Category Archives: Second Amendment

Tim Walz slammed as 'political chameleon' after ditching former pro-Second Amendment stance  Fox News

Go here to read the rest:
Tim Walz slammed as 'political chameleon' after ditching former pro-Second Amendment stance - Fox News

In 2020, Randy Franklin, a member of SMART-TD Local 656 in North Little Rock, Arkansas, took his call to work from Union Pacific like he had been doing every day as a conductor for the prior 20 years. Brother Franklin was hauling freight on a train between Arkansas and Texas when, due to faulty wiring, his truck caught fire and needed the local fire departments help.

Brother Franklins troubles were just beginning.

While fighting the fire in the Union Pacific parking lot, emergency responders and UP management discovered Brother Franklins handgun secured within the vehicle.

His pistol was properly registered with the state and safely stored in his locked truck.

UP promptly deadheaded Franklin back to Little Rock, fired him, and had him escorted off their property.

Despite what the Arkansas Supreme Court would later describe as Randys Perfect work history and the locked truck, the carrier insisted they could fire Brother Franklin for bringing firearms onto their property.

Franklin decided to challenge the carriers decision and reached out to his union officers.

Local 656 Chairperson Mike Pawelko and SMART-TD Arkansas State Legislative Director Gerald Sale recognized that this case had wide implications. Not just the states ability to protect Franklins rights legislatively as an employee, but also his Second Amendment rights protected by the U.S. Constitution were at stake.

Mike is one of our most seasoned LCs and was a great partner on this case, Sale said. We built a foundation in the initial investigation to support arbitration and legislation.

After Sale helped to lay the groundwork for a potential legislative solution in the initial investigation, General Chairperson Joey Cornelius and Pawelko took the issue to arbitration.

Not unexpectedly, Franklin had a setback in the arbitration hearing. The team appealed the ruling. Then, as planned, the union took its case to the Arkansas Legislature.

(They) were tenacious and left no stone unturned, said Franklin.

As the fight progressed, Franklin found himself out of service for more than a year.

Franklin and Sale successfully created a bill that gave all residents of Arkansas an explicit right to have a properly registered and stored firearm in their locked vehicle, despite any policy their employer may have.

State Rep. Justin Gonzales and Sen. Alan Clark co-sponsored S.B. 555. Excerpts and quotes from Franklins arbitration and appeal were quoted on the House floor. Their struggle with Union Pacific was used to explain why passing the bill was necessary and urgent.

Both sponsored the bill in each respective chamber and stood by Randy and our organization throughout the process, Sale said.

The bill passed with unanimous support with both Democrats and Republicans coming together. Franklins bill, Act 809, was then signed into law on April 22, 2021, by Gov. Asa Hutchinson. Hutchinson also sent a letter in support of Franklins employment being reinstated after he was targeted by UPs unfair policy.

This would have been the end if a railroad hadnt been involved. UP refused to accept that it was wrong.

When the new law went into effect, Franklins lawyer, W. Whitfield Hyman from Fort Smith, Arkansas, formally informed Union Pacific that Franklin would not be fired for exercising his newly reaffirmed right and should be back on the job.

UP didnt care what the state said and said they stood by their company policy. UP then filed a lawsuit in federal court to officially ignore the law written explicitly as a response to their treatment of Franklin, still out of work with his pension in jeopardy.

They were basically spitting in the face of the state Constitution, Sale said.

Franklin and his attorney had come too far to roll over and give up. They took Franklins case all the way to the state Supreme Court, which ruled against Union Pacific.

A lifelong member of the National Rifle Association (NRA), Franklin tried repeatedly to reach out to them for support after he was fired. The NRA did not have his back when needed. He also contacted the Gun Owners of American (GOA). They had no interest in aiding his efforts.

SMART-TD, literally and figuratively, did. When the chips were down, and his rights were being taken from him, the union had his back.

Franklin also is back on the job, and though he has not yet been compensated by the carrier for the time missed, the expectations are that there will be a settlement at some point for the clear violation of his rights.

