Rather Expose Them Christian News Blog

POLICE STATE NJ Senator Menendez Panders to Constituents Over Chipman for ATF Head

NJ Senator Bob Menendez Poses with EveryTown and Moms Demand Action, IMG menendez.senate.gov

NJ Senator Bob Menendez Poses with EveryTown and Moms Demand Action, IMG menendez.senate.gov

BY JOHN PETROLINO

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/06/nj-senator-menendez-panders-to-constituents-over-chipman-for-atf-head/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

New Jersey – -(AmmoLand.com)- The matter of David Chipman’s confirmation process to lead the ATF is still in flux. Advocates have been urging everyone to reach out to their senators about voting against the confirmation of Chipman. The rehashing of anything Chipman-related really does not have to happen again. However, what of the senators that are known anti-civil rights, proponents?

NJ Senator Bob Menendez

One such senator, Bob Menendez from New Jersey has a rather hubris and obnoxious form letter that he sends to those that write to him on the subject. Take a read:

Dear Constituent,

Thank you for contacting me to express concerns regarding David Chipman, President Biden’s nominee to lead the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF).  Your opinion is very important to me, and I appreciate the opportunity to respond to you.
 

 
On April 7, 2021, President Biden announced his nomination of David Chipman as Director of ATF.  Mr. Chipman previously served as a special agent at ATF for over 25 years.  If confirmed, Mr. Chipman would be the agency’s first permanent director since 2015.

 

As a former ATF agent and an advocate for sensible gun safety laws, I believe Mr. Chipman is prepared to lead the ATF’s efforts to help prevent gun violence and save lives in communities across the country.  I also believe that, as a gun owner himself, Mr. Chipman will strongly defend the rights of citizens to use legal firearms responsibly.

 

Mr. Chipman’s nomination currently awaits consideration before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, of which I am not a member.  Please rest assured that I will keep your views in mind when his confirmation comes before me for a vote.

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me.  Please do not hesitate to contact me if I may be of further assistance.  I invite you to visit my website (http://menendez.senate.gov) to learn more about how I am standing up for New Jersey families in the United States Senate.

NJ Senator Bob Menendez

Including the letter in full was probably not necessary, as I’m only going to focus on certain parts. However, in the spirit of fairness to ole Robert, I left the missive unchanged for everyone’s unbiased review.

Some of what Menendez said is factually based. Yes, Chipman was nominated by the Biden-Harris administration. Yes, Chipman would be the first permanent director since 2015 if confirmed. That’s about all where the “facts” lay. The first falsehood that should be pointed out is that Menendez states:

Your opinion is very important to me, and I appreciate the opportunity to respond to you.

On its face, this statement is flat-out false. If Menendez cared about the opinion of the constituents who write to him in opposition to the confirmation of Chipman, there is a high probability the same people do not support all the legislation he’s introduced or supported in order to advance the anti-freedom caucus’ agenda. Menendez supports legislation such as:

  • S.1558 — 117th Congress (2021-2022) Untraceable Firearms Act of 2021
  • S.1131 — 117th Congress (2021-2022) HEAR Act
  • S.974 — 117th Congress (2021-2022) Gun Records Restoration and Preservation Act
  • S.736 — 117th Congress (2021-2022) Assault Weapons Ban of 2021
  • S.529 — 117th Congress (2021-2022) Background Check Expansion Act

That’s just a smattering of the bills that Menendez supports in this session of congress. This is not an extensive investigative piece, but suffice it to say if someone is against Chipman, they’re probably against those bills. We can politely reply:

No Bob! I know my opinion is not important to you, so please do not pretend it is. We’d not be having this correspondence if you respected my opinion, which happens to align with the Bill of Rights. Whereas, your opinion and actions are contrary to freedom.

Next piece to look at:

As a former ATF agent and an advocate for sensible gun safety laws…

As discussed time and time again, Chipman worked for the “anti-gun”, read anti-civil rights, lobby. Chipman does not advocate for “sensible gun safety laws”, he is a prohibitionist, like you. Further, it has been proved that more laws do not equal less crime. If that were the case, the state you hail from, New Jersey, would be one of the safest in the country. But instead, New Jersey has some of the most violent and crime-ridden cities in the nation. The only city that has shown any appreciable advancement in curbing crime is Camden, once the murder capital of the US, saw shootings drop in 2020.

I also believe that, as a gun owner himself, Mr. Chipman will strongly defend the rights of citizens to use legal firearms responsibly.

To think that Chipman, a former ATF agent, does not himself own firearms would be grossly obtuse. Many former law enforcement personnel own firearms. There are many reasons why they might, but none of which are prevalent to the conversation. Plenty of politicians, political hacks, and congresscritters that are members of the anti-freedom caucus own guns. How about you Bob? Do you own any firearms? Owning a gun does not make someone an advocate for firearm liberties or would cause them to “defend the rights of citizens”. I actually know what I’d refer to as anti-gun gun owners, and it’s frustrating talking to “them”. Speaking of Chipman’s firearms, isn’t there a little drama about that which surfaced recently involving him losing his service weapon?

In closure, don’t thank us for our thoughts. You don’t mean it, so don’t say it. The public at large would have more respect for you if you were unapologetic on this subject and just said:

“Ya know, I’m gonna confirm Chipman because I think he supports the same gun control agenda that I do. He may not know what an ‘assault weapon’ is, but by golly, he wants to take them all!”

 


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 and on instagram @jpetrolinoiii .

John Petrolino
John Petrolino

 

POLICE STATE NEW JERSEY: Gun Control Group Applaud NJ Governor’s Office For ‘Operation ChokePoint’ Style Actions

New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy

BY JOHN PETROLINO

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/06/gun-control-group-applaud-nj-govs-office-operation-chokepoint/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

New Jersey – -(AmmoLand.com)- There are so-called “gun control” organizations that we, as gun owners, have to deal with on a constant basis.

Sure, the narrative has changed over the years, with many of the Astroturf groups referring to themselves as “gun safety” groups, but nonetheless, the spirit of “Handgun Control Inc” (aka Brady United) lives on in all of them. What is perhaps more surprising to me is learning about a group that apparently  has no issues mincing words and refers to themselves as a “gun control organization.”

One such group was corresponding with Governor Phil Murphy’s Director of Communications, Mahen Gunaratina. Looking through documents obtained through the Open Public Records Act (OPRA W170483) I glimpsed at an email thread involving Igor Volsky, the Executive Director of Guns Down America, and Governor Phil Murphy’s office. In the email dated March 15, 2019, Volsky does not hold any punches. In fact, what he had to say I’m going to include in full here for your immediate review:

Daniella — thanks so much for the connect, I’m moving you to BCC!

Mahen, we may have met when I interviewed the Governor as part of our ThinkingCAP podcast at CAP in 2018! I’ve since moved to running a gun control organization called Guns Down America and we’ve been absolutely loving what you guys are doing on the issue, particularly the decision to include the number of crime guns recovered by each manufacturer!!

I’m connecting with you because later this month we’re launching a campaign pushing the largest banks to stop doing business with the gun industry until that industry can be fundamentally reformed. Since TD Bank is headquartered in New Jersey, I’d love to hop on the phone and tell you more about that effort and ways the Governor can create some amazing change in the corporate responsibility/gun space.

I’m attaching a brief overview of our strategic thinking and would love to connect. Would you have some time next week?

Best,
Igor

Well, isn’t that a cute missive to digest? “I’m moving you to BCC!”, convenient. As noted earlier, this is a “gun control” group, self-proclaimed. If I had to take a guess, I’d say this goes directly against what the playbook from a group such as Moms Demand Action would say. My assumption, if I had the chance to read such a document, is it would say something very similar to exactly this:

DO talk about “preventing gun violence.” DON’T talk about “gun control.”

I suppose when the microphones aren’t hot, these groups have no issue admitting to exactly what they are. On one hand, I do find it rather refreshing to know that Igor, the head of a “gun control” group, is not trying to change his spots. Kudos! for honesty, at least with Governor Murphy’s office.

The first rule of gun control is never talk about gun control!

Something of a coincidence maybe, I will note that I did try to check out the podcast episode that Volsky mentioned in his email. Interestingly enough, the content of the interview is no longer available. What did Governor Murphy talk about? What is the content that no longer can be accessed? The title of the show is “New Jersey’s Gov. Phil Murphy on Resisting Trump” and you can read the show notes HERE:

New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy (D) joins Michele and Igor to discuss the progress his state has made—including passing equal pay and paid sick leave, pushing back against the GOP tax bill, and his decision to create a Cabinet as diverse as New Jersey—despite President Donald Trump’s efforts to dismantle progressive agendas. Also, Ben Olinsky, senior vice president of Policy and Strategy at CAP, joins to outline the Center’s big ideas for states, including overtime, a state Earned Income Tax Credit, and “clean slate” legislation to automatically seal nonviolent criminal records.

This is the type of stuff we, as gun owners, need to be aware of. This is the type of stuff the general public needs to learn about. Volsky fed us the information through this email he probably never thought would see the light of day. His group was advocating for an “operation chokepoint” type of tactics to be employed in New Jersey. This anti-civil rights enthusiast was clearly trying to conspire with government officials in the state of New Jersey to engage in discriminatory practices.

Volsky applauds “…the decision to include the number of crime guns recovered by each manufacturer!!” The program seems to have begun in January 2018. I vaguely remember the murmurs of this initiative via executive order starting, and most people were dismissive of it being more Astroturf “we’re doing something” measures. In light of litigation against one such tracked manufacturer, we can see there may have been some method to their madness. As reported:

State data show that more than 80% of the guns used in crimes in New Jersey came from outside of the state, with Smith & Wesson firearms among the heaviest-trafficked firearms into the state. According to the latest report, 48 Smith & Wesson-brand firearms were used in crimes in the state, the leader among all gun manufacturers.

The litigation is in the form of New Jersey suing Smith & Wesson over their advertising methods. From another report on the suit specifically:

“New Jersey is asking a judge to force Smith & Wesson Brands Inc. to hand over internal documents, the latest twist in an ongoing legal fight over how the gun manufacturer advertises to residents.

The subpoena came after Grewal’s office asked outside lawyers to help investigate how gun companies promote their products.

Smith & Wesson said in its lawsuit that this all amounted to an “unconstitutional fishing expedition” designed to weaken the Second Amendment.

Grewal’s office pushed back, saying last week that state law allowed them to dig into anyone advertising within New Jersey.

The review was not about “the product Smith & Wesson sells, but the representations and omissions in its marketing and advertising,” state officials argued in court documents, and the investigation has shown that some ads “may misrepresent the impact owning a firearm has on personal safety.”

Some Smith & Wesson ads also promoted carrying concealed firearms without mentioning that New Jerseyans needed a permit to conceal carry, state officials wrote.

Grewal’s office asked that Smith & Wesson be held in contempt of court for ignoring the subpoena.”

It’s eye-opening to see how all the pieces come together. New Jersey officials are using taxpayer dollars to sue a perfectly legitimate business. Looking at Guns Down America and what they stand for sheds more light on perhaps what else we could be up against in the Garden State:

Guns Down America has led large coalitions to execute successful campaigns that have forced FedEx to stop providing discounts to NRA members, drove two large insurers (Chubb and Lockton Affinity) to break their business relationship with the NRA’s Carry Guard insurance and helped push the NRA toward bankruptcy, pushed the nation’s largest banks to publicly back away from doing business with the gun industry, and convinced Walmart to significantly reduce their gun sales and begin actively lobbying for gun reform.

You, the gun advocate can connect the rest of the dots. Taking a 30,000-foot view, we are better able to see how these groups and methods all come together. Guns Down America has a line of communications with Governor Phil Murphy’s office. People like Volsky have his ear. AmmoLand News is going to continue to monitor and look into any potential wrongdoing by the Murphy administration. As you can see, we have our work cut out for us, and we are dealing with groups conspiring with the government against the people to usurp their rights.


About John Petrolino

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 and on instagram @jpetrolinoiii .

John Petrolino
John Petrolino

White House Doc Shows Plan To Use Threat of “Domestic Terrorism” For Gun Control

Anonymous Snitch Group to Dox ‘Domestic Terrorist’ Trump Voters

BY JOHN CRUMP

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/06/white-house-doc-shows-plan-to-use-threat-of-domestic-terrorism-for-gun-control/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

White House Doc Shows Plan To Use Threat of “Domestic Terrorism” For Gun Control, iStock-1267413669

WASHINGTON, D.C. –-(Ammoland.com)- Is the White House using the threat of “domestic terrorism” to institute gun control? According to a White House document titled the “National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism,” gun control is a crucial component of Joe Biden’s plan.

The document says there is a rise in domestic violet extremists (DVE). It highlights the biases against minority populations as one factor of the growth of DVEs. It also states that those that believe that the Federal government is overreaching its power are at risk for becoming extremist, and the “perceived government overreach will almost certainly continue to drive DVE radicalization and mobilization to violence.”

