The Legion

http://wreg.com/2015/07/31/some-lawmakers-say-attorney-generals-opinion-on-guns-in-parks-means-problems/     MEMPHIS, Tenn. —  You can take your gun to Memphis in May, according to a new opinion by Tennessee’s Attorney General Herbert Slatery. Memphis in May had argued that as a third-party contractor renting out Tom Lee Park, it had the right to ban guns from its event, but the opinion issued this week means that’s not the case. “It is not a good idea to have guns at a rock ‘n’ roll concert during Memphis in May when there are young folks everywhere,” Tennessee State Sen. Lee Harris said. “Sometimes quarters are tight, and there is lots of drinking going on.” Sen. Harris said something must be done to alter the way the current Tennessee Guns in Parks law reads. After a request from Sen. Harris, Slatery said handgun carry permit holders cannot be banned from carrying guns in public parks just because they are contracted out by a third party. “As a producer of events, we have the right to stipulate rules and guidelines for patrons entering the leased park space to attend our events,” Memphis in May CEO Jim Holt told WREG in May when asked how the event planned to handle the guns in parks law after it passed. Friday, Holt told WREG he was waiting to meet with the City of Memphis attorney and the Riverfront Development Corporation before commenting on Slatery’s opinion. Marla Whiting said lawmakers need to step back and really take a look at the law and its impacts. “You made it a law, so don’t be complaining about, well, my son got shot, my grandson got shot or my uncle got shot,” she said. “You made it a law for them to carry a gun, so that’s going to be a problem.” Previously local governments could decide whether to ban guns in parks, but state lawmakers took away that power this year. Sen. Harris said democrats, gun safety advocates and law enforcement will be meeting next month to try to figure out how they can get the law changed.

Thanks I did not see it.  I will close post.

Closing post.  Already posted.  

I live in Bartlett, TN and we have been able to carry in our parks since I believe 2009, but could not carry if any school activity was going on in the park. With the new park carry laws in place we should now be able to carry if we are not in the “Immediate Area” of the school activity. Am I correct on this or not. If I am correct the sign that is posted at the Bartlett parks would need to be changed. Below is a picture of the sign that was put up in 2009.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/06/04/gunpoint-average-texas-prof-fears-campus-carry-law-would-bring-grade-inflation/   "This is what is teaching college students in our universities today"     A Texas college professor claims a coming law that would allowing licensed gun owners to carry firearms on campuses will cause grades to shoot up. In a recent opinion piece published in Newsweek, Jessica Gullion, an assistant professor of sociology at Texas Woman's University, warns that allowing students to pack heat in the classroom could add a scary dimension to those after-class discussions about grades.   "Will we soon see a new sort of grade inflation, with students earning a 4.0 GPA with their firepower rather than brainpower?" Gullion wrote. Gullion recounted being intimidated by one student angry about her grade, and said knowing that angry students might be armed and could "resort to any means necessary" to keep their grades up could prompt professors to hand out easy As. "Allowing students to carry weapons to class strips off a layer of safety," she wrote. "Students are often emotional and can be volatile when it comes to their GPAs," she wrote. "Who would want to give a student a low grade and then get shot for it?" The National Rifle Association took aim at Gullion's argument, calling it "divorced from reality and logic." The national trend of states easing restrictions on carrying licensed firearms has not spurred the violence some predicted, according to the NRA, and any student willing to threaten a professor with death or injury is likely not waiting for legislation to pass. "Indeed, aping the irrational fears, paranoid delusions, or cultural biases of one’s teacher is far more likely to prop up one’s GPA than lawfully and unobtrusively carrying a firearm of which the teacher is unaware," the NRA wrote on its website. The state Legislature passed a measure over the weekend that would repeal a law prohibiting licensed gun holders from having firearms on school grounds. If signed by Gov. Greg Abbott, as expected, the law would go into effect next fall and in 2017 for community and junior colleges. Public school presidents have the right to ban guns in “reasonable” areas of the campus, and private colleges in Texas would be able to completely opt out of campus carry. Texans with concealed handgun licenses have been able to carry on college campuses for 20 years, but not in buildings. The campus carry law is one of two controversial gun bills on Abbott's desk. The other, which he is also expected to sign, would allow for licensed gun owners to openly carry handguns in most public spaces. 

http://abc13.com/news/texas-senate-approves-open-carry-of-handguns/737090/   HOUSTON -- Texas took a major step toward allowing the licensed open carry of handguns, with Senate approval Friday night after a fierce debate over restricting police powers to ask people carrying guns if they are legal. The open carry bill was expected to easily pass the Republican-majority chamber but got tangled in a bipartisan move to add the ban on police from stopping people solely because they are visibly carrying a handgun. The vote came less than a week after a biker shootout in Waco killed nine, an incident that was raised several times in the debate. The bill still needs a final vote in the House, which passed a nearly identical version last month. Republican Gov. Greg Abbott has pledged to sign an open carry bill into law. Supporters of the police restriction said it will prevent harassment of law-abiding citizens and racial profiling of minorities. "If somebody is going to be profiled for walking around the streets of Houston or Austin with a gun, someone who looks like me is more likely to get stopped," said Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, who is black. Law enforcement groups argue police should be allowed to determine who is legally carrying a handgun. Several lawmakers noted the Waco shootout, where authorities said they rounded up more than 300 weapons, and worried the ban would lead to felons and those with mental health issues carrying guns without fear of getting caught. "This is a mistake, and I think it's a mistake the state of Texas will come to regret," said Sen. Joan Huffman, R-Houston. Sen. Don Huffines, the Dallas Republican who amended the bill, said he was protecting law-abiding gun owners from unreasonable searches by police. Open carry advocates, including Abbott, have pushed the bill as an important gun rights and self-defense measure. Gun control advocates and police in the state's largest cities have concerns about public safety. Before the open carry debate, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who presides over the Senate, said House leaders also promised to pass a bill allowing concealed handguns in college classrooms. A spokesman for House Speaker Joe Straus confirmed the campus carry bill will get a vote before the session ends June 1. Texas has allowed concealed handguns since 1995 but is one of only six states with an outright ban on open carry. Texas has banned open carry for 140 years, a prohibition dating to the post-Civil War era that disarmed former Confederate soldiers and freed slaves. The state has nearly 850,000 concealed handgun license holders under a process that requires classroom and gun range training, although lawmakers have lowered those standards in recent years. Texas also allows the public display of long guns, such as rifles and shotguns, and open carry advocates have staged high-profile rallies at the Alamo and state Capitol. Concealed handguns are allowed inside the Capitol, where license holders can bypass metal detectors.

