Are we Losing the Gun Control Debate? The Left Coast Signals Yes!

People holding signs that read "no guns"

You win some and you lose some. I remember my coach telling me that after a particularly close match at the state championships. The loss was heartbreaking, but I was able to turn it into a positive. I rededicated my efforts, trained harder and made sure my head was on straight for the next tournament. Stories such as these are everywhere, and just fine for a boxer, wrestler or an archer, a baseball or football team. However, when it comes to gun control, we cannot afford to lose a single fight.

Gavel with American flag
The gun control crowd has lost the battle on the federal level, but it is winning at the state level.

For several years, the pro-Second Amendment forces have secured several victories. Despite the efforts of our President and the Antis, National organizations such as the NRA, NAGR, Second Amendment Foundation and numerous other grass roots organizations have successfully squashed each challenge to the Second Amendment on a federal level. Additionally, we have made great strides in expanding—or as most would believe—regaining our Second Amendment rights.

Every state now allows concealed carry—at least to some degree. Many states now allow open carry. Several bans for firearm type or magazine capacity have been struck down or defeated before they have passed. In addition to grass roots efforts, our victories may largely be attributed to more money and better organization than the gun control crowd, but that is about to change.


A tidal wave of anti-gun legislation and policy is forming. We can see it across the left coast (California, Oregon and Washington) and it is set to wash over the country. Last November, Washington passed I-594 with 59 percent. The legislation created universal background checks for all firearms sales, including those made online or at gun shows. It also covered any firearm transfers including many loans and gifts. The measure has exceptions for emergency gun transfers concerning personal safety, gifts between family members, antiques and loans for hunting.

However, the law was murky and ripe for legal challenge. The Second Amendment Foundation took the torch, but a federal judge tossed the suit last week. The reasoning is almost absurd. The pro-Second Amendment crowd in Washington has been vocal in their dissent, but also vocal that they would not intentionally disobey the law. U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle in Tacoma ruled that opponents of the law didn’t have standing to challenge the law because no one had been prosecuted under the law and they could not show they were at immediate risk because law enforcement had not attempted to charge someone using the law. In the judge’s defense, his hands do seem to have been legally tied.

The Second Amendment is my gun permit
The Second Amendment is in serious danger if rogue lawmakers are allowed to run amok unbridled.

“Plaintiffs explicitly concede that they have no intention of violating I-594, Plaintiffs have failed to allege any specific warning or threat to initiate a prosecution, and Plaintiffs have failed to allege any history of past prosecution or enforcement of I-594,” Settle wrote.

Several law enforcement officials have said they won’t consider simply handing a gun to someone else a “transfer” requiring a background check under the law, but the law’s opponents insist that’s not clear. It would only take one officer to take a different read on the law and some poor gun owner is going to have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to prove innocence. Alan Gottlieb, a co-founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, said he expected to appeal.

“It’s mind-boggling that a citizen must put their civil rights, not to mention their clean criminal record, at risk for the court to rule on the constitutionality of the law. You should be able to challenge an attack on your constitutional rights without having to go to jail first. The state has gotten away with this because they haven’t prosecuted anybody. Why do we have a law on the books that nobody is prosecuting?” said Gottlieb.

Oregon Expanding Background Checks

Another example of new losses in the battle for the Second Amendment comes from Oregon. Governor Kate Brown signed Senate Bill 941, otherwise known as the Oregon Firearms Safety Act in early May 2015. SB 941 will greatly expand background checks on firearm transfers in the state. SB941 will extend background checks to nearly all gun sales, including those done privately. With the enactment of SB 941, Oregon will become the eighth state with some form of “universal” background check law.

Image shows people holding signs that read "no guns"
It is not a lack of laws or legal gun owners that cause crime

SB 941 supporters include all of the usual gun control suspects such as Everytown for Gun Safety and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which argued that expanded background checks would keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

“This is a huge victory that will save lives in Oregon by keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and dangerous people who will no longer be able to exploit the vast ‘Internet loophole’ to buy guns for cash in back alleys without a Brady background check. Lives will be saved as a result,” said Dan Gross, President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, in a press release. “It shows the nation the kind of real progress we can make when elected leaders put the interests of the citizens ahead of the radical agenda of the corporate gun lobby.”


We all know the vast majority of criminals get their guns through theft, the black market, straw purchases or from friends and family members. The law serves to do little more than making lawbreakers out of average citizens while burdening an already over-tasked legal system. While some may believe Oregon has always been a liberal state, they need to consider this is the first significant gun control law passed in the Beaver State in nearly 14 years.

Oregon Firearms Federation logo

With any luck and a lot of hard work, supporters of the bill may find their victory short-lived. Petitions are currently underway to recall three of the lawmakers who supported the legislation, including House Majority Leader Val Hoyle (D-Eugene). Recalling these lawmakers would be a great start, but it did change the laws in Colorado. Either way, the tidal wave building in the West is real and a danger that needs to be stopped before it spreads.

So, I ask you, are we becoming complacent, believing states such as Washington and Oregon are safe from new gun control measures? Has the opposition taken the fight to a level we are not defending? How do we secure our rights and continue to defeat the assaults from the gun control crowd?

How do you feel about the gun control tidal wave and the best ways to stop it? Share your thoughts, opinions and grass roots efforts in the comment section.

The Mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, The Shooter's Log, is to provide information—not opinions—to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (128)

  1. The “Left Coast” is indeed in trouble. It is being run into the ground by Liberals. The States are broke, with all the taxes being spent on Liberal policies and / or given to Liberal “think tanks” to further their corrupt agenda. It’s embarrassing to a Native Californian to watch what has happened to this once great State. We now refer to ourselves as “The People’s Republik of California” for good reason. Why are they called “Liberals” when all they do is take away freedoms?

    1. Andrew: The paradox between the name “Liberal” and the authoritarian manner of the “Left”, as well as every other belief of the “Left”, is easily explained by the hypothesis (I would state obvious fact) that the “Left” simply means anti-Christian (also known as Satanists).

      Since Christ is “The Truth”, the Left, and everything about them is a lie.

      Thus they must call themselves “Liberals” because they are strict authoritarians.

      The pattern is the same for everything characterized as being “Left”.

      While it may be pure coincidence, I think Matthew 25:41 is a fitting verse.

      “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

    2. Exhibit A of why the Republican party has lost their mandate to lead since Reagan in the 80’s. Except to a small segment, the conflation of religion and politics is repugnant, and not too much different than the non-terroristic mullahs in the Middle East.

    3. Rick:
      The justification for this country was the “self evident” truth that [mankind] was “created”. Thus if there is no creator, there is no justification for the country, including the Constitution and the 2nd. Amendment thereto.

      The drafters were much more well read, and thus educated than the average American today, perhaps because there was no Comedy Central or Survivor type so called “Reality Shows”.

      They were well aware of Plato’s idea that a society should be ruled by the best and brightest, the Philosopher Kings.

      However they chose to create a Republic because of the Judo-Christian belief in the sin nature of man. They theorized that any group put in power would eventually rule for THEIR personal benefit, not that of the country as a whole. The 2nd. Amendment, as was every other idea they counted on to prevent the Central Government from gaining unbridled power, including the refusal to have a large standing army which could, and would, eventually be used against the people, was designed as a failsafe against the tyrannical usurping of power by the central government because of the sin nature of man.

      Furthermore, our economic system, Capitalism, was chosen BECAUSE it was well suited to the sin nature of man.

      Capitalism is basically cut throat competition with no concern for the losers. Devil take the hind most. Social Darwinism at it’s best. But with all it’s shortcomings, the alternative, a planned economy, was worse, since the same “Philosopher Kings” would control the economy for THEIR benefit.

      Take religion out of the equation (as you insist) and you are left with the doctrine of the LEFT.

      That the Constitution, including the 2nd. Amendment, was drafted by a bunch of ignorant superstitious men who lacked the vision to create a Utopian society. Thus it is up them, the Ivy League (and therefore highly intelligent Philosopher Kings postulated by Plato) to create such a Utopian society.

      It also follows that, since the 2nd Amendment was drafted because of the false and ignorant belief of the nature of man, there is NO reason to keep it.

    4. Some things you may be right on, but others appear to be short on. I be the perception of the Constitution came from the free will man. Free will is another biblical principle that most seem to ignore. I don’t believe the drafting was done by ignorant superstitious men. They were very well educated with a puritan religious background. Our education standards have been degrading, since this era.

