The NRA Is A Terrorist Organization That Sponsors Domestic Terrorism In The USA

The NRA Is A Terrorist Organization That Sponsors Domestic Terrorism In The USA

The NRA Is A Terrorist Organization That Sponspors Domestic Terrorism In The USA

The NRA Is A Terrorist Organization That Sponspors Domestic Terrorism In The USA

Sponsors

The NRA Is A Terrorist Organization That Sponsors Domestic Terrorism In The USA

Even “Gun Rights” Judge Can’t Stomach NRA Extremism

The NRA Is A Terrorist Organization Sponsoring Terrorism In The USA

The NRA Is A Terrorist Organization Sponsoring Terrorism In The USA

It is hard to find a federal judge more friendly to “gun rights” than Judge Sam Cummings of Lubbock, Texas. Yet even Judge Cummings refuses to follow the NRA off the cliff of Second Amendment extremism.

Judge Cummings achieved iconic status in the “gun rights” community in 1999 when, in U.S. v. Emerson, he became the first federal judge to rule that the Second Amendment confers an individual right to possess guns for private purposes. That ruling, literally, was unprecedented. It also was out of step with the Supreme Court’s view of the matter, reflected in a 1939 opinion that since the “obvious purpose” of the Second Amendment guarantee was “to assure the continuation” of a “well regulated Militia,” the Amendment “must be interpreted and applied with that end in view.” At the time of his ruling, no federal Circuit Court had read the Amendment as conferring a right divorced from the militia purpose.

Indeed Judge Cummings was sufficiently committed to a broad reading of the Second Amendment that, in the Emerson case, he dismissed the indictment of a very dangerous man for possession of a gun while subject to a restraining order. Timothy Joe Emerson had issued death threats against his estranged wife and her boyfriend, as well as pointing a Beretta pistol at his wife and their daughter during an argument. Judge Cummings, nevertheless, came down foursquare for Emerson’s constitutional right to be armed.

As is now well known, Judge Cummings’ unprecedented view of the Second Amendment was endorsed by the Supreme Court nine years later in District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the High Court, in a 5-4 decision, defied its own precedent in reading the Amendment to confer an individual right unrelated to militia service. Since Heller, the National Rifle Association and other “gun rights” groups have launched a massive legal offensive against existing gun laws (while at the same time arguing that we need to “enforce existing laws” instead of enacting new ones).

Given Judge Cummings’ record in gun cases, it is obvious why the NRA chose his court to file a constitutional challenge to the Texas law setting 21 as the minimum age to carry a concealed weapon in that State. Crime statistics show that arrests for murder and manslaughter peak at age 18, but the NRA was undeterred in arguing that 18-year-olds have a constitutional right to carry concealed and loaded handguns in public places.

 The NRA’s lawsuit became an embarrassment early on, when it was revealed that the NRA had recruited as the named plaintiff (and poster boy for teen concealed carry) a young man who had a propensity to post on Facebook his favorite violent phrases and quotations (e.g. “After hunting men, nothing can compare.”). After his infatuation with violence was exposed by the Brady Center, his utility to the NRA abruptly ended and he was dropped from the lawsuit.

The NRA’s biggest problem, though, was that Judge Cummings was careful to read the Supreme Court’s Heller opinion and understand that it does nothing to support the gun lobby’s constitutional extremism. Much to the NRA’s chagrin, Judge Cummings emphasized that the right recognized in Heller was, in his words “quite narrow,” finding that “the Second Amendment does not confer a right that extends beyond the home.” Judge Cummings cited the legion of other post-Heller rulings also confining Heller’s scope to the possession and carrying of guns within the home. Not only did the NRA’s handpicked federal judge find no constitutional right for an 18-year-old to carry handguns in public, he found no such right for anyone to do so. It is also worth noting that, four months ago, Judge Cummings rejected another NRA lawsuit and upheld the federal ban on gun dealer sales of handguns to persons under 21 years of ago, a restriction that obviously impacts the freedom of young people to have a gun inside the home for self-defense.

These Texas rulings are just the latest in a series of painful courtroom setbacks for the gun lobby. A Republican-appointed judge recently upheld the Obama Administration’s modest regulatory effort to curb gun trafficking to Mexico against gun industry attack, and the D.C. Circuit, in an opinion by Reagan-appointee Douglas Ginsburg, rejected the NRA’s challenge to the District of Columbia’s current gun registration system and its assault weapon ban.

