First GOP Congressman Has Signed Onto The Assault Weapons Ban Of 2019

H/T Town Hall.

Rep.PeterLess King is a gutless nutless RINO.

His being from New York fuels his anti-Second Amendment sentiment.

It’s inevitable. Every Congress a Democrat introduces an Assault Weapons Ban, with the hopes of turning the most popular rifle in America – the AR 15 (which stands for Armalite Rifle Model 15) – into a firearm that can no longer be possessed. Usually these types of bills fall very heavily on party lines, with Democrats supporting it and Republicans wanting nothing to do with the legislation.

That has now changed.

Rep. Pete King (R-NY) has signed onto the Assault Weapons Ban Act of 2019, which was first introduced in February by Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI). He is the first Republican to sign onto this legislation, New York Daily News reported.

“They are weapons of mass slaughter,” King said. “I don’t see any need for them in everyday society.”

The shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio pushed King to support an Assault Weapons Ban, although he has been a proponent of gun control in the past.

“The tragic shootings in El Paso and Dayton demonstrate again the need to address gun violence. Sensible gun regulation is essential as is psychological study of who resorts to gun violence and why and what early indicators there might be,” King said in a statement following the shootings. “Our prayers must be with those killed and wounded and their families.”

“I think the assault weapons ban is timely now, especially in view of the shooting in El Paso and Dayton,” he said.

But it’s not surprising that King came to the decision he did.

“It’s unfortunate that Representative King’s assessment of modern sporting rifles come straight from the talking points of gun control groups,” the National Shooting Sports Foundation’s Director of Public Affairs, Mark Oliva, told Townhall. “His note that no one ‘needs’ a modern sporting rifle tells us where he is being informed on firearms policy. Our Second Amendment is included in the Bill if Rights, not a Bill of Needs.”

King has been a supporter of gun control in the past. He’s previously supported bills, like the Toomey-Manchin Bill, which expands background checks for firearms purchases.

While most gun control supporting Democrats want an Assault Weapons Ban, the party has focused heavily on making universal background checks a reality. The reason? They believe there’s more support for universal background checks than an Assault Weapons Ban.

While Democrats are quick to spew the same talking points about background checks and an Assault Weapons Ban, they fail to miss a few key points.

The term “assault weapon” is arbitrary and typically refers to AR-15s, because Democrats believe AR stands for assault rifle (but it doesn’t). ARs are big, black and scary so they must be banned. The silliest thing is their requirements for what constitutes an “assault weapon” are based on cosmetic features, like a collapsable stock or detachable magazine, not the firearm’s functionality. It’s like they think that a collapsable stock will suddenly turn a semi-automatic firearm (where one bullet is fired with one pull of the trigger), suddenly becomes an automatic firearm (where rounds are continually fired as long as the trigger is pressed and there is ammunition in the magazine).

Democrats want to expand background checks but the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) isn’t wholesome. As of now, only 38 states provide 80 percent of their criminal convictions to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC), which is in charge of NICS. If all convictions aren’t being reported, background checks are a toss up. It’s the reason Fix NICS was such a big deal when it passed. Slowly, but surely, NICS is being updated. Not only that, but in recent mass shootings, the gunmen had no criminal history or backgrounds that would have prevented them from obtaining firearms.


NH Governor Stands Up for Gun Rights

H/T GunPowder Magazine.

Thank you to Governor Chris Sununu(R-NH)for standing up for the Second Amendment and vetoing these three anti-gin bills.

This week in the Granite State, New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu vetoed three bills that would have infringed on the rights of law-abiding gun owners.

HB 109 would have required background checks with the aim of closing the imaginary “gun show loophole.” HB 514 would have required three -day waiting period before the transfer of a firearm. And HB 564 would have prohibited the carry of a firearm on school property.

Of course, none of these measures would have any effect on violent gun crime, since criminals, by definition, do not follow laws. They are simply feel-good efforts made by politicians looking for votes and anti-gun media attention.