SMART-TD would like to recognize Brothers Franklin and Pawelko, the officers of Local 656, Joey Cornelius, general chairperson of GCA-569, SLD Gerald Sale and attorney Hyman for their accomplishment. They represent the fighting spirit and solidarity of our union, and our shared commitment that every member in every local deserves respect, justice, and fair treatment under the law. When we stand together and stay focused on the fight, we win.

Sale emphasized the degree of collaboration and unity it took from Local Chairperson Pawelko and GC Cornelius, as well as Franklins determination to stand up to the carrier.

As a state director, Im proud to have the type of relationship with all of the local chairs across the state where we all take the all-hands-on-deck approach, Sale said. This was a case of everyone from the local office to my office and the general chairpersons office working together to get Randy back to work and run pro-worker, pro-Second Amendment legislation to support his case.

Franklin expressed great appreciation for the unions efforts to resolve the matter.

Gerald (SLD Sale) was there for me and my family when we needed him. I never thought I would be in a situation where the career I had built for 20 years and the retirement my family was counting on was taken away from me like this, Franklin said. Everybody knows the union represents us when we have a hearing and will put in an appeal for us. I had no idea how committed these guys were to making sure I was OK, and my rights werent taken from me.

Nobody ever goes to work expecting their round trip to end in pushing legislation through the state House and fighting the bosses all the way to the Supreme Court. Its good to know that when things get weird out here, this union never leaves one of its own hanging out to dry.

Read the original post:
SMART-TD preserves member's Second Amendment rights, gets his job back - Smart Union

State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington Washington D.C. West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Puerto Rico US Virgin Islands Armed Forces Americas Armed Forces Pacific Armed Forces Europe Northern Mariana Islands Marshall Islands American Samoa Federated States of Micronesia Guam Palau Alberta, Canada British Columbia, Canada Manitoba, Canada New Brunswick, Canada Newfoundland, Canada Nova Scotia, Canada Northwest Territories, Canada Nunavut, Canada Ontario, Canada Prince Edward Island, Canada Quebec, Canada Saskatchewan, Canada Yukon Territory, Canada