      The Constitution itself is very complex. In the constitutional framework the framers left some of it to be protected by the states. This is why the battle is on states front. California is appearing as a losing front, which is a police state. This is were people become codependant on police for protection. Yet the state is being over run by Mexican cartel and their gangs. The police only know how to collect data on them, but not how to slow down their influence.

    5. !Rick: The justification for this country was the “self evident” truth that
      ![mankind] was “created”. Thus if there is no creator, there is no
      !justification for the country, including the Constitution and the 2nd.
      !Amendment thereto.

      Just out of idle curiosity, in “We hold these truths to be self-evident,
      that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator
      with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and
      the pursuit of Happiness” do you just gloss over the fact that almost half of the
      signers were also slave owners? I think that’s called “cognitive
      Plus, science has disproven anything was “created.”

      !The drafters were much more well read, and thus educated than the average
      !American today, perhaps because there was no Comedy Central or Survivor
      !type so called “Reality Shows”.

      Ain’t that the freaking truth…

      !They were well aware of Plato’s idea that a society should be ruled by the
      !best and brightest, the Philosopher Kings.

      And yet people voted for Sarah Palin….

      !However they chose to create a Republic because of the Judo-Christian
      !belief in the sin nature of man. They theorized that any group put in
      !power would eventually rule for THEIR personal benefit, not that of the
      !country as a whole.

      Your latter clause is totally true. The first is you grafting your beliefs onto
      their actions. “Sin nature of man” is your line, not theirs. They wanted
      to create a Republic because a direct democracy is too unwieldy.

      !The 2nd. Amendment, as was every other idea they counted on to prevent the
      !Central Government from gaining unbridled power, including the refusal to
      !have a large standing army which could, and would, eventually be used
      !against the people, was designed as a failsafe against the tyrannical
      !usurping of power by the central government because of the sin nature of

      Almost right. There’s that religious babble again that’s not in the
      Federalist papers or any other writings. (You don’t have to sell me on
      the existence or need of the 2nd Amendment. My guns will be quite handy
      when people like you try to set up a theocracy.) Remember, these are the
      same people who also carefully defined the “separation of church and
      state” just because of the religious abuses in history (having firsthand
      experience with the Church of England). As you said, they’re not ignorant
      men. You can’t have them fawningly religious on one hand and highly
      skeptical on the other–that just doesn’t compute. The reasons for
      that separation are well-documented in their writings; their beliefs are
      EXCACTLY what I said earlier: “You have to the right to believe whatever
      you want, but you don’t have the right to inflict it on someone else [me].”
      That’s what they wrote, that’s what they believed, and that’s what the
      Supreme Court has affirmed time and again.

      !Furthermore, our economic system, Capitalism, was chosen BECAUSE it was
      !well suited to the sin nature of man.

      Oh? Who chose capitalism? When? Where? How? The US was based on trade
      from the moment the first settler stepped ashore. It wasn’t “chosen” by
      anyone. The Constitution had protections for existing systems; it didn’t
      create any.

      !Capitalism is basically cut throat competition with no concern for the
      !losers. Devil take the hind most. Social Darwinism at it’s best. But with
      !all it’s shortcomings, the alternative, a planned economy, was worse,
      !since the same “Philosopher Kings” would control the economy for THEIR

      Yep. There’s a quote about capitalism only being good because all the
      alternatives are worse. Look at the second half of the 19th century when
      we had the “purest” industrial capitalism in the world, replete with
      robber barons, sweatshops, 80 hour work weeks, adulterated food, poisoned
      air, and a divide between rich and poor that makes today’s look
      insignificant. That’s the world you want to live in? Go for it. I hear
      China’s a lot like that now.

      !Take religion out of the equation (as you insist) and you are left with
      !the doctrine of the LEFT.

      Bulltwinkies. There’s a very comfortable middle area between the whack
      jobs of the left and the whack jobs of the right–and that’s right where
      I live.

      !That the Constitution, including the 2nd. Amendment, was drafted by a
      !bunch of ignorant superstitious men who lacked the vision to create a
      !Utopian society. Thus it is up them, the Ivy League (and therefore highly
      !intelligent Philosopher Kings postulated by Plato) to create such a
      !Utopian society.

      You’re making an (il)logical leap to that the founders were ignorant (who
      said that? I didn’t) superstitious (well duh, all religions are
      superstitions; that’s axiomatic) men who lacked vision.

      !It also follows that, since the 2nd Amendment was drafted because of the
      !false and ignorant belief of the nature of man, there is NO reason to keep

      No, only to those who believe that people are venal and bad because a pair
      of puppetmasters are controlling them. Rational people like me believe
      people are bad of their own free will…in which case we still need a 2nd
      Amendment. I worked with a born again guy once who couldn’t believe that
      someone who wasn’t like him wasn’t an immmoral, dishonest criminal (says
      more about him than of me, no?). His little black and white worldview
      couldn’t handle that shade of grey. Sound familiar? There are plenty of
      honest non-religious people, and plenty of religious criminals (including
      some Popes!) that belief can’t be any determination of morality!

    6. Really Rick? ” Science has disproven anything was ‘created'”? Since when? People came to this country looking for a place to freely worship God.

      Science has almost daily shown in more and more ways that the Bible is not only the basis of this country’s foundation but also that of the planet and universe.

      They’ve found that the universe is ever expanding and designed. Thus a big bang which did NOT bang itself.

      Archaeology has proven the existence of cities mentioned in the Bible which people stated for centuries never existed.

      Do you not recall the purpose of the CERN Collider? If I’m not mistaken it’s the God Particle.

      I appreciate the fact that you do not want anyone’s faith pushed on you. Neither do I want or appreciate my faith being ridiculed. Look, I don’t care what you believe. You can think the moon is made of bleu cheese if you wish. That does not give you the right to condemn the faith of others and call it superstition. I’m as proud of my faith as you are in your lack of it.

      If you are indeed an honest non-religious person I commend you for it. The world certainly needs more honest people.

      When it comes to the 2nd Amendment I think the best place to look is history and the fact that the Japanese clearly stated that the only reason they did not invade the continental U.S. during WWII was their perception that there was an American with a gun behind every blade of grass.

      As someone who has served my country I have no problem saying that our civilian gun owners are every bit as much of a deterrent to military invasion as our own military. The biggest reason being the fact that our military men and women are not permitted to carry their weapons on our country’s home soil. Lately we’ve seen the price they pay for these rules. The latest have been 4 Marines who lost their lives.

      By the way, in my opinion if someone is in America and shouting “ALLAH AKBAR” while shooting American soldiers they are a TERRORIST! If we’re fighting for 2nd Amendment rights perhaps we should begin with the right of our Servicemen and women to open carry on military installations. It could just save their lives!

    7. Really.

      And now I believe in reincarnation, because this thread just rose from the dead.

    8. Rick, that is EXCEEDINGLY well said.

      The religious nuts on the right are way, way more similar to the Taliban then they will ever realize. Ever so slightly different shade of the same color.

      Religion and government simply do not mix. Recipe for disaster.

    9. Rick what a bunch of crap. You are proof that you can justify anything you want bad enough.

      The “Progressives” on the right are way, way more similar to Communists then they will ever realize (until it’s to late). Ever so slightly different shade of the same color.

      Communism and people who wish to be free simply do not mix. Recipe for disaster.

  2. I know a whole bunch of them in Eugene, Newport, Medford areas. But, like you say, you’re outvoted, just as conservatives in CA are. And it’s sure NOT because we have not fought all that has been thrown at us.

  3. I don’t know why anti’s are pressing so hard for this universal background checks. Although not required by PA law, every gun show I have been to did background checks, and every internet purchase I have done went through an FFL. Whether I was selling a gun to someone in another state or buying a gun from a reputable company the gun was sent to an FFL for the buyer to have a background check.

  4. DaveW, you are right in that, as I said, there aren’t enough of us, even with our elected officials, to out vote the Willamette Valley, Eugene to Portland. There are most likely some conservatives one the “wet side” but you may have to burn the stump and sift the ashes to find any.

  5. Dale, I’m just saying the “dry side” is composed mostly of conservatives who get what the lefties on the wet side are willing to give us. The Oregon state legislature is now controlled by Democrats and recently passed a background check bill, SB941, which was signed by our interim governor. If one was to move to the “dry side” you may be in better company.

