bearingarms--2020-03-27--Lawsuits Filed Against NC, CA Sheriffs & CA Gov Over COVID-19 Gun Orders

The sheriffs of Wake County , North Carolina and Los Angeles County , California are the subjects of the latest round of lawsuits targeting emergency orders over the coronavirus pandemic , along with California Gov .
Gavin Newsom .
The California governor , along with Sheriff Alex Villanueva , are being sued over the closure of gun stores in Los Angeles County , which were ordered by the sheriff under the auspices of Newsom ’ s shelter-in-place order closing all businesses deemed to be non-essential .
The governor declined to declare gun stores essential , and after stating during a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leaving it up to sheriffs to make the call , Villanueva ordered stores closed .
The complaint ( which can be found here ) , argues that despite the extraordinary circumstances we find ourselves in , Newsom and Villanueva don ’ t have the authority to simply declare the exercise of a fundamental right to be null and void .
In fact , the importance of maintaining the ongoing activities of essential businesses for the safety , health , and welfare of Californians makes Plaintiffs ’ point : the need for enhanced safety @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and their members must be able to exercise their fundamental rights to keep and bear arms .
The governmental infringements at issue are only compounding the very dangers they purportedly seek to mitigate .
In this context , firearm and ammunition retailers arguably provide the most essential business function possible by enabling Californians to lawfully defend themselves , their loved ones and their property .
The various Orders that have been put in place by the Governor of the State of California , the California Department of Public Health , the Los Angeles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Los Angeles County Sheriff are unconstitutionally vague , arbitrary and capricious , and violate the Second and Fourteenth Amendment rights of Plaintiffs and similarly situated Californians .
State and local agency and county policies may not , legislatively or though mere fiat , as here , enact and/or enforce a suspension or deprivation of constitutional liberties during a time of crisis .
And they certainly may not use a public health crisis as political cover to impose bans and restrictions on rights they do not like .
Their Orders , policies , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ restrained and enjoined to protect the fundamental rights of law-abiding Californians .
The suit , called Brandy v. Villanueva , was brought by several individuals and Second Amendment organizations , including the Second Amendment Foundation , National Rifle Association , California Gun Rights Foundation , and the Firearms Policy Council .
The plaintiffs are seeking an injunction that would prohibit Newsom and sheriffs from ordering gun stores closed while the case is being litigated in court , though I wouldn ’ t be surprised if the judge allows Villanueva ’ s decision to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ litigated , since residents of Los Angeles County can still travel to other gun stores that remain open in order to purchase a firearm .
Meanwhile , the Second Amendment Foundation and Firearms Policy Coalition are joining Grassroots N.C. to challenge Wake County Sheriff Gerald Baker ’ s decision to not accept any applications for pistol purchase permits for nearly six weeks , leaving residents of the county unable to legally acquire the most common firearm for self-defense in the country .
In Stafford v. Baker the plaintiff ’ s argue that Baker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infringement of the right to keep and bear arms .
You can ’ t keep and bear if you can ’ t acquire , and as the Supreme Court ruled in Heller , banning an entire class of firearms like all handguns is a violation of the Second Amendment , even if rifles and shotguns remain available for purchase .
That ’ s the situation in Wake County at least until the end of April , according to the sheriff , and that ’ s unconstitutional , say the attorneys for the plaintiffs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of refusing to accept or process any new PPP applications constitutes a de facto categorical ban the likes of which is absolutely prohibited under the supreme law of the land , because it erects an insurmountable bar to obtaining a handgun – the “ class of ‘ arms ’ that is overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose ” of self-defense – for any average law-abiding citizen in Wake County .
Even looking to the tiers of scrutiny – for the sake of argument only since Heller mandates striking down a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most exacting degree of scrutiny would apply , which the ban would clearly fail despite ( and partly because of ) the current state of emergency .
Defendant Baker ’ s current practice of refusing to accept and process PPP applications have prohibited and are continuing to prohibit Individual Plaintiffs , the members and supporters of Institutional Plaintiffs , and all other similarly situated individuals from keeping , bearing , buying , selling , transferring , receiving , possessing , and/or transporting the quintessential class of protected arms , in violation of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declared as unconstitutional and enjoined as such , Defendant Baker will continue with this practice , and Plaintiffs have no plain , speedy , and adequate remedy at law .
As in the California case , the plaintiffs are asking for an emergency injunction blocking Sheriff Baker ’ s actions and compelling him to continue to accept pistol purchase permit applications .
I wouldn ’ t be surprised if Baker surrenders here , but it may not solve the problem .
Baker says his office has received over 750 applications over the past @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to suspend taking new applications is to clear through the mountain of paperwork that ’ s piled up .
He may decide to accept the purchase permit applications , but that doesn ’ t mean he ’ ll process them any faster , though state law only allows the sheriff 14 days to approve or deny an application and that would inevitably lead to another round of litigation .
The suit also challenges Baker ’ s suspension of concealed carry license applications , and that might be a harder case to make .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Carolina , so the plaintiffs do have the ability to bear arms , even though one common manner of carrying is off-limits to them .
Baker may also argue that the fingerprinting process has been halted for all kinds of licensing in Wake County because of public health reasons , and to continue processing concealed carry applications wouldn ’ t serve the public interest .
I ’ m very impressed by the ability of Second Amendment organizations to respond this week to growing number of emergency orders implicating our right to keep and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , now would be a great time to show your favorite organizations some financial support .
Rarely do I make a pitch like this , but litigation like this isn ’ t free , and the worst may be yet to come in some of these anti-gun states .
Right now we ’ ve seen orders from public officials that have made it impossible to legally acquire a firearm .
The next step , if any of these politicians would be zealous enough to take it , would be to try to ban @ @ @ @ @ @ @ almost unthinkable , even to me , but then again , I didn ’ t think a month ago that we ’ d be talking about the governor of New New Jersey shutting down firearm background checks to prevent legal gun sales .
These are extraordinary times , and if we can afford to do so we need to support the organizations that are not only engaged in the fight today , but will be needed for the fights in the weeks to come .

The sheriffs of Wake County, North Carolina and Los Angeles County, California are the subjects of the latest round of lawsuits targeting emergency orders over the coronavirus pandemic, along with California Gov. Gavin Newsom.
The California governor, along with Sheriff Alex Villanueva, are being sued over the closure of gun stores in Los Angeles County, which were ordered by the sheriff under the auspices of Newsom’s shelter-in-place order closing all businesses deemed to be non-essential. The governor declined to declare gun stores essential, and after stating during a press conference on Thursday that he was leaving it up to sheriffs to make the call, Villanueva ordered stores closed.
The complaint (which can be found here), argues that despite the extraordinary circumstances we find ourselves in, Newsom and Villanueva don’t have the authority to simply declare the exercise of a fundamental right to be null and void.
In fact, the importance of maintaining the ongoing activities of essential businesses for the safety, health, and welfare of Californians makes Plaintiffs’ point: the need for enhanced safety during uncertain times is precisely when Plaintiffs and their members must be able to exercise their fundamental rights to keep and bear arms. The governmental infringements at issue are only compounding the very dangers they purportedly seek to mitigate. In this context, firearm and ammunition retailers arguably provide the most essential business function possible by enabling Californians to lawfully defend themselves, their loved ones and their property. The various Orders that have been put in place by the Governor of the State of California, the California Department of Public Health, the Los Angeles County of Public Health, and the Los Angeles County Sheriff are unconstitutionally vague, arbitrary and capricious, and violate the Second and Fourteenth Amendment rights of Plaintiffs and similarly situated Californians. State and local agency and county policies may not, legislatively or though mere fiat, as here, enact and/or enforce a suspension or deprivation of constitutional liberties during a time of crisis. And they certainly may not use a public health crisis as political cover to impose bans and restrictions on rights they do not like. Their Orders, policies, and practices that do so much be immediately restrained and enjoined to protect the fundamental rights of law-abiding Californians.
The suit, called Brandy v. Villanueva, was brought by several individuals and Second Amendment organizations, including the Second Amendment Foundation, National Rifle Association, California Gun Rights Foundation, and the Firearms Policy Council. The plaintiffs are seeking an injunction that would prohibit Newsom and sheriffs from ordering gun stores closed while the case is being litigated in court, though I wouldn’t be surprised if the judge allows Villanueva’s decision to be enforced while the case is being litigated, since residents of Los Angeles County can still travel to other gun stores that remain open in order to purchase a firearm.
Meanwhile, the Second Amendment Foundation and Firearms Policy Coalition are joining Grassroots N.C. to challenge Wake County Sheriff Gerald Baker’s decision to not accept any applications for pistol purchase permits for nearly six weeks, leaving residents of the county unable to legally acquire the most common firearm for self-defense in the country.
In Stafford v. Baker the plaintiff’s argue that Baker’s actions amount to an unconstitutional infringement of the right to keep and bear arms. You can’t keep and bear if you can’t acquire, and as the Supreme Court ruled in Heller, banning an entire class of firearms like all handguns is a violation of the Second Amendment, even if rifles and shotguns remain available for purchase. That’s the situation in Wake County at least until the end of April, according to the sheriff, and that’s unconstitutional, say the attorneys for the plaintiffs.
Defendant Baker’s current practice of refusing to accept or process any new PPP applications constitutes a de facto categorical ban the likes of which is absolutely prohibited under the supreme law of the land, because it erects an insurmountable bar to obtaining a handgun – the “class of ‘arms’ that is overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose” of self-defense – for any average law-abiding citizen in Wake County. Even looking to the tiers of scrutiny – for the sake of argument only since Heller mandates striking down a categorical ban like this, period – the most exacting degree of scrutiny would apply, which the ban would clearly fail despite (and partly because of) the current state of emergency. Defendant Baker’s current practice of refusing to accept and process PPP applications have prohibited and are continuing to prohibit Individual Plaintiffs, the members and supporters of Institutional Plaintiffs, and all other similarly situated individuals from keeping, bearing, buying, selling, transferring, receiving, possessing, and/or transporting the quintessential class of protected arms, in violation of their Second Amendment rights. If not declared as unconstitutional and enjoined as such, Defendant Baker will continue with this practice, and Plaintiffs have no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law.
As in the California case, the plaintiffs are asking for an emergency injunction blocking Sheriff Baker’s actions and compelling him to continue to accept pistol purchase permit applications.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Baker surrenders here, but it may not solve the problem. Baker says his office has received over 750 applications over the past week, and the reason he wants to suspend taking new applications is to clear through the mountain of paperwork that’s piled up. He may decide to accept the purchase permit applications, but that doesn’t mean he’ll process them any faster, though state law only allows the sheriff 14 days to approve or deny an application and that would inevitably lead to another round of litigation.
The suit also challenges Baker’s suspension of concealed carry license applications, and that might be a harder case to make. Open carry is still legal in North Carolina, so the plaintiffs do have the ability to bear arms, even though one common manner of carrying is off-limits to them. Baker may also argue that the fingerprinting process has been halted for all kinds of licensing in Wake County because of public health reasons, and to continue processing concealed carry applications wouldn’t serve the public interest.
I’m very impressed by the ability of Second Amendment organizations to respond this week to growing number of emergency orders implicating our right to keep and bear arms, and if you can, now would be a great time to show your favorite organizations some financial support. Rarely do I make a pitch like this, but litigation like this isn’t free, and the worst may be yet to come in some of these anti-gun states. Right now we’ve seen orders from public officials that have made it impossible to legally acquire a firearm. The next step, if any of these politicians would be zealous enough to take it, would be to try to ban the transportation of firearms. That sounds almost unthinkable, even to me, but then again, I didn’t think a month ago that we’d be talking about the governor of New New Jersey shutting down firearm background checks to prevent legal gun sales. These are extraordinary times, and if we can afford to do so we need to support the organizations that are not only engaged in the fight today, but will be needed for the fights in the weeks to come.


