A federal judge has temporarily blocked a voter-approved California law that would have forced gun owners to get rid of high-capacity ammunition magazines by this Saturday.
U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez, who is based in San Diego, issued a preliminary injunction Thursday that found the law was likely unconstitutional because it prevented people from using firearms that employed “whatever common magazine size he or she judges best suits the situation.” The law would have barred people from possessing magazines containing more than 10 bullets.
“The State of California’s desire to criminalize simple possession of a firearm magazine able to hold more than 10 rounds is precisely the type of policy choice that the Constitution takes off the table,” the injunction read.
Benitez added that “a final decision will take too long to offer relief, and because the statute will soon visit irrevocable harm on Plaintiffs and all those similarly situated a state-wide preliminary injunction is necessary and justified to maintain the status quo.”
The judge granted the request of attorneys from the National Rifle Association-affiliated California Rifle & Pistol Association to temporarily block the law.
In the days leading up to the ban, some California gun owners, pro-gun sheriffs and sellers have been reluctant to give up their magazines. Some gun owners have previously said that they were hoping pending court challenges would block the ban.
“We’re not going to be knocking on anybody’s door looking for them,” said Shasta County Sheriff Tom Bosenko in an earlier interview with The Bee. “We’re essentially making law-abiding citizens into criminals with this new law.”
The ban is part of Proposition 63, approved with 63 percent of votes in November, that required background checks for people buying ammunition and instituted other firearms restrictions.
In a statement, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said that the proposition aims to prevent further mass shootings by those who own high-capacity magazines.
“Proposition 63 was overwhelmingly approved by voters to increase public safety and enhance security in a sensible and constitutional way,” Becerra said in the statement. “Restricting large capacity magazines and preventing them from ending up in the wrong hands is critical for the well-being of our communities.”
To get rid of magazines in compliance with the approved law, California gun owners would have been allowed to move them out of state, sell them to a licensed dealer, destroy them or hand them over to law enforcement.
California’s draconian new gun laws will require residents of the Golden state to register their “assault weapons” with the state (which they will have to pay to do of course) by the end of the year. But thanks to capitalism and the free market, gun makers have already figured out workarounds.
One of the new laws labels an “assault weapon” as any gun that doesn’t have a fixed magazine. So Franklin Armory owner Jay Jacobson invented “Drop in Fixed Magazine” or DFM. Jacobson had demonstrated his patented new device which is designed to get around the state’s new “assault weapons” law. The new law clamps down on a previous device known as a bullet button to Californians. The bullet button was a workaround for an earlier ban on rifles with detachable and quickly reloadable ammunition magazines. The DFM invention is actually ingenious for those stuck in the Golden state. The magazine is fixed from the bottom as the law requires; but it can come out the top, technically legal because it involves partially disassembling the gun. It’s a workaround that still allows shooters to quickly reload with very little delay.
If curious as to how the magazine works, watch the below video.
“Basically if it’s not written that you can’t do it, it should be good to go. So it’s not a loophole, it’s just the legislature hasn’t covered that yet,” said Jacobson. And the good news is that that is not the only new product on the market for Californians.
CBS News San Francisco says they have found at least six new inventions that work around the new law. One is the AR Maglock, which allows California AR-15 owners to comply with existing fixed magazine laws, thus avoiding Department of Justice registration. The AR MAGLOCK engages the magazine so it stays “fixed” in the firearm until the action is disassembled, complying with California SB 880 & AB 1135, and Department of Justice regulations.
Other inventions to get around the registration of your gun are the Patriot Mag Release, the MA Loader, and the Bear Flag Defense. They are all designed to allow bullet button gun owners to avoid registering, yet still, have fast reloading weapons. Many anti-gun hoplophobes reside in California, and they are not happy that the private market has found workarounds. But Jacobson says it will always be this way, and the market is going to provide.
“Criminals don’t care. So the only people that are affected by this are law abiding Californians that are trying to do the right thing. The legislature has tried several times to basically find ways to prevent the AR-15 from entering California. And the reality is that whether it’s Franklin Armory or my peers in the industry, there’s always going to be a way to make the firearm legal in California, and they are just grasping at straws,” said Jacobson.