Zip Code

Country United States of America US Virgin Islands United States Minor Outlying Islands Canada Mexico, United Mexican States Bahamas, Commonwealth of the Cuba, Republic of Dominican Republic Haiti, Republic of Jamaica Afghanistan Albania, People's Socialist Republic of Algeria, People's Democratic Republic of American Samoa Andorra, Principality of Angola, Republic of Anguilla Antarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S) Antigua and Barbuda Argentina, Argentine Republic Armenia Aruba Australia, Commonwealth of Austria, Republic of Azerbaijan, Republic of Bahrain, Kingdom of Bangladesh, People's Republic of Barbados Belarus Belgium, Kingdom of Belize Benin, People's Republic of Bermuda Bhutan, Kingdom of Bolivia, Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana, Republic of Bouvet Island (Bouvetoya) Brazil, Federative Republic of British Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago) British Virgin Islands Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria, People's Republic of Burkina Faso Burundi, Republic of Cambodia, Kingdom of Cameroon, United Republic of Cape Verde, Republic of Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad, Republic of Chile, Republic of China, People's Republic of Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia, Republic of Comoros, Union of the Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, People's Republic of Cook Islands Costa Rica, Republic of Cote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of the Cyprus, Republic of Czech Republic Denmark, Kingdom of Djibouti, Republic of Dominica, Commonwealth of Ecuador, Republic of Egypt, Arab Republic of El Salvador, Republic of Equatorial Guinea, Republic of Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Faeroe Islands Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Fiji, Republic of the Fiji Islands Finland, Republic of France, French Republic French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon, Gabonese Republic Gambia, Republic of the Georgia Germany Ghana, Republic of Gibraltar Greece, Hellenic Republic Greenland Grenada Guadaloupe Guam Guatemala, Republic of Guinea, Revolutionary People's Rep'c of Guinea-Bissau, Republic of Guyana, Republic of Heard and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras, Republic of Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region of China Hrvatska (Croatia) Hungary, Hungarian People's Republic Iceland, Republic of India, Republic of Indonesia, Republic of Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq, Republic of Ireland Israel, State of Italy, Italian Republic Japan Jordan, Hashemite Kingdom of Kazakhstan, Republic of Kenya, Republic of Kiribati, Republic of Korea, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait, State of Kyrgyz Republic Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon, Lebanese Republic Lesotho, Kingdom of Liberia, Republic of Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein, Principality of Lithuania Luxembourg, Grand Duchy of Macao, Special Administrative Region of China Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar, Republic of Malawi, Republic of Malaysia Maldives, Republic of Mali, Republic of Malta, Republic of Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania, Islamic Republic of Mauritius Mayotte Micronesia, Federated States of Moldova, Republic of Monaco, Principality of Mongolia, Mongolian People's Republic Montserrat Morocco, Kingdom of Mozambique, People's Republic of Myanmar Namibia Nauru, Republic of Nepal, Kingdom of Netherlands Antilles Netherlands, Kingdom of the New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua, Republic of Niger, Republic of the Nigeria, Federal Republic of Niue, Republic of Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway, Kingdom of Oman, Sultanate of Pakistan, Islamic Republic of Palau Palestinian Territory, Occupied Panama, Republic of Papua New Guinea Paraguay, Republic of Peru, Republic of Philippines, Republic of the Pitcairn Island Poland, Polish People's Republic Portugal, Portuguese Republic Puerto Rico Qatar, State of Reunion Romania, Socialist Republic of Russian Federation Rwanda, Rwandese Republic Samoa, Independent State of San Marino, Republic of Sao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic of Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of Senegal, Republic of Serbia and Montenegro Seychelles, Republic of Sierra Leone, Republic of Singapore, Republic of Slovakia (Slovak Republic) Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia, Somali Republic South Africa, Republic of South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands Spain, Spanish State Sri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic of St. Helena St. Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia St. Pierre and Miquelon St. Vincent and the Grenadines Sudan, Democratic Republic of the Suriname, Republic of Svalbard & Jan Mayen Islands Swaziland, Kingdom of Sweden, Kingdom of Switzerland, Swiss Confederation Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan, Province of China Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand, Kingdom of Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of Togo, Togolese Republic Tokelau (Tokelau Islands) Tonga, Kingdom of Trinidad and Tobago, Republic of Tunisia, Republic of Turkey, Republic of Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda, Republic of Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom of Great Britain & N. Ireland Uruguay, Eastern Republic of Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Viet Nam, Socialist Republic of Wallis and Futuna Islands Western Sahara Yemen Zambia, Republic of Zimbabwe

Originally posted here:
Jacob Sullum - Taking away Second Amendment rights based on nonviolent crimes - Defiance Crescent News

Wind turbines spin over agricultural land on Tuesday, May 30, 2023, in Huron Township. In St. Clair County, Kimball Township's board recently extended a temporary ban on renewable energy developments until later this year in one of three resolutions. The others addressed parental rights and homeschooling and the Second Amendment.

KIMBALL TOWNSHIP In one sitting, Kimball officials took formal stances on three major issues last week, re-establishing a temporary ban on renewable energy projects, designating the township as a "Second Amendment sanctuary," and supporting homeschooling parents.

Each idea has been discussed around St. Clair County before. But in a separate interview last week, Kimball Township Supervisor Rob Usakowski said they were trying to uphold a sect of values locally in opposition to a host of past and approaching action from Democratic lawmakers in Lansing.

Theres just so much uncertainty right now with the legislation that passed last year, he said of the renewable energy ban last week. T

he township board had previously passed a moratorium roughly a year ago before it was set to expire. At their June 4 meeting, it was one of the three resolutions passed, extending that ban until November.

Thats when new state rules that empower the Michigan Public Service Commission with the final say in siting industry-scale wind and solar developments something community officials have widely seen as interference with local control take effect.

A statewide drive to get something on the ballot to reverse those effects fell short of the required signatures in May to go before voters this year. Moving forward, organizers are pushing for another major election, leaving local elected leaders like Usakowski and the township board with a few unanswered questions.

Kimball Township resolutions 2024 by Jackie Smith on Scribd

Usakowski said they still get inquiries from interested wind and solar developers on a weekly basis. By next year, local rules cant be stricter than the states set of regulations passed in 2023.

