Second Amendment State/LEO response to federal gun ban threat

Why police chiefs favor disarmament and sheriffs don't.

Why So Many Police Chiefs Favor Gun Control, When Most Sheriffs Don't

Grand Junction, CO --(Ammoland.com)- This contains some concepts that many folks haven’t considered.
We are not siding with or against the police or advancing excuses for them and we hope it does not appear we are picking on them either; we aren’t.
For this work, we interviewed 17 chiefs and sheriffs from around the country. From those conversations (emails and phone) we have some quotes in this work. We were asked not to source the particular quotes and that is fair since this was not an on the record news interview, we just wanted their thoughts and opinions. So, as Joe Friday said, “just the facts ma’am.”
When it comes to various politicians and others speaking against gun ownership (the 2nd Amendment and Constitution by definition) politicians will many times cite city and state police chiefs who allegedly may support the anti-gun movement. These politicians may have police chiefs and their officers appear with them as props or spokesmen in news conferences.
So the logical question to ask is why are these top cops so seemingly against firearm ownership?
Chiefs are at the beck and call of their political bosses, mayors and city councils. “We chiefs get our opinion on firearm ownership when it is issued to us.”–A recent quote by a chief.

A sheriff told us “There is an active debate between sheriffs and chiefs that is affected by the big city chief culture because chiefs tend to emulate each other.”​

For our purpose here let’s just deal with city police, not state/national officials. If city politicians are against gun ownership (Chicago, Washington D.C, San Francisco, and New York for example) and the chief doesn’t agree he can (and probably will) be fired or demoted by the mayor or possibly by a simple majority of the City Council. In most towns over 50,000 population chiefs generally get paid between $70,000 and $140,000 a year plus benefits and retirement. Large city chiefs get well over $200,000 plus benefits, retirement and every once in a while you run into a chief earning well over $300,000.00 plus benefits. They want to hang onto that “chief” position, title and income.
This is why you see chiefs and their officers in the background when privileged officials posture against citizen firearm ownership and the Constitution by definition. Sure some chiefs may believe in citizen gun control and may be willing as a backdrop for self-serving politicians–especially if they were appointed by those in power at the time. So whenever a mayor, senator, representative or president wants a show of “top cops” showing support, a message is delivered to the particular city where the top officials are anti-2nd Amendment requesting top cops as props. The chiefs and officers are obediently delivered for props or advised to get their resume updated.
Sheriffs are by and large a different breed. They are elected by the people with a larger proportional number of citizens than city officials. The sheriff does not have to please a few city council members, a goofy mayor (or a governor). Sheriffs represent the beliefs and values of the majority of the area of his or her citizens who directly voted them into office. Yes, there will be sheriffs who do not want guns in the hands of citizens, but nothing like the number of police chiefs who have a near immediate career ending gun held to their heads by anti-Constitution politicians or the chief culture.
And most sheriffs take their Oath supporting the Constitution very seriously. And while they currently follow and enforce Constitutional applicable federal, state and county laws they reserve the power invested in their oath and position as elected officers of their county to resist or not to enforce Constitutional infringing law if or when that might come. If that were to occur, the state police and/or federal government may be ordered to step into that particular sheriff’s county to enforce those particular unconstitutional laws. The ramifications of those legal incursions might be very interesting to watch, especially, we were told, if that particular sheriff is actively supported by the citizens of that county.
The bottom line is: city, state and even federal chiefs will almost always bend to the will of their political masters–He who has the gold makes the rules.” Then this might be something to bring up in various press conferences with officers in the background.
Shults Media Relations, LLC
A PR firm that seriously supports the outdoor and firearms industry and our Constitution.
For more information please contact:
Jim Shults
Shults Media Relations, LLC
www.smrpr.com

 

Excellent!! I've already got a bunch of P-Mags, but now I'm certainly a fan.

If I can ever find one, my next AR will be a LaRue to boot.

Reward supporters of the 2nd Amendment!!\

Magpul’s Open Letter to CO Lawmakers – Pass Gun Control, We Leave & Take Our Jobs With Us

Magpul, the maker of one of the most popular AR-15 magazines, the PMAG, along with other AR-15 accessories has posted an open letter to their customers and Colorado lawmakers.

The company basically says if CO passes a proposed law that would ban magazines over 10 rounds in capacity, they would be forced to move their operation to another state in order to stay in operation.

In doing so the company would be taking their tax dollars and hundreds if not thousands of jobs with them (once you take sub-contractors into account).

Bravo Magpul, bravo. They join several companies who have taken a stand recently. This includes LaRue Tactical, who recently announced they would no longer sell rifles to state and local agencies that don’t allow citizens to own those same rifles.

