Guns

MSM PROMOTING ‘GUN CONFISCATION ORDERS’ AS SOLUTION TO MASS SHOOTINGS

In what many saw coming a mile away in the aftermath of both the Las Vegas Massacre and the Texas Church mass shooting, liberals in the government, with the help of their mainstream media allies, are now pushing what amounts to plans for gun confiscation, outside of normal law, for Americans across the country.

The new push for gun control from the left comes courtesy of ABC News which recently published a piece promoting the use of an Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) that many believe is nothing more than a thinly veiled confiscation plan that would allow a judge to “issue an ex parte order” for the direct confiscation of an American citizens firearms.

Unbelievably, the order can actually be issued without the firearm owner even being present, which would in turn end with police at the citizens door demanding he hand over his weapons or face violence from the state.

ABC’s Andy Fies, on the other hand, apparently wants Americans to see the orders differently, painting a more friendly picture of the ERPO’s while quoting two different left-wing gun control groups as seemingly unbiased experts on gun violence.

As of now, only Washington, California, Connecticut and most recently Oregon have ERPO laws (while Indiana and Texas have modified risk warrant statutes). Over the past year, however, spurred by a string of mass shootings beginning with the Pulse Nightclub attack that killed 49 in June 2016, legislatures in 19 states and Washington, D.C., have taken up 32 separate ERPO bills for consideration, according to Everytown for Gun Safety, a nonprofit organization that advocates for gun control.

Everytown’s deputy legal director, William Rosen, told ABC News that list will grow. “We expect to see at least as much interest in 2018,” he said.

“There is a growing consensus,” added Lauren Alfred of the gun violence prevention group Sandy Hook Promise, “that this is the first step we should be taking when we are talking about people who are at risk of hurting themselves or others.”

Current laws barring gun ownership are limited. Generally, a person with a long history of mental health issues can still legally buy or possess firearms if they don’t fall into specific statutory categories such as having been adjudicated mentally ill or under a domestic violence restraining order. But, as was the case with Texas church gunman Devin Kelley, even these restrictions may not work if the person’s troubled past is not recorded on a background registry.

With an ERPO, however, if family members or police can show a gun owner to be an imminent danger to themselves or others, they can force the person to surrender their weapon(s).

Keep in mind that Everytown for Gun Safety is a Michael Bloomberg funded, left-wing gun control group that was created as part of a rebranding effort by the billionaire gun grabber after his previous group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, was outed by multiple former members as actually pushing an agenda of full-scale gun confiscation.

The Extreme Risk Protection Orders scheme seems to be nothing more than another attempt at slowly eroding the right of lawful Americans to own firearms.

As AWR Hawkins reported in an April 2017 article about a similar law being pushed in Oregon, “Oregon state Sen. Brian Boquist (R-Dallas) is pushing a confiscation bill that would broaden the number of prohibited gun purchasers as well as require certain individuals to hand over any guns in their possession.”

At the time, gun rights activist and NRA member Keely Hopkins rightfully described the law as an attempt to remove your Second Amendment rights by using a third-party who would need little evidence to declare you unfit to own a firearm. (Imagine a vengeful ex-wife/husband)

“This bill allows for a protective order to remove your Second Amendment rights, not because of a criminal conviction, but based on third-party allegations using an evidentiary standard that falls far below what’s normally required for the removing of fundamental rights.”

It is also important to note that gun control advocates and the mainstream media are using The Las Vegas Massacre, which the authorities are openly lying about (there were at least 7 different shooters) as a pretext to further take away Americans right to bear arms. This is, and has always been, the modus operandi of the power elite.

Source

Guns

Assault Weapons Not Protected by Second Amendment, Federal Appeals Court Rules

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — Maryland’s ban on 45 kinds of assault weapons and its 10-round limit on gun magazines were upheld Tuesday by a federal appeals court in a decision that met with a strongly worded dissent.

In a 10-4 ruling, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, said the guns banned under Maryland’s law aren’t protected by the Second Amendment.

“Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war,” Judge Robert King wrote for the court, adding that the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller explicitly excluded such coverage.

Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, who led the push for the law in 2013 as a state senator, said it’s “unthinkable that these weapons of war, weapons that caused the carnage in Newtown and in other communities across the country, would be protected by the Second Amendment.”

Image: AR-15 rifles build by DSA Inc.
AR-15 rifles. Scott Olson / Getty Images

“It’s a very strong opinion, and it has national significance, both because it’s en-banc and for the strength of its decision,” Frosh said, noting that all of the court’s judges participated.

