President Trump Issues Executive Order Ending Banking Discrimination
NSSF, the Firearm Industry Trade Association, applauds President Donald Trump’s recent signing of an Executive Order Guaranteeing Free and Fair Banking for All Americans. This Executive Order enforces a firearm industry priority to end banking discrimination against individuals and entities based on political beliefs. For years, firearm industry companies and gun sellers have been denied banking and financial services by banks espousing anti-Second Amendment policies.

“President Trump is yet again delivering on his promise to protect Americans’ rights. This time by ensuring that banks cannot discriminate against firearm-related businesses…” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Sr. V.P. and General Counsel. “American businesses, and firearm businesses in particular, must have fair access to essential banking services that are based on an objective criteria and creditworthiness. Politics should not enter into a bank’s lending decision.”

President Trump’s Executive Order cited attempts by the previous administration to compel corporate banks to surveil Americans exercising their Second Amendment rights. The President also noted the illegal “Operation Choke Point”, executed by the Obama administration, former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and the Department of Justice (DOJ), along with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), to deny essential banking services to firearm-related businesses based on an ill-defined “reputational risk” criteria.

Banking regulators during the Biden administration also illegally pressured banks to refuse banking services based on politics. Before Biden took office, the first Trump administration pushed a Fair Access to Banking rule by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). However, in 2021, the Biden administration halted that Fair Access Rule before it could become effective.

NSSF continues to support Congressional efforts to codify these protections against banking discrimination by the Fair Access to Banking Act, introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by U.S. Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.) as H.R. 987 and in the U.S. Senate by U.S. Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) as S. 401 as well as the Firearm Industry Nondiscrimination (FIND) Act, introduced in the House by Rep. Jack Bergman (R-Mich.) as H.R. 45 and the Senate by Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) as S. 137.

Today we showcase three videos that cover current issues with gun sales and Second Amendment rights. We lead off with an NSSF interview video that covers key actions that will affect gun owners. The first is the adoption of new product/merchant categories that will allow credit card companies to track firearm purchases. This causes concern because it can identify persons as gun buyers when they only purchased outdoor gear or accessories. And it creates the risk of creating a list of gun owners — even though a national registry is forbidden by Federal law.

The first video, from the NSSF, also covers the impact of a recent Executive Order by President Joe Biden. This seeks to impose new types of gun control by fiat — without the approval of Congress. This new Executive Order is also covered in a recent BackFire TV video and a good video from the U.S. Concealed Carry Association (USCCA).

The NRA-ILA explains: “Joe Biden issued an Executive Order on gun control that could accurately be described as a mile wide and an inch deep. There is no doubt what it all adds up to: antagonism toward gun ownership is now the official policy of the U.S. government’s Executive Branch.

Now, Biden is basically directing an alphabet soup of federal departments — including Justice, Health and Human Services, Education, and Homeland Security — to comb through the BSCA and come up with their own plans to implement it to the fullest extent possible.”

NSSF President Discusses Credit Card Issues and Executive Order

Here is a very informative video from the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF). The video features NSSF President/CEO Joe Bartozzi interviewed by NSSF’s Erik Scarpati. The 20-minute video interview covers three main topics. First NSSF Pres. Bartozzi covers the history of the NSSF and explains its current mission to support the Second Amendment and promote the shooting sports. Second the interview covers some very concerning developments — how Federal agencies are pushing Credit Card companies to track firearms-related purchases. This is being done through the use of Merchant and Product Category Codes. This could effectively be used to create a de facto gun registry, which is specifically prohibited by Federal law. Third the interview covers the terms of President Biden’s recent Gun Control Executive Order.

Significant Issues with Biden Executive Order

Backfire TV head honcho Jim Harmer has built a popular YouTube Channel with over 650,000 subscribers. He is also a licensed attorney based in Utah. In this video, he discusses key items in President Biden’s recent Executive Order concerning firearms. Harmer explains the ways this Executive Order could restrict Second Amendment rights and encourage multiple Federal agencies to interfere with gun owners.

