New Bill to Legalize the Interstate Transportation of Magazines & Ammunition

H/T AmmoLand.

I doubt if this bill will make it out of the DemocRat controlled House.


USA – -( Gun Owners of America is proud to endorse Representative Mo Brooks’ upcoming legislation, the Lawful Interstate Transportation of Firearms Act which expands the transportation protections of the Firearm Owners’ Protection Act (FOPA).

Please ask your congressman to cosponsor this momentous legislation alongside Rep. Brooks.

Because repressive states outlawed “unlicensed guns,” Congress passed pro-gun legislation in 1986 to allow gun owners to transport firearms through these states without having to worry about being pulled over and arrested.

Currently, this provision of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act requires:

  1. That the gun be unloaded and inaccessible to the passenger compartment
  2. That the travel through the repressive state be temporary, and
  3. That the trip originates in a state where it was lawful to possess the firearm and terminate in a state where it is also lawful.

However, it didn’t occur to the lawmakers that repressive states would begin to arrest people who traveled through those states with ammunition, but no guns.

Obviously, they underestimated the psychopathy of anti-gun crazies like New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, former Mayor Bloomberg, and so forth.

It has reached the point where someone who transits through New York while traveling from New Hampshire to Virginia—as I do—risks arrest due to state law criminalizing the possession of otherwise lawfully-owned magazines or ammunition.

Congressman Mo Brooks is about to introduce legislation to remedy that. Under the Brooks bill, ammunition and magazines would be added to the list of items protected by FOPA.

In addition, police would be prohibited from harassing transiting motorists on the basis of firearms ownership.

And even if police find some technical violation of FOPA, that nit-picking will not be enough to throw the gun owner in prison and ruin his or her life.

Congressman Mo Brooks IMG from GOA
Congressman Mo Brooks IMG from GOA

GOA has been looking, for some time, for a congressman who could navigate the extremely complex issues surrounding this problem. And Mo Brooks has done it.

So, we have a champion who has stuck his neck out to introduce pro-gun legislation.

And we need to recognize his efforts by reaching out to every member of Congress and by urging them to become an original cosponsor of this bill — before this legislation is officially introduced and assigned a number.

Regardless of who controls the House, it’s important to take action and to keep pushing our pro-gun agenda. You can be sure that if the tables were reversed — and if it were the GOP in control of the House — anti-gun Democrats would still be pushing their obnoxious, anti-rights agenda.

So we need to create momentum for the future pushing a pro-gun agenda now.

Thank you for your help!

In liberty,

Michael Hammond
Legislative Counsel

Gun Owners Of AmericaAbout Gun Owners of America

Erich Pratt, or another GOA spokesman, is available for interviews. Gun Owners of America is a nonprofit lobbying organization dedicated to protecting the right to keep and bear arms without compromise. GOA represents over 1.5 million members and activists. For more information, visit GOA’s Newsroom.

11 Children Shot over Weekend in Gun-Controlled Chicago

H/T Breitbart.

So much for Mayor Light in the head’s promise gun violence.

Chicago has some of the strict gun control laws in the nation and has some of the highest gun crime in the nation.

Eleven children were shot over President’s Day Weekend in gun-controlled Chicago.

The New York Daily News reports a total of 25 were shot in Chicago, “and 11 of them were children.”

NBC Chicago reported that the weekend shootings varied in size and scope from accidental incidents–a 7-year-old shot and wounded himself accidentally–to an attack in an apartment complex that left six wounded, including three children.

There were three fatalities from the gun violence. The first fatal shooting occurred just after 3:30 p.m. Friday, the occurred Sunday afternoon, and the third happened Sunday just before 9 p.m.

Mayor Lori Lightfoot made reducing gun crime one of her chief goals during the mayoral campaign. But the NYDN reports gun crime in Chicago is on the rise. There have already been over 200 shootings and over 50 homicides in 2020, and we are only weeks into the month of February.

You Want to Compromise on Gun Control? OK, Let’s Compromise

H/T The Truth About Guns.

The world of gun owners’ compromise should be considered an obscene word. 

Reader Alan Smithee writes . . .

I keep hearing the word “compromise” used by politicians and anti-gun activists seeking to further restrict citizens’ access to firearms. Or even by those who want to take away guns, from law-abiding gun owners.

“Compromise” is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as “an agreement or settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.”

