In NSSF v. Bonta, U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Schopler has granted a Preliminary Injunction prohibiting the enforcement of California’s AB 1594 law that exposes firearm industry members to lawsuits in California for activities outside the state of California. The ruling by Federal Judge Schopler enjoined the enforcement of California AB 1594, the so-called “Firearm Industry Responsibility Act”. In 2023 the NSSF sued to challenge the law and moved for an injunction. In granting the injunction, Judge Schopler found that AB 1594 is likely unconstitutional because it violates the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution and the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.
“We are thankful the court enjoined the state from suing members of the firearm industry under this unconstitutional law that attempts to use the real threat of liability on commerce beyond California’s borders and impose its policy choices on its sister states”, stated NSSF Senior VP and General Counsel Lawrence G. Keane. CLICK HERE for more details of NSSF v. Bonta legal case.
NSSF Opposes Unconstitutional California Firearm Industry Liability Law
NSSF argued that California’s firearm industry liability law is preempted by the Federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) which was passed with bipartisan support in Congress and subsequently signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2005. The PLCAA was specifically enacted to stamp out frivolous lawsuits sought by activist politicians, gun control lawyers and greedy trial lawyers seeking to bankrupt the lawful firearm industry by blaming them and their lawfully-sold and non-defective products for the violence and harm caused by criminals who misuse firearms to commit their crimes.
“It’s no surprise California’s rabidly antigun General Assembly would pass and Governor Gavin Newsom would sign into law a blatantly unconstitutional attack on the lawful firearm industry instead of looking in the mirror to see how their own policies are leading to historic levels of criminal violence and endangering law-abiding and innocent Californians every day,” said NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel Lawrence G. Keane. “NSSF will not stand by and allow the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans … to be trampled upon while criminals committing acts of violence are handled with kid gloves by soft-on-crime prosecutors. California’s industry liability law is in blatant defiance of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bruen and is preempted by the PLCAA.”
Among other provisions, California AB 1594 bans the manufacture, sale and marketing of firearms the state deems “abnormally dangerous”. It allows civil lawsuits against a firearm industry member to be filed by the Attorney General, any municipality and any person who claims to have suffered harm from the misuse of a legal, lawfully sold firearm by a remote third party. The law unconstitutionally invades the sovereignty of sister States by directly regulating lawful commerce occurring entirely outside the state of California in violation of the Commerce Clause and the United States’ system of federalism. The law also violates the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) enacted by Congress in 2005 to stop just these sorts of frivolous lawsuits against members of the industry.
The NSSF argues that AB 1594 also directely linfringes on the Second Amendment and chills First Amendment rights by restricting protected free-speech advertising of Constitutionally-protected products that are lawfully made and sold — even when that advertising takes place outside of California’s borders.
Share the post "NSSF Wins Injunction Against Unconstitutional California AB 1594"
The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) is challenging California’s firearm industry liability law, AB 1594, passed in 2022 and signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom. The law, which goes into effect on July 23, 2023, encourages civil suits against the firearm industry for the illegal actions of criminals with guns. This law is an affront to the U.S. Constitution and is an attempt to circumvent the will of the U.S. Congress when it passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA).
The litigation, NSSF v. Bonta, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The NSSF now seeks a preliminary injunction to halt enforcement of AB 1594 as challenges to the unconstitutional law progress through the courts.
NSSF Files Motion to Enjoin Unconstitutional California Firearm Industry Liability Law
The NSSF filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in its legal challenge, NSSF v. Bonta, seeking to enjoin California’s firearm industry liability law, AB 1594. The unconstitutional law permits and encourages civil suits against members of the firearm industry for the damages/injuries caused by the actions of criminals. The law goes into effect next month on 7/23/23.
NSSF’s motion argues that California’s firearm industry liability law is preempted by the Federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) which was passed with bipartisan support in Congress and subsequently signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2005. The PLCAA was specifically enacted to stamp out frivolous lawsuits sought by activist politicians, gun control lawyers and greedy trial lawyers seeking to bankrupt the lawful firearm industry by blaming them and their lawfully-sold and non-defective products for the violence and harm caused by criminals who misuse firearms to commit their crimes.
