Uncategorized

Uncategorized

Headline Of The Day

August 8, 2014 by 1 Comment



The Washington Post had a fawning story on Ernst Mauch and his Armatrix iP1 on Wednesday. Pretty much it said if it wasn’t for those damn Second Amendment types we’d have “safer” (sic) guns.

In his post about this story, Mike Vanderboegh. never one to mince words, had this wonderful headline:

From the land of great ideas and engineering (You know, the folks who brought us Zyklon B). When some German starts talking about how Americans “must” do something, I get nervous.

To refresh your memory, Zyklon B. was a cyanide-based pesticide developed by German chemical conglomerate IG Farben in the 1920s. It was used with ruthless efficiency in the 1940s to kill about 1.2 million “enemies of the Reich” at  the Auschwitz and Majdanek death camps.

Uncategorized

Help Stop New Jersey’s War On Women

August 7, 2014 by

When a prosecutor seeks a minimum five year sentence on an otherwise law-abiding mother who makes an innocent mistake yet allows a NFL star who brutally knocked his then fiance’ unconscious off with deferred prosecution, that is a war on women.

And it disgusts me and many others.

I spoke with Frank Fiamingo of the New Jersey Second Amendment Society yesterday and he is equally disgusted. He, however, has a plan to start bringing pressure to bear on the politicians who are responsible. As Frank said last night, Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ) is responsible for what happens to Shaneen Allen and he needs to hear from you. Given his presidential aspirations, it doesn’t matter a bit if you don’t live in the Garden State.

Details of the NJ2AS plan is below along with contact information for the politicians involved.

The New Jersey Second Amendment Society (NJ2AS) is launching a Nationwide effort to save Ms. Allen from a minimum 5-year prison sentence – NOT for committing a crime with a gun, but merely for crossing the border from Pennsylvania into New Jersey with her legally owned gun. She mistakenly thought her PA carry permit was valid in NJ (as it SHOULD be). She made a mistake. She didn’t commit a “gun crime”.


We are contacting Americans all across the country, as well as Second Amendment and Liberty oriented groups and asking them to contact the following individuals to express their objection to her mistreatment:


James P. McLain
Atlantic County Prosecutor’s Office
4997 Unami Boulevard
Mays Landing, New Jersey 08330
(609) 909-7800
www.acpo.org


Governor Christopher Christie
Office of the Governor
PO Box 001
Trenton, NJ 08625
609-292-6000
www://www.state.nj.us/governor/contact


New Jersey Attorney General
John Hoffman
Richard J. Hughes Justice Complex
25 Market Street
P.O. Box 080
Trenton, NJ 08625
(609) 292-8740
www.state.nj.us/lps/


You may also send email to:
citizens.services@lps.state.nj.us


This is extremely URGENT! This young mother is being railroaded into prison by an ambitious prosecutor without a conscience.


Here is your chance to help a young mother and save her family from a grave injustice. PLEASE HELP!


For more information:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/08/05/judge-denies-motion-to-dismiss-case-against-philly-mom-arrested-for-legal-gun/

Please make the calls and emails. One reminder – be polite.

Uncategorized

Something To Start Your Day With A Smile

August 7, 2014 by 1 Comment

I got this yesterday from Brandon Combs of the Firearms Policy Coalition. You can use it any time you are listening to the news or reading a news release from the gun prohibitionists.  I know I heard at least one or two of these watching the 11 pm news last night when WLOS was describing the raffle being held by the local Tea Party organization.

Share it with your friends and make up your own prizes.

Uncategorized

Gun Rights Amendment Passes In Missouri

August 6, 2014 by 6 Comments

Amendment Five which would make the right to keep and bear arms “unalienable” in the state of Missouri was adopted by a two to one margin yesterday. It was one of a handful of constitutional amendments on the ballot in Missouri during yesterday’s primary election. Other amendments considered dealt with a transportation tax, a guaranteed right to farming, electronic privacy, and a veterans lottery ticket to fund veterans’ services.

Amendment Five which will become Section 23, Article I of the Missouri Constitution does a number of things. First, it extended the right to keep and bear arms to include ammunition and accessories. Second, and in my opinion the most important part of this amendment, it subjects any restriction on the right to keep and bear arms to strict scrutiny. Third, it obligates the government of the state of Missouri to uphold these rights and not to decline to protect them from infringement. Finally, it makes clear that this amendment does not prevent the legislature from restricting the rights of convicted violent felons and those adjudicated mentally ill.

Amendment Five also removed that portion of the previous Section 23 that said the right to keep and bear arms “shall not justify the wearing of concealed weapons.”

If one listened to the opponents of Amendment Five, it was going to lead to blood in the streets and a bankrupt government. Particularly amusing were the cost figures submitted by former state budget official Mark Reading whose work was funded by Everytown for Gun Safety.