Specifics of Biden Executive Order — Gun Buyer Lists, Red Flag Laws, and More…

President Joe Biden recently signed an Executive Order paving the way for eventual universal background checks, red flag laws, and further gun control measures. In this video, Katie Pointer-Baney, USCCA Director of Government Affairs, outlines what this Executive Order could mean for the future of private gun sales, Federal Firearms Licensees, and the Safer Communities Act.

Here are highlights from the video:
00:00 President Biden’s Executive Order
01:25 What is an Executive Order?
02:28 Accelerating the Safer Communities Act
03:02 How does the Order affect FFLs?
03:20 Law-abiding citizens and private gun sales
05:09 Let your elected representatives hear your viewpoint

How Credit Card Tracking Affects Gun Owners
The use of special Codes for outdoor sports stores is problematical to say the least. There is a real concern that there would be broad over-reporting of sales relating to guns, because the Code would be applied to a variety of purchases.

NRA America’s First Freedom explains: “A person who uses a credit card to purchase a gun safe, a trolling motor and binoculars from a sporting goods store over several weeks or months, as well as any ammunition they might need, will make all of these purchases under the same proposed MCC used for gun sales. If anti-Second Amendment extremists get their way, these purchases could then prompt a credit-card company to report the sales to the authorities. Next, a police officer, or an agent from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), might show up at a citizen’s home to find out why they’ve been buying so much stuff from their local ‘gun store’.”

For more information about the Credit Card Code issue, see this story in our Daily Bulletin: Credit Card Companies to Implement Special Code for Gun Sales.

Here’s a scary development that could impact the privacy rights of firearms owners. The Federal Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed a legal request to compel tech companies Google and Apple to disclose information on over 10,000 persons who downloaded software Apps used to calibrate ATN night-vision scopes. The Feds say they need the info to track possible illegal exports of ATN scopes. Frankly, this is a dangerous precent. What comes next? Will the DOJ demand the names and emails of all Snipers’ Hide members, or all NRA members for that matter?

Forbes Magazine reports: “According to an application for a court order filed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) on September 5, investigators want information on users of Obsidian 4, a tool used to control rifle scopes made by night-vision specialist American Technologies Network Corp. [ATN]. The App allows gun owners to get a live stream, take video, and calibrate their gun scope from an Android or iPhone device. According to the Google Play page for Obsidian 4, it has more than 10,000 downloads. If the court approves the demand, and Apple and Google decide to hand over the information, it could include data on thousands of people who have nothing to do with the crimes being investigated, privacy activists warned. Edin Omanovic, lead on Privacy International’s State Surveillance program, said it would set a dangerous precedent and scoop up ‘huge amounts of innocent people’s personal data’.”

The purported purpose of the data harvest is to aid the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency track possible illegal exports of ATN Night Vision scopes. But this kind of sweeping information request is both over-broad and dangerous in its implications. Cybersecurity experts were stunned by the ICE request, according to Forbes Magazine:

Innocents Ensnared
The request is undeniably broad and would likely include all users of the app within America, not just users abroad who might indicate illegal shipments of the gun appendage. Tor Ekeland, a privacy-focused lawyer, said it amounted to a “fishing expedition.” “There’s a more profound issue here with the government able to vacuum up a vast amount of data on people they have no reason to suspect have committed any crime.” Ekeland added.

Even those who’ve worked in government surveillance were stunned by the order. “The idea that this data will only be used for pursuing ITAR violations is almost laughable,” warned Jake Williams, a former NSA analyst and now a cybersecurity consultant at Rendition Infosec.

Story based on Report by NRA-ILA
The U.S. Supreme Court has taken up a challenge by an NRA state affiliate to a New York City gun control scheme that effectively prohibits lawfully-licensed handgun owners from leaving the city with their own firearms. In the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. City of New York, NY case, the plaintiffs raise objections to the N.Y. City law, particularly that it violates the Second Amendment.

