GUNS/BARMS (GUNS)

[Gmenfan]

New Mexico Wannabe Dictator Michelle Lujan Grisham Backs Down on Gun Ban

Many will cheer, but there's so much more work to be done and not enough people fighting the good fight.
JD Rucker
Sep 16, 2023

Just when many of us thought any semblance of sanity had evaporated in the United States of America, the country rallied for a lucid moment to oppose the tyrannical efforts of New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham. With pressure from every direction, including many of her fellow Democrats, plus a court order against her, she amended her gun ban to "only" go after certain public venues.

In other words, she caved from her gun ban and turned it into expansion of gun-free zones. It's not a true win for the 2nd Amendment as any such restrictions are unconstitutional, but it's good to see we haven't quite turned into a full-blown police state.

According to Just The News:

At a press conference on Friday, Michelle Lujan Grisham announced that she was amending her controversial gun order to allow open and concealed carry, except in parks and playgrounds "where we know we have high risk of kids and families," she said.

The move comes a day after a federal judge temporarily blocked the order and fellow Democratic politicians denounced her plan as unconstitutional. Local law enforcement had refused to enforce the order and the state's attorney general had refused to defend it in court.

Lujan Grisham, citing recent shootings, had declared a public health emergency centered on gun violence. The executive order signed September 8, included an "action plan" that banned carrying a loaded weapon off of private property in Bernalillo County, which includes Albuquerque. The governor's office threatened fines of up to $5,000 for violations.

The governor made the changes to the order after "listening to the debate in court," according to ABC.

"I want to point out that the conversation in that court was pretty clear that we are not wrong about this emergency, or about the issues related to violence, gun violence and public safety generally," she said.

This was a trial balloon to test the acceptance level for abolishing the 2nd Amendment. We can take it as a small victory, but in reality the powers-that-be learned lessons they will use against us. The battle will continue as incremental stripping of our God-given right to fight tyranny is an ongoing threat.

https://jdrucker.substack.com/p/new-mexico-wannabe-dictator-michelle?publication_id=682517&post_id=137088689&isFreemail=true&r=rd9j8

[Trinityz1]

"O'Connor Strikes Back": Federal Judge Exempts Plaintiffs From Biden's ATF 'Frame And Receiver' Rule

What's not being reported by corporate media outlets, such as Reuters, AP News, Bloomberg, and others, because any win (big or small) for the Second Amendment community is rarely covered due to their commitment to anti-gunners, such as 'Everytown' and 'Giffords,' is that Judge Reed O'Connor of the Northern District of Texas granted the plaintiffs in the Garland v. VanDerStok case, Defense Distributed and BlackHawk Manufacturing Group Inc. (doing business as 80 Percent Arms) motions for an injunction pending appeal, which basically means they're the only two companies that can sell 'ghost guns' nationally (or partially completed frames and receivers and weapons parts kits) while the case continues.


https://www.zerohedge.com/political/oconnor-strikes-back-federal-judge-exempts-plaintiffs-bidens-atf-frame-and-reciever-rule

[Gmenfan]

NEWSJudge Blocks New Mexico Order Restricting Gun Rights — Gov. Grisham Responds

https://truthpress.com/news/judge-blocks-new-mexico-order-restricting-gun-rights-gov-grisham-responds/

A federal judge ruled against the emergency public health order, issued by Democrat Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, repealing open and concealed carry rights in the largest county of New Mexico.

U.S. District Judge David Urias issued the judgment on Wednesday after numerous gun rights groups and advocates had filed lawsuits against the restrictions. The ruling temporarily suspends the order restricting gun rights until Oct. 3, when a hearing will be held to consider the merits of arguments for and against the ban.

Grisham released a statement on her official social media page about the ruling.

“Today a judge temporarily blocked sections of our public health order but recognized the significant problem of gun violence in this state. I refuse to be resigned to the status quo, and I will never stop fighting to prevent other families from enduring these tragedies,” she wrote.