bearingarms--2020-03-27--ATF, NICS Struggle To Keep Up With Surge In Gun Sales

Gun stores are having a difficult time keeping firearms and ammunition in stock as a surge of new gun owners continues to pour into those stores that remain open , so it shouldn ’ t come as a shock to learn that the FBI and ATF are also struggling to keep up with the incredible demand we ’ ve seen over the past two weeks .
According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation , some gun retailers are reporting a “ large and growing number of backlogs ” for background checks that come back as “ delayed.
” According to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ delayed for up to three business days , but the NSSF is hearing from retailers who are reporting that NICS employees are telling them it could be April 15th .
In an email to members , the NSSF pointed out that the lengthy delays “ appear to run counter to the Brady Act and NICS regulations , particularly in states without government office closures , ” and the organization has reached out to NICS to find out why these delays are stretching out for weeks .
Even for those who are approved through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ systems , it may not be an instantaneous process .
One gun store employee in Virginia I spoke with today told me he ’ s telling customers it ’ ll be 4-8 hours before they ’ re likely to hear back .
The NSSF also says many firearms retailers are now running out of the federal Form 4473 required for every gun sale .
ATF has informed us that it is currently limiting orders of ATF Form 4473s to 1,500 per request .
ATF has already ordered additional forms and expects to receive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ATF notes that as it replenishes its supply , it will reevaluate limiting orders .
If a firearm retailer does print photocopies of the Form 4473 to use during this time , it is important to print all six pages to remain compliant ( this includes the instructions pages ) .
In the past , retailers have been cited for not printing and filing all pages of Form 4473 .
NSSF continues to work with ATF on guidance for retailers as to whether you are permitted to conduct curb-side or sidewalk transactions during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ working on this issue and we should have more information on that front soon as well .
We encourage FFLs to contact your local ATF Field Office to seek guidance in the meantime .
We know at least one gun store in Nevada is already offering curb-side pickup for some customers .
I honestly never considered the possibility that curb-side or outdoors transactions may violate some ATF regulation , but I ’ m not surprised .
On today ’ s program we also get to several of your emails , questions , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shelter-in-place orders are playing out around the country .
Be sure to check out the entire show above , and don ’ t forget to subscribe to Townhall Media on YouTube or Bearing Arms Cam & Co on Apple Podcasts in order to keep up with the latest Second Amendment news and information , as well as interviews with those on the front lines of protecting and defending our right to keep and bear arms .
As always , thanks for watching , listening , and spreading the word !

Gun stores are having a difficult time keeping firearms and ammunition in stock as a surge of new gun owners continues to pour into those stores that remain open, so it shouldn’t come as a shock to learn that the FBI and ATF are also struggling to keep up with the incredible demand we’ve seen over the past two weeks.
According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, some gun retailers are reporting a “large and growing number of backlogs” for background checks that come back as “delayed.” According to federal law, those checks can be delayed for up to three business days, but the NSSF is hearing from retailers who are reporting that NICS employees are telling them it could be April 15th.
In an email to members, the NSSF pointed out that the lengthy delays “appear to run counter to the Brady Act and NICS regulations, particularly in states without government office closures,” and the organization has reached out to NICS to find out why these delays are stretching out for weeks.
Even for those who are approved through the NICS system or state background check systems, it may not be an instantaneous process. One gun store employee in Virginia I spoke with today told me he’s telling customers it’ll be 4-8 hours before they’re likely to hear back. The NSSF also says many firearms retailers are now running out of the federal Form 4473 required for every gun sale.
ATF has informed us that it is currently limiting orders of ATF Form 4473s to 1,500 per request. ATF has already ordered additional forms and expects to receive them early next week. Also, ATF notes that as it replenishes its supply, it will reevaluate limiting orders. If a firearm retailer does print photocopies of the Form 4473 to use during this time, it is important to print all six pages to remain compliant (this includes the instructions pages). In the past, retailers have been cited for not printing and filing all pages of Form 4473. NSSF continues to work with ATF on guidance for retailers as to whether you are permitted to conduct curb-side or sidewalk transactions during the national emergency. ATF lawyers are working on this issue and we should have more information on that front soon as well. We encourage FFLs to contact your local ATF Field Office to seek guidance in the meantime.
We know at least one gun store in Nevada is already offering curb-side pickup for some customers. I honestly never considered the possibility that curb-side or outdoors transactions may violate some ATF regulation, but I’m not surprised.
On today’s program we also get to several of your emails, questions, and comments about how the coronavirus pandemic and shelter-in-place orders are playing out around the country. Be sure to check out the entire show above, and don’t forget to subscribe to Townhall Media on YouTube or Bearing Arms Cam & Co on Apple Podcasts in order to keep up with the latest Second Amendment news and information, as well as interviews with those on the front lines of protecting and defending our right to keep and bear arms. As always, thanks for watching, listening, and spreading the word!


bearingarms--2020-03-27--Delaware Governor Backs Off, Allows Gun Stores To Stay Open

A lot of anti-gun governors have looked at the COVID-19 outbreak as all the reason they needed to shut down gun stores .
Since these are typically people who want to shut down the stores anyways , it ’ s entirely likely that the disease is nothing more than a pretext .
After all , considering the number of stores still open to the public right now in a lot of “ shelter in place ” jurisdictions , shutting down gun stores is especially petty .
Unfortunately for many of these governors , they ’ re finding a much bigger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recent to learn this lesson ?
Delaware ’ s Gov .
John Carney .
Firearms stores in Delaware can now accept customers by appointment only , the state said Thursday .
An emergency order from Gov .
John Carney to close nonessential businesses was amended to allow the change , following in Pennsylvania ’ s footsteps .
It comes less than two days after Delaware State Police began issuing cease-and-desist orders to businesses that remained open .
By mid-afternoon Thursday , troopers had delivered four letters : three to firearms stores and one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ John Carney ’ s modification came at about 5:30 p.m. Thursday .
“ I applaud ( Carney ) for listening to the store owners and the people and being reactive to the wants and needs of the community and doing the right thing , ” said Mitch Denham , founder of Delaware Gun Rights , a 21,000-member Facebook group .
“ I ’ m glad to hear that this happened.
” The classification of firearms stores as “ nonessential ” elicited uproar from gun rights advocates , who said the forced closures were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article 1 , Section 20 of the Delaware Constitution .
Both grant citizens the right to bear arms .
In truth , this isn ’ t the ideal scenario , but Carney and many other governors are trapped in a vicious loop of trying to balance public health with individual liberties .
It ’ s not an enviable position to be in .
Allowing them to remain open for appointments at least keeps them open and people working while also providing their communities with the opportunity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time .
Like I said , it ’ s not ideal , but at least the stores are open and people can get guns and ammunition .
They just have to have an appointment rather than just being able to pop on over .
The important thing is that Governor Carney is just the latest anti-gun governor to be forced to back off on his desire to shut down gun stores during the COVID-19 pandemic .
Hell , Illinois had the good sense to not even try this kind of thing .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s just me , but if this kind of backlash over temporarily closing gun stores is so severe , maybe it ’ s time to harness this degree of backlash for the rest of the anti-gun stuff governors like Carney try to inflict in their states .
It seems as if there are enough people in these states to have an impact at a time like this , so why not the rest of the time ?
Well , it ’ s possible that some of this is due to new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to buy guns .
I can especially see the latter being a factor .
Imagine buying a gun and waiting for it to arrive , only to find out you can ’ t pick it up when you need it because the governor ordered the stores closed .
That would make me pretty angry , that ’ s for sure .
To spend that kind of money on something because you feel like you need it , only to be blocked from taking possession until after the emergency is over ?
Regardless , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Second Amendment and I ’ m damn glad to see it .
Now , to see it everywhere else .

