Latest SAF ALERTS...This thread is for your information only; no comments/replies, please.

Brady gun control group taking second taxpayer-funded COVID bailout




The anti-gun group has cost taxpayers more than $1 million.

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence will soon receive a second taxpayer-funded PPP loan of $579,530, which was approved by the Small Business Administration just last month.

Last year, the gun control group received a PPP bailout of $695,000.

As soon as the funds from the current loan are disbursed, it will mean the Brady Center has cost taxpayers more than $1,274,530.

The multi-billion-dollar Paycheck Protection Program, or PPP, was launched by the federal government to help small businesses and their employees who were hit hard by COVID-19. Although technically a loan, the PPP offers 100% loan forgiveness if the business adheres to basic spending criteria.

Brady spokesman Liam Sullivan did not immediately return calls or emails seeking comment about whether these funds will be used to support anti-gun candidates. However, according to SBA documents, Brady said it will use the money to pay its 56 staffers.

According to SBA: “On the PPP application, Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence reported intending to use the proceeds of their PPP loan for the following expenses: Payroll: $579,529.”

According to their most recent IRS from 990, from 2018, the Washington D.C.-based nonprofit claimed more than $7.5 million in total revenue, and paid its president, Kris Brown, more than $283,700 in salary and other compensation.

The Brady Center is not the only anti-gun group to help themselves to taxpayer money.

Last year, the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence received $349,700 from the PPP, which it told the SBA it would use to pay its 16 staff members.










The Second Amendment Foundation's Investigative Journalism Project wouldn't be possible without readers like you. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation now to support pro-gun stories like this.






Other lesser-known anti-gun groups have cashed in on PPP funds too.

A partial list includes the following:

• The Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence, based in Washington, D.C., received $279,992
• Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence, based in Washington, D.C., received $248,900
• Christians Against Gun Violence Endangering Our Children, based in Garland, Texas, received $85,000
• CT Against Gun Violence Education Fund, based in Fairfield, received $59,430
• New Yorkers Against Gun Violence Education Fund, Inc., received $57,680
• CT Against Gun Violence Education Fund, Inc., based in Fairfield, received $48,700
• Women Against Gun Violence, bases in Los Angeles, received $14,652
• North Carolinians Against Gun Violence, based in Raleigh, received $13,285
• States United to Prevent Gun Violence, based in Chicago, received $6,800
• Rhode Island Gun Violence Education Fund, based in Kingstown, received $5,248

“The vast majority of Americans do not support these groups or their anti-rights efforts,” said Second Amendment Foundation founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “Therefore, American taxpayers should not be asked to help keep them afloat.”

None of the country’s major pro-gun organizations have applied for or received PPP funds, including the National Rifle Association, Gun Owners of America and the Second Amendment Foundation.






.




The Second Amendment Foundation's Investigative Journalism Project wouldn't be possible without readers like you. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation now to support pro-gun stories like this.

Column: The case for abolishing the ATF

Editor’s note: This is an opinion column. I alone am responsible for the content.

No one makes a better case for abolishing the ATF than the ATF.

There has never been a federal agency with such little regard for the sanctity of human life, with such a history of failure, with such antiquated duties and responsibilities, with such a propensity to overreact, with such an addiction to good press, with such a willingness to bend over for any politician in charge, and – as we currently see playing out – with such little regard for the constitutional rights of American citizens.

I have known special agents from other agencies – FBI, the U.S. Marshal’s Service and DEA to name a few – and all of them react the same way whenever the ATF comes up in conversation: “Yeah, well I’m not sure what’s up with those guys.”

Those guys’ leadership is and always has been a sick joke. ATF directors, who are presidential appointees, care more about keeping the White House happy than they do the Constitution, the safety of their agents or the lives of American citizens.

Joe Biden’s nominee for ATF director, presidential lapdog wannabe David Chipman, will only make things worse if he’s confirmed by the Senate. Chipman – a modern-day Chekist if there ever was one, cut from the same bolt of cloth as “Iron Felix” Dzerzhinsky himself – will transform the ATF into the NKVD for the 21st Century, complete with show trials, midnight renditions and a total disregard for human rights, as long as he gets regular belly rubs from whoever is actually running things behind the katy-barred doors of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

This toxic little imp of a man has already put the Senate and the entire world on notice that he wants to rip America’s most popular rifle from American hands, and given his history at Waco, if the hands are cold and dead it won’t bother him.

How did we get to where we’re at now? How did we reach a point in time where only a couple of Senators stand between us and a fully politicized and weaponized ATF, which is making ready to unleash hell upon American gun owners? For that, friends, you have to look at the agency’s history. Once you do, I’m sure you’ll agree that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives should have been abolished decades ago.

A history of failure: Ruby Ridge

Regardless of what you think of Randy Weaver’s politics and personal beliefs, and quite frankly I don’t think much of them, the man was living in a cabin with his family in the middle of the Idaho wilderness near the Canadian border with no electricity or running water, and was not a threat to anyone.

Unfortunately, some of the folks living off the grid nearby were members of the Aryan Nations. Weaver and his wife Vicki attended several of their events, but when interviewed by the FBI in 1985, told the agents they were not members and merely attended for “social reasons” – anything to get out of their one-room cabin for an evening, I guess.

Regardless, the ATF saw Weaver as a potential confidential informant who could infiltrate a terrorist group, so they targeted the Special Forces combat veteran in the hopes he would flip and become a confidential informant once they had criminal charges to dangle over his head.

The ATF sent their longtime informant Kenneth Faderley to Weaver’s home. Faderley claimed he bought two sawed-off shotguns from Weaver, although Weaver claimed the barrels were cut after Faderley purchased the guns, at Faderley’s request, which the courts view as entrapment.

When the ATF confronted Weaver, he refused to flip, so they filed criminal charges relating to the sale of the short-barreled shotguns. Weaver did not receive adequate notice of his court date, which he subsequently missed, so a federal arrest warrant was issued, the case was handed off to the U.S. Marshal’s and you know the rest.

Weaver’s wife Vicki and son Sammy were killed, along with Deputy U.S. Marshal William Degan. Weaver was charged with 10 federal felonies, including first-degree murder for the death of Degan, but he was acquitted of all charges except for the original bail violation. Weaver was fined $10,000 and served 16 months in prison. He sued the federal government upon his release and later agreed to a settlement of $3.1 million.

ATF’s current website includes no mention of Ruby Ridge, Randy Weaver, Lon Horiuchi – the FBI sniper who shot and killed Vicki Weaver – or Deputy U.S. Marshal Degan, who was just doing his job trying to bail out the ATF. The siege and killings at Ruby Ridge jumpstarted the constitutional militia movement, so I understand why ATF now wants to downplay its role in the fiasco.

Domestic terrorist Timothy McVeigh cited Ruby Ridge as one of the main reasons he bombed Oklahoma City’s Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in 1995 – which killed 168 people including 19 children – as have other murderous lunatics who followed in his wake.

A history of failure: Waco

Unlike Ruby Ridge, the ATF does acknowledge Waco on its website.

According to the agency’s “Remembering Waco” page:

“ATF’s investigation centered on Koresh and the Davidians being involved in the illegal manufacture and possession of machineguns and the illegal manufacture and possession of destructive devices, including bombs and grenades. ATF’s investigation showed that the group acquired:

• 136 firearms, including assault rifles and handguns
• 700+ magazines for those firearms
• 200,000+ rounds of ammunition
• 110 upper and lower receivers for AR15/M16 rifles
• Grenade-launcher attachments for AR15/M16 rifles
• 400+ empty M31 rifle grenades, along with black powder and other explosive chemicals”

The ATF points out that the inert rifle grenades “could be converted to live grenades.” It’s not known if any actually were, since all of the evidence was burnt to a crisp. However, none were ever fired in anger.

During the highly flawed initial assault, the ATF had to beg for a ceasefire so they could recover the bodies of their dead and wounded agents, during which Branch Davidian leader David Koresh released 24 members. Imagine that – a ceasefire – on American soil.

The ATF accepts no responsibility for what happened next during the final assault.

“A 51-day stand-off ended when the Davidian Compound erupted in fire(s) set by cult members, as law enforcement attempted to force them out by introducing tear gas into the building on April 19. The fire destroyed the compound and more than 70 residents were killed, many from gunshot wounds apparently inflicted by fellow cult members,” the ATF website states.

This is pure revisionist history – a new low for a federal agency – especially a law enforcement agency.

The incident at Waco claimed the lives of four ATF agents and more than 70 Branch Davidians. Since it happened on the heels of Ruby Ridge, officials finally began asking questions about ATF’s conduct and policies.

“A subsequent investigation by the Departments of Treasury and Justice regarding the actions of law enforcement agents during the siege determined that some tactics and decisions were poorly executed; and certain actions by ATF were criticized,” ATF’s website states. “However, the September 1993 U.S. Department of Treasury Administrative Review concluded: “…the agency is made up of dedicated, committed and experienced professionals, who have regularly demonstrated sound judgment and remarkable courage in enforcing the law. ATF has a history of success in conducting complex investigations and executing dangerous and challenging law enforcement missions. That fine tradition, together with the line agents’ commitment to the truth and their courage and determination has enabled ATF to provide our country with a safer and more secure nation under law.”

This, friends, is classic misdirection. On one hand, ATF admits it screwed up – bigtime – but on the other hand the ATF is saying look at the bravery of our agents.”

To be clear, I am not now, nor would I ever, question the bravery of the agents who had boots on the ground. I question the idiots in charge, who were so desperate for good headlines – especially after Ruby Ridge – that they lost all semblance of reason and pushed the Davidians until there was a bloodbath, which everyone including the President could see coming.

