Rather Expose Them Christian News Blog

Category: Free Speech/Constitution

It’s Bad. New Mexico’s Gov. (D) Grisham’s Public Health Order : Unconstitutional, Defies Bruen Ruling, & State’s Own Statutes

Ammoland Inc. Posted on by

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2023/09/nm-gov-grishams-public-health-order-unconstitutional-defies-states-own-statutes;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

 

WARNING: Liberal Logic Ahead, iStock

The unilateral action by New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham declaring a ban on civilian possession of a firearm, whether open or concealed, in public “to remain in effect for the duration of the public health emergencies. . .” is unconstitutional, unconscionable, and illegal.

But, apart from the illegality of Grisham’s Public Health Order on Second Amendment grounds and U.S. Supreme Court’s Bruen rulings,,,

…the Order runs afoul of New Mexico’s own state Statutes!

This latter matter has not yet been discussed. We do so here.

We begin with the phrase “Gun Violence,” which appears in the Governor’s Public Health Order. For the longest time, the Anti-Second Amendment establishment has raged over this thing, “Gun Violence.” The idea implicit in ‘Gun Violence,’ if one insists on the expression, is that of ‘Criminal Violence’, where a criminal uses “a gun” in the commission of a crime. In that commonsensical view the phrase ‘Gun Violence’ simply denotes criminal use of guns, nothing more.

So why not eschew talk of Gun Violence for the appropriate expression, ‘Criminal Violence’?

Doing so would drive public policy where it belongs, on crime and criminals and away from the mechanism criminals sometimes employ, although not invariably, to do their horrible misdeeds.

But Democrats and Progressives don’t want to talk about crime and criminals. They don’t even want to talk about criminal use of guns. They only want to talk about guns and reducing the number of them, and that creates a real problem.

For, who is it that owns and possesses most of those “guns?” The answer is tens of millions of innocent, rational, responsible, law-abiding citizens.

And why do tens of millions of Americans wish to keep and bear guns?

Well, they do so for many reasons, all lawful, and one of which stands out as predominant: self-defense.

But little mention of this finds its way into the public square because Democrats and a sympathetic Press won’t allow it. They don’t want it. Anti-Second Amendment elements in Government, in the Press, and in the greater society have their own uses for ‘Gun Violence.’ It is they, after all, who have coined the expression.

And that phrase is the driving force behind the Governor’s Public “Health” Order.

Boiled down to its essence, the tacit message conveyed is this:

“Guns are a virus, a virulent contagion, and like all virulent contagions, must be rooted out, quarantined, and eradicated, and I, New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham, intend to do just that!”

The idea of Guns as a virulent contagion is not a novel idea. It goes back decades.

In 1995, in an Academic Article, Don Kates and others wrote (Guns And Public Health: Epidemic Of Violence Or Pandemic Of Propaganda?)  about the strategy to deny one’s exercise of the natural law right of armed self-defense by viewing guns as a health menace. The article’s writers referred to this strategy as “The Public Health Agenda.”

“In 1979 the American public health community adopted the ‘objective to reduce the number of handguns in private ownership,’ the initial target being a 25% reduction by the year 2000. Based on studies, and propelled by leadership from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the objective has broadened so that it now includes banning and confiscation of all handguns, restrictive licensing of owners of other firearms, and eventual elimination of firearms from American life, . . . .

This follows the health advocate sages’ avowed intention to promote the idea that firearm ownership is an evil and that its elimination is a desirable and efficacious means of reducing violence.” From “Guns And Public Health: Epidemic Of Violence Or Pandemic Of Propaganda?”, 62 Tenn. L. Rev. 513, Spring, 1995, by Don B. Kates, et. al.

Viewing “Gun Violence” as a medical matter is inane. It involves tortuous use of a literary device, metaphor, as a mechanism upon which to design and implement public policy.

The metaphor is that guns are like a virulent plague and must be stamped out. And Governor Grisham’s Order is based on the metaphor of “Guns As Virulent Virus.” She attempts to apply the metaphor to law. That is absurd.

Our free Constitutional Republic is grounded on law, not metaphor.

Nonetheless, Grisham trusts that she can skate around the Second Amendment issue and the constraints of State law by focusing on guns as a public health menace. She hopes that no one will bother to notice the card trick and the use of metaphor she employs to do this.

Unfortunately, pervasive and undeniable lunacy doesn’t prevent ideological fanatics who wield immense power from thrusting their lunacy on everyone else, embroiling us all in their nightmarish reality.

So, why isn’t anyone attacking the Governor’s lunacy head-on? That is where attention should first be directed.

Grisham cites several New Mexico State Statutes. Do they offer her support? Let’s see.

N.M. Stat. Ann. § 12-10A-5 provides that,

“A. A state of public health emergency may be declared by the governor upon the occurrence of a public health emergency. Prior to a declaration of a state of public health emergency, the governor shall consult with the secretary of health. The governor shall authorize the secretary of health, the secretary of public safety and the director to coordinate a response to the public health emergency.”

But the pertinent question here is whether the mere possession of guns in public equates with “Gun Violence” such that this “Gun Possession” qua “Gun Violence” falls within the legal definition of a ‘Public Health Emergency’ under New Mexico law.

In New Mexico, public health emergencies fall within the purview of N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 24-1-1 — 24-1-44.

N.M. Stat. Ann. § 24-1-2 says this:

“As used in the Public Health Act [Chapter 24, Article 1 NMSA 1978]:

A. ‘condition of public health importance’ means an infection, a disease, a syndrome, a symptom, an injury or other threat that is identifiable on an individual or community level and can reasonably be expected to lead to adverse health effects in the community; . . . .”

So, then, Does “a condition of public health importance” include “Gun Violence” qua “Possessing Guns in Public” under New Mexico law?

No, it does not. This kind of thing does not fall within the purview of New Mexico’s “Public Health Act” and, therefore, cannot be construed as a “Public Health Emergency” under New Mexico law, as shown below.

N.M. Stat. Ann. § 12-10A-3 is the applicable “Definitions,” and Section. N.M. Stat. Ann. § 12-10A-3 (G) defines the phrase, ‘public health emergency.’

“‘Public health emergency’ means the occurrence or imminent threat of exposure to an extremely dangerous condition or a highly infectious or toxic agent, including a threatening communicable disease, that poses an imminent threat of substantial harm to the population of New Mexico or any portion thereof.”

Does the phrase “exposure to an extremely dangerous condition” that appears in the afore-cited statutory section embrace “Gun Violence” qua “Possessing Guns in Public” under New Mexico Law?

Such an idea would be a stretch—an impossible stretch. N.M. Stat. Ann. § 12-10A-2 explains why.

N.M. Stat. Ann. § 12-10A-2 (Purposes of the Act) says,

“The purposes of the Public Health Emergency Response Act [12-10A-1 NMSA 1978] are to:

A. provide the state of New Mexico with the ability to manage public health emergencies in a manner that protects civil rights and the liberties of individual persons; [emphasis added]

B. prepare for a public health emergency; and

C. provide access to appropriate care, if needed, for an indefinite number of infected, exposed or endangered people in the event of a public health emergency.”

Paragraph “C” implies the presence of an ongoing and serious chemical, biological, or epidemiological hazard, causing illness to many people. Such a health emergency is objective and the harm caused to many is measurable and extensive.

A health emergency does not include criminological problems, sociological concerns, or matters deriving from political biases or animosities.

Moreover, Paragraph “A” makes abundantly clear that any declaration of a public health emergency must be conducted in a manner that “protects civil rights and the liberties of individuals.”

The right of the people to keep and bear arms is one such fundamental civil right that requires protection when the New Mexico Governor declares, as here, a “Public Health Emergency.”

But how can the exercise of a fundamental civil right, the right of the people to keep and bear arms—that the governor implies is a public health emergency (for that is what the New Mexico Public Health Order targets), and one that must be harshly dealt with—truly be considered a health emergency under New Mexico law when that health emergency is the very fundamental civil right that must, as New Mexico law makes clear, be protected during an emergency?

The answer is: It cannot! That is the crux of the problem for Grisham and her “Public Health Order.”

Governor Grisham’s Order is legally incoherent, incompatible with State Statute, logically inconsistent, and, on analysis, overtly nonsensical.

We hope someone challenging Governor Grisham’s “Public Health Order” in Federal or State Court will make that argument.

About The Arbalest Quarrel:

Arbalest Group created `The Arbalest Quarrel’ website for a special purpose. That purpose is to educate the American public about recent Federal and State firearms control legislation. No other website, to our knowledge, provides as deep an analysis or as thorough an analysis. Arbalest Group offers this information free.

For more information, visit: www.arbalestquarrel.com.