“It’s no surprise California’s rabidly antigun General Assembly would pass and Governor Gavin Newsom would sign into law a blatantly unconstitutional attack on the lawful firearm industry instead of looking in the mirror to see how their own policies are leading to historic levels of criminal violence and endangering law-abiding and innocent Californians every day,” said NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel Lawrence G. Keane. “NSSF will not stand by and allow the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans … to be trampled upon while criminals committing acts of violence are handled with kid gloves by soft-on-crime prosecutors. California’s industry liability law is in blatant defiance of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bruen and is preempted by the PLCAA.”
In addition to the firearm industry liability provision, California’s AB 1594 bans the manufacture, sale, and marketing of firearms the state deems “abnormally dangerous” regardless of if they are commonly-owned. It allows civil lawsuits against a firearm industry member to be filed by a person who has suffered harm in California, the Attorney General, or even city or county attorneys for the harm caused by the criminal misuse of a firearm by a remote third party. The law unconstitutionally invades the sovereignty of sister states by directly regulating lawful commerce occurring entirely and wholly outside the state of California in violation of the Commerce Clause and the United States system of federalism.
NSSF’s challenge explains that AB 1594 is a law that was drafted prior to the Bruen decision and signed just weeks AFTER the Supreme Court published the landmark ruling. Rather than re-examining the legislation to ensure AB 1594 complied with Supreme Court precedent, California legislators ignored the Supreme Court’s decision and pushed AB 1594 through defiantly.
The NSSF argues that AB 1594 not only infringes on Second Amendment rights but chills First Amendment rights by restricting advertising of Constitutionally-protected products that are lawfully made and sold — even when that advertising takes place outside of California’s borders.
Share the post "NSSF Seeks Injunction Against Radical California AB 1594 Law"
The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) is challenging California’s firearm industry liability law, AB 1594, passed in 2022 and signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom. The law, which goes into effect on July 23, 2023, encourages civil suits against the firearm industry for the illegal actions of criminals with guns. This law is an affront to the U.S. Constitution and is an attempt to circumvent the will of the U.S. Congress when it passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA).
The litigation, NSSF v. Bonta, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The NSSF now seeks a preliminary injunction to halt enforcement of the unconstitutional law as challenges to AB 1594 progress through the courts.
“California’s General Assembly and Governor Newsom made a spectacle of defying the U.S. Supreme Court’s Bruen decision when this bill was passed and enacted,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “This law is openly hostile to the firearm industry and also defiant to Congress, the U.S. Supreme Court and the Constitution. Governor Newsom [seeks] to exert California’s radical gun control agenda across the United States. NSSF will defend our Constitutionally-protected industry against the broadsides of this extremist agenda.”
NSSF’s challenge explains that AB 1594, misleadingly titled the “Firearm Industry Responsibility Act,” is a law that was drafted prior to the Bruen decision and signed just weeks after the Supreme Court published the landmark ruling. Rather than re-examining the legislation to ensure it complied with Supreme Court precedent, Gov. Newsom forged ahead, challenging the ruling when he signed it.
The law bans the manufacture, sale and marketing of firearms the state deems “abnormally dangerous” regardless if they are commonly-owned. It also encourages civil lawsuits by a person who has suffered harm in California, the Attorney General, or city or county attorneys against a firearm industry member for the harm caused by the criminal misuse of a firearm by a remote third party. This is expressly prohibited by PLCAA. The law unconstitutionally invades the sovereignty of sister states by directly regulating lawful commerce occurring entirely and wholly outside the state of California in violation of the Commerce Clause and our system of federalism.
The NSSF argues that AB 1594 not only infringes on Second Amendment rights but chills First Amendment rights by restricting advertising of Constitutionally-protected products that are lawfully made and sold — even when that advertising takes place outside of California’s borders.
California’s AB 1594 is clearly unconstitutional on several fronts.
Share the post "NSSF Challenges CA Law Promoting Lawsuits vs. Gun Makers"
The Governor of Washington state, Jay Inslee, recently signed radical new legislation, House Bill 1240, that outlaws AR-platform rifles and other semi-auto, mag-fed “modern sporting rifles” (MSRs). This new WA state law, which goes into effect immediately as an “emergency” measure, will be fought in Federal Court. Two lawsuits have been filed, both seeking to strike down HB 1240 as unconstitutional.
