Category Archives: Second Amendment

Fire Weather Warningissued March 19 at 11:06AM MDT expiring March 19 at 7:00PM MDT in effect for: Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Broomfield, Denver, Douglas, Jefferson, Larimer, Logan, Morgan, Phillips, Sedgwick, Washington, Weld

Fire Weather Warningissued March 19 at 8:25AM MDT expiring March 19 at 7:00PM MDT in effect for: Kit Carson

Fire Weather Warningissued March 19 at 8:25AM MDT expiring March 19 at 7:00PM MDT in effect for: Yuma

Fire Weather Warningissued March 19 at 4:05AM MDT expiring March 19 at 8:00PM MDT in effect for: Fremont, Huerfano, Las Animas, Pueblo

Fire Weather Warningissued March 19 at 3:20AM MDT expiring March 19 at 7:00PM MDT in effect for: Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Broomfield, Denver, Douglas, Jefferson, Morgan, Washington, Weld

Fire Weather Warningissued March 19 at 3:20AM MDT expiring March 19 at 7:00PM MDT in effect for: Boulder, Larimer, Logan, Phillips, Sedgwick, Weld

Fire Weather Watchissued March 18 at 9:09PM MDT expiring March 19 at 7:00PM MDT in effect for: Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Broomfield, Denver, Douglas, Jefferson, Morgan, Washington, Weld

Fire Weather Watchissued March 18 at 12:41PM MDT expiring March 19 at 7:00PM MDT in effect for: Yuma

Fire Weather Watchissued March 18 at 2:59PM MDT expiring March 19 at 8:00PM MDT in effect for: Fremont, Huerfano, Las Animas, Pueblo

Link:
House passes Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act - The Denver Channel

Anytime this country takes even one step closer to its founding as a constitutional republic, its time to celebrate.

In 1973, under Richard Nixon the president who considered guns an abomination legislation was passed banning guns on the millions of acres of countryside under the watchful eye of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. This means no one is allowed to carry a gun for protection on that land if theyre just camping or hiking. (This is true even though hunting is allowed on some of those acres!)

However, that may soon change thanks to a 2014 lawsuit, Nesbitt v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which challenged the anti-gun regulation. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill, a Clinton appointee, ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in his decision:

[T]his complete ban goes beyond merely burdening Second Amendment rights but destroys those rights for law-abiding citizens carrying operable firearms for the lawful purpose of self-defense.

Of course, the equally anti-gun Obama administration appealed Winmills ruling. Just as the Court was about to consider it the Corps asked to be taken off the calendar. They are actually reconsidering theirpolicy, according to The Washington Post:

TheArmy Corps of Engineers is reconsidering the firearms policy challenged in this case, as well as plaintiffs requests for permission to carry firearms on Army Corps property. This reconsideration has the potential to fully resolve plaintiffs objections.

This is as it should be. The Second Amendment guarantees American citizens the right to protect their person and property at all times. Any regulation which denies that inalienable right, is in direct violation of our founding document. End of story.

H/T TruthRevolt

Go here to see the original:
American citizens may soon be able to exercise their Second Amendment rights even on federal land - Patheos (blog)

Fairfax, Va. The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) applauds the House of Representatives today for passing The Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act (H.R. 1181), a bill that protects the due process rights of veterans, in a 240-175 vote.

The constitutional rights of our veterans must be strongly protected, said Chris W. Cox, executive director, NRA-ILA. The House vote today is a step forward in ensuring our veterans rights are not infringed upon.

The VA has been effectively banning veterans who receive disability benefits and use a fiduciary to help manage those benefits from gun ownership. These individuals are being stripped of their Second Amendment rights by a bureaucratic rule that denies them due process.

There is no data indicating a correlation between needing help managing money and being a danger to oneself or others the criterion the government must meet before denying a person their Second Amendment rights.

If enacted into law, the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act would ensure that going forward, veterans who use a fiduciary would not be stripped of their constitutional rights unless a judicial authority first finds they pose a danger to themselves or others. This ensures due process rights for all veterans.

Needing help managing your money does not make you a danger to society. The NRA is pleased with the House vote today and we look forward to the Senate taking action soon, concluded Cox.