A lot of anti-gun governors have looked at the COVID-19 outbreak as all the reason they needed to shut down gun stores. Since these are typically people who want to shut down the stores anyways, it’s entirely likely that the disease is nothing more than a pretext. After all, considering the number of stores still open to the public right now in a lot of “shelter in place” jurisdictions, shutting down gun stores is especially petty.
Unfortunately for many of these governors, they’re finding a much bigger backlash than they expected.
The most recent to learn this lesson? Delaware’s Gov. John Carney.
Firearms stores in Delaware can now accept customers by appointment only, the state said Thursday. An emergency order from Gov. John Carney to close nonessential businesses was amended to allow the change, following in Pennsylvania’s footsteps. It comes less than two days after Delaware State Police began issuing cease-and-desist orders to businesses that remained open. By mid-afternoon Thursday, troopers had delivered four letters: three to firearms stores and one to a vape shop. Gov. John Carney’s modification came at about 5:30 p.m. Thursday. “I applaud (Carney) for listening to the store owners and the people and being reactive to the wants and needs of the community and doing the right thing,” said Mitch Denham, founder of Delaware Gun Rights, a 21,000-member Facebook group. “I’m glad to hear that this happened.” The classification of firearms stores as “nonessential” elicited uproar from gun rights advocates, who said the forced closures were a “direct infringement” on the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article 1, Section 20 of the Delaware Constitution. Both grant citizens the right to bear arms.
In truth, this isn’t the ideal scenario, but Carney and many other governors are trapped in a vicious loop of trying to balance public health with individual liberties. It’s not an enviable position to be in. Allowing them to remain open for appointments at least keeps them open and people working while also providing their communities with the opportunity to buy firearms during this very difficult time.
Like I said, it’s not ideal, but at least the stores are open and people can get guns and ammunition. They just have to have an appointment rather than just being able to pop on over.
The important thing is that Governor Carney is just the latest anti-gun governor to be forced to back off on his desire to shut down gun stores during the COVID-19 pandemic. Hell, Illinois had the good sense to not even try this kind of thing. That ought to tell you something.
Maybe it’s just me, but if this kind of backlash over temporarily closing gun stores is so severe, maybe it’s time to harness this degree of backlash for the rest of the anti-gun stuff governors like Carney try to inflict in their states. It seems as if there are enough people in these states to have an impact at a time like this, so why not the rest of the time?
Well, it’s possible that some of this is due to new gun buyers and those who are trying to buy guns. I can especially see the latter being a factor. Imagine buying a gun and waiting for it to arrive, only to find out you can’t pick it up when you need it because the governor ordered the stores closed. That would make me pretty angry, that’s for sure. To spend that kind of money on something because you feel like you need it, only to be blocked from taking possession until after the emergency is over?
Yeah…
Regardless, this is a good win for the Second Amendment and I’m damn glad to see it. Now, to see it everywhere else.


bearingarms--2020-03-27--Chicago Crime Plummets With Stay-At-Home Order In Effect

Apparently Chicago ’ s criminals are getting the message to stay home and practice social distancing during the coronavirus pandemic .
According to figures from the Chicago Police Department , there has been a single homicide in the city over the past week , far below the city ’ s average .
Chicago has not had a one-homicide week in more than five years , according to a WBEZ analysis of data from the Cook County Medical Examiner ’ s Office .
“ The coronavirus crisis is reducing people ’ s exposure to risk , keeping them inside , keeping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them out of bars and restaurants , ” said Wesley G. Skogan , a Northwestern University political scientist who studies crime .
The city ’ s slowdown in violence took hold March 19 , two days before Illinois Gov .
J.B. Pritzker ’ s stay-at-home order took effect .
During that same time , there ’ ve been 35 non-fatal shootings in the city , including a dozen on Wednesday , so it ’ s not like criminal activity has stopped completely .
Still , crime is down significantly in several categories .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the crime rate is effected by the coronavirus but obviously what we know going back many years and looking at data is that when large congregations of people are outside in neighborhoods where gun violence is prevalent that increases the risk , ” Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot said .
With more people at home , burglaries dropped 23 % .
The only major crime that rose last week were car thefts — the increase was only slight .
This is good news for Chicago , and they needed it , frankly .
Even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the Chicago Police Department says overall , murders are still up 34 % and shootings up 27 % compared to year-to-date totals in 2019 .
Some are concerned that the drop in violent crime could rebound in the weeks ahead .
WBEZ radio spoke to Northwestern University professor Wesley Skogan , who says there ’ s reason to think the decline is only temporary .
“ It ’ s getting warmer and , when the season is warmer , there ’ s always a lot more street activity and street excitement , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could eventually encourage violence stems from closing Chicago schools to combat the virus .
“ There ’ s simply a lot more kids at home — all day , every day — driving their parents crazy and driving themselves crazy , gathering in groups as teenagers will , ” Skogan said .
We know that the stay-at-home orders issued by many governors are temporary , and sooner or later ( hopefully sooner ) we ’ re going to be back outside , going to work , enjoying parks and restaurants , and getting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vast majority of us , that will be an unquestionably good thing , but for residents in Chicago ’ s high-crime neighborhoods , they may prefer to keep criminals quarantined to keep the peace on the streets .
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 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ //bearingarms.com/author/camedwards/

Apparently Chicago’s criminals are getting the message to stay home and practice social distancing during the coronavirus pandemic. According to figures from the Chicago Police Department, there has been a single homicide in the city over the past week, far below the city’s average.
Chicago has not had a one-homicide week in more than five years, according to a WBEZ analysis of data from the Cook County Medical Examiner’s Office. “The coronavirus crisis is reducing people’s exposure to risk, keeping them inside, keeping them out of risky places, keeping them out of bars and restaurants,” said Wesley G. Skogan, a Northwestern University political scientist who studies crime. The city’s slowdown in violence took hold March 19, two days before Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s stay-at-home order took effect.
During that same time, there’ve been 35 non-fatal shootings in the city, including a dozen on Wednesday, so it’s not like criminal activity has stopped completely. Still, crime is down significantly in several categories.
Murders dropped 29%
Shootings were down 19%
Sexual assaults dropped 51% from 2019 “We can’t specifically say the crime rate is effected by the coronavirus but obviously what we know going back many years and looking at data is that when large congregations of people are outside in neighborhoods where gun violence is prevalent that increases the risk,” Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot said. With more people at home, burglaries dropped 23%. The only major crime that rose last week were car thefts — the increase was only slight.
This is good news for Chicago, and they needed it, frankly. Even with the recent drop in violent crimes, the Chicago Police Department says overall, murders are still up 34% and shootings up 27% compared to year-to-date totals in 2019.
Some are concerned that the drop in violent crime could rebound in the weeks ahead. WBEZ radio spoke to Northwestern University professor Wesley Skogan, who says there’s reason to think the decline is only temporary.
“It’s getting warmer and, when the season is warmer, there’s always a lot more street activity and street excitement,” Skogan said. Another factor that could eventually encourage violence stems from closing Chicago schools to combat the virus. “There’s simply a lot more kids at home — all day, every day — driving their parents crazy and driving themselves crazy, gathering in groups as teenagers will,” Skogan said.
We know that the stay-at-home orders issued by many governors are temporary, and sooner or later (hopefully sooner) we’re going to be back outside, going to work, enjoying parks and restaurants, and getting on with our lives. For the vast majority of us, that will be an unquestionably good thing, but for residents in Chicago’s high-crime neighborhoods, they may prefer to keep criminals quarantined to keep the peace on the streets.


bearingarms--2020-03-30--NJ Congressional Candidate Takes Governor To Task

New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy doesn ’ t even make pretenses of being pro-Second Amendment .
At least , he doesn ’ t so far as I ’ ve been able to tell .
Many other anti-gunners will claim “ I support the Second Amendment but… ” when we all know that what almost always follows “ but… ” is going to be ample evidence that they don ’ t support it at all .
It ’ s just the way things go .
Recent comments he made regarding the Second Amendment , particularly in relation to COVID-19 , Murphy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In a letter to the editor of the New Jersey Herald , congressional candidate James Baldini had some harsh words for the governor .
Governor Murphy said : “ A safe society , for my taste has fewer guns , not more guns .
And that the guns that do exist are in the hands of the right people.
” He means of course the police and his bodyguards .
Not you and me , the law-abiding citizen .
The governor ’ s “ feelings ” are not legal reasoning to violate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not an acceptable jurisprudence to violate our Second Amendment rights .
His administration releases prisoners onto the streets , making our state less safe .
Who does he think will be armed ?
The governor sets you and me up to be victims .
It ’ s shameful .
Baldini goes on to point out that Murphy won ’ t have to worry about his own safety .
After all , he has a personal security detail that will protect him 24 hours a day , seven days a week .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be .
But Joe Blow in Newark is a different matter entirely .
Murphy ’ s move to shut down the gun stores means that Mr. Blow , who never felt he needed a firearm until now , is just slap out of luck .
This despite DHS guidance that gun stores are critical businesses .
That ’ s because the DHS guidance doesn ’ t fit with Murphy ’ s worldview .
I ’ ve said since the beginning that much of these decisions to shut down gun stores was ideologically driven @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concerns .
Murphy ’ s comments make it quite clear that such is his driving desire .
Baldini is right to call Murphy down over this , especially as he ’ ll not have to suffer for his decisions like the rest of his state will .
At a time like this , ideology shouldn ’ t be a driving force in depriving people of their constitutionally-protected rights .
Yet that ’ s what people like Murphy have done .
It ’ s a shame , too , because we ’ ve seen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Connecticut , and Pennsylvania all back off their instincts and ideology and declare gun stores essential businesses to some degree .
Gov .
Murphy could easily have done the same , even just declaring they could be open by appointment only if he were truly worried about minimizing the spread of COVID-19 .
But he ’ s not .
I will say that at least it ’ s nice to see one of the anti-gun governors admit as much .
That ’ s at least a refreshing change of pace .
It doesn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , mind you , but it ’ s refreshing .
My hope is that the inevitable lawsuit slaps Murphy around sufficiently for his nonsense .

