This week, Congressman Chris Collins (R-NY) introduced legislation that would shield popular rifles and shotguns, including the AR-15, from being banned under state laws. The bill, known as the Second Amendment Guarantee Act (SAGA), would also protect parts for these firearms, including detachable magazines and ammunition feeding devices.
The bill is a response to antigun laws in a small handful of states – including California, Connecticut, D.C., Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York – that criminalize the mere possession of highly popular semiautomatic long guns widely available throughout the rest of the country. Although rifles or shotguns of any sort are used less often in murders than knives, blunt objects such as clubs or hammers, or even hands, fists, and feet, gun control advocates have sought to portray the banned guns as somehow uniquely dangerous to public safety.
Ask Your Representative to support the Second Amendment Guarantee Act
Please contact your U.S. Representative and ask him or her to cosponsor and support H.R. 3576, the Second Amendment Guarantee Act. You can call your U.S. Representative at 202-225-3121.
TAKE ACTION TODAY
Anti-gunners’ focus on these so-called “assault weapons” was renewed after the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. That decision made clear that handguns – by far the type of firearm most commonly used in crime – were subject to Second Amendment protection and could not be banned. This led gun control advocates to seek out other sorts of guns to demonize, and they’ve since been strenuously promoting the myth that semiautomatic rifles and shotguns with certain features such as detachable magazines, pistol grips or adjustable stocks are “weapons of war” with no legitimate civilian use.
Yet Americans overwhelmingly choose these types of firearms for legitimate purposes, including protection of their homes and properties, “three-gun” and other practical shooting sports, and hunting and pest control. And, indeed, the states’ legislative attempts to ban these guns has spurred a market for innovative products that use the same basic calibers and firing mechanisms, but with stock, grip, and accessory configurations that comply with legislative guidelines.
Although the U.S. Supreme Court has yet to review any of these state bans, lower courts have come up with increasingly strained readings of the Second Amendment and Supreme Court precedents to try to justify them. The Seventh Circuit, for example, held that even if a ban’s incursion on Second Amendment rights had no beneficial effect on safety whatsoever, it could still be justified on the basis of the false sense of security it might impart to local residents with exaggerated fears of the banned guns. “[I]f it has no other effect,” the majority opinion stated, the challenged “ordinance may increase the public’s sense of safety.” That’s hardly an acceptable offset for the infringement of a constitutional right.
Members of the Supreme Court have criticized their colleagues for failing to review these cases and the lower courts for misapplying Supreme Court precedent. As noted in a dissent filed by Justice Clarence Thomas and joined by Heller’s author, the late Justice Antonin Scalia, “Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles.” Moreover, the “overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting.” “Under our precedents,” Thomas concluded, “that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons.”
With states’ violating Americans’ rights and federal courts allowing them to act with impunity, it is up to Congress to ensure that all Americans, wherever they may live, have access the best, most modern and innovative firearms for their lawful needs, including the protection of themselves and their families.
The SAGA would ensure that state regulations could not effectively prevent the manufacture, sale, importation, or possession of any rifle or shotgun lawfully available under federal law or impose any prohibitive taxes, fees, or design limitations on such firearms.
The NRA thanks Rep. Chris Collins for leading this important effort and urges his colleagues to cosponsor and support this staunchly pro-gun legislation.
Please contact your U.S. Representative and ask him or her to cosponsor and support H.R. 3576, the Second Amendment Guarantee Act. You can call your U.S. Representative at 202-225-3121.
IT’S ABOUT TIME!
Where were bills like this when the various ‘assault weapon bans’ were introduced? Of course, the political climate has changed.
Let’s support bills like this before the pendulum swings back again the other way!
The truly sad part is if State and federal legislators truly followed their oaths, none of this would be necessary.
(from Free North Carolina)
- In 1990, the “Gayssot law” was passed, stipulating that “any discrimination based on ethnicity, nation, race or religion is prohibited”. Since then, it has been used to criminalize any criticism of Arab and African delinquency, any question on immigration from the Muslim world, any negative analysis of Islam. Many writers have been fined and most “politically incorrect” books on those topics have disappeared from bookshops.
