|
|
November 14th, 2010
 Friday, November 19, is National Ammo Day, a day when gun-owners are encouraged to purchase at least 100 rounds of ammunition. National Ammo Day is an annual BUYcott event, a grassroots demonstration of the numbers of committed American firearms owners. There are an estimated 75 MILLION gun owners in the United States of America. If each gun owner or Second Amendment supporter buys 100 rounds of ammunition, that’s 7.5 BILLION rounds in the hands of law-abiding citizens!
Ammo Day is based on the principle that there is strength in numbers. Consider this — when politicians see the amount of tax dollars generated through ammunition sales those politicians will be less inclined to pass restrictive legislation. Likewise, when millions of lawful firearms owners “vote with their pocketbooks” on Ammo Day, it demonstrates that supporters of the Second Amendment are serious, organized, and willing to spend money to protect their rights. That’s something anti-gun politicians can’t ignore.
October 15th, 2010
 Acting 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.
October 2nd, 2010
Canada’s mandatory long-gun Registry has been a billion-dollar failure that has not reduced crime. In recent months, concerted efforts have been made to scrap the Registry. Success was almost achieved last week, when a Private Members Bill to eliminate the Registry was narrowly defeated by just two votes. On September 22, Members of Parliament voted 153 to 151 to maintain the Registry. The vote followed weeks of intense political maneuvering by the federal Conservative, Liberal and NDP parties.
Canadian Outdoors Network Vows to Continue Registry Fight
The Canadian Outdoors Network (CON), a consortium of 28 outdoors groups (including the Canadian Shooting Sports Assn.), says Parliament’s decision to keep the long gun Registry will not end the national debate on firearm ownership.
 “This is just one battle in a long war,” says Dr. Robert Bailey, CON National Coordinator. “This is about competing visions driven by differing ideologies. For us, the fight is about preserving our hunting, fishing, trapping and shooting lifestyle. The Registry paints legitimate gun owners as people who are inherently a threat or a risk to society and that’s simply not the case.”
The Canadian Outdoors Network, representing 500,000 Canadian hunters, shooters, and sportsmen, will continue its campaign to scrap a program plagued by cost overruns and controversy. Since 1995, the registry has cost taxpayers more than $1 billion with no demonstrated reduction in gun crime.
“If public safety was the primary objective, the current national debate would be about crime control, not gun control,” says Bailey. “It’s time we refocused these funds, and our efforts, on more appropriate programs that actually target crime, such as the smuggling of illegal firearms.”
The Outdoors Network will continue to push for change as the country prepares for an anticipated federal election. “It’s important that these MPs know exactly what they’ve done,” says Bailey. “They were elected on promises to get rid of the Registry, then flip-flopped for political reasons… they have to be held accountable.”
The Canadian Firearms Registry is a government-run registry of all legally-owned guns in Canada. Compulsory gun registration was written into the Firearms Act (Bill 68) in 1995, which also provided for the establishment of a centralized database. It requires every firearm in Canada to be registered or rendered in an unusable state. This was an effort to reduce crime by making every gun traceable. Any person wishing to obtain a firearm must first acquire a Possession and Acquisition Licence or PAL.
The Registry was supposed to cost Canadian taxpayers approximately $119 million dollars. Instead, documents obtained by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation show the program has cost upward of $2 BILLION dollars. At the same time there is little evidence that the Registry has had any notable effect on crime.
CANADIAN OUTDOORS NETWORK
Alberta Fish and Game Association
Alberta Outdoors Coalition
BC Wildlife Federation
BCWF Political Action Alliance
Canadian Institute for Legislative Action
Canadian Section of the Wildlife Society
Canadian Shooting Sports Association
Canadian Sporting Arms & Ammunition Assn.
Delta Waterfowl Foundation
Fédération Québecoise des Chasseurs et Pecheurs
Fur Institute of Canada
Friends of Fur
Hunting for Tomorrow Foundation
Long Point Waterfowl |
Manitoba Wildlife Federation
National Wild Turkey Federation
New Brunswick Wildlife Federation
Newfoundland & Labrador Wildlife Fed.