While left-wing groups like Antifa and Black Lives Matter are not mentioned in the document, patriot groups are referred to as militia violent extremist (MVEs). Last summer, left-wing riots caused havoc across the country, causing millions of dollars of damage to properties and cost several people their lives.

According to the document, the idea of fraud in the recent general election led to the January 6th breach at the Capitol. It also claims that COVID-19 conspiracy theories also have led people down the path of extremism. It lays down the idea that not trusting the government leads to violent domestic extremism. It claims that this plan is something all Americans can get behind. Many gun owners would disagree with President Biden’s statement.

The document breaks up the plan into four strategic pillars, and one pillar should be very concerning for gun owners. The Biden administration is using the threat of domestic terrorism to infringe on the right to bear arms.

The document reads:

Strategic Goal 2.1: Strengthen domestic terrorism prevention resources and services.

While those who break the law in furtherance of domestic terrorism must face investigation and prosecution for their crimes, it is equally important that the Federal Government engage in efforts to prevent individuals from being drawn into the grip of domestic terrorism in the first instance. That means reducing both supply and demand of recruitment materials by limiting widespread availability online and bolstering resilience to it by those who nonetheless encounter it, among other measures. It also means reducing access to assault weapons and high–capacity magazines and enforcing legal prohibitions that keep firearms out of dangerous hands. Such prevention efforts must be pursued while safeguarding civil rights and civil liberties, including privacy protections, and while avoiding discrimination, bias, and stereotyping.

The document wants to restrict access to modern sporting rifles. The AR15 is included in this category. The AR 15 is the most popular rifle in the country. Americans of all walks of life own these rifles, and people like Stephen Willeford have used an AR15 to defend their community from a crazed murderer. One pregnant woman even used an AR15 to protect her family against home invaders. According to the document, the Biden administration wants to make it harder for Americans to defend themselves with the rifle that has been called the modern musket.

The document also states the White House wants to use the threat of domestic extremism to reduce access to standard compacity magazines. It does not say how it will accomplish that goal, but people like Biden’s ATF director nominee, David Chipman, want to add standard capacity magazines to the NFA. Chipman went as far as comparing detachable magazines to machine guns.

It also talks about using “legal prohibitions” to prevent firearms from falling into “dangerous hands.” The document never mentions what prohibitions it will use. Gun rights advocates are worried that this move could be an excuse to push for new gun control restrictions. The Biden administration, in the past months, has launched attacks on the right to bears arms. These attacks include going after homemade firearms and pistol braces.

The White House did not return AmmoLand’s request for comment.


About John Crump

John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people of 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

DOJ Warns States About Second Amendment Sanctuaries~Meanwhile immigration sanctuary policies are lauded and emulated

BY MICHAEL CUTLER

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/06/doj-hypocritically-warns-states-about-second-michael-cutler/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

On June 17, 2021 AOL published an Associated Press report under the title, Justice Dept.: Missouri governor can't void federal gun laws.  This report began with this excerpt:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department is warning Missouri officials that the state cant ignore federal law after the governor signed a bill last week that bans police from enforcing federal gun rules.

In a letter sent Wednesday night and obtained by The Associated Press, Justice officials said the U.S. Constitution's Supremacy Clause outweighs the measure that Gov. Mike Parson signed into law Saturday. The new rules penalize local police departments if their officers enforce federal gun laws.

Acting Assistant Attorney General Brian Boynton said the law threatens to disrupt the working relationship between federal and local authorities, they said in the letter, noting that Missouri receives federal grants and technical assistance.

The public safety of the people of the United States and citizens of Missouri is paramount,” Boynton wrote in the letter.

The DOJ did not have to wait long for a response.  Just hours later, as reported by ABC News, Missouri responds defiantly to Justice Dept. over gun law, which noted, in part:

Similar bills were introduced in more than a dozen other states this year, including Alabama, Arkansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Wyoming, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, West Virginia and Iowa. In Texas, the governor has called for the state to become a so-called Second Amendment sanctuary.

Wow!  A new form of “Sanctuary policies” enacted by state governments and the federal government under Mr. Biden’s “leadership” is upset!

Having uttered the magic word “Sanctuary”, we cannot ignore that over the past several decades a growing number of cities and states, almost invariably led by radical leftists, have implemented so-called “sanctuary policies” that, to varying degrees, hamper cooperation between local and state police and federal immigration law enforcement authorities.

Certainly, our nation’s immigration laws are serious laws that were enacted to protect national security, public safety, public health and the jobs and wages of Americans.

Frequently these sanctuary policies have increased to the point where detainees lodged by ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) personnel have been blatantly ignored so that aliens who have serious criminal histories were released from custody rather than be turned over to ICE so that could be deported from the United States.

A few of these cases received attention from the media, but in reality, a huge number of such criminal aliens who should have been removed (deported) from the United States were permitted to roam freely in towns and cities across the United States, all too frequently, with tragic results.

Consider the horrific case of 32-year-old Kate Steinle who was shot to death by Jose Ines Garcia-Zarate, a citizen of Mexico who was illegally present in the United States and had an extensive criminal history in the United States.  He had been previously deported from the United States five times so that his mere presence in the United States constituted a felony under a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA): 8 U.S. Code § 1326.

On December 1, 2017, Business Insider published a report about this case, Kate Steinle's death at the hands of a Mexican national became a flashpoint in the immigration debate — here's the story behind her killing.  Here is an excerpt from this report:

At the time of Steinle's death, Garcia Zarate had been convicted of nonviolent drug crimes and deported five times since the early 1990s.

He faced a sixth deportation in 2015 and was in Justice Department (DOJ) custody that March after serving 46 months in prison for a felony re-entry into the US, but instead of transferring him into the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for deportation, the department transferred him to the San Francisco County Jail for prosecution of a 1995 marijuana charge.

San Francisco prosecutors, who had long ago deprioritized marijuana charges, dismissed the decades-old charge and released Garcia Zarate on April 15, 2015. Due to San Francisco's policy of limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities — which some refer to as a "sanctuary" policy — the city did not inform ICE when they released Garcia Zarate.

There is a huge number of similar cases around the United States, where "sanctuary policies” that contradict federal immigration law has resulted in the death and injury of thousands of victims at the hands of aliens who were illegal in the United States, subject to deportation but were shielded, aided and abetted by the jurisdictions who declared themselves to be “sanctuaries” for illegal aliens, in apparent violations of a number of laws, beginning with 8 U.S. Code § 1324 that begins with the following:

(a) Criminal penalties

            (1)

(A) Any person who—

(i) knowing that a person is an alien, brings to or attempts to bring to the United States in any manner whatsoever such person at a place other than a designated port of entry or place other than as designated by the Commissioner, regardless of whether such alien has received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States and regardless of any future official action which may be taken with respect to such alien;

(ii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, transports, or moves or attempts to transport or move such alien within the United States by means of transportation or otherwise, in furtherance of such violation of law;

(iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation;

(iv) encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law; or

(v)

(I) engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts, or

(II) aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts,

When President Trump acted to end sanctuary policies that harbor and shield illegal aliens, out of his well-founded concerns about public safety and national security, he was rebuffed in the courts and by globalists who complained that his efforts were based on xenophobia” and God knows what else!

Did the bipartisan 9/11 Commission that we keep so much about by Nancy Pelosi suffer from racism and xenophobia?  Pelosi has repeatedly called for a “9/11-style commission” to investigate the events at the Capitol on January 6, 2021.

Back on December 21, 2004, the Congressional Research Service issued a wide-ranging report that must be made mandatory reading for every political leader of the United States.  The title of the report was: 9/11 Commission: Legislative Action Concerning U.S. Immigration Law and Policy in the 108th Congress Updated December 21, 2004.

Here is the summary of this report began:

Summary

Reforming the enforcement of immigration law is a core component of the recommendations made by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9/11 Commission). The 19 hijackers responsible for the 9/11 attacks were foreign nationals, many of whom were able to obtain visas to enter the United States through the use of forged documents. Incomplete intelligence and screening enabled many of the hijackers to enter the United States despite flaws in their entry documents or suspicions regarding their past associations. According to the Commission, up to 15 of the hijackers could have been intercepted or deported through more diligent enforcement of immigration laws.

The 9/11 Commissions immigration-related recommendations focused primarily on targeting terrorist travel through an intelligence and security strategy based on reliable identification systems and effective, integrated information-sharing. As Congress has considered these recommendations, however, possible legislative responses have broadened to include significant and possibly far-reaching changes in the substantive law governing immigration and how that law is enforced, both at the border and in the interior of the United States.

The next time Nancy or her disciples invoke the 9/11 Commission, they need to be pointedly asked if they read the 9/11 Commission Report and how they and the Biden administration can blithely ignore the clear and present danger the Biden administration’s immigration policies (actions and lack of action) create for America and Americans.

Our nation’s Constitution and laws are not a menu from which picky eaters can decide what to order or not order.  It is hypercritical and beyond outrageous that the DOJ would attack Sanctuary policies regarding the Second Amendment while not only sanctioning immigration sanctuary policies but actually emulating those extremely dangerous policies in clear violation of standing federal law and in direct opposition to the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

Judiciary Delays Corrupt Biden’s Appointee Chipman Vote; SECOND AMENDMENT Activists Flood Capitol Switchboards

BY DAVE WORKMAN

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/06/judiciary-delays-chipman-vote-2a-activists-flood-capitol-switchboards/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

A vote on the nomination of David Chipman to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has been delayed until Thursday, June 24 by the Senate Judiciary Committee. (Screen snip, YouTube, Sen. Mike Lee)

U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- The Senate Judiciary Committee has delayed voting on the nomination of retired federal agent-turned-gun control advocate David Chipman one week, until Thursday, June 24, and during that time, grassroots Second Amendment activists are expected to be flooding Capitol Hill with messages of opposition.

“Between now and next Thursday,” suggested Jason Ouimet, executive director of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action, “(gun owners) ought to be contacting their Senators. They don’t want a partisan person like David Chipman running ATF.”

Ouimet spoke with AmmoLand News via telephone, expressing alarm that a nominee with Chipman’s background would be considered for the job of running the government’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. NRA has opposed the Chipman nomination from the beginning, stating, “Chipman has a long history of gun control advocacy that disqualifies him from leading the agency charged with enforcing federal gun laws.”

“The person who runs ATF ought to be somebody who can put politics aside, work with industry, gun owners and law enforcement,” Ouimet said.

Chipman, however, has worked for the gun prohibition lobby in the years since retiring from the ATF, which is responsible for enforcing the nation’s federal gun control laws.

Ouimet indicted calls to the Capitol have been heavy, and he said NRA has been concentrating attention on senators in certain states.

Earlier this week, Gun Owners of America provided an online avenue to oppose Chipman’s nomination. At the same time, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms offered the Capitol switchboard telephone number (202) 224-3121 for gun owners who prefer making a personal call to the offices of their two senators.

Ouimet suggested placing calls and sending messages specifically to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The committee’s direct line is (202) 224-7703:

DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS

REPUBLICAN MEMBERS

Messages for Committee Chairman Dick Durbin could also be called directly to his office at (202) 224-2152, and Ranking Member Sen. Chuck Grassley at (202) 224-3744.

The Senate will break for a couple of weeks in late June through July 12, Ouimet noted. During that period, when senators are at home meeting with constituents, grassroots activists can set up face-to-face meetings or attend “town hall” gatherings. Watch your local newspaper for information on such events.

Quimet expects a solid party-line vote in the Judiciary Committee, which is evenly divided with 11 members from each side of the aisle. It is when, or if, the nomination gets to the full Senate where each vote will hang in the balance, and a tie would be decided by Democrat Kamala Harris, in her role as president of the Senate.

Adding to the drama, Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene this week introduced H.R. 3960, which would abolish the ATF. Text of the legislation was not available when AmmoLand News checked on the measure Friday online.

In a statement quoted by the Washington Examiner, Greene observed, “The ATF’s unconstitutional war on gun owners and our Second Amendment rights must end.”

RELATED:


About Dave Workman

Dave Workman is a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms, and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.

Dave Workman

RED ALERT: Biden regime makes boldest move in history of America to ban, register firearms using federal bureaucracy

Image: RED ALERT: Biden regime makes boldest move in history of America to ban, register firearms using federal bureaucracy

BY J.D. HEYES

SEE: https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-06-14-biden-regime-aims-to-ban-register-firearrms.html;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

(Natural News) When Democratic presidential contenders like Beto O’Rourke say they are going after our guns, they mean it. When Democratic presidential contenders say they are pro-Second Amendment and pro-Constitution, they are lying.

Both of these facts have been proven anew thanks to a heinous new rule introduced this week by the Biden regime.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives believes it has the authority to confiscate, ban and register an entire class of firearms — tens of millions of them, in fact — without ever consulting Congress.