- The French government asked the media to obey the “Gayssot law.” It also asked that history textbooks be rewritten to include chapters on the crimes committed by the West against Muslims, and on the “essential contribution” of Islam to humanity. All history textbooks are “Islamically correct.”
- In hospitals, Muslims are increasingly asking to be treated only by Muslim doctors, and refusing to let their wives be treated by male doctors.
February 2, 2017: A “no-go zone” in the eastern suburbs of Paris. Police on patrol hear screams. They decide to check. While there, a young man insults them. They decide to arrest him. He hits them. A fight starts. He accuses a policeman of having raped him with a police baton. A police investigation quickly establishes that the young man was not raped. But it is too late; a toxic process has begun.
Political correctness is killing Europe, literally!
AND, it will kill the United States.
I’ve not been a private investigator since 1986. I’ve not been a credit card fraud investigator since 2009. But I’ve been some-kind of investigator (private security, process server) most of my adult life.
It’s in my blood.
As such, I’ve tried to keep up with the latest regarding what records are available, what has been limited (due to privacy concerns) and the like.
And, of course, the overall erosion of privacy since Al Gore invented the Internet! And the government passed The Patriot Act, NDAA, et al.
My dear friend Biff (previously lauded in song and story in these pages – well story, anyway) recently met me for coffee, and, as he oft wants to do, presented me with a gift!
I like gifts! 🙂
As he peruses used bookstores (in search of first editions and signed editions) he sometimes finds books his friends might appreciate.
And he found THIS!
It was obviously used and in fair condition. He was curious what I thought of it and it’s value to today’s sleuth.
It took me a few days to read it. I had to keep reminding myself this was geared for the neophyte. Hence the clever title…
Overall it’s a pretty good book. The author claims to be a retired FBI agent who now has his own P.I. agency in Florida. (The Internet does confirm this.) It’s fairly well organized and has both current and historic information regarding how to find stuff and to keep out of jail in so doing. It even has material regarding sources on the Internet, and electronic surveillance.
My copy is the second edition. An Amazon search revealed there is now a third.
It now holds a place of honor on my bookshelf, adjacent to Where’s What (the CIA book regarding where to find records, circa 1974).
Yeah, I’m a snoop at heart…
(FTC – neither Amazon, nor this book’s author gave me anything! Biff did, but he’s my friend! BACK OFF!)
New Jovian Thunderbolt passes along an allegory on one Constitutional Issue versus another.
That is Voter’s Rights versus Gun Rights!
Both Constitutional and of equal status, right? Wrong!
Stop saying that Washington DC now allows conceal carry. People posted that all over. It’s May Issue. And like most May Issue states it means “nobody without the juice.” It’s not allowing CCW.
Saying DC allows conceal carry is like saying a black man in Alabama in 1885 had the right to vote. Look at the 15th Amendment! It says so! Highest law of the land says a black man can vote. But that’s not the reality on the ground back then, is it?
No, Gun Crow laws are still in effect in DC, Maryland, New Jersey, New York… others.
How would you feel if Oregon, Washington, California, and Nevada, assuming you don’t live there, were just ignoring the 19th Amendment and didn’t let women vote? Maybe let them pretend they are voting at the polls, but then just not counting those female votes? Would you feel a little less free in North Carolina or Maine, or Wisconsin? Doesn’t really impact women near you, so… What’s the big diff? Just tell women in California to move someplace better. Right? How does that make you feel? It’s not like it’s in another country. It’s still YOUR country out west, there. If you join the military you are fight for those hypothetical and blatant disenfranchising states, too.
People tell me to move out of THIS state because of the gun banning regime. No, I’ll stay here. The state will change. Same with Jersey. Same with DC, and New York…
In fact, YOU should move here.
Mea culpa. I, too, probably jumped on the same bandwagon, extolling the freedom now being exercised in D.C. OOPS. – Guffaw
Until all our personal wealth is ‘shared’ (by force) with the less fortunate! It’s
Karl Marx’s, The President’s way…
Judicial Watch reports
that the Department of Justice is giving liberal activist groups money from a $16.6 billion settlement with Bank of America.
