Archive for 2nd Amendment

Gun Victory in Chicago!

Posted in General, News with tags , , , on July 13, 2010 by truthwillrise

By Mark Anderson

A Washington state gun rights organization is elated over its landmark federal court victory, saying that the U.S. Supreme Court’s five-to-four ruling on June 28 that overturns Chicago’s handgun ban “clearly shows that the right of the individual citizen to have a gun is constitutionally protected in every corner of the United States.”

That’s according to Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) President Alan Gottlieb. While some corporate media have called this decision a reversal of Chicago’s “firearms” ban, it strictly deals with handguns. “In striking down Chicago’s handgun ban, and incorporating the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms so it applies to state and local governments as well as the federal government, the high court affirmed that
a constitutionally protected civil right cannot be arbitrarily regulated as though it were a privilege,” Gottlieb stated in a news release.

This McDonald vs. City of Chicago case was named for plaintiff Otis McDonald. The SAF news release added that the decision “marks another important Second Amendment victory for attorney Alan Gura, who also successfully argued the Heller case in 2008,” referring to Dick Heller of Washington, D.C., who fought to overturn the district’s handgun ban.

This time around, Gura represented the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA), Mr. McDonald, three other Chicago residents and the SAF. ISRA Executive Director Richard Pearson said the ruling “has ended the years of oppression of law-abiding gun owners by the city of Chicago,” as quoted in the SAF release.

SAF spokesman Dave Workman told this editor on June 29 from his Bellevue, Wash. office that McDonald extends Heller across America. Workman, senior editor of Gunweek magazine, said Heller determined that the Second Amendment applies to the “federal enclave” known as the District of Columbia and that D.C.’s handgun ban was thus unconstitutional.

McDonald in effect extends Heller to apply to “San Francisco, Missoula, Milwaukee” and everywhere else, Workman said, adding that states [and their localities] such as Arizona, Washington and Montana with strong firearms protections in their own constitutions may be less affected and those like California that lack such provisions may be more affected.

Gottlieb stated that average Chicago residents like McDonald “will now enjoy the same right of self defense as a squad of bodyguards provides to Mayor Richard Daley. Now we can work to lower the deplorable violent crime rate in Chicago, something that the anti-gun mayor’s policies have been unable to accomplish.”

Contacted by AFP, Charles E. Rice, a Notre Dame professor emeritus of law, responded favorably to what the ruling generally accomplished but expressed reservations about the theory behind it.

“It’s the right result for, theoretically, the wrong reason,” said Rice.

Referring to the SAF’s statement about “incorporating the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms so that it applies to state and local governments” . . . and that “the high court affirmed that a constitutionally protected civil right cannot be . . . regulated,” Rice’s view is that a “civil right” is typically regarded as something a little different, like “the right to vote,” which is the kind of thing the government helps provide and therefore regulates, as opposed to a constitutional right, which is supposed to be a God-given thing that the government is prohibited from regulating, ideally.

Mark Anderson is a longtime newsman now working as the editor for AFP. He and his wife Angie provide photographs and video of the events they cover for AFP. Listen to Mark’s radio show at republicbroadcasting.org, Sundays at 7pm central. Email him at at truthhound2@yahoo.com.

Subscribe to American Free Press. Online subscriptions: One year of weekly editions—$15 plus you get a BONUS ELECTRONIC BOOK – HIGH PRIESTS OF WAR – By Michael Piper.

Print subscriptions: 52 issues crammed into 47 weeks of the year plus six free issues of Whole Body Health: $59  Order on this website or call toll free 1-888-699-NEWS .

Sign up for our free e-newsletter here – get a free gift just for signing up!

Elena Kagan’s Opposition to Gun Rights

Posted in Attack on Freedom, General, New World Order, News, Stupid Government Tricks, The Constitution, Tyranny, Unconstitutional with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on May 13, 2010 by truthwillrise

kagan and schumer

Ken Klukowski
Lux Libertas
May 13, 2010

A third instance of Elena Kagan opposing Americans’ Second Amendment right to own a gun has now become public, and is sure to become a major issue in her Supreme Court confirmation hearings. And it confirms that President Obama’s gun-control agenda is to create a Supreme Court that will “reinterpret” the Second Amendment until that amendment means nothing at all.

