Your Help Urgently Needed to Protect the Second Amendment Rights of America’s Veterans! – NRA ILA

Americas veterans helped protect us. Now we can ensure they themselves are not arbitrarily denied the right of self-protection.

On Wednesday, the House Committee on Veterans Affairs marked up and favorably reported H.R. 1181, the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act, sponsored by Committee Chairman Phil Roe, M.D. (R-TN). The bill now moves to the full U.S. House, where a vote could come as early as next week.

H.R. 1181 is meant to deal with a longstanding and shameful practice by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), which administers disability benefits for veterans and their families. Under this practice, anyone who the VA declares incompetent to manage his or her own benefits and assigns a fiduciary is automatically reported to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) as a prohibited mental defective. The person is then subject to a lifetime ban on the acquisition and possession of firearms, unless he or she successfully petitions for relief from disabilities.

As of Dec. 31, 2016, the NICS contained 167,815 active records submitted by the VA under this program.

The VAs program suffers from a number of legal and practical issues.

Above all, it does not attempt to identify which beneficiaries have mental illnesses that actually cause them to be a danger to themselves or others. Rather, it merely targets individuals who have been identified as needing help to manage their benefits. Yet there is no scientific or empirical evidence to support the idea that needing help managing money is the same thing as being too dangerous or irresponsible to safely handle a firearm.

Second, the statute on which the reporting is based prohibits firearm acquisition or possession by persons who have been adjudicated as a mental defective. While these terms are not defined in the statute, the purely bureaucratic process by which a fiduciary is assigned which in most cases does not involve a hearing, much less a judge is hardly the sort of procedure most would consider an adjudication. And the only issue at stake is whether the person needs help with his or her finances. It does not affect rights other than under the Second Amendment, including the right to form legally binding contracts, vote, hold office, serve on a jury, etc.

While the VA does theoretically make relief available after the fact, few of the beneficiaries affected by the program have the means to negotiate the highly bureaucratic process, which may also require expensive mental health evaluations and legal aid. The procedure also turns due process on its head by forcing the petitioner to prove by a high standard of evidence that he or she is not a risk to public safety, a premise the government was never required to establish in the original adjudication.

The VAs own records showed that as of April 2015, only 3% of relief petitions had been granted. And the decision makers considering the petitions are the same sorts of VA bureaucrats who made the original fiduciary determination, not an independent judge or magistrate.

H.R. 1181 would change all this by ensuring that the VA could only report a beneficiary to NICS as prohibited mental defective if a judicial authority had already made a finding that the person is a danger to self or others. This would ensure due process, as well protect those who simply need help managing their finances but are not at increased risk of committing a dangerous act with a firearm.

President Trump signed a measure into law last month that prevented the Social Security Administration from going through with a plan to implement a similar reporting system for certain of its Disability or Supplementary Security Income beneficiaries assigned representative payees.

And the House had passed a bill to halt VAs program in 2011, which eventually died in the Senate.

Action to stop this unconscionable infringement of veterans Second Amendment Rights is long overdue.

Please contact your congressional representative NOW and respectfully ask him or her to vote YES on H.R. 1181, the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act. You can call the Congressional Switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask to be connected to your representatives office, or you can send an email using our Take Action tool.

Americas veterans answered the call to serve for the good of all. Now is your chance to ensure their rights are protected. Dont delay. Please call or write your representative today.

Read more here:

Your Help Urgently Needed to Protect the Second Amendment Rights of America's Veterans! - NRA ILA

Pennsylvania Court: Automatic Knives not Protected by Second Amendment – AmmoLand Shooting Sports News


AmmoLand Shooting Sports News
Pennsylvania Court: Automatic Knives not Protected by Second Amendment
AmmoLand Shooting Sports News
An appeal was filed shortly after the conviction, based solely on the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The appeal did not reference Pennsylvania's state Constitution. Pennsylvania has a strong right to bear arms provision in ...

See the original post here:

Pennsylvania Court: Automatic Knives not Protected by Second Amendment - AmmoLand Shooting Sports News

FYI , AR-15 Rifles Are No Longer Included in Second Amendment – AmmoLand Shooting Sports News


AmmoLand Shooting Sports News
FYI , AR-15 Rifles Are No Longer Included in Second Amendment
AmmoLand Shooting Sports News
Buckeye, AZ -(Ammoland.com)- By now you've probably heard about the Federal Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit's horrible anti-rights decision declaring that so-called assault weapons and high-capacity magazines are not protected by the Second ...

Original post:

FYI , AR-15 Rifles Are No Longer Included in Second Amendment - AmmoLand Shooting Sports News

Second Amendment’s illogical conclusion | Letter – The Courier-Journal

Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device.