The NRA thanks Speaker Paul Ryan, Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy , Majority Whip Steve Scalise and Chairman Phil Roe for their leadership on this matter.

Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America's oldest civil rights and sportsmen's group. More than five million members strong, NRA continues to uphold the Second Amendment and advocates enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation's leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the armed services. Be sure to follow the NRA on Facebook at NRA on Facebook and Twitter @NRA.

Read the original:
House Passes Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act - NRA ILA

WASHINGTON -- Despite strong endorsements from some gun rights advocates, Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch has a slim appeals court record on the subject - a record that leaves his views a mystery on how far constitutional firearms rights extend.

The National Rifle Association notes favorably a 2012 case in which Gorsuch wrote for the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that the Supreme Court has held the Second Amendment protects an individuals right to own firearms and may not be infringed lightly.

Taken with his conservative leanings, originalist views on interpreting the Constitution and comparisons to the late Justice Antonin Scalia, that leads many gun owners to believe Gorsuch would protect their interests.

He has an impressive record that demonstrates his support for the Second Amendment, Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRAs Institute for Legislative Action, said in a statement endorsing the nominee.

However, Gorsuch has not ruled on major Second Amendment cases.

We dont know, for instance, if he believes people have a right to carry guns in public. We dont know what he thinks about restrictions on assault weapons or high-capacity magazines, said Adam Winkler, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, and author of Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America.

Those are the big issues that are likely to come before the Supreme Court with regards to the Second Amendment, Winkler said. And on those issues Gorsuch is a Second Amendment mystery.

The case cited by the NRA involved a man who appealed his conviction of being a felon in possession of a gun, saying he didnt know he was considered a felon due to a misunderstanding over his deferred prosecution in a previous robbery case.

Although he had signed documents indicating he would be considered guilty of a felony, the state judge told him, among other things, If I accept your plea today, hopefully you will leave this courtroom not convicted of a felony and instead granted the privilege of a deferred judgment, which means you will be supervised by the Department of Probation for a period of two years.

Miguel Games-Perez was arrested less than a year later with a pistol that had an obliterated serial number.

Gorsuch was on a three-judge panel that found the government had only to prove that Games-Perez knew he had a gun, not that he knew he was prohibited from having one.

Gorsuch said the panel was bound by precedent.

Our duty to follow precedent sometimes requires us to make mistakes. Unfortunately, this is that sort of case, Gorsuch wrote.

Games-Perez later asked the full appeals court to hear the case, a request that was denied in a 6-4 decision. Gorsuch dissented, saying the full court could reconsider its precedent. He wrote that due to the repeated misstatements from the court itself, Mr. Games-Perez surely has a triable claim he didnt know his state court deferred judgment amounted to a felony conviction.

Some groups favoring more stringent gun laws refer to the same case when arguing that Gorsuch is unfit for the Supreme Court.

Judge Gorsuchs views are so outside the mainstream that he has gone out of his way to side with felons over public safety, Peter Ambler, executive director of Americans for Responsible Solutions, said in a statement opposing Gorsuchs nomination.

And not all gun rights advocates are enthusiastic to endorse Gorsuch - because of another case.

Larry Pratt, executive director emeritus of Gun Owners of America, said the case that gave him pause involved a police officer in New Mexico disarming Daniel Rodriguez, a convenience store employee who had a pistol tucked into his waistband. The man turned out to be a convicted felon, but Pratt said the officer had no way of knowing that at the time because the man wasnt accused of a crime and the officer didnt question him beforehand.

Gorsuch sided with the appeals panel to uphold the mans conviction.

Ultimately, Pratt said, Gorsuchs judicial philosophy and overall record helped earn an endorsement.

Were going to support him with this caveat of our concern because of the Rodriguez case. And part of its a practical matter that if Gorsuch were to be turned down, its not likely, politically, that the next one would be any better, Pratt said.

J. Adam Skaggs, litigation director for the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, Americans for Responsible Solutions Foundation, said in a telephone interview that Gorsuch has a very thin paper trail, but the few cases where he has ruled on gun issues raise a lot of questions.