Arbalest Quarrel

Democrats Aren’t Coming to Take Your Guns…Until They Are

By Stephen Kruiser 2:51 AM on September 11, 2023
SEE: https://pjmedia.com/columns/stephen-kruiser/2023/09/11/the-morning-briefing-dems-arent-coming-to-take-your-guns-until-they-are-n1725981;Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

The Morning Briefing: Dems Aren't Coming to Take Your Guns...Until They Are
AP Photo/Andres Leighton

Top O’ the Briefing

Happy Monday, dear Kruiser Morning Briefing friends. Trenzino continues to feel that cheery couples on tandem bicycles have actual skeletons in their closets.

A common refrain we hear from anti-Second Amendment leftists goes something like this: “Don’t be ridiculous, we don’t want to take your guns.” It’s a way of dismissing our well-founded concerns that American leftists, if given the chance, will become fascists who won’t hesitate to abrogate even our God-given rights.

Yeah, we’ve met them.

Of course, variations on the above line are always — yes, always — offered as part of a larger conversation in which they then say something along the lines of: “OK, not all of your guns, just the ones that we’ve deemed super extra scary.”

It’s a testament to how adept leftists are at lying that they’ve been able to make claims like this while keeping straight faces for so many years.

As we know, however, they’ve all been emboldened by the success they had using the United States Constitution as a birdcage liner during the pandemic, and they don’t mind letting their masks (punish pandemic reference definitely intended) slip more and more.

According to every map that I have, New Mexico is still in the United States of America. Its governor seems to find that inconvenient. This is from Rick’s latest on the subject:

Republicans in New Mexico are calling for her impeachment. Elon Musk called her executive order banning firearms from being carried in public for 30 days “next-level illegal”.

But New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham is defending her order, claiming it was necessary to protect “public health,” and besides, her oath to uphold the Constitution was not “absolute.”

“No constitutional right, in my view, including my oath, is intended to be absolute,” she retorted after being asked whether her order violated her oath of office to “uphold the Constitution.”

I guarantee you that Gov. Stalin Grisham will not be the last Democrat to use the COVID-inspired “public health” nonsense as an excuse to oppress the good citizens of this country. They take to tyranny like ducks to water over there in Dem Land. I wouldn’t be surprised to find that the Democratic National Committee has spun off a little think tank to ponder new ways to use public health panic to shred the Constitution.

It’s beyond naive to think that any Democrat who shrugs off fealty to the Constitution via a sworn oath won’t continue throwing rules out the window. Now, more than ever, Democrats truly believe themselves to be above and/or outside any laws they find irritating.

Like open or concealed carry laws.

Disarmament is the endgame for every Democratic politician who blathers on about “assault weapons,” the “need” for an AR-15, or the odious “common sense gun reforms.” They’d prefer to enact tyrannical agendas on a populace that is meek, compliant, and unable to resist. Ambitious commies like New Mexico’s pantsuited nightmare chief executive know that people who are heavily invested in the First and Second Amendments won’t merely roll over and play gulag for them.

At present, the overreaching anti-2A zealots eventually run into a judge or a court that says, “Yeah…no,” to their attempts to turn legal gun owners into criminals overnight. If they get another few years to tweak the judiciary, the Bill of Rights will become a museum piece.

The Most Important Second Amendment Battle…Right Now WITH NEW MEXICO’S GOVERNOR

Washington Gun Law President, William Kirk, heads back down to New Mexico to see all the development, and there have been many since Gov. Grisham decided that she had the power to suspend her citizens' Second Amendment Rights. Even some of America's most notorious gun grabbers, including David Hogg and Ryan Busse, have publicly spoken out against this gross overreach. Several law enforcement agencies have said that will NOT enforce the order and the lawsuits have started to fly. NAGR is the first to the party so we go over their lawsuit today so that all of you can arm yourself with education. Read NAGR's complaint here. https://gunrightsfoundation.org/wp-co... Read NAGR's motion for a TRO here. https://gunrightsfoundation.org/wp-co...

 

22 Years Later, The freedom that the 9/11 hijackers hated is slipping away from us with terrifying speed.

by

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/22-years-later;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

“Only days after 9/11, Norwegian author Gert Nygårdshaug sneered at the idea that there might soon be an attack on ‘Oslo or Rome or Copenhagen.’ He was far from alone in his mockery. Then came Madrid, London, Bali, Beslan, Mumbai….The Western European elite played down, even denied, any connection among these events. Yet year by year the truth has become increasingly clear: though the U.S. was the target on 9/11, the front line of the war with Islamism is Europe.”

“If we’d had a president who had dared to speak the truth about our enemies and about the ideology (which is to say theology) that motivates them, and had done so eloquently and stirringly and repeatedly, à la Churchill…it might have made a huge difference….But perhaps not. Perhaps the poison of multiculturalism — the fear of acknowledging that our enemies were, in fact, our enemies — was simply too potent….The tragic fact of the matter is that ten years after 9/11, we are more ignorant, and more vulnerable, than ever.”

“9/11 was a day of heroes and of villains, of stark contrasts between good and evil. Yet how quickly the politicians, journalists, and others in positions of power managed to make a muddle of it all. Instead of witnessing a democratization of the Middle East, we experienced a steady Islamization of the West. Instead of seeing freedom bloom in the Islamic world, we saw a rise in Western censorship and self-censorship on the subject of Islam.”

“His enemies call him a fascist. On the contrary, he’s the first U.S. president since 9⁄11 who genuinely seems to grasp that Islam is fascism.”

“Twenty years on, under the disgraceful Biden, America feels like a damaged and diminished nation – its power weakened, its alliances shaken, its once-unshakable core beliefs largely shattered, not least by the suicidal compulsion to speak well of Islam.”

“America has been transformed very quickly into a country that’s so dramatically different from the one we lived in on September 10, 2001, that the twenty-first anniversary of that atrocity can feel almost irrelevant to our present concerns and calamities. But let’s remember that it was on 9/11 that the shock was delivered to our system that, responded to in precisely the wrong way, saw us wade deeper and deeper into the current muck of doubt, deception, and division.”

Sometimes it feels as if it happened just the day before yesterday, and other times it seems lost in the mists of time.

Time is like that.

At first, there was intense shock. Then a sharply focused anger, a flourishing of patriotism, and a potent resolve. And then, over the years, increasing confusion, division, self-doubt.

No, we shouldn’t have allowed a thirst for revenge, and a desire to remind the monsters of the world who was boss, to turn into an exercise in nation-building in the graveyard of empires and in one of the few Middle Eastern states without a theocratic government. Some of us, who had some knowledge of Islam, sensed that we were headed down the road to disaster. But we were, after all, relative newcomers to the study of that faith, and we were naive enough to think that people with fancy White House titles, people who turned up on all the Sunday morning shows, smooth and glib, and who always seemed to have all the answers, might know better than we did.

There are many ways of looking at 9/11. Every year when the anniversary comes around, 9/11 looks somewhat different, because the moment we’re looking back from is different. You can’t step into the same river twice.

One positive way of looking at 9/11 is to recognize it as the start of a road to wisdom – for some of us, anyway. Our country was attacked by devout members of a primitive death cult that had taught them to hate our freedoms; we retaliated by trying to democratize their undemocratic homelands. Instead of kicking out of our own country the adherents of that religion who obviously held America-hatred in their hearts, our political leaders continued to let them come. Both Republicans and Democrats whitewashed Islam, saying that the jihadists had betrayed it. This was a big lie, an inexcusable lie, a dangerous lie, which in the minds of the 50% or so of Americans who actually bought it served to implant the idea that on 9/11 they had been the good guys and we had done something to deserve the attacks.

This notion, in turn, reinforced the toxic ideologies that were being peddled to the children of the elite in the nation’s Ivy and Ivy-adjacent colleges, thereby helping to turn a generation of privileged young Americans destined for positions of cultural power into America-haters.

As it happened, the turn of the century not only brought 9/11. It also marked a dramatic shift in the ways in which information was spread. CNN had been around since 1980; Fox News and MSNBC came along in 1996, solidifying a 24-hour cycle of both news and opinion. The World Wide Web, introduced in 1991, exploded during the years around the turn of the century, giving us access to alternative sources of information that contradicted official narratives. Eventually, we realized just how much we’d been lied to over the years by our political and media establishment, realized just how far removed we were (and had been for a long time) from the government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

We didn’t stop loving America, but many of us put a greater distance in our minds between the country we loved and the people who ran it.

By the end of George W. Bush’s presidency, the moral clarity and resolve of the immediate post-9/11 period had been lost. We were in Afghanistan and Iraq, and supposedly it all had something to do with 9/11, but what exactly? The refusal of both Republican and Democratic politicians, and of the mainstream news media generally, to honestly address the fundamental facts about Islam had made it difficult, if not impossible, to discuss the very meaning of the attacks or to formulate a sensible response to them. A country that after 9/11 had been (at least briefly) almost wholly united in patriotism was now, because of differing attitudes toward America’s response to 9/11, more disunited than it had been in a long time.