  6. Just because Teddy liked to hunt in no way says he didn’t hold progressive views regarding social programs.

    1. “Just because Teddy liked to hunt in no way says he didn’t hold progressive views regarding social programs.”

      And you should note that nowhere did I say that; I specifically addressed guns.. His progressive views are also why you have safe meat to eat, parks to take your kids to, a reasonable length work week. I could go on about all of the good things that Teddy did that both you and I benefit from today. Want me to?

  7. Of course it does, but Washington and many of those in command, as well as the British Army were old school where everyone marched in a straight line and just kept shooting until it was over or they were shot.

  8. I don’t know why but I sense that there are a lot of people who feel the Founders were to stupid to believe that there would be improvements in weapon systems. Too stupid to think future generations would become teat sucking leaches.

    Remember, most of the Founders were educated, and several were men of science and technology

  9. However I submit that it difficult to explain the irrational views of the left without attributing it to some evil supernatural influence

    That evil supernatural influence would be Karl Marx who wrote of the “guilds” taking control of production from the owners. Guilds today are called unions.

    Then comes the progressive movement. There have been a number of progressive movements since 1776, as well as high ranking progressives. The most recent was formed in opposition to the views of Harry Truman. They accepted financial backing from the Communist Party.

    How does progressive relate to Democrat? People like FDR and Teddy Roosevelt were progressives. Progressives pushed for open borders. They pushed through the progressive tax system to pay for social programs which have been utter failures. Progressives were anti-gun . The list of similarities to what “Democrats espouse today goes on and on.

  10. Moving to the “dry side” won’t help. Our legislators are mostly conservative, but it’s still the same problem. The progressives make the decisions for the entire state.

  11. The Founders, particularly Madison and Mason, who wrote the 2A, spoke of personal weapons, not crew served weapons. Militia members, which included every able bodied male, were to respond with whatever they had. Further, they were not trained in the way of the military. George Washington disdained the militia because they lacked military training and discipline, and, when faced with opposing forces, they were most apt to break ranks and run for cover from which to shoot. Militia were expected to already know how to load their weapons and fire them accurate enough to put food on their tables.

    1. ” when faced with opposing forces, they were most apt to break ranks and run for cover from which to shoot.”

      Sounds reasonable to me.

  12. If you do your research, in addition to the sources you cited, the Constitution relies heavily on the Magna Charta of 1216. Of our original rights, they were all covered therein. Unfortunately, King John reneged on his promise to uphold that document once he had defeated a French invasion. That our own government had reneged on the Magna Charta, and that colonists were being treated quite differently from their fellow British citizens in England, gave grounds to support the idea that firearms, as the common weapon of the times, were needed to prevent such conduct by our government.

  13. I have no doubt that the Founders would have approved of any new firearms technology. The colonists had weapons superior to the British Army. They shot farther, were more accurate, were quicker to reload and easier to maintain (and they were Made in America).

    If we accept the premise that they would not have approved, then it follows that they should have rejected the better firearms and used the same stuff the British Army was using. Furthermore; staying with what was available at the time of the Revolution would, today, put “We the People” at a distinct disadvantage in defending our rights and our nation.

    From the very beginnings of the nation, the people freely adopted every new firearms technology until the National Firearms Act of 1938 which was purported to be a safety measure to protect the citizens from criminals (Al Capone and the rest) using machine guns. Of course, with rare exception, they used those weapons only against their competition and law enforcement.

    The same government allowed soldiers to retain their weapons when the war ended. This included southern soldiers if they took an oath to the unified government.

  14. Before suggesting more gun controls maybe people should talk to former gun owners in England and Australia. Criminals; including terrorists and drug dealers; still have guns. What they no longer have is a reason to fear law abiding citizens. In England, more and more officers are being trained on firearms and if not carrying a firearm, firearms are readily available. In Australia, as the government did in England, and is trying to do here, they lied to the gun owners, who had committed no crimes, and said it was only going to be those scary black rifles, then they added handguns, then rifles, and finally, shotguns. The crime rate soared. No, guns were not being used as much, but attacks on individuals and criminal acts involving property went through the roof. Drug crimes are just as bad. And Australia, England, etc, are dealing with rising terrorism.

  15. Why is it that those from the right are attacking their own the way progressives have been attacking us. Rather than accuse someone of drinking the cool aid, it would have been better, in my opinion, to simply say you disagree with my view.

    The left uses that attack tactic to stifle free speech, and to shut down those who are in opposition.

  16. The ringleaders KNOW the truth… they just don’t care. They have an agenda which, in their minds is far more important than truth, facts, the Constitution, or anything else. They want only to have dominion over the masses.

  17. I would love to see someday that these politicians realize that no matter what law is passed the criminals will still have the firearms and the law binding Americans citizens will not, and without these firearms to protect ourselves are families and other law binding American Citizens, crime will take control.

  18. RICK. You are a racist or something? Why did you stop with the Greeks. What about the Code of Hammurabi. And the Code of Ur-Nammu.

    But the drafters of the Constitution were influenced by Protestant Christianity, which I admit included elements which had also existed in previous cultures.

  19. @ Michael: Based on your comments I doubt you are capable of discerning the differences between “hate mail” and intellectual intervention… but I’ll give it a shot anyway.

    First I must preface my comments by stating that what you are about to read is not my personal opinion subject to your counter-banter, but instead is a presentation of clear historical fact as established by written word in the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and supported by the Federalist Papers as well as many other documents of the time.

    The Founders established no permanent standing armies, but rather well-trained and armed citizen soldiers; to be raised and activated only when times called for mounting a proper defense, both foreign and DOMESTIC, as determined by the duly elected representatives of the citizenry to Congress. Not only was such a mechanism well anticipated by the Founders, but it was expected that citizens continue to maintain state-of-the-art weaponry for this purpose.

    However well before this, the principle behind the citizen soldier was originally born out of the necessity to free us from a tyrannical government. A principle by which our entire Country is based and built upon, and would have been impossible to establish otherwise had the citizens not possessed the fortitude to take up arms and fight to declare independence from a tyrannical government.

    As such, the Founders knew very well that such tyranny was not a one-time predicament, and so they built in Constitutional safeguards to provide citizens with the continued means to keep tyranny forever at bay.

    One must consider the courage, resolve, and sacrifice it took for average citizens to rise up against a well-established government; so one must also consider the seriousness behind the Founders intended permanence for establishing the citizen soldier as a deterrent to maintain the peace and to prevent future tyranny.

    With such engrained history, it is impossible for a reasonable person to ever conclude that the Founders ever intended “the government” to possess weaponry greater than the sum of its citizens.

    So regardless of how technologically advanced weapons became, there can be no doubt the intent of the Founders was to ensure the power always and forever remained in the hands of the people, and thus explains their purpose for enumerating such rights by creating the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

    So the “reality” is – the Founders never had to concern themselves with anticipating technology in order for their principles to remain just as valid today as it did back then.

    1. “With such engrained history, it is impossible for a reasonable person to ever conclude that the Founders ever intended “the government” to possess weaponry greater than the sum of its citizens.”

      Because every farmer in Iowa has an F-16….

    2. @ Rick:

      Maybe not, but every farmer in Iowa has the right to fly one if they so choose to join their National Guard. They also have the freedom which affords them the right to elect representatives to Congress tasked with deploying those F-16s in accordance with the will of the people. And when the President or Congress defies such will, the people have lawful recourse to remove subversive whether it be through impeachment or force.

      I’ll be here all day should you require further guidance on matters of the Constitution…

    3. ““With such engrained history, it is impossible for a reasonable person to ever conclude that the Founders ever intended “the government” to possess weaponry greater than the sum of its citizens.””

      “Maybe not, but every farmer in Iowa has the right to fly one if they so choose to join their National Guard. ”

      That’s called a circular argument.

      “They also have the freedom which affords them the right to elect representatives to Congress tasked with deploying those F-16s in accordance with the will of the people. ”

      They don’t have elections in your neck of the woods? They do in mine. I may not like the idiots voted in (like my tea party representative), but other people in my district apparently did. That’s called representative democracy.

      ” the people have lawful recourse to remove subversive whether it be through impeachment or force.”

      Oops, you better brush up on that Constitutional law you’re trying to teach me. There’s lawful recourse to remove officeholders via non-reelection, or impeachment…via force is unlawful. “Watering the tree of liberty” is NOT enumerated in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights….

