by Dave Funk | Sep 7, 2023
As I mentioned on Tuesday of this week there is so much to cover, that I’ve split up this week’s President’s Message. Here is Part II of Legal News.
Bad Data = Bad Policy
Our third item this week is about our politicized Federal Bureau of Investigation. Dr. John Lott has just published an article at RealClearPolitics.com “FBI Data on Active Shooters is Misleading” His conclusion is that the FBI under-reports — by a factor of seven or eight times — the number of active shooters who are stopped by armed citizens.
“Unfortunately, the news media unquestioningly reports the FBI numbers. After 22-year-old Elisjsha Dicken used his legally-carried concealed handgun to stop what would have been a mass public shooting, an Associated Press headline noted: “Rare in US for an active shooter to be stopped by bystander.” A Washington Post headline proclaimed: “Rampage in Indiana a rare instance of armed civilian ending mass shooting.”
The CPRC’s numbers tell a different story: Out of 440 active shooter incidents from 2014 to 2022, an armed citizen stopped 157. We also found that the FBI had misidentified five cases, usually because the person who stopped the attack was incorrectly identified as a security guard.
We found these cases on a budget of just a few thousand dollars. Though we found that armed citizens had stopped eight times as many cases as the FBI claims, I make no assertion that we unearthed all of these stories. It is quite possible that the news media itself never covers many such incidents.”
The scary thing here is that bad data creates bad policy.
If the lawmakers in our country are fed garbage, they will produce garbage.
The last item this week is about a case out of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. It’s about a Center for Biodiversity vs. The US Forest Service case. Here is a first brush taken on the case by Constitutional Attorney Mark W. Smith in this twelve minute YouTube video:
“The Biden Administration’s Forest Service successfully fought off (with the help of the NRA, NSSF and others) a lawsuit seeking to require the regulations/ban of the use of lead-based ammunition in the Kaibab National Forest near the Grand Canyon. A big win for the 2nd Amendment and, in particular, hunters and sportsmen. Mark Smith Four Boxes Diner breaks it down in this video.”
This case is important in that parties are not liable for actions not taken by themselves (or in this case regulatory agencies) regarding the use of their products (or federal land) by third parties. In simpler terms, Ford can’t be sued by the victims of a drunk driver who was driving a Ford-produced vehicle, nor can a Federal Agency be forced to take action not specifically authorized by Congress.
These cases are all illustrations of why the Freedom Amendment in Iowa and the Bruen decision are so important to restoring what our founders saw as an inalienable right, the right to keep and bear arms, as enshrined in the 2th Amendment of our Bill of Rights.
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.
Dave Funk
President, IFC
by Dave Funk | Sep 5, 2023
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.
Dave Funk
President, IFC
by Katie Howard | Aug 22, 2023
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”
Ammoland Inc. Posted on August 19, 2023 by F Riehl, Editor in Chief
Opinion By Mark Oliva
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.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
About The National Shooting Sports Foundation
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, visit nssf.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.
Dave Funk
President, IFC
Recent Comments