Tag: 2nd amendment

US Department Of Commerce Asks Gun Holster Companies For Sales Records

A startling new report via AmmoLand News outlines how the US Department of Commerce Census Bureau asked major holster manufacturers/providers for order numbers, product descriptions, and locations where the items were shipped. 

Some holster companies rejected the Department of Commerce’s request for “commodity flow surveys” related to their sold products.

“We will never turn over any information on our customers to the government no matter the cost us,” Chad Myers, President of JM4 Tactical, said. “To do so would violate our core beliefs. We need to stand up to an overbearing government. Our customers can rest assured that their information is safe with us!”

AmmoLand said, “the Census Bureau sends out the Commodity Flow Survey to random companies every year … but this seems an abnormal amount of holster companies have received the notice leading some of the holster companies to wonder if the federal government has targeted them.” 

This is alarming because the overreaching government could be attempting to create a registry of gun owners, types, and numbers of firearms owned via the information collected in the survey.  

Holster companies have reached out to Arbiter Weston Martinez of Texas, a former Texas Real Estate Commissioner under former Governor Rick Perry, to push back on the government collection of data. 

“Clearly, the Biden administration is saber rattling for the left in the wake of all the recent losses they have incurred by Supreme Court rulings,” Martinez said. “My clients and I will never back down from anyone that is trying to impugn our Constitutional and God-give rights like the Second Amendment.”

Holster companies do not have a choice and are bound by law to turn over all requested information or face fines. 

Washington Gun Law President William Kirk provides more color on the Biden administration’s use of government agencies to collect data on law-abiding citizens. He said this administration is the least trustworthy of any administration in the country’s history regarding the lawful rights of gun owners. 

Keep reading

House Democrats Targeting at Least 40 Specific AR-15 Rifles in New ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban

The House Judiciary Committee will be proposing legislation next week that would ban certain “assault weapons,” according to an announcement on Friday.

The committee will meet next Wednesday, July 20, to debate the bill that “would ban the sale, import, manufacture or transfer of certain semi-automatic weapons,” the panel said. 

Should the committee pass the bill, House Democratic leaders would likely bring it to a floor for a full vote, which would likely pass as Democrats control the chamber, and would send it to the Senate, where it would need to garner 10 votes from Republican senators. The Senate, currently split 50-50, would likely stop the bill due to the filibuster.

The bill would allow the sale of weapons that are already privately owned and wouldn’t apply to antique, manually operated or certain hunting and sporting firearms, the House panel stated.

The text of the bill states that it would ban at least 40 specific AR-15-style rifles, including the “Bushmaster ACR, Bushmaster Carbon 15, Bushmaster MOE series, Bushmaster XM15, Chiappa Firearms MFour rifles, Colt Match Target rifles, CORE Rifle Systems CORE15 rifles, Daniel Defense M4A1 rifles, Devil Dog Arms 15 Series rifles” and more.

Keep reading

Woke California AG Tells Gun-Permitting Officials to Deny Applicants Based on Politics

After the Supreme Court’s landmark Second Amendment ruling in June, California’s attorney general encouraged law enforcement officials in the state to deny firearm carry permits to individuals with a history of “hatred and racism”—whether expressed in social media posts or elsewhere.

The problem is that in these politically polarized times, defining hatred and racism is problematic, leading to definitions that disfavor the beliefs of conservatives and others who don’t toe the “woke” or politically correct line, critics say. Allowing these concepts to be used in the gun-permitting process is a recipe for abuse and could lead to violations of gun-permit applicants’ Second and First Amendment rights, they say.

On June 23, the Supreme Court ruled in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, that New York state’s tough concealed carry gun permitting system was unconstitutional because it only granted public-carry licenses “when an applicant demonstrates a special need for self-defense.”

The day after the Bruen ruling, California Attorney General Rob Bonta, a Democrat, sent a “legal alert” (pdf) to law enforcement officials, advising them that the state was dropping the requirement for gun license applicants to provide a “good cause” because the requirement is now “unconstitutional and unenforceable.”

But “the requirement that a public-carry license applicant provide proof of ‘good moral character’ remains constitutional” and should continue to be enforced.

A “good moral character” investigation “requires an independent determination,” Bonta wrote.

Keep reading

UPS goes full “woke”, announces it will assist government in unconstitutional confiscation, destruction of gun parts

The shipping conglomerate has decided they will terminate the accounts of gun sellers across the country, adding that any “ghost firearms” found in shipments tendered to UPS may be confiscated and destroyed.

For example, UPS sent a letter to a Florida firearms dealer, Ghost Firearms, telling them they had terminated their account due to possible violations of regulations governing the shipping of “ghost weapons” to “unauthorized locations.”