Then, in the run-up to the 2008 presidential election, along came a relative newcomer to national politics who had two distinct attributes, both of which ultimately helped secure his victory. For one thing, his father had come from one Muslim country and the candidate himself had been raised in another; for millions of bien pensant Americans, voting for him was a way of apologizing for whatever we had done, in our cruel colonialist past, to make the jihadists hate us so much. For another thing, Obama was black, and his campaign rhetoric about “one America” promised guilt-ridden white Americans absolution, suggesting that his elevation to the Oval Office would put the question of racism – which we’d been repeatedly told was America’s original sin – behind us once and for all. For millions of voters, Obama was nothing less than an answer to our prayers, a gift from the gods, a golden prince with a silver tongue who’d been sent down to take what had been broken and to put it all back together again.

Upon taking office, of course, Obama revealed quickly enough (although a few wise souls had been on to him all along) that he was nothing more or less than a high priest of America. With remarkable speed, he proceeded to turn what had, after a long struggle, become essentially a post-racist society into a society centered increasingly on, and separated increasingly by, notions of group victimhood and grievance. The destructive power of this transformation was immense. A big part of the reason why so many children of white progressive parents have identified as transgender during the last few years is that they can’t bear thinking of themselves as members of an oppressive class.

It took the advent of Donald J. Trump to fully awaken many of us to the degree to which the Republicans and Democrats were a “uni party,” run by an inside-the-Beltway caste for the benefit of themselves, their elitist friends and cohorts, their corporate benefactors, and, in many cases, nefarious foreign interests who made it possible for them to buy multimillion-dollar mansions on Capitol Hill salaries. As the scales fell from our eyes, more and more of us found ourselves pondering with deep distrust the motives of politicians of both parties who’d sent the brave children of patriotic Americans to fight in faraway lands.

It was Trump who spoke up powerfully against needless wars and who raised the issues that truly affected ordinary American lives. Bring back jobs. Build the wall. Deport illegals. For decades, in the holy (and misbegotten) name of “free trade,” both parties had let China become the manufacturing hub of the world even as they let America’s own manufacturing heartland turn into the Rust Belt. Utterly indifferent to the welfare of their own hard-working, long-suffering constituents, our leaders acted as if these developments were inevitable, irreversible – the product of cosmic forces.

Trump’s rise on behalf of those neglected Americans sent up a howl by the political and media establishment that was heard around the world. When he dared to make what should have been the self-evident point that the American government should first of all care about Americans, he – along with the criminally neglected patriots who cheered him – was labeled a racist, a xenophobe, an Islamophobe, a white supremacist. The establishment righteously savaged him for calling shithole countries “shithole countries” even as they cheered Hillary Clinton for calling the hard-working middle Americans whom they’d betrayed “deplorables.”

Even before Trump was elected, the D.C. swamp creatures conspired to take him down. Now, three years into his successor’s term, they’re still working their mischief, more and more nakedly, and are going not just after him but after an ever-widening circle of his supporters. Laws, practices and institutional changes that were put in place after 9/11, supposedly to protect our freedom, are now being used to restrict our freedom. After 9/11, the feds and social-media giants began working together to deplatform jihadists but eventually were more focused on deplatforming opponents of the Democratic Party. The Homeland Security Department, which still oversees the ridiculous and intrusive security theater at our airports, is fighting climate change even as criminals flood across the southern border. The FBI transformed after 9/11 into a domestic intelligence service, has developed into a chilling Democratic Party Stasi, targeting traditionalist Catholics, arresting friends of Trump, and hiding Biden family crimes. The Department of Justice smiles on left-wing rioters and vandals but has detained for years MAGA fans who walked peacefully through the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. As I write this, it is being reported that the DOJ wants to imprison Owen Shroyer, a journalist, for giving a speech that day in Washington, D.C.’s Freedom Plaza.

By contrast, Muslims in America are above criticism. Nothing an individual Muslim says or does can change this. Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar – who, with her family, found sanctuary in the U.S. after her father, a longtime subordinate for Somalia’s Stalinist dictator, was forced to flee that country – married her brother for purposes of immigration and/or student loan fraud, has repeatedly expressed hatred for Jews and white men, has been involved in ballot harvesting, has committed multiple campaign-finance violations, has called for the defunding of the Minneapolis police, has defended Hamas and Iran, has described Angela Davis as her idol, has shared stages with people tied to Islamic terrorism, and has called America a racist nation. And yet because she is a Muslim, no mainstream media organ will dare to report honestly on all of this.

Back in 2015, Project Veritas reported on several leading universities where administrators or faculty had approved or aided in the formation of “Pro-ISIS Clubs” proposed by an undercover reporter. While the Muslim Brotherhood has a Facebook page, social media censors routinely delete criticism of Islam and yank the accounts of repeat offenders.

Have I strayed far from the topic of 9/11? Not really. Twenty-two years after 9/11, the freedom that our attackers hated is slipping away from us with terrifying speed. And though we didn’t know it at the time, it was on that now distant September morning that we started down the road to this sobering moment of crisis.

Avatar photo

Bruce Bawer

Bruce Bawer is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

New Mexico House Bill 50 Limits Magazines To 9 Rounds, Here’s How This Leads To Banning All Guns

With the legislative session beginning in less than a week, a brand-new measure has been introduced that would outlaw large-capacity (above 9 rounds) gun magazines in New Mexico. "As I'm looking, there is not one gun in this cabinet that would be allowed under the proposed law. Similarly, here, as I'm looking in this case, there would again not be one gun that would be permitted under the new law," said the owner of the Los Ranchos Gun Shop in New Mexico, Mark Abramson. Abramson has been providing New Mexico's gun owners with weapons for more than 40 years. But a newly proposed house measure would change the kinds of firearms he has been selling for years. "The Smith and Wesson M&P is one of our top-selling guns. It just wouldn't be allowed. Because Smith and Wesson will not make a magazine that only handles nine rounds because we'd be the only state in the union with that restriction," explained Abramson. The reality is that a reduced-capacity magazine necessitates magazine changes while you are defending yourself from criminals. As a result, defending yourself will be unfair to criminals who won't follow the requirement that there must be 9 or fewer bullets in a magazine.

New Mexico Governor Suspends Open & Concealed Carry Claiming Public Health Order, RIGHT TO SUSPEND HER OATH OF OFFICE, claims she has the power because “gun violence” is a “public health crisis.”

New Mexico Carry Prohibition is a Crime

Ammoland Inc. Posted on by

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2023/09/new-mexico-governor-suspends-concealed-carry-claiming-public-health-order;Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham issued a public health order suspending open and concealed carry of firearms in Bernalillo County public places for the next 30 days. Bernalillo County is the home of Albuquerque.

The Governor announced in a press conference Friday that she was taking the extraordinary step after the death of an 11-year-old due to a gunshot and several other shootings. She made the announcement alongside other New Mexico officials, all of whom had taken solemn oaths to support and defend the Constitution.

The Governor claims she has the power because “gun violence” is a “public health crisis.”

The order will almost certainly be challenged on Constitutional grounds. The move seems to run afoul of the Bruen Decision, which said individuals have the right to carry firearms outside the home. The Supreme Court did not make any exceptions for “public health.” In fact, the decision knocked down interest balancing. The Governor stated she expects legal challenges to the order.

AmmoLand News has reached out to several gun rights organizations to get comments. Gun Owners of America (GOA) responded, and the organization is aware of the Governor’s actions and is looking at options to challenge it.

One Cuban American who works for GOA compared the order to the country his family fled.

“New Mexico’ Governor has violated the rights of New Mexico’s law-abiding citizens in a manner I would only expect to see 90 miles off the coast of Florida,” said Luis Valdes, Florida Director, GOA. “In the Communist Hellscape that is Cuba. Criminals will continue to break the law, and the law-abiding will suffer because of it.”

Besides the restriction on carrying firearms outside of one’s residence, there were several other stipulations introduced. Including one measure that will place increased pressure on the locally owned and operated gun shops, implementing monthly inspections of federal firearms licensees (FFL) by the state.

• The Regulation and Licensing Division will conduct monthly inspections of licensed firearm dealers to ensure compliance with all sales and storage laws.
• The Department of Health, along with the Environment Department, will begin wastewater testing for illegal substances such as fentanyl at schools.
• The Department of Health will compile and issue a comprehensive report on gunshot victims presenting at hospitals in New Mexico, which shall include (if available): demographic data of gunshot victims, including age, gender, race, and ethnicity; data on gunshot victims’ healthcare outcomes; the brand and caliber of the firearm used; the general circumstances leading to the injury; the impact of gunshot victims on New Mexico’s healthcare system; and any other pertinent information.
• No firearms are allowed on state property, including state buildings and schools. This also includes other places of education where children gather, such as parks.
• New Mexico State Police will add officers in Albuquerque with funding for overtime provided.
• The Children, Youth, and Families Department will immediately suspend the Juvenile Detention Alternative Initiative and evaluate juvenile probation protocols.

