Remember In November

Grass Roots North Carolina has a biennial project whereby they evaluate candidates at the national and state levels on where they stand on gun rights. Candidates are rated from zero to four stars with four stars being the best. The evaluation process uses any votes the candidate may have taken plus their responses to a survey sent to every candidate at their registered office. It is called Remember in November.

This guide estimates where candidates stand on gun issues by comparing their views with those of a control group of gun owners. As noted below, a “4-STAR” candidate agrees with the control group on at least 90% of gun issues, a 3-STAR agrees on least 80%, a 2-STAR on at least 70%, a 1-STAR on at least 60%, and a 0-STAR candidate agrees on less than 60% of gun issues….

GRNC’s “Remember in November” project estimates candidates’ views on “assault weapons,” concealed handguns, gun storage laws, gun rationing, other gun control and the Second Amendment.  THE EVALUATIONS HEREIN ARE NOT ENDORSEMENTS.  We issued surveys first to a control group of gun owners and then to candidates. Next, we measured how closely each candidate’s views and voting record (if available) agree with the control group.  Pay more attention to voting records than survey results unless, of course, you believe politicians never lie.

The 2024 General Election candidate evaluations have been released. If you want to view by office and name, use this link. If you would prefer to have the higher ranked candidates for each office, use this link. I find the latter more useful myself.

It should be pointed out that if a candidate just blows off the survey, they will get a zero star rating as well they should. Most of the candidates blowing off the survey tend to be the Democrats. That said, you do get Republicans who should be pro-rights just ignoring it as well. See for example both Dave Boliek (R) for State Auditor and Mike Causey (R) for Insurance Commissioner. They are both zero stars as they didn’t return the survey. Likewise for Sherry Higgins who is running as the Republican in my state house district. In my opinion, this is foolish. In a close race every vote is needed and ignoring gun rights voters could be the difference between winning and losing. These are the type of Republicans that whoever coined the term for the GOP as the Stupid Party had in mind.

While the higher rated candidates tend to be either Republicans or Libertarians, I did find a race where both the Republican and Democrat were both 4-star rated. That was in State Senate District 9 located in southeastern North Carolina. Incumbent Republican Brent Jackson faces Democrat Jamie Campbell Bowles. Both are from Sampson County. I’m wondering if Ms. Bowles didn’t get the Democrat’s memo that guns are icky or just ignored it. I’m so old I remember when there was actually such a thing as a pro-gun Democrat.

One last thing. If you aren’t registered to vote, now is the time to do it! As someone who registered to vote on my 18th birthday, it always amazes me when I come across gun owners who are not registered to vote. I just can’t see leaving my rights at risk by not voting.

A Friday Roundup

This week started with us in Saint Louis where my older daughter had scheduled surgery on Monday. What was expected to be a 1.5-2 hour standard procedure ended up being a five hour surgery. The surgeon found an unexpected tumor hidden behind other organs. While it was cancerous, it is at an early stage with an excellent long term prognosis. The major downside is that she will need a second surgery to complete the original procedure. Please keep Wendy in your prayers.

The news this weeks seems to be coming faster than I can keep up with so I’ll just go with a roundup with links to more indepth coverage.

The New York Attorney General’s Office rested its case against the NRA and the individual defendants on Monday. Their final witness was Eric Hines who is a forensic accountant who found the NRA had a number of internal control failures. The attorneys for the NRA and the individual defendants then asked for a directed verdict saying the state had not proved its case and that certain laws do not pertain to them.

The Reload has a good analysis of this argument by Joseph Brucker. The crux of the NRA’s argument is as follows:

The defendants’ arguments centered largely on the applicability of New York’s Estates Powers and Trusts Law (EPTL) to nonprofit corporations and their executives. The statute contains a provision that subjects any nonprofit corporation organized for “charitable purposes” to certain registration and reporting requirements. However, “charitable purposes” are defined using language that echoes the IRS’s federal 501(c)(3) classification. The NRA, a 501(c)(4), admitted that the law governs some of its funds and activities. But it argued that the statute’s provisions relating to the “administration” of charitable property should only apply to its restricted charitable donations, not to general funds used for noncharitable activities such as lobbying.

The individual defendants, meanwhile, say the statute does not apply to them at all: an accountant or lawyer who accepts a position at a New York nonprofit, they argue, does not sign up for the same responsibilities as the “trustee” of a charitable foundation or bequest. The “trustee” designation set off a round of frenzied discussion in the courtroom on Monday.

If Judge Cohen accepts this interpretation, it could prove problematic for the state to force reform on the NRA.

Erik Uebelacker has been following the case for Courthouse News Service. He has a good synopsis of the testimony of former NRA 1st VP Willes Lee who had gone nuclear on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. What I found most interesting was Lee’s response as to why he had written those posts.

Lee was far more reserved in court than he was on Facebook. During his testimony, he was hesitant to critique the NRA at all, despite his willingness to do so frequently online last year. 

“I don’t know why I was posting those now,” he said Wednesday. “But I must have felt that way.”

He didn’t deny the validity of the content in any of the posts, however.

“I don’t know why I was posting those now”? Jeez! Talk about wimping out when put on the stand.