Two proposals by the anti-gun set, the so-called “red flag” laws and universal background checks, are under consideration in Congress and many state legislatures. Those with a firm belief in the Second Amendment are naturally dubious of those pushing these measures.

For generations, we’ve experienced “compromise” after “compromise,” yet in reality, all we’ve gotten is the perpetual erosion of our right to keep and bear arms. All concession by us, no compromise by them.

In the spirit of “compromise,” if taken at word’s worth, let’s enter the Land of Make Believe, and pretend the anti-gun crowd is actually amenable to compromise toward achieving these two goals. Here are a few compromises they could make which would actually benefit gun owners.

‘Red Flag’ Laws

red flag rights due process

While nobody wants to see firearms in the possession of those who may harm themselves or others, the proposed “red flag” legislation, if passed, would be a violation of both the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, at the very least. Not to mention, the Second Amendment.

In the spirit of compromise, however, I would propose that those who file a “red flag” report against someone must provide indisputable evidence of their claim in court within 72 hours of its filing. No proof? The guns remain with their owner.

Furthermore, those who are found to have purposely and fraudulently reported someone must serve a minimum of three years in prison, be subject to a civil lawsuit by the accused, and are themselves henceforth banned from firearm ownership for life. This is the typical federal penalty for a felon convicted of firearms possession. If someone is serious about having guns removed from another person’s possession, then he or she should bear the penalty if that charge is unfounded.

Universal Background Checks

Form 4473 and GLOCK (courtesy

While the argument can be easily made that a universal background check violates the Second Amendment, for the sake of discussion, let’s presume it becomes federal law. One painless compromise could be made by the anti-gun crowd in regards to this measure:

If two private citizens agree to the sale of a gun and both undergo and pass the check, the record of those who buy and sell is immediately and permanently expunged from any federal, state or municipal database. Having been conducted legally, there is no reason for any government entity to maintain a record of this transaction from that point forward.

Maintaining a record of this transaction would be a blatant violation of the the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, which prohibits the federal government from establishing a registry of gun owners and their guns.

In addition, those possessing a concealed carry license — which is already subject to a federal background check — will not be subjected to a universal background check when selling or buying a gun from another licensee. Law-abiding gun owners should be free to conduct transactions with other law-abiding gun owners without interference if they have already undergone training and licensing.

As well, it would save time and resources for law enforcement to go after actual criminals. Pretty simple, really.

One more idea: all federal form 4473s, i.e. the firearms transaction record, must be destroyed by federal firearms licensed dealers after five years, versus the current 20-year rule. The rule forcing FFLs to retain records for 20 years is in itself a type of de facto gun registry. Five years (or less) of mandatory record keeping should suffice for the purposes of criminal investigation by law enforcement.

But wait, there’s more!

I would consider the compromises listed above only the beginning of the discussion. If the anti-gun set is so determined to make these ideas law, I am equally determined, or more so, to see more pro-Second Amendment legislation enacted.

Call me Veruca Salt, but as a gun owner, I want more and I want it NOW!

Concealed Carry

open carry i vote gun in holster

All concealed carry licenses, no matter which state has issued them, will be respected by all 50 U.S. states and territories. The Bill of Rights applies to the citizens of all 50 states, yes?

Furthermore, concealed carry will be made legal in public libraries, public schools, colleges, universities, and other taxpayer-funded institutions, as well as other places open freely to the public. The only exceptions would be courts, jails and police stations.

It isn’t licensed concealed carriers who pose a criminal threat to the public. A crime being committed with a firearm is perpetrated virtually 100 percent of the time by someone who is, by definition, already a criminal, or otherwise prohibited by law from possessing a gun. “Gun-free” zones are never gun-free, and in fact, are places less safe than where firearms are allowed.

I’m not finished yet.

As the right to keep and bear arms is a civil right, no state or municipality will charge a fee for issuance of a concealed carry license, nor deny a concealed carry license to anyone who is A) a non-felon, B) 21 years of age, and C) has successfully completed 8 to 12 hours of safety training conducted by a licensed instructor.

To take it a step further, these licenses will no longer be subject to renewal as long as the licensee has not committed any felonies. Much the like the poll tax was used in the 1800s to prevent freed black slaves and poor whites from voting, the ability of a citizen to exercise his or her constitutional right to keep and bear arms should not be subject to a government fee. And 8 to 12 hours of safety training isn’t an onerous burden on the gun owner. Additional training would be recommended, obviously, but not required.

