PA Bill Number: HB1472
Title: In primary and election expenses, further providing for reporting by candidate and political committees and other persons and for late contributions ...
Description: In primary and election expenses, further providing for reporting by candidate and political committees and other persons and for late contrib ...
Last Action: Referred to STATE GOVERNMENT
Last Action Date: Apr 22, 2024
FOAC's Weekly Message For Sunday September 29th 2019 :: 09/29/2019
With the Senate hearings behind us, it seems appropriate to do a review of this entire spectacle! First, I want to praise and thank every one of the gun owners who showed up, ESPECIALLY all of the FOAC members who turned out in incredible numbers! A significant number of FOAC officers were at the hearings, both days, and all of us were smiling ear to ear at the sight of so many dedicated Second Amendment advocates! From the bottom of my heart thank you!!
From the moment we hit the Capitol steps it was apparent that the anti-gun groups felt that they were going to control this entire effort and that Extreme Risk Protection Orders and Universal Background Checks were nothing more than a stone’s throw from passage! Little did they expect to see so many terrific volunteers show up to express their opposition!
Towards the end of this message you will see links to the testimony and that includes the entire hearing on both days as well as specific links to specific testimony!
The structure of these hearings had a major fault in that time management for the speakers was very poorly controlled. Was this intentional? It’s hard to say but the fact remains that other than attorney Joshua Prince, all the pro-gun test of fires were placed at the very end of both days testimony.
One of the major sore spots for me personally was the extremely irritating placement of Dr. John Lott who, after flying all the way from Nevada, was relegated to five minutes and playing Tail End Charlie at the end of the first day’s hearings! While normally this could be significant placement the fact is that he was only given five minutes was an absolute insult considering the fact that he is an internationally recognized expert on these issues and that those who preceded him played so fast and loose with the facts!
So, what was the purpose of these hearings? Were they intended to really plumb the nuances of the violence that we see in today’s society or was it a precursor to justify the passage of more gun control?
Only time will tell but the fact that Sen. Farnese and Sen. Santarsiero DISRESPECTFULLY and IGNORANTLY abused Joshua Prince when he testified by trying to insinuate that he was somehow are bought and paid for product of the gun industry instead of the passionate defender of freedom is not only insulting but royally aggravating to all of the Second Amendment advocates in attendance!
One thing is abundantly clear, that if we had not had such an overwhelming turnout of gun owners, which amounted to at least 200 gun owners on the first day, and, at least 250 gunowners on the second day, the messaging of the anti-gun groups Cease-Fire PA and Moms Demand Action would have dominated the airwaves and the attention of legislators!
There is one point that I should bring up that was the most distasteful part of this episodic fight for freedom and that was the clearly intentional set up to create a confrontation between the pro-gun and anti-gun groups by Cease-Fire PA! On the second day, the 25th, an even greater number of gun owners was standing at the doors to Senate committee hearing room 1. Shira Goodman and her anti-gun group, Cease-Fire PA, set up with building services a news conference not on the rotunda steps but in the hallway right at the entrance to the Senate committee hearing room which is in a hallway that terminated at these hearing rooms! In 36 years of engaging in political activism in the Pennsylvania state Capitol building I have NEVER seen ANY group engage in this kind of the behavior which was clearly meant to deny us access to the priority sections of the Senate committee hearing room seats and create a confrontation between our two groups. Was the Gov.’s office involved? I think a good case could be made! Why were so many capital police so readily available to come down and FORCE gun owners out of the hallway? Why was the capital police officer, who was a lieutenant, so verbally and physically aggressive? Why did he personally engage in physical contact with gunowners, including myself?
A HUGE THANK YOU is due to PA State Reps. Stephanie Borowicz AND Valerie Gaydos for coming down to this anti-gun orchestrated Senate Circus and helping all the great 2A advocates out of this anti-gunner’s trap! Because of their help, gun owners (who had been waiting since 9:30 a.m. to get in to the 1 p.m. hearing) were admitted first! This ‘anti-gun news conference/rally’ wasn’t even on the schedule until the day BEFORE and there was ZERO notice posted anywhere! AGAIN! THIS WAS A MANUFACTURED (in my opinion) CONFRONTATION!