These gun lobby legal defeats underscore how much the NRA and its gun industry funders are dependent for their success on the tactics of political threats and intimidation. In too many legislative bodies, including the U.S. Congress, those tactics have often prevailed. A federal courtroom, however, is a far different forum, in which threats of reprisal have no place and advocates are required to offer facts and reasoned argument in support of their positions.

When the task is persuasion, instead of intimidation, the gun lobby has been firing blanks.

 

THE NRA Is A Terrorist Organization That Sponspors Domestic Terrorism In The USA

Fort Hood gunman Ivan Lopez slammed Newtown shooter Adam Lanza as attention seeker in Facebook posts

Lopez, who killed three fellow soldiers and wounded 16 at the Texas army base, wrote that Lanza ‘pretends to be a victim of mental illness followed by addiction to violent video games,’ according to Facebook posts obtained by CNN.

 

AUSTIN CHRONICLE OUT, COMMUNITY IMPACT OUT, INTERNET MUST CREDIT PHOTOGRAPHER AND STATESMAN.COMDEBORAH CANNON/APVehicles were checked outside the Bernie Beck Gate on Wednesday in Fort Hood, Texas, where Ivan Lopez killed three soliders and wounded 16 before taking his own life.

 

The Fort Hood gunman ranted on Facebook about his hatred for another mass shooter — Newtown, Conn., killer Adam Lanza.

 

Ivan Lopez, who killed three and wounded 16 more before taking his own life on the Texas army base last week, wrote that Lanza “pretends to be a victim of mental illness followed by addiction to violent video games,” according to Facebook posts obtained by CNN.

 

Lopez said the 20-year-old gunman, who killed his mother, 20 children and six staffers before shooting himself at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, sought “international attention.”

 

fORT HOOD shooter Ivan Lopez from his Ivan Slipknot facebook pages.  April 3, 2014

Lopez, 34, is seen in a photo from his Facebook page. He wrote in a post that Adam Lanza sought ‘international attention.’

Enlarge

Adam Lanza. CBS NEWS

Adam Lanza, 20, killed his mother, 20 children and six staffers before shooting himself at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012

Enlarge

 

“It is stupid to me that anyone can have easy access to a powerful weapon without being mentally evaluated,” Lopez, who had a history of depression and anxiety, wrote in the undated post.

 

“This makes the government an indirect accomplice. . . . These bastards have perfected their way of attacking studying previous massacres to gain publicity and their minute of fame as a villain. But thanks to Hollywood and the sensational profiling by the media (they) give more power to those intelligent cowards.”

 

It is stupid to me that anyone can have easy access to a powerful weapon without being mentally evaluated.

 

Lopez, 34, also wrote that he was distressed by his time in Iraq.

 

“Celebrating life. It has been exactly 1 year and 2 days since left Iraq seeing in Fallujah the most brutal explosion . . . I was left paralyzed and started a discussion over the radio . . . I was only focused on breathing deeply so that I don’t lose focus and continue the mission. (Those) were hours of agony waiting for an attack by the insurgency but we were able to exit Fallujah all alive. I was in vehicle #6. The worst was that #5 was a diesel truck, the perfect target. And I was only thinking about getting back with my family.

 

Members of the media wait outside of the Bernie Beck Gate, an entrance to the Fort Hood military base, for updates on a shooting that occurred inside on Wednesday, April 2, 2014 in Fort Hood, Texas. (AP Photo/ Tamir Kalifa)TAMIR KALIFA/APMembers of the media were seen waiting outside an entrance to the Fort Hood military base for updates on Wednesday.

 

“To be in the line of fire is f—– up but even more f—– is the suffering of the families,” he added.

 

Lt. Gen. Mark Milley, the post’s commanding general, said Lopez did not experience direct combat in Iraq.

 

People injured in the shooting at Fort Hood were brought to Baylor Scott & White Memorial Health Central Texas hospital for treatment. CNNPeople injured in the shooting at were brought to Baylor Scott & White Memorial Health Central Texas hospital for treatment.

 

Lopez also had problems at home. In a post from March — around the time he bought the .45-caliber pistol he used in the shooting — he claimed he had just been robbed.

“My spiritual peace has just gone. Full of hate. Now I think I’ll be damned. Last night I was robbed and I’m pretty sure there were 2 skinny ones. Green light and thumb down. That easy,” he wrote.