​

Here is the full letter form Magpul, as posted on their Facebook page:

“In addition to the national battle to protect our firearms rights, many states are currently engaged in their own fights. Here in CO, a state with a strong heritage of firearm and other personal freedoms, we are facing some extreme challenges to firearms rights. We have been engaged in dialogue with legislators here presenting our arguments to stop legislation from even being introduced, but our efforts did not deter those of extreme views.
After the NRAs visit last week, several anti-freedom bills were introduced by CO legislators, and a very aggressive timeline has been set forth in moving these bills forward.
The bills include:
HB 1229, Background checks for Gun Transfers–a measure to prohibit private sales between CO residents, and instead require a full FFL transfer, including a 4473.
HB 1228, Payment for Background Checks for Gun Transfers– a measure that would require CO residents to pay for the back logged state-run CBI system (currently taking 3 times the federally mandated wait time for checks to occur) instead of using the free federal NICS checks.
And finally, HB 1224, Prohibiting Large Capacity Ammunition Magazines–a measure that bans the possession, sale, or transfer of magazines over 10 round capacity. The measures and stipulations in this bill would deprive CO residents of the value of their private property by prohibiting the sale or transfer of all magazines over 10 rounds. This bill would also prohibit manufacture of magazines greater than 10 rounds for commercial sale out of the state, and place restrictions on the manufacture of military and law enforcement magazines that would cripple production.
We’d like to ask all CO residents to please contact your state legislators and the members of the Judiciary Committee and urge them to kill these measures in committee, and to vote NO if they reach the floor.
We also ask you to show your support for the 2nd Amendment at the Capitol on Tuesday, Feb 12, for the magazine ban committee hearing and Wednesday,
Feb 13, for the hearing on the other measures.
Due to the highly restrictive language in HB 1224, if passed, and we remained here, this measure would require us to cease PMAG production on July 1, 2013.
In short, Magpul would be unable to remain in business as a CO company, and the over 200 jobs for direct employees and nearly 700 jobs at our subcontractors and suppliers would pick up and leave CO. Due to the structure of our operations, this would be entirely possible, hopefully without significant disruption to production.
The legislators drafting these measures do so in spite of the fact that nothing they are proposing will do anything to even marginally improve public safety in CO, and in fact, will leave law-abiding CO residents less able to defend themselves, strip away rights and property from residents who have done nothing wrong, and send nearly 1000 jobs and millions in tax revenue out of the state.
We like CO, we want to continue to operate in CO, but most of all, we want CO to remain FREE.
Please help us in this fight, and let your voices be heard!
We have included the contact information for the House Judiciary committee for your convenience:
House Judiciary Committee
Rep. Daniel Kagan, Chair: 303-866-2921, repkagan@gmail.com
Rep. Pete Lee, Vice Chair: 303-866-2932, pete.lee.house@state.co.us
Rep. John Buckner: 303-866-2944, john.buckner.house@state.co.us
Rep. Lois Court: 303-866-2967, lois.court.house@state.co.us
Rep. Bob Gardner, 303-866-2191, bob.gardner.house@state.co.us
Rep. Polly Lawrence, 303-866-2935, polly.lawrence.house@state.co.us
Rep. Mike McLachlan, 303-866-2914, mike.mclachlan.house@state.co.us
Rep. Rep Carole Murray, 303-866-2948, murrayhouse45@gmail.com
Rep. Brittany Pettersen, 303-866-2939, brittany.pettersen.house@state.co.us
Rep. Joseph Salazar, 303-866-2918, joseph.salazar.house@state.co.us
Rep. Jared Wright, 303-866-2583, jared.wright.house@state.co.us”
Read the full article here:
https://www.facebook.com/magpul/posts/428803833863947...

 

And another one steps up and does the right thing. If S&W and Sig did this, maybe they would wake up.

Olympic Arms Stops All Sales to NY LEOs | The Truth About Guns

Press Release: Olympic Arms, Inc. Announces New York State Sales Policy

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Olympic Arms is a staunch believer in and defender of the Constitution of the United States, and with special attention paid to the Bill of Rights that succinctly enumerates the security of our Divinely given Rights. One of those Rights is that to Keep and Bear Arms.

Legislation recently passed in the State of New York outlaws the AR15 and many other firearms, and will make it illegal for the good and free citizens of New York to own a large selection of legal and safe firearms and magazines. We feel as though the passage of this legislation exceeds the authority granted to the government of New York by its citizens, and violates the Constitution of the United States, ignoring such SCOTUS rulings as District of Columbia v. Heller – 554, U.S. 570 of 2008, McDonald v. Chicago – 561 U.S. 3025 of 2010, and specifically the case of United States v. Miller – 307 U.S. 174 of 1939.