    4. While it might be a good philosophical debate as to whether or not a farmer can have an F-16, doing so distracts from the issue at hand, the COMPLETE elimination of the 2nd. Amendment.
      The REPUBLICANS, so called conservatives – that’s a laugh – have already restricted the citizens from having anything more powerful than a one half inch bullet or (with the exception of some grandfathered firearms), anything capable of firing faster that a turn of the LAST century (1900) semi-auto.
      The Left has already achieved 90+% of their goal. They are now trying to completely eliminate any means of the citizens defending themselves from the mob. AKA Democracy.
      Fear of mob rule, where the town drunk, drug addict, Xth generation welfare parasite etc. has a much say in the government as someone who contributes to it, was foremost in their minds. Thus the Constitution created a REPUBLIC, NOT a Democracy, which they KNEW would lead to destruction.

    5. “Fear of mob rule, where the town drunk, drug addict, Xth generation welfare parasite etc. has a much say in the government as someone who contributes to it, was foremost in their minds. Thus the Constitution created a REPUBLIC, NOT a Democracy, which they KNEW would lead to destruction.”

      Can you re-write that in coherent English, please?

    6. You have a point.
      I tend to get frustrated trying to relate to people who don’t have a clue.

      I readily admit part of what I said was incoherent. For example I indicated that they were thinking about elements of our present day dead beat society, where generation after generation lives off government welfare. Of course they didn’t. They could not even conceive of our modern day welfare system!

    7. Outstanding G-Man.

      Rick I was born in Iowa and we all had a choice of an F-16 or an A-10. I took the Warthog. Now I’m in Minnesota. Here we have a choice of more taxes or more taxes.

  20. Just to clarify something about the “Left Coast”. Most of the Lefties live on the wet side, (west of the summit of the Cascade Mtns.) That is in Oregon as well as Washington, possibly California. They make all of the decisions for the rest of the state because we don’t have the numbers to out vote them. So if you are a conservative and looking to move, come to the dry side, (east of the summit of the Cascades).

    1. Ron L. Don’t follow. Are you saying move to the”dry side” of Oregon, Washington & California? But as you correctly pointed out, the few conservatives in those areas are powerless against the Leftie on the wet side.

  21. The problem with passing these laws to make life “safer” is that it doesn’t.. Criminals never did and never will care about any laws you make. So by taking guns away from good civilians they can no longer protect themselves from the criminals that don’t give a damn what your laws are. Stop wasting your time trying to pass laws that don’t do anything. if you want problems to go away and people to start being better people lets start with school… They feed you lies and Misinformation to dumb us down. When your dumb you make bad decisions which can lead to you being a criminal. Let’s start making our youth smart people and we will can start making this world a better place.

    1. John. Perhaps you don’t see the beauty in the scheme. Of COURSE passing the laws doesn’t make life safer. Indeed, study after study shows that it INCREASES crime.
      So the solution is to double down. Make even more laws giving them more control, with the end goal being a Liberal paradise, a completely totalitarian state, just like under Stalin.
      Ditto as far as the schools are concerned. They realize they have to have a population that is totally ignorant and incapable of rational thought in order to control them.

  22. The changing view of the 2nd. Amendment is part of the changing religion in America. Therefore “… our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.”.

    In 1789 the country was predominantly Protestant [Christian] and thus the Constitution was written to reflect those values.

    Key concepts of Christianity are the sinful nature of mankind and the PERSONAL relationship between the individual and God, the Creator. Based on this understanding of human nature, The Bill of Rights, including the 2nd Amendment, was meant as a fail safe to prevent the Central Government from gaining 1/100th of the power it has now.

    The Left Coast’s predominant religion is Anti-Christianity [Satanism]. Anyone who doubts this for one second need only compare the lifestyle and the views of the Left with that of Sodom and Gomorrah. For example, how does the spiritual heart of California, San Francisco, differ from those earlier icons of Liberalism?

    As Satanists, the Left accepts as a matter of faith that everything about Christianity is wrong and just plain evil. Thus they believe the cure for all problems is more power to the rulers in the Central Government (and Religion) since there is NO such thing as personal responsibility. “It takes a village”, or better yet, a larger governmental body – if a village is good, a one world government AND religion is better since it will contain the collective GOOD nature of mankind. It therefore follows that the elimination of the protections in the Bill of Rights is the main priority, with the elimination of First Amendment being the ultimate prize.

    With the above in mind, I submit that those living in the heart of Satanist controlled areas take a lesson from Lot and Matthew 10:14-15 [ If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet. Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.], get out ASAP. And do not look back.

    What’s stopping you? A job? A business?

    Which do you worship? God or Mammon?

    Consider this for what it is, a battle between good and evil. A good soldier knows when to retreat and regroup to fight another day.

    Indeed, many of the firearms manufacturers have already seen the wisdom of a strategic retreat.

    1. Oh come off it man. I live in Texas and I am not religious yet I am as pro gun as it comes. This issue has absolutely NOTHING to do with religion except maybe Government worship. Stop trying to hijack the conversation for your own agenda. This is NOT a Christian issue, it is a Freedom issue. Nothing is more important than Freedom.

      My guns are there to protect me from criminals, government and religious crazies of all stripes.

    2. One does not have to be a Christian to see the danger from the Left.

      However I submit that it difficult to explain the irrational views of the left without attributing it to some evil supernatural influence.

    3. Pretty good analogy Dale Casto. I especially like your statement about “more power to the rulers in the Central Government.”

      A thorough understanding how the central government came into power is essential to understand the big picture, and also to know the only solution available. Those who deny the existence of an out of control central government, and there are many, are contributing to the problem.

      The Man Who Predicted (in 1899) What America Would Become

    4. It is amazing how many succinct warnings the American leadership has ignored.
      One could basically substitute Iraq (or Vietnam) for Spain.
      Then again, the reasons the predictions are so accurate is because humanity was the same then as now.
      Indeed, I had not grasped the significance of “Mark of the beast” – the requirement to give an outward sign of support for the central religion – political power in order to buy or sell until I saw how effective it was used in the Sodomite marriage lawsuits against Christians who did not want to participate in a religious ceremony celebrating the rejection of the Law of Moses and branding it as evil.

    5. “In 1789 the country was predominantly Protestant [Christian] and thus the Constitution was written to reflect those values. ”

      There is no “thus” there. The Constitution reflected 2000 years of accumulated Greco-Roman-Judeo-Christian beliefs and practices. Do note that 2 of the 4 aren’t even religions, but were cultures.

  23. The gun community should start naming the billionaires funding their anti civil rights group’s business interests then start mounting national boycotts against them. Cost them even more money. The best defense is a strong offense. Microsoft should be picketed for being anti civil rights. What’s Bloomberg own that we can cause to lose money?

  24. Wake up American Patriots! Either get together & overthrow this entire admin by killing them united or die one at a time in your homes! Choice is YOURS! Join your State Militias NOW!!!!

  25. It dumbfounds me that anyone, especially the politicians realistically thinks that criminals actually follow local or state guidelines when purchasing guns…of any type. Do your “leaders” actually believe that these idiotic laws will deter crime and take the guns out of the hands of the criminals? It’s the citizen’s fault. We are the ones that elect these moronic politicians who enact these bills. We don’t need protection from the criminals. We need protection from the politicians.

  26. I am truly dismayed by the speed of the lefts attack on our 2A. Before too long te same folks that insist on intruding on our rights.will go that next step and try to silences us law abiding citizens by convincing lawmakers by representing 2A supporters they will be use public humiliation to discourage them from representing the silent majority.

    Lord help us save this great country

  27. Recently several college students who were anti-gun were taken to a range. At the end of the session, all but one said they would like to do it again. When asked about the 2A, their attitudes had changed from completely anti-gun to not pro-gun but not anti-gun either.

  28. The Left Coast? Are those the same idiots who are trying to convince me there is a third sex and that pedophiles and sex offenders are the real victims?

  29. I’m a gun owner in Alabama and I very much appreciate the carry laws here and the reciprocal agreements with all the states nearby and those farther off.
    I do however believe there should be more succinct gun control laws to prevent criminals and street-corner thugs from having them and using them on innocent people and/or business robberies.
    In today’s urban society people over 50 are always in danger, not only when running errands but in their own homes.
    Gun wielding criminals are becoming more brazen and the police are afraid to do their jobs because anyone could have a weapon to wound or kill them.