The rule seeks to ‘regulate’ the use of (ban) so-called “Stabilizing Braces” — attachments to sporting pistols like those chambered for the AR-15 round to make them easier (and safer) to fire by essentially turning them into rifles.

So why that suddenly makes a difference to these gun-grabbing sons 0f you-know-whats is beyond us, given that actual AK and AR-style rifles will (for now) not be affected.

According to a fact sheet about the rule from SB Tactical, the rule, called, “Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached ‘Stabilizing Braces,'” is the second attempt by the agency to regulate the devices, the first rule having been withdrawn in December 2020 ahead of Biden’s expected ascendency into the Oval Office, which happened only because Democrats stole Donald Trump’s reelection victory.

“The [Notice of Proposed Rule Making] proposes amending the definition of the term ‘rifle,’ as contained in 27 CFR §§ 478.11 and 479.11, to ‘clarify that the term “rifle” includes any weapon with a rifled barrel and equipped with an attached ‘stabilizing brace’ that has objective design features and characteristics that indicate that the firearm is designed to be fired from the shoulder, as indicated on ATF Worksheet 4999,” the fact sheet begins.

“ATF explains that the purpose of the amendments would be to target attachments to pistols that the agency contends are designed to evade restrictions imposed by the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act,” which limits the size of shotguns and rifles, the fact sheet continues.

“While ATF acknowledges that some stabilizing braces are intended to assist those with disabilities or limited strength to fire pistols, ATF argues that the intent of many such braces is effectively to convert pistols into unregulated short-barreled rifles (SBRs),” says the fact sheet — a contention that makes no sense given that a) any firearm is ‘regulated’ in that every buyer must be cleared to purchase one; and b) making a short-barreled rifle into a rifle makes it (anyone?) a rifle.

So what’s the issue? Well, the issue is the Biden regime sees stabilizing braces as a way to get the camel’s nose under the tent of broader regulation and eventually registration and banning of all “assault weapon” types of rifles, and against the people’s will. Always remember, Democrats will never be ‘finished’ taking away guns until they can take away all of them, the Second Amendment be damned.

“ATF proposes applying a point system…to determine whether a particular stabilizing brace would convert an otherwise unregulated pistol into an SBR,” the summary continued. But regardless, “ATF says it reserves the right to classify a firearm as an SBR, even if it satisfies the point system on the Worksheet 4999.”

So, this is a ‘heads I win, tails you lose’ scenario the ATF is establishing for these SBRs, of which there are an estimated 20-40 million in circulation that have been legally purchased.

“This proposed rule would be the largest Executive Branch firearms ban/registration scheme in American history— forcing the registration or destruction of millions of privately-owned firearms, and the loss of thousands of good-paying jobs from hundreds of companies,” SB Tactical’s fact sheet continues. “Through the creation of an arbitrary points system (ATF Worksheet 4999), the proposed rule would ensure that 99% of the firearms already in circulation are suddenly unlawfully possessed.”

This is a naked gun grab by the regime. If you want to sound off on this unconstitutional BS — and you should — click here and let the ATF know you disapprove if this.

Sources include:

SBTactical.com (.pdf file)

SecondAmendment.news

 

NICS: Leak Shows People Being Added to Prohibited Firearms Purchase List Without Due Process

BY JOHN CRUMP

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/06/leak-shows-people-being-added-to-prohibited-list-without-due-process/#axzz6xrCIJwGc;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

WASHINGTON, D.C. –-(Ammoland.com)-Can you be added to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) “Prohibited” list without being convicted of a crime? According to leaked documents received by AmmoLand News, the answer appears to be “yes.”

The document in question is called “Guidance for Requesting a Submission of the NICS Indices Unlawful User/Addicted of a Controlled Substance Files.” It lets law enforcement officials add suspects to the prohibited list even if the subject hasn’t been convicted of a drug charge. Most gun owners are not aware that they can lose their gun rights without a court convicting them of a drug crime. This expanded power brings up a concern that the ability to add a suspect to the NICS Indices violates a person’s right to due process.

The NICS Indices is a list of people prohibited by the FBI from purchasing a gun.

When a Federal Firearms License holder (FFL) runs a NICS background check on a gun buyer, the system runs the purchaser’s name against the NICS Indices. If the system comes back with a positive hit, the FBI’s system will deny the sale of the firearm. No other information is supplied to the FFL about the denial.

The form lets law enforcement add someone to the NICS Indices if the subject fails a drug test. The reporting officer doesn’t have to file charges against the person who fails the drug test. Many positive drug tests are false. In almost all cases, the person is not notified that the law enforcement agency has added them to the NICS Indices.

The form also allows Law Enforcement to add a suspect to the NICS Indices if they claim they have found the person in possession of drugs regardless of state law. That means that a police officer finds someone in possession of a drug legal in a state, the officer can fill out the form and have the person added to the NICS Indices. More and more states have legalized marijuana, but the drug remains illegal on the federal level. An officer could find a person with marijuana and let them go because they are prohibited by state law from arresting them. The officer still could report them to the FBI and have their firearms rights revoked.

The most disturbing part of the form is that law enforcement can add someone to the list by claiming the person admitted to using drugs. The person doesn’t have to be arrested or fail a drug test. The officer can just claim the person said they had used drugs within the last year. A person who admits to trying marijuana eleven months ago will lose their gun rights by a cop adding them to the NICS Indices.

The biggest issue is that law enforcement could mark someone as an unlawful user of drugs without their knowledge. Lying on a 4473 form is a felony. The person who tried marijuana once 11 months ago might consider themselves drug-free, but the FBI would say they are a drug user since they have tried a drug within the last year. If a law enforcement officer reports them to the FBI, the same officer could arrest the person and charge them with a felony that could land them in prison.

The form also lets law enforcement add a person to the NICS Indies for mental health reasons. These reasons could be that law enforcement has committed someone involuntarily to a mental health facility or a court system adjudicating as mentally defective.

AmmoLand News obtained the form from an inside source that has chosen to remain anonymous.


About John Crump

John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people of 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.

 

DOJ Releases Biden Gun Confiscation Order Legislation

NRA-ILA AR-15 Locked

In May, Attorney General Merrick Garland told lawmakers that the Department of Justice’s civil rights work was “critical to protecting the American dream.” IMG NRA-ILA

BY NRAHQ

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/06/doj-releases-biden-gun-confiscation-order-legislation/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- In May, Attorney General Merrick Garland told lawmakers that the Department of Justice’s civil rights work was “critical to protecting the American dream.” Since then DOJ has made clear that Garland’s selective definition of “civil rights” has no room for the Second Amendment or even basic due process under the law. Moreover, contrary to recent messaging, Garland and the DOJ appears to support an increase in civilian-police confrontations – so long as the civilian involved is not actually suspected of having committed any crime.

On June 7, the DOJ released model state gun confiscation order legislation – sometimes referred to as “extreme risk protection order,” “gun violence restraining order,” or “red flag” legislation. Regardless of the marketing, such laws empower the government to extinguish a person’s Second Amendment rights and confiscate their firearms without due process. Those subject to these orders are stripped of their rights without being convicted of any crime. By releasing this model language, the Biden administration has endorsed these unconstitutional measures.

Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that no state shall “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms; in the Fourteenth Amendment context, a liberty. A respondent’s firearms are, of course, their property

Ex Parte Orders

The Biden gun confiscation order language provides that a,

court shall issue an emergency ex parte extreme risk protection order upon submission of an application by a petitioner, supported by an affidavit or sworn oral statement of the petitioner or other witness, that provides specific facts establishing probable cause that the respondent’s possession or receipt of a firearm will pose a [significant danger/extreme risk/other appropriate standard established by state law] of personal injury or death to the respondent or another person.

An ex parte hearing takes place without notice to respondents and without their ability to participate in the proceedings. The court is only presented the statements of the individual petitioning to strip the respondent of their rights. There is no opportunity for the respondent to challenge the veracity of the petitioner’s statements. This one-sided procedure is ripe for abuse.

The Biden administration proposes a “probable cause” evidentiary standard for the ex parte gun confiscation order procedure. This means that the petitioner need not establish proof that the respondent poses a “risk” in order for the court to issue a confiscation order.

Moreover, a “probable cause” standard makes no sense in this context. In order to make an arrest or acquire a search warrant, police need to cite specific facts that establish probable cause that a crime has been committed. Crimes, of course, have specific elements. In the Biden gun confiscation order context, no crime has been alleged. Vague claims about a person’s strange but lawful behavior giving rise to “probable cause” of “risk” is a ridiculous perversion of the long-established legal process.

Orders Pursuant to a Hearing

Biden gun confiscation orders issued after a full hearing, where the respondent had an opportunity to participate, would strip a person of their Second Amendment rights and firearms for at least one year. Under the Biden language, such an order could be renewed indefinitely in one-year increments – empowering the government to strip a person of their Second Amendment rights in perpetuity without a trial.

Moreover, in the full hearing context, the Biden administration endorses a “preponderance of the evidence” evidentiary standard. In other words, the petitioner must prove that there is a greater than 50-percent chance the respondent meets some nebulous level of “risk.” Of course, this weak evidentiary standard is in stark contrast to the traditional evidentiary burden used in circumstances where individuals face a lengthy and indefinite loss of a fundamental right: “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

During the course of an order, a respondent would have one opportunity to petition for the termination of their gun ban. In order to prevail,

The respondent shall have the burden of proving, by the same standard of proof required for issuance of such an order, that he or she does not pose a [significant danger/extreme risk/other appropriate standard specified by state law] of personal injury or death to himself or herself or another.

In a sick perversion of our constitutional order, under the Biden legislation, the state would be relieved of its burden to prove that the respondent poses a “risk” that necessitates the continued deprivation of a fundamental right. Rather, the respondent would be required to prove that they do not pose a “risk.”

Such a bastardized legal procedure based on a flimsy evidentiary standard combined with an ill-defined concept of “risk” endangers all gun owners’ right to keep and bear arms.

Petitioners

In many jurisdictions with gun confiscation order legislation, only close family members and law enforcement officers may petition for an order. This helps to ensure that the petitioner has a significant relationship with and knowledge of the individual, or in the case of law enforcement, will face professional consequences if they have been found to have abused the procedure.

In its draft legislation, the Biden administration has made clear that they want the categories of petitioners to be far broader. The legislation would define eligible petitioners to include,

(E) A health care provider [as defined by state law] who has provided health services to the respondent; 

(F) An official of a school or school system in which the respondent is enrolled or has been enrolled within the preceding [six months/one year/two years/other appropriate time period specified by state law]; or

(G) [Any other appropriate persons specified by state law.]

Under such a regime, a doctor, nurse, dentist, optometrist, or EMT might be able to petition the court to strip an individual’s Second Amendment rights regardless of how fleeting their interaction with the respondent may have been or whether or not they have any mental health assessment training.

Worse, the Biden administration endorses granting any school employee a veto on a student’s right to keep and bear arms up to two years after they were enrolled. Consider the danger of empowering one of the most partisan left-wing occupational fields to adjudicate millions of current and former students’ Second Amendment rights.

Dangerous Confrontations Between Citizens and Police

The Biden gun confiscation order legislation would create confrontations between armed individuals in their homes and the law enforcement officers tasked with disarming them. The problem is potentially even more acute in the ex parte context, where the arrival of an officer may be the individual’s first notice that their rights have been abrogated.

At 5:17 a.m. on November 5, 2018, police served a “Red Flag” protective order at the home of 60-year-old Gary J. Willis in Anne Arundel, Md.  According to the Baltimore Sun, Willis brought a firearm when he answered the early morning knock at his door. The confrontation ultimately ended with police shooting and killing Willis in his own home.

Confiscation of Non-Prohibited Persons’ Guns

The Biden gun confiscation order legislation contemplates the confiscation of all firearms in a location which a respondent has access to, regardless of whether those firearms are owned by the respondent.

The Biden legislation provides,

(1) If the evidence presented at the hearing establishes probable cause that the respondent has access to a firearm, on his or her person or in an identified place, the court shall concurrently issue a warrant authorizing a law enforcement agency to search the person of the respondent and any such place for firearms and to seize any firearm therein to which the respondent would have access.

(3) If the owner of a firearm seized pursuant to this subsection is a person other than the respondent, the owner may secure the prompt return of the firearm by providing an affidavit to the law enforcement agency affirming his or her ownership of the firearm and providing assurance that he or she will safeguard the firearm against access by the respondent.  The law enforcement agency shall return the firearm to the owner upon its confirmation, including by a check of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System and the applicable state firearm background check system, that the owner is not legally disqualified from possessing or receiving the firearm.