New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy doesn’t even make pretenses of being pro-Second Amendment. At least, he doesn’t so far as I’ve been able to tell. Many other anti-gunners will claim “I support the Second Amendment but…” when we all know that what almost always follows “but…” is going to be ample evidence that they don’t support it at all.
It’s just the way things go.
Recent comments he made regarding the Second Amendment, particularly in relation to COVID-19, Murphy illustrated his feelings about guns abundantly clear.
In a letter to the editor of the New Jersey Herald, congressional candidate James Baldini had some harsh words for the governor.
Governor Murphy said: “A safe society, for my taste has fewer guns, not more guns. And that the guns that do exist are in the hands of the right people.” He means of course the police and his bodyguards. Not you and me, the law-abiding citizen. The governor’s “feelings” are not legal reasoning to violate the Constitution. His “taste” is not an acceptable jurisprudence to violate our Second Amendment rights. His administration releases prisoners onto the streets, making our state less safe. Who does he think will be armed? The governor sets you and me up to be victims. It’s shameful.
Baldini goes on to point out that Murphy won’t have to worry about his own safety. After all, he has a personal security detail that will protect him 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
He’s as safe as anyone can be.
But Joe Blow in Newark is a different matter entirely. Murphy’s move to shut down the gun stores means that Mr. Blow, who never felt he needed a firearm until now, is just slap out of luck. This despite DHS guidance that gun stores are critical businesses. That’s because the DHS guidance doesn’t fit with Murphy’s worldview.
I’ve said since the beginning that much of these decisions to shut down gun stores was ideologically driven, rather than driven by public health concerns. Murphy’s comments make it quite clear that such is his driving desire.
Baldini is right to call Murphy down over this, especially as he’ll not have to suffer for his decisions like the rest of his state will.
At a time like this, ideology shouldn’t be a driving force in depriving people of their constitutionally-protected rights. Yet that’s what people like Murphy have done.
It’s a shame, too, because we’ve seen anti-gun governors in states like Illinois, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania all back off their instincts and ideology and declare gun stores essential businesses to some degree. Gov. Murphy could easily have done the same, even just declaring they could be open by appointment only if he were truly worried about minimizing the spread of COVID-19. But he’s not.
I will say that at least it’s nice to see one of the anti-gun governors admit as much. That’s at least a refreshing change of pace.
It doesn’t make it any less wrong, mind you, but it’s refreshing.
My hope is that the inevitable lawsuit slaps Murphy around sufficiently for his nonsense.


bearingarms--2020-03-30--NC Paper Crosses Line When Defending Sheriff

One thing I try to pride myself on is my ability to get both sides of the argument , particularly around guns .
While I get worked up like everyone and sometimes ascribe motives to some they might not actually have , I do try to step back and think about it calmly .
After all , not everyone actually thinks of themselves as a tyrant .
Remarkably few do , actually .
But it does get a little annoying when the other side of the debate makes no such attempt .
Take an editorial from the Winston-Salem Journal .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ accusation that we care more about gun rights than public health is nothing more than an incendiary attempt to frame this as an either/or discussion .
Sheriff Baker was under fire not because of public health concerns , but his failure to balance those concerns with people ’ s rights .
Few people actually don ’ t care about public health at a time like this .
There ’ s a reason so many of us are practicing social distancing , keeping home as much as possible , and generally avoiding contact with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We ’ re not stupid .
On the same token , though , we don ’ t feel our rights should be shuffled aside so easily by the mandate of an elected official .
Not that anyone on the Journal ‘ s editorial board gives a damn about that , apparently .
Of course , for them , it doesn ’ t seem to matter about rights at all .
Who are they to determine what I or anyone else needs right now ?
Besides , someone ’ s needs and someone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do with one another .
The Second Amendment doesn ’ t have a clause that allows governments to just ignore it whenever people get sick .
Sure , a case can be made that when a right directly contributes to people getting sick , then maybe it ’ s time to curtail that right .
That ’ s the thinking behind banning gatherings and church services , for example .
Yet getting a gun permit doesn ’ t endanger the public health to any appreciable degree .
Folks have a greater likelihood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ store than they do while getting or issuing a permit .
But if we ’ re going to play the need game , then let ’ s try this hypothetical on for size .
During the current emergency , it ’ s understandable that some newspapers wish to devote precious resources to various topics such as crime , politics , and lifestyle .
They ’ d likely continue covering sports if there were any sports to cover .
However , the current emergency necessitates a different approach .
Newspapers don ’ t actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during this difficult time .
They need to focus their limited resources on disease-related news exclusively .
Now , do you think that would fly with the editorial board at the Journal ?
Probably not .
It shouldn ’ t .
Our rights don ’ t go out the window because of COVID-19 and that includes the right to a free press .
It also includes the right to keep and bear arms , which the editorial board would do well to remember going forward .
None of us on this side of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health concerns , but I ’ m personally getting sick of those concerns being used as an excuse to curtail the rights of law-abiding Americans .
Just because some journalists who know everything they know about guns from watching bad action movies don ’ t think we need them just makes it that much worse .

One thing I try to pride myself on is my ability to get both sides of the argument, particularly around guns. While I get worked up like everyone and sometimes ascribe motives to some they might not actually have, I do try to step back and think about it calmly. After all, not everyone actually thinks of themselves as a tyrant. Remarkably few do, actually.
But it does get a little annoying when the other side of the debate makes no such attempt.
Take an editorial from the Winston-Salem Journal.
The Wake County sheriff, Gerald Baker, has enough real problems to deal with right now, as do law enforcement officials everywhere. People who want to rush out and buy guns, and people who worry about gun rights more than, apparently, public health and safety, need to give him a break.
I’m sorry, but the accusation that we care more about gun rights than public health is nothing more than an incendiary attempt to frame this as an either/or discussion.
Sheriff Baker was under fire not because of public health concerns, but his failure to balance those concerns with people’s rights.
Few people actually don’t care about public health at a time like this. There’s a reason so many of us are practicing social distancing, keeping home as much as possible, and generally avoiding contact with anyone not part of our immediate family. We’re not stupid.
On the same token, though, we don’t feel our rights should be shuffled aside so easily by the mandate of an elected official.
Not that anyone on the Journal‘s editorial board gives a damn about that, apparently.
Of course, for them, it doesn’t seem to matter about rights at all.
Odds are people wouldn’t be getting their permits any time soon anyway. By the time he called a suspension, Baker’s office had a backlog of 755 pending applications. It would be different if Baker were keeping people from getting something essential — say food or medication. But more guns are not what people need, especially now.
Who are they to determine what I or anyone else needs right now?
Besides, someone’s needs and someone’s rights have little to nothing to do with one another. The Second Amendment doesn’t have a clause that allows governments to just ignore it whenever people get sick.
Sure, a case can be made that when a right directly contributes to people getting sick, then maybe it’s time to curtail that right. That’s the thinking behind banning gatherings and church services, for example.
Yet getting a gun permit doesn’t endanger the public health to any appreciable degree. Folks have a greater likelihood of getting the virus at the grocery store than they do while getting or issuing a permit.
But if we’re going to play the need game, then let’s try this hypothetical on for size.
During the current emergency, it’s understandable that some newspapers wish to devote precious resources to various topics such as crime, politics, and lifestyle. They’d likely continue covering sports if there were any sports to cover. However, the current emergency necessitates a different approach. Newspapers don’t actually need to pen editorials on political matters during this difficult time. They need to focus their limited resources on disease-related news exclusively.
Now, do you think that would fly with the editorial board at the Journal?
Probably not. It shouldn’t. Our rights don’t go out the window because of COVID-19 and that includes the right to a free press.
It also includes the right to keep and bear arms, which the editorial board would do well to remember going forward.
None of us on this side of the discussion are oblivious to the public health concerns, but I’m personally getting sick of those concerns being used as an excuse to curtail the rights of law-abiding Americans. Just because some journalists who know everything they know about guns from watching bad action movies don’t think we need them just makes it that much worse.