So, it kind of leaves us in this gray area for a short period of time, the supervisor said.

Were going to lose local control completely here in November. Theres concerns, obviously, a lot of those projects could move forward without any type of siting from the township, which is difficult, he said. Were trying to protect the balance between (being) rural, which half our township is.

While other townships, such as Wales, have had moratoriums, Kimballs Second Amendment similarities fall much more in line with the St. Clair County Board of Commissioners, which passed its second sanctuary-related measure at the end of last year.

Traditionally, sanctuary infers a local stance that contested gun laws wouldnt been enforced if theyre viewed on one side of the political aisle as a violation of the Second Amendment.

Local law enforcement authorities have said they view such measures largely as a political statement rather than a dictation of what statutes they must enforce or ignore something sanctuary proponents have said they understand.

Kimballs resolution references the sanctuary movement of other states and spells out the township boards stance on defending gun rights, adding the board encourages elected law enforcement leaders to do their job in a manner that does not infringe on the citizens rights.

When asked, Usakowski pointed to things like red flag laws as an example of the type of action, they believe, that violates the Second Amendment.

We dont actually enforce anyway. It would be the county sheriff that enforces it, and so, were asking the county to just stick to the Constitution in and not act on any laws that would be passed in opposition to that, he said.

The county board also recently OKd a resolution backing parents who homeschool their kids after discussion at the state level sparked concern lawmakers could require homeschoolers have to register with the state.

Kimballs parents rights resolution spells out opposition to the idea in detail, asking the governor and policymakers not to approach it. We just think its the parents right to decide what they want to do, Usakowski said. Again, were looking at things that are the rights of the people.

Contact reporter Jackie Smith at (810) 989-6270 or jssmith@gannett.com.

This article originally appeared on Port Huron Times Herald: Kimball officials take stance on 2nd Amendment, parental rights, more in 3 resolutions

Continue reading here:
Kimball officials take stance on 2nd Amendment, parental rights, more in 3 resolutions - AOL

UPDATE (Wednesday, June 5): The House of Representatives listened to gun owners and passed H.R. 8580 by a vote of 209-196 with GOA-backed provisions to protect tens of thousands of veterans from being unconstitutionally disarmed by President Joe Bidens bureaucrats. The key vote from yesterday can be found here, where Aye is the correct vote. The bill now moves to the Senate.

ORIGINAL ALERT (Tuesday, June 4): Imagine risking your life to defend our country, only for Bidens bureaucrats to put your name in an FBI database and deprive you of your God-given right to keep and bear arms.

Thankfully, an appropriations bill that is set to come to the House floor any day now gives us the opportunity to protect U.S. veterans from the predatory bureaucratic nonsense that has been used to ban them from owning a firearm.

H.R. 8580, the Military Construction, Veteran Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2025, contains language that would prevent the Department of Veteran Affairs from disarming our nations veterans.

And right on cue, the White House is now officially lobbying against the passage of H.R. 8580 to ensure Bidens bureaucrats can continue disarming veterans.

If the Biden Administration has zero shame in slashing the gun rights of those who thanklessly served our country, then theyll have no problem coming for yours.

Thats why GOA needs your help countering the White Houses lobbying efforts by urging your Representative to support the gun rights of our nations veterans.

Please add your name to our pre-written letter urging your Representative to support both Section 261 of H.R. 8580 and Rep. Eli Cranes Amendment No. 31 which protect the Second Amendment rights of our nations veterans.

GOA members like you were very instrumental in persuading Congress to pass Public Law 118-42 earlier this year. This law stopped the VAs unconstitutional reporting of approximately 20,000 veterans per year to the FBIs National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) but only until it expires later this fall.

Thats why Section 261 and Amendment No. 31 are so critical, as they would extend this critical protection for veterans for another year by inserting it into the government appropriations.

Up until this point, veterans who had a fiduciary appointed to them to manage their finances were reported to the FBI and denied their right to own a firearm.

No veteran should be deprived of their Second Amendment rights because they need support to manage their finances. Frankly, no veteran should be deprived of their God-given rights period.