The legislation anticipates that law enforcement would be empowered to confiscate firearms owned by individuals who are not covered by a confiscation order. The legislation places no burden on law enforcement to determine whether the firearms at a location accessed by the respondent are in fact the respondent’s property. To add further insult, those whose firearms are erroneously confiscated would be required to undergo an FBI background check before the return of their lawful property.

No Solid Evidence Supporting Biden’s Gun Confiscation Legislation

In a “commentary” released alongside the draft Biden gun confiscation order legislation, the DOJ pronounced, “research has shown that states can save lives by authorizing courts to issue [gun confiscation orders].” In reality, research on the effectiveness of gun confiscation order laws has been limited.

Research does show that the absence of due process has practical consequences for those wrongfully targeted under gun confiscation orders. Connecticut adopted an ex parte gun confiscation order procedure in 1999. An examination of the law found that 32 percent of ex parte orders issued in Connecticut were overturned following a hearing.

The RAND Corporation conducted a comprehensive study that surveyed the available research on several gun control policies. As part of the study, RAND researchers sought to determine “How Extreme Risk Protection Orders Affect Gun Use Outcomes.” The study stated, “We found no qualifying studies showing that extreme risk protection orders decreased any of the eight outcomes we investigated.” The “gun use outcomes” studied included “violent crime” and “suicide.”

The draft Biden gun confiscation order legislation is an overt attack on the Second Amendment and the due process rights that protect all Americans, regardless of whether they own firearms.

Attorney-General Garland appears all too willing to selectively undermine civil rights by executive fiat at Biden’s request. However, gun owners can strike a blow against Biden’s executive gun control efforts by denying him his choice to lead ATF – longtime anti-gun activist David Chipman.

Please contact both of your United States Senators and ask them to vote against David Chipman.


About NRA-ILA:

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess, and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org

National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)

FIREARM CONFISCATION: Conservative Action Project Comes Out Swinging Against Chipman

ABOVE: David Chipman’s nomination to head the ATF just attracted some powerful opposition.

(Screen snip, YouTube, Sen. Mike Lee)

BY DAVE WORKMAN

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/06/conservative-action-project-comes-out-swinging-against-chipman/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- The Washington D.C.-based Conservative Action Project (CAP) came out swinging against the nomination of David Chipman, the former federal agent-turned-gun control advocate, to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, stating “He has a long history of misconstruing key details of how firearms work, and has laid out an aggressive anti-gun ownership platform.”

In a “Memo for the Movement” signed by nearly 100 prominent conservatives and Second Amendment advocates led by former Attorney General Edwin Meese III, the group is telling the U.S. Senate to reject the nomination of gun control extremist David Chipman.”

Also among those signing the memorandum are Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin (Ret.), executive vice president of the Family Research Council; Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness; L. Brent Bozell, founder and president of the Media Research Center; Alan Gottlieb, founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation; Kathleen A. Patten, president and CEO of American Target Advertising, Inc.; David N. Bossie, president of Citizens United; Terry Schilling, president of the American Principles Project; Tim Macy, chairman of Gun Owners of America; Martha Boneta, president at Vote America First, and Dawn Wildman, director of policy for the Coalition for Policy Reform, and dozens of others.

The full list reads like a Who’s Who of conservative politics and Second Amendment activism.

Gottlieb, who also chairs the grassroots Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, told AmmoLand News that this memo, with all the signatures, is “a major development.”

The CAP memorandum pulls no punches.

“Conservatives join with Second Amendment advocates in strongly opposing David Chipman to lead the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF),” the message states.

“A former ATF special agent, Chipman currently serves as a senior policy advisor to a pro-gun control lobbying group. He has a long history of misconstruing key details of how firearms work, and has laid out an aggressive anti-gun ownership platform.”

“Critically, it is unclear whether Chipman fully understands the technical details of firearms and the firearm markets he so eagerly looks to regulate. In 2018, Chipman argued in favor of subjecting all AR-15s and potentially all semi-automatic rifles to regulation under the National Firearms Act – a hugely punitive taxation and regulation measure on the country’s most popular rifle, hugely difficult to implement and police.

“In his recent confirmation hearing, Chipman reasserted his support for mass confiscation of semi-automatic rifles – especially troubling considering that, when asked by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) to define a semi-automatic assault rifle, his answer would cover every single modern sporting rifle in America today.

“Though Chipman walked back the claim in his confirmation hearing, he has previously advocated for arresting prospective gun purchasers in gun stores following a failed background check – regardless of whether or not the prospective purchaser has done anything wrong. This is a highly dubious proposal given a Department of Justice report from 2011, which found the “false positive” denial rate for background checks was roughly 95 percent.

“Chipman has also made false claims about both the nature and intent of firearms suppressors, as well as falsely stating in front of Congress that the American gun market is ‘flooded’ with ‘foreign made ARs.’

“David Chipman is a gun control extremist whose views on firearms and the Second Amendment are wildly out of step with constitutional interpretation and widely held social norms. It is clear that Chipman intends to use the position as Director of the ATF to further an aggressive anti-gun agenda, rather than implement the law as written. The Senate must oppose his nomination.”

According to The Hill, Chipman “is facing intense opposition from gun rights groups that are pushing key senators to reject his nomination.”

The Capitol Hill newspaper explained that “pro-gun organizations are protesting his nomination over his support for stricter gun laws and previous work as a policy adviser for Giffords, a gun control group.” Those organizations, the article added, “are now focused on moderates who could swing the outcome, namely Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.),Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Jon Tester (D-Mont.).”

In an article blasting Chipman for his answers during his May hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, the National Rifle Association asserted the nominee “worked to obscure the woeful record of the 1994 Clinton ‘assault weapons’ ban.” Chipman, according to NRA, “described the data regarding the ban’s efficacy as ‘mixed.’”

“In truth,” NRA said in the article, “the Clinton semi-auto ban was a failure that even the federal government has acknowledged as ineffective.”

“The evidence is clear,” the article concluded, “banning commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms and their accessories doesn’t work. Chipman and the broader gun control movement’s continued advocacy for a failed policy measure reveals that their political project isn’t motivated by a desire for ‘gun safety,’ reducing violence, or ‘public health,’ but rather a religious passion for civilian disarmament.”

If the Senate rejects Chipman’s nomination, it will be a major defeat for the Biden administration and a setback for Joe Biden’s gun control agenda. Throughout his political career, Biden has never been a friend of the Second Amendment, and his nomination of Chipman is seen by many in the firearms community as a deliberate attempt to pick a fight with gun owners.

In a statement to the media last month, Gottlieb observed, “Out of all the potential candidates to lead the agency, Joe Biden has picked the one individual whose nomination was guaranteed to ignite a political firestorm. At this point, it is fair to question why the president has done this. It looks like the president wants to put the gun prohibition lobby in charge of firearms regulation and enforcement.”

RELATED:


About Dave Workman

Dave Workman is a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms, and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.

Dave Workman

POLICE STATE NJ AG Grewal Misusing His Office To Extort & Shut Down Out-Of-State Gun Firms

BY LEE WILLIAMS

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/06/nj-ag-grewal-misusing-his-office-to-extort-shut-down-out-of-state-gun-firms/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

New Jersey’s anti-gun Governor, little Phil Murphy, has let his radical Attorney General, Gurbir Grewal, target, entrap and harass legal firearms retailers across the country. This is another reason Phil Murphy must lose in his reelection efforts in the NJ governor’s race.

New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal
New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal

New Jersey – -(AmmoLand.com)- New Jersey’s Attorney General is ordering firearm products banned in the Garden State, and then extorting thousands of dollars from out-of-state firms through lawsuits.

When I worked at a newspaper in Delaware, I was intimately aware that if I strayed across the border into New Jersey with any weapons, ammo, or mags and got caught, I would likely spend the rest of my life in state prison.

Back then, New Jersey officials were content with only targeting individual gun owners, either those who weren’t familiar with their crazy gun laws or those from free states who may have taken a wrong turn.

Nowadays, things are different. New Jersey officials, [under the leadership of rabid anti-gunner Phil Murphy] are actively targeting citizens of other states, who may have never even set foot in New Jersey.

New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal is using “undercover” detectives to entrap firearms retailers and manufacturers – especially those in other states – in the hopes that the exorbitant fees and penalties he will extort from them will force the owners out of business.

This is a new kind of gun control.

So far, AG Grewal has targeted retailers who sell firearm components designed for home-builds and, of course, those who sell standard-capacity magazines.

Even the judges are in on the AG’s scheme. A New Jersey state court recently ordered a Florida firm to pay the state $150,000!?

Their crime? They refused to turn over their customers’ names and addresses to the Attorney General.

Grewal v. 22Mods4ALL

According to the civil complaint, 22Mods4ALL is a small, mom-and-pop retailer with less than 10 employees located in Longwood, Florida.

22Mods4ALL sells ARs and AR components, as well as the accessories you’d expect. (They actually have 5.56 in stock at $0.66 per round.)

I reached out to them seeking comment for this story, but have not heard back. I can’t say I blame them. They’re up against a team with unlimited resources paid for by taxpayer dollars. Besides, the prosecution seems very personal. Whoever wrote the civil complaint Grewal’s office filed against the small shop has a flair for the dramatic. It’s based upon emotion, rather than facts.

The complaint begins in El Paso, where the author describes a mass murder committed by an AK-47 and “extra magazines capable of holding at least 30 rounds of ammunition each.” Then misdirects the reader on to Dayton, Ohio, and describes “a shooter equipped with an AR-15 style rifle, a 100-round drum magazine, and 250 rounds of ammunition.” Then it’s Parkland, Florida’s turn, followed by Tucson, Arizona, and then, finally, New Jersey, where the author defines “Large Capacity Magazine.”

“To prevent gun violence, and to mitigate the risk of mass shootings, the State of New Jersey has long banned possession of large capacity ammunition magazines (“LCMs”) — firearm magazines capable of holding more than the standard number of rounds provided by the manufacturer,” the complaint states.

You’ll notice that New Jersey’s LCM definition is flawed on its face. AR manufacturers designed 20- and 30-round magazines for the rifle – that’s the “standard number of rounds provided by the manufacturer.” [Standard Capacity Magazines or “SCMs”]

Regardless, the New jersey penalties are very clear: “Any person who knowingly possesses an LCM is guilty of a fourth-degree crime, punishable by fines of up to $10,000, and by a term of imprisonment of up to eighteen months,” the complaint states.

22Mods4ALL – allegedly – sold six 30-round magazines to “to New Jersey undercover detectives from the New Jersey Division of Criminal Justice (“DCJ”),” the complaint states. During a second purchase, the gun shop allegedly sold the detective three more. The Attorney General then sent 22Mods4All a cease-and-desist letter, which the gun shop honored. It stopped shipping mags to New Jersey, but that wasn’t the end of the malicious prosecution.

“The Attorney General also demanded Defendant provide the details of all past sales of ammunition magazines capable of holding fifteen rounds or more to any New Jersey address since January 1, 2014, including the name and address of the purchaser and the specific ammunition magazine purchased,” the complaint states.

In other words, the AG wanted the names of any New Jersey residents who may have bought a magazine, which would likely have been followed by a knock on their front door.

That may have been too much for the good folks at 22Mods4All who, evidently, respect their customers’ privacy and don’t want to see any of them carted off to prison.

“Defendant, despite repeated attempts at contact, has ignored the Subpoena for months. As a result, the CFA authorizes the Attorney General and the Director to obtain a judgment from the Superior Court directing compliance with the Subpoena,” the complaint states.

Last week, a New Jersey judge ruled that the gun shop owners must pay a civil fine of $150,000 for not cooperating with the AG’s subpoena and turning over a list of customers’ names and addresses.

Legal Reaction aka Extortion

The New Jersey AG is weaponizing his office to push a political agenda, according to former Florida prosecutor Lisa Chittaro.

Last year, Chittaro ran for State Attorney of Sarasota County but lost during the Republican primary to the incumbent. She had been endorsed by the National Rifle Association in the race.

“This is a crafty and questionable use of litigation,” Chittaro said. “Because of their elected position, this seems designed to impede and attack a legitimate business – a business that did not target the citizens of that state – for the sole purpose of attacking the Second Amendment.

“This attorney general is trying to harness access and regulate the spread of the internet, and hold a legitimate business accountable,” Chittaro said. “This is an attack on the Free Market, an attack on the Second Amendment – it’s an attack. They are using their office as a political weapon. They are pushing through their political agenda of gun control, and they are overreaching into the state of Florida. New Jersey is trying to put a legitimate Florida firm out of business.”

Takeaways

In my humble opinion, New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal has two reasons for his cross-border shenanigans. First, he wants to make a name for himself. That much is very clear. Second, he wants to close down gun shops – as many as he possibly can – because of his anti-rights political agenda.

As bad as AG Grewal tries to paint them, the good folks at 22Mods4All look like heroes.

