bearingarms--2020-03-30--Chicago Crooks No Match For Chicago Armed Citizens

While crime is down in Chicago at the moment , it hasn ’ t disappeared entirely .
There are still bad actors on the streets , but thankfully there are also tens of thousands of concealed carry licensees in the city , and several of them have been forced to protect themselves in recent days .
Fox 32 reports that a pair of armed citizens were able to protect themselves when a man opened fire on them on the city ’ s south side Sunday afternoon .
The man opened fire at a southbound vehicle about 5:20 p.m. in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chicago police said .
Two men inside the vehicle , 21 and 29 , returned shots , striking the older man in the abdomen , side and leg .
He was taken to Christ Medical Center in Oak Lawn in critical condition , police said .
Neither of the men in the vehicle was hurt .
According to police , both men who were targeted possess concealed carry licenses , and while the investigation continues , it looks right now to be a case of self-defense .
Thursday evening , another armed citizen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a crime spree in the city ’ s Rogers Park neighborhood .
CWB Chicago says an armed man engaged in a carjacking and robbed two businesses before he was shot at by a concealed carry holder .
It all started around 9 p.m. when the offender displayed a gun in his waistband as he tried to rob Little Caesars , 7001 North Clark , the reports show .
The man left empty-handed and immediately robbed Taqueria Hernandez across the street at 6983 North Clark .
At 9:04 p.m. , the offender flashed a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1700 block of North Lunt , the reports said .
He got away with the man ’ s silver 2008 Saturn sedan , which bears a license plate that begins with BK911 .
But the gunman made a tactical error around 9:15 p.m. when he walked up to a concealed carry holder on the 7000 block of North Paulina , pulled out a gun , and said , “ give me all you got.
” The would-be victim pulled out his own gun and opened fire on the offender , squeezing off at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officers reported .
No one sought medical attention for gunshot wounds from nearby hospitals , so it appears the robber was not struck .
The concealed carry holder may not have wounded the suspect , but he at least stopped the attack .
At the moment , police don ’ t have a suspect in custody , but that will hopefully soon change .
Just a few years ago , these stories would have been guaranteed to have a very different outcome , because there were no concealed carry holders in Chicago , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ matter .
Since 2012 , when Illinois politicians reluctantly accepted a shall-issue concealed carry law instead of trying to defend their ban on carrying firearms at the Supreme Court , tens of thousands of Chicagoans have embraced their right to carry , including at least three who used their firearms to protect their lives over the past week .

While crime is down in Chicago at the moment, it hasn’t disappeared entirely. There are still bad actors on the streets, but thankfully there are also tens of thousands of concealed carry licensees in the city, and several of them have been forced to protect themselves in recent days.
Fox 32 reports that a pair of armed citizens were able to protect themselves when a man opened fire on them on the city’s south side Sunday afternoon.
The man opened fire at a southbound vehicle about 5:20 p.m. in the 7900 block of South Knox Avenue, Chicago police said. Two men inside the vehicle, 21 and 29, returned shots, striking the older man in the abdomen, side and leg. He was taken to Christ Medical Center in Oak Lawn in critical condition, police said. Neither of the men in the vehicle was hurt.
According to police, both men who were targeted possess concealed carry licenses, and while the investigation continues, it looks right now to be a case of self-defense.
Thursday evening, another armed citizen was able to put a stop to a crime spree in the city’s Rogers Park neighborhood. CWB Chicago says an armed man engaged in a carjacking and robbed two businesses before he was shot at by a concealed carry holder.
It all started around 9 p.m. when the offender displayed a gun in his waistband as he tried to rob Little Caesars, 7001 North Clark, the reports show. The man left empty-handed and immediately robbed Taqueria Hernandez across the street at 6983 North Clark. At 9:04 p.m., the offender flashed a gun and carjacked a driver on the 1700 block of North Lunt, the reports said. He got away with the man’s silver 2008 Saturn sedan, which bears a license plate that begins with BK911. But the gunman made a tactical error around 9:15 p.m. when he walked up to a concealed carry holder on the 7000 block of North Paulina, pulled out a gun, and said, “give me all you got.” The would-be victim pulled out his own gun and opened fire on the offender, squeezing off at least five rounds at the man, officers reported. No one sought medical attention for gunshot wounds from nearby hospitals, so it appears the robber was not struck.
The concealed carry holder may not have wounded the suspect, but he at least stopped the attack. At the moment, police don’t have a suspect in custody, but that will hopefully soon change.
Just a few years ago, these stories would have been guaranteed to have a very different outcome, because there were no concealed carry holders in Chicago, or the state of Illinois for that matter. Since 2012, when Illinois politicians reluctantly accepted a shall-issue concealed carry law instead of trying to defend their ban on carrying firearms at the Supreme Court, tens of thousands of Chicagoans have embraced their right to carry, including at least three who used their firearms to protect their lives over the past week.


bearingarms--2020-03-30--Permit Applications Surging In NJ As Gov Cuts Off Access To Gun Sales

Communities across the state of New Jersey are seeing a soaring number of applications for pistol permits and Firearms ID cards , even as Gov .
Phil Murphy and the NJ State Police have cut off the ability to legally acquire firearms by shuttering gun stores and shutting down firearms background checks .
According to the Asbury Park Press , applications have increased 400 % in some towns compared to last month .
Capt .
Steve Laskiewicz of the Jackson Police Department said Wednesday the department received 54 applications , a more than three-fold increase , in the past week @ @ @ @ @ @ @ February , it was 16 .
“ We ’ ve seen an uptick in a big way , ” said Sgt .
James Kelly of the Brick Township Police Department… In Marlboro , whether from an increase in applications or a slow-down in processing them or both , the number of applications in process have jumped four fold .
Thirty days ago , there were 52 .
Two weeks ago that number reached 80 .
It now stands at 195 , Marlboro police Captain Stephen Levy said .
Keep in mind that residents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , for the moment anyway , they can ’ t actually purchase a firearm even if they receive their FID card or pistol purchase permit .
It appears that Murphy ’ s anti-gun moves have done nothing to quell the growing desire to own a gun in the Garden State .
If anything , Murphy has probably caused some folks to take the plunge who wouldn ’ t have otherwise .
I ’ ve seen some gun owners on social media get pretty dismissive about the rise in new gun owners , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trying to legally buy a gun .
I ’ ve seen variations on the theme of “ They should have already had one ” from several gun owners , but honestly , that argument doesn ’ t fly with me .
According to Scott Bach with the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs , there are about 1-million gun owners in the state , and about 7-million residents who don ’ t own a firearm .
In New Jersey , the anti-gun mentality is strong , and comes from elected officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the culture at large .
It ’ s not surprising to me that some folks in the state are realizing for the first time in their lives that they may have only been hearing from one side of the issue , and that the Second Amendment is more important to them than it was even a month ago .
These new gun owners , and those applying to receive government permission to exercise their constitutional rights , are potential allies in our fight to strengthen and secure our Second Amendment , but if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for not becoming a gun owner before now , we ’ re not doing them or us any favors .
Regardless of how late they may have shown up to the party , they ’ re here now , and we need to welcome them with open arms and encourage them to get involved in the legislative , legal , and cultural fights that some gun owners have been engaged in for decades .

Communities across the state of New Jersey are seeing a soaring number of applications for pistol permits and Firearms ID cards, even as Gov. Phil Murphy and the NJ State Police have cut off the ability to legally acquire firearms by shuttering gun stores and shutting down firearms background checks.
According to the Asbury Park Press, applications have increased 400% in some towns compared to last month.
Capt. Steve Laskiewicz of the Jackson Police Department said Wednesday the department received 54 applications, a more than three-fold increase, in the past week. During the same time frame in February, it was 16. Brick’s applications have also risen. “We’ve seen an uptick in a big way,” said Sgt. James Kelly of the Brick Township Police Department… In Marlboro, whether from an increase in applications or a slow-down in processing them or both, the number of applications in process have jumped four fold. Thirty days ago, there were 52. Two weeks ago that number reached 80. It now stands at 195, Marlboro police Captain Stephen Levy said.
Keep in mind that residents are applying for these permits knowing that, for the moment anyway, they can’t actually purchase a firearm even if they receive their FID card or pistol purchase permit. It appears that Murphy’s anti-gun moves have done nothing to quell the growing desire to own a gun in the Garden State. If anything, Murphy has probably caused some folks to take the plunge who wouldn’t have otherwise.
I’ve seen some gun owners on social media get pretty dismissive about the rise in new gun owners, and the difficulty that some Americans are having trying to legally buy a gun. I’ve seen variations on the theme of “They should have already had one” from several gun owners, but honestly, that argument doesn’t fly with me. According to Scott Bach with the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, there are about 1-million gun owners in the state, and about 7-million residents who don’t own a firearm. In New Jersey, the anti-gun mentality is strong, and comes from elected officials, the local media, and even the culture at large. It’s not surprising to me that some folks in the state are realizing for the first time in their lives that they may have only been hearing from one side of the issue, and that the Second Amendment is more important to them than it was even a month ago.
These new gun owners, and those applying to receive government permission to exercise their constitutional rights, are potential allies in our fight to strengthen and secure our Second Amendment, but if we treat them dismissively or with contempt for not becoming a gun owner before now, we’re not doing them or us any favors. Regardless of how late they may have shown up to the party, they’re here now, and we need to welcome them with open arms and encourage them to get involved in the legislative, legal, and cultural fights that some gun owners have been engaged in for decades.