While it certainly was a victory to protect gun-owning veterans from having their names screened by the FBI going forward, there are still more than a QUARTER OF A MILLION veterans who are already prohibited from exercising their Second Amendment rights based on their prior appointment of a fiduciary.

Congress must remove the names of veterans who were already determined prohibited persons based on the appointment of a fiduciary.

Thats why our pre-written letter also encourages your representative to support GOAs and Rep. Eli Cranes ongoing push to REMOVE the names of ALL veterans who have already been put into the NICS system.

With H.R. 8580 set to come to the floor any day now and the White House already beginning its pressure campaign to defeat it GOA needs YOUR help pressuring the House to save the gun rights of Americas veterans.

So please, add your name to our pre-written letter urging your Representative to support both Section 261 of H.R. 8580 and Rep. Cranes Amdt. No. 31 which protect the Second Amendment rights of our nations veterans.

Read this article:
GOA fighting to protect the Second Amendment rights of our nation's veterans - Gun Owners of America

WASHINGTON Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) introduced the STOP the BIS Rule Act, legislation seeking to defend the rights of American gun shop owners and uphold the Second Amendment. Sen. Lees bill would prohibitthe useoffederal funds to finalize, implement, or enforce the harmfulinterim ruleissued by the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), which severely restricts the sale of American-made firearms to international customers. Congressman Mark Green (R-TN) introduced companion legislation in the House of Representatives.

"Time and again, American gun exporters and small businesses jump through hoops imposed by this administration, only to find those standards arbitrarily changed,"said Sen. Lee."This rule is a strategic attempt to undermine an entire industry. We must challenge the Biden administration's relentless assault on the Second Amendment and defend the rights of our small business owners."

The Biden BIS has gone rogue. BISs new rule on gun exports will make it nearly impossible for many gun shop owners to make a living,said Rep. Green.This rule punishes law-abiding business owners all because of the lefts antipathy for the Second Amendment. Our Founders warned against this kind of sweeping government overreach.

The STOP the BIS Rule Act represents a firm stand against overregulation and would ensure that the federal government cannot use taxpayer dollars to undermine our constitutional rightsand unduly punish law-abiding gun manufacturers.

For bill text, clickHERE.

The rest is here:
Lee Introduces Bill to Protect Gun Shop Owners and Uphold the Second Amendment -... - United States Senator Mike Lee

The majority of U.S. House Democrats voted to take the Second Amendment rights away from certain veterans who served in the U.S. Armed Services.

They did so when they overwhelmingly rejected an amendment filed to a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs funding bill, known as the Crain Amendment.

House Democrats on Wednesday also largely voted against funding the Department of Veterans Affairs when they voted against the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2025. It narrowly passed, largely along party lines, by a vote of 209-197.

The White House said the president would veto the bill for several reasons, including Republican revisions to its LGBTQ policies. But one key measure Democrats overwhelmingly opposed served as a barometer for preserving Second Amendment rights: Section 261 revised through the Crane Amendment.

The amendment, named after its author, U.S. Rep. Eli Crane, R-Arizona, a former U.S. Navy SEAL, was designed to protect veterans Second Amendment rights. It clarifies that any veteran who the VA reported to the NICS was done so incorrectly in violation of their constitutional rights.

Crane had voiced concerns that VA bureaucrats and Democrats wanted to create an unauthorized process for dragging veterans before judges for red flag disarmament proceedings.

His provision wasnt included in the fiscal 2024 VA spending bill last year. Currently, the VA submits veterans names to the NICS if a judge appointed them with a financial manager.

The House provision and Cranes amendment was backed by Gun Owners of America to protect tens of thousands of veterans from being unconstitutionally disarmed by President Joe Bidens bureaucrats, it said.

Because of a horrendous policy initiated by President [Bill] Clinton, more than 250,000 veterans have had their Second Amendment rights revoked. This has been done without any Due Process no judge or jury just a mere determination by bureaucrats at the Veterans Administration that veterans must forfeit their guns when a fiduciary is appointed to handle their finances and complex VA benefits, Erich Pratt, SVP of Gun Owners of America, told The Center Square.