“To be clear: gun violence and drug abuse are acute threats to public health and safety in this state,” Grisham continued. “We will stay the course by increasing State Police presence in Bernalillo County, arresting the hundreds of violent offenders with outstanding warrants still on our streets, and directing our healthcare system to immediately expand capacity to accept persons experiencing drug addiction and homelessness.”

She went on to call on local law enforcement and the legislature to “enact solutions that save people’s lives.”

Grisham had issued the public safety order on Friday and said she was forced to do so based on several incidents involving gun violence against children in New Mexico. The law imposed a $5,000 fine on people who are caught carrying guns openly or in a concealed manner in public areas of Bernalillo County.

On Tuesday, the state’s attorney general notified Grisham in a letter that, based on his opinion that the order was unconstitutional, his office would not defend her against lawsuits.

“Though I recognize my statutory obligation as New Mexico’s chief legal officer to defend state officials when they are sued in their official capacity, my duty to uphold and defend the constitutional rights of every citizen takes precedence,” said Attorney General Raúl Torrez.

“Simply put, I do not believe that the Emergency Order will have any meaningful impact on public safety but,” he added, “more importantly, I do not believe it passes constitutional muster.”

Here’s more about the ruling:

[Gmenfan]

More Frightening but true facts about guns

[Trinityz1]

For all those who said they couldn't get ammo......

https://trueshotammo.com/

[Vexari]

The level of expertise and training is crucial

~~~ Situational awareness is key ~~~
(34:37)

Regardless of whether it's for the procurement of food

Or self defense

defendressofsan

Guns are often referred to as the great equalizer

[Vexari]

Just to demystify the process

~~~ Firearms will play an important role ~~~
(12:13)

In these tasks

defendressofsan

[crazy horse 0]

More people buying guns in Florida
The passing of a new law is changing the way people are buying guns. Florida gun show organizers say over 10,000 people have attended the show over the weekend.

https://www.wogx.com/video/1246348

[Gmenfan]

Victor Marx is the world record holder for the fastest gun disarm. pic.twitter.com/c5yHXTaAbC

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) July 9, 2023

[excel]

You'll know ................

[crazy horse 0]

‘Permitless is not open carry’: Palm Beach County Sheriff breaks down what’s in Florida’s new permitless carry law

Highlights of Article

"The biggest misconception is that people think they can carry the gun openly right on their side, just walk down the street. Permitless is not open carry," Bradshaw said.

All this law means is that those carrying concealed weapons will not have to apply for a permit, undergo a background check, or take an instructional course.

But when it comes to buying a gun, nothing has changed.

"You still have to go to the gun shop, you got to do a background check just like you did before. You have to be 21. You have to be a US citizen. You have to be not a convicted felon," Bradshaw said.

It’s the same idea when it comes to where you can bring guns.


"You can't play it in a bar or nightclub. You can't go into schools, you can't go into governmental meetings, and any place that says it's private property and people prohibit it, you can't carry that gun in there," Bradshaw said.

Even though having a permit won’t be necessary anymore under this new law, there are benefits to getting one. You won’t need to wait for a three day background check when buying a gun and you’ll be allowed to carry in 37 other states.

https://cw34.com/news/local/permitless-is-not-open-carry-palm-beach-county-sheriff-breaks-down-whats-in-floridas-new-permitless-carry-law-june-28-2023

[trkyhntr]

Overreach!

[crazy horse 0]

IRS Confiscates Tens of Thousands of 4473 Forms From Great Falls, MT Gun Dealer

Van Hoose had Highwood Creek Outfitters back up and running as usual on Thursday morning. He wants his customers to know that whatever prompted the IRS raid, he’s still very much in business.

He told us he intends to fight the IRS on this to recover his 4473s and he expects the legal bills to run into six figures. He’ll be establishing a GiveSendGo campaign to help raise funds to pay the attorneys. When that’s been established, we’ll add that information to this post for those who would like to help in the effort.