Due the passing of this legislation, Olympic Arms would like to announce that the State of New York, any Law Enforcement Departments, Law Enforcement Officers, First Responders within the State of New York, or any New York State government entity or employee of such an entity – will no longer be served as customers.

In short, Olympic Arms will no longer be doing business with the State of New York or any governmental entity or employee of such governmental entity within the State of New York – henceforth and until such legislation is repealed, and an apology made to the good people of the State of New York and the American people.

If the leaders of the State of New York are willing to limit the right of the free and law abiding citizens of New York to arm themselves as they see fit under the Rights enumerate to all citizens of the United State through the Second Amendment, we feel as though the legislators and government entities within the State of New York should have to abide by the same restrictions.

This action has caused a division of the people into classes: Those the government deems valuable enough to protect with modern firearms, and those whose lives have been deemed as having less value, and whom the government has decided do not deserve the right to protect themselves with the same firearms. Olympic Arms will not support such behavior or policy against any citizen of this great nation.

Olympic Arms invites all firearms manufacturers, distributors and firearms dealers to join us in this action to refuse to do business with the State of New York. We must stand together, or we shall surely fall divided.

Sincerely,
Brian Schuetz
President Olympic Arms, Inc.

 

One by one the ducks form a line...

 

As an owner of an Oly AR An email of support and appreciation is sent.

 

Good for them. Now, when the LEOs find out that they can't do their jobs without guns, then maybe the state legislatures will get their heads out of their butts.

BTW, in case anyone's interested or lives there, at least 2 states, Wyoming and Texas, are moving to invalidate gun control laws with a 'Firearms Protection Act'.

http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2013/introduced/hb0104.pdf

Texas Bill Would Make Federal Firearms Laws Unenforceable | NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth

 

VERY small. No hope of that here in CA, the land of the fruits and the nuts.

 

York Arms Cancels All Its New York Police Orders

(Does bowling strike arm plunge) Yes . . . keep it up guys . . . keep it up.

Buxton, ME --(Ammoland.com)- Based on the recent legislation in New York, we are prohibited from selling rifles and receivers to residents of New York.
We have chosen to extend that prohibition to all governmental agencies associated with or located within New York.
As a result we have halted sales of rifles, short barreled rifles, short barreled shotguns, machine guns, and silencers to New York governmental agencies.
For “civilian” customers residing in New York: At your choice, we will:

• Complete your order and ship to a dealer of your choice outside of NY.
• Refund your payment in full.
• Hold your items here for up to 6 months, at no charge – if you are in the process of leaving NY and taking residence in another state.

For LE/Govt customers in New York: Your orders have been cancelled.

 

Fan-flippin-tastic!! I love Spike's Tactical . . . wife's hometown n'all.

 

FOR IMMEDIATE PUBLIC RELEASE
BLACK WOLF WEAPONS AND TRAINING
ANNOUNCEMENT
In response to current business practices among our colleagues in other companies regarding the boycotts of Government and Police agencies of states that outlaw certain firearms or accessories to their citizens:

“Based on the recent legislation in New York, we are prohibited from selling rifles and receivers to residents of New York. We have chosen to extend that prohibition to all governmental agencies associated with or located within New York. As a result we have halted sales of rifles, short barreled rifles, short barreled shotguns, machine guns, and silencers to New York governmental agencies.
For LE/Govt customers in New York: Your orders have been cancelled.”
We do not do agency or government orders, nor to we cater to government bids or solicitations. We allow the bigger companies to handle these sometimes complex relationships.
WE SUPPORT the boycott of State Government agencies and Police Departments where the Second Amendment rights of citizens are infringed.
HOWEVER, we will continue to offer our services and products to any and all legally eligible individuals, regardless of their occupations in any state. We believe that each officer/civilian deserves the best gear and training so that they may successfully defend themselves and the people they protect and serve.
WE WILL BOYCOTT any company that denies the God Given Second Amendment rights to any legally eligible individual, as long as said individual is legally allowed to own, purchase, possess, or otherwise receive such gear or training. We will not break the law and provide illegal weapons and gear to those who are prohibited to receive or possess them regardless of our opinions about the unconstitutionality of such laws.
IF YOU LIVE IN SUCH A STATE, we suggest you move to a free state. In the event you cannot, for whatever reasons you may choose, we urge you to write your Representatives, your Senators, your Governors, your Statesmen, your Lobbyists, your Sheriffs, your Chief of Police, your Attorney General, and join your local state NRA affiliate. Make your voice heard.
WE WILL NOT SELL TO GOVERNMENT AGENCIES WHERE THE SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS OF CITIZENS ARE INFRINGED. WE WILL SELL TO ANY AND ALL LEGALLY ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE LEGALLY ABLE TO OWN AND POSSESS SUCH ITEMS.

