bearingarms--2020-01-15--A Tale Of Two Governors And Gun Control

A Tale Of Two Governors And Gun Control

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is throwing some cold water on the idea of more gun control laws in the state after a GOP-controlled state Senate committee approved a truly bizarre bill that requires gun owners to fill out a government form , have it notarized , and keep it indefinitely whenever they sell a firearm from their private collection .
The bill also requires background checks be performed for every private sale of a firearm at a gun show , and DeSantis says he ’ s not sure the bill ’ s needed .
DeSantis appeared skeptical of the proposal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by requiring background checks and a three-day waiting period for firearms sold at gun shows , saying screenings are already being performed by “ anyone selling firearms at any of those tables.
” “ So , when they say that to me , I don ’ t really know what it is .
I know there are talking points , but the fact of the matter is that anyone who is selling firearms is going to have to do background checks , unless it ’ s just a private sale .
But you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ table at a gun show on a private sale , ” the Republican governor told reporters Tuesday .
Meanwhile , Virginia Governor Ralph Northam is expressing skepticism about Virginia gun owners lawfully carrying during next week ’ s Lobby Day , when tens of thousands are expected at the state capitol .
Northam ’ s declared a temporary emergency and banned guns from the capitol grounds .
Northam ’ s also added to the chaos by allowing a single entrance to the capitol grounds that will have to funnel the thousands of attendees @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two governor ’ s on today ’ s Bearing Arms Cam & Co. , as well as cover an armed citizen story out of St. Louis , a recidivist report and armed citizen story from Texas , and a woman ’ s lifesaving efforts in LaGrange , Illinois .
Don ’ t forget you can subscribe to the show at Apple Podcasts , Spotify , Soundcloud , and the Townhall.com podcast page , as well as Townhall Media on YouTube .
On tomorrow ’ s show we ’ ll have the latest 2A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the governor ’ s capitol gun ban .
Thanks as always for watching , listening , and spreading the word .
Cam Edwards has covered the 2nd Amendment for more than 15 years as a broadcast and online journalist , as well as the co-author of `` Heavy Lifting : Grow Up , Get a Job , Start a Family , and Other Manly Advice '' with Jim Geraghty .
He lives outside of Farmville , Virginia with his family .
https : //bearingarms.com/author/camedwards/

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is throwing some cold water on the idea of more gun control laws in the state after a GOP-controlled state Senate committee approved a truly bizarre bill that requires gun owners to fill out a government form, have it notarized, and keep it indefinitely whenever they sell a firearm from their private collection. The bill also requires background checks be performed for every private sale of a firearm at a gun show, and DeSantis says he’s not sure the bill’s needed.
DeSantis appeared skeptical of the proposal to close the gun-show “loophole” by requiring background checks and a three-day waiting period for firearms sold at gun shows, saying screenings are already being performed by “anyone selling firearms at any of those tables.” “So, when they say that to me, I don’t really know what it is. I know there are talking points, but the fact of the matter is that anyone who is selling firearms is going to have to do background checks, unless it’s just a private sale. But you’re not going to have a table at a gun show on a private sale,” the Republican governor told reporters Tuesday.
Meanwhile, Virginia Governor Ralph Northam is expressing skepticism about Virginia gun owners lawfully carrying during next week’s Lobby Day, when tens of thousands are expected at the state capitol. Northam’s declared a temporary emergency and banned guns from the capitol grounds. Northam’s also added to the chaos by allowing a single entrance to the capitol grounds that will have to funnel the thousands of attendees inside.
So, instead of ensuring that the tens of thousands of people expected can actually assemble on the capitol grounds, they're going to be jammed up for blocks around the capitol? What a truly bad idea. https://t.co/9hoPAHAArn — Cam Edwards (@CamEdwards) January 15, 2020
We compare and contrast the two governor’s on today’s Bearing Arms Cam & Co., as well as cover an armed citizen story out of St. Louis, a recidivist report and armed citizen story from Texas, and a woman’s lifesaving efforts in LaGrange, Illinois.
Don’t forget you can subscribe to the show at Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Soundcloud, and the Townhall.com podcast page, as well as Townhall Media on YouTube.
On tomorrow’s show we’ll have the latest 2A news out of Virginia, including reaction to the governor’s capitol gun ban. Thanks as always for watching, listening, and spreading the word.


bearingarms--2020-01-15--Jewish Community Now Taking "Never Again" VERY Seriously

In the wake of the Holocaust , Jews all over the world announced : “ Never again.
” They were never going to allow the genocide of their people .
They weren ’ t going to allow themselves to be herded into camps for systematic extermination .
It ’ s part of why they fought to form their own nation , so that no government could ever do that to them again .
The problem is , Jews are still targeted for some inane reason .
Anti-Semitism is still a thing , a fact made all the more apparent due @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people because they ’ re Jewish .
Now , though , it seems a large number of Jews are realizing that “ never again ” means being able to defend themselves .
There are a number of stories supporting that assertion , too .
I ’ ve written some here already .
I ’ ve also written about Jews calling for their fellow Jews to be armed .
Well , it seems a lot more listening .
Fear spawned by the Monsey machete attack has driven a surge in weapons training and self-defense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rely on prayer and charity for protection .
Although security measures were already on the rise in this large and diverse religious hamlet following synagogue attacks in Pittsburgh , Pennsylvania and Poway , California , an assault in their own neighborhood has changed their reality dramatically .
Advertisements for arms training and other means of protection began proliferating across social media immediately after the Hanukkah attack on a rabbi ’ s home .
“ The level of fear is very high and unfortunately it ’ s not going to go away very quickly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lifelong Monsey resident .
Feiner is going to a safety and empowerment meeting this weekend given by a nonprofit Jewish security organization .
That ’ s one of at least two training sessions planned in the community in the coming days .
However , it ’ s also easy to blow this kind of thing off .
After all , sure some are concerned , but that doesn ’ t mean it ’ s a thing with the Jewish community , now is it ?
Well , I wouldn ’ t be so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1,000 percent in New York ’ s Jewish community since the December 28 , 2019 , attack on Hasidic Jews in a rabbi ’ s home .
The Washington Examiner reports that the surge is clear in Rockland County , the very county in which the rabbi ’ s home was attacked .
The Rockland County Clerk ’ s office reported the “ nearly 1,000 percent increase in gun permit applications in the week following the Dec. 28 attack.
” Erik Melanson , owner of Rockland County ’ s Precision Gunsmiths , said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worried , especially the large Hasidic and Jewish community in Rockland County .
I have had rabbis come in .
Some of the rabbis already have concealed carry [ permits ] .
” A thousand percent is nothing to sneeze at .
There ’ s nothing about this that doesn ’ t fill me with joy .
However , there are also some political considerations that need to be discussed as well .
Many American Jews tend to side with Democrats for some reason .
However , Democrats are anti-gun as well as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not fans of people protecting themselves , which it seems a growing number of Jews are doing , even in very liberal parts of the nation .
In other words , this represents a potential point of division between Jewish Democrats and the rest of their party .
This could lead to two potential outcomes .
One is that Jews begin migrating over to the Republican Party in greater numbers .
After all , the GOP is typically the pro-gun party , which means they ’ re also pro-self-defense laws .
They ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to have the means to defend themselves from machete-wielding maniacs .
On the other hand , it ’ s also possible that newly pro-gun Jews can start to pressure the Democrats back from the ledge on gun control .
After all , even Democrats have to listen to their constituency eventually , and if that involves a growing number of pro-gun voices in their ranks , you ’ d think the Dems would eventually listen .
That ’ s by no means an exhaustive list of potential outcomes , of course , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see .
Regardless , more Jews are wanting to defend themselves and that will invariably lead more toward being pro-gun in general .
That ’ s a very good thing , not just for the Jewish community , but for everyone .

In the wake of the Holocaust, Jews all over the world announced: “Never again.” They were never going to allow the genocide of their people. They weren’t going to allow themselves to be herded into camps for systematic extermination. It’s part of why they fought to form their own nation, so that no government could ever do that to them again.
The problem is, Jews are still targeted for some inane reason. Anti-Semitism is still a thing, a fact made all the more apparent due to a number of recent attacks targeting people because they’re Jewish.
Now, though, it seems a large number of Jews are realizing that “never again” means being able to defend themselves.
There are a number of stories supporting that assertion, too. I’ve written some here already. I’ve also written about Jews calling for their fellow Jews to be armed.
Well, it seems a lot more listening.
Fear spawned by the Monsey machete attack has driven a surge in weapons training and self-defense courses among residents taught from birth to rely on prayer and charity for protection. Although security measures were already on the rise in this large and diverse religious hamlet following synagogue attacks in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Poway, California, an assault in their own neighborhood has changed their reality dramatically. Advertisements for arms training and other means of protection began proliferating across social media immediately after the Hanukkah attack on a rabbi’s home. “The level of fear is very high and unfortunately it’s not going to go away very quickly,” said Rivkie Feiner, a lifelong Monsey resident. Feiner is going to a safety and empowerment meeting this weekend given by a nonprofit Jewish security organization. That’s one of at least two training sessions planned in the community in the coming days.
That’s probably a good thing.
However, it’s also easy to blow this kind of thing off. After all, sure some are concerned, but that doesn’t mean it’s a thing with the Jewish community, now is it?
Well, I wouldn’t be so sure.
Gun permit applications surged nearly 1,000 percent in New York’s Jewish community since the December 28, 2019, attack on Hasidic Jews in a rabbi’s home. The Washington Examiner reports that the surge is clear in Rockland County, the very county in which the rabbi’s home was attacked. The Rockland County Clerk’s office reported the “nearly 1,000 percent increase in gun permit applications in the week following the Dec. 28 attack.” Erik Melanson, owner of Rockland County’s Precision Gunsmiths, said, “A lot of people are worried, especially the large Hasidic and Jewish community in Rockland County. I have had rabbis come in. Some of the rabbis already have concealed carry [permits].”
A thousand percent is nothing to sneeze at.
There’s nothing about this that doesn’t fill me with joy. However, there are also some political considerations that need to be discussed as well.
Many American Jews tend to side with Democrats for some reason. However, Democrats are anti-gun as well as anti-self-defense in general. They’re not fans of people protecting themselves, which it seems a growing number of Jews are doing, even in very liberal parts of the nation. In other words, this represents a potential point of division between Jewish Democrats and the rest of their party.
This could lead to two potential outcomes. One is that Jews begin migrating over to the Republican Party in greater numbers. After all, the GOP is typically the pro-gun party, which means they’re also pro-self-defense laws. They’re the party who wants Jewish citizens to have the means to defend themselves from machete-wielding maniacs.
On the other hand, it’s also possible that newly pro-gun Jews can start to pressure the Democrats back from the ledge on gun control. After all, even Democrats have to listen to their constituency eventually, and if that involves a growing number of pro-gun voices in their ranks, you’d think the Dems would eventually listen.
That’s by no means an exhaustive list of potential outcomes, of course, but those are two that I could easily see. Regardless, more Jews are wanting to defend themselves and that will invariably lead more toward being pro-gun in general. That’s a very good thing, not just for the Jewish community, but for everyone.
“Never again,” indeed.


