For North Carolinians

The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission has published their proposed changes to fish, wildlife, and game lands regulations. The comment period is open through February 1, 2018. These comments can by made in writing, by email, or by attending one of the nine public meetings held across the state beginning in January 2018.

Links to the changes and to the meeting schedule are embedded in the release below:

Public
Comment Period Regarding Proposed Regulations Open through Feb. 1,
2018 
Public comment is sought on proposed
changes
 to agency regulations related to wildlife management,
fisheries and game lands for the 2018-19 seasons. The Wildlife
Commission will conduct nine
public hearings
in January across the state to discuss these proposed
regulations changes, including changes to deer
 and bear seasons.
The public is encouraged to
submit comments, opinions and suggestions by Feb. 1, 2018. Comments can be
submitted in-person at one of the hearings, by e-mail, (please include your
name and address) online
 or by
mail (Rule-making Coordinator, 1701 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC
27699-1701).

Today’s The Day

Today is the day that national concealed carry reciprocity finally comes to the floor of the House of Representatives. We have been promised it since last year’s Presidential campaign. It should have come up in March or April but the House Republican leadership seems to have been dragging their feet on this.

We have seen reciprocity pass the House before only to die in the Senate. HR 822 passed the House by a strong majority (272-154) back in November 2011. As much as some are upset about the pairing of carry reciprocity with the Fix NICS Act, that plus the number of red state Democrats up for re-election in the Senate may be the thing that gets it passed. The main thing in the Senate is not only to get it passed but to get it passed without amendments that would either cripple reciprocity or would add a virtual assault weapons ban to the bill. I could see Sen. Dianne Feinstein trying to do both of those things.

In the meantime, here is the schedule for today as put out by the House Majority Leader’s Office.

H.R. 38 – Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017, Rules Committee Print (Closed Rule, One Hour of Debate) (Sponsored by Rep. Richard Hudson / Judiciary Committee)
Postponed Suspension Votes:
1) S. 1266 – Enhancing Veteran Care Act (Sponsored by Sen. James M. Inhofe / Veterans Affairs Committee)
2) H.Con.Res. 90 – Condemning ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya and calling for an end to the attacks in and an immediate restoration of humanitarian access to the state of Rakhine in Burma, as amended (Sponsored by Rep. Joseph Crowley / Foreign Affairs Committee)
Special Order Speeches

The House will first have to vote on House Resolution 645 which contains the rule for consideration of HR 38. The Rules Committee provided this summary of the rule:

Rule Information

COMMITTEE ACTION:
REPORTED BY RECORD VOTE of 8-3 on Tuesday, December 5, 2017.
FLOOR ACTION ON H. RES. 645: 
MANAGERS: Collins/Hastings
1. Closed rule.
2. Provides one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary.
3. Waives all points of order against consideration of the bill.
4. Provides that an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 115-45 shall be considered as adopted and the bill, as amended, shall be considered as read.
5. Waives all points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended.
6. Provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

The bottom line is that today is the day to light up the phones to Capitol Hill and district offices. You can be damn sure the gun prohibitionists are doing it and thanks to Giffords you know what they are going to say.

Too Slick By Half

The (anti-gun) cult of personality known as Giffords has produced a Concealed Carry Reciprocity Toolkit for all their uninformed followers. It provides talking points, phone scripts, email templates, pre-written tweets, ready-to-use graphics, and loaded (pun intended) town hall questions.

Here are some of their talking points:

TALKING POINTS

  • This bill would make it legal for dangerous and untrained people to carry loaded, hidden guns in more public places. If this bill passes, people who are prohibited from getting a concealed carry permit in a state with strong gun laws will be allowed to apply for a permit in a state with weaker laws. This includes convicted stalkers, domestic abusers, people convicted of violent crimes, and people with no training or experience firing a gun.