    1. By all means let’s pile on more gun laws. More words on paper will most certainly convince these “criminals and street-corner thugs” to change their ways. Heck your suggestion for “more succinct gun control laws” might even be enough to scare them into turning over their illegal guns and switching to less lethal means like Tasers and pepper spray. One can only hope.

  30. If every gun owner took at least one person who was afraid of guns to the range and started them out with a .22 and worked up to a larger caliper, we would not have to worry about our rights being lost..

    In the past 7 years I have converted 15 anti’s to pro gun advocates. As fear of guns is the culprit that is so easily dismissed when they learn the safe use of a gun. .

  31. I could care less about California or what they do because I am born and Bred and live in the Great Constitutional State of Georgia where the Second amendment is alive and well! we do not elect officials in this state who are anti 2A or any other amendment for that matter and for the most part our LEO agents abide by the oath they swore on the bible to uphold and anyone who don’t like it has the freedom to move to any gun hating state they wish to move to.

    1. I also live in GA, and nutjobs like you are the only reason why I support 2A. I really don’t care how much hate mail I get over this, but the reality of 2A is that the founders did not know, nor did they anticipate, the potential technology of weaponry, and if they had, I don’t believe that they would have agreed that semi-literate knobs should have access to any and all available weapons technology. However, since you knobs seem to be arming yourself primarily to kill your fellow citizens, I do believe that it is necessary for sane people to purchase and own weapons to protect ourselves from your ilk when you decide to impose your theocratic values on the rest of us…

  32. I escaped the PRC (People’s Republic of California) and moved to Texas to have a better chance of keeping my constitutional rights. However, with a Marxist in the Whitehouse leading a lot of socialist politicians, I wonder how long I can hide.!?

    I guess it goes without saying that once they have ‘all’ of the guns, that’s it. We will be the newly formed USSR — United States Socialist Republic. At this rate it won’t be long and I’ll be afraid to take a shower..!? Especially with a government person right outside the door.!!

    1. Another vacuous comment. It constantly amuses me how you guys fear a mutable, transitory government, but are perfectly content to let the corporations dictate your lives. Why is it that you do not perceive the real threat to your freedom?

    2. Michael “corporations dictate your lives” is a problem, especially the non-profit corporations. They are sometimes part of the government, but mostly are above the government in doing evil. Research what the Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations and soon the Clinton Foundation are doing, and be afraid very afraid.

  33. The 2A issue is like the problem we have on the world stage. Because Obama has essentially castrated the military, nobody fears the ire of the United States of America anymore. Many cultures hold no respect for the weak. Nobody respect Jimmy Carter, but things changed as soon as Reagan was elected.

    Pro 2A needs to win the respect of our “enemies”. Perhaps the way to do that is to go after something the anti-gun crowd loves and give them a taste of what they seek to do to us.

    Another problem I see is that there is strength in numbers. Yes there are many pro 2A people, but we are fractured into small groups rather than a single united front. I see this among organizations which support the people in the military. Instead of a single association, each service has supporters. The national groups like VFW and American Legion are not united.

    Perhaps it’s about time for a march on Washington.

  34. But they don’t stay in one place. They spread like a cancer. Historically, what California does, eventually spreads to the other states.

    By the way, a great many conservatives remain in California, and we take offense at comments like “fruit and nuts”. My family settled here before the Gold Rush of 1849. We have always been conservatives and pro gun, as well as the rest of the Constitution.

    If we could get a mass migration of conservatives we could take back the state in short order.

    1. What are you smoking, no it doesn’t. What happens in California stays in California… Why do you think you guys are in so much trouble financially as a state? You guys have the strictest building codes, the craziest CEPA regulations and you let Hollywood and the Tech Lefties rule the state. You guys have eliminated all but one of your nuke plants yet the rest of the country is still thriving on them. You guys won’t build desalinization plants because you are worried about the ecological effects of the byproduct but yet you will sponge off of other states water supplies drying them up without a care in the world… Shall I go on?

    2. Don’t bother. You missed my point. Look around. The eco Nazis got their start here, and that has led to other states passing the same kinds of regulations and laws which have ruined CA. The idea of giving illegals a pass because ‘they just want a better life’ began here. Tearing out dams and such has spread through CA, OR, WA, ID. Western states which were once quite conservative are no longer so. Today they are passing marijuana legalization laws and restricting gun rights. Why? Because bad ideas don’t just stay in one place. It was Sen Feinstein who began the lies about assault weapons in order to get more guns listed. Tactics being used here are being adopted by anti-gun proponents nation-wide. Of course, there are bad ideas which begin in other states and spread here. I wish such ideas would stay in one state. Then we wouldn’t be in the mess we are in today. We could just let that state implode and be done with it.

    3. Agreed Don, I think the answer is to cut off California from sapping Lake Mead. They are the only state that uses the lake that has no limits on what they use. Cut off their water supply and no more California. I guess they could try to suck off Oregon and Washington but we’ll see how long that lasts.
      The government is afraid of the fact that the armed American citizen constitutes the largest army on the planet. They want to take the guns so they can strip the rest of our rights. Time to take the politicians out of office…by force if necessary.

  35. Yes. California Rifle and Pistol Assc and the NRA are in a class action suit against the Atty Gen. Rural Sheriffs, conservative legislators, etc.

    We have to do what the antis are doing… ‘one state at a time’. AND we have to make sure a conservative gets elected president. Obama used Holder to advance his agenda. A conservative president can reverse that agenda in the same way. Like instructing the Atty Gen to enforce the Constitution and to take no action which violates that document. Same with BATF… no more attempts to backdoor through ammo.

  36. Sure……you can……the same way we do here in Kommiecticut. Ignore, deceive, evade, and smuggle with non-compliance and acts of armed civil disobedience. All firearms transactions (including private ones) are supposed to be authorized by the state. Believe me, the underground gun trade here is alive and well. Can’t get something in your state, go on an out of state buying trip and get whatever the eff you want! All the threats of “harsh enforcement” have been nothing but bluster from a state government staring at 85% non-compliance, and they have NO idea what to do about it. CT, NY, MD, CO, WA, and now OR have found out they have pushed their marxist nonsense too far, and the citizen Patriots are not going to take it any more!

  37. The Framers gave us a republic form of government, because they were well aware of the evils that occur in a pure democracy. The rise of city states disenfranchises people who live outside of those city states. I-594 passed overwhelmingly in WA because in that state, only the 5 counties in and around Seattle are important. The same thing applies to Oregon and California. If there is a silver lining in the cloud of an overblown government, it is the fact that civil disobedience remains largely unknown and unchallenged. Civil disobedience is the reason that we 2A supporters now have to refer to ourselves as “peaceful” instead of “law-abiding” citizens.
    The antis are now targeting Nevada, believing that they can convince Las Vegas residents to out-vote the rest of the state. It remains to be seen if that can or will happen.
    A problem inherent in the thinking of Alan Gottlieb and some other 2A groups is that he thinks that legal theory trumps legal practice. He wasted his supporters’ money on the Washington case, because a plaintiff nearly always has to have standing in order to challenge a law. To Mr. Dolbee’s credit, he points this out in this article. In addition, it is rare to hit a home run in court. Most big victories are won a piece at a time.
    We 2A supporters need to step up our game if we intend to stop the incremental loss of our freedoms. Most pols start their careers at the local level. Thorough vetting and face time are essential at the local level, as are poll punishments for those who stray. For the near future, civil disobedience will also be necessary, as will be financial support for those organizations helping to defend those unfortunates arrested and prosecuted for violating these useless and draconian rights. I believe that victory will ultimately be ours, but that does not mean that we will win all, or even most, of the battles

  38. As it would be almost impossible to prevent a ballet petition from reaching the polls, it we must fight it out at the election through education and providing the truth to voters by exposing the gun grabbers lies. Effective recall elections as well as law suits are the best methods of combatting this particular form of this particular form of idiotic legislation.

    1. A ‘ballet petition”, would that be right after it does a sashay 😛 🙂 🙂

  39. we need to write our congressmen rally with social pro second amendment believers in our constitution the one i served in the elite 82nd airborne as a paratrooper infantryman and survived combat to preserve i am %30 percent paralyzed in my legs, i stood and swore an oath to protect our constitution the second amendment is not to be compromised at any cost we need to rise up and let washington d,c. know who we know they are ‘book of john 8:44.