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/irs-confiscates-tens-of-thousands-of-4473-forms-from-great-falls-mt-gun-dealer/

[Gmenfan]

Gun Control Doesn’t Work, and California’s Homicides Prove It

Gavin Newsom wants to spread his gun control nationwide – but it won’t save us.
By: James Fite June 15, 2023 - 7:30 am


California has the strictest gun control laws in the country – and Golden State gun grabbers are quite proud of the fact. They also like to tout their below-average per capita firearms murder rate when compared to the nation as a whole. Gov. Gavin Newsom, on June 8, jabbed at Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves on Twitter about the gun violence rates of their respective states and announced his proposal for a 28th Amendment to the US Constitution with the intent of binding the entire nation to his brand of “common sense.”

But don’t let the governor’s slick performance or per capita numbers fool you – California is no murder-free utopia of peace and love. The truth is, gun control doesn’t protect the law-abiding citizen, and California’s firearm homicides prove it.

Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics


While the true origin of the phrase “lies, damned lies, and statistics” is – perhaps appropriately – hard to accurately attribute, it reveals an important truth about statistical arguments. No matter what side one takes, there’s sure to be some statistic to back it up.

Advocates of gun control point to the Golden State and say that, since the per capita firearm murder rate is lower than the national average, clearly California-style gun control works. But there are other factors to consider when examining these laws’ success or lack thereof.

“More than 17 percent of the annual firearm murders in the United States occur in gun-controlled California,” Breitbart’s Second Amendment columnist AWR Hawkins recently wrote.

According to the CDC, 2021 saw 3,576 firearm homicides in California – the second highest state total, behind Texas – and 20,958 in the nation. California is the most populous state, it’s true, but that means that less than 12% of the nation’s total population accounts for 17% of gun deaths – despite also having the most gun control. The Golden State also has more school shootings than any other in the Union, a total of 169 since 1970, with Texas coming in second at 135. Furthermore, according to the FBI, California also took first place in “active shooter incidents” in 2021.

Per Capita Rates – Useful, but Potentially Deceiving

In a Twitter tiff with Reeves, Newsom said:

“Can’t wait for you to defend the fact that Mississippi has the highest gun violence death rate in the nation …

“(377% higher than California’s by the way)

“You can’t be serious.”



What Newsom is referring to, of course, is the firearm homicide rate per capita – or per 100,000 people. It’s a form of measurement weighted to account for population differences, as logic suggests a higher population means higher rates of, well, pretty much every human behavior. To some degree, that’s true. But compare two lists of the states side by side, one ranked by either murders per capita or the raw total and the other by population, and that theory quickly falls apart. Simply put, there are more factors contributing to most human behavioral trends than merely how many people happen to be around.

Using the anti-gun Everytown for Gun Safety’s gun law rankings, one can select two states to compare. A look at California and Mississippi seems to back Newsom’s play: California is ranked #1 in the nation, with a gun law strength score of 86.5 and a per capita gun homicide rate of 9. Mississippi comes in dead last at #50 in gun law strength, with a score of just three and a per capita firearm homicide rate of 33.9.

What neither Newsom nor the good folks at Everytown want to discuss, however, is how many people lost their lives in each state. In 2021 – the worst year on record for firearm homicides nationwide, according to the CDC – Mississippi lost 962 people to California’s 3,576.

Here’s another, perhaps more extreme example that demonstrates how per capita rates can be deceiving. Arkansas – this writer’s home state – comes in at #49, according to Everytown. For 2021, the Natural State receives just a 4.5 gun law strength score and rocks a murder rate of 23.3. After compiling the 2014-2021 data for both California and Arkansas using the CDC’s interactive map, it’s clear that all eight years of Arkansas murders combined don’t add up to even the two lightest years in California.