“New Hampshire is one of the safest states in the nation, we have a long and proud tradition of responsible firearm ownership and individual freedom,” Gov. Sununu wrote in his veto message.

As a New Hampshire resident, I cherish these freedoms and applaud the governor for standing up for them. It is nice to see a leader with a spine, not afraid to defy the opposition who want to turn New Hampshire into Massachusetts North by infringing on our 2A rights.

Sununu also cited Part I , Article2-a of the New Hampshire Constitution which states, “All persons have the right to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves, their families and their property and state.”

“This language provides what many believe to be more expansive legal protections for gun ownership than the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution,” Sununu wrote.

I couldn’t agree more with the governor’s statement. The vast majority of gun owner’s in my state are humble, law-abiding folks. These three bills would have done nothing but turn honest people into criminals. Thankfully, there is little worry the vetoes will be overturned since the Dems do not have a two-thirds majority. Firearm ownership is an important part of life here in New Hampshire, and I am grateful we have a Governor who understands what “Shall not be infringed” means.

Live Free or Die!

No Joe, Banning “Assault Weapons” Doesn’t Work

H/T Bearing Arms.

In spite of Slow Joe Thee Gaff Machine Biden’s fantasies, the 1994 assault weapons ban did nothing to lower crime.


Former Vice-President Joe Biden recently penned an op/ed (or more likely, someone penned it for him) claiming that the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban actually worked to reduce crime, and that a bigger, badder ban needs to be re-instituted. Clay Turner, former editor of America’s First Freedom magazine, says Biden’s got his gun ban all wrong.

For example: Biden claims, “We have a huge problem with guns.” Of course, you will find no reports of guns stalking women, invading homes or engaging in turf shootouts. People do these things. In academic circles, Biden’s claim is called anthropomorphism, or ascribing human characteristics to inanimate objects. It’s a literary device, not fact.

Data is not on Biden’s side, either. Research is often mind-numbing, but an entertaining article by BJ Campbell confirms, “There is no clear correlation whatsoever between gun ownership rate and gun homicide rate. Not within the U.S. Not regionally. Not internationally.” It’s worth the read, but if you’re not inclined to do so, consider that the U.S. gun homicide rates have been falling since the mid-1990s. Meanwhile, domestic gun sales have skyrocketed (especially during the Obama/Biden administration). Correlate that, Joe.

It’s also worth noting that the modern “school shooting era” began in 1996during the Clinton/Biden Gun Ban. The murders at Columbine High School, which have inspired so many others, took place in 1999, five years after the passage of the ban and five years before it would sunset. Clearly a semi-auto ban won’t stop these types of atrocities.

Compare Biden’s statement that we have a huge problem with guns to President Trump’s comment over the weekend that people pull the trigger, not the gun that pulls the trigger. Those two positions are basically the two sides of the gun control debate distilled down to their philosophical essences. On the one hand, the idea that we can ban our way to safety. If there are no guns, then there can be no gun crime! On the other hand, the idea that you have to deal with the individuals driving or responsible for gun-related violence, or else you can’t hope to dramatically reduce it.

But as Turner points out, Biden’s not interested in dealing with individuals. After all, he’s been accused of being an architect of mass incarceration. You think he wants to talk about putting the most violent offenders in prison? He’d rather talk about Bill Clinton’s friendship with Jeffrey Epstein than bring up targeted enforcement efforts and tougher sentences for violent criminals. If nothing else, his political instincts keep him focused on banning the most commonly sold rifle in America today.

Biden also asserts that “Assault weapons — military-style firearms designed to fire rapidly — are a threat to our national security.” His description is deliberately meant to confuse AR-15s with machine guns, which they are not. They work identically to your grandfather’s semi-auto pheasant gun: One trigger pull = one round fired. It will surprise those not well-acquainted with firearms that not one U.S. mass killing has been perpetrated with a machine gun — not even Las Vegas.