Reading projected the proposal could cost state and local governments $244 million, including $115 million for additional security at state-owned buildings and $54 million for school police officers to protect people from an assumed increase in gun violence. He also projected a $71 million loss in state and local tax revenues if tourists boycott Missouri because of its pro-gun constitution.

These numbers were rightly deemed “ridiculous” by Deputy State Auditor Harry Otto. I just don’t imagine a lot of residents of the Bay Area or New York City are traveling to St. Louis to see the Arch and partake in riverboat gambling.

The final vote in favor of Amendment Five was 602,076 (61%) with 385,422 (31%) opposed.

Uncategorized

Some Good Advice For Women Who Carry

August 4, 2014 by 5 Comments

Let’s face it – men have it easier when it comes to concealed carry. Our clothing is usually made of heavier fabrics which print less, we can wear sturdier belts even when “dressed up”, and our shoes rarely (never) have 3 inch or higher heels. Women, by contrast, have it harder especially when it comes to on-body carry which is the preferred way to do it.

That’s why I found this tips and tricks video from the NRA so good. It addresses the difficulties that women have with on-body carry and suggests some good solutions. Tatiana Whitlock makes a lot of sensible suggestions with regard to practice. I don’t have to think about shooting in heels in a confrontation but some women might.

Uncategorized

Florida Carry Plans Appeal

July 31, 2014 by 2 Comments

Florida Carry has been active in holding state universities in Florida to the letter and spirit of the law regarding weapons restrictions on campus. Florida has state preemption on firearms issues but many municipalities and other governmental units want to go their own way. This would include the University of Florida in Gainesville. As a result, Florida Carry is suing them in state court. Unfortunately, a circuit court judge (and loyal alumnus) ignored a higher court ruling and granted summary judgment to the University of Florida. Florida Carry will be appealing to the 1st District Court of Appeals where they won an earlier case against the University of North Florida.


From Florida Carry:

Florida Carry case against University of Florida gun ban regulations moving to the First District Court of Appeal

On January 10th, 2014 Florida Carry, Inc. filed a lawsuit against the University Florida (UF),
seeking a permanent injunction to protect the rights of students,
faculty, and the public from the university’s illegal and
unconstitutional regulations prohibiting or severely restricting
firearms and weapons on all university property including in student’s
personal vehicles and in university managed housing.

Since 1987
the Florida Legislature has preempted firearms law and issued state-wide
licenses to carry concealed for self-defense. In December Florida
Carry won a similar case against the University of North Florida (UNF).
In Florida Carry v. UNF
the First District Court of Appeal ruled that “The legislature’s
primacy in firearms regulation derives directly from the Florida
Constitution… Indeed, the legislature has reserved for itself the
whole field of firearms regulation in section 790.33(1)…” No public
college or university has any authority to prevent students and the
public from having a functional firearm in places that are
constitutionally protected or permitted under state law.

The
University of Florida has failed to comply with the court’s ruling by
doing nothing more than adding an “Intent” footnote to only one of its
illegal policies.

In 2008 the United States Supreme Court ruled
that the right to keeps arms in the home is at the very core of the
Second Amendment.

Today, (Wednesday July 30th, 2014) Circuit Court Judge Toby S. Monaco granted motions to dismiss and for summary judgement in favor of his alma mater and granted sovereign immunity to UF President Manchen.
The lower court Judge ignored the plain language of multiple Florida
firearms laws, multiple binding court cases from Florida and the US
Supreme Court, turned to blind eye to university policies that are
promulgated in continued violation, and refused to conduct any analysis
of the right to keep and bear arms.

This is the same failure to
follow the law and protect the fundamental right to keep and bear arms
that we saw from another lower court in our case against the University
of North Florida. Prior to winning the landmark Florida Carry v. UNF
case that secured the right of students to store firearms in their cars
parked on campus in the First District Court of Appeals late last year,
another Florida Circuit Court Judge entered a similarly poorly reasoned
decision.

“It’s disappointing but this type of ruling is exactly what we have come to expect from far too many intellectually dishonest lower court judges at this phase of any Second Amendment case.” said Florida Carry Executive Director Sean Caranna “Once again, we’ll appeal to the First DCA… and once again, we’ll win.”

Uncategorized

Boat Ramp Buzzards?

July 31, 2014 by 2 Comments

When I first saw the release below from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, I thought that by “boat ramp buzzards”, they meant thieves or vandals breaking into cars. I was surprised to find out that the NCWRC meant exactly what the headline indicated – buzzards of the avian variety. Specifically, they mean turkey buzzards in the Piedmont of NC and black buzzards further east in the state.

It seems that the buzzards know a good place to find food when they see it and are hanging out at boat ramps for easy pickings. Unfortunately, they have been both damaging cars and pooping everywhere. Given that they are Federally-protected as raptors, you can’t shoot or otherwise harm them. Thus, you just have to make boat ramps unattractive to them.

From the NCWRC:

RALEIGH, NC- The N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission is requesting public assistance in a battle against boat ramp buzzards.

