Second Amendment Foundation

Uncategorized

A Coalition Serves Freedom Of Information Request On Bloomberg

June 27, 2013 by 3 Comments

A coalition consisting of the Second Amendment Foundation, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and Tom Gresham of Gun Talk have served a Freedom of Information Law request on the City of New York to provide all records concerning Mayor Bloomberg’s Illegal Mayors and the use of city funds to support the group. It is an effort to smoke out just how much the citizens of the City of New York are paying for Bloomberg’s pet project.

From the SAF release:

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today has filed a Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request with the City of New York for all records relating to Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns, after newspaper allegations that city resources have been used for MAIG’s gun control efforts.

SAF is being joined in the request by the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and Tom Gresham, host of the nationally-syndicated “Gun Talk.”

“It was bad enough to learn via CBS News that the MAIG website was being hosted on a city-owned server, and administered by city employees,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb, “but it also appears that a special counselor in the mayor’s office was sent to lobby in Nevada on behalf of MAIG’s gun control agenda.”

The New York Post and Politico both published reports that Mayor Bloomberg sent Christopher Kocher to Nevada, and that in an apparent attempt to conceal who he worked for, Kocher “scrubbed his City Hall e-mail address from the state of Nevada lobbying-registration Web site early this month.”

“The public has a right to know what’s been going on between Bloomberg, the city and MAIG,” Gottlieb explained. “Gun control is Bloomberg’s pet peeve, and he’s been pushing an anti-gun agenda since sending so-called private investigators on a sting operation to gun shops all over the country, which got him in trouble with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.”

“There certainly appears to be a serious problem in Bloomberg’s administration,” Gresham added. “Evidently, the mayor and his staff have a gross misunderstanding of how the taxpayers’ money should be spent, and that should not include sending New York employees around the country to lobby for Bloomberg’s pet projects.”

The request was filed by SAF Special Projects Director Philip Watson, for the following information:

1. All electronic records related to Mayors Against Illegal Guns and the website MayorsAgainstIllegalGuns.org, including, but not limited to:


  • a. All electronic files saved on city servers

  • b. All Emails to or from users at the domain MayorsAgainstIllegalGuns.org

  • c. All current and former employees, officials, outside contractors, and volunteers with access to the website MayorsAgainstIllegalGuns.org

  • d. All current and former Email users and usernames that have had access to send or receive Email from @MayorsAgainstIllegalGuns.org


2. Any and all records related to Mayors Against Illegal Guns electronic files, including, but not limited to:


  • a. Emails

  • b. Any written documents

  • c. Any records describing processes for cooperation with this group

  • d. Any records describing how received communications with this group are processed

  • e. All employee pay or overtime related to cooperation or time spent with this group

  • f. Official names, titles, and contact information of all employees, officials, outside contractors, and volunteers involved with domain hosting, creation, maintenance, and communication for MayorsAgainstIllegalGuns.org

  • g. All costs incurred by the City of New York for creation, maintenance, domain hosting, and communication for MayorsAgainstIllegalGuns.org


3. Any and all records of communication since January 1, 2002 between any city official, employee, or volunteer and any gun control advocacy organization, including, but not limited to:


  • a. Mayors Against Illegal Guns

  • b. Demand A Plan

  • c. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

  • d. Center for Gun Policy and Research

  • e. Ceasefire

  • f. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence

  • g. Coalition to Stop Gun Violence

  • h. Joyce Foundation

  • i. Violence Policy Center

  • j. Legal Community Against Violence

  • k. Million Mom March

“The man is obsessed,” Gottlieb continued, “and if he’s spent so much as a dime of public money on what amounts to a private crusade, Mayor Bloomberg needs to be held accountable for that.”

Gottlieb has called on New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman to launch a full-scale investigation into the mayor’s potential misuse of public resources for his own private war on gun owners. He renewed that call today.

“If Eric Schneiderman won’t investigate Bloomberg for possible misuse of public funds,” Gottlieb said, “we will. The mayor has been acting increasingly like a self-appointed monarch, but this still the United States, not Bloomberg’s personal fiefdom.”

Given that other states and cities have strong freedom of information laws and given that there are a number of cities with a mayor belonging to MAIG, I think this provides a nice template for a grass roots effort to smoke out the use of public funds to promote gun control efforts. These politicians are like cockroaches and hate to see the light of day shone on their activities.

