Category Archives: Second Amendment

On Jan. 28, Iowa House District 7Republican Rep. Henry Stone of Forest City, voted to support a constitutional amendment to protect Iowans' right to keep and bear arms, helping pass it through the Iowa House.

"Iowa is one of only six states that currently has no language in its Constitution that protects the fundamental right to keep and bear arms," said Stone in a release. "This legislation would give Iowans the opportunity to state explicitly and unequivocally that their right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon by any future Legislature or overzealous Justices that are hostile to the Second Amendment."

HJR-4 would ensure Iowans right to keep and bear arms is constitutionally protected by adding the following amendment to the Constitution:

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The sovereign state of Iowa affirms and recognizes this right to be a fundamental individual right. Any and all restrictions of this right shall be subject to strict scrutiny.

The amendment, upon passage in the Senate, will now be on the ballot in 2022 to give Iowans the final say on this matter.

Follow this link:
Stone votes to add Second Amendment protections to Iowa Constitution - MDJOnline.com

While many policies that emanate from Olympia concerning the right to bear arms focus on restricting Second Amendment protections, state Sen. Phil Fortunato (R-Auburn, 31st-LD) is pushing to expand them.

Hes filed a state constitutional amendment to enshrine an individual right to own high-capacity magazines, a popular target for anti-gun advocates. Senate Joint Resolution 8205 would amend Article 1, Section 24 of the Washington Constitution by adding, The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state includes the right to possess firearm magazines and firearm loading devices of any size.

Arguments for banning high-capacity magazines focus on preventing a mass shooting. However, banning these magazines only puts the public at more risk, said Fortunato. An outright ban ignores the number of magazines already on the market. A conservative estimate based on gun ownership of the types of rifles that use them is about 50 million with each owner having an average of 5 magazines. Add handguns and the total number of magazines is over 250,000,000. The reality is that a person intent on killing innocent people is not going to be concerned about a law that bans some kinds of magazines.

A 2019 study on shootings shows that trained police officers have about a 25 percent accuracy rate with firearms, typically using a 9mm due to the larger magazine capacity. With the highest accuracy rate of 35 percent, about 14 rounds would need to be fired to stop one threat. Fortunato argues that average citizens exercising their rights deserve every tool to protect themselves as outlined in the state constitution.

All citizens deserve to have every means of protection at their disposal, Fortunato added. In no other area do we have a conversation about restricting rights enshrined in our constitutions. This should be no different. As technology advances, we should be looking at ways to expand protections for law-abiding citizens, not constrain them.

The above is a press release from Sen. Phil Fortunato. The Auburn Examiner has not independently verified its contents and encourages our readers to personally verify any information they find may be overly biased or questionable. The publication of this press release does not indicate an endorsement of its content.

Read the original here:
Fortunato Files State Constitutional Amendment Expanding Protections for Citizens Right to Bear... - Auburn Examiner

BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KGET) Second Amendment Sports is being sued for $2.5 million for allegedly failing to pay minimum and overtime wages as well as not allowing rest or meal breaks as provided for under state law.

The gun shop that operated in Bakersfield until its sale in December had the financial ability to pay such compensation, but willfully, knowingly, recklessly, and/or intentionally failed to do so, according to the lawsuit. It says the shop violated state Labor Code by not allowing a meal break of at least 30 minutes for a work period in excess of five hours, or a 10-minute rest break for every four hours worked.

Additionally, the lawsuit says Second Amendment Sports didnt pay compensation owed to employees who resigned, and provided inaccurate wage statements.

Employers in the state of California violate employment and labor laws every day, says the suit filed on behalf of former employees by the Lex Opus firm in Santa Ana. Current employees are often afraid to assert their rights out of fear of direct or indirect retaliation.

Former employees are fearful of bringing actions because they believe their former employers may damage their future endeavors through negative references and/or other means. The nature of this action allows for the protection of current and former employees rights without fear for retaliation or damage.