bearingarms--2020-03-30--GA Lawmaker Wants To Suspend Carry Laws During Crisis

Whether you think COVID-19 spells the end of the human race or think it ’ s just another version of the flu , the truth is that we ’ re in the midst of a very real crisis .
The disease kills the vulnerable and makes life miserable for plenty of others while it also spreads fairly easily .
It ’ s also precipitated a lot of closures of critical government functions .
Meanwhile , some states tried to get away with shutting down the gun stores , using COVID-19 as a pretext .
However , a lawmaker in my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different proposal .
A state lawmaker in Georgia wants to make it legal to carry a concealed firearm anywhere in the state because of the coronavirus .
“ We need to suspend enforcement , especially during the state of emergency , when so many individuals need to be able to defend themselves and their families and their loved ones and their property , ” said Republican state Rep. Matt Gurtler , according to GBP Radio .
Under the current public health emergency declared in Georgia , Republican Gov .
Brian Kemp can override @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suspend enforcement of certain gun restrictions in the state .
You see , there are a ton of new gun owners in the state .
Practically none of them bought firearms because they were going to go hunting .
They bought them for self-defense .
Many of those firearms are handguns , purchased with the idea of carrying them so they ’ d be handy should something go wrong .
The problem is that Georgia requires a permit to carry a firearm at all , either concealed or openly .
There ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a gun without a Georgia Weapons License .
Guess what many people can ’ t really get right now ?
Like many other places , the place you go to get a permit is effectively shut down due to concerns over COVID-19 .
In Georgia , that ’ s the probate courts , but the sheriff ’ s departments are also involved .
Even if they were open , though , it takes time for a permit application to wind its way through the process .
Weeks , actually .
By suspending those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carry their firearms lawfully without needing to wait for a permit that will likely take even longer than they currently do .
According to Gurtler , though , Governor Kemp has pledged to sign such an order , which is a big win for the state .
While our homegrown anti-gunners will freak over this and claim this will somehow empower criminals or some other nonsense , the truth is the criminals are already carrying guns without permits .
Moreover , they ’ re generally not allowed to even own weapons since so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The police know who they are and if they ’ re found with guns , they ’ ll still be arrested , same as always .
But the law-abiding citizen will be free to carry a firearm as they see fit without having to ask the government for permission .
No , it ’ s not constitutional carry .
Not really .
Constitutional carry would exist after the crisis has passed .
Yet despite my hopes , we ’ re not going to get that right now .
This , though , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my hope is that Governor Kemp will sign the order as soon as possible .

Whether you think COVID-19 spells the end of the human race or think it’s just another version of the flu, the truth is that we’re in the midst of a very real crisis. The disease kills the vulnerable and makes life miserable for plenty of others while it also spreads fairly easily. It’s also precipitated a lot of closures of critical government functions.
Meanwhile, some states tried to get away with shutting down the gun stores, using COVID-19 as a pretext.
However, a lawmaker in my home state of Georgia has a very different proposal.
A state lawmaker in Georgia wants to make it legal to carry a concealed firearm anywhere in the state because of the coronavirus. “We need to suspend enforcement, especially during the state of emergency, when so many individuals need to be able to defend themselves and their families and their loved ones and their property,” said Republican state Rep. Matt Gurtler, according to GBP Radio. Under the current public health emergency declared in Georgia, Republican Gov. Brian Kemp can override state laws. Gurtler wants Kemp to suspend enforcement of certain gun restrictions in the state.
That’s actually a very good idea.
You see, there are a ton of new gun owners in the state. Practically none of them bought firearms because they were going to go hunting. They bought them for self-defense.
Many of those firearms are handguns, purchased with the idea of carrying them so they’d be handy should something go wrong. The problem is that Georgia requires a permit to carry a firearm at all, either concealed or openly. There’s no avenue for the lawful carry of a gun without a Georgia Weapons License.
Guess what many people can’t really get right now?
Like many other places, the place you go to get a permit is effectively shut down due to concerns over COVID-19. In Georgia, that’s the probate courts, but the sheriff’s departments are also involved.
Even if they were open, though, it takes time for a permit application to wind its way through the process. Weeks, actually.
By suspending those laws, people will be free to carry their firearms lawfully without needing to wait for a permit that will likely take even longer than they currently do.
According to Gurtler, though, Governor Kemp has pledged to sign such an order, which is a big win for the state. While our homegrown anti-gunners will freak over this and claim this will somehow empower criminals or some other nonsense, the truth is the criminals are already carrying guns without permits. Moreover, they’re generally not allowed to even own weapons since so many of them are already convicted felons. The police know who they are and if they’re found with guns, they’ll still be arrested, same as always.
But the law-abiding citizen will be free to carry a firearm as they see fit without having to ask the government for permission.
No, it’s not constitutional carry. Not really. Constitutional carry would exist after the crisis has passed. Yet despite my hopes, we’re not going to get that right now. This, though, we can.
As a result, my hope is that Governor Kemp will sign the order as soon as possible.


bearingarms--2020-03-29--San Diego Officials Urge Gun Safety During Lockdown

Alright , so we ’ re not technically prisoners and we can still go some places , but what many of us are going through still feels like a lockdown .
During this time , we ’ re going to get a lot of advice from government officials .
Some of it–things like keeping six feet apart from one another , etc–are helpful tidbit or just reminders to do things to mitigate your risk .
Others feel downright insulting , such as telling grown adults to wash their hands .
Then again , considering the rapid spread of the virus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people needed the reminder .
In San Diego , officials are urging people locked down in self-isolation to practice firearm safety .
The San Diego City Attorney ’ s Office Thursday urged families with guns in the home to practice proper firearm safety while self- quarantining to keep the weapons out of the hands of children .
With stay-at-home orders issued at the state and local levels , and schools closed down due to the COVID-19 pandemic , City Attorney Mara Elliott ’ s office said gun safety is paramount .
“ When @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home and do not practice safe storage , you are increasing the risk that someone will be accidentally shot , ” Elliott said .
“ Children are very resourceful when it comes to locating things their parents thought they ’ d never find .
When they find a gun , it often leads to tragedy.
” The city ’ s Safe Storage of Firearms Ordinance , which was authored by Elliott and went into effect last year , requires San Diego gun owners to store firearms in a locked container or to secure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are in the immediate control of an authorized user .
Now , Elliot isn ’ t wrong when she said that kids can be resourceful finding things the parents don ’ t want to be found .
That ’ s true .
However , unless the parents are complete idiots , it ’ s unlikely they ’ ll be looking while everyone is locked down in the house together .
That ’ s usually not a prime snooping time for kids .
Frankly , the implication that gun owners aren ’ t going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everyone is stuck at home together is more than a little insulting .
Firearm owners are like many other parents and while that also includes a range of behaviors , Elliot ’ s comment targeted that one particular group and treats them as if they ’ re inattentive parents .
Hell , inattentive parents can also ignore their children eating drain cleaner , mixing a little ammonia with bleach in an at-home science experiment , or any number of other potentially fatal behaviors , yet where is the concern over those ?
To @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are poisoned each day .
Most of those are accidental .
Two per day die from it , meaning over 700 fatalities per year nationally from poisoning .
In 2018 , just 73 kids accidentally killed themselves with a firearm .
Now , I ’ m not making light of those fatalities .
All of them were avoidable and , as parents , we should be trying to make sure they ’ re avoided .
Yet Elliot has opted to simply target one group of parents during this time because it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has nothing to do with concerns over child safety .
If it was , then there would likely be some mention of these other potential risks .
Elliot wants nothing more than to paint gun owners as irresponsible threats to the community , but the truth is that guns present less risk to children during quarantine than Draino .

