Bearing Arms

Yes, The Second Amendment Is For Everyone

There are people I’m less than comfortable with having guns. Obviously, I’d prefer criminals didn’t have guns, but there are people who are so diametrically opposed to all that I hold dear who I’d rather see disarmed, as a general rule.

However, I also recognize that in order for me to maintain my rights, I have to protect the rights of people I don’t particularly care for.

You know, kind of like these guys.

According to Redneck Revolt’s mission statement, organising people also requires organising a defence of their communities. Hence, the gun range.

The Suffolk County branch group meets up for weekly sessions at the range, the name of which they asked to be kept secret. They often bring along other leftists groups, like the PSL, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), or the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW). Mike says those are some of his favourite days on the range.

“I think it’s very cool that we can bring groups together that normally wouldn’t have anything else in common,” he told me. “And seeing a whole bunch of leftists with guns is cool.”

Not everyone thinks the guns are cool, of course. Redneck Revolt has gotten pushback from liberal groups who think the weapons sully their image. But the members maintain that the firearms are necessary to protect themselves, and the communities of colour they want to help serve.

Much as I may disagree with these guys on just about everything they stand for, the beauty of the Second Amendment is that it protects their right to keep and bear arms as well.

What’s more, they seem to grasp that guns are essential to personal protection, hence their decision to have them regardless of what their fellow leftists think.

And, honestly, if that’s where it stays, more power to them.

The question is, will it?

“We are willing to take on personal risk to defend those in our community who live under the risk of reactionary violence because of their skin colour, gender identity, sexuality, religion, or birth country,” the group’s mission statement reads. “For us, that means that we meet our neighbours face-to-face, and stand alongside them to face threats whenever possible.”

The problem here is that it sounds like they’re looking for a fight. More to the point, I can’t help but look at their statement and see them looking for a fight against law enforcement who are constantly charged with violence against minorities, gays and lesbians, and transgendered people among other things. The rhetoric matches up all too well for me to not think such a thing.

However, the beauty of the Second Amendment is that so long as they don’t start anything, they’re more than welcome to own guns and shoot them. In fact, I’ll defend their right to own firearms to my last breath, despite the fact that I’d rather they didn’t.

The reason is that the Second Amendment isn’t just for one group of people. It’s for all Americans. It’s uniquely American, existing nowhere else on this Earth.

While I have little doubt that if Redneck Revolt got their Utopia, we’d all be disarmed in short order, they don’t have it and the fact that they have the right to be armed proves just how little tyranny they’re really experiencing.

After all, the Second Amendment is for everyone.

The post Yes, The Second Amendment Is For Everyone appeared first on Bearing Arms.

A Year In Review: Bearing Arms Highlights of 2017

2017 has been a whirlwind ride for almost all Americans, and it’s been no different here for us at Bearing Arms. Throughout the non-stop news cycle, we’ve brought you breaking stories, the latest trends, covered some sad tragedies and somewhere in between found ways to share some laughs. Here’s a look back at some of our 2017 stories that mattered most to you, our readers.

National Sporting Goods Store Files For Bankruptcy

On the heels of the closures of Sports Chalet and Sports Authority, and after Bass Pro Shops’ purchase of Cabela’s, another sporting goods store was forced to file for bankruptcy – but was there actually a silver lining for gun buyers?

Are We Heading Toward A Civil War?

After a group of left-wingers open-carried in the streets, one had to wonder if this was a sign of a coming violent, political clash between left and right-wing nuts. Could political tensions become so high that the United States could face another Civil War? Thankfully, we haven’t seen that yet.

Two Church Shootings, Two Very Different Outcomes

This year, mass shootings have dominated headlines. However, one shooting in Antioch, Tennessee, didn’t receive the news coverage it deserved. There was a significant difference between the attack on the church in Antioch and the attack on the church in Sutherland Springs. One didn’t fit within the media’s desired narrative; but sadly, the other one did. In Antioch, a lawful gun carrier killed the assailant, saving countless lives.

“Crash Me Ousside, Howbow Da?”

In one of the crazier stories of the year, Tulsa, Oklahoma, police were forced to kill a 21-year-old woman who had committed a series of gun crimes just days before their encounter. After exchanging fire with police, one officer decided to put an end to the shootout.

AR-15 Saves Homeowner From Home Invasion

Three robbers armed with brass knuckles and a knife were no match for a homeowner and his AR-15. What the family of one of the perpetrator’s had to say in response to the result of the altercation may have viewed the situation differently if it was his home and his family that were the targets of a home invasion.

SCOTUS Nominee Neil Gorsuch SCHOOLS Feinstein On 2nd Amendment

2017 was a great year in part because conservatives and Second Amendment supporters watched President Trump put an originalist on the Supreme Court. Here’s a flashback to when then-Judge Neil Gorsuch had his faceoff with Sen. Dian Feinstein (D-CA) before the Senate Judiciary Committee. The soon-to-be justice schooled the senior senator on the Second Amendment. In 2018, conservatives look forward to seeing more originalists being appointed to vacant court seats.

H&K Announce It Will No Longer Sell Weapons To This Country

In September, Heckler and Koch announced that the company would no longer be selling firearms to certain countries. While many Americans couldn’t care less whether H&K sells firearms to some nations on its list, one country found to be on the list may upset American gun owners – and potentially hurt H&K’s business.

Former Felon Saves State Trooper

In late January, a former felon became a hero after he saved a state trooper’s life. The most important detail of the story is that if it had not been for a judge’s decision 14 years ago, Thomas Yoxall would not have had the means to save Officer Edward Andersson.

Is Gun Ownership A Right?

Did the Founding Fathers intend for us to have a Second Amendment right? And does that right allow for every individual to be armed? Here’s what UCLA professor Eugene Volokh had to say about one of our nation’s most cherished constitutional rights.

That Time Hillary Clinton Politicized A Tragedy And Had Her Rear Handed To Her

Shortly after the tragic Las Vegas massacre, Hillary Clinton didn’t waste any time politicizing the tragedy. After tweeting about the horror, Twitter didn’t hold back its criticism of the former presidential candidate. Hillary Clinton, once again, revealed that her understanding of firearms is severely lacking. It’s a shame Clinton used a national tragedy in an attempt to score political points.

Looking Ahead To 2018

To all of our loyal readers, we thank you for coming back to read our reporting and political takes on today’s most important firearms, law enforcement and 2A issues. All of us here at Bearing Arms would like to wish you and your families a Happy New Year and look forward to the bright things that 2018 has in store for the Second Amendment community.

The post A Year In Review: Bearing Arms Highlights of 2017 appeared first on Bearing Arms.

Rant of the Week: Mental Health and the Liberal-Conservative Gun Debate

The Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia, have reported in the New England Journal of Medicine that research has indicated conservatives have a totally different genetic structure. Part of the findings of the five-year longitudinal study of conservatives includes a startling discovery by Dr. Harlow Fahrblaster.

In it, he wrote, “We looked at a cross-section of conservatives from the poorest to the wealthiest and found almost no differences at all other than what brand of cigar they smoke and what financial advisor they employ to get out of paying their fair share of taxes. When you peal back those superficial differences we found they all shared a genetic structure that indicates they are hostile aliens from another world.”