Uncategorized

CalGuns And SAF Challenge Microstamping Requirement

June 13, 2013 by 1 Comment

The CalGuns Foundation and the Second Amendment Foundation have filed a Second Amended Complaint in their case challenging Califorinia’s Handgun Roster. The amended complaint in Pena et al v. Cid now also challenges the handgun microstamping requirement.

From the CGF release:

CGF Challenges CA Handgun Microstamping Requirement in Federal Civil Rights Lawsuit

SAN CARLOS, CA – The Calguns Foundation announced today that attorneys for it and co-plaintiff Second Amendment Foundation have filed an amended complaint in the federal civil rights case Peña v. Cid that includes a challenge to California’s handgun microstamping regulations.

The plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment will be argued by the court’s deadline in November.

The lawsuit was originally filed in 2009 as a challenge to California’s handgun “Roster” regulations that arbitrarily bans handguns based on a list of “acceptable” handgun models approved by the state. The new filing addresses microstamping, which makes it even harder for Californians to legally purchase a handgun for self defense.

Gene Hoffman, chairman of The Calguns Foundation, said, “California’s attempt to limit the availability of handguns to her citizens is so broad that it makes it impossible to purchase the revolver that the U.S. Supreme Court has specifically ruled had to be registered to Dick Heller, whose case struck down the District of Columbia’s handgun ban and affirmed that the Second Amendment protects an individual civil right.”

“The state cannot dictate that some common arms can’t be bought just as they can’t dictate which versions of religious texts are acceptable,” Hoffman added. “Now that the state requires microstamping, it’s unlikely any new make or model of pistol will be added – making it even clearer that this is an incremental ban on firearms.”

“When the case was originally filed,” SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb recalled, “the state’s microstamping requirement was not active and was not part of the lawsuit. However, because of substantial delays involving the Ninth Circuit’s protracted Nordyke litigation, microstamping is now a significant issue. We’ve had to amend our complaint to address this new effort by California legislators to limit the types of handguns one can legally purchase.”

The amended complaint can be viewed at http://ia700204.us.archive.org/23/items/gov.uscourts.caed.191444/gov.uscourts.caed.191444.53.0.pdf

The May 17, 2013, California Department of Justice Information Bulletin on handgun microstamping regulation enforcement can be viewed at http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/firearms/infobuls/2013-BOF-03.pdf.

More information about the Peña v. Cid lawsuit can be viewed at http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Pena_v_Cid.

Uncategorized

SAF Congratulates NRA On Record Attendance At Annual Meeting

May 8, 2013 by

In a nice gesture, Alan Gottlieb of the Second Amendment Foundation issued a release yesterday congratulating the National Rifle Association on their record turnout in Houston for the Annual Meeting. While I saw Alan at the SAF booth in Houston, I didn’t get a chance to stop and talk.

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today congratulated the National Rifle Association for its record-breaking turnout over the weekend at the 142nd annual meetings in Houston, Tex.

“With a turnout of more than 86,000 members and guests, many of whom became new members, the NRA can be justifiably proud,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb, himself an NRA Life member. “It sends a strong signal to the gun prohibition lobby that America’s firearms owners are more committed than ever to protect their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.”

Gottlieb also offered sincere congratulations to Jim Porter, the newly-elected NRA president, succeeding Gottlieb’s longtime friend David Keene.

“There is no doubt that Jim Porter is devoted to protecting the Second Amendment,” Gottlieb stated. “We offer him our best wishes and hopes for a very successful presidency.”

SAF exhibited at the event and staff was in attendance at the members’ meeting, and Gottlieb noted that Houston made all NRA members feel very welcome.

“Without doubt,” he said, “this was a truly well-organized gathering, and considering the turnout, NRA staff clearly did a monumental job.

“We’re looking forward to late September,” he concluded, “when SAF and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms will be back in Houston for the 27th annual Gun Rights Policy Conference. After this weekend’s remarkable experience, it’s certain that Texans are not only ready to stand and fight to protect their firearms rights, but they will, as always, fight to win.”

Uncategorized

SAF Wins Injunction In Illinois

May 2, 2013 by

The Second Amendment Foundation announced today that they had won a permanent injunction against the Warren County (IL) Housing Authority and their ban on possession of firearms by residents or guests.

This is good news from Illinois.


BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation has won a permanent injunction against the Warren County, Ill. Housing Authority’s ban on the possession of firearms by residents or guests.