  • This bill fails to create a national standard for who should be allowed to carry a concealed weapon and undermines states rights by forcing states with strong concealed carry laws to honor permits from states with weak or non-existent concealed carry laws. Right now, states have the right to choose which states’ concealed carry permits they recognize, which is important because the requirement to carry hidden, loaded guns in public vary drastically from state to state. If this bill passes, that will no longer be the case.
  • Concealed carry reciprocity will make it nearly impossible for law enforcement officers to quickly and easily verify that people carrying a hidden, loaded weapon are doing so legally. Nearly every major law enforcement association OPPOSES this bill because of its disastrous consequences for public safety.
  • Concealed carry reciprocity will threaten the safety of victims of domestic violence, dating violence and stalking by enabling domestic violence offenders to follow their victims across state lines with loaded, concealed firearms. Preliminary data from the National Domestic Violence Hotline shows that 23% of victims reported that their abuser crossed state lines in an attempt to further assault their victims.
  • Weakening gun laws will increase violent crime in our communities. Recent research found that violent crime increased in states that loosened concealed carry laws, with 10% more murders and up to 14% more violent crime.

You can examine the entire document here.

What I think this illustrates is just how much of a top-down, Astro-turf organization that the group formerly known as Americans for Responsible Solutions really is. This was obviously created for them by public relations and media professionals. It assumes that the Know Nothings who feel that “something has to be done” are too uninformed to write their own letters or say something more than “I’m against this” when calling Congressional offices.

I find it highly ironic that a group so closely associated with the Democrats would go full “states’ rights” in their opposition to carry reciprocity. While it is now the rallying cry of the progressives on this issue, it was the rallying cry for racist Democrats in the 1950s and 60s in their opposition to integration and civil rights.

Happy Repeal Day!

Amendment 21

(Ratified December 5, 1933)

Control of Liquor Returned to the States

  1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
  2. The transportation or importation into any state, territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.
  3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several states, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the states by the Congress.

Prohibition of “intoxicating liquors” as embodied in the 18th Amendment was repealed 84 years ago today. To slightly paraphrase President Gerald Ford who was speaking on an entirely different matter, “My fellow Americans, our long national nightmare was over”.

We in the gun rights community should be especially happy to celebrate Repeal Day even if one is a teetotaler. The reason is that this period of time led to the rise of organized crime and its attendant violence. We are still living with the fallout from that area as we still have to pay a $200 tax for each and every suppressor, SBR, SBS, full-auto firearm (made before May 19, 1986), etc. that we want to buy and register. Without Prohibition and the attempted assassination of FDR, we probably wouldn’t have had this gun control monstrosity imposed upon us.

So tonight I plan to raise my glass to Sen. John Blaine of Wisconsin who introduced the resolution calling for the 21st Amendment.

Proposed Amendments To HR 38 That The Rules Committee Must Take Up

The House Rules Committee was scheduled to start their hearings on the rule for HR 38 which now combines the original HR 38 plus HR 4477 or the Fix NICS Act. Amendments for consideration have begun to pile up. Most are from Democrats who want to gut the bill with a few from Republicans who either want to clarify some aspects or who want to decouple the two bills.

In my opinion, the “bipartisan” amendment from Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA) and Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-FL) is the most dangerous as it would graft their so-called anti-bump stock bill which really is any modification on to HR 38.


As of 2:25PM EST:

Amendments (click headers to sort)