bearingarms--2020-01-15--British Robbery Could Have Gone Differently In The U.S.

It ’ s easy for Americans to forget just how different Great Britain is from our own nation .
We share a language and were once one of their colonies and all that , but culturally we ’ re very , very different .
They like different TV shows and music–though , to be fair , there is some overlap from time to time .
They ’ re not like us in a whole lot of ways .
And guns are a primary example .
That ’ s not a point I forget , but I got a stark reminder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ robbery in England .
A robbery gang wearing balaclavas and clutching guns and a machete stormed a home in a quiet Teesside village .
Armed officers flooded the quiet cul-de-sac in Elwick village , near Hartlepool , on Tuesday night .
Cleveland Police say five men entered the property and threatened those inside the semi-detached house on Greenlea at around 8.30pm .
After brandishing the firearm and the large knife , the gang then got away in an Audi S3 vehicle belonging to the victims .
So a weapon-wielding gang busted into the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
You know how that goes here in the U.S. ?
Crook # 1 : Give me all your mon- BLAM !
BLAM !
BLAM !
As the homeowner draws his or her firearm and begins putting rounds into bad guys until they ’ re either dead or have run away .
Homeowner : Honey ?
Think we should call the police now ?
Homeowners spouse : Might as well .
We could use some help cleaning this mess .
We have examples of , more or less , this very scenario playing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; not just for the residents but also the community as a whole .
The bad guys sometimes survive , of course , but when they don ’ t then the community doesn ’ t have to pay for trials or confinement .
If they do , then they ’ re typically much easier for the police to find .
No , not everyone has a gun and can respond like that , but a lot of people do .
That means criminals have to consider just what they ’ re walking into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brazen assault on a home .
They have to wonder if they ’ re going to walk out of there or not .
And , frankly , if you put a few more in the ground when they tried , I suspect you ’ d have a lot fewer of them in the first place .
Yet British law didn ’ t give those homeowners above any kind of a choice .
They were disarmed as a matter of law .
They couldn ’ t fight back , even if they wanted to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ book .
Any law that makes people victims is a law that should simply not exist .
The ability to defend ourselves against any kind of attack is something we should all enjoy regardless of what country we call home .
Unfortunately , the Brits don ’ t feel the same way .
They restrict the basic human rights of their citizens to the point that I can ’ t even consider them a free country .
And that ’ s why I ’ m not giving up my guns any time soon @

It’s easy for Americans to forget just how different Great Britain is from our own nation. We share a language and were once one of their colonies and all that, but culturally we’re very, very different. They like different TV shows and music–though, to be fair, there is some overlap from time to time. They’re not like us in a whole lot of ways.
And guns are a primary example.
That’s not a point I forget, but I got a stark reminder when I read the report of this robbery in England.
A robbery gang wearing balaclavas and clutching guns and a machete stormed a home in a quiet Teesside village. Armed officers flooded the quiet cul-de-sac in Elwick village, near Hartlepool , on Tuesday night. Cleveland Police say five men entered the property and threatened those inside the semi-detached house on Greenlea at around 8.30pm. After brandishing the firearm and the large knife, the gang then got away in an Audi S3 vehicle belonging to the victims.
So a weapon-wielding gang busted into the house and robbed the homeowners at gunpoint.
You know how that goes here in the U.S.?
**Busts in the door** Crook #1: Give me all your mon- BLAM! BLAM! BLAM! As the homeowner draws his or her firearm and begins putting rounds into bad guys until they’re either dead or have run away. Homeowner: Honey? Think we should call the police now? Homeowners spouse: Might as well. We could use some help cleaning this mess.
We have examples of, more or less, this very scenario playing out. It always works out better; not just for the residents but also the community as a whole. The bad guys sometimes survive, of course, but when they don’t then the community doesn’t have to pay for trials or confinement. If they do, then they’re typically much easier for the police to find.
No, not everyone has a gun and can respond like that, but a lot of people do. That means criminals have to consider just what they’re walking into before they try that kind of a brazen assault on a home. They have to wonder if they’re going to walk out of there or not.
And, frankly, if you put a few more in the ground when they tried, I suspect you’d have a lot fewer of them in the first place.
Yet British law didn’t give those homeowners above any kind of a choice. They were disarmed as a matter of law. They couldn’t fight back, even if they wanted to, and that is inhumane in my book.
Any law that makes people victims is a law that should simply not exist. The ability to defend ourselves against any kind of attack is something we should all enjoy regardless of what country we call home.
Unfortunately, the Brits don’t feel the same way. They restrict the basic human rights of their citizens to the point that I can’t even consider them a free country.
And that’s why I’m not giving up my guns any time soon.


bearingarms--2020-01-15--Woman Tries Using Red Flag Law To Punish Cop Who Shot Her Son

From the beginning of the discussion on red flag laws , opponents have argued that some people will try to use the laws to punish people for whatever reason .
Unsurprisingly , we were called paranoid .
Proponents of such laws argued that things like that don ’ t really happen because apparently people aren ’ t people or something .
Regardless , proponents claim it ’ s simply not an issue worth worrying about .
Yet , here we have a prime example of someone doing just that .
A mother whose teenage son was shot and killed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seeking to have the officer ’ s weapons seized under Colorado ’ s new red flag gun control law .
The case is a critical test of the bounds of the controversial law .
Susan Holmes filed an extreme risk protection order petition against Cpl .
Philip Morris in Larimer County on Jan. 9 .
A hearing has been set for Thursday .
On her petition , Holmes also checked the box next to the question of whether this person has posed “ a credible threat of or the unlawful reckless use of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she wrote : “ Phil Morris used his firearm to recklessly & violently threaten and kill 19 year old Jeremy Holmes.
” The problem is that Jeremy Holmes was shot and killed by Cpl .
Morris in the line of duty in 2017 , a situation that ’ s been described as “ suicide by cop.
” But , how did Holmes file the order in the first place ?
After all , Colorado law states only police or family members can file an application for a red flag order , so how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see , she claimed they were family .
She said she had a baby with Morris .
No such baby exists .
Now , Morris is fortunate here .
He ’ s lucky because this is early enough in Colorado ’ s foray into red flag laws that such filings make news and , in this case , the media actually looked into it .
The judge will likely learn of Holmes ’ s lies and dismiss the case .
But what if there hadn ’ t been a news report ?
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for me and a lot of other people .
Without the media report–something you simply can ’ t assume will pop up on every case out there–Morris could potentially face losing his job .
And through this all , what happens to Holmes ?
The Colorado legislature removed a provision from the original bill allowing victims of malicious red flag filings to seek civil damages .
That means Holmes is going to walk away from this without even a slap on the wrist .
After all , there ’ s no penalty in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though the judge might decide to slap her with a contempt of court charge .
And all this is the best-case scenario .
It ’ s also possible that the judge won ’ t even see the news reports and actually grant the order .
That means Morris won ’ t be able to do his job .
I ’ d like to think that his department would understand under the circumstances , but that ’ s not a given .
Pro-red flag folks will still try to tell me that this is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this is an isolated incident or that it ’ s simply not a big deal .
Well , I ’ m sorry , but the law shouldn ’ t be so easy to use as a cudgel to punish your enemies with .