In a 2010 case, Skaggs said Gorsuch relied on procedural grounds in rejecting the appeal of a man charged with possessing a gun after being convicted of domestic violence rather than conceding the point that convicted domestic abusers dont enjoy the same Second Amendment rights as law abiding citizens.

Instead, he went out of his way to resolve the case on a complicated procedural ground, Skaggs said.

Still, Winkler, the law professor, said its difficult to know how Gorsuch would rule in the most important Second Amendment cases because his track record is so limited.

Hes only decided a few cases with Second Amendment overtones and none of them are the major decisions on the important issues of the day, Winkler said. Nothing in his path tells use what he understands the scope of the Second Amendment to be.

Excerpt from:
SCOTUS nominee Neil Gorsuch's view of Second Amendment a mystery - CBS News

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Since San Bernardino, Sandy Hook, Columbine et al., the progressives, the media and their acolytes have beaten their chests calling for even stricter gun restrictions, although the most restrictive states and cities that have the highest crime. They insist that the Second Amendment does not apply to individuals, but only to the National Guard, even though the modern Guard did not come into existence until the Dick Act of 1903. To them, the Supreme Court decisions in Heller v. District of Columbia and McDonald v. Chicago affirming an individual right are mistaken, a conclusion reachable only by abjuring grammar and history.

To anyone who can diagram a sentence the Second Amendment is crystal-clear, not a Delphic pronouncement. The Founding Fathers, well versed in Latin grammar, knew exactly what they meant when they passed the Second Amendment. The meaning is in the main clause the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed a complete sentence. A well-regulated militia is, in Latin, an ablative absolute, it introduces the main idea. Would Second Amendment opponents be happier if it read, The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, a well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state? The idea remains the same, but given the progressivist idea of a living Constitution, they would nullify the Second Amendment by asserting knowledge of the Bill of Rights superior to that of its author, James Madison.

Historian Leonard Levys Origins of the Bill of Rights reaffirmed an individual right. Wrote Levy: The right to bear arms is an individual right. if all it meant was the right to serve in the military [it] would never have reached constitutional status in the Bill of Rights. The very language of the amendment is evidence that the right is a personal one, for it is not subordinated to the militia clause. The state constitutions of the revolution and early national period also acknowledged an individual right.

The Founders classical education made them realistically fearful of government power. They knew well what had befallen the Roman Republic and that tyrannies were only possible when the people lacked the means to resist. The chaos and oppression of the English Civil War and the Glorious Revolutions short-circuiting of the Stuarts divine right ambitions were fixed in their minds as was the English Bill of Rights (1689) which, although limited to Protestants, secured an Englishmans right to arms. However, the roots go even further back, to the Trained Bandes, locals called up to defend the realm as Elizabeth I did when the Armada threatened England. Englishmen provided their own accouterments according to their station. Likewise, the chronic war with France in which for over a century frontier settlements were attacked, settlers massacred or carried off into Indian slavery meant colonists had to protect themselves.

New England towns either supplied weapons or, as had Plymouth in 1632, ordered freemen to arm themselves for defense against ever-present Indian dangers. When Queen Annes War (War of the Spanish Succession) broke out in 1702, New England militias were called to support the British assault on French Canada. Militiamen brought their own weapons; those who did not own a musket were issued one that they could keep when mustered out. The battles of Lexington and Concord at the start of the American Revolution could not have taken place without an armed citizenry. Who, then, was the militia? To George Mason, it consisted of the whole people. Under the Militia Act of 1792, every man between 18 and 54 who when so enrolled and notified shall within six months thereafter, provide himself with a musket, bayonet and belt, two spare flints, a cartridge box with 24 bullets, and a knapsack.

