Posts Tagged ‘Second Amendment’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Ninth Circuit to Hear Gun Case

August 8, 2009

Second Amendment: Ninth Circuit to Hear Gun Case

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit agreed this week to review en banc (by the full court) a panel ruling from earlier this year which held that the Second Amendment applies to state and local governments through the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. The idea of such incorporation has long been a question regarding the Second Amendment, though no one would seriously question that the First Amendment, for example, applies to state and local governments. And the First Amendment contains the far more specific provision of “Congress shall make no law…” (emphasis added). The Second is far broader: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Still, we were rather surprised to see even a panel of the Ninth Circuit find that the Second Amendment means what it says.

Furthermore, Ninth Circuit Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain’s ruling in favor of gun rights is at odds with rulings by other Courts of Appeal — including a ruling penned by Sonia Sotomayor on the Second Circuit. The U.S. Supreme Court deliberately left the issue for another day in its Heller ruling last year, because the District of Columbia is not a state. Expect that silence to be broken in the not-too-distant future.

SOURCE

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on Ninth Circuit to Hear Gun Case

Good News and Bad News: GOA Alert

July 25, 2009 
Concealed Carry for Out-of-State Travel Fails
-- Senate falls two votes short this week

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, another leading gun rights Second Amendment
group, is a strong supporter of this amendment that's specifically
pushing for passage and scoring member's votes." -- Louisiana Senator
David Vitter, July 22, 2009

Friday, July 24, 2009

Well, there was good news and bad news this week.

The good news is that a majority of the U.S. Senate (58 members) voted
for an amendment to allow citizens who are already authorized to carry
firearms concealed to do so when they travel out of state.

The bad news is that the Senate still fell two votes short of the 60
votes needed to enact the amendment, which was sponsored by Republican
Senators John Thune (SD) and David Vitter (LA).  A prior Unanimous
Consent agreement allowed the amendment to be offered in the first
place, but as such, required that the legislation garner 60 votes
(rather than a simple majority) in order to pass.

The Thune-Vitter amendment was hotly debated on the Senate floor
Wednesday.  Senator Thune pointed out that, while 48 states have some
form of concealed carry law, his measure would simply "extend that
constitutional right across State lines," recognizing that the right to
bear arms and defend oneself "does not end at State borders or State
lines."

One of the more comical arguments made by some Democrat Senators --
Chuck Schumer (NY), Frank Lautenberg (NJ) and Dianne Feinstein (CA) --
is that this provision would compromise "states rights."

Of course, these Senators have shown they care little about "states
rights," as evidenced by federal gun control laws that bear their names:
the ban on semi-automatic firearms (the so-called Feinstein assault
weapons ban) and the lifetime gun ban on people who engage in
pushing-and-shoving incidents in the home (the Lautenberg misdemeanor
gun ban).

And where was their adherence to states rights when they voted for the
Brady bill, the Gun Free School Zones Ban and the Veterans Disarmament
Act?

Republican Senator Tom Coburn (OK) pointed out their hypocrisy when he
said:

"We had a vote in terms of honoring States rights in terms of the
national park bill on guns. Twenty-nine of my colleagues, thirteen of
whom now are 'defending States rights,' stepped all over States rights
with their vote against the Coburn amendment when it came to allowing
people to have supreme their State law in terms of national parks."

Senator Thune noted that his provision would protect the rights of
states by not applying any national standards.  Rather, the text simply
requires states to acknowledge the concealed carry permits from other
states.

In fact, the language of the text specifically states that nothing in
the amendment "shall be construed to affect the permitting process for
an individual... or preempt any provision of State law with respect to
the issuance of licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms."

Article IV of the U.S. Constitution allows for reciprocity-style
legislation by the Congress.  The Article allows Congress to enforce
"full faith and credit" across the country, so that each
state respects
the "public acts, records, and judicial proceedings" of every other
state.

Please go to the GOA website to see how your Senators voted:
http://capwiz.com/gunowners/issues/votes/?votenum=237&chamber=S&congress=1111

Gun owners should take special notice of Republican Senator Richard
Lugar (R-IN) and former-Republican-turned-Democrat Arlen Specter (PA) --
both of whom voted against concealed carry.  Had they voted pro-gun, the
Thune-Vitter amendment would have passed.

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

Internet Gun Rumor

Recently, there have been a lot of emails and phone calls about SB 2099
-- a "new" bill that purportedly requires Americans to claim
guns on
their 1040 federal tax forms, provide fingerprints, and pay a $50 tax on
each individual handgun they own.