bearingarms--2020-03-30--Victory! NJ Gov Backs Off Gun Store Shutdown

New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy abruptly reversed course on Monday and announced that gun stores in the Garden State , which have been closed for nearly two weeks , will now be allowed to re-open for business , though with modified hours and by appointment only to ensure social distancing policies .
The move by Murphy came just hours after officials with gun control groups Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action called on governors around the nation to follow Murphy ’ s lead and order gun stores to close .
Murphy ’ s original stay-at-home order issued on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down , and the commandant of the New Jersey State police followed suit soon after and stopped conducting background checks on firearms transfers .
That in turn led to lawsuits by the Second Amendment Foundation , the Firearms Policy Coalition , the New Jersey Second Amendment Society , and the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs , which challenged Murphy ’ s temporary ban on the legal acquisition of firearms as violations of the Second and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution .
Murphy had voiced his defiance to the lawsuits in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far as to say the closing of gun stores was a good thing .
At a press conference last week , the governor was asked about the fact that there was no legal way for New Jersey residents to acquire a firearm at the moment .
“ A safer society for my taste has fewer guns and not more guns , ” Murphy said Wednesday at his daily coronavirus press briefing .
“ The guns that do exist are at the hands of the right people , particularly trained members of law enforcement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ let ’ s hope it stays down , but we ’ re very comfortable where we landed on that , ” he continued , referring to his decision not to classify gun stores as essential businesses .
That was less than a week ago .
What changed ?
Well , the Department of Homeland Security released new guidance on critical members of the workforce over the weekend , and the firearms industry , from manufacturers down to retailers , were included as essential workers .
In fact Murphy told reporters on Monday that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ modifying his original order .
It looks like Murphy is taking a page from Gov .
Tom Wolf in Pennsylvania , who also originally didn ’ t include gun stores in his list of essential businesses , but backed off after several justices on the state Supreme Court opined that Wolf ’ s order was unconstitutional , and suggested allowing stores to operate by appointment only during the current emergency .
This is great news for would-be gun owners in the Garden State , though I suspect if the limited hours are too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the days ahead .
Gov .
Phil Murphy is no friend to gun owners , and his decision to allow gun stores to re-open wasn ’ t made out of respect for the rights of residents .
A huge thank you is owed to all of the organizations that brought suit against Murphy , as well as the organizations that worked to get the DHS guidance on critical workers modified to include the firearms industry .
Without those steps , I have no doubt that gun stores in New Jersey would still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with staff and employees prepping to open their doors tomorrow .
This is also a huge loss for gun control groups like Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action .
Even as they ’ re trying to convince governors to close gun stores , one of the few who actually did so reversed course .
It ’ s another sign that their messaging of “ gun safety means don ’ t own a gun ” is out of step with the feelings of most Americans right now .
At a crucial time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the so-called gun safety groups are demanding that any American who doesn ’ t already own a gun be prevented from buying one legally .
There ’ s nothing “ common sense ” about that , and it certainly doesn ’ t indicate any support for the Second Amendment .
All of their careful crafted “ moderate ” messaging is being thrown out the window in favor of a campaign to keep Americans from their most fundamental rights in a crisis , and I believe that they ’ re doing lasting harm to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prevent law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves and their families with a firearm .

New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy abruptly reversed course on Monday and announced that gun stores in the Garden State, which have been closed for nearly two weeks, will now be allowed to re-open for business, though with modified hours and by appointment only to ensure social distancing policies.
The move by Murphy came just hours after officials with gun control groups Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action called on governors around the nation to follow Murphy’s lead and order gun stores to close. Murphy’s original stay-at-home order issued on March 21st required gun stores to shut down, and the commandant of the New Jersey State police followed suit soon after and stopped conducting background checks on firearms transfers.
That in turn led to lawsuits by the Second Amendment Foundation, the Firearms Policy Coalition, the New Jersey Second Amendment Society, and the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, which challenged Murphy’s temporary ban on the legal acquisition of firearms as violations of the Second and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.
Murphy had voiced his defiance to the lawsuits in recent days, even going to so far as to say the closing of gun stores was a good thing. At a press conference last week, the governor was asked about the fact that there was no legal way for New Jersey residents to acquire a firearm at the moment.
“A safer society for my taste has fewer guns and not more guns,” Murphy said Wednesday at his daily coronavirus press briefing. “The guns that do exist are at the hands of the right people, particularly trained members of law enforcement. “Crime has been down and let’s hope it stays down, but we’re very comfortable where we landed on that,” he continued, referring to his decision not to classify gun stores as essential businesses.
That was less than a week ago. What changed? Well, the Department of Homeland Security released new guidance on critical members of the workforce over the weekend, and the firearms industry, from manufacturers down to retailers, were included as essential workers. In fact Murphy told reporters on Monday that’s the reason he’s modifying his original order.
“It wouldn’t be my definition but that’s the definition at the federal level and I didn’t get a vote on that,” Murphy said at his press briefing on Monday. The gun shops may re-open “by appointment only and under limited hours,” Murphy said. He said the state would continue to enforce its regulations on gun sales.
It looks like Murphy is taking a page from Gov. Tom Wolf in Pennsylvania, who also originally didn’t include gun stores in his list of essential businesses, but backed off after several justices on the state Supreme Court opined that Wolf’s order was unconstitutional, and suggested allowing stores to operate by appointment only during the current emergency.
This is great news for would-be gun owners in the Garden State, though I suspect if the limited hours are too restrictive, we may see additional litigation in the days ahead. Gov. Phil Murphy is no friend to gun owners, and his decision to allow gun stores to re-open wasn’t made out of respect for the rights of residents. A huge thank you is owed to all of the organizations that brought suit against Murphy, as well as the organizations that worked to get the DHS guidance on critical workers modified to include the firearms industry. Without those steps, I have no doubt that gun stores in New Jersey would still be dark today, instead of busy with staff and employees prepping to open their doors tomorrow.
This is also a huge loss for gun control groups like Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action. Even as they’re trying to convince governors to close gun stores, one of the few who actually did so reversed course. It’s another sign that their messaging of “gun safety means don’t own a gun” is out of step with the feelings of most Americans right now. At a crucial time in our nation’s history, the so-called gun safety groups are demanding that any American who doesn’t already own a gun be prevented from buying one legally.
There’s nothing “common sense” about that, and it certainly doesn’t indicate any support for the Second Amendment. All of their careful crafted “moderate” messaging is being thrown out the window in favor of a campaign to keep Americans from their most fundamental rights in a crisis, and I believe that they’re doing lasting harm to their brand with their blatant attempts to prevent law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves and their families with a firearm.


bearingarms--2020-03-30--RI Gun Bill Join Ranks Of Stalled Gun Control

I ’ m not going to make a case for COVID-19 being a good thing .
It ’ s a nasty disease that thousands have died from and tens of thousands more have been infected with .
It ’ s an ugly thing that I really wish had never come to our shores .
Unfortunately , it ’ s here and all we can do is try to deal with it .
Part of that is to at least acknowledge that it has led to a few good things .
For example , a number of gun control measures have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than become law , all because of COVID-19 .
Some Rhode Island gun control measures seem to be set to join that club .
Wednesday gun management monthly bill hearings for the Rhode Island Home Judiciary Committee ended up cancelled more than fears that a “ large crowd ” of listening to attendees could lead to the distribute of the Chinese coronavirus .
WPRI studies that Rhode Island ’ s state ’ s well being director , Dr. Nicole Alexander-Scott , created a “ strong suggestion ” the hearings be postponed .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , she observed that “ the virus can be distribute among people [ in ] close contact — a lot less than 6 feet aside.
” Alexander-Scott noticed , “ Cancelling or suspending huge occasions is an significant device to limit the distribute in Rhode Island , ” Among the the factors a massive group was envisioned at the hearing was the fact that somewhere around 17 charges dealing with guns ended up scheduled for consideration .
Of course , without those hearings , the bills can ’ t come up for a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to look like it might be a long while before we get to the point when these recommendations will be in our rearview mirror , it ’ s also likely it won ’ t be until after the legislative session .
So , COVID-19 will effectively kill the gun control bills .
These include an effort to define “ assault weapons ” and ban advertising them if they ’ re not “ registered.
” as well as measures seeking to ban incentives for teachers to get gun permits .
Not that any of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ court–after all , new firearms generally aren ’ t considered “ registered ” –but they could still jam up some folks in the meantime .
Only now , they aren ’ t going to become law .
Not this year , at least .
The downside , however , is that because this is COVID-19 related rather than an outright defeat , we ’ re likely to see these bills pop up again next year .
Anti-gunners are notoriously persistent , after all , and they will try to ram this down the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this while ignoring the fact that law-abiding citizens aren ’ t the problem in the first place .
Then again , Rhode Island is pretty low-crime as it is , so I fail to see what kind of problem they have that requires this kind of response .
Unless , of course , the “ problem ” as they see it is that not everyone is forced to agree with them that guns are bad , so they ’ re going to do everything they can to push things that direction .