From the beginning of the discussion on red flag laws, opponents have argued that some people will try to use the laws to punish people for whatever reason. Unsurprisingly, we were called paranoid. Proponents of such laws argued that things like that don’t really happen because apparently people aren’t people or something.
Regardless, proponents claim it’s simply not an issue worth worrying about.
Yet, here we have a prime example of someone doing just that.
A mother whose teenage son was shot and killed by a Colorado State University police officer is seeking to have the officer’s weapons seized under Colorado’s new red flag gun control law. The case is a critical test of the bounds of the controversial law. Susan Holmes filed an extreme risk protection order petition against Cpl. Philip Morris in Larimer County on Jan. 9. A hearing has been set for Thursday. … On her petition, Holmes also checked the box next to the question of whether this person has posed “a credible threat of or the unlawful reckless use of a firearm.” In her explanation, she wrote: “Phil Morris used his firearm to recklessly & violently threaten and kill 19 year old Jeremy Holmes.”
The problem is that Jeremy Holmes was shot and killed by Cpl. Morris in the line of duty in 2017, a situation that’s been described as “suicide by cop.”
But, how did Holmes file the order in the first place? After all, Colorado law states only police or family members can file an application for a red flag order, so how did Holmes file against Morris?
That’s easy. She lied.
You see, she claimed they were family. She said she had a baby with Morris. No such baby exists.
Now, Morris is fortunate here. He’s lucky because this is early enough in Colorado’s foray into red flag laws that such filings make news and, in this case, the media actually looked into it. The judge will likely learn of Holmes’s lies and dismiss the case.
But what if there hadn’t been a news report?
This is a huge part of the problem for me and a lot of other people. Without the media report–something you simply can’t assume will pop up on every case out there–Morris could potentially face losing his job.
And through this all, what happens to Holmes?
Nothing.
The Colorado legislature removed a provision from the original bill allowing victims of malicious red flag filings to seek civil damages. That means Holmes is going to walk away from this without even a slap on the wrist. After all, there’s no penalty in place for lying on the order, though the judge might decide to slap her with a contempt of court charge.
And all this is the best-case scenario. It’s also possible that the judge won’t even see the news reports and actually grant the order. That means Morris won’t be able to do his job. I’d like to think that his department would understand under the circumstances, but that’s not a given.
Pro-red flag folks will still try to tell me that this is a small price to pay or that this is an isolated incident or that it’s simply not a big deal. Well, I’m sorry, but the law shouldn’t be so easy to use as a cudgel to punish your enemies with.


bearingarms--2020-01-15--As Northam Enacts Capitol Gun Ban, More VA Towns Back 2A Resolutions

Even as Virginia Governor Ralph Northam is set to declare a temporary emergency in the state of Virginia in order to declare the state capitol grounds a gun free zone , more and more Virginia towns and cities are declaring their locales Second Amendment Sanctuaries .
There are now at least 130 counties , towns , and cities in Virginia that have taken the step , including several on Tuesday .
Council members in Portsmouth voted 4-3 Tuesday evening to declare the city a “ Second Amendment Constitutional City ” with a crowd of gun owners in attendance .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Second Amendment but all of our rights .
They are natural rights .
They ’ re God-given , not made by man , and no man can take them away , ” said Les Gilliam , who attended the meeting .
Gilliam had been at City Hall since 5 p.m. , two hours before the meeting started .
Other residents such as Sandra Walsh came later in the evening .
She was with her family .
“ It ’ s like World War II .
They came for somebody else and nobody helped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and nobody , then they came for us and there was nobody there , and I want to be there , ” said Walsh .
She says her granddaughter is expecting a child soon and says speaking up will help preserve the rights she and others enjoy now — for her future great-grandchild .
“ If I get a seat , I ’ ll stay .
Even at my advanced stage I have a voice , and I ’ m not giving up.
” Sandra Walsh gets it , and I ’ m @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
There were plenty of gun owners using their voices in Hopewell , Virginia on Tuesday evening as well .
City council members voted 6-1 to adopt a pro-Second Amendment resolution as dozens of supporters of the resolution turned out .
Opponents of the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement claim that it ’ s just a rural phenomenon , but with some of the states biggest cities like Virginia Beach , Chesapeake , and Portsmouth signing on , clearly the movement isn ’ t contained only to remote counties and out-of-the-way locales .
There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the city council in Lynchburg , Virginia voted 5-2 to reject a Second Amendment sanctuary resolution .
Hundreds of Second Amendment supporters spoke for six hours urging the council to adopt the resolution , but in the end most of the council members , including the mayor , voted against the measure .
As disappointing as that setback was , the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement is still alive and well in Virginia , and despite the repeated attempts by anti-gun advocates to portray the movement as dangerous , the hundreds of supporters who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ night were passionate and peaceful in their opposition to Ralph Northam ’ s gun control agenda .

Even as Virginia Governor Ralph Northam is set to declare a temporary emergency in the state of Virginia in order to declare the state capitol grounds a gun free zone, more and more Virginia towns and cities are declaring their locales Second Amendment Sanctuaries.
There are now at least 130 counties, towns, and cities in Virginia that have taken the step, including several on Tuesday.
Council members in Portsmouth voted 4-3 Tuesday evening to declare the city a “Second Amendment Constitutional City” with a crowd of gun owners in attendance.
“Tonight is about supporting not only the Second Amendment but all of our rights. They are natural rights. They’re God-given, not made by man, and no man can take them away,” said Les Gilliam, who attended the meeting. Gilliam had been at City Hall since 5 p.m., two hours before the meeting started. Other residents such as Sandra Walsh came later in the evening. She was with her family. “It’s like World War II. They came for somebody else and nobody helped; then they came for somebody else and nobody, then they came for us and there was nobody there, and I want to be there,” said Walsh. She says her granddaughter is expecting a child soon and says speaking up will help preserve the rights she and others enjoy now — for her future great-grandchild. “If I get a seat, I’ll stay. Even at my advanced stage I have a voice, and I’m not giving up.”
Sandra Walsh gets it, and I’m glad she’s using her voice.
There were plenty of gun owners using their voices in Hopewell, Virginia on Tuesday evening as well. City council members voted 6-1 to adopt a pro-Second Amendment resolution as dozens of supporters of the resolution turned out.
Opponents of the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement claim that it’s just a rural phenomenon, but with some of the states biggest cities like Virginia Beach, Chesapeake, and Portsmouth signing on, clearly the movement isn’t contained only to remote counties and out-of-the-way locales.
There was a setback on Tuesday night as the city council in Lynchburg, Virginia voted 5-2 to reject a Second Amendment sanctuary resolution. Hundreds of Second Amendment supporters spoke for six hours urging the council to adopt the resolution, but in the end most of the council members, including the mayor, voted against the measure.
As disappointing as that setback was, the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement is still alive and well in Virginia, and despite the repeated attempts by anti-gun advocates to portray the movement as dangerous, the hundreds of supporters who showed up at city council meetings last night were passionate and peaceful in their opposition to Ralph Northam’s gun control agenda.


bearingarms--2020-01-15--Florida Governor Fires Back At Gun Control Proposal

The state of Florida took on a slew of new gun control laws in the wake of Parkland , but the voters were clearly less than pleased with that .
After all , they elected a pro-gun governor instead of an anti-gun Democrat .
In fact , the only Democrat who won was going toe-to-toe with a scandal-ridden opponent that lost on general principle .
The people of Florida aren ’ t fans of gun control .
Yet that didn ’ t stop a proposal from gaining a bit of steam in the state senate .
Steam that the governor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the bill recently .
He wasn ’ t alone .
A day after a committee unanimously signed off on one of Senate President Bill Galvano ’ s top priorities , Gov .
Ron DeSantis and House Speaker Jose Oliva expressed skepticism Tuesday about the sweeping gun-control measure .
The proposal ( SB 7028 ) would close the gun-show “ loophole , ” create a record-keeping system for private gun sales and set aside $ 5 million to establish a “ statewide strategy for violence prevention , ” among other things .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s “ red-flag law , ” which was included in a wide-ranging law passed shortly after the Feb. 14 , 2018 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland .
DeSantis appeared skeptical of the proposal to close the gun-show “ loophole ” by requiring background checks and a three-day waiting period for firearms sold at gun shows , saying screenings are already being performed by “ anyone selling firearms at any of those tables.
” “ So , when they say that to me , I don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know there are talking points , but the fact of the matter is that anyone who is selling firearms is going to have to do background checks , unless it ’ s just a private sale .
But you ’ re not going to have a table at a gun show on a private sale , ” the Republican governor told reporters Tuesday .
Oliva seemed even more dubious , telling reporters that the House is “ always very careful when we in any way start to infringe on those things that people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is , Galvano might have an “ R ” after his name , but it ’ s also quite clear that the bill he ’ s decided is one of his “ top priorities ” isn ’ t going to go anywhere .
That ’ s good news because , as Governor DeSantis notes , those people with tables at gun shows aren ’ t selling guns without background checks .
The “ gun show loophole ” is a myth cooked up by anti-gunners who want to regulate each and every transfer of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a real thing and , as such , doesn ’ t represent a real threat .
Galvano is grabbing at guns , something Republicans aren ’ t supposed to do .
Luckily for the people of Florida , despite Galvano ’ s considerable power , it ’ s unlikely this bill will get passed .
If the speaker of the house and the governor are both against it , there ’ s not a lot of hope for the bill .
Frankly , I don ’ t even expect it to pass a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s position .
He may have considerable power , but no one is going to piss off the folks back home just to appease the leadership .