This is simply not true.  There is no S. 2099 in the Congress right now.
This is simply a case of taking a little bit of truth from an old bill
that was shot down, and creating a hoax.  For more information, please
visit the Snopes website, which is an excellent resource for debunking
internet rumors.  The specific URL regarding SB 2099 is:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/taxreturns.asp

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

Defend The 2nd Amendment Through Creative Giving...

As we confront the challenges of the future, we know that the generosity
of those who assist us will make all the difference in our success.
That's why GOA seeks your long-term support.

Please call 703-321-8585 during regular business hours or e-mail
goamail@gunowners.org to request information on how to keep control of
your assets and make a gift at the same time through:

* a bequest
* a retirement plan
* a will, living trust, or insurance policy

Requests for information are confidential and do not represent an
obligation.

Tags:, , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

Second Amendment permits…

July 25, 2009

I have posted several times about unalienable rights, and why in the world any permit or license should be needed. But, such is life these days in our not so United States…

Second Amendment Reciprocity?

“The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for, among old parchments, or musty records. They are written, as with a sun beam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself; and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power.” –Alexander Hamilton

As of this writing, Barack Hussein Obama’s “fundamental transformation of the United States of America” has obligated taxpayers for an admitted $7 trillion in current and future debt for his so-called “economic recovery” act. Heaping insult upon near-fatal injury, Congress is now considering an additional $2 trillion in proposed tax increases for BO’s CO2 folly, over $1 trillion for his nationalized healthcare experiment and untold trillions for another round of “economic recovery” programs. Furthermore, TARP Inspector General Neil Barofsky announced this week that total Federal exposure for all TARP “spending” had been leveraged to $23.7 trillion, equal to approximately one and one half times GDP.

All of this tax obligation comes amid the worst economic decline in decades, and is sure to test the limits of “Trickle-Up Poverty.”

Of course, none of the aforementioned Obama initiatives, or the collection and redistribution of wealth to fund them, is authorized by our Constitution (unless of course you subscribe to the so-called “Living Constitution” as amended by judicial diktat).

Therefore, if these schemes are not authorized by our Constitution, then we have an outlaw government, and if we have an outlaw government, then by what authority does that government assess and collect taxes?

That question will be the subject of an upcoming essay, but I raise it here in order to highlight an expenditure that our Constitution does authorize Congress to enact — defense appropriations.

The National Defense Authorization Act for 2010 (H.R. 2647) passed the House by a vote of 389 Ayes, 22 Nays (2 Republican) and 22 Present/Not Voting. It contained 69 amendments, mostly related to defense expenditures.

The Senate version of the NDAA (S.1390) with its 216 amendments is now being debated.

One of those amendments, a liberal effort to expand so-called “hate crimes” legislation, resulted in heated discourse on the Senate floor, including this scolding by John McCain (R-AZ) toward Harry Reid (D-NV): “The majority leader has made it clear that their highest priority … is a hate crimes bill that has nothing to do whatsoever with defending this nation. While we have young Americans fighting and dying in two wars, we’re going to take up the hate crimes bill because the majority leader thinks that’s more important … than legislation concerning the defense of this nation.”

Indeed, McCain has this one exactly right.

However, I draw your attention to another amendment, this one added by Sen. John Thune (R-SD), authorizing interstate reciprocity of concealed-carry permit holders cross state lines with their weapons. Thune’s amendment was stripped from the legislation even after mustering 58 votes for and 39 votes against.

Yes, that is a strong majority in favor, but still two votes short of the 60-vote threshold needed to block a promised filibuster by Chuck Schumer (D-NY). (In today’s milquetoast Senate, just the threat of a filibuster is treated as an actual filibuster.)

Deplorably, two Republican senators voted against Thune’s measure: Richard Lugar of Indiana and George Voinovich of neighboring Ohio.

For the record, I am not suggesting this measure would have passed had Lugar and Voinovich changed their votes — the Democrats were not going to let this one through. These votes always come down to who cut the best backroom wink-and-nod deals on some other piece of legislation in return for a aye or nay on this one. But I do wonder what Lugar and Voinovich got in return…

Schumer protested, “This amendment is a bridge too far, and could endanger the safety of millions of Americans. Each state has carefully crafted its concealed-carry laws in the way that makes the most sense to protect its citizens. Clearly, large, urban areas merit a different standard than rural areas. To gut the ability of local police and sheriffs to determine who should be able to carry a concealed weapon makes no sense. It could reverse the dramatic success we’ve had in reducing crime in most all parts of America. Whether you are pro-gun or pro-gun control, this measure deserves to be defeated. We will do everything we can to stop this poisonous amendment from being enacted.”