Northwestern Ontario Sportsmen’s Alliance
Nova Scotia Fed. of Anglers and Hunters
Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters
Pr. Edward Island Chapter Delta Waterfowl
Pr. Edward Island Trappers Association
Pr. Edward Island Wildlife Federation
Ruffed Grouse Society
Saskatchewan Wildlife Federation
Yukon Fish and Game Association
Wildlife Habitat Canada |
September 21st, 2010
 The 25th Annual Gun Rights Policy Conference (GRPC) will be held this upcoming weekend, September 24-26, in San Francisco, CA. Ironically (or perhaps deliberately?) the conference convenes in one of the most gun-hostile cities in North America. Past GRPCs have covered the latest firearms trends and outlined strategic plans to expand gun rights. This year GRPC organizers will focus on critical issues such as: city gun bans, youth violence, “smart” guns, concealed carry, federal legislation, legal actions, gun show regulation, state and local activity. Noted legal experts will also preview the upcoming court cases and revisit the U.S. Supreme Court landmark decision in D.C. v. Heller.
The team of “distinguished experts” has not yet been finalized, but past speakers have included: Alan M. Gottlieb, Wayne LaPierre, Larry Elder, Ken Hamblin, John Lott, Sandy Froman, Massad Ayoob, Tom Gresham, Alan Gura, Reps. Bob Barr and Chris Cannon and many others. This event is co-hosted by the Second Amendment Foundation, which offers free online registration.
NOTE: Books, monographs and other materials — enough to start a Second Amendment library — are FREE, as are Saturday luncheon, Friday and Saturday evening receptions, and morning/afternoon snacks. Other meals, travel costs, and lodging costs must be paid by attendee.
September 1st, 2010
 Despite last-minute efforts by their authors to secure passage, three proposed California laws restricting gun rights went down to defeat yesterday in Sacramento. Tuesday, August 31st, was the final day this year’s session of the California Legislature could pass new laws.
The fight went all the way to the midnight deadline for passage, but AB 1810, AB 1934, and AB 2358 were defeated — at least for this year. As the clock ticked down to midnight, the bills’ sponsors could not secure enough votes to pass the bills. In a state where Democratic Party legislators have rammed through anti-gun bills year after year, this is a significant victory for firearms rights. All three of these bills posed a fundamental threat to the rights of gun owners.
AB 1810 — Mandatory Registration of Long Guns
If enacted, Assembly Bill 1810 would have required registration of rifles and shotguns in the same way handguns are now registered in California. Under current law, the information collected at the time of purchase of a rifle or shotgun (serial number, make, and model) is destroyed after the background check is completed. AB 1810 would have required that the make, model, and serial number of the firearm, as well as the identifying information of the purchaser, be recorded and kept on file by the California Department of Justice.
AB 1934 — Prohibition of Open Carry of Unloaded Handguns
AB 1934 would have deleted provisions of current California law that allows an unloaded firearm to be carried openly in a belt holster. With some important restrictions, “Open Carry” remains legal in many areas of California. Organized “open carry” gatherings by Second Amendment supporters drew media attention, putting this issue in the limelight. Anti-gunners simply could not tolerate the idea that someone could carry a firearm in public places without going to jail. AB 1934 would basically place the entire state “off-limits” to open carry, eliminating a long-standing right in California.
AB 2358 — Collection of Information on Ammunition Purchasers
AB 2358 would have required that ammunition vendors provide detailed information on ammo sales to local law enforcement if required by city or county ordinance records. In addition to records of the date and type of ammo purchased, AB 2358 would force ammunition vendors to give police the names, address, and other personal information of all ammo purchasers. AB 2358 would have also allowed uncontrolled expansion of city and county ordinances requiring handgun ammunition vendors to transmit all information collected relating to sales of handgun ammunition and some rifle cartridges to local law enforcement agencies.
We applaud the California Legislators who voted against these three bills. Hopefully, this is the beginning of a change in the Golden State — perhaps inspired by the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that the Second Amendment protects the right of ALL Americans to keep and bear arms. We also commend the work of the California Rifle & Pistol Association, whose staffers organized opposition to AB 1810, AB 1934, and AB 2358. For all friends of the Second Amendment, and for all Californians involved in the shooting sports, this is a time to celebrate.