Buzzards, which are also known as vultures, have damaged cars, trucks and boat trailers at some Piedmont boating access areas. Damage and nuisance issues created by boat ramp buzzards include scratches on vehicle hoods and roofs, exterior moldings pulled apart and windshield wipers torn away, as well as large amounts of droppings.

To scare vultures away from boat ramps, Wildlife Commission staff is using visual and audial deterrents, including pyrotechnics and replicas of dead vultures.

The Commission requests the public assist in the effort to reduce vulture visitation by keeping access areas clean and removing trash and food remnants. Anglers should not leave behind fish guts, unused bait and fish carcasses, including in the nearby waterway.

Many boaters are covering vehicles with tarps or covers to prevent damage. Others are using alternate public boating access areas to reach the same waterway.

Vultures are scavengers, but they also are federally protected birds of prey. Two species are found in North Carolina – the turkey vulture, common in the mountains and Piedmont, and the black vulture, more common in the eastern region.

H/T The Outdoor Wire

Uncategorized

Judgment Stayed For 90 Days

July 29, 2014 by 2 Comments

As pretty much expected, Judge Frederick Scullin, Jr. granted the District of Columbia a stay of his decision finding DC’s ban on the possession of firearms outside the home as unconstitutional. However, the District only got 90 days or until October 22nd.

The plaintiffs had indicated that they would agree to a 90-day stay if the City Council would enact remedial legislation within that time that was consistent with Constitutional standards.

The plaintiffs have until Monday, August 4th, to file a motion in opposition to the stay and the defendants then have until the following Monday to file their reply in support of a 180-day stay pending appeal.

In a footnote to the order, Judge Scullin asserted that he saw no need to clarify his decision noting that the injunction “clearly applied only to handguns and not any other type of deadly dangerous weapon.” DC’s Attorney General had tried to assert the original ruling was broader than “scope of the gun owners’ lawsuit and that it appeared to apply to restrictions on the carrying of all deadly weapons and not just handguns.”

I agree with Bitter that there is no reason the DC City Council cannot enact a workable carry law within 90 days. As she notes, the DC police proved that they could come with something on the fly. 

As to an appeal of the decision, my gut still tells me that DC will go for it.

Uncategorized

Chief Lanier’s Memo To Metro Officers (Updated)

July 29, 2014 by 3 Comments

Thanks to the efforts of the National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea, we have the memo that District of Columbia Police Chief Cathy Lanier had sent out to all officers of the Metropolitan Police Department regarding carrying a pistol, either open or concealed, within the District.

UPDATE: David Codrea, the National Gun Rights Examiner, has an updated “official teletype” message from Chief Cathy Lanier that provides further guidance to the officers of the Metropolitan Police Department regarding the lawful carry of firearms outside the home in DC. This message goes into much greater detail than the earlier one issued on Sunday. While the District has officially requested a stay of the decision by Judge Scullin, it has not yet been granted as of early this morning.

Reading through the teletype, it is important to note that it only applies to handguns. The carry of a long gun such as a rifle or shotgun outside the home is still prohibited.

Given the fluidity of the legal situation, I’d be very careful if I were carrying in DC as a non-resident or even as a resident. The motion for the stay could be granted at any time which would probably return things to what they were before the decision. Or to use the full Latin phrase, status quo ante bellum. And yes, it is a war for our rights.

Uncategorized

DC Does As Expected

July 29, 2014 by

In a not unexpected turn of events, the District of Columbia filed a Motion for a Stay Pending Appeal today with the US District Court in the case of Palmer v. District of Columbia. They are asking for an immediate administrative stay, a stay pending appeal, or in the alternative, a stay of 180 days.

The Attorney General of DC and his legal team have communicated with the plaintiffs who would not oppose a 90 day stay if  the city council would enact remedial legislation – that is, a carry law that would cover both residents and non-residents – “that complies with constitutional standards.” Alan Gura has indicated he will be filing a response by next Monday to the District’s Motion.

In their supporting Memorandum of Points, the District points out that the 7th Circuit granted the State of Illinois a 180 day stay which they extended for another 30 days.

In Moore v. Madigan, the Seventh Circuit found that Illinois’ prohibition on the public
carrying of guns, with very few exceptions, violated the Second Amendment. 702 F.2d 933. The
Seventh Circuit, however, ordered its mandate “stayed for 180 days to allow the Illinois
legislature to craft a new gun law that will impose reasonable limitations, consistent with the
public safety and the Second Amendment as interpreted in this opinion, on the carrying of guns
in public.” Id. at 942.1 This Court should do the same.

I would note that there was broad support for a concealed carry bill in Illinois by both downstate Democrats as well as Republican members of the Illinois General Assembly. Such a bill had narrowly been defeated in an earlier session on the requirement for a super-majority. No such broad support exists within the DC City Council and they are likely to make a hash of it.

While I would like to think Judge Scullin would tell the District to go lump it, I fully expect that they will get some sort of stay. I hope I’m wrong.