The suit seeks a trial by jury and at least $2.5 million in damages.

Attorneys with Belden Blaine Raytis, LLP, representing Second Amendment Sports, could not immediately be reached for comment.

The next hearing in the suit, filed nearly a year ago, is scheduled Feb. 17.

See original here:
Second Amendment Sports sued for $2.5 million over alleged failure to pay minimum and overtime wages - KGET 17

Anne Orso of rural Viola said she was adamantly against the resolution. Its divisive; please focus on issues that unite the community.

Supervisor Mary Henry, who represents District 17, said most of the correspondence she received was opposing the proposed referendum. Henry said she strongly opposed the referendum, and the Board needs to spend time bringing the community together.

Dodie Whitaker of Viroqua said that as a woman of color, she and her friends and family see the area as a safe haven. Whitaker said shes a pacifist, but she supports the right of gun owners to have guns. She said she opposed the resolution for safety reasons, adding that she would like to see efforts focused on mental health and economic issues.

Paul Buhr of rural Viroqua also opposed the resolution. I see no reason to further divide us with this un-Constitutional measure, he said.

Cori Wilson of Ontario said she supported the proposed county resolution. She said she owns a gun and respects and appreciates the gun laws as they are currently written. Wilson said she encouraged people to look at H.R.127 thats now before Congress. She said the resolution is restrictive. Im surprised no one is concerned about restrictions to our rights.

Jared Lasky of rural Westby also spoke in favor of the resolution, saying the right to bear arms is not a suggestion but a directive.

Read the original:
Vernon County residents weigh in on Second Amendment resolution; Board to vote Feb. 2 - La Crosse Tribune

Editor, Daily Press:

Thank you, Sheriff Chennault, for standing up for our Second Amendment rights.

We refute the claim made in calls from people who worried the sanctuary status would invite the wrong kind of people into the area such as those who engaged in the Jan. 6 riot in Washington, D.C. In fact, the riot involved a handful of people and started before President Trump had even ended his speech.

We all have to bear in mind that when guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns. We must remember that a recent law change here in Oklahoma allows those who wish to carry firearms in public to do so without a conceal carry permit. That is a recognition of one of our rights, as individuals, under the U.S. Constitution rights that should never be taken away.

Your declaration of Cherokee County as a Second Amendment Sanctuary County is indeed a step in the right direction and for the right reasons. Please keep up the good work for the people of Cherokee County.

John E. Dick and A.C. Cargill

Tahlequah

Read more:
LETTER: Sheriff thanked for defending rights | Letters To The Editor | tahlequahdailypress.com - Tahlequah Daily Press

On Monday, Feb. 1 there will be a public hearing, on Tuesday, Feb. 2 the Vernon County Board of Supervisors will vote on a resolution masquerading as something allegedly designed to preserve the Second Amendment of the United States.

This partisan resolution will preserve nothing. The Second Amendment like all the others is well protected by the U.S. Constitution. To make any change to a Constitutional Amendment requires a vote to pass by a minimum of three-quarters of the 50 states.

The Second Amendment is not in danger of being nullified or modified. No evidence has been presented to show the Second Amendment to be in danger.

The Second Amendment consists of just one comprehensive, concise sentence that needs no expansion or modification by Vernon County nor anyone else. There is nothing in the resolution that is new other than semantics intended to provide a solution for a problem that does not exist.

Rather than predicting future problems why not work on solving Vernon County's real problems and concerns rather than inventing one.

If this passes we can be assured that it will become precedent for more of the same in the future. We in Vernon County do not need this resolution. Represent the citizens of the county not some partisan idealism.

Originally posted here:
Letter to the editor: Second Amendment preservation resolution is unecessary - La Crosse Tribune

Whenever the issue of firearms ownership is brought up, those on both sides dig in and there is little way to truly find compromise. Supporters of the Second Amendment often already complain that their rights have been eroded. While theSecond Amendmentmay read, Congress shall make no law the truth is that there has been legislation that limits firearms ownership including the National Firearms Act of 1934, the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986.