July 23rd, 2010
It’s a bit hokey, but the new music video from Australian singer/songwriter Steve Lee, has a catchy tune — and an important message. We commend I’ll Give Up My Gun, Lee’s latest musical jab at nanny-state gun restrictions in his Australian homeland. Lee, who earned worldwide attention for his I Like Guns music video, addresses serious topics — gun confiscation and personal freedom — in his new YouTube video. For those fighting anti-gun politicians, not only in Australia, but in other nations around the world, Lee’s defiant lyrics provide inspiration: “I’ll give up my gun… when the ocean runs dry. I’ll give up my gun… when politicians don’t lie.”
To widen its appeal, Lee’s video blends humor with a serious theme. Hopefully this video may cause a few fence-sitters to rethink their position on gun control. Credit to Steve of The Firearms Blog for spotlighting this entertaining, yet thought-provoking video.
July 5th, 2010
On July 1st, the NRA and NRA-ILA sent a letter to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee opposing the nomination of Solicitor General Elena Kagan as Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. In the letter, the NRA explained that “throughout her political career, [Kagan] has repeatedly demonstrated a clear hostility to the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution”. CLICK HERE for PDF file with full text of the NRA/NRA-ILA letter.
Highlights of NRA and NRA-ILA (Institute for Legislative Action) Letter
As [Kagan] has no judicial record on which we can rely, we have only her political record to review. And throughout her political career, she has repeatedly demonstrated a clear hostility to the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.
 As a clerk for Justice Thurgood Marshall, Ms. Kagan said she was “not sympathetic” to a challenge to Washington, D.C.’s ban on handguns and draconian registration requirements. As domestic policy advisor in the Clinton White House, a colleague described her as “immersed” in President Clinton’s gun control policy efforts. For example, she was involved in an effort to ban more than 50 types of commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms — an effort that was described as: “taking the law and bending it as far as we can to capture a whole new class of guns.” And as U.S. Solicitor General, she chose not to file a brief last year in the landmark case McDonald v. Chicago, thus taking the position that incorporating the Second Amendment and applying it to the States was of no interest to the Obama Administration or the federal government. These are not the positions of a person who supports the Second Amendment.
During her confirmation hearings last year, Justice Sonia Sotomayor repeatedly stated that the Supreme Court’s historic Heller decision was “settled law”. Even further, in response to a question from Chairman Leahy, she said “I understand the individual right fully that the Supreme Court recognized in Heller’.” Yet last Monday in McDonald, she joined a dissenting opinion which stated: “I can find nothing in the Second Amendment’s text, history, or underlying rationale that could warrant characterizing it as ‘fundamental’ insofar as it seeks to protect the keeping and bearing of arms for private self-defense purposes”. We would also note that both Heller and McDonald were 5-4 decisions. The fact that four justices would effectively write the Second Amendment out of the Constitution is completely unacceptable.
Ms. Kagan has repeatedly declined to say whether she agrees with the dissenting views of justices Stevens, Breyer, Ginsburg and Sotomayor, which leaves unanswered the very serious questions of whether she would vote to overturn Heller and McDonald or narrow their holdings to a practical nullity.
Any individual who does not believe that the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right and who does not respect our God-given right of self-defense should not serve on any court, much less receive a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. Justice Sotomayor’s blatant reversal on this critical issue requires that we look beyond statements made during confirmation hearings and examine a nominee’s entire body of work.
Unfortunately, Ms. Kagan’s record on the Second Amendment gives us no confidence that if confirmed to the Court, she will faithfully defend the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms of law-abiding Americans.
July 5th, 2010
In McDonald v. Chicago, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the Second Amendment applies to State and Local goverment actions, not just to Federal laws and activities. In so ruling, the High Court established that State and municipal laws can be challenged on the grounds that they violate a citizen’s individual right to “keep and bear arms”.
This landmark decision was the focus of the July 4th edition of Gun Talk Radio, when host Tom Gresham interviewed Attorney Alan Gura, lead counsel for Otis McDonald and other plaintiffs. Gura was also the lawyer who successfully challenged the District of Columbia gun ban, in D.C. v. Heller.
If you missed the July 4th broadcast, you can still hear what Gura has to say about the Supreme Court rulings in the McDonald and Heller cases. Gun Talk Radio archives its past broadcasts. Just right click on the Podcast icon below and “Save As” to download an .mp3 file with the Alan Gura interview. This is a very thought-provoking interview. We strongly recommend you listen.