I’m not going to make a case for COVID-19 being a good thing. It’s a nasty disease that thousands have died from and tens of thousands more have been infected with. It’s an ugly thing that I really wish had never come to our shores.
Unfortunately, it’s here and all we can do is try to deal with it.
Part of that is to at least acknowledge that it has led to a few good things. For example, a number of gun control measures have stalled out and will likely die rather than become law, all because of COVID-19.
Some Rhode Island gun control measures seem to be set to join that club.
Wednesday gun management monthly bill hearings for the Rhode Island Home Judiciary Committee ended up cancelled more than fears that a “large crowd” of listening to attendees could lead to the distribute of the Chinese coronavirus. WPRI studies that Rhode Island’s state’s well being director, Dr. Nicole Alexander-Scott, created a “strong suggestion” the hearings be postponed. In light of the predicted group of citizens, she observed that “the virus can be distribute among people [in] close contact — a lot less than 6 feet aside.” Alexander-Scott noticed, “Cancelling or suspending huge occasions is an significant device to limit the distribute in Rhode Island,” Among the the factors a massive group was envisioned at the hearing was the fact that somewhere around 17 charges dealing with guns ended up scheduled for consideration.
Of course, without those hearings, the bills can’t come up for a vote. Since it’s starting to look like it might be a long while before we get to the point when these recommendations will be in our rearview mirror, it’s also likely it won’t be until after the legislative session.
So, COVID-19 will effectively kill the gun control bills. These include an effort to define “assault weapons” and ban advertising them if they’re not “registered.” as well as measures seeking to ban incentives for teachers to get gun permits.
Not that any of those measures would likely hold up in court–after all, new firearms generally aren’t considered “registered”–but they could still jam up some folks in the meantime.
Only now, they aren’t going to become law. Not this year, at least.
The downside, however, is that because this is COVID-19 related rather than an outright defeat, we’re likely to see these bills pop up again next year. Anti-gunners are notoriously persistent, after all, and they will try to ram this down the throats of law-abiding Rhode Islanders.
All this while ignoring the fact that law-abiding citizens aren’t the problem in the first place. Then again, Rhode Island is pretty low-crime as it is, so I fail to see what kind of problem they have that requires this kind of response.
Unless, of course, the “problem” as they see it is that not everyone is forced to agree with them that guns are bad, so they’re going to do everything they can to push things that direction.


bearingarms--2020-03-31--WI Man Reportedly Assaults Roomie Over Possible COVID-19 Exposure

We ’ re all a little on edge right now , what with this whole plague thing going on .
For some , life isn ’ t very different .
They ’ re still able to shop , work , and otherwise exist fairly normally because there ’ s not really an issue where they ’ re at .
For others , it ’ s a little different .
Some of us are living very different lives right now because of COVID-19 .
Yet part of this isn ’ t so much because everyone is so vulnerable , but because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I don ’ t mind minimizing contact with others because both my kids have a history of breathing issues , for example .
Others , however , are a little too jumpy about this .
Thomas Mikulance , 53 , of the 400 block of Three Mile Road , is charged with misdemeanor battery and disorderly conduct , with domestic abuse assessments .
According to the criminal complaint : On Wednesday , Caledonia Police responded to the 400 block of Three Mile Road for a report of an assault .
The caller said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ residence covered in blood and said he had been assaulted by his roommate , Mikulance .
The victim returned to the apartment with blood around his nose and told police that he told Mikulance that he may have come into contact with someone who tested positive for COVID-19 .
The victim said Mikulance called him “ nasty ” and was angry that the victim did not wash his hands , a precaution in stemming the spread of the virus .
The victim also claimed Mikulance spit on him and hit him several times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know whether the victim washed his hands or not .
I don ’ t know that he took any precautions at all .
None of that actually matters right now .
What matters is that someone got so worked up over this disease that he committed an act of violence because of the potential for exposure .
Mikulance apparently has been charged with domestic violence a couple of times before , which suggests that this isn ’ t a new thing for his temper .
The difference , however , is the trigger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kind of thing to happen a whole lot more .
People are suddenly cooped up in their homes with other people with almost no outlet for interaction with others and tempers wear pretty thin fairly quickly .
That ’ s even more true if we ’ re talking about roommates who simply cohabitate but rarely interact or are even hostile to one another .
This kind of thing is going to happen .
Especially as no one is really sure what ’ s accurate and what isn ’ t .
We have media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for at least some patients , all while the government is saying we ’ re not even remotely to that point .
It ’ s confusing , so it ’ s not surprising that there ’ s at least some degree of anger bubbling up .
That does not justify violently assaulting someone .
It never will .
I mean , I could get it if the roommate had intentionally tried to infect Mikulance or something .
Then you could call it self-defense .
Instead , you ’ ve got Mikulance allegedly acting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if the roommate does have the virus , I ’ m pretty sure punching him violates all those social distancing rules we ’ ve heard so much about and thus increases one ’ s likelihood of infection .
Just a hunch , though .

We’re all a little on edge right now, what with this whole plague thing going on. For some, life isn’t very different. They’re still able to shop, work, and otherwise exist fairly normally because there’s not really an issue where they’re at.
For others, it’s a little different. Some of us are living very different lives right now because of COVID-19.
Yet part of this isn’t so much because everyone is so vulnerable, but because it helps protect those who are. I don’t mind minimizing contact with others because both my kids have a history of breathing issues, for example.
Others, however, are a little too jumpy about this.
Thomas Mikulance, 53, of the 400 block of Three Mile Road, is charged with misdemeanor battery and disorderly conduct, with domestic abuse assessments. According to the criminal complaint: On Wednesday, Caledonia Police responded to the 400 block of Three Mile Road for a report of an assault. The caller said that his friend showed up at his residence covered in blood and said he had been assaulted by his roommate, Mikulance. The victim returned to the apartment with blood around his nose and told police that he told Mikulance that he may have come into contact with someone who tested positive for COVID-19. The victim said Mikulance called him “nasty” and was angry that the victim did not wash his hands, a precaution in stemming the spread of the virus.
The victim also claimed Mikulance spit on him and hit him several times.
Now, I don’t know whether the victim washed his hands or not. I don’t know that he took any precautions at all. None of that actually matters right now.
What matters is that someone got so worked up over this disease that he committed an act of violence because of the potential for exposure.
Mikulance apparently has been charged with domestic violence a couple of times before, which suggests that this isn’t a new thing for his temper. The difference, however, is the trigger for him.
Honestly, expect this kind of thing to happen a whole lot more. People are suddenly cooped up in their homes with other people with almost no outlet for interaction with others and tempers wear pretty thin fairly quickly. That’s even more true if we’re talking about roommates who simply cohabitate but rarely interact or are even hostile to one another.
This kind of thing is going to happen.
Especially as no one is really sure what’s accurate and what isn’t. We have media reports of hospitals considering universal DNR orders for at least some patients, all while the government is saying we’re not even remotely to that point. It’s confusing, so it’s not surprising that there’s at least some degree of anger bubbling up.
That does not justify violently assaulting someone. It never will.
I mean, I could get it if the roommate had intentionally tried to infect Mikulance or something. Then you could call it self-defense. Instead, you’ve got Mikulance allegedly acting like an ass.
More importantly, if the roommate does have the virus, I’m pretty sure punching him violates all those social distancing rules we’ve heard so much about and thus increases one’s likelihood of infection. Just a hunch, though.


bearingarms--2020-03-31--NC Sheriff Agrees To Start Processing Pistol Licenses Again

Wake County Sheriff Gerald Baker agreed on Tuesday that his office will resume accepting pistol purchase permit applications within seven days .
In a consent order filed Tuesday in Wake County , the sheriff has agreed to “ modify the application process ” to ensure that applications can still be received and processed while allowing for social distancing procedures to minimize the spread of the coronavirus among employees of the sheriff ’ s office and the public .
The agreement comes just days after the Second Amendment Foundation , Firearms Policy Council , and Grassroots NC filed a federal lawsuit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ applications , which are a necessary step in order to legally purchase a handgun in the state .
Under North Carolina law , sheriffs have 14 business days to process the applications , but Baker said his office was overwhelmed by the sharp increase in applications , and needed more than a month to simply process the backlog .
I think gun owners are aware of and understanding of the need to modify some procedures in order to protect everyone ’ s health , but to simply stop accepting applications .
Other sheriffs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accepting applications in the parking lot outside of the sheriff ’ s office , limiting visits to appointments only , and cleaning the office between visits .
Baker could have done so from the outset , but he chose instead to simply close the office down to Wake County residents hoping to purchase a handgun for self-defense .
The original lawsuit filed by the Second Amendment organizations also challenged Baker ’ s decision to hold off on accepting concealed carry applications , but Tuesday ’ s order only mentions pistol purchase permits .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ does allow the court to revisit the issue for “ further guidance or hearings ” as necessary , so we may see another hearing if the sheriff continues to ignore concealed carry applications over the next five weeks .
Then again , we may not .
North Carolina is an open carry state , and with limited resources , Second Amendment organizations are having to prioritize their legal battles .
States like Maine , New Mexico , New York , and Washington are still imposing restrictions on the ability of brick-and-mortar gun stores @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a higher priority than a case dealing with the temporary suspension of concealed carry applications in one county .
Congratulations to all the plaintiffs in this case for quickly reaching an agreement with Sheriff Baker that will allow for residents to at least acquire a firearm for self-defense if they choose to do so , and stay tuned .
The Second Amendment Foundation ’ s Alan Gottlieb told Bearing Arms Tuesday afternoon that more litigation is coming for officials who still refuse to recognize that the right to keep and bear arms is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one .

