Category Archives: Second Amendment

A letter to the editor on Oct. 18 ("2nd Amendment confirms existing right," The Daily Progress) defends gun ownership by quoting the 17th-century philosopher John Locke. While Locke had an influence on the men who wrote our Constitution and the Bill of Rights, he certainly did not write those documents. To force fit a constitutional interpretation around Locke's notions is at variance with how "strict constructionists" usually interpret these documents. At least that's what strict constructionists claim to do, until they want to expand the Constitution's meaning to suit their own purposes.

The Second Amendment's actual wording, in the version authenticated by Thomas Jefferson himself, says: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

The Founding Fathers' intent should be clear in A well regulated militia. Able-bodied male citizens of the time were expected to be members of a militia, regulated by state governments, and to drill, follow general orders, the orders of responsible officers and, at need, provide for the common defense. Modern gun advocates conveniently ignore the "well regulated militia" phrase and focus only on private gun ownership.

The Second Amendment says nothing about random gun owners having private arsenals of assault weapons, concealed or open-carry handguns, extended magazines, silencers, Teflon-coated bullets or any of the other modern paraphernalia that strict constructionist gun advocates demand as a right.

Read the original here:
Opinion/Letter: 2nd Amendment was all about militia - The Daily Progress

Photo courtesy of Ruger.

When was the last time you went plinking? You know, shooting for fun in the woods, on the farm or at a range, probably with a .22 LR? Its what got most of us started in shooting and led to a lifetime of enjoyment with firearms. I started shooting with a friends Remington Nylon 66 in Apache Black and chrome, a .22 LR rifle I still lust after. Not long afterward, I was introduced to wing shooting with a .410-Bore shotgun and soon had my own .22 LR rifle, a Winchester 69A bolt-action.

Although you can shoot paper targets, its more fun to shoot other targets when plinking, especially if the target moves or breaks. Way back when, city dumps were left uncovered and afforded an amazing variety of targets for a dedicated plinker. Tin cans, glass bottles and the occasional rat could be hunted and shot in the dump. These days, dumps are covered, shooting isnt allowed and we dont approve of shooting glass anywhere. However, aluminum cans, plastic water bottles and similar objects can be set out and used as targets. Clay birds make good targets, because they break and are biodegradable. Should you wish to spend a little money, there are a huge variety of small-bore steel targets, as well as plastic and rubber targets that can withstand a lot of hits.

Plinking is a terrific family activity and can be used as an opportunity to teach firearms safety, gun handling and marksmanship. Once the basics are mastered, a variety of targets and informal competition can be used to maintain interest and keep everyone entertained. Shooting is fun, and a family plinking session should always be structured as a fun and enjoyable activity. Theres a lot of personal responsibility involved in handling firearms safely, followed by cleaning up and leaving no trash after the shooting session.

I encourage you to introduce some folks to shooting by taking them plinking. Taking a young boy or girl shooting is a fun and rewarding experience for everyone involved, but dont forget to include adults, too. You probably know some people who have never been introduced to shooting and would appreciate an invitation. One of the best things we can do to preserve our sport and strengthen the Second Amendment is getting more people involved in shooting, and plinking is a terrific way to do it.

View post:
Go Plinking. The Second Amendment Depends On It. - Shooting Illustrated

Staff Reports

MondayOct21,2019at2:26PM

The Second Amendment contains some of the Constitutions most debated language, creating a cultural and political divide in this country: A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Hendersonville native and legal expert Robert Orr will present a history of the 2nd Amendment on Nov. 9, 1 p.m. in the Kaplan Auditorium at the Henderson County Library.

Orr will address important court decisions interpreting and applying the Amendment as well as some of the broader issues of firearms regulation and gun violence that have sparked a divisive debate among pro-gun advocates and gun safety groups.

Orr was licensed as an attorney in North Carolina in 1975 and practiced law in Asheville for eleven years prior to serving on the N.C. Court of Appeals and as an Associate Justice on the N.C. Supreme Court. He won four statewide elections over the course of his judicial career, retiring in 2004.