Link to Video:   http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/29108286/you-may-be-locked-loaded-but-can-you-legally-shoot     You may be locked, loaded, but can you legally shoot? The WMC Action News 5 Investigators are taking a look at the gun laws in the Mid-South to find out what you can do to protect yourself.   Every week in neighborhoods all over the Mid-South, home owners are taking matters into their own hands.   "I have entered your home by force and that is not acceptable," says gun instructor and law enforcement officer Chris Fowler.   Fowler says before you make the decision to shoot an intruder - you better know the law.   The laws are different in every state.  In Tennessee and Mississippi, you can use deadly force in self-defense. In Arkansas, you cannot use deadly force if there is a safe place to retreat.   "In Tennessee, you can't use deadly force to protect property, life but not property," Fowler explained. "What we don't want to do ever is shoot through a door," Fowler added.     Fowler says if an intruder is trying to get in your front door or a window, it does not give you the legal right to shoot.   "Until they make the breach, until they enter, you shouldn't shoot," says Fowler.     The intruder must enter your home before you pull the trigger. You can't just shoot a person for coming onto your property. Tennessee's Castle Doctrine allows anyone with or without a gun carry permit to shoot an intruder who unlawfully comes into your house, a house or building you're visiting or your vehicle.   “Your vehicle is an extension of your home," says Fowler.      Last week a man shot and killed an attempted carjacker in Orange Mound.   That victim ended up in the hospital when another man tried to rob him, opened fire, and took off in the victim's car.   "If you are in fear of death or bodily injury, you can use a gun to defend yourself,” says gun instructor Chip Holland.   Holland says the only time you can use deadly force inside your car is if you feel personally trained. The laws do NOT protect property.   For any of it to be legal-- whether in your home or in your car-- you must fear for your life before you pull the trigger.

I would agree with you on the techniques used in the video.  These techniques would take a lot of training and practice to perfect.

Click on link to view video:  http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/29074638/how-to-survive-a-carjacking     You're driving around town, going about your business, on the road, and out of nowhere, it all comes to a screeching halt.     Your vehicle, and your life are in jeopardy. According to Memphis police, carjackings have increased almost 10 percent in the past year. The three most likely places for carjackings in Memphis: intersections, outside a house or apartment, and gas stations.   A  WMC Action News 5 investigation found that in Memphis, carjackings are most likely to happen in parts of north Memphis, Downtown and Midtown.   But they can happen anywhere, any day of the week and any time of day.   You have to think quickly and clearly, and there are risks involved, but you can fight back, and win.   "Don't go anywhere with them," said self-defense and martial arts instructor Chad Chilcutt. "What's going to happen is what's going happen right then and there."   Chilcutt and his son, Cody, walked us through different scenarios of what to do in all three of those most common carjacking situations.   "The car is actually something that can be used for you or against you," Chilcutt said. He says always prepare to expect the unexpected.     All of these moves take practice, but if done correctly, can save your life.    "We try to teach to always be aware of your surroundings," Chilcutt said. "Safety first, so at any moment, even if you're not ready, you can handle the situation a lot better."   Watch the story above for a video demonstration of three carjacking self-defense moves.   