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

Where do you draw the line on the spectrum of weapons between, say, rocks and any weapons of mass destruction?

Try Another

Audio CAPTCHA

Image CAPTCHA

Help

CancelSend

A link has been sent to your friend's email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

CJ Letter 2:23 p.m. ET March 10, 2017

Nuclear explosion(Photo: RomoloTavani, Getty Images/iStockphoto)

I am curious if Mr. Milby - Reader's Forum "Weapons of war protected by Second Amendment" March 8, 2017- believes that Second Amendment rights extend to nuclear weapons. If not, where does he draw the line on the spectrum of weapons between, say,rocks and anyweapons of mass destruction?In addition tonuclear bombs, are chemical weapons covered by the Second Amendment? What about lasers from satellites? Ballistic missiles? As a private citizen, I just want to know what I and my fellow citizens have a right to own and use in order to defendourselves from tyranny, government or otherwise. Or, maybe the interpretation of the Second Amendment should be more nuanced than Mr. Milby proclaims.

Christopher Rife

Louisville40291

Read or Share this story: http://cjky.it/2mu9SES

3:45

3:13

3:46

3:46

3:28

4:00

1:53

2:18

6:56

7:28

3:15

3:05

3:51

3:38

3:12

2:41

3:38

2:31

3:22

3:45

1:33

1:56

3:24

3:03

3:39

3:14

3:37

3:56

3:01

2:19

0) { %>

0) { %>

Original post:

Second Amendment's illogical conclusion | Letter - The Courier-Journal

House to debate gun bill on IFC’s ‘Second Amendment Day’ – Radio Iowa

Its the Iowa Firearms Coalitions Second Amendment Day at the state capitol and gun rights advocates are ready to watch the Iowa House debate a bill that includes many of their priorities. Kurt Liske, vice president of the Iowa Firearms Coalition,called ita show of appreciation from House Republicans.

The fact that we have a day that we scheduled months out in advance, to have them essentially tailor their schedule to ours is almost unheard of, Liske said this morning. The fact that theyre doing this is a real testament to you guysthe fact that youre out there helping with campaign work, things like that.

More than 70 members of the Iowa Firearms Coalition crowded into a capitol committee room thismorning for a briefing on the bill. Members wore orange stickers that read: I support the Second Amendment and I vote.

Representative Matt Windschitl, a Republican from Missouri Valley who is floor manager of the gun bill, spoke to the group.

A lot of things in this bill, including the stand your ground provisions, have been a long time coming, Windschitl said, and it looks as though weve finally got an opportunity to push this down to the governors desk.

Windschitl is a trained gunsmith and his family runs a gun store in Missouri Valley. He uses the word phenomenal to describe the bill as currently crafted.

With the make-up of the legislature the way it is, we have gotten this bill to a place where I didnt even expect us to as far as the freedoms we have in here, Windschitl said. This sets us up for future successes. This sets us up so we can come back next year and get our freedoms back that have been encroached upon over generations.

Windschitl, whohas received death threats becauseof his advocacyfor the legislation, said theres some hate and discontent out there about the bill. He urged Iowa Firearms Coalition members to lobby theirSenators today.

Weve still got our work cut out for us when we move this over to the senate, Windschitl said. There are a lot of senators that are very eager to get all of this done, but the majority in the senate is new and so some of them have not faced the challenges that go into running bills like this, because they can get kind of controversial.

House debate of the bill is expected to get underway early this afternoon.

More here:

House to debate gun bill on IFC's 'Second Amendment Day' - Radio Iowa

Will Trump Roll Out the Big Guns on Second Amendment Issues … – CALIFORNIA


Jewish Journal
Will Trump Roll Out the Big Guns on Second Amendment Issues ...
CALIFORNIA
Avowed Second Amendment enthusiast Donald Trump drew plenty of scorn and outrage recently when he signed a bill overturning an Obama era restriction on ...
Bill to end 'reckless' denial of Second Amendment rights in ...Arizona Daily Sun
Other viewpoints: 2nd Amendment doesn't trump 1stThe Columbus Dispatch
My first gun: How I became a Second Amendment American ...Jewish Journal
theTrumpet.com -The Ramapo News
all 7 news articles »

Read the original post:

Will Trump Roll Out the Big Guns on Second Amendment Issues ... - CALIFORNIA

The Second Amendment and ‘weapons of war’ – The Fayette Tribune

Put simply, writes Judge Robert King of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war.

In Kolbe v. Hogan, the court upheld Marylands ban on assault weapons, also known as rifles that look scary to people who know nothing about guns.

