So what rifle is that in the IFC logo you ask? I’ve been asked that question several times through the years, again just recently, but I’ll tell you that I did not have anything to do with our logo. The shotgun is pretty obvious, along with the Glock pistol. But unless you’re a student of Col. Jeff Cooper, you might not recognize the rifle. Those asking the question were not.
It’s a Steyr Scout, similar to one I took on my first hunt to Africa. I wrote about this gun, and Col. Cooper’s Scout Rifle concept back in 2018 for ClashDaily.com.
Here is an expert of that article;
“If You Absolutely, Positively Must Have ‘Just One Rifle’ for Personal Protection …
So every good American should already own at least one AR15, also known as the Modern Sporting Rifle, or MSR. But did you know there’s another rifle you should own?
The Scout Rifle “In The Books” ~
Retired Marine Colonel Jeff Cooper, arguably the Father of the Modern Technique of the Pistol, who passed away several years ago, not only wrote and taught extensively about handguns, but he also spent a significant amount of time studying what would make a good all-around rifle for a lone rifleman, or as he termed, “The Scout”. That rifle, in his mind, was best personified by what Col. Cooper called: The Scout Rifle. One of my favorite quotes of Col. Cooper was:
“Pick up a rifle and you change instantly from a subject to a citizen.”
Very few people could explain the true historical significance of the rifle, or how to employ it, as well as Col. Cooper did. Recently, another well-known gun writer by the name of Richard Mann wrote an excellent book about Col. Cooper’s Scout Rifle concept. I highly suggest you buy a copy of Mr. Mann’s book THE SCOUT RIFLE STUDY.
To best sum up Mr. Mann’s book and why the Scout Rifle is such a great tool, I’ll quote him here:
So, I’ll leave the discussion with this. Imagine that tomorrow you must go on a very long walk, to an unknown destination, and you can take one rifle with you. Sometime before that walk is over – possibly more than once – it’s a guarantee you’ll very much need to shoot something with that rifle. You’ll not know when, you’ll not know what you’ll have to shoot. You’ll not know the distance or conditions of the shot. But you will know anything less than a kill zone hit with substantial power, will not be good for you…
From 41,000 feet in the air, I have my rifle picked out and already in my gun safe; it will be my Blaser R93 Tracker in 308 Winchester. Read Richard Mann’s book and decide what rifle you need. My guess is that you will find his and Col. Cooper’s advice is very informative, and you may very well buy yourself a Scout Rifle.”
One of the things I had to let go of when I became President of IFC was writing that weekly column for ClashDaily.com. The column was about current events and I loved writing it.
A rifle should be part of your Be Ready at All Times plan, be it a Scout, General Purpose rifle, or a modern sporting rifle. Never forget that those gun control dangerous quacks are playing a long game but so are we at IFC. Help us by joining or renewing your IFC membership here today.
Shoot Straight, Speak The Truth, and Never Surrender Our Liberties.
This week there is so much to cover, that I’ve split it into Part I of Legal News, and later this week (on Thursday) we will publish Part II.
Knife-weilding Attacker Shot – Case Closed
First up, news out of Polk County, Iowa. Finally, the Polk County Attorney announced a decision that took far longer than it should have regarding 62-year-old Steven Miller, who shot a knife-wielding attacker who was threatening a group of people. To quote one of the victims:
“He saved our lives. We would have been stabbed if he wouldn’t have kept his line of sight with that man to make sure that we did not get hurt,” said Shelby Meier, the wife of the alleged shooter.…
“Horrific. I am in shock. Like how everything went down. Not something I expected,” said Katelyn Moredock, the wife of the second shooting victim who will survive.
Meier and Moredock allege that Miller was being aggressive from Moredock’s room, attacking Moredock’s husband. That is when Meier said her husband went into the room and that is when Miller grabbed a knife. From there the ladies described being chased with the blade into the apartment hallway, fearing for their lives, saying the shooter had no choice.