Judge William Traxler issued a dissent. By concluding the Second Amendment doesn’t even apply, Traxler wrote, the majority “has gone to greater lengths than any other court to eviscerate the constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms.” He also wrote that the court did not apply a strict enough review on the constitutionality of the law.

“For a law-abiding citizen who, for whatever reason, chooses to protect his home with a semi-automatic rifle instead of a semi-automatic handgun, Maryland’s law clearly imposes a significant burden on the exercise of the right to arm oneself at home, and it should at least be subject to strict scrutiny review before it is allowed to stand,” Traxler wrote.

National Rifle Association spokeswoman Jennifer Baker said, “It is absurd to hold that the most popular rifle in America is not a protected ‘arm’ under the Second Amendment.” She added that the majority opinion “clearly ignores the Supreme Court’s guidance from District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects arms that are ‘in common use at the time for lawful purposes like self-defense.'”

The NRA estimates there are 5 million to 10 million AR-15s — one of the weapons banned under Maryland’s law — in circulation in the United States for lawful purposes. Asked about an appeal, Baker said the NRA is exploring all options.

 

 

But Elizabeth Banach, executive director of Marylanders to Prevent Gun Violence, said the decision is “overwhelming proof that reasonable measures to prevent gun violence are constitutional.”

“Maryland’s law needs to become a national model of evidence-based policies that will reduce gun violence,” Banach wrote in a statement.

U.S. District Judge Catherine Blake upheld the ban in 2015, but a divided three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last year that she didn’t apply the proper legal standard. The panel sent the case back to Blake and ordered her to apply “strict scrutiny,” a more rigorous test of a law’s constitutionality. The state appealed to the full appeals court.

Maryland passed the sweeping gun-control measure after the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre that killed 20 children and six educators in Connecticut. King mentioned the massacre at the start of the ruling.

“Both before and after Newtown, similar military-style rifles and detachable magazines have been used to perpetrate mass shootings in places whose names have become synonymous with the slaughters that occurred there,” King wrote. He listed the 2012 shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado; the December 2015 shootings in San Bernardino, California; and the shootings last year at an Orlando, Florida, nightclub, where 49 people were killed and 53 injured.

King also noted that enacting the law is “precisely the type of judgment that legislatures are allowed to make without second-guessing by a court.”

“Simply put, the State has shown all that is required: a reasonable, if not perfect, fit between the (Firearms Safety Act) and Maryland’s interest in protecting public safety,” King wrote.

Source

Guns

“Offensive” coffee commercial savagely mocks the liberal logic behind gun control

Veteran, comedian, internet star, and entrepreneur Mat Best is back with another great commercial for Black Rifle Coffee.

If you love coffee as much as the 2nd Amendment and don’t mind offending gun control advocates, you’ll love this video.

Evan Hafer, an Army Special Forces veteran and Black Rifle Coffee CEO, started roasting coffee in Colorado as a side job between deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. Now he plans to expand his company to bring more jobs to the 2.5 million post-9/11 veterans.

With the help of other veterans like Mat Best, Black Rifle Coffee has been spreading the word about their brand through funny videos like the one below.

WARNING: If you’ve ever needed to use a safe space for a good cry, you’re going to have a bad time.

Guns

Man who shot Ohio judge was father of teen convicted of rape

COLUMBUS, Ohio — A man who shot and wounded a judge outside a county courthouse before being gunned down by a probation officer was the father of a high school football player who was convicted of rape in 2013, authorities said Monday.

Jefferson County Judge Joseph Bruzzese Jr. was shot Monday morning near the courthouse in Steubenville, across the Ohio River from West Virginia’s northern panhandle and just west of Pittsburgh.

Evidence markers were placed on the street and the sidewalk near the Jefferson County Courthouse in Steubenville, Ohio.

Evidence markers were placed on the street and the sidewalk near the Jefferson County Courthouse in Steubenville, Ohio.

 

Authorities identified the gunman as Nathaniel “Nate” Richmond, the father of Ma’Lik Richmond. Ma’Lik, then 17, served about 10 months in a juvenile lockup after being convicted with another Steubenville High School football player of raping a 16-year-old girl during an alcohol-fueled party in 2012.

The case brought international attention to the eastern Ohio city of 18,000 residents and led to allegations of a cover-up to protect the football team.

Investigators are looking for a motive in the shooting and haven’t found a connection to the rape case, prosecutor Jane Hanlin said.

A visiting judge from Hamilton County, where Cincinnati is located, handled the majority of the rape case.