As talk radio host Darryl W. Perry of Free Talk Live notes, Kings perversely broad statement would cover a ban on the possession of rocks:

And David put his hand in his bag, and took thence a stone, and slang it, and smote the Philistine in his forehead, that the stone sunk into his forehead; and he fell upon his face to the earth. So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone, and smote the Philistine, and slew him 1st Samuel, Chapter 17

King also displays a poor grasp of history. No judicial power is required to extend the Second Amendment to cover weapons of war, because theyre precisely what it was intended to cover in the first place.

The Second Amendment was ratified only a few years after a citizen army many of its soldiers armed, at least at first, with weapons brought from home defeated the most fearsome professional military machine in the history of the world, the army of a global empire.

The express purpose of the Second Amendment was to guarantee the continued maintenance of an armed populace. In fact, the Second Militia Act of 1792 legally required every adult able-bodied white American male to own and maintain weapons of war (a musket or rifle, bayonet, powder and bullets) just in case the militia had to be called out.

Even in the 1939 case usually cited to justify victim disarmament (gun control) laws, U.S. v. Miller, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the reason Jack Miller/s short-barreled shotgun could be banned was that it WASNT a weapon of war: [I]t is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.

Yes, you read that right: The Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment applies ONLY to weapons of war. I think thats too narrow myself, but at least it comes at the matter from the correct historical perspective.

The purpose of the Second Amendment is best understood in terms of a quote falsely attributed to Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto of the Japanese navy at the beginning of World War II: You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.

Shame on King and the 4th Circuit for failing to uphold the plain meaning of shall not be infringed.

(Thomas L. Knapp is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism, thegarrisoncenter.org. He lives and works in north central Florida. Follow him on Twitter @thomaslknapp.)

Go here to see the original:

The Second Amendment and 'weapons of war' - The Fayette Tribune

Legislators should support Second Amendment – Star-Gazette – Elmira Star-Gazette

Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device.

1

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

Legislators should support Second Amendment

Try Another

Audio CAPTCHA

Image CAPTCHA

Help

CancelSend

A link has been sent to your friend's email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

Thomas P. Greven 4:25 p.m. ET March 7, 2017

Concealed carry(Photo: Getty Images / iStockphoto)

It is estimated that more than 15 million American citizens have permits to carry concealed firearms. Add to that millions more in the 12 states that allow concealed carry without a state-issued permit or license.

In each case, citizens are required to under go federal background checks before purchasing a firearm. Liberal Democrats insist on passing strict firearms laws. As is the case with New Yorks SAFE Act, passed behind closed doors in the middle of the night by Gov. Andrew Cuomos liberal regime, it only hinders honest American citizens from availing themselves of their Second Amendment rights.

I know of no criminal who while committing a criminal act would be dissuaded from using a firearm because it violates the law. The only thing these laws do is to allow liberal politicians to give a false sense of security to the public. Chicago is a prime example of a Democrat-controlled city with strict gun control laws and one of the highest homicide rates in the country.

Without the Second Amendment, the rest of our constitutional rights are in jeopardy. Its time for the voters to elect representatives who support our Second Amendment and a national state reciprocity for those who legally and responsibly carry firearms.

THOMAS P. GREVEN

CORNING

Read or Share this story: http://stargaz.tt/2mCIODZ

0:55

0) { %>

0) { %>

Read more here:

Legislators should support Second Amendment - Star-Gazette - Elmira Star-Gazette

Iowa: Successful Second Amendment Day Ends with the House Passage of Pro-Gun Omnibus Legislation – NRA ILA

Today, with a gallery full of gun owners and Second Amendment supporters, the Iowa House of Representatives voted 58-39 to pass pro-gun omnibus legislation, House File 517. This important bill now heads over to the Senate where it will await a committee referral and consideration. Please contact your state Senator and politely urge them to SUPPORT HF 517 when it comes up for a vote.

HF 517 would make many pro-gun reforms and covers a diverse range of important issues for Iowa gun owners. Included in HF 517 are the following pro-gun reforms:

Thank you to those who showed up to the Iowa Capitol today in support of this important legislation. However, the fight isnt over yet. Please begin to contact your state Senator and politely urge them to SUPPORT HF 517 when it comes up for a vote.

Read the original here:

Iowa: Successful Second Amendment Day Ends with the House Passage of Pro-Gun Omnibus Legislation - NRA ILA

Piers Morgan Gets a Dose of Second Amendment Reality on Good Morning Britain – Bearing Arms

Australian immigrant Nick Adams appeared on Good Morning Britain with Piers Morgan and Susanna Reid to discuss President Trumps supposed Muslim ban.

Things took an interesting turn when Reid suggested Trumps Muslim ban is ineffective and instead suggested the president take a hardline stance on guns.