Thankfully, GOA-backed legislation that passed this week in the House will continue to prevent the VA from submitting names of veterans to the NICS system. GOA urges the Senate to maintain this rider in their version of the legislation. Despite the temper tantrum from the White House, common sense says no veteran should be disarmed over such ridiculous reasons.

Democrats overwhelmingly voted against the Crane Amendment with 192 voting against it and only seven voting for it. Thirty-two members didnt vote on the amendment.

The amendment passed by a vote of 211-193, preventing the VA from disarming an estimated 20,000 veterans during the next fiscal year.

Seven Democrats voted in favor of the amendment: Reps. Henry Cuellar (TX), Jared Golden (ME), Vicente Gonzalez (TX), Mary Peltola (AK), Marie Perez (WA), Gabe Vasquez (NM) and Marc Veasey (TX).

The White House issued a statement saying the president would veto the bill because Republicans changed section 261, which prohibits the VA from reporting a person determined to be mentally incompetent during the VA benefits evaluation process without the order or finding of a judge, magistrate, or other judicial authority.

The proposed revision would effectively prohibit the VA from reporting mentally incompetent beneficiaries who need a fiduciary to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), thus creating a dangerous loophole that would allow these individuals to obtain firearms and endanger their safety and the safety of their communities, the White House said.

Overall, only four Democrats voted for the entire bill, all of whom also voted for the Crane Amendment: Golden, Gonzalez, Peltola and Perez. Two Republicans also voted against the bill: Reps. Tom McClintock of California and Matt Rosendale of Montana.

Twenty-five members of Congress didnt vote on the bill, including 14 Democrats and 11 Republicans.

More:
Majority of House Democrats vote against amendment protecting certain vets gun rights - MyHometownToday.com

In Maharashtra, a significant step towards sustainable energy use is underway with a draft amendment to existing guidelines concerning Grid Interactive Rooftop Renewable Energy Systems. This second amendment enables both individual and collective setups of renewable energy systems, such as solar panels, within the same electrical distribution area, thereby enhancing accessibility and utility.

Under the revised provisions, any residential consumer can install a renewable energy system anywhere within their distribution licensees area. This flexibility allows for the generation of renewable energy through arrangements like virtual net metering. Virtual net metering is particularly innovative as it permits the energy produced by a renewable system to be shared amongst multiple consumers. For instance, members of a housing society can collectively install and benefit from a single renewable energy system. The total capacity of this system is merely the sum of what each participating consumer is eligible for, ensuring fair and equitable distribution and usage.

Moreover, these updates streamline the technical and bureaucratic processes associated with setting up new systems. Any residential installation up to 10 kW no longer requires a technical feasibility study, thus speeding up approval times. For larger setups, the rules specify a timeline for completing feasibility studies, emphasizing efficiency and responsiveness from the distribution licensees.

For energy accounting, the revisions detail a clear methodology. The energy produced is first used to offset consumption in corresponding time blocks within the billing cycle. Surplus energy is treated differently depending on the consumers time-of-day usage pattern, ensuring that credits are calculated fairly. At the end of the financial year, any unadjusted credits are handled according to specific guidelines provided, maintaining transparency and accountability in energy billing.

These modifications not only facilitate the adoption of green energy but also reflect a regulatory environment that supports innovation and consumer choice in energy sources. The updates anticipate future growth in the sector and aim to build an infrastructure that supports up to 5,000 MW of rooftop solar installations, marking a significant commitment to renewable energy in Maharashtra.

The Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (MERC) has introduced these regulations under the powers conferred by Section 61 and Section 86(3) read with Section 181 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003). Additionally, these regulations align with Clause 5.3 of the Tariff Policy, 2016, and other enabling powers. After previous publication, MERC has enacted the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (Grid Interactive Rooftop Renewable Energy Generating Systems) (Second Amendment) Regulations, 2024, which amend the Principal Regulations set in 2019 and the First Amendment in 2023.