This year, no case on the Supreme Court docket is more important than McDonald v. Chicago, where the Court is deciding whether the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is only a right you have against the federal government, or instead if the Second Amendment (like most of the Bill of Rights) also secures a right you can assert against state and local governments. At issue is whether Chicago’s law banning all guns—even in your own home—is constitutional.

When the Supreme Court considered its last Second Amendment case, District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008, then-U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement filed a brief in the case, and then requested and received time to argue the federal government’s position in that case as to the meaning of the Second Amendment.

When the McDonald case was argued before the Court on March 2 of this year, current Solicitor General Kagan argued… Nothing. Not only did she not ask for time during oral argument, she didn’t even file a brief (which the solicitor general routinely does in important constitutional cases—and the McDonald case is monumentally important).

If someone asserts that the solicitor general shouldn’t file a brief because it’s a state matter as to whether the Second Amendment is “incorporated” to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment (which is the issue in McDonald) the record speaks to the contrary. The last time the Supreme Court “incorporated” a right from the Bill of Rights to the states, in the 1969 case Benton v. Maryland, the solicitor general filed a brief, and then (just like Heller in 2008) got divided argument time to express the government’s views in front of the Court.

Why wouldn’t Kagan file a brief expressing the view of over 75% of Americans that the Second Amendment is an individual right, one that every American citizen has against all levels of government?

Aside from her shocking decision not to file a brief in McDonald, we’ve learned that Elena Kagan was part of the Clinton White House’s gun-control efforts, where a Clinton staffer said, “We are taking the law and bending it as far as we can to capture a whole new class of guns.”

Then it became public that when the Supreme Court was asked in 1987 to decide if the D.C. gun ban was unconstitutional (the same law that the Court eventually struck down in Heller), Kagan wrote to Justice Marshall on the Court that she was “not sympathetic” toward the argument that the Second Amendment doesn’t allow D.C. to completely ban all guns.

Three anti-gun decisions. Three strikes, and you’re out.

The bottom line is that Barack Obama supports the Chicago gun ban, a position he publicly repeated as recently as June 26, 2008 (the day the Heller decision was released). President Obama believes that there’s nothing unconstitutional about the city—or even the whole state—where you live completely banning you from having any firearms for hunting or self-defense, even in your own home.

As my coauthor Ken Blackwell and I discuss in our new bestselling book, The Blueprint: Obama’s Plan to Subvert the Constitution and Build an Imperial Presidency, President Obama’s gun-control agenda is to create a Supreme Court that will repeatedly rule that whatever gun-control laws come before it are okay. No matter how severe the anti-gun measure is, the Court will say, “This is constitutional.”

President Obama—the most anti-gun president is American history—has nominated for our highest court a close personal friend of his. And now we see that Obama has every reason to believe that his close personal friend shares his radical view on the Second Amendment, one that will work against the constitutional rights of 90 million American gun owners.

Elena Kagan’s confirmation hearings this summer could get very interesting. America’s gun owners have a way of making their voices heard.

Nevadans are free to don their arms in the open

Posted in Life Improvement, News, The Constitution, Truth/Freedom with tags , , , , on April 7, 2010 by truthwillrise

Steve Kanigher
Las Vegas Sun
April 7, 2010

Just about everybody on the Metro Police force has heard of Tim Farrell, and he sometimes gets mistaken for a law enforcement officer.

Farrell is simply a 29-year-old wireless Internet engineer — and a gun rights crusader. He is one of what appears to be a growing number of people taking up the “open-carry” cause, advocating a constitutional right to openly carry firearms.

“The open-carry movement has gained momentum over the last four or five years because people are waking up to their rights,” Farrell says. “I don’t need a permit to exercise free speech. I don’t need a permit to be tried by a jury if I’m accused of a crime, so why do I need a permit to carry a gun if I have a constitutional right to carry a gun?”

Read entire article

Supreme Court to Rule on Second Amendment

Posted in Attack on Freedom, Legal, New World Order, News, Stupid Government Tricks, The Constitution, Unconstitutional with tags , , , , , , , on September 30, 2009 by truthwillrise

Joan Biskupic
USA Today
September 30, 2009

 

  • A d v e r t i s e m e n t
  • efoods

The U.S. Supreme Court announced Wednesday it will return to the controversy over individual gun rights by hearing an appeal from a group of firearms owners in Chicago.

 

They are challenging a lower appeals court ruling that said the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to guns only in the face of federal regulation, not against state and municipal restrictions.