Biden’s usage of “military-style” wording sounds ominous, but he stops short of claiming AR-15s are military guns. In truth, no organized military in the world goes to war equipped with AR-15s precisely because they are not machine guns. Yet Biden is unashamed when he hypes them as “weapons of war.”

How does the AR-15, the most popular rifle in America, constitute “a threat to our national security?” Best estimates place about 16 million AR-15s in the hands of U.S. civilians, yet their use in homicide is so rare that the FBI doesn’t even track them. Instead, FBI data lumps them in with all other types of rifles — which are used in less than 4% of U.S. gun homicides.

Turner touches on an important point that I’ll exploring in greater depth soon here on Bearing Arms; Joe Biden (and gun control groups more generally) wants you to be afraid. Not you, the gun owner, though he does want you to fear a gun ban enough to comply with it. No, he and gun control groups want voters to be afraid. They’ve discovered fear is an excellent motivator, even better than anger, and they’re pushing hard with rhetoric designed to make Americans terrified to leave their home for fear they’ll fall victim to a mass shooting.

Ultimately, it’s all about politics for Biden. This quote by Turner sums it up nicely.

My father once told me to beware of taking advice from someone with something to sell. With this propaganda, Biden is selling us — Biden, for President. Seen in this light, the half-truth in his headline is clear: “Banning Assault Weapons Works”—Not to make us any safer, but perhaps to get Biden nominated.

As front runner, Biden can choose to adopt and co-opt policies from other candidates and try to make them non-issues in the larger primary fight. Biden knows you can’t run for president as a Democrat in this cycle unless you’re in full support of a semi-auto ban. Don’t be surprised if he calls for a ‘buyback” before long as well, especially if Beto O’Rourke gains any ground in polling after his “reset” last week to a campaign centered around gun control. Joe knows politics, and that’s unfortunately what this is all about.

Trump: It’s ‘The People That Pull The Trigger, Not The Gun’

H/T Bearing Arms.

President Trump is correct it is the person that pulls the trigger and it is not the guns fault as the gun is an inanimate object.

We need to address mental health problems and how to prevent the mentally ill from buying a gun.

Just how far is President Trump willing to push expanded background checks? Over the weekend, Senator Joe Manchin told CBS News that there’s been “good dialogue” with the White House on the issue, but the president himself seemed more interested in talking about mental health reform on Sunday.

“It’s the people that pull the trigger, not the gun that pulls the trigger so we have a very, very big mental health problem and Congress is working on various things and I will be looking at it,” Trump told reporters on the tarmac before heading back to Washington after a vacation at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey.

The White House, Trump said, is “very much involved” in the discussions Congress is having to address gun violence and while “a lot of things are happening on the gun level” he said “the concept of mental institutions” must be addressed.

“These are people that have to be in institutions for help, I’m not talking about as a form of a prison, I’m saying for help and I think it’s something we have to really look at, the whole concept of mental institutions,” he said. “I remember growing up we had mental institutions, then they were closed — in New York, I’m talking about — they were, many of them closed. A lot of them were closed and all of those people were put out on the street.”

“So I think the concept of mental institutions has to be looked at,” he said.

Gun control groups, meanwhile, are doing their best to focus attention on things like “universal background checks,” “red flag” laws, and sweeping gun and magazine bans, holding rallies in support of new anti-gun laws in cities across the country over the weekend.

Dozens gathered in Foley Square in lower Manhattan to pressure the Senate, specifically Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, to take action on tougher gun safety laws, CBS2’s Hazel Sanchez reported.

“Mitch McConnell has had that bill on his desk since February, over 200 days,” said Scott Pappalardo of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America. “We need that bill to be put forward. It’s a bi-partisan bill. It will pass the Senate. He just needs to put it up to vote.”

Dozens gathered in lower Manhattan? That’s it? I’m pretty sure “dozens gather” in lower Manhattan on a daily basis, which doesn’t say much for the engagement of gun control groups, even in an anti-gun stronghold like New York City. Still, the weekend protests were more about getting press attention. The real lobbying by Everytown for Gun Safety will be taking place on Capitol Hill and in battleground districts and states. The anti-gun group founded by Michael Bloomberg says it will spend at least one million dollars targeting Republican lawmakers in an attempt to get their support for any gun control legislation considered by Congress in September.

