|
|
September 11th, 2011
The folks at the NRA Museum have created a new 304-page, photo-illustrated history of firearms. With over 1500 photographs, this new book covers all types of firearms, from small handguns to large rifles. Illustrated are deringers, flintlocks, revolvers, semi-autos, machine guns, muzzle loaders, long rifles — and much more. Researched by the NRA’s historians, The Illustrated History of Firearms is a worthy addition to any gun aficionado’s library. You can pre-order the book now from Amazon.com for just $19.79 (list price is $29.99.) The NRA Museum will be releasing two companion volumes, also available through Amazon: Guns of the Wild West, and Guns of World War II.
April 1st, 2011
 The U.S. Border Patrol Agency has been ordered to “give up its guns”, starting this summer. In a surprise directive issued this morning, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), parent agency of the Border Patrol, announced that up to one-half of U.S. Border Patrol Agents will be required to turn in their firearms, starting August 1, 2011. The current issue sidearm of the Border Patrol is the HK P2000 LEM in .40 SW, but Agents many also carry rifles and shotguns. Duty Weapons will be replaced by non-lethal dye markers, similar to paintball guns.
Agents to Be Disarmed in Border Areas
 Speaking at a Washington, DC press conference, Homeland Security Director Janet Napolitano stated that stripping the Border Patrol of lethal weapons reflects the “long-stated objective of this Adminstration to value human life over all other lesser considerations.” Napolitano stressed that the Border Patrol would not be required to give up all its firearms. The Patrol would still maintain pistols, rifles, and shotguns in “secure lock-ups” removed from the “immediate border area”.
The goal of the policy shift, Napolitano stated, is to eliminate the risk of accidental or unintentional injury to “wayward travelers and undocumented citizens”. Napolitano denied that confiscation of Border Patrol Agents’ firearms was a response to “trigger-happy men in green”. Napolitano stated: “I have the greatest faith in our men and women in the Border force”, adding that “we are now giving those Agents viable non-lethal technologies with which they can carry out their duties”.
Firearms Replaced by Non-Lethal Alien Immigrant Marker System (NLAIM)
The technologies cited by Director Napolitano include the new Non-Lethal Alien Immigrant Marker (NLAIM) which will be provided to Border Patrol agents on the “front line”, i.e. those who actively patrol the southern border. The NLAIM is a pneumatic device that propels small, liquid-filled marker balls at effective ranges up to 50 feet. Once released, the liquid inside the balls leaves a highly-visible, long-lasting dye mark on anything it contacts. In addition, the dye marker solution is activated by body heat so it literally “glows in the dark” when viewed through night-vision optics.
Is NLAIM Technology Really Something New?
 Critics of NLAIM technology claim that NLAIM devices are merely over-priced versions of recreational paintball guns, many of which sell for under $200.00. NLAIMs, which will be provided in both pistol and carbine configurations, cost nearly $2700.00 each, not including transport modules. A total of 10,000 NLAIMs will be delivered to the Border Patrol under a no-bid DHS contract valued at $26.8 million dollars. Some of that cost will be offset by revenues earned from the recycling of current Border Patrol firearms which will be decommissioned, melted down, and sold for scrap.
Chief Border Patrol Agent Randall Sikes (Del Rio Sector) defended the switch from conventional firearms to NLAIMs. Sikes stated that: “Hey, these aren’t just run-of-the-mill paintball guns — I mean these babies are state-of-the-art. Plus you can’t buy our day/night ammo balls in any paintball store. You think glow in the dark capability comes easy? The NLAIM is a sophisticated law enforcement tool, not a toy.”
Sikes also said that the NLAIM lets an Agent respond more effectively than ever before to a border incident. “Look, with a real gun, I mean you can either point it, or shoot it, and we don’t want the latter. The border-crossers we face know we won’t shoot them, so they just run away. At least now we can color-tag them and the choppers can chase ‘em down. We get the job done and no one gets hurt. Plus the NLAIMs are a hoot to shoot. It’s a win-win.”
The United States Border Patrol is a federal law enforcement agency within U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), a component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Currently, the U.S. Border Patrol employs over 20,200 agents, who are specifically responsible for patrolling the 6,000 miles of Mexican and Canadian international land borders. Agents are assigned primarily to the Mexico–United States border. There are 20 Border Patrol sectors, each headed by a Sector Chief Patrol Agent. Currently, U.S. Customs and Border Protection has more sworn law enforcement officers than any other agency in the U.S. Federal government.
