Charlotte, NC --(Ammoland.com)- Question: Does the Second Amendment apply to the states because it is incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges and Immunities or Due Process clauses and thereby made applicable to the states?
Conclusion: Yes
On June 28, 2010, the Supreme Court, in McDonald et al. v. City of Chicago, Illinois, et al. – a case challenging handgun bans in Chicago and Oak Park, Illinois – ruled that the Second Amendment protects a fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense nationwide.
The ruling reversed the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which upheld the bans, and requires that court to reconsider McDonald in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Chicago thereafter passed an ordinance imposing unreasonable restrictions on gun ownership.
NRA is supporting Benson v. Chicago, challenging the ordinance.
An audio recording of the oral arguments in the Supreme Court has now been released. To listen to the audio, please click here.
About: Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America’s oldest civil rights and sportsmen’s group. Four million members strong, NRA continues its mission to uphold Second Amendment rights and to advocate enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation’s leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the military. Visit: www.nra.org
Iowa Backlash – Kent Sorenson Positive 2A Record Twisted by Anti-Gun Appel By Jeff Knox.
FirearmsCoalition.org
Manassas, VA --(Ammoland.com)- Earlier this year I wrote about and participated in a brouhaha regarding concealed carry in Iowa.
The NRA had put forward a poor excuse for a carry reform bill that made the already complex maze that is Iowa’s gun law even more complex and dangerous to Second Amendment rights. Several of us were trying hard to get the bill improved before it ended up doing more damage than good.
The hero of that fight was a young State Representative named Kent Sorenson who is now being attacked for being too supportive of gun rights by his opponent in a tough State Senate race.
Not only is Sorenson being attacked as a pro-rights “extremist” by his opponent, Staci Appel, she is accusing him of defending “wife beaters” because he opposed a state expansion of the notorious Lautenberg domestic violence law. What’s even worse is that Appel was literally moments away from receiving the official NRA endorsement in the race when her first attack ads hit criticizing Sorenson for supporting pro-rights positions which are also all supported by the NRA. To their credit, NRA immediately withdrew their endorsement, but the association literally had to stop the presses to keep an endorsement of Appel from appearing in the pages of NRA publications.
Sorenson was the sponsor of an Iowa Constitutional Carry bill which I strongly supported and was instrumental in pushing a much weaker NRA-sponsored bill into revisions which eventually made the bill an acceptable, though disappointing vehicle for reforming concealed carry in the state. Not only did Kent Sorenson carry a heavy load in that fight, he has been an active sponsor or cosponsor of virtually every pro-rights measure introduced in the Iowa legislature since he was first elected a few years ago. Sorenson has not just been a supporter of gun owners, he has been an outspoken advocate on our behalf. That’s why I was thrilled to see him step up to challenge the anti-rights, liberal Democrat, Appel for a seat in the State Senate this year.
In the Senate, Sorenson would have even more influence and be a more effective advocate for the Second Amendment cause. But Appel’s attacks seem to be taking a toll. She has zeroed in on Sorenson’s opposition to a state ban on firearms possession by persons convicted of any misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. The bill also called for local authorities to immediately confiscate all firearms from anyone who is the subject of a restraining order or order of protection – including women who are routinely placed under such orders in retaliation when they get restraining orders against estranged husbands or boyfriends. Appel’s brutally tasteless ads are appearing on television and in direct mail and picture battered women with statements that “Kent Sorenson’s positions on guns are so scary, even the NRA has opposed them” and that “Sorenson actually supported letting people with a history of domestic abuse own a gun.”
Of Course Appel’s ads are suggesting that Sorenson’s position on the domestic violence bill was what was too extreme for NRA. In fact NRA opposed the domestic violence bill and negotiated changes to keep the Iowa bill from doing much more than mirroring federal law. What Appel’s ads are actually alluding to is the rift created when Sorenson pushed forward with his Constitutional Carry bill instead of withdrawing it in favor of the much weaker NRA compromise proposal. In truth, Sorenson’s bill was officially supported by NRA and Sorenson voted for the NRA bill when it cam to a vote. NRA didn’t oppose the Sorenson bill, they just didn’t really work for its passage because they felt that it couldn’t garner the necessary votes and they preferred an incremental approach.