No lawsuits have been announced, but it is not a question of if. It is only a question of how many and when the cases will be filed.

UPDATE 9/9/2023 Local Law Enforcement have begun to weigh in:

Statement from Bernalillo County Sheriff John Allen:

“…However, as the elected Sheriff, I have reservations regarding this order. While I understand and appreciate the urgency, the temporary ban challenges the foundation of our Constitution, which I swore an oath to uphold. I am wary of placing my deputies in positions that could lead to civil liability conflicts, as well as the potential risks posed by prohibiting law-abiding citizens from their constitutional right to self-defense.

I was elected to represent and safeguard all constituents and to ensure the balance between our rights and public safety is maintained. That means we must critically evaluate any proposed solution to the deeply rooted issue of gun violence, ensuring we both protect our community and uphold the values that define us as a nation.”  ~ Bernalillo County Sheriff John Allen.

Albuquerque Police Department Chief Medina sent the following message to APD officers about the governor’s state order on gun possession.

 

UPDATE 9/10/2023

Late Saturday, September 9th, 2023, Gun Owners of America filed a Temporary Restraining Order against the NM Governor’s unconstitutional order.

RANDY DONK, GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA, INC. and GUN OWNERS FOUNDATION, Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 1:23-cv-…

New Mexico Suspends Concealed Carry Public Health Order

About John Crump

John is an NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people from all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.

John Crump

New Mexico Gov Who Banned Firearms in Albuquerque Says Her Oath Is Not ‘Absolute’~NRA Condemns Dem Governor For Temporarily Suspending Open And Concealed Carry

By Rick Moran 10:15 AM on September 10, 2023
New Mexico Gov Who Banned Firearms in Albuquerque Says Her Oath Is Not 'Absolute'
AP Photo/Morgan Lee
Republicans in New Mexico are calling for her impeachment. Elon Musk called her executive order banning firearms from being carried in public for 30 days “next-level illegal”.

But New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham is defending her order, claiming it was necessary to protect “public health,” and besides, her oath to uphold the Constitution was not “absolute.”

“No constitutional right, in my view, including my oath, is intended to be absolute,” she retorted after being asked whether her order violated her oath of office to “uphold the Constitution.”

It’s true there are exceptions to most of our Constitutional rights. We can’t yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater, for example. There’s also the “fighting words doctrine” that makes incitement to violence illegal.

But anyone who claims there are exceptions to their oath needs to be impeached. The words “oath” and “absolute” pretty much go together. And this cretin of a governor is looking to separate them because she’s gotten herself in a heap of trouble.

Exclusively for our VIPs: Dems Hate the Constitution: New Mexico Gov. Bans Gun Carry in Albuquerque

The ban on carrying firearms in public grew out of recent shootings where children were caught in the crossfire. Our hearts bleed for the kids, but just how in the name of all that is good and holy will banning the concealed or open-carrying of guns prevent kids from getting killed?

New York Times:

At a news conference on Friday, [Grisham] said that shootings have amounted to an epidemic and that the suspension allowed for a “cooling-off period” for the state to figure out the best way to address gun violence and public safety. She said she expected the suspension to be challenged in court and could not guarantee it would stand.

“I welcome the debate and the fight about making New Mexicans safer,” she said.

Gun violence is sort of like a disease — “amounted to an epidemic” — so let’s toss the Constitution into the trash. After all, isn’t that what the government did during the pandemic?

The National Association for Gun Rights has already filed suit to block the executive order. Legal experts believe the suit is a slam dunk. But Lujan-Grisham is undeterred. She believes 1+1=3.

“I have emergency powers,” she said. “Gun violence is an epidemic. Therefore, it’s an emergency.”

Huh? This woman gives non-sequiturs a bad name.

Patrick Carter, co-director for the University of Michigan’s Institute for Firearm Injury Prevention, said there was evidence that fewer guns lead to less violence in an area. However, he said, there was not enough data or research to determine whether or not this ban would have an effect on preventing firearm injuries, which he said required “a comprehensive approach that blends policy with other types of interventions.”

Let’s just say it: New Mexico’s governor panicked.

Robert Leider, an assistant professor of law at George Mason University, said bans like this have been issued “when you have public disorders or other states of emergency, but most states of emergency usually involve something more acute.” He expressed skepticism that the ban would be upheld in court. “I’m not aware of any precedent for this just for general criminal wrongdoing,” he said.

The effort to tie public health to an inability to enforce gun laws is one of the left’s most cynical end runs around the Constitution. In this instance, the exercise is likely to be shot down in record time.

____________________________________________________________

NRA Condemns Dem Governor For Temporarily Suspending Open And Concealed Carry

WASHINGTON, DC – FEBRUARY 16: U.S. Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D-NM) (C) speaks during a news conference. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

OAN’s Brooke Mallory
4:35 PM – Sunday, September 10, 2023

SEE: https://www.oann.com/newsroom/nra-condemns-dem-governor-for-temporarily-suspending-open-and-concealed-carry/;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

New Mexico’s Democrat governor, Michelle Lujan Grisham, came under fire from the National Rifle Association (NRA) for temporarily restricting open and concealed carry across Albuquerque and neighboring Bernalillo County due to an emergency public health order.

“In a shocking move, Governor Lujan Grisham is suspending Second Amendment rights by administrative fiat, ignoring the U.S. Constitution and the New Mexico Constitution,” NRA-ILA Executive Director Randy Kozuch told the press.

The Democrat governor, according to the NRA head, should eliminate “soft-on-crime policies.” According to police statistics, 76 homicide victims have been reported in Albuquerque so far this year, which is fewer than the 93 victims reported during the same period last year.

“Instead of undermining the fundamental rights of law-abiding New Mexicans, she should address the soft-on-criminal policies which truly endanger its citizens,” Kozuch said.

In an executive order made public on Friday, Lujan Grisham temporarily banned the open and concealed carry regulations in Bernalillo County for at least 30 days. The shootings of a 13-year-old girl in July, a 5-year-old girl in August, and an 11-year-old boy this month served as the impetus for the statement.

“As I said yesterday, the time for standard measures has passed,” the governor said, according to her office’s press release on the order. “And when New Mexicans are afraid to be in crowds, to take their kids to school, to leave a baseball game – when their very right to exist is threatened by the prospect of violence at every turn – something is very wrong.”

On Friday, the governor held a press conference where she boldly said that no constitutional right is “absolute.”

“No constitutional right, in my view, including my oath, is intended to be absolute,” Lujan Grisham said after a reporter asked whether it’s “unconstitutional” to force Americans not to exercise their right to bear arms.

“There are restrictions on free speech. There are restrictions on my freedoms. In this emergency, this 11-year-old, and all these parents who have lost all these children, they deserve my attention to have the debate about whether or not, in an emergency, we can create a safer environment. Because what about their constitutional rights?” she said.

The reporter continued by inquiring of the Democrat governor whether she thought that criminal offenders with access to black market weapons would obey her directives on the 30-day suspension.

“Uh, no,” she responded. After that question, she reportedly went into a tangent about the importance of reporting crimes to law enforcement.

The National Association for Gun Rights and a local, unnamed resident have already launched a lawsuit against Grisham for “violating their Second Amendment rights.”

“Gov. Luhan Grisham is throwing up a middle finger to the Constitution and the Supreme Court,” Dudley Brown said. Dudley is the president of the National Association for Gun Rights.

The USCCA’s recently established 501(c)(4) group, the U.S. Concealed Carry Association for Saving Lives Action Fund, also denounced the order “in the strongest possible terms.”

“Not only does Governor Grisham lack the constitutional authority to implement such an unprecedented assault on the Second Amendment rights of New Mexico citizens, but it strikes at the very heart of what responsible gun owners have been saying for years – criminals do not follow the law, and this order only serves to punish law-abiding gun owners who protect their community,” said Katie Pointer Baney, chairman of the board and executive director of the USCCA-FSL Action Fund.

On X, formerly known as Twitter, the NRA emphasized that the New Mexico Bill of Rights guarantees the right to keep and carry guns for “security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes.”

A statute permitting people to file a $2 million lawsuit if their constitutional rights are infringed was enacted by the governor in 2021.

“Under the New Mexico Civil Rights Act, signed into law by @GovMLG, a person whose rights under the Bill of Rights are violated may sue to recover for damages and obtain injunctive relief. Damages may be awarded up to $2 million per person whose rights were violated,” the NRA said. 