Wake County Sheriff Gerald Baker agreed on Tuesday that his office will resume accepting pistol purchase permit applications within seven days. In a consent order filed Tuesday in Wake County, the sheriff has agreed to “modify the application process” to ensure that applications can still be received and processed while allowing for social distancing procedures to minimize the spread of the coronavirus among employees of the sheriff’s office and the public.
The agreement comes just days after the Second Amendment Foundation, Firearms Policy Council, and Grassroots NC filed a federal lawsuit over Baker’s suspension of permit applications, which are a necessary step in order to legally purchase a handgun in the state. Under North Carolina law, sheriffs have 14 business days to process the applications, but Baker said his office was overwhelmed by the sharp increase in applications, and needed more than a month to simply process the backlog.
“A public health emergency doesn’t suspend or nullify the right to keep and bear arms,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “During times of emergency is when a citizen needs the ability to obtain the means of self-defense, and Sheriff Baker’s decision stands directly in the way of that.”
I think gun owners are aware of and understanding of the need to modify some procedures in order to protect everyone’s health, but to simply stop accepting applications. Other sheriffs in North Carolina have adopted measures like accepting applications in the parking lot outside of the sheriff’s office, limiting visits to appointments only, and cleaning the office between visits. Baker could have done so from the outset, but he chose instead to simply close the office down to Wake County residents hoping to purchase a handgun for self-defense.
The original lawsuit filed by the Second Amendment organizations also challenged Baker’s decision to hold off on accepting concealed carry applications, but Tuesday’s order only mentions pistol purchase permits. The order by Judge A. Graham Shirley does allow the court to revisit the issue for “further guidance or hearings” as necessary, so we may see another hearing if the sheriff continues to ignore concealed carry applications over the next five weeks. Then again, we may not. North Carolina is an open carry state, and with limited resources, Second Amendment organizations are having to prioritize their legal battles. States like Maine, New Mexico, New York, and Washington are still imposing restrictions on the ability of brick-and-mortar gun stores to operate, and those may be a higher priority than a case dealing with the temporary suspension of concealed carry applications in one county.
Congratulations to all the plaintiffs in this case for quickly reaching an agreement with Sheriff Baker that will allow for residents to at least acquire a firearm for self-defense if they choose to do so, and stay tuned. The Second Amendment Foundation’s Alan Gottlieb told Bearing Arms Tuesday afternoon that more litigation is coming for officials who still refuse to recognize that the right to keep and bear arms is infringed when you can’t acquire one.


bearingarms--2020-03-31--The Trace Tries To Use Shame Against New NRA Partner Network

With the National Rifle Association shuttering NRATV , the nation ’ s oldest civil rights organization no longer really had a good outlet to make sure it ’ s views were heard .
While they have their magazines , a lot of people are like me .
They don ’ t actually read them anymore and they end up collecting dust before being tossed by wives who no longer believe you when you say , “ I ’ m going to read that.
” Or maybe that ’ s just me .
Anyway , there are reasons the NRA would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their point of view is heard .
That ’ s not going to be CNN or MSNBC and even Fox News is starting to give hints of a leftward lean from time to time .
So , the NRA turned to the internet and partnered with BlazeTV .
Unsurprisingly , The Trace is already trying to make that untenable .
Their tool ?
Shame .
“ We need cold hard facts that we can share with friends , family and co-workers — unfiltered and uncensored by the fake news media and extremist gun-control @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Grable wrote to readers in the latest edition of American Rifleman , the NRA ’ s flagship magazine .
“ That ’ s why NRA has partnered with BlazeTV — a news and entertainment organization for people who love America — to bring you up-to-date and honest information about the issues that will come to shape our nation in the years to come.
” BlazeTV was established in 2018 when two conservative media outlets , Glenn Beck ’ s The Blaze and Mark Levin ’ s CRTV , merged .
The network serves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to reach their audiences through streaming video , podcasts , and radio .
Last week , as the coronavirus death toll in the United States and the number of known cases grew exponentially , BlazeTV ’ s Steve Deace told his audience that America was risking another Great Depression “ over a virus that , the more we learn about it , the less lethal it becomes.
” He described a “ cultural Pearl Harbor ” in which leftists and pagans are using hysteria over the virus as “ their weapon of mass @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” to America .
The NRA ’ s membership skews older and male , a cohort for whom the virus has proven most lethal .
On his March 24 show , Beck urged Americans “ over 50 ” to return to work , “ even if we all get sick , I ’ d rather die than kill the country , because it ’ s not the economy that ’ s dying , it ’ s the country.
” Another BlazeTV figure , Steven Crowder , who has labeled the AIDS epidemic a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Twitter followers on March 9 : “ How do I feel about the # COVID19 panic ?
I ’ m not participating .
Carry on.
” On his show the following day , Crowder cautioned that the situation could deteriorate , but added : “ We may be totally fine by this point tomorrow !
” “ It ’ s not as dire as the media want you to believe , ” Crowder said later .
“ They create this hysteria without any context … so that they can pin the virus and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” In other words , because they ’ re not completely freaking out over the virus , they should be shamed .
Here ’ s the thing , though .
Deace isn ’ t wrong in saying that the virus appears to be less lethal as we learn more .
The death rate seems to be trending down as we learn how best to treat this disease .
Not a lot , but it ’ s still decreasing and some existing drugs appear to work quite well and fighting the disease .
Further @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dead have been revised down , including in places that had literally just begun their self-isolation mere days before .
While a case can be made that the measures worked , an alternate case can also be made that they were unnecessary in many places .
Beck is expressing his own opinions and stating that he would be willing to risk his life to keep the economic engine of this country running .
He ’ s not talking arbitrarily about some faceless group but about himself .
Crowder isn ’ t saying there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his opinion that much of the panic is media-driven rather than based on the facts on the ground isn ’ t exactly wrong either .
As I ’ ve noted , I live in one of the worst outbreaks in the country .
Last week , I found out it ’ s one of the worst outbreaks in the world when looked at on a per capita basis .
Even I recognize the role the media has played in building the hysteria .
Hell , CNN criticized President Trump for giving hope .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Well , that remains to be seen .
However , they ’ re offering up topics for debate .
They also support the NRA ’ s mission , which is why BlazeTV partnered with them .
What The Trace is trying to do is alienate the NRA from any kind of outreach to non-members , something BlazeTV can help them with .
They want to make it unpalatable for the NRA to work with BlazeTV in an effort to make the organization back away and look elsewhere .
They ’ re taking a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these measures and will they lead some something worse–and trying to use it to shut down not just this discussion , but the discussion about gun rights as well .

With the National Rifle Association shuttering NRATV, the nation’s oldest civil rights organization no longer really had a good outlet to make sure it’s views were heard. While they have their magazines, a lot of people are like me. They don’t actually read them anymore and they end up collecting dust before being tossed by wives who no longer believe you when you say, “I’m going to read that.”
Or maybe that’s just me.
Anyway, there are reasons the NRA would look for an outlet to make sure their point of view is heard. That’s not going to be CNN or MSNBC and even Fox News is starting to give hints of a leftward lean from time to time.
So, the NRA turned to the internet and partnered with BlazeTV.
Unsurprisingly, The Trace is already trying to make that untenable. Their tool? Shame.
“We need cold hard facts that we can share with friends, family and co-workers — unfiltered and uncensored by the fake news media and extremist gun-control candidates,” NRA membership director Todd Grable wrote to readers in the latest edition of American Rifleman, the NRA’s flagship magazine. “That’s why NRA has partnered with BlazeTV — a news and entertainment organization for people who love America — to bring you up-to-date and honest information about the issues that will come to shape our nation in the years to come.” BlazeTV was established in 2018 when two conservative media outlets, Glenn Beck’s The Blaze and Mark Levin’s CRTV, merged. The network serves as a platform for right-wing media personalities to reach their audiences through streaming video, podcasts, and radio. Last week, as the coronavirus death toll in the United States and the number of known cases grew exponentially, BlazeTV’s Steve Deace told his audience that America was risking another Great Depression “over a virus that, the more we learn about it, the less lethal it becomes.” He described a “cultural Pearl Harbor” in which leftists and pagans are using hysteria over the virus as “their weapon of mass destruction to deliver the last kill shot” to America. … The NRA’s membership skews older and male, a cohort for whom the virus has proven most lethal. On his March 24 show, Beck urged Americans “over 50” to return to work, “even if we all get sick, I’d rather die than kill the country, because it’s not the economy that’s dying, it’s the country.” Another BlazeTV figure, Steven Crowder, who has labeled the AIDS epidemic a hoax, offered this to his million Twitter followers on March 9: “How do I feel about the #COVID19 panic? I’m not participating. Carry on.” On his show the following day, Crowder cautioned that the situation could deteriorate, but added: “We may be totally fine by this point tomorrow!” “It’s not as dire as the media want you to believe,” Crowder said later. “They create this hysteria without any context … so that they can pin the virus and the negative economic impact on Donald Trump.”
In other words, because they’re not completely freaking out over the virus, they should be shamed.
Here’s the thing, though. Deace isn’t wrong in saying that the virus appears to be less lethal as we learn more. The death rate seems to be trending down as we learn how best to treat this disease. Not a lot, but it’s still decreasing and some existing drugs appear to work quite well and fighting the disease.
Further, estimates of the total number of dead have been revised down, including in places that had literally just begun their self-isolation mere days before. While a case can be made that the measures worked, an alternate case can also be made that they were unnecessary in many places.
Beck is expressing his own opinions and stating that he would be willing to risk his life to keep the economic engine of this country running. He’s not talking arbitrarily about some faceless group but about himself.
Crowder isn’t saying there’s no disease, only stating his opinion that much of the panic is media-driven rather than based on the facts on the ground isn’t exactly wrong either. As I’ve noted, I live in one of the worst outbreaks in the country. Last week, I found out it’s one of the worst outbreaks in the world when looked at on a per capita basis. Even I recognize the role the media has played in building the hysteria. Hell, CNN criticized President Trump for giving hope.
Now, are these gentlemen right? Well, that remains to be seen. However, they’re offering up topics for debate.
They also support the NRA’s mission, which is why BlazeTV partnered with them.
What The Trace is trying to do is alienate the NRA from any kind of outreach to non-members, something BlazeTV can help them with. They want to make it unpalatable for the NRA to work with BlazeTV in an effort to make the organization back away and look elsewhere.
They’re taking a legitimate point for debate–just how necessary are these measures and will they lead some something worse–and trying to use it to shut down not just this discussion, but the discussion about gun rights as well.