Guntalk 2010-07-04 Part A
Hour One – Guests Alan Gura, Attorney
and U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe, R-OK
June 28th, 2010
 In McDonald v. City of Chicago, the most important Second Amendment legal case since D.C. v. Heller, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution applies to States and local governments. This will allow plaintiffs to proceed with their legal challenge to a Chicago law banning handgun possession. Justice Alito wrote the High Court’s 5-4 decision.
In making this ruling, the High Court held that the Second Amendment applies to actions of State and local governments under the incorporation doctrine derived from the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Justice Thomas offered a well-reasoned concurring opinion arguing that the “Privileges and Immunities” Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment also demands that State and municipal governments not abridge citizens’ Second Amendment rights.
CLICK HERE to Read FULL TEXT of McDonald v. City of Chicago Decision
Now State and Municipal Laws Can Be Challenged on Second Amendment Grounds
In a decision written by Justice Alito, the Supreme Court ruled the individual right to keep and bear arms protected by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution applies to states and local governments. The court split along ideological lines in voting 5 to 4 to support the right of individuals to own handguns for self protection. The Second Amendment now carries “full sway” over state and municipal actions, as do most of the other protections enumerated in the Bill of Rights. In applying the Second Amendment to state action, the Court followed a familiar blueprint under which other rights have been applied to the states by virtue of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The case before the Court, McDonald v. City of Chicago, was filed in 2008 a day after the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in District of Columbia v. Heller — in which the high court reaffirmed that the Second Amendment protects an “individual” right to keep and bear arms. The Heller decision, however, did not reach the question of whether the Second Amendment also applied to the states.
Immediately after Heller, several Chicago residents, including retired maintenance worker Otis McDonald, filed a federal lawsuit challenging the city’s long-standing gun ban. The Chicago-based federal courts ruled that the Second Amendment did not apply to the states and local governments, setting the stage for the Supreme Court to decide the question it left unanswered in its Heller decision.
On hearing today’s decision, Plaintiff Otis McDonald thanked the Justices: “for having the courage to right a wrong, which has impacted many lives long ago and will protect lives for many years to come.”
Steve Sanetti, President of the NSSF, which filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of McDonald, added: “Today’s ruling is a victory for freedom and liberty. All law-abiding Americans, no matter whether they live in a big city like Chicago or in rural Wyoming, have the same Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Constitutional rights don’t stop at state or city borders. Cities like Chicago and New York and states like California must now respect the Second Amendment.”
Credit: Thanks to German Salazar, Esq. for sourcing the text of the Supreme Court’s decision.
April 19th, 2010
 Today, April 19th, is “Patriot’s Day”, the anniversary of the “Shot heard ’round the world.” Earlier today, in Washington, DC, supporters of Second Amendment gun rights rallied near the Washington Monument. Those dedicated rally attendees came from all parts of the country to demonstrate their support for the individual right to keep and bear arms. The DC rally, along with companion demonstrations in state capitols nationwide, drew the attention of the national print and television media. The reporters recorded plenty of stirring speeches on the subject of gun control and individual rights. Perhaps the TV cameras were seeking greater drama — but there were no fights, no violence, no guns fired into the air.
Those who attended the main DC rally were estimated at a “few hundred” to “as many as 2,000″ (Washington Post). Perhaps the rally could have drawn more attendees, but the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case of Heller v. D.C., which recognized an individual right to “keep and bear” arms, may have created a sense of complacency among firearms owners. Indeed, the Washington Post News Blog observed: “The March comes at a time when the trend appears to be toward normalizing carrying of firearms in public. Even before the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in [Heller] recognized an individual’s constitutional right to possess firearms, an increasing number of states have allowed citizens to carry guns openly or conceal them on their person. Last year, 24 states loosened restrictions in firearms laws, and Iowa and Arizona passed laws this year easing restrictions on gun possession.”
Related Stories
Second Amendment Rally in DC and VA (USA TODAY)
Gun Owners Rally in Support of Gun Rights (Voice of America)
Gun Rally: Second Amendment Activists Swarm DC, VA Rallies (Huffington Post) VIDEO
|