Weaver and Koresh had one thing in common. They both left their compounds regularly, usually unaccompanied – fair game for a traffic stop by local sheriff’s deputies, which wouldn’t have raised any red flags. If ATF wanted the men arrested so badly, all they had to do was ask the local sheriffs for assistance. The Marshal’s SOG team, FBI’s HRT and hundreds of other lawmen could have all stayed home, and scores of lives would have been saved. Unfortunately, the morons who were running this lethal circus didn’t think like that. They were more concerned about how they looked on the nightly news than they were the lives of the Branch Davidians or even their own agents. They cared more about headlines than human lives.

They still do.

A history of failure: Fast and Furious

There are (real) law enforcement agencies that won’t let drugs “walk” during a reverse-sting operation. Their rationale is that they don’t want drugs posing a threat to the public. I happen to agree with this philosophy. Law enforcement should never put something dangerous into the hands of criminals and then let it walk out the door.

However, from 2006-2011, the ATF let guns walk – a lot of guns – 2,000 guns, of which only 700 were ever recovered.

The goal of what became known as “Operation Fast and Furious” was to target Mexican drug cartels.

Working with FFLs who couldn’t refuse to cooperate, the ATF allowed illegal straw purchasers in Tucson and Phoenix to buy weapons and then ship them back across the border in the hopes they would lead ATF to the cartel’s shot-callers. To date, none of these high-level cartel leaders has been arrested.

Instead, the guns were used by hardcore criminals on both sides of the border.

The whole affair would be almost laughable, were it not for the December 2010 murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, who was killed by one of the firearms the ATF allowed to walk. In addition to Terry, more than 150 Mexican civilians were murdered by ATF’s guns. This is a national disgrace.

In a perfect world, everyone with knowledge of this operation should have seen the inside of a federal prison, much less been relieved of command, but once it became public and Congress got involved, the Obama/Biden Administration invoked executive privilege, at the behest of then-Attorney General Eric Holder, which tied up the proceedings until the Democrats took back control of the House and the entire matter was dropped. A heroic Border Patrol agent and 150 civilians have never received any justice.

For me, the most stunning part of this entire deadly debacle is the complete disregard ATF had for the potential victims of the weapons they let walk across the border – a complete lack of concern for the sanctity of human life.

After all, they weren’t providing guns to responsible gun owners. They were arming drug cartels with advanced weaponry. That no one in the agency’s upper echelons even considered or cared that the weapons they gave to the cartels might be used in crimes is simply stunning – revolting, actually. No one with any street sense – I mean real cops – would have allowed these guns to cross the border. I have no doubt that the victims’ race and nationality played a role in the ATF’s decision making, too. That’s the real tragedy. That alone is reason enough to disband the entire organization.

Agent Terry’s murder led to the creation of the Brian Terry Foundation, which honors his legacy by raising money “for the families of fallen U.S. Border Patrol agents and provides educational scholarships for students pursuing a career in law-enforcement.” I would ask that you please consider them as part of your charitable giving.

Antiquated duties

Nowadays, I’m worried about the increasing lethality of the Chinese and Russian militaries. I’m concerned about cyber-attacks on our infrastructure, a loss of my constitutional rights during the next COVID shutdown, and an economy that’s starting to look a lot like Jimmy Carter’s.

If a couple of country gentlemen want to cook up a batch of corn squeezins, or some entrepreneur in New York City offers untaxed cigarettes for less than $20 a pack, I don’t care. I prefer whiskey that’s been aged for more than a few hours, and I don’t ever plan to go to New York City again.

Still, even though most of us are completely unconcerned about untaxed liquor or contraband tobacco, they stupidly remain a big part of ATF’s regulatory responsibilities. Alcohol and tobacco enforcement, like most of ATF’s duties, could be handled easier by the states, or simply ignored. After all, today there are far more pressing concerns.

The same can be said for ATF’s firearms regulatory duties – especially its enforcement of the National Firearms Act. The NFA was enacted in 1934 in response to the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre of 1929. It’s about as relevant today as prohibition, bathtub gin and flappers.

In my opinion, the NFA and the agency that enforces it should both be scrapped. Just take a look at what’s regulated by the NFA: Machineguns, short-barreled rifles and shotguns, suppressors, destructive devices and “any other weapons.” Most of them pose little risk to the public, and those that do are fiercely regulated by other federal laws.

I own two sound suppressors. One is on my lawn mower; the other is on my truck. If I want one for a firearm, it should be as easy to obtain as a replacement for my Toro’s. As to the short-barreled firearms, can anyone show me how a rifle with a barrel less than 16-inches or a shotgun with a barrel less than 18-inches is somehow more dangerous to the public than weapons with longer barrels? And machineguns are the real red herring on the NFA list. There are about 180,000 machineguns legally available for civilian ownership, and you don’t need all the fingers on one hand to count the number that have ever been used to commit a crime. Why, you ask? Because machineguns are incredibly expensive. Prices start at around $10,000, so anyone who can afford one can afford a quality gun safe.

As to the destructive devices ATF regulates through NFA – hand grenades, bombs, explosive missiles and poison gas weapons – there are more than enough federal laws and federal agencies to regulate their misuse.

The NFA’s “AOW” category regulates disguised weapons, such as pen guns, cane guns, umbrella guns and smooth-bore revolvers. I will agree that these weapons need federal regulation the moment someone can show me that they’ve ever been used in a crime where the suspect didn’t escape on horseback.

The main reason NFA should be scrapped, along with the ATF, is that the Act and the agency that enforces it have become weaponized by the Biden/Harris administration.

The President and his elfish nominee now want our ARs and anything with a pistol brace to fall under NFA regulation. That, friends, cannot be allowed to happen. That is the real threat to our liberties, our gun culture and our way of life.

The real threat

There’s a word used to describe any new law that instantly turns millions of Americans into federal felons – tyranny – and that is exactly what Chipman wants to do.

If he’s confirmed, all of our ARs and pistol braces will end up regulated by the NFA. The little tyrant and Biden have already promised as much.

Sure, it’s easy to say you won’t comply, but keep in mind a violation of NFA can result in 10 years imprisonment, massive fines and loss of your civil rights. I’d prefer that gun owners never have to make this heady decision. The easiest way to accomplish this is to stop Chipman’s nomination cold, and then get rid of the ATF.

Last week, Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene announced she will soon file a bill that would abolish the ATF. The Georgia Republican said the legislation would be titled “The Brian A. Terry Memorial Eliminate the ATF Act.” While I strongly support any effort to abolish the country’s most bloodthirsty federal agency, I doubt the bill will gain much traction in Nancy’s House. Pelosi is an old-school gun grabber, who I’m reasonably certain wrote the original draft of the NFA. At the very least, Rep. Greene’s bill will start a national conversation about the need to get rid of the ATF, and it will also serve as a reminder that we need to fight for our rights and our rifles right now.

Contact your Senators immediately. Call each of their field offices too and tell them you oppose Chipman’s nomination. While you’ve got their staffers on the phone, tell them you want the ATF abolished. If they ask why, tell them ATF has reached its maximum allowable body count. Tell them it’s time to get rid of the ATF before they do any more harm, and more innocent people lose their lives.

As always, thanks for your time.

Lee

The Second Amendment Foundation's Investigative Journalism Project wouldn't be possible without readers like you. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation now to support pro-gun stories like this.

No, NPR, there aren’t 400 Second Amendment Sanctuary counties in the US — there are 1,930



Taxpayer funded National Public Radio tries to downplay and trivialize the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement, without letting the facts get in their way.

To be clear, there are 1,930 counties that have now become Second Amendment Sanctuaries, which is more than 61% of all the counties in the United States.

Of these counties, 1,137 made the decision to protect the Second Amendment on their own. The rest are located in the 15 states — the most recent being Texas — that declared themselves Second Amendment Sanctuaries, according to Noah Davis of sanctuarycounties.com and its companion site constitutionalsanctuaries.com.

Davis has the most up-to-date maps and data available on the topic. He has tracked the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement since its inception in his home state of Virginia.

The fact more than 61% of the country has chosen to protect the Second Amendment rights of their citizens has largely been ignored by the legacy media. If they have bothered to do a story on sanctuaries at all, their goal has been to downplay if not belittle the movement. Of course, that, friends, is what we call spin.

Taxpayer subsidized National Public Radio is the latest to try to torpedo the movement, which is growing every single day.

On NPR’s June 21 edition of “Here & Now,” the host falsely states there are only 400 counties that have become Second Amendment Sanctuaries, not 1,930. This is a common error among the legacy media. Davis has said it stems from a story originally published more than a year ago by Bloomberg’s anti-gun propaganda factory — The Trace. The story keeps rebounding around the internet, even though the numbers have increased significantly, because of lazy reporting and shoddy research.

This wasn’t NPR’s only attack on the grassroots movement.

The show’s guest, Anders Walker, a constitutional law professor at St. Louis University’s School of Law, tore into the sanctuary movement even more.

“It’s a bit of political theater,” Anders said. “Their using language made popular during the Trump Presidency.”

Asked whether he believes the Biden/Harris administration will “crack down” on the sanctuary movement, Anders said Biden has been “very savvy about not pushing issues that are going to generate an explosive backlash.”

“However, I think he has made it clear he does want to go after things like the AR-15.” Anders said, adding that if the Democrats win the midterm elections, they will likely “reup the Assault Weapon Ban.”

The NPR host and the good professor then staged a bit of political theater of their own.

“What message does this bill send even if it is almost purely symbolic?” the host asked.

“I personally think is sends a losing message, which is: ‘We’re gonna double-down on opening up gun sales to everybody.’ I don’t think that is a good look for the NRA. It’s not a good look for gun owners. It makes them look irresponsible,” Anders said.

I sent an email to the “Here & Now” program alerting them to their missteps and asking when and how they intend to correct their errors. Although I received an automated acknowledgement that they received my email, I have not received an actual response.