Now if that appeared in Salon Magazine, was reported on CNN, or discussed on “The View,”you can bet your 5-11 tactical pants it would be gospel spewed out by every media outlet on the far side of Fox News. Liberals are infamous for outright lying and even more infamous for outright believing the trash that liberal pundits put out.

One of the recurring themes liberals keep espousing is about gun control and mental illness, and as recently as several days ago, it was briefly mentioned in an op-ed in the Calaveras Enterprise titled, “Dude, Where’s My Representative.” I probably don’t need to tell you this is in California, right “dude”?

Jerry Tuck, author of the op-ed, was on a diatribe about conservative mentality, local political conservatives in general and POTUS specifically. Tuck wrote, “The “swamp” does need to be drained, but all the toothy reptiles exposed by the receding water will not be Democrats.” Then, specifically about Republicans, he said “…They howl about the Second Amendment, but crazy white men with assault rifles are doing all the killing and gun control is a socialist plot… and mental health is the cause of the killings so they passed a law ensuring that the mentally ill can buy guns.”

Last month in Politico, Jonathan Metzl penned a piece titled, “I’m a Psychiatrist. Making Gun Violence about Mental Health Is a Crazy Idea.” In it, Metzl wrote, with reference to the Sutherland Springs, Texas, mass murder, “…before we knew about the extent of the injury and death, or the events that transpired or the biography and motives of yet another angry white male armed with a semi-automatic rifle and a grudge—before we really knew anything, President Donald Trump jumped into the fray with a diagnosis. ‘Mental health is your problem here,’ Trump opined…’This isn’t a guns situation. This is a mental health problem at the highest level.’”

Metzl went on to write, “Respectfully, Mr. President: It’s not that easy. As a psychiatrist who’s taken a hard look at the connection between mental health and gun violence, I’ve seen where this conversation leads, which usually involves trying to prevent “mentally ill” people from buying guns and involving mental health practitioners in that effort.”

Well duh, that’s the point. And I find it interesting that a psychiatrist would say in the same breath he has no clue how to deal with a situation germane to his Ph.D., but he knows better how to do the President’s job than the President himself.

It is true that Trump said the problem is a mental health issue, because it is a mental health issue. Trump isn’t the only president to have felt that way. An Obama-era regulation would have required the Social Security Administration to report any beneficiaries with psychiatric disabilities to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. The NRA opposed the rule, not so it could assure higher gun sales as liberals love to say any occasion they get, but rather because it was so loosely written that almost anyone could fall victim to it for something as simple as having help balancing your checkbook.

Let’s be realistic here. Every day, mental health professionals are judging whether or not someone is psychologically fit to go into law enforcement, the military, become an airline pilot or a host of other occupations. They routinely make decisions that affect people’s lives, but when it comes to reporting those who might generally be considered a loose wing-nut and threat to society over firearm ownership, they don’t know how to do it? Seriously?

How about this? Stop writing stupid op-eds, go back to college and take a couple of professional courses to remind you what to look for in a raving lunatic and be part of the solution instead of blabbing pointlessly about the problem.

The post Rant of the Week: Mental Health and the Liberal-Conservative Gun Debate appeared first on Bearing Arms.

Armed Robber Foiled When No One’s Fooled By Fake Gun

Just the other day, I reported on a 9-year-old boy who scared a car thief with a pellet gun. He simply pointed the gun at the bad guy, and the criminal decided not to take the risk. It happens.

While it’s not a good idea to bank on people doing so, it worked out for the kid who had nothing to lose.

It did not work out well for one criminal who thought he could pull a fast one.

Derringers are a popular style of pistol, but a faux rifle made by a man with the same name wasn’t nearly as effective when it was used in an attempt to rob a local Circle K Christmas afternoon.

On Monday, police arrested Jeffrey Derringer, 48, of Akron after they say he tried to rob the convenience store at Main Street and Tallmadge Avenue with a homemade fake rifle.

One employee ran to the back of the store to call police.

In that time, another employee got a closer look at what Derringer actually had — a makeshift rifle fashioned out of a pipe, a fake scope, a spring and two table legs clamped together as the stock.

The latter employee ran around the counter and confronted Derringer. Three customers in the store joined the employee.

The fake gun wasn’t particularly convincing, being crafted out of a couple of table legs, a length of pipe, a spring, and something to serve as a fake scope.

There are pop tarts that have been made to look more gunlike than this thing. Yes, it’s that bad.

After it became clear that his Bugs Bunny-like effort was failing, Derringer took off. He was pursued by an employee and three customers who detained him for the five minutes it took for the police to arrive.

Derringer was booked into the Summit County Jail for aggravated robbery. I suspect charges of terminal stupidity would be forthcoming if we could actually make that illegal. Too bad it’s not.

He’s lucky, though. Ohio isn’t exactly a state known for being unfriendly to guns. Derringer might well have found himself shot after pulling this stunt. Bonus points would be awarded to the armed citizen if an actual derringer was used, but anything would have worked.

Derringer may have found himself shot and killed all because of having a fake gun.

In fact, if he had, it might have served as a fantastic warning not to pull something like this. As it is, all Derringer really does is serve as an object of ridicule for such a poorly conceived plan.

I could say a lot more about why his ruse didn’t work, but I don’t really want to give pointers to someone else who may think this is a grand idea. Instead, I’ll simply repeat that self-defense laws aren’t based on how real the danger is, but how real the perception of danger is. If someone pulls a gun on your and you shoot them, you’re not less justified simply because the guy’s gun was unloaded.

The same is true if the gun is fake.

Just something for future nimrods to keep in mind.

The post Armed Robber Foiled When No One’s Fooled By Fake Gun appeared first on Bearing Arms.

Shreveport Police Department: Don’t Shoot Guns In The Air

Every New Year’s Eve, I hear gunshots. I’m not sure if it’s just a Southern thing or universal, but some people like to take their guns out and pop off a few rounds at midnight. And no, they’re gunshots, not fireworks which I also hear.

This year, the Shreveport, LA Police Department is asking folks to not shoot their guns up in the air.

“With New Year’s Eve just around the corner,” the department said in a press release on Thursday, “the Shreveport Police Department would like to take this opportunity to remind everyone NOT to fire guns into the air in celebration of the New Year.”

It’s a fair request.

“Please remember that what goes up must come down,” the department notes. “and that certainly applies to bullets shot into the air. While some may think they magically disappear, this is not the case, and people can be hurt or killed by falling projectiles.”

After all, it’s a matter of physics. While something falling straight down will eventually reach terminal velocity, which is too slow for a round to kill, that only happens if you fire at a perfect 90 degrees to the ground. At 89 degrees or 91 degrees, things are different. Then, things get ugly.

At that angle, the bullet simply arcs on its path, giving it significant range. Guns fired like this have been known to kill people miles away.

Remember that you’re responsible for every single round you fire. Shooting into the air sounds like great fun, but the consequences can be dire.

No one who shoots their guns into the air means to hurt anyone. They’re just trying to celebrate something. However, every time you do something like that, you’re letting an irrational genie out of the bottle who doesn’t give a damn about your intentions.

If you’re somewhere rural enough where shooting a gun in the middle of the night isn’t dangerous all on its own, then maybe you should consider shooting into a backstop or even the ground. Hell, if you’re that rural, you may have your own range. A celebratory night fire with tracers, people firing responsibly at a gun range, could be a whole lot of fun. I’d be down with that one.

