Mediaboss Marketing

RICHMOND, Va. Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring issued an advisory opinion Friday saying that Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions passed by localities across Virginia ahead of possible new gun safety laws passed by the General Assembly will have no legal effect.

With new control of both the state House and Senate, the expectation is lawmakers will pass a number of gun control measures in 2020 for Democratic Governor Ralph Northam to sign.

In response to this expectation, Republican-leaning counties around Virginia havepassed resolutionsdeclaring themselvesto beSecond Amendment sanctuariesand voiced opposition to any future laws that may infringe upon Second Amendment rights.

Last week, Hanover County became the latest Virginia localityto pass a resolution supporting the right to bear arms.

In the advisory opinion, Herring says localities and local constitutional officers cannot nullify state laws and must follow potential gun violence prevention measures passed by the General Assembly.

When the General Assembly passes new gun safety laws they will be enforced, and they will be followed. These resolutions have no legal force, and theyre just part of an effort by the gun lobby to stoke fear, said Herring in a statement.

What were talking about are the kind of commonsense gun safety laws that Virginians voted for just a few weeks ago, like universal background checks to make sure that dangerous people arent buying guns. Too many Virginians have lost their lives to guns and it is well past time that we enact these gun safety measures that will save lives and make our communities safer.

House Majority Leader Todd Gilbert (R-Shenandoah) released a statement Friday afternoon calling Herrings opinion a contradiction of previous statements.

Attorney General Herrings opinion is interesting, as it directly contradicts his own statements and actions regarding the supremacy of state law over the preferences of the officials who must enforce them.

In 2014, Herring declined to defend Virginia law in state court, despite a statutory duty to do so. He told the Richmond Times Dispatch [delegatetoddgilbert.us16.list-manage.com] If I think the laws are adopted and constitutional, (then) I will defend them

His opinion today notes that it has long been the indisputable and clear function of the courts to pass upon the constitutionality of legislative acts. This not only conflicts with his previous statement about his own conduct, but also the position of a number of Democratic Commonwealths Attorneys regarding prosecution of marijuana possession.

Herrings advisory opinion comes after Del. Jay Jones (D 89th) wrote the Attorney General a letter requesting a definitive opinion heading into the 2020 General Assembly session.

37.540725-77.436048

Excerpt from:
Attorney General: Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions have no legal effect - WTVR CBS 6 News

On Dec. 11, Gun Owners of America argued before the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals that the governments recently enacted ban on bump stocks is illegal.

The organization's argument is by no means controversial. The government bureau that made them illegal, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, even admitted in a court filing that it lacks authority under the Gun Control Act and National Firearms Act to issue the rule. In short, it violated the Second Amendment as a way of reaping more power for itself, and that should not be tolerated.

The GOA can and will continue fighting the illicit actions of gun regulators as they arise in court, and they will be penalized; however, this piecemeal approach can only go so far. It is high time for Second Amendment advocates in Congress and the White House to begin taking action to reform the rogue bureau.

After all, this isnt the first time the ATF has disregarded the law. Just two months ago, a judge similarly found the bureau to have been enforcing laws that dont exist against gun owners. The bureau has been pretending that receivers are bound by the same draconian D.C. regulations as entire put-together firearms and have been threatening their manufacturers with prosecution for not going through the full regulatory process.

The methods the bureau has used to generate firearm cases against the American people have always been questionable. In the 1970s and 1980s, Congress studied the issue closely, with a Senate subcommittee report ultimately concluding that it is apparent that ATF enforcement tactics made possible by current federal firearms laws are constitutionally, legally, and practically reprehensible."

Its cousin organization, the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, is no better. The tax bureau used to be a part of the ATF, but in 2002, the Homeland Security Act divided the organization into two. The tax bureaus half is now responsible for tax collection, labeling regulations, and trade oversight, and it remains just as reckless as the ATF.

The tax bureau pointedly refuses to provide clarity to its obscure, complex mandates. As former Treasurer Bay Buchanan pointed out, Ever since its foundation, TTB has seemingly gone out of its way to ensure that firearms and ammo merchants remain out of compliance with the law.

Like the ATF, the tax bureau also has no problem violating the law. For example, it recently proposed Notice No. 176, a rule that it alleges will "eliminate unnecessary regulatory requirements and provide consumers broader purchasing options." Over a dozen conservative organizations have called out the illegality of this proposed rule, which they say will cost hundreds of millions of dollars. In a letter to the administration, they said it violates President Trumps Executive Order 13771, which calls for the elimination of two regulations for every new one proposed, as well as Executive Order 12866 from the Clinton years, which mandates the Office of Management and Budget review any regulatory action that will cost the economy $100 million or more.

Unelected government bureaucrats should not be allowed to continue increasing the size of the regulatory state and infringing on the peoples Second Amendment rights, not when Republicans control the Senate and the White House.

With the ATFs abuses are still being reported in the news and are fresh on the publics mind, now is the time for the Senate to begin holding hearings and getting to the bottom of the exploitation.