 

 

Lopez also had problems at home. In a post from March — around the time he bought the .45-caliber pistol he used in the shooting — he claimed he had just been robbed.

 

“My spiritual peace has just gone. Full of hate. Now I think I’ll be damned. Last night I was robbed and I’m pretty sure there were 2 skinny ones. Green light and thumb down. That easy,” he wrote.

 

The Second Amendment Is An Obsolete Disgrace. It’s Time To #Repeal2A NOW

It’s Time To Take The USA Back From GunNuts

Photos: Facebook/Mary Penrose, YouTube screenshot

CALL TO ARMS: Texas A&M law prof says it’s time to repeal Second Amendment

A full-time professor on the faculty of the newly-minted Texas A&M University School of Law called for the repeal and replacement of the Second Amendment on Friday.

The professor, Mary Margaret “Meg” Penrose, made her controversial declaration during a day-long panel symposium on gun control and the Second Amendment at the University of Connecticut School of Law in Hartford.

UConn’s main student-run journal, The Connecticut Law Review, organized the event, according to Connecticut Public Radio. It was well-attended, primarily by law students, law professors and local attorneys.

Penrose was among the speakers, reports CTNewsJunkie, a Connecticut news site.

Penrose cited the Sandy Hook massacre, which occurred in Connecticut, as well as other mass shootings including the 2011 Tucson shooting that left six people dead and U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords critically wounded.

Noting her own outrage that Americans continue to tolerate gun violence, Penrose asked audience members to raise their hands if they thought laws intended to prevent gun violence have been successful. No one raised a hand.

“I think I’m in agreement with you and, unfortunately, drastic times require drastic measures,” the professor said, according to CTNewsJunkie. “I think the Second Amendment is misunderstood and I think it’s time today, in our drastic measures, to repeal and replace that Second Amendment.”

Penrose then proposed a solution that would allow each state to determine its own gun policies.

“The beauty of a ‘states’ rights model’ solution is it allows those of you who want to live in a state with strong restrictions to do so and those who want to live in a state with very loose restrictions to do so,” the professor explained.

Penrose also noted that she tells students in her constitutional law courses that the entire United States Constitution is an obsolete document.

“Why do we keep such an allegiance to a constitution that was driven by 18th Century concerns?” she asked, according to CTNewsJunkie. “How many of you recognize that the main concern of the 18th Century was a standing army? That’s what motivated the Second Amendment: fear of a standing army.”

She described herself as “somewhat agnostic about guns” but “extremely passionate about” the Constitution she calls outdated.

Connecticut Gov. Dannel P. Malloy also spoke at the event, stressing his belief that the Second Amendment offers a limited right and bragging about the strict gun control laws he signed earlier this year.

“In the 1930s, machine guns were the weapon of choice for mobsters,” Malloy said, according to Connecticut Public Radio. “And we collectively decided that machine guns should be illegal for private possession in the United States. We don’t see machine guns being used in the U.S. in crimes. We did for some time after the ban was initially implemented but there’s a reality about what happens to those kinds of weapons once they become illegal.”

At least one symposium speaker wasn’t hell-bent on destroying the Second Amendment.

Josh Blackman, a professor at South Texas College of Law, observed that gun control laws have a sordid racially-motivated history.

“The first gun control laws were actually meant to subjugate slaves,” Blackman explained, according to CTNewsJunkie. “There has been a very close connection between gun control and racism.”

Penrose’s employer, Texas A&M University School of Law, is located in downtown Fort Worth.

 

NRA Helps Criminals When They Advice: Don’t Cooperate With Police

NRA Advice: Don’t Cooperate With Police If Your Gun Shows Up At A Crime Scene

Chuck Michel, one of the National Rifle Association’s top lawyers, urged California NRA members not to cooperate with police if their guns turn up at crime scenes, warning that prosecutors would use a non-existent California law to engage in malicious prosecution against gun owners.

recipient of the NRA’s 2013 Defender of Justice Award and representative of the NRA in California, Michel appeared on the January 28 edition of NRA News show Cam & Company to criticize California’s Armed and Prohibited Persons System (APPS). APPS is a unique crime fighting tool aimed at keeping guns out of the hands of people who, because of their criminal record or mental health issues, are banned by law from owning them. The system cross references California’s gun ownership databases with databases of individuals prohibited from owning a gun in order to identify gun owners who are no longer allowed to own their weapons, who are then instructed to turn in their firearms. If notices to prohibited owners to turn in guns do not receive a response, law enforcement officers may visit the prohibited owners at home to take the guns and in some cases make arrests.

