bearingarms--2020-01-16--Northam's Capitol Square Gun Ban Upheld By Court, Appeal To Follow

A Virginia judge Thursday afternoon denied a request by the Virginia Citizens Defense League and the Gun Owners of America to block Governor Ralph Northam ’ s ban on firearms in Capitol Square during Monday ’ s Lobby Day activities and rally that ’ s expected to bring tens of thousands of gun owners to the capitol .
Speaking to Bearing Arms ’ Cam & Co. shortly before the suit was filed , Van Cleave said Virginia statutes are clear that the governor only has the power to ban firearms from emergency shelters during a state of emergency , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ space , not an emergency shelter .
You can read the entire filing here , but it ’ s worth noting that according to the filing , both Ralph Northam and Attorney General Mark Herring voted in favor of limiting the governor ’ s ability to regulate firearms during a state of emergency when the law was changed during the 2012 session .
In Judge Joi Taylor ’ s ruling late Thursday afternoon , she failed to address the 2012 law cited by the VCDL and GOA , simply stating that during a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to those tasked with making “ complex , subtle , and professional decisions.
” Taylor did file her response early enough for an appeal to take place , and hopefully the appeals court will pay more attention to the section of Virginia law that expressly forbids the governor from enacting a gun ban during a state of emergency , except in “ emergency shelters ” .
On today ’ s show Van Cleave also discusses some of the logistics for Lobby Day , and it ’ s important to note that even if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is ultimately blocked by the courts , all other weapons will still be legally banned from Capitol Square .
That means the security procedures will still be in place Monday morning ; one entrance with multiple magnetometers to screen those who want to participate in the Lobby Day activities and rally from the capitol grounds .
Van Cleave also notes that areas adjacent to the capitol grounds will be open to those who want to legally carry .
The Capitol Police will allow 10,000 individuals onto the capitol grounds , but we really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expect on Monday .
Governor Northam is doing his best to drive down attendance , but I wouldn ’ t be surprised to see 20-30,000 people in downtown Richmond Monday morning , and there ’ s a distinct possibility that we ’ ll see a far larger crowd .
Be sure to check out the entire interview with Phillip Van Cleave above , and don ’ t forget to subscribe to the show at Apple Podcasts , Spotify , Stitcher , and the Townhall.com podcast page .
Thanks as always for watching and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in tomorrow when my guest will be West Virginia Del .
Gary Howell , who ’ s one of the sponsors of a resolution that offers to annex any Virginia county , city , or town , that wants to leave their current state and align themselves with a more 2A friendly government .
Thanks as always for watching , listening , and spreading the word !

A Virginia judge Thursday afternoon denied a request by the Virginia Citizens Defense League and the Gun Owners of America to block Governor Ralph Northam’s ban on firearms in Capitol Square during Monday’s Lobby Day activities and rally that’s expected to bring tens of thousands of gun owners to the capitol.
Speaking to Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co. shortly before the suit was filed, Van Cleave said Virginia statutes are clear that the governor only has the power to ban firearms from emergency shelters during a state of emergency, and the 14-acre Capitol Square is a public space, not an emergency shelter. You can read the entire filing here, but it’s worth noting that according to the filing, both Ralph Northam and Attorney General Mark Herring voted in favor of limiting the governor’s ability to regulate firearms during a state of emergency when the law was changed during the 2012 session.
In Judge Joi Taylor’s ruling late Thursday afternoon, she failed to address the 2012 law cited by the VCDL and GOA, simply stating that during a state of emergency courts must give deference to those tasked with making “complex, subtle, and professional decisions.”
#BREAKING: Here is Judge Joi Taylor’s ruling denying a request for an injunction against Gov. Northam’s firearm ban that goes into effect tomorrow night. Ban was put in place as part of a state of emergency declaration for Monday’s gun lobby day at the State Capitol. @CBS6 pic.twitter.com/yDSnkxmbHR — Cam Thompson (@CamThompsonCBS6) January 16, 2020
Taylor did file her response early enough for an appeal to take place, and hopefully the appeals court will pay more attention to the section of Virginia law that expressly forbids the governor from enacting a gun ban during a state of emergency, except in “emergency shelters”.
On today’s show Van Cleave also discusses some of the logistics for Lobby Day, and it’s important to note that even if the governor’s ban on firearms is ultimately blocked by the courts, all other weapons will still be legally banned from Capitol Square. That means the security procedures will still be in place Monday morning; one entrance with multiple magnetometers to screen those who want to participate in the Lobby Day activities and rally from the capitol grounds. Van Cleave also notes that areas adjacent to the capitol grounds will be open to those who want to legally carry.
The Capitol Police will allow 10,000 individuals onto the capitol grounds, but we really have no idea how many folks to expect on Monday. Governor Northam is doing his best to drive down attendance, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see 20-30,000 people in downtown Richmond Monday morning, and there’s a distinct possibility that we’ll see a far larger crowd.
Be sure to check out the entire interview with Phillip Van Cleave above, and don’t forget to subscribe to the show at Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, and the Townhall.com podcast page. Thanks as always for watching and listening, and be sure to tune in tomorrow when my guest will be West Virginia Del. Gary Howell, who’s one of the sponsors of a resolution that offers to annex any Virginia county, city, or town, that wants to leave their current state and align themselves with a more 2A friendly government.
Thanks as always for watching, listening, and spreading the word!


bearingarms--2020-01-16--As MI Lawmakers Consider Legalizing Stun Guns, But Is Training Required?

When it comes to self-defense , guns are the best tools for the job .
However , they ’ re not tools for everyone .
What I mean by that is not everyone is comfortable with a firearm .
Some are just scared of guns .
Others aren ’ t sure they can pull the trigger and take a human life .
Still others may have any of a myriad of other reasons not to carry a gun .
For those people , less lethal options are kind of ideal .
The problem is that is , those options are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Currently , Michigan is considering changing a bit of that , but now questions have arisen as to whether training should be required .
Michigan ’ s current law only allows law enforcement and those with a concealed pistol license to use a taser .
Self-defense experts said there is a lot that needs to be determined in this plan including the difference between a taser , and a stun gun .
“ I think it ’ s a great stepping stone , as a trainer and security expert I train a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said Henry Reyna , security expert .
Reyna said that if the new bill passes , he hopes some form of training comes along with it .
“ I know there ’ s a lot of interest and a lot of voters probably want to see this bill passed .
It all comes down to the training , just so that they ’ re not going off half-cocked and not really truly understanding what ’ s reasonable and what ’ s not reasonable , ” Reyna said .
I always roll my eyes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ living as a trainer says that training should be required .
After all , this is someone who stands to benefit from the law…if there ’ s a training requirement in place he can cash in on .
Now , I ’ m not saying Reyna is like that .
I don ’ t know the guy so I couldn ’ t say .
I am saying , though , that I ’ m skeptical of anyone ’ s motivations regarding a law–particular one that infringes on someone ’ s G0d-given right to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
Frankly , no training requirement should be put in place .
The right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental human right .
No training should be required to exercise a fundamental human right .
And make no mistake here , stun guns and tasers are arms .
They ’ re not intended to be lethal , but they ’ re still weapons and still useful for self-defense , hence why training shouldn ’ t be required .
My hope is that Michigan passes the bill legalizing these for everyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that both stun guns and tasers are legal and without any training requirement .
While I ’ d still urge people to get training and to read up on self-defense laws to make sure they ’ re not misusing these tools , I don ’ t want to see more barriers to self-defense .
As it is , it ’ s expensive for poor individuals to exercise this right as it stands .
The last thing we should do in any state is to put it completely out of reach .

When it comes to self-defense, guns are the best tools for the job. However, they’re not tools for everyone.
What I mean by that is not everyone is comfortable with a firearm. Some are just scared of guns. Others aren’t sure they can pull the trigger and take a human life. Still others may have any of a myriad of other reasons not to carry a gun.
For those people, less lethal options are kind of ideal.
The problem is that is, those options are illegal in many states for whatever reason.
Currently, Michigan is considering changing a bit of that, but now questions have arisen as to whether training should be required.
Michigan’s current law only allows law enforcement and those with a concealed pistol license to use a taser. Self-defense experts said there is a lot that needs to be determined in this plan including the difference between a taser, and a stun gun. “I think it’s a great stepping stone, as a trainer and security expert I train a lot of people in self-defense,” said Henry Reyna, security expert. … Reyna said that if the new bill passes, he hopes some form of training comes along with it. “I know there’s a lot of interest and a lot of voters probably want to see this bill passed. It all comes down to the training, just so that they’re not going off half-cocked and not really truly understanding what’s reasonable and what’s not reasonable,” Reyna said.
I always roll my eyes a bit when someone who makes a living as a trainer says that training should be required. After all, this is someone who stands to benefit from the law…if there’s a training requirement in place he can cash in on.
Now, I’m not saying Reyna is like that. I don’t know the guy so I couldn’t say.
I am saying, though, that I’m skeptical of anyone’s motivations regarding a law–particular one that infringes on someone’s G0d-given right to defend themselves–when they stand to profit from it.
Frankly, no training requirement should be put in place. The right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental human right. No training should be required to exercise a fundamental human right. And make no mistake here, stun guns and tasers are arms. They’re not intended to be lethal, but they’re still weapons and still useful for self-defense, hence why training shouldn’t be required.
My hope is that Michigan passes the bill legalizing these for everyone and does so in such a way that both stun guns and tasers are legal and without any training requirement. While I’d still urge people to get training and to read up on self-defense laws to make sure they’re not misusing these tools, I don’t want to see more barriers to self-defense.
As it is, it’s expensive for poor individuals to exercise this right as it stands. The last thing we should do in any state is to put it completely out of reach.