The problem, of course, is simple dilution, and nowhere is that more apparent than when comparing small towns to big cities. Along the Caddo River in southwest Arkansas sits the city of Glenwood, population 2,036. The city-data.com crime tracking table shows total crimes for Glenwood from 2007 to 2020. In that whole 14-year span, there were a whopping two murders – one of which didn’t even involve a firearm. Over the same period, Los Angeles saw 4,214. The average annual count in the much larger city ranged from 251 to 395 and averaged out at 301.


But the per capita rate ranged from 6.4 to 10.2 and averaged 7.7. Now compare that to Glenwood’s 44.5 in 2007 when a single teen was shot under mysterious circumstances (it remains unsolved to this day) and 47.5 in 2018 when one local man stabbed another during a heated argument that turned violent. That small-town per capita rate looks quite intimidating – perhaps more so, with the unsolved murder – but where would you have felt safer during those 14 years?

Where Gun Control Fails

If gun control really worked, California wouldn’t lead the nation in active shooter incidents, school shootings, and come in second in total firearm homicides while also boasting the nation’s strictest laws. Put simply, gun control fails because violent criminals don’t balk at petty crimes like illegally acquiring or possessing something.

Despite what anti-gun Democrats like to say about common sense, they fail to see the actual sense in the words of criminologist Cesare Beccaria, later quoted by Thomas Jefferson in Commonplace Book: “The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes … Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”

https://www.libertynation.com/gun-control-doesnt-work-and-californias-homicides-prove-it/

[Gmenfan]

US Court Of Appeals Rules Felons Can Own Guns — Supreme Court Showdown Is Coming

https://truthpress.com/news/us-court-of-appeals-rules-felons-can-own-guns-supreme-court-showdown-is-coming/

Yesterday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit handed down a major ruling in favor of the Second Amendment rights of ex-felons. At issue was the federal “felon-in-possession” law—18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), which bars ex-felons from possession of firearms. While it is always risky to bet on granting of review before the Supreme Court, this en banc decision is well positioned for a Supreme Court showdown over the Second Amendment.

The federal law makes it “unlawful for any person . . . who has been convicted in any court, of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year” to “possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition.”

In this case, Bryan David Range pleaded guilty in the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County to one count of making a false statement to obtain food stamps. He later explained that he was earning between $9.00 and $9.50 an hour to support his wife and three young children on $300 per week. Range’s wife applied for food stamps but understated Range’s income, which she and Range signed. Range later took responsibility for the misrepresentation.

Range received three years’ probation (which he completed) and had to pay thousands in fines. However, when Range pleaded guilty in 1995, his conviction was classified as a Pennsylvania misdemeanor punishable by up to five years’ imprisonment. That triggered the federal ban. When his wife recently bought him a deer-hunting rifle, he learned that he was barred under federal law. District Judge Gene E.K. Pratter ruled against him.

Judge Pratter looked at five factors to determine whether Range was an “unvirtuous citizen” due to his conviction as a historical justification for the denial of gun possession. Those factors were “(1) whether the conviction was classified as a misdemeanor or a felony; (2) whether the elements of the offense involve violence; (3) the sentence imposed; (4) whether there was a cross-jurisdictional consensus as to the seriousness of the crime,… and (5) the potential for physical harm to others created by the offense.” The government conceded that four of the five favored Range, but Pratter found that he was still properly barred under the “cross-jurisdictional consensus” among other states.

Judge Thomas Hardiman wrote the majority opinion, supported by nine of fifteen judges. Four judges (Shwartz, Restrepo, Krause, and Roth) dissented.

The majority declared:

In sum, we reject the Government’s contention that only “law-abiding, responsible citizens” are counted among “the people” protected by the Second Amendment. Heller and its progeny lead us to conclude that Bryan Range remains among “the people” despite his 1995 false statement conviction. Having determined that Range is one of “the people,” we turn to the easy question: whether § 922(g)(1) regulates Second Amendment conduct. It does. Range’s request—to possess a rifle to hunt and a shotgun to defend himself at home—tracks the constitutional right as defined by Heller. 554 U.S. at 582 (“[T]he Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.”). So “the Second Amendment’s plain text covers [Range’s] conduct,” and “the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct.” Bruen, 142 S. Ct. at 2126.

Gene Volokh noted that the Supreme Court could grant cert”in conjunction with the Fifth Circuit domestic civil restraining order automatic disarmament case, U.S. v. Rahimi. As a practical matter, this is a much more important case than Rahimi (which itself is quite important).”

The case has one of the strongest profiles for review by the Supreme Court. There is now a split among the circuits and this is a well-argued en banc decision. It also is an appeal that would be made by the United States over the invalidation of a federal statute. If you were a betting person, this is your best bet for a grant of the writ of certiorari.

If accepted, the case would present a question that I flagged during the confirmation hearings of Justice Amy Coney Barrett. At the time, I was particularly interested in her dissent in Kanter v. Barr. Rickey Kanter was convicted of one count of felony mail fraud for defrauding Medicare in connection with therapeutic shoe inserts. The Seventh Circuit panel split 2-1 with Barrett in dissent. Focusing on the “history and tradition” of such restrictions, Barrett also took on the voting rights and jury service point with a key distinction:

“The problem with this argument is that virtue exclusions are associated with civic rights—individual rights that “require[ ] citizens to act in a collective manner for distinctly public purposes.” See Saul Cornell, A New Paradigm for the Second Amendment , 22 LAW & HIST. REV. 161, 165 (2004). For example, the right to vote is held by individuals, but they do not exercise it solely for their own sake; rather, they cast votes as part of the collective enterprise of self-governance. Similarly, individuals do not serve on juries for their own sake, but as part of the collective enterprise of administering justice…

Heller , however, expressly rejects the argument that the Second Amendment protects a purely civic right. Moore v. Madigan , 702 F.3d 933, 935 (7th Cir. 2012). It squarely holds that “the Second Amendment confer[s] an individual right to keep and bear arms,” Heller , 554 U.S. at 595, 128 S.Ct. 2783 (emphasis added), and it emphasizes that the Second Amendment is rooted in the individual’s right to defend himself—not in his right to serve in a well-regulated militia, id. at 582–86, 128 S.Ct. 2783.”

Range has obviously strong analogies to Kanter and could allow now Justice Barrett to revisit the issue in a major new Second Amendment opinion.

[Trinityz1]

yeppers.......

[excel]

Reality ...................

[Trinityz1]

Federal Court Delivers Setback To Biden ATF’s Far-Reaching Pistol Brace Rule

A federal court has blocked a Biden administration rule that would regulate braced pistols as short barrel rifles.

The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) filed a lawsuit against the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in January over a new rule that mandates pistol brace owners register their guns as short barrel rifles or face up to 10 years in jail and a $10,000 fine. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a preliminary injunction pending appeal against the rule Tuesday “as to the Plaintiffs” in the case.

https://dailycaller.com/2023/05/23/federal-court-delivers-setback-to-biden-atfs-far-reaching-pistol-brace-rule/

[crazy horse 0]

Judge Rules Banning 18-20 Year Olds From Purchasing Firearms Is Unconstitutional
Judge says 18 was the age of majority for acquiring and possession firearms during the nation's founding period

https://timcast.com/news/judge-rules-banning-18-20-year-olds-from-purchasing-firearms-is-unconstitutional/

[Vexari]

Matt Gaetz brings AR-15 to gun control hearing

~~~ ATF gun store restrictions ~~~
(8:23)

At the highest rate in sixteen years

HalfDollar48

[Vexari]

This is disarmament ahead of genocide

~~~ By governments ~~~
(17:59)

Against the people

For more updates, visit: http://www.brighteon.com/channel/hrreport

NaturalNews

[Vexari]

