Law | Conservative Libertarian Outpost

Posts Tagged ‘Law’

The Second Amendment and the States…

June 12, 2009

I was roundly blasted on several websites last year when the D.C. vs. Heller decision was rendered by the gutless cowards that make up the Supreme Court. All too many neophytes called it the greatest thing since smokeless powder for American gun owners. Guess what folks? The devil, as I always say, is in the details.

Thankfully, nearly all state Constitutions use wording that makes the U.S. Constitution look wimpy by comparison with regards to the populace owning and possessing weapons. The ability to defend oneself and others is an unalienable right, not an inalienable privilege handed to the serfs.

Hence now the Heller decision is being used to actually attempt to deny liberty and freedom to the masses by the forces that seek domination over them in complete denial of natural law. Read on… Oh, and don’t forget to read between the lines this time!

Last year’s landmark Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller definitively settled the fact that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right—as opposed to a collective one—to keep and bear arms. Yet that ruling applied only to the federal government (which oversees Washington, D.C.). Does the Second Amendment apply against state and local governments as well?

Although Heller never answered that question, Justice Antonin Scalia’s majority opinion did provide a very potent hint. In footnote 23, Scalia observed that while the Court’s earlier ruling in U.S. v. Cruikshank (1876) stated that the Second Amendment did not apply against the states, “Cruikshank also said that the First Amendment did not apply against the States and did not engage in the sort of Fourteenth Amendment inquiry required by our later cases.”

To appreciate Scalia’s meaning, consider that the Supreme Court has been protecting First Amendment rights from state and local abuse since 1925’s Gitlow v. New York. The Court has done so under the so-called incorporation doctrine, whereby most of the Bill of Rights and certain other fundamental rights have been incorporated against the states via the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, which reads, “nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” Cruikshank is therefore a dead letter when it comes to free speech. So why should it still matter for gun rights? As the footnote basically points out, Cruikshank was decided before incorporation had even been invented. So it’s the modern incorporation doctrine that matters now, not the long-dead reasoning behind Cruikshank.

This controversy lies at the center of last week’s unfortunate decision in National Rifle Association v. Chicago (formerly McDonald v. Chicago), where the federal 7th Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Second Amendment offers zero protection against the draconian gun control laws currently in place in Chicago and Oak Park, Illinois.

It’s a mistaken and also strangely misguided decision, as plaintiff’s attorney Alan Gura (who previously argued and won Heller) demonstrates in the appeal he quickly filed with the Supreme Court. As Gura notes, not only did the 7th Circuit decline “to perform the required incorporation analysis,” the court “erred in failing to heed Heller‘s cautionary statement that the pre-incorporation relics [including Cruikshank] lack ‘the sort of Fourteenth Amendment inquiry required by our later cases.'”

Moreover, the 7th Circuit even suggested that federalism would best be served by letting the states disregard the Second Amendment entirely. “Federalism is an older and more deeply rooted tradition than is a right to carry any particular kind of weapon,” Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook wrote for the three-judge panel.

Yet as Gura rightfully responds in his petition, “To claim that of all rights, the Second Amendment must yield to local majoritarian impulses is especially wrong considering that the rampant violation of the right to keep and bear arms was understood to be among the chief evils vitiated by adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment.” Indeed, the 14th Amendment was specifically written and ratified by the Radical Republicans after the Civil War to protect the recently freed slaves and their white allies from the depredations of the former Confederate states, including the infamous Black Codes, which curtailed property rights, liberty of contract, free speech, and the right to keep and bear arms.

The Second Amendment deserves the exact same respect as the rest of the Bill of Rights, nearly all of which have now been incorporated, something Gura is careful to explain. Which is precisely what the 7th Circuit should have said. Moreover, Gura persuasively argues that now is the right time for the Supreme Court to correct one of its most glaring historical errors by overturning the controversial Slaughterhouse Cases (1873), which essentially gutted the 14th Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause, which reads, “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” As numerous legal historians have now documented, the text, original meaning, and history of that clause all point in one direction: It was designed to nationalize the Bill of Rights and other substantive rights.

The 7th Circuit essentially breezed past this argument, though it’s perhaps worth noting that Judge Easterbrook did so while repeatedly referring to the “Privileges and Immunities Clause,” which is actually located in Article IV of the Constitution, when he quite clearly meant to write (and refer to) the 14th Amendment’s “Privileges or Immunities Clause.” It’s a small error, to be sure, though it’s still one that the federal circuit ought not to make.

So what does all this mean for the future of the Second Amendment and gun rights? Last January, the 2nd Circuit, including Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor, reached the same erroneous conclusion about incorporation as the Seventh did last week. Yet in April, the 9th Circuit got it right, holding in Nordyke v. King that, “the right to keep and bear arms is ‘deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition’… [and] is necessary to the Anglo-American conception of ordered liberty.” This split among the circuits means the Supreme Court will almost certainly take up the issue.

Given that Gura’s provocative and sharply reasoned appeal is now in the Court’s hands, and given that Chicago’s contested handgun ban so closely resembles the D.C. ban nullified last year in Heller, this case offers the perfect opportunity for the Court to fully restore the Second Amendment to its rightful place in our constitutional system.

Damon W. Root is an associate editor at Reason.

Bonus video: Reason.tv talked with Alan Gura last June about “The High Stakes of the DC Gun Ban Case” just before the Supreme Court released its decision in the Heller case. Click below to watch and go here for downloadable versions and related materials.

SOURCE

Tags:Gun Control, Heller v. D.C, Law, natural law, News, Politics, Supreme Court
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, Men's Issues, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

AWB 2009? Some AG’s get it correct!

June 12, 2009

All to often in recent years we have seen various high end types in Law, as in attorney’s, seek to disavow their sworn oaths to the Constitution. Be that in wrongful prosecutions, or supporting ex post facto law simply based upon political correctness, or expediency.

So, I ask, is what follows the real deal? Or simply political posturing?

MCDANIEL SENDS LETTER TO U.S ATTORNEY GENERAL EXPRESSING OPPOSITION TO REINSTATEMENT OF ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN

Thursday, Jun 11, 2009

LITTLE ROCK- Today, Attorney General Dustin McDaniel, along with Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott and 21 other State Attorneys General, sent a letter to United States Attorney General Eric Holder expressing their opposition to the reinstatement of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994’s semi-automatic firearms prohibition, which is commonly referred to as the “Assault Weapons Ban.”

In the letter, Generals Abbott and McDaniel note President Obama’s appreciation for the great conservation legacy of America’s hunters. They go on to say, “We share that appreciation for hunters and are committed to defending our Second Amendment rights–which is why we believe that additional gun control laws are unnecessary. Instead, authorities need to enforce laws that are already in place.

“I certainly share the President’s desire to reduce violent crime in our country, and across our borders,” McDaniel said. “However, based on the facts available, there is no reason to believe this law will result in any meaningful reduction in such crime and, therefore, does not justify further infringement on Americans’ Second Amendment rights.”

The text of the letter follows:

The Honorable Eric Holder
United States Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice

Dear Attorney General Holder:

We the undersigned Attorneys General respectfully write to express our opposition to the
reinstatement of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994’s semiautomatic
firearms prohibition, which is commonly referred to as the assault weapons
ban.

As the states’ top law enforcement officials, we share the Obama Administration’s
commitment to reducing illegal drugs and violent crime within the United States. We
also share your deep concern about drug cartel violence in Mexico. However, we do not
believe that restricting law-abiding Americans’ access to certain semi-automatic firearms
will resolve any of these problems. So, we were pleased by the President’s recent
comments indicating his desire to enforce current laws – rather than reinstate the ban on
so-called assault weapons.

As you know, the 1994 ban on so-called ‘assault weapons’ did not apply to machine guns
or other fully automatic firearms. Machine gun ownership was first regulated when the
National Firearms Act was passed in 1934. And more than twenty years ago, Congress
took additional steps to ban fully automatic weapons. Because fully automatic machine
guns have already been banned, we do not believe that further restricting law-abiding
Americans’ access to certain semi-automatic firearms serves any real law enforcement
purpose.

Recent public statements by congressional leaders reflect that same view. On February
26, 2009, The Hill newspaper quoted the Senate Majority Leader’s spokesman saying:
“Sen. Reid would oppose an effort [to] reinstate the ban.” When House Speaker Nancy
Pelosi was recently asked whether she supports reinstating the 1994 ban, the Speaker
reportedly responded “No…I think we need to enforce the laws we have right now.” We
agree with the Speaker and the Majority Leader.

The same sentiment has also been expressed to you by sixty-five (65) Congressional
Democrats in a letter dated March 17, 2009. In that letter, they astutely noted, “It is hard
to believe the ban would be…effective in controlling crime by well-funded international
drug traffickers, who regularly use grenade launchers, anti-tank rockets, and other
weapons that are not available on the civilian market in the United States.”