One of the significant suggestions provided in these amendments is the emphasis on virtual net metering. This system is advantageous for residential consumers who may not have adequate space for individual installations. By allowing multiple residential consumers, including housing societies, to set up a common renewable energy system, the regulations promote collective energy generation and consumption. This ensures that renewable energy benefits are more widely distributed and accessible.

Another key suggestion is to simplify the process for residential installations up to 10 kW. By removing the requirement for a technical feasibility study for smaller installations, the amendments aim to reduce the administrative burden and accelerate the adoption of rooftop solar systems. This change is expected to encourage more residential consumers to invest in renewable energy, contributing to the overall sustainability goals of the state.

Furthermore, the amendments include clear and detailed guidelines for energy accounting. The approach ensures that energy production and consumption are accurately recorded, and surplus energy is credited appropriately. This transparency is crucial for building consumer trust and promoting the widespread adoption of renewable energy systems.

Overall, these regulatory updates reflect a proactive approach by the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission to support and expand the use of renewable energy. By addressing technical, administrative, and financial aspects, the amendments aim to create a conducive environment for the growth of the renewable energy sector in Maharashtra. The states commitment to increasing its rooftop solar capacity to 5,000 MW highlights its dedication to sustainable energy and reducing its carbon footprint.

Please view the document below for more details.

Like Loading...

The rest is here:
MERC Proposes 2024 Draft Second Amendment Regulation For Grid Interactive Rooftop Renewable Energy Systems - SolarQuarter

Hundreds of Air Force service members in dress blue uniforms filed into a Georgia megachurch Friday for the funeral of Roger Fortson, 23, a senior airman who was shot and killed by an Okaloosa County sheriff's deputy earlier this month after he answered the door to his apartment holding a gun at his side.

Fortson's dramatic funeral, which included a video message from Rev. Al Sharpton, was a stark reminder of the deadly incoherence between America's Second Amendment culture and hypervigilant police training and tactics.

Fortson was fatally shot on May 3 after sheriff's deputies arrived at his apartment complex in Fort Walton Beach, Florida, responding to a call about an alleged domestic disturbance.

Body camera footage released by the Okaloosa County Sheriff's Office shows the deputy knocked on Fortson's door and announced himself several times. Fortson eventually opened the door, holding a handgun at his side. The officer said "step back" and began firing. Fortson only had time to raise his empty hand, palm outward. Three to four seconds elapsed between Fortson opening the door and the deputy firing six rounds at him.

Ben Crump, a prominent civil rights attorney who is representing Fortson's family, said in a recent press conference that police went to the wrong door. A radio dispatcher told deputies that the call was "fourth-party information from the front desk at the leasing office," and body camera footage showed an unidentified woman telling deputies she was "not sure" which door the disturbance came from before directing them to Fortson's apartment. Fortson's family says he legally owned the gun, had no criminal record, and was home alone at the time of the incident.

"We've got to call it as it isRoger died of murder," Rev. Jamal Bryant said at Fortson's funeral. "He died of stone-cold murder. And somebody has got to be held accountable. Roger was better to America than America was to Roger."

The Okaloosa County Sheriff's Office initially framed the fatal shooting as self-defense.

"Hearing sounds of a disturbance, he reacted in self defense after he encountered a 23-year old man armed with a gun and after the deputy had identified himself as law enforcement," a May 4 statement from the Okaloosa County Sheriff's Office read.

The two narratives illustrate a problem Reason has written about time and time again: The government insists that its citizens have a Second Amendment right to own guns and defend their homes with them, but it also insists that it's reasonable for police to respond with deadly force when they're startled by the sight of a gun, or what could be a gun but might be a harmless object, or the knowledge that a gun is nearby, as in the case of Philando Castile.

Last year police in Farmington, New Mexico, fatally shot a man while responding to a domestic disturbance call at the wrong house, after the man showed up at the door holding a gun.

In 2022, Florida resident Corey Marioneaux Jr. was charged with attempted murder of a police officer for shooting a gun at SWAT team officers who had just broken through his front door with a battering ram at 5 a.m. The charges against Marioneaux were later dropped, and an internal review found no wrongdoing on the part of the police eithera simple misunderstanding that could have killed someone.