If you can’t do that, and they’re legal in your state and city, then go with fireworks. No, they’re not as cool as guns as a general thing, but legal fireworks are also fairly safe if used responsibly.

However, none of this is required to celebrate the coming of 2018. None at all. It may be tradition, but if you can’t do it safely, then it’s time to shelve that tradition.

2018 will come with its own challenges. Among them will be gun control zealots attempting to usurp our God-given right to keep and bear arms because it makes them feel a little safer. They don’t care that they’re doing more harm than good.

The last thing anyone needs to do is give them a rallying cry by being stupid, so don’t.

Be responsible gun owners and don’t shoot up into the air like a moron.


The post Shreveport Police Department: Don’t Shoot Guns In The Air appeared first on Bearing Arms.

Virginia Firearms School To Host Kid’s Gun Awareness Class

No one wants to see children get hurt with a firearm. Unfortunately, it happens far too often. Kids, who are naturally curious about all things, may well find a gun and if they’re not sure what to do with it, bad things can happen. This is true whether they find it in your home or out in the bushes somewhere.

That means kids need to be trained regarding guns. Since the schools won’t allow that education, apparently, a firearms training school in Virginia is stepping up to accept the challenge.

Too many children have lost their lives in accidental gun deaths, so it’s never too early to learn gun safety.

T4Tactics in Lynchburg is hosting an event on January 13, 2018 called “Kids and Guns – Don’t Touch.” It’s open to all ages.

Kids are finding guns everywhere and not being told what to do.

This upcoming hour and a half event will teach kids what and what not to do if they find an unsecured gun.

They’ll have coloring books and plenty of songs and games to get the point across.

Experts say it all starts with responsible gun ownership, especially with adults.

The experts are not wrong.

However, as individuals, we’re only responsible for our own actions. We can’t make other gun owners act responsibly. Sure, we can do the whole thing of calling up our kids’ friends and asking them about guns and whatnot, but is an irresponsible gun owner going to be honest about it? I still remember one of my friend’s mom’s telling other parents that she was collecting keys at a party where alcohol would be present, only to do no such thing. Why would you just accept another parent’s honesty about it?

While many of us have taught our children about guns, in particular how to handle them and what not to do with them, not everyone does and guns can pop up anywhere. Making sure kids have the understanding of what not to do is key.

Let’s be honest, some adults don’t even know what to do if they find a firearm. Why would anyone expect kids to know without being taught?

Marko Galbreath of T4Tactics said, “Somebody’s natural reaction when they pick up a gun if they’re not trained is finger on the trigger, and they point it everywhere. So, we don’t even use a real gun or fake gun in the training, we just have fun and teach them: ‘If you see one, here’s what you do,'”

Unfortunately, my experience supports Galbreath’s assertion. People who don’t know anything about guns don’t even start to exercise common sense when they pick one up without any instruction first. It probably has to do with how Hollywood has everyone running around with their booger hook on the bang switch, like nothing bad ever happens that way.

So a class like this is a wonderful thing, and it needs to happen in every community across the nation. If the schools won’t teach this stuff, then maybe we do.

People in the Lynchburg area should check out the event here.


The post Virginia Firearms School To Host Kid’s Gun Awareness Class appeared first on Bearing Arms.

Small Group Of GA Senators Want To Destroy Guns

Guns are tools. Nothing more, nothing less. While they’re potentially dangerous tools, they’re still just tools. They don’t possess a mind of their own, much less their own motives. While they can be used to do bad things, they’re also used to protect the innocent.

However, that fact doesn’t stop a handful of liberal state senators from Georgia who want to destroy guns in police custody rather than selling them to licensed dealers.

From The Truth About Guns:

In 2012, the Georgia Legislature passed a statute to forbidding the police to destroy valuable firearms. The statute requires that firearms in possession of police — whether confiscated, seized or otherwise acquired — be sold to legal dealers. Once administrative costs are covered, the money from the sale goes to the general fund of the administering political subdivision.

When the law went into effect, a number of Georgia political subdivisions violated the law with impunity. The chief amongst them: the City of Atlanta. Guns sold at auction by police usually bring between $100 and $200 each. Atlanta was sitting on at least 6,000 guns more than two years ago.

Atlanta has likely added two thousand more guns since then. Assuming $150 per gun, and eight thousand guns, that is $1.2 million dollars the city refuses to put in its general fund. The figure doesn’t include the cost of storing and securing the valuable property, or the cost of organizing a sale.

Three Democrat senators, Lester G Jackson from Savanna (top of post),  Ed Harbison from Columbus (posing in front of the flag above), and Gail Davenport from Jonesboro (posiing in front of the flag below), have introduced legislation to allow police to destroy legal, valuable, guns. The legislation would repeal of the 2012 law.

As TTAG notes, this law has about as much chance of passing as a bill to issue a full-auto rifle to every man woman and child would have of passing in New York City. This is Georgia we’re talking about here.

That said, the Atlanta area has always been the more liberal part of Georgia, one that has often tested the state’s preemption laws regarding guns. They’re used to thinking the rules don’t apply to them. The legislature says no trying to keep guns out of public parks, Atlanta keeps trying to keep guns out of public parks. They simply don’t care what the state says when it comes to guns…and the Atlanta taxpayer is the one who foots the bill for these failed efforts time and time again.

Now, on top of their previous wastes in trying to test state law, they’re also refusing to put a million or so dollars into their bank account?

No, this is just pure, unadulterated stupid.

Guns are not the problem. Anyone with half a brain will know that the problem has nothing to do with guns, especially ones sold by licensed dealers.

No, all these antics do is deprive poor people of inexpensive firearms that they could then use to defend themselves. Low-income neighborhoods are the ones most likely to be inundated with crime, making those who live there the ones most in need of personal protection.

These senators aren’t helping these communities by trying to deny them arms, they’re trying to hurt them.

The post Small Group Of GA Senators Want To Destroy Guns appeared first on Bearing Arms.

Number Of Officers Killed In The Line Of Duty In 2017 Lowest In 50 Years

Being a police officer is a challenging job. After all, there are people who want you dead simply because of the outfit you put on before going to work. Further, you’re actually required to do things that are going to anger some folks. Both of those situations ramps up the risk of officers being murdered pretty darn high.

However, 2017 is shaping up to have the fewest officers killed in the line of duty in half a century.

The number of law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty dropped sharply in 2017, marking the second-lowest toll in more than 50 years.

As of Thursday, 128 officers have died in the line of duty this year, with 44 shot and killed. That’s down 10% from 2016, when 143 officers died, with 66 gunned down, according to data released by the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, a nonprofit aimed at honoring officers and improving safety.

The only other year with fewer deaths in the past five decades was 2013, when 116 officers were killed.

“This is one of those good-news, bad-news situations,” said Craig Floyd, president and chief executive of the fund. “On one hand, you had 128 officers who made the ultimate sacrifice, showing the cost of public safety, but for the first time since 2013, the number of deaths has actually declined.”

Mr. Floyd is correct, it really is. For most of us, this is still fairly good news. For the families and friends of those 128 officers, however…

Several things are credited as being potentially responsible for the low number. Among them are better body armor, better community relations, better training, and just less violence in American communities.

Or, it could all be an outlier and mean nothing.

Yeah, that’s something to rock yourself to sleep at night with, isn’t it?