Under Title 18, Section 924 of the U.S. Code,
knowingly transferring a firearm to an individual who will use that firearm to commit a
violent or drug-related crime is already a federal offense. Similarly, it is also a felony to
possess a firearm for the purpose of furthering drug trafficking. At a recent
Congressional hearing, Kumar Kibble, the Deputy Director of the Immigration and
Custom Enforcement’s Office of Investigations, testified that the Patriot Act included
changes to Title 18, Section 554 of the U.S. Code, which improved federal authorities’
ability to investigate and prosecute illegal smuggling.

As Attorneys General, we are committed to defending our constituents’ constitutional
rights – including their constitutionally-protected right to keep and bear arms. This duty
is particularly important in light of the United States Supreme Court’s recent Heller
decision, which held that the Second Amendment “elevated above all other interests the
right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home.”
The high court’s landmark decision affirmed that individual Americans have a
constitutionally-protected right to keep and bear arms. We, the undersigned Attorneys
General, are staunch defenders of that right and believe that it should not be encroached
upon without sound justification – and a clear law enforcement purpose.

We are pleased that the Administration appears to conform with the Congressional
leadership’s position on this very important issue. Importantly, the White House website
no longer calls for the reinstatement of the 1994 ban. In fact, it expressly acknowledges
“the great conservation legacy of America’s hunters.” We share that appreciation for
hunters and are committed to defending our Second Amendment rights–which is why
we believe that additional gun control laws are unnecessary. Instead, authorities need to
enforce laws that are already in place.

As Attorneys General, we look forward to working with you and President Obama on
common-sense law enforcement solutions to transnational crime. We stand ready to
cooperate and collaborate on crime prevention and law enforcement initiatives that will
protect our constituents, crack down on transnational crime, and help reduce narcotics
consumption in the United States. But, for the reasons explained in this letter, we do not
believe that reinstating the 1994 assault weapons ban will solve the problems currently
facing the United States or Mexico.

Sincerely,

SOURCE

Tags:AWB 2009, Campos Compean ans Ramos, DV, Eric Holder, Gun Control, Law, mysandry, News, Politics
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Men's Issues, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

Second Amendment: Seventh Circuit Upholds Chicago Ban

June 7, 2009

Commentary from The Patriot Post (see sidebar) about an earlier post subject on this blog.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled Tuesday that Chicago’s handgun ban could stand because the Second Amendment is not incorporated against the states or local jurisdictions. Likewise, the three-judge panel said, last year’s Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller did not apply to states or municipalities. The 1982 ban was challenged by the National Rifle Association and has already been appealed to the Supreme Court.

The case is particularly interesting because of the lack of precedent on incorporation, though the Ninth Circuit Court found in April that the Second Amendment is incorporated against the states. The Supreme Court has ruled in the past that under the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause, much of the Bill of Rights is incorporated against the states. (Blogger Eugene Volokh has more on the Privileges or Immunities Clause used in past 2A rulings.) Imagine a state forbidding freedom of speech and religion or allowing unreasonable searches and seizures — such laws would not stand. On the other hand, the Second Amendment doesn’t mention Congress as the First Amendment does, but simply says the right “shall not be infringed.” Yet states and municipalities infringe on that right all the time. And as we noted last week, Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor once wrote, “[T]he right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.”

Perhaps Investor’s Business Daily said it best: “The Circuit Court decision was written by Judge Frank Easterbrook and joined by Judges Richard Posner and William Bauer. Easterbrook’s reasoning is fascinating. According to him, the Revolution was fought and independence won so that the Founding Fathers could write a Constitution with a Bill of Rights that applied only to the District of Columbia.”

Talk about warped logic!

Tags:Law, News, Politics, RKBA, Second Amendment
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on Second Amendment: Seventh Circuit Upholds Chicago Ban

Second Amendment Newsletter: Dave Kopel

June 6, 2009

	Kopel Newsletter [kopelnewsletter@liberty.seanet.com]
Sent:	6/5/2009 3:44:53 PM
To:
Subject:

Dave Kopel’s Second Amendment Newsletter

June 5, 2009
Dave Kopel’s Second Amendment Project is based at the Independence Institute,
a free-market think tank in Golden, Colorado.
http://www.independenceinstitute.org

The Independence Institute publishes several newsletters on other topics, plus a weekly newsletter containing our most recent op-eds and news of our activities. E-mail subscription to any of these newsletters is free.

Delivery of this newsletter comes courtesy of the Second Amendment Foundation, in Bellevue, Washington.
http://www.saf.org
This email was sent to psperry1@aceweb.com

Please visit Dave Kopel’s website, containing articles on the Second Amendment and other freedom topics.
http://www.davekopel.org

To subscribe to this free e-mail newsletter, please send a request to:
kopelnewsletter@liberty.seanet.com

New by Kopel: Sotomayor; Nordyke v. King; No on Koh; Still More No on Koh; ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban; 10th Circuit on Firearms; Judge Wilkinson’s Errors on Heller; Journal on Firearms & Public Policy; Necessary and Proper Clause; Podcasts on Sotomayor; Nordyke, the Iliad; Chicago 7th Circuit Decision; Montana Firearms Freedom; Dave Debates Ken Gordon on TV on Nullifying the Electoral College
Important Announcements! Alcohol, Tobacco, AND Firearms! Freedom Underground Symposium: Firing the Nanny (State), And… Dr. Rice Launches Web Page, Millions Affected! Or maybe just him…
International: Koh wants to Ban International Firearms Trade; Canadian Gun Permit Prurience; Red Chinese Have Gun Problem; Germany Passes New Restrictions; Irish will have More Legal Guns; Mexican Border Sweeps Not Finding Guns; Tancredo weighs in on ‘90%’; UK Golfers Arrested for Taking Swings at Attackers
Public Opinion, Culture & Media: The NRA Convention in Phoenix; Christian Science Monitors RKBA Bloggers; Gallup Finds Low Gun-Ban Support; AHSA ‘Rethinks’ RKBA Positions; Obama disappoints Brady Campaign; Failed War on Drugs leads to War on Guns; Philadelphia Gun Shop Protest Criminals; Anti-RKBA Former Surgeon General Indicted; LaPierre debates Rendell on CBS; ABC’s Laughable ‘Mass Shooting’ Simulation; Gun Group Hindered on Pennsylvania Campus? Barone on Elites vs. People on Guns and Climate; More on Gun-Free Zones
Federal: Interior Department on Guns in National Parks; Democrats Giving Up Anti-RKBA; Obama Spares Tiahrt Amendment; New Bill on VA ‘No Gun’ List; RKBA Restoration for Minor Convictions; ‘Gun Show Loophole’ Re-Re-Redux; Tell the USAF about Your Guns
States: Pro-Gun California City Attorney; D.C. having to cope with Legal Guns; Montana ‘Castles’; From Brady to NYC D.A?; OK allows trans-state Purchase; Texas Cracks Down (More) on Illegal Gun Trade; The NY Nunchaku Case
Courts: RKBA Supporters Scared of Sotomayor; Gun Goes Off, +10 Years; SAF Sues California Sheriffs; No Guns on Colorado Campus; NRA vs. Chicago; Massachusetts Court Calls Banned Gun Possession ‘A Victimless Crime’; NJ Gun Rationing; NRA Sues Pittsburgh over ‘Report Stolen’ Law
Research: VPC’s Figures Tell Pro-RKBA Tale; Brady Campaign Won’t Correct Article’s Outright Errors

New by Kopel

Sotomayor

Sonia Sotomayor versus the Second Amendment

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
May 26, 2009
http://volokh.com/posts/1243356423.shtml

Judge Sotomayor’s record suggests hostility, rather than empathy, for the tens of millions of Americans who exercise their right to keep and bear arms.

Sotomayor vs. the Second Amendment, Part II

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
June 2, 2009
http://volokh.com/posts/1243930775.shtml

The opinion in Maloney v. Cuomo is not a good example of intellectual rigor. When a judge treats a constitutional right as non-fundamental—yet cites no legal authority, and does not even acknowledge that the issue has been raised on appeal—it raises the possibility that the judge may be hostile to that right. There is a dedicated entry on the Maloney case below.

Highly Dubious Claim against Sotomayor

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
May 26, 2009
http://volokh.com/posts/1243364874.shtml

The blog article which created this item has a small tag on the article which says “satire.”

Should Repubs. Fight Sotomayor? Left Bloggers say No; Righties Split

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
May 27, 2009
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_05_24-2009_05_30.shtml#1243461980

“I voted ‘Yes,’ and wrote: ‘The Democrats who tried to block Roberts and Alito appear to have suffered no adverse consequences. [And, I should have added, neither did the Dems. who filibustered Miguel Estrada, who, like Sotomayor, is a Hispanic with an impressive life story.] Sotomayor is on the wrong side of fairness, empathy, the Constitution and the American people in regards to firearms ownership (Maloney v. Cuomo; United States v. Sanchez-Villar); wealthy people using the government’s eminent domain power to extort money from small business (Didden v. Village of Port Chester); and a racial spoils system for government employees (Ricci v. DeStefano).’ ”

Sonia Sotomayor

Dave Kopel with Amy Oliver
The Amy Oliver Show on KFKA Radio
May 27, 2009
http://audio.ivoices.org/mp3/iipodcast303.mp3

Dave and Amy talk about President Obama’s first, controversial, nomination of a judge to serve upon the Supreme Court of the United States.