The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) has filed a federal lawsuit against the state of Washington, challenging the constitutionality of the recently enacted HB 1240, which bans the manufacture, sale, import, and distribution of many semi-automatic firearms. The lawsuit, named Hartford v. Ferguson, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.
In addition, NSSF (National Shooting Sports Foundation) filed a lawsuit, Banta et al v. Ferguson, against Washington’s Attorney General Robert Ferguson and John Batiste, Chief of Washington State Patrol, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief from state authorities enforcing HB 1240, which bans modern sporting rifles. The lead plaintiff is Amanda Banta, a 2012 Team USA Olympian and 10-year member of the U.S. Rifle Team and resident of Spokane, Washington.
GunsAmerica Digest reports: “HB 1240 is part of a broader gun reform package signed into law that includes a 10-day waiting period, mandatory firearms training for prospective gun buyers, and a new legal pathway for the Attorney General and family members of shooting victims to sue gun makers who market their products to prohibited persons. These additional provisions take effect this summer. HB 1240 has exemptions for law enforcement and members of the military. Existing owners of black rifles are also grandfathered in — at least for now.”
NSSF challenges Washington’s MSR ban, arguing that it violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court held in Heller that the Second Amendment protects the rights to keep and bear arms “typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes.” There are over 24.4 million MSRs in circulation today, more than there are Ford F-150s on America’s roads.
HB 1240 is very harsh. According to GunsAmerica Digest: “HB 1240 only allows 90 days for firearm dealers and manufacturers to sell or transfer their existing stock out of the state. Furthermore, the bill stipulates that violations will be considered a misdemeanor offense, which could result in a maximum penalty of 364 days in jail and a fine of $5,000.”
“NSSF will not stand idly by as politicians cleave away fundamental Constitutional rights from Americans,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior V.P. and General Counsel. “The right to keep and bear arms that are commonly owned belongs to law-abiding citizens. Politicians in Washington exceed their authority when they usurp those rights to mollify radical special-interest groups. These politicians violate their oaths to protect and defend the Constitution and the rights of the citizens they represent.”
SAF claims the new law — which took effect immediately — infringes on Second and Fourteenth Amendment rights and is seeking preliminary and permanent injunctions from the court.
SAF founder and Executive V.P. Alan M. Gottlieb criticized the state for putting politics above constitutional rights: “[Washington] has criminalized a common and important means of self-defense, the modern semiautomatic rifle. The state has put politics ahead of constitutional rights, and is penalizing law-abiding citizens while this legislation does nothing to arrest and prosecute criminals[.]”
SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut called out the authors and supporters of the legislation: “As we note in our complaint, the firearms that Washington bans as ‘assault weapons’ are, in all respects, ordinary semiautomatic rifles. To the extent they are different from other semiautomatic rifles, their distinguishing features make them safer and easier to use.”
Share the post "Washington State Bans Modern Sporting Rifles — Lawsuits Filed"
The first step in overturning unconstitutional new anti-gun laws in New York state has been accomplished. In the case of Antonyuk et al v. Hochul, a Federal judge has enjoined the application of a draconian New York law which severely restricts the rights of gun owners to carry firearms outside their homes.
The groups leading the legal action in Antonyuk v. Hochul, Gun Owners of America (GOA) and Gun Owners Foundation (GOF), secured a temporary restraining order (TRO) in Federal court against the poorly-named New York “Concealed Carry Improvement Act”.
Provisions of this law that are blocked under this TRO include:
— Requiring businesses to openly state they ALLOW concealed carry
— Disclosing one’s social media accounts for review
— Prohibitions on carrying in most so-called “sensitive places”, including doctor’s offices, Times Square, restaurants, and places of entertainment, and on public transportation
— In-person interviews with law enforcement
The TRO will take effect next week, unless a Federal circuit court overturns this ruling before then. Erich Pratt, GOA’s Senior Vice President, issued the following statement:
“Anti-gunners like Kathy Hochul and Eric Adams lied and misrepresented the 2nd Amendment to the courts, putting New Yorkers at a great disadvantage in the midst of rising crime. We are grateful to Judge Suddaby for his quick action to restore the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Once the TRO goes into effect, GOA encourages New Yorkers to exercise their rights and to defend themselves and the ones they love.”