http://www.localmemphis.com/story/d/story/lawmaker-says-memphis-in-may-breaking-the-law/37186/bK-60R_8skmvovB64wuwcQ (This was on the news this evening) MEMPHIS, TN (localmemphis.com) -- Lawmakers say people who run the Memphis In May festival are breaking the law. Festival organizers say they have the right to tell people they cannot take handguns to the park, but a state senator says not so fast. A law approved this year allows people who are licensed to carry guns in parks. The park is getting pork ready. Stands going up where various barbecue teams gather during the big championship event. Plenty of people, alcohol, and no handguns. At least that is what organizers said. "I sympathize with them. I want them to ban guns. I am all for them banning guns. The question is whether it's legal to ban guns and it's not," State Senator Lee Harris of Memphis said. Harris voted against the bill to allow people to legally carry guns in parks. It is now the law, by the way. Folks with Memphis in May said in a statement, “as a producer of events we have the right to stipulate rules and guidelines for patrons entering the leased park space to attend our events. We prohibit any type of weapon.” Senator Harris said they cannot do that. "And so the fact that there's a non-profit organization renting park property for the month of May doesn't make that park property not subject to state laws," Harris said. Harris says some cities are now trying to get around the law by saying their parks aren't parks. It sounds silly, but this is what the city of Nashville is doing. "Their city attorney's office is reclassifying some of their properties. They have some outdoor pavilions and some outdoor amphitheaters and they're reclassifying those saying they're not parks, because parks are for recreation and these are for sitting down, observing, and being entertained," Harris said. No one is sure what will happen if anybody is banned or challenges the rules.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/06/robert-farago/breaking-hillary-clinton-calls-gun-rights-advocates-terrorists/     Speaking at CNN’s town hall meeting tonight, presidential candidate Hillary Clinton lambasted American gun right advocates. “We cannot let a minority of people — and that’s what it is, it is a minority of people — hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people.” While she was at it, Ms. Clinton called for an “assault weapons ban,” conflating semi-automatic weapons with fully-automatic weapons as she went . . .   We’re going to have to do a better job protecting the vast majority of our citizens, including our children, from that very, very, very small group that is unfortunately prone to violence and now with automatic weapons can wreak so much more violence than they ever could have before.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/05/11/knife-rights-movement-gets-switchblades-other-knife-laws-repealed-in-states/     Once overshadowed by the hot-button gun rights debate, laws restricting knife sales and possession are the new "second front" in the battle to preserve Second Amendment rights.  The issue has gained more attention in recent years -- most recently in Baltimore, where obscure knife laws have surfaced at the center of the Freddie Gray death case. Well before that case, though, the nonprofit advocacy group Knife Rights has been steadily working in state capitals across the country to roll back or repeal longstanding knife bans and restrictions.  And they've seen a string of successes.  “We’ve introduced the Second Amendment to a significant number of people who never considered it their amendment,” said Doug Ritter, who founded Knife Rights in Arizona in 2009.  The group argues that possessing and carrying any kind of blade is, as with guns, a right enshrined in the Constitution. They've deployed that argument to, so far, help 10 states wipe most -- if not all -- knife restrictions from the books. It also has successfully advocated for so-called preemption laws in eight states, blocking local jurisdictions from circumventing state law with their own, stricter regulations.   Not all repeals are the same -- some leave laws against switchblades like stilettos on the books. But others are comprehensive, like in Oklahoma and Maine, which just legalized switchblades, in March and April respectively.  Knife Rights’ first victory was in 2010, when it worked to get all switchblades, dirks and daggers legalized in New Hampshire. Bills in several other states are currently pending.   “There’s no blood running in the streets, no state has come back and said we shouldn’t have done this and tried to reinstate [laws],” Ritter said.  Contrary to the image of gang members carrying butterfly knives to the local rumble, people carry knives for a multitude of reasons, and it is not to maim or kill, Ritter said. “The reality is, millions of Americans use and own knives at home, work, and recreation. But every once in a while someone uses a knife as an arm, to protect the family.”   That’s where the Constitution comes in. “The Second Amendment says ‘the right to bear arms.’ Knife rights are the second front in the defense of our Second Amendment,” Ritter said, noting his group has garnered the support of the National Rifle Association, and employs Todd Rathner, an NRA board member, as its chief lobbyist.   Right now, big retail stores sell a range of blades. However, under arcane existing laws, said Ritter, some of those knives could be deemed illegal, as a series of franchises including Home Depot and Paragon Sporting Goods, found out when they were sued by New York City in 2010. At the federal level, it is still illegal to send or sell switchblades through the mail or across state lines, though there is no restriction on individual possession. Each state has its own regulations, complicated by varying definitions relating to prohibited items and conceal/carry restrictions. In many cases, state laws conflict with local ones. This can be confusing to knife owners, said Ritter, a point that has been highlighted in the case against the police officers involved in Freddie Gray’s arrest and subsequent death in Baltimore.   Police said Gray was carrying “a spring-assisted, one-hand-operated knife,” which reportedly fits Baltimore’s definition of an illegal switchblade, but does not fit Maryland’s. That’s why Marilyn Mosby, the state’s attorney prosecuting the officers, insists Gray was not carrying an illegal weapon when he was apprehended on April 12.   “Simply carrying a knife in your pocket should not be crime,” said Ritter. But one’s interpretation of what is and what is not an illegal blade could have a major impact on the state’s case. “[This case] has raised awareness about knife rights.”  Jacob Sullum, an editor for Reason magazine, made a similar complaint. “If police and prosecutors cannot agree on whether Gray's knife was legal, of course, it is hardly fair to expect the average citizen to know, let alone subject him to criminal penalties (a fine up to $500 and up to a year in jail under Baltimore's ordinance) for guessing wrong,” he wrote on May 6.   Maine State Rep. Joel Stetkis, a Republican, successfully lobbied to pass a law that not only allows for switchblades, but all tools with automatic release, which up until now were banned and getting innocent people into trouble, he says.  “People were having their personal property confiscated and charged with a crime and facing jail time … just for having their pocket knife opening in a certain manner,” Stetkis told FoxNews.com. Even if they were ultimately acquitted, "it’s in the newspaper, and on the Internet ... That can actually make a difference of whether someone gets an interview or not [for a job].”   This confusion between switchblades, which have an automatic release, and spring-assisted knives, which do not, led to 60,000 arrests in New York City in 10 years, according to an investigation by the Village Voice, in 2014. There, ordinary pocketknives carried by residents have been deemed as “gravity blades,” or knives that can be opened with a flick of the wrist, and therefore considered switchblades and illegal. In 2010, the city said one-third of homicides in New York were caused by knives.   Knife Rights is currently suing the city because it says the law is unconstitutional. The “wrist flick” test is “not an objective test at all,” said Ritter.   But not everyone supports the movement. Law enforcement groups have weighed in against various bills, especially those that allow people to carry all manner of blades in public. They say switchblades and combat knives have no place on America's streets.   According to a report by Bloomberg, knives were the second-deadliest weapon behind guns in the U.S. In 2013, 1,500 died from “cutting instruments,” compared with almost 8,500 who died from firearms.   “I’ve seen a lot of deadly attacks with knives and I think repealing all the laws and eliminating them would be ridiculous,” said Jack Rinchich, a retired Florida police chief who now serves as president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police. A Marine Corps veteran who spent 40 years in law enforcement, he is a staunch defender of the Second Amendment.   However, “I do believe we need laws restricting certain types of knives, especially those that are designed to kill,” he told FoxNews.com. “I don’t think anyone should be walking down the street with a combat knife for any reason.”  Chief Sean Mannix, the Texas president of the chiefs’ association, agrees, saying that, “reasonable regulation is okay.”   “I don’t think our society is reflective of one in which the majority wouldn’t be comfortable with people running around with offensive weapons.”