National Parks

Respecting States’ Wishes

David B. Kopel
Room for Debate, a Blog of the New York Time
May 22, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/ptscbf

One of eight voices split on either side of the issue, Dave argues that state law will now regulate the practice of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in the national parks, rather than national fiat.

Guns in Parks: The Hoplophobes’ Travel Guide to the United States

David Kopel
The New Ledger
May 29, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/l55l6q

Dave provides here a retrospective examination of the entire discussion on the New York Times blog, including analysis of the readers’ comments posted afterward. He then provides a helpful series of itineraries for those so affected by hoplophobia, the irrational fear of weapons, that they cannot transit entire areas in which legally-carried firearms might be present.

Nordyke vs. King

The State of Heller

Dave Kopel
America’s 1st Freedom
June, 2009
http://www.davekopel.com/2A/Mags/State-of-Heller.pdf
PDF files require Adobe Acrobat Reader or similar software.

Dave here examines the 9th Circuit’s Nordyke decision, which held that the Second Amendment is enforceable against state and local government.

9th Circuit’s Ruling Applies 2nd Amendment to States

Dave Kopel
Dave Kopel’s Second Amendment Podcast
April 20, 2009
http://audio.ivoices.org/mp3/iipodcast285.mp3

Dave explains Nordyke v. King, in which the Ninth Circuit held that the 2nd Amendment is incorporated by the 14th.

Important Announcements!

The Independence Institute’s 7th Annual Alcohol, Tobacco & and Firearms Party

Press Release
The Independence Institute
June 20, 2009
http://www.i2i.org/main/event.php?event_id=59

This annual event, in which all three of the above shall be indulged in proper sequence, features as a guest speaker Sam Wurzelbacher, AKA “Joe the Plumber.” Tickets sell QUICKLY.

Freedom Underground Symposium

Press Release
The Independence Institute
June 19, 2009
http://www.i2i.org/main/event.php?event_id=70

Dave and other regional and national thinkers shall discuss ways to resist Nannyism and the Nannyist state at the Warwick Hotel in Denver. The page contains registration costs and information.

Dr. Rice Announces Author’s Web Site!

Rob S. Rice
Informational Web Page
May 3, 2009
http://www.robricebooks.com

At last, the strange, sinister figure in between Dave and this newsletter sidles out from the shadows with an official author’s web site, as suggested long ago by… Dave! Upon this opaque sheet of photons shall you find samples of Dr. Rice’s historical prose, Dr. Rice’s hysterical comedic prose, his non-prose, his outright fabrications, and… one… song… Survivors will also find contact information, guides as to where to purchase Dr. Rice’s codified creativity, and with him explore the limits of good taste and self promulgation!

International

Koh’s Goal for the Legal Trade in Arms: Ban It

Theodore Bromund
The Heritage Foundation
May 11, 2009
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/05/11/koh%E2%80%99s-goal-for-the-legal-trade-in-arms-ban-it/

“Harold Koh, the nominee for Legal Adviser to the State Department, supports ‘the global regulation of small arms’ and a ‘global gun control regime.’ And he believes it is ‘needlessly provocative’ for any U.S. representative to refer to the right to bear arms when speaking to a foreign audience: the very mention of the Second Amendment, apparently, is offensive. ”

Canada

Want a Gun Permit? Tell us About Your Sex Life

George Jonas
National Post (Canada)
April 15, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/lh57jf

“Before renewing his gun permit in 2007, the authorities decided to inquire into Lemieux’s bedroom history. Did he divorce anyone in the last two years? Did he break up with a girlfriend? If yes, use a separate sheet to explain.”

China

Staring Down the Barrel: the Rise of Guns in China

James T. Areddy
The Wall Street Journal
October 14, 2008
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122394012224530655.html

“China may be freer from gun crime than many nations, and official statistics show overall crime on a continuous down trend. Yet, these days, reports about gun crimes turn up as often as several times a week even in the tightly controlled state-run media.”

Germany

Germany Moves to Tighten Laws over Gun Control

Associated Press
May 28, 2009
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124343392124058697.html

“Germany’s cabinet approved legislation that would tighten gun restrictions, two months after a teenager shot and killed 12 people. The law, which requires parliamentary approval, would mean stricter checks on weapons owners and a higher age limit for users of large-caliber weapons.”

Ireland

Handgun culture increasing in the State, says Deasy

Michael O’Regan
Irishtimes.com
May 29, 2009
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0529/1224247669572.html

“Current licensing laws could mean 10,000 legally held handguns in the State over the next five years, John Deasy (FG) told the Dáil. ‘I believe society does not want that,’ he added.”

Mexico

Southbound Checks at Border Yield Few Guns

Associated Press
May 17, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/m9w8qj

“The findings? Wads of U.S. currency headed for Mexico, wedged into car doors, stuffed under mattresses, taped onto torsos, were sniffed out by dogs, seized by agents and locked away for possible investigations. No guns were found as the reporters watched; they rarely are.”

Why the Lies About Guns Going to Mexico?

Rep. Tom Tancredo
Human Events
April 30, 2009
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31649

“Mexico needs to face its own demons, beginning with the corruption within its law enforcement agencies and at its ports of entry. The U.S. can help in many ways, such as enhancing our own border security. But adding more restrictions on the ownership of guns by law-abiding Americans will not help Mexico.”

United Kingdom

Golfers Arrested after Fighting off Gang Attempting to Steal Clubs

The Telegraph (UK)
May 12, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/oo2tc5

“A group of golfers have been arrested on assault charges after allegedly fighting off a gang who attempted to steal their clubs.”

Public Opinion, Culture, & Media

Facts from the NRA Convention

“Bitter Bitch”
Bitchin’ in the Kitchen: Food, Politics, and Comfort Food for the Soul
May 19, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/mmmunt

A blogger present reports some interesting and encouraging statistics from the NRA Convention held this May in Phoenix, Arizona.

Before Recent Shootings, Gun-Control Support was Fading

Lydia Saad
Gallup, Inc.
April 8, 2009
http://www.gallup.com/poll/117361/Support-Gun-Control-Laws-Time-Lows.aspx

In this curiously worded and framed article, Ms. Saad expresses frequent surprise that in the light of shootings of the defenseless by the armed, American support for a ban on legal firearms is at an all-time low.

A Rifle in One Hand, a Laptop in the Other. Behind the Scene with Pro-gun Bloggers

Patrik Jonsson
The Christian Science Monitor
May 16, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/qsnj8x

An even-handed survey of the presence, role, and effectiveness of the bloggers present at the NRA convention in Phoenix, with some interesting analysis.

The Myth of 90 Percent: Only a Small Fraction of Guns in Mexico Come from U.S.

Jacob Sullam
Townhall.com
April 22, 2009
http://townhall.com/Columnists/JacobSullum/2009/04/22/drug_control_begets_gun_control

“The futile effort to stop Americans from consuming politically incorrect intoxicants is the real source of the violence in Mexico, since prohibition creates a market with artificially high prices and hands it over to criminals. ‘Because of the enormous profit potential,’ two senior federal law enforcement officials told the Senate Judiciary Committee last month, ‘violence has always been associated with the Mexican drug trade as criminal syndicates seek to control this lucrative endeavor.'”

Brady Campaign Rhetoric Then and Now: What a difference Six Months Makes

Kurt Hoffman
The St. Louis Examiner
May 21, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/qfqqrx

What the Brady Campaign hoped to obtain from the Obama Administration and the Democrat-controlled Congress and what it has received so far are very different things.

AHSA 2.0: A New Beginning?

“Thirdpower”
‘Dreams of Our Trailers’ Blog
May 24, 2009
http://daysofourtrailers.blogspot.com/2009/05/ahsa-episode-ii-new-beginning.html

The American Hunters and Shooters Association, a group generally considered to be a means of dividing pro-RKBA sportsmen, has announced that it is revising irs previous support for an ‘Assault Weapons’ ban and other legislation popularly considered antithetical to civilian firearms ownership.

Mennonite Preacher among those Arrested in Phila Gunshop Protests

Ken Ellingwood and Tracy Wilkinson
Pocono Record
May 24, 2009
http://www.poconorecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090524/NEWS/90524002/-1/NEWS01

“‘He purposely outraged people by doing stuff that was not acceptable in order to be able to create a new paradigm,’ Kauffman said. ‘I felt like that’s what I was doing. It’s so obvious we have problem and we have to… challenge the accepted way of doing things.’ ”

Phila. Gun-shop Protesters Acquitted

Vernon Clark
The Philadelphia Inquirer
May 27, 2000
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/20090527_Phila__gun-shop_protesters_acquitted.html

“‘After the verdict, defense attorney Lawrence Krasner said, ‘Justice was done. I hope Mr. Colosimo thinks twice before he continues to do what he has been doing.'” Mr. Colosimo is the owner of the Philadelphia gun shop.

Another Corrupt Anti goes Down

“Jacob”
Gun Legislation & Politics in New York Blog

http://blog.nysrpa.org/?p=2293

Antonia Novello is a former New York health commissioner and was the U.S. surgeon general from 1990 to 1993. In 2004 she spoke at a rally of the anti-RKBA ‘Million Mom March’ rally. On May 12, 2009, General Novello was charged with twenty counts of fraud and abuse of her office as New York State Health Commissioner.

