WASHINGTON — Gun-rights advocates are using Judge Sonia Sotomayor's involvement in two Second Amendment cases as ammunition to challenge her nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court, threatening to draw the Obama administration into a debate over firearms laws that it has tried hard to avoid.
The clash between gun-control laws and the breadth of the constitutional right to bear arms is one of several social issues being scoured by people on both sides of the ideological spectrum for clues to Judge Sotomayor's leanings. Her record on the bench provides few hints of her views on such hot-button issues as abortion or gay marriage.
The gun owners' opposition stems from two rulings in which Judge Sotomayor took part while on the federal appellate bench. The January 2009 Maloney v. Cuomo decision involved a challenge from a New York resident arrested for possessing nunchakus, a martial arts weapon made of two thick sticks joined at the ends by a short length of chain or cord. The defendant said the state's ban on nunchakus violated his Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
A three-judge panel including Judge Sotomayor rejected the claim in an unsigned opinion. The court cited earlier rulings, including an 1886 Supreme Court decision, in holding that “the Second Amendment applies only to limitations the federal government seeks to impose on this right,” not to state legislative efforts. Read more
Author R.J. Rummel has produced a significant body of work including numerous essays and several books that deal with the subject of democide, a term he coined to describe a widely-accepted legal definition of murder that applies when perpetrated by government upon its own people.
After examining about 10,000 sources over many years, Rummel estimates that governments of the world have murdered (i.e., committed democide on) approximately 262 million people in the 20th century alone.
That shocking figure is no joke and, as Rummel points out, is about 7 times higher than the combat death toll from all wars fought over the same period combined. 20th Century wars were the worst in man's history and killed almost twice as many people as “ordinary” civilian criminal murders across the globe over the same one-hundred-year span.
It should come as no surprise that the hallmark of democide according to Rummel is authoritarian government.
It should also be no surprise that virtually every monstrous genocide or democide event in modern history was conducted by collectivist or socialist-style dictatorships, with the lion's share of atrocity garnered by the Marxist variety – those great saints who do everything “for the good of the people” and who without any sense or shame hold offices and/or comprise significant political parties in most “civilized” nations today.
In fact, the results of various flavors of socialism are what prompted other historians to invent the word “genocide” in the first place. Read more
Ardis wants to see legislation passed in Springfield allowing Peoria to enact an ordinance permitting citizens the right to carry a concealed weapon.
His comments come one day after a gas station attendant was shot and killed in the East Bluff and a shot was discharged on Newman Golf Course during a botched robbery.
“I'm trying to see if there is an opportunity for (the General Assembly) to enact a concealed-carry ordinance in the city of Peoria for a three to four year test to see (if there is) a reduction in these types of crimes,” Ardis said.
Getting concealed-carry legislation passed in Illinois, however, is another matter, because the politically charged issue in Springfield has often met resistance by state lawmakers, particularly those from the Chicago area.
There are two strong but opposing beliefs on the issue: Opponents believe more gun ownership does little to prevent crime, while proponents point to statistics in other states with concealed-carry laws showing that gun violence goes down.
But Ardis' pitch in setting up Peoria as a pilot for concealed-carry regulation in Illinois is something unique, one anti-gun official said. Read more
Judge Sonia Sotomayor could walk into a firestorm on Capitol Hill over her stance on gun rights, with conservatives beginning to question some controversial positions she's taken over the past several years on the Second Amendment.
Earlier this year, President Obama's Supreme Court nominee joined an opinion with the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that Second Amendment rights do not apply to the states.
A 2004 opinion she joined also cited as precedent that “the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.”
Ken Blackwell, a senior fellow with the Family Research Council, called Obama's nomination a “declaration of war against America's gun owners.”
Such a line of attack could prove more effective than efforts to define Sotomayor as pro-abortion, efforts that essentially grasp at straws. Sotomayor's record on that hot-button issue reveals instances in which she has ruled against an abortion rights group and in favor of anti-abortion protesters, making her hard to pigeonhole.