“The NRA remains committed to defending the rights of every American and sounding the alarm on such dangerous and unconstitutional proposals that prevent the law-abiding from defending themselves and their families from violent criminals who have overtaken this state under her watch,” Kozuch added.

Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts

Shocking: New Mexico Governor Bans Second Amendment!

ABOVE: PASTOR & PREACHER SPENCER SMITH REPORTS

Two Republican members of the New Mexico State House of Representatives are calling for Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham to be impeached.

Gov. Lujan Grisham holds news conference on gun violence

Michelle Lujan Grisham speech at Biden's Belen conference

 

President Biden to campaign for Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham

Former Policeman: Governor Suspends Constitution! Lawsuits Filed…Where Is The Arrest?!

Ronchetti: Lujan Grisham Admits Gun Ban Is A Farce As Crime Rages

Stand Up Against The Wicked Witch of the West Governor of New Mexico: Why the 2nd Exists

 

 

Team Biden Continues Two-Pronged Assault on 2nd Amendment and Small Businesses

By Stephen Kruiser 3:35 AM on September 01, 2023
The Morning Briefing: Team Biden Continues Two-Pronged Assault on 2nd Amendment and Small Businesses
AP Photo/Haven Daley

Top O’ the Briefing

Happy Friday, dear Kruiser Morning Briefing friends. Ertenzo felt most purposeful when adding a secret fourth bean to his three-bean salad for the annual Cornhole Club picnic.

The commie puppet masters who run Joe Biden’s brain have made no secret of their contempt for the Second Amendment and law-abiding American gun owners. They’ve had their senile mouthpiece babbling about “assault weapons” almost from the moment he was installed in the Oval Office.

Democrats don’t have a lot of luck with sweeping gun control legislation for a couple of reasons. First, they keep passing laws that make gun owners who have adhered to the law criminals overnight. These laws eventually find their way to a judge or a court that says, “Yeah…no.”

The other reason — and this is the big one — is that there are a lot of Democrats who own guns and are fond of their Second Amendment rights. Most of them are in flyover country, which is why a lot of the D.C. Dems are out of touch with reality.

Team Biden is nothing if not relentless in its pursuit of an anti-American agenda, however. Instead of the legislative process, the bureaucracy is being used to choke the life out of the Second Amendment, which Catherine wrote about yesterday:

The Biden administration, failing to get enough congressional cooperation to trample on the Second Amendment, continues its war against gun dealers.

Bingo.

As we examine the story further, it’s important to remember that Democrats have contempt for small business owners. People who can’t be forced into unionizing and stuffing the coffers of the Democratic Big Labor slush fund are useless to them.

Here’s more from Catherine’s post:

I previously wrote a VIP post about how hundreds of gun dealers suddenly lost their licenses to Biden’s ATF, in what the gun industry says is a back-handed way of undermining gun rights (if you’re not already a VIP subscriber, join today!). Some dealers informed the media that the federal government is hurting a major ally in identifying “suspicious gun buyers” by targeting legitimate gun dealers. But the Biden administration is successfully hurting gun dealers’ business. “We were making $1 million a year, now it’s less than $100,000,” gun dealer Anthony Navarro told the Wall Street Journal. “This policy is designed to be a backdoor violation of the Second Amendment.” Now there’s the new ATF rule, also aimed at gun dealers.

I’m an Arizona resident. Rules regarding private gun sales are practically nonexistent. Both parties have to be Arizona residents and after that, YOLO. The Grand Canyon State has functioned with minimal gun laws for a very long time. My grandfather owned a gun store when I was a kid, so I know whence I speak (write). What the feds want to do now is get their fascist little fingers all over the transactions between individuals, which Ryan Petty explains at our sister site Bearing Arms:

The White House outlined that under the suggested guidelines, individuals would be expected to obtain a federal license and conduct background checks if they meet one or more of several conditions. These include frequently selling firearms shortly after purchasing them, offering guns in near-new condition, selling multiple units of the same gun model, or selling business inventory as a previously federally-licensed dealer without transferring it to a personal collection for at least one year, effectively targeting the so-called fire sale loophole. The proposed rules would establish criteria around the frequency and type of gun sales by unlicensed sellers, along with the condition of the firearms.

The Second Amendment infuriates leftists because the federal government hasn’t been able to wrest control of it from the states. It’s a perfect example of how the country is supposed to work. My good friend, colleague, and “Unwoke” podcast co-host Kevin Downey Jr. once asked me if all of my guns were legal. I replied, “In this state they are.” Were I to move back to California, the story would be different.

The anti-2A crowd is fond of saying, “We don’t want to take away your guns.”

They do, of course, but until they can, they’d like to make the legal acquisition of firearms so onerous that people just give up.

Democrats Defund Firearm Education Nationwide

Ammoland Inc. Posted on by
SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2023/08/democrats-defund-firearm-education-nationwide/;Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

In what seems to be another attempt at discouraging firearm activities, the Department of Education has decided to withhold the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) funds from hunting and archery education programs nationwide.

Due to the attack at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, the Department of Education decided to pass the 2022 Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. This new policy required the department to withhold certain grant funds from school archery and hunting programs.

The specific provision in the act was an amendment to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which prohibits federal funds from going to programs that “provide to any person a dangerous weapon or training in the use of a dangerous weapon.”

Logical-thinking people would understand that more training would increase responsible gun ownership, but the anti-gun segment of our population sees this topic differently. We understand that when people think like this, they usually project their own thoughts about what they think “they” might do with a gun. Some cannot see that the thoughts in their own mind are not necessarily those of others. Many within the anti-gun circles have been conditioned to believe that guns are used only for killing, so they have a hard time seeing the topic rationally. This results from decades of anti-gun mind manipulation perpetuated on people who can’t think for themselves.

Democrats play the long game in disarming their fellow citizens and convincing the weak-minded to go along in their pursuit.

We’ve seen their attempts to tax ammo in what would appear to be an attempt at shutting down gun ranges by making it overly expensive to practice. They understand that if ammo is expensive enough, parents won’t be spending time at the range, and this would certainly reduce the amount of time they spend training their children. If the next generation of children grow up without guns in the household and without any familiarity or interest, they will likely be non-gun-owners in their adult lives. The anti-gun strategy is generational, and they seem to be determined to do anything they can to reverse the naturally instinctive desire for gun ownership in America. In this case, removing all opportunities for kids to learn about guns only helps their agenda.

Under this new defunding scheme, millions of students will be denied the ability to learn firearm safety and will be unable to participate in recreational shooting sports. It would seem that is the idea.

In response to this new attempt by the Government to discourage American gun ownership, Congresswoman Elise Stefanik, from New York’s District 21, said:

“This is the most recent example of a series of far-left pushes by the Biden administration and education secretary Cardona in the name of their partisan political agenda. Despite long-standing, bipartisan congressional support, the Department of Education has decided to eliminate the opportunity for millions of American students to exercise their Second Amendment right by safely learning to use firearms and participate in recreational, shooting sports.”

The left is very strategic in the way they attack the 2nd Amendment. This is just another attempt at their goal of a government-controlled citizenry. However, they can’t seem to get rid of that pesky 2nd Amendment.

About Dan Wos, Author – Good Gun Bad Guy

Dan Wos is available for Press Commentary. For more information contact PR HERE

Dan Wos is a nationally recognized 2nd Amendment advocate, Host of The Loaded Mic, and Author of the “GOOD GUN BAD GUY” book series. He speaks at events, is a contributing writer for many publications, and can be found on radio stations across the country. Dan has been a guest on Newsmax, the Sean Hannity Show, Real America’s Voice, and several others. Speaking on behalf of gun rights, Dan exposes the strategies of the anti-gun crowd and explains their mission to disarm law-abiding American gun owners.

Dan Wos
Dan Wos

NYC MAYOR: Curtis Sliwa Arrested, Protestors Clash at Anti-Migrant Protest Gracie Mansion NYC~Migrant crisis reaches boiling point on Staten Island, New York City~Nassau County, Long Island refuses illegal immigrants

YORKVILLE, Manhattan- Protests against Migrant Shelters being set up in the outer boroughs continued for another weekend this time in front of Gracie Mansion. Protesters want the City to stop migrants from being housed in the 5 boroughs and the Federal Govt to close the US Border. Earlier in the rally, they were a far-left counter-demonstrations that had scuffles with the anti-migrant rallygoers. Curtis Sliwa of the Guardian Angels and two senior citizens were arrested after blocking the entrance to Gracie Mansion.

Migrant crisis reaches boiling point on Staten Island, New York City

A judge has ruled that New York City cannot use a former school on Staten Island as a migrant shelter, for now, despite asylum seekers arriving Friday afternoon.