“It’s definitely a good sign but if it’s a trend, we’ll have to see,” said Geoffrey P. Alpert, a professor at the University of South Carolina and a researcher on high-risk police activities. “We’re starting to see the impact of all this new training and equipment, and a shift because of the overall concern for officer safety.”

While shootings played a big role, traffic accidents caused the largest number of deaths. Crashes killed 47 officers this year, down 15% from 2016. A number of factors — including enhanced policies that limit vehicle pursuits and speeding and the “move-over law,” which requires drivers to slow down and switch lanes when an officer is pulled over  — could be behind the drop, experts say.

Alpert is correct, one year doesn’t make a trend, so we’ll have to see.

That said, we can hope. After all, while police officers come in all shapes, sizes, and decency, most of us would rather see the good ones nice and safe and the bad ones become unemployed and/or arrested. Death really isn’t good for anyone here.

Maybe I’m just biased. After all, I first had to learn about death when one of my father’s fellow officers was killed in the line of duty. I don’t like hearing about dead officers.

But I don’t think I’m alone on that, and hearing that there are a lot few of them is a big win for everyone.

The post Number Of Officers Killed In The Line Of Duty In 2017 Lowest In 50 Years appeared first on Bearing Arms.

NYC To Beef Up Security For Times Square New Year’s Eve Celebration

New York always seems like a prime target for maniacs and madmen, but with two terrorist attacks in the Big Apple since Halloween, authorities aren’t taking any chances. While no credible threat has been reported to the Times Square revelers, officials are stepping up security measures just in case.

The security precautions that will be taken by the New York Police Department to protect the revelers are expected to be unprecedented. Typical security measures, like using sand trucks and blocker vehicles on nearby cross streets and a mix of plainclothes and uniformed officers, will be deployed as always, but other steps, such as increasing security at nearby parking garages and closer surveillance of large rental trucks, are also being put in place, city officials said, according to local ABC station WABC.

Police officials are expected to make more detailed disclosures about their plans on Thursday.

John Cohen, a former counterterrorism coordinator for the Department of Homeland Security and current ABC News contributor, said that it is “not surprising at all” that security is being increased this year “based on how the threat facing the country has evolved.”

“It’s very possible that our traditional intelligence techniques for detecting threats are not well suited to uncover potential attacks,” Cohen said, adding that it means that more precautions are necessary.

“In the current threat environment, the public plays a major role in both helping to detect potential attacks and being prepared in the event they find themselves at a location where an attack is unfolding,” Cohen said.

I have to agree with Cohen that our usual methods of gathering intelligence are woefully inadequate for these kinds of attacks. It’s very difficult to gather information that’s simply existing inside of the warped mind of a deranged ideologue willing to kill for their religion.

That said, the precautions are warranted. Times Square on New Year’s Eve is probably the most attractive target imaginable to terrorists. Thousands of people in one place, a party atmosphere that at once lowers people’s guard and probably exemplifies American excess, what’s not to like if you’re a jihadi?

Among the precautions being taken is tougher security on rental trucks, a favorite weapon of terrorists in this day and age, and at parking garages.

Just knowing about these procedures will probably dissuade a potential terrorist from this as a target, which is good. However, it seems they’re also looking primarily at attacks that have already happened as a guide for what may happen in the future. That’s limiting to some extent.

But that also assumes we’re being told about all precautions, which I suspect isn’t the case. For example, I suspect there are snipers from the NYPD SWAT team that will be positioned surrounding Times Square in case someone gets froggy and wants to pull a Las Vegas-style attack that haven’t been mentioned.

That’s just speculation on my part, mind you, but only a fool would tip their hand and let a potential attacker know everything. After all, if you know ahead of time, you’ve got time to circumvent those measures.

Let’s all just pray that none of these measures are tested and that we have a peaceful and pleasant New Year’s Eve.

The post NYC To Beef Up Security For Times Square New Year’s Eve Celebration appeared first on Bearing Arms.

Californians Stocking Up On Ammo Prior To Jan. 1 Deadline

When the state of California enacted their new ammunition regulations, you had to know this was going to happen. When you give people a deadline on when their relatively unfettered access to a product ends, expect a run on that product before it runs out.

That’s exactly what’s happening in California.

Online ammunition retailer said sales have skyrocketed in the weeks leading up to January, with Californians snatching up 50 percent more ammunition than gun owners in other states.

“Californians are ordering more than customers in other states right now which suggests that they are stocking up,” Eric Schepps of told in an email. “What is even more glaring is the number of folks coming to our site right now and buying as opposed to just shopping or reading content. The number of actual ammo buyers versus just shoppers is about double the normal rate for California visitors right now.”

Prop 63, backed by California Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom’s as the “Safety for All” voter proposition, requires background checks prior to all ammunition sales in addition to a moratorium on direct internet sales. The measure states vendors must secure an annual permit in addition to placing requirements on dealers that state ammo be displayed in a manner that is not accessible to the public — such as in a locked cabinet.

The legislation has caused backlash among the gun community with one small ammunition maker already out of business and other gun rights groups promising legal action over the initiative.

While 2A organizations go to bat for California gun owners, it seems Californians are wasting no time freely stocking up on ammo from vendors while they still can.

I can’t help but believe that this is the normal, human reaction. It’s not that people won’t be able to buy ammo after the new rules go into place–though just when that’ll actually happen is up in the air at the moment since California officials dragged their feet on writing them–but that their free access will end.

That means people will want to put off having to deal with the new rules for as long as possible. They’ll buy as much as they can now so they won’t have to fool with stuff later.

In the process, any chance of the new law accomplishing anything goes out the window.

Not that there was much chance of that. After all, people can buy ammo out of state all they want and not have to worry. Unless California wants to put checkpoints on every road leading into and out of the state (don’t tempt them), the law will be a waste of time.

What it will do is create a nice little black market for ammo sales, so they’ve got that going for them.

But for the time being, it seems clear that Californians are stocking up all so they can avoid the stupid. More power to them and, in the long run, maybe they can work to repeal these ridiculous and idiotic regulations.

The post Californians Stocking Up On Ammo Prior To Jan. 1 Deadline appeared first on Bearing Arms.

Controversy Over Sporting Goods Store Moving To Palm Beach Mall

Until such time as the Supreme Court nullifies any and all gun laws and restrictions on who can carry and where they can carry, there will always be some controversy over where those limits lie. However, every now and then, we get a glimpse at the hand of those who would see us disarmed completely and see that there are literally no places they will accept firearms even existing, regardless of the circumstances.

Take an op-ed regarding a Dick’s Sporting Goods potentially moving to a Palm Beach, FL mall.

You can purchase a lot of things at the mall nowadays, from candles to cars. But a hunting rifle? No. Too many targets. Too little security. Too much individual instability.

Some places are just off-limits

Dick’s, which would occupy space in the Sears store just around the corner from Mrs. Fields and Zales Jewelers, is mulling offering the opportunity to buy arms and ammunition, much to the chagrin of Palm Beach Gardens’ police chief and other city leaders.

Yes, Dick’s Sporting Goods may have the law on its side. But there is just something wrong about this.

Florida, thanks to our weak-kneed Legislature and succession of law-and-order governors, has earned its moniker, the “Gunshine State.” But even they, so far, have deemed certain places off limits — schools and college campuses, for example.

