Pres. Elect Trump, Shut Down Mexico’s Lawsuit….

 The Biden administration did something unprecedented in American legal history - it allowed a foreign government to bring lawsuit against American firearms manufacturers in an effort to bankrupt them.  Pres. Biden made his disdain for firearms manufacture and ownership clear from the time he hit the campaign trail during his first run.

But he was frustrated by his administration’s inability to pass his desired gun control initiatives, particularly an “assault weapon” ban, legislation that would have had the effect of banning hundreds of semi automatic rifles and handguns, including an entire class of semi automatic firearms - something the United States Supreme Court had already declared unconstitutional in its historic Heller vs DC decision.

Then an opportunity presented itself: Mexico was looking for a scapegoat for its inability to bring violence fueled by the drug cartels that call Mexico home under control.  The Biden administration saw the opportunity to bankrupt firearm manufacturers rather than wasting political capital trying to merely ban specific weapon types.  Allowing Mexico access to the US justice system would make the success off a lawsuit more likely by prejudicing the proceedings: a sovereign country with epidemic violence that also happens to be our next door neighbor and one of our biggest trading partners.  Such an opportunity hadn’t presented itself since Connecticut permitted the lawsuit that bankrupted Remington and Bushmaster to proceed.

He jumped at the opportunity.

Pres.Elect Trump, Mexico has no standing or business bringing suit against American firearms manufacturers in US courts.  After assuming office again, you need to instruct your DoJ to shut down this lawsuit.

Psychologist: Psychological Tests Can't Predict Rogue Pilots...

In the aftermath of the GermanWings crash, the reliability of psychological testing is downplayed. Said Dr. Erin Bowen, a behavioral psychologist, in an interview conducted for the Today Show,

"The idea nowadays that a full psychological workup would somehow clue you in to which pilots are going to do things like this, it's fiction."

Yet the Brady and Bloomberg anti-firearms groups continue to insist that psychological evaluations are the magic bullet (forgive the pun) that should determine who should or should not own a firearm. If they can't predict which lawfully-licensed pilots are going to take down an aircraft, then they certainly can't predict which firearms owners are likely to commit crimes with lawfully-owned firearms.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Thank you, Dr. Bowen, for stating what so many of us have known for so long.

Moms Demand Implements New Ad Series To Pressure Companies To Prohibit Open Firearm Carry….

Moms Demand (yes, they are maintaining a separate identity since merging with Everytown) is running the following series of ads in newspapers across the nation in an effort to force Kroger and other companies to prohibit open carry:

Each ad presents the same question: Kroger won't let you in their stores with/without shirt, skateboard, or shoes, so why should they allow a loaded gun?

Well, let's see, Moms Demand: of the four scenarios you portray, inappropriate (or no) attire, a skateboard, eating, and carrying a firearm (at least they portrayed the firearms carriers accurately, with fingers off the trigger), which one is a right explicitly protected by the Constitution?

Good call, Kroger!

Note: this focus by Moms Demand on ARs is completely out of line with reality; in logical terms, they are employing the logical fallacy reductio ad absurdum to the open carry debate - making an absurd reduction to portray all carriers as AR carrying, potential nut jobs. While I have seen numerous people legally openly carrying handguns, I have never in my 50 years, even in my place of employment where I sell firearms (including ARs), actually seen someone enter a store or restaurant with an AR. Despite the headlines capitalizing on open carry events in which some owners choose to show up with ARs, the reality is that encountering someone in a public venue carrying one is exceedingly rare.

H.R. 4934 Demilitarizes Federal Agencies….

Here is the press release from Utah Congressman Chris Stuart:

Washington, D.C. – Today, Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah) introduced the Regulatory Agency De-militarization (RAD) Act, which stems the trend of federal regulatory agencies developing SWAT-like teams.

In recent years, numerous federal regulatory agencies – including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Food and Drug Agency and the Department of Education – have created their own special law enforcement teams to conduct their own arrests and raids. This is in part a product of the 2002 Homeland Security Act, which gave most Offices of Inspector General arrest and firearm authority.

"It's disturbing to see the stories of federal regulators armed to the teeth and breaking into homes and businesses when there was no reason to think there would be resistance," Stewart said.

