Open Letter To Second Amendment Caucus

Concealed Carry Reciprocity
Open Letter To Second Amendment Caucus
TPATH
TPATH

USA – -(Ammoland.com)-It has just been reported that the next Congress, the 115th, will see a new caucus.

This group of conservative Republicans say that their goal is to help President Donald J. Trump implement legislation that will support and enforce our 2nd Amendment Rights. The Caucus Founder, Rep. Thomas Massie gave no details.

Since TPATH and the SAPPA Group have a lot on our plates we decided to contact him and offer some ideas that might get his group off to a flying start.

I’ll let everyone know if and when we get a response from the Congressman. In the meantime you can read our snail mail letter to him below:

Letter to Congressman Thomas Massie

THE SAPPA GROUP

To: Congressman Thomas Massie
P.O. Box 821
Newport, KY 41072
RE: Congressional 2nd Amendment Caucus
Date: December 9, 2016

Dear Rep. Thomas Massie,
I read with great interest an article posted on www.ammoland.com which referenced the creation of the Congressional 2nd Amendment Caucus that you and several other Congressmen have formed in an effort to provide assistance to Donald J. Trump’s agenda during 115th Congressional Session.

The article referenced above was vague and provided no specifics on what your new caucus has planned or what legislation it might be working on.  A bit of research finds that you are not a cosponsor to HR 402 (Reciprocal Carry Bill).   Do you in fact intend to join that group of legislators or is there some reason or flaw in the bill that has kept you form signing on to it?  More on this Bill later in this letter.

Before I go on I want to introduce myself and inform you of what my group has been involved with during these past few years.  I am cofounder of the SAPPA Group.  (Second Amendment Preservation and Protection Action)  Our group has for the past almost two years been battling the Federal District Court in Trenton, NJ.  Mr. Nicholas E. Purpura, also cofounder, filed a lawsuit against the State of New Jersey on the basis that the legislative, executive and judicial branches of this state’s government have conspired to deny its citizens their civil rights in violation of Federal Rico statutes.

This type of legal action, relating to the 2nd Amendment, had never been undertaken before.  The Brief was filed under much criticism and was given zero chance of surviving even a few weeks in the liberal District Court.  We filed that Petition in March of 2015 and as of this date, all the underhanded shenanigans, collusion and failure by the court to make rulings, it is still going strong as we are now in the process of getting the 3rd Circuit Court to revoke an order by the lower court which would have unfairly ended our legal action.

During this time, our Pro Se litigant has filed motions, prevented unlawful dismissals of our suit which has seen several professional groups of defense attorney’s demoted or replaced and just recently, the District Court Judge (an Obama appointee) was removed and replaced.   We have kept a log of all the activity of this lawsuit.  That log can be seen here:  http://www.tpath.org/sappa-news-and-reports.html

Also we have posted all the filings generated by the Petitioner (Mr. Purpura) as well as the defense attorneys and the Federal Courts. They can be seen here: http://www.tpath.org/sappa-district-court-documents.html

Our Petition, while it has been filed against the activities of New Jersey, the repercussions will affect all states of the Union which institute and enforce unconstitutional laws on its people.

So just in case your caucus was in need of a starting point to get your activity off the ground, we have decided to get this information to you.  If you take some time to review the documents generated over this past 18 months you will see that this battle we have been waging could use some high level assistance as we move into the Appeals process.  Please consider this request.

Back now to H.R. 402 of the 114th Congress.

I asked if you had any problems with the Bill as written, because our SAPPA Group would like to see some changes to it.  We would like for your new caucus to consider the changes we suggest here and support them.

As we all know Federalism and the liberties our founders included in the Bill of Rights and the Constitution cannot be trumped or infringed upon by any of the sovereign states.  That however has failed to prevent many of them of doing just that.  Many states are in competition for being the most egregious offenders but none of them top the illegal laws which have been enacted in New Jersey.

For example, New Jersey does have a program which allows citizens to acquire carry permits.  They know they had to do this to comply with several federal Court rulings.  But, having the permit process on the books and allowing the people to practice their 2nd Amendment Rights are two very different things.  In New Jersey a private citizen has close to zero percent chance of being approved for a carry permit.  Well over 99% of carry permit applications filed by private citizens in New Jersey, are denied.

That is why the wording of H.R. 402 and its sister bill in the Senate needs some changes made to it before it’s voted on again and sent to President Trump.  The wording in the heading of the bill which states – “To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.”- needs to be amended.   The word group – nonresident of a state- must be removed and replaced with – any person regardless of which state is his permanent residence, who has a valid carry permit issued by any other state-.

This change will prevent states such as NJ, NY, Connecticut and a few others from thwarting the rights of its residents who may have carry permits issued in other states where they might visit or live in at certain times of the year.  The 14th Amendment guarantees that laws and rights are to be applied equally to every citizen of the United States.  If this suggested amendment to H.R. 402 is not made, those states will be able to claim any resident of their state who has a valid permit from another state may not carry there.  This would defeat the concept and intent of H.R. 402.

Also the SAPPA Group would like to suggest yet another Amendment to H.R. 402.  That would be the addition of some “bite” to the new legislation.  That means Federal fines or penalties for any state that refuses to comply with the law as passed and enacted.  Many liberal states routinely ignore the several Federal Court rulings which have been made in support of the 2nd Amendment.   They can do this because a “ruling” carries no penalty and would require a legal action which is long term and nearly impossible to win.