The lefts assertion that Americas creators couldnt foresee a firearm beyond a flintlock is the logical fallacy of presentism we know better today. Were the Dark Ages better than the Pax Romana because 900 A.D. came later than 300 A.D? Contrary to modernist fallacies, innovation, not stasis, was the characteristic of 18th century society. They might not have foreseen the M-16 but they knew the devastation of the massed firepower of .69 caliber Brown Bess and that weapons evolved. The matchlock was superseded by the wheelock, the wheelock by the flintlock, as the rifle was to supersede the musket. In 1770, British Army Major Patrick Ferguson had invented a breechloading flintlock rifle and effectively deployed his riflemen at Saratoga in 1777 (Fergusons rifle could have revolutionized warfare). By 1819, 19 years after the Constitutions ratification, the U.S. Army adopted the Hall breechloader.

What of the Second Amendment, then? It is most certainly individual, but more importantly, it does not grant a right; it affirms an existing one as surely as natural law recognizes every mans right to self-defense.

William Layer is a historian who covered Air Force presidential operations during the early years of the Reagan administration.

Go here to see the original:
The Second Amendment as an individual right - Washington Times

The General Assembly is considering a bill that would require gun owners who openly carry a weapon to produce their gun permit if asked by law enforcement. Changes to the proposed language in the bill are causing some contention among members of the Judiciary Committee, which held a public hearing on the legislation Wednesday.

The original language of House Bill 6200 stated that police could only request to see the permit if there was reasonable cause that a crime had been committed. The Judiciary Committees version of the bill removes that clause, meaning if a person carries a pistol or revolver in plain sight and a police officer asks for his or her permit, they would be obliged to comply, whether there is reasonable cause or not.

Several committee members were concerned by the removal of reasonable suspicion from the bill.

"This committee hears a lot of testimony on a lot of issues making sure that our citizens of all different types are not discriminated against," said Republican state Representative Christie Carpino, "and I have a real fear that if [House Bill] 6200 passes, we're gonna deal with that.

Connecticut Chief State's Attorney Kevin Kane testified that the draft language seems reasonable and legal.

"The problem is difficult situations that the police are confronted in. To resolve it, all they have to do is say 'May I see the permit?' And just the mere showing of the permit doesn't seem to be that intrusive," said Kane. "I think a fair balance is to require people to show [the open carry gun permit] if asked."

Other lawmakers on the committee worried that the proposal would make it easier for police to unfairly target minority gun owners. The bill is supported by the Connecticut Police Chief's Association, while Second Amendment groups like the Connecticut Citizens Defense League say it violates the constitution.

Go here to read the rest:
Police And Second Amendment Groups Debate Open Carry Bill - WNPR News

A quick thinking convenience store clerk in Ohio recently used his Second Amendment rights when a would-be armed robber pulled a weapon to rob him.

According to WTTE-TV, 27-year-old Emanuel Hamm walked into the M&M Food Mart in Darbydale, Ohio, Thursday night around 9:30 p.m. with plans to rob the store. But the quick thinking clerk, who wished to remain anonymous, derailed those plans.

He pulled a gun and said give me the money, the clerk told WTTE, recounting the events.

As soon as I saw the gun, I pulled mine and I shot him, the clerk explained. That was the first thing that came to my mind when I saw the gun. I thought of my kids. Somebody thought it was an easy target and it wasnt.

Surveillance footage caught the incident on tape. It shows Hamm walking into the store with one hand in his pocket. The video shows the clerk, suspicious of Hamm, put his hand on a gun in his back pocket. When Hamm finally draws his weapon, the clerk was able to draw first, shooting and injuring Hamm. Hamm is then seen scrambling for the door.

Store owner Aziz Khettab told WTTE that after his store was robbed three times last year, he decided to finally buy a gun so he and his clerks could protect the store, its customers and his source of income.

Hamm was able to get away, despite being shot in the hand. But after he appeared at a local hospital with a gunshot wound, which WTTE reports was not life-threatening, police arrested him and charged him with aggravated robbery.

Still, the store clerk told WTTE that he feels bad for injuring Hamm.

It was really tough, he told WTTE. Its not easy to shoot someone, especially with someone who never had to deal with guns.

I feel bad for him, but I didnt have a choice, the clerk explained.

Watch the surveillance footage below via WTTE:

See the original post here:
Quick thinking store clerk exercises Second Amendment rights when confronted by armed robber - TheBlaze.com

5525412

On May 12, 2006, Kimberly Corban was asleep in her college bedroom when a complete stranger raped her.