http://wreg.com/2015/05/08/despite-new-law-guns-still-banned-at-memphis-in-may/     MEMPHIS, Tenn.– Questions began swirling when Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam signed the controversial ‘Guns in Parks’ bill into law a few weeks ago. One of the biggest questions;  how would this apply to busy parks in our area and Memphis in May? Jim Holt, President and CEO of Memphis in May, said guns were still not allowed at Memphis in May even though it’s at Tom Lee Park. He released this statement: “Memphis in May International Festival leases Tom Lee Park from the Riverfront Development Corporation for publicly ticketed events. As a producer of events, we have the right to stipulate rules and guidelines for patrons entering the leased park space to attend our events. We prohibit any type of weapon, including pocketknives and we have other restrictions (food and beverages, chairs, umbrella’s, cameras, selfie sticks, etc.) for patrons that attend our events.” Memphian Mandy Nix said she could see why someone would carry a gun but said Memphis in May wasn’t the place for it. “You know you feel more protected when you do, but I can see why certain people wouldn’t want them to be down there,” she explained. “I agree with it. I mean anybody can hurt anyone at anytime. Drinkin,” said Jeremy Vela. Vela might be against guns at the festival, but other spots he said he’s okay with them. “Rest of the parks that’s fine, you got these open parks. Anything can happen,” he explained. Memphis in May seemed to have found a way to work with the law but what about other places? Mayor A C Wharton has been critical since the beginning. “Philosophically it’s easy to pass a law like that but how do you operationalize it?” he asked the day the bill was signed. Many questions remain how the law will be monitored around schools and other functions with children.

