The following is a guest post.
Guns laws are one of the most controversial topics in the United States of America.
For instance, the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights states;
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, the right of people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Just as there has been a push to regulate the possession of firearms, there has been an equal push back. I’m happy to tell you that there are several ways in which to have a voice on the political battleground surrounding the Second Amendment.
First, a little history of one of the most controversial periods of gun reform in U.S. history.
The NRA and the Black Panthers
Currently, especially given the recent events at the Capitol, a spotlight has been put on what is called “Extremist Groups.” However, this is not the first time in history that an armed political protest has shaken nations, especially considering the prevalence of the Black Lives Matter movements.
While the Civil Rights Movement was able to establish full citizenship rights for African Americans by overturning Jim Crow Laws. It ultimately did very little to help balance economic issues and the political under-representation African American’s faced.
So, as a reaction to the ongoing socioeconomic strife, and the ongoing police violence towards the black community, the Black Panther Party was formed, and armed themselves.
At the time, Californian laws allowed public carry of loaded firearms as long as they were carried openly and not pointed at anyone. Which allowed the Black Panthers to patrol their communities and record police behavior while armed.
What happened next, set the stage for gun law reform and control.
As it so happened, the Black Panther group had organized an armed protest at the Californian State Capitol, which was a publicity stunt. And unlike recent Capitol protests, it ended rather peacefully.
Ultimately this culminated in the passing of the Mulford Act, supported by the NRA, which set a precedent for gun control.
How to Defend Your Rights as a Civilian
You as a civilian have a few ways to affect or advocate for the social changes you would like to see.
Let’s cover a few.
And if you find momentum, you may find yourself in the political arena someday.
So let’s get into the momentum part.
Diction Syntax and ElocutionWhat you say, the words you use, and how you say it.
Being able to present yourself well, and the argument you are willing to represent mean everything.
Human nature makes a subconscious snap decision on the judgement of an individual within 13 seconds. So if you can’t make a solid first impression right off the bat, you will be fighting an uphill battle, and often a losing one.
The human subconscious is a powerful tool, use your posture, clothes, and voice to your advantage.
Communication is 90% body language. That’s your in.
Once you have the in, the words come. Be sure to know what you are going to say before you say it, anticipate arguments, and rebuttals, and be prepared. Know your words and how to play your platform to your advantage.
Data and information are what will seal the deal.
Personally, don’t attempt an armed protest in today’s charged atmosphere. I could go on at length about battle fever and riot behavior.
It will not end well for anyone involved, look at Palestine and Israel, look up what happened to those 30 armed yet non-violent Panthers after the protest. It’s sad.
Might makes right.
Thank your stars you are an American, where debate is the true battleground of policy.
If you are politically motivated, simply use it as a case study, to formulate an argument.
Also, give thanks to the Black Panthers and the NRA, and check out some of the best pistol optics you can purchase on the market.
Richard Douglas writes on firearms, defense and security issues. He is the founder and editor of Scopes Field, and a columnist at The National Interest, 1945, Daily Caller and other publications.
From the Firearms Policy Coalition, which will be filing suit:
Thank you for reaching out to Firearms Policy Coalition on our 2A Hotline regarding Nevada AB286, a ban on homebuilt firearms. Unfortunately this legislation did pass the Senate today and we are continuing to prepare for challenging its Constitutionality as soon as possible.
For your information, we have some answers to frequently asked questions about what it might be like to be a plaintiff for an FPC action challenging 2nd Amendment infringements. You can read about it at FPCPlaintiff.org.
Our legal team will be reaching out to you soon at the phone number you provided to us. If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to reply to this email or be ready to discuss it with us by phone.
Thanks again for your interest.
FPC Legal Project Coordinator
You cannot sell your 80% lower or a completed firearm made from one; unless you sell it to an FFL before 2022.
Your existing 80% lower or completed firearms are illegal to possess. This provision is an unconstitutional taking and will likely get demolished in court.
Your older, unserialized guns that were made before serial numbers were required are exempt.
Remember, you didn't buy these firearms so that you could just turn them in because they made the illegal. If you intent to buy 80% receivers, do it before 01/01/2022 and keep your mouth shut about them.
Contact the governor and ask for a veto. Why not?
Are casino executives retarded? Yes, yes they are. The effect of banning guns in casinos will mean that crime will go up as criminals can assume that crime will go up as criminals can assume that everyone on or near the Strip or downtown is disarmed. This bill will have an unintended consequence of driving up crime as criminals are no longer afraid of unarmed tourists.
We have it on good authority that MGM and Wynn casinos are pushing SB 452, the casino gun-free zone gun ban bill, which was revived from the language in AB 286 earlier. The assembly bill had the gun-free zone language stripped out, but casino pressure on the Democrat controlled legislature saw the provision revived through emergency procedures.