The case was filed more than a year ago in U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois, Rock Island Division. Ronald G. Winbigler, a resident of Costello Terrace in Monmouth, is a physically disabled former police officer who wanted to keep a handgun in his residence for personal protection.

SAF filed the lawsuit on his behalf, and they were represented by attorney David Sigale, who noted, “People do not lose their Second Amendment rights just because they are of limited means. It is an indignity to make the waiver of constitutional rights a condition of government-subsidized housing.”

SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb was delighted with the ruling.

“We brought this case because it was unconscionable,” Gottlieb said, “in the wake of our victory in McDonald v. City of Chicago that a public entity in Illinois would engage in this kind of discrimination against a citizen. The WCHA has removed the lease provisions, and agreed that they were unconstitutional.”

In an order signed by District Judge Sara Darrow, plaintiffs are awarded reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. In her ruling, however, she did not make a constitutional declaration, but only recognized that SAF and the WCHA had agreed in that issue.

“Public housing is the last place one would expect to encounter residency provisions that run counter to the Bill of Rights,” Gottlieb said. “We’re delighted that this issue has been resolved to the benefit of Mr. Winbigler and citizens like him.”

Uncategorized

SAF Files Suit In Nebraska … Again

April 2, 2013 by

The Second Amendment Foundation has filed suit against Nebraska officials over the statutory prohibition against carry permits for permanent legal resident aliens. In 2011, the Second Amendment Foundation filed suit against the City of Omaha in Gonzalez v. Omaha over a city ordinance which prohibited permanent legal aliens from being able to register a handgun. In that case, the City of Omaha settled, changed their ordinance, and sent a check to SAF for legal fees.

Substantial case law exists regarding the civil rights of permanent legal aliens. They are a suspect class and any different treatment for them is held to strict scrutiny. Illegal aliens, non-resident aliens, and others such as those on student
or tourist visas are not considered part of a suspect class. There have been cases in Kentucky and South Dakota involving concealed carry for legal aliens and the courts have always found in their favor. I expect it will be no different here.

From the Second Amendment Foundation:

SAF SUES NEBRASKA OVER CARRY PROHIBITION FOR RESIDENT ALIENS

For Immediate Release: 4/1/2013

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today filed a motion for injunctive relief against Nebraska officials over a statutory prohibition that prevents non-citizens legally residing in the state from obtaining a concealed carry permit.

SAF filed the lawsuit on behalf of 68-year-old Carlos Nino De Rivera Lajous, a Mexican citizen who has been legally residing in Lincoln since 1990. SAF is joined in the action by the Nebraska Firearms Owners Association. Defendants in the lawsuit are Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning and David Sankey, superintendent of the Nebraska State Patrol, both in their official capacities.

“Mr. Lajous received a permanent resident visa in 1991, and he has earned three associated degrees from Central Community College in Hastings,” noted SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. “He has certainly established himself as a productive member of his community over the past 22 years.

“Ironically,” Gottlieb continued, “Mr. Lajous is allowed to carry a firearm openly in Nebraska, except for certain locations where doing so is not allowed under state law. He is prohibited from obtaining a concealed carry permit by state statute, thus making open carry his only option for personal protection, and as a result, he is the victim of what might be called a ‘Catch 22’ in state law.

“There is no rationale for a system in which someone can legally carry openly for self-defense, but yet that person cannot obtain a concealed pistol permit because of nationality,” he said. “SAF has challenged similar problems in Washington, New Mexico and Iowa where non-citizen legal residents faced troublesome local gun laws, and when Mr. Lajous’ Nebraska problem came to our attention, we acted.”

The case was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska. Plaintiffs are represented by attorneys David G. Sigale of Glen Ellyn, Ill., and Bernie Glaser of Lincoln.

The complaint for the case of Lajous et al v. Bruning et al can be found here.

Uncategorized

SAF On Win In 7th Circuit

February 23, 2013 by

The refusal of the 7th Circuit to grant Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan an en banc hearing is a win for concealed carry in that state. While the question remains whether Madigan will appeal to the US Supreme Court, in the meantime the Illinois General Assembly has to get to work on a concealed carry law that would pass the court’s muster.

As you can imagine, the Second Amendment Foundation is thrilled with the refusal to grant an en banc hearing.