January 2nd, 2011
 Last week, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) issued an important ruling affecting gunsmiths. The ruling covers the obligations of dealer-gunsmiths who work as sub-contractors for a licensed firearm manufacturer. Specifically, the ruling addresses record-keeping requirements and whether dealer-gunsmiths must have a manufacturers’ license to complete certain types of production work. We recommend that all gunsmiths involved in external finish work (such as cerakoting or parkerizing) review the ruling carefully.
The ATF explains: “The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has received inquiries from firearms industry members asking whether licensed dealer-gunsmiths who would be engaged in the business of repairing, modifying, embellishing, refurbishing, or installing parts in or on firearms for, or on behalf of a licensed importer or manufacturer are required to be licensed as manufacturers and abide by the requirements imposed on manufacturers.
In recent years, licensed firearms importers and manufacturers have contracted certain firearms manufacturing activities on their behalf to specialized licensed firearms manufacturers. Such activities include applying special coatings and treatments to firearms (e.g., bluing, anodizing, powder-coating, plating, polishing, heat/chemical treating).
 This has caused confusion over which importers and manufacturers are required to identify/mark firearms and maintain permanent records of importation or manufacture. For this reason, licensed importers and manufacturers have asked whether licensed dealer-gunsmiths, who are not required to mark firearms and keep production records, may engage in such manufacturing activities on their behalf.”
Summary of ATF Ruling 2010-10
ATF Ruling 2010-10 addresses questions about activities such as bluing, anodizing, powder-coating, plating, polishing, heat and chemical treating. There has been confusion over whether these activities require a federal firearms manufacturers license, and what are subcontractors’ firearms-marking and record-keeping requirements. As stated by the BATFE in a 12/30/2010 Press Release:
Ruling 2010-10 holds that licensed firearms dealer-gunsmiths are not engaged in a manufacturing business, and are not required to hold a manufacturers license, under certain specified conditions. The ruling was issued to address modern firearms manufacturing processes, which often involve a number of contractors other than the manufacturer whose name is marked on the firearm.
Under the ruling, licensed dealers may perform manufacturing services if:
(1) The firearms are not owned by the licensed dealer-gunsmith;
(2) The licensed dealer-gunsmith returns the firearms to the licensed manufacturer or licensed importer upon completion of the manufacturing process and does not sell or distribute the firearms to any other person; and
(3) The firearms were properly identified and marked by the importer or manufacturer in accordance with the law and regulations.
We recommend that gunsmiths whose activities may be covered by ATF Ruling 2010-10 read the complete text of the ruling: ATF RULING 2010-10 Official Complete Text.
September 16th, 2010
 The History Channel’s new TOP SHOT television show was a big success, attracting more than two million viewers each week. The show, which featured equal amounts of “Reality TV” and head-to-head competition with a variety of weapons, had a winning formula that captured a large audience. The competitors in this gun-friendly series became instant celebrities of sorts, none more so than Iain Harrison, the ex-pat British Army officer who was “the last man standing” on the show’s final episode. Iain was a fast learner who had no real weaknesses with any weapons — from throwing knives to AR15s. He was a popular and deserving champion who came away with the show’s $100,000 prize and bragging rights to the title of “Top Shot”.
Iain Harrison was recently interviewed by the NRA’s American Hunter magazine. In his interview, Iain gave away a few TOP SHOT secrets — including “behind the scenes shenanigans”. To read the complete interview with Iain, visit AmericanHunter.com. In his closing comments, Iain had this to say about the overall experience:
If you ever get the chance to participate in one of these shows, my advice is to go for it. So long as you and your family can handle the separation, it will present a great opportunity to see behind the scenes of a TV show, shoot a few unusual guns and make some lasting friendships. Just remember that the show’s audience is comprised of mostly non-shooters, and whether you like it or not, you are acting as an ambassador for the sport we all love. Your behavior reflects on all gun owners. Don’t screw it up.
CLICK HERE for Harrison Interview.
Iain Harrison photo courtesy NRA Blog.
June 13th, 2010
 In December 2009, President Obama signed a transportation funding bill that included a provision allowing Amtrak passengers to bring firearms aboard trains — provided the arms are stowed in locked, checked baggage.