Records show Bruzzese was overseeing a wrongful-death lawsuit that Nate Richmond filed in April against the Jefferson County Metropolitan Housing Authority. A hearing on a motion by the housing authority to dismiss punitive damages claims was set for Aug. 28. Messages were left for Richmond’s attorneys.

Richmond had a few traffic violations in the past couple of years, and several years ago he was arrested on various domestic violence and assault charges, court records show.

The prosecutor said Bruzzese was shoved to the ground during Monday’s attack. Courthouse video shows the judge and Richmond firing about five times each, Jefferson County Sheriff Fred Abdalla said.

Bruzzese was talking after being wounded, Steubenville City Manager James Mavromatis told WTOV-TV. The judge was flown to a Pittsburgh-area hospital. Ohio Governor John Kasich said he was told the judge would survive.

The attack had to be intentional because people know about the reserved spots where judges park, one of Bruzzese’s judicial colleagues said.

Judge Joseph Corabi said he and the county’s two other judges park in reserved spots next to the courthouse. Judges then walk a few feet down what’s known as Courthouse Alley to a side entrance to the building, said Corabi, the Jefferson County juvenile and probate court judge.

“Everybody knows who parks there. That’s why it’s not an accident what happened. He was clearly an intended target,” Corabi said.

Ma’Lik Richmond, now 21, is currently on the Youngstown State football team but isn’t allowed to play in any games, the school said this month.

News of his participation drew a wave of criticism in the university community recently, and a petition was started to keep him from playing.

Corabi said Bruzzese is known as an avid hunter. He called him fair, hardworking, well-liked and “a tough son of a gun.”

“He is very intelligent, and he can cut to the chase,” Corabi said. “He spots issues, and he resolves the issues.”

Bruzzese hears general and domestic relations cases as one of two judges serving in Jefferson County Common Pleas Court.

Bruzzese has served on that court since 1997. He was most recently re-elected in 2014 for another six-year term.

He had likely arrived early to review his usual Monday morning batch of legal motions, Corabi said.

The shooting suspect’s body could be seen lying next to a car at the drive-thru of a neighboring bank. Police said a man who was in the car with him was taken into custody.

The courthouse was closed for the day as local and state authorities helped secure the scene. Jefferson County Commissioner Thomas Graham told WTOV some courthouse workers witnessed the “tragic situation” and people would need time to process what happened.

The state crime lab will help investigate the shooting, Attorney General Mike DeWine said.

The chief justice of the Ohio Supreme Court, Maureen O’Connor, called the attack a “cowardly ambush” and urged court personnel, especially judges, to take extra precautions.

“Violence against judges represents an attack on the Rule of Law, the foundation of our country,” O’Connor said.

Source

Guns

Czech government tells its citizens how to fight terrorists: Shoot them yourselves

 

A couple of months ago, Czech President Milos Zeman made an unusual request: He urged citizens to arm themselves against a possible “super-Holocaust” carried out by Muslim terrorists.

Never mind that there are fewer than 4,000 Muslims in this country of 10 million people — gun purchases spiked. One shop owner in East Bohemia, a region in the northern center of the Czech Republic, told a local paper that people were scared of a “wave of Islamists.”

Now the country’s interior ministry is pushing a constitutional change that would let citizens use guns against terrorists. Proponents say this could save lives if an attack occurs and police are delayed or unable to make their way to the scene. To become law, Parliament must approve the proposal; they’ll vote in the coming months.

Getty.jpg

The Czech Republic already has some of the most lenient gun policies in Europe. It’s home to about 800,000 registered firearms and 300,000 people with gun licenses. Obtaining a weapon is relatively easy: Residents must be 21, pass a gun knowledge check and have no criminal record. By law, Czechs can use their weapons to protect their property or when in danger, although they need to prove they faced a real threat.

This puts the country at odds with much of Europe, which has long supported much more stringent gun-control measures.  In the wake of the 2015 terror attacks in Paris, France pushed the European Union to enact even tougher policies. The European Commission’s initial proposal called for a complete ban on the sale of weapons like Kalashnikovs or AR-15s that are intended primarily for military use. Ammunition magazines would be limited to 20 rounds or less.

The Czech Republic came out hard against the directive. Officials warned — somewhat ominously — that the measure would limit the country’s ability to build “an internal security system” and make it nearly impossible to train army reservists. And a total ban on military-style rifles that can fire large numbers of rounds would make illegal thousands of weapons already owned by Czech citizens, potentially creating a black market for terrorists to exploit. Finland and Germany offered their own reservations; Europe’s pro-gun groups also mobilised against the bill with the support of politicians on the extreme right.