And while there has never been a court challenge regarding retailers in shopping malls like the Gardens and Town Center at Boca Raton, exposing these so-called “soft targets” to the whims of a deranged individual — like those in Las Vegas, Sutherland Springs, Texas, or Orlando — would have to be a big no-no.

In other words, the issue here is that a place that sells firearms might move into a mall.

Make no mistake, there are already guns in that mall. I promise you, there are guns moving into and out of that mall each and every day it’s opened, with no problems whatsoever. Nor will there be.

What the writer here, one Rick Christie, fails to note is how mass shootings have an overwhelming tendency to take place not in gun stores or locations adjacent to gun stores, but in places where firearms aren’t allowed. A mall in Florida–as Christie notes, a state known as the “Gunshine State”–is a poor choice for such escapades due to the chance of meeting armed resistance almost immediately.

But Christie is either ignorant or willfully ignores such facts.

Instead, he posits a fantasy where people purchasing guns at Dick’s will be gunned down by armed citizens who think an attack is about to take place. He even quotes Police Chief Stephen Stepp who apparently thinks we’re all just a bunch of Rambos waiting for the chance to go off, yet at no point is there even a single example of this having ever happened. Anywhere.

Frankly, I hope Dick’s does move into the mall, if for no other reason than to watch as precisely nothing happens as a result.

People can get prickly when it comes to stores that sell guns, but why? It’s a legal product and the vast majority of them are never used for any ill purpose. Cars are far more likely to be used to hurt someone than a gun will be, yet we get paranoia like this.

The only way to deal with it is to show just how unfounded such squeamishness is.

The post Controversy Over Sporting Goods Store Moving To Palm Beach Mall appeared first on Bearing Arms.

LodeStar Firearms CEO Wrongly Claims New ‘Smart Gun’ Is The Future

Gareth Glaser, CEO of LodeStar Firearms and a corporate executive of thirty years, thinks his new idea for smart guns will save lives. The new smart gun technology, which really isn’t new, would only allow for a gun’s rightful owner to fire the weapon if they were using the proper “token.” Bearing Arms has covered the topic of smart guns in the past and understands that, in the words of David, “smart guns prove people aren’t.

For those who are unfamiliar with smart guns and tokens, a token is a small object that would “send a signal to a “smart gun” held in that person’s hand allowing for the trigger to operate … [the token would need to be] within inches of the trigger.”

Glaser has suggested a few different kinds of tokens for his firearms, and he thinks gun owners would be willing to pay a little extra for the safety feature. That wishful thinking is unlikely to occur. Gun owners familiar with these kinds of firearms know that tokens, as well as the technology itself, possess some serious flaws.

One of Glaser’s tokens would involve a microchip, which would be implanted between the shooter’s trigger finger and thumb. A microchip may be a hard pass for most gun owners. It may be safe to assume that those who already own firearms or are looking to make their first purchase would be against the idea of needing a medical procedure, no matter how small or non-invasive, to operate their firearm. Not to mention, requiring an implant comes across as, well, Orwellian. Furthermore, what were to happen if, in a life or death situation, the firearm does not read the microchip and a person is unable to defend themselves? When it comes to life or death, people want to know their fate is not left up to a sensor.

According to Glaser, if gun owners don’t like the idea of an implanted microchip, other tokens can be used; for example, a ring or watch. But even then, gun owners can run into problems. What would happen if the ring or watch were misplaced? The firearm would be rendered inoperable. Imagine a worst case scenario, and an innocent gun owner is unable to protect his or her family, because they do not have the ring or watch. They’ve either lost it under the bed or just can’t remember where they set it down. The potential for loss of life or a serious tragedy would increase.

But if one were to unwisely make such a purchase or put their trust in the functionality of said “safety features”, when does LodeStar plan to put this type of firearm up for sale and how much more money would people spend on it?

NBC 10 in Philadelphia stated, “[Glaser] said Lodestar plans to bring a smart gun to market by the summer of 2019. He expects the handgun to cost about 20 percent more than its common counterpart: roughly $750.”

If one forgets about the tokens themselves, there are additional problems with a firearm like this. There is the chance that, if the gun were to fall into the wrong hands, a criminal would easily be able to find a way around the features to fire the weapon.

To illustrate problems smart guns can have, Wired interviewed a hacker in July of this year. With just $15 in magnets, the hacker was able to bypass the security features of a smart gun known as the “Armatix iP1.” By using the magnets, the hacker could fire the $1,500 weapon without wearing the watch that was “needed” to do so. Additionally, after identifying the frequency at which the signal between the gun and watch operates, the hacker was able to disable the firearm by using a transmitter emitting the same frequency.

See the video below.

Though the firearm shown in the video is not the same exact firearm that LodeStar would be selling, these are problems that LodeStar’s firearms could encounter, and gun owners should keep this in mind.

Here’s the bottom line: when it comes to firearms, the best gun is a gun that allows for easy access and allows the gun owner’s life to be held entirely in their own hands.

The post LodeStar Firearms CEO Wrongly Claims New ‘Smart Gun’ Is The Future appeared first on Bearing Arms.

Firearms And The Relation To Male…Equipment

Anti-gunners love to try and equate male genitals and firearms for some reason. They often claim they’re phallic symbols even though anyone whose junk looks like a gun needs to see a physician immediately. However, that doesn’t stop them from making the claim.

Such as this charming individual I encountered on Twitter yesterday.

Love guns? You must feel inadequate. #FuckYerGuns #FuckTheNRA @betsyriot

— Betsy Resistance (@Betsy_Shalala) December 5, 2017

To which I replied that yes, I do feel inadequate. After all, my member won’t sling projectiles at 1,200 feet per second toward bad guys, thus it’s inadequate for certain functions.

However, it also got me to thinking about why so many anti-gun women try this tactic. Do they really think we gun owning men equate our sex organs with our guns?

As Massad Ayoob once noted, if a firearm were related to a man’s…manhood, no guy would buy a gun with a two-inch barrel. He’s right.

But that’s not really what it’s about.

The attempt here isn’t because anyone actually thinks male reproductive organs or guns really have anything in common. What they’re trying to do is use a picture of gun owners as almost all male and then try to undermine our masculinity. They’re trying to claim that real men don’t need guns, but don’t want to use the language since feminist find it so objectionable.

What they miss is that while firearms may not be phallic symbols, they are a part of masculinity. In fact, a key part of masculine behavior.

Last year, I published a book on masculinity. In part, it was to counter so much BS floating around as to what a man is and what a man isn’t. In the process, I outlined three roles all men should fill. The professor, or the one who teaches the young about what a man is and how to do various things, was one. The provider, which is self-explanatory, is another, though I do note that being a provider doesn’t preclude a spouse making as much or more than you. The final role of a man is to be the protector, the one who keeps his family safe from harm.

When it comes to protecting what you love, no tool is more efficient or effective than a firearm. Period.

Some may argue that the gun is the tool of a weak man, it’s not. It’s the tool of someone who understands that the bad people of the world don’t like to play by anyone’s rule book but their own, and if you’re unarmed, you may be woefully unprepared to stand up and protect those you care about.

Contrary to some people’s implication, having a gun isn’t unmanly. In fact, I’d argue that being able to own a gun and refusing to do so is the unmanly act. Anyone who does so has shirked their responsibility to protect their family, outsourcing it to others who may or may not be able to act effectively should the moment of truth arrive.