As a resident, if you want to make the U.S. safer, you dont target immigrants, you look at the biggest problem, surely threatening Americans everyday, and thats the absolutely shocking level of gun crime, Reid told Adams. And if President Trump directed his attention to towards tightening up controls on firearms that would immediately make the country a safer place.

Do you not understand that people lookat this from outside the United States and scratch their heads going, Why would you not want to have extreme vetting on lunatics or criminals getting their hands on high-power guns?'

Adams response to why the Second Amendment is important was spot on:

Author's Bio: Beth Baumann

Excerpt from:

Piers Morgan Gets a Dose of Second Amendment Reality on Good Morning Britain - Bearing Arms

Drop Second Amendment ‘rights’ pretense – DesMoinesRegister.com

Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device.

1

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

It is time to drop the pretense of defending our constitutional rights and call it what it is.

Try Another

Audio CAPTCHA

Image CAPTCHA

Help

CancelSend

A link has been sent to your friend's email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

John Rose, West Des Moines, Letter to the Editor 6:48 p.m. CT March 6, 2017

A federal firearms transaction record, which includes a background check, lays near a selection of guns at Ron's Pawn and Gun in Des Moines.(Photo: Christopher Gannon/The Register, Christopher Gannon/The Register)Buy Photo

It seems as though the Republican majority in the Legislature is about to ram through a flurry of new gun laws that they falsely label Second Amendment rights. The Second Amendment, like all of the others included in the Bill of Rights, is not an absolute. Like all others, is defined by interpretation of the federal courts. Therefore when some say that it enables open or concealed carry of guns with virtually no restrictions, they are simply voicing an opinion.

At this point, the Supreme Courthas ruled that the Second Amendment does indeed apply to the private ownership of guns by private citizens, but they also ruled that governments have the right to impose reasonable restrictions on that ownership. Several states have placed severe restrictions on concealed or open carry and others have all but removed all restrictions. The federal courts have declined to overturn any state law thatseverely restricts concealed or open carry. Therefore, the right to carry may be termed a legal right granted by state government, but it is not a constitutional right.

It is time for proponents of relaxing Iowas gun laws to drop the pretense of defending our constitutional rights and call it what it is. What they really want is to legislate their opinion into law, and if public opinion polls are to be believed, their opinion is at odds with the majority. Therefore, I challenge them to drop their attempts to ram these proposals through the legislature. If we really must have gun laws that are more lax, let the people decide through the referendum process.

John Rose, West Des Moines

Read or Share this story: http://dmreg.co/2myzBMX

3:46

3:28

4:00

2:18

3:15

3:05

3:38

3:12

2:41

3:38

0) { %>

0) { %>

See more here:

Drop Second Amendment 'rights' pretense - DesMoinesRegister.com

Weapons of war should be allowed | Letter – The Courier-Journal

Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device.

1

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

The Second Amendment is not about guns, Instead, it is about the inalienable right to self defense.

Try Another

Audio CAPTCHA

Image CAPTCHA

Help

CancelSend

A link has been sent to your friend's email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

CJ Letter 1:56 p.m. ET March 6, 2017

Weapons(Photo: Czanner, Getty Images/iStockphoto)

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals recently found that the Second Amendment does not apply to weapons of war. I beg to differ. In our founders day, the musket was a weapon of war and a firearm widely used outside of war.Like most people today, our founders knew that technology would advance. Clearly, they believed that one day tyrants could rise again. This was the single most important aspect of why the founders established the Second Amendment. No modern day judge could possibly reach any other conclusion unless influenced by self-ideology. The Second Amendment not only covers AR-15s and AK-47s, but bigger more powerful semi automatics. Killers can always kill when they are facing unarmed victims, but this is not so for the armed citizen facing soldiers with semi-automatic weapons, for revolvers, shotguns and bolt action rifles are limited against such firepower. The Second Amendment is not about guns, Instead, it is about the inalienable right to self defense, a right that should never be defined by any man or woman, but protected by the oaths of statesmen, who have pledged to uphold that right.

Mark Damon Milby

Pekin, Indiana47165

Read or Share this story: http://cjky.it/2mwYPeE

3:46

3:28

4:00

1:53

2:18

6:56

7:28

3:15

3:05

3:51

3:38

3:12

2:41

3:38

2:31

3:22

3:45

1:33

1:56

3:24

3:03

3:39

3:14

3:37

3:56

3:01

2:19

4:36

2:58

1:47

0) { %>

0) { %>

Read the original:

Weapons of war should be allowed | Letter - The Courier-Journal

Students for the Second Amendment persevering after ammunition funding is revoked – University of Delaware Review

Kirk Smith/THE REVIEW After the university pulled funding for the RSOs ammunition, the Students for the Second Amendment have found alternative means of sponsorship.