Meanwhile on the other side of the issue, gun control advocates have called for greater efforts to conduct background checks. Earlier this year Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) introducedHouse Resolution 127Sabika Sheikh Firearms Licensing and Registration Act, which called for at least twenty-four hours of training with every firearm an individual owns, require a psychological evaluation to obtain a license and even require owners of antique firearms to have such a license.

While it is unlikely Lees bill will be met with much support, there have been calls for a national gun registry. However, Second Amendment supporters, who naturally would oppose such a registry, may have an unlikely ally in privacy advocates.

A new study conducted by researchers at Brown University has found that an encrypted gun registry would bridge the divide on this issue. It suggests that it would make it more difficult for those legally barred from owning firearms from acquiring one, and also make it easier for law enforcement to trace firearms much in the way that automobiles can be tracked.

The study was led by Browns Seny Kamara, who began the work after staffers from U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) reached out in 2018.

How successful such a national database would be all depends on whether every county in the country signs on, something Kamaraadmitted to Wired magazine couldbe a tall order.

People in different parts of the country are going to feel differently about it, so the idea was to design something like a national gun registry that could potentially be voluntary, Kamara explained.

Rather than being a true national registry, this would work as a series of non-centralized data bases, all of which would be encrypted to maintain privacyyet could be accessible to law enforcement via a physical authentication token. Such a key would ensure that officials could gain access while the general public could notand because it is encrypted, in theory it would be inaccessible to hackers.

The study did not look into a plethora of issues, such as how it would handle private sales, what information would be contained in the registry or even how data could be shared across a decentralized network. For one thing what happens if a firearm is sold or transferred to another user in a different database? How would that be tracked?

While ablockchainthat is used inbitcoin and other cryptocurrenciescould potentially play a role, it is meant to allow the transfer of digital money without disclosing the user. In this case the user and associated physical firearm is what is registered. If that firearm is sold, stolen or otherwise changes hands without updating the database the information is completely useless!

All of those facts make it obvious to see that the National Rifle Association and other groups that support the Second Amendment would remain opposed to the database. It would only servelaw abidingindividuals and put a burden on gun shops and dealers to report the transactions of the sales.

However, at this point the Brown study wasnt so much to develop an encrypted network but rather to even determine if was possible. About the best possible takeaway on this is that at least Sen. Wyden was exploring the feasibility of the technology and not writing actual legislation.

Far too often, lawmakers write bills without having a good grasp of technology, especially when it comes to encryption, Wyden toldWiredin a statement. My view has always been that making good public policy depends on knowing what is possible on the technical side. So when I had the idea to create a new kind of secure gun registry, I was hoping Professor Kamara could give me a gut check on whether this was a harebrained idea or not.

Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer who has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers and websites. He regularly writes about military small arms, and is the author of several books on military headgear includingA Gallery of Military Headdress, which is available on Amazon.com.

Image: Reuters.

Read the original here:
Encrypted Gun Registry: How to Preserve the Second Amendment? - The National Interest

Gun violence prevention advocates

There is a good reason the process of amending Iowas Constitution is drawn-out. Two separate legislative sessions must act, followed by ratification by Iowa citizens. The intent is clearly for careful deliberation by legislators and a final decision by a fully informed public. Sponsors of SJ1 and HSB9, a constitutional amendment to ensure Iowans the right to bear arms, seem uninterested in either.

Its sponsors would have you believe it simply enshrines federal Second Amendment protections in Iowas Constitution. However, this is a supercharged Second Amendment stipulating that Any and all restrictions of this right [to bear arms] shall be subject to strict scrutiny. The Second Amendment does not say (and the U.S. Supreme Court never held) that strict scrutiny applies to all gun regulations.