 

Corruptixco wants feds to create a gun registry for border states. My guess is, since the Kenyan and Holder quit supplying the cartels easy weapons, they would like a directory of where to go to get more.

Mexico Asks U.S. Senate to Create Registry of American Gun Owners in Border States | Stand With Arizona

How would you like the Mexican government to know what guns you own? Well that’s exactly what would happen if Mexico had its way.
Mexican lawmakers are formally asking the U.S. Senate to create a registry of all commercialized firearms in border states, which includes California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas – and SHARE IT with them. Mexico says it will make it easier to trace guns used in violent attacks.
The measure was reportedly approved on January 9 by Mexico’s Permanent Commission, a government entity that meets when Mexico’s Senate and the Chamber of Deputies is in recess.
Gun owners in Arizona are calling the proposal “foolish” and an “invasion of privacy.”
See the details below from KPHO…
A number of the gun owners interviewed by KPHO-TV also referenced the Obama administration’s disastrous gun-running operation known as “Fast and Furious.”
The operation, conducted by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), allowed illegal straw buyers to walk across the border with nearly 2,000 firearms, including semi-automatic rifles. The weapons ultimately ended up in the hands of Mexican drug cartel members and were used in a number of crimes, including murders and kidnappings.
Further, a gun from Fast and Furious was found at the murder scene of U.S. Border Agent Brian Terry in December of 2010.
Democrats in Congress have been calling for a ban on semi-automatic rifles and universal background checks for all firearms sales, some even calling for a national gun registry. Further,Democrats in Missouri and California have proposed bills that would result in the possible confiscation of semi-automatic rifles.
Given that the new government of Mexico has proposed a truce with the drug cartels, one wonders if there is a more sinister motive at play? Could the cartels want to know which large Texas ranchers have semi-automatic weapons, for example? A registry could provide such knowledge rather handily.
Once again we see Mexico meddling in our internal affairs – as they did with Arizona’s S.B. 1070 on behalf of the illegal aliens they were so happy to dump on us.
Tell your Senator to tell Mexico to mind its own damn business: Contact Your Senator here.

 

I can see some commie insurers like GEICO not even underwriting such a policy. I hope @UGRev has some good insurance providers . . . or is making plans to flee.

Bill in NY Would Require All Gun Owners to Maintain $1 Million Liability Insurance Policy

From Examiner.com, A bill was introduced in the State Assembly by Felix Ortiz (D-Brooklyn) that would require citizens of New York to acquire liability insurance as a condition to gun ownership.
Bill S2353 will require all gun owners in NY to obtain and “continuously maintain” insurance coverage of at least $1 million, or they will suffer “immediate revocation of such owner’s registration, license and any other privilege to own” a firearm.
If the citizen fails to obtain the insurance, then by simply owning the firearm, they will be in violation of the law.

It is estimated that the required $1 million liability policy would cost a holder $1600-2000 annually.

If the bill is passed, gun owners will have 30 days to get the insurance.

Similar bills have been introduced in other states and gone nowhere, but due to New York’s strong anti gun legislature, this bill may have a chance of passing and it is believed Governor Cuomo would certainly be willing to sign it.

​

Read the full article here:
http://www.examiner.com/article/ny-state-bill-to-require-lia...

 

Push to keep feds out of state gun markets gains momentum | Fox News

States across the country are trying to protect gun ownership from the long arm of Washington by proposing bills declaring that firearms made and kept within their borders are not subject to federal restrictions.

Nine states have proposed such legislation sincePresident Obama and fellow Democrats in the Senate began trying to tighten federal gun laws in the wake of several mass shootings that occurred within months of each other.

“There’s a lot of momentum,” Montana activist Gary Marbut told FoxNews.com on Monday.

Marbut was behind the original Firearms Freedom Act, which says the Commerce Clause allowing Congress to regulate inter-state commerce does not apply to the in-state manufacturing, selling and ownership of firearms. Montana passed the bill in 2009.

Since then, a host of other states have tried to pass copycat legislation. Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Washington have proposed such legislation since January -- following the Dec. 14, 2012, shooting in which 20 first-graders and six adults were killed inside a Newtown, Conn., elementary school.
However, Montana's legislation is hardly settled law. Shortly after the law passed in his state, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives wrote Marbut to say federal law still supersedes.