So yes, we’re overcompensating for something. We’re overcompensating for the fact that no body part of ours can require everyone else to play by Marquis of Queensbury rules in the world. Plain and simple.

The post Firearms And The Relation To Male…Equipment appeared first on Bearing Arms.

Hero Deputy Busts Through Ice To Save Boy’s Life

Washington County sheriff’s Sgt. Aaron Thompson speaks at a press conference in Hurricane, Utah, Tuesday, Dec. 26, 2017, following his rescue of an 8-year-old boy who fell into an icy pond in New Harmony on Monday. Authorities have not offered details about the boy’s condition but Thompson said at a news conference Tuesday that deputies were hopeful for the boy. (Alex Cabrero/The Deseret News via AP)


Being from Georgia, where we’re notorious for not having frozen ponds, lakes, or any water outside of an ice cube tray in the freezer, the idea of falling through the ice is terrifying. I can imagine that it’s worse for people who actually fall through the ice.

In Utah, however, when one boy fell through the ice, he had a guardian angel looking out for him. An angel wearing a badge.

 Utah sheriff’s deputy said Tuesday he was desperate and numb from the cold as he punched and stomped his way into a frozen pond on Christmas Day to pull out an 8-year-old boy who had fallen through the ice while chasing his dog.

With cuts on his forearms, Washington County sheriff’s Sgt. Aaron Thompson said at a news conference that rescuers believe the child was in the 37-degree water for about 30 minutes until the deputy rescued him.

“I couldn’t feel anything. I didn’t notice anything when I was doing it,” Thompson said. “I knew that time was of the essence. I had a very short window to get that child out of the water.”

Sheriff’s Lt. David Crouse said the boy was hospitalized in Salt Lake City but he didn’t have details on his condition. Thompson said deputies were hopeful.

The boy fell through the ice in the town of New Harmony, north of St. George.

It’s funny how if a police officer does something bad, it may well end up on every news program from here to Timbuktu, but a heroic action like this? Virtually nothing.

However, let’s be clear, Thompson is a hero. While it appears he doesn’t like the spotlight, what he did was heroic in every sense of the word. He risked his own life for another, and that’s something we all like to think we’d do, but far too many of us are lying to ourselves about it.

For Sgt. Thompson, there’s not a doubt in the world.

The thing is, there are brave men and women like him in every department in the country, so while the media is painting police officers are racist, bigoted people who just can’t wait to blow away minorities, people like Sgt. Thompson are risking their lives to save a boy’s life. Meanwhile, the media wonders just why people don’t trust them anymore.

What we do trust is that people like Sgt. Thompson and his colleagues are people who will put their lives on the line for their fellow man. While the courts have ruled they have no duty to protect life, not every officer ascribes to that, as is evidenced by this incident.


The post Hero Deputy Busts Through Ice To Save Boy’s Life appeared first on Bearing Arms.

Huffington Post Shares Black Gun Experience

The last thing I ever thought I’d see was the Huffington Post run a story about gun ownership in any way, shape, or form and present it in a way that didn’t make me want to hurl things through the air at the stupidity. After all, the site is notoriously liberal, and that means anti-Second Amendment. The site is littered with anti-gun posts, so many that it’s impossible to think of the site as being remotely pro-gun.

Well, the post they ran yesterday won’t unwind that image from your mind, but it actually as a fair look at a certain segment of gun ownership. In particular, black ownership of firearms.

In the post, they interview a number of black gun owners, including Black Guns Matter founder Maj Toure.

It doesn’t appear that HuffPo edited for content, though they do admit they did edit for length–which makes some sense considering some interviews might run long.

What does appear, however, is a testimony to how much work needs to be done.

Time and time again, there’s a portrait painted of the average gun owner. It’s that of a white male, middle to upper class financially, and probably a devout Christian.

To be sure, that fits a whole lot of us, but there is a pile of gun owners who it doesn’t fit, and we seriously need to think about how to fix that perception. After all, it becomes harder for anti-gun zealots to go after guns when one of their target demographic groups are embracing them.

Unfortunately, that’s easier said than done.

The mainstream media has done a fine job of muddying the waters on guns. As the post notes, the Tamir Rice incident looms large in any such discussion, mostly because the press failed to try and understand how something like that could happen. After all, they already had a reason: racism.

However, toy guns can look awfully realistic, especially in the split-second a police officer has to make a decision.

The Huffington Post piece does show one important factor, however. It shows that black gun owners aren’t monolithic in their thoughts, opinions, and experiences. While some recount what they believe are troubling encounters with police, others make it clear they’ve had nothing but positive interactions with law enforcement. Some view firearms as key for personal defense while others have bought the leftist line of how guns make you less safe.

In other words, there’s no single experience for black gun owners, which isn’t surprising. There’s no single experience for any kind of gun owners.

Yet it’s clear that we, as a community, haven’t done a particularly good job at reaching out to these other gun owners. It seems that most don’t understand that no, we don’t view black gun owners as thugs. We view them as kindred spirits, fellow travelers who have also embraced their sacred right to keep and bear arms.

They’re not any different than us, and that’s important. After all, if the gun grabbers take our guns, they’ll grab theirs as well.

The post Huffington Post Shares Black Gun Experience appeared first on Bearing Arms.

Gun Stores Are Unregulated? Tell That To Store Facing Losing FFL Over Clerical Issues

Anti-gun zealots love to claim that gun stores are practically unregulated. Giffords, for example, claims, “Although all firearms in the United States originate with licensed gun dealers, these dealers are subject to very little federal scrutiny.” This argument is parroted throughout the anti-gun sphere of the internet and in their face-to-face meetings.

Of course, it’s absolute bovine excrement.

For example, let’s take a look at what’s happening with a gun store in Illinois.

A Zion gun store might lose its Federal Firearms License with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in connection with allegations that 1st Class Firearms owner Craig Bricco has failed to address clerical errors in firearm purchases.

At the heart of the revocation issue is what the bureau considers an excessive number of mistakes on the six-page ATF form 4473, which is required of the buyer for every sale of a weapon.

Bricco told the News-Sun that he takes responsibility for the mistakes made, but feels that 42 clerical errors in over 1,500 forms, over a 12-month period going back to early 2014, is hardly excessive. Bricco stressed he’s always tried to improve on mistakes, but that past history with the bureau has probably worked against him.

An ATF special agent responded by saying the forms should be virtually error free, given the importance of accurately tracking weapons sold to the public.

Bricco can appeal a ruling, but he’s also mulling options for the Sheridan Road location he’s owned since 2008 in the event he loses his license.

Now, I’m not going to excuse the mistakes. For one, I don’t know what they are. Is BATFE being picky here, or are they serious problems? Without knowing specifics, I just can’t comment on that aspect at all except to say that the error rate seems high but nothing more.

However, I challenge the folks at Giffords to name three other industries where a clerical error on less than three percent of your paperwork can cause someone to lose a federal license. Name three other industries where paperwork mistakes can potentially land you in prison?

I’ll name one for them: Pharmaceuticals. The drug industry is the only one I know of with this level of meticulous requirements or else you lose everything.

