|
|
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
March 22nd, 2010
On April 19, 2010, thousands of concerned Americans will convene in Washington, DC in a mass demonstration of support for individual rights under the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment March, in the planning for over two years, is designed to “galvanize the courage and resolve of Americans” while demonstrating that the PEOPLE do not want Washington politicians passing more anti-gun legislation. The brainchild of Skip Coryell, author of “RKBA: Defending the Right to Keep and Bear Arms”, the Second Amendment March promises to be the largest pro-firearms demonstration ever held in DC. In addition, there will be “satellite” marches in state capitols nationwide.
Co-sponsored by the Gun Owners of America (GOA) and the United States Concealed Carry Association (USCCA), the Second Amendment March will take place from 10:00 am to 4:00 pm on April 19, 2010. Attendees will assemble on the northeast corner of the Washington Monument grounds, and the entire program will take place there. There will be many notable speakers at the April 19th event, including Larry Pratt, (Exec. Director of Gun Owners of America), Rep. Paul Broun (Georgia 10th Dist. Congressman), Lt. Col. David Grossman (U.S. Army Rangers Ret.), and Philip Van Cleave (Pres., Virginia Citizens Defense League).
We urge all our readers who live within a couple hours of Washington to consider attending this March. Despite the favorable ruling in the Heller vs. DC Supreme Court case, firearm rights are still under attack across the country. A big turn-out at this event could have a powerful effect on setting National firearms policies in the future.
The directors of the Second Amendment march need volunteers to provide directions at the rally, and to man information booths. CLICK HERE to learn more about state events. Click the link below to donate.
March 22nd, 2010
 The National Rifle Association has selected Janet Nyce of Green Lane, Pennsylvania, to receive the 2010 Marion P. Hammer Woman of Distinction Award. This award recognizes exceptional contributions to the preservation of the Second Amendment and the shooting sports through education, advocacy, volunteerism, and legislative activism in support of the goals of the NRA.
Nyce was introduced to hunting by her husband, James, nearly 45 years ago. Since then, the two have raised three children, nurtured six grandchildren and shared their passion for the outdoors in their Pennsylvania community. An accomplished shooter, Nyce hunts with a rifle, shotgun, muzzleloader, and compound bow. Her devotion to training and education led to her becoming an NRA Certified Instructor in shotgun, rifle, and Refuse To Be A Victim. She also volunteers with her community’s Women On Target® Instructional Shooting Clinic and serves as a shotgun Range Master at the NRA’s Youth Hunter Education Challenge.
 “Being a mentor and instructor are two of the greatest joys in my life. The return factor is amazing,” Nyce said. “I always have felt this quote is so true: ‘the leader who shares experience ensures a bright future and leaves a legacy of success behind.’” As an appointee of the Governor’s Advisory Council for Hunting, Fishing and Conservation, Nyce mentors 30 young people who make up the Governor’s Youth Council for Hunting, Fishing and Conservation. In 2005, Nyce was a finalist of the Budweiser Conservation Award. She is a member of many hunting and conservation groups and is a Patron member of the NRA and the National Wild Turkey Federation. Nyce is also a life member of both Safari Club International and Second Amendment Sisters.
Each year the NRA bestows the Woman of Distinction Award to honor the pioneering spirit of Ms. Marion P. Hammer, the creator of the Eddie Eagle GunSafe Program and first woman president of the National Rifle Association. Hammer has influenced many in her fight to preserve Second Amendment freedoms. From her role as lobbyist in the passage of Florida’s Right-to-Carry legislation, to her grassroots efforts in educating youth about firearm safety, ownership and responsibility, Hammer exemplifies activism.
Article by Danielle Sturgis, courtesy NRABlog.com
March 3rd, 2010
Those interested in the landmark McDonald v. Chicago Second Amendment case can now read the complete transcript of the Oral Arguments conducted yesterday before the U.S. Supreme Court. We added the link to the transcript late in the day on Tuesday, so you might have missed it. (FYI, the written opinion in this case is not expected until June, 2010).
