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.
IFC Board Member, Richard Rogers with IFC’s first Educator Academy reflection. Special guest and student of the IFC Educator Academy, Nathan Tillotson.
Governor Newsom wants California Gun Control for all of America and to turn America into the mucked-up mess that California has become. Sometimes you read an article so good, all we can do is pass it along in its entirety. So here goes an editorial from AmmoLand.com:
“Gov. Newsom Wants To Export California Gun Control Across America”
Gun control politicians really are coming for America’s guns. There’s no denying it after California Gov. Newsom made his proposal for a 28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution official.
Gov. Newsom wants to export strict California gun control to the rest of America. He introduced a proposal for a Right to Safety – an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would strip Second Amendment rights from individuals and instead make the government the arbiter of which firearm “privileges” would be allowed. That’s a recipe for disaster. California is more than just the canary-in-the coal mine for what happens when gun control politicians run rampant on rights without proper checks against abuse of authority. The state is also a harbinger for what happens when law-abiding citizens are stripped of their ability to lawfully defend themselves and more protections are afforded to criminals than to their victims.
The proposal was introduced by California state Sen. Aisha Wahab and Assemblymember Reggie Jones-Sawyer as Senate Joint Resolution 7. The resolution “calls on the U.S. Congress to call a constitutional convention under Article V of the Constitution of the United States for the purpose of proposing a constitutional amendment.” The intent is to affirm that state and local governments can negate Second Amendment rights and write their own gun restrictions, creating a patchwork of varying gun control across the nation and impose a series of gun control restrictions that California already has in place which have proven impotent in stemming the tidal wave of crime.
California Crime
Just one day after dropping this brick on the feet of the American public, federal workers in San Francisco were instructed to work remotely due to rising crime. Traveling into the city has become so risky, that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a memo to employees stating, “In light of the conditions at the (Federal Building) we recommend employees … maximize the use of telework for the foreseeable future,” according to a New York Post report. That office is in the Nancy Pelosi Federal Building in San Francisco, named for the Speaker Emerita. The building is also home to her district staff and U.S. Department of Labor (DoL) and Department of Transportation (DoT). It is unclear if the other departments issued similar warnings.
The “stay-away” memo reflects the worsening crisis of lawlessness in San Francisco and across California. The City by the Bay has descended in a “promised land of milk and fentanyl” as crime and drugs run unabated. Grocery and drug stores are shuttering over thefts and Gumps, a luxury retailer that’s been in San Francisco for 166 years, warned that this might be their last year because of a “litany of destructive San Francisco strategies…” the retailer wrote to Gov. Newsom and San Francisco Mayor London Breed.
Gov. Newsom is unbothered by the downward spiral of the city where he was once mayor. He’s focused on his gun control 28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would codify national age-based gun bans by raising the minimum age to buy a firearm from 18 to 21. It would also mandate universal background checks, which are unworkable without a national firearm registry. That’s prohibited by federal law. Gov. Newsom’s proposed Constitutional amendment would also implement a waiting period for all firearm purchases, immediately delaying the ability of law-abiding Americans to exercise their rights. It would also ban ownership of Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs), or as California’s antigun politicians call them – “assault weapons.”
Here’s the kicker. Gov. Newsom honestly believes all this can be done “while leaving the Second Amendment intact”.
That’s dishonest – intellectually, politically or any other lens through which to view it. What Gov. Newsom is proposing – and California lawmakers are now considering sending to the U.S. Congress – is nothing short of gutting the Second Amendment.
California Control
These are flagrant civil rights violations. Denying rights to adults under the age of 21 relegates firearm ownership to a privilege – granted and rescinded at a government’s whim. The government would usurp the rights endowed by “our Creator” and assume that role. Gov. Newsom would codify a national age-based gun ban – downgrading the Second Amendment to a second-class right. Free speech, free exercise of religion and free press would be preserved for adults at 18 but not the right to keep and bear arms. It is impossible for Gov. Newsom to claim that his proposal leaves the Second Amendment intact.