bearingarms--2020-01-16--TSA Reports Record Number Of Guns Confiscated

You can ’ t get on a plane with a gun unless you ’ re an air marshal or one of the pilots approved to carry .
For the rest of us ?
We either have to leave the gun at home or check it in our luggage .
This , however , should not be breaking news to anyone .
We should all have a firm grasp on this fact by now .
Unfortunately , it seems way too many people haven ’ t gotten the memo .
Why else would the TSA have a record number of guns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they confiscated a record high number of guns across the U.S. in 2019 .
They found more than 4,400 guns at checkpoints , a five percent increase from 2018 with an overwhelming majority — 87 percent of those guns — loaded .
A TSA administrator says the increase of handguns found at checkpoints is troubling .
I ’ m about to say something I never thought I ’ d say : I agree with the TSA administrator .
Regardless , though , this is a problem .
It ’ s a big problem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whole , really , but not for the reasons the TSA administrator may think .
While I don ’ t believe guns should be prohibited on planes–I happen to think 9/11 would have gone down very differently with armed passengers , though I suspect not everyone agrees–the fact is that they are .
If you try to carry a gun on a plane , you ’ re going to lose your gun at a minimum .
We all know this by now .
So why are people doing it ?
The most likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they have their gun on their person somehow .
Yet that ’ s a bit of a problem too .
You see , we like to use the phrase “ responsible gun owners ” when arguing against gun control laws .
However , things like this make us all look pretty damn irresponsible .
I mean , if we can ’ t even remember we ’ re carrying guns , how can we really be trusted with them ?
Now , I know this is a BS argument .
It ’ s not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s that we ’ re comfortable with the guns and it simply isn ’ t part of our regular thinking .
It ’ s like remembering you have a wallet on you .
You know it ’ s there when you need it , but it ’ s otherwise just a part of your everyday carry .
The problem is , we know this , but the public at large doesn ’ t necessarily .
They don ’ t get why we ’ re even carrying guns , much less how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them before getting on a plane .
Look , there ’ s a lot going on right now as anti-gunners try to demonize us .
They ’ ll paint us however they can and use that tarring to justify whatever draconian measures they can think of in the process .
The last thing in the world any of us need to do is given them ammunition to make it that much easier , and that ’ s precisely what ’ s happening .
So take a few moments before you head to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not carrying your gun .
You get to keep your gun that way and not make life difficult for the rest of us .

You can’t get on a plane with a gun unless you’re an air marshal or one of the pilots approved to carry. For the rest of us? We either have to leave the gun at home or check it in our luggage.
This, however, should not be breaking news to anyone. We should all have a firm grasp on this fact by now.
Unfortunately, it seems way too many people haven’t gotten the memo. Why else would the TSA have a record number of guns confiscated for 2019?
TSA officers say they confiscated a record high number of guns across the U.S. in 2019. They found more than 4,400 guns at checkpoints, a five percent increase from 2018 with an overwhelming majority — 87 percent of those guns — loaded. … A TSA administrator says the increase of handguns found at checkpoints is troubling.
I’m about to say something I never thought I’d say: I agree with the TSA administrator.
Now I need a shower.
Regardless, though, this is a problem. It’s a big problem for the gun rights community as a whole, really, but not for the reasons the TSA administrator may think.
While I don’t believe guns should be prohibited on planes–I happen to think 9/11 would have gone down very differently with armed passengers, though I suspect not everyone agrees–the fact is that they are. If you try to carry a gun on a plane, you’re going to lose your gun at a minimum. We all know this by now.
So why are people doing it?
The most likely answer is that many are just forgetting they have their gun on their person somehow. Yet that’s a bit of a problem too. You see, we like to use the phrase “responsible gun owners” when arguing against gun control laws. However, things like this make us all look pretty damn irresponsible. I mean, if we can’t even remember we’re carrying guns, how can we really be trusted with them?
Now, I know this is a BS argument. It’s not that we don’t remember, it’s that we’re comfortable with the guns and it simply isn’t part of our regular thinking. It’s like remembering you have a wallet on you. You know it’s there when you need it, but it’s otherwise just a part of your everyday carry.
The problem is, we know this, but the public at large doesn’t necessarily. They don’t get why we’re even carrying guns, much less how we can “forget” to remove them before getting on a plane.
Look, there’s a lot going on right now as anti-gunners try to demonize us. They’ll paint us however they can and use that tarring to justify whatever draconian measures they can think of in the process. The last thing in the world any of us need to do is given them ammunition to make it that much easier, and that’s precisely what’s happening.
So take a few moments before you head to the airport and make sure you’re not carrying your gun. You get to keep your gun that way and not make life difficult for the rest of us.


bearingarms--2020-01-16--VA Senate Signs Off On First Gun Control Bills

On mostly party line votes , the Virginia state Senate approved four gun control measures on Thursday , sending the bills to the House of Delegates for approval .
SB 35 , approved on a party line 21-19 vote , would weaken the state ’ s firearms preemption laws by allowing cities and counties to impose gun bans at permitted events , as well as allowing localities to ban gun shows on government owned property and in government owned buildings .
The legislation also changes state law and will enable localities to sue gun manufacturers .
SB 69 , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also passed on a party line vote .
The bill would revive an old law in Virginia that was taken off the books in 2012 .
Just as with the old law , Virginia concealed carry holders are exempt from the gun rationing scheme , which could have the unintended consequence of swelling the ranks of concealed carry licensees in the state .
SB 70 , the so-called “ universal background check ” bill , actually received a couple of votes from Republican state senators and passed out of the Senate on a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in committee to only apply to sales of firearms in Virginia , not all transfers , which means you can loan or give a gun to your sister without going through a background check , but if you sell her a firearm from your private collection it would be a crime to do so unless you went through an FFL who conducted a background check .
It ’ s a worthless bill that is largely unenforceable , to be blunt .
SB 240 , the Extreme Risk Protection Order bill , was also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but for some reason the bill was passed by for the day .
That ’ s generally a sign that the bill might not have the necessary votes or that one or more lawmakers in the majority want to amend the bill , but haven ’ t finalized their language .
Whatever the reason , Virginia gun owners should be contacting their state senators and urging them to oppose this bill , which violates the due process rights of Virginians and will do nothing to help those in crisis and in need of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Virginia should also be contacting their delegates about SB 35 , SB 69 , and SB 70 , which now cross over to the House of Delegates .
Interestingly , we haven ’ t seen any gun bills in the House assigned to committees yet , which is unusual according to several sources familiar with the legislative proceedings .
It may be next week before the House takes up its own gun control bills , but we know that they ’ re still coming .

On mostly party line votes, the Virginia state Senate approved four gun control measures on Thursday, sending the bills to the House of Delegates for approval.
SB 35, approved on a party line 21-19 vote, would weaken the state’s firearms preemption laws by allowing cities and counties to impose gun bans at permitted events, as well as allowing localities to ban gun shows on government owned property and in government owned buildings. The legislation also changes state law and will enable localities to sue gun manufacturers.
SB 69, which rations purchases of handguns to one-per-month, also passed on a party line vote. The bill would revive an old law in Virginia that was taken off the books in 2012. Just as with the old law, Virginia concealed carry holders are exempt from the gun rationing scheme, which could have the unintended consequence of swelling the ranks of concealed carry licensees in the state.
SB 70, the so-called “universal background check” bill, actually received a couple of votes from Republican state senators and passed out of the Senate on a 23-17 vote. The bill was modified in committee to only apply to sales of firearms in Virginia, not all transfers, which means you can loan or give a gun to your sister without going through a background check, but if you sell her a firearm from your private collection it would be a crime to do so unless you went through an FFL who conducted a background check. It’s a worthless bill that is largely unenforceable, to be blunt.
SB 240, the Extreme Risk Protection Order bill, was also on the Senate calendar this afternoon, but for some reason the bill was passed by for the day. That’s generally a sign that the bill might not have the necessary votes or that one or more lawmakers in the majority want to amend the bill, but haven’t finalized their language. Whatever the reason, Virginia gun owners should be contacting their state senators and urging them to oppose this bill, which violates the due process rights of Virginians and will do nothing to help those in crisis and in need of mental health treatment.
Gun owners in Virginia should also be contacting their delegates about SB 35, SB 69, and SB 70, which now cross over to the House of Delegates. Interestingly, we haven’t seen any gun bills in the House assigned to committees yet, which is unusual according to several sources familiar with the legislative proceedings. It may be next week before the House takes up its own gun control bills, but we know that they’re still coming.


bearingarms--2020-01-16--VA GOP Slams Northam's Lobby Day Gun Ban, Demands Briefing