Culture and conflict resolution

~~~ Second amendment, gun control ~~~
(47:26)

And cultural de-escalation for America

To learn more, visit: https://topshotchris.com/

For more updates, visit: http://www.brighteon.com/channel/hrreport

NaturalNews

[Trinityz1]

U.S. Woman Faces Ten Years For Flying to Australia With Gold-Plated Handgun

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2023/04/25/u-s-woman-faces-ten-years-for-flying-to-australia-with-gold-plated-handgun/

[Trinityz1]

yep and from NJ as well............

[SkeBallLarry]

" Bingo " .. !!

[trkyhntr]

The problem in Colorado is that a bunch of Kalifornicators moved there to escape the liberal la-la land they lived in, but brought their liberal idiot ways with them. Colorado used to be a great state in which to live.

[Trinityz1]

CO Democrats are trying to pass a law that makes it illegal
to discharge a firearm on your OWN PRIVATE PROPERTY...
so people with acreage like myself....it would be illegal...
and I have a cliff as a back stop........

so yep, I absolutely despise Democrats from now and ever more.......
they can do all the good they want.........
but will NEVER EVER TRUST ONE EVER AGAIN...........

RFK jr...nope..........not one of them, not ANY OF THEM............EVER
if that's the only choice on a ballot
leave it blank....

actually that's what I did last time

[Trinityz1]

at that range, all you need is a shotgun with 00 or a slug

[getmoreshares]

unreal-- ONE SHOT -- all you need!

[Trinityz1]

that and the 2nd Amendment was also in place to protect us from an abusive gov't.

[Trinityz1]

dayum........you gotta be a bit nutz to have something like that
and put it to your shoulder.........broke the 2x4....that was pretty cool

[crazy horse 0]

Armed Citizen Shoots 3 Robbers That Were Robbing A Gas Station in Houston

If this video does not dismantle the narrative of the "High capacity magazine ban," I do not know what will.

This man was able to shoot three out of four robbers by himself, demonstrating the power of the Second Amendment.

While I cannot confirm, I highly doubt he used a limited capacity magazine to achieve this.

Those who argue for banning so-called "High Capacity magazines" should ask themselves: how would such a ban have helped this person in this situation? If anything, it would have hindered him.

Even if the robbers had limited capacity magazines, there were still four armed attackers against one defender. Nevertheless, the defender was still able to turn the tables on the robbers.

Houston police officers say the four suspects who entered the store with face masks on began demanding customers’ belongings at gunpoint.

That’s when a 22-year-old customer inside the store pulled out his own firearm and began shooting at the suspects. The customer wasn’t injured in the incident, police said.

Gunfire was exchanged and three out of the four suspects were hit by bullets, HPD said.

Additionally, a 46-year-old man who did not have a weapon was also struck by gunfire. That bystander was transported to the hospital and was said to be in stable condition. It was not immediately known if the bystander was shot by a suspect or the armed customer.

Considering all of this, I have taken my fair share of defense courses and realized that these types of situations are not easy, and things are not always as clear-cut as one may think.

After watching this video, I encourage you to watch the video I did with USCCA, called "How These Defensive Gun Uses Could Land You in Prison."

You will quickly realize how complicated a self-defense shooting can be, which is why I advise anyone who carries a gun for self-defense, has a gun at home for home defense, or carries or owns any weapon for self-defense to look into getting a membership like USCCA.

This will give you access to self-defense insurance so that if you are ever in a self-defense situation, you have the emotional, financial, and legal resources necessary to get through it.

If you want to learn more about how complex a self-defense situation can be, watch the video I mentioned.

