB 6146, SB 6049, SB 5463, SB 5992, and SB 5444 today!

If you click on their links it will take you to a web page that allows you to easily send letters to your Washington State legislative creatures.

From New Hampshire:

State Rep. Katherine Rogers, D-Concord, pleaded guilty to assault and was sentenced on Friday in Concord District Court in connection with a confrontation last year with well-known gun-rights advocate Susan Olsen.

The misdemeanor charge stems from an exchange between Rogers and Olsen during a recount of ballots for a state Senate seat in November 2016. Rogers was charged in August.
Olsen was allegedly sitting next to Rogers when Olsen asked Rogers to move the ballots closer. Olsen says that was when Rogers grabbed her and hit her on the side of her head.

And we have more details here:

Olsen stated that she said to Rogers, “If you strike me again, I will have you arrested.” She alleged that Rogers, a former county attorney, countered, “in a low, mocking, angry whisper,” something to the effect of “Hit me. I know you want to. Go ahead. Hit me.”

Olsen claimed that Rogers was “smirking” while she was speaking and then, reportedly leaned in further, “sounding almost like she was daring me,” and allegedly stated, “I know what you want to do. You want to shoot me.”

One of the signs of certain personality disorders is that they think they can read the minds of other people (ask me in person about some of my experiences with this). I strongly suspect a large number of anti-gun people have mental issues.

Why are these people so violent? Oh, I remember now. It’s in their nature.

In the last twenty years most of the progress we have made in the gun rights movement has been in the domain of self-defense. This is our strongest point. We now have concealed carry in nearly all states and even in Washington D.C. with Constitutional Carry (called “Vermont Carry” when I first got involved in the movement) making good progress.

Alan Korwin explains there is another front we can open on the war with the anti-gun forces using our strongest weapon:

The Gun-Free Zone Liability Act of 2018

• Improving American Safety and Security
• Eliminating Bias and Prejudice
• Restoring Constitutional Values
• Dropping the Pretense: “We don’t want your kind eating here.”

Establishes liability for harm caused by criminal conduct, when such conduct is wholly or partially enabled by limiting an individual’s right or ability to self defense.

We are far better off making the anti-gun people defend their weakest positions rather than let them attack with their strongest weapons. Both sides have limited resources. Make them expend their resources on defense rather than on offense.

There have been people expressing concern H.R. 38, which intents to provide a means by which nonresidents of a State whose residents may carry concealed firearms may also do so in the State, will be ignored by some state and local political jurisdictions. While it is true criminals tend to continue doing criminal things the bill provides some relief for the victims of these particular criminals:

(2) When a person asserts this section as a defense in a criminal proceeding, the prosecution shall bear the burden of proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the conduct of the person did not satisfy the conditions set forth in subsections (a) and (b).

(3) When a person successfully asserts this section as a defense in a criminal proceeding, the court shall 10 award the prevailing defendant a reasonable attorney’s fee.

(d)(1) A person who is deprived of any right, privilege, or immunity secured by this section, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage of any State or any political subdivision thereof, may bring an action in any appropriate court against any other person, including a State or political subdivision thereof, who causes the person to be subject to the deprivation, for damages or other appropriate relief.

(2) The court shall award a plaintiff prevailing in an action brought under paragraph (1) damages and such other relief as the court deems appropriate, including a reasonable attorney’s fee.

This is a good first step and would seen to me it hints that pro-rights federal administrations can, and perhaps will, utilize existing law:

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

It wouldn’t take very many government criminals being arrested, let alone successfully prosecuted, before the criminal class of these political jurisdictions would get the message and decide they had more important business to attend to than prey upon innocent people exercising their specific enumerated rights.

While H.R. 38 isn’t the end result we want, it’s a significant step in the correct direction.

Gun control group sends lawmakers fliers with images from Vegas shooting:

A gun control group sent fliers to the White House and members of Congress with graphic images from the mass shooting earlier this year in Las Vegas.

The fliers — sent by the Massachusetts-based gun control group Stop Handgun Violence — invite recipients to “wipe the blood off your hands and end mass shootings.”

…

The recipients then have two options:

The first option reads: “I will vote in favor of background checks for all gun sales and renew the federal ban on military style assault weapons.”

The second reads: “I will continue to put gun lobby blood money above American lives.”

“When you RSVP, imagine these are your kids,” the bottom of the invitation says, above a graphic photo of the Las Vegas shooting.

Stop Handgun Violence says on its website its mission is to “prevent firearm violence through public awareness, education, policy advocacy and law enforcement strategies — without banning guns.”

“Without banning guns”? In the flier they sent out, quoted above, they specifically call for the banning of guns.

They lie. They ignore the science on the effect of mass shootings on legislation. They dance in the blood of innocent victims. It’s what they do.