Strict scrutiny is the highest level of scrutiny by the courts, putting up a high barrier not only to enactment of new restrictions on gun ownership and use but any and all restrictions. Recent polls in Iowa show the vast majority of the public, including a majority of gun owners, favor closing loopholes in the background check system and other sensible restrictions such as permit requirements. At a time when gun violence is increasingly recognized as a public health crisis, legislative committees dealing with SJ1 and HSB9 should show their commitment to responsive government by offering adequate time for their deliberation.

Gun violence prevention advocates:

Temple Hiatt, Iowa City

Lori Durian, North Liberty

Jodie Theobald, Iowa City

Lenore Holte, Coralville

Patricia Zebrowski, Iowa City

Leslie Carpenter, Iowa City

Susan Bryant, Iowa City

Rebecca Truszkowski, Coralville

Julie Kearney, Iowa City

Liz OHara, Iowa City

Gun violence prevention advocates

Read this article:
This is not the Second Amendment - The Gazette

The open carry of guns and other weapons would be banned on the Capitol campus and at or near any public demonstration across Washington under a measure that received a remote public hearing Tuesday, with proponents calling it a common-sense measure amid heightened political divisions and opponents arguing it would infringe on constitutional gun rights.

The sponsor of thebill, Democratic Sen. Patty Kuderer, told her fellow members of the Senate Law and Justice Committee that in light of events like the fatal shooting at a protest in Kenosha, Wis., last year as well as recent armed protests at the state Capitol that saw violence, the measure was needed "to ensure that weapons are not used to intimidate peaceful protesters or to increase the potential for lethal violence to occur.

Kuderers bill would prohibit people from carrying weapons, either on their person or in their vehicle, while attending a demonstration at a public place or while being within 1,000 feet of a demonstration.

It also prohibits openly carried weapons in the state Capitol or on the Capitols grounds. Violation of the law would be a gross misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $5,000, or both. She said she modeled it on a similar law enacted in Alabama.

Republican Sen. Keith Waggoner, a member of the committee, challenged Kuderer, asking, Do you not see a conflict of logic to support a First Amendment right, but youre introducing a bill that suspends a Second Amendment right? Theyre both equal in my mind.

Kuderer disagreed, saying that the Second Amendment is not suspended under the measure. You are just limited to where you can exercise that.

Right now you cant bring your gun into a courthouse, she said. Try it. I can guarantee you wont get very far.

While openly carried guns have been banned in both the public galleries of the Senate and House chambers and in public hearing rooms at the Capitols legislative office buildings since 2015, people can still openly carry weapons in the main public areas of the Washington Capitol and on the grounds of the Capitol campus.

Permitted concealed weapons have been banned from the Senate public gallery since 2018, but they are allowed in the House public gallery.

The Capitol building has been closed to the public since last March because of the coronavirus pandemic. But last January, more than 100 people, some with long guns and militarized gear, entered the building and attempted to speak with House Republican Leader J.T. Wilcox. In December, there was a shooting that injured one person during a clash between protesters in a parking lot near the Capitol's two press houses.

More than a dozen states ban open carry in government-owned buildings or state Capitol buildings, according to theGiffordsLaw Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Just four other states plus the District of Columbia prohibit open carry at demonstrations or protests, according to the center.

Earlier this month, a state panel in Michigan banned the open carry of guns in that Capitol. Moves to ban weapons at the Statehouse there have been pushed since April, when protesters opposed to Gov. Gretchen Whitmers COVID-19 restrictions, some armed with long rifles and other weapons, entered the Michigan Capitol demanding to be allowed onto the floor of a legislative chamber that was closed to the public.

During more than 90 minutes of public testimony before the Washington state committee, lawmakers heard from alternating panels of supporters and opponents of the bill.

Jessica Zielinkski testified in opposition, saying she openly carries a firearm as protection for herself and her three young children. She described a situation last summer where she become trapped within a protest in downtown Seattle while heading home from running errands and was surrounded by angry protesters.

I was terrified, and I was afraid for my life, she said. Under this proposed bill, I would have been guilty of a gross misdemeanor simply because a protest erupted around me and trapped me within it.

Second Amendment rallies are common in Washington state. The number of protests including people carrying weapons has increased with protesters drawn to the Capitol to oppose coronavirus restrictions, and then, after the election, the outcome.

Chief Adrian Diaz, Seattles interim police chief, said hes a supporter of Second Amendment rights but told the committee he supported the proposed bill because the the presence of firearms at large gatherings have created significant dangers.

The proposed law would add demonstrations and the Capitol grounds to the list of designated places where firearms are already prohibited statewide, including restricted areas of jails, courtrooms, taverns and commercial airports.

The committee is scheduled to vote on the measure on Thursday.

Link:
Bill would ban open carry of weapons at Capitol campus, public demonstrations - knkx.org

Ty Garbin, 25, entered his plea during a Wednesday hearing in Grand Rapids federal court; a trial date has been set for his five co-defendants.

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. A Livingston County man has pleaded guilty to conspiring to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, becoming the first defendant to admit responsibility in a case that included allegations of setting Whitmer adrift on Lake Michigan.

Ty Garbin entered his plea during a Wednesday hearing in U.S. District Court in Grand Rapids. A trial date for the other federal defendants has been set for March.

Garbin will remain in federal custody ahead of sentencing later this year. He faces any term of years up to life in prison.

Under the plea agreement, Garbin, 25, admitted that he attended a Second Amendment Rally outside the state Capitol building in Lansing. At that rally, co-defendant Adam Fox said he wanted to recruit 200 people to storm the Capitol, try any politicians they caught for treason and execute them by hanging on live television, court records show.

Garbin also admitted that he attended a meeting hosted by Fox in Wyoming, Mich. in which Fox proposed kidnapping Whitmer and holding her for trial.

In the 17-page plea agreement, Garbin admitted to attending a field training exercise in Wisconsin where conspirators again discussed a plan to storm the Michigan Capitol and kidnap the governor.

Conspirators eventually agreed that the Capitol would be too hard of a target and began planning instead to assault the governors vacation home in northern Michigan, court records show.

The plea agreement contains additional details of the conspiracy, which continued up until the six federal defendants were arrested.

It includes a September field training exercise at Garbins property near Luther, Mich. and the assembly of a shoot house to simulate Whitmers vacation home.

Throughout the day on September 12, 2020, the defendant and the other conspirators discussed their plans to kidnap the Governor, according to the plea agreement.

That evening, Garbin and others drove to Whitmers vacation home to see how the area looked in the dark because they expected to kidnap the Governor at night, according to the plea agreement.

On Oct. 7, Garbin and some of his co-defendants travelled to Ypsilanti to meet with an undercover FBI agent, not knowing the meeting was a ruse to facilitate their arrest.

During Wednesdays plea hearing, Judge Robert J. Jonker explained there would be a guideline range for sentencing. The sentence, Jonker said, will also be designed to convince you not to get involved in anything like this again.

The judge explained that Garbin could receive a lower sentence for providing substantial assistance to the government.

Jonker asked Garbin if he wanted to proceed with the plea hearing. Garbin said he did.

Do you have any second thoughts? the judge asked. I do not, Garbin responded.

During questioning by the judge, Garbin said he grew up in Wyandotte, Mich. and graduated from high school there. He also said he attended a trade school for aviation maintenance.

The judge told Garbin that sentencing will be held July 8.

Meanwhile, state cases are pending against eight other people on terrorism-related charges.

At the core of the state and federal cases was dissatisfaction with government and restrictions tied to the coronavirus pandemic. More than 200 state and federal law enforcement officials were involved in the investigations, which lasted several months and spanned several states.

Make it easy to keep up to date with more stories like this.Download the 13 ON YOUR SIDE app now.

Have a news tip? Email news@13onyourside.com, visit our Facebook page or Twitter. Subscribe to our YouTube channel.

See the rest here:
Man admits role in plot to abduct Gov. Whitmer; first defendant to enter plea - WZZM13.com