After months of contentious negotiations, the EU passed a compromise last month; the Council of Ministers will confirm the measure this spring. All member states will have 15 months to comply with the new gun restrictions. The final measure bans the sale of most military-style rifles and requires all potential buyers to go through a psychological check before they can buy a weapon. If someone fails a check in one E.U. state, that information will be shared in an international database so that the person can’t procure a gun somewhere else. Online sales are also severely curtailed. The Czech Republic was the only country to oppose the directive for being too strict. Luxembourg also voted against the measure, but on the grounds that it was too weak.

That means that regardless of how the Czech parliament votes on the terrorist-hunting measure, gun laws in the Czech Republic are going to get stricter. All gun purchasers will be required to pass the psychological checks, though it’s not yet clear if gun owners will have to turn in newly illegal weapons. That ambiguity has led one Czech newspaper to suggest that the Interior Ministry’s latest move is much more about political safety than safety from terrorism.

Source

Guns

Court reverses conviction of felon who was hunting with replica antique

The Florida Supreme Court in a 5-2 ruling overturned the conviction of a man for being a felon in possession of a firearm because the gun he was using wasn’t considered modern under state law. The case involves Christopher Weeks who was charged for being a felon in possession of a firearm on Feb. 4, 2012, after a Florida Fish and Game Wildlife officer stopped him on state land during primitive weapon season for deer hunting. Weeks had been hunting with a Traditions .50-caliber muzzleloader equipped with a scope, a gun he received as a Christmas present after researching guns a felon could possess.

State law defines an antique firearm as any gun that used a “matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar early type of ignition system or replica thereof” or was made before 1918. Yet, authorities argued the scope modernized the gun.

Facing a jury trial, Weeks pleaded no contest and received three years probation. However, a 2013 District Court reversed that ruling on appeal, citing state law was unconstitutionally vague and, even though Weeks had added a scope to the muzzleloader, the addition was not enough to make the black powder percussion gun a modern firearm. State prosecutors took the position that Weeks’ firearm was not an exact copy of a weapon manufactured before 1918 — due to the scope — and his conviction should stand.

This week, the Supreme Court in a 5-2 split agreed with Weeks’ argument and held state law emphasizes the ignition system as the distinctive feature of an “antique firearm,” and that the hunter’s replica “used a type of firing system specifically mentioned” as exempt in the law’s language in an opinion written by Justice Barbara Pariente. Justices James E.C. Perry, Jorge Labarga and Ricky Polston concurred.

Justice Charles Canady, in a separate concurrence, blasted the State’s line of reasoning that adding a scope to Weeks’ replica made it a modern firearm, arguing that in the same logic “an antique replica with any modern accessory attached, such as camouflage tape, a rubber recoil pad, or a nylon rifle sling, would—unlike a similarly configured actual antique—fall outside the definition of an ‘antique firearm’ whether the accessory is permanently secured or temporarily affixed.”

Justice R. Fred Lewis broke with the majority and joined with Justice Peggy Quince in a dissent based on the technology involved.

“Although the firearm may have relied upon an ignition mechanism used by similar firearms before 1918, it also featured a scope that was not found on weapons that were available in 1918,” wrote Lewis. “In my view, such a firearm cannot constitute an antique firearm as defined by Florida law.”

Lewis, however, was factually incorrect in his assertion. Brass-tubed telescopic rifle sights from Morgan James and others were available prior to the Civil War while both Stevens Arms and Winchester introduced commercial lines of rifle scopes in 1902 and 1909, respectively, and sold them via mail order — meaning either could have been in common use in Florida well before 1918.

Source

Guns

Gun Carry Laws Can Complicate Police Interactions

The recent targeted attacks on police in Dallas and Baton Rouge have law enforcement on edge. Some departments are telling officers to patrol in pairs when possible, and to be extra vigilant about possible ambush. Complicating matters is the question of how to interpret and react to the presence of a gun. With more Americans now exercising their legal right to carry firearms, police find themselves having to make rapid judgments about whether an armed citizen is a threat.

While police are more sensitive to the presence of legal guns now, the dilemma isn’t a new one. Gun rights groups started a push for more permissive laws in the 1990s, and most states now allow concealed carry, open carry or both.

And police are divided: Chiefs tend to favor more gun control, while the younger rank and file tend to support gun rights.

But even many rank-and-file cops want some limits. Steve Loomis is head of the biggest police union in Cleveland — he calls himself a “Second Amendment guy,” but on Sunday he asked Ohio Gov. John Kasich to limit the state’s open-carry law during this week’s Republican convention.

Loomis, talking to a reporter from The Plain Dealer, said there are certain practical problems in having people walk around downtown carrying semiautomatic rifles.