The leadership of the House and Senate Republicans in Virginia have authored a letter to Governor Ralph Northam requesting a security briefing over the unspecified threats that the governor alluded to in his Wednesday press conference declaring a temporary state of emergency in Richmond and a ban on firearms in Capitol Square during next Monday ’ s Lobby Day activities .
The letter , which was transmitted to the governor ’ s office early Thursday afternoon , expresses doubt over the legality of the governor ’ s actions , but also requests more information about the nature of the threats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to you today regarding your Executive Order of Wednesday , January 15 , 2020 , declaring a State of Emergency on and around Capitol Square .
Chapter 44-146.15 of the Code of Virginia states that the Governor does not have the “ authority to in any way limit the right of the people to keep and bear arms…except to the extent necessary to ensure public safety…in any place or facility used… as an emergency shelter or for the purpose of sheltering persons.
” Law enforcement officials have indicated they have identified “ credible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Monday , January 20 , and you have stated these as justification for your declaration .
While the safety of those on Capitol Square is paramount , the restrictions you have enacted place significant burdens on the First and Second Amendment rights of Virginians .
We have concerns about your authority for declaring this emergency .
We , as members of the General Assembly , have received none of the information you have referenced to justify these restrictions .
As such , we request that your office conduct a secure briefing on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the Unified Command for the leadership of the General Assembly at the earliest possible time .
The lawmakers go on to say they understand the need for operational security , and suggest that the leaders of both the Democrat and Republican caucuses be briefed on the nature of the threats without legislative staff present .
Considering the abridgment of the constitutional rights of Virginians your declaration has imposed , and because we have serious concerns about whether a governor has the authority to enact such restrictions , we believe it is imperative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ representing both majority and minority caucuses – are appropriately briefed as to the nature of these threats .
Time is of the essence , and we await your prompt response .
I hope House and Senate Republicans have more luck hearing from the governor than I ’ ve had with my invite to join me on Bearing Arms ’ Cam & Co. ( no , I still haven ’ t heard anything from Northam ’ s press secretary ) .
As for the threats , the closet thing I ’ ve seen to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York Times is reporting ; three individuals are facing federal firearms and immigration charges after being arrested in Maryland .
Prosecutors say the trio they allegedly discussed driving to Richmond for Lobby Day “ in anticipation of a possible race war.
” There will be no race war on Lobby Day .
In fact , there ’ ll be Virginians of all races , creeds , and colors standing together for the human right of self-defense and the right of the People to keep and bear arms .
Given the fact that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Day , I suspect that more than a few of the speakers , myself included , will reference the importance of the right to keep and bear arms in the civil rights struggle .
I will also be talking about the fact that young men of color are likely to be disproportionately impacted by Northam ’ s new gun control laws , which gun control advocates and anti-gun politicians seem intent on ignoring .
I know that some will try to use the Lobby Day as their own stage for their own pet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ malignant they might be .
They are not what Lobby Day is about , and they will not be greeted warmly by the tens of thousands of Virginia gun owners who are taking time off of work , arranging childcare , and in some cases traveling hundreds of miles to lobby legislators to oppose Ralph Northam ’ s gun ban .
In fact , as I ’ ve said before ; if you ’ re planning on going to Richmond on Monday to do anything other than peacefully and powerfully join in support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

The leadership of the House and Senate Republicans in Virginia have authored a letter to Governor Ralph Northam requesting a security briefing over the unspecified threats that the governor alluded to in his Wednesday press conference declaring a temporary state of emergency in Richmond and a ban on firearms in Capitol Square during next Monday’s Lobby Day activities.
The letter, which was transmitted to the governor’s office early Thursday afternoon, expresses doubt over the legality of the governor’s actions, but also requests more information about the nature of the threats the governor mentioned.
We respectfully write to you today regarding your Executive Order of Wednesday, January 15, 2020, declaring a State of Emergency on and around Capitol Square. Chapter 44-146.15 of the Code of Virginia states that the Governor does not have the “authority to in any way limit the right of the people to keep and bear arms…except to the extent necessary to ensure public safety…in any place or facility used… as an emergency shelter or for the purpose of sheltering persons.” Law enforcement officials have indicated they have identified “credible” threats against the events scheduled for Monday, January 20, and you have stated these as justification for your declaration. While the safety of those on Capitol Square is paramount, the restrictions you have enacted place significant burdens on the First and Second Amendment rights of Virginians. We have concerns about your authority for declaring this emergency. We, as members of the General Assembly, have received none of the information you have referenced to justify these restrictions. As such, we request that your office conduct a secure briefing on the threats identified by the Virginia Fusion Center and the Unified Command for the leadership of the General Assembly at the earliest possible time.
The lawmakers go on to say they understand the need for operational security, and suggest that the leaders of both the Democrat and Republican caucuses be briefed on the nature of the threats without legislative staff present.
Considering the abridgment of the constitutional rights of Virginians your declaration has imposed, and because we have serious concerns about whether a governor has the authority to enact such restrictions, we believe it is imperative that leaders of the General Assembly – representing both majority and minority caucuses – are appropriately briefed as to the nature of these threats. Time is of the essence, and we await your prompt response.
I hope House and Senate Republicans have more luck hearing from the governor than I’ve had with my invite to join me on Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co. (no, I still haven’t heard anything from Northam’s press secretary).
As for the threats, the closet thing I’ve seen to any specific threat is a story that New York Times is reporting; three individuals are facing federal firearms and immigration charges after being arrested in Maryland. Prosecutors say the trio they allegedly discussed driving to Richmond for Lobby Day “in anticipation of a possible race war.”
There will be no race war on Lobby Day. In fact, there’ll be Virginians of all races, creeds, and colors standing together for the human right of self-defense and the right of the People to keep and bear arms. Given the fact that Lobby Day is taking place on MLK Day, I suspect that more than a few of the speakers, myself included, will reference the importance of the right to keep and bear arms in the civil rights struggle. I will also be talking about the fact that young men of color are likely to be disproportionately impacted by Northam’s new gun control laws, which gun control advocates and anti-gun politicians seem intent on ignoring.
I know that some will try to use the Lobby Day as their own stage for their own pet causes, no matter how benign or malignant they might be. They are not what Lobby Day is about, and they will not be greeted warmly by the tens of thousands of Virginia gun owners who are taking time off of work, arranging childcare, and in some cases traveling hundreds of miles to lobby legislators to oppose Ralph Northam’s gun ban. In fact, as I’ve said before; if you’re planning on going to Richmond on Monday to do anything other than peacefully and powerfully join in support of the Second Amendment, stay home.


bearingarms--2020-01-16--Virginia Bill Seeks To Go After Hunting Outfitters

Hunting can be big business in rural parts of any state .
For some small communities with a lot of hunting outfitters , it could well be the one thing that keeps a community afloat .
That ’ s what makes a particular bill coming out of Virginia so problematic .
SENATE BILL NO .
774Offered January 8 , 2020Prefiled January 8 , 2020A BILL to amend and reenact § 29.1-521 of the Code of Virginia , relating to big game hunting ; guaranteed kills prohibited ; penalty .
———-Patron– Chafin———-Referred to Committee on Agriculture , Conservation and Natural Resources———-Be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Virginia : 1 .
That § 29.1-521 of the Code of Virginia is amended and reenacted as follows : § 29.1-521 .
Unlawful to hunt , trap , possess , sell , or transport wild birds and wild animals except as permitted ; exception ; penalty .
A .
The following shall be unlawful : 12 .
To offer for sale , sell , offer to purchase , purchase , or guarantee a kill of , or charge a fee for killing , a deer , bear , or wild turkey .
Such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of small game or migratory birds .
Nothing in this subdivision shall prevent a landowner from leasing land for hunting , except that a lease of land for hunting deer , bear , or wild turkey shall not be for a duration of less than three days .
A violation of this subdivision shall be punishable as provided in § 29.1-553 .
Now , bear in mind that “ guaranteeing ” a kill doesn ’ t mean you have to do anything illegal to do so .
Depending on various factors , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ animal with a high degree of certainty without breaking any game laws .
So what ’ s the deal with this ?
Well , for one thing , outfitters guaranteeing kills is a marketing thing .
It draws in hunters who figure if they ’ re going to spend the money , they want to make a kill .
Honestly , I can ’ t say I blame them .
I don ’ t get guarantees when I hunt , but I tend to do it as cheaply as possible so that ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of dollars for a hunting experience , a guarantee is something I want .
Outlawing the “ guarantee ” factor serves to only do one thing : Remove any incentive for out-of-state hunters to come to Virginia .
While it ’ s possible that someone who doesn ’ t understand anything about hunting may think that you can only guarantee a kill through some skeevy means , that doesn ’ t mean it ’ ll just eliminate the skeevy actions .
Instead , unscrupulous outfitters will continue to do unscrupulous things and figure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Meanwhile , the law-abiding outfitters will lose out on business while the state loses out on out-of-state dollars going toward licenses and other equipment .
Instead , those hunters will find other places to hunt that are either less-expensive , closer to home , or will issue those guarantees .
At the end of the day , I can see why someone might push a bill like this , but it ’ s horribly misguided .
If anything , it ’ s going to hurt hunting in Virginia far more than it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all the other news coming out of Virginia these days , this is likely to get missed .
Don ’ t let it .