There was a concerted effort by the Left to paint Thune’s reciprocity amendment as having nothing to do with national defense — a tit-for-tat in response to McCain’s complaint about Reid’s “hate crimes” amendment.

However, I subscribe to the notion that “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” That would be directly from the Second Amendment in our Constitution’s Bill of Rights.

Sidebar: For those who don’t know enough about American history to comprehend that “a well regulated Militia” refers to “the People,” stop reading this essay and take Civics 101 at any accredited institution. Oh, wait, they don’t teach Civics 101 any longer, which not only perpetuates but, in fact, institutionalizes ignorance of our Constitution.

The Second Amendment’s assurance of the right, nay, the responsibility to own and carry firearms, with the attendant proscription against government infringement of that right, is our most essential reassurance of self defense, national defense and defense of our Constitution from “enemies, domestic and abroad.”

Justice Joseph Story, appointed to the Supreme Court by James Madison (our Constitution’s principal author), wrote in his “Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States” (1833), “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of the rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”

On that note, let’s take a closer look at Schumer’s complaint in an effort to discern what the Second Amendment really provides.

“Each state,” says Schumer, “has carefully crafted its concealed-carry laws in the way that makes the most sense to protect its citizens. Clearly, large, urban areas merit a different standard than rural areas.”

Schumer is asserting that the Second Amendment prohibits only federal government infringement of the right to keep and bear arms while that prohibition is not incorporated to prohibit state governments from infringing on the same right.

So, would Schumer likewise argue that states have authority to regulate First Amendment rights of religious freedom, or freedom of speech, or of the press? Of course not.

Ironically, the First Amendment notes, “Congress [emphasis added] shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” (Our Founders chose their words with great deliberation.)

Though the First Amendment is clearly a proscription on congressional legislation, not state legislation, the Second Amendment contains no such language and declares that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

However, the Left has errantly incorporated proscriptions of the First Amendment upon the states (while completely redefining “speech” to include even the most grotesque forms of expression but restricting political speech,) while arguing that the Second Amendment is a prohibition only upon the federal government.

Sidebar: When an über-leftist attempts to make an argument for federalism, beware. Though the 10th Amendment in the Bill of Rights defines federalism — “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” — this does not suggest that the previous amendments apply only to the federal government.

In order to consider whether there is a constitutional basis for Thune’s reciprocity amendment in the first place, we must first discern our Founders’ original intent.

The Bill of Rights was adopted in 1791 after great disagreement on whether the enumeration of such rights was even required. Alexander Hamilton aptly summed up the basis for this disagreement in Federalist No. 84: “I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. … For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?”

Indeed, read in context, the Bill of Rights is an affirmation of innate individual rights, of Natural Rights as noted by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence: “[All men] are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The Bill of Rights, then, is a clear delineation of constraints upon the central government in regard to infringement of those rights.

Further, it is ludicrous to argue that the enumeration of those rights was a prohibition on only the federal government since, in the words of Hamilton (and echoed in the writings of many other Founders), “Why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?”

These rights were enumerated, according to those who favored inclusion, in order to explicitly recount the rights of “the people,” as noted in the Bill of Rights Preamble (yes, it has one): “The Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added…”

In other words, our Founders argued that they enumerated both “declaratory and restrictive clauses” in order to “prevent misconstruction or abuse of [central government] powers” that would infringe on the inherent rights of the people.

More than a century after the Bill of Rights was adopted, the Supreme Court (of Jefferson’s “Despotic Branch”) began incorporating the provisions in the Bill of Rights as applicable to the states. This, in and of itself, implied that somehow the inalienable rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights might not already extend to all people in all jurisdictions.

The High Court construed the 14th Amendment’s Section 1 as support for incorporation: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

It is notable that the 14th Amendment makes direct reference to the Bill of Rights’ Fifth Amendment prohibition against depriving any person of “life, liberty, or property.”

In the mid-20th century, the Supreme Court increasingly used the 14th Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause, Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause to make portions of the Bill of Rights binding upon the states. The consequence of this interpretation was and remains that the inalienable rights enumerated by our Founders are now awarded at the discretion of the judiciary, not endowed by our Creator.

However, given the fact that our Founders’ intent with the Bill of Rights was to enumerate certain declaratory and restrictive clauses to ensure the Declaration’s “unalienable rights” of all men, one must conclude by extension that those rights are inalienable by any government jurisdiction, irrespective of the 14th Amendment.