“Somebody’s going to be watching, there’s going to be multiple police officers watching that person with that AR-15, when they should be over here watching for the guy that’s not on his meds that has a couple of handguns,” Loomis said.

That’s one of the challenges for police: Even in states with open carry, when people see someone with a gun, they tend to call the cops — and then the police get the thankless job of challenging someone who may or may not be a threat. One high-ranking officer in Texas calls it a “headache.”

“When you have all these people running around with guns and rifles, you don’t know who the bad guy is,” he says.

Another potential headache is concealed-carry permits, and the people who like to keep their guns secret, like Joseph Olson of Minnesota.

“Unless it’s an essential part of what I’m doing, like defending myself, whether or not I’m carrying it at any given time is something I never say,” says Olson, a retired law professor who led the campaign to make his state a concealed-carry state in 2003.

Legal guns used to be a rarity in the Twin Cities, but in recent years the number of permits has jumped, and armed citizens are a routine factor for the police.

Olson says he thought Minnesota police had adapted to the reality of legal guns — until he was pulled over by an especially nervous-seeming cop.

“His voice had a tremor in it and I remember thinking to myself, ‘Oh, my God.’ I decided when I heard his voice that I was not going to introduce another element into the transaction,” Olson says. He decided not to mention his gun.

Minnesota law doesn’t require people to tell police they have a gun unless asked. Instructors give conflicting advice on this — but cops say they appreciate being told as soon as possible. Most of them have stories about close calls, when a legal gun appeared in the wrong way.

One officer recalls telling a gun owner, “Do you realize you almost died tonight?” The officer, whom we’re not identifying because he doesn’t have permission from work to talk about this, says he’d pulled the man over for a routine traffic stop.

“So I said, ‘I see you have a permit to carry. Do you have a firearm in the vehicle?’ ”

“And … [he said] ‘Yeah, it’s right here,’ and he reaches over to his passenger seat, and I’m going, ‘Stop. Don’t move,’ and he grabs this shirt,” the officer recalls. “And I can then see a gun in it, and he’s grabbing it.”

The officer says he managed to grab the man’s arm before being forced to pull his own gun, but police have shot motorists for a lot less than that.

Minnesota is an example of a state that’s still adjusting to its new gun culture, and the state hasn’t introduced any specific training for officers on how best to handle legally armed citizens. Some wonder if that played a role in the death of Philando Castile earlier this month. He’s the black man who was shot during a traffic stop; his girlfriend, who was in the car with him, has said he was trying to tell the officer about his permitted gun.

Scott Dibble, a state senator from Minneapolis, says he’s surprised officers haven’t been given specific training for these situations, and he’s also concerned that members of the public aren’t being given clear, consistent instructions on how to inform officers that they’re armed.

Dibble favors maximum transparency: “Seems like the right thing to do is to say, ‘Officer, I’m a concealed-carry permit holder, I have a firearm, I don’t want you to be surprised should you see it.’ ”

Then again, Dibble says, that’s apparently what Philando Castile was trying to do when he got shot by a police officer.

Source

Guns

Family Plans to Destroy Stockpile of Inherited Guns and Ammo Worth Millions, Lawyer Says

Family members set to inherit a stockpile of guns and ammunition, worth millions of dollars, plan to destroy the weapons “to send a message,” their attorney Daniel Brookman told ABC News today. “They want these instruments of death to be destroyed,” Brookman said. “They don’t want these weapons out on the street.”

Jeffrey A. Lash, of Pacific Palisades, California, died last summer of natural causes, but left behind a stockpile of more than 1,500 guns, 6.5 tons of ammunition and nearly $250,000 in cash, according to local ABC-owned station KABC-TV. All of the purchases were legally made, KABC reported.

The reason Lash amassed such a collection remains a complete mystery.

Lash did not leave behind a will, so his first cousins and closest relatives are set to inherit the stockpile, according to Brookman, although the inheritance is still in litigation.

The family members are taking a firm stand in deciding that they want nothing to do with the weapons, or the millions of dollars they could earn from selling them, Brookman explained.

“They don’t want them to contribute to the carnage,” he said. “Especially in light of San Bernardino and Orlando, as ordinary citizens they feel like a stand should be taken.”

He added: “The relatives are wanting to send a message not just to the nation at large, but also to our elected leaders.”

The family’s stance comes as Congress has been debating gun control measures over the past week.

On Monday, the Senate rejected four gun safety measures that came to the floor for voting. Today, Democrats organized a “sit-in” on the House floor to protest Republican inaction over gun violence.