Hunting can be big business in rural parts of any state. For some small communities with a lot of hunting outfitters, it could well be the one thing that keeps a community afloat.
That’s what makes a particular bill coming out of Virginia so problematic.
SENATE BILL NO. 774Offered January 8, 2020Prefiled January 8, 2020A BILL to amend and reenact § 29.1-521 of the Code of Virginia, relating to big game hunting; guaranteed kills prohibited; penalty. ———-Patron– Chafin———-Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources———-Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia: 1. That § 29.1-521 of the Code of Virginia is amended and reenacted as follows: § 29.1-521. Unlawful to hunt, trap, possess, sell, or transport wild birds and wild animals except as permitted; exception; penalty. A. The following shall be unlawful: … 12. To offer for sale, sell, offer to purchase, purchase, or guarantee a kill of, or charge a fee for killing, a deer, bear, or wild turkey. Such prohibition shall not apply to the killing of small game or migratory birds. Nothing in this subdivision shall prevent a landowner from leasing land for hunting, except that a lease of land for hunting deer, bear, or wild turkey shall not be for a duration of less than three days. A violation of this subdivision shall be punishable as provided in § 29.1-553.
Now, bear in mind that “guaranteeing” a kill doesn’t mean you have to do anything illegal to do so. Depending on various factors, a guide can put someone on a game animal with a high degree of certainty without breaking any game laws.
So what’s the deal with this?
Well, for one thing, outfitters guaranteeing kills is a marketing thing. It draws in hunters who figure if they’re going to spend the money, they want to make a kill. Honestly, I can’t say I blame them. I don’t get guarantees when I hunt, but I tend to do it as cheaply as possible so that’s fine. If I dropped thousands of dollars for a hunting experience, a guarantee is something I want.
Outlawing the “guarantee” factor serves to only do one thing: Remove any incentive for out-of-state hunters to come to Virginia.
While it’s possible that someone who doesn’t understand anything about hunting may think that you can only guarantee a kill through some skeevy means, that doesn’t mean it’ll just eliminate the skeevy actions. Instead, unscrupulous outfitters will continue to do unscrupulous things and figure out language that gets around the ban.
Meanwhile, the law-abiding outfitters will lose out on business while the state loses out on out-of-state dollars going toward licenses and other equipment. Instead, those hunters will find other places to hunt that are either less-expensive, closer to home, or will issue those guarantees.
At the end of the day, I can see why someone might push a bill like this, but it’s horribly misguided. If anything, it’s going to hurt hunting in Virginia far more than it will help anyone.
Unfortunately, with all the other news coming out of Virginia these days, this is likely to get missed. Don’t let it.


bearingarms--2020-01-16--West Virginia Lawmakers Offer To Annex Virginia Counties

West Virginia and Virginia used to be the same state , until the issue of slavery drove residents in the western part of the state to break away and form their own state as the Civil War erupted in 1861 .
Now , several lawmakers in West Virginia are offering to reunite at least a portion of the states once again by annexing any Second Amendment Sanctuary communities and make them a part of West Virginia if Governor Ralph Northam ’ s anti-gun agenda is enacted into law .
House Concurrent Resolution 8 was filed this week in the West @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not lead to 91 more counties in West Virginia , it ’ s at least poking Virginia ’ s anti-gun lawmakers for their zealous attempt to infringe on the rights of residents .
For that reason alone I hope it passes unanimously .
The bill actually calls for county referendums to be held in Virginia counties before August 1st , 2020 .
If the General Assembly in Virginia were to approve counties leaving the state ( which isn ’ t going to happen ) , then the West Virginia legislature would put the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the people via a referendum in November of this year .
If the resolution were to pass , the first step would be to inform the counties in Virginia that this option is available to them .
Further Resolved , That the Legislature directs that the Clerk of the House forward copies of this resolution to the Board of Supervisors of each county in the Commonwealth of Virginia who have voted to become sanctuary counties for firearms rights , and to the Council of each independent city in the Commonwealth of Virginia who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ firearms rights ; and , be it Further Resolved , That the Legislature directs that the Clerk of the House forward copies of this resolution to the Clerk of the House of Delegates and Clerk of the Senate of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia and requests , in a spirit of peace and goodwill , that the General Assembly will allow this measure for the peaceful transfer of peoples and the restoration of harmony to the Virginias ; and , further requests , in a continuance of such spirit , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ body have an effective date far enough into the future so that this exchange of peoples and territory could be accomplished before the effective date of such legislation .
Again , there is absolutely zero percent chance of the General Assembly bidding a fond farewell to the vast majority of the state .
It ’ s simply not going to happen .
I do wonder if any Virginia counties might try to hold a non-binding vote on moving to West Virginia regardless of the legal impossibilities .
Virginia Democrats were taken by surprise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I can only imagine their reaction of dozens of counties began asking the state of West Virginia to take them in and offer them sanctuary as well .
Del .
Gary Howell is one of the sponsors of this resolution , and I ’ m fairly confident that he ’ ll be my guest on Friday ’ s Bearing Arms ’ Cam & Co. so we can talk a little more about this idea and what made him and some of his colleagues decide to offer to take in Virginia ’ s pro-2A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tune in and check it out tomorrow !

West Virginia and Virginia used to be the same state, until the issue of slavery drove residents in the western part of the state to break away and form their own state as the Civil War erupted in 1861. Now, several lawmakers in West Virginia are offering to reunite at least a portion of the states once again by annexing any Second Amendment Sanctuary communities and make them a part of West Virginia if Governor Ralph Northam’s anti-gun agenda is enacted into law.
House Concurrent Resolution 8 was filed this week in the West Virginia legislature, and while it may not lead to 91 more counties in West Virginia, it’s at least poking Virginia’s anti-gun lawmakers for their zealous attempt to infringe on the rights of residents. For that reason alone I hope it passes unanimously.
The bill actually calls for county referendums to be held in Virginia counties before August 1st, 2020. If the General Assembly in Virginia were to approve counties leaving the state (which isn’t going to happen), then the West Virginia legislature would put the question of annexation to a vote of the people via a referendum in November of this year. If the resolution were to pass, the first step would be to inform the counties in Virginia that this option is available to them.
Further Resolved, That the Legislature directs that the Clerk of the House forward copies of this resolution to the Board of Supervisors of each county in the Commonwealth of Virginia who have voted to become sanctuary counties for firearms rights, and to the Council of each independent city in the Commonwealth of Virginia who have voted to become sanctuary cities for firearms rights; and, be it Further Resolved, That the Legislature directs that the Clerk of the House forward copies of this resolution to the Clerk of the House of Delegates and Clerk of the Senate of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia and requests, in a spirit of peace and goodwill, that the General Assembly will allow this measure for the peaceful transfer of peoples and the restoration of harmony to the Virginias; and, further requests, in a continuance of such spirit, that any firearms legislation proposed by that body have an effective date far enough into the future so that this exchange of peoples and territory could be accomplished before the effective date of such legislation.
Again, there is absolutely zero percent chance of the General Assembly bidding a fond farewell to the vast majority of the state. It’s simply not going to happen. I do wonder if any Virginia counties might try to hold a non-binding vote on moving to West Virginia regardless of the legal impossibilities. Virginia Democrats were taken by surprise by the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement. I can only imagine their reaction of dozens of counties began asking the state of West Virginia to take them in and offer them sanctuary as well.
Del. Gary Howell is one of the sponsors of this resolution, and I’m fairly confident that he’ll be my guest on Friday’s Bearing Arms’ Cam & Co. so we can talk a little more about this idea and what made him and some of his colleagues decide to offer to take in Virginia’s pro-2A counties and communities. Be sure to tune in and check it out tomorrow!