# Version # Sponsor(s) Party Summary Status
1 Version 1 Titus (NV) Democrat Strikes Title I of H.R. 38. Submitted
2 Version 1 Thompson, Mike (CA), Demings (FL) Democrat SUBSTITUTE Invests in the NICS system and expand background checks to all commercial sales. Submitted
3 Version 1 Thompson, Mike (CA) Democrat Establishes a select committee on gun violence. Submitted
4 Version 1 Norton (DC) Democrat Prohibits Title I (Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017) from taking effect until the law banning guns in U.S. Capitol buildings and grounds is repealed. Submitted
5 Version 1 Lofgren (CA) Democrat Prevents forum shopping by limiting concealed carry reciprocity to those who have a permit from their state of residence. Submitted
6 Version 1 Deutch (FL) Democrat Prohibits a person from carrying a concealed firearm across state lines if they have been convicted in the past 5 years of cruelty to animals. Submitted
7 Version 1 Deutch (FL) Democrat Preserves a State or local governments right to restrict concealed weapons on private property. Submitted
8 Version 1 Bacon (NE) Republican Extends the renewal of concealed carry permits under LEOSA from every year to every 3 years. Submitted
9 Version 1 Raskin (MD) Democrat Permits law enforcement officers to conduct reasonable investigations to verify with the issuing State that an individual producing a concealed carry permit/license is eligible to carry such a firearm. Precludes the payment of attorney fees if an individual is convicted of a crime in the same proceeding in which this Act is successfully used as an affirmative defense. Submitted
10 Version 1 Raskin (MD) Democrat Provides that concealed carry reciprocity will not be permitted between states unless the reciprocating state issues a joint certification from the Attorney General, head of the State police, and Secretary of State that the laws of both states involved are substantially similar. Precludes reciprocity in states with no restrictions on concealed carry to similarly situated states. Submitted
11 Version 1 Raskin (MD) Democrat Provides that concealed carry reciprocity will not be permitted between states unless the issuing state provides a means of permit/license verification on a 24-hour basis, conducts reverification checks at least biannually, and has the authority to revoke permits/licenses if ineligibility is determined. It also creates a GAO study regarding firearms crimes committed by concealed carry permit holders. Submitted
12 Version 1 Raskin (MD), Norton (DC) Democrat Precludes application of this Act in the District of Columbia. Submitted
13 Version 1 Nadler (NY) Democrat States that a person who has been convicted of a violent crime within the preceding three years may not possess or carry a concealed handgun under this section in a State that by law prohibits a person from doing so on the basis of a conviction for such offense. Submitted
14 Version 1 Schneider (IL) Democrat Prohibits a person who has been convicted of two (2) or more offenses related to driving under the influence of alcohol or controlled substances within the preceding five (5) years from possessing or carrying a concealed handgun in a State that by law prohibits a person from doing so on the basis of such convictions. Submitted
15 Version 1 McKinley (WV) Republican Clarifies that complete records submitted by State authorities reporting to NICS shall include disposition records. Submitted
16 Version 1 Moulton (MA), Curbelo (FL) Bi-Partisan Bans the manufacture, possession, or transfer of any part or combination of parts that is designed and functions to increase the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle (i.e. bump stocks and similarly functioning devices of different names). Submitted
17 Version 1 Jackson Lee (TX) Democrat Takes an affirmative step towards addressing public safety threats posed by gun violence when perpetrated by former military personnel with convictions through accountability of the Department of Defense. Submitted
18 Version 1 Jackson Lee (TX) Democrat Prohibits any person convicted of a hate crime, as defined under section 249 or any substantially similar offense under the law of any State, from carrying under this bill. Submitted
19 Version 1 Jackson Lee (TX) Democrat Provides that States not be required to allow an individual to carry where such person is convicted of an offense of domestic violence or stalking as defined under the law of a State or Indian tribe, or as defined under the Violence Against Women Act. Submitted
20 Version 1 Demings (FL) Democrat Strikes the provision that would allow persons from other states to carry concealed weapons in school zones. Submitted
21 Version 1 Demings (FL) Democrat Strikes the new private right to sue a law enforcement officer in that officer’s individual capacity for any alleged violation, and to allow judges discretion in determining whether to award attorney’s fees to a prevailing party. Submitted
22 Version 1 Kildee (MI) Democrat Eliminates the study on crimes committed using bumps stocks and inserts a provision mandating that bump stocks be treated like machine guns and silencers under the National Fire Arms Act. Submitted
23 Version 1 King, Steve (IA) Republican Ensures that Members of Congress are afforded the greatest latitude regarding interstate concealed carry, commensurate with that of Federal Judges under this legislation. Submitted
24 Version 1 King, Steve (IA) Republican Ensures that Judges are treated the same as all other law-abiding citizens regarding interstate concealed carry. Submitted
25 Version 1 Biggs (AZ), King, Steve (IA) Republican Strikes Title II, the Fix NICS Act, from the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017. Submitted

UPDATE: The hearings are being carried on YouTube Live.

CMP Issues Info On The Purchase Of The Surplus 1911s

Late last night, Mark Johnson, Chief Operating Officer of the Civilian Marksmanship Program, sent out an email with info on how the CMP was planning to handle sales of the approximately 10,000 1911s they will (or should) be receiving from the Department of the Army. As I’ve mentioned before, I hold a 03 Curios and Relics FFL. I responded immediately to Mr. Johnson questioning why 03 FFLs could not be the recipient of the firearm. I also posted his first draft to a mailing list for C&R FFLs.