Takeaways

In my humble opinion, the Biden/Harris administration, the legacy media and the folks at The Trace and other anti-rights groups are scared witless by the Second Amendment Sanctuary movement,

More than 61% of the country has drawn a line in the sand — telling the federal government not to infringe upon their God-given and constitutional rights. The movement ceased being “symbolic” a long time ago.

Despite the good professor saying it’s not a “good look” for the NRA, neither the NRA nor any other civil rights organizations have anything to do with it. This is a pure grassroots movement. It’s organic. It’s hyper-local. It’s about citizens standing up to their government — period. No one person or organization is pulling any strings.

That NPR and other outdated members of the legacy media are now belittling and downplaying Second Amendment sanctuaries shouldn’t come as a shock to anyone. They’re scared, after all, but not nearly as scared as the politicians. The movement positively terrifies them. It strikes at their very core. It tells them very plainly that we will not comply with their tyrannical edicts.

As the movement grows — and it is growing by leaps and bounds — we will see more attacks from politicians, which will then be parroted by their staunch supporters in the legacy media, assuming, that is, they can break a reporter loose from their hard-hitting, investigative coverage of Joe Biden’s ice cream cone du jour.

As always, thanks for your time.

Lee







The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project wouldn't be possible without readers like you. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation now to support pro-gun stories like this.

Verifying Biden's 'rogue gun dealers cause crime' theory

The Second Amendment Foundation's Investigative Journalism Project sent a FOIA to the ATF to verify the President's most recent claims.

Joe Biden announced more executive orders Wednesday, in addition to a new zero-tolerance policy for “rogue gun dealers,” who he now claims are responsible for violent crime increases in five major cities historically controlled by Democrats.

The President’s five-point plan also includes additional money for police — who he previously said should be defunded.

“Rogue gun dealers” the President alleged, are those Federal Firearm Licensees who “willfully” transfer a firearm to a prohibited person, and/or who refuse to cooperate with a tracing request from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

To verify the Biden’s claims, I submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request Wednesday morning to the ATF, seeking the numbers of gun dealers, by state, who, over the past three years, have been prosecuted for willfully transferring a firearm to a prohibited person and/or for refusing to cooperate with a tracing request from the ATF. We will update this story when the agency responds.

While the President highlighted other areas, such as taxpayer funding of community violence intervention, reentry and summer jobs programs, guns were definitely the theme of his speech, which included calls on Congress to ban “assault weapons” and “high-capacity magazines.”

“No one needs to have a weapon that fires 30, 40 or up to 100 rounds, unless you think the deer are wearing Kevlar vests, or something,” Biden said.

During his 15 minute speech, Biden rambled when he tried to adlib — unable to complete sentences. He had difficulty reading from the teleprompter. At times he slurred his words. And once again he referred to the ATF as the “AFT,” although this time he corrected his mistake.

Takeaways

If you’re scratching your head in confusion wondering why the Biden/Harris administration would target FFLs — arguably one of the most heavily regulated federal license holders — you’re certainly not alone. Everyone in the firearms industry knows full well there are — maybe — a dozen or so “rogue gun dealers” out of approximately 60,000 FFLs in the entire country.

What Biden left out of his speech is also telling.

He never once mentioned gangs or gangsters — the root cause of violent crime in every major city whose mayor Biden now wants to prop up.

In Chicago alone there are more than 100,000 gang members. I’m sure each owns more than a few stolen firearms, so guns aren’t the problem. Gangsters are — as evidenced by the fact there were 54 people were shot in the city last weekend.

Now, if he’s really trying to find ways to reduce violence, Biden only has to recall the words he used as a Senator in 1994: “Lock the SOBs up.”

As always, thanks for your time.

Lee

The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project wouldn't be possible without readers like you. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation now to support pro-gun stories like this.

Leaked ATF report: Private gunmakers are criminals, terrorists and violent extremists

If there is any federal agency that can be counted on to create a problem just to justify their own existence it is certainly the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

When it comes to overhyping the next “threat” to the homeland – regardless of the facts – the ATF seldom disappoints.

The embattled agency’s latest piece of creative fiction is a warning about “privately made firearms” or PMFs, and it should serve as a warning to gun owners, homebuilders and everyone else who values their civil rights.

An ATF document titled “First Responder Awareness of Privately Made Firearms May Prevent Illicit Activities,” was published last week by the Joint Counterterrorism Assessment Team (JCAT).

“JCAT is a collaboration by the NCTC, DHS and FBI to improve information sharing among federal, state, local, tribal, territorial governments and private sector partners, in the interest of enhancing public safety,” the document states. “This product is NOT in response to a specific threat against the United States. It provides general awareness of, considerations for, and additional resources related to terrorist tactics, techniques and procedures, whether domestic or overseas.”

To be clear, the ATF and JCAT consider homebuilt firearms “terrorist tactics, techniques and procedures,” even though Americans have been making guns legally in their homes since before there even was a United States of America.

The document was never supposed to be leaked to the media or the public, and is exempt from discovery through the federal Freedom of Information Act, but some freedom-loving soul published it online yesterday despite its ominous warning:

“WARNING: This document is UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY. Do not release to the public, the media, or other personnel who do not have a valid need to know without prior approval from NCTC, DHS, or the FBI. This document may contain US Person information deemed necessary for the intended recipient to understand, assess, or act on the information provided. Additionally, this document may contain information exempt from public release under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552).”

“Criminals and violent extremists continue to seek ways to acquire firearms through the production of privately made firearms (PMFs),” ATF’s document warns. “PMF awareness and identification can aid
PMF recovery, prevention of illicit activities including terrorism, and overall first responder and public safety.”

Evidently, even the ATF was worried that their door-kickers might go too far, again – they can’t afford another Waco or Ruby Ridge – so they included a subtle warning before things get out of hand.

“NOTE: Many of the activities described herein may involve Constitutionally protected activities and may be insignificant on their own. Action should not be taken solely based on the exercise of Constitutionally protected rights.” Yep, those pesky Constitutional rights tend to get in the way.

Much of the advice the ATF passes on to First Responders would be laughable, were it not for the fact that Americans have a right to make firearms in their own homes. Apparently, that doesn’t matter. If you’re found with 3D printers, printing medium such as plastic, ceramic, or metal spools, or place what the agency considers to be too large of an order online, you’re going to be suspected of terrorism or violent extremism even though your actions are perfectly legal.

I have written about the need to abolish the ATF before, because no one seems capable of reining in the rogue agency or forcing them to accept the fact American actually do have constitutional rights.

This is more important now than ever before, because Biden’s nominee to head the ATF, David Chipman, is a paid anti-gun activist who would definitely take the agency in the opposite direction. If Chipman is confirmed by the Senate, this leaked ATF report is just a warning of more serious civil rights violations yet to come.

The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project wouldn't be possible without readers like you. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation now to support pro-gun stories like this.

Click Here For Web Version
SAF: ‘MEDIA BIAS IGNORES POSITIVE SELF-DEFENSE STORIES INVOLVING GUNS’


BELLEVUE, WA – While the legacy media is quick to sensationalize every incident involving misuse of firearms, they just as quickly downplay or completely dismiss reports of lawful self-defense with firearms, and the Second Amendment Foundation is openly challenging the establishment press to explain why.

“Why are the gun prohibition lobby and their bought and paid for politicians and media mouth pieces ignoring stories like this,” wondered SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, after learning of a 12-year-old Louisiana boy’s recent heroic defense of his mother by using a hunting rifle to fatally shoot an armed intruder who was attacking her.

Gottlieb, who co-authored “Good Guys with Guns,” “Right to Carry” and “America Fights Back,” said cases of armed self-defense seem to vanish from the headlines. However, let a tragedy involving a firearm occur, and it becomes the launchpad for on-air interviews with gun control proponents, lengthy newspaper articles about past incidents and editorials demanding additional restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms.

“We’ve seen the media celebrate the heroics of private citizens who pull people out of crashed cars or burning buildings,” Gottlieb observed, “but if an armed citizen stops a restaurant gunman or kills a dangerous home invader, or even saves the life of a law enforcement officer, that story vanishes from the headlines quicker than coherency from a Joe Biden speech.

“We know from experience the gun prohibition lobby suddenly develops lockjaw every time a private citizen successfully uses a gun to save a life,” he continued, “and anti-gun politicians invariably dismiss such cases as ‘isolated incidents.’ But as municipal police agencies see their budgets cut, their morale sinking and their officers leaving, private citizens will increasingly be taking care of themselves and others. Eventually the media and politicians will no longer be able to downplay, dismiss or simply ignore such cases.

“Armed private citizen heroes, regardless of age, may not fit the media narrative,” Gottlieb concluded, “but they fit the American mold. Instead of sweeping such stories under the nearest rug, we should celebrate that fact that such courage exists, along with the fundamental right to keep and bear arms that allows people to be victors rather than victims.”


The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

Law enforcement is a state right.

Our founders knew that concentrating too much power in any one federal agency – especially a law enforcement agency – could lead to a tyrannical police state. It was one of their greatest fears. After all, they knew a thing or two about tyranny, and it was something they wanted to avoid at all costs.

As a result, today’s federal law enforcement agencies have very limited authority and very specific missions: Border Patrol patrols the borders, of course; DEA investigates narcotics; and the ATF enforces archaic alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives laws. The FBI has by far the broadest powers, but it too is constrained by a very specific set or rules and guidelines from the U.S. Attorney General – a process called predication. Contrary to what’s depicted on television, before FBI special agents can swoop in and take over a case, they must first have a federal predicate – they must believe that a federal crime or national security threat exists before they can investigate.

All of these federal agencies are transparent and accountable to the public, although some more so than others. They’re all subject to the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which was signed into law in 1966, and they routinely publish annual reports as well as internal investigations by their inspectors general.

All federal law enforcement agencies keep the public informed of their activities – all except one.

If you want to create a secret police force, the U.S. Capitol Police would be a good choice, since they’re already halfway there. The agency has scant oversight. It’s shrouded in secrecy and refuses to change.