So, in regard to Sen. Thune’s reciprocity amendment, I ask, “Reciprocity for what?” Are we so steeped in the errant notion that our rights are a gift from government that we no longer subscribe to the plain language of our Constitution based on the inalienable rights of man? Has the temperature been turned up so slowly over the last eight decades, so incrementally, that when we finally feel the heat, it will be too late for us to jump, like frogs, out of the pot?

With our Constitution now in exile, I can understand why Sen. Thune would forward an amendment to provide interstate reciprocity for law-abiding concealed weapon permit holders.

However, the Second Amendment still enumerates my right to carry.

When senators such as Chuck Schumer and Dick Durbin declare, “We’re able to breathe a sigh of relief,” in regard to the defeat of Thune’s amendment, let me suggest that you obtain a copy of our Constitution, and be prepared to educate anyone charged with enforcing the law, just what it is that they have sworn to “Support and Defend.”

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!

Mark Alexander
Publisher, PatriotPost.US

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, Men's Issues, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

Piracy and the right to self defense

June 28, 2009

Just yesterday the History Channel had a program about the American flag ship that Somali pirates attacked earlier in the year, and the fine work that the U.S. Navy did in getting the ship and crew rescued. Not to sell the Navy short by any means, but a lot of what happened was as a direct result of the actions taken by the crew. Indeed, if the crew had not taken decisive action, the Navy’s job would have been much tougher.

It seems that those that are so much smarter than common people prefer appeasement. Indeed, what in recent history has appeasement accomplished? World War Two comes to mind, as does the seizing of the American Embassy in Iran.Let’s not forget our second place finish in the Southeast Asian War games when appeasement stopped the bombing. Or the Korean War and what that has led to in the aftermath, as in lunatics with nuclear weapons. Appeasing hostage takers brought us September eleventh, and the World Trade Center attacks that this nation is still reeling from.

So then what is all this about? Well, I do have my problems with the N.R.A. But this time they hit the ball right out of the park, and it went straight over the center field fence. Read on.

Friday, June 26, 2009
Last month we reported on the arming of merchant mariners to allow them to defend their crews and ships from pirate attacks.  We noted that, with the increase in pirate attacks on the high seas, many are now realizing that firearms and armed citizens can be as effective a criminal deterrent at sea, as they are on land.

The International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) wrapped up a meeting earlier this month, where it agreed on “revised guidance on combating piracy and armed robbery against ships.”

Among other things, the report recommends “guidance to shipmasters and crew…who may be kidnapped or held hostage for ransom, based on the current United Nations guidance on ‘surviving as a hostage.’”

As hard as it is to believe, the MSC report concludes that, “flag States should strongly discourage the carrying and use of firearms by seafarers for personal protection or for the protection of a ship. Seafarers, it was agreed, are civilians and the use of firearms requires special training and aptitudes and the risk of accidents with firearms carried on board ship is great. Carriage of arms on board ship may encourage attackers to carry firearms or even more dangerous weapons, thereby escalating an already dangerous situation. Any firearm on board may itself become an attractive target for an attacker. Carriage of firearms may pose an even greater danger if the ship is carrying flammable cargo or similar types of dangerous goods.”

These recommendations defy reason, given that the pirates are already heavily armed and know vessels are easy targets due to the high level of probability that seamen are unarmed.

By contrast, U.S. Representative Frank LoBiondo (R-NJ) has introduced H.R. 2984–the “United States Mariner and Vessel Protection Act of 2009.” The purpose of the Act is to assist in the defense of United States-flag vessels against piracy and to ensure the traditional right of self-defense of those vessels against piracy.

Commenting on the measure, Rep. LoBiondo, the ranking member of the U.S. House of Representatives Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation subcommittee, said: “Our merchant marine fleet is increasingly under attack from unlawful individuals and rogue groups that seek to disrupt commerce, seize U.S. and foreign crews, and instill fear on international waters. It is only appropriate that our fleets be legally allowed to defend themselves from these violent encounters. This common-sense legislation is a necessary step in empowering U.S.-flagged vessels to protect their crews and cargo.”

SOURCE

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 4 Comments »

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:, , , ,
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

Table of Contents

  1. 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
  2. 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…
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. 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
  7. 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
  8. 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.