Nassau County, Long Island, New York Executive Bruce Blakeman says local leaders have legal authority to refuse shelter for illegal immigrants.

Coalition of FFLs Sue Over Biden’s “Zero Tolarance” Policy

Ammoland Inc. Posted on by
SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2023/08/coalition-of-ffls-sue-over-bidens-zero-tolarance-policy/;Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

 

In recent months, the Second Amendment community has faced unprecedented challenges in the wake of President Biden’s attack on gun rights. One of the most contentious issues has been implementing the “zero tolerance” policy for gun dealers by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). As staunch defenders of the Second Amendment, a coalition of Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) has stepped up to contest what they view as an overreach of government authority. The alliance is led by Eric Blandford, who runs the successful YouTube channel Iraqveteran8888.

“Selling firearms is a perfectly normal business venture, and nobody should have to fear losing their entire life savings over a typo,” Blandford told AmmoLand News.

The announcement was announced on the popular YouTuber’s channel. He was joined in the video by Senior Vice President of GOA, Erich Pratt.

The Biden administration’s “zero tolerance” policy for gun dealers has drawn significant criticism from pro-gun advocates, including FFLs.

President Biden claims that the policy aims to crack down on alleged violations of federal gun laws by firearm dealers. The coalition of FFLs claims the ATF is taking an over-aggressive stance on even minor clerical errors. The members point to the ATF punishing law-abiding FFLs for trivial mistakes and administrative errors leading to the revocation of FFLs. Under the policy, the revocation of FFLs is at a 17-year high.

The FFL coalition argues that the ATF’s “zero tolerance” approach undermines the due process rights of FFLs and could potentially lead to the unjust revocation of licenses. Instead of focusing on rooting out actual criminals, this policy places undue burdens on small business owners who strive to adhere to complex and often confusing regulations. There is also evidence that the ATF is using the revocation process as retaliation against FFLs that sue the Bureau. Moorehouse Enterprises is one of the alleged victims of ATF reprisal. The gun store sued the ATF over the new rule on frames and receivers. After the lawsuit was launched, a local Industry Operations Inspector (IOI) examined the company’s books and found a few errors. Even though the IOI was positive about the inspection, the small local business received a revocation letter. The gun store has now launched a second lawsuit contesting the revocation with the help of Gun Owners of America (GOA).

The legal battle launched by the FFL coalition centers on upholding the principles of due process and fair treatment under the law.

Pro-gun advocates argue that treating minor administrative mistakes with the same severity as deliberate violations disproportionately punishes FFLs who are attempting to comply with an elaborate set of regulations.

The coalition believes that this overzealous approach by the ATF could have far-reaching implications, not only for FFLs but for the broader Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. By contesting the ATF’s “zero tolerance” policy, the coalition seeks to protect not only their livelihoods but also the rights of responsible gun owners across the nation.

The ongoing legal battle between gun stores and the ATF represents a pivotal moment for Second Amendment rights in the United States. The FFL coalition’s efforts are a testament to the enduring commitment of Americans to safeguard their constitutional rights.

About John Crump

John is an NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people from all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.

John Crump

Biden’s DOJ Asks SCOTUS to Gut the 2nd Amendment in 67-Page Brief

Biden’s DOJ Asks SCOTUS to Gut the 2nd Amendment in 67-Page Brief

Ammoland Inc. Posted on by

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2023/08/bidens-doj-asks-scotus-gut-2nd-amendment/;Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

Constitutional attorney Mark W. Smith, a member of the United States Supreme Court Bar, breaks down the recent DOJ Brief regarding the USA v. Rahimi. Follow Mark as we do on YouTube at The Four Boxes Diner.

In a notable development, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) has submitted a significant brief (67+ pages, embedded below) to the United States Supreme Court in the case of the United States of America vs. Zaki Rahimi. The focus of this case is the constitutionality of 18 USC 922 G8, which pertains to domestic violence restraining orders and their alignment with the Second Amendment.

Mark Smith, a constitutional attorney, suggests that the DOJ, representing the Biden Administration, is arguing for extensive interpretation measures. The contention seems to be that the Second Amendment allows Congress and other legislative bodies the power to disarm individuals [aka “infringe”] deemed not “Law-abiding” or “responsible.” The criteria for such judgments, as outlined in the brief, could range from minor infractions like jaywalking to more serious criminal activities.

The broad implications of such an interpretation might leave a vast number of citizens without the right to keep and bear arms.

Central to the case is Zaki Rahimi’s incident from December 2019, where he allegedly assaulted his girlfriend and threatened a witness with a firearm. The event resulted in a restraining order against Rahimi in February 2020 after he ostensibly admitted to the accusations.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals previously held that the federal law in question in Zaki Rahimi’s case was in violation of the Second Amendment. Still, the DOJ’s arguments seem to lean heavily on connecting firearms with domestic violence, potentially setting a precedent for justifying ‘red flag’ laws. Their position leans on the Heller case from 2008, which identified the rights of “law-abiding and responsible” individuals to bear arms.

The DOJ attempts to spin its argument based on three main talking points, all taken out of legal and historical context:

  1. Previous court precedents distinguished between law-abiding citizens and those deemed otherwise.
  2. Historical precedents allowed for disarmament during the founding era, citing laws that existed during the period.
  3. Arguing that the majority of American states have similar domestic restraining orders suggests a national consensus.

Critics rightfully argue that simply because many states have implemented certain rules doesn’t automatically affirm their constitutionality.

This shocking 67-page brief from the DOJ would be a significant shift in interpreting the Second Amendment. Whether this unconstitutional human rights grab prevails will be determined by the Supreme Court in its upcoming deliberations.

Read Related: Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Rahimi Restraining Order Second Amendment Case

Biden DOJ Legal Brief to SCOTUS in U.S. v. Rahimi

By Fred Riehl and AI tools. Note: Research behind this article was generated using AI technology and may contain some automated content aggregation and analysis.

Women Speak Out in Opposition to Tenn. Gun Control ‘Special Session’

DC Project Women Speak Out in Opposition to Tenn. Gun Control ‘Special Session’

Ammoland Inc.Posted on by
SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2023/08/women-speak-out-in-opposition-to-tenn-gun-control-special-session/;Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

Opinion

  • Red Flag Law: Governor Bill Lee’s push for a “red flag” law is resisted by concerned moms, who argue it’s more harmful than helpful.
  • Gun Control Debate: Ashley Britt and Amanda Suffecool critique gun control measures for not necessarily ensuring safety and having roots in racism.
  • Misuse of ERPO: Kristen Benson highlights the potential for aggressors to misuse Extreme Risk Protective Orders, endangering innocent victims further.

Governor Bill Lee, R-Tenn., has been discussing the implementation of a so-called “red flag” law lately. While Lee tried to see to it that his favored measure would have been passed in the last legislative session, luckily, he failed in his efforts.

Since then, Lee called for a special session for the legislators to open up, and many suspect this was in efforts to ram-rod through an extreme risk protective order bill, but many are vehemently against that notion. The DC Project recently went to Nashville, where they held a press conference about so-called gun control measures, the dangers of such, and making known that red flag laws are more harmful than helpful.

On Monday, August 21, 2023, a delegation of several of the DC Project ladies assembled. At the helm was Dianna Muller, the founder of the group, who is a competitive shooter and veteran police officer with over twenty years of experience. Concerning the event, their release stated that the “DC Project-Women for Gun Rights will discuss the upcoming special session on gun control. Hear from moms, law enforcement professionals, survivors of violence, and experts in firearms safety on why they oppose the calls for more gun control. Several House Republican leaders will attend.

The teal-clad ladies drew the attention of several lawmakers and had a decent representation present. Opening up the press event was Tenn. House Assistant Majority Leader Mark Cochran, and he discussed the special session.

I think you will see Tennessee lead the nation in providing solutions that focus on separating dangerous people from society, while protecting your central constitutional liberties. And again, we’re about focusing on individual responsibility and focusing on the holding criminals responsible and for protecting the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens.

DC Project Members Dianna Muller and Amanda Suffecool with Tennessee Legislators

There were several DC Project delegates and other speakers present who spoke, including:

Dianna Muller
Nikki Goeser
Ashley Britt
Amanda Suffecool
Kristen Benson

Ashley Britt, the Tennessee state Director, spoke about her role as a mother and hunter.