Thankfully, many states have already established “constitutional carry,” wherein law-abiding citizens may carry their weapons legally, without licensure. For those who believe not only the words, but the intent, of the Second Amendment, this ideally would be the law of all 50 United States.

Ayy Tee Eff

pistol suppressor silencer

All ATF rules regarding gun accessories will be abolished. This includes “bump stocks,” forward grips, pistol grips, and rapid-fire triggers. Furthermore, the use and ownership of suppressors will no longer be subject to ATF approval and no longer require a $200 tax stamp.

The use of any of these accessories on a gun do not constitute any additional danger to anyone. In fact, a suppressor acts as a muffler, helping to prevent hearing loss. It is not a “silencer” as Hollywood and the media have portrayed in countless films and television shows.

All ATF rules regarding the minimum lengths of guns will be abolished. The National Firearms Act of 1934 (yes NINETEEN THIRTY FOUR) made fully automatic firearms illegal, unless the would-be owner paid a $200 tax stamp. It also restricted the possession of so-called “sawed-off” shotguns.

This legislation was passed in response to violence being committed by criminal gangs during the Prohibition era. Remarkably, Prohibition was repealed in 1933, yet at that time Congress determined to crack down on gang violence despite the fact the primary reason for this violence was due to Prohibition.

The NFA needs to go away. That this law is still in effect is both antiquated and preposterous, as criminals aren’t apt to shell out $200 and undergo a background check to obtain these weapons. They do as they please despite the law. Because, well, “criminals.”

As the NFA is abolished, there should be no further legislative measures, by either the federal or state governments, to enact a so-called “Assault Weapons” ban against any semi-automatic guns, or otherwise. The passage of such, akin to the 1994 “assault weapons” ban, is undeniably at odds with both the spirit and the letter of the Second Amendment.

Semi-automatic guns have been in common use by Americans for more than 100 years. Just because a gun looks scary to someone is not a valid reason to violate the Bill of Rights.

Handgun, rifle and shotgun ownership, as well as sales of ammunition, will be legal for all law-abiding citizens who attain the age of 18. Old enough to vote? Old enough to serve in the armed forces? You’re old enough to be a firearms owner. Congratulations!

high large capacity magazines

There should be no restrictions on the sale or possession of magazines, regardless of capacity. “High capacity” magazines have become a bogeyman for the anti-gun crowd. The problem is the definition of “high capacity.” Is 10 enough? Is 11 too much? For some vehement anti-gun folk, three rounds is too much.

A .22 long rifle Henry lever action rifle can hold 15 rounds of ammunition in its tube magazine, but because it’s not detachable and because it looks like a classic western rifle, it doesn’t meet the definition of scary much less something “tactical” such as, say, a Keltec CP33 handgun which comes standard with 33-round magazine. Or a GLOCK 19, with a standard capacity 15-round magazine. The examples go on and on.

Do you want “red flag” laws? Universal background checks? I believe what I have proposed are good starting points for a discussion.

Compromise is about each side making concessions, right? If these measures become law without concessions by the other side, then millions upon millions of law-abiding gun owners will become gun “outlaws” – a bad consequence for America and slap in the face to the Founding Fathers who used their “weapons of war” to free the 13 colonies from tyrannical British rule.

Virginia Senate Committee Kills Gun Ban for 2020, Kicks Bill to 2021

H/T AmmoLand.

What is next on the gun-grabbing agenda of Governor Ralph”Blackface” Northam(Delusional-VA)?

Breaking News Virginia Senate Committee Kills Gun Ban for 2020, Kicks Bill to 2021
Breaking News Virginia Senate Committee Kills Gun Ban for 2020, Kicks Bill to 2021

U.S.A. –-( A controversial gun ban bill, HB 961, has been defeated in the Virginia Senate Judicial Committee. The defeat comes in the form of a decision to postpone the bill to 2021. The committee also voted to send a letter to the crime commission, asking them to study the bill.  The parliamentary maneuvers amount to killing the bill. From

RICHMOND, Va. (WRIC) — The Senate Judiciary Committee continued HB961, also known as the assault weapons ban, to the 2021 session.

The bill will be much harder to pass in 2021. Virginia has its state legislative elections in odd-numbered years. In 2021, all  100 of the House of Delegates offices will be up for re-election. The House of Delegates is currently controlled by the Democrat Party, with 55 members. The Republicans are represented in the House with 45 members.