A Congressional bill signed into law by the President carries much more weight in that the penalties for breaking that law will (should) be swift and exacting.

As your new caucus forms up in the new session, hopefully you will consider some or all of what our SAPPA Group has suggested herein.

With the warmest of regards and wishes for the success of your caucus we thank you for your time and do anticipate hearing from you concerning the important topics in this letter.

Dwight Kehoe
Editor www.tpath.org
Cofounder The SAPPA Group

and

Nicholas E. Purpura
Petitioner for the Federal Brief
Purpura v Christie; at al

TPATH

Visit TPATH at http://www.tpath.org/

13 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tionico
Tionico
4 years ago

I note well the suggested change in the language of the present bill, and support it. It would be JUST LIKE the socialist panty wetting gun grabbers “running” New Jersey, New York, California, etc, to quickly find and use the “loophole” in the r=current language and deny NJ residents with no Mother May I Card from NJ but maybe having a Florida card their right to carry in NJ. But I have one more beef with even the changed language: “The word group – nonresident of a state- must be removed and replaced with – any person regardless of which… Read more »

hijinx60
hijinx60
4 years ago

Some time back, South Korea offered to return to the U.S. several thousand M-1 s which had been supplied to South Korea for use during WW2. Of course Obama refused to accept them. I know that ‘replicas’ can be purchased now, but I have always wanted to have one that has a real history. Perhaps a President Trump will accept these as they could be sold and the money used to help pay some on the national debt or other cause. I hope that someone can get this message to Mr. Trump as his views on 2A are very positive.

Johnny
Johnny
4 years ago

This article is simply brilliant. I wish I had written it because it is so relevant and cogently addresses the problems we face in NJ and elsewhere in practical terms. I am very impressed with this SAPPA Group. Keep up the Great Work! May the Good Angels watch over you.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
4 years ago

In a contest between the state government and at the federal government, the U.S. Constitution has preprogramed the federal government to win. If we dominate the federal government, we can force the states to comply with the Second Amendment. Trump and the Republican majorities in Congress owe us. Push, push, push! No Second Amendment, No Second Term!

Tionico
Tionico
4 years ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

the 14th Article of Ammendment MANDATES that rights enjoyed by a resident of one state MUST be upheld by all the states. If I marry in one state, that marriage is valid in any state. If I can drive a car in California, I can also drive in in New Jersey. If I can own or have in my possession an “assault weapon” (set aside the term for now) in Idaho I can also own/have the same gun whilst I am in New York. If I can own a handgun with a mag that holds fifteen rounds in Washigton I… Read more »

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
4 years ago
Reply to  Tionico

, I think that we need to discuss repeal of the NFA and the GCA as unconstitutional burdens on our Second Amendment Civil Rights, first! Then we need to have assert that the Second Amendment fills the field of law on the subject of firearms, and preempts the states because so many states, and cities are passing gun control laws that they do not have the authority to pass, and using their law enforcement people to back up their blatantly unconstitutional laws. If we do not assert preemption, the states and cities will ignore the Second Amendment out of existence.

Fb
Fb
4 years ago

While the east coast does have issues will acquiring permits such as New York, New Jersey stated in this article. it’s important to always list all states with this problem.

May or not issue states:
California
New York
New Jersey
Connecticut
Delaware
Hawaii
Massachusetts
Maryland
Rhode Island

Captain Witold Pilecki
Captain Witold Pilecki
4 years ago
Reply to  Fb

A Correction: believe it or not, Kommiecticut is actually a working “shall Issue” state. If you pass the criminal background checks and have an NRA Pistol Safety Course within the last year, you will be issued a permit. State statute dictates this process should take no longer than eight weeks from date of application. If it does there is recourse. My wife got hers in less than four weeks. Now, there are still dickheads in local police departments that will “lose” applications, or misspell a word that gets an application kicked back from the feds, and then neglect to tell… Read more »

martin
martin
4 years ago

Capt Pilecki,
Good to hear from you, thought maybe the folks in Kommiecticut sent you back to Eastern Europe.
I hope that you have a very Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
/r Martin

Captain Witold Pilecki
Captain Witold Pilecki
4 years ago
Reply to  martin

To Martin & All; Nie…we are still here behind enemy lines and the only possible crack in the resistance would be from people exiting the state. Believe me, there are a multitude of reasons for leaving, gun control being a major one. Myself, I am on the verge of leaving unless I can land a job before unemployment runs out and I start bleeding money. Those that are committed to the Armed Civil Disobedience have stayed strong, and the state has yet to make a move, even for what could be considered “low hanging fruit”. I have been trying to… Read more »

randy
randy
4 years ago

This is key for people living in non-free states:
“the word group – nonresident of a state- must be removed and replaced with – any person regardless of which state is his permanent residence, who has a valid carry permit issued by any other state-.”

Parnell
Parnell
4 years ago
Reply to  randy

Being a NJ resident with a Florida Non-Resident permit, I really want to see the wording changed.

martin
martin
4 years ago
Reply to  randy

Agree with Randy!
It will be interesting to see how the Communistic States like California, New York, New Jersey and Connecticut as well as Washington DC react if a universal concealed carry law is passed on a National level.
I am certain that these states will attempt to ignore such a law by declaring the entire state a “Gun-free Zone” or some other nonsense.