They should be commended for protecting their New Jersey customers – if they have any, of course. Standing up to a bully sounds good, but they’re standing up to a bully who can put them out of business. That takes balls – big brass ones. The problem is exacerbated because AG Grewal desperately needs a win – something he can show off to his constituents.

Right now, Attorneys General from 24 states have filed a brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn New Jersey’s ban on standard-capacity magazines.

“The Amici States the Attorneys General serve are among the forty-three states that permit the standard, eleven-plus capacity magazines that New Jersey has banned…and have advanced their compelling interests in promoting public safety, preventing crime, and reducing criminal firearm violence without a magazine ban such as the one here,” the brief states.

I certainly hope the Justices will take up the case. In the meantime, someone needs to take a hard look at Attorney General Grewal. He is clearly misusing the powers of his office to further his own political agenda.

There’s a term for that. It’s called public corruption, and it’s always been a problem in the Garden State.


About Lee Williams

Lee Williams, who is also known as “The Gun Writer”, has been writing about the Second Amendment, firearms, the firearms industry, and the gun culture for more than 10 years. Until recently, he was also an editor for a daily newspaper in Florida. Before becoming an editor, Lee was an investigative reporter at newspapers in three states and a U.S. Territory. Before becoming a journalist, he worked as a police officer. Before becoming a cop, Lee served in the Army. He’s earned more than a dozen national journalism awards as a reporter, and three medals of valor as a cop. Lee is an avid tactical shooter.

Lee Williams

Biden’s ATF Nominee David Chipman to Ban All “Assault-type” Weapons

Biden’s ATF Nominee David Chipman to Ban All “Assault-type” Weapons

BY BOB ADELMANN

SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/bidens-atf-nominee-david-chipman-to-ban-all-assault-type-weapons/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

During a Senate confirmation hearing on Monday, Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) pressed Biden pick, David Chipman, who is poised to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), to explain his position on banning the popular semi-automatic AR-15 rifle. Asked Cruz, “The AR-15 is one of if not the most popular rifles in America. It’s not a machine gun, it’s a rifle. Your public opinion is that you want to ban AR-15s. Is that correct?”

Chipman was crystal clear: “With respect to the AR-15, I support a ban.”

He then expanded on his remark, calling the rifle “particularly lethal”:

The AR-15 is a gun I was issued on ATF’s S.W.A.T. team and it’s a particularly lethal weapon, and regulating it as other particularly lethal weapons, I have advocated for.

This was the first among many lies, distortions, and prevarications that punctuated the nominee’s responses to intense probing and questions by Republican senators. The lie: the firearm Chipman was issued was no doubt a fully automatic weapon, capable of firing many rounds rapidly with a single press of the trigger. This is a far cry from popular AR-15s now owned by an estimated 20 million law-abiding American citizens.

The second statement — that the AR-15 is a “particularly lethal weapon” — is even more chilling: it suggests that the mere ownership of the firearm provides sufficient proof that its owner is intent on committing mayhem and, it would follow, he should be banned for owning the weapon.

Chipman prevaricated when asked by Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) to define an “assault weapon”: “An assault weapon would be … what Congress defines it as,” trying to avoid the question.

Cotton pressed Chipman: “Can you tell me what is an assault weapon? How would you define it if you were the head of the ATF?” Chipman finally came up with an answer: “any semi-automatic rifle capable of accepting a detachable magazine above the caliber of .22, which would include the .223 which is largely, you know, the AR-15 round.”

Cotton leaped at his response: “I’m amazed … that might be the definition of an assault weapon … that would basically cover every single modern sporting rifle in America today!”

Cotton missed an opportunity: under Chipman’s definition nearly every semi-automatic weapon — rifles and handguns — would be banned if the nominee had his way. That would include the 9mm, 40 caliber, and popular .45 calibers for which most handguns are chambered to accept.

Senator Cotton was just getting warmed up:

On March 25, Politico reported that Hunter Biden, President Biden’s son, applied for a handgun that was later thrown in the trash and had to be recovered by Secret Service agents in 2018. Politico reported that Hunter Biden completed this background check and answered “no” to the question of whether he was an unlawful user or addicted to any drug.

Hunter Biden has since published a book and gone on a nation-wide book tour conducting numerous interviews stating that he was, in fact, very much addicted to drugs at the same time that he purchased this firearm. This would mean that by his own admission Hunter Biden lied on that form, and by your earlier testimony, committed a serious felony.

Should Hunter Biden be prosecuted for breaking the law?

Chipman’s effort to evade the question was revealing:

If I’m confirmed as ATF director, it will be my responsibility to enforce all federal laws without political favor. I do not know any factors in this particular case, but I am familiar with the press account of it.

His response was totally inadequate, and Cotton pressed Chipman again:

Can I get your commitment that if you are confirmed you will, in fact, look into this matter and refer it for prosecution if you find that Hunter Biden violated the law?

Chipman sidestepped the question once again:

I will ensure that all violations of law are investigated and referred to.

And then came the masterstroke that topped the lengthening list of Chipman’s double-speak prevarications:

I’m not sure that it has not been investigated.

For all intents and purposes, the confirmation was over and Chipman is history. Other senators peppered the nominee with questions about his comments that mocked new gun owners who have been setting records in acquiring firearms. Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) summed them up: “It concerns me that you, as the nominee to be the director of the ATF, would have such a flippant and, if I may say so, utterly condescending attitude toward first-time gun owners in this country. Why would you choose to insult so many of your fellow Americans with a statement like this based on the fact that they purchased a gun?”

Other senators quizzed the nominee about his comments following the ATF’s attack on the Branch Davidians in Waco, Texas, in 1993. Chipman said: “Cult members used two .50 caliber [automatic weapons] to shoot down two Texas National Guard helicopters.”

Again, the nominee waffled:

I could have done a better job be describing them as being “forced down” because of the gunfire, as opposed to shot down, which might have left the impression that they were blown out of the sky, which they were not.

I regret that confusion.

Chipman was one of the chief investigators into the Waco incident and so had to know his statement was a canard. It was only under public pressure brought by the senators that he even came close to apologizing, calling it a “confusion” that he “regrets.”

Chipman lied when he was pressed by Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas): “Is a law-abiding gun owner a threat to public safety, in your view?”

Chipman revealed his anti-gun, and anti-gun owner, ideology:

Thank you for that question, senator. If the term “law-abiding” means someone has lawfully possessed a gun, there are often occasions that that person then goes on to commit a violent crime.

Wrong. Very few of the horrific mass shootings Americans have witnessed and suffered involve a rifle; the vast majority involve handguns. Semi-automatic rifles are almost never involved.

Aidan Johnston, spokesman for Gun Owners of America (GOA), summed up Chipman’s performance:

Today clearly showed that David Chipman is too radical to lead an agency that should not exist in the first place. The tyrannical gun control advocated by Chipman will be totally ineffective to stop criminals.

That “tyrannical gun control” refers to the bill offered by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) in March. The proposed bill would ban more than 200 firearms, including the AR-15, the AK-47, and Uzi models.

But this bill has little chance of passage. Only 35 Senate Democrats have co-sponsored it, and it will take 60 votes for passage. A similar bill offered by anti-gun/anti-gun owner senators in 2013 received only 40 votes.

Chipman’s dismal performance could have lasting and favorable implications for worried gun owners. If he is confirmed, every gun owner in the country will know that the government has now officially declared war on his right to purchase, own, and use firearms, and they will remember come election time in November 2022. And they will continue to purchase them in record numbers.

If Chipman isn’t confirmed, the next in line to be nominated by Biden to head the ATF will face the same sharp questioning, providing Americans with still another opportunity to appreciate the lengths to which the Biden administration is prepared to go in its attempt to disarm them.

Related video and articles:

ATF Chief: Waco Whacko? | 2A For Today

April Gun Sales Continue Surge After Record-breaking March

ATF Claims FOIA Request on Hunter Biden’s Gun Violates His Privacy

Laws for thee but not for me? It’s fair to ask how administration enforcers would react had this story been about anyone’s son but the president’s.

BY DAVID CODREA

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/05/atf-claims-foia-request-on-hunter-biden-gun-violates-his-privacy/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- Six months after attorney Stephen Stamboulieh filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives on my behalf regarding the agency’s reported involvement in the case of Hunter Biden’s gun, we have received an answer. ATF won’t tell us anything because it says Biden’s privacy interests outweigh the public’s right to know.

It’s a typical pattern of stonewalling and defiance of federal transparency laws by those who ruthlessly enforce edicts on the rest of us that gun owners really saw come to the fore during the heyday of Operation Fast and Furious investigations into ATF “gunwalking.” As AmmoLand Shooting Sports News readers have seen in a series of exclusive reports, that has extended through the years to this day, with the government’s recent non-responsive “response” to a FOIA request filed with Kent Terry, brother of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry, whose murder was the catalyst for the deadly criminal scheme to begin unraveling.

The Blaze reported in late October that “Hunter Biden’s handgun was taken from his vehicle without his knowledge by Hallie Biden,” his brother’s widow with whom he then had an affair, “and she placed it in a garbage can outside a Delaware supermarket.” Readers of this column will recall it tied that account in with the question of if the president’s son had broken the law by denying abuse of controlled substances on the Firearm Transaction Record, ATF Form 4473. Lying on the form is a federal felony.

That report was followed up with two separate FOIA requests being filed a few weeks later, to both ATF and the Secret Service, which had also been reported to be investigating the Biden gun incident.

“In response to your FOIA request, the Secret Service FOIA Office has conducted a reasonable search for all potentially responsive documents,” that agency responded in late January. “The Secret Service FOIA Office searched all Program Offices that were likely to contain potentially responsive records, and no records were located.”

Attorney Stamboulieh filed a complaint on my behalf in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in late April because that position is refuted by numerous media reports and by Hunter Biden’s own account retrieved from a text message on his damaged laptop computer.

ATF’s responses have been more circuitous.

“We have determined that you are a non-media, non-commercial requester pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(ii)(III),” Adam C. Siple, Chief, Information and Privacy Governance Division, asserted in a Feb. 26 FOIA request receipt acknowledgment.

In other words, I’m not what this ATF functionary considers an “authorized journalist,” flying in the face of decades of professional experience, the law, and years of filing FOIA requests with government agencies and then reporting on their responses or lack thereof – just like here. Trying to make it about me was just a feint—empowering government bureaucrats to arbitrarily and inconsistently determine who is or is not a journalist is clearly unconstitutional, and obstructs the ability to investigate and report on matters of public interest.

All to stall and dodge on a FOIA response concerning one of the Democrat political elites?

“Based on the information you provided to us, we were not able to locate any responsive records subject to the Freedom of Information Act,” Siple informed us a month later, curiously parroting the Secret Service position. The information we provided was pretty specific. So, they weren’t involved, either? Are they saying they don’t have any documents subject to FOIA, not that there aren’t any? Could it be all the reports were wrong?

Then something even more curious happened. Two days later, Siple informed us via email that he was withdrawing the “no records” response. Neither Stamboulieh nor I recall that happening to one of our requests before.

Then on May 12, Siple gave us ATF’s official response:

“As you know, my office did initially conduct a search for records responsive to Mr. Codrea’s FOIA request, but I have since determined that this was an error because the subject of this particular records request is a third party and a private citizen. Under these circumstances, the request should have been denied categorically without a search due to the substantial privacy interests retained by the subject of Mr. Codrea’s request.

“In my view, the denial of Mr. Codrea’s records request is required by law under the Privacy Act and the existence of any such material is exempt from disclosure under the FOIA. As you may know, disclosure of records relating to a third party is only permitted with the express authorization and written consent of the third party or a demonstration that the public interest in the disclosure outweighs the personal privacy interests of the third party. Since you have not provided any documentation that would demonstrate your right to access the records of a third party, we cannot confirm or deny the existence of such records or disclose the requested information at this time.”

Would it be fair to suspect they know all about it and don’t intend to do a thing unless forced to? And had this involved an ordinary private citizen, they’d have posted all about it years ago?

Stamboulieh responded, citing Biden’s own public admissions, credible media reports, and that “Mr. Biden’s purchase of a firearm (and subsequent loss and lack of prosecution) is of such a public interest that twenty-two House of Representative members are asking that Mr. David Chipman ‘publicly commit to investigate allegations that Hunter Biden falsified information during a background check in order to illegally obtain a firearm…’”

That’s a key point, and I’ll get back to it, but first, here is our response:

There is a real opportunity during Chipman’s Senate Judiciary hearing scheduled for Wednesday (watch here beginning at 10 a.m. Eastern) to ask him pointed questions under oath about the Hunter Biden allegations. It will tell us much if he defers to the ATF “privacy” excuse and it will tell us even more if all the Democrats champing at the bit to confirm him and impose “universal background checks” support giving Chipman, and thus the president’s son, a pass on his.