Get the Dawson sights.  I have put them on all my Glocks, M&P's, and 1911's.  No problems at all.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/04/15/oregon-sheriff-says-proposed-gun-background-check-law-wont-be-enforced/?intcmp=latestnews     An Oregon sheriff said Tuesday that he will not enforce an upcoming state law that expands gun background checks to include private sales, The Herald and News reported. Sheriff Dave Daniel, from Josephine County, which sits on the border with California, told the paper that it appears that the law is not in line with the county’s charter and said he does not have the personnel to pursue violators committing a misdemeanor. The Oregonian reported that Senate Bill 941, which passed the state Senate on Tuesday, calls for criminal background checks for private gun transfers. The Beaver State would become the 12th state to adopt the policy. The state already requires a background check at dealerships. Like any gun law, supporters say any measure that makes it more difficult for a criminal to obtain a firearm is positive. On the other hand, those opposed say criminals will manage to get their hands on a gun anyway and will not be scared off at the thought of committing a Class B misdemeanor.   The Herald and News report pointed out that Daniel is in a precarious position because state law would seemingly trump the county charter. But Daniel appeared to play down the significance of the law. "I can't enforce that law, so therefore it won't be enforced," Daniel told the paper. He continued, "I have felonies going on daily in Josephine County. That's my priorities."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/04/09/right-to-bear-arms-gun-grabbing-sweeping-nation/     Cherished family heirlooms were among the 21 firearms Michael Roberts surrendered to the Torrance Police Department in 2010, after his doctor filed a restraining order against him. The court order was the result of a dispute Roberts had with a member of the doctor’s staff and, after Roberts pleaded no contest, the matter was resolved. Yet, even though he filed the proper Law Enforcement Gun Release paperwork on four separate occasions, obtained clearance from the California Department of Justice and had two court orders commanding the return of his guns, police refused to hand them over. With the backing of the National Rifle Association and California Rifle and Pistol Association, Roberts filed a federal lawsuit in May 2014, over the $15,500 worth of firearms. In the end he got the money, but not the guns. The police had had them destroyed. Second Amendment lawyers say his case is not rare. “NRA and CRPA constantly get calls from law abiding people having problems getting their guns back,” said Chuck Michel of Long Beach based Michel & Associates, who represented Roberts in the case. “The state Department of Justice wrongly tells police not to give guns back unless the person can document ownership of the gun and it is registered in the state DOJ’s database. But the law doesn’t require this.” Gun owners can’t comply anyway, Michel said, because police themselves routinely fail to enter the firearms into the DOJ’s database, and most people don’t have receipts for the guns they own. While Americans have the constitutional rights to keep and bear arms – and protect their property from government’s unlawful seizure – it is not just in California where guns are seized and destroyed illegally, attorneys charge. "This kind of below-the-radar bureaucratic gun confiscation is a growing Second Amendment and property rights violation problem, particularly in strict gun control states like California, New Jersey and Massachusetts,” said Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation. “People can't afford to spend tens of thousands of dollars on legal fees to get back a $500 firearm." The Second Amendment Foundation’s most recent case involves Rick Bailey, a 56-year-old Navy veteran from Glendale, Ariz., whose entire collection of 28 firearms valued at $25,000 was seized by authorities because of an ongoing dispute with a neighbor. After Bailey complained over several months to the city of Glendale that his neighbor frequently parked his landscaping company’s dump trucks in front of Bailey’s home -- and toxic chemical odors were coming from his neighbor’s property -- the neighbor obtained a harassment order against Bailey. Police showed up and seized Bailey’s gun collection.  “Mr. Bailey is devastated by this situation. We seem to live in an environment when someone’s life can be turned upside down on an allegation that should have been thoroughly investigated before any action was ordered by a court,” Gottlieb said. “We’re helping Bailey in his appeal of the judge’s order so he can not only reclaim his valuable firearms, but also some of his dignity as well.” Probably the most notorious gun confiscation case happened after Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans in 2005 when the city’s then-mayor, Ray Nagin, ordered all legally owned firearms seized. The Second Amendment Foundation successfully sued on behalf of thousands of law abiding gun owners to stop, or reverse, the confiscations. But hundreds more gun owners without legal representation or ownership paperwork had to abandon their guns. Those firearms still have not been destroyed, Gottlieb said. In Massachusetts, residents who had their guns taken because of restraining orders or other reasons must pay a fee to a private storage company when their legal issues are resolved, regardless of their own culpability. The fees can run in the thousands of dollars, often exceeding the value of the guns. Instead of paying the fee, they often forfeit the firearms and the company auctions them off, Gottlieb said. In Kentucky, a law passed in 2014 that allows law enforcement to take firearms from those accused – not convicted – of domestic violence crimes. Similar laws are in place in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Louisiana. In Lakewood, Ohio, in August 2011, police seized 13 firearms valued at $15,000 from U.S. Army veteran Francesca Rice while she wasn’t home, according to Cleveland Scene. Police reportedly had an employee of the condominium complex let them in. The firearms collection of Rice, who served her country in Iraq, included handguns, shotguns, a vintage Chinese SKS M21 semi-automatic carbine and a semi-automatic rifle. The seizure was based on a “situation involving the gun owner's absence from a VA hospital where she had been receiving treatment…. However, no charges were ever filed, and a year later, Rice's requests to have her guns returned had gone unanswered,” the Ohio-based Buckeye Institute reported, noting after the lawsuit was settled, the police were ordered to return her firearms. These tactics are a way for police departments or the government to make it more costly to own guns, said John Lott, an economist, leading expert on guns, and author at the Crime Prevention Research Center. Lott believes the illegal policies most hurt poor gun owners, who not only are less likely to afford to get their property back, but also typically live in neighborhoods where they are more vulnerable to crime. Seizing legally owned guns can also be a way for law enforcement agencies to boost their revenue if, as in some cases, they sell the firearms rather than destroying them, Lott said. In the Roberts’ case in California, police blamed a letter from the California Department of Justice that required gun owners to produce documentation showing it was their firearm that was seized and ordered them to register all firearms that previously had been exempt. The receipt the police department issued when confiscating the firearms wasn’t sufficient proof, the DOJ said, and most firearms owners don’t have other proof of purchase, especially for firearms passed down from generation to generation. The case was settled for $30,000 and the department changed its policy, but Roberts suffered through three years of aggravation and lost family heirlooms as a result of the department’s actions. In 2012, California civil rights attorney Donald Kilmer represented the Second Amendment Foundation and CalGuns Foundation in the first legal challenge in California for wrongful retention of firearms and won, leading San Francisco and Oakland to change their policies. But remarkably, the situation in California in some respects is getting worse. “The legislature has never met a gun regulation they didn’t like and the state is populated with millions of people who want to exercise their Second Amendment rights,” said Kilmer. The problem now is that the State Bureau of Firearms is issuing letters that misstate the law with regard to what documentation gun owners must produce to get their property back, Kilmer said. In the past, if firearms were seized in California from a home because of psychiatric issues, domestic violence allegations, restraining orders or other issues, the firearms were returned after the case was resolved through a court order. However, under a new law, Kilmer said a background check is required to ensure the property is not stolen, the owner has to prove ownership, and then the owners get a letter clearing them to pick up their property. “It makes sense on its face, but it is taking longer to issue letters,” Kilmer said, adding most gun owners can’t meet other requirements because they don’t have paperwork to show title, many legally owned guns are not registered, the federal government is forbidden from keeping firearms ownership records with the exception of for specialty guns, and California just started its database in 1996 exclusively for handguns. “People keep forgetting the right to keep and bear arms, the Second Amendment, is protected by the U.S. constitution, and private property is protected under the Fifth Amendment,” Kilmer said. “Government cannot take property without just compensation and due process. The great thing is that when it comes to guns, you get protection under both amendments.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/04/06/state-gop-lawmakers-working-to-roll-back-gun-restrictions-after-midterm-wins/?intcmp=latestnews     Conservatives emboldened by election victories are working to roll back gun restrictions in several states, while those on the other side of the debate are claiming success elsewhere in passing initiatives related to gun background checks. On the pro-gun spectrum, for example, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback last week signed a bill to allow Kansans to carry concealed weapons in the state without training or a permit. Second Amendment Foundation founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb told Fox News, "I think the voters spoke pretty loud and clear in November and elected a pretty pro-gun rights Congress as well as many statehouses across the country and we're seeing now lots of bills being sponsored...".  On the other side, Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, said her group is focused on initiatives it can win with voters, rather than legislators. "In 2013, we helped close the background check loophole in six states," Watts  said. "In 2014, we helped pass laws in red and blue states to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers." Watts also pointed to the overwhelming passage of Initiative 594 by voters in Washington state last fall. That law expands the federal background check requirement for gun sales to private dealers, such as those now found at gun shows. "The gun lobby has been so insidious in this country in taking away the responsibilities that go along with gun rights," Watts said. She added in an interview with Fox News that the National Rifle Association (NRA) has an annual budget of $350 million. The NRA said that while its operating budget is close to that figure, a "small fraction" -- approximately $20 million -- goes toward what it calls 'political activity,' with the bulk spent on safety and training programs. Moms Demand Action works with Everytown for Gun Safety, which is bankrolled by former New York City mayor and billionaire, Michael Bloomberg. Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA), told Fox News, "Billionaire Michael Bloomberg's tactics may be new, but the fight is the same. The NRA and our five million members stand ready to defend the Second Amendment wherever the battlefield. The majority of Americans do not want more gun control and we will fight tooth and nail to expose Bloomberg's lies and defeat his extreme gun control agenda. " Prior to those comments, Watts explained her group's mission is about education." We're not anti-gun, we're not against the Second Amendment. We're about responsibilities that come along with gun rights and that includes things like background checks and keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people," she said. Gottleib, who lives in Washington state where the Second Amendment Foundation is based, acknowledged he is aware of Everytown's tactics for voter initiatives, adding "...our big concern is buying ballot measures." Part of the reason so much action is currently being seen at the state level is the sheer immobility on Capitol Hill. Currently, four national reciprocity bills, three in the House, one in the Senate, are before Congress. Passage of any of them would treat conceal carry permits much like driver's licenses - no matter the state in which it was issued, it would be valid nationwide. But the NRA says right now it is looking more toward 2016 than this year's congressional session. These pieces of legislation need to garner a veto-proof majority because, "We have a president that hates the Second Amendment", said Jennifer Baker, a spokeswoman for the NRA. Watts compared the battle over gun rights to a marathon, not a sprint. "We're not going to find a law to fix every single problem in this country, right. Not every law stops every crime. But what we can do is put more laws in place to ensure things like background checks are happening," she said. And as the NRA holds its annual meeting later this week in Nashville, where several presidential contenders are expected to speak, the opposition has its sights set on the future as well. "We're feeling a huge amount of momentum," Watts said. "Momentum around gun safety in this country and we believe that will continue into 2016 and beyond.”