Alright, so we’re not technically prisoners and we can still go some places, but what many of us are going through still feels like a lockdown.
During this time, we’re going to get a lot of advice from government officials. Some of it–things like keeping six feet apart from one another, etc–are helpful tidbit or just reminders to do things to mitigate your risk. Others feel downright insulting, such as telling grown adults to wash their hands.
Then again, considering the rapid spread of the virus in my town, I suspect some people needed the reminder.
In San Diego, officials are urging people locked down in self-isolation to practice firearm safety.
The San Diego City Attorney’s Office Thursday urged families with guns in the home to practice proper firearm safety while self- quarantining to keep the weapons out of the hands of children. With stay-at-home orders issued at the state and local levels, and schools closed down due to the COVID-19 pandemic, City Attorney Mara Elliott’s office said gun safety is paramount. “When you have guns and children in the home and do not practice safe storage, you are increasing the risk that someone will be accidentally shot,” Elliott said. “Children are very resourceful when it comes to locating things their parents thought they’d never find. When they find a gun, it often leads to tragedy.” The city’s Safe Storage of Firearms Ordinance, which was authored by Elliott and went into effect last year, requires San Diego gun owners to store firearms in a locked container or to secure guns with a trigger lock unless they are in the immediate control of an authorized user.
Now, Elliot isn’t wrong when she said that kids can be resourceful finding things the parents don’t want to be found. That’s true.
However, unless the parents are complete idiots, it’s unlikely they’ll be looking while everyone is locked down in the house together. That’s usually not a prime snooping time for kids.
Frankly, the implication that gun owners aren’t going to pay attention to their children when everyone is stuck at home together is more than a little insulting. Firearm owners are like many other parents and while that also includes a range of behaviors, Elliot’s comment targeted that one particular group and treats them as if they’re inattentive parents.
Hell, inattentive parents can also ignore their children eating drain cleaner, mixing a little ammonia with bleach in an at-home science experiment, or any number of other potentially fatal behaviors, yet where is the concern over those?
To put it in perspective, 300 children are poisoned each day. Most of those are accidental. Two per day die from it, meaning over 700 fatalities per year nationally from poisoning.
In 2018, just 73 kids accidentally killed themselves with a firearm.
Now, I’m not making light of those fatalities. All of them were avoidable and, as parents, we should be trying to make sure they’re avoided. Yet Elliot has opted to simply target one group of parents during this time because it’s politically advantageous to do so. It has nothing to do with concerns over child safety. If it was, then there would likely be some mention of these other potential risks.
Elliot wants nothing more than to paint gun owners as irresponsible threats to the community, but the truth is that guns present less risk to children during quarantine than Draino.


bearingarms--2020-03-29--DHS Revises Guidance On Essential Workers To Include Firearms Industry

Gun stores and ranges , as well as firearms and ammunition manufacturers , are critical components of the nation ’ s workforce and should be allowed to continue to operate , according to new guidance released by the Department of Homeland Security on Saturday evening .
As Christopher Krebs , the director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency , noted in the new Guidance on the Essential Critical Infrastructure Workforce , the designation is not a mandate for any businesses to remain open , and the decision ultimately continues to rest at the state and local level .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not , nor should it be considered , a federal directive or standard .
Additionally , this advisory list is not intended to be the exclusive list of critical infrastructure sectors , workers , and functions that should continue during the COVID-19 response across all jurisdictions .
Individual jurisdictions should add or subtract essential workforce categories based on their own requirements and discretion .
The advisory list identifies workers who conduct a range of operations and services that are typically essential to continued critical infrastructure viability , including staffing operations centers , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ call centers , working construction , and performing operational functions , among others .
It also includes workers who support crucial supply chains and enable functions for critical infrastructure .
The industries they support represent , but are not limited to , medical and healthcare , telecommunications , information technology systems , defense , food and agriculture , transportation and logistics , energy , water and wastewater , law enforcement , and public works .
Even though the new memo isn ’ t an order for gun stores to remain open , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government considers the firearms industry to be essential .
The new memo specifically states that “ Workers supporting the operation of firearm or ammunition product manufacturers , retailers , importers , distributors , and shooting ranges ” are considered essential components for law enforcement , public safety , and other first responders , which makes sense .
The biggest question now is whether or not this will make a difference in places like New Jersey and California .
New Jersey Gov .
Phil Murphy has ordered all gun stores to shut down , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conducting firearm background checks .
In California , Gov .
Gavin Newsom has allowed counties to make the decision about gun stores staying open , and in San Jose , Alameda County , and Los Angeles County , law enforcement has ordered those businesses to close .
This new guidance could cause a re-evaluation of those orders , but if nothing else the DHS advisory provides some hefty legal ammunition to the lawsuits that have been filed in those states seeking to re-open gun stores and restore the ability of residents to acquire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the federal government and a majority of states are in favor of keeping firearms retailers , ranges , and manufacturing facilities open , it makes it much harder for politicians like Murphy or Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva to argue that guns are a luxury or non-essential item .
The Second Amendment Foundation , for example , is pointing out that 700 New Jersey police officers have tested positive for the coronavirus and are currently quarantined .
“ This is exactly why the Foundation lawsuit to force New Jersey to re-open gun @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb in a Sunday news release .
“ People need to be able to obtain the means of self-defense in times such as these .
This is why the right to keep and bear arms is essential.
” Authorities in New Jersey are trying to assure residents that law enforcement won ’ t be impacted by the number of infected officers , but at this point that sounds more like a hopeful prognostication rather than a promise based on data .
There are about 36,000 full-time officers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ State Police data , and experts said the public should not be concerned about a looming officer shortage .
“ If you have the right officers and you have the right supervisors … we are good , ” said Maria Haberfeld , a police science professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York .
Crime has also dropped in the state , officials have said , which could help departments cope with any short-staffing , according to Jon Shane , a retired Newark police captain who teaches at John Jay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as many police officers to respond if the work isn ’ t there , ” he said .
While smaller agencies would be more affected by sick officers , he said , even a steep decline in cops could be offset by help from neighboring departments , state troopers and “ special officers , ” which are sometimes retired cops at schools .
I ’ m glad to see that crime is down at the moment , but that doesn ’ t mean that it will continue to be below normal , especially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ month or more .
As we reported yesterday , some in law enforcement are already expressing concern about civil unrest in areas of the country hit hard by the coronavirus in coming weeks .
It ’ s perfectly reasonable for Americans , including New Jersey residents , to want a firearm for self-defense at the moment .
It ’ s unconscionable and unconstitutional for Gov .
Phil Murphy to deny them their right to acquire a gun in these uncertain times .

Gun stores and ranges, as well as firearms and ammunition manufacturers, are critical components of the nation’s workforce and should be allowed to continue to operate, according to new guidance released by the Department of Homeland Security on Saturday evening.
As Christopher Krebs, the director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, noted in the new Guidance on the Essential Critical Infrastructure Workforce, the designation is not a mandate for any businesses to remain open, and the decision ultimately continues to rest at the state and local level.
This list is advisory in nature. It is not, nor should it be considered, a federal directive or standard. Additionally, this advisory list is not intended to be the exclusive list of critical infrastructure sectors, workers, and functions that should continue during the COVID-19 response across all jurisdictions. Individual jurisdictions should add or subtract essential workforce categories based on their own requirements and discretion. The advisory list identifies workers who conduct a range of operations and services that are typically essential to continued critical infrastructure viability, including staffing operations centers, maintaining and repairing critical infrastructure, operating call centers, working construction, and performing operational functions, among others. It also includes workers who support crucial supply chains and enable functions for critical infrastructure. The industries they support represent, but are not limited to, medical and healthcare, telecommunications, information technology systems, defense, food and agriculture, transportation and logistics, energy, water and wastewater, law enforcement, and public works.
Even though the new memo isn’t an order for gun stores to remain open, it’s now clear that the federal government considers the firearms industry to be essential. The new memo specifically states that “Workers supporting the operation of firearm or ammunition product manufacturers, retailers, importers, distributors, and shooting ranges” are considered essential components for law enforcement, public safety, and other first responders, which makes sense.
The biggest question now is whether or not this will make a difference in places like New Jersey and California. New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy has ordered all gun stores to shut down, and the state police are no longer conducting firearm background checks. In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom has allowed counties to make the decision about gun stores staying open, and in San Jose, Alameda County, and Los Angeles County, law enforcement has ordered those businesses to close.
This new guidance could cause a re-evaluation of those orders, but if nothing else the DHS advisory provides some hefty legal ammunition to the lawsuits that have been filed in those states seeking to re-open gun stores and restore the ability of residents to acquire firearms and ammunition for self-defense. If the federal government and a majority of states are in favor of keeping firearms retailers, ranges, and manufacturing facilities open, it makes it much harder for politicians like Murphy or Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva to argue that guns are a luxury or non-essential item.
The Second Amendment Foundation, for example, is pointing out that 700 New Jersey police officers have tested positive for the coronavirus and are currently quarantined.
“This is exactly why the Foundation lawsuit to force New Jersey to re-open gun stores during this emergency is so important,” said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb in a Sunday news release.
“People need to be able to obtain the means of self-defense in times such as these. This is why the right to keep and bear arms is essential.”
Authorities in New Jersey are trying to assure residents that law enforcement won’t be impacted by the number of infected officers, but at this point that sounds more like a hopeful prognostication rather than a promise based on data.
There are about 36,000 full-time officers in the state, according to recent State Police data, and experts said the public should not be concerned about a looming officer shortage. “If you have the right officers and you have the right supervisors … we are good,” said Maria Haberfeld, a police science professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York. Crime has also dropped in the state, officials have said, which could help departments cope with any short-staffing, according to Jon Shane, a retired Newark police captain who teaches at John Jay. “We don’t need as many police officers to respond if the work isn’t there,” he said. While smaller agencies would be more affected by sick officers, he said, even a steep decline in cops could be offset by help from neighboring departments, state troopers and “special officers,” which are sometimes retired cops at schools.
I’m glad to see that crime is down at the moment, but that doesn’t mean that it will continue to be below normal, especially if the stay-in-place orders last for another month or more. As we reported yesterday, some in law enforcement are already expressing concern about civil unrest in areas of the country hit hard by the coronavirus in coming weeks. It’s perfectly reasonable for Americans, including New Jersey residents, to want a firearm for self-defense at the moment. It’s unconscionable and unconstitutional for Gov. Phil Murphy to deny them their right to acquire a gun in these uncertain times.