But Sotomayor's position on gun control is far more crystallized.
Blackwell, who also ran unsuccessfully to head the Republican National Committee, told FOX News her position is “very, very disturbing.”
“That puts our Second Amendment freedoms at risk,” he said. “What she's basically saying is that your hometown can decide to suppress your Second Amendment freedoms.” Read more
According to the Insurance Journal, “Edmondson's office, in partnership with the National Rifle Association (NRA), defended the constitutionality of two Oklahoma gun laws that prohibit businesses from forbidding their employees to store firearms in locked vehicles parked on company property. A federal lawsuit filed in 2004 claimed the statutes were unconstitutional and preempted by federal statutes. The federal district court rejected the plaintiffs' constitutional arguments but found that the statutes were preempted by the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OSHA).”
The case eventually went to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, which, “reversed the district court's decision regarding OSHA.”
“We will continue to vigorously defend the Second Amendment right of every American to keep and bear arms,” Edmondson said. “I am grateful to the NRA for their expertise and support in this effort.”
Currently before the House Judiciary Committee, “The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009 would authorize Attorney General Eric Holder to deny the sale or transfer of firearms to known or suspected terrorists—a list that could extend beyond groups such as radical Islamists and other groups connected to international terror organizations,” Fox News reported.
Who could argue about denying arms to terrorist? No one. Yet, with this bill, the devil’s in the details.
“Critics say the names of suspected terrorists could be drawn from existing government watch lists that cover such broad categories as animal rights extremists, Christian identity extremists, black separatists, anti-abortion extremists, anti-immigration extremists and anti-technology extremists.”
In effect, any group or people who someone might want to label as “extremist” or “anti.”
“It doesn't say anything about trials and due process,” Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, told Fox News. “This is one of the most outrageous pieces of legislation to come along in some time. It's basically saying, ‘I suspect you, so your rights are toast.’”
The bill’s Constitutionality was a big question.
“There is a Second Amendment right to hold and bear arms,” said Robert Cottrol, a law professor at George Washington University. “That right is not absolute, for instance with convicted criminals. But there would have to be an individualized determination, as in a trial, to prove someone is guilty of something before they are deprived of such a right.”
BELLEVUE, WA – The nomination of Second Circuit Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor to replace retiring Justice David Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court is a slap at gun rights and the Second Amendment, the Second Amendment Foundation said today.
Judge Sotomayor, a New York native, ruled on a Second Circuit Appeals Court panel that the Second Amendment is not a fundamental right and does not apply to the states in the case of Maloney v. Cuomo. This ruling is in direct conflict with a Ninth Circuit Court ruling in the Nordyke v. King case in California that the Second Amendment is incorporated through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
“While Democrats in Congress have been making great strides in the gun rights arena, refusing to consider a renewal of the Clinton gun ban, and offering overwhelming bipartisan support for legislation allowing citizens to carry firearms in national parks, President Obama just demonstrated that he prefers judges who oppose Second Amendment rights,” said SAF founder Alan M. Gottlieb.
Incorporation may be taken up by the high court during its next session beginning in October, because attorneys in the Maloney case plan to appeal in late June.
“If the Maloney appeal is accepted by the Supreme Court,” Gottlieb wondered, “would Justice Sotomayor – provided she is confirmed – recuse herself from deliberations?”
Judge Sotomayor has written an opinion that declined to order the release of certain information under the Freedom of Information Act. In one case, according to SCOTUSblog, she wrote that the “unwarranted invasion of privacy” for individuals whose names would be release under an FOIA request outweighed the public interest.
“Would a Justice Sotomayor be just as protective of the privacy rights of concealed carry permit holders if a newspaper wanted to publish that information,” Gottlieb asked. “We hope that during Senate confirmation hearings, someone asks about her positions on incorporation and the privacy rights of gun owners. The Second Amendment needs to be expanded, not eviscerated.”