  40. As long as the anti-gunners stay in the socialist republic of fruits, nuts and flakes, we (actually, they) won’t have a problem.

  41. Don’t know where you are at, but, out here in rural CA, even Democrats hate what has been going on. Of course, many years ago, Moonbeams father Pat destroyed the state with his progressive ideology, and that is how we got Ronald Reagan. Pat put the state deep in debt, and Ron put us back in the black by cutting taxes, getting rid of over regulation, ridding the state of duplication, and without laying off anyone. He cut positions by attrition… when someone retired or died he just didn’t fill the position. Those were the days when state residents got essentially a free higher education, we had good roads, and life was good. Sadly he tried the same things in DC but was blocked. I am hoping that Moonbeam has brought us to the point of a turnaround. This past election saw the Democrat super majority busted. It’s a start. Of course, the diehards will continue to push their socialist agenda.

    1. another Reagan coolaid drinker, the amnesty he granted turned into 5 million votes for Obie, and when I get my social securty check I get to pay taxes on it which before RR was not taxed, I will agree with you on moonbeam

  42. I noticed that California didn’t even get honorable mention here and I would bet that we’ve got more chicken littles who want to disarm us than Washington and Oregon combined. For a long time I was one of the worst deniers and boy do I regret It now. Our neighborhoods have become dangerous and our cities are now social sewers. That seems to be common to everyplace the gun grabbers have taken power. Hopefully the voters will come to their senses by 2016. If we’re all still alive.

    1. Also out here in California you won’t be able to buy a pistol or revolver after January 1 2016 thanks to Arnold Schwarzenegger’s law of micro stamping. Is there any group trying to stop that?

    2. The People’s Republic of California is hopeless in my opinion. I’ve lived here most of my life and may stay another 10 years and then I’m selling and moving to a state that’s not looted and destroyed by liberals.

      Unfortunately, in California – the asylum is run by the inmates!

  43. Thomas Jefferson said it best…”When the people fear the government,there is tyrnney,When the government fears the people, there is liberty”

  44. Well Don it was less than 6 months ago. I am aware of the changes. Yet in the original case the driving force was the FOB and this were the agreement was struck. I believe the comment on Article 2 is so out of text it is unreal. Seems the comment left out Article 3, 4, Amendment 14, states rights, natural rights and individual rights. Besides Congressional acceptance of state laws. Then there is the. Supremacy Clause. The states are not bond by presidential executive order unless under rmartial law

  45. While the lefties and the westies keep pushing for more controls… the rest of the states seem to be going in the opposite direction and passing more and more favorable legislation. We can turn it around IF we keep Hillary OUT, and we retain control of the Legislative Branch. Barring that, we have alternatives: civil disobedience, using the laws to our advantage while we still can (like ghost weapons and each of us applying for and FFL), and, finally, force of arms. Following WW1, the government broke it’s promise to the veterans to provide them with a mule, a piece of land, and $10 per month. The veterans marched on DC and the Capital Police fired on them. That got the rest of the nation up in arms (pun intended). The government immediately capitulated.
    A very similar confrontation took place in the 1700s when the British Army, under orders to confiscate weapons and powder in order to “control the dissidents”, were dispatched across Massachusetts and were met by armed common folk (aka dissidents), and the result was the “shot heard ’round the world”. It’s hard to believe that so many people, in this age of terrorists killing anyone who does not agree with them, want people disarmed.

  46. Someone please hand the judge and the lawmakers a firearm in front of a law enforcement officer and demand that they be cited or arrested. Record it. If the officer refuses to cite or arrest, go up the food chain. their supervisor, and or the county sheriff. Make sure the law is enforced equally.

  47. Universal Background Check (UBC), is simply a back door opening to gun confiscation. How do you monitor or control “private sales?” You can’t. Therefore, after some time passes. The lawmakers will say for the UBC to work as it was purported. The State will have to incorporate a gun registry. All a person has to proclaim, is they purchased the firearm “privately,” prior to the UBC law went into effect. And the politicians are well aware of this. And the UBC is the incremental stage they’re willing to take. To ultimately pass a gun registry. This manner is exactly what the Obama Administration was attempting to do with their subsequent universal background check too.

    Also,, as of 05/12/15, a congressman has submitted a Bill to the Judicial Sub-Committee. To end online ammunition sales. All ammo must be purchased from a retail store. The seller of ammo would have to be licensed to sell ammo. When purchasing ammo, you must present a valid I.D. And lastly,…any bulk ammo sales must be reported to the local police department. In which the local police must maintain a record. The part of being licensed to sell ammo. Is just another manner to collect taxes and monitor a persons business. And what constitutes bulk buying. Luck, for the gun community. This Bill will never make it out of the sub-committee or committee. However, under the right political climate…i.e., democrat majority in both houses of congress. A Bill like this could probably be passed.

    What this all means, is this war is never ending. And the anti-gunners will “never” stop. Until, all guns are illegal for civilian to possess, own and use. We cannot drop our guard. Most likely the democrats and/or anti-gunners will make numerous attempts of sneaking in some sort of gun legislature into other Bills. That has nothing to do with firearms. We need to remain vigilant in all our endeavors. Sorry for the long post. However, what I conveyed in the aforementioned, I felt was necessary to get across. Because whenever, I read an article about Universal Background Checks (UBC), The author neglects to mention, that a UBC, is a step in eventually getting a “Gun Registration Bill” pass. Politicians are quite aware, they cannot get the true Bills they want to see incorporated amongst the citizens. Therefore, their agenda, is to pass legislation in incremental stages. That leads to the true gun laws, they want passed.

    Respectfully submitted,
    Dr. Rick S.

  48. They can have my gun!!! WHEN THEY PRY IT FROM MY COLD DEAD FINGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Explain to me how 12% of the population elected OBAMA to the presidency??? I guess I will no longer be a gun toting law abiding (CITIZEN) ( NOT A SUBJECT OF THE USA) & become a criminal if LOUISIANA or the Feds ever pass total gun control. I fear a government that fears my gun!!! This country was taken away from the Native American with guns, it was defended against the BRITISH & ALL OTHER INTRUDERS with a gun & I’ll be dead & dammed before they take my weapons!!!!!!!! I’m a CITIZEN NOT A SUBJECT TO THE RULING GOVERNMENT.

  49. Every time this subject comes up people toss out were is this coming from. It’s like the concept of police state. Remember Obama was a state senator in Illinois. Illinois has been a police state since the 70s. All law enforcement is controlled by state police. All officers must be para military trained. The state has extreme gun controls based by the FOP and not federal regulations. To formulate a legal strategy one must understand the battleground

    1. When was the last time you were in Illinois. The game field is changing there, they are going in the opposite direction from the Left coast. You have to remember… You get away from the city of Chicago, which by the way is not the entire state, and the views on guns is totally opposite of what the city thinks. Yes, some of the burbs have anti-assault weapon bans in place but most burbs have very active shooting communities that are growing. Add to this the fact the state was forced to allow conceal carry.

  50. They don’t call it the “Left” coast for nothing. You put that many Liberals in one location and of course you will be able to pass crazy regulations. Come back with a crazy story like this once this starts happening on the other side of the Rockies and then it will be a believable trend.

  51. I am against gun control. Yes the 2nd has been depleted in many state. Each time we look at the legal system, politicians, and those who support gun control. Nobody looks at that terrorist society. We live in a county were people think it will never happen to them, if it does they can point a dead finger at someone. Ie California is a good example. They’re have top notch law enforcement. Yet, the Los Zappas control the border and their gangs are moving into major cities. Law enforcement has not been able to control this Mexican cartel that carries a terrorist rating.

  52. Actually, God is my gun permit, and the Constitution just reiterates that.. We are endowed with certain unalienable rights, and defense of self, family, and neighbor is mandated by God. Sell your cloak and buy a sword/gun. And the People/citizens are to be a greater fighting force than the Govt. politicians, unless we give up our rights and weapons to a tyrannical Govt. I guess each person has to make their own choice whether to voluntarily submit, or stand your ground..

  53. Hollis v. Holder (now Hollis v. Lynch).

    Our rights are creeping towards the courts.

    The balance of the SCotUS going forward will likely be what makes or breaks us for the next few generations.