“We believe that education is key to safety and violence prevention, not legislation. We want to thank leader Cochran and all of our other Tennessee representatives for being here with us today,” Britt said, “We all want the same thing. To be safe, and we want our children to be safe.” Britt continued:

“Our hearts break after every senseless tragedy, especially when We know that there are meaningful and effective solutions that can make our communities safer. But inevitably, after a tragedy, the gun control lobby immediately turns the conversation to more laws and more restrictions. It’s time to look at the evidence and acknowledge the truth. These policies are failures, and they do not produce the desired results. Gun control policies sound like a good idea, but make it difficult for citizens to defend themselves, which emboldens criminals, increases violence, and makes our community less safe. Common sense to me means that those cities with the most violence and murder like Baltimore, DC, Chicago, that they should adopt the laws of the cities that are not linked to violence. Gun control policies like ERPOs, aka red flag laws, do not keep you safe. Do not Chicago our Nashville.”

Nikki Goser gave an impassioned speech. Her story is one that has led to meaningful legislative change in the state of Tennessee, with the introduction, passage, and enactment of lifetime order of protections becoming policy in the state. Goser had a message for everyone at large;

“Moms Demand Action does not speak for me. I was a victim of a violent crime,” she said. “My husband Ben was brutally murdered in front of me by a man who’s stalking me. I was denied the ability to carry my legal firearm to protect us that night because of the gun-free zone…Policies that Moms Demand support.”

A statement was read by Amanda Suffecool that was prepared by a woman who chose not to attend the event. The woman who was going to speak said that she was concerned about things that were being said on the news about potential violence and decided not to show up. Suffecool said the African-American mother of three asked her to step in and tell everyone about her story.

My journey to gun ownership only started recently. It was during COVID and the whole toilet paper shortage that I realized how vulnerable I was. How would I protect my family in a critical incident? I decided to buy a gun. And I’m speaking today because my experience may be similar to the recorded 14 million first-time gun owners over the past couple of years. It was scary at first, but with training with friends, and then with certified instructors, I was empowered. I am more confident in my own safety and my ability to provide and protect for my children.

I also learned how gun control is steeped in racism, in order to prevent the newly freed slaves from being able to protect themselves. If government ushered in gun control, do you think that I’m not worthy, or capable or trustworthy to handle a firearm? If you say Black lives matter, then stop making it more difficult for us to protect ourselves. Every restriction, every permit, every license makes gun ownership and self-defense a rich man’s game. I can’t afford a bodyguard. And I don’t work in a building with security.

As a woman, I’m smaller. I’m less equipped for violence. And my firearm…my newly acquired firearm is an equal protector. It’s an equalizer. Gun rights are women’s rights. Now I know the Second Amendment is for all Americans. Thoughts and prayers and calls for more gun control isn’t enough. How about letting me defend myself and my family from evil?

Kristen Benson, a survivor of violence, explained that extreme risk protective orders only make things worse for women who are similarly situated as she was.

“Not only am I a mom, but I’m a survivor of sexual abuse and rape. I know what it is to be vulnerable and to live in constant fear,” Benson said, “But I have since dedicated my life to overcoming the terror of my past.” Benson explained she opened up a firearm training company in order to specifically teach life-saving skills to empower women who should not have to live in fear. “Their aggressor can easily manipulate ERPOs against them as a way of intentionally disarming them and rendering them completely defenseless,” Benson said of how the system can be weaponized.

Representative Chris Todd talked about the special session. Todd was highly supportive of the gun rights advocates who attended and observed;

“We stand with you. Most of us get why you’re here. We are on the same page. We know what you’re saying is the absolute truth. We know what our constituents are saying.” Todd also offered up an assurance, “We’re not gonna let anything bad come out of here. We’re gonna make sure your rights and liberties are protected.”

The press conference had many other women and advocates speaking on behalf of the Second Amendment and our civil liberties. With the special session in full swing, we have to remain hopeful that the representatives who pledged their support will ensure no freedom-limiting measures pass.

To catch a partial broadcast of the DC Project press event, watch the embedded video above or at WZTV FOX 17 News, Nashville.

Read Related:

Tennessee Governor Bill Lee, Pushes Forward with Red Flag & Gun Control Special Session

John Petrolino is a US Merchant Marine Officer, writer, author of Decoding Firearms: An Easy to Read Guide on General Gun Safety & Use, and NRA-certified pistol, rifle, and shotgun instructor living under and working to change New Jersey’s draconian and unconstitutional gun laws. You can find him on the web at www.johnpetrolino.com on Twitter at @johnpetrolino, Facebook at @thepenpatriot, and on Instagram at @jpetrolinoiii.

John Petrolino
John Petrolino

TN Governor Bill Lee, Pushes Forward with Red Flag & Gun Control Special Session

Tennessee Governor Bill Lee, Pushes Forward with Red Flag & Gun Control Special Session

Ammoland Inc. Posted on by

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2023/08/tennessee-governor-bill-lee-pushes-forward-with-red-gun-control-special-session/;Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

Danger Red Flag Warning

Despite calls not to, Tennessee Governor Bill Lee has called a Special Session with the obvious purpose of pursuing his Red Flag agenda and other gun control measures.

In April 2023, Governor Bill Lee circulated a proposed Red Flag law, which he refers to as a “temporary mental health order of protection,” solely to rebrand it and confuse the public and some legislators. However, it is rebranded that proposal, and his goal is to pass a Red Flag law in Tennessee, whether in this special session or in the upcoming regular session.

The fact that he still has a Red Flag law as his goal is evidenced by the inclusion of that topic as item 12 in his proclamation.

As of Monday morning, August 21, 2023, the Legislators have filed 102 House Bills, 14 Senate bills, 24 House Joint Resolutions, 74 Senate Joint Resolutions, and 10 House Resolutions. Of the proposed bills, many of them have broad captions, and many of them can be amended to do things entirely different from the language contained in the bodies of the original bills.

Thus, the risk for a Red Flag law remains present – particularly when that has been the primary goal of Bill Lee and several Legislators (including the Lt. Governor) since April 2023.

A review of these bills that have been filed, particularly in light of the extremely broad captions on some bills, shows that Tennesseans are presently at risk for all manner of shenanigans.

Not only is there the opportunity that Red Flag (also known as “extreme risk” legislation) possible, there are many other bills that address things like safe storage requirements, establishing expanded categories of prohibited persons, DNA tracking of those who are merely arrested even for non-violent felonies, further denying access of the public to public records, expanding definitions of hate crimes, and a wide range of other topics. Again, the risk is that any of these might be intentional misdirections and that the filed bills could be easily and dangerously amended to do other things – indeed, this is exactly what happened in 2020 when Bill Lee and his legislative conspirators filed the initial harmless bill that was later changed to a 2nd Amendment bill (part of which has been already declared to violate the 2nd Amendment and 14th Amendments and to constitute federal civil rights violations!)

Whether a Red Flag law or other 2nd Amendment violations or even other violations of constitutional rights come out of the special session is not the end of the inquiry. The problem is that Bill Lee and others want Red Flag laws, extreme risk laws, gun storage mandates, and other clear violations of the 2nd Amendment. If they do not get them now, they will continue to pursue them.

What should 2nd Amendment supporters be doing?

1) Don’t go to the Legislature this week – instead call, email and stay in touch with your individual legislators. Demand that NOTHING come out of this special session. Demand that they vote to adjourn and go home. If Bill Lee throws a fit and calls another special session, do it again and keep doing it.

2) Do not be satisfied if a legislator tries to assure you that no Red Flag law and perhaps even no “gun control” will come out of the special session – the only acceptable answer is “no gun control ever on my watch – now or in the future.”

3) Demand that Legislators immediately take up the mandate of the Supreme Court in the Bruen case when they come back in January and that the only acceptable 2nd Amendment issues or public safety issues will be to repeal any and all laws and regulations in Tennessee that did not exist in the plurality of the states at the time the 2nd Amendment was adopted in 1791. Everything else must go.

4) Demand that your Legislators make and support a motion to immediately adjourn the special session. As Senate Caucus Chairman Jack Johnson recently stated, there are constitutional questions about whether the Governor’s callfor a special session meets the constitutional requirements.

 

Read Related: TN Governor Bill Lee, STOP!! Calling for Gun Control Special Legislative Session ~ VIDEO

About Tennessee Firearms Association:

The Tennessee Firearms Association is dedicated to defending the right to keep and bear arms and promoting the responsible use, ownership, and carrying of firearms.

Tennessee Firearms Association

These Global Organizations Want to Control You

These Global Organizations Want to Control You

  • By Ben Shapiro
  • Published August 21, 2023
  • https://thevaccinereaction.org/2023/08/these-global-organizations-want-to-control-you/; Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

There’s a group of people who control what you are allowed to see, what you read, what you watch, the posts you engage with. You haven’t heard of them, you don’t know their names. But they determine, through methods both direct and indirect, whether you are allowed to be exposed to particular messages. Their decisions can bankrupt companies, silence voices and fundamentally shift cultural norms. Who are these people and how do they do this? Well, at the top level you have a network of global elite and its creed… a universal framework full of guidelines and ratings designed to enforce approved narratives and punish disapproved ones.