She thought those was her last moments on earth, as he tried killing her soul by brutally assaulting her body. This assault, her 911 calland her decisions afterward changed the trajectory of her entire life.

Now, she believes your greatest courage comes from your worst struggles. She has vowed never to be vulnerable again as she has learned more about self-protection, including how to use a firearm.

With her help and courage, her rapist was caught and convicted in 2007. She has also become a role model and an inspiration to a multitude of other young people who are learning how to protect themselves.

Last week, the head-turning, entrepreneurial TurningPointUSA launched the Trigger Warning Campus Tour, featuring Corban talking about her story and what students can do. Her motto is being a victim is never a choice, but becoming a survivor is.

I dont carry because I worry about what could happen. I carry because I already know.

There are no promises once citizens learn and train how to use a firearm, but the way you train or how much you know or what you choose to carry is going to be one more tool in your toolbox, Corban says. Safety and security are multi-layered, she says, mentioning dogs, security systems, and mace.

The Daily Caller News Foundation filmed Corban at Conservative Political Action Conference after her Armed and Fabulous panel. She spoke along with Kristi McMains, Katie Pavlich, Antonia Okaforand Ashlee Lundvall.

In this interview, Corban tells how she met Kristi McMains, a Louisville attorney attacked in January 2016. The two met in 2016 at the NRA annual meeting. Kristi had been so moved by Corbans story that she began carrying a gun for self-protection only to find within weeks her life was threatened by a man with a knife. Kristi says she was alive because of Corban, who told her story and changed McMains life.

Corban says at the first meeting last year, they ugly cried. Then, at CPAC, Corban was a proud mom hearing McMains tell her story for the first time.

Corban says she avoids movies that glorify rape. She says, what its like to have your soul murdered is never accurately depicted. I dont seek out fictional depictions of it in movies because theres enough of it in real life.

For more on Kimberly Corban see her website, the NRA ad she was inand her interaction with former President Obama, who she voted for in 2008, at a CNN town hall in 2016 about gun control here or follow her on Twitter @Kimberly_Corban.

Videographer Sean Moody is credited with the video work for this piece.

Mrs. Thomas does not necessarily support or endorse the products, services or positions promoted in any advertisement contained herein, and does not have control over or receive compensation from any advertiser.

Read the original post:
Rape Survivor Explains Why She Supports The Second Amendment [VIDEO] - Daily Caller

While U.S. President Donald Trump's vow to "totally" protect the Second Amendment has eased gun owners' worried minds, his lax stance on firearms is causing a negative impact on the outdoor retail industry.

The F.B.I. said it conducted 2.23 million background checks in February, representing a 14% decline from February 2016. Background checks were down 20% in January and 17% in December, as gun owners no longer feel the need to rush to stock up on firearms as they did when former President Barack Obama was pushing for stricter federal gun laws.

During his campaign, Trump was even endorsed by The National Rifle Association (NRA).

But, as gun sales drop, outdoor retailers across the board are feeling the pressure.

Dick's Sporting Goods (DKS) said on its recent fourth-quarter earnings call that its outdoor category was particularly pressured, "driven in part by a decline in hunting."

"We did say that the hunting business was difficult," Dick's CEO Edward Stack said in response to an analyst's question on individual categories. "That hunting business...it continues to struggle and struggled in the fourth quarter, both firearms and a bit from an ammunition standpoint."

Olin (OLN) , owner of Winchester Ammunition, reported a 20% slip in ammo sales in its recent fourth quarter. In a December report, Wunderlich Securities analyst Rommel Dionisio estimated that firearms sales will "likely slow" in 2017. Looks like consumers are proving his prediction right.

Gander Mountain, one of the largest outdoor retailers in the U.S., filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11 on Friday, listing $500 million to $1 billion in assets and liabilities.

Gander Mountain, which touts itself as being "America's Firearms Supercenter," blamed its filing on slowing foot traffic. The company operates about 110 stores in 26 states in the U.S.