Other Topics

The No on Koh Letter

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
May 20, 2009
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_05_17-2009_05_23.shtml#1242846839

Dean Koh is an excellent writer and an impressive scholar. But his legal vision is for a substantial diminution of the sovereignty of the American people, and as Legal Advisor to the State Department, he would have tremendous power to advance that vision. As Dean Koh has explained, his writings on transnationalism are not merely descriptive; they are also a strategy for activists. Of course Dean Koh has the right to advocate as sees fit. The Constitution, however, requires that major presidential appointees must earn the Advice and Consent of the United States Senate. The Senate’s duty to be especially careful on Advice and Consent would seem to be at its apex when an appointee’s record shows a long-standing determination to weaken the existing constitutional sovereignty of the United States of America.

Koh, No!

David Kopel
America’s 1st Freedom
July, 2009
http://davekopel.org/2A/Mags/koh-no.htm

President Barack Obama continues to fill his administration with devout gun-ban advocates, this time appointing transnationalist Harold Koh as legal adviser to the Department of State.

The Pieces Fall into Place

Dave Kopel
America’s 1st Freedom
May, 2009
http://davekopel.org/2A/Mags/kerlikowske.htm

With Gil Kerlikowske, President Obama continues the trend of appointing anti-gun activists to important positions in his administration.

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

David B. Kopel
Denver University Law Review
Vol. 86, 901, 2009
http://law.du.edu/documents/denver-university-law-review/v86-3/Kopel.pdf
PDF files require Adobe Acrobat Reader or similar software.

Here is the final text of Dave’s article in the Denver University Law Review’s annual survey of the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.

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

David B. Kopel with Nelson Lund
The Virginia Journal of Law and Politics
Forthcoming
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1309714

Critique of 4th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Wilkinson’s Virginia Law Review article asserting the D.C. v. Heller is a 21st century version of Roe v. Wade. Here is the updated, near-final version.

Journal on Firearms and Public Policy

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
May 20, 2009
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_05_17-2009_05_23.shtml#1242846839
http://www.saf.org/JFPPIndexhtmlpdf.htm

The Journal on Firearms & Public Policy, published by the Second Amendment Foundation, is an annual interdisciplinary journal. It publishes a mix of original articles, and reprints of important articles published elsewhere. Among the the authors of original articles who may be best-known to newsletter subscribers are Gary Kleck, James Jacobs, Roy Wortman, Gary Mauser, Clayton Cramer, Andrew McClurg, and David Beito. I am happy to announce that 14 of the 20 volumes are now available on-line, with most of the remainder coming soon. The URL for the Journal’s archive is here: http://www.saf.org/JFPPIndexhtmlpdf.htm

The Necessary and Proper Clause: An Explanation

Dave Kopel with Rob Natelson
Dave Kopel’s Second Amendment Podcast
May 14, 2009
http://audio.ivoices.org/mp3/iipodcast292.mp3

Dave interviews University of Montana law professor Rob Natelson about the proper interpretation of the clause.

7th Circuit Court of Appeals Handgun Ruling

Dave Kopel with Jon Caldara
Dave Kopel’s Second Amendment Podcast
June 4, 2009
http://audio.ivoices.org/mp3/iipodcast307.mp3

In an interview with Jon Caldara, Dave explains the new decision in NRA v. Chicago.

The Montana Firearms Freedom Act

Dave Kopel with Amy Oliver
Dave Kopel’s Second Amendment Podcast/KFKA Radio
June 4, 2009
http://audio.ivoices.org/mp3/iipodcast304.mp3

Dave explains the new Montana law which attempts to exempt guns which are made and sold intra-state from the application of federal gun laws which were enacted under the federal power over interstate commerce.

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

Dave Kopel with Ken Gordon
Independent Thinking
April 10, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/kmojzd
http://tinyurl.com/mrenak
http://tinyurl.com/lpof9m

Dave Kopel and former State Senator Ken Gordon debate the issue on KBDI Public Television’s Independent Thinking. Kopel argues that the Electoral College is superior, and that, in any case, the compact is unconstitutional. Part 2 is here: http://tinyurl.com/mrenak; Part 3 is here: http://tinyurl.com/lpof9m.

Important New Translation of Homer’s Iliad

Dave Kopel with E. Christian Kopff
Dave Kopel’s Second Amendment Podcast
May 29, 2009
http://audio.ivoices.org/mp3/iipodcast300.mp3

Homer’s masterpiece has been around since 800 BC, and adored ever since. Professor E. Christian Kopff of CU-Boulder recently wrote the introduction to the new translation of the Iliad; Dave interviews him about why this new version is important.