CLICK HERE for transcript of Oral Argument
(PDF file, 77 pages, 342kb).
To learn more about the plaintiffs in this case, click the link below to read a profile in the Chicago Magazine website. The ‘name’ plaintiff is Otis McDonald, a 76-year old retired maintenance engineer (and grandfather). The son of sharecroppers, McDonald grew up in Louisiana, then moved to Chicago at age 17. Now he simply wants the right to have a handgun to defend himself in his home.
Chicago Magazine Story on McDonald v. Chicago Plaintiffs.
March 2nd, 2010
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments in McDonald v. City of Chicago, a major Second Amendment case that will determine whether cities and states must honor the Constitutional Right to keep and bear arms, set forth in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It will be argued that the protections of the Second Amendment should extend to state and local government activity, based on the provisions of the 14th Amendment.
The key words from the 14th Amendment are “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law . . . . ”
You can consider McDonald v. City of Chicago as the sequel to the 2008 landmark case — the District of Columbia v. Heller — in which the Supreme Court reaffirmed that the Second Amendment is an “individual” right to keep and bear arms. The Court’s decision, however, applied only to areas regulated by the federal government, such as the District of Columbia. As a result the Heller decision inspired further legal attempts to clarify how the right to keep and bear arms applies to citizens nationwide.
After Heller, many lawsuits were filed to overturn municipal and state laws that prevented individuals from owning handguns. In Chicago, several residents brought suit challenging the city’s long-standing gun ban. These residents, among them 76-year-old Otis McDonald, wanted a handgun to protect themselves and their families. McDonald, interviewed by ABC News, lives in a crime-ridden neighborhood and wants a gun to defend himself in his home: “If I’ve got a gun, and if others have guns in their homes to protect themselves, then that’s one thing that police would have to worry about less.”
How broadly or narrowly the Second Amendment will be applied to state regulations is the key question in today’s hearing in McDonald v Chicago. Today, one hour has been set for oral arguments. Attorney Alan Gura, who won the Heller case, will argue for the petitioners Otis McDonald, et al. Former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement will argue for the NRA, which is also a party to the case. Chicago’s defense will take up the remainder of the time.
Final Decision is Months Away
Legal experts will attempt to predict how McDonald v. Chicago will be decided, based on the questions/comments of the Justices during oral argument. However, we will have to wait many months before the Supreme Court’s actual written ruling. In a case of this significance, we can expect a lengthy written opinion (with dissents), that may not be issued until summer 2010.
Report and Photo Courtesy NSSF
February 24th, 2010
The NRA announced that MidwayUSA has collected more than $5 million through the company’s “Round-Up” program, bringing MidwayUSA’s total giving to the NRA to over $8 million.
 Created by MidwayUSA founders Larry and Brenda Potterfield in 1992, the “Round-Up” program asks customers to “round up” their order amount to the next highest dollar. The proceeds are then sent to the NRA-ILA’s National Endowment for the Protection of the Second Amendment. “Round-up” donations are held in trust, as an “endowment”. The NRA-ILA utilizes the interest from the account for fighting anti-gun legislation across the United States. “We’re proud the Round-Up Program has been so successful,” said Mr. Potterfield. “It’s an easy way to offer customers the opportunity to make a big difference in the future of hunting and shooting.”
Larry and Brenda Potterfield have been active patrons of the NRA for years, supporting programs such as “Round-Up,” the Bianchi Cup, Friends of NRA, the Keystone Endowment, and The NRA Annual Meetings and Exhibits to name a few. “We can’t thank the Potterfields and MidwayUSA customers enough,” said Wayne LaPierre, NRA Exec. Vice President. “In the history of the NRA, no other company has given so generously to support the Second Amendment. Larry and Brenda’s idea for the Round-up program was pure genius[.]”
|