To combat its own slipping gun sales, American Outdoor Brands (AOBC) is trying a different tactic in separating itself from the firearms industry. For instance, it changed its name from Smith & Wesson, a brand too associated with guns.

At its investor day in January, American Outdoor said it would be expanding on acquisitions of companies that are not so heavily focused on firearms to create long-term value. The move follows its recent acquisitions of knife maker Taylor Brands and Ultimate Survival Technologies, the manufacturer of survival, rescue, life support and disaster preparedness equipment.

Shares of American Outdoor have fallen about 15% since Trump was elected to office.

Trump and your taxes: Watch Jim Cramer lead a roundtable discussion on how investors and retirement savers should position their portfolio.

See more here:
How Trump's Vow To Protect Second Amendment Is Causing ... - TheStreet.com

Americas veterans helped protect us. Now we can ensure they themselves are not arbitrarily denied the right of self-protection.

On Wednesday, the House Committee on Veterans Affairs marked up and favorably reported H.R. 1181, the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act, sponsored by Committee Chairman Phil Roe, M.D. (R-TN). The bill now moves to the full U.S. House, where a vote could come as early as next week.

H.R. 1181 is meant to deal with a longstanding and shameful practice by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), which administers disability benefits for veterans and their families. Under this practice, anyone who the VA declares incompetent to manage his or her own benefits and assigns a fiduciary is automatically reported to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) as a prohibited mental defective. The person is then subject to a lifetime ban on the acquisition and possession of firearms, unless he or she successfully petitions for relief from disabilities.

As of Dec. 31, 2016, the NICS contained 167,815 active records submitted by the VA under this program.

The VAs program suffers from a number of legal and practical issues.

Above all, it does not attempt to identify which beneficiaries have mental illnesses that actually cause them to be a danger to themselves or others. Rather, it merely targets individuals who have been identified as needing help to manage their benefits. Yet there is no scientific or empirical evidence to support the idea that needing help managing money is the same thing as being too dangerous or irresponsible to safely handle a firearm.

Second, the statute on which the reporting is based prohibits firearm acquisition or possession by persons who have been adjudicated as a mental defective. While these terms are not defined in the statute, the purely bureaucratic process by which a fiduciary is assigned which in most cases does not involve a hearing, much less a judge is hardly the sort of procedure most would consider an adjudication. And the only issue at stake is whether the person needs help with his or her finances. It does not affect rights other than under the Second Amendment, including the right to form legally binding contracts, vote, hold office, serve on a jury, etc.

While the VA does theoretically make relief available after the fact, few of the beneficiaries affected by the program have the means to negotiate the highly bureaucratic process, which may also require expensive mental health evaluations and legal aid. The procedure also turns due process on its head by forcing the petitioner to prove by a high standard of evidence that he or she is not a risk to public safety, a premise the government was never required to establish in the original adjudication.

The VAs own records showed that as of April 2015, only 3% of relief petitions had been granted. And the decision makers considering the petitions are the same sorts of VA bureaucrats who made the original fiduciary determination, not an independent judge or magistrate.

H.R. 1181 would change all this by ensuring that the VA could only report a beneficiary to NICS as prohibited mental defective if a judicial authority had already made a finding that the person is a danger to self or others. This would ensure due process, as well protect those who simply need help managing their finances but are not at increased risk of committing a dangerous act with a firearm.

President Trump signed a measure into law last month that prevented the Social Security Administration from going through with a plan to implement a similar reporting system for certain of its Disability or Supplementary Security Income beneficiaries assigned representative payees.

And the House had passed a bill to halt VAs program in 2011, which eventually died in the Senate.

Action to stop this unconscionable infringement of veterans Second Amendment Rights is long overdue.

Please contact your congressional representative NOW and respectfully ask him or her to vote YES on H.R. 1181, the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act. You can call the Congressional Switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask to be connected to your representatives office, or you can send an email using our Take Action tool.

Americas veterans answered the call to serve for the good of all. Now is your chance to ensure their rights are protected. Dont delay. Please call or write your representative today.

View post:
Your Help Urgently Needed to Protect the Second Amendment Rights of America's Veterans! - NRA ILA