Only in New York!!!   http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/03/19/gotham-gun-shop-appears-as-ruse-to-preach-anti-firearm-message/     A "gun shop" that suddenly appeared in the heart of Manhattan last week only to close its doors after two days was actually an elaborate ruse by a pro-gun control group that sought to lure potential customers in order to make their anti-firearms case. States United to Prevent Gun Violence set up the "Guns with History Gun Shop" on Manhattan’s Lower East Side, and pretended to offer for sale guns used in high-profile crimes. The phony sales pitches were really part of a "social experiment" -- pretexts for telling customers about the dangers of gun proliferation in unconsummated transactions recorded by hidden cameras, according to the group. In one such conversation, the bogus clerk shows a replica Bushmaster assault rifle like the one Connecticut State Police said Adam Lanza used in the Sandy Hook school massacre. “Collectors love this one," the actor states in a video the anti-gun group posted on YouTube. “Adam Lanza’s mom had this in her collection, too, until he took this and several other guns and killed her and then went down to Sandy Hook and killed 6 teachers and 20 innocent children. Twenty little kids…Gone like that.”   Pro-gun advocates called the effort a misleading stunt. “This is a tasteless PR stunt designed to further an anti-gun agenda, and it’s out of touch with reality," NRA spokeswoman Jennifer Baker told FoxNews.com. "As gun ownership has risen to an all-time high, violent crime has fallen to a 43-year low, and the firearm accident death rate has fallen to the lowest that it has been in over a hundred years. A clear majority of the American people support the use of firearms for protection and put more faith in gun ownership rights than in gun control." Another critic blasted the fake gun shop, calling it "the most disgusting and outrageous stunt" gun control "extremists" have cooked up to date. "These people won’t be happy until all law-abiding citizens are disarmed," added blogger Kimberly Morin in a post on TheFederalistPapers.org. The replica weapons displayed at the store bore tags linking them to specific crimes, while a sign in the front window beckoned passersby with a sign saying, “First-time gun buyer? We are here to help you.” Several purported customers were shocked when they learned of the stories behind each of the guns. “A very handy gun,” the clerk says in another segment as he shows a 9-mm. semiautomatic to another customer. “Easy to use. It’s a great gun to carry in your purse, like that gal from the Walmart, her 2-year-old son reaches into her pocketbook, pulls it out, shoots her.” Officials for SUPGV local New York office say that the stunt was cleared with the city, through the office of Mayor Bill de Blasio, and that they applied for filming permits. All the guns within the shop were props and no ammunition was on hand. Julia Wyman, executive director of States United to Prevent Gun Violence, said the effort was part of a campaign to educate prospective first-time gun buyers.  “Our aim is to ensure those looking to purchase a firearm are aware of the potential risks [and to promote responsible gun ownership],” Wyman said. “Often gun purchasers wrongly believe guns will keep them safe when, in fact, a gun in the home greatly increases the risk of homicide and suicide. This sets the record straight so consumers can make an informed choice to buy a firearm or not.” New York's city and state gun laws are among the nation's strictest. Residents of the five boroughs are required to apply for pistol licenses through the NYPD and must obtain special permission if they want to carry the weapon on their person. Rifles and shotguns also must be registered within city limits.

http://wreg.com/2015/03/12/shoot-dont-shoot-how-law-enforcement-decides/    Watch the video on the story.   SHELBY COUNTY, Tenn. — When faced with a life-threatening situation, law enforcement officers sometimes have to make split-second decisions. But when do they pull their gun and use deadly force? When is it justified? Calls have been pouring into the newsroom with viewers at home asking those very questions. WREG’s Katie Rufener went to investigate and show you what deputies are trained to do when lives are at stake. The Shelby County Sheriff’s office has a program that simulates a shooting scenario. So, we decided to test how Katie, as a citizen, would react, versus a seasoned, trained deputy. Officer Jay Jones is a 16-year veteran with the Shelby County Sheriff’s Office. In one video simulation a biker refuses to do what Jones tells him. Then he puts his hand behind him and pulls out a gun. Jones shoots the biker. It can happen that quickly. “Sometimes we can’t see in a vehicle what he’s reaching for,” he explained. When responding to a dangerous situation, Jones said it can be difficult for law enforcement to determine when to pull the trigger. But if the person is ignoring repeated commands or makes sudden movements like the man drawing a gun in the simulator, they do what they have to to protect lives, including their own. WREG reporter Katie Rufener went through the same scenario as Officer Jones. Katie told the person to show their hands just like he did. She repeated that command ten times. He didn’t not listen, and when the man reached in his pocket, Katie shot. But this time, the man didn’t have a gun. “At that point, what he pulled out was a handkerchief,” Helms told Katie. “But did you feel threatened?” She answered, “I did.” Lieutenant Kevin Helms has had to make quick decisions like that several times over the years. “I’ve been involved in two shootings. I’ve been shot myself and had to shoot two people, myself,” he said. “If I could give those days back, I’d give them back in a heartbeat.” Every time there is an officer involved shooting, whether it is justified or not, Helms said it is investigated. But regardless of what some may think, he said killing someone is never easy for officers. “That’s the last thing an officer wants to do, is have to use their weapon. But, there are times when individuals give us no choice, and that’s what we have to revert to.” Deputies say the most important thing is for people to understand how critical it is to respond to commands as soon as they’re given. The sheriff’s office also has a team of deputies who are trained to handle situations involving those who are mentally ill.