bearingarms--2020-03-29--COVID-19 And Gun Violence, A Deadly Combination

While most of us hate the term “ gun violence ” as it seemingly tries to blame the gun for the violence , it ’ s still the standard term when talking about violence committed with a firearm .
It ’ s the term we use so everyone understands we ’ re talking about a particular subset of violence .
Guns are also quite effective at messing up a human being when used against them .
It ’ s why they ’ re used in war and for people who need to protect themselves from attackers who might be bigger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the era of COVID-19 , however , the offensive use of firearms just makes things even worse than usual .
Of course , those are ventilators not available for COVID-19 patients .
Many will look at this and think this just proves we need gun control .
However , I ’ ll note that there ’ s nothing in these stories to suggest that these are people who will be impacted by gun control laws in the first place .
To me , this looks more like evidence that those who are dedicated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are people who aren ’ t likely to self-isolate during a pandemic .
These are people who are likely not even worrying about social distancing–forget “ violence interventions ” for a moment .
You ’ re not likely to go all Jackie Chan and stop a gun-wielding attacker with your sick Karate moves , so let ’ s stop pretending that ’ s actually an option–these are people who will likely kill regardless of the rules in place .
In fact , is it any wonder that more law-abiding people are buying guns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be .
Now , the overall point that gun violence doesn ’ t help anyone during the outbreak is valid .
It draws resources from sick patients and sick patients draw resources from potential shooting victims .
What needs to be understood , though , is that when talking about this kind of thing , we ’ re also talking about people who see that as a feature , not a bug .

While most of us hate the term “gun violence” as it seemingly tries to blame the gun for the violence, it’s still the standard term when talking about violence committed with a firearm. It’s the term we use so everyone understands we’re talking about a particular subset of violence.
Guns are also quite effective at messing up a human being when used against them. It’s why they’re used in war and for people who need to protect themselves from attackers who might be bigger and stronger than they are.
In the era of COVID-19, however, the offensive use of firearms just makes things even worse than usual.
The coronavirus pandemic is at present so monumental it has the ability to overshadow everything else — including pressing problems that already exist. In Philadelphia, that includes gun violence. According to data from the Philadelphia Police Department, in the four weeks ending March 22, almost all crime categories — including overall violent crime — saw large declines compared with the prior four weeks. An exception is shootings, which have risen 22%, to 106, in the last four weeks. The bitter irony is that social distancing required by the coronavirus has the potential to make gun violence more deadly — not just because it limits violence interventions, but because it forces gun-wound victims to compete with COVID-19 patients for essential health services. COVID-19 is imposing serious demands on units of blood, ventilators, and personal protective gear for health-care workers. Treating gun victims requires a lot of blood, a product in short supply due to canceled drives. Similarly, gun victims are at high risk of needing ventilators. Trauma surgeon Mark Seamon says that in his hospital, Penn Presbyterian, there are 5 to 15 gun-wound patients on ventilators at any given moment.
Of course, those are ventilators not available for COVID-19 patients.
Many will look at this and think this just proves we need gun control. However, I’ll note that there’s nothing in these stories to suggest that these are people who will be impacted by gun control laws in the first place.
To me, this looks more like evidence that those who are dedicated to taking a person’s life are people who aren’t likely to self-isolate during a pandemic. These are people who are likely not even worrying about social distancing–forget “violence interventions” for a moment. You’re not likely to go all Jackie Chan and stop a gun-wielding attacker with your sick Karate moves, so let’s stop pretending that’s actually an option–these are people who will likely kill regardless of the rules in place.
In fact, is it any wonder that more law-abiding people are buying guns right now? It shouldn’t be.
Now, the overall point that gun violence doesn’t help anyone during the outbreak is valid. It draws resources from sick patients and sick patients draw resources from potential shooting victims.
What needs to be understood, though, is that when talking about this kind of thing, we’re also talking about people who see that as a feature, not a bug.


bearingarms--2020-03-29--It's Not Unreasonable To Want A Gun Right Now

Gun control groups are doing their best to convince Americans that they ’ re being foolish or succumbing to panic if they ’ re going to their local gun store for the first time in their lives to buy a gun for self-defense .
From the mocking tone of “ you can ’ t shoot a virus ” to the scolding of “ “ you ’ ll only hurt yourself or your kids ” , the gun safety movement is letting it be known that their definition of gun safety is “ don ’ t own a gun.
” Clearly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lot of deaf ears , as gun sales have exploded across the country in the past couple of weeks .
Distributors who just a few months ago were looking at a large amount of inventory are now scrambling to fill orders from gun shops , and many gun store owners say they ’ re dealing with a huge number of first-time gun buyers .
Jason Cazes , owner of Low Price Guns in Bellevue , says three weeks ago , the boom in business hit like a ton of bricks .
“ It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and sudden.
” Cazes found himself flooded with new customers with an urgent request .
“ Hey I need a hand gun , I need a shot gun .
All the sudden they ’ re interested in having something for protection , ” he said .
Cazes soon found himself in the same position as gun shops all over the state and nation , struggling to keep up with the huge demand .
“ We ’ re out of a lot of inventory now , there are a lot of people in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gun control advocates are losing the argument right now , and for a simple reason .
They ’ re wrong .
It ’ s not unreasonable to want a firearm to protect yourself and your family , and I ’ m not saying that because I ’ m part of the gun lobby , or I ’ m trying to stoke fear and panic in order to buy guns .
The coronavirus is already having an impact on some police departments , and officers themselves are growing increasingly concerned about what the next @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Detroit , a fifth of the police force is in self-quarantine , while 10-percent of the New York Police Department called out sick on Friday .
As the Associated Press reported : If police departments and sheriffs offices are concerned about how their departments will hold up over the coming weeks , the people served by those departments and offices have every reason to be concerned as well .
Right now , we ’ re actually seeing a decline in violent crime in places like Chicago , but virtually no one things that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely return to normal levels as we re-open the economy and relax social distancing measures , but what happens if a third of the police force is out with the coronavirus ?
Departments across the nation are already telling people that they aren ’ t responding in person to most non-violent crimes , and some non-violent criminals are being released early from their jail or prison stays .
This has been done in an attempt to mitigate the spread of the COVID-19 virus in the institutions , where social distancing is practically impossible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to see outbreaks in county jails , state prisons , and federal penitentiaries .
We ’ re not going to get to the point of releasing convicted killers and other violent criminals , but the corrections system is going to be just as stressed as law enforcement , and we could see more inmates in jail for non-violent crimes let out early , even if they have violent criminal histories in their past .
What exactly are police officers worried about ?
First and foremost , they ’ re worried about getting sick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ basic personal protection equipment to officers , and often times the masks and hand sanitizer they ’ re issued is past its expiration date , as was recently reported in San Antonio .
Beyond their reasonable concern about becoming sick , and potentially passing on the virus to at-risk family members or members of the public they come in contact with , some are concerned about widespread unrest in hard-hit cities .
The AP , for example , spoke to retired Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis , who expressed apprehension about the prospect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ halls .
Some officers I ’ ve spoken with over the past couple of weeks aren ’ t as concerned about widespread unrest as they are an increase in home invasions , carjackings , and other crimes of violence , particularly if lockdowns and shelter-in-place orders remain in effect for weeks or months to come .
Desperate people do desperate things , and their concern is that the economic impact of the pandemic could lead to an increase in violent crimes at the same time their departments will be struggling to maintain staffing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not unreasonable to want a firearm to protect yourself and your family right now .
I think it ’ s actually a pretty practical step to take .
However , new gun owners MUST take advantage of the online resources that are available to help them be safe and responsible with their new firearm until they can get some training at a local range .
Gun University ’ s “ Gun 101 ” is a great site for new gun owners , and organizations like the NRA , NSSF , USCCA , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gun safety tips , articles , and videos on their social media .
Gun owners can and should share those links as much as possible to help to ensure that new gun owners are exposed to this information .
It is unreasonable to expect Americans to remain disarmed and defenseless when law enforcement across the country is concerned about how the coronavirus will impact their departments and their ability to protect and serve their communities .
It ’ s downright unconstitutional ( and unconscionable ) to prevent them from getting a gun for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in states like New Jersey , where Gov .
Phil Murphy has ordered gun stores closed and the state police have stopped doing background checks for gun sales .
Murphy told the press this week that , in his opinion , “ a safer society ” has fewer guns in the hands of the people .
Clearly there are millions of Americans who disagree , and many of them have become gun owners over the past couple of weeks .
I think we all hope our concerns dissipate over time , that departments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and we don ’ t see an increase in violent crime .
What we hope for and what could happen are two very different things , however , and it is absolutely not unreasonable to want a firearm today in order to help you protect yourself and your loved ones in the uncertain future that lies ahead .