It's difficult enough to encourage pro-2A citizens to show up to these hearings, but to have CeaseFire PA and Mom’s Demand Action organize a rally in a public corridor as an anti-gun stunt, that was abetted by an anti-gun Governor, to PHYSICALLY force and threaten with arrest those very same citizens out of a hallway they had been STANDING in for HOURS was unconscionable.
Normally the Capitol Police are outstanding and routinely polite but THIS fellow used Stalinist actions to manhandle people! In over 36 years of being in the Capitol at ALL sorts of rallies with high emotion I have NEVER been treated in this fashion, EVEN under Rendell and Casey.
I want to make a point of this because it is clear that the pressure being focused on gun owners to succumb to more restrictive and oppressive gun control is coming from every quarter! It is becoming next to impossible to get newspapers to respond to op-ed’s in a timely fashion and when they do they force us to provide documentation that is never a factor for gun control groups.
Out of over a dozen newspapers that this op-ed was submitted to only one printed it:
Defending the 2nd Amendment is becoming more and more controversial and vitriolic, especially for those willing to risk running the gauntlet of the media, the biased and hostile political left and over-bearing ignorant politicians! Well-funded anti-gun groups are making ‘every’ effort to push the false narrative that the ‘people’ support a wide panoply of restrictive gun control and destroy ‘any’ informed debate that would cast doubt on their anti-freedom agenda. The very BEST way to counter these lies ‘and’ support those leaders willing to testify publicly against the freedom-stealing socialist agenda is for gun owners to attend and be seen in every hearing where policy makers and politicians bring up gun control. Anti-gun groups are doing this now in ‘every’ capitol and in every hearing at the state and federal levels!
Sacrificing our time to protect the 2nd Amendment and, indeed, all of the Bill of Rights is a responsibility that has been passed to all of us. IF we fail, there will be ‘NO’ America, for Freedom is our most important legacy.
ACTION ALERT: Anti-Gun Group Everytown Frantically Scraping Up Opposition to HB 1066 (Firearm Preemption Law) that Just Passed PA House Judiciary Committee on a Party Line Vote - Rep. Mark Keller – targeted by Anti-Gun Group Everytown for Sponsoring HB 1066
WE need your help! HB 1066 passed the house judiciary committee on September 24 by a party line vote. This legislation is meant to strengthen the firearm preemption law that currently exists by providing for the recovery of legal fees if communities that pass gun laws lose in court and the moving party, whether it be an individual or group such as FOAC, when’s the court case!
As you know, Harrisburg and Pittsburgh and dozens of other communities have illegal laws or have just recently passed them! Anti-gun groups are frantic that the legislature will pass this legislation because they know that, constitutionally speaking, they will lose and that will set the stage for a collapse of all their gun control efforts at the local or municipal level, which is substantial!
The anti-gun group Everytown is targeting Pennsylvania House of Representatives members in a campaign to demand that they vote against HB 1066 and WE NEED YOUR HELP as does Representative Mark Keller! The message they are sending out is reproduced below.
From: Miss XXXXX XXXXX <bounce@list.everytown.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 11:24:55 PM
To: Mark Keller <Mkeller@pahousegop.com>
Subject: Oppose HB 1066 in PA (message from Miss XXXXX XXXXX in 17XXX)
Dear Representative Mark Keller,
As your constituent, I want you to oppose HB1066 a punitive preemption bill that would make Pennsylvania one of only a few states in the country to enable special interest groups to sue local officials to block enactment or enforcement of local gun safety laws — and would allow a lawsuit if a locality simply has gun safety laws on the books.
But unlike the laws in other states, HB 1066, would allow out-of-state interest groups with members in the state to sue Pennsylvania cities and towns. This legislation will undermine local law enforcement trying to enact or enforce public safety law measures. Please oppose HB 1066 and do not let this reckless bill become law in our state.
Sincerely,
Miss XXXXX XXXXX
XXXXXXX, PA
Look at the LIES in the Message Above. Consider how Everytown is INTENTIONALLY covering up for the INTENTIONAL violations of PA Criminal Law! We URGENTLY ASK YOU to contact your state representative and respectfully insist that they support HB 1066 AND that they respond to you in writing as to their position on this legislation and if they are opposed “respectfully” insist they provide the reasoning and investigation they’ve used as to why they oppose this legislation. Then, if you will be so kind as to forward that response along with any material they send you to us we would like to make sure we put that in their record and we will adjust their election recommendation based on their position on this legislation and it will be a graded vote!
Pennsylvania House Of Representatives Judiciary Committee Votes to Focus on Criminals Rather Than Attack Gunowners!
Judiciary Committee chairman Rob Kauffman has proven to be a man of rare courage and conviction! Not only that, but he has been very open to providing information on measures that will come before his committee.
On September 24th the Judiciary Committee avoided any talk of gun control and focused on violent career criminals and fixing the preemption laws accountability provisions, HB 1066 in particular.
Additionally, chairman Kauffman has stated decisively that he will not entertain any more gun control through his committee in this session! That was an incredibly bold and courageous statement which has focused a great deal of criticism through the media and anti-gun groups. If you have a moment please consider reaching out and thanking Representative Kauffman for his bold stand against the forces of constitutional darkness!
How Gun Control Groups Package Lies to STEAL the 2nd Amendment
There is one statistic that is particularly difficult to handle/explain for supporters of the 2nd Amendment; namely, that most of the Top 10 states for highest rates of gun deaths are conservative, pro-Second Amendment “red” states. In other words, the states most determined to protect their gun rights are the states most likely to suffer from high mortality rates due to “gun violence.”
As you might have already guessed, there’s more to the story.
What we should really be focused on is reducing the number of homicides in which guns are used. The question is, where are these homicides occurring?
According to an analysis of the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) statistics, 54% of all U.S. counties had ZERO homicides in 2014 (latest data available), and 70% of the counties had no more than one homicide. In fact, 68% of all homicides occurred in just 5% of U.S. counties, with over 50% of all homicides occurring in 2% of the counties.
So, in these Republican “red” states, the vast majority of homicides are concentrated in places like Atlanta, Birmingham, Memphis, New Orleans, Baton Rouge, etc. All of these cities have been controlled by Democrats for decades, and most have stringent gun laws. In fact, the U.S. cities that have far and away the highest murder rates are all Democrat-controlled — St. Louis, Baltimore, Detroit, New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Kansas City, Cleveland, Memphis, Newark, Chicago, etc.
Louisiana is a perfect example. It has the cities with the fourth- and fifth-highest murder rates in the country, with New Orleans (39.5 murders per 100,000) and Baton Rouge (38.3 murders per 100,000). Yet the average for the entire state plummets to 12.4 murders per 100,000, meaning that outside of those two cities, the state is actually pretty safe.
The murders tend to be highly concentrated even within counties. For example, the vast majority of murders in Los Angeles County are in the southeastern part of the county, with virtually none in the northwestern section. In Washington, DC, virtually all murders occur in the eastern part of the city.
In Chapters from My Autobiography, American humorist Mark Twain wrote, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.” And maybe nowhere in the spectrum of the American political debate are statistics used more deceptively than in the debate over gun control.
Bellicose US House of Representatives’ Democrats Pass Gun Control Legislation for Political Gain
Has Democrat over-reach derailed gun control legislation OR was this all really a game of high stakes brinkmanship??
Thus far this session, 1,700 hundred pages of new gun laws were passed by the Democrat-controlled house. The laws have three things in common.
- They are egregious in how far they go in infringing on the 2nd Amendment.
- They say one thing and do another
- They are designed never to pass; it is all a ploy.
Democrats WANT gun control as a wedge issue to scare a suburban woman into voting for them in 2020.
This has all happened before.
In 1999 the gun safety bill was put together, it had safety locks required for all gun sales, and the requirement that violent juvenile actions would be included in NICS and prevent the sale of a firearm in the future. It was killed not by the GOP but the democrats. It was killed for one reason only. To keep gun control as a wedge issue for the 2000 elections.
198 DEMOCRATS in the house voted to allow violent juveniles to own firearms once they turned 18. The bill included new rules for background checks at gun shows, a ban on the importation of large-capacity magazines and a requirement that safety locks be sold with new guns.
Democrats said that this bill had not gone far enough, and they offered amendments to the bill designed to kill it, 198 democrats voted no.
So… when you hear about how important gun control is, remember it was all on the table, all there for the left to have made law. EVERYTHING they say they want was there. They turned it down to keep gun control as an issue for the 2000 election.
H.R.822 – Firearm Risk Protection Act of 2019
It’s the same thing this time; the left moves forward laws that have to be defeated.
Let me ask you a few questions about the law Pelosi has passed to the Senate.
You go shooting with your son-in-law, and you hand him your old favorite 586. He takes the gun and shoots off a ½ dozen rounds and hands the gun back to you. How long should you spend in a federal pen for that illegal firearms transfer under their new laws? Five years? 10? Remember the gun never leaves your sight, but that won’t matter now will it.
You will have to turn in your GLOCK 17 and 19. Why? They are both considered “ASSAULT WEAPONS” under the new house rules.
A criminal breaks into your house and steals a gun. It was in a locked box and met all the legal requirements for gun storage. That criminal kills someone in the commission of a crime. How long should you be jailed for being the owner of a stolen gun? Ten years?
Now the left wants you to buy insurance if you own a gun, but they also sued and fined Chubb and Lockton for offering insurance to gun owners. So, the obvious question is how or why would an insurance company offer insurance to gun owners if doing so gets them sued and fined? So, to own a gun, you HAVE to have insurance, but any insurance company that offers insurance will be sued out of existence.
It’s ALL a lie; it just politics as usual. It’s all democrats using our rights to scare voters.
Nationwide ‘2nd Amendment Rally’ Planned for Nov. 2 in Washington, D.C.
Grassroots Second Amendment activists from across the country are being urged to attend a 2nd Amendment Rally on Saturday, Nov. 2 at the Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., where they hope to deliver a message that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Now is the time for activists to make plans, as the rally is a mere six weeks away. It is being dubbed as a “rally for the Second on the 2nd.”
As explained by activist Rob Pincus, director of media relations for “Save the Second,” during an interview with the Right of the People podcast from the Gun Rights Policy Conference in Phoenix, “We’ve got a big election coming up next year. We need to remind the nation; we need to remind ourselves that we are the Second Amendment lobby and that’s why the 2nd Amendment rally is important.”
There is also a Facebook page where people can learn details as they emerge. He said there is no sponsorship for this event and no single organization. Funding is provided by “people who care about the Second Amendment.”
“The Second Amendment expressly protects the rights of the individual,” Pincus stated. “The individual needs to get involved and the Second Amendment rally is an opportunity to do that.”
Are the Actions of the Left Pushing Americans to the Brink ‘and’ is Civil War Coming?? Some Seem to Think so; What Will YOU Do?
Most of us don’t want a second Civil War, though many of us will fight because it is clear that MANY Americans are rattled and unhappy with the track of government and attacks on our Freedoms! A very few even seem to think war is a good idea. But the obvious question is what would it look like?
The answer is nothing like the last civil war. The causes of the last Civil War were economic. Tariffs on products coming into and leaving southern ports meant the agrarian south was at odds with the more urban and industrialized north. No such division exists today. The left does not control states; the left controls cities; everything else belongs to the people.
The days of massed armies are long passed. So, what can we expect?
Most liberal politicians will be in hiding or deceased within the 1st 72 hours. A nation of riflemen will step up.
If you picked a City, let’s say Chicago. Close off the roads, shut down the airports and the City has maybe five days of food, close off fuel or power and in the winter, it freezes in two days.
Pick a City like Los Angeles that imports all its water, close that down and inside a week, the City is dry.
Civil unrest will follow – our major cities will burn from self-immolation.
Only in the big cities will the left control law enforcement. The State Guard units will not fire on civilians and will not necessarily come to defend cities where they do not live; they have families of their own to protect.
With 120,000,000-gun owners in America, 3% represents 3.6 million people. There are 850,000 law enforcement officers in the US. The numbers favor those of us who stand for freedom. In the face of these number the 1st thing the left will try to do is forcefully disarm the people in the big cities. That may not go as smoothly as they plan.
The fact is that the left is driving this. They have ZERO tolerance for anyone who does not think and believe as they do. That type of division can only lead one direction. We must break their grip on the narrative.
The war on the Bill of Rights is not just about the Second Amendment it's about all of them.
The link below is to an article where New York City now has a $250,000 fine for insulting or using the terms like illegal alien. This is to silence any discussion of the illegal immigration movement or demanding enforcement of immigration laws. There are even calls to JAIL people who criticize man-made climate change.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-city-250g-illegal-alien-immigration
ANTIFA is the left’s, Brown Shirts. What happens if these masked cowards move to take power; who will stand in their way? American gun owners will rally to protect their neighborhoods. We will fire on the ANTIFA crowds to protect our children. It would be a quick fight.
Within military circles of veterans some other questions are being discussed as well:
- What happens when Mexico occupies Southern California and parts of Texas and Arizona to protect their citizens? What happens if they don’t stop there? With Gavin Newsom as the Governor of CA, will he welcome the Mexican invasion? Is the re-conquest of the lands lost in the Mexican/American war next?
- Can Canada handle the 10’s of millions of refugees?
- With our significant cities already being cesspools of disease and poverty, what happens afterward? How do you rebuild a country so divided with its major cities in ruins? Reconstruction will be harder than you realize.
So, what can you do?
GET POLITICALLY ACTIVE, do what you can to stave off this conflict or prevent it.
Remember, luck favors the well prepared. Have you thought long term about your family when it all goes south? I’d rather be prepared for something I hope never happens than left unprepared when/if it does. How about you?
This article is a note of caution for those on the left; you cannot win.
I hope you’re listening, so full of hate, you on the left are, that it blinds you to reality. Do not ring a bell you cannot un-ring.
US House Democrats' Assault Weapons Hearing Fails Epically
Gun control advocates intended for Wednesday’s (9/25) U.S. House Judiciary Committee hearing entitled “Protecting America from Assault Weapons” as a public execution of America’s favorite rifle and those own it. The effort failed miserably.
In a nutshell, Nadler and his fellow gun-haters reiterated the same old tired talking points and sound bites from big gun control. And from the other side of the issue, patriots and liberty advocates dismantled the left’s talking points with vigor, some drama, and varying degrees of devastationn.
First off, we saw how Democrats would rather attack gun rights than the root causes of crime. In fact, we had seen this recently when Dems didn’t want to include gang members in their proposed red flag legislation, despite the fact that 80% of murders in America are committed by gang members.
At Wednesday’s hearing, for the handful who saw it, Dems probably succeeded in trying to make Republicans look uncaring and heartless though. Let’s face it: fear and emotion trump facts and logic for most low-information voters.
Nadler and friends never once discussed the proven benefits of firearm ownership for self-defense. Those benefits outnumber criminal misuse of guns by a massive factor. But gun control has become the issue du jour for radical Democrats, especially with Trump’s roaring economy and foreign policy successes.
When it comes to guns, Dems have avoided saying whether they support confiscation or wholesale bans of semi-auto rifles, but they didn’t even try to say they opposed such radical proposals during the hearing. In other words, yes, they would ban (and confiscate) your semi-auto rifles – indeed any rifle that accepts a detachable magazine. In fact, they would like to see all “high-velocity” rifles banned.
Why are gun control advocates such control freaks? (See the list of what they actually want to ban. It’s lengthy, to say the least.)
Democrats had touted the hearing for weeks, hoping to use it to hammer “assault weapons” in front of the public. Fortunately for gun owners, the Dems’ own Trump Derangement Syndrome headlines pushed Nadler’s dog and pony show far off the front pages. What a shame.
Gun Control Groups Are Frantic Over the Court Case: New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn v City of New York
Some in the news dismiss the importance of the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. New York case; Vox’s Ian Millhiser describes New York City’s ban on traveling outside of city limits with licensed firearms as a “minimal burden” on gun owners, covering conduct outside the Second Amendment’s “core.”
Because the freedom to transport a legally owned firearm outside of your home, city, or state is apparently not always justified.
That “minimal burden” is why anti-gunners are so afraid of an adverse outcome in the Supreme Court case, potentially expanding the scope of Second Amendment rights and putting an end to the RKBA being treated as a second-class right.
The Court will discuss the mootness argument next week. If they don’t dismiss the case, arguments are scheduled for December 2.
At least 10 (lower) courts apply what United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Judge Stephen Higginson describes as a “two-step analytic framework” (to Second Amendment cases). Under this framework, “severe burdens on core Second Amendment rights” are subject to “strict scrutiny,” the most skeptical level of review that courts typically apply in constitutional cases. “Less onerous laws, or laws that govern conduct outside of the Second Amendment’s ‘core,’” are subject to a more permissive test known as “intermediate scrutiny.”
Thus, major burdens on gun owners are especially likely to be struck down, while less consequential burdens are more likely to be upheld.
Kavanaugh, for his part, rejects this consensus framework altogether. In his 2011 dissent, he argued that the consensus view should be abandoned for a different test — “courts are to assess gun bans and regulations based on text, history, and tradition, not by a balancing test such as strict or intermediate scrutiny.” While it’s unclear how Kavanaugh’s test would apply in every individual case, the fact that Kavanaugh took a position well to the right of his two Republican colleagues strongly suggests that his test would invalidate more gun laws than would the consensus framework.
New York State Rifle, moreover, offers someone like Kavanaugh the perfect vehicle to upend the consensus framework because the (now repealed) rule at the heart of this case imposes only a minimal burden on gun owners.
New York offers two kinds of handgun licenses. A “carry” license permits gun owners to carry a handgun for “target practice, hunting, or self-defense.” Meanwhile, a less permissive “premises” license permits a gun owner to “have and possess in his dwelling” a handgun. Premises license holders, however, may only bring the gun outside of their home for limited reasons, which include bringing the gun to seven specific gun ranges to practice shooting.
The plaintiffs in New York State Rifle, each of whom has a premises license, raise a very narrow challenge to this framework. As a federal appeals court explained, some of them “seek to transport their handguns to shooting ranges and competitions outside New York City.” One of them also owns two homes, and he wishes to be able to transport one gun between those two homes.
New York State Rifle, in other words, involves what Judge Higginson described as a “less onerous law” that governs “conduct outside of the Second Amendment’s ‘core.’” This isn’t a grand showdown over when and where people can carry guns — or whether they bring a gun into their own home. It’s a small legal dispute about little more than whether lawmakers can require certain gun owners to practice shooting at certain specified gun ranges.
And yet, this very smallness is what makes New York State Rifle so dangerous to the consensus framework. The rule at the heart of this case is the very sort of gun restriction that the consensus framework is likely to treat as insignificant. And that gives the Supreme Court an ideal vehicle to hold that judges should treat all gun laws with skepticism — even very minor ones.
LEGAL ACTION: From FPC: Second Amendment Protects “Large-Capacity” Gun Magazines
Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced the filing of an important legal brief in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals regarding the State of California’s ban on so-called “large-capacity” magazines that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition. The brief is available online at FPCLegal.org.
FPC's coalition brief was joined by nine individual gun owners, all plaintiffs in another federal magazine lawsuit, and eight Second Amendment advocacy organizations, including Second Amendment Foundation and Armed Equality—a pro-right to keep and bear arms group that emphasizes armed and responsible self-defense for its LGBTQ+ members, who are especially vulnerable to attacks involving multiple assailants. The brief argues that so-called “large-capacity” magazines are inherent components of functional firearms; that they are constitutionally protected because they are “in common use” for lawful purposes; and that because they are constitutionally protected, they cannot be banned.
“This case presents the type of Second Amendment challenge the Supreme Court has ruled on more than any other: a challenge to a prohibition on particular arms. And the Court’s precedent is clear: if the arms are commonly owned by law-abiding citizens, they cannot be prohibited,” said FPC Director of Research and brief lead author, Joseph Greenlee. “Evidence presented in this case shows that over 100 million magazines of the type that the State of California bans are owned in America. It is therefore indisputable that the magazines are common, and as such, their prohibition violates the Second Amendment.”
“Magazines are inherent, operating parts of all semi-automatic firearms, and it is indisputable that the so-called ‘large-capacity magazines’ at issue in this case are in common use for lawful purposes and protected by the Constitution,” explained George M. Lee of Seiler Epstein LLP, co-counsel on the brief and lead counsel in a similar magazine challenge in the Eastern District of California Federal District Court. “This brief shows why the court must affirm the decision below and restore the true command of Heller, which holds that these arms cannot be banned.”