http://fox59.com/2015/03/07/firearms-fashion-show-highlights-importance-of-gun-safety/     INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. (March 7, 2105) – Indianapolis women got a first hand look Saturday at new fashionable ways to safely conceal guns. The Fashion and Firearms Concealed Carry Extravaganza is the first of it’s kind in Indianapolis. More than 300 women of all ages and walks of life attended the interactive event raising money to support local Well Armed Woman chapters. Models walked the runway, showing off trendy ways to carry a gun. Event organizers say the idea of the event is to make sure women have fashionable options while carrying. Indianapolis women got a first-hand look Saturday at new fashionable ways to safely conceal guns. The Fashion and Firearms Concealed Carry Extravaganza is the first of its kind in Indianapolis. More than 300 women of all ages and walks of life attended the interactive event raising money to support local Well Armed Woman chapters. Models walked the runway, showing off trendy ways to carry a gun. Event organizers say the idea of the event is to make sure women have fashionable options while carrying. “There are ways to carry, whether you’re wearing a cocktail dress, shorts and a tank top,” explains Cathy Brown, event co-chair. The focus of the event is on safety. Last month, a Michigan woman died when a gun she was carrying in a bra holster, misfired. “That’s why we’re doing this. It’s all about safety. There are four rules to gun safety and when all four rules are followed, accidents are very unlikely to happen,” says Brown. The four rules of gun safety are: Treat every gun as if it’s loaded. (Even if you know it’s not). Never point a gun at anyone or anything you’re not willing to destroy. Keep your finger off the trigger and out of the trigger guard until you’re ready to fire. Know your target and what’s behind it. The event is also about empowering women. Dawn Hillyer purchased a gun a few years ago because of a stalker she had for six years. “I never thought I would be a gun person. It’s about protection and women taking control and being your own hero and being able to protect yourself,” Hillyer says. She started her business, Hiding Hilda, to help other women become inspired to protect themselves. Her purse designs offer a special compartment for guns. Profits help sponsor scholarships for law enforcement on stalker training. Her case was the first in Indiana. She says it’s what prompted her to get a gun and since then, other women have followed her lead. “He gets out of prison in 2017 and I’m not going to live like that again. I’m not gonna run. I’m not gonna hide. I’m gonna stand right up,” Hillyer says.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/03/08/couple-denied-role-as-foster-parents-over-permits-to-carry-guns/     A Nevada couple were denied their request to serve as foster parents because they have permits to carry guns. Brian and Valerie Wilson, of Las Vegas, told “Fox & Friends” Sunday that they have always planned to become foster parents and eventually adopt, but have been denied permission to do so because of a state regulation that prohibits the carrying of loaded weapons with foster children. “I really want a family,” said Valerie Wilson. “It really is heartbreaking because these kids are in institutionalized homes; they aren’t getting the families that they deserve,” she told “Fox & Friends.” “It’s heartbreaking that they’re not getting the home they deserve,” she said.   “It just doesn’t make sense,” Brian Wilson added. “We’re talking about law-abiding people, people who have had background checks. “We’re not talking about leaving a firearm around the house,” he said. The Wilsons said they got the gun permits years ago after they were victims of an attempted home invasion. “We realized that bad things can happen to good people at any time and we need to be responsible,” Brian Wilson said. Now the Wilsons are fighting to get the law in Nevada changed. They testified last week before the state Assembly Judiciary Committee to ask lawmakers to approve Assembly Bill 167, which would allow residents to carry loaded weapons on their person or in a car and still serve as foster parents, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reported. Current rules reportedly require guns and ammunition to be stored separately in secure containers in homes with foster children. The Wilsons’ request for a variance to the current law was denied. Assemblywoman Olivia Diaz, a Democrat, said foster children are often traumatized. She asked if having them exposed to weapons would be appropriate. Jill Marano, deputy administrator of the state Division of Child and Family Services, said the agency has fears about the possibility that a child could gain access to a loaded weapon. She opposed the bill in its current form.

This is a video clip.   http://video.foxnews.com/v/4092808001001/kentucky-store-clerk-fights-off-and-shoots-robber/?intcmp=obnetwork#sp=show-clips

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2015/03/04/beretta-reveals-new-striker-fired-pistol/?intcmp=features Beretta revealed its first full-size striker fired pistol, the Beretta APX, at the IDEX (International Defence Exhibition & Conference) in Abu Dhabi last week. The Beretta APX joins Beretta’s handgun lineup - folks that converged in Abu Dhabi for IDEX had a chance to have a look at it before it is released in the United States. What about Beretta reveals that are more targeted to the U.S.? At the SHOT Show in Las Vegas earlier this year, Beretta featured a range of new weapons including the debut of the new M9A3 pistol. In December 2014, Beretta USA submitted to the U.S. Army the M9 Engineering Change Proposal that outlines their key advances to the M9 including enhanced reliability, durability, ergonomics and modularity. Pistol Performance IDEX is one of the first big fixtures on the defense tech calendar so many companies opt to unveil their latest and greatest to the international military customers there. Since 1915, Beretta has manufactured semi-automatic pistols and the company will now be one of the few major players that makes full-size polymer and metallic framed handguns in both hammer and now striker fired operating systems. The company has produced more than 600,000 of the M9 U.S. Armed Forces sidearm for the Department of Defense over the past 30 years. Their first full-size striker fired pistol, the APX, has also been designed with the needs of the military and law enforcement in mind. Beretta and Beretta Defense Technologies Vice President Carlo Ferlito explained, in a statement, that “Beretta waited to enter the striker fired market until we had a pistol we knew would meet the needs of the operator. The APX has been more than three years in development. We tested it extensively with professional end users and incorporated that feedback at every opportunity.” “The result is a pistol platform that delivers superior performance in durability, reliability, accuracy and ergonomics,” he said. The pistol can withstand a 45,000-round firing schedule with 5,000 rounds between stoppages, according to Beretta. That degree of success in exhaustive testing would suggest it is highly durable and reliable. It is still early days since the Army requirements have yet to be released, but Beretta does plan to enter the APX to compete for the eventual U.S. Army’s Modular Handgun System selection. In the meantime, the IDEX reveal began generating buzz in the market beyond the US military. The APX may have been tailored to meet the military and law enforcement client needs, but the company will also make a commercial version available later this year. The APX in a nutshell The full-size 7.55-inch-long APX is a striker fired pistol built on a chassis system. The just over 4.25 inch long barrel is cold-hammer forged and there is a nitriding surface treatment on all the steel parts. Beretta describes the operation as semi-auto, tilting barrel locking system using a non-pre-cocked striker block. The serialized stainless steel chassis is encased with a fiberglass reinforced polymer frame and this helps to reduce the weight. With an empty magazine loaded, the APX weighs about 26.8 ounces in the 9 mm versions and just over 26.8 ounces in the .40 S&W variant. To accommodate different hand sizes, there are three sizes of removable backstraps and grips. Each option provides a different palm swell and length of pull for the user. For those who may need to wear heavy gloves, the trigger guard opening is designed to make that possible. APX also features coarse slide serration making cocking with cumbersome gloves easier. The trigger, designed to be flatter and wider than others in the striker-fired pistol space, has a pull weight of about 6 pounds. The trigger travel is 6 mm, with reset at 3. For mounting accessories, the APX has the standard 1913 Picatinny rail. Keeping in mind the military customer, the APX sights will be a standard three-dot combat sight system with a unique mounting system. For one handed slide cycling, there’s a rear sight ninety-degree face. Fieldstripping and switching components should be super easy. Triggerless disassembly is one of the advantages of striker-fired pistols and the APX has enhanced safety with the ability to disassemble without pulling the trigger. There is a disconnector pin on the rear right side of the pistol under the breech. When will it hit U.S. shores? The company intends to submit a variant of the new APX pistol to the upcoming U.S. Army Modular Handgun System and a similar model tailored for the civilian consumer should be released later this year. Eventually, it will be available in 9x19 mm with 17 round magazine capacity, .40 S&W with 15 round magazine capacity and 9x21 mm IMI calibers with 15 round magazine capacity. The APX will not take M9/M92 magazines to the dismay of some. Beretta has yet to confirm a price point or release date in the United States. But you can follow this link to become one of the first to know when APX becomes commercially available in the U.S. IDEX is the only international defense exhibition and conference in the Middle East and North Africa that showcases tech that encompasses land, sea, and air defense. Held biennially, IDEX is conducted under the patronage of His Highness Sheikh Khalifa Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, President of the UAE and Supreme Commander of the UAE Armed Forces. At this year's IDEX, more than 1,100 companies from around the world converged to showcase their wares covering 124,000 square meters of space. IDEX is touted as an opportunity to reach potential buyers in the Middle East and North Africa – as well as beyond.