The Senate Judiciary Committee should call in ATF head Regina Lombardo to discuss the bureau's legal violations and what steps, if any, are being taken to correct them.

Meanwhile, Louisiana Sen. John Kennedys Senate appropriations subcommittee should call the tax bureaus leaders, Mary J. Ryan and Daniel Riordan, in to see if they accept the deregulatory and transparency orders currently on the books and what action, if any, they are taking to ensure compliance.

If the ATF or the tax bureau's leaders refuse to come before Congress or give lackluster answers to congressional questioning, the Trump administration can and should replace both. As luck would have it, Lombardo, Ryan, and Riordan are only serving in acting roles, so the White House has every right to replace them with permanent leadership officials at any time. In the case of the tax bureau, this would not even require Senate confirmation.

Gun Owners of America will continue to monitor the behavior of both bureaus and fight their illegal activity in court, but substantive change will never occur if we do not receive a helping hand from our friends in Congress and the White House.

Michael Hammond is legislative counsel for Gun Owners of America, a gun rights organization representing more than two million gun owners.

Continue reading here:
Gun regulators have admitted to violating the Second Amendment - Washington Examiner

As leftist politicians continue to threaten the constitutional rights of law-abiding Americans, citizens are standing up for themselves.

Dozens of counties in California, Colorado, Illinois, Rhode Island, Texas and elsewhere have voted to become Second Amendment Sanctuaries, declaring that sheriffs in those counties will not enforce gun-control legislation that violates the Constitution.

In New Mexico, 29 of the states 33 county sheriffs signed a resolution earlier this year opposing sweeping gun-control bills proposed in the state legislature. Most recently, Virginia made headlines as more than 40 counties joined the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement that is sweeping the nation.

A February NPR article noted that professional discretion is a constant feature of policing, as law enforcement officers do not have the time nor the resources to enforce every single law every time one is broken. It is customary for police to decide which laws are a priority and whether pursuing lawbreakers to the full extent of the law is worthwhile. In the case of extreme gun laws, sheriffs have expressed several concerns: the laws are ineffective and unenforceable, they put police officers at increased risk, and they infringe on the Second Amendment rights enshrined by the Constitution.

(Senate Bill 8, a background check bill) does nothing to protect citizens and is unenforceable, the New Mexico Sheriffs Association wrote in a letter earlier this year. We also oppose House Bill 83 (a red flag gun-confiscation law), as it violates due process and puts law enforcement in a more dangerous situation and does nothing to protect citizens. This bill could disarm the very people trying to defend their lives and personal property.

There is concern that the sanctuaries undermine the will of the people (though such concern was notably not expressed when counties declared themselves sanctuaries for illegal immigrants); however, sheriffs are elected officials. Sheriff Bob Songer of Klickitat County, who has vowed not to enforce Washington states Initiative 1639 a package of gun-control laws told NPR, As an elected sheriff and a constitutional sheriff, I believe it violates the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and, more specifically, violates the Washington state Constitution.

In an interview with Reuters, Songer expressed the attitude prevailing among Second Amendment sanctuary sheriffs: Unfortunately for the governor and the attorney general, theyre not my boss, Songer said. My only boss is the people that elected me to office.

These sanctuary resolutions are the last resort for voters in rural areas whose lifestyles and views are not represented by urban voters and lawmakers. As Reuters reports, the sanctuary movement is exposing the rift between rural and urban America as much as the one between the Republican and Democratic parties, as small, conservative counties push back against statewide edicts passed by big-city politicians.

Zach Fort, president of the New Mexico Sport Shooting Association, told Gunpowder Magazine (of which, full disclosure, I am the editor), Theres a lot of pessimism shared by those who want to protect their gun rights right now. A lot of people think theyre being railroaded and not being listened to.

New Mexico Sheriffs Association President Tony Mace expressed a similar frustration, When this legislation is drafted every session, we are not invited to the table, he told Gunpowder Magazine. Our voices are falling on deaf ears. Theyre not giving our point of view any attention at all. If theyre not going to listen to us, then we are going to use their tactics against them. I, like the other sheriffs, was elected to protect our citizens constitutional rights. And thats exactly what we plan to do.

In sum, Second Amendment sanctuaries are sheriff-led movements. Sheriffs are elected by the people of the counties they oversee, and if the people agree with sheriffs that the Constitution remains the supreme law of the land, then Second Amendment Sanctuaries are the supreme fulfillment of the rights and freedoms the Constitution protects.

See more here:
Teresa Mull (Point): Second Amendment sanctuaries reflect the will of people who value the Constitution - NNY360

Lack of communication on guns, disregard of, first, rule of law. and then of a faith tradition

At the conclusion of reading this article, my reaction was one of sadness. I believe this sadness resulted from three thoughts. First, I can remember my elementary school days when we practiced protecting ourselves from enemy air raids with convention/nuclear weapons. We had to get under our desks and close our eyes.