Since then, Orr has served as the founding Executive Director of the N.C. Institute for Constitutional Law; taught as an adjunct professor at UNC School of Law; and since 2010 has returned to the private practice of law. Orr currently divides his time between Raleigh and his mountain home in Yancey County. Hes married with four grown children and four grandchildren.

A short question and answer session will follow Orrs talk.

The event is sponsored by Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America - Hendersonville Group, which describes itself as a nonpartisan organization that supports the 2nd Amendment, but believes common-sense firearm safety legislation can help decrease gun violence.

See the article here:
Former NC Justice Orr to speak on 2nd Amendment - BlueRidgeNow.com

There is currently a leftist jihad against Christian values, Conservatives, gun owners and Trumpsters. Beto ORourkes recent attack on owners of certain rifles chimes right in.

Mass shootings were almost nonexistent when I was a kid, and some high-schoolers would occasionally bring a gun to show their buddies. What happened?

Christian values that once helped moderate our evil ways are constantly scorned by Hollywood, the left, the ACLU and Democrats who now hold atheists in high esteem.

NFL quarterback Drew Brees was recently vilified for telling kids to bring their Bibles to school on Oct 3. The left has sown bad seeds for decades, and now the harvest is coming in.

Statistics show about one person a day is killed in America with a rifle, while 29 are killed daily by drunken driving. No one is attacking the sale of alcohol. Eight teens a day are killed by wrecks while on a cell phone, but phones are OK. Sixty percent of gun deaths are self-inflicted. About 129 Americans a day die from opioids. However, thats a non-violent crime. More than 2,000 unborn Americans are slaughtered daily, and Dems approve.

Democrats want to ban certain rifles, and then it will be pistols. Will bad guys give theirs up? Revolvers and slide actions would be next. Obviously their goal is erasing the Second Amendment. Listening to the Dems in their debates is like an echo chamber of insanity. So, borrowing a line from early American patriots: Dont tread on me!

JIM EHMEN

Paxton

Follow this link:
Letter to the Editor | Second Amendment is under attack - Champaign/Urbana News-Gazette

By Vikram D. Amar and Alan E. Brownstein

This artwork refers to the political conversations about guns.

This artwork refers to the political conversations about guns.

Photo: Donna Grethen / Tribune Content Agency

This artwork refers to the political conversations about guns.

This artwork refers to the political conversations about guns.

Opinion: What the gun lobby gets wrong about the Second Amendment

The Supreme Court will hear a gun control case in December that could significantly limit the ability of state and local governments to regulate guns for public safety reasons.

The case involves a New York City regulation on transporting handguns that was repealed in July. Although that original rule is no longer in effect, for now the court has not determined the matter to be moot, so the case will move forward.

In this dispute and others, opposition to gun regulations is often grounded on the premise that once an individual interest is identified as a fundamental right, that interest prevails over all countervailing public concerns.

That premise is profoundly mistaken. And, importantly, it is inconsistent with the way that constitutional doctrine has developed with other fundamental rights, such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Second Amendment rights should be treated no more favorably, despite the political rhetoric of gun rights supporters who claim that any firearm regulation is an unconstitutional infringement on their rights.

Of course, a constitutional right does carry with it a strong presumption against government interference with that particular activity, even though the exercise of the right involves a societal cost. We protect freedom of religion, for example, even though we know that some religious practices like pulling children out of school after the eighth grade might be considered problematic or harmful.

But there is a critical difference between assigning a high value to a constitutional right when balancing it against social concerns, and arguing that the right necessarily overrides the publics ability to regulate that activity in ways that may be needed to protect the community.

The doctrine surrounding freedom of speech is instructive. No one doubts that speech rights are taken seriously in America. Yet the right to free speech is not absolute and can be regulated in numerous circumstances. Courts subject government regulations that affect speech to different standards of review that balance the publics interest against the individuals liberty. Among factors considered are the kind of speech involved and the location and manner of the restriction.

For example, a ban on rallies on public streets in residential neighborhoods after 9 p.m. would likely be upheld even though it burdens speech, so long as the law did not discriminate based on the message rally speakers expressed.

So too with protections for personal privacy under the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. That amendment doesnt bar all searches and seizures, but instead requires that such intrusions be reasonable, a concept that inherently involves some kind of balancing of interests. Hence, we all must endure airport security screening searches because they are a reasonable means to protect air travel safety.

The individual right to bear arms for self-defense, as announced by the Supreme Court in 2008, is likewise not unlimited. Even though the court in that case struck down a flat ban on possession of handguns that might be used for self-defense in peoples homes, it observed that states could for historical and public-policy safety reasons prohibit people with felony convictions or people with mental illness from possessing guns, demonstrating that the very scope of the Second Amendments protection takes account of countervailing public objectives.

For instance, some states require that gun owners keep their firearms locked up if there are children living in the home, even though gun owners might prefer easier access to firearms for self-defense.

Or consider the contours of self-defense itself. A Second Amendment right to keep guns for self-defense does not eliminate the need for society to think about how guns should be responsibly employed, even in self-defense situations. If someone uses a gun purportedly for self-defense purposes and kills another person, the Second Amendment does not preclude an evaluation of whether the alleged threat was sufficient to justify the use of deadly force or whether the killing involved excessive force because reasonable nonlethal alternatives were available for the shooter to defend himself.

The national debate now has focused on proposed regulations such as background checks and assault weapons bans. Whether specific measures would be permissible under the Constitution depends on their particulars, but the big point is that particulars matter.

In evaluating gun control regulations, its legitimate to take into account the social harms and risks arising from individuals keeping, bearing and using firearms.

Constitutional analysis of the Second Amendment, as with other fundamental rights, requires some kind of balancing of interests, which includes considering the states need to promote public safety.

Vikram D. Amar is dean and professor of law at the University of Illinois College of Law. Alan E. Brownstein is professor of law at the UC Davis School of Law.

See original here:
Opinion: What the gun lobby gets wrong about the Second Amendment - Middletown Press

2nd Amendment Rally

Washington D.C. -(Ammoland.com)- On November 2nd at 1:00 PM, gun owners will descend on the lawn of the U.S. for the 2nd Amendment rally.

Gun rights advocates and gun celebrities will take the stage for speeches on the importance of the Second Amendment. This gathering isn't a protest. It is a chance for like-minded people to come together for fellowship and a chance to show those holding political office that gun owners do care about fighting against bad gun laws. We will get active in the political realm.

No one gun rights organization is putting on the one of a kind rally that is taking place on the Capitol lawn. It is an authentic grassroots movement, and people from all over the country are coming to take part in it. AmmoLand will be on-site, covering the speakers and events.

Maj Toure is taking a break from his campaign for Philadelphia City Council to talk about the importance of gun rights. Toure has a gift for electrifying crowds with his pointed improvised speeches. In Richmond, over the summer, Toure's Bacon's Rebellion speech inspired the group like no other speaker I have ever seen before.

Other speakers include Erich Pratt of Gun Owners of America. He will be speaking on the attack on the Second Amendment, and what gun owners can do to protect their rights. Pratt is the Executive Vice President of GOA and a lifelong gun-rights advocate.

YouTube stars will be speaking and meeting other gun owners. Eric Blandford of the YouTube channel Iraqveteran8888 will be giving a speech on why he sees the Second Amendment as critical for Americans. He will tell the crowd of his love for the country and why he paid his own way to speak at the rally.

The former Police officer and head of the D.C. Project Dianna Muller will also be up on stage speaking. Muller made waves when she told Congress in no uncertain terms that she will not comply with any unconstitutional laws dealing with modern sporting rifles. In the days since her testimony, her words of I will not comply became a rallying cry for gun rights activists around the country.

Another speaker will be Kevin Dixie of N.O.C. Firearms training. He will bring his unique perspective on gun ownership and the rights of gun owners. Kevin will not throw out talking points. His insight is unique to him.

That point is what I believe this rally will show. We all have different perspectives, and as Americans, we are born with the right to have those views. Without the Second Amendment, we can't safeguard our other rights.

We might not agree on everything. For transparency, I disagree with some of the speakers on issues like background checks and obeying laws I think violates my rights, but that is a part of being in a big tent group. You don't have to agree with everyone.

I had a chance to hold two live streams with some of the speakers of the rally. In the first stream Rob Pincus, Eric Blandford, Dianna Muller, and Maj Toure joined me. I hosted Jeff Knox, Cheryl Todd, Riley Bowman, and Chris Cheng on the second live stream. I was able to dig into the reasons for the rally and get my questions answered.

About John Crump

John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. He is the former CEO of Veritas Firearms, LLC and is the co-host of The Patriot News Podcast which can be found at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/patriotnews. John has written extensively on the patriot movement including 3%'ers, Oath Keepers, and Militias. In addition to the Patriot movement, John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and is currently working on a book on leftist deplatforming methods and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, on Facebook at realjohncrump, or at http://www.crumpy.com.

Read more from the original source:
Chatting With The Speakers Of The 2nd Amendment Rally - AmmoLand Shooting Sports News

JEFFERSON COUNTY, Tenn. Jefferson and Sevier Counties are now considered "gun sanctuaries." They join Monroe, Blount and Loudon Counties who previously passed similar resolutions.

Both counties passed the Second Amendment gun sanctuary resolutions Monday night at their county commission meetings. This comes after the Town of Dandridge passed a similar resolution earlier in October.

Commissioners in Jefferson County said it was important to them and members of the community to show support for the Second Amendment.

Stewart Harris, who spoke to 10News from WETS-FM in Johnson City before his weekly radio show, is a constitutional law professor at LMU Duncan School of Law. He said becoming a sanctuary city or county is more of a political statement than a constitutional statement.

He said states, counties and even towns making the move to become gun sanctuaries has picked up traction in the last couple of years.

RELATED: Blount County is now a Second Amendment sanctuary county

"They will decide they are concerned about gun control laws being imposed by some other jurisdiction," Harris said.

Harris explained the Second Amendment and right to bear arms only kicks in when the government tries to restrict your gun rights.

"In a state like Tennessee, it's very unlikely that will happen, but we're really not talking about a constitutional issue, we're talking about a political decision from the people of these counties," Harris noted.

It's more like insurance.

For instance, One of the sponsors of the sanctuary resolution in Jefferson County, Todd Kesterson,said in a statement:

"We are seeing how many politicians on the Federal level are working toward gun confiscation in efforts to skew or change how the 2A reads. We feel like our freedoms are under attack and wanted to join several of our surrounding counties in letting the State and Federal Governments know that we disagree with these efforts."

The resolution states the county will not provide resources toward any actions or mandates that infringe on the people's right to bear arms. But, Harris said the cities or counties cannot get in the way of federal law.

RELATED: Polk Co. leaders vote in favor of making their county a 'gun sanctuary'

"If there is a conflict between state and national laws, then national laws win every time," Harris explained.

Jefferson County Sheriff Jeff Coffey said this new resolution won't change the way they enforce the laws and things like the federal bump stock ban still apply.

RELATED: Measure fails to make Greene County a 'Second Amendment sanctuary'

Link:
Jefferson and Sevier Counties added to the list of Tennessee 'gun sanctuaries' - WBIR.com

The importance of protecting the Second Amendment is crucial to the Constitution and civilian life; not just for protection against others, but to also protect ourselves from government tyranny. However, I am the first to admit that gun background checks are still far from perfect and this has led to problems.

The Second amendment states A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. The right to bear arms is a persons right to possess firearms for their own personal defense.

The Second amendment brings forth strong opinions, and is often misunderstood. Not only is this right for personal protection, but to also protect the country against a government mistreating the people. It was created because of our colonial past under Englands rule.

