HOME PAGE
Shooters' FORUM
Daily BULLETIN
Guns of the Week
Articles Archive
BLOG Archive
Competition Info
Varmint Pages
6BR Info Page
6BR Improved
17 CAL Info Page
20 CAL Info Page
223 Info Page
22BR Info Page
30BR Info Page
6PPC Info Page
6XC Info Page
243 Win Info Page
6.5x47 Info Page
6.5-284 Info Page
7mm Info Page
308 Win Info Page
FREE Targets
Top Gunsmiths
Tools & Gear
Bullet Reviews
Barrels
Custom Actions
Gun Stocks
Scopes & Optics
Vendor List
Reader POLLS
Event Calendar
HELP PAGE
> Contact Us
> ADVERTISING














Eurooptic vortex burris nightforce sale




teslong borescope digital camera barrel monitor


As an Amazon Associate, this site earns a commission from Amazon sales.









July 13th, 2018

Second Amendment Foundation Sues California State DOJ

CA Gun bullet button assault rifle registration
Graphic courtesy The Daily Shooter YouTube channel.

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.”

CA Gun bullet button assault rifle registration

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.

Share the post "Second Amendment Foundation Sues California State DOJ"

Permalink Bullets, Brass, Ammo, News 2 Comments »
July 27th, 2017

Firearms Carry Right Recognized in District of Columbia Case

U.S. Court of Appeals Second Amendment Wrenn vs. District Columbia
Federal Courthouse in Washington, DC. Photo by AgnosticPreachersKid under CC 3.0 license.

Story based on report by Second Amendment Foundation.
This week, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) won a precedent-setting victory against “good reason” requirements for concealed carry in our Nation’s capital when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued a permanent injunction against enforcement of such a requirement in the District. This order was issued in the consolidated cases of Wrenn v. District of Columbia and Grace v. District of Columbia.

According to the ABA Journal: “The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled 2-1 on Tuesday that the restriction violates the Second Amendment because it amounts to a total ban on the right to carry a gun for most residents.” The 2-1 decision, written by Judge Thomas Beall Griffith, stated:

“At the Second Amendment’s core lies the right of responsible citizens to carry firearms for personal self-defense beyond the home, subject to longstanding restrictions… The District’s good-reason law is necessarily a total ban on exercises of that constitutional right for most D.C. residents. That’s enough to sink this law under (the 2008 U.S. Supreme Court’s Heller ruling).” Griffith added, in no uncertain terms: “The Second Amendment erects some absolute barriers that no gun law may breach.”

U.S. Court of Appeals Second Amendment Wrenn vs. District Columbia“Today’s ruling contains some powerful language that affirms what we have argued for many years, that requiring a so-called ‘good cause’ to exercise a constitutionally-protect right does not pass the legal smell test,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “We’re particularly pleased that the opinion makes it clear that the Second Amendment’s core generally covers carrying in public for self-defense.”

The court went on to state in its 31-page majority opinion that the District of Columbia’s “good cause” requirement was essentially designed to prevent the exercise of the right to bear arms by most District residents. Therefore, the net effect of the requirement amounted to nothing more than a complete prohibition in direct contradiction to the 2008 Heller decision that struck down the District of Columbia’s 30-year handgun ban.

After the decision was handed down, SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb released a statement saying, “To read the majority opinion and not come away convinced that such ‘good reason’ or ‘good cause’ requirements are just clever ways to prevent honest citizens from exercising their rights is not possible. To say we are delighted with the ruling would be an understatement. We are simply more encouraged to keep fighting and winning firearms freedom one lawsuit at a time.” The Second Amendment Foundation invites donations to support future legal efforts to protect Second Amendment rights.

Share the post "Firearms Carry Right Recognized in District of Columbia Case"

Permalink Handguns, News 4 Comments »
October 26th, 2015

Seattle Gun and Ammo Tax Challenged by Firearms Groups

Seattle Gun ammo tax

Seattle recently passed a law imposing special taxes on the sale of guns and ammunition. Labeled a “gun violence” tax, the Seattle ordinance is designed to discourage firearms use and, presumably, drive gun and ammo vendors out of the city. City Council President Tim Burgess, author of the controversial Seattle ordinance, likened the gun/ammo levy to “sin taxes” on alcohol and tobacco: “We’ve been working on this for several years. We tax cigarettes and alcohol and even wood-burning stoves for public health purposes. Why not guns and ammunition?”

Opponents of the new law have taken the city to court. The NRA, Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), NSSF and other organizations have challenged the so-called “gun violence tax” recently passed by the Seattle City Council. A motion for summary judgment has been filed citing Washington State’s long-standing preemption statute which “fully occupies and preempts the entire field of firearms regulation within the boundaries of the state.”

Gun group lawyers argued that the city “is well aware of this restriction on its legislative power” because Seattle’s most recent attempt to regulate firearms was emphatically struck down by the Court of Appeals in the case of Chan vs. Seattle. (That lawsuit derailed an attempt by the city under former Mayors Greg Nickels and Mike McGinn to ban guns in city park facilities.)

Seattle Gun ammo tax

“Seattle is trying to be too clever by half,” said SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. “This so-called ‘gun violence tax’ clearly seeks to limit access to firearms and ammunition by imposing what amounts to a regulatory fee on the sale of all firearms and ammunition within City limits. The city can’t do that, and we’re confident the court will tell them so. In the final analysis, this is an attempt to skate around, and thus erode, our state’s model preemption law. That cannot be allowed to stand. The City of Seattle is not an entity unto itself, but still part of Washington State, and therefore the city has to abide by the same laws we all follow.”

Public domain Seattle photo by Rattlhed.

Share the post "Seattle Gun and Ammo Tax Challenged by Firearms Groups"

Permalink News 4 Comments »
October 15th, 2010

Suit Filed on Behalf of Veteran Denied Gun Rights

Second AmendmentActing on behalf of a Georgia resident and honorably discharged Vietnam War veteran, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) has filed a lawsuit against Attorney General Eric Holder and the Federal Bureau of Investigation over enforcement of a federal statute that can deny gun rights to someone with a misdemeanor conviction on his record.

The lawsuit was filed in United States District Court for the District of Columbia. SAF and co-plaintiff Jefferson Wayne Schrader of Cleveland, GA are represented by attorney Alan Gura, who successfully argued both the Heller and McDonald cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.

In July 1968, Schrader, then 21, was found guilty of misdemeanor assault and battery relating to a fight involving a man who had previously assaulted him in Annapolis, MD. The altercation was observed by a police officer, who arrested Schrader, then an enlisted man in the Navy, stationed in Annapolis. The man he fought with was in a street gang that had attacked him for entering their “territory,” according to the complaint.

Schrader was ordered to pay a $100 fine and $9 court cost. He subsequently served a tour of duty in Vietnam and was eventually honorably discharged. However, in 2008 and again in 2009, Mr. Schrader was denied the opportunity to receive a shotgun as a gift, or to purchase a handgun for personal protection. He was advised by the FBI to dispose of or surrender any firearms he might have or face criminal prosecution.

“Schrader’s dilemma,” explained SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb, “is that until recently, Maryland law did not set forth a maximum sentence for the crime of misdemeanor assault. Because of that, he is now being treated like a felon and his gun rights have been denied. No fair-minded person can tolerate gun control laws being applied this way.” Gottlieb added: “Mr. Schrader’s case is a great example of why gun owners cannot trust government bureaucrats to enforce gun laws.”

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.

Share the post "Suit Filed on Behalf of Veteran Denied Gun Rights"

Permalink News 1 Comment »