Gov. Newsom would also institute a federal government watchlist for every firearm owner in America – simply for exercising a civil liberty. Universal background checks won’t work without a national firearm registry, which is prohibited under federal law. To follow a firearm from creation to destruction requires that the owner of that firearm be listed on a searchable national database. That’s also called a government watchlist. There would be no tolerance for watchlists of who attends a church, mosque or synagogue. Yet, Gov. Newsom doesn’t believe this requirement tramples rights.
Gov. Newsom believes that anyone wanting to exercise their right to lawfully purchase a firearm should be required to wait – without defining what that wait time is. California currently has a 10-day mandatory waiting period, despite the fact that every gun buyer in that state passes the same background checks and fills out the same Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF) Form 4473 as a gun buyer in Virginia. Using the same First Amendment analogy, there would be no national appetite for telling Americans they must wait 10 days to “cool off” before making a redress against their government.
Gov. Newsom’s proposed ban on MSRs – or so-called “assault weapons” isn’t a ban in future sales. It’s a ticket for the government to seize lawfully-owned and possessed rifles. The text of the proposal is a “prohibition on the private possession” of these firearms. There are more than 24.4 million MSRs in circulation since 1990. They are the most-popular selling centerfire rifle in America. Gov. Newsom would institute not just a ban on selling these rifles but would necessitate a government seizure of them as well.
California Dreaming
Critics say this isn’t about actual gun control but political posturing. Call it gun control “peacocking” for when Gov. Newsom could potentially throw his name into the ring as a possible 2024 Democratic presidential nominee. That is, if President Joe Biden is unable to compete for re-election.
“Newsom right now is trying to appear to be a presidential as possible for either a 2024 or 2028 run at the White House,” said Washington-based candidate advisor Erica Taylor to the California Globe. “This amendment thing, it is pretty obvious to be a ploy. You put out a proposed amendment like this for attention. You don’t put out a press release on it after every little thing you do with it.”
Just over a year ago, Gov. Newsom “unexpectedly” dropped by The White House while President Biden was out of the country. He later told media he wouldn’t challenge President Biden in 2024. However, his unplanned White House visit caught the attention of many as him measuring the drapes and envisioning himself occupying the Oval Office.
The notion of all the drama of a 28th Amendment being nothing more than show might not be out of the question. After all, it is not much more than window dressing that would never garner national support.
NSSF is the trade association for the firearm industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of thousands of manufacturers, distributors, firearm retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations, and publishers nationwide. For more information, visitnssf.org”
I wish I could say it as well! Remember to be Ready at All Times and never forget that those anti-freedom 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.
Once again, “the Cat’s away, so the mice will play!” Our illustrious President, Dave Funk is burning the candle at both ends working at the Iowa State Fair these days, so I’m on tap for this week’s President’s Message. You’re going to get a veritable stew, if you will — there’s a lot going down these days.
Laws for me but not for thee! Can you think of a current case where this applies? (Can you think of one where it Does NOT Apply?!)
First, in today’s news, Hunter Biden’s attorneys are arguing that the sweet diversion deal on the gun charge (you know, the one that DOESN’T send him to jail?), yeah…Anyway, his attorneys are arguing that even though the entire plea deal fell apart in court under the judge’s scrutiny in late July, the deal on the gun charge is separate and still binding. Really?
Specifically, a Fox News article reports:
Hunter Biden’s legal team said in a Sunday court filing that federal prosecutors reneged on a plea deal reached by both parties in June, and an agreement reached on a felony gun charge against the president’s son still stands.
The article goes on to report:
The filing says “the Defendant intends to abide by the terms of the Diversion Agreement that was executed at the July 26 hearing”…
Of course, this filing came two days after Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed David Weiss as special counsel to lead investigations into Hunter Biden. This is the same U.S. Attorney for Delaware who led a very slow and lax prosecution into the tax and gun charges eventually levied against Hunter Biden and who crafted the original “sweetheart deal” on both that came apart in court last month. (Funny, I seem to recall that when the judge clarified with the prosecutors that immunity from additional crimes would not apply to Hunter, HIS attorneys declared – in court – that the entire agreement was “null and void”). Here is a link to the full article, if you care to read it: Hunter Biden’s Attorneys Argue Gun Deal Still Stands
Growing up as a military brat, I learned ALL the acronyms — including RHIP (Rank Has Its Privileges)! Indeed.