Gun control groups are doing their best to convince Americans that they’re being foolish or succumbing to panic if they’re going to their local gun store for the first time in their lives to buy a gun for self-defense. From the mocking tone of “you can’t shoot a virus” to the scolding of ““you’ll only hurt yourself or your kids”, the gun safety movement is letting it be known that their definition of gun safety is “don’t own a gun.”
Clearly, their arguments are falling on a lot of deaf ears, as gun sales have exploded across the country in the past couple of weeks. Distributors who just a few months ago were looking at a large amount of inventory are now scrambling to fill orders from gun shops, and many gun store owners say they’re dealing with a huge number of first-time gun buyers.
Jason Cazes, owner of Low Price Guns in Bellevue, says three weeks ago, the boom in business hit like a ton of bricks. “It was overwhelming, and it was unexpected and sudden.” Cazes found himself flooded with new customers with an urgent request. “Hey I need a hand gun, I need a shot gun. All the sudden they’re interested in having something for protection,” he said. Cazes soon found himself in the same position as gun shops all over the state and nation, struggling to keep up with the huge demand. “We’re out of a lot of inventory now, there are a lot of people in the waiting queue,” he said.
Gun control advocates are losing the argument right now, and for a simple reason. They’re wrong. It’s not unreasonable to want a firearm to protect yourself and your family, and I’m not saying that because I’m part of the gun lobby, or I’m trying to stoke fear and panic in order to buy guns. The coronavirus is already having an impact on some police departments, and officers themselves are growing increasingly concerned about what the next few weeks could look like.
In Detroit, a fifth of the police force is in self-quarantine, while 10-percent of the New York Police Department called out sick on Friday. As the Associated Press reported:
An increasing number of police departments around the country are watching their ranks get sick as the number of coronavirus cases explodes across the U.S. The growing tally raises questions about how laws can and should be enforced during the pandemic, and about how departments will hold up as the virus spreads among those whose work puts them at increased risk of infection. “I don’t think it’s too far to say that officers are scared out there,” said Sgt. Manny Ramirez, president of Fort Worth Police Officers Association.
If police departments and sheriffs offices are concerned about how their departments will hold up over the coming weeks, the people served by those departments and offices have every reason to be concerned as well. Right now, we’re actually seeing a decline in violent crime in places like Chicago, but virtually no one things that is going to last. Crime will likely return to normal levels as we re-open the economy and relax social distancing measures, but what happens if a third of the police force is out with the coronavirus?
Departments across the nation are already telling people that they aren’t responding in person to most non-violent crimes, and some non-violent criminals are being released early from their jail or prison stays. This has been done in an attempt to mitigate the spread of the COVID-19 virus in the institutions, where social distancing is practically impossible, but we’re already starting to see outbreaks in county jails, state prisons, and federal penitentiaries. We’re not going to get to the point of releasing convicted killers and other violent criminals, but the corrections system is going to be just as stressed as law enforcement, and we could see more inmates in jail for non-violent crimes let out early, even if they have violent criminal histories in their past.
What exactly are police officers worried about? First and foremost, they’re worried about getting sick. Many departments are struggling to provide basic personal protection equipment to officers, and often times the masks and hand sanitizer they’re issued is past its expiration date, as was recently reported in San Antonio.
Officers at the San Antonio Police Department’s Central Substation were provided hand sanitizer Wednesday that had an expiration date of 2011, leading some officers within the department to question their agency’s response to the COVID-19 outbreak. “We don’t want officers getting sick at work and bringing it home to their families,” said Mike Helle, president of the San Antonio Police Officers Association. “Why in the world would our department distribute something that is completely worthless?”
Beyond their reasonable concern about becoming sick, and potentially passing on the virus to at-risk family members or members of the public they come in contact with, some are concerned about widespread unrest in hard-hit cities. The AP, for example, spoke to retired Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis, who expressed apprehension about the prospect of riots outside of hospitals or city halls.
Some officers I’ve spoken with over the past couple of weeks aren’t as concerned about widespread unrest as they are an increase in home invasions, carjackings, and other crimes of violence, particularly if lockdowns and shelter-in-place orders remain in effect for weeks or months to come. Desperate people do desperate things, and their concern is that the economic impact of the pandemic could lead to an increase in violent crimes at the same time their departments will be struggling to maintain staffing levels.
No, it’s not unreasonable to want a firearm to protect yourself and your family right now. I think it’s actually a pretty practical step to take. However, new gun owners MUST take advantage of the online resources that are available to help them be safe and responsible with their new firearm until they can get some training at a local range. Gun University’s “Gun 101” is a great site for new gun owners, and organizations like the NRA, NSSF, USCCA, and others have also been heavily promoting basic gun safety tips, articles, and videos on their social media. Gun owners can and should share those links as much as possible to help to ensure that new gun owners are exposed to this information.
It is unreasonable to expect Americans to remain disarmed and defenseless when law enforcement across the country is concerned about how the coronavirus will impact their departments and their ability to protect and serve their communities. It’s downright unconstitutional (and unconscionable) to prevent them from getting a gun for self-defense, as we’ve seen in states like New Jersey, where Gov. Phil Murphy has ordered gun stores closed and the state police have stopped doing background checks for gun sales. Murphy told the press this week that, in his opinion, “a safer society” has fewer guns in the hands of the people.
Clearly there are millions of Americans who disagree, and many of them have become gun owners over the past couple of weeks. I think we all hope our concerns dissipate over time, that departments can handle the coronavirus ravaging their ranks and we don’t see an increase in violent crime. What we hope for and what could happen are two very different things, however, and it is absolutely not unreasonable to want a firearm today in order to help you protect yourself and your loved ones in the uncertain future that lies ahead.


bearingarms--2020-03-28--Armed Citizen Shoots, Kills Active Shooter At Tulsa Shopping Center

A woman was shot and killed at a Tulsa , Oklahoma shopping center Friday night after she opened fire on customers .
While police are still investigating a possible motive and haven ’ t released the woman ’ s identify , the Tulsa World reports that the woman ’ s rampage was apparently stopped by a concealed carry holder before she was able to inflict any injuries .
Who knows how bad this could have been had an armed citizen not been around to stop the shooter before she actually hit anyone ?
Sadly , because she didn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ story isn ’ t of nearly as much interest to the media as it would be otherwise , and this story will get virtually no national news coverage because there wasn ’ t enough carnage inflicted .
The media would much rather talk about lives lost than lives saved .
Even locally , the story isn ’ t really getting a lot of attention .
There was a brief writeup in the local paper and a short segment on local news channels , but that ’ s about it .
Granted , this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for hours of live , uninterrupted coverage , but to me this story is just as important as it would be if the suspect had actually taken any innocent lives , and it ’ s worth far more attention than what its received so far .
In fact , one Tulsa news station managed to report on the story and completely miss the fact that an armed citizen saved lives .
From KTUL-TV : Tulsa police say a woman has died after a shooting in north Tulsa Friday evening .
According to investigators @ @ @ @ @ @ @ near East 54th Street North and North Peoria Avenue .
Police say it was all caught on security footage outside a local store in the area and that ’ s why they now have the suspect in custody .
KTUL ’ s story makes it sound like this guy just walked up to the woman and shot her , and was then taken into custody .
There ’ s no mention of the fact that the woman was shooting at customers , the man was a concealed carry holder , or that he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no expectation of an arrest .
This is journalistic malpractice at best , and an outright deception at worst .
From what the Tulsa Police are saying , it sounds like this armed citizen deserves a medal .
KTUL ’ s reporting makes it sound like he deserves to be locked up .
Hopefully the station will update their story , but for now their report stands a stark reminder of the media ’ s failure to treat stories of armed self-defense with the same attention they give stories of murder and mayhem @