“We write to inform you that UPS has learned that your company may be violating applicable laws concerning the shipment of ‘ghost guns’ to unauthorized locations,” the letter stated. “In light of our concern, UPS has determined that it will cancel your account, effective immediately.”

The letter from UPS continued that if pickup service for the retailer was offered, it will be discontinued effective immediately.

“Accordingly you may not re-open an account with UPS, whether you seek to do so through a UPS employee or through UPS’s internet website. We ask that you do not attempt to tender any shipments to UPS via The UPS Store, UPS Customer Centers, UPS On-Call Pickup Service, UPS Internet Shipping, or any other UPS locations,” the letter continued.

The letter went on to tell Ghost Firearms that any package determined to be tendered by them was subject to having such package seized and contents destroyed.

Keep reading

Supreme Court Strikes Down New York’s Unconstitutional Concealed-Carry Gun Law

The Supreme Court voted 6–3 on June 23 to strike down New York state’s draconian concealed-carry gun permitting system on constitutional grounds.

The Supreme Court has been strengthening Second Amendment protections in recent years and observers have said the court’s 6–3 conservative supermajority could help expand gun ownership protections. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment protects “the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation,” and in McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), it held that this right “is fully applicable to the States.”

The ruling comes amid rising crime rates, activist demands to defund police departments, and a Biden administration push to strengthen gun control policies. A gun control package, introduced in the wake of a series of high-profile mass shootings, is moving forward in Congress.

The Empire State’s gun permit law, like laws in seven other states, generally requires an applicant to demonstrate “proper cause” in order to obtain a license to carry a concealed handgun in public.

New York makes it a crime to possess a firearm without a license, whether inside or outside the home. An individual who wants to carry a firearm outside his home may obtain an unrestricted license to “have and carry” a concealed “pistol or revolver” if he can prove that “proper cause exists” for doing so, according to state law. An applicant satisfies the “proper cause” requirement only if he can “demonstrate a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community,” according to a 1980 ruling by the Supreme Court of New York in Klenosky v. New York City Police Department.

The specific issue before the court was whether the state’s denial of the petitioning individuals’ applications for concealed-carry licenses for self-defense violates the U.S. Constitution.

Keep reading

Push To Ban ‘Assault Rifles’ Like Fight To End Slavery, CRT Backer Ibram X. Kendi Tells CBS News

The ongoing effort to ban so-called assault weapons is similar to America’s bloody fight to end slavery, a CBS contributor and chief proponent of Critical Race Theory (CRT) said Sunday.

In a segment commemorating Juneteenth, Ibram X. Kendi told “Face the Nation” host Margaret Brennan he teaches his young daughter that the struggle for emancipation continues today. Kendi, the network’s “Racial Justice Contributor,” said “freedom” today means liberation from poverty and guns.

“I’m actually going to teach her that … throughout this nation’s history, there’s [sic] been two perspectives on freedom, really two fights for freedom,” Kendi said. “Enslaved people were fighting for freedom from slavery, and enslavers were fighting for the freedom to enslave.”

“And in many ways that sort of contrast still exists today,” he continued. “There are people who are fighting for freedom from assault rifles, freedom from poverty, freedom from exploitation. And there are others who are fighting for freedom to exploit, freedom to have guns, freedom to maintain inequality.”

Keep reading

Right to own a gun could hinge on definition of ‘boyfriend’ in ‘red flag’ laws

Talks in the Senate chamber regarding the sweeping gun legislation that was passed in the House last week has hit a snag: what is the definition of a boyfriend? It seems lawmakers cannot quite discern when a relationship becomes serious enough for the label, and to bypass the “loophole.”

The question comes in regards to a provision in the legislation that would close the so-called “boyfriend loophole” in laws that bar people convicted of domestic violence, or have been subjected to a domestic violence restraining order, from purchasing guns.

According to the New York Times, laws currently bar people who are issued these convictions from purchasing guns only if they were married to, lived with, or  had a child with the victim.

Lawmakers are attempting to close this “loophole” by including other intimate partners, but are now stuck in negotiations as to when someone becomes an intimate partner.

“Is it one date or several? Could an ex-boyfriend count?” the New York Times questioned. Perhaps Congress could take a cue from social media, and only use the term when it becomes Insta official.

With lawmakers attempting to pass this sweeping legislation before their Fourth of July recess, Senators have now honed in on this issue as part of their final negotiations.

Lawmakers have questioned the definition of a boyfriend or intimate partner, and whether those who are subject to this kind of gun ban should be able to appeal in the future.

Keep reading