About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

David Codrea

SCOTUS: Police Cannot Seize Guns Without A Warrant

Constitution Glock iStock-697763612

BY JOHN CRUMP

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/05/scotus-police-cannot-seize-guns-without-a-warrant/#axzz6vEMbv2D8;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

WASHINGTON, D.C. –-(Ammoland.com)- In a case argued in front of the Supreme Court, that could affect Red Flag laws across the country, SCOTUS ruled unanimously that the “community caretaking” exception does not apply inside the home.

Caniglia v. Strom centers around the police seizing the firearms of a man that his wife reported as suicidal. The incident that led to the issue started when Edward and Kim Caniglia began to have marital problems in their 27-year long marriage. Mr. Caniglia grabbed his unloaded handgun and sat it on the table, and told his wife, “shoot me now and get it over with.”

Mr. Caniglia then left the house to go on a drive. While he was gone, Mrs. Caniglia hid the gun. When he returned, the couple started to fight again. This time, Mrs. Caniglia left the house and decided to stay at a motel to let things calm down and blow over.

Mrs. Caniglia tried to call her husband the following day, but he was not answering the phone. She then contacted two police officers to do a welfare check on her husband with her. She told the police about what her husband did the night before but stressed that her husband didn’t threaten her. He was just expressing how hurt he was because of the fighting. Mr. Caniglia has never been abusive and does not have a criminal record.

Police told Mrs. Caniglia to stay in the car. They found Mr. Caniglia sitting on the back porch. They talked to him, and he assured them that he wasn’t suicidal. One of the officers said Mr. Caniglia appeared completely normal but was upset because the police became involved in the dispute. The officers wanted him to go to the hospital for a mental evaluation.

Mr. Caniglia was hesitant because he believed the officers would seize his guns if he did, but the officers agreed not to take his firearms. The officers had him transported to the hospital via ambulance. Once gone, the police did what they promised Mr. Caniglia that they would not do. They entered his home and searched for guns. The officers seized two handguns, magazines, and ammunition without a warrant. They claimed to have used the “community caretaking” exception.

When Mr. Caniglia returned home, he found out police seized his guns without a warrant and did not leave him with any way to retrieve his firearms. When he tried to get the guns back, the police refused to turn over the man’s property. He would have to sue to get them back.

He claimed that police violated his Fourth Amendment rights and his right to due process. The case made its way through the courts. President Joe Biden strongly supported the actions of the police. President Biden has been pushing Congress to pass a national “red flag” law.

SCOTUS rejected the notion that police could take someone’s guns without due process.

Anti-gun groups condemned the decision of the Court and claimed it makes people less safe. Gun rights groups hailed the decision as a victory for freedom. One gun group, Gun Owners of America, filed an amicus brief in the case on behalf of Mr. Caniglia. The organization celebrated the decision as a victory for inalienable rights.

“The Supreme Court today smacked down the hopes of gun-grabbers across the nation,” Gun Owners of America Senior Vice President Erich Pratt told AmmoLand. “The Michael Bloombergs of the world would have loved to see the Supreme Court grant police the authority to confiscate firearms without a warrant. But the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the Fourth Amendment protections in the Bill of Rights protect gun owners from such invasions into their homes.”

The case will have a rippling effect across the legal landscape. The courts will have to decide if this decision affects “red flag” laws.


About John Crump

John is an NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people of 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

 

West Virginia Governor Signs Second Amendment Preservation Act

West Virginia just passed preemptive legislation to protect citizen’s gun rights.

NRA West Virginia Flag

BY HAROLD HUTCHISON

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/05/west-virginia-governor-signs-second-amendment-preservation-act;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

West Virginia – -(AmmoLand.com)- West Virginia has joined the list of Second Amendment sanctuaries with the passage of HB2694, the 2nd Amendment Preservation Act. Governor Jim Justice signed the measure into law, meaning it will take effect on July 9, according to the website of the West Virginia state legislature.

The text of the legislation includes significant barriers to the use of state and local law enforcement authorities for enforcing some of the onerous restrictions that Joe Biden wishes to impose on our Second Amendment rights. For instance, the legislation prohibits “federal commandeering” of state and local law enforcement agencies for the purposes of enforcing any federal firearms law.

In essence, the federal government is prohibited from commandeering, which the legislation defines as “taking control of or seizing the assets, personnel, or operations of an agency of this state, or of a political subdivision of this state, or the employees of an agency or political subdivision of this state without the express authority for the control having been formally given by the state or political subdivision of the state.”

More importantly, the legislation also prohibits local and state agencies from acting against people who are in compliance with state firearms laws, particularly when they may be in conflict with an “inconsistent federal firearms law” or an “inconsistent presidential executive order or action.”

An “inconsistent federal firearms law” is defined as “a federal statute, regulation, or rule relating to firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition that is inconsistent with the laws of the State of West Virginia. Inconsistent federal firearms law also means and includes any federal firearms law which the enactment, enforcement, or execution of which violates the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.” Similarly, an “inconsistent presidential executive order or action” is defined as “an executive order or action issued by the President of the United States relating to the enforcement or execution of an inconsistent federal firearms law.”

The state states that “a federal firearms law which criminalizes the possession of a firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition for federal purposes when the possession of that firearm, firearm accessory or ammunition would not be, and is not, a violation of the law of the State of West Virginia” is considered to be “inconsistent with the laws of the State of West Virginia.” The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action has a summary of that state’s firearms laws for loyal Ammoland readers to review.

According to Gun Owners of America, the legislation passed by huge margins (72-24 with 4 abstentions in the statehouse, 30-4 in the state senate). The gun-rights group has asked members to “thank or spank” state legislatures, depending on their vote, and to thank Governor Justice for signing the bill into law.


About Harold Hutchison

Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.Harold Hutchison

 

 

Proof FBI’s NICS Firearms-Background-Check is Gathering Our Private Info for INTERPOL

CENSORED POST; EXCERPTS ONLY:

BY JOHN CRUMP

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/04/proof-fbis-nics-firearms-background-check-is-gathering-our-private-info-for-interpol/#axzz6tWezxsOj

EXCERPTS: 

"Instead, we worked our contacts and were able to get a second copy of the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) User Manual from another source that showed the redacted information.

One of the FBI censored sections deals with giving U.S. citizens’ private data to INTERPOL, the international criminal police organization that facilitates worldwide police investigations.

Gun owners have been told background checks are ONLY used to verify a person’s eligibility to buy a gun. This document seems to dispute this assertion. Now you can see why they want Universal Background Checks so bad…"

 

Democrat Governor of POLICE STATE NJ Pushing for More Radical Gun Control, Hates Your Rights

BY JOHN PETROLINO

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/04/governor-new-jersey-pushing-more-radical-gun-control/#axzz6tQoSf9vD;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

New Jersey – -(AmmoLand.com)- On Thursday, April 15, 2021, Governor Phil “Free Stuff” Murphy announced statewide legislative and executive measures that will assault the freedoms of New Jersey citizens.  New Jersey, with the toughest laws infringing on Second Amendment rights, the new measures will do nothing to curb gun violence, just act as more burdensome laws for responsible gun owners to navigate.

Phil “The Bill of Rights is Above my Pay Grade” Murphy ran on an anti-gun (anti-rights) platform, and it has not been a stretch for him to make good on his campaign promises to the ilk of the Commie Mommies at Moms Demand Action.  Murphy does not mince any words about it, even pretending to be in support of lawful firearm ownership, with him stating during a COVID-19 press release last year that “A safer society, for my taste, has fewer guns and not more guns…”

From a press release, the following areas are what Murphy said are going to be focused on:

Funding Gun Violence Prevention Measures

  • Increasing Violence Intervention Funding: Cities and states across the country have been demonstrating that we can achieve rapid, sustained reductions in shootings by investing in evidence-based, community-driven strategies like group violence intervention, relationship-based street outreach, and hospital-based violence intervention programs. Though the FY2022 budget process, Governor Murphy proposes an additional $10 million in funding for these initiatives in New Jersey.
  • Dedicating $2 million to Rutgers GVRC:  Governor Murphy established the Gun Violence Research Center at Rutgers University due to the federal government’s failure to dedicate funding to research gun violence as the public health epidemic that it is. The Governor’s FY2022 Budget proposal will dedicate $2 million to help the DVRC collect much-needed data in this area.

Supporting Gun Violence Prevention Legislation

  • Requiring Firearm Safety Training: S-2169/A-5030 (Weinberg/Reynolds-Jackson) would modernize firearm ID cards, as well as require completion of a firearm safety course in order to receive a permit to purchase a gun or receive a firearm ID card. Connecticut, California, Hawaii, Illinois, Rhode Island, Maryland and the District of Columbia all have laws requiring individuals to undergo safety training prior to being able to purchase.
  • Mandating Safe Storage of Firearms: Owning a firearm for protection in the home can present a substantial obstacle to safe firearm storage, with individuals often opting to keep weapons loaded and easily accessible. Last legislative session, the Assembly passed A-3696/S-2240 (Downey/Gopal) requiring firearm owners to store the firearm in a securely locked box or container; in a location where a reasonable person would believe to be secure; or to secure the firearm with a trigger lock.
  • Raising Minimum Age to Purchase Long Guns to 21: Under current law, a person 18 years of age and older may obtain a firearms purchaser identification card and a handgun purchaser is required to be at least 21 years old. The bill (A-1141/S-3605, Freiman/Cryan) increases from 18 to 21 the age at which a person is eligible to receive a firearms purchaser identification card used to purchase shotguns and rifles but would still allow for those at least 18 to possess a long gun for purposes of hunting; military drills; competition; target practice; training; or under the supervision of a parent or guardian.
  • Promoting Microstamping Technology: Microstamping technology provides law enforcement with the tools to quickly link firearm cartridge casings found at the scene of a crime to a specific firearm, without having to recover the firearm itself.  The technology essentially creates a “license plate” on cartridge casings to identify the gun that was used to shoot the ammunition.  Last legislative session, S-112/A-1098 (Weinberg/Downey) would require within a year that firearm manufacturers incorporate this technology into new handguns sold in New Jersey.
  • Establishing Electronic Ammunition Sales Recordkeeping: The State Commission of Investigation (SCI) issued a report in 2016 finding that straw purchases of ammunition were unchecked because firearm IDs lacked photo identification.  The SCI also found that sales records were often hand-written into log books — a problem for law enforcement, which should be able to consult an electronic database when it investigates questionable ammunition purchases.  A-1292/S-1481 (Greenwald/Weinberg) would require manufacturers or dealers of handgun ammunition to keep a detailed electronic record of ammunition sales, and report ammunition sales to the State Police.
  • Banning .50 Caliber Firearms: Military-style .50 caliber rifles are banned or restricted in several other states. California has a complete ban on .50-caliber rifles, Connecticut bans specific models and Maryland has some restrictions.  S-103/A-1280 (Gill/Greenwald) would revise the definition of “destructive device” under New Jersey law so that it includes weapons of .50 caliber or greater.
  • Closing Loophole for Importing Out-of-State Firearms: Individuals who move to New Jersey from another state are allowed to bring their legally acquired guns with them without registering the guns according to New Jersey law.  A-3686/S-372 (Vainieri Huttle/Cryan) would close this loophole by requiring firearm owners who move to New Jersey to obtain a firearm purchaser identification card (FPIC) and register their firearms within 30 days of residing in this State.
  • Holding the Gun Industry Accountable: In New Jersey, almost 80% of guns used in crimes are originally purchased outside of the state.  However, the gun industry has failed to take any steps to stem the flow of guns to the illegal market through gun shows, flea markets, straw purchasers, and theft.  The industry has also failed to make its products safer and has engaged in unscrupulous marketing.  A bill recently introduced in the New York Senate would hold gun manufacturers liable for the public harm they cause by amending the state’s public nuisance laws to prohibit the gun industry from endangering the safety or health of the public through its sale, manufacturing, importing or marketing of guns.  Governor Murphy proposes similar legislation.

Additional Measures

  • Regulating School Shooting Drills: New Jersey schools currently are required to conduct active shooter exercises but guidelines are vague on how drills should be conducted. Governor Murphy proposes authorizing the Department of Education to establish trauma-informed and age-appropriate standards for lockdown drills including encouraging preparation over simulation; barring use of simulated gunshots; advanced notice to parents about planned drills; durational limits; training; and prohibiting rewarding children for fighting off potential gunmen during a drill.
  • Reconvening Historic “States for Gun Safety” Summit: New Jersey was poised to host a multi-state summit in Newark last year on gun-safety issues — a first-of-its-kind event organized by a coalition of states that formed three years ago in response to persistent inaction on gun control at the federal level.  The all-day summit was expected to draw governors and officials from New Jersey, Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, but was cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The multi-state effort has involved a sharing of data among the member states, including the exchange of information about illegal trafficking and about those disqualified from owning firearms.  Governor Murphy intends to reconvene the Summit in the Summer of 2021.
  • Announcing Nominations to the Personalized Handgun Authorization Commission: Governor Murphy today announced that he will soon file nomations to the so-called “Smart Gun Commission.” The commission aims to bring together industry experts, business representatives, and advocates for discussion of gun violence in New Jersey.