Federal Judge Blocks Part of Georgia’s Law That Protects Kids From Transgender Treatment

Federal Judge Blocks Part of Georgia's Law That Protects Kids From Transgender Treatment

By Chris Queen 2:44 PM on August 21, 2023

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/columns/chris-queen/2023/08/21/federal-judge-blocks-part-of-georgias-law-that-protects-kids-from-transgender-treatment-n1720854;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

Federal Judge Blocks Part of Georgia's Law That Protects Kids From Transgender Treatment
AP Photo/Armando Franca
This past spring, the Georgia General Assembly passed a law that was intended to protect kids from transgender treatment. The new law was a step in the right direction, but as is far too often the case, Georgia Republicans stopped just short of what the bill should have been.

And now a federal judge has issued an injunction blocking part of the law after two physicians groups sued to dismantle it. United States District Judge Sarah Geraghty “announced earlier this month that she needed to ‘take some additional time to make sure I get this right,'” according to Fox 5.

“According to the court document, the motion was granted to halt part of the law until a trial can determine whether or not it is constitutional,” reports WSB Radio. However, the injunction only affects part of the law.

“The ban on surgery is still in place,” the WSB report continues. “The injunction only stops the law from preventing hormone therapy for transgender kids.”

The lawsuit states that the law, which took effect on July 1, undermines parents’ ability to make the right medical decisions for their kids and “singles out transgender minors for the denial of essential medical care.”

“It interferes with a parent’s right to govern their children’s medical care, for one, which is a pretty substantial right,” Ed Buckley, one of the attorneys involved in the suit, told WSB.

Related: Georgia Passes a Bill Against Transing Kids, but Does It Do Enough?

“This law unapologetically targets transgender minors and denies them essential health care,” read a statement from attorneys representing the plaintiffs. “The ruling restores parents’ rights to make medical decisions that are in their child’s best interest, including hormone therapy for their transgender children when needed for them to thrive and be healthy.”

Supporters of the bill maintain that the law is intended to save children from unnecessary medical treatments. State Sen. Carden Summers (R-District 13), who wrote the original bill, said, “We’re just trying to protect the children. That was the bill’s intent, and that’s where we’re at.”

“It’s major judicial overreach based on a false ideology,” Cole Muzio of Frontline Policy Council said of the ruling in a statement to PJ Media. “While Georgia’s SB 140 is both weak and poorly constructed, there is nothing unconstitutional about it.”

The left is fond of the old saying that “It takes a village to raise a child.” These days, it takes a movement to save kids from the harm that the left wants to do to these precious young souls.

Here at PJ Media, we want the next generations of kids to live their lives free of the baggage that the transgender lobby is trying to foist on them. You can join us in our mission to protect children by becoming a PJ Media VIP.

Your support helps us to report the truth without fear of censorship, and it offers you some awesome benefits too, including access to the comments section, exclusive articles, podcasts, and an ad-free experience at your fingertips.

VIP Gold gives you even more goodies: VIP access to all of the sites in the Townhall family, along with live chats! Our VIPs really are a community of people committed to the mission of telling the truth, and we appreciate every one of them.

VIP membership is a great value all its own, but you can use the code SAVEAMERICA to get a 50% discount. There’s never been a better time — and a better opportunity — to stand up for the truth.

House Freedom Caucus Issues Demands in Return for Continued Spending

House Freedom Caucus Issues Demands in Return for Continued Spending

By Athena Thorne 3:09 PM on August 21, 2023
SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/athena-thorne/2023/08/21/house-freedom-caucus-issues-demands-in-return-for-continued-spending-n1720844;Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

House Freedom Caucus Issues Demands in Return for Continued Spending
AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite
The House Freedom Caucus (HFC) issued a list of demands on Monday, which it characterized as requirements for it to support a continuing resolution. The stopgap spending agreements have become an annual spectacle in Congress, as appropriated funds run out at the end of the fiscal year (Sept. 30) before new appropriations have been determined. The alternative is a government “shutdown,” which Democrats in office and the media manipulate into bad press for fiscally responsible, disobedient Republicans.

Politico reports that both Democrat and Republican Congressional leaders have previously admitted the need for a continuing resolution. Politico called the list of demands a “not unexpected” “headache” for Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.). But the outlet also acknowledged that the Republican leader is already on board with at least some of the agenda: “McCarthy has repeatedly vowed that he won’t take up an ‘omnibus’ spending package — when all 12 spending bills are rolled into one mammoth piece of legislation.” So there’s a glimmer of hope for a semblance of fiscal restraint, anyway.

Related: Congress Looking at a Stopgap Spending Bill Until It Reaches a Deal on FY2024 Budget

What are these demands by the roughly three dozen stalwart conservative reps in exchange for passing spending resolutions? Let’s take a look.

In its introduction to the list, the HFC notes, “As Congress continues to work to pass appropriations bills, we must rein in the reckless inflationary spending, and the out-of-control federal bureaucracy it funds, crushing the American people. We remain committed to restoring the true FY 2022 topline spending level of $1.471 trillion without the use of gimmicks or reallocated rescissions to return the bureaucracy to its pre-COVID size while allowing for adequate defense funding.” That would be great. Of course, it will be hard to wrest back crisis-level spending from establishment politicians, but thank goodness a brave few are willing to try.

The HFC then went on to list its demands in return for agreeing to pass appropriations bills:

We will oppose any spending measure that fails to…

  1. Include the House-passed “Secure the Border Act of 2023” to cease the unchecked flow of illegal migrants, combat the evils of human trafficking, and stop the flood of dangerous fentanyl into our communities;
  2. Address the unprecedented weaponization of the Justice Department and FBI to focus them on prosecuting real criminals instead of conducting political witch hunts and targeting law-abiding citizens; and
  3. End the Left’s cancerous woke policies in the Pentagon undermining our military’s core warfighting mission.

All of those measures should never even have had to be in question, but the U.S. government is badly adrift at this time. The conservative caucus wasn’t done, though. “Furthermore,” the statement goes on,” we will oppose any attempt by Washington to revert to its old playbook of using a series of short-term funding extensions designed to push Congress up against a December deadline to force the passage of yet another monstrous, budget-busting, pork-filled, lobbyist handout omnibus spending bill at year’s end and we will use every procedural tool necessary to prevent that outcome.” You can’t say no one warned you, Congress. So what’s the plan for passing spending appropriations in a measured, timely manner this year?

But wait, there’s still more! There was a tasty cherry of transparency and oversight on top: “Lastly, we will oppose any blank check for Ukraine in any supplemental appropriations bill,” declared the common-sense conservatives.

It’s preposterous and sad that any one of these issues has to be demanded. And it’s outrageous and tragic that only a handful of the 541 elected representatives in the U.S. Congress — to say nothing of the executive branch — will insist upon them. May the Freedom Caucus have the strength and courage to hold the line through the ugly political season ahead.

 

Appeals Court Rules New Jersey Can Sue Gun Industry

Appeals Court Rules New Jersey Can Sue Gun Industry

Assault rifles hang on the wall for sale at Blue Ridge Arsenal in Chantilly, Virginia, on October 6, 2017. (Photo by JIM WATSON / AFP) (Photo by JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images)

OAN’s James Meyers
12:47 PM – Friday, August 18, 2023

SEE: https://www.oann.com/newsroom/appeals-court-rules-new-jersey-can-sue-gun-industry/;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

A federal appeals court ruled in favor of the state of New Jersey to allow them to sue local gun businesses under the state’s “public nuisance” law. 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit ruled that the lawsuit brought by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) over the Garden State being able to sue the gun industry was filed too early.

The Appeals Court claimed they filed the lawsuit before the new law enforcement began but did acknowledge that the new law is vague and does not detail what can cause the state to file a lawsuit. 

“The National Shooting Sports Foundation challenges a new state gun law as violating its members’ constitutional; rights,” Judge Stephanos Bibas, a former President Trump appointee, wrote. “But we see little evidence that enforcement is looming.”

The lawsuit comes after New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy (D-N.J.), signed the “public nuisance” law into effect in July 2022. 

The law allows the state’s attorney general to file lawsuits against local gun businesses based on an exception to the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which is meant to protect the gun industry from liability. 

A district court allowed the NSFF’s imposition of a preliminary injunction in January, claiming the “nuisance law” was in direct conflict with the PLCAA. 

However, NSSF General Counsel Lawrence Keane stated the gun organization will file another suit against the state if they enforce the law against the gun industry.

“While we respectfully disagree with the court’s decision on our pre-enforcement challenge, it is important to note the court did not say New Jersey’s law does not violate the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act; it clearly does,” Keane said.

This is the first time a federal appellate court has weighed in on these new gun laws.

Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts

1 2 3 4 5 6 … 100