“He did have his gun raised and told him ‘stop please, please don’t do this, please stop’, and he just charged at him like a wild animal,” said Meier. “…He just kept coming. He wouldn’t stop even the first shot he still stayed standing.”
The ladies would go on to say that the alleged shooter helped Moredock’s husband by providing first aid until medics arrived.”
This is another of many examples of defensive firearms use that happen every day in the United States. Despite claims to the contrary by the anti-gun dangerous quacks of the left, lawful gun owners are not vigilante wannabees, but are responsible citizens who, for the most part, just want to be left alone.
ATF vs John Corey Fraser
Up next: We have all watched the Department of Justice run out the clock on the Hunter/Joe Biden investigation by slow-walking looking into corruption until the statute of limitations had run out. Another case of trying to slow walk, or time-out a case, is before US Fourth District Circuit Judge Robert E. Payne. The DOJ was trying to moot a claim by then nineteen-year-old Virginian, John Corey Fraser. that as a nineteen-year-old he was prohibited from making a handgun purchase as unconstitutional–by delaying the case until Fraser turned twenty-one.
Thankfully, Judge Payne prevented the DOJ from killing the case, first by adding Fraser’s younger brother as an additional plaintiff and then by granting Class Action status:
“By infringing upon the Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights, the challenged statutory and regulatory provisions inflicted an irreparable injury on Plaintiffs. “[I]t is well-established that ‘(t]he loss of First Amendment freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury.’” Legend Night Club v. Miller, 637 F.3d 291, 302 (4th Cir. 2011) (quoting Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347, 373 (1976))}. The same holds true for Second Amendment freedoms. After all, the Second Amendment “is not a second-class right.” New York State Rifle & Pistol Assoc., Inc. Bruen, 142 S.Ct. 2111, 2156 (2022) (quotation marks and citation omitted). As the Supreme Court explained in Bruen, because “[t]he Second Amendment is the very product of an interest balancing by the people. . . it surely elevates above all other interests the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms for self- defense.”
Contrary to the Government’s view,’ it does not matter that, one day, Plaintiffs will age out of the prohibited category. Since they turned 18, and at this moment and this point in their lives, their constitutional rights have been, and continue to be, denied by the Government’s conduct in enforcing the challenged statutory and regulatory regime. That establishes that the Plaintiffs have suffered an “irreparable injury.”
Nor is the irreparability of the constitutional injury eliminated because, as the Government argues, the Plaintiffs and class members “may lawfully obtain handguns as a gift from their parents.” Nothing in the Second Amendment limits the Plaintiffs’ exercise of their constitutional rights to what a third-party, by grace, may choose (or not) to do to help Plaintiffs exercise that right (here the right to purchase that which the Second Amendment entitles them to purchase on their own).”
Although the nationwide injunction was issued in the Fraser case it has been stayed until the DOJ has time to appeal to the Fifth Circuit the ruling. This is an important case from a legal protection perspective. I’ll be watching it closely to keep you informed.
These cases are all illustrations of why the Freedom Amendment in Iowa and the Bruen Case are so important to restoring what our founders saw as an inalienable right, the right to keep and bear arms as enshrined in the 2nd Amendment of our Bill of Rights.
STAY TUNED FOR PART II OF THIS WEEK’S LEGAL NEWS — CHECK BACK ON THURSDAY!
Stay Ready at All Times and never forget that those gun control dangerous quacks are playing a long game but so are we at IFC. Help us by joining or renewing your IFC membership here today.
Shoot Straight, Speak The Truth, and Never Surrender Our Liberties.
Are the lower Federal Courts going rogue against SCOTUS’s Bruen decision? To answer that question we have to look at how case law is developed in America. We all know that Congress writes legislation, and the President either vetoes or signs it into law. After that, various administrative agencies write rules and regulations, some with criminal penalties and some with civil penalties.
After a party challenges or enforces that law, and once it’s been to trial, appeals can be brought based upon the outcome of the trial (either civil or criminal). That’s an overly simplified explanation on how to develop case law.