Fortunately, before I moved on to high school, these drills were no longer necessary. Unfortunately, today all schools must have active shooter procedures, which must be practiced. Also, unfortunately, the occurrences of active shooter incidents in schools and in our communities continue to increase. I do not profess to have the wisdom to know what we should change, but I am convinced nothing will change until we learn to talk to each other and respect each others viewpoints.

My second sadness is that my neighbors appear to be taking the perspective that any law passed by our legislature and signed by our governor can be disregarded by us and our Frederick County government. I am proud to be an American and to have served our great country in our military.

Our long-standing commitment to free election and peaceful transition of power (as embodied in our Constitution and Amendments) is the foundation upon which our democracy rests. The rule of law is also central to our system of government. We should not be rebelling against laws that have been or may be passed by our state legislature. That is the purpose of the court system. Also, the rebellious tone sends the wrong message to our children.

Finally, my greatness sadness is there is never a faith component to thesediscussions. Our Founding Fathers were men of faith. Yet, when we discuss important issues, we conveniently omit our faith traditions. These traditions form a moral compass upon which we should live our lives and make decisions. While the Scriptures of our major faith traditions do not address guns, they do provide a framework for living a moral life.

In the Christian faith tradition, which I practice, a central theme of the Gospel is Gods love for us and the love we should have for each other. I suspect many citizens who have signed the petition have also been raised in a faith tradition. I also suspect the moral compass provided in their Scriptures was not considered when they signed. Perhaps in future discussions on the 2nd Amendment, we can establish a common basis for an informed discussion by sharing with each other the foundation of our moral compass.

At the conclusion of the 1990 movie Ghost, the last thing Sam says to Molly as he leaves this world is: Its amazing, Molly. The love inside, you take it with you. Love is the only thing we can take with us when we die. Lets include our love for each other in future discussions of the Second Amendment and all other contentious issues we must face.

Michael J. Conk is a resident of Frederick County.

Michael J. Conk is a resident

of Frederick County.

Read more:
Open Forum: Response to Second Amendment Sanctuary - The Winchester Star

Corporate Tyranny Shameful Harassment

United States -(AmmoLand.com)-One thing is becoming more and more clear the legislative and political arenas are now only part of the overall battle over our Second Amendment rights. While Second Amendment supporters have done well in those arenas, including making the Supreme Court reasonably pro-Second Amendment, the new arenas threaten to outflank the gains in the political and legislative arenas.

These arenas include, but they are not limited to, corporate gun control, leveraging pop culture, Silicon Valley censorship, and social stigmatization. The fact of the matter is anti-Second Amendment extremists have developed their plans in case they suffer a substantial reverse in the Supreme Court. The right ruling would strike down anti-Second Amendment legislation and secure the legal rights we seek, but those rights could very well be a dead letter.

Lets start with corporate gun control. The wallet has always been the Achilles heel of the firearms industry. When Andrew Cuomo was quarterbacking big-city lawsuits against gun manufacturers, the goal was to force companies to choose between accepting settlements that forced them to agree to the agenda of anti-Second Amendment extremists or go bankrupt from massive legal fees against dozens of plaintiffs.

This new corporate gun control is operating on the same principle at least where banks and financial institutions are concerned. The goal is this: Maybe they cant pass a law that prohibits manufacturing modern multi-purpose semiautomatic firearms, but if banks deny business to those who make AR-15s or component parts, then the AR-15 will eventually fade away without any laws passed to ban it. Even if it isnt a bank, a company like Salesforce can force a licensed dealer to choose between an expensive change in software or acquiescing to an agenda.

Silicon Valleys censorship is just as threatening as corporate gun control. Social media and the internet have become crucial for Second Amendment supporters to not only get facts out, but to coordinate their activism and to help each other out. Shut down the voices, though, either through a one-sided application of rules of conduct, and all of the sudden, Second Amendment supporters are cut off. This is what Instagram is doing with its new rules, for instance.

Meanwhile, anti-Second Amendment extremists are leveraging pop culture. Think of it this way Hollywood stars generate press, even when they are not at the A-List levels of celebrity like Angelina Jolie or Meryl Streep. In fact, these days, its about getting press for those who have seen better days, like Alyssa Milano. In the fierce competition, anti-Second Amendment advocacy can help an actor or actress get work and keep a career going. It would also include what gets included in storylines on hit TV shows.

That celebrity power then helps generate the social stigmatization of gun ownership and Second Amendment support. That social stigmatization has been a long-time goal, going back to Eric Holders famous desire to brainwash Americans against guns. In this case, it is about making it so painful to defend our rights that you choose silence and acquiescence rather than lose out on promotions, being the outcast in your neighborhood, or even seeing your family face being berated or worse.

The fact of the matter is that while the political and legislative battles to defend our rights are important, they have never been the only battles we have to fight. This is why the approach we choose to defend our rights matters and why we have to be mindful of how we come across. The ultimate battle we must win for our Second Amendment rights is in the hearts and minds of our fellow Americans.

About Harold Hutchison

Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.

Read this article:
Winning The Fight Beyond Elections and Legislation Winning The Fight Beyond Elections and Legislation Second Amendment - AmmoLand Shooting Sports News