I work with USCCA because I believe they have the best all-around membership on the market, but even if you don't choose USCCA, choose something because you might be alone if you ever have to defend yourself, but you don't have to be alone through the legal process.

I think USCCA is the best, which is why I work with them, and they do offer my followers special FREE bonuses to become a member with a 365-day money-back guarantee.

Self Defense insurance with special bonuses for Colion Noir subscribers
?? https://www.mrcolionnoir.com/go/uscca/

Join MY Exclusive 2A Advocacy Text List while AUTOMATICALLY being entered in our monthly 2A Giveaways
?? https://bit.ly/3FFLHJi

Let's Go Brandon Merchandise
?? https://bit.ly/3EbcXP8

Get UnApologetically 2A Content In Short-Form On YouTube & Help Protect The Second Amendment
??https://www.youtube.com/colionnoirsho...

FREE BOOK - If I Only Had One Concealed Carry
?? https://www.mrcolionnoir.com/start-here/

PRO 2A Message Hats In Trucker, Dad, Snapback & More
?? https://shop.mrcolionnoir.com/collect...

Looking to help further our Pro Constitution, Pro 2A message, donate below:
https://www.MrColionNoir.com/donate/

UnApologetically 2A Content Content On Other Platforms:
Twitter - https://twitter.com/mrcolionnoir
Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/colionnoir/
Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/COLIONNOIR/
Gab - https://gab.com/ColionNoir
Truth Social- https://truthsocial.com/@ColionNoir
Youtube Shorts - https://youtube.com/colionnoirshorts?...

#2ANews #ColionNoir #DefensiveGunUse

[getmoreshares]

https://twitter.com/txsnipergirl/status/1648764433282261013

[Vexari]

That's good

Experience means something

[Trinityz1]

in other words....you don't use a conceal carry.......
I have for 50 years......
and I've been legal the last 15

[Vexari]

Holsters are much like vehicles

Depends on what it's for


When a pack of wolves descend out of nowhere

All bases are covered

In a ninja format

Word picture after reading post

depending on how fast you can get it out
those are good especially for a little .380

I prefer a shoulder holster underneath
easy to get out fast when needed......
and because I prefer bigger firepower than most
for small, an ankle holster or one in the small of my back....
I have some clip on ones that work well on the hip
covered by a long shirt or jacket

I like being able to access and aim fast

[Trinityz1]

then a .380 in that is just perfect....
can put that on a fanny pack strap for quick access

[50 MIL STRONG]

I live in Florida and go shirtless often.
357 at home, 9mm in car, and 380 on my hip.

[Trinityz1]

depending on how fast you can get it out
those are good especially for a little .380

I prefer a shoulder holster underneath
easy to get out fast when needed......
and because I prefer bigger firepower than most
for small, an ankle holster or one in the small of my back....
I have some clip on ones that work well on the hip
covered by a long shirt or jacket

I like being able to access and aim fast

[Trinityz1]

prefer a Galco for actual usage

of course one would have to be a user of such holsters to understand why.......
and there's some others that are just as good as those.......

[50 MIL STRONG]

Prefer my Sneaky Pete at half the price.
https://www.sneakypeteholsters.com/?

[Vexari]

The VNSH holster

Best for concealed carry

https://vnsh.com/

[getmoreshares]

He’s right pic.twitter.com/a4VbgEZGIR

— wilder😎🇺🇸 (@wilderpatriot) April 16, 2023

[Trinityz1]

Mass Shooting Survey: More Voters Blame Mental Health than Guns

https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2023/04/15/mass-shooting-survey-more-voters-blame-mental-health-than-guns/

[Trinityz1]

Donald Trump Pushes National Reciprocity at NRA: ‘Second Amendment Must Apply Across State Lines’

https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2023/04/15/donald-trump-pushes-national-reciprocity-at-nra-second-amendment-must-apply-across-state-lines/

[Trinityz1]

NRA Meetings: Donald Trump Pledges Tax Credit for Teachers Who Train to Be Armed

https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2023/04/14/nra-meetings-donald-trump-pledges-tax-credit-teachers-who-train-armed/

[Vexari]

Great discussion on firearms and freedom