The groups benefitting from the lawsuit, according to Investor’s Business Daily
, are the National Council of La Raza, Operation Hope, National Community Reinvestment Coalition, and Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America. The money also went to “delinquent borrowers” in Chicago, Oakland, Detroit, Philadelphia, and other major “Democrat strongholds.”
“This is a wealth redistribution scheme disguised as a lawsuit,” Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, told The Daily Caller. “And who benefits from the distribution? Interest groups the administration relies on, outside interest groups, allies and politicians in communities trying to benefit as well.”
How Times Have Changed!
Law Enforcement of The United States forcibly taking a Cuban child refugee back to communist Cuba. (1999)
Law Enforcement of The United States welcoming illegal alien children (who are being abandoned by the thousands, many of whom are ill) into the United States. (2014)
What’s wrong with these pictures?
I recently received an email from the Libertarian Party (Large L). (I self-identify as a libertarian (small L).) In part it says we (The United States) should wholesale accept these (illegal alien) children, as we have accepted other minor refugees previously – like after the fall of Nazi Germany. They state there are enough private or religiously-funded charitable entities to handle their care and welfare. Of course, what they fail to mention is someone is still needed to catalog and sort these children by their needs, and distribute them to the appropriate charity for assistance.
Gee, I wonder what government entity will
volunteer demand to assist in this Herculean task?
At what cost to whom?
Of course, the Libertarian Party (Large L) also stands for open borders, and unrestricted commerce. This is where they and I part company – philosophically.
I believe we should secure the borders and monitor commerce. Securing the border allows us to maintain food safety, security from external terrorism, and parity of domestic goods and services. If we allow completely open borders, and we get tainted produce from say Chile, who ya gonna call, the U.N.? (snicker)
Not to mention all the diseased minors being forced across our border, designed to tax the system and weaken the health of Americans.
Don’t get me wrong – these kids do pull at my heart strings – just as designed. The same folks who don’t want us to be the World’s policeman want us to be the World’s doctor. Interesting…
I keep thinking of the Cuban boat people, and Cloward & Piven. Yet again.
Some things never change.
h/t Theo Spark
HERE ARE LISTED, IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER, ALL THE DEVELOPED NATIONS OF THE WORLD THAT OFFER BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP TO THE BABIES OF TOURISTS AND ILLEGAL ALIENS:
1. United States of America
(anyone else? Bueller, Bueller?)
That’s right, every other modern developed nation in the world has gotten rid of birthright citizenship policies! Yet, during the last few months most of the U.S. news media and many politicians have ridiculed comments by other politicians that it is time for the U.S. to put an end to birthright citizenship for tourists and illegal aliens.
Folks, the U.S. stands alone.
For more on this exciting development, including modern developed countries that recently ENDED their birthright citizenship policy, please go read the following blog link:
Nobody Asked Me…
We need radical immigration law changes and enforcement to protect the rights of those legally here, not to automatically increase the voting rolls by fiat government mandate.
h/t Old NFO
No Lawyers – Only Guns and Money tells us of the above policy having been implemented by the UofC, obviously in an effort to stop the violence perpetrated against students.
Because those legally-armed, vetted students are (in)famous for inciting violence on campus against the
sheep other unarmed students.
From the Denver Post:
The University of Colorado Boulder and University of Colorado Colorado Springs are amending their student housing contracts, segregating students who possess a valid concealed-carry permit.
The university said Thursday morning that both campuses will establish a residential area for residents over age 21 with a permit. In other residential areas, students will not be permitted to carry a concealed weapon, the new policy states.
The new housing policy does two things. First, it seeks to use contract law to negate the ruling of the Colorado Supreme Court which stated that the University of Colorado did not have the power to ban concealed carry on campus. Second, and more insidiously, it points out to thugs, rapists, and other criminals areas on campus where they will be relatively safe. That is, by creating obvious gun-free zones, the University System has put a big red target on the back of all those students living in traditional undergraduate student housing.
Go and read the whole thing. And, when your stomach returns to normal ruminate as to whether Colorado concealed-carry permit records are public records. (I don’t live in Colorado – I’ve no idea).