The Department of Justice won’t say whether any of these devices are legal until after it issues formal regulations on how to implement the new assault weapons ban, a process that is six months behind schedule because a government is inefficient at everything. They can’t seem to even roll out a ban on an item they hate with the mass majority of the state’s voters behind them. But the private market is well ahead of these new draconian laws.
After the maddening decision in the Philando Castile case, many gun owners are disturbed and the NRA they trusted for so long and paid to protect their rights is silent. Where are the lobbyists? Afterall, Castile was exercising his rights to keep and bear arms per the second amendment, yet he lost his life to a cop.
It’s often argued that the American murder rate is high because guns are more available here than in other countries. After a tragedy like the massacre at Columbine High School, anyone could feel that it is too easy for Americans to get their hands on weapons. But nobody has a good solution. This is another issue where you see the extremes of the two existing major parties. Democrats want to confiscate all guns, which is a dumb idea because only the law-abiding citizens would turn in their guns and the bad guys would be the only ones left armed. The Republicans walk the NRA line and refuse even limited restrictions. I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I also support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within seventy-two hours if a potential gun owner has a record. –Donald Trump in his book, The America We Deserve
The NRA could have throw support behind any of the libertarian candidates (Gary Johnson won the nomination); all of whom had more credibility and trustworthiness when it comes to the protection of your rights. Or, they could have said “none of these candidates will protect gun rights, so we won’t endorse,” but they didn’t. So it honestly makes sense that they are silent now when gun owners want a response.
Two days after Philando Castile’s July 6 slaying, the group issued a cautious statement that did not name Castile and declined further comment “while the investigation is ongoing.” Even after the disastrous decision (the endorsement of Donald Trump), those who are still members seem to want a response from the organization about the killing of a fellow gun owner.
The NRA’s actions spoke when they endorsed Trump, far as former NRA members are concerned. Now, their silence and refusal to stand on Castile’s side against the growing power of the government will hopefully be the nail in their coffin. Philando Castile had the right to keep and bear arms just like the rest of us. He isn’t some second class citizen just because it was a cop who took his life.
“I wasn’t reaching for it,” Castile moaned in his last words after Yanez shot him seven times, killing him in front of his child. The family of Castile, 32, later furnished his permit to carry a firearm, issued June 4, 2015, by the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office.
What’s more, Castile; who had no serious criminal record; appeared to have gone above and beyond in informing the officer about his gun. Under Minnesota law, permitted firearm carriers aren’t required to disclose them during traffic stops unless asked, Bryan Strawser of the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus noted to the Star-Tribune last year. Would Castile’s silence, like the NRA’s, have saved his life?
This case is a perfect opportunity for gun owners to stand up and support each other, but they just can’t seem to do it. It’s dividing those who want freedom, and those who fear it. This is cognitive dissonance at it’s finest. It’s making some gun owners back the “thin blue line,” yet that mentality is warring with their gun rights, and on a visceral level, they know this.
(Dean Weingarten, Gun Watch) The NICS checks for April, 2017 were 2,045,564. That is the second highest number of NICS checks for any April. The highest was in 2016, with 2,145,865. The third highest April was in 2014, with 1,742,946. Both of those were driven by fear of strong gun control measures that might be passed by President Obama.
The Trump era of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) checks has finished its first four months.
It was anticipated that firearm sales and NICS checks would drop with a Trump presidency. It has not happened as expected.
NICS checks remain unexpectedly strong under President Trump. January 2017 NICS were 80% of January 2016 NICS. February 2017 NICS were 85% of 2016 numbers. March of 2017 is very close to previous records. It is over 96% of the record set in 2016, and just short of 98% of March, 2014. April, 2017 checks are over 95% of those for 2016, and are more than 17% higher than the next highest April, in 2014.
The unwillingness to accept a Trump Presidency by the left, combined with fear that a Trump Presidency could be overthrown by a media coup, could be a motivation for higher firearm sales. The fear of violence from the Left, as shown in Berkley, Portland, the District of Columbia, and San Francisco.
Structural increases in the number of firearms owners may have increased the base level of sales.
There has been a gradual increase in the use of NICS for things other than firearm sales. The increases are for such transactions as the sales of suppressors/silencer, gun carry permits, and even checks on school teachers. There are indications that the actual number of firearm sales have exceeded those of April, 2016.