The two best ways to follow the NRA trial day by day are to follow NRA Watch and to follow the tweets of Uebelacker. I hate to admit our enemies have done an excellent job in covering the testimony in the case in an above board and fair way. NRA Watch is a project of Bloomberg’s Everytown.

Moving on in the Spirit of Aloha, the Supreme Court of Hawaii doesn’t like Heller, McDonald, or Bruen nor do they think it applies in Hawaii.

The court said:

“The spirit of Aloha clashes with a federally-mandated lifestyle that lets citizens walk around with deadly weapons during day-to-day activities,” the court wrote. “The history of the Hawaiian Islands does not include a society where armed people move about the community to possibly combat the deadly aims of others.”

Christopher Wilson had legally purchased his firearm in Florida back in 2013. He had been charged with possessing an unregistered firearm. His first challenge under the Second Amendment was denied but his second challenge after the Bruen decision was successful. A Hawaii district court had dismissed the charges based upon Bruen but the state appealed.

If ever a case cried out for the grant of a writ of certiorari it is this one. I can’t see how the SCOTUS can ignore such an in-your-face challenge to the supremacy of national law. As gun rights attorney Alan Beck notes, “The use of pop culture references to attempt to rebuke the Supreme Court’s detailed historical analysis is evidence this is not a well-reasoned opinion.”

In other 2A news, a group of Second Amendment organizations including the Second Amendment Foundation, CCRKBA, and theFirearms Policy Coalition are asking the US Supreme Court to grant certiorari in Bianchi v. Brown. The SCOTUS had vacated and remanded the case then known as Bianchi v Frosh back to the 4th Circuit for a ruling consistent with Bruen. Since then, the case was argued before a 3-judge 4th Circuit panel and its has been over a year since the argument without a decision. For some reason, the 4th Circuit has now decided to hear the case en banc. The case is a challenge to Maryland’s ban on so-called “assault weapons” (sic).

Adam Kraut, SAF Executive Director, notes in their release:

“The Fourth Circuit’s decision to hear this case en banc, over a year after it was argued before a panel and with no published opinion, seems to imply the court desired to take this case from a panel with which it disagreed,” noted SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “The unconstitutionality of Maryland’s Assault Weapons Ban has been apparent since it was passed into law, as Heller already provided the proper analysis, which the Fourth Circuit previously ignored to shield the law from a swift death. Intervention from the Supreme Court is necessary to restore order and force the lower courts to properly address this issue in a timely manner, as each day the Plaintiffs rights are being infringed upon.”

Finally, I would like to note that Early, One-Stop Voting begins for the North Carolina March Primary next Thursday, February 15th. Grass Roots North Carolina has issued their Remember in November ratings of the candidates based upon both their voting history (if any) and a survey. Likewise, GRNC-Political Victory Fund has issued their recommendations regarding pro-rights candidates in contested races. Today is the last day to be registered to vote for the primary. This will be the first election in which a photo ID will be required since North Carolina voters approved a constitutional amendment requiring it in 2018.

GRNC Releases 2024 Remember In November Ratings

Grass Roots North Carolina, the state’s independent gun rights group, has released their latest version of Remember in November. It is a rating of all candidates for Council of State, US Congress, State House, and State Senate in North Carolina on where they stand on gun rights.

From GRNC on their star ratings:

“Remember in November” candidate evaluations estimate where candidates stand on gun issues by comparing their views with those of a control group of gun owners. As noted below, a “4-STAR” candidate agrees with control group on at least 90% of gun issues, a 3-STAR agrees on least 80%, a 2-STAR on at least 70%, a 1-STAR on at least 60%, and a 0-STAR candidate agrees on less than 60% of gun issues.

Every candidate was sent a survey to their address of record with the NC State Board of Elections. Their responses were compared to a control group of gun owners on issues ranging from concealed handguns to safe storage to the Second Amendment. If a candidate did not return a survey, their response was rated a zero. When it comes to ratings, the voting record, if any, should be considered more important than survey results. In other words, action speak louder than words.

Candidate evaluations sorted by name are here.

Meanwhile, candidate evaluations by office and district sought are here.

If you look at the candidate evaluations, you will note that Republicans who blew off the survey receive the same score as Democrat anti-gun politicians. For example, in the race for Governor of NC, Republican attorney Bill Graham who has blanketed the airwaves with ads blew off the survey and has no voting record received a zero star rating. Likewise, Attorney General Josh Stein (D-NC) blew off the survey but had a negative voting record from his time in the General Assembly received the same zero star rating.

Meanwhile, in my own State Senate district, both the Republican and Democrat blew off the survey which is a shame. I already know that St. Sen. Julie Mayfield (D-Buncombe) is anti-gun but it would be nice to know that Republican Kristie Sluder believes in the Second Amendment. Her Facebook page says she stands with Trump but what does that mean in terms of gun rights?

My State House district is the same with neither the Democrat or Republican responding to the survey. If you are a Republican running in a district with a Democrat incumbent, you just might pick up a few extra votes if you stake out your position as pro-gun rights. The GOP is not called the Stupid Party without reason.