The state of Florida took on a slew of new gun control laws in the wake of Parkland, but the voters were clearly less than pleased with that. After all, they elected a pro-gun governor instead of an anti-gun Democrat. In fact, the only Democrat who won was going toe-to-toe with a scandal-ridden opponent that lost on general principle.
The people of Florida aren’t fans of gun control.
Yet that didn’t stop a proposal from gaining a bit of steam in the state senate. Steam that the governor decided to cool down with his take on the bill recently. He wasn’t alone.
A day after a committee unanimously signed off on one of Senate President Bill Galvano’s top priorities, Gov. Ron DeSantis and House Speaker Jose Oliva expressed skepticism Tuesday about the sweeping gun-control measure. The proposal (SB 7028) would close the gun-show “loophole,” create a record-keeping system for private gun sales and set aside $5 million to establish a “statewide strategy for violence prevention,” among other things. The measure would also expand on the state’s “red-flag law,” which was included in a wide-ranging law passed shortly after the Feb. 14, 2018 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland. DeSantis appeared skeptical of the proposal to close the gun-show “loophole” by requiring background checks and a three-day waiting period for firearms sold at gun shows, saying screenings are already being performed by “anyone selling firearms at any of those tables.” “So, when they say that to me, I don’t really know what it is. I know there are talking points, but the fact of the matter is that anyone who is selling firearms is going to have to do background checks, unless it’s just a private sale. But you’re not going to have a table at a gun show on a private sale,” the Republican governor told reporters Tuesday. Oliva seemed even more dubious, telling reporters that the House is “always very careful when we in any way start to infringe on those things that people consider their constitutional rights.”
The truth is, Galvano might have an “R” after his name, but it’s also quite clear that the bill he’s decided is one of his “top priorities” isn’t going to go anywhere.
That’s good news because, as Governor DeSantis notes, those people with tables at gun shows aren’t selling guns without background checks. The “gun show loophole” is a myth cooked up by anti-gunners who want to regulate each and every transfer of a firearm. It’s not a real thing and, as such, doesn’t represent a real threat.
Galvano is grabbing at guns, something Republicans aren’t supposed to do.
Luckily for the people of Florida, despite Galvano’s considerable power, it’s unlikely this bill will get passed. If the speaker of the house and the governor are both against it, there’s not a lot of hope for the bill. Frankly, I don’t even expect it to pass a vote in the senate, despite Galvano’s position. He may have considerable power, but no one is going to piss off the folks back home just to appease the leadership.


bearingarms--2020-01-15--VA Dems Introduce Ammo Tax, Partial Hunting Ban

Friday is the deadline for lawmakers to file legislation in Virginia , which means we have three more days for legislators to introduce even more bills attacking the right to keep and bear arms , as well as the longstanding traditions of rural Virginians .
Some of the latest bills to be introduced do exactly that .
HB 960 , for instance , would impose a new tax on firearms and ammunition in the state , with the proceeds going to hire school counselors and psychologists .
I ’ m certainly not opposed to more mental health counselors in our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the entire community should be paying for , not just gun owners .
Besides , since the goal of gun control advocates like Del .
Mark Levine is to reduce the number of legal gun owners , it seems odd that he would try to raise the funds for additional counselors by tapping into what he hopes will be a declining revenue stream .
My suspicion is that this has less to do with raising money for school counselors and more to do with making it more expensive to exercise a constitutional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sure to cause controversy in rural Virginia is SB 886 , which would put so many restrictions on hunting with dogs that it would be be impossible to comply .
From the bill ’ s summary : Prohibits a dog owner from allowing his dog to run at large on the property of another after the landowner has given notice to the dog owner to keep dogs off the property .
The bill provides for a civil penalty of $ 100 per dog enforced by animal control , conservation police , and other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 250 per occurrence for a second or subsequent occurrence .
The bill contains an exception to the penalty if the dog ’ s owner or custodian releases the dog on property measuring 500 acres or more that is owned or leased by him or on which he has written permission to hunt .
The bill provides that the release of a hunting dog on a public road or on either side of such road within 100 feet of the centerline is a Class 4 misdemeanor .
The bill also requires a hunter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , when going on prohibited lands to retrieve his dog , to obtain the permission of the owner or occupant of the property before entering such prohibited lands .
A violation of such is a Class 4 misdemeanor .
Finally , the bill makes it a Class 4 misdemeanor to discharge a firearm or bow within 75 feet of either side of the centerline of a road .
Current law prohibits such discharge in or across any road , within the right-of-way thereof , or in a street of any city or town @ @ @ @ @ @ @ There are lots of guys who hunt with dogs where I live , and if you ’ re one of them , it ’ s absolutely a way of life .
I ’ m not , so it ’ s something I tolerate , even when their hounds come baying across my fields and get distracted by my goats or chase after my chickens .
My attitude is I chose to move here , and this has been a way of life far longer than I ’ ve owned my farm .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every now and then I do end up going out and talking to a hunter parked on my driveway or at the edge of my property .
Other rural residents are not as tolerant .
They can ’ t stand the dogs running through their woods and pastures , and they get concerned when they drive by hunters on the side of the road who are waiting for their dogs to drive a deer out into the open shoulder where they can take a shot .
It ’ s a divisive issue in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ northern Virginia Democrat Dave Marsden introduced the bill instead of a more rural representative will only deepen the divide .
Back in 2017 , a similar measure offered by the Republican Speaker of the House was narrowly defeated in a 48-47 vote .
If I had to hazard a guess , I ’ d say this year the proposal is likely to pass , despite the bill ’ s inability to address several issues , including what happens to the thousands of hunting dogs in the state if you can no longer hunt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see more bills like this dropping in the next couple of days as the filing deadline approaches .
In the meantime , if you ’ re a Virginia gun owner make sure you ’ re keeping up the contact with your state senator and delegate and urging them to oppose Ralph Northam ’ s agenda targeting the state ’ s legal gun owners .

Friday is the deadline for lawmakers to file legislation in Virginia, which means we have three more days for legislators to introduce even more bills attacking the right to keep and bear arms, as well as the longstanding traditions of rural Virginians.
Some of the latest bills to be introduced do exactly that. HB 960, for instance, would impose a new tax on firearms and ammunition in the state, with the proceeds going to hire school counselors and psychologists. I’m certainly not opposed to more mental health counselors in our schools, but this seems like something that the entire community should be paying for, not just gun owners.
Besides, since the goal of gun control advocates like Del. Mark Levine is to reduce the number of legal gun owners, it seems odd that he would try to raise the funds for additional counselors by tapping into what he hopes will be a declining revenue stream. My suspicion is that this has less to do with raising money for school counselors and more to do with making it more expensive to exercise a constitutional right.
Another bill that’s sure to cause controversy in rural Virginia is SB 886, which would put so many restrictions on hunting with dogs that it would be be impossible to comply. From the bill’s summary:
Prohibits a dog owner from allowing his dog to run at large on the property of another after the landowner has given notice to the dog owner to keep dogs off the property. The bill provides for a civil penalty of $100 per dog enforced by animal control, conservation police, and other law-enforcement officers and a civil penalty of $250 per occurrence for a second or subsequent occurrence. The bill contains an exception to the penalty if the dog’s owner or custodian releases the dog on property measuring 500 acres or more that is owned or leased by him or on which he has written permission to hunt. The bill provides that the release of a hunting dog on a public road or on either side of such road within 100 feet of the centerline is a Class 4 misdemeanor. The bill also requires a hunter of game other than fox or raccoon, when going on prohibited lands to retrieve his dog, to obtain the permission of the owner or occupant of the property before entering such prohibited lands. A violation of such is a Class 4 misdemeanor. Finally, the bill makes it a Class 4 misdemeanor to discharge a firearm or bow within 75 feet of either side of the centerline of a road. Current law prohibits such discharge in or across any road, within the right-of-way thereof, or in a street of any city or town. The bill includes technical changes.
There are lots of guys who hunt with dogs where I live, and if you’re one of them, it’s absolutely a way of life. I’m not, so it’s something I tolerate, even when their hounds come baying across my fields and get distracted by my goats or chase after my chickens. My attitude is I chose to move here, and this has been a way of life far longer than I’ve owned my farm. I have my no trespassing signs, but every now and then I do end up going out and talking to a hunter parked on my driveway or at the edge of my property.
Other rural residents are not as tolerant. They can’t stand the dogs running through their woods and pastures, and they get concerned when they drive by hunters on the side of the road who are waiting for their dogs to drive a deer out into the open shoulder where they can take a shot.
It’s a divisive issue in rural Virginia, and the fact that northern Virginia Democrat Dave Marsden introduced the bill instead of a more rural representative will only deepen the divide. Back in 2017, a similar measure offered by the Republican Speaker of the House was narrowly defeated in a 48-47 vote. If I had to hazard a guess, I’d say this year the proposal is likely to pass, despite the bill’s inability to address several issues, including what happens to the thousands of hunting dogs in the state if you can no longer hunt with dogs?
We may very well see more bills like this dropping in the next couple of days as the filing deadline approaches. In the meantime, if you’re a Virginia gun owner make sure you’re keeping up the contact with your state senator and delegate and urging them to oppose Ralph Northam’s agenda targeting the state’s legal gun owners.


bearingarms--2020-01-15--Plans For 3D-Printed Guns May Soon Be Back Online

To me , one of the most fascinating advancements in my lifetime has to be the 3D printer .
The idea of anyone being able to own a device that will fabricate a three-dimensional object out of just strings of plastic is kind of a game-changer .
Suddenly , people can make their own parts for various things , fabricate their own prototypes , they can do all sorts of things with it .
Perhaps the coolest , though , is that we can now manufacture our own firearms , either in part or in whole .
thanks to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ upset that those plans were ever online .
They ’ re going to be even more upset if this plan goes through and they ’ re back online .
A federal rule change could soon make it legal to put 3D printed gun blueprints — first introduced by a Texas man — back online after being blocked from the internet twice .
The Trump administration has proposed transferring authority of some small arms and ammunition exports from the U.S. Department of State to the Commerce Department — a move that would effectively relax @ @ @ @ @ @ @ printed gun blueprints from being posted online .
The Trump administration gave the requisite 30-day notice of the rule change to Congress on Nov. 13 , meaning the White House could announce the transfer of authority any day , ending a long fought battle by Austin-resident Cody Wilson to allow the blueprints to be made publicly available .
Meanwhile , gun control activists warn that the change could make firearms available to dangerous people who would otherwise be prevented from purchasing a gun .
I hate to break it to those people , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their hands on guns for decades without having to pass a background check .
The P.A .
Luty backyard submachine gun rendered gun control effectively null and void years ago .
That ship has long set sail .
Besides , 3D printer files are already in the wild .
Tons of people have them , myself included , who don ’ t really have any interest in building a firearm .
I ’ ve got them in case that changes and the anti-gun scolds successfully keep those plans off the internet .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want people like you or me to be able to build a gun without their permission .
They don ’ t want us doing anything without their permission .
They ’ d make us raise our hands like little children before going to the bathroom if they thought they could get away with it .
Yet technology has made them obsolete and they know it .
We don ’ t have to ask for permission to build a gun that ’ s perfectly legal to own .
If I had the required licenses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ requiring background checks and FFL transfers , none of these people would care all that much .
But law-abiding citizens being able to build these for their own use ?
That ’ s heresy in their minds .
Again , criminals have been able to do this for years and they won ’ t stop .
So why stop the law-abiding citizens of this great land from building otherwise legal guns ?