After casinos closed down in 2020 due to the pandemic, no one was traveling because of fear and poverty. The casinos lowered rates to insanely low levels and attracted customers who couldn’t ordinarily afford to come to Vegas. A lot of these customers were utter trash; humans with low impulse control of their violent tendencies and a lot of gang members, felons, and drug dealers.
We had a number of high profile crimes happen on the Strip and a spectacular increase in violence. Metro had to specially bust down on people illegally carrying guns. Casinos installed magic gun detectors so now even legal concealed carriers could get popped by these machines.
So what do the Democrats and the stupid executives do? They support making a new trespassing offense for having a gun at a casino. Basically, if they don’t want you armed at a casino, you won’t be. The past/current “honor system” of keep it concealed and don’t cause trouble will be out the window. MGM controls multiple casinos on the Strip and Caesar’s, the other big chain, will probably follow suit, along with the smaller operations.
Guns will be illegal even in your car in the parking lot, garages, or dropping of/picking up. You can bet security will not be conducive to allowing you to walk from casino to casino, checking your gun at each one, just so you can stay armed as you walk the Strip or Las Vegas’ and Reno’s scummy downtown casino areas. The effect of this bill is the area of the major casinos will be gun-free zones and havens for criminals.
Because tourists don’t just stay at one casino like an inclusive resort, but instead walk from casino to casino, the various attractions and local businesses, no one will be carrying. Since the Strip has zero public parking and you won’t be able to go into most casinos armed anyway, everything from Dean Martin to Maryland Parkway will be gun free. Remember; you can’t legally even have a gun in your car at the casinos.
That means that crime will go up. We know that concealed carry decreases crime because criminals are afraid of being shot. Criminals will be able to assume that anyone in these areas on foot are disarmed. Their risk of being shot will decrease dramatically and crime will go up.
So because the casinos lower rates, invite trash who cause crime, the casinos now want to increase penalties for carrying a gun at a casino, and this will have the unintended consequence of driving up crime. If SB 452 goes into law, violence and crime on the Strip will only increase and tourists will be scared away.
Everyone remembers what a scumhole New York City was until Mayor Giuliani cleaned it up. Las Vegas’ casinos would be stupid to repeat the same mistake by criminalizing legally armed citizens.
The casino gun ban was given a last minute revival in the form of SB 452. Emergency procedures were abused to revive this from the dead when it was already stripped from AB 286. Leave comments, email and call ALL senators; NOW. Hit up the governor too.
Disregard the last post and email on AB 286.
This bill would ban firearms on the property of any posted casinos; that means the parking lot, garages, and drop-off/pick-up areas. Legally, this means if you are going to casino, you are disarmed the entire trip because you can't leave your gun in the car.
Concealed carry: they have to warn you to leave before calling the police.
Open carry: they don't have to warn you before calling this police.
This makes no sense. Someone carrying illegally (and is probably a bad guy) is far more of a risk than someone who is openly carrying, because OC'ers have nothing to hide.
This bill is totally unnecessary because "leave when warned or else be trespassed" is already Nevada law. Most people conceal carry, so the open carry portion as well is unnecessary.
This bill would also disproportionately affect minorities who would likely be targeted by police and security. No one deserves to be disarmed because they're on the Strip. By disarming the public criminals will know that essentially the entire Strip and downtown is a gun-free zone.
It's time to tell MGM and Wynn "no." Our valuable tourists and gaming customers who support this state's economy do not need to be disarmed and alienated because low rates brought utter trash into the state where they caused problems.
What to do:
AB 286, is pending in the Senate for a final floor vote. The casino gun ban may be added back in at the last minute. It would be illegal to carry a gun at a casino even without a specific warning from security. Major casinos are pushing this bill because of the crime on the Strip. This bill would disproportionately target minorities and make you a criminal for having a gun in you car, nevermind taking it into the casino.
We need to act now in order to kill it off. We're suggesting a coordinated phone blast Weds. 5/19 and Thurs. 5/18 to ring the Senator's phones off the hook. Focus on Democrats; make up a zip code in their area if they ask for one.
Don't bother with Republicans or the Assembly. Call ALL the Democrat senators, not just your own.
Or you could suggest that any gun control passed by Democrats this year will harm their chances for re-election next year.
Seriously people, this is how you get normal, handgun open carry banned. Or worse, get rifle carry banned when you actually need to carry rifles (the riots this time last year, anyone)?
But this peaceful incident belies the whole idea that open carriers are going to shoot people.
Anyone see any videos of this online in any of the "First Amendment auditor" type circles by chance?
Score this one as a success! AB 286, the bill that would have banned guns first on pretty much all private property with just a tiny sign, then casino properties, passed the Assembly on a party line vote. It goes on to the Senate. The BIG WIN here is that the trespassing while armed portion of the bill was removed! It is not only about 80% unfinished receivers or so-called "ghost guns."