You want to stay mobile. You want a solid shooting rest. You want Stoney Point Shooting Sticks.
You want to stay mobile but still have a solid shooting rest. You want to something that’s lightweight, durable and easy to use.
You want to get your hands on Stoney Point shooting sticks.
These handy little aluminum shooting sticks are everything you’d want for use in the field. The soft yet textured shooting head opens to a v-shape to cradle the forearm of the rifle and the Posi-Lock ® system means you can quickly and easily adjust the elevation with just the twist of leg.
Available in two different sizes for shooting while standing or sitting, Stoney Point shooting sticks come with a lanyard holes so you can create a quick sling and a friction lock to keep them together when you are not using them.
Best of all, they work. If you want an easy-to-use shooting platform that can go with you anywhere in the field, get your hands on a set of Stoney Point Shooting Sticks.
President Barack Obama signed the gun law Friday as part of a measure creating new rules for the credit card industry. But the Interior Department says that because the credit card law won't take effect until nine months after it is signed, the gun measure also will be delayed.
Spokeswoman Kendra Barkoff said the Interior Department will follow Congress's directive and put the new firearms law in effect in late February.
Until then, rules adopted under the Reagan administration will remain in place. The rules severely restrict guns in the national parks, generally requiring that guns be locked or stored.
Ord is challenging the dismissal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, where the Second Amendment Foundation and the ACLU National Capital Area are participating as amicus curiae in support of Ord, saying his case against the city should move forward.
At issue on appeal is whether Ord has standing to sue the District.
For background, Ord runs a private security business, Falken Industries, and is considered a special conservator of the peace under Virginia law.
That means Ord, who is a “qualified” law enforcement officer in the eyes of Virginia, allowed to carry a gun there.
Ord thinks he should be allowed to carry a gun in D.C. for his line of work. But he’s not willing to test the authorities—not after police in April 2008 applied for and received a warrant for his arrest on the charge of possession of an unregistered firearm, a misdemeanor. Read more
Edmondson's office, in partnership with the National Rifle Association (NRA), defended the constitutionality of two Oklahoma gun laws that prohibit businesses from forbidding their employees to store firearms in locked vehicles parked on company property.
A federal lawsuit filed in 2004 claimed the statutes were unconstitutional and preempted by federal statutes. The federal district court rejected the plaintiffs' constitutional arguments but found that the statutes were preempted by the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OSHA).
Edmondson and the NRA then took the case to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, asking the circuit court to overturn the lower court's OSHA preemption ruling.
Earlier this year, the court granted Edmondson's request and reversed the district court's decision regarding OSHA.
The plaintiffs, Ramsey Winch Inc., Auto Crane Co., ConocoPhillips, Norris, DP Manufacturing Inc., and Tulsa Winch Inc., could have appealed the ruling to the United States Supreme Court within 90 days, but that deadline has passed. Read more
California Assembly Bill 962 and Senate Bill 585 are scheduled to be considered on Thursday, May 28.
AB962, sponsored by Assembly Member Kevin De Leon (D-45), is in the Assembly Committee on Appropriations. AB962 would make it a crime to privately transfer more than 50 rounds of ammunition per month, even between family and friends, unless you are registered as a “handgun ammunition vendor” in the Department of Justice's database. Ammunition retailers would have to be licensed and store ammunition in such a manner that it would be inaccessible to purchasers. The bill would also require purchasers submit to fingerprinting, which would be submitted to the Department of Justice. Lastly, mail order ammunition sales would be prohibited.
SB585 is currently in the Senate Appropriations Committee. Introduced by State Senator Mark Leno (D-3), SB585 would prohibit the sale of firearms and ammunition on the property or inside the buildings that comprise the Cow Palace. In short, SB585 is a stepping-stone to banning gun shows on all publicly-owned property in California.