Heated Debate Over Assault Weapons

CBS Interactive
“Face the Nation” Website
April 19, 2009
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/04/19/ftn/main4954990.shtml

“Governor Ed Rendell (D-Penn.) and the executive vice president of the National Rifle Association Wayne LaPierre engaged in a heated debate over the assault weapons ban on this morning’s Face The Nation.”

Debunking ABC’s 20/20 Episode “If I Only Had a Gun”

“Douva”
Rantings of the Last Skysurfer Blog
April 11, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/mhkxfa

ABC’s laughable ‘demonstration’ that an armed civilian would be helpless against a putative mass-shooter receives here a thorough de-bunking.

Student says CCAC is Trying to Thwart Gun Advocacy Group

Bill Schackner
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
May 28, 2009
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09148/973334-53.stm

“A Community College of Allegheny County student yesterday publicly accused the school of trying to stop her from organizing a group advocating the right to carry concealed firearms on campus.”

Elites out of Touch on Guns and Climate

Michael Barone
The Detroit News
May 26, 2009
http://www.detnews.com/article/20090526/OPINION03/905260311/1008/opinion01/Elites-out-of-touch-on-guns-and-climate

Michael Barone discusses the Gallup poll treated above and cites it as an example of a growing divide between the putative leaders and followers of American political culture.

Gun Free School Zone Follies

David Rittgers
Cato @ Large Blog
May 18, 2009
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/05/18/gun-free-school-zone-follies/

Two recent examples—intruders at a birthday party and an accosted bicyclist—illustrate the unfortunate requirements of those who defend themselves to be prosecuted due to the location of their means to do so.

Federal

Interior Spokeswoman’s Statement on New Firearms Law for Parks and Refuges

Press Release
U.S. Department of the Interior
May 22, 2009
http://www.doi.gov/news/09_News_Releases/052209c.html

“The Department of the Interior will follow Congress’s directive and implement the new firearms law, which states that its provisions will take effect nine months from today. For the time being, the current Reagan Administration regulations governing possession of firearms in national parks and wildlife refuges remain in place…”

Democrats Hold Fire on Gun Control

Jim DiMascio
Politico
May 19, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/lpxo5y

” ‘The NRA and its allies have succeeded in making the slippery slope argument stick,’ said Al Cross the Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues at the University of Kentucky. ‘Any form of gun control is a step in the direction of outlawing guns. People have heard that for so many years, it’s become a very hard thing for Democrats to go against.’ ”

Reaction from Anti-gunners to Obama’s Support for Law Enforcement on Gun Tracing is Telling

Dave Workman
The Seattle Examiner
May 12, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/ogn7aw

“Because Barack Obama’s 2010 budget request reaffirms a federal statute – the so-called Tiahrt Amendment that protects sensitive gun trace data from the prying eyes of lawsuit-happy mayors and gun control lobby attorneys – gun prohibitionists are wailing and the press can’t even get it right.”

Moran Introduces Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act

Press Release
Rep. Jerry Moran

http://tinyurl.com/lpdvf3

“Under current VA practice, veterans and other VA beneficiaries who have a fiduciary appointed to act on their behalf are deemed “mentally defective” and are reported to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), a system which prevents individuals from purchasing firearms. Moran’s legislation would require a judicial authority to determine that a VA beneficiary poses a danger to themselves or others before the VA may send their names to the FBI’s NICS.”

Tupak Re-Introduces Second Amendment Restoration Act

Press Release
Rep. Bart Stupak
April 29, 2009
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/speech/mi01_stupak/morenews/200904292guns.html

“U.S. Congressman Bart Stupak (D-Menominee) has introduced legislation to restore the gun rights of individuals convicted of minor, non-violent crimes. H.R. 2153, the Second Amendment Restoration Act, ensures states have the discretion to restore individuals’ gun rights after conviction of minor crimes. The National Rifle Association (NRA) has endorsed the legislation.”

Lautenberg renews Push to Shut Gun Show ‘Loophole’

Jordy Yager
The Hill
April 21, 2009
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/lautenberg-renews-push-to-shut-gun-show-loophole-2009-04-21.html

“Several high-ranking senators led by Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) on Tuesday relaunched their push to require gun sellers to conduct background checks on purchases of all types of guns at state gun shows.”

Don’t be Gun Shy: Register Your Firearms!

Senior Airman Torri Larson
21st Space Wing Public Affairs
May 6, 2009
http://www.peterson.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123147916

“There are many things to do when arriving at a new duty station: find a house, enroll the kids in school and register the car, among others. One duty many Airmen may overlook when residing in on-base housing is to register their privately-owned firearms.

States

California

Chuck Michel’s partner elected LA County Attorney

David Hardy
Of Arms and the Law Blog
May 21, 2009
http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2009/05/chuck_michels_p.php

” ‘This is a tremendous victory for the Second Amendment, because Trutanich’s opponent, rabidly anti-gun- owner Los Angeles City Councilmember Jack Weiss, works closely with the gun ban lobby to advance its agenda. Weiss had promised to work with other anti-gun-owner cities and the Obama Administration to pass ill-conceived gun bans and to overturn the Supreme Court’s ruling confirming your Second Amendment rights…’ ”

District of Columbia

Guns are up in D.C., Violence is Down

Don Surber
The Charleston Daily Mail (WV)
May 28, 2009
http://www.dailymail.com/Opinion/DonSurber/200905270619

“With the ban gone, Mayor Adrian Fenty was forced to ask city council to change the law and crack down on illegal gun ownership, said Peter Nickles, attorney general for the district.”

Montana

Montana Lawmakers Have it Right with New Statute on Self-defense

Dave Workman
The Seattle Examiner
April 30, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/cltagf

“The new statute squarely puts the law in the hands of the citizens, by plainly stating they have no duty to retreat if attacked in a place where they have a right to be. The law also allows armed citizens to use force or threaten the use of force when he or she reasonably believes an attack is about to occur, or to stop an attack already in progress.”

New York

District Attorney Candidate Unveils Gun Platform

Sewell Chan
The New York Times
May 4, 2009
http://www.ilaalerts.org/UM/T.asp?A1.2.4958.14.1218879

Richard Aborn is the former president of Handgun Control, Inc., the current Brady Campaign. He is running for Manhattan District Attorney. This story provides details of Aborn’s five-point outline to oppose firearms-related violence in New York City. Aborn’s scheme is replete with measures against civilian firearms ownership.

Oklahoma

Governor Signs Gun Legislation

News Channel 8, KTUL Tulsa (OK)
April 21, 2009
http://www.ktul.com/news/stories/0409/615418.html

“Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry has signed into law a bill that allows Oklahoma hunters and gun collectors to purchase guns in other states without violating the law.”

South Carolina

SC measure asks Voters whether Hunting is a Right

Associated Press
April 21, 2009
http://www.carolinalive.com/news/news_story.aspx?id=289859

“South Carolina voters may be asked whether their right to hunt and fish should be protected by the state constitution. The House voted 106-1 on Tuesday to approve a proposal that would allow voters to decide. The vote easily met the required two-thirds approval needed for a constitutional amendment.”

Texas

Gun-smuggling Bill Ready for Perry to Sign: Legislature Passes Measure Aimed at Stopping the Flow of Weapons to Mexican Drug Cartels

Matt Stiles
The Houston Chronicle (TX)
May 22, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/n7nclm

“While illegal gun trafficking is already a federal crime, the bill’s authors said they hope the legislation will give state authorities more tools to fight the problem, too.”

Courts

Gun Rights Groups are Wary of Sotomayor

Declan McCullagh
CBS News Political Hotsheet
May 27, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/lsvjd4

“Dave Kopel of the free-market Independence Institute predicts that ‘Judge Sotomayor’s record suggests hostility, rather than empathy, for the tens of millions of Americans who exercise their right to keep and bear arms.’ ”

Sonia Sotomayor on Gun Rights and Racial Preferences

Damon W. Root
Reason Online
May 26, 2009
http://www.reason.com/news/show/133722.html

“As a respected jurist with an impressive legal resume, Sotomayor appears just as qualified to sit on the Supreme Court as any recent nominee. But from the standpoint of individual liberty and limited constitutional government, there are significant reasons to be wary of her nomination.”

Court Upholds 10-Year Penalty for Robber’s Flub

Adam Liptak
The New York Times
April 29, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/nhhdt9

The Supreme Court ruled that a bank robber who accidentally fired his pistol during a successful robbery must still serve the additional ten year penalty for discharging a firearm in relation to a crime.

SAF, Calguns Challenge Arbitrary Denial of Right to Bear Arms In California

Press Release
The Second Amendment Foundation
May 5, 2009
http://saf.org/viewpr-new.asp?id=294

“In the action filed today, Plaintiffs challenge the policies of two California Sheriffs, in Sacramento and Yolo counties, who reject the basic human right of self defense by refusing to issue ordinary people gun carry permits. Of course, violent criminals in the impacted counties continue to carry guns without police permission.”