Recently voters in Oregon passed Ballot Measure 114 that outlawed “large capacity magazines” and required gun registration. That law has been challenged in federal court and a bench trial was held by the U.S. District Court. Judge Karin Immergu released her findings on July 14th that the new state law is constitutional.
Judge Immergu “weighed” the evidence she heard and clearly did not follow the guidance SCOTUS set down in Bruen. Her reasoning is clearly flawed, and the best analysis I have seen on the ruling so far was by RedState.com author JimThompson. I’ll quote a large section here because it’s so well written:
“In short, this court admitted some evidence but dismissed other evidence, such as:
“…between 1990 and 2018, there were 304.3 million detachable magazines in circulation in the United States.” Of those, “approximately 160 million had a capacity of eleven rounds or greater.” She found that that evidence “was entitled to little weight” (page 24). Instead, she found the testimony of an expert on self-defense use to be compelling. That evidence was that LCM is rarely used in self-defense and therefore were not in “common use.”
That is a stunning finding. It means that any gun or accessory not typically used in self-defense could be seen as not meeting the “common use” test and therefore could be banned.
This seems in conflict with what Justice Kavanaugh wrote in his Hellerdissent (before he was a sitting SCOTUS Justice).
“There is no meaningful or persuasive constitutional distinction between semi-automatic handguns and semi-automatic rifles. Semi-automatic rifles, like semi-automatic handguns, have not traditionally been banned and are in common use by law-abiding citizens for self-defense in the home, hunting, and other lawful uses. Moreover, semi-automatic handguns are used in connection with violent crimes far more than semi-automatic rifles are. It follows from Heller‘s protection of semi-automatic handguns that semi-automatic rifles are also constitutionally protected and that D.C.’s ban on them is unconstitutional.”
And in the remanded matter ofNew York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the Supreme Court was not inclined to side with what seemed to be laws restricting the right to keep and bear arms — like Oregon’s Measure 114. Judge Immergu frequently cherry-picked from Bruen to satisfy her conclusions.
Also of note, current LCM owners are “exempt” inasmuch as they can keep what they already own. If there is a compelling “public safety” concern because most mass shooters used LCMs, and they can cause more injury and death, why then are current owners not ordered to turn in their LCMs? If an LCM is “more” dangerous than a 10-round capacity magazine, and is an existential public safety threat by just existing, then it is a danger now, not just in the future. Oregon didn’t attempt to confiscate LCMs because the state knew that such a measure would go down in flames. But that still leaves me wondering — if something is “dangerous,” how can the state justify not asking for all LCMs to be turned in?
Magazine capacity is highly related to the lethality of a weapon, because capacity is what determines the number of shots that can be fired within a given time without having to pause to reload. Tr. 6/6/2023 513:5–10. State laws banning LCMs reduce the incidents of mass shootings between 48 to 72 percent and decrease the number of fatalities that occur in these mass shootings by 37 to 75 percent. Tr. 6/6/2023 506:14–19. Defendants presented credible evidence at trial demonstrating that the relationship between restrictions on LCMs and reductions in mass shootings is so pronounced that it is a causal relationship, meaning that the restrictions were at least partly responsible for the reductions. Tr. 6/6/2023 507:20–508:1
I am not convinced that Judge Immergu’s reasoning is sound and suspect it will not hold up on appeal. It seems that ignoring that millions of LCMs are owned (and never used in mass shootings) is a fatal flaw in her ruling. Her finding that although they are owned by millions not typically used in self-defense seems like a pre-conceived conclusion in search of facts to support it.
California, Hawaii, Washington, and now Oregon have passed laws restricting LCMs–even though these laws, like Measure 114, will eventually make their way to SCOTUS and, in my opinion, will be found unconstitutional.
Be careful what you ask for, Oregon. It may come back to bite you.