To say that gun stores aren’t regulated is beyond ridiculous. Every FFL I know lives in a state of near-constant paranoia of screwing up their paperwork and having the full weight of BATFE slam down upon their tiny person. Others who have considered going into the industry don’t because of that fear.

How much more regulating do FFLs require in the anti-gun zealot’s mind? What else do they expect? What’s the endgame here?

The only conclusion is that they want the regulations to be so onerous that no one will operate a gun store. After all, it doesn’t matter if you have a right to keep and bear arms if you can’t find a place to purchase those arms, right? That’s what it’s all about. They want to drive gun stores out of business so that they don’t have to worry about the Second Amendment anymore.

And they’re not nearly as sneaky about it as they like to think.

The post Gun Stores Are Unregulated? Tell That To Store Facing Losing FFL Over Clerical Issues appeared first on Bearing Arms.

Cities Sue Pentagon Over NICS Failures

Sutherland Springs was horrific. There’s just no other way to describe an event that murders multiple generations of families and practically decimates a small town. In fact, “horrific” is really too mild a word to ascribe to such an event.

It was made all the worse for many by finding out that the NICS, the very system charged with keeping guns out of the hands of people like this killer, failed to do so. It failed because the Department of Defense had failed to report the killer’s crimes during his Air Force enlistment to the system.

People were upset, to say the least.

Then it was revealed that the killer was far from the only one the DOD failed to report to the NICS.

Now, a handful of cities are filing a lawsuit against the United States Armed Forces for this failure.

The cities of New York, Philadelphia and San Francisco have filed suit against the Pentagon for repeatedly failing to report military convictions to a federal database designed to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals.

The lawsuit was filed in federal district court in Virginia on Friday in cooperation with former Arizona Democratic congresswoman and shooting victim Gabby Giffords’ gun control advocacy group.

The cities are seeking a court order to monitor compliance with reporting requirements that the Pentagon in recent weeks has acknowledged it has failed to comply with for years.

Two separate military investigations — one by the Air Force and one by the Department of Defense Inspector General — recently found the failure to share the data is systemic across the military branches, in some cases a full third of the time.

The complaint states that “twenty-six innocent people were murdered and twenty others wounded, in a Texas church in a mass shooting that could, and should, have been prevented. … Had Defendants simply followed the law, that shooter never should have been able to purchase the weapon he used.”

“No new laws are required to achieve that goal,” it adds. “Instead, this Court need only grant Plaintiffs’ request to compel Defendants to diligently implement, and consistently apply, the unambiguous laws that have been on the books for decades.”

The idea that New York and San Francisco would latch onto this is hardly surprising. Philadelphia isn’t all that much of a surprise either, to be fair, but it doesn’t have the serious anti-gun “street cred” of the other two and this is too good an opportunity for them to pass up.

Finding out Giffords is involved as well isn’t all that surprising either. After all, this is a group that has been trying mightily to find itself a big win and is grabbing hold of anything and everything it can to score it. However, I suspect this will fail just like everything else they’ve tried.

For one thing, I’m not sure these cities actually have the standing to sue the federal government. I suppose Sutherland Springs might, but these other communities? Not so much.

But I’m not a lawyer, so I could be wrong on that one.

What I do know is that filing a lawsuit against the federal government is dicey at best. There are plenty of rules in place over what you can sue the government over and, well, Uncle Sam has deeper pockets than NYC, San Fran, and Philly put together. Yes, they’re our pockets, ultimately, but they’re still fairly deep.

I don’t expect this lawsuit to go anywhere, but it’ll let Giffords feel like they’re doing something, so let’s give them a pat on the head like a mentally disabled child and send them on their way.

The post Cities Sue Pentagon Over NICS Failures appeared first on Bearing Arms.

Terrorism And Armed Resistance

When an Egyptian immigrant in Harrisburg, PA decided to conduct what the Department of Homeland Security referred to as a terrorist attack, he probably had a good chance of creating all kinds of havoc.

After all, we’ve seen enough mass shootings lately to understand that such attacks can be devastating.

For suspected terrorist Ahmed Aminamin El-Mofty, however, his plan didn’t go as he intended. That might have been his target selection.

As officials search for more clues about the motive for an Egyptian immigrant’s shooting rampage that targeted law enforcement in Pennsylvania’s capital city, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is calling it a “terror attack.”

Pennsylvania State Police, Harrisburg police and other Pennsylvania authorities have yet to classify Ahmed Aminamin El-Mofty’s Friday afternoon shooting rampage as terror.

The 51-year-old shot at local and state police during the shooting spree that spread two miles across Harrisburg. Law enforcement officers shot and killed El-Mofty. Dauphin County District Attorney Ed Marsico said he has “no doubt” the gunman targeted law enforcement.

Tyler Q. Houlton, the acting press secretary for DHS, posted a statement on Twitter late Saturday confirming El-Mofty emigrated from his native Egypt on a “family-based immigrant visa” and became a naturalized citizen before going on the shooting spree that Houlton called a “terror attack.”

The gunfire began shortly after 4 p.m. Friday, when the man fired several shots at a state Capitol officer in downtown Harrisburg, striking his car several times and sending one shot “that went very close to hitting him,” Marsico said. About 20 or 30 minutes later, he fired several shots at a state trooper, striking her once.

The trooper is “doing well,” is in good condition and is expected to make a full recovery, Marsico said.

Of course, that’s good news. I hope the trooper makes a speedy and full recovery, obviously.

However, let’s look at El-Mofty’s chosen target demographic. He went after people who he had to know would be armed and trained to use lethal force to defend themselves or other people.

As a result, his attack was about as effective as using a Lena Dunham photo to treat erectile dysfunction.

Now, let’s think about something I wrote following the botched New York subway attack when I suggested armed citizens as being a key part of dealing with domestic terrorism. I suggested then that a nation of armed citizens, milling about in their day-to-day life, could be an effective bulwark against terrorism because they could meet terrorist aggression with naked, American force.

I’m sorry, but if the events in Pennsylvania do nothing else, they solidify that belief.

While El-Mofty may have been a complete idiot because he chose to go after the police, the point remains that he went after people who were armed and could fight back. The result was fewer casualties and a dead bad guy. I’m sorry, but that’s a big win.

Yes, an officer was injured, and that’s unfortunate. However, we’re not dealing with police funerals in Pennsylvania today, and it’s proof that terrorism fails when it’s met with armed resistance.

Just like every other kind of murdering scumbag out there.

The post Terrorism And Armed Resistance appeared first on Bearing Arms.

Under The Trump Administration, 2017 Was A Good Year for Gun Owners

The nation is quickly approaching the one year mark of Donald Trump’s presidency. Over the course of the 2016 presidential election cycle, then-candidate Donald Trump promised to fight for people’s Second Amendment rights; whether it be by repealing Obama-era gun regulations, encouraging Congress to pass pro-second amendment legislation, or appointing federal judges that would protect one of America’s most important constitutional rights.

2017 was a good year for gun owners and the Second Amendment. One can point to many wins for the Second Amendment this year, but here are five.

National Reciprocity

Perhaps the most significant win for 2A supporters and gun owners this year, a victory that occurred just this month, was the passage of H.R. 38, a national reciprocity and background check improvement bill, in the House of Representatives. Though the legislation has yet to become law, organizations like the National Rifle Association (NRA) have been pressuring the Republican-led Congress to hold a vote on this bill for years. The NRA and gun owners across the country may now see their hopes come to fruition. This bill never had the chance to become law under former President Barack Obama. But in a party-line vote, House Republicans passed the bill 231 to 198.