Sam Paredes, on behalf of the Board of Directors for the Gun Owners Foundation, added:
“New York doubled down to infringe on the Second Amendment in direct contradiction of the edicts from the U.S. Supreme Court. GOA and GOF are thankful to be vindicated by Judge Suddaby, who helped restore gun rights today. GOA and GOF will continue to fight for the rights of the people until Albany sets aside anti-gun hysteria and supports their citizens’ unalienable right to self-defense, as guaranteed by the Second Amendment.”
Share the post "Unconstitutional New York State Concealed Carry Law Enjoined"
By a 217-213 vote, the U.S. House of Representatives narrowly passed a bill that would ban mag-fed semi-automatic rifles for the first time since 2004, with two Republicans voting for the measure and five Democrats voting against it. This article features the NSSF’s response to this new legislation, which would ban sales of AR-type rifles and some pistols.
NSSF Denounces Unconstitutional Gun Ban Passed by U.S. House of Representatives
NSSF, the firearm industry trade association, condemns the U.S. House of Representatives’ passage of H.R. 1808, the “Assault Weapons Ban of 2022″, as amended. The legislation ignores the Constitutional right, upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, for law-abiding Americans to keep and bear arms that are in common use. NSSF estimates that there are over 24.4 million Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs) in circulation in America between 1990 and 2020.
“This legislation is as dangerous as it is revealing of the contempt for which the House Democrats hold for the Constitution and the U.S. Supreme Court”, said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF’s Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “Chairman Jerrold Nadler admitted during debate in his committee that he didn’t care the legislation was unconstitutional and defied Supreme Court precedent. Democratic representatives are not fulfilling the interest of ‘the People,’ instead representing special-interest gun control groups that seek to disarm law-abiding citizens and scapegoat them for crimes committed by others.”
The MSR remains the most-popular selling centerfire semiautomatic rifle in the United States today. There are more MSRs in circulation today than there are Ford F-Series trucks on the road. The Supreme Court upheld that commonly-owned firearms are lawful for private ownership in both the Heller and Bruen rulings. Banning of an entire class of semiautomatic firearms can be viewed as nothing short of an outright infringement of Second Amendment rights — rights which belong to the people and not the government. This legislation, however, also includes some semiautomatic shotguns and handguns.
This legislation does nothing to improve public safety, as it doesn’t address criminals acting without regard for law or innocent life. Instead, it will put the lives of those who obey the law at greater risk by denying them an entire class of firearms that are used for home defense.
The previous 1994 Assault Weapons Ban proved to be ineffective at reducing crime. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) concluded the “assault weapons ban” did not result in crime reduction. (See Analysis).
The FBI’s Uniform Crime Report shows more murders were committed by individuals using knives, fists and clubs than by those using any rifle – not just MSRs like AR-15s.
Share the post "House of Representatives Votes to Ban Modern Sporting Rifles"
Recognizing that a confirmation vote was likely to fail, the Biden White House has retracted the nomination of David Chipman to head the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). An aggressive anti-gunner, Chipman has advocated the banning of AR-15s and other popular semi-auto rifles. There were concerns about the handling of his own, issued firearms when he worked for the ATF, and his statements as a paid anti-gun activist were extreme and worrisome. Chipman is currently a paid gun control lobbyist who has worked for Bloomberg’s Everytown, as well as the gun control groups Brady United and Giffords Law Center.
Sen. Mitch McConnell was pleased that the Biden Administration retracted the “terrible nomination of David Chipman”. McConnell noted that it was “absurd that a vocal opponent of Americans’ Constitutional rights was ever picked to run ATF. This is a win for the Second Amendment and law-abiding American citizens.”
Sen. Steve Daines concurred: “I’ve been opposed to David Chipman leading the ATF from the start. He’s an anti-Second Amendment, gun-grabbing radical that should not lead the agency that regulates firearms.”
“The defeat of David Chipman is a victory for all Americans who value the right of self-defense,” said Young Americans for Liberty spokesman Eric Brakey, who added: “Chipman has called for a total ban on private ownership of commonly-owned firearms — like the AR-15[.] President Biden should have never nominated this rabid activist on the payroll of Bloomberg-funded anti-gun groups to lead the ATF in the first place.” And the Second Amendment Foundation’s Alan Gottlieb stated: “This is a great grassroots victory for the Second Amendment.”