Few laws in the history of our nation, or even in contemporary times, have come close to such a sweeping prohibition on the transportation of arms. — U.S. DOJ Brief challenging N.Y. City law

Given the uniquely oppressive and bizarre nature of the challenged restrictions, many observers believe the real question in the case isn’t whether New York City will lose but on what grounds and how badly. The City itself, in fact, recently made a desperate attempt to avoid a ruling on its laws by claiming to the court that it was in the process of revising the regulations to address the issues raised in the case. The court rejected that gambit, and proceedings in the case have continued.

The Trump administration, through the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), has filed a brief in support of the plaintiffs. The DOJ argues that the New York City regulation is unconstitutional, because the “transport ban infringes the right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Second and Fourteenth Amendments.” The DOJ’s brief states the Second Amendment does not end at the property line of one’s own home.

“The Second Amendment guarantees both the right to ‘keep’ and the right to ‘bear’ firearms”, the brief states. “Read naturally, the right to ‘bear’ firearms includes the right to transport firearms outside the home; otherwise, the right to ‘bear’ would add nothing to the right to ‘keep’.”

The administration also seeks to establish a method for resolving future cases that is faithful to the Supreme Court’s opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller, which has been largely ignored by lower courts. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals decision being challenged in the New York City case, like many other lower court Second Amendment decisions before it, used a judicial balancing test that Heller specifically rejected to uphold the disputed gun control measures.

The government’s brief, on the other hand, urges the court to “look first to the text of the Second Amendment, the history of the right to keep and bear arms before ratification, and the tradition of gun regulation after ratification” to judge the validity of a gun control law.

Applying this test to New York City’s travel ban, it states:

Few laws in the history of our Nation, or even in contemporary times, have come close to such a sweeping prohibition on the transportation of arms. And on some of the rare occasions in the 19th and 20th centuries when state and local governments have adopted such prohibitions, state courts have struck them down. That is enough to establish that the transport ban is unconstitutional.

Also filing in support of the plaintiffs was a coalition of pro-gun states led by Louisiana and including Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia. Like the DOJ’s brief, the states’ brief urges the Supreme Court to use text, history, and tradition to find that New York City’s travel ban violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendment.

Alternatively, the states’ brief argues, if the court should adopt the Second Circuit’s approach to applying a tiered level of scrutiny, it should subject the law to a rigorously applied heighted scrutiny. “New York City could not possibly meet such scrutiny here,” the brief concludes.

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) has filed a lawsuit against the California Department of Justice and Attorney General Xavier Becerra, seeking an injunction against the agency for failing and refusing to establish a properly functioning Internet-based firearms registration system.

Joining SAF in this legal action are the Calguns Foundation, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation and three private citizens. The lawsuit was filed in Shasta County Superior Court.

“We’re suing because California DOJ’s Firearms Application Reporting System (CFARS) broke down during the deadline week for people to register their firearms in accordance with new state laws,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “For a whole week the system was largely inaccessible. People who wanted to comply with the law simply couldn’t and now they face becoming criminals because they couldn’t do what the law requires.”

The lawsuit notes that during the week of June 25-30, which was the statutory registration deadline, the CFARS system was inaccessible and inoperable on a variety of web browsers across the state. Many users who were able to initially log in and begin the process could not finish because the system crashed, obliterating all of their work. The CFARS system was substantially underfunded and understaffed from its inception, Gottlieb noted.

“It’s like a bad version of ‘Catch-22’,” Gottlieb observed. “The government required registration by the deadline, but the online registration failed and people couldn’t register. They’re required to obey the law, but the system broke down, making it impossible to obey the law. Now these people face the possibility of being prosecuted. We simply cannot abide that kind of incompetence.”

“Attorney General Xavier Becerra seems to care about everything but the constitution, the rule of law, and law-abiding California gun owners,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “If Becerra spent as much time doing his job as he does talking about his pet crusades against the federal government, hundreds of thousands of Californians would not be in legal jeopardy right now.”

“Predictably the state of California wants to take guns away from the law abiding. In this instance they couldn’t even build a working system to respect gun owners’ rights,” explained CGF Chairman Gene Hoffman. SAF and its partners want the court to prevent DOJ from enforcing the law to allow individual plaintiffs and other citizens in the same situation to register their legally-possessed firearms through a “reliable and functional registration system.”