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:, , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 10 Comments »

Sotomayor for the Supreme Court

May 27, 2009

I’ve been holding off a bit with regards to the nomination of Judge Sotomayor for the Supreme Court. As noted in a previous entry I favored Ken Salazar for the position. Nevertheless, I feel that a few things need to be addressed with her selection.

Certainly everything that noted barrister David Kopel in his short assessment, found HERE should be looked over closely. As should the many concerns and comments there as well as over at my good friend TexasFreds.

In various places around the Internet I saw references to “reverse racism.” That, in and of itself is “bass ackwards” to quote an old Marine that I knew when I was growing up. Racism is racism. End of discussion. Same thing with sexism. Ms Sotomayor appears, at least from her history as reported too widely to cite, to have more than a bit of racist and sexist in her. I’d hoped that we as a nation had grown beyond all that sort of thing. Yet, in the last election cycle we were inundated with being told that it was not about race at all, but “change.” Then no sooner than the ballots were counted all that could be heard was how the United States had elected it’s first “Black President.” So much for a nation outgrowing it’s past like an adolescent outgrowing poor social skills. Not to mention that the man is half white, and half Arab… I suppose some things never do really change.

Also, having read the quotations from the Kopel piece I have to seriously wonder about the woman’s grasp of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Yes, I read her bio, and what came immediately into my mind were the words of a Professor Emeritus said to me many years ago. I shall repeat them here; “Never, young man, confuse education with intelligence.”

I shall leave me readers with that tiny bit of wisdom that I was blessed to be able to learn in years gone by.

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Immigration, Law, Men's Issues, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 6 Comments »

Greater Gun Rights Battles Looming‏

April 3, 2009 
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

Wednesday, April 1, 2009

In March, both the U.S. House and Senate finished up work on a massive,
anti-gun $10 billion omnibus federal land bill.

The bill had been held up for over a year in large part due to GOA
members fighting for Second Amendment rights on federal land -- YOUR
land.

The Second Amendment has been null and void for many years on all land
controlled by the National Park Service (NPS).  While regulations
promulgated in the waning days of the Bush administration partially
reversed that gun ban, a federal judge recently blocked those rules from
taking effect.

GOA worked closely with pro-gun members of the House and Senate to add a
complete repeal of the NPS gun prohibition to the larger land bill.
While these efforts delayed passage of the bill, in the end the anti-gun
congressional leadership teamed up with "pro-gun" compromisers and
passed the measure without protecting the Second Amendment.

In an effort to appease gun owners, language was added to the bill to
protect hunting and fishing.  But, as GOA pointed out to the Congress,
the Founding Fathers did not pledge their lives, fortunes and sacred
honor to protect a recreational pastime.

The final attempt to protect the Second Amendment from NPS bureaucrats
came on a procedural vote in the House that would have made in order an
amendment, sponsored by pro-gun Reps. Doc Hastings (R-WA) and Rob Bishop
(R-UT), to repeal the gun ban.  That motion failed by a vote of 242-180.

So now not only does the gun ban remain in place, the new bill greatly
expands the total amount of NPS land.  Since NPS-controlled parks and
trails also include many busy roadways, hundreds of thousands of gun
owners can unwittingly find themselves in violation of the gun ban
without even knowing they are on federal land.

Representatives Hastings and Bishop, along with Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA),
have vowed to continue their efforts to wipe this unconstitutional gun
ban from the books.  In the Senate, Tom Coburn (R-OK) is also pushing
for the repeal of the anti-gun NPS regulations.

Gun Owners of America would like to thank the thousands upon thousands
of email subscribers who repeatedly contacted their congressmen in this
battle to protect the Second Amendment.  We were sold out by
compromisers this time, but we will "remember in November" 
those who
voted against the Second Amendment.

Please help spread the word so we can get even more people contacting
their elected officials.  As the late Senator Everett Dirksen said,
"When I feel the heat, I see the light."

And do we ever need to turn up the heat!

Many important battles for your Second Amendment rights lay before us.
For instance, Barack Obama and his anti-gun cronies are making a massive
push to renew the Clinton semi-auto ban.

The President and his Attorney General, Eric Holder, are blaming the
current violence among Mexican drug cartels on firearms from the United
States.  This is another blatant attempt by anti-gun advocates to use
whatever situation they can find to further erode your Second Amendment
rights.

The problems of corruption and violence in Mexico should not be used as
an excuse to curtail your right to keep and bear arms.  But once again
law-abiding American gun owners are in danger of being punished for the
criminal actions of others.

The Clinton gun ban is just one of the attacks that you and GOA will be
fighting.