Kentucky has contributed to the number by running NICS checks on every concealed carry permit holder every month. Kentucky performs nearly three million checks every year.
The average ratio, over 15 years, is a little less than .6 NICS checks for each firearm added to the private stock.
If that ratio holds true, over 5 million guns were added to the private stock in the first four months of 2017.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation has attempted to adjust for this by eliminating checks done for carry permits from the overall NICS checks. According to their calculations, the highest level of firearm sales in March occurred in 2013, with 2017 being the next highest.
It is clear that the expected drop in firearms sales has been minimal. Firearm sales may actually have risen compared to 2016.
by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.
The number of gun-related background checks in April remained near record levels, FBI statistics released on Monday show.
The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) ran 2,045,564 gun-related checks in April. That represents a decrease of about a hundred thousand checks from the all-time record for the month of April set in 2016. It also is a drop of almost four hundred thousand from March as the gun industry enters its seasonal low period.
An analysis of the raw NICS numbers from the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) shows that sales may actually be higher than last April. The group’s analysis strips out NICS checks that are conducted for gun-carry permits or other checks that aren’t related to sales. The analysis found that 1,111,596 checks were related to sales, a small increase from the same period last year.
“The April 2017 NSSF-adjusted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is an increase of 0.04 percent compared to the April 2016 NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 1,111,205,” the NSSF said in a release.
The industry group said its analysis shows that sales aren’t in a slump, as many in the media have proclaimed in recent months.
“Anyone looking to proclaim a continuing sales slump would be wrong based on the best number we have as a proxy for firearms sales for April 2017 compared to April 2016,” Mike Bazinet, a NSSF spokesman, told the Washington Free Beacon.
Sales in the first two months of 2017 were significantly slower than the record-setting pace of 2016, but NSSF says sales in March and April have matched or exceeded that pace.
Metrics for measuring gun sales in the United States remain limited. While NICS checks are required for many gun sales, most states do not require NICS checks on sales between private individuals on the used firearm market. Other factors can affect the raw numbers reported by the FBI, like transactions of multiple guns using a single NICS check or transactions in states that accept proof of a gun-carry permit in place of a NICS check.
“These statistics represent the number of firearm background checks initiated through the NICS,” the FBI noted in its monthly background check report. “They do not represent the number of firearms sold. Based on varying state laws and purchase scenarios, a one-to-one correlation cannot be made between a firearm background check and a firearm sale.”
Still, NICS checks remain one of the best gauges for gun sales as they are required on all sales of new guns and nearly all sales involving licensed gun dealers.
One of the most important rights we have as American citizens is the right to bear arms. Without it, many of us would live in constant fear. A gun provides many with comfort as well as protection. It gives people the ability to fall asleep knowing their loved ones are safe. However, simply owning a gun doesn’t make someone an expert in how to use it. To become proficient, they must attend weapons training courses. As the demand for guns increases, so does the necessity for proper instruction. To help meet this need, some are getting creative.
In response to the growing demand for gun training, churches across the state of Oklahoma are offering gun safety lessons alongside their bible study. This helps promote the word of God as well as responsible gun use and ownership. This may even break the stereotypes of reckless gun owners.
According to reports, churchgoing Christians in Oklahoma are being taught how to defend themselves with a gun. The program, led by firearms instructor Roy Jones, has taught roughly 5,000 students over the last decade how to properly handle a firearm. However, instead of working at a usual training facility, Jones takes his courses to churches across the state, calling it, “not your typical gun class.” Since he teaches at a church, he also educates his students more about Christianity.
Despite what some may think, Jones argues that self-defense and spirituality are not mutually exclusive. “Blessed be the Lord, my rock, who trains my hands for war, and my fingers for battle,” he quoted during an interview with Fox News. He reasons that although the scripture teaches love and compassion, if someone’s life is in danger, then it’s perfectly acceptable to do whatever is necessary to protect them. The same goes for self-defense. “We will turn the other cheek…I’m the least likely guy to pull out a gun in a fight,” he claimed, adding, “but we will not turn the other cheek if you’re going to assault my family or cut off my head in the process.”