To me, one of the most fascinating advancements in my lifetime has to be the 3D printer. The idea of anyone being able to own a device that will fabricate a three-dimensional object out of just strings of plastic is kind of a game-changer. Suddenly, people can make their own parts for various things, fabricate their own prototypes, they can do all sorts of things with it.
Perhaps the coolest, though, is that we can now manufacture our own firearms, either in part or in whole. thanks to the technology.
Yet some people are very upset that those plans were ever online. They’re going to be even more upset if this plan goes through and they’re back online.
A federal rule change could soon make it legal to put 3D printed gun blueprints — first introduced by a Texas man — back online after being blocked from the internet twice. The Trump administration has proposed transferring authority of some small arms and ammunition exports from the U.S. Department of State to the Commerce Department — a move that would effectively relax regulations that have previously prevented the 3D printed gun blueprints from being posted online. The Trump administration gave the requisite 30-day notice of the rule change to Congress on Nov. 13, meaning the White House could announce the transfer of authority any day, ending a long fought battle by Austin-resident Cody Wilson to allow the blueprints to be made publicly available. Meanwhile, gun control activists warn that the change could make firearms available to dangerous people who would otherwise be prevented from purchasing a gun.
I hate to break it to those people, but criminals have been able to get their hands on guns for decades without having to pass a background check. The P.A. Luty backyard submachine gun rendered gun control effectively null and void years ago. That ship has long set sail.
Besides, 3D printer files are already in the wild. Tons of people have them, myself included, who don’t really have any interest in building a firearm. I’ve got them in case that changes and the anti-gun scolds successfully keep those plans off the internet.
The truth is, they don’t want people like you or me to be able to build a gun without their permission. They don’t want us doing anything without their permission. They’d make us raise our hands like little children before going to the bathroom if they thought they could get away with it.
Yet technology has made them obsolete and they know it. We don’t have to ask for permission to build a gun that’s perfectly legal to own. If I had the required licenses and build 3D-printed guns for sale, requiring background checks and FFL transfers, none of these people would care all that much. But law-abiding citizens being able to build these for their own use? That’s heresy in their minds.
Again, criminals have been able to do this for years and they won’t stop.
So why stop the law-abiding citizens of this great land from building otherwise legal guns?


bearingarms--2020-01-16--VCDL Expected To Seek Injunction Blocking Northam's Gun Ban

According to Phillip Van Cleave , president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League , attorneys are likely to file suit as early as Thursday to seek an injunction blocking Governor Ralph Northam ’ s gun ban on the grounds of the state capitol during next Monday ’ s Lobby Day , which is expected to draw tens of thousands of gun owners to the state capitol .
Back in 2012 , Virginia lawmakers approved a measure that limits the governor ’ s ability to regulate any aspect of gun ownership during a state of emergency .
Here ’ s what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chapter is to be construed to : ( 3 ) Empower the Governor , any political subdivision , or any other governmental authority to in any way limit or prohibit the rights of the people to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by Article I , Section 13 of the Constitution of Virginia or the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States , including the otherwise lawful possession , carrying , transportation , sale , or transfer of firearms except to the extent necessary to ensure public safety in any place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Governor , any political subdivision of the Commonwealth , or any other governmental entity as an emergency shelter or for the purpose of sheltering persons ; So , the only place where firearms can be banned by the governor in a state of emergency are “ places or facilities ” designated as an emergency shelter for the purpose of sheltering persons .
In his proclamation declaring a state of emergency , Northam referred to Capitol Square as a shelter .
To provide for the shelter and safety of state employees who work on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those who come to peacefully assemble , and consistent with the General Assembly ’ s prohibition on weapons in the Virginia State Capitol and the Pocahontas Buildings , and Executive Order 50 ( McAuliffe ) , which prohibits firearms in offices occupied by executive branch agencies , no weapons , including firearms , may be carried or possessed on any land , real property , or improvements owned by the Commonwealth of Virginia within the area bounded by Broad Street , Ninth Street , Bank Street and Governor Street in the City of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any Commonwealth-owned parking lots for Virginia ’ s Department of Transportation , the Madison Building , the Monroe Building , the Patrick Henry Building , Washington Building , the Jefferson Building , and the Oliver Hill Building .
I ’ m not an attorney , but even the original co-author of the 2012 law thinks Northam is going beyond what the law allows .
Watson says he ’ s concerned that there won ’ t be enough time to get this case before a judge .
If the VCDL does decide to seek @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ d need to do it fairly quickly Thursday morning in hopes of getting an emergency hearing on Friday .
If the ban remains in place , Van Cleave says he believes the Capitol Police will do their best to ensure as easy an entrance to the capitol grounds as possible .
There will be one entrance point with multiple magnetometers set up , and the Capitol Police will allow about 10,000 inside the space where guns are banned .
Just beyond the capitol grounds on Ninth Street , however , there will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so those who wish to lawfully carry are being asked to do so there .
Phillip Van Cleave is scheduled to join me on Bearing Arms ’ Cam & Co. later today , and hopefully we ’ ll learn more about any litigation as well as the latest plans for Monday morning .

According to Phillip Van Cleave, president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, attorneys are likely to file suit as early as Thursday to seek an injunction blocking Governor Ralph Northam’s gun ban on the grounds of the state capitol during next Monday’s Lobby Day, which is expected to draw tens of thousands of gun owners to the state capitol.
Back in 2012, Virginia lawmakers approved a measure that limits the governor’s ability to regulate any aspect of gun ownership during a state of emergency. Here’s what the law says.
Nothing in this chapter is to be construed to: (3) Empower the Governor, any political subdivision, or any other governmental authority to in any way limit or prohibit the rights of the people to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by Article I, Section 13 of the Constitution of Virginia or the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, including the otherwise lawful possession, carrying, transportation, sale, or transfer of firearms except to the extent necessary to ensure public safety in any place or facility designated or used by the Governor, any political subdivision of the Commonwealth, or any other governmental entity as an emergency shelter or for the purpose of sheltering persons;
So, the only place where firearms can be banned by the governor in a state of emergency are “places or facilities” designated as an emergency shelter for the purpose of sheltering persons. In his proclamation declaring a state of emergency, Northam referred to Capitol Square as a shelter.
To provide for the shelter and safety of state employees who work on or near the Virginia State Capitol and those who come to peacefully assemble, and consistent with the General Assembly’s prohibition on weapons in the Virginia State Capitol and the Pocahontas Buildings, and Executive Order 50 (McAuliffe), which prohibits firearms in offices occupied by executive branch agencies, no weapons, including firearms, may be carried or possessed on any land, real property, or improvements owned by the Commonwealth of Virginia within the area bounded by Broad Street, Ninth Street, Bank Street and Governor Street in the City of Richmond, Virginia, as well as any Commonwealth-owned parking lots for Virginia’s Department of Transportation, the Madison Building, the Monroe Building, the Patrick Henry Building, Washington Building, the Jefferson Building, and the Oliver Hill Building.
I’m not an attorney, but even the original co-author of the 2012 law thinks Northam is going beyond what the law allows.
So the Governor has declared the Capitol Grounds a “Shelter” in order to get around the law. I’m curious how many times a 14 acre plot of land has been designated an emergency shelter? — Mike Watson_Virginia (@MikeWatson_VA) January 15, 2020
Watson says he’s concerned that there won’t be enough time to get this case before a judge. If the VCDL does decide to seek an injunction, as expected, they’d need to do it fairly quickly Thursday morning in hopes of getting an emergency hearing on Friday.
If the ban remains in place, Van Cleave says he believes the Capitol Police will do their best to ensure as easy an entrance to the capitol grounds as possible. There will be one entrance point with multiple magnetometers set up, and the Capitol Police will allow about 10,000 inside the space where guns are banned. Just beyond the capitol grounds on Ninth Street, however, there will be no ban on firearms, and so those who wish to lawfully carry are being asked to do so there.
Phillip Van Cleave is scheduled to join me on Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co. later today, and hopefully we’ll learn more about any litigation as well as the latest plans for Monday morning.