bearingarms--2020-01-16--The Desperate Smearing Of Virginia Gun Owners

Anti-gun politicians and gun control activists are busily crafting a narrative that Monday ’ s Lobby Day rally at the state capitol is going to be a disaster of epic proportions ; a rampaging mob of militia members , white supremacists , and “ gun extremists ” intent on starting the Second Civil War or at least another Charlottesville .
Moms Demand Action , for example , issued a “ fact sheet ” that ’ s short on actual facts but long on attacks on those attending the Lobby Day activities .
In it , the gun control groups claims @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawmakers when in fact we ’ re just hoping they ’ ll listen to what we have to say .
The group also refuses to call Second Amendment Sanctuaries by their name , referring to them instead as “ Lawless Counties.
” While it ’ s true that resolutions don ’ t have legal force , no one ’ s ever claimed they did .
In fact , the resolutions ( in most cases ) simply express the intent of county supervisors not to spend any public money to enforce unconstitutional gun control @ @ @ @ @ @ @ movement will come from commonwealth ’ s attorneys and county sheriffs who use their discretion to not enforce unconstitutional gun laws .
And yes , even in Virginia , law enforcement has the discretion to not enforce laws , even those that are clearly constitutional .
Moms Demand Action then tries to claim that the streets of Richmond are going to be filled with angry white supremacists hoping to spark a civil war .
In the wake of Charlottesville , where “ a day of volatile street-fighting ended with a white supremacist plowing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Virginia officials , legal experts , civil rights leaders , and leading editorial boards are worried that January 20th will turn into another violent , hate-fueled disaster .
According to Alex Friedfeld , a researcher at the Anti-Defamation League , “ White supremacist ‘ accelerationists ’ have seized on the standoff [ over gun safety laws in Virginia ] as the potential beginning of a civil war that will destroy the United States and allow them to build a white nation in its ruins.
” Governor Northam has already held multiple @ @ @ @ @ @ @ armed , out-of-state protestors descending on the Capitol .
As Mary McCord , the legal director of Georgetown Law ’ s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection , put it – these resolutions have “ spurred extremists who want to stand up local militias to engage in armed rebellion against the state — action that isn ’ t just dangerous but that also runs counter to the Constitution.
” Governor Northam himself claims that there have been credible , though unspecified threats that require him to ban guns from the capitol grounds , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told USA Today that there ’ s no resemblance between Lobby Day and what happened in Charlottesville in August of 2018 .
Indeed .
Now , having said that , are there folks making noise about coming to Lobby Day for their own purposes or to grab a bit of the media ’ s attention ?
Absolutely , and to be honest , I hate it .
I ’ ve watched the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement explode across the state of Virginia over the past two months , and I know that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve peacefully turned out for their local supervisors meetings aren ’ t going to suddenly turn into a rampaging mob when they show up at the state capitol on Monday .
I know that these folks who have spoken so powerfully and passionately about why they ’ re opposed to Ralph Northam ’ s gun control agenda aren ’ t taking time off of work and arranging childcare so they can go be on TV or engage in attention-grabbing stunts or up their Instagram followers .
Because of the national attention that Lobby @ @ @ @ @ @ @ drawing in outside actors like a moth to a flame .
I believe most of them are coming to Virginia with the right mindset and good intentions .
Others , on the other hand , may indeed be trying to stir up trouble or at least draw attention to themselves and detract from the message that the tens of thousands of Virginia gun owners are hoping to send .
There ’ s not much we can do about it , unfortunately , other than outnumber those grifters and possibly even agent provocateurs who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ derail Lobby Day .
I ’ m confident we ’ ll be able to do so , and I ’ m looking forward to seeing thousands of my fellow gun owners in Richmond on Monday .
I ’ ll be lining up bright and early to pass through the magnetometers if need be so I can join Stephen Williford , Dick Heller , Del .
Nick Freitas , Antonia Okafor , and the others who ’ ll be speaking during the Lobby Day rally , though I suspect that many attendees may choose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ established by the governor .
Gun control advocates and anti-gun politicians like Ralph Northam are doing everything they can to try to tamp down attendance and make it seem like a gathering of nutjobs will be taking place .
Those in attendance on Monday , and those lucky few who read or watch a fair accounting of Lobby Day , will clearly see that the heart and soul of the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement is comprised of average everyday Americans who are engaged in citizen activism , many of them for the very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year ’ s Lobby Day isn ’ t the end of a movement , though it may be the culmination of the dozens of meetings where thousands of us have shown up to declare our support for our cities , towns , and counties becoming Second Amendment Sanctuaries .
It might be the end of a chapter , but we ’ re still at the beginning of this story .
We still have to see what bills pass out of the legislature , what bills are signed by Gov .
Northam , what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what bills go into effect on July 1st .
Then , and only then , will see how these Second Amendment Sanctuaries respond to any unconstitutional laws placed on the books .

Anti-gun politicians and gun control activists are busily crafting a narrative that Monday’s Lobby Day rally at the state capitol is going to be a disaster of epic proportions; a rampaging mob of militia members, white supremacists, and “gun extremists” intent on starting the Second Civil War or at least another Charlottesville.
Moms Demand Action, for example, issued a “fact sheet” that’s short on actual facts but long on attacks on those attending the Lobby Day activities. In it, the gun control groups claims that gun owners are hoping to intimidate lawmakers when in fact we’re just hoping they’ll listen to what we have to say.
The group also refuses to call Second Amendment Sanctuaries by their name, referring to them instead as “Lawless Counties.”
Lawless County resolutions hold no legal weight, undermine law enforcement, and create a dangerous environment for people who may hurt themselves or others: Policy experts, state attorneys general, and law enforcement alike agree: Lawless County resolutions, or as gun extremists call them, ‘Second Amendment Sanctuary’ resolutions, which threaten that officials will disregard their duty to enforce duly enacted and constitutional laws, have no legal force. The resolutions also threaten the safety of communities nationwide by fostering distrust in law enforcement and may deter people from reporting individuals that may hurt themselves or others.
While it’s true that resolutions don’t have legal force, no one’s ever claimed they did. In fact, the resolutions (in most cases) simply express the intent of county supervisors not to spend any public money to enforce unconstitutional gun control laws. The real weight of the movement will come from commonwealth’s attorneys and county sheriffs who use their discretion to not enforce unconstitutional gun laws. And yes, even in Virginia, law enforcement has the discretion to not enforce laws, even those that are clearly constitutional.
Moms Demand Action then tries to claim that the streets of Richmond are going to be filled with angry white supremacists hoping to spark a civil war.
In the wake of Charlottesville, where “a day of volatile street-fighting ended with a white supremacist plowing a car into a crowd of counter-protesters,” Virginia officials, legal experts, civil rights leaders, and leading editorial boards are worried that January 20th will turn into another violent, hate-fueled disaster. According to Alex Friedfeld, a researcher at the Anti-Defamation League, “White supremacist ‘accelerationists’ have seized on the standoff [over gun safety laws in Virginia] as the potential beginning of a civil war that will destroy the United States and allow them to build a white nation in its ruins.” Governor Northam has already held multiple meetings to prepare for legions of heavily armed, out-of-state protestors descending on the Capitol. As Mary McCord, the legal director of Georgetown Law’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, put it – these resolutions have “spurred extremists who want to stand up local militias to engage in armed rebellion against the state — action that isn’t just dangerous but that also runs counter to the Constitution.”
Governor Northam himself claims that there have been credible, though unspecified threats that require him to ban guns from the capitol grounds, though a spokesperson for the Capitol Police told USA Today that there’s no resemblance between Lobby Day and what happened in Charlottesville in August of 2018.
Macenka said Capitol Police have not heard much from out-of-state groups but dismissed the comparison between the lobby day and Charlottesville attack. “Charlottesville didn’t seem to have any purpose. People seemed to come together bent on committing violence,” Macenka said. “There is some very serious legislation at issue here.”
Indeed. Now, having said that, are there folks making noise about coming to Lobby Day for their own purposes or to grab a bit of the media’s attention? Absolutely, and to be honest, I hate it.
I’ve watched the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement explode across the state of Virginia over the past two months, and I know that the tens of thousands of people who’ve peacefully turned out for their local supervisors meetings aren’t going to suddenly turn into a rampaging mob when they show up at the state capitol on Monday. I know that these folks who have spoken so powerfully and passionately about why they’re opposed to Ralph Northam’s gun control agenda aren’t taking time off of work and arranging childcare so they can go be on TV or engage in attention-grabbing stunts or up their Instagram followers.
Because of the national attention that Lobby Day is receiving, it’s drawing in outside actors like a moth to a flame. I believe most of them are coming to Virginia with the right mindset and good intentions. Others, on the other hand, may indeed be trying to stir up trouble or at least draw attention to themselves and detract from the message that the tens of thousands of Virginia gun owners are hoping to send.
There’s not much we can do about it, unfortunately, other than outnumber those grifters and possibly even agent provocateurs who might be on hand to try and derail Lobby Day. I’m confident we’ll be able to do so, and I’m looking forward to seeing thousands of my fellow gun owners in Richmond on Monday. I’ll be lining up bright and early to pass through the magnetometers if need be so I can join Stephen Williford, Dick Heller, Del. Nick Freitas, Antonia Okafor, and the others who’ll be speaking during the Lobby Day rally, though I suspect that many attendees may choose to remain outside of the gun-free zone established by the governor.
Gun control advocates and anti-gun politicians like Ralph Northam are doing everything they can to try to tamp down attendance and make it seem like a gathering of nutjobs will be taking place. Those in attendance on Monday, and those lucky few who read or watch a fair accounting of Lobby Day, will clearly see that the heart and soul of the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement is comprised of average everyday Americans who are engaged in citizen activism, many of them for the very first time.
They know that this year’s Lobby Day isn’t the end of a movement, though it may be the culmination of the dozens of meetings where thousands of us have shown up to declare our support for our cities, towns, and counties becoming Second Amendment Sanctuaries. It might be the end of a chapter, but we’re still at the beginning of this story. We still have to see what bills pass out of the legislature, what bills are signed by Gov. Northam, what bills get challenged in court, and what bills go into effect on July 1st. Then, and only then, will see how these Second Amendment Sanctuaries respond to any unconstitutional laws placed on the books.


bearingarms--2020-01-16--Surprising Opposition To Second Amendment Sanctuary Movement Surfaces