BY MADIE BUIANO SENIOR REPORTER

Two months after the university revoked the organizations funding to buy ammunition, Zoe Callaway, president of Students for the Second Amendment, hasnt stopped in her pursuit to bring firearms to campus.

In the meantime, the club will host various speakers throughout the semester. Callaway has spoken to the National Rifle Association, advocates for gun rights and the Second Amendment Foundation, a nonprofit organization dedicated to educating the public on Americas constitutional heritage to possess firearms.

Callaway hopes to bring Gays for Guns to campus, a group dedicated to teaching LGBTQ communities proper firearm use. For her last semester as president, Callaway wants to co-sponsor the event with Haven, the schools largest LGBTQ organization.

It would be a really good way to come together, especially since the country is so divided, Callaway said. To bring these two groups together would speak volumes.

Havens president, Elias Antelman, said he didnt have enough knowledge on the subject to comment.

The university provided ammunition funding to the club for approximately three years. Under the new university president, Dennis Assanis, that is no longer the case. Callaway and Jeremy Grunden, the newly appointed vice president of Students for the Second Amendment, were unexpectedly informed of the change over winter break. According to Gruden, the new policy will make the RSOs recurring trips to the shooting range harder.

They did it under our noses, just slipped it in there and didnt really tell anybody, Grunden said.

The unanticipated change will not affect the groups ability to buy ammunition for the time being. In July, Fox News wrote a story on Students for the Second Amendment titled College rifle, pistol-shooting clubs under fire, underfunded amid gun debate. Following the story, Callaway said people donated a couple thousand dollars to their club, money that they will use in substitute of university funds.

Weve also been offered discounts at different stores, Callaway said. People are willing to help us.

Despite funding restrictions, Grunden said that the group has other priorities, like continuing the fight to bring concealed carry to campus, a goal Calloway announced in October. Since then, the group has pursued support through state legislation, rather than through the school administration. The second semester president said she has spoken to senators and representatives in Delaware that have expressed interest.

We all understand its going to take a long time, longer than we like, Callaway said. We still need to find people who will help us draft a bill, and who would be willing to present it at legislative hall.

If her plan to bring concealed carry to campus is successful, Callaway already has an idea for moderating who will be allowed to carry firearms. She said that if members of the community already have their concealed carry permit, they should be permitted to have guns on their person.

Having a permit from a different state means that a screening process has already occurred. Callaway said there should be a mandatory class that people who hope to carry firearms should take as a way to stifle concerns throughout campus.

In the meantime, Students for the Second Amendment is planning a range trip following spring break. On these trips, the groups members go to a local shooting range to shoot paper targets.

According to Grunden, these excursions are of particular interest to members who are first time shooters because it provides them with an opportunity to learn about gun safety and how to properly operate a weapon.

Weve even taken foreign exchange students to the range, Callaway said. Guns are completely banned in China, so this is their only chance to ever shoot a gun.

Other than a range trip Callaway and Grunden said they will be reserving a kiosk in Trabant to advertise and educate the UD community on what their club is about. Callaway said they have been making new pamphlets that have information about gun laws in local states. They are hopeful that this will bring in new members, she said.

Read more:

Students for the Second Amendment persevering after ammunition funding is revoked - University of Delaware Review

What the Second Amendment really says about guns: Letters – Orlando Sentinel

A closer look at the Second Amendment

In response to William Ivesters letter to the editor on Monday about the Second Amendment, I ask that he look again at the amendment. It is clever to pick phrases out of context, but that is misguided. Amendment 2 in its entirety states, A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Clearly, the last part of the sentence refers to the first part a well-regulated militia. In todays parlance, I believe that means each states National Guard. Last time I checked, every gun owner in the United States was not a member of the National Guard.

The judiciary is expressly empowered, by the Constitution, to review, analyze and rule on the meaning of the words of our Constitution. For example, where does the Constitution say guns? It doesnt. It says arms. It is the responsibility of the judiciary to determine what is meant by arms. Bombs? Anti-aircraft missiles? This word, like many others, has to be defined in each generation.

America of the 21st century is very different from the America of our Founding Fathers. Our ability to interpret the foundational documents of our Republic in light of the realities of the world we live in is crucial to the vitality of our nation. It is time, and it is appropriate and necessary, for our country to enact legislation that seeks to protect its citizens.

Cathy Swerdlow Longwood

As a graduate student studying writing at the University of Central Florida, I read Scott Maxwells Sunday column on grammar with great interest. It may surprise him to find out, though, that I am on his side.