SAF Challenges D.C. Handgun Ban Scheme

Press Release
The Second Amendment Foundation
March 9, 2009
http://www.saf.org/viewpr-new.asp?id=287

“The Second Amendment Foundation and three Washington, D.C. residents today filed a lawsuit challenging a regulation by District of Columbia city government that arbitrarily bans handguns based on a roster of ‘acceptable’ handguns approved by the State of California.”

Judge Dismisses Lawsuit over CU Gun Ban

John C. Ensslin
The Colorado Springs Gazette (CO)
March 27, 2009
http://www.gazette.com/articles/judge-52991-ban-lawsuit.html

“Miller found that the students incorrectly described the regents as a local government affected by the state’s concealed carry law. Rather, the regents are a statewide authority with their legislative powers. He also found nothing in the state constitution that would prohibit the regents from enacting a gun ban on campus.” The student group plans to appeal Miller’s ruling.

Nos. 08-4241, 08-4243 & 08-4244 National Rifle Association of America, Inc., Et Al., v. City of Chicago, Illinois, and Village of Oak Park, Illinois

Judges Frank H. Easterbrook, Judges Richard A. Posner and William J. Bauer
United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit
June 2, 2009
http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/O01FGGJE.pdf
PDF files require Adobe Acrobat Reader or similar software.

A three judge Panel of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed the previous rejection of the NRA’s suits against the city of Chicago and Oak Park on the grounds that the Heller decision is not binding upon the laws of the individual states and municipalities. Supreme Court nominee Judge Sotomayor was among the judges ruling to this effect in the appealed decision. The plaintiffs have announced an intention to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

08-4241 : National Rifle Assoc v. City of Chicago

Public Access to Oral Argument recordings, Opinions, Unpublished Orders, and other Selected Case Materials
Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals
March 13, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/mh4t9r

Here can be found a recording of the oral arguments in the NRA vs. Chicago case.

ChicagoGunCase.com: Case Filings

Mark Taff
The Second Amendment Foundation
Ongoing
http://www.chicagoguncase.com/case-filings/

The Chicago case filings are online here.

SJC Calls Illegal Gun Possession Victimless

John R. Ellement
The Boston Globe (MA)
May 5, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/czng28

The Supreme Judicial Court yesterday ruled that illegal gun possession is a ‘passive and victimless crime’ and that those charged with having illicit firearms cannot be held without bail as a danger to society.

NJ Court weighs Jersey City’s Handgun Limits

Victor Epstein
Associated Press
April 27, 2009
http://www.dailyrecord.com/article/20090427/UPDATES01/90427027

“The legal discussion revolved around whether the 2006 ordinance improperly pre-empts existing state gun laws by limiting handgun purchases to one per person each month. At issue is the ability of urban communities such as Newark, Camden and Jersey City to reduce gun-related crime by more closely regulating handgun purchases.” The link between limiting purchases and reducing crime receives no substantiation in the story.

NRA Sues to Overturn Pittsburgh’s Lost, Stolen Gun Law

Jeremy Boren
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
April 24, 2009
http://pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/pittsburgh/s_622166.html

“One of the four plaintiffs, Richard Haid, 60, of Mt. Washington, said the law unfairly punishes law-abiding gun owners… ‘What about the gun I use to shoot tin cans? I haven’t seen it in weeks. It’s locked in a cupboard. Am I supposed to do an inventory every day to see if it’s stolen?’ Haid said.”

Maloney v. Rice: The Nunchaku Case

James M. Maloney
Informational Web Page
April 30, 2009
http://homepages.nyu.edu/~jmm257/mvc.html

“The mere possession of nunchaku or ‘chuka sticks’ within one’s own home for peaceful use in martial-arts practice (or for home defense) by a person with no criminal record is classified as a misdemeanor that may carry up to a one-year prison sentence. Possession by a person who ‘has been previously convicted of any crime’ is defined as a felony. Based upon research that I have conducted, it appears that New York and California are the only states in the United States that have ever defined and prosecuted as a crime the simple possession of nunchaku within one’s own home. (Ironically, the nunchaku, which was originally a farm implement, was adapted for use as a weapon by the People of Okinawa after invading oppressive governments disarmed them, making it illegal to possess a sword or spear.)”

Research

Violence Policy Center Proves that More Guns Means Less Violent Crime, Murder

Howard Nemerov
The Austin Examiner
May 20, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/qmy85q

“Suicide rates drive the difference between ‘gun death’ in VPC’s ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ gun law states, but since ‘weak’ states also have higher rates of non-gun suicide, VPC must either admit there are other causative factors besides gun availability, or admit that if more guns cause more suicides, then guns also cause less homicide and violent crime. As it stands right now, VPC’s own data proves that more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens is an effective anti-crime tool.”

Brady Campaign: Biased, Inaccurate Research

Howard Nemerov
The Austin Examiner
April 12, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/cbskr3

“In May of 2007, the Brady Center, research arm of the Brady Campaign, published a report entitled No Gun Left Behind: The Gun Lobby’s Campaign to Push Guns Into Colleges and Schools. Though nearly two years have passed, numerous inaccuracies remain which, having persisted this long in a publicly-accessible document, call into question the Brady Campaign’s ability to publish credible reports and/or their capacity for telling the truth.”

This newsletter is compiled with help from Dr. Rob S. Rice. For more on this exsanguinous, yet rubicund individual, see here: http://robricebooks.com. E. Christian Kopff was Dr. Rice’s undergraduate advisor. Dave Kopel is Dr. Rice’s current employer. Kopel interviews Kopff! Koincidence?

Al Qaeda delenda est!

Tags:Dave Kopel, Gun Control, Independence Institute, Law, News, Politics, Second Amendment, Sotomayor
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 10 Comments »

Update on Federal Legislation

June 6, 2009

There are a number of pro-gun bills pending in Congress that require your attention and action. Please review these legislative initiatives and be sure to contact your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121, and your U.S. Senators at (202) 224-3121, and urge them to cosponsor and support these measures. Additional contact information can be found using the “Write Your Representatives” feature at www.NRAILA.org.

• S. 941/H.R. 2296– the “Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Reform and Firearms Modernization Act.” This bill would roll back unnecessary restrictions, correct errors, and codify longstanding congressional policies in the firearms arena. These bipartisan bills are a vital step to modernize and improve BATFE operations. Of highest importance, S. 941 and H.R. 2296 totally rewrite the system of administrative penalties for licensed dealers, manufacturers and importers of firearms. S. 941 and H.R. 2296 would allow fines or license suspensions for less serious violations, while still allowing license revocation for the kind of serious violations that would block an investigation or put guns in the hands of criminals. This will help prevent the all-too-common situations where BATFE has revoked licenses for insignificant technical violations — such as, improper use of abbreviations, or filing records in the wrong order.

For more information on S. 941/H.R. 2296, please click here.

To see if your Senators are a cosponsor of S. 941, please click here.

To see if your Representative is a cosponsor of H.R. 2296, please click here.

• H.R. 197– the “National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act.” This bill would allow any person with a valid carry permit or license issued by a state, to carry a concealed firearm in any other state if the permit holder meets certain criteria. In states that issue permits, a state’s laws governing where concealed firearms may be carried would apply within its borders. In states that do not issue carry permits, a federal standard would apply. The bill would not create a federal licensing system; it would simply require the states to recognize each other’s carry permits, just as they recognize drivers’ licenses.

For more information on H.R. 197, please click here.

To see if your Representative is a cosponsor of H.R. 197, please click here.

• H.R. 442– The “Veterans’ Heritage Firearms Act.” This legislation would provide a 90-day amnesty period during which veterans and their family members could register firearms acquired overseas between June 26, 1934, and Oct. 31, 1968, without fear of prosecution. Congress granted a limited amnesty in 1968, but most veterans did not receive enough notice to participate. H.R. 442 would not apply to all firearms brought home by veterans. The only firearms that normally have to be registered at the federal level are those subject to the National Firearms Act (NFA). More common trophies, such as bolt-action rifles or semi-automatic pistols, need not be registered. Therefore, H.R. 442’s proposed amnesty would only apply to machineguns and other NFA firearms. (It also would not apply to “destructive devices” such as bombs and grenades.)

For more information on H.R. 442, please click here.

To see if your Representative is a cosponsor of H.R. 442, please click here.

• H.R. 1074 — “The Firearms Interstate Commerce Reform Act.” This bill would remove several antiquated and unnecessary restrictions imposed on interstate firearms business since 1968. The bill would update certain procedures applicable to commerce in firearms and remove certain Federal restrictions on interstate firearms transactions.

For more information on H.R. 1074, please click here.

To see if your Representative is a cosponsor of H.R. 1074, please click here.

SOURCE

Tags:Law, News, Politics
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on Update on Federal Legislation

Department of Justice endorses Mob rule!

June 2, 2009

The DOJ has endorsed mob rule via allowing anyone to vote period. How long until ACORN, La Raza, and the New Black Panthers have even more dead people, people that do not exist, and NAMBLA members twisting our nation into some cheap imitation of Mexico? Not to mention non citizens voting.