Marbut acknowledges he wrote the legislation to set up a legal challenge and “roll back a half a century of bad precedent.”

The bill is scheduled to finally get its day in court when the Ninth Circuit begins oral arguments March 4. Marbut expects to lose in the liberal-leaning court, which includes San Francisco, Seattle and Portland, Ore. But he thinks such a decision will put him in a better position to appeal to the country’s highest court.

“The mood of the country is right for the Supreme Court to consider what I think is a great mistake,” said Marbut.

Marbut, a shooting-range supplier, says existing big-name gun manufacturers are “not players” in the case because they have a nationwide market regulated by federal law. However, small upstart companies including gunsmiths and mom-and-pop operations would likely be able to make and sell guns within states, if the courts rule in his favor.

“Making firearms is not rocket science,” Marbut said.

The proposals have gotten plenty of pushback. State Democratic Rep. Robyn Driscoll criticized the Montana legislature for passing the law at the time, telling The Wall Street Journal a couple years ago that lawmakers wouldn’t support funding for education or women’s clinics but passed “this blatantly unconstitutional bill to pay for a Supreme Court fight.”

Montana passed the law at a time when gun control still was not widely discussed on Capitol Hill. Now, Obama and Senate Democrats have proposed legislation that essentially calls for a universal background check for potential gun buyers and re-instituting a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.

While the National Rifle Association and other gun-rights advocacy groups have mounted their opposition based largely on the Second Amendment right to bear arms, Marbut is focused on the 10th Amendment that focuses more on the limits of federal power.

Eight states including Montana, Arizona, Alaska and Tennessee have passed similar legislation, while 17 have had bills proposed but not passed in prior sessions.

 

Instead of gun owner's info, let's send them the personal info for everyone involved it this bulls41t. Like the outed gun owner's map, turn the tables, and let the dirt fly.

 

OK to nullify federal laws within the state.

Oklahoma House Committee Passes Firearms Freedom Act, 13-0 – Tenth Amendment Center Blog

The Oklahoma Firearms Freedom Act unanimously passed out of the House Public Safety Committee Wednesday.
HB2021 would exempt firearms manufactured and remaining in the state of Oklahoma from federal law, federal taxation or federal regulation, including registration.
The bill passed 13-0 and will move on to the calendar committee for further consideration. If approved, it will head to the House floor for a vote.
The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Sean Roberts (R-Hominy), finds its foundation in a proper understanding of the commerce clause.

“Regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.”​

It continues, nullifying the unconstitutional federal expansion of the commerce power by reasserting state control over items manufactured and retained in the state:

A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Oklahoma and that remains exclusively within the borders of Oklahoma is not subject to federal law, federal taxation or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of the United States Congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the Oklahoma Legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce.​

The Constitution states, “The Congress shall have power… to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes…The Congress shall have Power…to make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.” Robert Natelson notes in The Original Constitution that there are misconceptions of the commerce clause in the Constitution, that the regulation of commerce is not exclusively enumerated to Congress and that commerce did not include everything under the sun. The states still have immense power to regulate commerce within their own state and even with foreign nations.
Natelson writes, “Federalists repeatedly represented that the Constitution would leave the states as the sole government regulators of the vast majority of human actives. They affirmed that the central government would have almost no role over…use of personal property outside commerce, wills and inheritance, business regulation and licensing, manufacturing” and others.
Also Natelson writes, “The Constitution banned states from imposing duties on imports or exports without the consent of Congress…otherwise, states were free to regulate commerce with foreign nations–and even to impose embargoes on goods from outside–subject to preemption by Congress or by federal treaties.”
“This is a great first step, and the unanimous vote shows the level of support for this bill. People in Oklahoma don’t want D.C. messing with their guns.” Tenth Amendment Center communications director Mike Maharrey said. “The feds think they can pretty much regulate anything under the commerce clause, and this simply isn’t true when you understand the intent of the Constitution. Intrastate commerce is the purview of the states.”
LEGISLATION AND TRACKING
If you would like a bill like this to be introduced in your state or local community, see the Tenth Amendment Center’s model legislation, The Second Amendment Preservation Act.
To track Firearms Freedom Acts throughout the country, click HERE
ACTION ITEMS
If you live in Oklahoma, contact members of the Calendar Committee and let them know you want them to pass HB2021 on to the House floor for a vote. You can find committee member contact information HERE.
Also contact your representative and ask them to support the bill. You can find legislator contact information HERE.