Many thanks are owed to the NVFAC PAC for their help in getting us this far and they will work in the Senate to get the remainder of the bill taken care of. On a side note, the federal government is probably going to ban that stuff anyway, but, it is still a huge win.
See the current amended version here.
As you recall, the original bill would have allowed private property owners pretty much anywhere to ban even permitted concealed carry. This was toned down to just premises with unrestricted gaming licenses.
No one deserves to be disarmed anywhere they go. Casinos cannot protect innocent citizens from violence inside their casinos, on the Strip, the parking garage, etc. Heck, you aren't safe within rifle range of a hotel window. The persons causing violence on the Las Vegas Strip are not law-abiding citizens or even permitted concealed carriers (though we loathe the idea of permission slips).
We do not believe the power of the state should be extended to ban firearms on private property. If a property owner does not want armed patrons, the existing trespassing statutes, which require a verbal warning and not just a sign, are sufficient. We know that signs don't protect anyone and don't dissuade criminals from carrying guns. All signs do is give police a reason to arrest after an incident has happened while good people are defenseless.
At a bare minimum, concealed firearm permittees should have been exempted from the bill. If hotels want to disarm permittees, let them exercise their existing prerogatives. Hotels, if they are going to disarm customers, need to provide secure storage in the rooms. Laws shouldn't prohibit someone who is picking up fares or dropping off friends at the entrance, or storing the gun in a locked car, from those behaviors.
Sandra Jauregui is clearly off the reservation within her party and unsupported by her collogues. The left knows that gun control is unpopular right now and something like banning guns in a majority of public spaces would be very risky to re-election. Keep up the pressure!
No more gun control!
Jorge Gomez brings his rifle to downtown Las Vegas last spring during the George Floyd/Black Lives Matter riots. Something happens with police, he appears to run away, police claims Gomez raises his rifle, police shoot him. Apparently no video evidence was found to corroborate their statement, but body cams weren't issued to that unit and local security footage didn't quite capture the incident (IIRC).
Right, wrong, or indifferent; we disagree with brining a rifle to an incident like this. Even truly non-violent political protests (2A rallies) we have conflicting feelings about openly carrying rifles.
Riots are events that quickly go beyond the law (for both sides) and is basically a return to uncivilized behavior. Anything can happen and expecting protestors, innocents, or police to play by the rules of a calm, sunny day is stupid.
Don't bring a rifle to a riot unless you expect to use and you also accept the risk of being shot. If you want to play "good guy, bad guy," Kyle Rittenhouse is on trial for his life after shooting three actual bad guys who tried to kill him during the riots in Kenosha.
If it isn't your revolution (that you're willing to die for) or your home/business you're willing to kill and die for, don't bring a rifle to this stuff. The first rule of surviving dangerous situations is don't be there. Whatever Metro might have done wrong, Mr. Gomez would be alive if he didn't openly carry his rifle that night.
I was reading the trial coverage of the Minneapolis Police officer Derek Chauvin, on trial for the “murder” of George Floyd. Basically the reports from legal reporters who are actually at the trial show that the prosecution is doing a terrible job proving the case and is essentially making the defenses’ case. This is the kind of detailed reporting that we got during the OJ Simpsons case.
Last night I caught a segment talking about it on the evening TV news and they basically edited some of the statements and to portray the situation that Chauvin was in the wrong and guilty which is completely out of context with the actual testimony. The use of force expert for the prosecution was an LAPD sergeant who happened to be black. Seems to me they found an expert of convenience who of course called the use of force “excessive.”
That clip is pretty much what LA saw. Compare that against the reports from Legal Insurrection, above. The real testimony shows a complex, nuanced cause at a minimum, and at the other end of the spectrum, that Chauvin was not kneeling on Floyd’s neck and that Floyd had just ingested a fatal dose of Fentanyl. Regardless of perspective, this isn’t an issue that can be dealt with in two minute clips on the evening news. People died and cities burned because of this stuff last year.
Whatever the outcome of the trial is, the media is not accurately reporting what’s going on at the trial and is putting out this narrative that regardless of the evidence, Chauvin is guilty. Instead of accurately reporting on the facts and testimony, they are creating the expectation in the public’s mind that Chauvin will be convicted when in reality that’s a chancy thing. The media is fomenting riots and insurrections with their misleading coverage.
In a few weeks, if Chauvin is acquitted, brace for riots worse than we’ve seen. The unintelligent public has been primed to expect a guilty verdict of murder and it is highly probable he will receive an acquittal or a lesser included charge.
If you don’t believe in evil, you should.
Clayton E. Cramer
Gun Free Zone
The War on Guns
The View From Out West