Here at Bearing Arms , we ’ ve fully embraced the Second Amendment sanctuary movement .
After all , if states are going to push unconstitutional gun control laws , we have a moral obligation to protect the Second Amendment rights of the people .
One way of doing that is by providing sanctuaries for those rights .
Unsurprisingly , there ’ s opposition to those rights .
Anti-gunners would oppose summertime if pro-gunners openly supported it , so of course , they oppose sanctuary counties .
Yet there ’ s a bit of opposition coming from a surprising source @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , there can be anti-gun sanctuaries .
That ’ s why Second Amendment Sanctuaries in Ohio have garnered an unlikely opponent : gun-rights groups .
“ These people that are pushing this stuff might snatch defeat from the jaws of victory , ” said Chris Dorr , executive director of Ohio Gun Owners , in his podcast that posted Monday evening .
After the Clermont County Board of Commissioners on Monday declared the county a Second Amendment County , Dorr wrote a letter asking them to repeal it .
It ’ s an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it ’ s important to remember that Chris Dorr and his group are part of a kind of hinky network of supposed gun rights groups that have raised a lot of red flags in the gun rights community .
But , the question is , does that invalidate what Dorr is saying here ?
Well , it might .
The truth of the matter is that “ anti-gun sanctuaries ” have already existed for years .
States with preemption have an ongoing battle against municipalities that seek to ignore those laws .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but the effect is the same .
They ignore the law because it suits them .
Pittsburgh ’ s push on gun control predates the explosion of Second Amendment sanctuaries , after all .
Yet it ’ s also possible that Dorr is worried that if counties just opt to ignore gun control laws , there will be less revenue available for his “ network ” of organizations .
Or , you know , not .
Regardless of Dorr ’ s motivations–and I ’ ll freely admit that maybe his motivations are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cynical bastard–the truth of the matter is that I don ’ t see the concerns as legitimate .
As I ’ ve said , anti-gunners have been ignoring preemption laws for ages .
They ’ re always convinced those measures don ’ t really apply to them for some ridiculous reason .
I remember GeorgiaCarry.org battling the city of Atlanta over guns in city parks somewhere around a decade ago .
Yet the Second Amendment sanctuary movement is our one ability for counties in anti-gun states or with anti-gun lawmakers to make a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not everyone is interested in rolling over and giving up their rights .
Not by a longshot .
It ’ s our one tool with which to fight back in some of these states , states that it becomes very easy to forget about the folks who understand the role a firearm plays in American life .
For someone to claim that doing anything like that represents some kind of a risk to gun rights suggests to me that they ’ re someone we don ’ t need to listen very seriously to @ @ @ @

Here at Bearing Arms, we’ve fully embraced the Second Amendment sanctuary movement. After all, if states are going to push unconstitutional gun control laws, we have a moral obligation to protect the Second Amendment rights of the people. One way of doing that is by providing sanctuaries for those rights.
Unsurprisingly, there’s opposition to those rights. Anti-gunners would oppose summertime if pro-gunners openly supported it, so of course, they oppose sanctuary counties.
Yet there’s a bit of opposition coming from a surprising source.
If there can be gun sanctuaries, there can be anti-gun sanctuaries. That’s why Second Amendment Sanctuaries in Ohio have garnered an unlikely opponent: gun-rights groups. “These people that are pushing this stuff might snatch defeat from the jaws of victory,” said Chris Dorr, executive director of Ohio Gun Owners, in his podcast that posted Monday evening. After the Clermont County Board of Commissioners on Monday declared the county a Second Amendment County, Dorr wrote a letter asking them to repeal it.
It’s an interesting position to take.
Of course, it’s important to remember that Chris Dorr and his group are part of a kind of hinky network of supposed gun rights groups that have raised a lot of red flags in the gun rights community. But, the question is, does that invalidate what Dorr is saying here?
Well, it might.
The truth of the matter is that “anti-gun sanctuaries” have already existed for years. States with preemption have an ongoing battle against municipalities that seek to ignore those laws. They don’t declare themselves sanctuaries, but the effect is the same. They ignore the law because it suits them. Pittsburgh’s push on gun control predates the explosion of Second Amendment sanctuaries, after all.
Yet it’s also possible that Dorr is worried that if counties just opt to ignore gun control laws, there will be less revenue available for his “network” of organizations.
Or, you know, not.
Regardless of Dorr’s motivations–and I’ll freely admit that maybe his motivations are pure and I’m just a cynical bastard–the truth of the matter is that I don’t see the concerns as legitimate. As I’ve said, anti-gunners have been ignoring preemption laws for ages. They’re always convinced those measures don’t really apply to them for some ridiculous reason. I remember GeorgiaCarry.org battling the city of Atlanta over guns in city parks somewhere around a decade ago.
This isn’t new.
Yet the Second Amendment sanctuary movement is our one ability for counties in anti-gun states or with anti-gun lawmakers to make a bold stand and warn those lawmakers that not everyone is interested in rolling over and giving up their rights. Not by a longshot. It’s our one tool with which to fight back in some of these states, states that it becomes very easy to forget about the folks who understand the role a firearm plays in American life.
For someone to claim that doing anything like that represents some kind of a risk to gun rights suggests to me that they’re someone we don’t need to listen very seriously to about gun rights.


bearingarms--2020-01-17--Meet The WV Lawmaker Talking About Annexing VA's 2A Sanctuary Counties

When I first heard about the idea offered up by several West Virginia lawmakers to allow counties in Virginia to leave the state and be annexed into West Virginia , I thought it was a pretty funny political stunt and statement .
After talking with Del .
Gary Howell , one of the chief sponsors of the resolution , I ’ m convinced that he ’ s serious .
What ’ s more , it ’ s not a bad idea ( though I still don ’ t know how practical it is ) .
Howell notes that there ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ books from 1870 that allows Frederick County , Virginia to join West Virginia , and the WV state Senate has already approved a resolution welcoming the northwestern Virginia county to become a part of the Mountaineer State .
West Virginia became a state in 1861 when the Union-supporting counties of Northwestern Virginia broke off from the rest of the state , which eventually became the capital of the Confederacy .
Frederick was one of three counties , along with Berkeley and Jefferson , given the opportunity to join West Virginia after the Civil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do so , but Frederick never held a vote on the issue .
“ There remain , as there have always been , feelings of deep affection for Frederick County and for her inhabitants by and among the citizens of West Virginia , and in particular by and among the citizens of those counties in West Virginia which may be regarded as the children of Frederick County , ” Sen. Trump wrote in the resolution .
“ In 1862 , when the government of Virginia , meeting in Wheeling , took up the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state , Frederick County was among those counties which were regarded as having a natural place within the new state.
” Howell and dozens of other delegates , meanwhile , want to take it one step further and find a way for other counties to leave Virginia for higher and common ground .
Of course , in order for that to happen , the Democrat-controlled General Assembly in Virginia would have to sign off , and I honestly don ’ t see that happening .
However , depending on the legislative session turns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Virginia counties holding non-binding votes in favor of leaving the state as a political message .
Del .
Howell raises some really interesting points about the deep divides in our society , and whether or not they could be alleviated through a redrawing of borders .
If we redistrict and gerrymander congressional districts , why not go the whole enchilada and redo the boundaries of states ?
Sure it ’ s a little crazy , but don ’ t you ever get the feeling that our current state is making a lot of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s the perfect time !
Also on today ’ s program we discuss the upcoming Lobby Day in Virginia , and the logistics of attending as well as our plans for coverage of the event here at Bearing Arms .
Don ’ t forget to subscribe to the show at Apple Podcasts , Spotify , Stitcher , and the Townhall.com podcast page .
Thanks as always for watching , listening , and spreading the word !

When I first heard about the idea offered up by several West Virginia lawmakers to allow counties in Virginia to leave the state and be annexed into West Virginia, I thought it was a pretty funny political stunt and statement. After talking with Del. Gary Howell, one of the chief sponsors of the resolution, I’m convinced that he’s serious. What’s more, it’s not a bad idea (though I still don’t know how practical it is).
Howell notes that there’s a Supreme Court decision on the books from 1870 that allows Frederick County, Virginia to join West Virginia, and the WV state Senate has already approved a resolution welcoming the northwestern Virginia county to become a part of the Mountaineer State.
West Virginia became a state in 1861 when the Union-supporting counties of Northwestern Virginia broke off from the rest of the state, which eventually became the capital of the Confederacy. Frederick was one of three counties, along with Berkeley and Jefferson, given the opportunity to join West Virginia after the Civil War. Berkeley and Jefferson chose to do so, but Frederick never held a vote on the issue. “There remain, as there have always been, feelings of deep affection for Frederick County and for her inhabitants by and among the citizens of West Virginia, and in particular by and among the citizens of those counties in West Virginia which may be regarded as the children of Frederick County,” Sen. Trump wrote in the resolution. “In 1862, when the government of Virginia, meeting in Wheeling, took up the question of the formation of a new state, Frederick County was among those counties which were regarded as having a natural place within the new state.”
Howell and dozens of other delegates, meanwhile, want to take it one step further and find a way for other counties to leave Virginia for higher and common ground. Of course, in order for that to happen, the Democrat-controlled General Assembly in Virginia would have to sign off, and I honestly don’t see that happening.
However, depending on the legislative session turns out, I could see a few Virginia counties holding non-binding votes in favor of leaving the state as a political message.
Del. Howell raises some really interesting points about the deep divides in our society, and whether or not they could be alleviated through a redrawing of borders. If we redistrict and gerrymander congressional districts, why not go the whole enchilada and redo the boundaries of states? Sure it’s a little crazy, but don’t you ever get the feeling that our current state is making a lot of us a little crazy? Maybe now’s the perfect time!
Also on today’s program we discuss the upcoming Lobby Day in Virginia, and the logistics of attending as well as our plans for coverage of the event here at Bearing Arms. Don’t forget to subscribe to the show at Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, and the Townhall.com podcast page. Thanks as always for watching, listening, and spreading the word!