    Vote for a candidate who will nominate pro-2nd judges to the Court in 2016.

  54. What is it about the 2nd Amendment that they anti-gun people can’t understand. Infringe means to affect in any way, even minor.

  55. Universal background checks would be no problem if we could trust the government. Unfortunately, we can’t. Give an inch they take a mile.

  56. Do what we have been doing behind enemy lines in CT, NY, MD, CO, WA, and now OR….. and DO NOT COMPLY, making their intolerable and unconstitutional acts NULL and VOID. Here in CT, the threats of “harsh” enforcement have been nothing but bluster, as approximately 85% of us former law-abiding gun owners are now felons. State government does not have a clue as to what to do, but if they make the wrong move it will be disastrous! We now refer to ourselves as “peaceable citizens” that simply wish to be left alone. The underground gun trade is alive and well as the state’s gun registry is all but useless and totally outdated. We continue to ignore, deceive, evade, and smuggle to get whatever we need.

    1. GM, BINGO! Nullification and civil disobedience by massive numbers of gun owners is the best solution to constitutional over reach, regardless of what level of government it’s at. State governments, as you note, not only don’t have a clue, they don’t have any recourse when thousands or tens of thousands of otherwise law abiding citizens ignore their unconstitutional laws. For starters, just exactly how does a state enforce a BC on me selling you a firearm in the privacy of my home? Second, I’ve bought guns both on-line and at gun shows. Always had to have a BC at gun shows, and always had to have guns purchased on-line shipped to an FFL dealer where a BC was done before I could take possession.

  57. The anti’s know for now that they can’t do much in the federal system , but we must still keep up the fight in state courts or they’ll get enough of a foothold in enough states to drag their cause back to the federal courts. We must not ever let them get to that postion.
    I believe that one day we might have to all unite and refresh the tree of liberty by evicting the tyrants that want nothing more than to totally enslave us to their socialist dictatorship, and put in their place men and women who understand the beliefs and values this nation was founded on, WE THE PEOPLE need to get back to those basic beliefs and vales and maybe we won’t have to spend so much time and money fighting to keep our GOD given rights.

  58. This is EXACTLY how the Libtards won the Sodomite Marriage war.

    Instead of a frontal attack, they chip away at it one state at a time until the Libtards on the Supreme Court (ALL the “Prestigious” Law schools have been in their control for years, thus the only for a Judge to be accepted into the legal “In Crowd” is to parrot their beliefs) has the cover it needs to use the “evolving standard” or some other bull to override the Constitution.

    And do not forget, this is not a Republican / Democrat thing.
    The ICON of the so called “Conservative” party, Ronald Reagan, signed off on the New Jersey Democrats amendment to the falsely named “Fire Arm Owners Protection Act” which gutted the 2nd. amendment by making it illegal for a citizen to acquire a new Assault Rifle (not the scary looking semi-auto the Libtards CALL Assault Rifles”

    As Franklin pointed out, the US is only a Republic (as long as) we can keep it.

    Actually, it ceased to be a Republic in the 1860’s when the Federal Government, under the first Republican President, Lincoln, used what the founding fathers were afraid, a “stand Army” to invade the Southern States who disagreed with the import / export tariffs put in place by the New York, New Jersey etc. industrialists.

    1. “Actually, it ceased to be a Republic in the 1860’s when the Federal Government, under the first Republican President, Lincoln, used what the founding fathers were afraid, a “stand Army” to invade the Southern States who disagreed with the import / export tariffs put in place by the New York, New Jersey etc. industrialists.”

      You need to go back to (or go for the first time, most likely) to school and learn US history. Tariffs, not that they were a cause–or even a factor–were the opposite of what you claim: They were kept low by the Southern Democrats in spite of the high tariffs wanted by the northern industrialists. The thought that the “Lincoln invaded the South” over tariffs is ludicrous, and not supported by ANY historical evidence.

  59. I think the left coast should break away from the USA along with the current White House. They can make there own Constitution since they don’t like the American peoples along with the Bill of rights. They can bring in all the illegal immigrant’s they want so the American people do not have to flit the bill any longer. Make up their own laws on Gun Control ad have the murder rate sky rocket and try to find something else to blame it on. We can elect a President by the people for the people, I repeat FOR the PEOPLE.

    1. Toney Maeurer, I don’t think Rick will agree with you on the left coast breaking away. He thinks Lincoln didn’t invade the South over tariff laws. So he probably also thinks it is illegal for the left coast to “break away from the USA.”

    2. “I don’t think Rick will agree with you…He thinks Lincoln didn’t invade the South over tariff laws.”

      I don’t just THINK that, sweetheart, but I KNOW that.

  60. State law DOES NOT supersede federal law. State law CAN NOT over ride the constitution of the United States. No state ban has been challenged in the U. S. Supreme Court as of yet. When that happens ALL state laws WILL be deemed unconstitutional. Therefore all citizens will regain their Constitutional rights.

    1. If fact in most cases state law does and can supersede federal law. For a recent example just look at Colorado and the legalization of marijuana. State law does not and cannot supersede the US constitution or laws related to civil rights however in most other areas the states rule.

    2. Under the 1968 Gun Control Act Public law 90-618 Para 922 Unlawful Acts Sec. D (3) It is prohibited for any person to posses a firearm if they are an unlawful user or addicted to marijuana. The ATF has the responsibility of interpreting that law. And since the federal government has NOT amended the law it stands on the books. Also the federal government has not legalized marijuana so therefore may deem any user prohibited.

    3. Actually you’re incorrect regarding State laws superseding Federal law when it pertains to civil rights. Article 2, Clause 2 of the US Constitution states, that no laws, documents, treaties, agreements, etc., cannot and will not supersede and/or be above the US Constitution and it’s laws. The reason, the US govt. and Justice dept doesn’t intervene with Colorado and other States that legalize marijuana. Is due to the laws passed initially were for medicinal purposes. Justice, agreed for the moment to not get involved with States and enforcing drug laws. In regard to marijuana. However, if the Federal govt. want to get involved. they most definitely could. And would be perfectly legal for them to do so. Via Article 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution. The Fed simply elects at this time to stay out of it. Article 2, is the reason why, America is not a signatory to many UN mandates. Like being America isn’t a member of the Internal Criminal Court (ICC) due to Article 2. Then you have the 10th amendment which is the Sovereignty of the States. The Articles of the Constitution bear just as much strength and power as the amendments. Maybe even the articles of the Constitution have more power over the amendments. Why the US Supreme Court neglects to hear some cases. Or attempts to interrupt the Constitution is beyond me. It’s politics at its best. Amendments, like the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th are pretty clear. And not necessary or open to interrutation. imo.

  61. If the states on the Left Coast are selectively unhappy with some of the amendments contained in the Bill of Rights, perhaps we should invite them to secede!

    1. HEAR-HEAR, plus the others that don’t support our 2nd Amendment Rights…..!!!!

  62. The 2nd was written for a tyrannical government. That government is the one we have now. Revolution is required in this nation to once again free ourselves of those that would void our liberty and take our freedom.

  63. Dave, please get a grip and understand the legal landscape before you put freedom at risk by spouting a bunch of amateur BS. Constitutional law happens in courts, not legislatures.

    We have WON the debate for all time, in Heller and McDonald. The basic human right of armed self-defense is, and has been officially declared for all time to be, a “FUNDAMENTAL” right. That is the law, and it cannot change because it is rooted in history going back to the Magna Carta and beyond.

    This means that any law impacting the basic human right of armed self-defense must (a) protect a legitimate governmental interest, and (b) be the “least restrictive means” for protecting that legitimate interest. That is the “strict scrutiny” test, which is the constitutional standard courts apply in any case involving any law that impacts any “fundamental” right, including the basic human right of armed self-defense.

    As the Heller court indicated, the only applicable legitimate government interests vis a vis gun rights are (1) reasonable restrictions on commercial sales (i.e., existing law such as the NFA); (2) keeping guns away from felons and mentally ill (i.e. existing law on that subject); and (3) keeping guns out of sensitive places such as courts and schools [where adequate security is provided so we don’t need to exercise our basic human right of armed self-defense] (i.e., existing law on that subject).