bearingarms--2020-01-17--VA Congressman Rips Northam's Lobby Day Gun Ban

Congressman Denver Riggleman , who represents Virginia ’ s 5th district that stretches from Charlottesville south to the Virginia/North Carolina border , says he ’ s concerned about Governor Northam ’ s declaration of a temporary state of emergency and a ban on firearms in Capitol Square in advance of Monday ’ s Lobby Day activities .
Speaking to WVIR-TV , Riggleman said that the governor has a duty to err on the side of the constitutional rights of Virginia residents .
“ Yeah , there ’ s an emotional aspect of this – it ’ s awful .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the side of constitutional rights and know that there are bad people out there .
I know that ’ s not the politically correct thing to say , especially in Charlottesville .
But when you go down in Buckingham , when you go down in the south side , you don ’ t have gun violence .
You have people who hunt every day , love their kids , protect America and as a constitutionalist , it ’ s very difficult for me not to support those who say this is an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state house.
” Full disclosure ; Denver Riggleman is my representative in Congress , and I ’ ve generally been pleased with what he ’ s done while in office .
He knows full well that his comments are going to drive gun control activists in the Charlottesville area to hammer him , but he ’ s still speaking out in defense of his constituents and their constitutional rights .
Riggleman is right about the people in Buckingham County and Virginia ’ s southside .
I ’ ve spoken to dozens of residents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ past two months , and none of them are calling for civil war or the storming of the governor ’ s mansion .
They ’ re simply asking to be left alone , and they ’ re telling lawmakers in Richmond that they have no plans of complying with any unconstitutional gun control laws .
Their efforts in civil engagement may be starting to pay off .
The Associated Press ran a little-noticed story a couple of days ago highlighting the fact that several Democrats in Virginia ’ s state senate are expressing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a proposed ban on so-called “ assault firearms ” , magazines that can accept more than ten rounds , and suppressors .
Some top Virginia Democratic senators are expressing reservations about plans to ban assault weapons – a key part of the new Democratic majority ’ s gun-control proposals and one that ’ s drawn fierce resistance from gun-rights advocates .
“ A lot of people don ’ t really understand assault weapons and how complicated the issue really is , ” said Democratic Sen. John Edwards .
“ It ’ s going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a way to do it .
But we ’ re studying it , that ’ s all I can say.
” He ’ s one of at least four moderate senators – the others are Sens .
Chap Petersen , Creigh Deeds and Lynwood Lewis – who are skeptical of plans to ban assault weapons .
None of them has ruled out voting for an assault weapon ban , but all have said they aren ’ t impressed with any of the drafts of proposed bans they ’ ve seen .
“ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that makes sense yet , ” Deeds said .
Ralph Northam doesn ’ t need all four senators to sign off , but with a narrow 21-19 Democrat majority in the state senate , he needs at least two of the “ moderate ” Democrats to get on board .
Senator Edwards is the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee , which has approved four gun control bills so far , though the senate ’ s gun ban bill was killed in committee at the request of the sponsor .
Today is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ introduced for this legislative session .
We ’ ll see soon enough if another gun ban bill is filed , but in the meantime , I hope the good people of Virginia that Rep. Riggleman talked about continue to write , email , and call their lawmakers urging them to oppose Northam ’ s anti-gun and anti-gun owner agenda .

Congressman Denver Riggleman, who represents Virginia’s 5th district that stretches from Charlottesville south to the Virginia/North Carolina border, says he’s concerned about Governor Northam’s declaration of a temporary state of emergency and a ban on firearms in Capitol Square in advance of Monday’s Lobby Day activities.
Speaking to WVIR-TV, Riggleman said that the governor has a duty to err on the side of the constitutional rights of Virginia residents.
“Yeah, there’s an emotional aspect of this – it’s awful. But I think you always have to err on the side of constitutional rights and know that there are bad people out there. I know that’s not the politically correct thing to say, especially in Charlottesville. But when you go down in Buckingham, when you go down in the south side, you don’t have gun violence. You have people who hunt every day, love their kids, protect America and as a constitutionalist, it’s very difficult for me not to support those who say this is an overreach by the new administration at the state house.”
Full disclosure; Denver Riggleman is my representative in Congress, and I’ve generally been pleased with what he’s done while in office. He knows full well that his comments are going to drive gun control activists in the Charlottesville area to hammer him, but he’s still speaking out in defense of his constituents and their constitutional rights.
Riggleman is right about the people in Buckingham County and Virginia’s southside. I’ve spoken to dozens of residents at various county supervisors meetings over the past two months, and none of them are calling for civil war or the storming of the governor’s mansion. They’re simply asking to be left alone, and they’re telling lawmakers in Richmond that they have no plans of complying with any unconstitutional gun control laws.
Their efforts in civil engagement may be starting to pay off. The Associated Press ran a little-noticed story a couple of days ago highlighting the fact that several Democrats in Virginia’s state senate are expressing reservations and concern about HB 961, a proposed ban on so-called “assault firearms”, magazines that can accept more than ten rounds, and suppressors.
Some top Virginia Democratic senators are expressing reservations about plans to ban assault weapons – a key part of the new Democratic majority’s gun-control proposals and one that’s drawn fierce resistance from gun-rights advocates. “A lot of people don’t really understand assault weapons and how complicated the issue really is,” said Democratic Sen. John Edwards. “It’s going to be very difficult to figure out a way to do it. But we’re studying it, that’s all I can say.” He’s one of at least four moderate senators – the others are Sens. Chap Petersen, Creigh Deeds and Lynwood Lewis – who are skeptical of plans to ban assault weapons. None of them has ruled out voting for an assault weapon ban, but all have said they aren’t impressed with any of the drafts of proposed bans they’ve seen. “I’ve not seen an enforceable bill that makes sense yet,” Deeds said.
Ralph Northam doesn’t need all four senators to sign off, but with a narrow 21-19 Democrat majority in the state senate, he needs at least two of the “moderate” Democrats to get on board. Senator Edwards is the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which has approved four gun control bills so far, though the senate’s gun ban bill was killed in committee at the request of the sponsor.
Today is the final day for new legislation to be introduced for this legislative session. We’ll see soon enough if another gun ban bill is filed, but in the meantime, I hope the good people of Virginia that Rep. Riggleman talked about continue to write, email, and call their lawmakers urging them to oppose Northam’s anti-gun and anti-gun owner agenda.


bearingarms--2020-01-17--Eminem Drops Surprise Album With Anti-Gun Song, Video

Eminem is channelling his inner spree killer in the first video off of his surprise album “ Music To Be Murdered By.
” The single , called “ Darkness , ” features the rapper in a darkened hotel room , targeting attendees of a concert far below his window , recalling the attack on the Route 91 Harvest Music Festival in Las Vegas in 2017 .
The song itself is written from the point of view of the killer in Las Vegas ( whose name will not be mentioned here ) , and intertwines gun control tropes with a portrait @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many lives as possible .
And I ’ m already sweatin ’ but I ’ m locked and loaded For rapid fire spittin ’ for all the concert-goers Scopes for sniper vision , surprise from out of nowhere As I slide the clip in from inside the hotel Leanin ’ out the window , going Keyser Söze Finger on the trigger , but I ’ m a licensed owner With no prior convictions , so loss , the sky ’ s the limit So my supplies infinite , strapped like I ’ m @ @ @ @ @ @ @ video , a link appears where viewers can sign up to vote , along with the following message : The message also encourages viewers to donate to a number of gun control groups like Michael Bloomberg ’ s Everytown for Gun Safety .
One of the most common arguments from gun control advocates is that if you don ’ t support their agenda , you simply must not care about violence .
Never mind the fact that we ’ ve seen active killer attacks in states with restrictive gun control laws like California @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with restrictive gun control laws , such as the Paris attack in November of 2015 .
As far as anti-gun activists are concerned , once we ban guns , all our problems will disappear .
It ’ s rhetoric that ’ s similar to that of Prohibitionists a century ago .
Back then , the famed preacher Billy Sunday advocated for a ban on liquor and saloons in language that could be appropriated by Eminem or Shannon Watts today .
Personal liberty is not personal license .
I dare not exercise personal liberty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ others .
Our forefathers did not fight and die for personal license but for personal liberty bounded by laws .
Personal liberty is the liberty of a murderer , a burglar , a seducer , or a wolf that wants to remain in a sheep fold , or the weasel in a hen roost .
You have no right to vote for an institution that is going to drag your sons and daughters to hell .
Billy Sunday and the Prohibitionists ( good name for a band , by the way ) ended @ @ @ @ @ @ @ didn ’ t work out the way they intended .
Instead of a sober utopia , the United States was flooded with black market booze that fueled the rise of the Mafia , led to a staggering increase in violence , and ended up encouraging millions of Americans to break the law as they sought out back alley speakeasies and bathtub gin .
In truth , if banning guns solved the problem of violence , then Washington , D.C. would have been the safest city in the nation when it banned handguns .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ crime ridden places in the country .
If gun control worked , Baltimore , Maryland wouldn ’ t have just experienced its highest per capita homicide rate in history .
You won ’ t hear anything like that from Eminem or any other anti-gun celebrity .
They ’ re intent on changing the laws , as well as the culture when it comes to legal gun ownership .

Eminem is channelling his inner spree killer in the first video off of his surprise album “Music To Be Murdered By.” The single, called “Darkness,” features the rapper in a darkened hotel room, targeting attendees of a concert far below his window, recalling the attack on the Route 91 Harvest Music Festival in Las Vegas in 2017.
The song itself is written from the point of view of the killer in Las Vegas (whose name will not be mentioned here), and intertwines gun control tropes with a portrait of a man intent on taking as many lives as possible.
And I’m already sweatin’ but I’m locked and loaded
For rapid fire spittin’ for all the concert-goers
Scopes for sniper vision, surprise from out of nowhere
As I slide the clip in from inside the hotel
Leanin’ out the window, going Keyser Söze
Finger on the trigger, but I’m a licensed owner
With no prior convictions, so loss, the sky’s the limit
So my supplies infinite, strapped like I’m a soldier
At the end of the video, a link appears where viewers can sign up to vote, along with the following message:
“When will this end? When enough people care. Make your voice heard and help change gun laws in America.”
The message also encourages viewers to donate to a number of gun control groups like Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety.
One of the most common arguments from gun control advocates is that if you don’t support their agenda, you simply must not care about violence. Never mind the fact that we’ve seen active killer attacks in states with restrictive gun control laws like California, as well as attacks in countries with restrictive gun control laws, such as the Paris attack in November of 2015. As far as anti-gun activists are concerned, once we ban guns, all our problems will disappear.
It’s rhetoric that’s similar to that of Prohibitionists a century ago. Back then, the famed preacher Billy Sunday advocated for a ban on liquor and saloons in language that could be appropriated by Eminem or Shannon Watts today.
Personal liberty is not personal license. I dare not exercise personal liberty if it infringes on the liberty of others. Our forefathers did not fight and die for personal license but for personal liberty bounded by laws. Personal liberty is the liberty of a murderer, a burglar, a seducer, or a wolf that wants to remain in a sheep fold, or the weasel in a hen roost. You have no right to vote for an institution that is going to drag your sons and daughters to hell.
Billy Sunday and the Prohibitionists (good name for a band, by the way) ended up getting their wish, but it didn’t work out the way they intended. Instead of a sober utopia, the United States was flooded with black market booze that fueled the rise of the Mafia, led to a staggering increase in violence, and ended up encouraging millions of Americans to break the law as they sought out back alley speakeasies and bathtub gin.
In truth, if banning guns solved the problem of violence, then Washington, D.C. would have been the safest city in the nation when it banned handguns. Instead it was one of the most crime ridden places in the country. If gun control worked, Baltimore, Maryland wouldn’t have just experienced its highest per capita homicide rate in history.
You won’t hear anything like that from Eminem or any other anti-gun celebrity. They’re intent on changing the laws, as well as the culture when it comes to legal gun ownership.


