• 10 years ago the gov’t went door-to-door confiscating guns – Let’s keep it from happening again.

    September 9, 2015
    Proof that warrant-less door-to-door gun confiscation does actually occur in America.

    Warrant-less gun confiscation can and does happen. Here’s proof from not that long ago.

    10 year anniversary

    It’s been a decade since Hurricane Katrina tore through the Gulf Coast. The destruction that occurred was truly catastrophic. What’s worse the storm not only destroyed homes and businesses, but in the days that followed it also brought out some of the worst in our society.

    Looters. Thieves. Violent attacks.

    A near breakdown of society followed in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Those that chose to wait out the storm were in many cases left to fend for themselves as law enforcement had either evacuated or were stretched so thin that they could not quickly respond to calls for help.

    Targeting gun owners

    Many of the Katrina holdouts were nothing more that law-abiding private citizens simply trying to save their life’s belongings. Both from the hurricane, but also from the dregs of society looking to loot and pillage the storm ravaged community of New Orleans.

    Yet despite this the New Orleans police administrators decided to go door-to-door targeting gun owners, confiscating their weapons at a time when they were needed most. On September 8th New Orleans Police Superintendent Eddie Compass declared “No one will be able to be armed… Guns will be taken. Only law enforcement will be allowed to have guns.” Thus began the city-wide warrant-less confiscation operation carried out by the New Orleans Police Department, the U.S. Army National Guard, and Deputy U.S. Marshals.

    This trampling on the Second and Fourth Amendments didn’t make many headlines, but it did get covered by ABC news. See a copy of their story embedded below.

    Deny. Deny. Deny.

    The confiscations continued for nearly two weeks. It took a lawsuit filed by the National Rifle Association, the Second Amendment Foundation and the Gun Owners of America to finally stop the warrant-less door-to-door firearms confiscation.

    Even after a restraining order was filed the City of New Orleans continually denied that it ever confiscated any firearms. It took more than five months of legal proceedings to get the city to even admit that it wrongfully taken more than 1,000 privately owned firearms. Even after it admitting they took the weapons it took the City of New Orleans more than years and several lengthy rounds of legal action to return many of the firearms to their rightful owners.

    Lessons learned & work to be done

    Civil rights minded and freedom loving Louisiana legislators quickly recognized they had to act to keep this gross disregard for the Bill of Rights from happening again. In early June of 2006 HB760 was signed into Louisiana law. The measure prohibited confiscation of firearms in a state of emergency, unless the seizure is pursuant to the investigation of a crime, or if the seizure is necessary to prevent immediate harm to the officer or another individual.

    21 other states quickly passed their own versions. Unfortunately Iowa was not among them.

    The Iowa Firearms Coalition is working to guarantee all Iowa’s civil rights are protected during a state of emergency. In 2015 we filed HF45. This bill would prevent the confiscation of any lawfully owned private firearms and ammunition during a state of emergency in the state of Iowa. It would go even further than the Louisiana bill by making sure gun shops and sporting goods stores that sell firearms and ammunition are not targeted by the government and forced to close while other businesses remain open. This would help ensure that during times of emergency Iowans would not only have a means to protect themselves, but also a way to re-stock if need be.

    Sadly this bill did not gain any traction during the 2015 legislative session. But expect to see it re-introduced in 2016 and every year that follows until we get this vital bill signed into law.

    We firmly believe the right to bear arms does not disappear when the weather gets rough or during any other form of disaster. In fact that’s often when the Second Amendment is needed most. If you agree with us please consider hitting the “Donate” button to support to our cause, or better yet become a member.



    Iowa Firearms Coalition is an entirely volunteer, grassroots, 2nd Amendment advocacy group. Responsible for bringing uniformity to Iowa’s Concealed Weapons Permitting process, IFC’s members work to protect and enhance 2nd Amendment rights in Iowa. An affiliate of the National Rifle Association, the IFC actively seeks to foster and promote the shooting sports. Sign up for our email list for the latest on 2nd Amendment issues in Iowa. You can support our work by becoming a member, or making a donation.

  • 4 Common Myths About the NRA…Busted!

    December 12, 2014



    Originally written by Daniel T. McElrath for the NRA’s Family Insights

    Myth 1: The NRA represents gun manufacturers.