Amtrak’s gun ban was instituted after the 9/11/2001 terrorist attack. The 2009 legislation will restore rail riders’ rights that existed prior to “9/11″. Amtrak has until December to put the new law into effect, and Amtrak is obliged to deliver an implementation plan to Congress next week.
Amtrak officials have resisted the new policy on gun transport from the beginning, pointing to a shortage of funding. However, just last week, on 6/10/2010, the Government Accounting Office (GAO) removed any “wiggle room” for Amtrak. The GAO held that the legislation obligating Amtrak to carry firearms was “permanent law”, erasing doubts that Amtrak would have to comply. The amendment (to the 2009 funding bill) which obliges Amtrak to resume firearms carriage was authored by Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS). Senator Wicker explained the purpose of his amendment: “Sportsmen who would like to use an Amtrak train for hunting trips cannot do so because they are not allowed to bring a firearm in checked luggage, something that is done every day at airports across our country.”
How does all this shake-out for shooters traveling by rail? Amtrak’s current policy still prohibits carriage of firearms on trains, and that won’t change until December, 2010. Below is the language of Amtrak’s stated rules regarding transport of firearms:
AMTRAK Baggage Policy — Firearms in Checked Baggage
Amtrak’s current policy prohibits all firearms, ammunition and other weapons aboard its trains. This includes any being carried on the person, in carry-on baggage, or in checked baggage. Please be advised that this policy remains in effect until Amtrak begins firearm carriage service by December 2010.
The Departments of Transportation and Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2010, enacted into law on December 16, 2009, requires Amtrak to implement the procedures necessary to provide storage and carriage of firearms in checked baggage cars and at Amtrak stations that accept checked baggage, within one year of the bill’s enactment. This requirement applies solely to checked baggage, not carry-on baggage.
April 17th, 2010
NSSF VP and Gen’l Counsel Lawrence Keane has analyzed the laws governing transport of firearms and ammunition. Here Keene explains long-standing restrictions as well as some new rules that affect firearms owners who ship guns by Common Carrier or who bring firearms when they travel by air.
Disclose to the Carrier if Contents Include Firearms or Ammunition
In a recent case, an individual was criminally prosecuted by the federal government for shipping two guns and some ammunition via a common carrier. The federal government also seized and forfeited the firearms and ammo. Why? Because the shipper “knowingly” failed to disclose to the carrier in writing that the contents of the package contained firearms and ammo. He violated Section 922(e) of the Gun Control Act. This case provides an important lesson for all of us who may, for example, ship a firearm to ourselves for an event rather than check the firearm as luggage.
You MUST declare the contents to the common carrier in writing (on the carrier’s form, check the box/fill in the line). It is a crime to “knowingly to deliver or cause to be delivered to any common or contract carrier for transportation or shipment . . . to persons other than a licensed [importer, manufacturer, dealers, or collector], any package or other container in which there is any firearm or ammunition without written notice to the carrier that such firearm or ammunition is being transported or shipped.”
 Name on Airline Reservations and Picture ID must be Identical
An important new change is taking place for everyone who travels. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has launched a program called “Secure Flight,” which will require travelers to provide their full name as it appears on the government-issued identification they will be traveling with (i.e. passport, driver’s license) when making airline reservations. With this change, you will no longer be able to travel under an abbreviated name or nickname (i.e. Scott vs. W. Scott, Liz vs. Elizabeth or Bill vs. William). This change in airline procedure may affect you and require you to make changes to how your name appears in your travel documents including profiles with your travel agency.
 Educate Yourself About Restricted Items
The TSA offers a comprehensive list of all prohibited items on its website, www.TSA.gov. The lengthy list explains which items may be carried on and which must go in checked luggage. The exhaustive list of items barred from carry-on includes many things you might not expect.
For example, it is illegal to have drill bits or even screwdrivers (more than 7″ in length) in carry-on luggage. Scissors longer that 4″ must be checked. Hammers must be checked. Gel shoe inserts must be removed and checked, and even snow globes may not be carried on a plane. Because its hard to remember all the restrictions, we recommend you download the TSA’s digital PDF brochure on restricted items, and use it for reference before your new airline trip.
May 6th, 2008
This Wednesday night, May 7th, Shooting USA will reprise its 2008 SHOT Show Special. The hour-long broadcast on the Outdoor Channel will include footage shot on the floor of the SHOT Show in Las Vegas.