A woman was shot and killed at a Tulsa, Oklahoma shopping center Friday night after she opened fire on customers. While police are still investigating a possible motive and haven’t released the woman’s identify, the Tulsa World reports that the woman’s rampage was apparently stopped by a concealed carry holder before she was able to inflict any injuries.
Who knows how bad this could have been had an armed citizen not been around to stop the shooter before she actually hit anyone? Sadly, because she didn’t actually kill or injure anyone, this story isn’t of nearly as much interest to the media as it would be otherwise, and this story will get virtually no national news coverage because there wasn’t enough carnage inflicted. The media would much rather talk about lives lost than lives saved.
Even locally, the story isn’t really getting a lot of attention. There was a brief writeup in the local paper and a short segment on local news channels, but that’s about it. Granted, this wasn’t a situation that called for hours of live, uninterrupted coverage, but to me this story is just as important as it would be if the suspect had actually taken any innocent lives, and it’s worth far more attention than what its received so far.
In fact, one Tulsa news station managed to report on the story and completely miss the fact that an armed citizen saved lives. From KTUL-TV:
Tulsa police say a woman has died after a shooting in north Tulsa Friday evening. According to investigators a man shot and killed the woman near East 54th Street North and North Peoria Avenue. Police say it was all caught on security footage outside a local store in the area and that’s why they now have the suspect in custody.
KTUL’s story makes it sound like this guy just walked up to the woman and shot her, and was then taken into custody. There’s no mention of the fact that the woman was shooting at customers, the man was a concealed carry holder, or that he was questioned and released by police with no expectation of an arrest.
This is journalistic malpractice at best, and an outright deception at worst. From what the Tulsa Police are saying, it sounds like this armed citizen deserves a medal. KTUL’s reporting makes it sound like he deserves to be locked up. Hopefully the station will update their story, but for now their report stands a stark reminder of the media’s failure to treat stories of armed self-defense with the same attention they give stories of murder and mayhem.


bearingarms--2020-03-28--Rhode Island Gov Re-Opens Gun Ranges After Discussions With 2A Group

Rhode Island Gov .
Gina Raimondo is raising eyebrows and taking heat for her decision to have the state police “ hunt down ” and quarantine any New Yorkers who might try to flee the Big Apple and seek refuge in the smallest state in the Union , but the governor is also receiving some qualified praise from gun owners after she reversed her decision to order gun ranges to shut down during the coronavirus pandemic .
Frank Saccoccio , president of the Rhode Island Second Amendment Coalition , says he reached out to the governor ’ s office to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , arguing that the many new gun owners in the state need access to ranges right now in order to get some hands-on experience with their recent purchases .
“ They have to have some venue where they can go safely to know how to load the firearm , unload the firearm , ” Frank Saccoccio told NBC 10 News in an interview Friday .
“ They need to see if there are any safety features on it , how to properly store it , be able to talk to a range safety @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regards to firearms and to tell them how to properly transport it , how to keep it safe when it ’ s in their house .
All of these features have to be available to someone in the event they just purchased a new firearm.
” Surprisingly , Raimondo appears to have been swayed by Saccocio ’ s argument .
On Friday , the state announced new rules that will allow indoor and outdoor ranges to remain open , though their capacity will be severely curtailed .
“ We are working hard to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as long as they are able to do so safely , ” said Matt Sheaff , a spokesperson for the Department of Business Regulation .
“ We listened to and worked with the industry to come up reasonable accommodations that allow them to remain open while complying with public health guidance.
” Those new rules include closing bars and common areas to all customers , limiting indoor ranges to no more than two people at any given time and limiting outdoor ranges to no more than four people at a time .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to one hour per customer , Sheaff said , adding that employees must also develop a way to ensure lines don ’ t build up while people are waiting , while keeping them at a safe distance from each other .
I think ranges could safely operate with more customers allowed on the firing line , frankly .
The limiting of outdoor ranges to four people is especially ridiculous , given that doctors around the country are actually encouraging people to spend time outside ( while practicing social distancing measures ) .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to ranges that are operated by the state of Rhode Island .
The Great Swamp Shooting Range , for instance , remains closed until at least April 15th , though the firing line at the range could easily handle four shooters spread out six feet apart .
At the moment , Rhode Island has a couple of hundred coronavirus cases , and the governor is adamant about keeping those numbers down , to the point that she ’ s apparently had conversations about closing the borders of the state to outside visitors .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ at Hot Air , the governor didn ’ t get the legal green light to shut down entry into the state , but she did get the go-ahead to target out-of-state visitors , especially those with New York license plates .
Her public statement on that subject was put as bluntly as you would imagine .
“ Yesterday I announced and today I reiterated : Anyone coming to Rhode Island in any way from New York must be quarantined .
By order .
Will be enforced .
Enforceable by law.
” So Rhode @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any New Yorkers in the state .
Precisely how they plan to do that isn ’ t specified .
Her executive order applies to anyone who has been in New York in the past 14 days .
She is further calling out the National Guard to be stationed at the T.F .
Green airport , Amtrak train stations and at bus stops .
The Guardsmen will also be “ following up with people at local residences.
” The maximum penalty for noncompliance ?
A fine of $ 500 and 90 days in prison @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chapter of the ACLU is blasting Raimondo for her new strategy , though he ’ s strangely silent about the crackdown on folks trying to exercise their Second Amendment rights .
Brown is right that the governor can ’ t simply suspend the constitution during a state of emergency , but that applies to all of our rights , not just those protected by the Fourth Amendment .
Thankfully , the Rhode Island Second Amendment Coalition has done what it can to ensure that ranges and gun stores remain open , albeit with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the members of the organization for pushing back on Raimondo ’ s demand that gun ranges shut down , and here ’ s hoping they can continue to improve the limited access currently allowed by the governor ’ s office .

Rhode Island Gov. Gina Raimondo is raising eyebrows and taking heat for her decision to have the state police “hunt down” and quarantine any New Yorkers who might try to flee the Big Apple and seek refuge in the smallest state in the Union, but the governor is also receiving some qualified praise from gun owners after she reversed her decision to order gun ranges to shut down during the coronavirus pandemic.
Frank Saccoccio, president of the Rhode Island Second Amendment Coalition, says he reached out to the governor’s office to object to the closure of gun ranges, arguing that the many new gun owners in the state need access to ranges right now in order to get some hands-on experience with their recent purchases.
“They have to have some venue where they can go safely to know how to load the firearm, unload the firearm,” Frank Saccoccio told NBC 10 News in an interview Friday. “They need to see if there are any safety features on it, how to properly store it, be able to talk to a range safety officer or somebody who is trained with regards to firearms and to tell them how to properly transport it, how to keep it safe when it’s in their house. All of these features have to be available to someone in the event they just purchased a new firearm.”
Surprisingly, Raimondo appears to have been swayed by Saccocio’s argument. On Friday, the state announced new rules that will allow indoor and outdoor ranges to remain open, though their capacity will be severely curtailed.
“We are working hard to keep as many businesses open as possible, as long as they are able to do so safely,” said Matt Sheaff, a spokesperson for the Department of Business Regulation. “We listened to and worked with the industry to come up reasonable accommodations that allow them to remain open while complying with public health guidance.” Those new rules include closing bars and common areas to all customers, limiting indoor ranges to no more than two people at any given time and limiting outdoor ranges to no more than four people at a time. Both indoor and outdoor ranges are limited to one hour per customer, Sheaff said, adding that employees must also develop a way to ensure lines don’t build up while people are waiting, while keeping them at a safe distance from each other.
I think ranges could safely operate with more customers allowed on the firing line, frankly. The limiting of outdoor ranges to four people is especially ridiculous, given that doctors around the country are actually encouraging people to spend time outside (while practicing social distancing measures). The new rules also don’t apply to ranges that are operated by the state of Rhode Island. The Great Swamp Shooting Range, for instance, remains closed until at least April 15th, though the firing line at the range could easily handle four shooters spread out six feet apart.
At the moment, Rhode Island has a couple of hundred coronavirus cases, and the governor is adamant about keeping those numbers down, to the point that she’s apparently had conversations about closing the borders of the state to outside visitors. As my colleague Jazz Shaw points out at Hot Air, the governor didn’t get the legal green light to shut down entry into the state, but she did get the go-ahead to target out-of-state visitors, especially those with New York license plates.
Her public statement on that subject was put as bluntly as you would imagine. “Yesterday I announced and today I reiterated: Anyone coming to Rhode Island in any way from New York must be quarantined. By order. Will be enforced. Enforceable by law.” So Rhode Island law enforcement officers will forcibly quarantine any New Yorkers in the state. Precisely how they plan to do that isn’t specified. Her executive order applies to anyone who has been in New York in the past 14 days. She is further calling out the National Guard to be stationed at the T.F. Green airport, Amtrak train stations and at bus stops. The Guardsmen will also be “following up with people at local residences.” The maximum penalty for noncompliance? A fine of $500 and 90 days in prison.
The head of the Rhode Island chapter of the ACLU is blasting Raimondo for her new strategy, though he’s strangely silent about the crackdown on folks trying to exercise their Second Amendment rights.
“While the Governor may have the power to suspend some state laws and regulations to address this medical emergency, she cannot suspend the Constitution,” Rhode Island ACLU executive director Steven Brown said in a statement. “Under the Fourth Amendment, having a New York state license plate simply does not, and cannot, constitute ‘probable cause’ to allow police to stop a car and interrogate the driver, no matter how laudable the goal of the stop may be.”
Brown is right that the governor can’t simply suspend the constitution during a state of emergency, but that applies to all of our rights, not just those protected by the Fourth Amendment. Thankfully, the Rhode Island Second Amendment Coalition has done what it can to ensure that ranges and gun stores remain open, albeit with limited capacity. Kudos to Saccoccio and the members of the organization for pushing back on Raimondo’s demand that gun ranges shut down, and here’s hoping they can continue to improve the limited access currently allowed by the governor’s office.