The NRA attributes the victory for the Second Amendment supporter to the intense opposition to the bill voiced by tens of thousands of activists. Over 22,000 activists showed up in January, at the Capitol, on Lobby day, to show intense and widespread opposition to infringements on the right to keep and bear arms. From the

Thanks to Second Amendment supporters around the Commonwealth ceaselessly voicing their opposition to a sweeping gun ban, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 10-5 to reject House Bill 961 on February 17th. Bloomberg’s House majority in the General Assembly is not going to deliver their most coveted agenda item to their billionaire master.

91 of 95 counties in Virginia have declared themselves to be Second Amendment sanctuaries.

The bill was highly controversial, banning many of the most popular rifles in the United States, as well as significant numbers of shotguns, pistols, and accessories. If passed it would have certainly been challenged in the courts. Both the Virginia State Constitution, and the United States Constitution contain strong protections for keeping and bearing arms.  From the Virginia Constitution:

Section 13. Militia; standing armies; military subordinate to civil power

That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

The amendment was altered in 1970 to include the phrase “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”, which echoes the wording in the Second Amendment.  As the Second Amendment has been upheld as an individual right, It is difficult to believe the Virginia amendment would not be.

A new Governor and a new legislature will be elected in 2021. Both elections will test the resolve of Second Amendment supporters to oppose more infringements on the rights to keep and bear arms. Election of a pro-Constitution Governor would prevent most infringements from passing in Virginia.

There are several other bills in the legislative hopper. The legislature in Virginia meets for a limited time. It becomes ever more difficult to pass legislation as the end of the session nears.

Amy Klobuchar, Anti on the 2nd Amendment

H/T AmmoLand.

She has gone from angry Amy to crazy Amy.


Nevada – -( With the Nevada Caucus this weekend, we’re continuing our series of Democratic candidates and their anti-gun positions. Today I wanted to share Amy Klobuchar’s anti-gun agenda.

While NVFAC PAC is a state PAC and we don’t get involved in federal elections, these will be the people setting the tone for the anti-firearms policies we will be opposing in this election and the next legislative session in Nevada.

Amy Klobuchar Vows to: (directly from her website)

  • Institute universal background checks by closing the gun show loophole.
  • Ban bump stocks that can increase a semiautomatic rifle’s rate of fire to 700 rounds per minute.
  • Ban high capacity magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.
  • Quickly raise the age to buy military-style assault weapons from 18 to 21 and fighting to ban the sale of assault weapons.
  • Provide grants to states to implement extreme risk provisions to empower families and law enforcement to keep guns away from people who show signs of threatening behavior.
  • Close the “Charleston loophole” by giving law enforcement additional time to complete background checks.
  • Close the “boyfriend loophole” by preventing people who have abused dating partners from buying or owning firearms.
  • Establish a waiting period for sales of handguns and assault rifles, which law enforcement can waive in the case of an emergency.
  • Prohibit the online publication of code for 3D printing firearms.
  • Hold manufacturers and distributors of gun kits to the same standards as those of completed firearms.
  • Provide funding for the Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention to conduct research on firearm safety and gun violence prevention.

Last year a red flag law was passed by the Nevada legislature, and now Amy Klobuchar (and many Nevada democrats) are vowing to increase funding for programs in Nevada and nationwide that can strip your constitutional rights without an opportunity to defend yourself before a judge or jury. Help us stand against these attacks on your rights. Click here to join the Caliber Club to pledge a monthly donation or click here to make a one-time donation to help us continue to oppose these efforts in Nevada.

Thank you for your continued support of NVFAC PAC.

For freedom,
Don Turner, President
Nevada Firearms Coalition PAC

Mayor Pete on Guns

H/T Town Hall.

Mayor Pete is a rabid anti-gun nut job.

One of the Democrats’ favorite talking points on gun control is that we don’t need military weapons of war on America’s streets. Former mayor Pete Buttigieg has been the most effective of the presidential candidates at making this claim, because of his military background. If anyone knows whether a gun is a military weapon, it is surely an Afghanistan War veteran who was trained on these weapons.

Representative Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) is the only other remaining candidate with military experience, having been a major in the Hawaii Army National Guard for 17 years, and she is the least outspoken about gun control.

 “As someone who trained on weapons of war, I can tell you that there are weapons that have absolutely no place in American cities or neighborhoods in peacetime, ever,” Buttigieg declared at the Miami Democratic Presidential Debate in June last year.