If you couldn’t attend SHOT Show yourself, this is “must-see” television. Over 2,000 gun, hunting, and outdoor product manufacturers showcased their products at the 2008 SHOT Show. Shooting USA’s camera team found many new exciting products to feature. In addition, Shooting USA covers the Firearms Media Range Day. Held the day before SHOT Show opened at the Las Vegas Convention Center, Range Day gave media members “hands-on” experiences with some of the latest pistols, rifles, and shotguns to hit the market.
Wednesday’s May 7th broadcast times for the Shooting USA Shot Show Special on the Outdoor Channel are:
Eastern Time: 4:30 PM, 8:30 PM
Central Time: 3:30 PM, 7:30 PM
Mountain Time: 2:30 PM, 6:30 PM, Midnight
Pacific Time: 1:30 PM, 5:30 PM, 11:00 PM
January 8th, 2008
The NSSF reports that Citicorp’s Merchant Services Division is refusing to process gun-related customer credit-card sales. This applies both to legal firearms transactions conducted through licensed FFLs as well as ordinary sales of firearms accessories. The first company to be affected by this decision appears to be firearms distributor CDNN Sports, a large retail operation based in Texas. Citi Merchant Services and First Data notified CDNN that its merchant services account would be terminated and funds seized. (Citicorp Merchant Services employs First Data Merchant Services Corporation to handle credit card transactions.)
Charlie Crawford, president of CDNN Sports Inc., explained: “We were contacted recently by First Data/Citi Merchant Services by a June Rivera-Mantilla stating that we were terminated and funds were being seized for selling firearms in a non-face-to-face transaction. Although perfectly legal, we were also informed that no transactions would be processed in the future, even for non-firearms.”
If you have a Citigroup credit card, or use Citibank for your banking services, you may want to consider shifting your accounts to another financial services provider — and be sure you tell the Citibank representatives why you are making the shift. If gun owners act in solidarity, other credit card companies may think twice about following Citigroup’s lead in refusing to handle gun transactions. To voice your concern to Citi Merchant Services and First Data Corp. directly, you can contact June Rivera-Mantilla at 631-683-7734 or Robert Tenenbaum at 631-683-6570.
If you run a firearms-related business and wish to shift to an NSSF-affiliated credit card processing program, contact Payment Alliance International at 1-866-371-2273 (ext. 1131).
November 21st, 2007
 The U.S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari in the much-discussed District of Columbia v. Heller case (Docket 04-7041), previously known as Parker vs. District of Columbia. This means the High Court WILL review the decision by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals striking down the D.C. statute banning residents from owning handguns. The Court of Appeals held that the District of Columbia’s anti-gun law violated the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. In reaching its decision, the Appellate Court found, as a matter of law, that the Second Amendment provides an individual right to keep and bear arms. This was a “breakthrough” finding. Other Circuit Courts of Appeal have held that the Second Amendment merely confers a “collective right” to keep and bear arms. In practical terms, this means that the Second Amendment applies to an organized militia (i.e. the National Guard), but not to individuals.
The High Court’s decision to hear D.C. v. Heller is historically significant. This will represent the first time the Supreme Court rules directly on the meaning of the Second Amendment since the U.S. v. Miller case in 1939. The decision in Miller was poorly reasoned and left many basic issues unresolved, including the key question “Does the Second Amendment confer an individual or collective right?”
The “collective right” interpretation of the Second Amendment is disfavored among legal scholars, despite what anti-gun advocacy groups claim. Many of the nation’s most respected law professors, including Lawrence Tribe of Harvard Law School, Akhil Reed Amar of Yale, William Van Alstyne of Duke, and Sanford Levinson of the Univ. of Texas, have strongly argued that the Second Amendment secures an individual right to keep and bear arms.
BACKGROUND
The mayor of Washington, D.C., Adrian M. Fenty, filed the appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, setting the stage for the High Court to rule. According to FBI statistics, Washington D.C., despite its gun ban, ranks as one of the most dangerous cities in the United States and maintains one of the highest per-capita murder rates in the country.
In March, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, in striking down the District’s gun ban, held in Parker, et al., v. District of Columbia that “The phrase ‘the right of the people’ . . . leads us to conclude that the right in question is individual.” This was the second time in recent history that a Federal Circuit Court upheld the view that the Second Amendment was an individual right. In 2001, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in the case of U.S. v. Emerson that “All of the evidence indicates that the Second Amendment, like other parts of the
Bill of Rights, applies to and protects individual Americans.”
|