The United States Capitol Police (USCP) is part of the legislative branch, which is exempt from FOIA requirements. Because they report to Congress, the USCP believes they too are exempt from FOIA. I should point out by way of comparison that even the CIA is subject to FOIA. Additionally, the USCP publishes no annual reports, and even the findings of its own inspector general are kept secret and not made public.

The mission of the USCP is to “Protect the Congress – its members, employees, visitors, and facilities – so it can fulfill its constitutional and legislative responsibilities in a safe, secure and open environment,” so you would think that the agency would focus its enforcement efforts in Washington, D.C., but that is no longer the case.

Congress is now seeking to nationalize the USCP by creating “field offices” in different states. Two field offices are planned for now, but more are coming.

“The new USCP field offices will be in the Tampa and San Francisco areas. At this time, Florida and California are where the majority of our potential threats are,” the agency announced in an email last week.

These new field offices will be used to “investigate threats” made against members of Congress, Acting USCP Chief Yogananda Pittman announced last week.

Clearly, Pittman and the agency she heads are reeling from the events of Jan. 6. In her press release titled: “After the Attack: The Future of the U.S. Capitol Police,” Pittman spells out some of the changes that have already taken place. While the chief announced the acquisition of two new “wellness support dogs” – Lila and Filip – a “pivot towards an intelligence-based protective agency,” the purchase of new riot helmets, shields and less-than-lethal munitions, she did not identify the types of threats her officers will investigate in their newly created regional offices.

The one thing that is clear, given the USCP’s penchant for secrecy, the public will never know what they’re up to.

Chain of command

Since it was founded in 1828, seven USCP officers have died in the line of duty. Today, the USCP has more than 2,300 officers and civilian employees, and an annual budget of more than $460 million.

To say that the agency has a muddled chain of command would be an understatement.

The USCP is overseen by the Capitol Police board, as well as four committees from the House and Senate. The Capitol Police Board consists of the Sergeants-at-Arms from the House and Senate, the Architect of the Capitol, Mr. J. Brett Blanton, and Chief Pittman, who serves as an ex-officio member.

Congressional oversight comes from the House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Legislative Branch, the Committee on House Administration, the Senate Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Legislative Branch, and the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration.

All of these committees are currently chaired by Democrats.

Chief Pittman reports directly to the Capitol Police Board, which is subordinate to the four congressional committees. None of these boards or committees are subject to federal FOIA requirements, or are otherwise accountable to the public.

History of secrecy

Demand Progress is a left-of-center internet-activist nonprofit 501(c)4, which advocates for online freedom, civil liberties and transparency in government, among other things.

In June of last year, the group sent a letter to the chairs and ranking members of USCP’s congressional oversight committees, calling for greater transparency and accountability within the agency.

It noted the cozy and “often personal” relationship that exits between the USCP and their congressional protectees. “This is a relationship that arises from privilege, and we would hope that all interactions with the USCP would go as smoothly as those they have with elected officials and senior staff.”

The letter also pointed out that the USCP, “provides little public information about its activities; is under no statutory obligation (such as a Freedom of Information law) to answer record requests from the public; does not publish an annual report on its activities; does not publish reports from its oversight body, the Capitol Police Board, nor the USCP Inspector General; does not proactively publish its annual statistical summary of complaints drawn from Office of Professional Responsibility records; and only began in December 2018 publishing sparse information concerning its weekly arrests. The agency issued only 15 press releases in 2019; has never used its Twitter account; and, while we have been able to determine there is a daily Department News Summary, that document has not been made available despite our requests. In addition, repeated efforts to meet with Capitol Police Chief Steven A. Sund concerning the USCP’s agenda have been rebuffed, and the Public Information Office is unhelpful and unresponsive.”

The USCP’s media office did not return calls and emails seeking their comments for this story, either.

Demand Progress also found that “the USCP routinely goes beyond the mission of protecting Congress, both in terms of the people they interact with and the role that they play. Capitol Police officers make arrests on and off the Capitol complex, with nearly 10% of annual arrests made at Union Station; a significant number of arrests are for traffic violations or drug use; and the majority of ‘incidents’ occur outside of business hours. When the USCP is acting in a law enforcement capacity, it should be held to similar standards as other law enforcement agencies. When it acts like a federal agency, it should be held to account like all federal agencies.”

The group called on USCP to publish annual reports similar to local police departments, to create a FOIA process, to publish Inspector General reports, to publish its internal complaint process and to start using its social media accounts.

Takeaways

To be clear:

The USCP operates in secret.

The USCP is not accountable to the public.

The USCP has little oversight, given its “personal relationship” with Congress.

The USCP has a history of operating outside of its scope – such as making drug arrests off capitol grounds.

The USCP will soon be operating in many states with a mandate that’s nebulous at best.

If you add all of these factors together, you end up with a secret police force that is ripe for abuse – a team of modern-day witch hunters willing to do whatever the politicians in charge desire.

It all comes down to whom they consider a threat.

We all know what the Biden/Harris administration and Democratic congressional leaders think of gun owners. Once you disagree with their gun-confiscation plans you’re labeled a “violent extremist.” Are we now going to become the subject of secret police investigations? Will our calls, emails and get-togethers be monitored? Are our civil rights up for violating? How would we even know? You can’t FOIA the USCP for documents bearing your name like you can the FBI and local law enforcement.

I am less concerned about civil rights abuse from the federal law enforcement agencies that are part of the Justice Department – except for ATF, of course – because there are usually enough safeguards in place to prevent their misuse. Besides, I’ve seen firsthand how the Justice Department reacts when news of an agency with a pattern and practice of civil rights abuse is published. I’ve personally watched the DOJ take over the prison system and a state mental hospital in Delaware, as well as the entire police department of a U.S. Territory, once their civil rights abuse was revealed. But that’s the Justice Department. The USCP reports to Congress, which has a rather contemptuous history of allowing civil rights abuse to fester until it can no longer be ignored.

And the sad part is that this whole crazy scheme isn’t even necessary. Local law enforcement is handled best by local officers, certainly not secret federal police.

The bottom line is this: America was founded on personal freedoms and individual liberties. We certainly don’t need to create an American version of the KGB, Stasi or Mukhabarat.

If you think this is too farfetched or that it can’t happen here, wait till one of Joe Biden’s door-to-door goons asks to see your vaccine passport. Maybe that will change your mind.

Nowadays, it seems Orwell got nearly everything right except the title, which he only missed by 37 years.


The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project wouldn't be possible without readers like you. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation now to support pro-gun stories like this.

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today filed an important amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court supporting a challenge of New York State’s restrictive concealed carry permitting scheme by the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association.

SAF is joined in this “friend of the court” brief by several organizations including the New Jersey Second Amendment Society, Buckeye Firearms Foundation, Connecticut Citizens Defense League, Illinois State Rifle Association, Florida Carry, Inc., Grass Roots North Carolina, Louisiana Shooting Association, Tennessee Firearms Association, Maryland Shall Issue, Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, Sportsmen’s Association for Firearms Education, and Virginia Citizens Defense League.

“This case has been a long time coming and it would not be an overstatement that SAF has an intense interest because of our many members in New York and elsewhere that so-called ‘proper cause’ requirements are routinely used to deny law-abiding citizens the ability to carrying firearms for personal protection outside their homes,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “Such laws are arbitrary in nature and they place an absurd level of authority in the hands of local officials and their subordinates to deny citizens their constitutional right to bear arms.”

The Supreme Court has not heard a Second Amendment case in more than a decade, Gottlieb recalled, “and it is high time to consider another.” The last time the high court took on a Second Amendment case was in 2010, which resulted in the victory known as McDonald v. City of Chicago, a case brought by SAF that nullified Chicago’s unconstitutional handgun ban and incorporated the Second Amendment to the states via the 14th Amendment and made this New York case possible. The 35-page brief is submitted by attorneys David H. Thompson and Peter A. Patterson, Cooper & Kirk PLLC, Washington, D.C.

“The Second Amendment should no longer be treated like the ugly stepchild of the Bill of Rights,” Gottlieb observed. “Its language is clear, that the amendment protects not only the right of the individual citizen to keep arms, but to bear them, and that right extends beyond the confines of one’s home. A right limited to someone’s home is no right at all, and the court now has an opportunity to make that abundantly clear, settling an important constitutional issue once and for all.”


The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

Biden/Harris Administration already weaponizing ATF without waiting for Chipman

by Lee Williams

Even though Joe Biden’s nomination of David Chipman to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has “issues” according to one senior Democrat, and is stalled in a Senate committee, the Biden/Harris Administration has started weaponizing the ATF without waiting for the president’s embattled nominee to take over.

As expected, their target is the firearms industry.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation recently received a copy of an internal ATF memo, which was written by Acting Assistant Director George Lauder and sent to ATF’s senior management.

The memo mentions Biden’s five-point strategy to reduce gun violence, which was announced at a press conference June 23.

“ATF’s role in the Strategy is essential, and includes refocusing our FFL inspection and administration action policies,” Lauder wrote.

The memo calls on field agents to prioritize their gun shop inspections by using a data tool that tracks the number of firearms sold by a gun dealer that are later used in crimes. It also tracks the time period between the sale and the crime.

When they say the memo, the NSSF immediately alerted their members, because of the impact it might have on a gun dealer’s ability to conduct business.

“This memo is concerning because it is the opening moves to the manifestation of what both President Biden and Vice President Harris said they would do during the presidential campaign. They said they would use the ATF as a bludgeon against the firearm industry and revoke licenses for minor clerical errors,” Mark Oliva, NSSF’s public affairs director told me Tuesday. “It is very concerning that the ATF would be using data analytics for crimes that were committed by unrelated third party or attempt to draw conclusions of time-to-crime statistics to label a lawful retailer as party to criminal activity.”

The remainder of the memo focuses on what Biden calls “rogue gun dealers,” who he claims are responsible for violent crime increases in five major cities historically controlled by Democrats.

If an ATF inspector finds that a gun dealer has transferred a firearm to a prohibited person, or failed to conduct a background check, falsified records or refused to cooperate with an ATF tracing request or inspection, the inspector is to recommend revocation of the dealer’s Federal Firearms License.

The gun dealers I spoke to Tuesday scoffed at this new assertion. This has always been the law, they said. The president is simply grandstanding, trying to take the heat off of the Democrats in charge of these crime-ridden cities by creating a new boogeyman for the public and the media to blame for the increasing crime – the “rogue gun dealer.”

“The overwhelming majority of firearm retailers abide by federal and state laws and regulations,” Oliva said. “Retailers that ignore the law are participating in criminal activity and NSSF wants those individuals to be held responsible for their actions, However, the Department of Justice's own reports show the overwhelming majority of criminals obtain firearms through illicit means, mostly through theft or the black market.”

The day after Biden announced his five-point strategy, I submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the ATF, seeking the numbers of gun dealers, by state, who, over the past three years, have been prosecuted for willfully transferring a firearm to a prohibited person and/or for refusing to cooperate with a tracing request from the ATF. Experts say the number will be very small – less than a dozen across the entire country.

To date, the ATF has not even acknowledged receipt of the FOIA request.

The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project wouldn't be possible without readers like you. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation now to support pro-gun stories like this.

by Lee Williams

The New York Times has seized upon a lawsuit filed by the Mexican government against six American firearms manufacturers – which even the newspaper’s own experts admit is frivolous – as if it’s a holy writ, in order to add their political support to the Biden-Harris Administration’s calls for increased gun control.

Using cherry-picked data taken out of context from a report from the Government Accountability Office, the Times reporters boldly state that “70 percent of the firearms submitted for tracing in Mexico between 2014 and 2018 originated in the United States.” However, that is not what the data says. That’s not the whole picture. It’s the submitted for tracing part that’s misleading – misleading in a big way.

According to the GAO report, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) did find that 70 percent of the firearms seized in Mexico from 2014 to 2018 and submitted to ATF for tracing were manufactured in the United States, but the GAO report points out that “ATF does not receive complete data about thousands of firearms, such as those recovered by Mexican states, because only Mexico’s federal Attorney General’s office submits trace requests to ATF.”

That last part never made it into the Times’ story. Why? Because it doesn’t fit their false anti-gun narrative that American-made firearms are flooding into Mexico.

In their response to the story, the National Shooting Sports Foundation pointed out that less than 12 percent of the 30,000 firearms seized in Mexico during 2008 were of U.S. origin.

The NSSF also noted that the actual number of American guns is even lower than 12 percent.

“The ATF has noted that more than 20 percent of the firearms submitted for tracing are duplicates. With such errors distorting the statistics it is clear that even fewer than 12 percent of these firearms originated in the U.S. And of the small number that did come from the U.S., many did not come from retail firearm sales,”

Again, this fact was omitted from the Times’ story.

What wasn’t left out of the story was a slam of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) – a 2005 law that protects gun makers from frivolous lawsuits such as this one – which the Biden-Harris Administration has specifically targeted for repeal.

“Legal experts questioned the lawsuit’s ultimate chances, given that U.S. federal law guarantees gun manufacturers a strong shield against being sued by victims of gun violence and their relatives,” the Times reported. “But some said the lawsuit could lend political support to the strengthening of gun regulations in the United States, which are among the loosest in the hemisphere.”

Questionable appeal

Using the lawsuit to buttress their biased narrative, the Times claimed American gun makers “knowingly facilitate the sale of arms to criminal groups in Mexico by marketing their wares in ways that appeal to drug traffickers.”

They cite as an example a Colt “Emiliano Zapata” limited edition 1911 in .38 Super, which they say was used by a Sinaloa cartel leader to murder a Mexican journalist in 2017.

I find this claim somewhat racist, and while I have not spoken to Colt’s marketing department or their distributor, I am fairly certain the Emiliano Zapata commemorative 1911 was not marketed toward cartel leaders, but rather to history buffs, 1911 collectors, .38 Super collectors and other people who just like a good gun.

Besides, Colt has produced hundreds of collectable firearms that commemorate John Wayne, NRA’s Centennial, the WWI battle of Meuse-Argonne, the Golden Spike, John Browning, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the USS Arizona, the OSS, Colt’s Sesquicentennial, the Pony Express, the 50th Anniversary of the Vietnam War, the USMC, Texas Rangers, the US Cavalry and the Age of Flight.

If some Mexican narcotrafficante now uses a Colt “John Wayne” Commemorative 1911 in a murder, that’s on him. It certainly shouldn’t reflect poorly on Colt or the Duke,

“Even if it’s carless, they’re not liable,” Tim Lytton, a law professor at Georgia State University, told the New York Times.

Who’s really at fault?

To be clear, the blame for the thousands of lost lives in Mexico should be placed squarely on the corrupt and feeble Mexican government and the powerful drug cartels, not American gun makers. Besides, the cartels are also using AKs, RPGs, RPKs, Uzis, FALs, AUGs, Tavors and a host of other foreign military weapons, which they smuggle into the country or steal from Mexican law enforcement. These are not coming from the United States, nor were they ever submitted for tracing by ATF.

The NSSF agrees.

“The Mexican government is responsible for the rampant crime and corruption within their own orders,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel, said in a press release. “Mexico’s criminal activity is a direct result of the illicit drug trade, human trafficking and organized crime cartels that plague Mexico’s citizens. It is these cartels that criminally misuse firearms illegally imported into Mexico or stolen from the Mexican military and law enforcement. Rather than seeking to scapegoat law-abiding American businesses, Mexican authorities must focus their efforts on bringing the cartels to justice. The Mexican government, which receives considerable aid from U.S. taxpayers, is solely responsible for enforcing its laws – including the country’s strict gun control laws – within their own borders.”

Brady involvement

The lawsuit Mexico v. Smith and Wesson, was filed in federal court in Massachusetts on behalf of the Mexican government by the Texas law firm of Hilliard Shadowen, which specializes in class-action lawsuits, and by Jonathan Lowy, who is chief counsel for the Brady Center, one of the country’s leading gun-control groups.

Brady’s involvement should tell you the goal is not to win the lawsuit, but to milk it for free publicity – such as a story in the country’s largest newspaper – to further Brady’s goal of total civilian disarmament.

The lawsuit doesn’t state how much money the Mexican government is seeking, but the Times story says the Mexican Foreign Ministry estimates there could be “$10 billion in potential damages.”

The real gunrunners

If the Mexican government is looking to go after those responsible for flooding their country with American firearms, they should look no further than the ATF and its “Operation Fast and Furious.”

Between 2006 and 2011, the ATF allowed more than 2,000 firearms to be smuggled across the border into Mexico. Only 700 were ever recovered.

The goal of ATF’s flawed operation was to target Mexican drug cartels, but it failed miserably. Instead, the guns were used by hardcore criminals on both sides of the border.

In December 2010, Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was killed with of the firearms the ATF allowed to walk across the border. In addition to Terry, more than 150 Mexican civilians have been murdered with ATF’s guns.

The Mexican government should take another look at this bloody debacle. They’ll see it wasn’t American firearms manufacturers who are arming the drug cartels with advanced weapons. The ATF already took care of that.

The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project wouldn't be possible without readers like you. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation now to support pro-gun stories like this.

The American Independent is a website that claims it is the “No. 1 digital platform for progressive news, reaching millions of people each month.”

“We strive to report with honesty and integrity, shining a light on those in power and the progressive politics movement,” the website claims. Unfortunately for its progressive readers, the website falls far short of its lofty claims.

In a story published Tuesday titled: “GOP senators opposing Biden's ATF pick took tens of thousands of dollars from gun lobby,” the liberal website accuses the 11 Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee of “promoting a disinformation campaign” against David Chipman, the Biden-Harris administration’s nominee for director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

These 11 Republicans, the website alleges, have taken campaign contributions from the “gun lobby.”

“All 11 senators pushing for a second hearing based on the allegations — which have been promoted by the NRA, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, and the Second Amendment Foundation — have received tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions by those groups in their last few reelection campaigns,” the website alleges.

This is a flat-out lie.

The Second Amendment Foundation is incorporated as a 501(c)3 nonprofit, and is incapable of making any campaign donations.

“We make no political contributions,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “This is a complete fabrication – they lied.”

The American Independent has no phone number associated with its website, unlike most real journalism websites, so the Second Amendment Foundation demanded a correction through the website’s internal “contact us” message page:

In your story titled: “GOP senators opposing Biden's ATF pick took tens of thousands of dollars from gun lobby,” which was published yesterday, you have an egregious error of fact. Your story alleges that the Second Amendment Foundation made campaign contributions to 11 Republican Senators. This is an outright lie. As a 501(c)3, the Second Amendment Foundation cannot and does not make campaign contributions. Please contact me via email when the correction is published.

As of noon Wednesday, the error has not been fixed and no correction has been published.

We will update this story once the website acknowledges its mistake.

The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project wouldn't be possible without readers like you. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation now to support pro-gun stories like this.

BELLEVUE, WA – “Joe Biden is no longer hiding his real intentions,” to ban semiautomatic rifles and handguns, the Second Amendment Foundation says in a new 60-second TV message that will be broadcast on nearly two dozen cable networks nationwide beginning next week.

Biden revealed his agenda in a stunning remark made during a Townhall program aired by CNN. Responding to a question about guns and crime, Biden responded, “The idea you need a weapon that can have the ability to fire 20, 30, 40, 50, 120 shots from that weapon, whether it’s a, whether it’s a 9mm pistol or whether it’s a rifle, is ridiculous. I’m continuing to push to eliminate the sale of those things…”

“This was Joe Biden in a remarkably candid moment,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “He acknowledged to the entire country that he wants to ban not only the most popular rifle in America today, but also the type of pistol used by millions of law-abiding citizens for personal protection and home defense.

“When people view our new TV ad, they won’t have to take our word for it. They can listen to the words from Biden’s own mouth,” he said.

“Biden was, for once, honest enough to reveal his true agenda,” Gottlieb continued, “and we’re going to vigorously oppose his schemes by educating and alerting the public with our new, hard-hitting message that includes the president making that remark, as well as taking legal action as needed.”

SAF’s new 60-second message will be broadcast on the following networks: AMC, FX, the Comedy Network, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, Fox Business, One America News Network, Destination America, Bloomberg, BBC America, the Investigation Discovery Channel, American Heroes Channel, SYFY (Science Fiction), TLC (The Learning Channel), TruTV, DirecTV, The Weather Channel, HLN, Dish TV, CNBC, the Outdoor Channel and Sportsman Channel.

Viewers are asked to text “SAVE 2A” to 474747, and join the fight to save a right.

“This was not just some prepared remark on a teleprompter,” Gottlieb observed. “This was Joe Biden admitting he wants to ban millions of handguns, which he knows are protected by the Second Amendment. This was the president telling his constituents he would very much like to disarm them of their only means of personal protection. We’ve been warning about Biden’s intentions for a long time, and now he has confirmed everything we said. We’re hoping every American gun owner joins this fight to beat Biden’s disarmament plan.”

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

Joe Biden got lost in the bushes outside the White House Wednesday, after returning from a long weekend at his home in Wilmington, Delaware. Biden walked right past a Secret Service agent who was pointing the right way and stumbled into the bushes until he saw a side door, which he had to open himself. The President of the United States does not open his own doors at the White House.

Biden’s declining cognitive skills have become blatantly obvious – fodder for late-night comics. He cannot complete a simple sentence unless he’s reading from a teleprompter. His handlers have tried to offer the excuse that Biden suffers from a stutter, but what’s wrong with Joe is far more serious than a speech impediment. Biden drifts off mid-sentence and appears to lose touch with reality. It’s happening far too often for comfort.

The President of the United States has become a puppet, who has to be led – sometimes by the hand – to waiting news cameras, where he stumbles through speeches that someone else has obviously written. So, who is pulling Biden’s strings?

In my humble opinion, in the Biden-Harris Administration’s war against our guns, former Obama national security advisor and UN Ambassador, Susan Rice, who now serves as Biden’s domestic policy advisor, is clearly calling the shots. Rice has a staunch anti-gun pedigree, coupled with direct access to Biden – and Obama – and the means and ability to orchestrate the war against our God-given, constitutional rights.

The evidence is everywhere.

The anti-gun forces love this woman. They were overjoyed when Biden appointed her as one of his closest advisors.

“Ambassador Susan Rice recognizes that gun violence is one of the most urgent threats facing our country, and through this appointment, President-elect Biden is continuing to build the strongest gun safety administration in history,” John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety, said in a statement heralding her appointment. “As Ambassador Rice said in our Demanding Women conversation this summer, ‘the American people want common-sense gun laws’ — and we’re excited to work with her to make that happen.”

“Ambassador Rice is committed to ending our gun violence epidemic, and she understands that COVID-19 has dramatically exacerbated our gun violence crisis,” Shannon Watts, leader of Moms Demand Action, said in the same statement. “Her appointment is proof positive that this administration is wasting no time in addressing the gun violence that takes 100 lives every day and wounds hundreds more. I know Ambassador Rice will be instrumental in helping tackle these dual public health crises.”

Extremist views

Rice’s anti-gun history is well documented.

In 2018, according to Everytown, then-Ambassador Rice signed a letter calling “gun violence” a national security threat. The letter called on officials to “ban assault weapons, mandate background checks and waiting periods, and raise the minimum age to purchase guns.”

In 2020, when she was one of several vice-presidential contenders, Rice told a live Twitter audience that “In the Obama-Biden administration, we implemented more than two dozen very important reforms that put curbs on access to guns, but we need legislation. We need Joe Biden in the White House and Democrats in control of the House and the Senate.”

Rice also claimed that because she grew up in the District of Columbia, which has some of the nation’s strictest anti-gun laws and the skyrocketing crime rates they produce, she had the expertise needed to make a good vice president.

In February 2021, according to a statement from the White House press office, Rice held a virtual meeting with the leaders of Everytown, Moms Demand Action, Giffords and Brady. To be clear, she met with the entire anti-gun lobby personally, without her boss.

“They discussed the ongoing public health crisis of gun violence in America, the historic increase in homicides across American cities last year, and commonsense steps that can be taken to make our communities safer such as closing background check loopholes, stopping the proliferation of unregulated and untraceable ‘ghost’ guns, and expanding community-based violence intervention programs,” the statement reads.

After the meeting, White House spokesperson Jen Psaki told reporters that Rice, and of course Biden, would be “working on gun control policies over the coming weeks.” Psaki added that the White House and the anti-gun groups had “shared goals.”

Just this month, according to a White House statement, Rice met with Attorneys General from the District of Columbia, New York, New Jersey, California, Pennsylvania, Washington state, Massachusetts and Connecticut, to discuss “policies and strategies for holding gun manufacturers and dealers accountable for wrongful conduct that contributes to the supply of firearms used to commit gun crimes.”

The group strategized about various methods they could use, such as state consumer-protection and nuisance lawsuits, for end-runs around the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce Act, which shields gun manufacturers from exactly the type of frivolous litigation Rice and the AGs discussed.

“As directed in the President’s gun crime reduction strategy, participants in the convening also discussed how we can hold gun manufacturers and dealers accountable for unlawful conduct while PLCAA is still the law of the land,” the statement reads. “Attorneys general discussed the opportunity and barriers to using generally applicable state consumer protection and nuisance laws to take action against gun manufacturers and gun dealers under PLCAA’s predicate exception. They also discussed how state legislators could enact firearm-specific liability laws, like New York State’s new law, to potentially create new predicates allowing litigation to proceed under PLCAA.”

The unelected president

The country has seen powerful presidential advisors before, but it is highly unlikely that Rahm Emanuel, David Axelrod or Jared Kushner ever told their bosses what to do. They offered advice, not marching orders.

The difference with Rice’s position is Biden’s declining mental health. I have no doubt that not only does Rice tell Joe what to say, she tells him where to stand and what to wear when he’s saying it. She has gone way past simply advising Biden, and has clearly taken personal charge of the war on our gun rights, and the role that her former boss, Barack Obama, plays in her decision making has yet to be fully revealed.

That Rice is unelected to any office yet wields so much personal power should scare every American, regardless of their political party, especially since she has a history of extremist views, which our out of step with mainstream Americans.

To be clear, Rice has opened the White House doors – which Biden is sometimes lucky to find – to every anti-gun organization in the country, and has even allowed them to make major personnel decisions. How else do you think David Chipman was chosen to lead the ATF? Chipman was working for Giffords when Giffords met with Rice at the White House.

If you need further proof of Rice’s power, she just colluded with eight Attorneys General on how to circumvent federal law in order to put lawful gun makers out of business. The AGs are sworn to uphold the law, not find workarounds to suit their personal beliefs, yet none of them were held accountable for the conspiracy.

Regardless of which president Rice is truly serving – Biden or Obama – as long as she’s just a short walk from the Oval Office, our God-given, constitutional rights are in peril.

The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project wouldn't be possible without readers like you. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation now to support pro-gun stories like this.

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation is celebrating a victory in Pennsylvania involving a long-existing gun club in the Pittsburgh area, as a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has unanimously remanded the case back to the lower court for a second time. The case is known as Drummond v. Robinson Township.

At issue is an effort by officials in Robinson Township to write and enforce restrictive zoning laws against the 265-acre Greater Pittsburgh Gun Club, now operated by plaintiff William Drummond. SAF filed the legal action on his behalf. They are represented by veteran civil rights attorney Alan Gura, who argued both the Heller and the Second Amendment Foundation’s McDonald landmark U.S. Supreme Court case victories.

The Township has been at odds with the range since the early 1990s, and the range was even closed for about ten years until Drummond leased the property in 2017 with the intent to sell firearms and operate the shooting range. The Township amended its zoning rules and in 2018, Drummond and SAF filed suit. While the District court sided with the Township, the Appeals Court reversed and remanded. Drummond’s motion for a preliminary injunction did not receive a substantive ruling before the District Court dismissed his action, the so he appealed a second time.

“Assuming (Drummond’s) motion is renewed on remand,” wrote Circuit Judge Cheryl Ann Krause, “we trust the District Court will address it promptly.”

She was joined by Judges Kent A. Jordan and Luis Felipe Restrepo.

SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb is delighted that the Appeals Court “has ruled in our favor both times.” He is confident of a favorable ruling in the case on remand.

“By the time our victory in this case is finalized,” Gottlieb said, “it will add Second Amendment protection to gun clubs, gun stores and gun ranges because it provides for heightened levels of scrutiny for cases involving gun ranges.

“Anti-gunners have tried to push restrictive zoning on gun clubs, ranges and gun stores in an effort to use zoning laws to make sure gun ranges and stores cannot operate,” he observed. “It amounts to Second Amendment violations and business discrimination under color of law. That cannot be allowed.

“SAF will continue pursuing this and similar cases,” Gottlieb said, “because our mission is to win firearms freedom, one lawsuit at a time.”

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

September 8, 2021 is the deadline for public comments to ATF’s proposed stabilizing arm brace rule on “Factoring Criteria for Firearms With Attached ‘Stabilizing Braces’”

As reflected in the proposed rule (available here), ATF plans to reclassify millions of stabilizing brace-equipped pistols as subject to the NFA, triggering extensive paperwork requirements, taxes, long wait times, and transfer restrictions. Current owners of stabilizing brace-equipped pistols caught by ATF’s expanded NFA controls will need to register their firearm and pay the ATF $200 tax, turn the firearm into ATF, or take one of several other undesirable options.

SAF’s public comments (available here) explain the many problems with ATF’s proposed rule, which would unlawfully infringe on the Second Amendment rights of SAF members and other firearms owners.

ATF stated it will not consider any public comments submitted in response to its withdrawn December 18, 2020 rulemaking on arm braces, and so commenters to that prior rulemaking will need to submit new comments in connection with the most recent proposed rule.

HOW TO SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS

• You can submit your comments to ATF via the Federal eRulemaking portal at: www.regulations.gov here on or before September 8, 2021.

• Your comment must reference docket number “ATF 2021R–08”

• Your comments should be original. ATF will not consider duplicate comments. See Commenter’s Checklist here if you want more information about commenting.

• Your comments should be professional in tone. ATF will not consider comments with profanity or other inappropriate content.

• Better comments describe how the proposed rule would impact the commenter.

• You can also mail written comments to:

Denise Brown, Mail Stop 6N– 518

Office of Regulatory Affairs

Enforcement Programs and Services

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives

99 New York Ave. NE

Washington, DC 20226

ATTN: ATF 2021R-08

Mailed comments should be in 12-point font size (.17 inches) or larger, include the commenter’s first and last name and full mailing address, be signed, and may be of any length. ATF will treat comments postmarked on or before September 8, 2021 as timely.


The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

BELLEVUE, WA – As the Sept. 8 deadline looms for public comment on the proposed rule change regarding handgun stabilizing arm braces, the Second Amendment Foundation has launched an ambitious effort to encourage and guide gun owners to submit comments to the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Read SAF’s comments here.

“Time is running out and we want to provide millions of targeted gun owners the means to weigh in on this alarming proposal,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “ATF wants to reclassify millions of stabilizing brace-equipped pistols by making them subject to the National Firearms Act. If that happens, current owners of such pistols would need to register their guns and pay a $200 tax on each one, or turn it in to the ATF, or take one of several other undesirable options.”

SAF has produced a video message about this proposal, and offers these suggestions on how gun owners should submit their comments:

• You can submit your comments to ATF via the Federal eRulemaking portal at: www.regulations.gov here on or before September 8, 2021.
• Your comment must reference docket number “ATF 2021R–08”
• Your comments should be original. ATF will not consider duplicate comments. See Commenter’s Checklist here if you want more information about commenting.
• Your comments should be professional in tone. ATF will not consider comments with profanity or other inappropriate content.
• Better comments describe how the proposed rule would impact the commenter.
• You can also mail written comments to:

Denise Brown, Mail Stop 6N– 518

Office of Regulatory Affairs

Enforcement Programs and Services

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives

99 New York Ave. NE

Washington, DC 20226

ATTN: ATF 2021R-08

Mailed comments should be in 12-point font size (.17 inches) or larger, include the commenter’s first and last name and full mailing address, be signed, and may be of any length. ATF will treat comments postmarked on or before September 8, 2021 as timely.

“We cannot overemphasize the urgency here,” Gottlieb said. “Gun owners need to submit their comments now. This is just one more manifestation of the Biden administration’s effort to crack down on gun owners and the Second Amendment.”

Dear Gun Rights Enthusiast,

The 2021 Gun Rights Policy Conference (GRPC) is the 36th one hosted by the Second Amendment Foundation and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

Since the first GRPC held in Seattle in 1986, we have evolved and grown from 70 attendees to over 6500 virtual attendees in 2020.

Given the current COVID-19 environment and constraints on travel as well as the inability of our reserved hotel to accommodate us, we have had to adapt once again.

For 2021, the Second Amendment Foundation and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms are offering GRPC as a virtual online event.

The theme remains the same, Saving Freedom Now. We anticipate having almost 80 speakers and plan to increase our reach ten-fold.

Register for this unique event today!

We look forward to having you join us virtually at the 36th Annual Gun Rights Conference. We will be keeping you advised as to the confirmed speakers and multiple media platforms where you can join us when we go live on September 25th, 2021. The entire virtual online event will be archived for future watching.

Given the unusual opportunities that an online virtual GRPC offers us, plan to be surprised, entertained and amazed by the quality of the presentations that we have planned for you.




The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois challenging a prohibition in Cook County against the possession, acquisition, gifting, transfer or carrying of so-called “assault weapons.” The case is known as Viramontes v. Cook County.

SAF is joined by the Firearms Policy Coalition and three private citizens, Cutberto Viramontes, Rubi Joyal and Christopher Khaya, all Cook County residents. Named as defendants are Cook County, Toni Preckwinkle, president of the Cook County Board and the county’s chief executive officer; Kimberly M. Foxx, state’s attorney and Sheriff Thomas Dart, in their official capacities. Plaintiffs are represented by attorneys Christian D. Ambler of Stone & Johnson. CHTD in Chicago and David H. Thompson, Peter A. Patterson and William V. Bergstrom with Cooper & Kirk, PLLC, Washington, D.C.

“The county has enacted and enforced a prohibition on semiautomatic modern sporting rifles, which they erroneously describe as ‘assault weapons,’ even though such firearms are in common use all over the country,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “As a result, the county is denying our individual plaintiffs their rights under the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms.”

The “Blair Holt Assault Weapons Ban” was adopted in November 2006 and revised in July 2013, according to the SAF complaint. It criminalized possession of so-called “assault weapons,” forcing owners of such firearms to remove them from the county, make them permanently inoperable or surrender them to the sheriff. The ban also deems such firearms “contraband” and requires the sheriff to seize them.

“This ordinance bans any semi-auto rifle that can accept a magazine of more than ten rounds, if it has any one of various cosmetic features that have nothing to do with how the firearm functions,” Gottlieb explained. “It lists a number of firearms banned under the law and the list looks like someone just scanned a bunch of scary-looking guns and added them to the roster.



“The guns on the ban list are commonly owned and used all over the country for all kinds of legitimate purposes including hunting, target shooting, competition, predator control and recreation,” he said. “Citizens have a right to own such firearms, and to ban them is an affront to the Constitution.”




The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

Florida GOA director bashes pro-gun state lawmaker



The Florida legislature has a pest-control problem – it’s infested with RINOs.

Republicans have controlled the state House, Senate and Governor’s mansion for years, but Floridians still don’t have constitutional carry. The Gunshine State once led the nation in gun rights – we pioneered concealed carry, Castile Doctrine and Stand Your Ground – but nowadays, Florida has the most restrictive gun laws of any Republican-majority state.

Much of the blame for this can be laid at the tiny feet of former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg, who in 2018 gave then-Senate President Bill Galvano $500,000, which led to passage of the “Parkland Bill” – to date, the biggest, most sweeping gun control bill in the history of the state. Once this and other contributions were outed by the National Rifle Association, all the Bloomberg funding went underground.

At the state level, the blame begins and ends with the Republican Party of Florida, which tends to forget about gun owners until primary season. While there are state lawmakers who deserve praise, there are more than a few who deserve blame.

To be clear, Rep. Cord Byrd deserves our praise, as well as the thanks of every gun owner in the Gunshine State.

Byrd has proven he can always be counted on to support our God-given and constitutional right of self-defense. He is a strong supporter of both the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article I Section 8 of the Florida Constitution, and he has earned an A+ rating from the NRA.

When it comes to guns, Byrd has proven time and time again he is one of us and not a RINO, and I’m reasonably certain that when he cuts himself shaving, he bleeds Hoppe’s #9.

Unfortunately, none of that mattered to Luis Valdes, the Florida Director of the Gun Owners of America.

For reasons known only to Valdes, he singled Byrd out for blame Wednesday – posting an extremely offensive and naïve statement on social media:




Personally, I’ve never met Valdes, although we’ve spoken on the phone a few times. It is important that he and other advocates who come before the legislature understand the legislative process, and Valdes’ ignorant post proves he does not understand the process. Even worse, he did a disservice to gun owners by attacking a trusted lawmaker – a true friend of ours – who champions the Second Amendment.

In my opinion, Valdes must think that by attacking legislators who have a proven track record of advocating for gun owners, he somehow gains street cred. In fact, all this does is prove he does not deserve the trust of gun owners or the ability to speak on their behalf.

Valdes needs to understand that limited committee time cannot be spent on bills that have no chance of passing. That includes bills that do not have a companion in the other chamber. Legislators must find a sponsor in the other chamber. When they don’t or can’t, the blame lies with them for failing to do their job, not with a committee chairman who has a duty to ensure that bills of other members who have done their homework are heard.

Valdes’ attack did not go unnoticed.

“When groups and group spokespersons, who don’t understand the legislative process, attack legislative leadership and committee chairmen who support the Second Amendment, they shoot themselves in the foot and do an enormous disservice to law-abiding gun owners,” said Marion Hammer, past president of National Rifle Association, current NRA board member and executive director of the Unified Sportsmen of Florida.

Others agree.

“It’s hard to call this friendly fire when it’s intentional,” said Sean Caranna, founder and executive director of Florida Carry, Inc. “This is a case of someone who cannot tell friend from foe. GOA has in the past and should do better. I am surprised at this short-sighted attack, and I call on GOA to get their house in order.”

A longtime Florida Carry member tried to talk some sense into Valdes Wednesday, but he wouldn’t hear of it and doubled down on the comments he made is his post. As someone who spent 20 years as an investigative reporter, I understand Valdes wants to generate buzz and possibly a headline, and he’s not the first to go after a well-known member of the gun community in the hopes it will create even more of a splash, but we have a hard enough time gaining friends in Tallahassee. Badmouthing our allies and holding them up for ridicule is naïve and counterproductive. While I am all-in on holding public officials accountable, you have to go after the right public officials. Let’s start with those who are anti-gun.

I have nothing but respect for Gun Owners of America, but clearly Valdes and GOA owe Byrd an apology. It should be public, heartfelt and it should happen most ricky-tick.

The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project wouldn't be possible without readers like you. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation now to support pro-gun stories like this.

BELLEVUE, WA – The California Department of Justice has announced the dates when it will re-open registration of so-called “assault weapons” required by a federal court as a result of the successful Second Amendment Foundation lawsuit in the case of Sharp v. Becerra.

The court also ordered the State of California to pay $151,821.42 in legal fees to the plaintiffs.

California owners of affected firearms may complete the registration process during a 90-day period running from January 13, 2022 through April 12, 2022, according to a directive from Luis Lopez, director of the Bureau of Firearms, and Attorney General Rob Bonta.

Registration will be open for eligible “bullet-button” firearms for those persons who would have been eligible to register under Penal Code 30900, if they lawfully possessed the firearm prior to Jan. 1, 2017, and if they attempted to register prior to the original deadline of July 1, 2018, the DOJ said.

SAF was joined in the lawsuit by the Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, Madison Society Foundation, Calguns Foundation and several private citizens.

“Law-abiding California gun owners were not responsible for the failure of the registration process, and we’re delighted with the outcome of our lawsuit to set things right,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “When a process that should be user-friendly becomes a fiasco, it’s the government’s responsibility to correct the problem and the affected citizens should not suffer any consequences.

“We will be closely monitoring the process when it begins in January, to make sure this time around everything works as it is supposed to,” Gottlieb promised.

According to the DOJ memo, registration will be handled “using the same procedures that were used by the Department in 2018…except that individuals may submit a paper form in lieu of an Internet registration. Individuals who believe they are eligible to take advantage of the re-opened registration period as a result of the federal court order may get more information here.


The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

We’re not insurrectionists, Gabby

For American gun owners, one of the major problems with the legacy media controlling the national narrative is that their fellow leftists are never held accountable for what they say, regardless of how libelous, insulting and flat-out wrong their comments are.

If a falsehood – even a whopper of a lie – fits their personal political views, the media will never question what is said. They’ll even promulgate the lie by repeating it in news stories and social media, which results in the statement being regurgitated so often it becomes accepted as fact by the uninformed.

Case in point, a tweet from Gabby Gifford’s anti-gun group, Giffords, which was sent Sept. 10:

“The insurrectionists who attacked the US Capitol are the same ones pushing an extremist guns-everywhere agenda,” the tweet states. “For the safety and future of our country, lawmakers need to protect public safety and democracy from extremism and violence.”

To be clear, insurrection is a federal crime punishable by a hefty fine and up to 10 years in prison, although none of the Jan. 6 defendants Gabby references have been charged with it. What’s worse is that Gabby clearly says that gun owners and anyone else who supports our God-given constitutional rights are criminals capable of extremism and violence, who need to be specifically targeted and suppressed by new laws for the sake of our public safety and democracy.

On what planet does this make sense?

Gabby’s statement is so over-the-top I half hoped someone would hold her accountable, but of course no one did. She’s seen as an anti-gun icon by the left, and can get away with saying whatever she wants, even marginalizing American gun owners and insisting we’re all revolutionaries-in-waiting.

Take a look in the mirror if you want to see who Gabby is defaming. We are the fringe, she wants the public to believe, rather than the majority we truly are. We are the real mainstream, not violent extremists. We don’t need to be targeted by new laws, especially since we are the law enforcement officers who would enforce these laws. Besides, the true violent extremists – the real threats to our democracy – were recently gifted billions of dollars worth of advanced weaponry by the Biden-Harris regime.

Gabby and her ilk usually dismiss comments they disagree with as hate speech, which they then try to censor through their allies in the legacy media, but her comments are the real hate speech. I understand she is angry and lashing out, since we stopped her employee, David Chipman, from becoming ATF director, but there is no excuse for comments like this.

We will continue to call out hateful speech like this, regardless of who says it.

CCRKBA is the sister organization of SAF. SAF focuses on litigation, CCRKBA on lobbying and related matters.

CCRKBA: ‘REPORT THAT MORE WOMEN BUYING GUNS IS NOT SURPRISING'

BELLEVUE, WA – A report in the Wall Street Journal showing that nearly half of all new gun buyers since January 2019 are women is not surprising, considering efforts to defund police agencies, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.

The WSJ report on the 2021 National Firearms Survey notes approximately 3.5 million women and 4 million men bought guns for the first time between 2019 and April of this year. Overall, the draft report suggests more than 81.4 million Americans over the age of 18 own firearms, translating to 31.9 percent of the adult population.

“We’ve known that women are the fastest-growing segment of the gun-buying public,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “We’re delighted to see so many women joining the firearms community, learning new skills, making new friends and taking more responsibility for their safety and the safety of their families.

“In the process,” he continued, “these new gun owners are learning more about their rights and responsibilities. We have always encouraged new gun owners to seek good safety instruction through local gun ranges or gun clubs so they can become both competent and confident.

“As a result,” he added, “we’re seeing more women joining our organization. They’re willing to fight to protect their newly-exercised gun rights, and we’re proud to have them on board.”

Gottlieb said nobody should be surprised by the rising interest in gun ownership, especially during a time when many law enforcement agencies are losing officers due to political posturing by politicians who seem more interested in headlines than public safety. Crime rates are increasing as a result, and law-abiding citizens are realizing they must take more responsibility for their personal safety.

“Millions of Americans appreciate now, more than ever, the fact that our Second Amendment protects their right to own a gun,” Gottlieb observed. “This should send a message to anti-gun politicians and the gun prohibition lobby that increasing numbers of American citizens aren’t buying the nonsense they’re selling. Instead, these good-sense citizens are buying firearms, learning to use them properly and making it clear they will not surrender their safety, and that of their neighborhoods, to an emboldened criminal element.

“Too many proponents of public disarmament live in gated communities, enjoy private security and all the perks of elitism,” he stated. “Average citizens enjoy no such luxuries. They don’t live in a bubble, and they’re not going to live in fear.”


With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of the nation’s premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States. The Citizens Committee can be reached by phone at (425) 454-4911, on the Internet at www.ccrkba.org or by email to [email protected].


<Please e-mail, distribute, and circulate to friends and family>

Copyright © 2021 Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, All Rights Reserved.

Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
James Madison Building
12500 N.E. Tenth Place
Bellevue, WA 98005 Voice: 425-454-4911
Toll Free: 800-426-4302
FAX: 425-451-3959
Email: [email protected]

The Second Amendment Foundation has filed a federal lawsuit challenging New York state and municipal laws prohibiting private citizens from possessing and using stun guns and tasers, noting in its complaint, “Most courts have found that bans on stun guns and tasers violate the Second Amendment and are unconstitutional.”

Joining SAF are the Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., and three private citizens, Nunzio Calce, Shaya Greenfield and Raymond Pezzoli. The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Plaintiffs are represented by attorney David Jensen of Beacon, N.Y. The case is known as Calce, et.al. v. City of New York, et. al.

Named as defendants are the City of New York and Police Commissioner Dermot Shea.

“As we explain in our complaint, states and localities have some ability to regulate the keeping and bearing of arms,” noted SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “However, the Second Amendment prevents states and localities from flatly prohibiting law-abiding citizens from keeping bearable arms, and particularly arms that are in common use for the purpose of self-defense.”

As noted in the 10-page federal complaint, all four of the individual citizens participating in this legal action reside in neighborhoods within the City of New York.

“New York City has traditionally labored to keep its honest citizens defenseless,” Gottlieb observed, “with its extremist gun control laws and by enforcing a prohibition on non-lethal defensive weapons as well. What are people to do when they are prevented by the government from having the tools necessary to fight back against violent attackers?

“After all,” he added, “it is bad enough for citizens to face having to fight criminals, but it is worse when they have to fight their own government just to exercise their right of self-defense. Good people should not fear being prosecuted for simply having a defensive tool for personal protection. But the law does not allow it, and this must be challenged.”

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation and two California gun rights groups have filed a federal lawsuit challenging the state’s restrictive regulatory scheme covering the sale of firearms and ammunition as it applies to gun show operations in the state.

Joining SAF are the California Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., South Bay Rod and Gun Club, Inc., B&L Productions, Inc./Crossroads of the West, Captain Jon’s Lockers, LLC; L.A.X. Firing Range, Inc./LAX Ammo and six private citizens. The case is known as B&L Productions v. Newsom.

SAF is represented by noted civil rights attorney Donald Kilmer, who successfully represented SAF in overturning the ban on gun shows at the Del Mar Fairgrounds in San Diego County, where the defendants were ordered to pay plaintiffs over a half-million dollars.

Named as defendants in this case are California Gov. Gavin Newsom in his official and personal capacity, Attorney General Robert Bonta, California Department of Food & Agriculture Secretary Karen Ross, San Diego County District Attorney Stephan Summer, San Diego County Counsel Thomas Montgomery, the 22nd District Agricultural Association and Does 1-50. The 57-page federal complaint was filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.

“Boiled down to the basics,” explained SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, “the state has been regulating gun show operations almost out of existence, and more restrictive than brick-and-mortar retail gun shops or even internet sales. This amounts to deprivation of rights under color of local law, including the First Amendment rights of free speech and freedom of assembly, and the 14th Amendment’s equal protection under the law.

“This lawsuit follows our successful action against the Del Mar Fairgrounds,” he added, “but the regulatory regime now in place in California applies to any gun show, anywhere in the state. What is alarming to us is that Crossroads of the West has followed the rules, and so have vendors at their gun shows. Yet, the state is attempting to prohibit constitutionally protected activities that are perfectly legal, and are already highly regulated.

“Like it or not,” Gottlieb observed, “gun shows are public forums where like-minded people can meet and discuss various issues, engage in firearm sales and purchases, learn about gun safety and enjoy the camaraderie inherent at such events. Obviously, the defendants don’t like that, but they simply cannot violate constitutional rights to satisfy a personal disdain.”


The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.