The Replica Prop Forum
Very cool site I am also a member of
Thursday, October 31, 2024
Wednesday, October 30, 2024
ProPublica’s Falsehoods Exposed: How Anti-Gun Bias Distorts the Truth About Lawful Gun Owner Data - Ammoland.com
In an article titled “Without Knowledge or Consent,” Corey G. Johnson at ProPublica claims to expose a “secret” effort by the gun industry to create a vast, clandestine database of gun owners. But the reality is far less sensational—and far more ethical—than what ProPublica wants you to believe.
In a statement released to AmmoLand News by the Managing Director for Public Affairs of the NSSF, Mark Oliva, he responded:
“NSSF does not maintain a database of gun owners. This was specifically told to ProPublica [directly to Corey G. Johnson] on several occasions.”
Despite this, the reporter chose to accept misrepresentations of the truth as fact. NSSF used information to reach gun owners for the #GUNVOTE voter education program that was supplied by a very limited number of firearm manufacturers. That information was purged after those elections were complete. NSSF uses commercially-available data to reach voters for #GUNVOTE program to educate voters on how to vote, where to register, and where to vote on Election Day.”
ProPublica’s report was based on decades-old information to arrive at a pre-ordained narrative just days before the election. These allegations were previously raised by U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) in an attempt to discredit The Firearm Industry Trade Association. The allegations were not true then and are not true today.
“NSSF maintains that gun owner privacy is paramount to ensuring the free exercise of Second Amendment rights. That is why NSSF has been the leading voice to pass laws Second Amendment Privacy Acts in 17 states to bar financial institutions from collecting data related to firearm and ammunition purchases that would create a back-door gun registry. NSSF also supports the Protecting Privacy in Purchases Act introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by Congresswoman Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) and companion legislation by U.S. Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tennessee) in the U.S. Senate that would make this a federal law.
No American should be ever placed on a government watchlist for exercising their Constitutionally-protected rights.”
Click the link to read the whole article: ProPublica’s Falsehoods Exposed
“Extra-Large” Capacity Magazine Ban Upheld by DC Appeals Court - Ammoland.com
The United States Court of Appeals for The District of Columbia Circuit disregarded the text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment and ruled that DC’s magazine ban is Constitutional.
The case, Hanson v. District of Columbia, challenged the city’s ban on magazines holding more than ten rounds. The plaintiffs wanted to own 17-round magazines, the standard size for Glock 17s and other full-size handguns. The Circuit Court referred to these magazines as extra-large capacity magazines (ELCM).
A District Court upheld the law earlier, leading the plaintiffs to appeal to a three-judge panel at the DC Circuit Court. They argued that the District Court got it wrong because the law was unconstitutional under the Bruen and Heller standards. DC claimed that the law was within the scope of the Second Amendment and consistent with both these cases.
The Supreme Court’s Heller opinion said that a bearable arm in common use for lawful purposes cannot be banned. DC argued that magazines holding more than ten rounds are rarely used in self-defense and, therefore, are not commonly used for self-defense. The plaintiffs countered that just because most self-defense situations require less than ten shots doesn’t mean those guns were not equipped with magazines holding more than ten rounds. The judges agreed with the plaintiffs.
Click the link to read the whole article: Magazine Ban Upheld by DC Appeals Court
Tuesday, October 29, 2024
Monday, October 28, 2024
Sunday, October 27, 2024
Sunday Serial Matinee - The Shadow (1940) {4 hours 46 minutes}
Saturday, October 26, 2024
Prayers Needed
Tina Britt - Blue All The Way 1969 Full Album Vinyl - luis german lombo
Friday, October 25, 2024
State Attorneys Claim Hunting Rifles Not Constitutionally Protected in Connecticut - Ammoland.com
Hunters take note: State attorneys are arguing your rifles are not “constitutionally” protected in Connecticut.
In a significant legal debate before the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that could impact hunters across Connecticut, state attorneys are arguing that hunting rifles, particularly semi-automatic ones, are not protected by the Constitution.