bearingarms--2020-03-28--Anti-Gunners Continue To Argue Gun Stores Not "Essential"

As governor after governor declares gun stores as essential businesses , there are those who disagree .
Honestly , that ’ s fine .
Disagreement is healthy .
The last thing we really need on most issues is a national echo chamber .
However , it ’ s almost comical how anti-gunners continue to beat this particular drum .
The latest example of this comes from Newsday where our journalistic betters have decided to tell us just how stupid we are to disagree .
We ’ re in the midst of a pandemic , with residents in many states around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ orders to remain at home except for essential trips to essential businesses .
A run to the drugstore for a prescription is still allowed , for obvious reasons .
So is going the grocery store to stock up on food .
But how about a quick trip to the nearest gun shop for a new .38 and some ammo ?
Should that be allowed when we ’ re all being told to stay home ?
Well , according to gun advocates — including , naturally , the National Rifle Association — it should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ order exemptions for gun shops , arguing that they provide an essential service during a pandemic .
That ’ s ludicrous .
Unless you plan on shooting those little coronaviruses one by one , no , gun shops are not providing an essential service during a pandemic .
They are profiting from the marketing of fear _ get armed now before the desperate hordes invade your neighborhood in search of toilet paper !
Again , the National Rifle Association does not profit from gun sales .
They ’ re an advocacy organization , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that a member of the L.A. Times editorial board doesn ’ t understand that is telling .
( He works for the L.A. Times but this was published at Newsday . )
I also note he plays the whole “ shooting the virus ” joke that anti-gunners use to feel oh-so-clever .
Look , are there going to be desperate hordes ?
I mean , I ’ ve mentioned them before .
Are they going to be a thing ?
Maybe , but probably not .
Yet you ’ re a complete idiot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your family ’ s safety to just “ probably not.
” After all , people like this writer are also all about destroying small businesses permanently because someone might get a disease while there , though they probably won ’ t .
You ’ d think he ’ d understand the term “ caution.
” However , let ’ s also face the fact that our economy is about to go into the toilet .
At this point , it ’ s only a matter of just how much fecal matter is already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ result in desperate people committing crimes in an effort to feed their families .
That ’ s especially true if these lockdowns become even more prolonged .
But hey , you ’ re just delusionally paranoid for wanting a gun at a time like this , but he ’ s totally not for wanting to completely destroy people ’ s livelihoods over a virus that can be avoided with some changes in behavior .
Anyone else sniff the BS here ?
Meanwhile , gun rights are an essential liberty that should not be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Constitution .
It doesn ’ t provide for circumventing those rights because some people got sick .
Especially when people are still wandering around grocery stores , handling all kinds of things then putting them back on the shelf , and things like that .

As governor after governor declares gun stores as essential businesses, there are those who disagree.
Honestly, that’s fine. Disagreement is healthy. The last thing we really need on most issues is a national echo chamber. However, it’s almost comical how anti-gunners continue to beat this particular drum.
The latest example of this comes from Newsday where our journalistic betters have decided to tell us just how stupid we are to disagree.
We’re in the midst of a pandemic, with residents in many states around the country — including California — under orders to remain at home except for essential trips to essential businesses. A run to the drugstore for a prescription is still allowed, for obvious reasons. So is going the grocery store to stock up on food. But how about a quick trip to the nearest gun shop for a new .38 and some ammo? Should that be allowed when we’re all being told to stay home? Well, according to gun advocates — including, naturally, the National Rifle Association — it should be. They are pushing for shutdown order exemptions for gun shops, arguing that they provide an essential service during a pandemic. That’s ludicrous. Unless you plan on shooting those little coronaviruses one by one, no, gun shops are not providing an essential service during a pandemic. They are profiting from the marketing of fear _ get armed now before the desperate hordes invade your neighborhood in search of toilet paper!
Again, the National Rifle Association does not profit from gun sales. They’re an advocacy organization, not an industry organization. The fact that a member of the L.A. Times editorial board doesn’t understand that is telling. (He works for the L.A. Times but this was published at Newsday.)
I also note he plays the whole “shooting the virus” joke that anti-gunners use to feel oh-so-clever.
Look, are there going to be desperate hordes? I mean, I’ve mentioned them before. Are they going to be a thing? Maybe, but probably not.
Yet you’re a complete idiot if you’re willing to trust your family’s safety to just “probably not.” After all, people like this writer are also all about destroying small businesses permanently because someone might get a disease while there, though they probably won’t. You’d think he’d understand the term “caution.”
However, let’s also face the fact that our economy is about to go into the toilet. At this point, it’s only a matter of just how much fecal matter is already in the bowl. Bad economies can result in desperate people committing crimes in an effort to feed their families. That’s especially true if these lockdowns become even more prolonged.
But hey, you’re just delusionally paranoid for wanting a gun at a time like this, but he’s totally not for wanting to completely destroy people’s livelihoods over a virus that can be avoided with some changes in behavior.
Anyone else sniff the BS here?
Meanwhile, gun rights are an essential liberty that should not be infringed. It says so right in the Constitution. It doesn’t provide for circumventing those rights because some people got sick. Especially when people are still wandering around grocery stores, handling all kinds of things then putting them back on the shelf, and things like that.


bearingarms--2020-03-28--Pro-Gun Author Targeted For Harassment On Facebook

Once upon a time , I have very different views on politics .
A couple of books actually helped me change my mind .
One was Atlas Shrugged , but a lesser-known book called Freehold also played a huge factor .
The author of Freehold is a man named Michael Z. Williamson .
Among his libertarian beliefs , Williams is pretty much a Second Amendment absolutist , the kind of guy who truly believes you should be able to buy a minigun at a curb store .
It ’ s part of why I like him .
However , his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s been targetted for harassment on Facebook .
For some time , Facebook has made it clear it ’ s hostile toward the Second Amendment and anything but left-leaning politics .
However , it ’ s also supposed to be hostile toward harassment of individuals for any reason .
Yet Williamson is a target for just that , as he outlines at his own blog .
He provides screenshots to support all of this over there , but he highlights some of the bizarre declarations he ’ s received from the social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very serious publication like “ Nature , ” or making a political comment is “ Spam.
” And in the second example , they didn ’ t even tell me what I ’ d posted that was alleged to be “ Spam.
” Note that the “ spam ” is still “ pending review ” nine months later .
This is why I have multiple backup accounts .
Yes , that ’ s against their rules .
They can fuck themselves with their rules .
This has happened over 100 times , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Williamson provides screenshots showing what he actually said .
It ’ s clear that he ’ s providing a citation for his comment about the Nature article itself .
This falls well within the rules of Facebook and is , in fact , a key feature of internet debate .
If you make a claim , be prepared to back it up or , even better , provide your source from the beginning .
Another example was Williamson ’ s posting of an article about CodeIsFreeSpeech.com regarding 3D printed firearms .
As @ @ @ @ @ @ @ post removed that linked to the Washington Times about a University of Utah professor punished for putting a “ Second Amendment Zone ” in his classroom in an effort to shame gun carriers .
These are legitimate news items and topics for discussion .
So what gives ?
Well , as Williamson puts it : Arguing that he has a harasser on the payroll at Facebook is a very serious charge .
I ’ ve reached out to Facebook for any comment , but haven ’ t heard back as of this writing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Williamson ’ s fans and long-time followers on Facebook have seen how often he catches bans .
It ’ s almost something of a joke with them at this point .
While Williamson pushes boundaries with some of his Facebook commentary , he ’ s not complaining about posts being removed that talk about feeding people into woodchippers or things of that sort .
He ’ s not whining over having stuff yanked because it crosses actual lines .
He ’ s pissed because mundane commentary that should be acceptable anywhere is being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has alternate accounts , something he acknowledges is against the site ’ s rules , but he has…thoughts on that .
Somewhat salty thoughts that I ’ d best not share directly , though I agree with him .
Go read them yourself .
Since the site also has rules against harassment , though , and those don ’ t seem to be slowing anyone down , he might as well do what he needs to do .
While Williamson seems to be getting the lion ’ s share of harassment–and not just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ came under attack as the author of several bestselling books was supposedly not notable enough for them–he may not be alone .
Fellow pro-Second Amendment author Larry Correia also had something of a bizarre occurrence .
Coming off of a 30-day ban , Correia was immediately slammed with a one-week ban .
Is it the same people as Williamson ?
It might be .
It might also be someone completely different .
It might not even really be a case of harassment .
However , the timing is more than a little suspicious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ having posts yanked and get banned over things they ’ re never told about ?
I ’ m sorry , that doesn ’ t pass the smell test .
For Facebook , the options are simple .
They can either ignore this as a problem and show the world that they only view harassment as a one-way street or they can address it evenly across the board so people like Williamson aren ’ t being silenced .
It ’ s really their call at this point .