The fact of the matter is these are all just fluff.  None of the proposals will do anything to stop violent actions and or actors.  These are just feel good, “look at me I’m doing something” policies that not only will not help stop so-called gun violence but further infringe on the responsible gun owners in the state.  The constitutionality of many of these proposals is quite questionable, even under a progressive laissez-faire way of doing things, especially given the questions asked and answered in Heller.

To cherry-pick some of the proposals:

The funding measures they want to take are just more examples of cronyism and trying to prove something is being done by throwing money at it.  Nothing of any value has come from the Rutgers GVRC.  Let’s see the reports and data…Smart guns?  How’s that working out for ya?  Obviously not too well since Murphy announced the nominations for a “smart gun” commission.

On the legislative end, all we are being provided are infringements.  Mandatory training for a fundamental right is patently absurd.  As a firearm trainer myself (as in I would financially gain from such a law), I advocate that everyone that owns firearms should get training, but it should not be a requirement.  The state of New Jersey already has mandatory storage laws for keeping children from accessing firearms.  If there are bad actors that are not following the current law already, what makes the legislature think the same people will follow a new law?  The proposal to make it so that those who are 18 can no longer buy a firearm is a gross infringement.  This is coming from the same people that want to allow 16-year-olds to vote.  Microstamping is going to be similar to the first smart gun law in New Jersey – AN ABYSMAL FAILURE!  The technology does not exist.  .50 Cal ban?  To quote a meme from social media I read the other day “Note to self, do not rob a store with a .50 rifle.”  To even suggest that a .50 firearm is a real threat is showing how out of touch the legislature and Murphy truly are, lets get a statistic on the number of .50 firearms used to do anything illegal, showing the true carnage through facts.  I’ll wait….

The Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs sums this situation up quite well in their recent press release:

“Phil Murphy announced a sweeping new package of gun control proposals in an orchestrated press event featuring anti-gun lawmakers, clergy, and civic leaders. Despite stating that most gun crime occurs in NJ’s major urban centers,

Murphy went on to announce proposals whose focus is to restrict legal gun owners statewide, rather than severely punishing gun criminals.”

I also spoke to Dan Grdovic, the president of the Coalition of New Jersey Firearms Owners and this is what he had to say about the announcement:

“Again, the governor is proposing additional gun laws that will do absolutely nothing to curb violence (of any kind) and instead is furthering additional laws designed to make lawful gun ownership more difficult. We also note that the governor had surrounded himself with groups whose only mission is too stamp out all legal gun ownership.”

AmmoLand News is going to continue to follow these items as they develop.  Much attention needs to be drawn to the infringements that New Jersey is looking to impose on the peaceful responsible gun owners of the Garden State.  One thing is for sure Phil Murphy treats gun owners as 2nd class citizens, and his prejudice towards this civil right is downright criminal (this is not how you are supposed to treat minorities sir!).

Feel free to contact the Governor’s office and let them know your feelings on all this.


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 and on instagram @jpetrolinoiii .

John Petrolino
John Petrolino
 

Democrats Pushing a Truly Radical Gun Ban Agenda in 2021, & You’re the Target

BY JEFF KNOX

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/04/democrats-pushing-radical-gun-ban-agenda-you-the-target;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

USA – -(AmmoLand.com)- The fabricated “epidemic of gun violence” is “so severe and so desperate”, and the need “to take action” to address it is so urgent, that Democratic politicians from Joe Biden to Chuck Schumer to Nancy Pelosi to state representatives, mayors, and city council members are using gun control as a lever to try and force the destruction of the Senate filibuster.

Of course, there’s not an “epidemic of gun violence,” and the tragedies that these politicians are using to justify their calls, would not – could not – have been prevented or mitigated by the gun control laws they are pushing. But why let reality get in the way of a good crisis? And it’s not that these politicians don’t know that they’re blowing smoke. They know all too well. They know that the proposals they’re putting forward are “mostly symbolic,” but that doesn’t matter to them, because they have other proposals waiting in the wings. They know that “gun crime” had plateaued in recent years after falling steadily for almost 3 decades. It only surged up over the past year, almost exclusively in large, Democrat-controlled cities, after politicians told police to stand back and let rioters and looters have their way, then turned around and slashed police budgets. The vast majority of the US has violent crime rates comparable to, or lower than, the UK or most European countries.

But crime isn’t the issue. Control is the issue, and the Democrats want total control.

If Democrats can take out the filibuster, killing the only tool already weak Republicans have of keeping a one-vote majority from riding rough-shod over them, they have no intention of settling for the “modest,” “reasonable,” “commonsense gun safety reforms” that they’re currently touting. Sure, they’ll pass deadly “red flag” laws (that abridge due process and compromise at least the Fourth and Fifth Amendments along with the Second), “universal (sic) background checks” (that criminalize private transfers and create a gun registration framework), and restrictions on “ghost guns” (that is gun parts), but then they’ll keep going.

They’ll not only prohibit the manufacture and sale of “assault weapons” and normal, or what they call in their world, “high-capacity” magazines, but they’ll also prohibit their transfer and possibly ban their possession altogether, requiring that they all be turned in or destroyed. California already passed a total ban on possession of “high-capacity” magazines, but that confiscation law has been blocked by the courts so far.

This isn’t some crazy conspiracy theory or the Chicken Little hype that comes from too many gun rights groups in their fundraising letters. This is over 40 years of experience researching, debating, and writing about gun control and politics, reading the current situation, and clearly seeing the true objectives.

Democrats are literally power-mad. They believed that they had a permanent lock on the strings of power back in 2016, but the American electorate disabused them of that mistaken notion. They then pulled out all the stops in 2020, managing to secure a narrow victory that many people still question, but they’re determined to lock up their hold on power this time no matter what.

The filibuster is all that stands between them and permanent control in Washington.

Once the filibuster is gone, Democrats will add DC and Puerto Rico as new states – with 2 new Democratic senators each – and they’ll add 4 more seats to the Supreme Court to negate the current conservative majority. Then, with a solid majority in both houses, they’ll push through more and more gun control. With a blatantly political Court to do their bidding, we’ll see Heller neutered, and every gun control scheme currently in the legal pipeline declared to be constitutional.

The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act will be repealed, opening the door for cities, states, and special interest groups to resume their war on gun companies using a weaponized judiciary to drive the civilian arms industry into bankruptcy.

Cap it all off with major new immigration reform, granting citizenship to the millions of people currently in our country and still pouring in illegally, and Republicans will lose any hope of ever regaining the majority in either house.

This is what Democratic leaders are currently pushing for.

What they intend to do with that consolidated power is genuinely frightening.

There was a time that Americans could identify as Republican or Democrat, “conservative” or “liberal,” “right” or “left,” and still genuinely believe that the United States of America was a special place worth preserving. The Republic was Reagan’s “shining city on a hill,” or Kennedy’s “Camelot,” founded on Jefferson’s “unalienable rights,” that despite its flaws, contradictions and tragedies, had firm principles to aspire and rise to. There was a time that Americans of every mainstream political stripe agreed that those principles and aspirations were something worth defending, even fighting and dying for.

Something has changed. Sometime in the past twenty years – maybe even less – the American consensus has faded to be replaced by ideology owing more to Marx and Engels than to Hume and Locke. (Do most Americans under 50 even know these names, aside from Marx?)

We like to think that even the most strident Democrat wants our nation to continue and our people to be prosperous and happy, but looking at what they are trying to do, and the lengths they’re willing to go to in order to get what they want, it’s hard to envision anything less than a repeat of the mistakes and failures of the USSR, played out right here in the USA.

This isn’t hype or bluster. This is clearly what Democrats are trying to do, and they’re getting closer every day.

There are currently just two or three Democratic Senators objecting to the idea of deleting the filibuster, but it’s quite possible that they could fold or a Republican or two could make a deal and jump the aisle, giving Dems the simple majority they need to change the rules. If that happens, the writing is on the walls. Remember the push for Obamacare back in 2010. Nancy Pelosi’s statement that “we need to pass the bill so we know what’s in it,” and the tremendous pressure brought to bear to get their caucus in line in support of the bill, in spite of massive protests at the Capitol and in state capitols around the country.

That was only a warm-up for what’s going on right now. This is the biggest opportunity Democrats have seen since Lyndon Johnson convinced them that they could lock up the black vote by passing the Civil Rights Act, even though it betrayed the founding principles and history of their party, and meant they’d have to publicly turn their back on their direct action wing, the KKK.

I have to admit that I’m stumped as to what the average Democrat thinks America should or could look like with this bunch of power-crazed vultures in total control, but I can pretty much guarantee that it won’t go well.

It’s easy to talk about banning certain guns and accessories, but enforcing such bans is a much bigger challenge. So I ask Joe Biden, Joe Manchin, Kyrsten Sinema, and the rest of the DC elites: How many Americans are you willing to kill or incarcerate for failing to comply with gun laws that have been shown to not actually save lives?
How many Americans are you willing to see killed or incarcerated for one too many rounds in a magazine?

How many police officers are you willing to see killed or wounded trying to enforce laws that are “mostly symbolic,” but which millions of Americans believe are blatant violations of their God-given and constitutionally guaranteed rights?

The political divide is deep and getting deeper. Trust in the election process is almost completely destroyed. The balance of power in DC teeters on a single vote, making it very hard to advance any agenda. Rather than following the American tradition of working to build support for their ideas, and thus gain the majorities needed to advance them, Democrats are choosing to try and change the rules and rearrange the board.

Putting forward better ideas and selling those ideas to voters in order to win more seats in the next election, thus allowing you to advance your agenda, is just too slow, old-fashioned, and risky for this current crop of Democratic leaders. They demand change. Now. And they will justify any action that puts them on top. Many Republicans respond almost as poorly, by making ridiculous and unsubstantiated claims and engaging in the same sort of “Hooray for Our Side!” politics that the Democrats are guilty of.

Both the radical Democratic leadership and the benighted “business as usual” GOP establishment are playing with fire. Neither side seems to understand that pushing people to the extremes will breed more extremism. The radical Democrats want to defund the police and expect those same police to protect them and execute their gun confiscation orders. They turn a blind eye to “mostly peaceful” protests that burn cities down while expecting their Antifa shock troops to intimidate veterans of real wars of insurgency.

For its part, the GOP establishment whistles in the dark hoping they can make a deal with people who clearly intend to bury them.

By looking the other way, the establishment has given an opening to the fringes of their own parties. The investigations that should rightly be a bi-partisan affair have become the province of only conspiracy theorists. Meanwhile, guns are flying off the shelves, and ammunition isn’t even making it to the stores.

We seem to be living under the old Chinese curse: “May you live in interesting times.” Perhaps men and women of goodwill on both sides will join hands across the political aisles. Perhaps the American Experiment will emerge from this crisis stronger and more resilient and with better safeguards for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness than ever.

For now, the spoiled children have taken over the school and they’re doing their best to lock the doors to keep the adults outside. It’s tragic and terrifying.

Keep contacting your elected servants (Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121).

Pray for the Republic. And keep your powder dry.


Jeff Knox
Jeff Knox

About Jeff Knox:

Jeff Knox is a second-generation political activist and director of The Firearms Coalition. His father Neal Knox led many of the early gun rights battles for your right to keep and bear arms. Read Neal Knox – The Gun Rights War.

The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. The Firearms Coalition has offices in Buckeye, Arizona and Manassas, VA. Visit: www.FirearmsCoalition.org.

COMMUNIST POLICE STATE NJ Gov. Murphy Begs For Package of ‘Rights-Trampling Gun Control’

POLICE STATE NEW JERSEY DEGENERATES FURTHER INTO COMMUNIST METHODS

BY DUNCAN JOHNSON

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/04/nj-gov-murphy-begs-for-package-of-rights-trampling-gun-control;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- In yet another blatant attempt to further infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy unveiled his latest in a long line of unconstitutional, rights-infringing gun control schemes.