His eight-hour course teaches people how to handle weapons, makes them take a 15-question exam, lets them practice at a private range, and informs people about relevant state laws gun owners should be aware of. He also teaches people how to avoid being arrested if they shoot someone in self-defense. He tells his students, ““you show the officer respect, but you never consent. You have to articulate that you were the victim, but you say, ‘With all due respect, you will have my full cooperation after I seek my legal counsel.”
Some argue that he’s just using religion to make extra money. However, he claims that this assumption is inaccurate. Instead, he wants people to know what to do in a dangerous situation. Unless properly trained, an armed person in a life-threatening situation could panic and either miss the aggressor or accidentally hit an innocent bystander. In response to people who claim he’s just “getting rich by using God’s name,’” he stated, “I’m just one little guy. Do I make a little money? Yes. But I’m not doing this to get rich.”
Instead, he insists that his courses are designed to teach people self-defense. He believes that people should be prepared if they find themselves in a dangerous situation. There are countless stories that reinforce the importance of gun ownership. One news story that Jones mentioned to journalists had to do with a woman recently killed by two pit bulls. Another story involved a fatal stabbing at a food distribution center. He asked reporters, “can you imagine what went through her mind the last few minutes of her life?” He argues that both of these deaths could have been averted “if they’d had a legal gun and been trained to use it.”
Many who attend Jones’ class understand firsthand why owning a gun is important. Wendy Johnson, one of his students, claims that she started taking the class after her friend was mugged. “One day, my co-worker did not show up for work,” she stated, explaining “someone had attacked her in a parking lot and had literally beaten her face. I don’t want to see anyone else in the ER with a swollen face because someone hit them in the head for their purse.”
Legal firearms don’t just protect people out in public, they also protect people at home. Earlier this year, three armed intruders broke into a house in Oklahoma. Thankfully, the homeowner’s son heard them breaking in and raced downstairs with an AR-15. Upon seeing them, he opened fire, striking and killing all three. And just recently, an armed intruder kicked down the door of a random house in Las Vegas, Nevada and attempted to rob the person inside. However, the resident had a weapon, and once he stepped inside, the burglar was shot dead.
Guns also protect people at work. Last month, an armed burglar attempted to rob a store at gunpoint. Fortunately, one of the other associates in the back heard the commotion and had a gun. He snuck up behind him and got him to surrender. Video of the altercation can be seen below (Warning: Graphic video):
States like Oklahoma and Nevada have legislation, known as “Stand Your Ground” laws, which offer a broad range of protections for gun owners defending their life or property. Their legislation makes it legal for someone to use “reasonable force, including deadly force” if someone is unlawfully entering “the dwelling, place of business or employment, or occupied vehicle,” of another person.
Unfortunately, not all states are friendly towards gun owners. Republican lawmakers in Oregon recently betrayed their party by introducing legislation that allows for the confiscation of personal guns. The bill, sponsored by State Senator Brian Boquist (R-Dallas), makes it possible for an immediate family member to strip someone of their Second Amendment right. It also makes it more difficult to buy a gun. Those who make it more difficult for people to have a gun put the lives of others at risk. They must be voted out of office and replaced with pro-gun conservatives.
The importance of gun ownership is undeniable. Programs like the one offered by Jones help people not just own a gun but understand how to use it. This gives people the opportunity to protect the ones they love so God can focus on other things. Conservatives nationwide must do everything possible to ensure the Second Amendment is not infringed upon. Those who wish to disarm the country must not succeed. If they do, innocent people will die.
As Resurrection Sunday passes by us one more year, those who believe were reminded of the majestic ways in which God operates. For those who do not share in the Christian faith (or perhaps any faith) it was just a regular Sunday. While the decision to learn about the facts of religion are up to everyone to pursue or decline, it is worthy to note the paradox that exists between what our nation’s founders believed and what our leaders over the last 50 to 100 years have been promoting. It seems odd that, while everyone is free to either worship or shake their fists at God or America, the government itself should be a bit on the “pro-religion” side of the debate considering that our Constitution (which allows for all but an endorsement) permits it.