Now is the time to make sure your lawmakers hear from you. Even if your Senators have never voted for to strengthen or protect Second Amendment rights, or if they’ve never voted for a gun control bill in their life, they still need to know what you’re thinking. Be polite, be civil, but be heard.

Lawyers File Lawsuit against Unconstitutional Pennsylvania Law, Black Guns Matter Leader Runs for Philly Office

H/T GunPowder Magazine.

More lawsuits need to be filed against the blatantly unconstitutional gun laws.

We also need to have more pro-Second Amendment people running for office. 

A team of lawyers has filed a brief of Amici Curiae in the U.S Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit challenging Section 302 of Pennsylvania’s Mental Health Procedures Act (MHPA) in favor of due process rights for gun owners.

“We are arguing that the permanent prohibition to own a firearm for an involuntary, Section 302 commitment is unconstitutional and a violation of an individual’s right of due process under the Commonwealth Constitution and the US Constitution,” Dr. Val Finnell, Pennsylvania Director for Gun Owners of America, said in a press release. “The only thing required to lose your gun rights under the MHPA is a stroke of a doctor’s pen, and that’s wrong.”

Section 302 of the MHPA says that mental health evaluations may be conducted “without a warrant upon application by a physician or other authorized person who has personally observed conduct showing the need for such examination.” Patients committed for treatment under the law lose their right to own a weapon regardless of whether the treatment is voluntary.

The lawyers questioned the constitutionality of this process itself, rather than the entirety of Section 302. In 2017, The Pennsylvania Supreme Court made a similar argument in In re Nancy White Vencil, which states that “evaluation and treatment…is insufficient under the Fourteenth Amendment, due to the lack of due process,” to warrant such an outcome.

A Hot Topic in PA
Pennsylvania’s courts have historically ruled in favor of the Second Amendment, even though local lawmakers routinely argue that town home rule charters give townships and municipalities the right to prohibit certain weapons.

Under Article 9, Section 2 of Pennsylvania’s Constitution, municipalities have the right to adopt home rule charters. Their legislative authority is limited by the Constitution, however, and by acts of the General Assembly. The organizations argued that this Constitutional provision bars home rule cities from regulating the use of firearms without an act of the Assembly.

In 1993, both Philadelphia and Pittsburgh attempted to outlaw so-called “military-style assault weapons.” Later that year, Pennsylvania’s General Assembly passed HB 185, which restricts how municipalities and townships can regulate firearms.

Three years later, lawmakers from Philadelphia and Pittsburgh challenged HB 185 in Ortiz v. Commonwealth in order to pass another so-called “assault weapons” ban. The Commonwealth’s Supreme Court argued that laws passed by the General Assembly hold precedence over home rule charters.

Following the Tree of Life Synagogue shooting in 2018, Pittsburgh City Council again attempted to outlaw AR-15s. Shortly thereafter, several lawsuits filed by gun rights organizations landed on the desk of Pittsburgh’s mayor contending that this law is unconstitutional as well. Those lawsuits are still being heard by the courts.

Earlier this year, Rep. Angel Garcia introduced a bill that would require firearm owners to register their weapons annually. The bill never made it out of committee.



Turning the Tide
Maj Toure, the founder of Black Guns Matter, has spent the past few years traveling the country and teaching inner city groups about the Second Amendment. He has taught alongside stalwarts such as Chicago’s Rhonda Ezell with the goal of educating people about guns, so conflicts won’t end in tragedy. One topic he always covers is the danger that laws like Section 302 pose for gun owner’s rights across the country.

Toure is now running for city council of Philadelphia.

“[Red flag laws are ] a clear violation of due process, of American values,” Toure told Gunpowder Magazineat CPAC this year. “Red flag laws and extreme protection orders basically allow someone to say they’re uncomfortable with another person having guns, and the police can perform no-knock raids to retrieve them and their guns.”