7TH CIRCUIT LETS POSNER RULING
STAND; HUGE WIN FOR CCW, SAYS SAF

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today won a significant victory for concealed carry when the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals let stand a December ruling by a three-judge panel of the court that forces Illinois to adopt a concealed carry law, thus affirming that the right to bear arms exists outside the home.

The ruling came in Moore v. Madigan, a case filed by SAF. The December opinion that now stands was written by Judge Richard Posner, who gave the Illinois legislature 180 days to “craft a new gun law that will impose reasonable limitations, consistent with the public safety and the Second Amendment…on the carrying of guns in public.” That clock is ticking, noted SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb.

“Illinois lawmakers need to create some kind of licensing system or face the prospect of not having any regulations at all when Judge Posner’s deadline arrives,” Gottlieb said. “They need to act. They can no longer run and hide from this mandate.”

“We were delighted with Judge Posner’s ruling in December,” he continued, “and today’s decision by the entire circuit to allow his ruling to stand is a major victory, and not just for gun owners in Illinois. Judge Posner’s ruling affirmed that the right to keep and bear arms, itself, extends beyond the boundary of one’s front door.”

In December, Judge Posner wrote, “The right to ‘bear’ as distinct from the right to ‘keep’ arms is unlikely to refer to the home. To speak of ‘bearing’ arms within one’s home would at all times have been an awkward usage. A right to bear arms thus implies a right to carry a loaded gun outside the home.”

Judge Posner subsequently added, “To confine the right to be armed to the home is to divorce the Second Amendment from the right of self-defense described in Heller and McDonald.”

“It is now up to the legislature,” Gottlieb said, “to craft a statute that recognizes the right of ordinary citizens to carry outside the home, without a sea of red tape or a requirement to prove any kind of need beyond the cause of personal protection.”

The ruling also affects a similar case filed by the National Rifle Association known as Shepard v. Madigan.

Uncategorized

SAF Says You First

January 11, 2013 by 1 Comment

The Second Amendment Foundation suggested that foes of guns should be the first ones to give up their own guns. That would include the guns of their bodyguards and other security personnel. I know this idea isn’t new but it is good to see a major gun-rights organization adopt this position.

From their release:


BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today challenged the nation’s leading opponents of gun ownership to “lead by example” and give up their own firearms and armed security before expecting the citizens, for whom they work, to surrender their ability to defend themselves.

“It seems clear from the direction the administration is going that it wants to severely restrict the rights of law-abiding gun owners to purchase the firearms of their choice, “said SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb, “and we think they should demonstrate their belief in their own programs by giving up their firearms and security first.

“That would include Joe Biden’s shotguns,” he added, “and the armed security now enjoyed by Senators Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein, and Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi.

“It would especially apply to President Obama,” he continued, “who just signed legislation giving himself Secret Service protection for life, at the expense of taxpayers he wants to disarm.”

Gottlieb said the same principle should apply to anti-gun celebrities who have bodyguards while supporting legislation that would deprive average citizens from owning firearms for personal protection.

“For example,” he noted, “when I appeared with CNN’s Piers Morgan recently, he asserted that nobody needs an AR-15. The other day near Houston, a Texas teenager used an AR-15 to defend himself and his 12-year-old sister from a home invasion by shooting two burglars. Piers can choke on that.”

Gottlieb believes that public figures have no right to suggest gun bans for private citizens unless they first voluntarily give up their personal security.

“These anti-gun politicians were not elected to positions of royalty,” Gottlieb said. “They are citizens, with no more rights than any other citizen. They were elected to serve the public, not treat the public like serfs. If they want us to put our safety at risk, they should drop the pretense and give up their guns and guards before daring to suggest that anyone else do the same.”

Uncategorized

SAF & CCRKBA Propose National Commission On Causes Of Violence

December 19, 2012 by 3 Comments

The Second Amendment Foundation and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms has proposed a national commission to study the causes of violence. Rather than focus solely on the tools, i.e., guns, they are proposing to find the root cause of why you have people go so far off the rails as in Aurora or Newtown. I think this is a much more valuable approach to the tragedy in Newtown than passing more laws that will never stop a madman but might prevent the good people from defending themselves.


BELLEVUE, WA – Two leading national gun rights organizations are calling
for the creation of a national commission to study the causes of
violence in America, and offer possible preventive measures.

The Second Amendment Foundation and Citizens Committee for
the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said that a national dialogue on
violence has already begun in the wake of the Sandy Hook school tragedy,
but that a national commission would be more able to address the
complexity of this dilemma.