Immediately following Chipman’s nomination, Gottlieb said it had the smell of political patronage to the Giffords Law Center gun control lobbying group. He also accurately portrayed the nomination as a declaration of war on gun owners’ rights. “We predicted Joe Biden’s pick would ignite a political firestorm, and it did”, Gottlieb recalled. “The President has been so wrong on so many issues, and the Chipman nomination ranks right up there[.]”
Gottlieb continued: “We’re proud of the grassroots effort to defeat this foolish Biden scheme to put an acknowledged extremist gun ban advocate in charge of ATF[.] This is a major defeat for the billionaire elitists who bankroll the gun prohibition movement.”
The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms declared that the withdrawal of anti-gun lobbyist David Chipman’s nomination to head the ATF is “a much-deserved defeat for the gun prohibition lobby and Joe Biden”.
Share the post "David Chipman Withdrawn as Nominee for ATF Director"
You may want to monitor Gun Talk Radio this Sunday, March 28, 2021. This Gun Talk episode will be one of the most important of the year. The broadcast covers efforts in Washington to throttle the Second Amendment along with a shocking decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denying citizens the right to carry firearms. This broadcast airs Sunday, 3/28/21 from 2:00 PM to 5:00 PM Eastern time. You can interact with the Gun Talk team by calling 866-TALK-GUN with comments and questions.
Multiple Gun Rights Issues Covered on Sunday
Important topics include the 9th Circuit’s recent ruling in Young v. Hawaii that the Second Amendment does not guarantee the right to bear arms outside the home, state preemption laws, a bid to end the FOID card, examining the partnership between the gun industry and the mental health industry. The show also covers the recent Boulder, Colorado shooting and a U.S. Senate hearing on the prevention of gun violence. Top Shot’s Chris Cheng testified in the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on Gun Violence Prevention. Chris stops by to talk about the hearing. CLICK HERE for Video of testimony at Senate Hearing.
In this Gun Talk episode journalist Emily Miller examines the Ninth Circuit’s latest decision regarding open carry. CLICK HERE to read Miller’s analysis of that Circuit Court decision issued Friday, 3/24/2021.
Young v. Hawaii Decision Goes Against Supreme Court Precedents
Speaking about the 9th Circuit’s recent 7-4 ruling in Young v. Hawaii, the NSSF says that upholding Hawaii’s ban on carry ignores the clear language of the Second Amendment and U.S. Supreme Court precedent of the landmark 2008 Heller decision and 2010 McDonald decision, which displayed the exact opposite findings. The Ninth Circuit’s ruling underscores the need for the U.S. Supreme Court to accept firearm-related cases for review to settle the long-standing disputes. Lower courts have failed to apply Supreme Court precedents and are effectively treating the Second Amendment as a second-class right.
“The blatant defiance of the Supreme Court to undermine Heller and hollow out rights afforded to individuals by their Creator and clearly protected by the Constitution is unconscionable,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior VP and General Counsel. “It is with amazing boldness that the Ninth Circuit brazenly sets aside not just the previous findings of the Supreme Court, which legally they are bound to apply, but actively chooses to ignore plain English and refuses to acknowledge the right to bear arms. We look forward to filing an amicus brief when this heads to the Supreme Court.”
On Gun Talk Radio this week, Tom Gresham covers the shooting in Boulder and the calls for new gun control laws that were launched within minutes of the breaking news. With random attacks always comes talk of mental health, and Walk the Talk America’s Michael Sodini will address mental health issues on the Sunday show. In addition, Illinois State Senator Neil Anderson talks about lifting the Illinois requirement to have a Firearm Owners Identification Card (FOID) in order to purchase or own a gun.
Gun Talk Radio Broadcast Times — and Podcast Archive
This broadcast airs Sunday, March 28, 2021 from 2:00 PM to 5:00 PM Eastern time on radio stations nationwide. Past podcasts can be heard online via the GunTalk Podcast Center and Apple iTunes. The Gun Talk podcast archive has many great shows. Click the link below to hear a recent show (1/3/2021) about mainstream media and financial industry bias against firearms and shooting sports enterprises.