According to attorney Joshua Perry, representing the Connecticut Attorney General’s office, the Second Amendment protects guns commonly used for self-defense, but not hunting rifles. As if there is a difference!? Perry’s arguments were made during a hearing at the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit as part of a lawsuit filed by the National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR) and a co-plaintiff, Toni Theresa Spera.
The lawsuit challenges Connecticut’s restrictive gun control law passed after the Sandy Hook tragedy, which bans the sale of firearms classified as “assault weapons.”
National Association for Gun Rights and Spera believe these laws infringe on their Second Amendment rights. However, Perry contends that Connecticut has the authority to regulate firearms that are not typically used for self-defense, suggesting that hunting rifles do not fall under this category.
Perry also referenced a previous Supreme Court ruling (Columbia v. Heller), which upheld the ban on M16 rifles, stating that the Constitution guarantees the right to self-defense but does not offer blanket protection for all weapons.
Click the link to read the whole article: State Attorneys Hunting Rifles Not Protected in Connecticut
Georgia Case Against a School Shooter’s Father Treats an Inattentive Parent as a Murderer - Ammoland.com
Colin Gray, whose 14-year-old son is charged with murdering two students and two teachers at a Georgia high school last month, himself faces 29 criminal charges that could send him to prison for the rest of his life. The case is part of a troubling trend in which prosecutors seek to spread the blame for school shootings by criminalizing parental failures.
Judging from the allegations against him, Gray is no one’s idea of a model parent. Prosecutors say he failed to securely store the rifle used in the Sept. 4 attack at Apalachee High School in Winder, Georgia, a weapon he bought his son, Colt, as a Christmas present.
Gray allegedly knew Colt was deeply troubled but failed to get him the help he needed. He allegedly disregarded signs that Colt was prone to violence, including a photograph of a school shooter the teenager had on his bedroom wall.
If the Apalachee High School shooting had involved a handgun, these claims might have supported a felony charge under a Georgia statute that applies to a parent who “furnish(es) a pistol or revolver to a minor” when he “is aware of a substantial risk” that the minor “will use a pistol or revolver to commit a felony offense.”
But because that law does not cover rifles, prosecutors are relying on other statutes that are less obviously applicable.
An indictment unveiled last week charges Gray with two counts of second-degree murder, each of which is punishable by 10 to 30 years in prison.
Click the link to read the whole article: Georgia Case Treats Inattentive Parent as a Murderer
Shamisen × Metal × Ska | Work & Study BGM by Samurai Girl 3
Standing Against ATF Overreach: PSA & GOA File Amicus Brief in U.S. vs. Wendt - Ammoland.com
On October 18, 2024, Palmetto State Armory, alongside FRAC (Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition), Gun Owners of America, B&T USA, and eight states, filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. This filing opposes the ATF’s controversial unauthorized expansion of the 1986 machine gun ban, known as the Hughes Amendment, which was leveraged against former Iowa Police Chief Bradley Wendt. This case marks a critical battle over gun rights and government overreach.
The Hughes Amendment, part of the Firearm Owners Protection Act (FOPA), restricts the civilian ownership of machine guns manufactured after May 19, 1986. The law aimed to curb access to machine guns for the general public, but its enforcement has been increasingly scrutinized for overstepping its original scope. In United States vs. Wendt, the ATF prosecuted Wendt, who had taken a machine gun registered to his police department to a public range event. Wendt, formerly the Police Chief of Adair, Iowa, was sentenced to federal prison in July 2024 for this conduct.
ATF Overreach
The ATF argued that Wendt’s actions were outside his “official duties” as a police officer, a phrase absent from the Hughes Amendment’s legal text. Critics argue that the ATF’s insistence on this interpretation represents an alarming trend in the agency’s efforts to broaden the scope of laws beyond what Congress intended.
Click the link to read the whole article: Standing Against ATF Overreach