While the self-appointed grammar police patrol public writing, ever vigilant for imagined crimes against the English language, modern linguistics scholars acknowledge that language changes, and the language rules change with it. They know and appreciate that Ernest Hemingway splits infinitives, Jane Austen ends sentences with prepositions, and E.B. White himself uses sentence fragments and comma splices. Great writing comes from brilliant use of words, not blind obedience to dictatorial grammar rules.

And kudos to Maxwell for defending his writing with a good dictionary. What a great counterattack to grammar police brutality. Hopefully, these militant grammarians will reference their own 21st-century rule book before they literally pounce on Maxwell again.

Leslie Nixon Ormond Beach

Normally, I would excoriate the Sentinels editor for printing a letter like Bill Lanes on Sunday with its theme of "drip drip drip" as "evidence of collusion" between the Trump campaign and the Russians.

However, since the mainstream news sources coupled with the intelligence community and Democratic politicians offer the same nonproof of such, I'll give the newspaper a pass on publishing "fake news."

David Holley Orlando

In response to President Trump's accusation that President Obama wiretapped Trump Tower, Sen. Marco Rubio said if we find out it's not true, he'll have to explain what he meant.

Trump's history is to tell a lie and defend it aggressively, or say the media twisted his meaning, Then tell another bigger lie to divert attention from the first one. His lies are tied up in so many knots 100 sailors in 10 years couldn't untie them.

How about reversing Rubios plan of action? Demand that Trump prove his claim is true.

There is a truism that it's much easier to prove a positive than a negative. If hes as smart as we've been told, Trump could clear this up in minutes. His mendacity is mindful of the boy who cried wolf. One day the wolves will devour their creator.

James Weatherspoon St. Cloud

Original post:

What the Second Amendment really says about guns: Letters - Orlando Sentinel

Campbell County hunters excited for proposed 2nd Amendment sales tax holiday – WATE 6 On Your Side

LAFOLLETTE (WATE) A proposed sales tax holiday for guns and ammunition will soon be on its way to a Tennessee Senate committee. The proposed Second Amendment Sales Tax Holiday would eliminate the 9.25 percent sales tax on firearms and ammunition for the first weekend in September.

House Bill 744 was drafted by 36th District State Rep. Dennis Powers and aims to give hunters a break this season.

Weve always been a state that believes in the Second Amendment and Second Amendment rights, said Representative Powers.

Susie Carroll and her husband have ownedLa Follette Sports Shop for more than 30 years and she believes the tax free weekend will not only attract business, but help sustain a way of life for some.

Some people here, they eat everything they kill and so I think it would help them tremendously, said Carroll. It would help them to buy their ammunition and whatever they needed to hunt with.

Rep. Powers says there will be pros and cons though and not everyone may agree with it.

There will be a little bit of an expense because you are losing some revenue, said Powers.

Well some people who are not for guns are not going to like it, said Carroll. Theyre going to think it would be better to do it on some other item than a hunting item, but hunting is a big factor is this part of the country.

David Goins has been hunting since age 7 and says hes seen the rising cost of firearms and ammunition limit the number of people who hunt.

Its expensive. I mean you go out to buy a gun now to hunt with its not $150 to $200 anymore like it was when I was a kid. Its $500 to $600 plus tax, said Goins. Thats a lot of difference in their income you know, on what theyre going to have to spend.

The bill is expected to be filed this weekend. Powers also hopes the tax free weekend will attract more gun manufacturers to the state of Tennessee, which, in turn, could create more jobs.

The rest is here:

Campbell County hunters excited for proposed 2nd Amendment sales tax holiday - WATE 6 On Your Side

Arizona Passes Bill to Lift Infringements on Second Amendment Rights – Bearing Arms

On Wednesday, the Arizona Senate passed Senate Bill 1122, which prohibits local governments from requiring background checks for private party transfers. The billis considered to be a legislative repercussion against the city of Tucson. In the past, Tucson has destroyed every gun it seized, something gun-rights activists says could violate state law.

Because of Tucsons position on guns, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich sued Tucson under a state law that allows the state to pull funding from local governments whose policies contradict those of the states. In other words, Tucson has one option: repeal the ordinance or face significant funding shortages. Losing state funding would cost the city of Tucson $170 million.

The Tucson city council refused to repeal the ordinance. While the issue plays out in court, the council has decided to pause the gun destruction program.

According to Brnovich, gun control is a state-level issue, not a local issue.

SB 1122 is being considered the legislative remedy to the Tucson problem.

From guns.com:

This is over-wrought, he said Tuesday during session. This does not allow local cities or counties to do any type of a background check for any exchange of property including cars. This is being decided before the state Supreme Court right now so lets not rush it. We should not be deicing for a city whats best for the public safety of its citizens.