Podcast about Boulder Colorado Shooting and Gun Control
Podcast about Impending Gun Control Laws:
Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk Radio show airs live on Sundays from 2PM-5PM Eastern, and runs on more than 270 stations. Listen on a radio station near you or via LIVE Streaming. All Gun Talk shows can also be downloaded as podcasts through the GunTalk Podcast Center or Apple iTunes. Gun Talk is also available on YouTube and GunTalk.com.
Share the post "Court Gun Rulings and Federal Gun Control on Gun Talk Radio"
On Thursday, March 11, 2021 the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 8, a bill that would impose mandatory Federal NICS background checks on ALL firearms transfers, including private sales. Some states, such as California, already have this restriction in effect, but in a few other states intra-family or person-to-person long gun sales are allowed. The House also passed a second gun control measure, H.R. 1446, which would extend the initial background check review period from three to 10 business days. Previously if the NICS check was not completed by the FBI within 3 business days, a sale could (in most circumstances) proceed.
NOTE: H.R. 8 and H.R. 1446 have NOT (yet) been approved by the U.S. Senate, or signed into law. But given Democratic Party control of the Senate and White House, there is a good chance that both these House bills may well become the law of the land.
About H.R. 8 — What It Would Require
This bill would change the law in states where certain types of person-to-person sales do not currently require the purchaser to have a Federal background check. USA Today explained: “The legislation would expand the cases in which a background check is required for the sale or transfer of a firearm, including for private individuals and groups, closing the ‘Gun Show Loophole'[.] The bill would make it illegal for anyone who is not a licensed firearm importer, manufacturer or dealer to trade or sell firearms to another person; current federal law requires background checks only for [sales made by] licensed gun dealers.”
As it stands now, this Universal Background Check bill would not mandate a National Registry of all firearms, but we know that many Democratic Party politicians, including Pres. Biden and V.P. Harris, support a National Registry. This would provide the Federal government with a database of all firearms owned by Americans, along with the location of the guns. Such a Registry would facilitate gun confiscation, as is happening right now in Canada. (READ about Canadian Gun Confiscation.)
NRA-ILA Finds Flaws with H.R. 8 and H.R. 1446
After the House of Representative passed gun control bills HR 8 and HR 1446, on a nearly party-line vote, NRA-ILA Exec. Dir. Jason Ouimet released the following statement:
“These bills are a transparent attempt by gun control advocates in Congress to restrict the rights of law-abiding Americans under the guise of addressing the violent criminal culture in America. The truth, however, is that neither of these bills will do anything to solve that problem. By giving full power to unelected government bureaucrats to indefinitely delay and prevent lawful firearm transfers, H.R. 1446 could ultimately destroy the Second Amendment rights guaranteed to every law-abiding American by turning it into a privilege enjoyed by a select few. H.R. 8, so called ‘universal’ background checks, cannot be enforced without a federal gun registry, will not prevent crime, and will turn otherwise law-abiding citizens into criminals for simply loaning a firearm to friends or family members. If Congress is serious about the safety of law-abiding citizens, it should have passed concealed carry reciprocity so that Americans can safeguard themselves and their families across state lines and throughout our country during these dangerous times.”
Video Explains Important Provisions of H.R. 8 and H.R. 1446:
Share the post "House of Reps Passes H.R. 8 for Universal Background Checks"
The November 3rd election is just 18 days away. If Joe Biden wins, he has promised an aggressive anti-gun agenda starting with further restrictions on semi-auto rifles. Joe’s running mate Kamala Harris said she would enforce gun control via Executive Order. Gun confiscation by Executive Order happened in Canada when Prime Minister Trudeau, without legislative approval, ordered Canadians to turn in their magazine-fed semi-auto rifles.
So, is it time to finally get an AR-platform rifle? Or get another if you already have one? Only you can decide that, but we have identified three great AR deals — two complete lowers under $190 and a complete AR Carbine for under $550. And yes, these are all IN STOCK NOW. Check out these deals:
PSA Complete Lower with Adjustable Stock — $179.99
Complete Palmetto State Armory AR lower is fully assembled. It will take take standard complete uppers, which you can build or purchase later without an FFL. The lower is the section that much be purchased through an FFL with a background check.