Lauded by statists and anti-rights special interest groups, Murphy’s plot to prevent the People of New Jersey from exercising their natural rights contains a number of tyrannical provisions intended to redline your rights. These include demanding the State’s legislature:

  • Further complicate New Jersey’s ineffective and unconstitutional FOID bureaucracy
  • Mandate “classes” for those seeking to exercise their right to bear arms
  • Force gun owners to store their firearms in a way that leaves them unable to be used for immediate self-defense
  • Update the definition of “destructive device” to include .50 caliber firearms
  • Eliminate the right of those under 21 from purchasing long guns
  • Wholly prevent newcomers to the state from bringing with them their previously legally-acquired firearms without first getting the permission of the State
  • Establish a digital database to track every single ammunition purchase within the state
  • Require the absurd and nonexistent “microstamping” technology to effectively ban all new firearm designs (the subject of an FPC challenge)
  • Establishing a bizarre legal scheme to use punitive legislation and litigation to eliminate gun manufacturers, eliminating the People’s access to their rights

As well as directly:

  • Funneling taxpayer dollars directly to anti-gun advocacy groups operating under the veil of “public health”
  • Empowering taxpayer-funded, anti-gun think tanks at public universities
  • Mandating the use of State-sponsored anti-rights propaganda into already traumatic school shooting drills
  • Holding a ‘confiscation conference’ to have tyrants from across the country will meet and discuss how best to assault the People’s natural rights

To join the fight against Governor Murphy’s oppressive, anti-gun demands, visit FirearmsPolicy.org/act. Those wishing to become a member of the FPC Grassroots Army and fight against future infringements from across the nation can visit JoinFPC.org.

Firearms Policy Coalition and its FPC Law team are the nation’s next-generation advocates leading the Second Amendment litigation and research space. Some FPC legal actions include:

For more on these cases and other legal action initiatives, visit FPCLegal.org and follow FPC on Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube.


About Firearms Policy Coalition

Firearms Policy Coalition (www.firearmspolicy.org) is a 501(c)4 nonprofit organization. FPC’s mission is to protect and defend constitutional rights—especially the right to keep and bear arms—advance individual liberty, and restore freedom through litigation and legal action, legislative and regulatory action, education, outreach, grassroots activism, and other programs. FPC Law is the nation’s largest public interest legal team focused on Second Amendment and adjacent fundamental rights including freedom of speech and due process, conducting litigation, research, scholarly publications, and amicus briefing, among other efforts.

Firearms Policy Coalition

_________________________________________________________
New Jersey Governor Murphy Announces Major New Gun Control Plans
EXCERPTS:
On April 15, 2021, NJ Governor Phil Murphy announced a sweeping new package of gun control proposals in an orchestrated press event featuring anti-gun lawmakers, clergy, and civic leaders. Despite stating that most gun crime occurs in NJ’s major urban centers, Murphy went on to announce proposals whose focus is to restrict legal gun owners statewide, rather than severely punishing gun criminals.

 

 

Watts’ Tweet Reveals Racist, Sexist Motivation to ‘Replace’ White Men

Shannon Watts revels in the thought of having “white gun extremists … replaced” and of passing citizen disarmament edicts through fear, and then expects gun owners she contemptuously calls “buffoons” to surrender their firearms? (Moms Demand Action/Facebook)

BY DAVID CODREA

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/04/watts-tweet-reveals-racist-sexist-motivation-to-replace-white-men/#axzz6sTwFL3MJ

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “This is the last gasp of white gun extremists losing power and you’ll all soon to be replaced by women and people of color who will ensure you’re spotlighted in history books as the buffoons you are. And also will undo all of the dangerous things you’ve done,” Moms Demand Action’s Shannon Watts tweeted Friday. She was reacting to former Texas State Representative Jonathan Stickland’s reminder that “constitutional carry” is advancing  in rebuttal to her contention that Second Amendment advocates are “losing power.”

“This is exactly why these people are dangerous,” the website Mom-at-Arms observed. They use things like gun control to advance other agendas.” As an aside, if you’re not familiar with this website, set some time aside to rectify that. They’re innovative and observant, often exposing gun-grabber screw-ups and/or offering insights that no one else has thought of.

In this case, they focus on the “systemic racism” that defines the way Mom Demand Action’s benefactor, Everytown for Gun Safety (the name itself advances two bald-faced lies), operates.

In an earlier investigation, Mom-at-Arms showed how, despite offering lip service to “racial justice,”  Everytown does not appear to practice what it preaches when it comes to its own minority employees. That’s hardly surprising when billionaire citizen disarmament backer Michael Bloomberg is on record calling for (and then trying to hide) special infringements against the right of minorities to keep and bear arms.

As long as we’re talking cognitive dissonance and steaming hypocrisy, does anyone else find it contradictory to call the police out for shooting minorities and then demand the police should be the “Only Ones” allowed to carry guns in public?

Watts’ tweet introduces another chilling motivation, “replacement theory.” And that’s doubly curious because the “political left” smears and tries to discredit citizens who object to the Republic being culturally terraformed for political power.

“A racist conspiracy theory called the ‘great replacement’ has made its way from far-right media to the GOP,” a Business Insider screed by a Media Matters flack warns. “[S]ome of the GOP’s most stalwart voices have drummed up a more explicit accusation that immigrants are here to steal the very essence of America and replace it with something foreign — an idea plucked directly from far right-wing media.”

“[The] ADL CEO has been writing letters and giving interviews on CNN, demanding that FOX News fire Tucker Carlson for having the audacity to use the word ‘replacement’ in criticizing liberal immigration policy in the United States,” the Throne, Altar, Liberty blog notes in a detailed analysis of the way the Anti-Defamation League’s actions, like Everytown’s, are not what its deceptive name implies.

Those positions, of course, are just more gaslighting, meant to spook “conservatives” out of talking about what is really going on for fear of being labeled “racists” and then “canceled.” If Tucker Carlson is “too extreme,” where will the benchmark for acceptability be moved, and at what point will even “moderates” like Susan Collins or Mitt Romney be vilified as “Nazis”?

The fact remains, tens of millions of foreign nationals have been and are being deliberately attracted in with the intention of turning the “pathway to citizenship” into a superhighway.  That they vote overwhelmingly Democrat (and anti-gun) is observable, and what the Democrats have shown time and again is a huge part of a plan they don’t want looked at for what it is.

It figures that, rather than address the issue of Texas constitutional carry, Watts resorts to ridicule. The gun-grabbers rely on that cheap redirection all the time when they have no counter to the truth, which is pretty much always. It’s a tactic they learned from collectivist organizer (and the subject of Hillary Clinton’s senior thesis) Saul Alinsky, who wrote as “Rule 5” in his subversive manifesto, Rules for Radicals:

“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.”

For well-to-do, white Watts to posture as a champion for women (who she demands to be defenseless) and people of color, is just more of the fraud that defines everything about her, starting with the “simple stay-at-home mom” lie. That’s curious for someone who refuses to acknowledge questions about the role she played as a high-level communications executive for a multinational conglomerate, and then for its PR firm, in directing public attention away from the suffering of a black man who won a substantial settlement after a jury found their product gave him terminal cancer.


About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

David Codrea

____________________________________________________

SHANNON WATTS TALKS WITH BETO O'ROURKE, BOTH GUN CONTROL ADVOCATES:

 

POLICE STATE New Jersey: Gov. Murphy Announces Drastic Gun Control Agenda

New Jersey State Flag NRA ILA

NJ once again showing wanton disregard for its citizen’s rights. IMG NRA-ILA

BY NRAHQ

SEE: https://www.ammoland.com/2021/04/new-jersey-gov-murphy-announces-drastic-gun-control-agenda/#axzz6sCT5Y4m7;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

U.S.A. -(AmmoLand.com)- Thursday morning, Gov. Phil Murphy held a press conference to unveil yet another gun control package in the Garden State.  Every time he reverts back to the same playbook, it is nothing more than an admission that years of gun control have been a failure.  But because he has no real ideas about how to enhance public safety, the Governor doubles down on more of the same failed laws.

The Governor has proposed and supported the introduction of legislation which includes:

    • Reworking the Firearms Identification Card system (FID) to include mandatory firearms safety course completion to even those who own firearms.
    • Legislation that would require mandatory storage.  Gun owners would be forced to store their firearms under lock and key in safes, rendering them useless in self-defense situations.
    • Raising the age to 21 for FID card issuance for long guns and completely stripping an entire class of legal adults of their constitutional rights.
    • Microstamping.  This legislation would require all new semi-automatic handguns to be equipped with microstamping technology, a costly technology that is unproven and easily circumvented.  This is nothing more than a traditional handgun ban.
    • Forced market acceptance of “smart guns” by mandating that gun shops sell them.  Again, this is nothing more than an attempt to ban traditional handguns.
    • A .50 Caliber ban.  This is a firearm that weighs about 30 lbs., costs thousands of dollars, and is rarely, if ever used as a crime gun.  This is the proverbial solution in search of a problem and constitutes political pandering at its worst.
    • Electronic registering of all ammunition sales.
    • Registering of firearms brought into the state by residents relocating to New Jersey.  Ironically, under Murphy’s reign, most moving vans are pointed in the opposite direction.

There were other issues that were discussed, but these are a sample of the drastic steps the Governor is proposing.  With each step, he is inching toward his goal of completely banning the Second Amendment in New Jersey.

New Jersey has some of the toughest gun laws in the country and has for decades.  Despite these laws, cities like Paterson, Camden, Newark, and Trenton are some of the most violent cities in the country.  This is evidence that none of these laws have been successful.  New Jersey gun laws are an epic failure and so is Gov. Phil Murphy.  NRA and its New Jersey members are adamantly opposed to these proposals, and we will fight them every step of the way in Trenton.


About NRA-ILA:

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess, and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org

National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)

 

Nebraska Joins Growing Number of Second Amendment Sanctuary States

Nebraska Joins Growing Number of Second Amendment Sanctuary States

BY BOB ADELMANN

SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/nebraska-joins-growing-number-of-second-amendment-sanctuary-states/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

When Nebraska Governor Pete Ricketts signed a proclamation on Wednesday declaring his state a “Second Amendment Sanctuary State,” he joined an increasing number of other governors pushing back against unconstitutional federal overreach at the hands of the Biden administration and the Democrat-controlled Congress.

He said:

Nebraska has always been a state that has supported our Second Amendment rights. As a symbol of that support, I am signing a proclamation declaring Nebraska a Second Amendment Sanctuary State, and, with my signature, it will become official.

He also thinks it’s enforceable against federal encroachment:

The White House and U.S. Congress have announced their intention to pursue measures that would infringe on the right to keep and bear arms.

Nebraska will stand up against federal overreach and attempts to regulate gun ownership and use in [our state].

His proclamation makes it nearly impossible for federal authorities to enforce federal statutes without the state’s assistance.

Likewise, when Arizona declared itself a Second Amendment Sanctuary State, its proclamation stated:

An act, law, treaty, order, rule or regulation of the United States Government that violates Amendment II of the Constitution of the United States is null, void and unenforceable in this state.

[Therefore] this state and all political subdivisions of this state are prohibited from using any personnel or financial resources to enforce, administer or cooperate with any act, law, treaty, order, rule or regulation of the United Stats Government that violates Amendment II of the Constitution of the United States.

Without state help in enforcing federal law, those federal laws become toothless. (Think federal marijuana laws).

Nebraska joins Alaska, Arizona, Kansas, Idaho, and Wyoming in taking a stand against Biden’s proposed overreach.

Texas is going to join the club shortly. House Bill 2622 and its companion, Senate Bill 541, are close to passing both statehouses. And Governor Greg Abbott is ready to sign it: “This is what I’m seeking for Texas: a law to defy any new federal gun control laws. I look forward to signing it.”

On the other hand, New Jersey is far from celebrating the Second Amendment for its citizens. In fact, that state’s attorney general, Gurbir Grewal, has just filed a complaint in New Jersey’s Superior Court that gunmaker Smith & Wesson is refusing to release its marketing materials to him.

What Grewal is hoping to find is evidence that the company’s marketing strategy somehow violates New Jersey’s Consumer Fraud Act by “misrepresenting to consumers the impact of owning a firearm and/or safety in the home.”

As John Mastronardi, writing at American Thinker, observed:

Grewal asserts that some uncited “preliminary investigation,” conducted by persons or agencies unknown, supports his otherwise unsupported premise that criminals — i.e., “consumers” — are somehow influenced by Smith & Wesson’s false and misleading advertising.

Criminals, of course, aren’t influenced in the slightest by advertising from any gun maker. And if Grewal really and truly thinks so, then New Jersey is in even more trouble than it already is.

Wrote Mastronardi:

If the highest law enforcement officer in New Jersey really thinks gang members and felons care about home firearm safety, or are seduced into getting a Smith & Wesson [firearm] because the company’s ads mislead them … then New Jersey is in far more dire straits than has recently been reported.

What those Second Amendment Sanctuary States are doing is a form of nullification of federal overreach. New Jersey (and other states with anti-gun legislatures) on the other hand, is a party to the federal crime. This illustrates the vast ideological divide that separates those who love and support the Constitution and those who consider it a hindrance to completing their agenda of tyranny.

The Real Story BY OANN: Biden’s Coming for Your Guns

Rumble — Joe Biden is pushing ahead on criminalizing the second amendment. It's not that we didn't know he was coming for our guns, it's just we didn't know when. And apparently, that time is now. According to a new report from the Washington Examiner, Biden's six new executive actions “could turn up to 4 million owners into felons overnight.”

1 7 8 9 10 11 13