Included among 10 new disputes the justices added to their calendar Wednesday for the upcoming 2009-10 term, which begins next Monday, the guns case brings the court back to a sensational topic that pits uniquely American notions of frontier liberty against contemporary worries over urban violence.

When the justices heard a case on the subject in March 2008, people began lining up in front of the court’s columned building two days early for a seat.

Read entire article

Gun sales going ballistic Fears of regulation, crime spur sales of firearms and ammo

Posted in New World Order, News, Police State/Martial Law, Truth/Freedom with tags , , , , on April 21, 2009 by truthwillrise
<!–

[component:image-cutline] [include_ifnot:ap:/core/components/story/photos/reprints.inc]

–>

By Don Lehman
dlehman@poststar.com

Updated: Friday, March 20, 2009 10:32 AM EDT

Gunmakers can thank a former New York senator and presidential candidate for an ongoing boom in gun sales, if you ask one local firearms vendor.

George Nemec, owner of Nemec’s Sport Shop & Farm & Garden Center in Warrensburg, said gun sales at his business began to increase about two years ago, after Sen. Hillary Clinton announced her intent to run for president. People were concerned about the possible impact of a Democratic president on the Second Amendment right to bear arms.

“Handguns, shotguns, rifles — it’s every type,” Nemec said. “People are worried the government is going to take their guns away, or they’re going to tax them (guns and ammunition) to death.”

With a Democratic president in office and economic troubles fueling fears of rising crime, guns — and the rounds they fire — are a hot commodity these days.

Across the country, gun dealers are reporting a big uptick in sales of both firearms and ammunition. Requests for federal background checks for prospective gun buyers have surged since last fall, with the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms reporting a nearly 50 percent increase after the election of President Barack Obama.

Tom King, president of the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, said gun and ammunition sales around the country have risen in recent months.

He said many are concerned a Democratic president and Democratic-controlled Congress will change gun laws and could potentially ban certain types of firearms, like those commonly referred to as assault rifles. Democratic lawmakers are generally viewed as less friendly to gun owners than their Republican counterparts.

“We’re hearing it around the country. People are concerned about losing their guns,” King said. “If they buy them now, they’ll be grandfathered if the laws are changed.”

Locally, gun dealers are seeing a number of trends when it comes to sales and purchases of firearms and ammunition.

Most said gun sales are up, while others said they are steady. Ammunition sales have risen dramatically, they agreed.

“We’re selling a lot of guns. It’s been that way since November,” said Kevin Zacharewicz, owner of Zack’s Sport’s in Round Lake. “Handgun sales are up; self-defense shotguns are up. People are worried about what’s going on financially.”

Zacharewicz said state government trends are also motivating sales in New York. The state Senate is now controlled by Democrats, which has many gun owners in the Empire State concerned about what gun-control laws might be pursued.

“There’s a lot of concern about the government and what they’re going to do,” said John West, whose family runs The Crossroads Country Store & Sport Shop.

At MacGregor’s Gun Shop in Queensbury, owner Scott MacGregor said he’s seen a “sudden influx” of customers wanting to buy “home defense-type weapons,” like shotguns.

Everyone interviewed by The Post-Star for this story agreed ammunition of all calibers has gotten tougher to find, as gun owners stock up. Prices skyrocketed in recent years as metal prices went up, which caused many gun owners to stock up in anticipation of rising ammunition prices.

There are also concerns that some larger calibers, or those used by military-type weapons, could be banned, restricted or taxed more heavily.

One northern Warren County resident found out recently the government is paying attention to such ammunition sales.

West said a customer of his recently stocked up on .223-caliber rounds, a caliber often used in assault-style weapons. The customer bought 1,000 rounds a few months ago through a mail order company.

Shortly after the purchase, he received a visit from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, whose interest was apparently piqued by a large-scale purchase of that caliber.

“His wife was home. He was at church,” West said.

“People are buying a lot of ammunition in bulk these days,” said Kathie Ferullo, owner of Discoveries USA, an outdoors outfitter in Warrensburg that sells guns and ammo. “For some types, we have to wait on a waiting list.”

The down economy is also causing people to liquidate some of their valuable assets, including guns.

West said his business hasn’t seen a big rise in gun sales, but it has seen a rise in people wishing to sell guns to his store for economic reasons. He said one man recently brought in an 80-year-old antique rifle to sell because he needed money.

“We’ve had guys come in with three or four guns to sell,” he said.