“If we don’t identify and get at the root causes of
violence,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan M. Gottlieb of Bellevue,
Washington, “it won’t matter how many guns you ban, you will still have
violence. There were no guns around when Cain slew Abel, and throughout
recorded history, mankind has engaged in considerable violence. Only in
the past two centuries have firearms played a historic significance.”

“Connecticut already has laws regulating firearms and even
modern semi-automatic rifles,” noted SAF President Joseph Tartaro of
Buffalo, New York. “They did not prevent what happened in Newtown, any
more than Norway’s laws, or Germany’s or Russia’s prevented some of the
recent mass murders in those countries.

“If the public policy debate which is sure to follow,”
Tartaro continued, “focuses solely on gun law solutions and ignores all
the other key questions, we will have done a disservice to the memories
of all the victims of such madness in Connecticut, in Colorado, in
Oregon, or anywhere else.”

Both gun rights leaders noted that violence is a problem in the United States, and “we need to solve it.”

“Gun owners are like anyone else,” Gottlieb observed. “We
have families, we have children and grandchildren. We want to keep them
safe. We walk the same streets as any other citizen, and many gun owners
have decided to protect themselves and their families. Our rights as
gun owners should not be sacrificed in the interest of providing the
illusion that ‘something’ is being done.

“Any meaningful discussion on violence,” Gottlieb added,
“would need to include mental health, violent video games, television
shows and films, media malpractice that sensationalizes violence and the
dangerously false sense of security created by so-called ‘gun-free
zones’.”

“If we have a debate,” Tartaro concluded, “let’s make it a broad and meaningful one.”

Uncategorized

SAF On The Win Today In Chicago

December 11, 2012 by 1 Comment

The Second Amendment Foundation released this statement this afternoon concerning their win in the SAF’s case of Moore v. Madigan. As you can imagine, they are very happy.

What isn’t said is that the win in Moore/Shepard now gives them a split on carry between circuits with the 7th coming down on the side of carry while the 2nd Circuit’s ruling on Kachalsky affirmed New York’s Sullivan Law. This is very good as it will make it more likely that the Supreme Court will hear one or another of the Second Amendment carry cases working their way through the courts.

From the SAF’s release:

SAF WINS HUGE VICTORY FOR CARRY IN ILLINOIS

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation has won a huge victory for the right to bear arms outside the home, with a ruling in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals that declares the right to self-defense is “broader than the right to have a gun in one’s home.”

The case of Moore v. Madigan, with Judge Richards Posner writing for the majority, gives the Illinois legislature 180 days to “craft a new gun law that will impose reasonable limitations, consistent with the public safety and the Second Amendmenton the carrying of guns in public.”

“We are very happy with Judge Posner’s majority opinion,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “This is a victory for Illinois citizens who have been long denied a right recognized in the other 49 states; to have the means necessary for self-defense outside the home.

“In the broader sense,” he added, “this ruling affirms that the right to keep and bear arms, itself, extends beyond the boundary of one’s front door. This is a huge victory for the Second Amendment.”

“The Second Amendment,” Judge Posner writes, “states in its entirety 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.’ The right to bear’ as distinct from the right to keep’ arms is unlikely to refer to the home. To speak of bearing’ arms within one’s home would at all times have been an awkward usage. A right to bear arms thus implies a right to carry a loaded gun outside the home.”

Later, Judge Posner adds, “To confine the right to be armed to the home is to divorce the Second Amendment from the right of self-defense described in Heller and McDonald.”

“That the court will give Illinois lawmakers six months to craft a law allowing carry outside the home recognizes that the right to bear arms means what it says,” Gottlieb concluded. “The ball is now in the Legislature’s court, and we eagerly wait to see how well they can live up to their responsibility.”

Uncategorized

Emily Miller On SAF’s Illegal Mayors Initiative

November 28, 2012 by



In a follow-up to her Washington Times article on the Second Amendment Foundation’s push to point out all of Mayor Bloomberg’s illegal mayors, Emily Miller was interviewed by Cam Edwards of NRA News on Monday.

Emily discusses how MAIG jumps on any shooting “like white on rice”. She then discusses the background of some of the MAIG members and their criminal past (and present). Of course, this is not new information to anybody who has followed gun blogs for a while. Still, it is good that this info is getting out. Even better is that the NRA through NRA News is acknowledging the roll that the Second Amendment Foundation is playing in publicizing this information.