Once upon a time, I have very different views on politics. A couple of books actually helped me change my mind. One was Atlas Shrugged, but a lesser-known book called Freehold also played a huge factor. The author of Freehold is a man named Michael Z. Williamson. Among his libertarian beliefs, Williams is pretty much a Second Amendment absolutist, the kind of guy who truly believes you should be able to buy a minigun at a curb store.
It’s part of why I like him.
However, his beliefs are also likely the reason he’s been targetted for harassment on Facebook.
For some time, Facebook has made it clear it’s hostile toward the Second Amendment and anything but left-leaning politics. However, it’s also supposed to be hostile toward harassment of individuals for any reason.
Yet Williamson is a target for just that, as he outlines at his own blog. He provides screenshots to support all of this over there, but he highlights some of the bizarre declarations he’s received from the social media giant.
Posting links to a very serious publication like “Nature,” or making a political comment is “Spam.” And in the second example, they didn’t even tell me what I’d posted that was alleged to be “Spam.” Note that the “spam” is still “pending review” nine months later. This is why I have multiple backup accounts. Yes, that’s against their rules. They can fuck themselves with their rules. This has happened over 100 times, and I’ve lost count.
Again, Williamson provides screenshots showing what he actually said. It’s clear that he’s providing a citation for his comment about the Nature article itself. This falls well within the rules of Facebook and is, in fact, a key feature of internet debate. If you make a claim, be prepared to back it up or, even better, provide your source from the beginning.
Another example was Williamson’s posting of an article about CodeIsFreeSpeech.com regarding 3D printed firearms. As he noted:
I can’t share the article of a legal foundation because they claim it’s “controversial” to oppose the government. Gee, it’s almost as if they have a political axe to grind.
He also had a post removed that linked to the Washington Times about a University of Utah professor punished for putting a “Second Amendment Zone” in his classroom in an effort to shame gun carriers.
These are legitimate news items and topics for discussion.
So what gives? Well, as Williamson puts it:
My wife, an IT security professional, notes that she stops getting notifications about my posts about 24 hours before these things happen. I have several stalkers, and at least one of them works for Fecesbook in an administrative capacity. They’ve even blocked me from asking for review:
Again, screenshots are provided.
Arguing that he has a harasser on the payroll at Facebook is a very serious charge. I’ve reached out to Facebook for any comment, but haven’t heard back as of this writing.
The thing is, though, Williamson’s fans and long-time followers on Facebook have seen how often he catches bans. It’s almost something of a joke with them at this point. While Williamson pushes boundaries with some of his Facebook commentary, he’s not complaining about posts being removed that talk about feeding people into woodchippers or things of that sort. He’s not whining over having stuff yanked because it crosses actual lines. He’s pissed because mundane commentary that should be acceptable anywhere is being hit as well.
Luckily, Williamson has alternate accounts, something he acknowledges is against the site’s rules, but he has…thoughts on that. Somewhat salty thoughts that I’d best not share directly, though I agree with him. Go read them yourself.
Since the site also has rules against harassment, though, and those don’t seem to be slowing anyone down, he might as well do what he needs to do.
While Williamson seems to be getting the lion’s share of harassment–and not just on Facebook, but his Wikipedia page came under attack as the author of several bestselling books was supposedly not notable enough for them–he may not be alone. Fellow pro-Second Amendment author Larry Correia also had something of a bizarre occurrence.
Coming off of a 30-day ban, Correia was immediately slammed with a one-week ban.
Is it the same people as Williamson? It might be. It might also be someone completely different. It might not even really be a case of harassment.
However, the timing is more than a little suspicious. Two pro-gun authors seem to keep having posts yanked and get banned over things they’re never told about? I’m sorry, that doesn’t pass the smell test.
For Facebook, the options are simple. They can either ignore this as a problem and show the world that they only view harassment as a one-way street or they can address it evenly across the board so people like Williamson aren’t being silenced.
It’s really their call at this point.


bearingarms--2020-03-27--Oregon Ballot Initiatives May Be COVID-19 Casualties

So far , there ’ s been very little upside to the COVID-19 pandemic .
I mean , it ’ s a potentially deadly disease that ’ s popping up all over the nation and has reached alarming levels in a number of places such as New York City , New Orleans , and my hometown of Albany , Georgia .
Being stuck inside for weeks now has been pretty damn frustrating .
In fact , the only real good news are indications the disease might not be as bad as people feared .
When your good news is “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people might die , ” it ’ s time to recalibrate your expectations out of life .
However , on the gun rights side of things , it seems there ’ s an upside to COVID-19 .
This is the season when Oregon initiative campaigns normally crank up their canvassing drives to gain enough signatures to qualify for the November ballot .
But it ’ s hard to gather signatures when most people are staying at home and don ’ t want to get close to canvassers carrying a clipboard .
As a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out ballot measure campaigns with grim efficiency — to the point that Oregon this year may have the fewest number of citizen initiatives in more than four decades Initiatives dealing with gun control , clean energy and highway tolls appear increasingly unlikely to make the ballot .
One measure calling for tougher firearms storage requirements just recently received a final ballot title , clearing the way for signature-gathering .
But Jake Weigler , a spokesman for State of Safety Action , said the group has decided to pull the plug .
“ With @ @ @ @ @ @ @ finalized and the challenge of gathering signatures in the current pandemic environment , ” Weigler said , “ we ’ ve just decided it ’ s not a viable strategy of trying to go forward to put this on the 2020 ballot.
” Mark Knutson , a Lutheran minister who is a leader of Lift Every Voice Oregon , acknowledged that his group may also have to abandon its quest to qualify a measure putting new restrictions on semiautomatic firearms .
His group is still waiting for the Oregon Supreme Court to decide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for three possible measures aimed at prohibiting large-capacity magazines and more tightly regulating sales of military-style semiautomatic rifles .
Now , I ’ d much rather these measures get outright defeated and beaten so badly that no one ever tries to pass this kind of stupidity ever again .
I also don ’ t like the idea of people dying as a means of scoring a political win .
That said , I ’ m also not the kind of guy to look a gift horse in the mouth .
Based on what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being shot down on their efforts to close gun stores during this crisis , I have a feeling that even if they could gather signatures , these measures would face an uphill battle .
That ’ s putting it mildly .
As people begin to understand just how precarious our civilization actually is and how easily everything we trust about our society can be taken away , they ’ re starting to also understand that one needs to be as self-reliant as possible .
They ’ re not likely to embrace still more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would directly impact their ability to defend their families .
Expect to see these measures again next year .
Then , crush these measures next year .

So far, there’s been very little upside to the COVID-19 pandemic. I mean, it’s a potentially deadly disease that’s popping up all over the nation and has reached alarming levels in a number of places such as New York City, New Orleans, and my hometown of Albany, Georgia. Being stuck inside for weeks now has been pretty damn frustrating.
In fact, the only real good news are indications the disease might not be as bad as people feared. When your good news is “hey, maybe not quite as many people might die,” it’s time to recalibrate your expectations out of life.
However, on the gun rights side of things, it seems there’s an upside to COVID-19.
This is the season when Oregon initiative campaigns normally crank up their canvassing drives to gain enough signatures to qualify for the November ballot. But it’s hard to gather signatures when most people are staying at home and don’t want to get close to canvassers carrying a clipboard. As a result, the coronavirus crisis is knocking out ballot measure campaigns with grim efficiency — to the point that Oregon this year may have the fewest number of citizen initiatives in more than four decades Initiatives dealing with gun control, clean energy and highway tolls appear increasingly unlikely to make the ballot. … One measure calling for tougher firearms storage requirements just recently received a final ballot title, clearing the way for signature-gathering. But Jake Weigler, a spokesman for State of Safety Action, said the group has decided to pull the plug. “With the delays in getting the ballot title finalized and the challenge of gathering signatures in the current pandemic environment,” Weigler said, “we’ve just decided it’s not a viable strategy of trying to go forward to put this on the 2020 ballot.” Mark Knutson, a Lutheran minister who is a leader of Lift Every Voice Oregon, acknowledged that his group may also have to abandon its quest to qualify a measure putting new restrictions on semiautomatic firearms. His group is still waiting for the Oregon Supreme Court to decide on the final language of ballot titles for three possible measures aimed at prohibiting large-capacity magazines and more tightly regulating sales of military-style semiautomatic rifles.
Now, I’d much rather these measures get outright defeated and beaten so badly that no one ever tries to pass this kind of stupidity ever again. I also don’t like the idea of people dying as a means of scoring a political win.
That said, I’m also not the kind of guy to look a gift horse in the mouth.
Based on what we’re seeing with anti-gun governors being shot down on their efforts to close gun stores during this crisis, I have a feeling that even if they could gather signatures, these measures would face an uphill battle. That’s putting it mildly.
As people begin to understand just how precarious our civilization actually is and how easily everything we trust about our society can be taken away, they’re starting to also understand that one needs to be as self-reliant as possible. They’re not likely to embrace still more gun control, especially on proposals that would directly impact their ability to defend their families.
Expect to see these measures again next year.
Then, crush these measures next year.