    So, any law that goes beyond that limited scope of power outlined in Heller automatically fails the first prong of the “strict scrutiny” test — there is no legitimate government interest. But even if the crazies could find a way to convince a court that there ever could be a legitimate government interest in regulating the basic human right of armed self-defense, any law impacting that right still must meet the “least restrictive means” standard. This is the legal reasoning a federal court recently used when it struck down the federal law against interstate sales of handguns.

    The crazies can flail about at the state level as they may, but in so doing they will simply end up embarrassing themselves and costing a lot of legal fees (paid for by taxpayers who will not stand for that waste) when the courts declare these unconstitutional laws unconstitutional — as they must, will and have been doing consistently.

    The crazies are desperate because their pet fund-raising tools are slipping away with the Internet’s exposure of their anti-freedom lies and the courts’ striking down of their totalitarian policies. You are simply flipping out over what the crazies are trying to do in their desperation.

    Be a winner, and talk like a winner. Rather than expressing woe and fear because desperate crazies are acting like desperate crazies, speak the truth by identifying the desperation for what it is, and celebrating that desperation as clear evidence that we have in fact WON.

    But anyone reading your BS would think the exact opposite of the truth — and this puts freedom at risk by shifting peoples’ mindsets from the reality of what has ACTUALLY been happening in court into the insanity of “perception is reality.”

    1. Hi PeteDub,

      Small point regarding your excellent post: schools are demonstrably not adequately protected locations to the extent that we would be proscribed from utilizing our right of self defense. While, as a group, I think it is fair to say that teachers are generally anti-gun, I believe that there should be at least 10-15% of them who are armed at all times and trained in how to best defend their schools children from a committed attacker.

    2. Pete, it is you who needs to get a grip. Making this statement: “We have WON the debate for all time, in Heller and McDonald. The basic human right of armed self-defense is, and has been officially declared for all time to be, a “FUNDAMENTAL” right. That is the law, and it cannot change because it is rooted in history going back to the Magna Carta and beyond.”
      is just plain wrong. Both Heller and McDonald were 5-4 SCOTUS decisions. So your “for all time” could mean until another liberal justice is appointed to the Court. I think Dave’s article is very informative.

  64. It is obvious to me that ” a house divided..etc. is the problem with those who stand for gun control and undermining the 2nd AMENDMENT. Just look at the methods of the oposition and learn! Those who are against the 2nd Amed. and gun rights are outmanuvern us. WHY? Power in numbers. They are better organized and speak with a louder voice.
    The NRA can’ t do the job by themselves (They do a great job within their size limitations) because their voice CANNOT BE HEARD above the organations who want to eliminate our rightsthose
    We need to form a large comitted organization made up of the NRA along with the many smaller proactive groups ,and with every gun owner, not a member of any group. We need form a cohesive unit, that speaks with one voice so loud it cannot be ignored!

    I suggest that phone, email and contact information of all state and federal politicians along with pre-written letters and emails, that state our position, be attached to every request t thst we Contact our representativest. Most communications I enclude some but not all this information.
    I have not been able to participate to a lot of contact requests because I didn’t have these things. We all could participate quickly no matter how we are notified (in our cars, homes, or offices) MAKE IT EASY TO RESPOND QUICKLY!

    PS don’t require donations before you send our emails. I give what I can, but when dues are jammed in my face I don’t participate. You lose a lot of backers for this reason. Send requests for dues, donations, and membership fees in seperate messages.



  65. Couple of thoughts here…

    First, I find it interestingly hypocritical the judiciary couldn’t take action on this, but without a single arrest to show for court standing Federal Judges still have no problems shutting down new state immigration laws just the same.

    Lately we’ve seen these judges jump through hoops to go out of their way to protect the perceived rights of people that aren’t even citizens, but yet can’t seem to do the same for the ratified Constitutional Rights of actual citizens as spelled out in the Second Amendment. No bias to see here folks … so just move along.

    And second, I feel this article unfairly portrays our efforts as if we are somehow faltering. The reality is, contending with the anti-gunners is much like dealing with a child. You try to put in place as many preventative solutions to protect your child, but most of the time you simply have to wait and see what bone-headed move your child will make next. Only then can you swoop in and save them from themselves after the fact.

    So like a parent-child relationship, we may not always predict the next wave of adolescent stupidity these anti-gunners will pursue next, but make no mistake, we will always have the fortitude and intellect to swoop in and counteract whatever they do try.

  66. ” The reasoning is almost absurd. The pro-Second Amendment crowd in Washington has been vocal in their dissent, but also vocal that they would not intentionally disobey the law. U.S. ”

    This is why we (the american people) lost. If we refuse to cooperate with the government, they will use bullets to force us.

    If the government refuses to cooperate, should we do any different?

  67. In the progressive, fascist States (capital S) the meaning of the 2nd amendment:

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    is plastic. Regardless of:

    Fascists want to redefine our God given rights into government given rights. Generally under the cover of ‘safety’ or ‘protecting the children.’

    It is clear, from many contemporary sources that “the right of self-defense is the first law of nature,” was universally understood in our nascent group of sovereign States (capital S). The “several States” created and provided limited power via the Constitution to the Federal Government. The amendments to the Constitution where meant to clarify basic rights that transcend States and other governmental entities.

    Are we losing the fight to maintain our 2nd amendment guarantee of keeping and bearing arms. At this point, with recent rulings from the nine black robed, legal priests (who over step their Constitutional boundaries on a regular basis), and the fact that a recent majority of citizens believe that self defense and keeping a gun is a good thing and should be protected, that we are OK. Having said that, this is an on-going fight and the fascists NEVER give up or admit defeat. The people of your State want gun freedom? Forget it, go to the State supreme court and over turn any popularly supported laws. State supreme court not rule in the fascists favor? OK, they are stupid, go to the Supreme Court of the U.S. and try to over turn the State court. That didn’t work? Well, darn it, we’ll start an information terror program of lying news stories about how guns kill children. The evil gun, all by itself, leaps up off of the table, or makes its way out of a locked safe, loads itself, aims at the innocent child and kills that child. Clearly, no one should have these self aware tools laying about. No! Wait! Look there’s a hammer on that work bench! It’s levitating of its own accord, its coming at my head! Darn it! I have to get rid everything that is not nailed down. **step off soap box, rant over**

  68. “Oregon will become the eighth state with some form of “universal” background check law.”

    Do they do a background check, or do they do a background check and retain the data? Big difference between the two.

  69. We will have our rights back only when we send this government

    to join that of king george.


    IN THE U.S.A.

    1. We have to be careful of how we phrase this topic. (your phrasing is fine, I just want to make sure others do not go over board here) In my opinion, the U.S. Federal government will attempt to Federalize and militarize all local police and move to a more fascist police state type of “governing.” “We the people” will not attack our Federal government first, it will attack us. In the beginning of this probable future, it will become very murky whether in a particular situation self defense is legal or not. This is the conundrum presented to families who suffer an attack on their home by a SWAT team that accidentally targets the wrong home (this has happened several times at least that I know of). If the homeowner is prepared and does not know that the home invaders are police and defends him/her self, is that self-defense? I think it is.

    2. I believe we have a Right to know if they have a valid warrant, and what they are looking for, before we submit to them, whether they are swat, or Military, or whatever.. How do we know they are not there to just confiscate weapons, food, etc? It’s getting to the point that we can’t just surrender because they yell “Police”.. It does not mean they have a valid constitutional right to invade your property, home, car, etc.. claiming you are a terrorist, believe in the constitution, worship the true God, are Not constitutional reasons without confirmation of person breaking the true laws.. Obama making up his own laws is not valid.. If the police or gestapo are breaking the law, you should resist, or you give them Absolute power over us.. ..

    3. Sean, some excellent points you raised. I happen to agree with you that the Federal govt. will attempt to federalize local and independent towns too. It’s actually already begun. At a small scale per se. However, they (Fed) has to start somewhere.

      As for attacking the police or not obeying their orders. In a situation when you or your family is NOT the intended target. A person can fight back. And does not have to obey police orders. It’s called “Deprivation of Rights, Under Color of Law.” I would go into more detail, however my comment would be too lengthy. Please look this up. And you’ll understand more. As well as, get answers to many questions you subsequently raised. Lets hope the govt. doesn’t attempt to “federalize” this country. I prefer to remain optimistic. But as each day passes, my optimism seems to get chipped away some.

    4. I hate to say it but I believe you are correct abelhorn. God knows we can’t depend on politicians.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit exceeded. Please click the reload button and complete the captcha once again.

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.