At this point the race between Sorenson and Appel is statistically a dead heat and that’s not good news for Sorenson or gun owners. If Appel’s Domestic Violence attack strategy proves successful we can expect to see many more of these types of attacks all around the country in future elections. It has the potential to make Republicans run from the gun issue and it will embolden the anti-rights crowd to push even harder – especially on confusing and misleading legislation like the “No Guns for Wife Beaters” legislation exploited in this case.
The “wife beater” attack is not a new strategy, but if it works against Sorenson, it would represent a ray of hope for a whole lot of anti-gun politicians hopelessly bobbing about on rough political seas these days. In the wrong hands a little hope can be a very dangerous and destructive thing.
Here’s to hoping that this particular hope proves empty in short order. If you’re in Iowa or know anyone there, Kent Sorenson needs your help.
About: The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. The Firearms Coalition is a project of Neal Knox Associates, Manassas, VA. Visit: www.FirearmsCoalition.org
[...] for First Amendment free speech rights! No matter. Using garden-variety reportorial … Website Share Tweet Previous postThe Research Of Machine Vision Technology Applied In Notebook [...]
I always get a kick out of people who say he is the first black President. What they should really say is he is the first half white President. Not sure why his white side is always downplayed. He is a smart guy, but the bottom line is he stands for nothing and has no guiding principles. All he cares about is getting re elected, that’s all. And if he has to contradict himself, lie, spin, cheat, steal, bully, praise, domineer, back off…whatever…he will do it. He’s tenacious that way, but stands for nothing.
There’s one other thing I’ve been screaming out since this LIAR stood at the podium and LIED to the nation (as he has so many times before). “I HAVE THE FLAG THE NAVY SEALS TOOK ON THEIR OPERATION TO KILL BIN LADEN” So (starting with the lesser here), no attempt to capture and put him on trial? Weren’t the democraps whining this was a “law enforcement matter” years back? So “law enforcement” now is about “doing hits” on known criminals? How very “Chicago” of you Mr. President. Well, doesn’t take a genious to look around and see the “government jackbooted hit squad” has been policy for quite some time. Lastly, I spent 6-years with Special Operations (Army) plus 6 reserve working with and training SOF units so I know what I’m saying here… NO SPECIAL OPERATIONS UNIT, INCLUDING NSWG/DEVGRU (aka Navy SEALS) CARRIES A FLAG INTO BATTLE!!! THAT SH!T WENT OUT AFTER THE CIVIL WAR AND THE ONLY COMBAT UNITS HOISTING A FLAG IN THIS DAY DO SO WHEN ESTABLISHING A FOB (forward operating base) OR OCCUPYING A TERRITORY… NO SEAL TEAM CARRIES A FLAG WITH THEM ON A COVERT MISSION!!! Lemme stress this again… a flag takes up more space than 2 IFAK’s (individual first aid kits, includes bandages, tourniquets and life-saving blood-clotting items… saved many a lives!)… why would a 2-chalk 24-man SEAL team waste space carrying some imaginary flag on a hostage rescue mission? Space and weight is golden… every inch of space and pound of weight saved is room for more ammo (at least in the Ranger and SOF units I served with) so I can’t imagine why what is arguably the most professional unit in the armed services would waste space carrying a flag on a “S&D” (seek & destroy) or strike mission. What did they do, raise this flag above the compound, take a picture then take it down, repack and get out of the AO? REALLY? The NSWG/DEVGRU group known as SEAL Team-6 would NOT waste space and weight carrying some flag on a mission like that. I believe, based on my 12+ years working with warriors like these that this is yet ANOTHER LIE THE LIAR IN CHIEF HAS SPEWED!
[...] package; all chambered in 5.56mm NATO (.223 Rem), one of the most popular … Read more on AmmoLand.com (press release) (function() {var s = document.createElement('SCRIPT'), s1 = [...]