    One of the most pervasive myths about NRA is that it represents firearm manufacturers. It doesn’t. It represents firearm owners. Firearm manufacturers are represented by the National Shooting Sports Foundation. Yes, manufacturers often contribute money to the Association or raffle/contest prizes to one of its many programs, but NRA—at its heart—is a non-profit civil rights organization. As for firearms manufacturers, their size and cash reserves are grossly overestimated by those who oppose gun rights. A firearm is an extremely durable product with a very long service life, and is a big-ticket item for most consumers, limiting sales. Unless a firearm manufacturer is also a defense or law-enforcement contractor with domestic and/or foreign government contracts, it is typically a small operation; certainly nowhere near being a Fortune 500 company.

    Myth 2: The NRA’s power rests in how much money it gives out to candidates.

    Many gun-control advocates seem to have trouble believing that someone would disagree with them on a subject like gun control and that, if someone does, it must be the result of greed. The truth is that the NRA’s power comes not from distributing cash, but from producing votes. NRA members are politically informed and engaged, and vote in extremely high numbers. Moreover, many are single-issue voters who have arrived at the understanding that their opinions on any other subject are potentially moot without the Second Amendment backing them up.

    Myth 3: The NRA’s influence is grossly disproportionate to its membership numbers.

    This miscalculation is based on the actual number of paid NRA memberships. It fails to consider the practical realities of non-profit advocacy. Not every family can afford separate memberships for each member of the family. Many households have only one “official” member, but everyone in the home reads the NRA Official Journal and supports the Association in spirit. During times of economic hardship, organization memberships are often viewed as a luxury and are voluntarily suspended by annual members until things improve. Further, when the political situation is “good” for gun owners (for example, when there is a pro-gun administration in Washington), gun owners feel safe and often allow their memberships to lapse. And, of course, some people just aren’t “joiners.” They believe in the Right to Keep and Bear Arms but, for whatever reason, don’t formally join advocacy organizations, though they vote in support of the Second Amendment. So, while NRA may have “only” 5 million members, each of those represents many like-minded folks who turn out come Election Day and cast votes in preservation of their rights.

    Myth 4: Polls show that most Americans disagree with NRA and want more gun control.

    The mainstream press often cites polls showing Americans support gun control. Don’t believe them. First of all, many of these polls are conducted immediately following highly publicized mass shootings, when people respond emotionally. Also, you have to know how the poll was conducted and how questions were posed. If asked, simply “Are you in favor of gun control?” a person on the street may say yes. However, if you pose the question “Do you favor more gun control legislation or the enforcement of existing laws?” that same person may favor the latter.

    We also must consider whether we really want Constitutional rights determined via polling. The Bill of Rights protects the individual from “the tyranny of the majority.” The Second Amendment doesn’t say “Good poll numbers being essential to good public policy, the right of the people … .” Are we forbidden from practicing a certain religion because it’s not trending well? Do we give up the right to read a good book because it’s fallen into disfavor among the majority?
    Join the NRA – $10 off annual memberships

    Iowa Firearms Coalition is an entirely volunteer, grassroots, 2nd Amendment advocacy group. Responsible for bringing uniformity to Iowa’s Concealed Weapons Permitting process, IFC’s members work to protect and enhance 2nd Amendment rights in Iowa. An affiliate of the National Rifle Association, the IFC actively seeks to foster and promote the shooting sports. Sign up for our email list for the latest on 2nd Amendment issues in Iowa. You can support our work by becoming a member, or making a donation.

  • In his own words: Bruce Braley calling for more gun regulation

    October 13, 2014

    Bruce Braley, a “strong supporter” of the 2nd Amendment wants more regulation. By this point it should be old news that Braley, a trial lawyer by trade, favors more regulation. If this ticks you off as much as it ticks us off, join us in our fight to oust Braley and the rest of his anti-gun comrades on November 4th.




    I’m a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. But the Second Amendment is like the other amendments in the Bill of Rights, it’s a balance between individual liberty and the public good. And that’s why it starts out in order to have a well-regulated militia. So we want to make sure that we’re providing that proper balance. And I think that there’s a big difference between where we stand on these issues. Senator Ernst doesn’t think you should even have to go to a permit process to carry a concealed weapon and you should be able to take him to a bar or church. And I think that’s wrong.”


    Special thanks to Jan Mickelson for sharing this video.