bearingarms--2020-01-17--FBI Arrest Three Neo-Nazis Reportedly Planning Terrorist Attacks, Media Links To VA

Tensions are pretty high in Virginia .
They ’ re pretty high everywhere else , too , really .
After all , if things go badly in the Old Dominion state , they ’ re not necessarily going to stay there .
They have the potential to spread out like a wildfire .
Gov .
Ralph Northam has cited what he called “ credible ” threats stemming from a pro-gun rally scheduled for Lobby Day in the state as his justification for declaring a state of emergency in the state and banning guns in the capitol .
Legally , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually do that , but that ’ s neither here nor there .
What is , though , is how the FBI made an arrest on Thursday of three neo-Nazis in Maryland and how the media automatically links it to Virginia .
Alarming calls online for a race war .
The arrest of three suspected neo-Nazis .
Memories of the explosive clashes in Charlottesville , Va. , three years ago .
A sense of crisis enveloped the capital of Virginia on Thursday , with the police on heightened alert and Richmond bracing for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ next week that is expected to draw white supremacists and other anti-government extremists .
This is how the article starts .
A bare mention of the arrest of three suspected domestic terrorists .
It then goes into a discussion of the tensions in Virginia .
A lot about what ’ s going on in Virginia .
Then , after a long time , we finally get to this : The three men taken into custody on Thursday morning were part of a long-running investigation into the Base .
The men were charged with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Justice Department .
One of the men , Patrik J. Mathews , 27 , a main recruiter for the group , entered the United States illegally from Canada , according to the officials .
He was arrested along with Brian M. Lemley Jr. , 33 , and William G. Bilbrough IV , 19 .
Mr. Mathews was trained as a combat engineer and is considered an expert in explosives .
The Canadian Army discharged him after his ties to white supremacists surfaced .
Mr. Lemley previously served as a cavalry soldier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ F.B.I .
has grown increasingly concerned about the Base as it has worked to recruit more people .
The group encourages the onset of anarchy , according to the Counter Extremism Project , an organization that tracks far-right extremists .
Experts say that its founder , an American , appears to be living in Russia .
Mr. Lemley and Mr. Bilbrough were charged on Thursday with transporting and harboring aliens along with conspiracy .
Prosecutors also charged Mr. Lemley and Mr. Mathews with transporting a firearm and ammunition with the intent of committing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mr. Mathews with possessing a firearm and ammunition while being in the country illegally .
So it takes that long to finally get to the meat of the article and discuss the accused domestic terrorists in question .
It should be noted that The Base apparently got their name from Al Quida .
It seems that when you translate the notorious Islamic terrorist organization ’ s name into English , you get “ The Base.
” Which really suggests these guys are all kinds of fuzzy .
So what does this arrest have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as anyone can tell , nothing .
Nothing at all .
Yes , even the New York Times all but admits that .
That said , Maryland isn ’ t very far from Virginia so I ’ ll acknowledge the possibility that these three tools may well have been plotting something for that event .
I wouldn ’ t hold your breath on it , though .
The links itself are tenuous at best .
Had Richmond been the target , it ’ s likely the FBI would have found evidence of concrete @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
No doubt , though , some will look at the timing of the arrest and argue that it ’ s all the proof one needs to know something was up .
I , however , disagree completely .
Arrests happen when they happen .
Unless these were made in Richmond just as these three dipsticks were gearing up , without some concrete evidence of just what they were going to attack , we simply don ’ t know .
Yet I find it incredibly irresponsible for the New York Times to tie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ especially when there ’ s so little evidence to do so .
In fact , doing so may do more to fan the flames of what ’ s happening in Virginia more than anything else .
Right now , things are tense and all it will take is a spark to light it off .
While I don ’ t think this will be that spark , it ’ s likely to add fuel to the fire as Virginian anti-gunners try to justify new measures with this link .
The New York Times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Couple that with the fact that there ’ s almost nothing indicating the two aren ’ t linked until the article–a long one–was almost completely finished .
And this from a writer who ’ s a two-time Pulitzer Prize winner .
Is it any wonder that trust in the media is at an all-time low ?

Tensions are pretty high in Virginia. They’re pretty high everywhere else, too, really. After all, if things go badly in the Old Dominion state, they’re not necessarily going to stay there. They have the potential to spread out like a wildfire.
Gov. Ralph Northam has cited what he called “credible” threats stemming from a pro-gun rally scheduled for Lobby Day in the state as his justification for declaring a state of emergency in the state and banning guns in the capitol. Legally, it doesn’t look like he can actually do that, but that’s neither here nor there.
What is, though, is how the FBI made an arrest on Thursday of three neo-Nazis in Maryland and how the media automatically links it to Virginia.
Alarming calls online for a race war. The arrest of three suspected neo-Nazis. Memories of the explosive clashes in Charlottesville, Va., three years ago. A sense of crisis enveloped the capital of Virginia on Thursday, with the police on heightened alert and Richmond bracing for possible violence ahead of a gun rally next week that is expected to draw white supremacists and other anti-government extremists.
This is how the article starts. A bare mention of the arrest of three suspected domestic terrorists. It then goes into a discussion of the tensions in Virginia.
A lot about what’s going on in Virginia.
Then, after a long time, we finally get to this:
The three men taken into custody on Thursday morning were part of a long-running investigation into the Base. The men were charged with various federal crimes in Maryland, according to the Justice Department. One of the men, Patrik J. Mathews, 27, a main recruiter for the group, entered the United States illegally from Canada, according to the officials. He was arrested along with Brian M. Lemley Jr., 33, and William G. Bilbrough IV, 19. Mr. Mathews was trained as a combat engineer and is considered an expert in explosives. The Canadian Army discharged him after his ties to white supremacists surfaced. Mr. Lemley previously served as a cavalry soldier in the United States Army. The F.B.I. has grown increasingly concerned about the Base as it has worked to recruit more people. The group encourages the onset of anarchy, according to the Counter Extremism Project, an organization that tracks far-right extremists. Experts say that its founder, an American, appears to be living in Russia. … Mr. Lemley and Mr. Bilbrough were charged on Thursday with transporting and harboring aliens along with conspiracy. Prosecutors also charged Mr. Lemley and Mr. Mathews with transporting a firearm and ammunition with the intent of committing a felony. The complaint also charges Mr. Mathews with possessing a firearm and ammunition while being in the country illegally.
So it takes that long to finally get to the meat of the article and discuss the accused domestic terrorists in question. It should be noted that The Base apparently got their name from Al Quida. It seems that when you translate the notorious Islamic terrorist organization’s name into English, you get “The Base.”
Which really suggests these guys are all kinds of fuzzy.
So what does this arrest have to do with Virginia? So far as anyone can tell, nothing. Nothing at all.
Yes, even the New York Times all but admits that.
According to the authorities, Mr. Lemley and Mr. Mathews made a functioning assault rifle. They also bought more than 1,500 rounds of rifle ammunition, fired the rifle at a Maryland gun range and acquired vests to hold body armor. Although the charges were not directly linked to the Richmond rally, law enforcement officials said the three men had discussed attending it.
Attending doesn’t mean targeting.
That said, Maryland isn’t very far from Virginia so I’ll acknowledge the possibility that these three tools may well have been plotting something for that event. I wouldn’t hold your breath on it, though.
The links itself are tenuous at best. Had Richmond been the target, it’s likely the FBI would have found evidence of concrete plans for an attack of some sort.
No doubt, though, some will look at the timing of the arrest and argue that it’s all the proof one needs to know something was up. I, however, disagree completely. Arrests happen when they happen. Unless these were made in Richmond just as these three dipsticks were gearing up, without some concrete evidence of just what they were going to attack, we simply don’t know.
Yet I find it incredibly irresponsible for the New York Times to tie the two events together like this, especially when there’s so little evidence to do so. In fact, doing so may do more to fan the flames of what’s happening in Virginia more than anything else. Right now, things are tense and all it will take is a spark to light it off.
While I don’t think this will be that spark, it’s likely to add fuel to the fire as Virginian anti-gunners try to justify new measures with this link. The New York Times is supposedly a trusted news organization.
Couple that with the fact that there’s almost nothing indicating the two aren’t linked until the article–a long one–was almost completely finished. And this from a writer who’s a two-time Pulitzer Prize winner.
Is it any wonder that trust in the media is at an all-time low?