I’m not sure who to give the hat tip to on this, TexasFred, who credited the Liberty Sphere, or my email provider where I found it from Pamala.

Since she’s a lot better looking than either of them she gets the nod!

Tuesday, June 02, 2009

Obama’s Justice Dept Will Allow Non-Citizens to Register to Vote in Georgia

Any shot for Americans to take back this country from the hard left in 2010/2012 is looking increasingly dim ….

Obama Justice Department Decision Will Allow Non-Citizens to Register to Vote in Georgia (hat tip Clyde)

Decision Bars Georgia From Continuing Voter Verification Process

Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel issued the following statement following the U.S. Department of Justice’s denial of preclearance of Georgia’s voter verification process

Atlanta – “The decision by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to deny preclearance of Georgia’s already implemented citizenship verification process shows a shocking disregard for the integrity of our elections. With this decision, DOJ has now barred Georgia from continuing the citizenship verification program that DOJ lawyers helped to craft. DOJ’s decision also nullifies the orders of two federal courts directing Georgia to implement the procedure for the 2008 general election. The decision comes seven months after Georgia requested an expedited review of the preclearance submission.

“DOJ has thrown open the door for activist organizations such as ACORN to register non-citizens to vote in Georgia’s elections, and the state has no ability to verify an applicant’s citizenship status or whether the individual even exists. DOJ completely disregarded Georgia’s obvious and direct interest in preventing non-citizens from voting, instead siding with the ACLU and MALDEF. Clearly, politics took priority over common sense and good public policy.

“This process is critical to protecting the integrity of our elections. We have evidence that non-citizens have voted in past Georgia elections and that more than 2,100 individuals have attempted to register, yet still have questions regarding their citizenship. Further, the Inspector General’s office is investigating more than 30 cases of non-citizens casting ballots in Georgia elections, including the case of a Henry County non-citizen who registered to vote and cast ballots in 2004 and 2006.

“It is important to underscore that not a single person has come forward to say he or she could not vote because of the verification process. Further, while DOJ argues that the process is somehow discriminatory, the historic voter turnout among Hispanic and African-American voters in the 2008 general elections clearly says otherwise.

Posted by Pamela Geller on Tuesday, June 02, 2009 at 11:42 AM in VOTER FRAUD: DEMOCRAT TOOL | Permalink

Tags:DOJ, Law, mob rule, News, Politics, voting
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Immigration, Law, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 3 Comments »

GOA on Sotomayor

June 1, 2009

Obama Picks Anti-gun Judge for the Supreme Court
— Time to start contacting your Senators right away

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org

Friday, May 29, 2009

Unless you’ve taken a very long Memorial Day vacation, you’ve no doubt
heard the big news.

President Obama has picked an anti-gun radical to replace Justice David
Souter on the Supreme Court.

Obama’s pick is Judge Sonia Sotomayor, who is currently on the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Second District. There she has racked up an
anti-Second Amendment record and has displayed contempt for the rule of
law under the Constitution.

The Heller decision put the Supreme Court in support of the
Constitutional protection of the individual right to keep and bear arms.
Sotomayor, a politically correct lover of centralized government power
(as long as she is part of the power elite), immediately went into
counter-attack mode against the Heller decision.

Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which ruled
in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to the
states. As she and her cohorts claimed, the Supreme Court has not yet
incorporated the states under the Second Amendment. Until then, she
believes, the Second only applies to the District of Columbia.

This is pure judicial arrogance — something Sotomayor relishes (as long
as she is one of the ruling judges). In fact, protection of the right
to keep and bear arms was a major objective for enactment of the
Fourteenth Amendment, as recently freed slaves were being disarmed and
terrorized in their neighborhoods.

But Sotomayor disdains this important right of individuals, as indicated
by an earlier opinion from 2004. In United States v. Sanchez-Villar,
she stated that “the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental
right.”

Sotomayor has held very anti-gun views, even as far back as the 1970s.
Fox Cable News reported yesterday that in her senior thesis at Princeton
University, she wrote that America has a “deadly obsession”
with guns
and that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to
firearms ownership.

Sotomayor’s Second Amendment views go hand in hand with her politically
correct views on the law and the role of judges.

In a speech given at Duke University in 2005, she made it abundantly
clear that judges are involved in making policy. Realizing that this
did not sound very judicial (even though most judges act on this basis),
Sotomayor tried to laugh off her brazen admission: “I know this is on
tape and I should never say that, [audience laughing], because we don’t
make law — I know. Um, okay. I know, I’m not promoting it, I’m not
advocating it.” The audience continued to laugh. They got the joke.

But Sotomayor’s joke will be on us and our liberties if she gets
confirmed to the Supreme Court. And that is why we need to start
contacting our Senators early and often, urging them to vote against
this dangerous nomination.

ACTION: Please contact your two Senators and urge them to oppose the
nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court. You can
go to the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators the
pre-written e-mail message below.

—– Pre-written letter —–

Dear Senator:

If you cherish the Second Amendment and agree that it protects an
individual right to keep and bear arms — as stated by the recent Heller
decision — then you must vote against Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

This choice for the Supreme Court is totally unacceptable! Consider a
partial rendering of her anti-gun record:

* Sotomayor ruled in United States v. Sanchez-Villar (2004) that “the
right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.”

* Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which
ruled in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to
the states. This makes her more liberal than the Ninth Circuit, which
stated in April that the Second Amendment does apply to the states.

* Sotomayor has held very anti-gun views, even as far back as the 1970s.
Fox Cable News reported on May 28 that in her senior thesis at Princeton
University, she wrote that America has a “deadly obsession”
with guns
and that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to
firearms ownership.

I will consider a vote in favor of Sotomayor as the most anti-gun vote a
Senator could cast. To send an anti-gun liberal judge to the Supreme
Court for the rest of her life is to establish “legislation without
representation.” After all, she says that the courts are where policy
is made, and once she’s there, we’ll never be able to vote her out.

Again, please vote against this dangerous nomination.

Sincerely,

There are times when people simply cannot fathom why I support the Gun Owners of America. Well? Read the above, then watch this from the wimps at the N.R.A.

Tags:Constitution, Gun Control, Law, News, Politics, Sotomayor, Supreme Court
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on GOA on Sotomayor

Politicians hang fire on guns

May 22, 2009

Across the country, ammunition prices are soaring and many guns are in short supply as weapons fly off the shelves at stores. This is a telling economic indicator about consumer confidence as many Americans stock up for fear that the end is nigh. It’s also a logical reaction to gun-owner fears that Democrats will implement far-reaching new gun controls. There is cause for concern. Leaders in the Obama administration and Congress have stated that they plan to limit what guns Americans can buy and that guns should be registered.

SOURCE

There is one thing that can be said of President Obama with certainty — his election has had a phenomenal effect on gun sales.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said Feb. 25 that, “As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons.” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi poured fuel on the fire five weeks later by admitting that Democrats want to register guns. “It’s a Democratic president, a Democratic House,” she said on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” “We don’t want to take their guns away. We want them registered.”

The gun controllers are at odds with public opinion. Despite Americans constantly being bombarded with attacks on guns by an anti-gun media, Frank Newport, editor-in-chief of the Gallup Poll, notes that “Attitudes toward gun control have become more conservative, people not wanting gun control.” A Gallup poll released April 8 shows that only 29 percent of Americans support banning handguns. According to Gallup, “the latest reading is the smallest percentage favoring a handgun ban since Gallup first polled on this nearly 50 years ago.”

Popular support for the Second Amendment isn’t lost on all congressional Democrats. On May 12, 27 Senate Democrats voted with 39 Republicans to end a ban on law-abiding citizens carrying legal firearms in national parks. The amendment was attached to unrelated legislation to regulate credit cards. The same tactic was used Feb. 26 when an amendment striking down most of the District’s gun-control laws was attached to a Senate bill giving the District a vote in Congress. Twenty-two Democrats, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, voted for this amendment, which passed 62-36.

It’s too early to celebrate Democratic respect for gun rights. Some Senate Democrats who voted for the national park amendment complained that they were painted into a corner on the issue. Sen. Richard J. Durbin, Illinois Democrat, the party’s chief vote counter, told National Public Radio last week that they were concerned about “how many more times they’d have to face such votes.” Democrats are torn between their constituents’ support for gun rights and an Obama administration committed to gun control.

SOURCE

And the obama continues to be “The Gun Salesman of the year!”

Tags:Gun Control, Law, News, Obama, Politics
Posted in Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

The smell of napalm in the morning..?

May 21, 2009

No, not quite, but still a victory for freedom and liberty despite some whining from those that we expect that sort of behavior from…

Victory at Last
— National Park Service Gun Ban Repealed!

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org

“Gun Owners of America was the most consistent and loudest voice on
Capitol Hill in support of the effort to repeal the National Park
Service gun ban.” — Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK)

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Good news!

The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill today that included an
amendment to repeal the gun ban on National Park Service (NPS) land and
wildlife refuges.

The amendment, sponsored by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) and attached to a
credit card industry reform bill, passed the House overwhelmingly by a
vote of 279-147.