bearingarms--2020-03-31--Gun Stores Reopen For Business In New Jersey and Los Angeles County

Gun stores ordered closed by several anti-gun elected officials are open for business today after stunning reversals on Monday in the state of New Jersey and Los Angeles County .
The Washington Free Beacon ‘ s Stephen Gutowski joins me on today ’ s Bearing Arms ’ Cam & Co to talk about the latest developments , and well as the few remaining holdouts that are still preventing firearms retailers from selling to customers .
While Gov .
Phil Murphy in New Jersey and Sheriff Alex Villanueva in Los Angeles County have allowed stores to re-open , albeit with some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states are still being very vague about whether gun stores can open or not .
According to the latest guidance from the National Shooting Sports Foundation , there are now no states that are outright prohibiting gun stores from conducting business , as was the case in New Jersey .
However , the executive orders issued by governors in California , Maine , Massachusetts , New Mexico , New York , and Vermont have all declined to declare gun stores essential businesses to this point .
Regulations vary from state to state , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ businesses that only sell firearms and ammunition to close , while stores that sell guns and ammunition along with “ essential ” items allowed to remain open and firearms sales to take place .
In New Mexico , there ’ s also an exemption for stores that sell “ household consumer products ” or “ services necessary to maintain the safety of residences ” , according to the NSSF , and the Santa Fe New Mexican reported on Monday that some stores in the state are staying open in apparent defiance of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ challenge is the governor ’ s order is incomprehensible , ” said Mark Abramson , owner of Los Ranchos gun store in Albuquerque , which is only allowing people to pick up firearms they ’ d already purchased before the order took effect .
“ There ’ s a clear exception for security and police , and the challenge is if you ’ re a hardware store that sells guns , it appears you ’ re OK , ” he said .
“ If you ’ re a gas station that sells ammunition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appear to be , in enforcement , anyway , selecting a single industry , yet we ’ re providing the same service .
“ The police have driven by like four times to make sure we ’ re shut down or largely shut down , and we are , ” Abramson added .
Nora Meyers Sackett , a spokeswoman for the governor , said in an email the order is clear : “ If a business is not listed as essential in the order , then they ’ re not essential and they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be looking for ways to opt into the order to close , not for excuses to opt out , ” Sackett continued .
“ This is true for every single business in every single industry .
We understand it ’ s so hard for businesses to change or suspend their operations in this way .
But public health demands it .
… This is the only way we will slow the spread of the virus.
” If I were a gun store in New Mexico , I think I ’ d probably @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for sale as well and call myself a hardware store .
Interestingly enough , the public health order issued by Gov .
Michelle Lujan Grisham does allow for armed security services to continue to operate , but if your personal safety is a do-it-yourself job , you ’ re out of luck unless you ’ ve already acquired your firearms and ammunition or live near a store that sells firearms in addition to other “ essential ” goods .
Be sure to check out the entire interview with Stephen Gutowski above , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recidivist report , our armed citizen story , and today ’ s good deed as well .
Thanks for watching , listening , and spreading the word !

Gun stores ordered closed by several anti-gun elected officials are open for business today after stunning reversals on Monday in the state of New Jersey and Los Angeles County. The Washington Free Beacon‘s Stephen Gutowski joins me on today’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co to talk about the latest developments, and well as the few remaining holdouts that are still preventing firearms retailers from selling to customers.
While Gov. Phil Murphy in New Jersey and Sheriff Alex Villanueva in Los Angeles County have allowed stores to re-open, albeit with some restrictions, the governors in several other states are still being very vague about whether gun stores can open or not. According to the latest guidance from the National Shooting Sports Foundation, there are now no states that are outright prohibiting gun stores from conducting business, as was the case in New Jersey. However, the executive orders issued by governors in California, Maine, Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York, and Vermont have all declined to declare gun stores essential businesses to this point.
Regulations vary from state to state, with Maine, for instance, ordering businesses that only sell firearms and ammunition to close, while stores that sell guns and ammunition along with “essential” items allowed to remain open and firearms sales to take place. In New Mexico, there’s also an exemption for stores that sell “household consumer products” or “services necessary to maintain the safety of residences”, according to the NSSF, and the Santa Fe New Mexican reported on Monday that some stores in the state are staying open in apparent defiance of the governor’s order.
“The challenge is the governor’s order is incomprehensible,” said Mark Abramson, owner of Los Ranchos gun store in Albuquerque, which is only allowing people to pick up firearms they’d already purchased before the order took effect. “There’s a clear exception for security and police, and the challenge is if you’re a hardware store that sells guns, it appears you’re OK,” he said. “If you’re a gas station that sells ammunition, you’re OK. They appear to be, in enforcement, anyway, selecting a single industry, yet we’re providing the same service. “The police have driven by like four times to make sure we’re shut down or largely shut down, and we are,” Abramson added. Nora Meyers Sackett, a spokeswoman for the governor, said in an email the order is clear: “If a business is not listed as essential in the order, then they’re not essential and they are ordered closed. “Businesses need to be looking for ways to opt into the order to close, not for excuses to opt out,” Sackett continued. “This is true for every single business in every single industry. We understand it’s so hard for businesses to change or suspend their operations in this way. But public health demands it. … This is the only way we will slow the spread of the virus.”
If I were a gun store in New Mexico, I think I’d probably start offering a few hammers and nails for sale as well and call myself a hardware store. Interestingly enough, the public health order issued by Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham does allow for armed security services to continue to operate, but if your personal safety is a do-it-yourself job, you’re out of luck unless you’ve already acquired your firearms and ammunition or live near a store that sells firearms in addition to other “essential” goods.
Be sure to check out the entire interview with Stephen Gutowski above, and stick around afterwards for today’s recidivist report, our armed citizen story, and today’s good deed as well. Thanks for watching, listening, and spreading the word!


bearingarms--2020-03-31--Court Tells Ohio School District To Stop Armed Teacher Program

An Ohio appellate court says a school district in the state can not allow teachers and staff to carry firearms to protect students , unless the staff undergo the same 700 hours of training that the state requires for law enforcement officers .
The ruling , authored by Judge Robert Ringland , is a moot point at the moment with Ohio schools closed until at least May 1st , but could have a major impact on school safety in the district when students return .
In his opinion , Ringland says that state law requires than any armed security in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ received the same amount of training that police officers receive , even if the staff aren ’ t serving as law enforcement .
“ The express language of the statute does not suggest an intention to allow teachers or staff to carry a firearm while on duty with less training than that indicated in the statute , ” Judge Robert Ringland wrote for the court .
“ Rather , the plain language of the statute reveals that a board of education may only employ such persons if they have received significant training or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” The appellate court ’ s decision overturns a ruling by an Ohio district judge , who determined last year that because the armed school staff weren ’ t police officers , they weren ’ t required to have the same level of training as they would need in order to serve as a cop .
“ Clearly teachers , administrators , administrative assistants and custodians , along with most , if not all , other school employees are not employed by educational institutions in such capacity , unlike someone such as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he wrote in his decision , which was obtained by local newspaper Journal-News .

The lawsuit was filed by several parents in the Madison school district, but Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown Law served as co-counsel in the case, and the anti-gun litigation arm of Everytown for Gun Safety has been challenging policies allowing armed school staff in several other cases around the county as well.
The superintendent of the Madison school district says the school board will be weighing all of their options, including taking the case to the Ohio Supreme Court. While this suit only challenged the policy in Madison, there are dozens of school districts around the state that have adopted similar rules in recent years, particularly in rural areas. In Tuscarawas County, for example, at least five school districts allow armed school staff. The local sheriff points out that police officers in Ohio may have to undergo 700 hours of training, but only 60 hours of that involves firearms.
Tuscarawas County Sheriff Orvis Campbell said he believes that area educators who have been armed have the training and skills necessary to keep everyone safe. Teachers there have gone through FASTER training, provided by the Buckeye Firearms Association. FASTER stands for Faculty/Administrator Safety Training & Emergency Response. Police officers who go to a police academy receive 60 hours of training on firearms, and two days of that is in the classroom, Campbell said. By comparison, area teachers have been given three separate weeks of training. “I put guys through one of them, and it’s very good,” he said. “All of them are qualifying at at least the same level as every peace officer (in Ohio), and all of them have kept up so far,” Campbell said.
I’m not sure why armed school staff would need to undergo hundreds of hours of training on defensive driving, arrests, crime scene investigation, and more, given the fact that they will never actually need to put any of that into use. Armed teachers aren’t police. They’re a first line of defense in case of an active shooter on school grounds, and it’s ridiculous that the 12th Appellate Court in Ohio has taken the position that armed teachers must, in effect, be police officers too.
Hopefully this will be appealed to the state Supreme Court and we’ll see a better decision. In the meantime, it might be a good idea for lawmakers to revisit the applicable statute and make it clear that districts can decide for themselves how best to protect their students, including armed school staff if necessary.