The 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.

In fact, according to the L.A. Times: “In less than two decades, the gun murder rate has been nearly cut in half. Other gun crimes fell even more sharply, paralleling a broader drop in violent crimes committed with or without guns. Violent crime dropped steeply during the 1990s and has fallen less dramatically since the turn of the millennium.”

A separate independent study by the Pew Research Center, affirms that “National rates of gun homicide and other violent gun crimes are strikingly lower now than during their peak in the mid-1990s, paralleling a general decline in violent crime[.] Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm — assaults, robberies and sex crimes — was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993.” The PRS findings were based on CDC data (for gun homicides) and on U.S. Justice Department data for “non-fatal victimizations”.

Ignorant Americans Believe Gun Crime is Rising
Ironically, though it is absolutely clear that serious gun crime has dropped while gun ownership has increased, the majority of Americans believe that gun crime is on the rise. According to a survey by the Pew Research Center, the majority of Americans believe that serious gun crime is on the rise.

A recent Pew Research Center survey asked the question: “Compared with 20 years ago, has the number of gun crimes in America gone up, gone down, or stayed the same?” Among those surveyed, 56% said gun crime had gone up, 26% said it had stayed the same, and 12% said it had gone done. 65% of women said gun crime has gone up compared to 46% of men.

As to why most Americans don’t understand that gun crime has gone down, one can only speculate. Certainly, the way firearms-related subjects are reported by the mass media may play a role in confusing the general public.

We recommend that you read the Overview of the Pew Research Center Study, which presents many interesting (and thought-provoking) points. After “crunching the numbers”, the Pew researchers analyzed why gun crime rates have declined so dramatically over the last two decades. A variety of factors are discussed, including demographic changes, increased policing, and tougher laws.

OJP’s Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) and Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) are providing three grants to support state efforts to improve flow of the information needed by NICS. The grants would be used to improve access to and reporting of: 1) mental health information; 2) felony convictions; 3) misdemeanor domestic violence convictions; and 4) domestic violence restraining orders. The project also hopes to get immediate access to active felony and misdemeanor warrants. The grants will support enhancements to electronic submissions of fingerprints to state and federal systems as well as linking of arrest and disposition. Funding will be provided under National Criminal History Improvement Program (NCHIP), NICS Act Record Improvement Program (NARIP), and a new initiative called, Improving the Completeness of Firearm Background Checks through Enhanced State Data Sharing. CLICK HERE for more info on the new Background Check Data Sharing Programs.

Gun owners who live or do business in California should strongly consider purchasing this 320-page book. California gun laws are complex and confusing. There are over 800 California state statutes regulating the manufacture, distribution, sale, possession, and use of firearms. There are thousands of overlapping federal laws regulating firearms that apply in California. And there are hundreds of administrative regulations, local ordinances, and California Department Justice Firearms Bureau written and unwritten policies that also apply.

On top of the already byzantine regulatory scheme, on January 1, 2012 California firearm laws were completely reorganized and re-numbered. Because of the complexity of the laws, and the recent statute number changes, inadvertent gun law violations by well-intentioned citizens are increasingly common. In the politicized legal environment of California “gun-control” laws, the consequences of even an inadvertent violation can be severe.

With all the overlapping regulations, it’s no wonder that confusion runs rampant among California gun owners, as well as among police, prosecutors, and judges. To protect yourself, you need to know the law. This book will help. California Gun Laws tells you how to legally buy, own, transport and possess firearms, and explains how you get your firearms or firearm rights back if they are taken away. The book warns about common legal “traps” that may ensnare California firearm owners.

Author Profile: C.D. (Chuck) Michel is an attorney with 20 years of experience representing the National Rifle Association (NRA) and California Rifle & Pistol Association (CRPA), as well as firearm manufacturers, wholesalers, retailers, and gun owners, Michel has been litigating civil and criminal firearm cases since 1991, many of which were high profile and attracted state and national media attention.