bearingarms--2020-01-17--Conservative Pundit Says 2A Sanctuaries Are A Bad Idea

The Washington Examiner ‘ s Brad Polumbo is out with a piece slamming the growing number of communities in Virginia and across the national declaring themselves to be Second Amendment Sanctuaries , but his argument isn ’ t the typical one we ’ ve seen from gun control advocates .
In fact , Polumbo describes himself as a supporter of the right to keep and bear arms and an opponent of Ralph Northam ’ s gun control agenda .
He just thinks Second Amendment Sanctuaries are bad ideas .
As by the Washington Examiner , more than 80 Virginia counties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the state , have declared themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries .
The resolutions passed by local governments in some cases simply ( and rightfully ) condemn the gun control proposals coming out of the Statehouse .
But in other instances , the counties threaten to resist enforcement and openly flout state law .
For instance , after his county declared itself a sanctuary , Culpeper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins that if necessary , he plans to “ properly screen and deputize thousands of our law-abiding citizens to protect their constitutional right to own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ localities are openly saying they ’ ll take arms against the state government before allowing laws they disagree with to take effect .
Seriously ?
This is madness .
No , that ’ s not what Jenkins is saying , and it ’ s irresponsible for Polumbo to assert such a thing without talking to the sheriff himself .
What Sheriff Jenkins is saying when he talks about deputizing thousands of law abiding citizens is allowing existing Virginia gun owners to maintain possession of any firearm banned by Governor Northam .
Remember that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ original gun ban bill offered up by Virginia Democrats after winning election in November , all residents who lawfully possessed guns that were classified as “ assault firearms ” had to get rid of them or else become a felon .
However , there was an exemption for law enforcement , and Sheriff Jenkins was talking about using that exemption to basically make every resident of Culpeper County exempt from the new gun law .
Polumbo is simply way off base by claiming this was some sort of threat of a civil war @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to fight anti-gun laws is in the courts .
If they really do violate the Second Amendment — and I sure think they do — then the courts will eventually rule as much , even if the issue must go all the way to the conservative-majority Supreme Court .
I sincerely doubt most of this anti-gun agenda would survive legal scrutiny if properly challenged by Second Amendment supporters in the judicial system .
I agree that fighting any new gun laws in court will be an important step , and the vast majority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ using the courts to challenge any unconstitutional laws .
Far from ignoring the judicial system , these Second Amendment Sanctuary communities are explicitly saying they ’ ll use it .
Here ’ s the resolution from Carroll County , Virginia , for example .
I don ’ t know about you , but when the resolutions are specifically talking about using “ legal means ” including “ legal actions ” to oppose unconstitutional gun control measures , it doesn ’ t sound very lawless to me .
What about if any of these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
No , it ’ s really not an affront to the rule of law , nor would it turn our system upside down .
In fact , it wouldn ’ t be any different than the status quo that exists in the state of Virginia today , where prosecutors are publicly stating they won ’ t enforce some of the state ’ s drug laws .
Virginia sheriffs and prosecutors have the discretion to enforce the laws and pursue justice as they see fit .
If a county sheriff doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anyone for simply possessing a 20-round magazine if that becomes illegal under Virginia law , he ’ s well within his authority to do so .
Polumbo says Second Amendment Sanctuaries concern him because he doesn ’ t want to see a descent into lawlessness .
He won ’ t , though he might see a large amount of civil disobedience if Ralph Northam ’ s gun control bills become gun control laws .
A principled and peaceful stand in defense of constitutional rights isn ’ t anarchy .
In fact , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our American history , from the earliest days of our republic through the Second Amendment Sanctuary counties that are growing by the day in 2020 .
Rather than fear the movement , Polumbo should embrace it for what it is ; a grassroots wave of civic engagement that uses the First Amendment to protect the Second .

The Washington Examiner‘s Brad Polumbo is out with a piece slamming the growing number of communities in Virginia and across the national declaring themselves to be Second Amendment Sanctuaries, but his argument isn’t the typical one we’ve seen from gun control advocates. In fact, Polumbo describes himself as a supporter of the right to keep and bear arms and an opponent of Ralph Northam’s gun control agenda. He just thinks Second Amendment Sanctuaries are bad ideas.
As reported by the Washington Examiner, more than 80 Virginia counties, an overwhelming majority of the localities in the state, have declared themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries. The resolutions passed by local governments in some cases simply (and rightfully) condemn the gun control proposals coming out of the Statehouse. But in other instances, the counties threaten to resist enforcement and openly flout state law. For instance, after his county declared itself a sanctuary, Culpeper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins said that if necessary, he plans to “properly screen and deputize thousands of our law-abiding citizens to protect their constitutional right to own firearms.” Essentially, some of these localities are openly saying they’ll take arms against the state government before allowing laws they disagree with to take effect. Seriously? This is madness.
No, that’s not what Jenkins is saying, and it’s irresponsible for Polumbo to assert such a thing without talking to the sheriff himself. What Sheriff Jenkins is saying when he talks about deputizing thousands of law abiding citizens is allowing existing Virginia gun owners to maintain possession of any firearm banned by Governor Northam.
Remember that under SB 16, which was the original gun ban bill offered up by Virginia Democrats after winning election in November, all residents who lawfully possessed guns that were classified as “assault firearms” had to get rid of them or else become a felon. However, there was an exemption for law enforcement, and Sheriff Jenkins was talking about using that exemption to basically make every resident of Culpeper County exempt from the new gun law. Polumbo is simply way off base by claiming this was some sort of threat of a civil war by the sheriff.
The right way to fight anti-gun laws is in the courts. If they really do violate the Second Amendment — and I sure think they do — then the courts will eventually rule as much, even if the issue must go all the way to the conservative-majority Supreme Court. I sincerely doubt most of this anti-gun agenda would survive legal scrutiny if properly challenged by Second Amendment supporters in the judicial system.
I agree that fighting any new gun laws in court will be an important step, and the vast majority of Second Amendment Sanctuary resolutions also mention using the courts to challenge any unconstitutional laws. Far from ignoring the judicial system, these Second Amendment Sanctuary communities are explicitly saying they’ll use it. Here’s the resolution from Carroll County, Virginia, for example.
I don’t know about you, but when the resolutions are specifically talking about using “legal means” including “legal actions” to oppose unconstitutional gun control measures, it doesn’t sound very lawless to me. What about if any of these laws are upheld in court, however?
If, however, these laws somehow are upheld by judges even after appeal, then local government officials have no right to defy them. Refusal to abide by laws properly passed through our electoral system and then upheld by the judiciary … well, that’s just anarchy. It’s an affront to the rule of law and would turn our system upside down.
No, it’s really not an affront to the rule of law, nor would it turn our system upside down. In fact, it wouldn’t be any different than the status quo that exists in the state of Virginia today, where prosecutors are publicly stating they won’t enforce some of the state’s drug laws. Virginia sheriffs and prosecutors have the discretion to enforce the laws and pursue justice as they see fit. If a county sheriff doesn’t think it makes any sense to arrest anyone for simply possessing a 20-round magazine if that becomes illegal under Virginia law, he’s well within his authority to do so.
Polumbo says Second Amendment Sanctuaries concern him because he doesn’t want to see a descent into lawlessness. He won’t, though he might see a large amount of civil disobedience if Ralph Northam’s gun control bills become gun control laws. A principled and peaceful stand in defense of constitutional rights isn’t anarchy. In fact, it’s woven into the fabric of our American history, from the earliest days of our republic through the Second Amendment Sanctuary counties that are growing by the day in 2020. Rather than fear the movement, Polumbo should embrace it for what it is; a grassroots wave of civic engagement that uses the First Amendment to protect the Second.


bearingarms--2020-01-17--Charging Of Baltimore Cop And The Faulty Logic Of Gun Control

While individual gun grabbers may claim to have some respect for the Second Amendment , remarkably few of them can articulate firm limits on how far gun control should go .
For example , Shannon Watts has claimed she ’ s not really anti-gun but completely lost her crap over a .22 bolt-action because it looked scary .
If a bolt-action rimfire rifle is too terrifying for her , then just what is acceptable ?
At the core , the truth is that anti-gunners really want guns reserved only for the military and police .
The problem with that is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bunch of angels .
They ’ re human beings with human failings .
While most are good , decent people who just want to help people out , there are some that are apparently willing to cross the lines of decency .
Federal prosecutors have charged another Baltimore police detective in connection with a BB gun planting incident from 2014 .
According to the five-count indictment , Robert Hankard , 43 , has been with the BPD since 2007 and was promoted to detective in 2014 .
Hankard ’ s being indicted on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provided a BB gun he knew would be planted on a suspect , falsified an application for a search warrant and an arrest report in a second incident where drugs were planted on a suspect , as well as that he falsely testified to a federal grand jury in a federal investigation .
The charges stem from Sgt .
W.J .
striking someone with his vehicle in March 2014 and calling another officer asking for a BB gun to plant to justify his actions running the man over .
The officer then planted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And , to be clear , this isn ’ t just any group of officers .
Oh no , this is the Gun Trace Task Force .
In other words , these are the cops being trusted with removing guns from the streets of Baltimore , and they ’ re allegedly planting evidence ?
The problem with relegating non-military firearm possession to just the police is that this doesn ’ t slow down .
It doesn ’ t go away .
That ’ s because , as I said , police aren ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bad in any profession , but in law enforcement the bad have an ability to do far worse than in many other careers .
For one , they ’ re all armed .
For another , they have far too many friends who can make things like this happen .
Yet this is the future anti-gunners want .
They want to empower corrupt cops to hit people with cars and then set them up to go to prison over nothing .
Meanwhile , you and I are powerless before not just these allegedly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ criminals that seek to make our lives a living hell , just so they can avoid having to get a real job .
You can not pretend that no private citizen can be trusted with guns while also pretending that every police officer absolutely can .
It just doesn ’ t make any sense and anyone with half a brain knows it .
Unfortunately , so many gun control activists don ’ t , so what does that tell you about them ?