~~~ People are their own first responders ~~~
(41:33)

When seconds count

Police are only minutes away

www.firearmsandfreedoms.com

For more updates, visit: http://www.brighteon.com/channel/hrreport

NaturalNews

[Trinityz1]

You'll never guess which state just ruled gun confiscation 'red flag' laws unconstitutional

By D. Parker

The hideous laws designed to violate almost all parts of the Bill of Rights are finally being struck down as unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court of the State of New York, the state's second highest court, recently ruled the state's so-called "red flag" law unconstitutional. These unconstitutional gun confiscation schemes go by different designations, but they are colloquially known as red flag laws. The gun-grabbing ghouls of the far left are creative in describing their operation.

Anyone supportive of individual liberty and our commonsense civil rights has been horrified at how these authoritarian abominations violate almost all aspects of the Bill of Rights. Even worse, they signal a new era in gun control and selective enforcement of the law.

Anti-liberty authoritarians started with a direct violation of everyone's commonsense civil right of self-defense by crafting gun confiscation laws without due process. But don't ever expect them to utter the C-word; they've worn out their dictionaries and thesauruses, looking for soft-sounding alternatives to the word "confiscation," even though that is exactly what is taking place. This was coupled with the evisceration of the people's right to due process, so right off the bat, they violated the 2nd and 5th Amendments without breaking a sweat.

Then just to sweeten the deal, they've executed these unconstitutional atrocities with ex parte ("from one party") proceedings, as the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School states:

Typically, a court will be hesitant to make an ex parte motion. This is because the Fifth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee a right to due process, and ex parte motions — due to their exclusion of one party — risk violating the excluded party's right to due process.

So the great news is that the first time you'll find out that the guns you own (or allegedly own) are to be confiscated will be at 4:30 A.M., when a SWAT team smashes in your front door. If you and your pets survive that ordeal, there is also the violation of the equal protection of the law (another aspect against the 14th Amendment).

Never being satisfied with just destroying a couple of commonsense civil rights, these laws were cobbled together with assaults on 4th Amendment rights against illegal search and seizure with that 4:30 A.M. raid. So this is "cruel and unusual punishment" (8th Amendment) against completely innocent people. Then, of course, the ex parte aspect of these laws violates the 6th Amendment "right to confront witnesses."

Then there is the lovely prospect of the process being the punishment, even if you don't own any guns. That situation would probably be far worse, since the authorities will feel obligated to tear your house apart to find what doesn't exist. Good luck getting them to pay for all the damage and putting it back together. And since one of these unconstitutional punishments can be set upon you for something you said, we'll add the 1st Amendment as well.

So there you have it: one set of laws that essentially violate most of the Bill of Rights, used against people who haven't violated the law. But that's not even the worst aspect of all of this. Unconstitutional red flag gun confiscation orders along with unconstitutional enhanced background checks and safe storage requirements signal a new era in gun control. With these new types of restrictions on freedom, selective enforcement can be the standard, with just one side being deprived of its commonsense civil rights.

Blanket bans and prohibitions used to be the norm, whereby the gaslighting ghouls would try to take all of one type of gun out of circulation. Now, while they still pay lip service to "assault weapon" bans, the mantra always seems to be the trifecta of tyranny: unconstitutional red flag gun confiscation orders, unconstitutional enhanced background checks, and unconstitutional safe storage requirements (note the common theme in all of that).

Unconstitutional controls on private property with enhanced background checks will see a push for unconstitutional gun registration. Unconstitutional safe storage requirements will require you to keep your guns in one inconvenient place, ready for quick confiscation when needed. Then, with all of that in place, all they have to do is go down the list looking for the people they dislike and confiscate their guns. They will which people are "safe," because they are loyal leftists, and whom to raid. Isn't that nice?

But now all of that is falling apart. Several rulings have finally and logically determined that red flag gun confiscation schemes are unconstitutional — in New York State, no less.

Let's hope the freedom trend continues and these laws are struck down everywhere, and we are finally rid of this threat to individual liberty.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/04/youll_never_guess_which_state_just_ruled_gun_confiscation_red_flag_laws_unconstitutional.html

[Trinityz1]

GROSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Gmenfan]