There is also a massive anti-gun bill in Congress, H.R. 45, that
includes universal gun owner licensing and registration, and the Obama
White House continues its efforts to ban private firearms transactions
at gun shows.

You can help us reach out to even more gun owners.   Please forward this
message to your friends and encourage them to sign up for the GOA email
alerts.

And if you haven't already become a member of GOA, consider joining.
For a small amount of money such as $35, $50 or $100, you can join with
other Americans to save our Constitutional rights.  Visit
www.gunowners.org to join GOA today.

Thank you again for being part of the GOA team working to protect
American liberty.

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 3 Comments »

S22 yet another assault on YOUR rights

February 24, 2009

Anti-gun Land Bill Moving Again
— Gun control should be stripped from the legislation

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

Monday, February 23, 2009

An alert last week asked you to urge your representative to oppose a
massive land bill that was scheduled to come before the full House at
any time.

The good news is that opposition to the bill grew so loud that the
leadership pulled it from the calendar so they would have more time to
muster enough votes to pass it.

Well, that also gives you another chance to contact your own
representative to tell him to OPPOSE the anti-Second Amendment Omnibus
Land Act. The bill, S. 22, is now scheduled to be voted on this week.

S.22 is a mammoth bill comprised of over 190 separate pieces of
legislation and will come to the floor with a rule that will not allow
pro-gun representatives to offer amendments.

There are serious Second Amendment concerns with this legislation. S.
22 will greatly expand the amount of land controlled by the National
Park Service (NPS). Because the rights of lawful gun owners are
restricted on NPS land, the bill will create even more
“anti-Second Amendment” zones.

In contrast to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the U.S. Forest
Service, which allow State and local laws to govern firearms
possession, NPS land was until recently subject to a complete gun ban.

In the waning days of his administration, President Bush partially
reversed the ban, but that half-way measure still leaves a significant
portion of the gun prohibition in place. Gun Owners of America has
fought for several years to fully repeal the NPS regulations, but those
efforts have been hampered by the anti-gun leadership of both the House
and Senate.

GOA opposes many parts of the bill that are controversial and have not
been debated on their individual merits.

Consider just a few provisions of the 1,294-page bill:

* Section 2002 codifies the National Landscape Conservation System,
which groups together 26 million acres of federal land and places it
under one umbrella agency. The NLCS was created during the Clinton
administration and run administratively since that time. S. 22 will
make the system permanent, raising concerns for hunters and sportsmen.
Much of this land is consolidated from the BLM and the Forest Service,
which have always allowed hunting and recreational shooting. It is
unclear what rules will be promulgated by the new agency and if gun
owners’ rights will be protected at all.

* Section 5204 of the bill establishes the Washington-Rochambeau Route
as a Historic Trail. This dual trail begins in Rhode Island and
travels 650 miles to Yorktown, Virginia. The trail includes parts of
major thoroughfares on the east coast such as Interstate 95 and US
Route 1, meaning the gun ban could effect hundreds of thousands of
unsuspecting gun owners each day.

* Section 5301 authorizes the federal government to buy private land
adjacent to national parks and trails. Such land would be controlled by
the NPS, and thus be subject to the agencies’ anti-gun regulations.

* Section 7002 makes the birthplace of William Jefferson Clinton a
National Historic Site. Well, perhaps it’s fitting that the legacy of
former President Clinton, who was responsible for so many anti-Second
Amendment laws, will include yet another “gun free” zone.

In all, the bill designates over 2 million acres of wilderness,
establishes three new national parks, a new national monument, three
new national conservation areas, and four new national trails.

If there are parts of the bill that could stand on their own, they
should be brought up separately and dealt with in an open and fair
process — and not used as bargaining chips in exchange for compromises
of your Second Amendment rights.

Some people on Capitol Hill contend that all of these bills already
passed the House anyway. In fact, no they haven’t. More than 70 of
these bills now before the House were only passed by the Senate. The
House of Representatives never even held hearings or open debate on
these measures.

Representative Rob Bishop (R-UT) has indicated that he wants to at
least have the opportunity to offer an amendment to ensure that the
Second Amendment rights of all Americans are protected.

However, right now it looks as though the anti-gun House leadership
will refuse to allow any amendments to the bill, in order to ensure
that it goes straight to President Obama’s desk.

There is a possibility that an amendment to protect only hunting and
recreational shooting on federal land would be allowed. Such an
amendment by itself is not sufficient and is clearly designed as a
“cover” vote for gun rights compromisers.

Please contact your representative and urge him or her to insist that
an amendment be allowed to protect ALL of your Second Amendment rights
— not just hunting and recreational shooting.