You will note below the added verbiage saying that 03 FFLs cannot perform a NICS check on the recipient. In a note I received back from Mr. Johnson, he said, “An 03 FFL can’t perform the in person background check on the recipient end. BATF and the Army prefer the second background check and shipment to the 01 FFL.”

Pardoning me for being a little blunt but Mr. Johnson’s response is utter bullshit. There is no need for a 03 FFL to perform a NICS check on themselves. They are LICENSED by the freaking BATFE to begin with. Even the original NICS check run by the CMP is superfluous. If this surplus 1911 was coming from anywhere else but the CMP, the seller would, after the receipt of a signed copy of my C&R FFL, ship that pistol directly to my door.

Frankly, there is only one of these 1911s I want. It has the serial number 1910270 and was issued to my Dad on his second tour of duty in South Vietnam.

If you hold a 03 FFL and would like to send a note to Mr. Johnson, his email is coo@thecmp.org

Below is how the CMP plans to conduct these sales:

To all CMP constituents:
 
The CMP Board of Directors has discussed at length how the sales of
1911s would be handled, if the CMP were to ever receive them from the
United States Army.
 
Some preliminary decisions further clarified:
  1. Decisions concerning the grade and pricing of the 1911s will not
    be made until inspection has occurred of a substantial quantity which
    will take an estimated 150 days post receipt.
  2. All laws pertaining to the sale of 1911s by CMP will be strictly obeyed.
  3. Potential
    purchasers will have to provide to CMP a new set of documents
    exhibiting:  1) proof of U.S. Citizenship, 2) proof of membership in a
    CMP affiliated club, 3) proof of participation in a marksmanship
    activity, 4) a new form 2A with notary, 5) a signed copy of the 01
    Federal Firearms License in which the 1911 will be transferred to. 
  4. A
    NICS background check will be performed by CMP on the customer to
    assure the customer is eligible to purchase prior to shipment to the FFL
    licensed dealer. The customer must receive a “proceed” from NICS prior
    to shipment of the pistol to the FFL licensed dealer.
  5. The
    CMP customer will be required to complete a form 4473 in person at the
    FFL dealers place of business, successfully passing a NICS check
    performed by the FFL holder, before the pistol can be transferred.  This
    is a second NICS check performed on the customer.
  6. Qualified CMP customer will only be allowed to purchase one 1911 per calendar year.
  7. No 1911s available in the CMP stores, or on line, only mail order sales.
  8. CMP will set the date in which it will accept orders for the 1911s. The date will be posted to the world.
  9. Orders will only be accepted via mail order delivery.
  10. Orders will only be accepted post marked on the date or after, no early orders.
  11. Once CMP receives 10,000 orders, customer names will be loaded into the Random Number Generator.
  12. The Random Number Generator will provide a list of names in sequence order through a random picking process to CMP. 
  13. Customers will be contacted in the sequence provided by the Random Number Generator.
  14. When
    the customer is contacted a list of 1911 grades and pricing options
    that are available will be offered for selection of one.
  15. As CMP proceeds down the sequenced list less grade and pricing options will be available. Again, this done completely random.
 
Note: 1911 type pistols purchased from CMP cannot
be transferred to 03 FFL (curio and relic) license.  BATF and the United
States Army prefer the second background check be performed by a “store
front” FFL dealer.  Each customer purchasing a 1911 type pistol from
CMP will be subjected to two NICS background checks, one performed by
CMP and the other performed by the FFL dealer the pistol is being
shipped to.
 

Mark Johnson
Chief Operating Officer
Civilian Marksmanship Program

HR 38 Is Moving To A Floor Vote

The House Rules Committee will issue a rule for HR 38 – Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 – on Tuesday, December 5th. This news was announced on Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk Radio show by Rep. Richard Hudson (R-NC) on Sunday.

It is expected that the bill will come before the House for debate and a vote starting on Wednesday.

However, as predicted by Rep. Tom Massie (R-KY) the Fixed NICS bill has been merged with concealed carry reciprocity. It is now Title II of HR 38. Massie goes on to say that when the bill hits the Senate, carry reciprocity will be dropped and only the Fix NICS portion approved. Then given different bills have passed the House and Senate it will go to a conference committee who will only report out the Fix NICS portion of the bill. Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV) has offered an amendment to the bill being considered in the Rules Committee that would drop the carry portion of the bill.

It should be noted that Massie, despite being chairman of the Second Amendment Caucus, has opposed HR 38 from the start according to Dave Cole who is both a constituent of Massie and a blogger at Black Man with a Gun.

I think it was to be expected that that bills would be combined in that they both dealt with guns and both came out of the House Judiciary Committee at the same time. The NSSF is supporting both parts of the bill including the Fix NICS portion.

HR 4477 – Fix NICS – as it passed the House Judiciary Committee includes a provision to require the Attorney General to provide a report on how often bump stocks had been used in crimes. This would be part of the combined bill. That said, I think the actual instances of a bump stock equipped carbine or rifle being used in a crime will be very few.

California Sued Over New AWB Regulations

A coalition of gun rights organizations plus three individual plaintiffs have sued California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and the California Department of Justice over newly adopted regulations concerning the assault weapons ban on bullet buttons. The suit was filed in California Superior Court for the County of Riverside.

The CalGuns Foundation has this summary of the case:

Summary: Holt, et al. v. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra is a constitutional, statutory, and Administrative Procedure Act (APA) challenge to the DOJ’s “bullet-button assault weapon” regulations. The DOJ’s regulations expose people to criminal liability that would not otherwise exist under the actual laws regulating firearms in California.
Individual Plaintiffs/Petitioners: George Holt, Irvin Hoff, Michael Louie, and Rick Russell are all law-abiding, tax-paying residents of California who lawfully own firearms potentially subject to the DOJ’s illegal regulatory scheme. 
Institutional Plaintiffs/Petitioners: Firearms Policy Coalition; Firearms Policy FoundationThe Calguns FoundationSecond Amendment Foundation
Defendants: Xavier Becerra, Attorney General of California; Stephen J. Lindley, Chief of the Department of Justice Bureau of Firearms; the California Department of Justice; Debra N. Cornez, Director of the Office of Administrative Law; Betty T. Yee, California State Controller; Does 1-50,
Litigation Counsel: George M. Lee; Douglas A. Applegate; Raymond M. DiGuiseppe

The complaint can be found here.

The institutional plaintiffs – SAF, CalGuns Foundation, Firearms Policy Coalition, and Firearms Policy Foundation – released a joint statement on the lawsuit.

Gun Owners & Civil Rights Groups File Legal Challenge to California’s “Assault Weapon” Regulations

The lawsuit argues that the State’s “bullet-button assault weapon” regulations are largely unlawful, should have been subject to the Administrative Procedure Act process, waste taxpayer dollars, and should not be allowed to stand.

SACRAMENTO, CA (November 30, 2017) — Today, attorneys for four individual gun owners as well as advocacy organizations The Calguns Foundation (CGF), Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), and Firearms Policy Foundation (FPF) filed a new lawsuit and petition for writ of mandate that challenges more than a dozen new “assault weapon” regulations ramrodded into effect by the State of California’s Department of Justice (DOJ).

Named as defendants are California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, Chief of the DOJ Bureau of Firearms Stephen Lindley, the California Department of Justice itself, Director of the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) Debra Cornez, and State Controller Betty Yee.

Plaintiffs’ attorney George M. Lee said that the lawsuit was focused on protecting law-abiding people from illegal regulatory and enforcement actions.

“By making and enforcing unlawful rules, and going around the rules to do it, the DOJ is putting tens if not hundreds of thousands of law-abiding people at risk of serious criminal liability,” said Lee. “This case seeks to make the DOJ follow the same laws they impose on others and protect law-abiding gun owners in the process.”

“The DOJ is acting like an out-of-control bullet train that’s running off the rails,” said plaintiffs’ attorney and former Deputy Attorney General Raymond DiGuiseppe. “Our plaintiffs want to get the State’s agencies back on the tracks and following the law.”

CGF Chairman Gene Hoffman notes, “The DOJ has used every trick in the book to avoid good faith rulemaking action, and we cannot allow that to go unchallenged. California laws are bad enough without piling on unlawful and harmful regulations, so we seek here to restore the rule of law—and some sanity.”