According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), in 2017 there were 39,773 deaths due to gun violence. About 60% of these incidents are suicides, but it also includes murders and other gun-related deaths. I believe that the number of these deaths can be reduced if we had a more rigorous process for allowing people who could qualify to own a firearm.

The selection process in the United States for one to carry firearms has been drastically abused for many years because some states do not require background checks while it is required in other states. Not having background checks lead to the wrong people owning guns which in turn cause more violence.

As a hunter and strong supporter in the Second Amendment, I believe the importance of background checks is crucial to getting guns out of the wrong hands. In Massachusetts, everyone must go to their local police station and answer questions from the chief of police before even being considered to own a license to carry (LTC).

Personal and safety questions continue into the gun store which include any mental health issues, felonies and other crimes. Anyone with any felonies or serious misdemeanor charges will not be able to own firearms in Massachusetts. Plus, any diagnosis of mental illness will prevent the sale and ownership of a firearm.

Even with all these steps, some people slip through the cracks. One of the major problems that prevents the government from stopping gun violence is easy access gun shows across the country. At these gun shows, private sellers arrive to sell their own guns to potential customers. The problem is background checks are not performed at these events. Since they are private sellers, they do not have to to look into someones past, which is a huge problem.

With the gray areas in gun shows, there is also the issue of what mental health is and what is classified as mental illness issue. I believe only professional medical diagnoses should be used to determine mental fitness. The system needs to stay this strict if we, the people, want our daily lives to be safer.

Not having the Second Amendment will also abolish hunting and the ability to survive on your own. As a hunter, the thought of not being able to put food on the table of your family is a tough thing to think about. Hunting has been key in human survival all throughout time. If the world collapses, people will have no means of getting food in the wilderness.

Having the Second Amendment is very important to a successful country and personal protection. This fear of not being able to defend yourself when in danger is a frightening thought. Owning an LTC will surely limit the chances of one being a victim of a crime or assault.

More here:
Don't Judge Me: Why We Need the Second Amendment - The Beacon

Tiverton voted to recall Town Council President Robert Coulter and Town Council Vice President Justin Katz in the special recall election on October 10. Nearly 1,600 voters voted yes to the recall with only 80 votes cast in favor of Coulter and Katz. Katz blamed the defeat on on the statewide machine of political action committees, including the teachers union, that sent out numerous mailers and others who put bunches of political talk and lies, on social media to get people out to vote.

The Rhode Island Coalition Against Gun Violence (RICAGV) is encouraged by the recall results. Coulter and Katz led the introduction last spring of a resolution declaring Tiverton a second amendment sanctuary town. With a room packed with out-of-town folks and residents, the resolution was defeated 4-3, only to be revised and brought back at a later date for passage. The resolution directed law enforcement to enforce gun laws with discretion. The councilors also made it known that they were using their elected positions to send a message to the State House regarding their views on gun legislation.

Second amendment sanctuary resolutions are dangerous because they advance the false narrative that the Second Amendment is at risk, making law-abiding gun owners feel threatened and contributing to the sort of hysteria that leads many to vehemently oppose any measure at all that regulates gun possession, no matter the weapon or the threat to public safety.

I am satisfied that these councilors were recalled. The introduction and passage of this resolution was the last straw for many who had watched them push their political agenda outside the conventions of town governance. It sowed division in a town already divided, said RICAGV supporter and Tiverton resident, Maureen Morrow. Furthermore, it contained incendiary and false language about seized weapons stating the town would not use taxpayer dollars to store weapons. No present or proposed law in Rhode Island calls for seizing weapons.

RICAGV looks forward to seeing who will go on to replace Coulter and Katz in the General election scheduled next month.

Read this article:
RICAGV: Tiverton voters recall town councilors who championed 'second amendment sanctuary' resolution - Uprise RI

In a bright red shirt with a Gun Sense Voter button pinned to the front, David Zilles strolled down a quiet residential street on a recent weekend with his two young children while canvassing for votes.