“I understand that federal agents must be capable of protecting themselves. But what we have observed goes far beyond providing necessary protection. When there are genuinely dangerous situations involving federal law, that’s the job of the Department of Justice, not regulatory agencies like the FDA or the Department of Education. Not only is it overkill, but having these highly-armed units within dozens of agencies is duplicative, costly, heavy handed, dangerous and destroys any sense of trust between citizens and the federal government.”

The RAD Act has three pieces:

1. Repeals the arrest and firearm authority granted to Offices of Inspectors General in the 2002 Homeland Security Act.

2. Prohibits federal agencies, other than those traditionally tasked with enforcing federal law—such as the FBI and U.S. Marshals, from purchasing machine guns, grenades, and other weaponry regulated under the National Firearms Act.

3. Directs the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to write a complete report detailing all federal agencies, including Offices of Inspectors General, with specialized units that receive special tactical or military-style training and that respond to high-risk situations that fall outside the capabilities of regular law enforcement officers.

“The militarization of agencies is only a symptom of a much deeper and more troubling problem within Washington – that the federal government no longer trusts the American people,” Stewart said. “When all of us feel that we are no longer seen as citizens but as potential dangerous suspects – a relationship of trust is impossible. I’m working to restore and rebuild trust – beginning with this effort to defund paramilitary capabilities within federal regulatory agencies.”

Specific examples of the militarization of federal regulatory agencies include:

In July 2010, a multi-agency taskforce, including armed officers from the Food and Drug Agency, raided a Venice, California organic grocery store suspected of using raw milk. (LA Times, July 10, 2010).

In June 2011, armed federal agents with the Department of Education’s OIG broke down the door of a Stockton, California home at 6 AM and handcuffed a man suspected of student aid fraud. (Washington Post, June 8, 2011).

In July 2013, an armed multi-agency taskforce, including officers from the Environmental Protection Agency, the Bureau of Land Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Park Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service raided a small Alaska mining operation suspected of violating the Clean Water Act. (Washington Times, Oct. 11, 2013).

On May 7th, 2014, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s OIG released a solicitation for submachine guns.  For the full text of the bill, click here.

Original Co-sponsors of the bill include: Representatives Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), Sam Graves (R-Mo.), Tom McClintock (R-Calif.), Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.), Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.), Kerry Bentivolio (R-Mich), Todd Rokita (R-Ind.), Billy Long (R-Mo.), Doug LaMalfa (R-Calif.), Adrian Smith (R-Neb.), James Lankford (R-Okla.), Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), Matt Salmon (R-Ariz.), Tom Rice (R-S.C.) and Mark Amodei (R-Nev.). 

Make a point of taking the time to contact your US Representative, and urge him or her to sponsor this bill. 

Dr. Carson Shamelessly Co-opts Biblical Account Of Esther To Shore Up Gun Control Argument….

"When it came to 'assault weapons,' Carson said that conservatives who refused to engage in conversations about gun control had an 'infantile attitude.'

The former neurosurgeon pointed to the Bible story of Ester, which he said meant that conservatives needed to know when to compromise for the good of the 'bigger picture',” dr. ben carson on gun rights 

Dr. Carson's misappropriation of the Biblical account of Esther to shore up an argument for gun control is beyond the pale.

The account of Esther has nothing to do with "conservatives need[ing] to know when to compromise for the good of the 'bigger picture',” it has everything to do with the survival of a people and the complete and utter destruction of their enemies using any and all means necessary.  The account of Esther ends with the death of the man who was the architect of a plan to destroy the Jews of the Persian Empire, and the unfettered license for the Jews of the empire to do anything and use any means at their disposal to defend themselves from their attackers:  

"… the king allowed the Jews who were in every city to gather and defend their lives, to destroy, to kill, and to annihilate any armed force of any people or province that might attack them…," Esther 8:11  

No where does the account of Esther indicate that the queen limited the Jews in the kinds of weapons they could use to guarantee their survival because of where they lived, nor did she call on them to find a way to see the "bigger picture" and compromise with their enemies; she didn't characterize the concern for their survival as "infantile."

Dr. Carson's attempt to co-opt the Biblical account of Esther in this manner is shameless and shameful.