“The government agencies responsible for enforcing the law must also follow the law,” SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb said. “This case is an important step in protecting law-abiding gun owners from an out-of-control regulatory state.”

“The DOJ is playing a dangerous game with the law, and it needs to stop,” observed FPF Vice President Jonathan Jensen. “Tens of thousands of people could face potential felonies in just a handful of months, and meanwhile the DOJ has moved the goalposts with the registration clock ticking.”

“The State of California is nothing short of bipolar with its gun control policies,” commented FPC President Brandon Combs. “On one hand, the State is requiring people to register virtually all of their guns. On the other hand, the DOJ is doing everything it can to suppress compliance and prevent people from registering their guns.”

A copy of the complaint and petition for writ of mandate can be viewed or downloaded at http://bit.ly/holt-v-becerra.

CASE BACKGROUND:

Last July, California Governor Jerry Brown signed a number of new gun control bills into law, including two (SB 880, Hall; AB 1135, Levine) expanding the State’s ban on so-called “assault weapons.”

“The Legislature ignored every rule in the book to fast-track their civilian disarmament agenda and herd the people into a state-wide gun-free-zone,” said FPC Spokesperson Craig DeLuz in a statement at the time.

Following that, last December, the California DOJ submitted its first attempt at “assault weapons” regulations under the OAL’s “File & Print” process, which means that the DOJ claimed the regulations were not subject to the public notice or comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

However, DOJ withdrew the regulations near the end of OAL review period after receiving thousands of opposition letters from FPC members and Second Amendment supporters.

Then, in May of this year, the DOJ re-submitted regulations under the same “File & Print” process. FPC, FPF, CGF, and Craig DeLuz sued the DOJ over the Department’s actions of blocking access to public records concerning its promulgation of these regulations. The regulations were completely rejected by OAL a little more than a month later.

Following that, the DOJ submitted a virtually-identical set of regulations under the “File & Print” process, again claiming “APA-exempt” status. The OAL approved those regulations in July, allowing the DOJ to go forward with its new “assault weapon” regulatory process.

Then, just before closing doors for the Thanksgiving holiday, the DOJ notified FPC and other Institutional Plaintiffs that it had filed yet another proposed rulemaking on “bullet-button assault weapons” (that would create new 11 CCR § 5460) for the purpose of bootstrapping its prior July regulations into effect for all purposes including criminal prosecutions.

FPC published the new proposed regulations and prior regulatory updates at BulletButtonBan.com, a Web site it established in 2016 for tracking the new California assault weapon laws and regulations. Members of the public can use FPC’s Grassroots Action Tools to submit responsive written comments to DOJ regarding the new proposed regulations.

A public hearing on the new regulations is scheduled for 10 a.m. on January 8, 2018, at the Resources Building Auditorium in Sacramento.

ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL PLAINTIFFS:

Plaintiffs George Holt, Irvin Hoff, Michael Louie, and Rick Russell are all law-abiding, tax-paying residents of California who lawfully own firearms potentially subject to the DOJ’s illegal regulatory scheme. This scheme would retroactively deem their firearms “assault weapons” that either must now be registered as such through a burdensome and wasteful registration process or that cannot be registered all, effectively rendering any continued possession unlawful. The DOJ’s regulations expose them to criminal liability that would not otherwise exist under the actual laws regulating firearms in California.

The plaintiffs have joined this lawsuit to stand against the illegal regulatory actions of the DOJ and protect their rights and the rights of countless other law-abiding California gun owners being placed in jeopardy.

ABOUT THE ORGANIZATIONS:

The Calguns Foundation (www.calgunsfoundation.org) is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization that serves its members, supporters, and the public through educational, cultural, and judicial efforts to advance Second Amendment and related civil rights.

Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

Firearms Policy Coalition (www.firearmspolicy.org) is a 501(c)4 grassroots nonprofit organization. FPC’s mission is to defend the Constitution of the United States, especially the fundamental, individual Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, through advocacy, legal action, education, and outreach.

Firearms Policy Foundation (www.firearmsfoundation.org) is a 501(c)3 grassroots nonprofit organization. FPF’s mission is to defend the Constitution of the United States and the People’s rights, privileges and immunities deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition, especially the inalienable, fundamental, and individual right to keep and bear arms.