Please contact the members of the Assembly and Senate Appropriations Committees and respectfully urge them to oppose AB962 and SB585. Contact information for the committees can be found below.
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS:
Assemblymember Kevin de Leon (D-45) – Chair (916) 319-2045
The Post is howling over the fact that a voting rights bill to allow District of Columbia residents full representation in the House of Representatives is being stalled by a measure that would strip the city’s vehemently anti-gun council of the authority to regulate guns.
The city council and mayor despise the ruling they got from the U.S. Supreme Court last year that struck down the long-standing handgun ban as a violation of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Since that ruling, the city has had to be dragged kicking and screaming to a point that they are now at least allowing citizens to register handguns, yet they are trying to micro-manage the program in such a manner as to discourage the greatest number of people from exercising their newly-restored Second Amendment rights.
Well, too bad for the Washington Post. While their editorial whines that “It is infuriating that this unacceptable trade-off is even on the table,” they should keep in perspective that there should not be the need for a “trade-off” in the first place. The Post needs to remember that owning a gun is just as much a right as casting a vote. Indeed, the fact that so many Americans have owned guns, and have been willing to bear them on battlefields all over the world, is what has guaranteed that voting right still exists.
The Post editorial observes, “As the first African American president, Mr. Obama is in a unique position to talk about the injustice of disenfranchising the people of the District, many of whom are African American.”
Well, let’s ignore the racial overtone of that statement and look at disenfranchisement.
On Wednesday, the House of Representatives corrected a long-standing case of “disenfranchisement” by passing a measure that will restore the Second Amendment to our national parks and wildlife refuges. Gun prohibitionists howled, engaging in over-the-top rhetoric that demonstrates how out of touch with reality some of them have become. Read more
AR-15 scopes are pretty simple; after all, you're just picking a scope for a rifle. Of course in the defensive, law-enforcement or military context, durability becomes much more important than in hunting.
Red-Dot Scopes
The Aimpoint with the twist-off 3X adapter, being used to slam LaRue targets far downrange.
The beginning of red-dot scopes in practical competition began with Jerry Barnhart in 1990. He mounted an Aimpoint on a .38 Super Open gun and proceeded to win the Nationals with it.
Later that year, Doug Koenig, having mounted a red-dot scope on his Open gun, won the World Shoot. After that, there was no going back. Well, at least not for a few years.
The original scopes were dim, had narrow tubes and were quite fragile. It was not unheard of for a competitor to have two or three pre-zeroed scopes in their gear bag. Should one decide to break, they’d unbolt the old one and install the new one.
I recall one time, at a USPSA Nationals, after a hard rain the sun came out. My extensively-modified and unsealed scope fogged up. By holding a butane lighter flame against it, I was able to dry it out. We’ve come a long way since then, and Aimpoint has done a lot to advance the field.
The method of operation of any red-dot scope is the same: you look through it, at the target. For fast, close-in shooting, you simply let the dot “float” in your field of view. Where it is, is where you hit.
Optical purists quibble about which red-dots are and are not perfectly parallax-free. Parallax is the change in point of impact from the dot (or crosshairs) of a scope, when you move the dot or crosshairs from the optical center of the scope by moving your head.
A scope with parallax will have the point of impact away from the dot or crosshairs when they are near the edge of the field of view. In a magnifying optic, parallax can be a problem.
Optically, the magnifying scope can be adjusted so it is parallax-free at a single distance. However, the effect is so small at distance that scopes can be said to be “parallax-free” at or beyond a certain distance when properly adjusted.
Target competitors fuss over it greatly. A scope adjusted to be parallax-free at fifty yards will show parallax at 100, and vice-versa. When a change of fractions of an inch can mean lost points and lost matches, target shooters get fussy. The lack of magnification and the large dot size means that even a red-dot optic that is not well-engineered and has parallax hardly matters.