Michel characterized APPS — which has recovered more than 10,000 guns since its inception — as a “campaign of shame against gun owners.” Stating that “laws out here are now turning the tide so that gun owners cannot trust the police,” Michel also claimed that gun owners could be prosecuted if their firearms innocuously end up at the scene of the crime under California law.

MICHEL: So now the NRA has taken a new approach, we are really warning people, the NRA is warning people about these kinds of things [APPS]. The next thing I think will be a warning about not volunteering information if you get called because your gun turns up at a crime scene. Because now with the 48 hour theft reporting, you could be prosecuted if you don’t report a gun missing within 48 hours of when you should have known. And of course the prosecutors can say you should have known instantaneously.

But California does not have a law that requires gun owners to report lost or stolen firearms. A proposal to create such a requirement was vetoed in 2013 by California Gov. Jerry Brown, who expressed skepticism of the laws efficacy. Furthermore, as the bill’s digest explains, the law would have given gun owners seven days, not 48 hours, to file a report and the time limit would only begin when the gun owner “knew or reasonably should have known” the firearm as missing. Licensed firearm dealers, a small fraction of gun owners, are required to report lost or stolen firearms “[w]ithin 48 hours of discovery” in California.

Laws requiring gun owners to report lost or stolen weapons are meant to combat firearm trafficking by preventing traffickers from avoiding culpability by claiming that crime scene guns left their possession through loss or theft. These laws can also assist in returning stolen firearms to their lawful owners, by putting the police on notice of what is missing. An analysis by gun violence prevention group Mayors Against Illegal Guns found that states with no lost or stolen reporting requirement export crime guns at a rate two-and-a-half times higher than states with reporting requirements:

Previously the NRA released a video special attacking APPS as “confiscation under the guise of safety” by highlighting the case of a woman who had her firearm seized by APPS. However, by the special’s own admission the woman had been involuntarily committed, and therefore was not allowed to own a firearmunder federal law. The NRA frequently attempts to stifle the enforcement of gun laws, especially on the federal level.

Moms Demand Action Objects To Proposed Amendment To Remove Federal Ban On Guns In Post Offices

 

 

 

At Least 194 Children Have Been Shot to Death Since Newtown The NRA says arming more adults will protect kids—but most are killed at home, our investigation shows, often with unsecured guns.

At Least 194 Children Have Been Shot to Death Since Newtown
The NRA says arming more adults will protect kids—but most are killed at home, our investigation shows, often with unsecured guns.

– Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America vehemently objects to any attempt to amend existing federal law and lift the ban on guns in post offices, as proposed by Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky. Sen. Paul’s amendment to the Senate postal reform bill would allow licensed gun owners to carry weapons inside post offices. Guns are currently banned in all American federal buildings, including post offices.

Sen. Paul is attempting to have the amendment included in a postal reform bill being debated by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. Prior to the current ban on guns inside federal buildings, mass shootings at U.S. Post Offices were so frequent that the phrase “going postal” became a popular way to describe workplace violence in America.

“As mass shootings continue to trend upward in America, it is unthinkable that Sen. Paul would attempt to remove a ban on guns in a workplace where mass shootings have occurred,” said Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America. “Moms will not sit idly by while our lawmakers pick apart existing common-sense gun laws. We will fight tooth-and-nail to help protect our children and families from senseless gun violence.

“There is simply no reason why post offices should be exempt from the ban on guns in federal buildings, especially given the history of shootings inside post offices,” said Watts.

About Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America Much like Mothers Against Drunk Driving was created to change laws regarding drunk driving, Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America was created to build support for common-sense gun reforms. The nonpartisan grassroots movement of American mothers is demanding new and stronger solutions to lax gun laws and loopholes that jeopardize the safety of our children and families. In just one year, the organization has more than 130,000 members with a chapter in every state in the country. The group recently joined forces with Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the largest gun violence prevention organization in the country. For more information or to get involved visit www.momsdemandaction.org. Follow us on Facebookwww.facebook.com/MomsDemandAction or on Twitter @MomsDemand

SOURCE Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America

 Read more articles by Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America

Second Amendment rights can and should be burdened as courts have ruled.

Second Amendment rights can and should  be burdened

Second Amendment rights can and should
be burdened

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 251 other followers

%d bloggers like this: