Category: Second Amendment

Posted on

Iowa Governor Signs Bill Into Law Letting Residents Buy, Carry Guns Without Permits

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds on Nov. 16, 2020. (Kelsey Kremer/Des Moines Register/Pool)

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds signed legislation into law on Friday lifting some restrictions to buy or carry a handgun in the state for law-abiding citizens.

The NRA-backed legislation named “House File 756” will take effect on July 1 and eliminates the requirement for law-abiding Iowans to obtain a permit to purchase a handgun from private non-licensed sources. Additionally, to carry a weapon, people will no longer need to have a permit as well.

Individuals will still have to follow federal law and go through an instant background check to buy from licensed sellers each time they purchase a gun.

People who fail to commit to the new law will be charged with a Class D felony, which is punishable by up to five years in prison. It will become a felony if a person sells, rents, or loans a firearm to someone the seller “knows or reasonably should know” isn’t legally allowed to get a gun or is intoxicated.

“Today I signed legislation that protects the 2nd Amendment rights of Iowa’s law-abiding citizens while still preventing the sale of firearms to criminals and other dangerous individuals,” Reynolds said in a statement after signing the bill.

“This law also takes greater steps to inform law enforcement about an individual’s mental illness helping ensure firearms don’t end up in the wrong hands,” she added. “We will never be able to outlaw or prevent every single bad actor from getting a gun, but what we can do is ensure law-abiding citizens have full access to their constitutional rights while keeping Iowans safe.”

The new law has been supported by the National Rifle Association (NRA), which applauded the governor for signing the bill allowing law-abiding adults to carry a concealed firearm without first asking the government’s permission for a permit.

On March 22, House File 756 passed 60–37, with all Republicans voting for it, along with Democrat state Rep. Wes Breckenridge. Republicans have a majority in the Senate and previously passed a similar piece of legislation through a committee.

Iowa now becomes one of 19 states in the U.S. that no longer requires law-abiding citizens to get a permit before carrying a gun for self-defense.

The 18 other states that eliminated this requirement are: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

Democrats have opposed the bill, saying the reversal is dangerous and a “reckless disregard for the safety and well-being of Iowans.”

“Our communities aren’t safer when criminals can legally purchase a handgun without a background check,” Iowa Democratic Party Chair Representative Ross Wilburn said in a statement in reaction to Reynolds signing the bill.

“Background checks are wildly popular, even among gun owners, as a common-sense way to keep people safe,” he said. “Legislation like this serves no purpose other than appeasing the gun industry and its powerful lobbyists.”

Mark Olivia, director of public affairs at the National Shooting Sports Foundation, told The Epoch Times that laws restricting gun ownership have dubious origins.

“The history of gun control laws really has its roots in Jim Crow-era racist laws that are designed to deny people their rights,” he said. “Your permit is your Second Amendment right. The idea of having to get a permit to be able to exercise your Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is antithetical to what your rights are as an American at birth.”

Source: Iowa Governor Signs Bill Into Law Letting Residents Buy, Carry Guns Without Permits

Posted on

Arkansas State Senate Passes Bill Banning Enforcement of Federal Gun Control Laws

A man looks at handguns at a shooting range in Randolph, N.J., on Dec. 9, 2015. (Jewel Samad/AFP via Getty Images)

The Arkansas state Senate voted this week to block federal law enforcement officials enforcing certain gun laws and regulations, sending a bill to the state House in the midst of congressional gun-control proposals.

The Senate voted 28-7 to approve the measure, which will then be sent to the House. Arkansas’ Legislature is overwhelmingly Republican.

“All acts, law, orders, rules, and regulations of the United States Government, whether past, present, or future, that infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Arkansas Constitution, Article 2, [Section] 5, are invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, are specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state,” according to the text of the bill.

The measure will prohibit any law enforcement agencies in Arkansas from cooperating with federal officials to enforce federal gun laws that go in conflict with the rights provided in the Arkansas Constitution, according to Arkansas Online. Some state lawmakers expressed a worry that President Joe Biden would ramp up gun-control measures.

“It is more important now than ever that we protect our state rights,” Sen. Trent Garner, a Republican, said of the passage of the bill. “Once [Democrats in the U.S. Senate] get rid of the filibuster, guess what happens next? It is called packing the courts,” he claimed, referring to statements from Democratic lawmakers that the 60-vote legislative be removed in order to pass their agenda items.

“You would have to be totally blind to death to not see that our nation is as divided right now as it ever has been and we have elected officials in office in Washington, D.C., who actually don’t even care what the Constitution says and decided that they are going to do it their way no matter what happens and have no respect for the 10th Amendment,” Republican Sen. Jason Rapert said, according to the news outlet.

State Sen. Jim Hendren said the bill would put Arkansas’ federal funding at risk and would place an unnecessary hurdle between Arkansas law enforcement and federal agents.

Following two mass shootings in Atlanta and Boulder, Colorado, Biden and top Democrats said that it’s imperative that new restrictions be passed. Dozens of Democratic House members this week sent a letter to Biden, saying that he should take executive action to ban “concealable assault-style firearms” such as the semi-automatic Ruger AR-556 pistol that was used in the Boulder shooting.

“Concealable assault-style firearms that fire rifle rounds pose an unreasonable threat to our communities and should be fully regulated under the National Firearms Act consistent with the intent and history of the law. The recent tragedy in Boulder, Colorado where 10 people including a police officer were killed is one in a string of deadly incidents involving this style of weapon,” Reps. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.), Joe Neguse (D-Colo.), Val Demings (D-Fla.), and Ed Perlmutter (D-Colo.) said in a letter to Biden.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters last week that Biden is looking to issue an executive order on gun control.

Source: Arkansas State Senate Passes Bill Banning Enforcement of Federal Gun Control Laws

Posted on

People’s Rights leader arrested for alleged law enforcement threats

A Las Vegas man linked to anti-government activist Ammon Bundy has been arrested for allegedly threatening the lives of a police detective and a prosecutor who both handle domestic terrorism cases.

Joshua Martinez, 32, who runs Bundy’s burgeoning People’s Rights network in Nevada, faces stalking and harassment charges related to the alleged social media threats against Metro Detective Kenneth Mead and Chief Deputy District Attorney Michael Dickerson, according to a criminal complaint.

Dickerson obtained a felony gun conviction against Martinez in 2019, and Mead had a courtroom encounter with Martinez in that case. Martinez was sentenced to probation.

Last Wednesday Martinez posted a Facebook photo of a flag-draped coffin carried by uniformed officers with the caption, “How police officers take out their trash,” the complaint alleges. Next to the photo, Martinez said, “I can’t wait to see the news and hear that Detective Kenneth Mead is in that casket.”

Another post that day featured a photo of Dickerson with the statement, “This is Michael Dickerson. He is Detective Kenneth Mead’s bitch. Dickerson, I hope you and Mead die a slow and painful death… Mead, I have a message for you — Molon Labe.” The Greek phrase, which means come and take them, is regarded as an expression of defiance for some gun rights activists.

The complaint alleges that Martinez threatened Mead with the intent that Mead be “placed in reasonable fear of death or substantial bodily harm.”

In an interview with the Review-Journal days before his arrest, Martinez said his main effort with Bundy’s group was holding Las Vegas police accountable when they stop people on the streets. He has posted videos on social media of police during stops, sometimes challenging their actions.

“We don’t believe in bowing down to police,” he said. “We’re anti-corrupt government. Not just anti-government. We need government.”

Martinez, dressed in blue jail garb, chains and a mask, made a brief appearance in Las Vegas Justice Court on Tuesday. When a judge told him the district attorney’s office might have a conflict of interest in the case because Dickerson is one of the victims, Martinez responded “I’ve been targeted. I understand.”

A deputy public defender representing Martinez said she planned to raise the conflict issue in court papers.

Four felony charges

Martinez, who is being held at the Clark County Detention Center on $1 million bail, is facing four felony charges — aggravated stalking, challenge to a fight with use of a deadly weapon, stalking with use of the internet or electronic communication and possession of a firearm by a prohibited person. He also faces two misdemeanor harassment charges.

Police found a shotgun they allege was in his possession when they executed a search warrant last week. His plea deal sentence in the 2019 gun case prohibits him from having guns.

Deputy District Attorney Eckley Keach, who is prosecuting the stalking case against Martinez, said his office is taking the threats seriously.

“The goal is to make sure that justice is done, not only for the named victims in this case but also to ensure that the community is protected against people who choose to threaten to harm others,” Keach said.

In a Review-Journal story on the broadening spectrum of extremismpublished Feb. 20, Martinez said that Bundy’s newest grassroots group, about 415 members strong in Nevada, prefers a “bullhorn” over violence.

“We try to keep things peaceful,” he said. “Ammon wants everything peaceful.”

But the criminal complaint alleges Martinez between June 1, 2017 and February 18, 2021 “unlawfully” engaged in social media conduct against Mead and Dickerson that “would cause a reasonable person to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, or harassed.”

On the day of the Jan. 6 Capitol Hill riot, Martinez posted on Facebook: “This is Detective Kenneth Mead with the Metropolitan Police Department. He is an enemy of the constitution and has tried to make my life a living hell but has failed. To any activist here in Las Vegas, please keep an eye out for him. I also have his resume just in case you want more intel on him. Contact me for more information.”

The post included three screen shots of Mead, according to the complaint.

History of violence

“In a later post, Martinez wrote, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

Martinez added more in the comments on that post: “How can you gain your rights back by working with a tyrannical government? You can’t take down the palace using the kings tools. Name a people who have gained their rights back by being peaceful. Violence is what moves history.”

Martinez has a history of creating disturbances at the federal courthouse in 2017 while supporting the Bundy family during the criminal case stemming from an armed standoff with the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. In October 2018, he was found guilty of disorderly conduct, fined $500 and ordered to stay away from the courthouse.

Both Ammon Bundy and his father Cliven Bundy were among those charged in the April 2014 armed showdown near the Bundy ranch over the federal agency’s roundup of his cattle. But a federal judge later found government misconduct and dismissed the high-profile case.

The younger Bundy made headlines recently for anti-government actions in Idaho and elsewhere in the Northwest, as part of People’s Rights efforts to organize against coronavirus restrictions and other perceived government overreaches.

He told the Los Angeles Times that the new grassroots network had about 50,000 people in 35 states, and he described it as “neighborhood watch on steroids.”

The Southern Poverty Law Center suggested that Ammon Bundy is attempting to build a “network of right-wing, often anti-government activists” that can be mobilized quickly if needed.

Bundy also was regarded as one of the leaders of the deadly 2016 occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon.

Source: People’s Rights leader arrested for alleged law enforcement threats

Posted on

Editorial: Courts should overturn ‘Red Flag’ law

A number of Nevada counties have passed Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions in response to state lawmakers passing a “Red Flag” law in 2019 that would allow persons accused of being a potential danger to themselves or others to have their firearms confiscated by order of a judge.

But rather than threatening to flout the law, the better route is the one taken by Elko County commissioners recently and that is to challenge the law in the courts. The commissioners voted to join a lawsuit filed in December by attorneys for NevadansCAN (Citizens Action Network) that argues the “Red Flag” section of Assembly Bill 291, which was passed on a near party-line vote with Democrats in favor and Republicans opposed, is unconstitutional because it violates the right to due process and the right to keep and bear arms — as guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the Nevada Constitution, which states, “Every citizen has the right to keep and bear arms for security and defense …”

According to the Elko Daily Free Press, at the start of the meeting Elko County Sheriff Aitor Narvaiza declared, “On Jan. 7, 2019, I was elected sheriff of Elko County. I took an oath to protect the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of Nevada. I’m here to tell the lawmakers to keep your hands off our guns.”

He was quoted as saying, “Let’s enforce the laws that we have which are reasonable instead of enacting more laws which are unconstitutional. … A great president once said this country cannot be defeated in combat, but it can be defeated within. Right now this country is crumbling, slowly, due to weak-minded politicians and lawmakers who push unconstitutional laws for personal gains and to fill their pockets.”

He received several rounds of applause the newspaper reported.

The litigation appears to have sound legal footing due to a recent unanimous Nevada Supreme Court ruling. The court found that gun ownership is such a fundamental right that it cannot be taken away merely by a judge’s ruling, opining that a person charged with misdemeanor domestic battery is entitled to a trial by jury, because the state Legislature in 2017 enacted a law saying someone convicted of such a crime could have their right to keep and bear arms denied.

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that only those persons charged with a “serious” crime are entitled to a jury trial. The unanimous Nevada opinion written by Justice Lidia Stiglich states the change in state law to prohibit firearms possession by someone convicted of domestic violence effectively increases the “penalty” and makes the crime “serious” rather than “petty.”

“In our opinion, this new penalty — a prohibition on the right to bear arms as guaranteed by both the United States and Nevada Constitutions — ‘clearly reflect[s] a legislative determination that the offense [of misdemeanor domestic battery] is a serious one,’” Stiglich wrote in a case out of Las Vegas.

The NevadansCAN lawsuit declares, “This (“Red Flag”) law makes mincemeat of the due process of law, will endanger law enforcement and the public, and is a tool for stalkers and abusers to disarm innocent victims. Empirical data is available that nearly a third of such orders are improperly issued against innocent people, in states with experience of the operation of such a law.”

Proponents of such laws often cite the Oct. 1, 2017, mass shooting that left 58 country music concert goers dead in Law Vegas as justification, but neither this “Red Flag” law nor the recently enacted tougher background check law would have prevented that tragedy.

AB291 defies the Second Amendment right to bear arms, the Fourth Amendment right to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures, the Fifth Amendment right to not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law and the 14th Amendment prohibition against states abridging the privileges and immunities of U.S. citizens.

It must be overturned and litigation is the proper route to do so.

A version of this editorial appeared this week in some of the Battle Born Media newspapers — The Ely Times, the Mesquite Local News, the Mineral County Independent-News, the Eureka Sentinel,  Sparks Tribune and the Lincoln County Record.

Source: Editorial: Courts should overturn ‘Red Flag’ law

Posted on

Federal effort seeks to fight domestic violence

The U.S. Department of Justice is leading a new effort to fight domestic violence. U.S. Attorney General William P. Barr announced details earlier this week.
 

U.S. Attorney General William P. Barr recently announced the formation of a Domestic Violence Working Group aimed at keeping guns out of the hands of convicted domestic abusers, using the tools of federal prosecution to stop and prevent domestic violence.

The group will operate under the auspices of the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee (AGAC) and be comprised of nine U.S. attorneys across the country, chaired by U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas Erin Nealy Cox.

“Too often, domestic abusers start with threats and abuse, and end up committing extreme violence and even homicide, with devastating impact on families and the community around them,” Barr said in a news release that provided details. “I have directed this working group to examine this issue and determine the best way to use federal gun prosecutions and other appropriate tools to supplement state, local and tribal efforts to address domestic violence.”

Cox said: “With so many domestic disputes escalating from bruises to bullets, we felt we needed to supplement our state and local partners’ efforts to curb domestic violence with federal prosecutions. We hope our initial cases send a message to convicted abusers: Not only could the Justice Department theoretically prosecute abusers for firearm possession – they have and they will.”

Federal law has long barred convicted felons, as well as individuals subject to certain domestic violence protective orders or convicted of domestic violence misdemeanors, from possessing firearms.

The Justice Department news release said:

■ Offenders with domestic violence in their past pose a remarkably high risk of homicide. Research shows that abusers with a gun in the home are five times more likely to kill their partners than abusers who don’t have that same access to a firearm. And according to one recent study, more than half of America’s mass shootings are cases of extreme domestic violence.

■ Keeping guns from domestic abusers legally prohibited from possessing them would significantly reduce violence in America, a major priority of the Justice Department.

■ Federal gun cases involving domestic violence present unique challenges. In some states, the federal and state definitions of domestic violence differ, requiring complex legal analysis that varies based on the location of conviction.

The working group will share best practices, legal analysis and guidance on prosecuting abusers who unlawfully possess guns, and will advise U.S. attorneys across the country on outreach to local law enforcement, judges, and nonprofit groups.

At a glance

Working Group members include:

Scott W. Brady, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania

Robert M. Duncan, Jr., U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Kentucky

Nicola T. Hanna, U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California

Justin E. Herdman, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio

Erin Nealy Cox, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas

Christina E. Nolan, U.S. Attorney for the District of Vermont

Byung J. Pak, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia

R. Trent Shores, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Oklahoma

Timothy J. Downing, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Oklahoma

Source: U.S. Justice Department

Source: Federal effort seeks to fight domestic violence


Posted on

VICTOR JOECKS: Controversial gun control measure could pass without a hearing

The Legislature could pass a controversial gun control measure without ever holding a public hearing.

At issue is a red flag law, which allows courts to order the confiscation of weapons from people who pose a threat to themselves or others.

Narrowly tailored, these laws can be beneficial. For instance, the Parkland, Florida, school shooter had a history of disturbing and dangerous behavior. Police went to his house 39 times in seven years. It could have prevented a mass murder had a court taken away his weapons.

In the aftermath of the Parkland shooting, some prominent conservatives, such as David French with National Review, came out in support of red flag laws. But getting the details wrong can turn a good idea into a bad law. It’s a tough balancing act to design a statute that allows government to seize someone’s weapons while respecting an individual’s right to due process.

Finding that balance requires discussion and compromise. That could have happened. Early in the session, state Sen. Julia Ratti, D-Sparks, proposed a very broad red flag bill, Senate Bill 120. For instance, included in the definition of high-risk behavior was the act of acquiring a firearm within six months of displaying a firearm.

A judge who determined someone engaged in those behaviors and posed a risk could order that individual to turn over his or her firearms to law enforcement. The bill also required only “clear and convincing” evidence, a lower standard than beyond a reasonable doubt. Under the proposal, a judge could have ordered an individual’s firearms be confiscated without the subject knowing he’d been accused of threatening behavior.