The case Farley referenced pits Tucson against the state over its destruction of seized or surrendered firearms. The policy preempts state law which requires such firearms be sold, though a court decision in favor of Tucson would quash SB 1122, Farley said.

The city of Tucson is arguing that gun regulations are a matter of local control, he said. I think we should wait to see what the court decides before we make any more laws that could be invalidated.

Author's Bio: Beth Baumann

Link:

Arizona Passes Bill to Lift Infringements on Second Amendment Rights - Bearing Arms

GUEST COLUMN: 2nd Amendment currently being misinterpreted … – Port St. Joe Star

Hugh Taylor | Special to the Daily News

Re: Column, Feb. 14, Why did the Constitution need the Second Amendment?

With guns being as much of a problem as they are, I am interested in learning more about the matter and what can be done about it. The history set forth in the recent column in your paper by Dr. Mark Hopkins is the best that I have read and provides an excellent starting point in understanding the matter.

I personally feel that the Second Amendment only permits gun ownership when a citizen is an active member of an organized (controlled and structured) militia. I think the Second Amendment is currently being misinterpreted.

My training in the USMC taught me that a gun in the hands of an untrained person is nearly worthless as a tool of self-defense and provides only a feeble and false sense of security to the untrained. The present interpretation of this amendment not only provides the public with a false sense of security, but also is causing the loss of freedom and many unnecessary deaths.

People now have to be careful about when and where they go. Laws need to be enacted that protect citizens from the use of guns and the sale of inappropriate weapons (hunting guns excluded). These laws should include search and seizure of weapons that are possessed in the public domain along with stiff fines for violation.

We need a Wyatt Earp. Where is he now? You may remember he required that people check their guns into the sheriffs office when they came to town (Wichita, Kansas) in the late-1800s and that stopped the bloodshed there.

This guest column is from Hugh Taylor, a snowbird from Overland Park, Kansas.

Editors Note

Guest editorials and columns that regularly appear in this space are not intended to reflect a particular stance of the Northwest Florida Daily News but rather share expanded viewpoints from other media outlets and our readers. To be considered for publication, guest editorials and columns from readers cannot be longer than 500 words and must be submitted by email to letters@nwfdailynews.com. Please put Guest Editorial or Guest Column in the subject line.

Read more:

GUEST COLUMN: 2nd Amendment currently being misinterpreted ... - Port St. Joe Star

Rep. Sean Roberts praises passage of Second Amendment … – Guymondailyherald

State Rep. Sean Roberts praised the passage of House Bill 1803, which prohibits the expenditure of public monies to oppose rights protected by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The bill passed out of the House Public Safety Committee by a vote of 7-6.

The right to keep and bear arms is one of the most sacred to our citizenry, said Roberts, R-Hominy. With the state facing a deficit of over $850 million for the upcoming fiscal year, the practice of spending taxpayer dollars lobbying for gun control needs to end. Allowing the expenditure of public dollars to erode our rights protected in the constitution is an affront to our freedom.

Rep. Jeff Coody, R-Granfield, a supporter of the bill, said, I am thankful that we can move closer to the day when the constitutional rights of Oklahoma citizens will not be trampled on by unelected bureaucrats whose salaries and expenses are paid with the tax dollars of those citizens.

The bill is now eligible to be considered by the full House.

See more here:

Rep. Sean Roberts praises passage of Second Amendment ... - Guymondailyherald

Leave the Second Amendment alone – Gillette News Record

I respond to the Feb. 26 editorial by Ann Turner entitled Leave the Gun Laws Alone regarding three concealed carry bills of the 2017 Wyoming Legislature.

Turner addresses HB136 Campus Carry, which recently failed in the Wyoming Senate. It would have allowed a concealed carry permit holder to carry a concealed firearm on campus.

Turner also mentions HB137 and HB194. Senate-amended HB137 failed conference/concurrence committee consideration Feb. 27, then passed reconsideration March 1. The House version allowed permittees to carry into governmental meetings. Senate amendment(s) are unknown.

On Feb. 27, HB194 passed the Senate. If enacted as presented to the Senate, the bill would empower school districts to authorize permittee employees and volunteers to carry concealed on school property. However, a Feb. 28 GNR article citing Sen.Von Flatern, reported that HB194 was amended Feb. 27 in the Senate, then passed on third reading. As of this writing, however, the roll call votes on bills and amendments page on the legislative website reflects no amendment to HB194 voted on since a failed amendment on Feb. 24. The article reports the Senate amended HB194 in conference/concurrence committee to allow anyone to carry concealed on school property except school employees and volunteers, unless said employees and /volunteers have school district consent and permits. So, at this time, appears HB194 is up for gubernatorial consideration. At this time, the exact terms of HB194 are unclear.