2024 Matters – Vote Thoughtfully!
Jim’s excellent analysis leaves out one important consideration. The left relies on activist judges to interpret our Constitution the way they want it. They do this because they cannot win in the court of public opinion or through the normal legislative process. Oregon is in the 9th Judicial District, the most liberal of all districts. My guess is that this is the first of many “set up” cases needed to strike down Bruen in a future more liberal SCOTUS. This is one reason that Presidential elections are so important. Who controls the White House controls the future of the judiciary. Let’s not fall for the next shiny thing come 2024 and ensure a pro-gun and pro-constitutionalist Presidential nominee comes out of the Iowa Caucus a winner and gets elected next year.
The anti-freedom dangerous quacks are playing a long game but so are we. Help us by joining or renewing your IFC membership here today.
Shoot Straight, Speak The Truth, and Never Surrender Our Liberties.
Inflation hits all of us. Despite Biden telling us it’s transitory, we all know every day it’s not. Many of those of us who read George Orwell’s classic book on big government “1984” saw it as a warning. The leftist in America led by “Divider-in-Chief” Joe Biden see it as a road map to total one-party control. They like the wealth that capitalism provides but still want total power over our everyday lives.
Unfortunately, even we at IFC are stuck living with its effects. As a result, we have to raise membership dues for the first time in several years.
Starting September 1st of this year Membership dues will be as follows:
Annual $45 American Hero $35 Life $750
That’s the bad news. The good news is we are making many membership improvements that these increases will help fund, including behind-the-scenes digital content efforts, additions to our Trusted Partners Discounts Program, and expansion of the Iowa Outdoor Alliance Program. Of course, the underlying drive here is to add value to each person’s membership.
As always, the best thing you can do is join or renew your IFC membership to continue to support this all-volunteer effort to secure your 2nd Amendment Rights.
Shoot Straight, Speak The Truth, and Never Surrender Our Liberties.
Interesting legal developments in this post-BRUEN era. The first one is a real surprise, the second one maybe not so much in light of the insults from the Left toward the U.S. Supreme Court.
U.S. District Judge Robin L. Rosenberg sentenced a Florida man to fifteen months in Federal Prison for sending threatening Tweets to Colorado U.S. Congresswoman in 2021. Matthew Lee Comiskey sent five threatening tweets to Rep. Lauren Boebert mentioning firearms and encouraging others to do her harm. Comiskey originally faced five counts of making an interstate threat but pleaded guilty last year to one count. In my previous life as a corporate pilot, I had the pleasure of meeting Rep. Boebert and dining at Shooter’s Grill, her Rifle, Colorado restaurant where nearly every member of the staff is armed.
Not surprisingly the anti-gun, and now-convicted felon’s mother, told the court that her son’s actions were “out of character”. Sure they were. Thanks to Ammoland.com for bringing this story to our attention.
In another news story this week, with a nine-to-zero decision, SCOTUS eases prison sentences for some gun crimes. It has to do with concurrent vs consecutive sentences. But the interesting thing in the ruling was that the Court returned to the Judiciary some discretion in sentencing. You might be wondering why it’s important. It appears to be another step toward reigning in federal agencies, limiting them to only exercising the power Congress has allocated them.
Finally this week, we are getting more information about twenty (yes, twenty!), IRS Agents raiding a gun store in Montana, seizing AFT 4473 forms as part of an alleged tax case. We had something similar happen years ago in Des Moines, Iowa. The gun dealer here was told by the IRS that his business was far more profitable based on the number of firearms sales, despite an audit showing that it was not. (Clearly, federal employees with no business experience assume that the markup on new guns is the amount between the jobber wholesale price and MSRP, not some other number as dictated by the local market). He did not have the money to fight the IRS assessment, despite them being sure he had millions in an unidentified account somewhere. But don’t worry, 87,000 new IRS agents won’t be bothering everyday Americans. Biden says they are only going after the super-rich.
Help IFC continue to fight the good fight by joining or renewing your membership today.
Shoot Straight, Speak The Truth, and Never Surrender Our Liberties.
Sign up now for our e-mail alert list to stay plugged into what's going on with your 2A rights here in Iowa.
IFC will never sell, rent or share your personal information, including your e-mail address, with any third parties for any purposes without your express permission. IFC may share your personal information for the purpose of delivering our e-mail to you or as required by law.
Recent Comments