“I think the weapons of war can do no good in American neighborhoods,” Buttigieg told CNN’s “New Day” last August. “I trained on weapons that are similar to these. And they have one purpose, which is to destroy as much as possible, as quickly as possible. They have tactical uses in war zones. Since when are American cities and neighborhoods supposed to be war zones?”

It is a theme that he has pushed endlessly.

But there are a few problems with Buttigieg’s claims. First, he never had military training, let alone weapons training. He never even received leadership training.

Naval officers typically go through four years at Annapolis or another military academy. Otherwise, they attend ROTC during college or complete Officer Candidate School as postgraduates. All of these programs involve extensive training. Instead, Buttigieg used a used little-known loophole — direct commission in the reserves — to skip all of the training that other officers receive.

Second, no self-respecting military in the world would use the “assault weapons” that we sometimes see in mass shootings. AR-15s fire the same sorts of bullets as small game-hunting rifles, and even do so with the same velocity and rapidity (one bullet per pull of the trigger). In fact, AR-15s aren’t allowed for deer hunting in most states because of the fear that they will wound rather than kill the animals. This may cause the deer to die slowly and painfully.

Buttigieg may be correct that weapons of war are designed to “destroy as much as possible, as quickly as possible.” But that’s not the story of civilian gun use. Guns can also be used to protect people and keep them from harm. About 95% of the time that people use guns defensively, they simply brandish the gun and cause the criminals to break of their attack.

Buttigieg supports virtually every other gun control law that is being pushed, from licensing requirements to mandatory gun locks.

There are few differences among the remaining Democrat presidential candidates. Even the supposedly “moderate” Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) supports mandatory gun buybacks, though she insists that this is “not gun confiscation because you give them the offer to buy back their gun.” This is still taking guns away from people, whether or not you stuff some cash in their pockets when you do it.

Another candidate who is selling himself as a moderate is former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg. His opposition to private gun ownership is well known. He is willing to start with a “voluntary buyback and ban on purchasing assault weapons, before enforcing a mandatory buyback.”

Buttigieg, however, is almost too good to be true for gun control advocates. By appearing to know about guns, he gives their ill-informed claims legitimacy. But Buttigieg should do the right thing and try to really educate Americans about firearms. He should admit that the AR-15 and other “assault weapons” function nothing like true weapons of war.


ATF Proposes Step to Make a National Gun Registry Easier

H/T AmmoLand.

Please use the link provided in the article to oppose these changes to form 4473.

USA – -( The ATF has issued new rules that will alter the format for Form 4473’s and make it easier to create a national gun registry.

Here’s what we know. ATF agents have used annual inspections to electronically record the contents of Form 4473’s being kept by federal gun dealers. See here and here.

We also know that a software company exhibiting its wares at the Shot Show in Las Vegas has crafted a system where ATF can take the contents of all the dealer’s Bound Book entries by simply capturing them on a thumb drive.

The movie, Red Dawn, shows how the 4473 form can be used as a backdoor gun registry. In the movie, a Cuban commander orders an officer to obtain the 4473s from the sporting goods store, so the invading forces know who owns firearms.

(The Bound Book entries contain all of the buyer’s personal information and gun information which is on a Form 4473.)

We know that billionaire “Midget Mike” Bloomberg has made Universal Background Checks/National Gun Registries the centerpiece of his $2 BILLION campaign for the presidency — presumably because, if everyone with a gun has a 4473, then everyone with a gun will be in the national gun registry being compiled by ATF, using its copies of 4473’s.

And we know that the ATF is now trying to put the names of gun owners on the same page of the 4473 as the identifying information of the gun. See here.

But if they’re successful with changing the 4473 in this way, it will be much easier for ATF to create a national gun registry by photographing paper documents.

ATF Changes Form 4473
ATF Changes Form 4473

So it appears that we have an answer to the almost inexplicable question of why ATF is crawling over glass now to reincarnate the format for the 4473 which was junked decades ago.

This is, of course, one piece of the National Gun Registry strategy.

But, given that ATF is required by law to receive comments between now and February 24, it is worth our time to let them know that we know what they’re up to.

So please click here to urge our federal government to REJECT the proposed changes to the 4473 form.

Again, let them know that bureaucrats shouldn’t be making it easier to register the firearms of law-abiding gun owners!

In liberty,

Michael Hammond
Legislative Counsel