While the passage in the House was a high point, it was also amusing to watch the liberals freak out.

Campus Carry

In a move that many will see as a way to make college campuses safer, three additional states passed legislation that will now allow those with concealed carry licenses to carry on public universities, though there may be some restrictions in place and additional requirements for gun owners to meet. Georgia, Arkansas, and Kansas all passed this important legislation earlier in the year, much to the dismay of liberals who think gun-free zones are the solution to mass shootings. In reality, gun-free zones make innocent people sitting ducks. Second Amendment supporters understand the best way to defend against mass shootings is to have responsible gun carriers.

Pro-Second Amendment Judges

Capitalizing on a campaign promise, President Trump appointed a constitutional originalist in Justice Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, and he has continued to appoint judges to vacant seats who respect the rights in the constitution. Several of President Trump’s appointees have been endorsed by the NRA and are now sitting in lifetime positions. The president has set a record for having the most confirmations in a president’s first year in office, and there are many more vacancies to be filled. The more constitutionalists appointed, the safer the Second Amendment and the American people’s gun rights will be. As an example, former Justice of the Texas Supreme Court, Justice Don Willett, was endorsed by the NRA. President Trump appointed, and the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmed, Judge Willett to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

Massive Number of Gun Sales 

Though Hillary Clinton did not win the presidential election last year, it appears that gun sales have not fallen. As Tom explained last week, though gun manufacturers see a loss of profits, it’s not because the American people aren’t buying guns. Gun manufacturers have an inventory problem, which means more affordable firearms for buyers as the rate of demand drives prices down. These manufacturers may have been expecting a President Hillary Clinton and were gearing up for a spike in sales as the American people would expect a significant push for gun control. Evidence of an increase in gun sales occurred on Black Friday. The day after Thanksgiving, the FBI conducted a record number of background checks, 203,086 to be exact. In July, the Washington Examiner reported that 2017 was on pace to be “the second biggest year for gun sales ever.”

Repeal of Obama Gun Regulation

In November, those on the left claimed that President Trump had made it easier for those with mental illnesses to acquire a firearm. That couldn’t be farther from the truth. What President Trump did was repeal a regulation that had done away with a person’s right to due process, as the regulation prevented those looking to exercise their second amendment rights from buying a gun. The Daily Wire explained:

The actual purpose of the bill … was to undo a last-minute Obama regulation approved by the Social Security Administration after Trump was elected. In 2013, following the Sandy Hook school shooting, then-President Obama first suggested the original regulation, which required the automatic reporting to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) of Social Security recipients whose benefit payments are sent to a designated “representative payee” because the recipients are considered incapable of maintaining their own financial affairs. Inclusion in the NICS effectively prohibits a person from purchasing a firearm. This is an obvious restriction of Second Amendment rights…

Even the American Civil Liberties Union agreed with President Trump’s move to do away with the regulation.

What To Expect In 2018

Next year, conservatives and Second Amendment supporters have a few legislative moves and regulations to look out for. As mentioned previously, the House has passed its national reciprocity legislation, but it still must pass in the Senate. Now, it will be up to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) to ensure Republicans have the votes, so that President Trump can sign the legislation into law.

Along with the national reciprocity legislation, a group of Senators has also introduced separate legislation to fix the NICS system by creating penalties for agencies that fail to accurately report the criminal histories of individuals to the FBI. As the legislation has bipartisan support from its onset, the bill has a shot at becoming law. Currently, the legislation does not appear to restrict gun rights but intends to prevent errors in relaying information to other agencies, with the aim of keeping another Sutherland Springs massacre from happening again.

Furthermore, a big review is already underway on bump stocks, and a decision can be expected to be reached next year. Bump stocks have come under intense scrutiny after it was revealed that the Las Vegas shooter used the devices to increase the rate of fire from his semi-automatic rifles to carry kill dozens of concertgoers. The DOJ and ATF are considering their options.

Below is a Vice interview with a former ATF analyst who helped determine the legality of bump stocks.

A Bright Future

In 2017, the American people received a small taste of how the Second Amendment will be treated under a Trump presidency and a Republican-led Congress. There is a lot to look forward to in 2018, and Republican voters will need to focus on the 2018 midterm elections to ensure President Trump has the support he needs in Congress to further his conservative agenda in protecting the Second Amendment and encouraging Americans to exercise their right to bear arms.

The post Under The Trump Administration, 2017 Was A Good Year for Gun Owners appeared first on Bearing Arms.

Washington Gun Store Robbed In ‘Smash And Grab’

A gun store in Bellvue, Washington is just the latest victim of a “smash and grab” robbery, the kind that is occurring at gun stores all over the country. In this case, it was the second such robbery to take place at West Coast Armory.

From KIRO:

Police say a stolen car was used by burglars to ram into a Bellevue gun shop and shooting range.

The burglary happened at West Coast Armory at 13216 Southeast 32nd Street at about 4 a.m. Tuesday.

Officers say multiple firearms were taken and the stolen car was left at the scene.

A similar theft took place in 2016. In that case, guns and ammunition were stolen and the vehicle was left at the scene, much like this one.

Now, that doesn’t mean that the two events are related in any way other than coincidence.

That said, it’s a prime example of how gun stores need to step up and start figuring out a way to secure their firearms from theft before state and local governments start deciding how they should do it.

While insurance probably covers the theft just fine, it does nothing about the fact that there are firearms on the streets and in the hands of criminals. Unfortunately, that does nothing to mitigate the potentially impending regulation from the government that will happen unless things change.

So what needs to happen?

Insurance Companies Need To Offer Discounts For Stores That Secure Guns

Having never owned or operated a gun store, I can’t say definitively how the insurance required works, but it seems a great first place to start would be for insurance companies to offer discounts for companies that utilize some means of securing firearms after-hours. Whether it’s locking the guns up in a safe or securing them on the racks somehow, having some means to secure the guns keeps them safe from theft.

Once the word goes out that the guns are secured, the chances of being broken into are reduced.

After all, no one is breaking into these stores for the cash in the safe or other merchandise. They want the guns.

If they can’t get the guns quickly, it makes the idea of trying to steal them unpalatable and they’ll be forced to find other means of securing their guns.

The best part about this is that it’s a free market solution, no government involvement required.

New Industry ‘Best Practices’

Peer pressure is a thing, and despite what they told us in high school, it can be a good thing.

If gun stores, in general, begin instituting lock-up procedures as part of the industry’s best practices–whether formally recognized as such or not–then others will follow suit. They’ll find out that it can be done fairly easily or inexpensively or whatever, and, so long as it’s not ruinous to their business, embrace the new procedures.

Such practices would also invite innovation as stores try new things to maximize effectiveness while minimizing cost. It becomes a win/win for everyone and, again, it doesn’t require the government to get involved.




These are just two possible solutions to the problem and make no mistake, it is a problem. None involve government meddling and thus don’t violate the Second Amendment.

However, if we want to keep the fingers of government out of this, we need to step up and remove the reasons for them to even consider it. We need to show them we can police ourselves just fine.


The post Washington Gun Store Robbed In ‘Smash And Grab’ appeared first on Bearing Arms.