If I were a student with a valid permit, and the records were confidential (as they are in Arizona) I think I’d just play it close to the vest (or under the vest) and keep my damn mouth shut.
But, that’s just me.
h/t John Richardson, The Denver Post
Shall Not Be Questioned points us to an interesting story – Armed robber is shot by an armed customer, but it occurred in a store that posted against carrying firearms.
Which begs two questions?
1. When did warning signs ever stop criminals?
2. Is the World a better place because a usually law-abiding person ignored the sign and stopped an armed robber?
threedonia.com has an essay about the United States versus every other nation. And liberty.
What Rufus says, in part:
~What used to set the U.S. apart from all other nations was our citizens had more personal liberty than any others.
The U.S. government can take whatever percentage of money I earn, whenever they choose. They can take whatever percentage of money they choose from any agreement I may enter into with another person. They can even take whatever percentage they choose of my worldly possessions when I die. They even control and forbid what I can use as money in exchange with others for goods and services. My state and local governments do the same.
The U.S. government and my state government mandate standards that I must adhere to while educating my children. They mandate how many days and years I must educate my children. If I fail to meet their standards they can remove my children from my care. If they determine I am not feeding or exercising my children properly they can remove them from my care.
The U.S. government controls what I eat. I cannot put a food or liquid into my body without prior consent from the U.S. government. A dairy farmer cannot drink the milk from his own livestock without first meeting government standards and controls. If, tomorrow, I am diagnosed with a deadly disease and I meet another citizen who has developed a medicinal cure for that disease I am not permitted to purchase that cure without government approval. That government approval almost always takes at least one decade and can often take two, or more. If my life expectancy is less than the period required to meet that process I will die. At its discretion the government can prohibit any medicine it chooses, regardless of its benefit. The same is true for foods and beverages.
The U.S. government controls how I can defend my property and limits what weapons I can use in my own personal defense. Local and federal governments limits the construction of any edifice I may wish to build on my property. Each autumn I fill over 120 bags of yard waste with leaves. Even though I have three fireplaces and a fire pit on my property (and all meet proper building codes) I am forbidden to burn those leaves on my land. The size and material of the bags I must put the leaves in are also dictated by local statute. I am forbidden from growing fruits or vegetables on my land for sale to others. I am forbidden from owning livestock of any kind. My pets are subject to enough laws and regulations to fill a bookshelf.
I cannot enter into an agreement to fly on an airplane with a private company without submitting to a search of my personal belongings and my own body. I cannot drive the automobiles I own as fast or slow as I believe is prudent. I cannot ride my bicycle on public roads without “proper” equipment. I cannot paddle my kayak without proper registration, life vest, equipment…
Even though I have worked very hard since the age of 15 and have money invested in stocks, bonds and commodities, as well as owning property and quite a few material goods I am broke. Actually I am in debt. My government has borrowed trillions of dollars in my name. As a citizen I am responsible for those debts and they amount to more than I can pay. My government has bankrupted me financially.
Many men throughout history, including some of the Founding Fathers, have referred to the United States as “an experiment” in government. And it was. The question has always been, “can men handle liberty and freedom.” We have been avoiding the obvious for decades, maybe a century or more. The experiment has been run. The hypothesis has been tested. The data have been collected. The conclusion is, “No.”
That does not mean there are no people here who cherish liberty. There are. Millions. I’ve traveled to dozens of foreign countries; communist, socialist, monarchy, theocratic, democratic… In each nation I met men and women who cherish liberty. Men and women who love mankind and devote their lives to bettering the human condition. Men and women who work for human freedom. Governments can’t take that spirit away. It will never die. But that’s separate from our relationship with our government. That relationship used to be equivalent in the United States. No longer. Life is good. My wife and kids are healthy. We’ve got food in the pantry, central air-conditioning, books to read, music to listen to, clothes to wear. The U.S. is a great place to raise a family. There are oceans, mountain’s majesty and fruited plains. I’m not going anywhere.
But don’t tell me we have personal liberties.
Please go to the link above and read the whole thing. While it’s still allowed. – Guffaw