bearingarms--2020-01-16--High Schoolers Give Lawmakers Grades No One Cares About

When March For Our Lives first started up , they pushed to get children involved in the gun control debate .
They somehow figured that young people were absolutely essential for pressuring lawmakers and other adults to start doing what a handful of kids wanted .
To be fair , in the wake of yet another mass shooting dominating the news for weeks on end , it ’ s not real surprising that young people started freaking out .
People freaking out is really the only way for gun control to take hold , so it was kind of perfect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ played a long time ago .
Now , the Utah chapter of that organization seems to think that giving lawmakers bad grades for not doing what the group wants will somehow make them change their minds .
They may still be in high school , but the March for Our Lives Utah activists gathered at the Capitol Wednesday to announce they intend to hold state lawmakers responsible for a lack of progress on gun control issues .
“ We are here today because gun safety is an issue we care about .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our communities .
Utah has a gun violence problem , ” Skyline High School senior Ainsley Moench , 17 , said .
“ Many of our legislators have stood by and refused to take action , and while they ’ ve done that , people have continued to die.
” Moench said the students “ are fighting back ” by grading each member of the Utah Legislature on how they dealt with firearms-related bills during the 2019 session , including failed attempts to pass universal background checks for gun buyers and a “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be temporarily taken away from someone deemed a danger .
“ We are tired of seeing our friends die .
We are tired of being scared .
We are tired of being ignored , ” she said , citing gun violence as one of the leading causes of death for young people .
“ Our age group has power , and we are not afraid to use it .
We want to be safe .
We want our communities to be safe .
We want to live.
” First , Sparky , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ friends die .
If you did , it had to do with criminal activity in their neighborhood that they may actually have been engaged in themselves–that ’ s what usually does it , after all–and nothing to do with random acts of violence like mass shootings .
Second , you ’ re deluding yourselves if you think a bad grade from a group these lawmakers don ’ t actually care about is going to do anything .
I mean , I get it .
They ’ re high school students so grades mean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much for adults .
You see , while the NRA does grades as well , they ’ re not really for the lawmakers .
They ’ re for the voters who care about gun rights .
It lets us judge how politicians stack up .
Which I guess someone will say is what these kids are trying to do .
It should be noted that Utah has allowed guns in schools for ages now and not had a single mass shooting during that entire time at any single level .
Moreover , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of gun laws in the state .
In short , no one actually cares about these grades except people who weren ’ t going to vote for these lawmakers in the first place .
So , again , no one cares .
But hey , give them an “ A ” for effort .

When March For Our Lives first started up, they pushed to get children involved in the gun control debate. They somehow figured that young people were absolutely essential for pressuring lawmakers and other adults to start doing what a handful of kids wanted.
To be fair, in the wake of yet another mass shooting dominating the news for weeks on end, it’s not real surprising that young people started freaking out. People freaking out is really the only way for gun control to take hold, so it was kind of perfect for them.
But the bit got played a long time ago.
Now, the Utah chapter of that organization seems to think that giving lawmakers bad grades for not doing what the group wants will somehow make them change their minds.
They may still be in high school, but the March for Our Lives Utah activists gathered at the Capitol Wednesday to announce they intend to hold state lawmakers responsible for a lack of progress on gun control issues. “We are here today because gun safety is an issue we care about. And so do our friends, families and our communities. Utah has a gun violence problem,” Skyline High School senior Ainsley Moench, 17, said. “Many of our legislators have stood by and refused to take action, and while they’ve done that, people have continued to die.” Moench said the students “are fighting back” by grading each member of the Utah Legislature on how they dealt with firearms-related bills during the 2019 session, including failed attempts to pass universal background checks for gun buyers and a “red flag” law to allow guns to be temporarily taken away from someone deemed a danger. “We are tired of seeing our friends die. We are tired of being scared. We are tired of being ignored,” she said, citing gun violence as one of the leading causes of death for young people. “Our age group has power, and we are not afraid to use it. We want to be safe. We want our communities to be safe. We want to live.”
First, Sparky, I doubt you’ve seen your friends die. If you did, it had to do with criminal activity in their neighborhood that they may actually have been engaged in themselves–that’s what usually does it, after all–and nothing to do with random acts of violence like mass shootings.
Second, you’re deluding yourselves if you think a bad grade from a group these lawmakers don’t actually care about is going to do anything.
I mean, I get it. They’re high school students so grades mean a great deal, but not so much for adults.
You see, while the NRA does grades as well, they’re not really for the lawmakers. They’re for the voters who care about gun rights. It lets us judge how politicians stack up.
Which I guess someone will say is what these kids are trying to do.
In Utah.
It should be noted that Utah has allowed guns in schools for ages now and not had a single mass shooting during that entire time at any single level. Moreover, the people there seem to like the lack of gun laws in the state.
In short, no one actually cares about these grades except people who weren’t going to vote for these lawmakers in the first place. So, again, no one cares.
But hey, give them an “A” for effort.


bearingarms--2020-01-16--Judge Slaps Broward County Down Over Gun Control Ordinances

The people of Broward County , Florida have made some questionable choices through the years .
Not only have they not told David Hogg to sit down and shut up , but they also elected Scott Israel as sheriff .
Were that the extent of their sins , that would be enough , but I ’ m afraid it ’ s not .
They also managed to elect county officials who thought preemption didn ’ t apply to them .
Of course , these aren ’ t the first officials to try this crap .
They ’ re just the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in court .
Since 1987 , Florida law has prohibited city and county governments from adopting their own gun laws or placing restrictions on firearms .
The law gives the state carte blanche to occupy “ the whole field ” of firearm and ammunition regulation .
The legislature gave it some teeth in 2011 by tacking on $ 5,000 fees and threatening removal from office if legislators violated the law .
As a result , pro-gun advocacy organizations have repeatedly sued Florida cities and counties over gun-control ordinances .
A Broward circuit judge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gun-rights organization that sued Broward County and the county ’ s administrator over ordinances that “ infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Florida Constitution.
” Judge Carlos A. Rodriguez ruled that three county ordinances regulate firearms in violation of Florida statute and permanently banned Broward County from enforcing ordinances that relate to guns and ammunition .
Florida Carry , a pro-gun advocacy organization , filed the lawsuit in 2014 .
“ The core of the issue is that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regulate firearms and ammunition , and they were doing so , ” says Sean Caranna , the organization ’ s executive director .
The judge awarded the organization just $ 1 in damages and reimbursement of legal fees .
But , more importantly , the ruling hammers home that Broward County can ’ t decide to ignore state law regarding preemption .
Frankly , the award of damages is kind of a non-factor since that ’ s not what this was ever really about .
Preemption is hated by anti-gunners , but it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law that prevents an unnavigable patchwork of gun control laws that could turn someone into a criminal for just being a few feet on the wrong side of an invisible line .
Broward County–to say nothing on the other municipalities all over the country still trying this–thought that they knew better and , frankly , didn ’ t give a good damn about the rights of law-abiding citizens .
What the ruling did was remind Broward County that they ’ re not special .
The law applies to them just the same as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now been reminded and they get to pay Florida Carry ’ s legal fees , which means they ’ re making it possible for Florida Carry to fight other battles now that they ’ ve won this one .
Nicely done , Broward County .
Not only did you issue everyone else a reminder about preemption in the state , but you ’ ve empowered a state-level organization to pick up their battles against gun control elsewhere .
I mean , it ’ s almost poetic , really .
Is it wrong that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as to what the next bit of stupidity to come out of Broward County might be ?

The people of Broward County, Florida have made some questionable choices through the years. Not only have they not told David Hogg to sit down and shut up, but they also elected Scott Israel as sheriff. Were that the extent of their sins, that would be enough, but I’m afraid it’s not.
They also managed to elect county officials who thought preemption didn’t apply to them.
Of course, these aren’t the first officials to try this crap. They’re just the latest to get their efforts smacked down in court.
Since 1987, Florida law has prohibited city and county governments from adopting their own gun laws or placing restrictions on firearms. The law gives the state carte blanche to occupy “the whole field” of firearm and ammunition regulation. The legislature gave it some teeth in 2011 by tacking on $5,000 fees and threatening removal from office if legislators violated the law. As a result, pro-gun advocacy organizations have repeatedly sued Florida cities and counties over gun-control ordinances. A Broward circuit judge last week ruled in favor of a gun-rights organization that sued Broward County and the county’s administrator over ordinances that “infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Florida Constitution.” Judge Carlos A. Rodriguez ruled that three county ordinances regulate firearms in violation of Florida statute and permanently banned Broward County from enforcing ordinances that relate to guns and ammunition. Florida Carry, a pro-gun advocacy organization, filed the lawsuit in 2014. “The core of the issue is that they do not have the authority to regulate firearms and ammunition, and they were doing so,” says Sean Caranna, the organization’s executive director. The judge awarded the organization just $1 in damages and reimbursement of legal fees.
But, more importantly, the ruling hammers home that Broward County can’t decide to ignore state law regarding preemption. Frankly, the award of damages is kind of a non-factor since that’s not what this was ever really about.
Preemption is hated by anti-gunners, but it’s a necessary component of state law that prevents an unnavigable patchwork of gun control laws that could turn someone into a criminal for just being a few feet on the wrong side of an invisible line. Broward County–to say nothing on the other municipalities all over the country still trying this–thought that they knew better and, frankly, didn’t give a good damn about the rights of law-abiding citizens.
What the ruling did was remind Broward County that they’re not special. The law applies to them just the same as it applies elsewhere. They’ve now been reminded and they get to pay Florida Carry’s legal fees, which means they’re making it possible for Florida Carry to fight other battles now that they’ve won this one.
Nicely done, Broward County. Not only did you issue everyone else a reminder about preemption in the state, but you’ve empowered a state-level organization to pick up their battles against gun control elsewhere. I mean, it’s almost poetic, really.
Is it wrong that I’m now kind of intrigued as to what the next bit of stupidity to come out of Broward County might be?