For decades, law-abiding citizens have been prohibited from exercising
their Second Amendment rights on NPS land and wildlife refuges, even if
the state in which the land is located allows carrying firearms.

With some limited exceptions for hunting, the only way to legally
possess a firearm anywhere in a national park is by having it unloaded
and inaccessible, such as locked up in an automobile trunk. A Bush
administration regulation partially reversed the ban, but that action
was singlehandedly negated recently by an activist judge in Washington,
D.C. The Department of Interior decided not to appeal that ruling.

Senator Coburn believes, like you do, that Americans should not be
forced to sacrifice their Second Amendment rights when entering NPS land
and wildlife refuges.

GOA worked with Coburn on an amendment that simply allows for state and
local laws — instead of unelected bureaucrats and anti gun activist
judges — to govern firearm possession on these lands.

The anti-gun leadership in both the House and Senate went berserk and
fought to keep the Coburn amendment from being attached to the
underlying bill. Sparks were flying on the floor of the House of
Representatives today.

Anti-gun Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) whined that a “very
good” credit
card bill had been “hijacked” by the Coburn amendment. To
this, Rep.
Rob Bishop (R-UT) pointed out that gun control is the policy of tyrants,
as evidenced by the British attempt to confiscate firearms at Lexington
and Concord in 1775.

Congressional leaders and entrenched bureaucrats have fought GOA over
the NPS gun ban for the past eight years.

But your activism has finally broken through. The late Senator Everett
Dirksen said, “When I feel the heat, I see the light!” Well,
you have
applied a lot of heat. Members of Congress know that they oppose your
Second Amendment rights at their own peril.

As it stands today, both houses of Congress have now passed the Coburn
amendment — and President Obama is expected to sign the provision into
law (only because it is part of a larger credit card bill that he really
wants).

So, congratulate yourself for winning this long, hard battle. GOA was
the leading, and often only, national gun group involved in this fight.
You involvement was absolutely vital to achieving this win.

Of course, many more battles lie ahead. President Obama continues to
push for the Senate to ratify massive international gun control
treaties. There is a battle over a Supreme Court nominee coming up.
Anti-gun zealots in Congress are aggressively pushing to renew the
Clinton gun ban and close down gun shows.

And as the health care debate picks up steam in the coming weeks and
months, GOA is battling efforts to create a computerized national
healthcare database. Such a database can be used to deny people their
Second Amendment rights in the same way that so many veterans have lost
their gun rights based only on the diagnoses of a doctor for things like
combat-related stress.

GOA will be calling for action on these and other Second Amendment
issues as they move through Congress.

In the meantime, have a safe Memorial Day as we remember those who gave
the ultimate sacrifice so that America would remain “Land of the
Free.”

****************************

What’s Your Current GOA Status?

Obviously, we now face years of invigorated attacks on our gun rights.
Shutting down gun shows, prohibitions on specific calibers, another
semi-auto ban, and the anti-gun extremists’ Holy Grail of mandatory
federal licensing and registration of all gun owners — these are just
some of the horrors that we already know we’ll have to defeat head-on.
Meanwhile, we’ll take every opportunity to go on offense and advance the
Second Amendment.

It can’t be done without every single voice being counted. That’s why we
are asking you to consider making the commitment of becoming a Gun
Owners of America Life Member. By doing so, you put the politicians on
notice that neither you nor GOA is going away — that no matter who’s in
the White House, there is always going to be a solid wall of resistance.

Now is a perfect time to become a Life Member. And if you aren’t a GOA
member at all, isn’t it time you became one?

Tags:Gun Control, Law, National Parks gun ban, News, Politics, states rights
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hunting Fishing and the Great Outdoors, Law, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on The smell of napalm in the morning..?

What planet are we on..?

May 20, 2009

What planet are we on? That was what I was thinking as I perused the Internet beyond the basic blogs and such that I look at most every day. News, as always, is slanted toward whatever the particular agenda of the instant platform supports. Statistics are twisted to support, again, whatever agenda is being blasted as the savior of the day. “Experts” of all stripes inform all of us lesser beings about what is best for us on any number of subjects or issues.

A fundamental part of philosophical libertarianism is being able to make your own choices and not having them made for you by others. So long, that is, as you are not impinging on others liberty in doing so. Hence, why I cannot support recent legislation with regards to credit cards, and other things that have been going on in places that are above “my pay grade” as the saying goes.But then, there is also the related issue of basic honesty that went hand in hand with that fiasco. Obfuscation by the lenders was used as a tool to lure those that simply could not understand what the ramifications of getting involved in these scams were, and what could happen. To little, and to late? It reminds me of Tobacco companies being less than truthful about the health effects of their products.

With that in mind, I will post a few things found around the net. Hopefully with proper citation:

“As a tool for understanding the thinking of Obama, [Saul] Alinsky’s most famous book, Rules for Radicals, is simultaneously edifying and worrisome. Some passages make Machiavelli’s Prince read like a Sesame Street picture book on manners. After Obama took office, the pundit class found itself debating the ideology and sensibility of the new president — an indication of how scarcely the media had bothered to examine him beforehand. But after 100 days, few observers can say that Obama hasn’t surprised them with at least one call. … Obama is a pragmatist, but a pragmatist as understood by Alinsky: One who applies pragmatism to achieving and keeping power. … Moderates thought they were electing a moderate; liberals thought they were electing a liberal. Both camps were wrong. Ideology does not have the final say in Obama’s decision-making; an Alinskyite’s core principle is to take any action that expands his power and to avoid any action that risks his power. As conservatives size up their new foe, they ought to remember: It’s not about liberalism. It’s about power. Obama will jettison anything that costs him power, and do anything that enhances it…. It’s not about the policies or the politics, and it’s certainly not about the principles. It’s about power, and it has been for a long time.” –columnist Jim Geraghty

“[T]he budding tyrant identifies personal insults as insults to the country. …Obama and his followers demonize anyone who challenges the Obama agenda as unpatriotic traitors to the country. …Obama’s entire persona is geared toward his personal elevation. His website, BarackObama.com, continues to run apace despite his elevation to the presidency — only now, the focus of the website is ‘Organizing for America.’ The website leads off with this Leninesque quote from Obama: ‘I’m asking you to believe. Not just in my ability to bring about real change in Washington … I’m asking you to believe in yours.’ … Despite certain early warning signs of incipient tyranny, the Obama administration is … still bound by the dictates of the republican electoral system. We must guard those dictates especially carefully, however, in a time when the Cult of Obama casually suggests that disagreement with the Great Leader is tantamount to anti-Americanism.” –columnist Ben Shapiro

“The Troubled Assets Relief Program, which has not yet been used for its supposed purpose (to purchase such assets from banks), has been the instrument of the administration’s adventure in the automobile industry. TARP’s $700 billion, like much of the supposed ‘stimulus’ money, is a slush fund the executive branch can use as it pleases. This is as lawless as it would be for Congress to say to the IRS: We need $3.5 trillion to run the government next year, so raise it however you wish — from whomever, at whatever rates you think suitable. Don’t bother us with details. … The Obama administration’s agenda of maximizing dependency involves political favoritism cloaked in the raiment of ‘economic planning’ and ‘social justice’ that somehow produce results superior to what markets produce when freedom allows merit to manifest itself, and incompetence to fail. The administration’s central activity — the political allocation of wealth and opportunity — is not merely susceptible to corruption, it is corruption.” –columnist George Will

“Republicans and conservatives are trying to grapple with the Obama administration’s $3,600,000,000,000 federal budget — let’s include the zeroes rather than use the trivializing abbreviation $3.6 trillion — and the larger-than-previously-projected $1,841,000,000,000 budget deficit. Political arguments are usually won not by numbers but by moral principles. And conservatives, banished by voters from high office, are having a hard time agreeing on a moral case. … For the policies of the Obama administration are not designed to shelter and nourish what Edmund Burke called the ‘little platoons.’ They are designed to subject them to what [Alexis de] Tocqueville called ‘soft despotism,’ which he identified as the natural tendency and potentially fatal weakness of American democracy. Our would-be soft despots are offering Americans money and the promise of security against economic distress. The vastly increased cost of government will nonetheless nearly leave half of households free from the burden of paying federal income tax and eligible for occasional rebates. … The policy proposals of the Obama administration are portrayed … as addressing the concerns of middle-income people uneasy about the workings of capitalism. But they are not aimed at giving these people more control and choices over the course of their lives — rather the contrary.” –columnist Michael Barone

“The economic freedom which is the prerequisite of any other freedom cannot be the freedom from economic care, which the socialists promise us and which can be obtained only by relieving the individual at the same time of the necessity and of the power of choice; it must be the freedom of our economic activity which, with the right of choice, inevitably also carries the risk and the responsibility of that right.” –economist Friedrich August Hayek (1899-1992)