That same year, a Minneapolis Police Department officer shot and killed 22-year-old Amir Locke during the execution of a no-knock raid. Locke, who was not named in the search warrant, appeared to be asleep under a blanket on a couch. As police entered the room, he put his hand on the barrel of a handgun, and an officer shot him three times.

In 2006, former Reason writer Radley Balko detailed the case of Cory Maye, a Mississippi man sentenced to death for fatally shooting a police officer during a no-knock drug raid.

Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis relentlessly brags about "Free Florida," a supposed refuge from liberal busybodies, where things like owning a gun and not eating vat-grown meat are sacred. The title of his book was in fact The Courage to Be Free. But DeSantis has no courage when it comes to the police. His only priority is giving law enforcement more privileges and insulation from civilian accountability.

Roger Fortson lived in this very same Florida. Now his name will be added to the long list of people who were killed for doing something they were assured was their right as free citizens of the United States.

Originally posted here:
Roger Fortson's Death Shows the Conflict Between Gun Rights and Paranoid Cops - Reason

In April, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to take up a case challenging the Biden administrations efforts to curb the sale of homemade, untraceable ghost guns that are frequently used in crimes.

The case seeks to topple a rule imposed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that requires sellers of ready to build ghost gun kits to add serial numbers to some parts and conduct background checks on prospective buyers.

But legal experts say the stakes are much higher. A ruling against the federal government could broaden Second Amendment protections, jeopardizing numerous laws governing the manufacture and sale of firearms.

The Supreme Court may want to expand Second Amendment protections from the right to own and carry a firearm to the right to make firearms and to sell them, said Timothy Lytton, a law professor at Georgia State University.

Such an outcome could do away with bans or restrictions on ghost guns in California, New Jersey, and at least 11 other states. The ruling could also pave the way for lower courts to overturn requirements for gun manufacturers and dealers to obtain federal licenses, be inspected by the government, and maintain sales records.

A federal district court in Texas and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the ghost gun rule in 2023. Lytton said these lower court opinions wrestled with more sweeping questions about the limits of the Second Amendment, teeing up the justices to do the same. Those opinions, he said, may have larger implications for the Supreme Courts analysis, and that may be Second Amendment implications.

The challenge comes two years after the Supreme Courts landmark Bruen ruling, which established that gun regulations must be consistent with the countrys historical tradition of firearm regulations to be considered constitutional. In court filings concerning the ghost guns rule, gun manufacturers and gun rights organizations have seized on Bruens history and tradition test by arguing that early Americans often acquired firearms through homemade means.

President Biden directed the ATF to regulate ghost guns after they were used in a spate of high-profile shootings and increasing evidence emerged that homemade weapons were being used in crimes. A March 2023 ATF report found that between 2016 and 2022, law enforcement recovered more than 72,000 ghost guns. More than 1,200 of those weapons surfaced in connection to homicides and attempted homicides.

Ghost guns continue to be a problem, said Graham Barlowe, a former ATF agent, pointing out that millions of ghost guns sold before the new rule took effect remain in circulation. Criminal elements seek out ghost guns because they are available, and they are anonymous.

The ATFs ghost gun rule, implemented in 2022, broadened the legal definition of a firearm to include kits sold with parts and tools to build ghost guns. That requires sellers of these kits to obtain a federal gun dealers license and add serial numbers to some parts before sale so that they can be traced back to their owners if they turn up at a crime scene.

Legal experts say the challenge is part of a broader conservative legal movement to limit the scope and scale of the federal governments powers, and it is one of at least four cases in front of the justices that could have major ramifications for how guns are regulated in the United States.

John Donohue, a Stanford law professor and gun policy expert, said the ghost gun rule has gone a long way toward curtailing the illicit use of unserialized weapons, but he worries the justices will determine that the ATF overstepped its authority.

As a matter of policy, I think its an unassailable, correct policy, Donohue said about the rule.The only question is whether it has been done in a way that allows the Supreme Court to throw a monkey wrench in the process.

The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments in the case in the fall.

Here is the original post:
How the SCOTUS Ghost Gun Case Might Jeopardize Other Gun Laws - The Trace