Turner asserts that ... we strongly believe in the Second Amendment ... Then, she pivots, applauding the defeat of HB136 and opposing soon-to-be-defeated HB137 and soon-to-be-gubernatorial-ready HB194 on safety grounds. Turner argues as of 2011 Wyoming already has adequately loosened its gun laws so that people can carry concealed weapons without a permit. She observes that due to such loosening, there already exists the unfettered right to carry concealed guns.

How unfettered can our right to carry concealed be if were still considering bills to expand that right? Turner closes asserting, Simply put, there are places where guns shouldnt be allowed. Doesnt sound unfettered to me!

The penultimate gun law is the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It simply, clearly says, ... the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It doesnt say the right of the people to keep and bear arms can be reasonably regulated, just so long as the right is not substantially infringed. The peoples right established by the Second is second only to the right of free speech established by the First Amendment.

Some say even the First is infringed. They assert, You cant yell Fire! in a crowded theater. Thats correct, UNLESS ITS TRUE! If theres actually a fire, Fire! could be an important word/tool preventing or minimizing injury. Dont preemptively outlaw the use of Fire! in a theater because someone may yell it irresponsibly and untruthfully. Likewise, dont preemptively ban guns from theaters, schools or governmental meetings because someone may irresponsibly and unsafely use one. Guns could be an important tool to prevent or minimize injury. Prosecute the irresponsible, the unsafe with reckless endangerment or aggravated battery.

War with England was freshly remembered when writing the Second, so it was deemed important that the people be able to oppose an unfair, overbearing or nefarious ruler or government, foreign or domestic.

The selection of two unqualified words, not and infringed, in the Second clearly imparts the absoluteness of the peoples right. The root of infringed is fringe. A fringe is the edge or periphery of something.

Its clear the peoples right to bear arms shall not be abridged in the slightest not even bits out of the periphery, edge the fringe. Every rancher knows the law of trespass. You fence off one foot of one boundary of anothers 35,000-acre ranch and its trespassing, no matter that its merely the periphery, edge, the fringe.

My opinions not conventional wisdom. Its not that of the U.S. Supreme Court. But, the court is not always right. Its just always the court its always the last word for now. Court rulings are not cast in stone.

Bills are unqualified evidence that the right to carry concealed, let alone the right to bear arms generally, is still substantially fettered and infringed. Bills are legislative attempts to correct some of the unconstitutional infringements by Wyomings law.

In short, the Second is the only gun law thats constitutional.

C. Robert Klus Jr. is a retired attorney who lives in Gillette.

View post:

Leave the Second Amendment alone - Gillette News Record

GUEST COLUMN: 2nd Amendment currently being misinterpreted – The Northwest Florida Daily News

Hugh Taylor | Special to the Daily News

Re: Column, Feb. 14, Why did the Constitution need the Second Amendment?

With guns being as much of a problem as they are, I am interested in learning more about the matter and what can be done about it. The history set forth in the recent column in your paper by Dr. Mark Hopkins is the best that I have read and provides an excellent starting point in understanding the matter.

I personally feel that the Second Amendment only permits gun ownership when a citizen is an active member of an organized (controlled and structured) militia. I think the Second Amendment is currently being misinterpreted.

My training in the USMC taught me that a gun in the hands of an untrained person is nearly worthless as a tool of self-defense and provides only a feeble and false sense of security to the untrained. The present interpretation of this amendment not only provides the public with a false sense of security, but also is causing the loss of freedom and many unnecessary deaths.

People now have to be careful about when and where they go. Laws need to be enacted that protect citizens from the use of guns and the sale of inappropriate weapons (hunting guns excluded). These laws should include search and seizure of weapons that are possessed in the public domain along with stiff fines for violation.

We need a Wyatt Earp. Where is he now? You may remember he required that people check their guns into the sheriffs office when they came to town (Wichita, Kansas) in the late-1800s and that stopped the bloodshed there.

This guest column is from Hugh Taylor, a snowbird from Overland Park, Kansas.

Editors Note

Guest editorials and columns that regularly appear in this space are not intended to reflect a particular stance of the Northwest Florida Daily News but rather share expanded viewpoints from other media outlets and our readers. To be considered for publication, guest editorials and columns from readers cannot be longer than 500 words and must be submitted by email to letters@nwfdailynews.com. Please put Guest Editorial or Guest Column in the subject line.

More here:

GUEST COLUMN: 2nd Amendment currently being misinterpreted - The Northwest Florida Daily News