Machined from Aluminum Forgings 7075-T6
Hardcoat Anodizing: MIL-A-8625F, Type III, Class 2
Milspec diameter Receiver Extension
M4 Stock
Staked M4 Lock Nut
Standard Carbine Buffer
Un-notched Hammer compatible with 9mm use
PSA Complete Lower with Adj. Magpul FDE Stock — $199.99
Complete Palmetto State Armory lower with Magpul Flat Dark Earth grip and stock is fully assembled. It will take a standard complete upper, which you can build or purchase later without an FFL. The lower is the section that much be purchased through an FFL with a background check.
Machined from Aluminum Forgings 7075-T6
Hardcoat Anodizing: MIL-A-8625F, Type III, Class 2
Milspec diameter Receiver Extension
Magpul MOE Stock, Flat Dark Earth
Magpul MOE Grip, Flat Dark Earth
Staked M4 Lock Nut
Standard Carbine Buffer
Enhanced Polished Trigger (EPT)
Un-notched Hammer compatible with 9mm use
PSA 16″ Freedom Rifle Olive Drab ($539.99) or Black ($549.99)
This is a full, complete AR15-type rifle with 16″ barrel, and M4-type receiver. Twist rate is 1:7″. Sold complete, except for magazine. This same rifle is also available in all-black for $549.99. This rifle must be transferred through an FFL with background check.
Barrel Length: 16″
Barrel Profile: A2
Barrel: A2 Profile, Chrome Moly Vanadium, Nitride finish
Muzzle Thread Pattern: 1/2″ x 28
Twist Rate: 1 in 7″
Barrel Extension: M4
Gas System Length: Midlength
Receiver Material: Forged 7075-T6
Receiver Type: M4
Handguard Type: Mid-Length Classic with heat shields, ODG
Fire Control Group: Standard Mil-Spec Trigger Group
Grip: A2-style, ODG
Stock: M4-style, ODG
Overall Length: 32 inches
Weight (as configured): 6.8 lbs
Election Day is just 52 days away. On November 3, 2020, Americans will head to the polls. For gun owners, this may be the most significant Presidential election in a generation. The Democratic Party, as stated in the DNC platform and Democrat-sponsored Bills now in Congress, intends to severely restrict gun rights, require a federal license for gun ownership, ban online ammo sales, and ban whole classes of firearms.
Nearly 5 million Americans are first-time gun buyers. We hope they, along with ALL gun owners, will vote on November 3rd, and remember which candidates support the Second Amendment. As the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) states: “Current events across the United States demonstrate why the Founding Fathers 230 years ago had the foresight to recognize why the right to keep and bear arms would still be vital today.”
Target shooters, hunters, and gun owners must work together to defend their Constitutional rights. On Election Day 2020, vote to protect America’s firearms freedoms: #GUNVOTE.
Hornady Contributes $500,000 to 2020 #GUNVOTE Effort
#GUNVOTE is a vital NSSF campaign to encourage America’s gun owners to register to vote and vote for candidates who support the Second Amendment and gun rights. Go to Action.gunvote.org to learn how to register to vote in your state, and find your polling place.
Hornady Manufacturing, maker of ammunition, tools, and reloading components, has contributed $500,000 to the NSSF’s #GUNVOTE voter registration and education campaign.
“A historic number of Americans have jumped off the fence to purchase firearms so far this year, and it’s critical for gun owners old and new to be educated and vote in November,” said Steve Hornady, President of Hornady Manufacturing. “The Second Amendment has never faced a threat like it does today. It is crystal clear why our right to keep and bear arms is now more important than ever. Making this contribution to NSSF’s #GUNVOTE campaign will ensure the firearm and ammunition industry has the resources needed to educate gun owners, target shooters and hunters about what is at stake in this election. Hornady Manufacturing is proud to support this critical voter registration, education and mobilization campaign.”
SIG Sauer Contributes $250,000 to 2020 #GUNVOTE Effort
SIG Sauer, a world-leading firearms maker, has contributed $250,000 to NSSF’s #GUNVOTE voter registration and education campaign. This campaign seeks ensure that America’s gun owners exercise their right to vote so they can protect the Second Amendment.
“SIG Sauer believes it is imperative for all gun owners to be registered to vote and to know where the candidates at all levels of government stand on the Second Amendment so that on election day they can make informed choices to protect their rights”, said SIG Sauer CEO Ron Cohen. “Our contribution to the #GUNVOTE campaign represents SIG Sauer’s wholehearted belief in the NSSF #GUNVOTE effort”.