At worst, the parallax in a red-dot scope is not enough to move the point of impact out of the “shadow” of the dot. As one example, if the parallax error of a Brand-X red-dot scope is three-quarters of an inch at 100 yards, and the dot itself is 2MOA, then moving your head is not going to move the point of impact off of the dot. If the dot is on the target, you get a hit. And the parallax error may well be less than the accuracy limits of the ammo being used. So, the short explanation is: don’t sweat it.
If a manufacturer tells you their red-dot is parallax free, it probably is. And even if it isn’t, you aren’t going to miss your target because of it. At least not this side of 300 yards.
How red-dot sights work is also pretty much the same, with one big exception. Basically, a low-powered laser inside of the scope body reflects off of an internal plate that is partially-mirrored. The mirrored plate does not interfere with seeing through the scope. (But does explain why red-dot optics are often a bit dimmer than outside light.)
You see the dot. You aim with the dot. At close range you use binocular vision, let the dot “float” and get your hits. At distance you mentally focus, see only the view through the scope, and put your dot on your target.
No, this isn’t a combo you’d see in Iraq. But with an accurate rifle and a solid mount, a cheap scope serves until you’re practiced or can afford the better optics. Don’t be a slave to fashion.
The ability to look through an optic without seeing it is part of the “Bindon Aiming Concept.” The late Glyn Bindon figured out that a glowing dot against a black background was as good as transparent to the human brain when viewed with binocular vision. (Actually, our mind. Our brain is simply the mechanico-chemical processor of the thought processes of our sentience. But let’s not complicate things.)
By looking “through” an otherwise solid aiming device, you could shoot quickly and still be accurate. Even though you can look through most red-dot optics, your mind is following the same pattern that Glyn figured out.
Some competition shooters use this concept with magnifying optics. If they have a scope with a battery-powered or fiber optic enhanced aiming point, they will close the front scope cover on a magnifying scope.
The result is an opaque optic they can aim “through” using the Bindon Aiming Concept. They get both a magnifying optic when they want it, and a red-dot when they need it.
Across the country, ammunition prices are soaring and many guns are in short supply as weapons fly off the shelves at stores.
This is a telling economic indicator about consumer confidence as many Americans stock up for fear that the end is nigh. It's also a logical reaction to gun-owner fears that Democrats will implement far-reaching new gun controls.
There is cause for concern. Leaders in the Obama administration and Congress have stated that they plan to limit what guns Americans can buy and that guns should be registered.
Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said Feb. 25 that, “As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi poured fuel on the fire five weeks later by admitting that Democrats want to register guns. “It's a Democratic president, a Democratic House,” she said on ABC's “Good Morning America.” “We don't want to take their guns away. We want them registered.” Read more
Gun rights advocates have found a sweet spot in Democratic-dominated Washington, and they are using it to aggressively push legislation.
Their latest victory came yesterday when the House passed a bill that will allow people to bring concealed and loaded guns into national parks. Advocates won with the help of moderate Democrats.
Those Democrats, many from states in the South and Midwest, joined nearly all House Republicans to back yesterday's provision, which has passed in the Senate and could become law this week. The gun bill passed 279 to 147 in the House with the help of 105 Democratic votes; 145 Democrats opposed the bill.
The legislation was the latest defeat for gun-control advocates, who had expected more success with a Democratic president and Democratic majorities in both chambers of Congress.
The bill to grant the District of Columbia a voting member in the House remains stalled after Senate Republicans attached a provision to the legislation that effectively would repeal many of Washington's gun restrictions.
Yesterday's provision, originally sponsored by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), would allow gun owners to bring the weapons into national parks and wildlife refuges as long as they are permitted by the laws of the state in which the park is located. The bill codifies a change the Bush administration had sought in its final months, but a federal judge blocked the effort in March. Read more
Looking to go armed, but are stuck in the weeds as to what to arm yourself with? Here are 20 excellent concealed carry gun options that will keep you on the defensive.
You want to stay mobile but still have a solid shooting rest. You want to something that’s lightweight, durable and easy to use.