Nothing to see here folks. Moving on…
School Districts Arming Staff & Employing More Security
In the aftermath of Uvalde, Texas conservative lawmakers have been pushing for more teachers to be armed. Although many teachers have voiced opposition, “the strategy is catching on with more and more isolated school districts, like Harrold, where the nearest officer is miles away”. In this article (now over one-year-old), Harrold Independent School District Arms Half of its Staff, this very remote small rural school district on the Texas/Oklahoma border has armed fully one-half of its staff to thwart any would-be active shooter threats. Cody Patton, Superintendent of Harrold Schools, says:
I have two daughters in this school…But basically every kid who walks in that door is my child, and I’m responsible for their safety and make sure they get home to mom and dad at the end of the day. So we want to give our employees whatever they need to protect our kids.
So how does the general public feel about this idea? In this 26-minute YouTube video from Bearing Arms, Cam & Co. Research Shows Armed Teachers Save Lives, Cam interviews Dr. J. Eric Dietz with the Homeland Security Institute at Purdue University about effective measures to save lives. Dr. Dietz says that “so much of what’s going on, isn’t accomplishing that”. Dr. Dietz says that, based on their research, an on-site school resource officer who responds without delay can reduce casualties by about 70%, but stated that when you add just 5% of teachers with concealed carry, you can have even better casualty reductions. He went on to say that if armed teachers were focused on just protecting the kids in their classrooms, they could further reduce casualties by another 5-10%. The video also discusses the reality of police response time, saying in most places in the country it ranges between 5-10 minutes, and sometimes more.
Public attitudes toward this idea are changing: A poll by the Trafalgar group polled 1,091 general election voters and found that 57.2% of the respondents said they felt a school shooting situation would be more dangerous without armed teachers. The video is worth listening to and the link is above.
Meanwhile, here in Iowa…IFC Educators Academy Begins!
IFC is launching its first-ever Educator Academy beginning this morning. For the next three days, selected scholarship applicants — all of whom are employed by an Iowa school — will be getting intensive training on Active Shooter Response. The premier trainers (Lt. Col. Ed Monk (U.S. Army Ret.) & owner Last Resort Firearms Training) and Adam Winch (Former Law Enforcement and Military Policy Officer with duties including SWAT, Quick Reaction Team, and trainer for Colorado National Guard) and John McLaughlin (Chair of Iowa Firearms Coalition, Active Self Protection and NRA certified firearms trainer) will review the statistics and realities of active shooter events, discuss in-depth what works (and what doesn’t) to counter an active shooter, put the participants through the paces with safe gun handling, dry fire practice, drawing from concealment and then on to live fire drills, then timed live fire drills. Participants must shoot qualifying scores to pass. In addition, there is a trauma medicine segment. This is not for the faint-hearted and I guarantee you the participants will be bone tired when this event concludes. Stay tuned next week for a recap!
Guess I better close. Dave will never turn me loose again! 🙂
Join the fight for our Second Amendment rights. Join IFC. We need every body! The threats are increasing every day.
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.
So how does the general public feel about this idea? In this 26-minute YouTube video from Bearing Arms, Cam & Co. 
IFC is launching its first-ever Educator Academy beginning this morning. For the next three days, selected scholarship applicants — all of whom are employed by an Iowa school — will be getting intensive training on Active Shooter Response. The premier trainers (Lt. Col. Ed Monk (U.S. Army Ret.) & owner Last Resort Firearms Training) and Adam Winch (Former Law Enforcement and Military Policy Officer with duties including SWAT, Quick Reaction Team, and trainer for Colorado National Guard) and John McLaughlin (Chair of Iowa Firearms Coalition, Active Self Protection and NRA certified firearms trainer) will review the statistics and realities of active shooter events, discuss in-depth what works (and what doesn’t) to counter an active shooter, put the participants through the paces with safe gun handling, dry fire practice, drawing from concealment and then on to live fire drills, then timed live fire drills. Participants must shoot qualifying scores to pass. In addition, there is a trauma medicine segment. This is not for the faint-hearted and I guarantee you the participants will be bone tired when this event concludes. Stay tuned next week for a recap!
Recent Comments