That was my excite thought also.

This is an update on the Ammo Ban. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/02/28/lawmakers-wont-be-silenced-over-obama-administration-proposed-ammo-ban/       Lawmakers are firing back at a proposal by the Obama administration to ban one of the most common bullets used with the popular AR-15 rifle, with more than 100 members of Congress signing a letter opposing the move on ammo. Word of the  proposal by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to ban .223 M855 “green tip” ammunition came out on Thursday and prompted an immediate backlash from sportsmen. House members from both parties and some law enforcement officials were not far behind. “[The ban] will interfere with Second Amendment rights by disrupting the market for ammunition that law abiding Americans use for sporting and other legitimate purposes,” reads the letter signed by lawmakers and addressed to ATF director Todd Jones.   The bullets, which can pierce bulletproof vests used by law enforcement, had previously been approved by the ATF in 1986. The agency now says that because handguns have now been designed that can also fire the bullets, police officers are now more likely to encounter them and so they should be banned. However, the congressional letter notes that the ATF provides no evidence of the bullet’s danger to law enforcement. “ATF has not even alleged – much less offered evidence – that even one such round has ever been fired from a handgun at a police officer,” the letter reads. Many police organizations are also not in favor of the ban. “The notion that all of a sudden a new pistol requires banning what had long been perfectly legal ammunition doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense to many officers,” William Johnson, executive director of the National Association of Police Organizations, told FoxNews.com NAPO represents over 1,000 police units and associations and 241,000 law enforcement officers around the country. Johnson added that the bullets currently banned under the law deserve to stay banned. “Some bullets… such as ones coated with Teflon, really are specifically designed to defeat bullet proof vests, and we think they should remain illegal,” he said. But some law enforcement experts support the ban. “I am definitely for the banning of these rounds… officers worry about them all the time,” former NYPD detective Harry Houck told FoxNews.com, though he added that a ban might not actually keep criminals from getting the ammunition. Gun control groups support the ban. "We understand why law enforcement has always been concerned about the threat of armor-piercing bullets," Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, told FoxNews.com. Lawmakers warn that the regulation – especially as it follows on the heels of attempts to restrict lead bullets -- will “result in drastically reduced options for lawful ammunition users.” Already, the ammunition has been cleared from many store shelves by gun owners looking to stock up in anticipation of the ban. The proposed regulation would not prohibit owning the bullets, but it would stop anyone from manufacturing or importing them. Gun-rights groups also worry that the ban – if allowed to stand – won’t stop with this type of bullet. “Almost any hunting rifle bullet will go through body armor, so you could prohibit almost any rifle bullet with this. This is the administration redefining the law on its own,” Alan Gottlieb, of the Second Amendment Foundation, told FoxNews.com. The lawmakers also dispute the ATF’s legal authority to ban the bullets, saying that the proposed ban “does not comport with the letter or spirit of the law.” The law, which was passed in 1986, gives the agency authority to ban bullets that are “constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper or depleted uranium.” However, the congressmen say that the core of these bullets “contains a substantial amount of lead, raising questions about its classification as ‘armor piercing’ in the first place.” The congressmen also allege that the ATF violated government transparency requirements. “The Administrative Procedures Act… requires that ‘general notice of proposed rulemaking shall be published in the Federal Register…’ To date, [the proposed ban] has not been published in the Federal Register.” The ATF has announced that it is currently taking public comments on the regulation until March 16, when it will prepare to issue a final regulation. Comments can be sent to APAComments@atf.gov. An ATF spokesman emphasized that no final decision has been made yet. “No final determinations have been made and we won’t make any determinations until we’ve reviewed the comments submitted by industry, law enforcement and the public at large,” ATF spokesman Corey Ray told FoxNews.com. “The framework is… intended to protect law enforcement while respecting the interests of sportsmen and the industry,” he also noted.