With the Presidential election looming, the stakes have never been higher. Joe Biden and his VP candidate Kamala Harris have pledged to enact new laws that could result in rifle confiscation, criminalization of private sales, and banning of online guns and ammo purchases. In addition, Biden and Harris have called for new gun taxes, while Harris has advocated banning guns by Executive Action — rule by fiat, bypassing the legislative process.
Share the post "Hornady and SIG Sauer Donate to Important GUNVOTE Program"
Shown is text from H.R.5717 and S.3254 mandating Federal firearms licensing.
Make no mistake about it — leaders of the Democratic party want to dismantle the Second Amendment and impose devastating new restrictions on gun owners. Companion Bills currently in Congress will require a Federal License to own ANY Firearms. The first line of the identical bills, H.R.5717 and S.3254, mandates a federal license for any American to legally “purchase, acquire, or possess a firearm or ammunition”. Yes you can’t even own ammo without a Federal license. Morever, to obtain such a license, citizens can be subject to psychological/character exams so that bureaucrats can “make a determination of suitability”. Such requirements effectively destroy the Second Amendment. Imagine if you had to obtain a license to vote, or pass a psychological “determination of suitability” before you could attend your church.
These companion bills, which have been endorsed by Joe Biden and his running mate Kamala Harris, represent the greatest legislative threat to the gun rights in the history of the country. Biden himself has called for the banning of AR15s and other modern sporting rifles, while Harris has advocated the use of Executive Action to confiscate semi-auto rifles (as was done recently in Canada).
The Jews for the Protection of Firearms Ownership (JPFO.org) have analyzed these companion bills in Congress. The JPFO states that this legislation’s “character [and] suitability” requirements for licensing would effectively eliminate the Second Amendment: “The Bill of Rights’ ban on infringement would be ignored… Unelected bureaucrats will literally choose who can bear arms [and] all existing arms in private hands will be subject to confiscation.”
The Democratic-sponsored gun control legislation, H.R.5717 and S.3254 will require current and future gun owners to pass psychology and character tests to continue owning the firearms they already legally possess. When asked, legal experts have been unable to describe how this could be applied fairly and predictably. America has an estimated 100 million gun owners. That number has grown dramatically in 2020 because of citizens’ fears over large scale rioting and intimidation by BLM and Antifa, and the demands by Democrats to “defund the police”.
The first line of the identical bills, HR5717 and S3254, requires a federal license for any American to legally “purchase, acquire, or possess a firearm or ammunition”. This is de facto infringement.
To obtain this license you would need to prove to unelected officials that you are of “sound mind and character”, you do not “potentially create a risk to public safety”, and you meet “any other requirements the State determines relevant”. Authorities, “make a determination of suitability”, for your possession and ownership of firearms, including any you currently own.
How bad are the Democratic-sponsored gun bills? Read this summary of Senate Bill 3254, sponsored by Elizabeth Warren. The provisions of companion House Bill H.R.5717 are identical.
Senate Bill 3254 Official Summary of Provisions
Gun Violence Prevention and Community Safety Act of 2020
This bill makes various changes to the federal framework governing the sale, transfer, and possession of firearms and ammunition. Among other things, the bill does the following:
— Requires individuals to obtain a license to purchase, acquire, or possess a firearm or ammunition;
— Raises the minimum age — from 18 years to 21 years — to purchase firearms and ammunition;
— Establishes new background check requirements for firearm transfers between private parties;
— Requires law enforcement agencies to be notified following a firearms-related background check that results in a denial;
— Creates a statutory process for a family or household member to petition a court for an extreme risk protection order to remove firearms from an individual who poses a risk of committing violence;
— Restricts the import, sale, manufacture, transfer, or possession of semi-automatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices;
— Restricts the manufacture, sale, transfer, purchase, or receipt of ghost guns (i.e., guns without serial numbers);
— Makes trafficking in firearms a stand-alone criminal offense;
— Requires federally licensed gun dealers to submit and annually certify compliance with a security plan to detect and deter firearm theft;
— Removes limitations on the civil liability of gun manufacturers;
— Allows the Consumer Product Safety Commission to issue safety standards for firearms and firearm components;
Share the post "Democratic Bills Require Federal License to Possess Guns and Ammo, along with Bureaucratic “Determination of Suitability”"