Attorney Lee also recently filed a federal constitutional challenge to California’s ban on so-called “assault weapons” based on the district court’s ruling in Duncan (striking down the California magazine ban) and the State’s definitions of banned “assault weapons” (some of which are based on a firearm’s characteristics, including the use of a so-called “large-capacity” magazine in an otherwise legally-configured firearm). That case, captioned Miller v. Becerra, was assigned to Southern District of California Federal District Court Judge Roger T. Benitez, who struck down the State’s magazine ban in Duncan. The parties expect further filings in that case in the coming weeks.
About Firearms Policy Coalition
Firearms Policy Coalition (www.firearmspolicy.org) is a 501(c)4 grassroots nonprofit organization. FPC’s mission is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States—especially the fundamental, individual Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms—advance individual liberty, and restore freedom.
FOAC in the Media: Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings on Gun Control, the Constitution & Health Related Issues:
- Josh Prince Esq. Testimony: https://youtu.be/jRyAgYjfhgI
- Dr. Gallo’s Testimony: https://youtu.be/BCKHEJ8HTcE
- Kim Stolfer’s Testimony: https://youtu.be/wnP9_qr8LyM
- Dr. John Lott’s Testimony: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xV-zT7HRKmo
Full Senate Judiciary Testimony: Sept. 24th – https://judiciary.pasenategop.com/092419/
Full Senate Judiciary Testimony: Sept. 25th – https://judiciary.pasenategop.com/092519/
VIDEO OF THE WEEK: Community Responses to Gun Violence in our Cities
Maj Toure Testimony Before Congress: Time Stamp (1:23 – 1:29)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=4&v=qIhtI77wUgc
Quote of the Week: “We’ve been assured by Democrats, and their media lackeys, that it is absolutely impossible to find and deport eleven million illegal aliens, and that any discussion of the subject is absurd.
Yet, from these same mouths we’re asked to believe that finding, and forcibly confiscating, sixteen million ‘assault weapons’ can be easily done.” - Sweeney
1st Point to Ponder: Dr. Lott’s testimony before PA Senate Judiciary Committee (9/24)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xV-zT7HRKmo
2nd Point to Ponder: ‘Who are we’ is a video that presents thoughts for all of us to consider about our Freedoms and the current desperate grab for socialism to cure societal ills!
https://foac-pac.org/Videos/37
3rd Point to Ponder: Congressional Testimony Regarding House of Representatives Hearing on Gun Control and Assault Weapons: 'Americans use firearms to defend themselves between 500,000 and two million times every year. God forbid that my mother is ever faced with a scenario where she has to stop a threat to her life. But if she is, I hope politicians protected by professional armed security didn't strip her of the right to use the firearm she can handle most competently.' – Amy Swearer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZmkv-5jnW0&feature=youtu.be
Gun Control Quote to Remember: “We see those as fighting words, not a final declaration,” Shira Goodman, executive director of Ceasefire PA, one of the state’s leading gun control advocacy groups, said about the Franklin County Republican’s declaration. “If that means we’ve got to battle in the Senate or try discharge petitions or try to amend other bills that are moving (to get an extreme risk order bill considered), we’re going to do it.'
Founding Father’s Statement on Freedom: 'Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.' - Patrick Henry (1788)
CLOSING THOUGHTS: Government finds ways to protect itself when it violates its own laws. Government makes it very difficult to sue the government. You slip and fall on a lettuce leaf in a supermarket, you can sue the supermarket. But if you slip in the post office, it is very difficult to sue the post office.
If you don’t go to the right lawyer who knows what hoops to jump through, you find yourself without any recourse.
Why?
Because the government has protected itself. The most fiercely prosecuted crimes are those that harm the government’s prerogatives. They’re not property crimes against private individuals. The most fiercely prosecuted crimes interfere with what the government does.
Government is essentially the negation of liberty. The whole theory of natural rights is that each individual is sovereign. Each individual has human liberty, and everything the government does, everything from A to Z, is a negation of that liberty.
Yours in Freedom!
Kim Stolfer, President
As a reminder, every gun owner can participate in the October 13, 2019 FOAC Monthly meeting from any PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android phone by clicking on the link below:
Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://zoom.us/j/134200286
One-tap Mobile: US: +19292056099,,134200286# US (New York)
Dial by location: +1 929 205 6099 US (New York)
Meeting ID: 134 200 286
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/adSioEAVyf