Listen to what Toure had to say about red flag gun confiscation laws at CPAC this year:





















Armed Suspect Shoots 3 People, Concealed Carrier Shoots and Successfully Stops Suspect

H/T Concealed Nation.

One thing we know for sure is the concealed carrier stopped anyone else from being shot.

DETROIT, MICHIGAN — An armed citizen drew his firearm and shot a suspect who police say had just shot three people. The incident began over the results of a dice game, and the concealed carrier likely saved lives.

An argument broke out after a dice game in the area of Seven Mile and Harlow streets on the city’s west side, at about 8:45 p.m.

Three of the victims, 18, 23 and 24 years old, were hospitalized in temporary serious condition. The condition of a fourth victim, 61 years old, is unknown.


The injured suspect was arrested by police and taken into custody.

News reports did not mention if the concealed carrier was a passerby or was a part of the group of people involved in the incident.

Police are still investigating, but it doesn’t seem that this armed citizen will be facing any charges related to the self-defense shooting.


H/T Guns In The News.

It is not about guns but it is about control.

An armed man is a citizen but an unarmed man is a subject.

Very few Americans will remember the following historical facts regarding Black-American gun ownership in America:

  • The first task of the Democrat-controlled Ku Klux Klan was to disarm the black population in the South.
  • It was citizen militias that repelled white mobs who were attacking black neighborhoods in many Northern cities in the days before reconstruction. On at least two occasions, those militias were composed entirely of black gun owners.
  • During the freedom struggles of the 1960s, organized black militias in at least three Southern states protected civil rights workers of all races.

Recently, Ken Blackwell, former Secretary of State in Ohio, wrote, “Tragically, despite this heritage of responsible and effective use of firearms, equal citizenship has frequently been denied to black Americans through the use of gun control laws. Such laws were used to keep firearms out of the hands of African Americans—to deny their very equality as human beings—from the earliest colonial days through the end of Jim Crow in 1965.”

Blackwell continued, “I would argue that even today, blacks continue to suffer disproportionate harm from gun control laws, as major cities deny legal firearms to the residents of high-crime urban neighborhoods.”

I completely agree, Mr. Blackwell.

I am honestly perplexed at the level of evil represented in recent and past shootings in America; it is senseless, violent hate without a mask. The struggle to protect the innocent from armed aggressors is one every American, regardless of party affiliation, should be a part of.

In many instances, anti-gun politicians use religion to excoriate Second Amendment supporters. Phrases like, “How can you as a Christian stand for this kind of lawless behavior where people have easy access to guns and kill others? It doesn’t make sense – you ought to be for more gun control if you’re a Christian!”

These hypocritical assertions come from many who believe the act of murder against a black American is okay so long as the child is unborn or infant. This is driving me crazy because I can’t even wrap my head around this nefarious, illogical absurdity.

Many black political leaders and “so-called” non-Eurocentric political leaders should consider an overhaul of their disdainful thinking of the Second Amendment. Their support of government infringement of the right to bear arms is violating the Constitution and robbing black Americans of the ability to defend themselves, demoting them to second-class citizenship.

As seen in every single mass shooting, the government is completely incapable of protecting the citizenry from these kinds of attacks. If the people do not protect themselves, there is no protection. All “gun-control” laws do is fight or obstruct the people from protecting themselves.

Our Founding Fathers dedicated our Constitution to “preserve the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity” (emphasis added). The Second Amendment was a part of their way to ensure we can accomplish this regardless of our color.

To quote Mr. Blackwell again, “…Any political party that undermines those rights is making the minority community most vulnerable. Law-abiding Americans deserve the right to defend themselves.”

I believe today we need “control” of our leaders and we need to make sure that they advocate, endorse, and sponsor the protection of all Americans’ God-given right to life, liberty, and property.

Schedule an event or learn more about your Constitution with Jake MacAulay and the Institute on the Constitution and receive your free gift.