“Secularism is a euphemism for a set of beliefs that are the antithesis of faith. Boiled down to its basic elements, secularism is man’s subordination of morality to his own earthly judgments, scientific and otherwise. …[T]he secularist catechism holds that truth is subjective, relative or contextual; because it demands that rationality can solve moral and ontological questions about man’s nature, that discrimination is the greatest of all evils and that patriotism is the only social disease that isn’t sexually-transmitted. … Obama’s thesis … is that our moral code can exist in the absence of a religious foundation. …[S]ecularism — and its cousin, multiculturalism — are the primary causes of the weakening of western society at a most dangerous time in history. The weakness results … because secularism turns the bedrock of western society — the moral code derived from Judeo-Christian faith — into sand. By divorcing our societies from faith, we render every man’s morality equal to every other’s, and thus make them all valueless. When President Obama says we are a nation bound by ideals and values, he postulates an impossibility: where do those secular ideals and values come from if — as liberal dogma requires — every man makes up his own?” –Human Events editor Jed Babbin

“When Barack Obama speaks at an American university, he does not provide a different perspective. He preaches to the liberal choir. And I am afraid that most of today’s Catholic universities are no exception. … Contrary to providing diversity of opinion, by inviting Barack Obama, [Notre Dame University president] Father Jenkins really just played to his audience. True leadership would have been to invite a speaker who would inspire this young audience to take seriously the values of their Catholic tradition. … Where can a parent send their son or daughter to get educated and not be indoctrinated with liberal boilerplate? Catholic universities were supposed to serve this purpose. But it’s clear that they, too, have been swept into the liberal tsunami that has engulfed America. Ironically, Father Jenkins states in his letter that Notre Dame’s invitation to Obama is ‘not a political statement or an endorsement of policy.’ He then expresses admiration for the president’s views on ‘expanding health care, alleviating poverty, and building peace through diplomacy.’ Does Father Jenkins not even understand what a ‘political statement’ is? Unfortunately, Notre Dame’s invitation to President Obama has only contributed to the moral ambiguity tearing at our nation’s fabric.” –columnist Star Parker

“And then there is the stark reality that we live in an era of what I call ‘historical and Constitutional illiteracy.’ Most Americans, I am convinced, know very little about world history or American history, and the lessons entailed therein. Likewise, I’m pretty certain that most Americans have no clue about the Constitutional limits on the powers of the government, and the idea that there should be any limits at all on the Executive Branch is unthinkable. In many ways, it’s a sad state of affairs. Americans are scared and want their President to be an omniscient, omnipotent savior, and the man we elected knows with certainty that he is that savior. Yet it’s comforting to know that, in many ways, some of the founders of our nation understood human nature so remarkably well that they could have predicted a day when future generations would want not a President, but a messiah, and a day when a President fancied himself as such. Such wisdom is yours for the reading in ‘The Federalist Papers,’ that old compilation of some 85 newspaper editorials that argued for the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, published in 1787 and 1788. While make the case for limiting the power of government, and establishing ‘checks and balances’ between government’s various ‘departments,’ James Madison eloquently wrote in ‘The Federalist Number 51:’ ‘It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government….’ It would seem that Madison the philosopher (who went on to become our Fourth President of the United States) was quite certain that those who govern will never be ‘angels’ (he would probably also concur that a President will never amount to a messiah). Madison also seems to indicate that those who govern will naturally begin to think a bit too highly of themselves, and will have difficulty with ‘self-restraint.’ The good news, even in this brief passage of Madison’s writings, is that ‘the people’ – – those of us who are ‘the governed’ – – can still function as the force that prohibits government from spiraling out of control. Certainly, we are still ‘free enough’ today to speak out, to allow our voices to be heard, and to freely exchange ideas about our country and its government — even if those ideas are contrary to the edicts of a dead-certain Command-In-Chief. The question is not ‘can we,’ but ‘will we’ function as that balancing force against a government that is spiraling out of control? Madison and the other founders set the course. Will we follow their lead?” –columnist Austin Hill

All the above are from the Patriot Post, see the sidebar.

Then we have an example of a lawmaker that knows better then you do when it comes to how to live your life. Go figure!

When we last focused attention on Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (well, aside from her braying about Kirsten Gillibrand’s serial betrayals not being despicably turncoat enough), she was trying to ban guns because they had something on them she could not define beyond “I believe it’s the shoulder thing that goes up.” That and introducing an Assemblywoman who wants to fight terrorism by banning .50 caliber firearms because their bullets had “a heat seeking device” that would allow you to “cook [ a deer] at the same time” you shot it.

Full story here

Then, we have political organizations that, simply put, are less than honest…

A group of ACORN whistle-blowers called ‘ACORN-8’ is alleging that the organization has engaged in deceptive practices and broken federal law.

ACORN is the ‘community-based’ voter registration organization that is under investigation in numerous states for voter registration fraud.

Here is what we know so far:

*Barack Obama was the legal rep for ACORN early in its formation and helped the group get organized.

*While the group claims its mission is to register the poor and minorities to vote, numerous reports from around nation point to intimidation tactics, partisanship in favor of Barack Obama, and outright fraud on the part of ACORN workers whose primary goal was to get Obama elected rather than merely register the poor to vote.

*The New York Times killed a story the day before the election that directly linked Barack Obama with ACORN’s deceptive practices. This allegation is corroborated by taped conversations between a NYT reporter and a source–a conversation that proves the Times had the story but made a conscious decision not to run it for the fear it would hurt Obama at the polls.

Full article here

Tags:Gun Control, Law, Libertarianism, Life, News, Politics, Truth in media
Posted in Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on What planet are we on..?

	Patrick Sperry on On Not so civil wars…
	TexasFred on Guest commentary…
	MaddMedic on Guest commentary…
	Patrick Sperry on The Stupid runs deep…
	Patrick Sperry on Math for planning in the comin…

Posts Tagged ‘Law’

Rate this:

Share this:

MCDANIEL SENDS LETTER TO U.S ATTORNEY GENERAL EXPRESSING OPPOSITION TO REINSTATEMENT OF ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN Thursday, Jun 11, 2009

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Dave Kopel’s Second Amendment Newsletter

Table of Contents

New by Kopel

Sotomayor

Sonia Sotomayor versus the Second Amendment

Sotomayor vs. the Second Amendment, Part II

Highly Dubious Claim against Sotomayor

Should Repubs. Fight Sotomayor? Left Bloggers say No; Righties Split

Sonia Sotomayor

National Parks

Respecting States’ Wishes

Guns in Parks: The Hoplophobes’ Travel Guide to the United States

Nordyke vs. King

The State of Heller

9th Circuit’s Ruling Applies 2nd Amendment to States

Other Topics

The No on Koh Letter

Koh, No!

The Pieces Fall into Place

The Second Amendment in the Tenth Circuit: Three Decades of (Mostly) Harmless Error

Unraveling Judicial Restraint: Guns, Abortion, and the Faux Conservatism of J. Harvie Wilkinson, III

Journal on Firearms and Public Policy

The Necessary and Proper Clause: An Explanation

7th Circuit Court of Appeals Handgun Ruling

The Montana Firearms Freedom Act

Should Colorado Join the Interstate Compact which Attempts to turn the Electoral College into a National Popular Vote?

Important New Translation of Homer’s Iliad

Important Announcements!

The Independence Institute’s 7th Annual Alcohol, Tobacco & and Firearms Party

Freedom Underground Symposium

Dr. Rice Announces Author’s Web Site!

International

Koh’s Goal for the Legal Trade in Arms: Ban It

Canada

Want a Gun Permit? Tell us About Your Sex Life

China

Staring Down the Barrel: the Rise of Guns in China

Germany

Germany Moves to Tighten Laws over Gun Control

Ireland

Handgun culture increasing in the State, says Deasy

Mexico

Southbound Checks at Border Yield Few Guns

Why the Lies About Guns Going to Mexico?

United Kingdom

Golfers Arrested after Fighting off Gang Attempting to Steal Clubs

Public Opinion, Culture, & Media

Facts from the NRA Convention

Before Recent Shootings, Gun-Control Support was Fading

A Rifle in One Hand, a Laptop in the Other. Behind the Scene with Pro-gun Bloggers

The Myth of 90 Percent: Only a Small Fraction of Guns in Mexico Come from U.S.

Brady Campaign Rhetoric Then and Now: What a difference Six Months Makes

AHSA 2.0: A New Beginning?

Mennonite Preacher among those Arrested in Phila Gunshop Protests

Phila. Gun-shop Protesters Acquitted

Another Corrupt Anti goes Down

Heated Debate Over Assault Weapons

Debunking ABC’s 20/20 Episode “If I Only Had a Gun”

Student says CCAC is Trying to Thwart Gun Advocacy Group

Elites out of Touch on Guns and Climate

Gun Free School Zone Follies

Federal

Interior Spokeswoman’s Statement on New Firearms Law for Parks and Refuges

Democrats Hold Fire on Gun Control

Reaction from Anti-gunners to Obama’s Support for Law Enforcement on Gun Tracing is Telling

Moran Introduces Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act

Tupak Re-Introduces Second Amendment Restoration Act

Lautenberg renews Push to Shut Gun Show ‘Loophole’

Don’t be Gun Shy: Register Your Firearms!

States

California

Chuck Michel’s partner elected LA County Attorney

MCDANIEL SENDS LETTER TO U.S ATTORNEY GENERAL EXPRESSING OPPOSITION TO REINSTATEMENT OF ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN

Thursday, Jun 11, 2009