Zilles, a 46-year-old nuclear engineer and a Democrat, is mounting a campaign to wrestle away a House of Delegates seat that has been held by Republicans for more than a decade.

Among his top priorities as a candidate are reforming Virginias gun laws a topic that has taken center stage this year after a mass shooting in Virginia Beach left 12 people dead and a legislative special session called to address gun violence was shut down by GOP lawmakers.

Im a strong supporter of our Second Amendment rights, Zilles, who is running in the open 23rd House district, said. But I think the community realizes we need to close the loopholes and the gaps that exist in our gun laws.

In addition to supporting proposals they argue will bring down health care costs, protect the environment and encourage job growth, Zilles and his cross-town ally Jennifer Woofter, who is running against longtime Republican incumbent Kathy Byron in the neighboring 22nd House district, believe common sense solutions to gun violence is a message that is resonating with voters.

A Washington Post-Schar School poll conducted late last month found gun policy is the most important issue for Virginians. Of the three-quarters of voters who told pollsters the topic is very important, support for Democrats and Republicans evenly is split, indicating the issue is animating voters on both ends of the political spectrum.

Its top of mind in a way that I think it hasnt been in previous years, Woofter said.

Democrats have not won in the 22nd or 23rd districts which stretch from Amherst County, across Lynchburg and into Campbell, Bedford and Franklin counties since the boundaries were redrawn nearly a decade ago.

The same poll that found near universal interest in gun issues also found voters in central and western Virginia favor Republican candidates over Democratic candidates, 53% to 43%. The state GOP is hoping to maintain its slim majority in the General Assembly and is counting on the Lynchburg-area districts to remain in Republican hands.

Just as Democrats see gun reform as a winning issue, Republicans are convinced their approach will carry them to victory.

Ive got a lot of grassroots support among the Second Amendment supporters, Wendell Walker, Zilles Republican opponent and a first-time candidate for office, said. These guys vote. They dont sit around and talk about it.

Republicans and gun-rights advocates have said Democrats gun control proposals are too extreme for most voters and punitive to responsible gun owners.

Theyre really misreading the public on guns, said Philip Van Cleave, president of the gun rights group Virginia Citizens Defense League.

Both Byron and Walker, who have earned A ratings from the National Rifle Association, have pledged to block expanded background checks and red-flag laws to keep guns out of the hands of potentially violent people proposals championed by their Democratic opponents.

We all know that when the recent tragedy which sparked this discussion again happened we had laws in place, Byron said, referring to the May 31 shooting in Virginia Beach. But criminals dont follow the law. So this is a situation where just passing additional laws isnt necessarily going to be a solution to anything.

Zilles and Woofter know theyre up against tough odds. Both said they believe turnout, which has hovered at about 30% in years without a statewide race on the ballot, will be a key factor if they are to prevail Nov. 5.

There are enough Democrats out here, Woofter said, pointing to Sen. Tim Kaines strong showing in Lynchburg during his reelection bid last year. The question is: Are they going to come vote in an off, off-year election?

Both of the Democratic upstarts are backed by the local chapter of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America a national nonpartisan group advocating for stronger gun laws and have relied heavily on the group for support. Indeed, Zilles entry into the political arena began when he joined the chapter last year in the wake of the school shooting in Parkland, Florida, and the student activism that arose from the massacre.

Maggie Millard, the membership lead for the local Moms Demand Action chapter, said about 30 members have volunteered with the Zilles and Woofter campaigns this year.

Were really excited to have two gun-sense candidates running in our districts this year, Millard said. Its clear that our community is ready for change; this isnt a Democrat thing, this is a Virginia thing.

Information from the Associated Press was used in this report.

Reach Richard Chumney at (434) 385-5547.

Richard Chumney covers breaking news and public safety for The News & Advance. Reach him at (434) 385-5547.

See more here:
As election nears, candidates in Lynchburg-area delegate contests offer competing messages on gun reform - Lynchburg News and Advance