While individual gun grabbers may claim to have some respect for the Second Amendment, remarkably few of them can articulate firm limits on how far gun control should go. For example, Shannon Watts has claimed she’s not really anti-gun but completely lost her crap over a .22 bolt-action because it looked scary. If a bolt-action rimfire rifle is too terrifying for her, then just what is acceptable?
At the core, the truth is that anti-gunners really want guns reserved only for the military and police.
The problem with that is that the police aren’t a bunch of angels. They’re human beings with human failings. While most are good, decent people who just want to help people out, there are some that are apparently willing to cross the lines of decency.
Federal prosecutors have charged another Baltimore police detective in connection with a BB gun planting incident from 2014. According to the five-count indictment, Robert Hankard, 43, has been with the BPD since 2007 and was promoted to detective in 2014. Hankard’s being indicted on federal charges related to allegations that he provided a BB gun he knew would be planted on a suspect, falsified an application for a search warrant and an arrest report in a second incident where drugs were planted on a suspect, as well as that he falsely testified to a federal grand jury in a federal investigation. The charges stem from Sgt. W.J. striking someone with his vehicle in March 2014 and calling another officer asking for a BB gun to plant to justify his actions running the man over. The officer then planted the BB gun underneath the vehicle.
And, to be clear, this isn’t just any group of officers. Oh no, this is the Gun Trace Task Force.
In other words, these are the cops being trusted with removing guns from the streets of Baltimore, and they’re allegedly planting evidence?
The problem with relegating non-military firearm possession to just the police is that this doesn’t slow down. It doesn’t go away. That’s because, as I said, police aren’t perfect. There are good and bad in any profession, but in law enforcement the bad have an ability to do far worse than in many other careers. For one, they’re all armed. For another, they have far too many friends who can make things like this happen.
Yet this is the future anti-gunners want. They want to empower corrupt cops to hit people with cars and then set them up to go to prison over nothing.
Meanwhile, you and I are powerless before not just these allegedly corrupt officers, but also the everyday criminals that seek to make our lives a living hell, just so they can avoid having to get a real job.
You cannot pretend that no private citizen can be trusted with guns while also pretending that every police officer absolutely can. It just doesn’t make any sense and anyone with half a brain knows it. Unfortunately, so many gun control activists don’t, so what does that tell you about them?


bearingarms--2020-01-17--Delaware Bill Seeks To Ban "Ghost Guns"

Delaware Bill Seeks To Ban "Ghost Guns"

In the northeastern part of the United States , gun control is a very popular thing .
I don ’ t really know why that is , of course , but I can recognize that fact as well as anyone else .
So , I guess we shouldn ’ t be surprised that a state like Delaware is gearing up to go after homebuilt firearms .
You know , that thing many of us do because we like guns and we like tinkering , so of course we like tinkering with guns .
Building guns is just a step up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a bill in Delaware seeks to put an end to people doing that legally .
Lawmakers on Thursday filed a bill that would ban “ ghost guns , ” homemade firearms considered to be untraceable because they lack key identifying markings .
House Bill 277 would outlaw firearms that have no serial number , are “ constructed in a shape or configuration such that it does not resemble a firearm , ” are made “ entirely of non-metal substances ” or are otherwise undetectable by metal detectors .
The measure is intended to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which authorities say are dangerous because they can be built at home and made to be almost impossible to track , giving individuals prohibited from having guns another avenue to obtain weapons .
“ Delaware has been at the forefront of gun control legislation , whether it ’ s closing the gun show and Charleston loopholes , passing red flag laws , or expanding background checks , ” House Majority Leader Valerie Longhurst , a Bear Democrat who is the main sponsor , said in a statement .
“ Sadly , individuals are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ laws .
The sale and manufacture of these so-called ghost guns is a terrifying way to bypass law enforcement , especially for people who are prohibited from possessing a firearm.
” Possessing an unfinished firearm would be a Class D felony , which carries with it a maximum sentence of eight years in prison .
Making a covert or untraceable gun would also be a Class D offense , while simply having such a weapon would fall under a Class E felony .
Class E felonies have a maximum of five years in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they ’ ll penalize you more for an unfinished gun than a finished one .
That tells you something right there .
In particular , it tells you that Longhurst and company aren ’ t really interested in making anyone safer .
They ’ re interested in controlling things .
An unfinished receiver means you ’ re someone who is clearly beyond their control , while a finished rifle only suggests it .
Note that , currently , it ’ s perfectly legal to have these guns in Delaware , but if they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into a felony , it seems clear they won ’ t be putting in a grandfather clause .
That ’ s a big problem .
However , let ’ s also remember that criminals don ’ t obey the laws .
While criminals can ’ t buy guns from law-abiding dealers due to current gun control policies , they still buy guns aplenty .
Yes , some people manufacture guns , too , for criminal acts , but only a fool would think that if they already have a 3D printer and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from making guns because of the law .
While some argue that these so-called “ ghost guns ” are showing up at crime scenes more frequently , there ’ s been a complete lack of hard numbers .
That ’ s another reason we should all be skeptical of the arguments made on these attempted bans .
My hope is that this doesn ’ t go anywhere .
The people of Delaware deserve better from their legislators .

In the northeastern part of the United States, gun control is a very popular thing. I don’t really know why that is, of course, but I can recognize that fact as well as anyone else.
So, I guess we shouldn’t be surprised that a state like Delaware is gearing up to go after homebuilt firearms. You know, that thing many of us do because we like guns and we like tinkering, so of course we like tinkering with guns. Building guns is just a step up from that, of course.
Yet a bill in Delaware seeks to put an end to people doing that legally.
Lawmakers on Thursday filed a bill that would ban “ghost guns,” homemade firearms considered to be untraceable because they lack key identifying markings. House Bill 277 would outlaw firearms that have no serial number, are “constructed in a shape or configuration such that it does not resemble a firearm,” are made “entirely of non-metal substances” or are otherwise undetectable by metal detectors. The measure is intended to counteract the rise of 3D-printed firearms, which authorities say are dangerous because they can be built at home and made to be almost impossible to track, giving individuals prohibited from having guns another avenue to obtain weapons. “Delaware has been at the forefront of gun control legislation, whether it’s closing the gun show and Charleston loopholes, passing red flag laws, or expanding background checks,” House Majority Leader Valerie Longhurst, a Bear Democrat who is the main sponsor, said in a statement. “Sadly, individuals are constantly looking for loopholes to bypass these laws. The sale and manufacture of these so-called ghost guns is a terrifying way to bypass law enforcement, especially for people who are prohibited from possessing a firearm.” … Possessing an unfinished firearm would be a Class D felony, which carries with it a maximum sentence of eight years in prison. Making a covert or untraceable gun would also be a Class D offense, while simply having such a weapon would fall under a Class E felony.
Class E felonies have a maximum of five years in prison.
So, in short, they’ll penalize you more for an unfinished gun than a finished one. That tells you something right there. In particular, it tells you that Longhurst and company aren’t really interested in making anyone safer. They’re interested in controlling things. An unfinished receiver means you’re someone who is clearly beyond their control, while a finished rifle only suggests it.
Note that, currently, it’s perfectly legal to have these guns in Delaware, but if they’re going to turn mere possession into a felony, it seems clear they won’t be putting in a grandfather clause. That’s a big problem.
However, let’s also remember that criminals don’t obey the laws. While criminals can’t buy guns from law-abiding dealers due to current gun control policies, they still buy guns aplenty. Yes, some people manufacture guns, too, for criminal acts, but only a fool would think that if they already have a 3D printer and the required files they’ll simply refrain from making guns because of the law.
While some argue that these so-called “ghost guns” are showing up at crime scenes more frequently, there’s been a complete lack of hard numbers. That’s another reason we should all be skeptical of the arguments made on these attempted bans.
My hope is that this doesn’t go anywhere. The people of Delaware deserve better from their legislators.


bearingarms--2020-01-16--MI Lawmakers Consider Legalizing Stun Guns, But Is Training Required?