Whatever could the reason for that be? Could it be that the Law of the Land says that our rights are “God-given?” Our current government wants to dictate who, for example, can own a gun. They want to meddle in where a gun can be, as if Uncle Sam is in charge of where one may or may not feel safe. South Carolina has recently awoken from their PC slumber and approved a bill that would allow everyone, even those who don’t have a permit, to carry a gun legally. There is no mention of a permit needing to be obtained in our founding document, after all.
Government wants to dictate if we can even own a gun, and yet that pesky Constitution insists that they can’t do this because government only recognized the rights given from God; they don’t grant it. The Founders showed us that God did. So, the best choice left for those who wish to control the masses is to kill God in the eyes of man. Make Him look foolish, like believing in one’s imaginary friend, and God falls from fact to fiction. Then once that lie is in place, goodbye rights. After all, if one doesn’t believe in God, then government becomes in charge of who has what rights when.
Thankfully, God or not, South Carolina is taking control of what the Bill of Rights promises, not what the current whims of a fallen PC culture tell them is true. If this becomes law, anyone in SC who is allowed to legally buy a gun may carry that firearm. They are also keeping their conceal carry law intact just to ensure that their citizens can still carry guns in other states where a permit is required, so this new change won’t’ tarnish that right in other states, either. Rep. Mike Pitts (R-SC) has said that the bill honors federal law by forbidding protection in airports in schools, so thanks to the feds, anyone in those two areas will still be defenseless targets for madmen, but this is still a massive Constitutional win.
“The bill is a very simple bill,” says Pitts, “It means, by definition of the Constitution, it gives you the ability to keep and bear arms without having to be permitted by the country.” Notice how he was careful to avoid saying who does give us our rights, only that our rights are not doled out by “the country,” and that is a step in right direction to fighting the overreach of Big Brother. He dare not say “God,” for the anti-God crowd in their Senate will shoot it down just out of deictic hatred. So, those who love the Constitution are figting in more subtle terms, which is both clever and needed. Someday, maybe even airports and schools won’t be targets.
The whole plan is coming together too, with the approval coming in at 64-46. In an even bigger win, since we live in an age of terror when our first responders are often attacked as they come to help (Black Lives Matter also impede ambulances and the like, resulting in death), under this bill, THEY TOO get to find that their lives matter. First responders will now be allowed to carry a gun to protect their lives when they come to save ours. This may be the best bill currently on the table in any state in the entire union.
Rep. Gary Clary, (R-Clemson) thinks that more debate is needed, something that will only allow it to be watered down and ruined. Since it is perfect as is, one has to wonder if he got his AAA standing with the NRA from a Cracker Jack box because he is dropping the ball here. “When we talk about protecting constitutional rights, when we talk about respecting each others rights, we begin with the First Amendment, and that’s the right to free speech, ” said the retired judge. “And in this body that is the most important thing that we have to represent for the people that send us here.”
Isn’t the “most important” thing to honor their rights and protect their lives? Clary seems to not think so as he says also, “And when we tell the folks that don’t have enough votes to pass a bill or to defeat a bill that we’re going to cut off the debate, that we’re going to cut off their right to speak, then we’re telling them that the (35,000) to 38,000 people that they represent, that they are irrelevant.” This is the talk of a RINO just waiting to capitulate, not a gun-respecting Republican, regardless of who was foolish enough to endorse him. If someone is right and they have facts on their side, then why should they welcome in arguments from those that are wrong? How can wrong views help the debate?
The most foolish argument came from (NO surprise) a Democrat, Rep. Justin Bamberg (D-SC). Not only does he want to go back to training classes (which have pros and cons for another article), but he thinks that blacks who take the right will become targets from police who long to shoot armed black men. “If I’m an African-American male on the Battery in downtown Charleston and I’m open-carrying at 1 or 2 in the morning, which I’ll legally be able to do, is my very being, the very breath in my body going to give law enforcement probable cause to stop me?” So to him, a black man should not protect himself – just to cower from police. If Bamberg were right (he isn’t), wouldn’t the black man or women need the gun more?
The fact is, no cop is going to bother a black any any more than any other man for taking charge of his or her own protection as they walk at 2 am or 2 pm. The facts are that just as most people who take martial arts never ever use it once in their whole lives, most people who carry guns never even unholster them because the need never arises, thankfully. Still, the right to have it when needed is given to us by our Creator and to lose track of that fact is to pull a bullseye on our own heads.