If the court issued such an order — potentially without the person’s knowledge — the information would have been sent to the Nevada Records of Criminal History. Subjects would thus be prevented from passing a background check if they tried to legally buy a firearm. That makes sense. No point in taking someone’s firearms away if they’re allowed to just buy another one. What doesn’t make sense is that if the information doesn’t get removed automatically from the database if the court removes the protection order. The individual must petition a court to remove it.

This means the government could take your guns without you even knowing you’d been accused. And if you cleared your name, you’d have to return to court to restore your ability to purchase firearms. So much for innocent until proven guilty and due process.

Public and behind-the-scenes input would have improved this bill. But SB120 died in mid-April without a hearing.

That should have been the end of it. But Democrats are now considering amending a red flag law into Assembly Bill 291, which bans bump stocks.

If that happens, there won’t be a public hearing and gun owners may not even find out what’s in the bill until after it has passed.

That would be a mistake. A conversation about a red flag law is worth having, but getting the details right won’t happen if Democrats rush it through.

VICTOR JOECKS: Controversial gun control measure could pass without a hearing

Victor Joecks’ column appears in the Opinion section each Sunday, Wednesday and Friday. Listen to him discuss his columns each Monday at 10 a.m. with Kevin Wall on 790 Talk Now. Contact him at vjoecks@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-4698. Follow @victorjoecks on Twitter.

Source: VICTOR JOECKS: Controversial gun control measure could pass without a hearing


Posted on

The Real Reason for AB291 and removing State Gun Law Preemption Laws?

Clark County commissioners open to gun restrictions on Strip

CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) — Some Clark County commissioners have voiced general support for considering firearm restrictions on the Las Vegas Strip if Nevada lawmakers give them the power to create stricter gun laws.

The county would be given such power under the omnibus AB291 gun bill moving through the Democrat-controlled Legislature despite widespread opposition from Republicans and gun rights groups.

Some commissioners say state law prevented the body from enacting gun regulations following the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history. The gunman attacked a 2017 Las Vegas music festival and used bump stocks to mimic the firing rate of an automatic firearm.

AB291 - Revises provisions relating to public safety. (BDR 15-759)
Captured from nellis - 4-29-2019 6:35 pm
Reprint Total Opinions Opinions in Favor Opinions Against View Comments
Original Bill Version 1913 208 1705
April 22, 2019 41 1 40
Bill Totals 1954 209 1745 View Comments

Share Your Opinion with Your Legislators
80th (2019) Session - While you still can!

"As a large metropolitan area, we simply face different law enforcement challenges than other places in the state," said Commissioner Justin Jones at a bill hearing, mentioning the millions of tourists who visit Las Vegas each year. He also said declaring the Las Vegas Strip a gun-free zone on major holidays would be a common-sense gun measure.

Jones said in an interview that he expects there to be interest on firearm restrictions for the Las Vegas Strip, if the Nevada bill passes.

Commissioner Tick Segerblom says he would go further.

Segerblom said he's not only in support of those restrictions, but wants a discussion over adding an assault weapons ban, handgun registrations and ammunition limitations.

Giving counties the ability to dictate gun laws allows the conversation over firearm issues to extend past the state's biennial legislative session, he said.

Nevada is one of the few states in which the Legislature meets every other year.

Jones and Segerblom are former state lawmakers who have backed gun bills in the past.

Commission Chairman Marilyn Kirkpatrick expressed support for considering gun regulations for the Strip corridor, but cautioned that the commission would have to consider the impact on large hunting shows.

The amended Nevada bill handily passed the Assembly with no Republican support. The Nevada bill would also ban bump stocks and lower the alcohol limit for legally possessing a firearm outside a person's home.

Unlike the original bill, the amended legislation would not allow cities and towns to enact stricter firearm laws. Yet the changes to the bill have not blunted criticism.

Don Turner, president of the Nevada Firearms Coalition, said the group remains in strong opposition to the amended bill and is most concerned with provisions giving counties the ability to create stricter firearm laws, arguing that it's easier to pass a local ordinance than a state law.

Assemblyman Tom Roberts, a Republican who voted against the amended bill, said he is in support of the bump stock ban, but disagreed with giving counties the power to create more stringent firearm laws. He argued it would create a patchwork of laws.

"It's not something I believe that we should be giving up to the county commissions, when we have such a large and diverse state with huge differences of opinion on this issue," he said.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Source: Clark County commissioners open to gun restrictions on Strip