ACTION: Please urge your Representative oppose S. 22. You can go to
the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Representative the
pre-written e-mail message below.

—– Prewritten Letter —–

Dear Representative:

I urge you to oppose S. 22. Among the many problems with this
1,294-page bill are the following concerns gun owners have:

* Section 2002 codifies the National Landscape Conservation System,
which groups together 26 million acres of federal land and places it
under one umbrella agency. The NLCS was created during the Clinton
administration and run administratively since that time. S. 22 will
make the system permanent, raising concerns for hunters and sportsmen.
Much of this land is consolidated from the BLM and the Forest Service,
which have always allowed hunting and recreational shooting. It is
unclear what rules will be promulgated by the new agency and if gun
owners’ rights will be protected at all.

* Section 5204 of the bill establishes the Washington-Rochambeau Route
as a Historic Trail. This dual trail begins in Rhode Island and
travels 650 miles to Yorktown, Virginia. The trail includes parts of
major thoroughfares on the east coast such as Interstate 95 and US
Route 1, meaning the gun ban could effect hundreds of thousands of
unsuspecting gun owners each day.

* Section 5301 authorizes the federal government to buy private land
adjacent to national parks and trails. Such land would be controlled by
the NPS, and thus be subject to the agencies’ anti-gun regulations.

Since it appears that amendments will not be allowed to this bill —
thus prohibiting any attempt to remove these troubling provisions — I
would urge you to vote against S. 22.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Gun Control, Hunting Fishing and the Great Outdoors, Law, Local Politics Colorado, News, Politics, Uncategorized, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on S22 yet another assault on YOUR rights

Montana pisses in Obama’s cornflakes!

February 17, 2009

Montana passed liberty and freedom from the Authoritarians in the federal government. I love it!

House shoots down federal gun controls
Posted on Feb. 14
By KAHRIN DEINES of the Associated Press

HELENA (AP) – Montana lawmakers fired another shot in battles for states’ rights as they supported letting some Montana gun owners and dealers skip reporting their transactions to the federal government.

Under House Bill 246, firearms made in Montana and used in Montana would be exempt from federal regulation. The same would be true for firearm accessories and ammunition made and sold in the state.

“What we need here is for Montana to be able to handle Montana’s business and affairs,” Republican Rep. Joel Boniek told fellow lawmakers Saturday. The wilderness guide from Livingston defeated Republican incumbent Bruce Malcolm in last spring’s election.

// –>

Boniek’s measure aims to circumvent federal authority over interstate commerce, which is the legal basis for most gun regulation in the United States. The bill potentially could release Montanans from both federal gun registration requirements and dealership licensing rules. Since the state has no background-check laws on its own books, the legislation also could free gun purchasers from that requirement.

“Firearms are inextricably linked to the history and culture of Montana, and I’d like to support that,” Boniek said. “But I want to point out that the issue here is not about firearms. It’s about state rights.”

The House voted 64-36 for the bill on Saturday. If it clears a final vote, the measure will go to the Senate.

House Republicans were joined by 14 Democrats in passing the measure.

“I would hope that our U.S. Supreme Court would begin to retreat from what I think is an abusive interpretation of our interstate commerce clause,” said Rep. Deborah Kottel, a Democrat from Great Falls who supports the measure.

That clause in the U.S. Constitution grants Congress authority to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the states. The Supreme Court has handled cases seeking to limit the clause’s application in recent years. In 2005, the court upheld federal authority to regulate marijuana under the clause, even when its use is limited to noncommercial purposes n such as medical reasons n and it is grown and used within a state’s borders.

The Montana bill follows fears here and elsewhere that the election of Barack Obama as president will trigger more gun regulation. In the months before Obama’s inauguration, Montanans rushed to stock up on guns, pushing gun sales beyond normal benchmarks despite the recession.

Opponents of the measure worry lax regulations in the state could lead to a similar surge in both gun sales and gun manufacturing.

“Who are we bringing in and is this the kind of business we want to have in this state?” asked Rep. Sue Malek, D-Missoula. “I want our state to be recognized as a state that cares about people, and that cares about the environment.”

The bill is one of a number the Legislature is considering that may extend gun rights in Montana.

Earlier in the week, the House passed another measure, HB228, that would let Montanans carry concealed weapons in city limits without having permits.

On Saturday the House Judiciary Committee narrowly passed a resolution that affirms Montanans’ right to carry weapons in national parks and wildlife refuges.

SOURCE

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Gun Control, Law, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 10 Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »