Mediaboss Marketing

Published February 19, 2015

A man convicted 25 years ago in Maryland on a misdemeanor charge for carrying a firearm without a license will see his Second Amendment rights restored, under a new federal court ruling issued Wednesday.

Alan Gottlieb, founder and executive director of the Washington-based The Second Amendment Foundation, which represented Julio Suarez, called the ruling significant.

Under existing federal law many people convicted of non-violent state-level misdemeanors have lost their Second Amendment rights because theyve been lumped together with convicted felons due to indeterminate sentencing laws, Gottlieb said.

Thats not right, and cases like this help restore some perspective and narrow some broad legislative brush strokes.

The case provides a building block on which similar cases can be challenged, Gottlieb said.

Suarez, originally pulled over by police in 1990 on a suspected DUI charge, was convicted instead of possessing a firearm without a permit and sentenced to 180 days in prison, 1 year probation and a $500 fine. Court records show the terms of imprisonment and fine were both suspended.

The father of three, who has been married for 20 years and is an active member of his local church, has since led an exemplary life, Gottlieb said, but he noted the conviction was enough to cost Suarez his ability to buy and keep a firearm for defense of his home and family.

In a 26-page decision, Middle District Court Judge William W. Caldwell said Suarez is no more dangerous than a typical law-abiding citizen and poses no continuing threat to society.

A person should not lose his or her constitutional rights for non-violent indiscretions that occur once in a lifetime, said Second Amendment Foundation Attorney Alan Gura, who represented Suarez.

More:
Man convicted of misdemeanor 25 years ago has Second Amendment rights restored

About 100 Second Amendment activists gathered at the Statehouse on Saturday to push for gun rights in the midst of the General Assemblys debate over taking guns from convicted abusers. Thad Moore/The Post and Courier

COLUMBIA Second Amendment activists rallied Saturday at the Statehouse, three days after the Senate voted to bar anyone convicted of a high-level domestic violence crime from possessing guns.

About 100 people gathered outside the capitol holding signs, flags warning Dont Tread on Me and even a pitchfork. The rally was planned before the Senate took up the domestic violence bill, organizers said. But, for some, the passage of the gun ban underscored why they were holding the rally.

Our timing couldnt be better, said Andrew Miller, state coordinator of Gun Rights Across America, which organized the rally.

Sen. Lee Bright, a Spartanburg Republican who was one of three Upstate senators who voted against the domestic violence bill, attended the rally along with three other lawmakers.

When it comes right down to it, weve got to fix this house, Bright told the crowd, gesturing to the Statehouse behind him. Weve got problems in South Carolina.

The gun ban was hotly contested during Senate debate, and was passed only after a compromise was reached that requires a judges approval to take away firearms in the least serious domestic violence crimes. The measure still needs to pass the House, where the bill does not include a gun ban.

Federal law already barred anyone convicted of domestic violence from possessing a gun, but victims advocates argued that a state ban was needed to enforce the law.

Bright called the gun ban an assault on the Second Amendment, but not all those who rallied to defend gun rights disagreed with taking guns away from abusers. A February poll found that 76 percent of South Carolinians would support a law that kept convicted batterers from acquiring guns.

Read more:
Second Amendment activists gather at South Carolina Statehouse rally in midst of domestic violence debate

The Second Amendment Foundation will launch a nationwide TV and radio campaign Monday aimed at exposing legal holes in President Obamas executive actions to ban ammunition commonly used in AR-15 sport utility rifles.

We bought $700,000 of time on Fox News and Glenn Becks Blaze network, Alan Gottlieb, the groups founder and executive vice president, told The Washington Times in a Sunday telephone interview. Its aimed at getting our legal argument out to the public, and at getting support for a possible lawsuit.

The foundations one-minute commercial heralds 1 million Americans to call a toll-free number to voice their concerns, make a contribution and target Mr. Obama for exercising another executive power grab.

PHOTOS: Awesome rifles: The best and the baddest

The ad claims, The Obama administration was unable to impose gun restrictions and confiscation through the legislative process, so now its trying to ban commonly used ammunition through regulation. If we allow Obama to ban ammunition through executive fiat now, it will lead to the loss of our Second Amendment rights by the time Obama leaves office.

Press secretary Josh Earnest said last week that Mr. Obama supports the ban because he predicts that the AR-15s .223 caliber M855 ammunition will be used to pierce law enforcement officer armor, although there are no such reported cases to date.

The Second Amendment Foundations media campaign is being launched only days after it sent a scathing legal threat to B. Todd Jones, director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. In addition, 239 congressional lawmakers, including seven Democrats, dispatched a letter voicing their own concerns to the federal agency.

PHOTOS: Bang for your buck: Best handguns under $500

The proposed regulations, which ban the production and sale of the steel-tipped ammunition was a response to an ATF report that claims new handguns are capable of firing the ammunition. But the new AR-15 handguns are nearly 2 feet long, and weigh about 6 pounds, making them almost impossible to conceal like a traditional handgun.

The administrations logic does not satisfy the requirements under federal law to classify the ammunition as armor piercing, the foundation argues.

Link:
Obama AR-15 ammunition ban targeted in gun group's nationwide media campaign

Clackamas County is considering a resolution supporting Second-Amendment gun rights, but some residents are concerned it could put firearms in the wrong hands.

County commissioners will vote on a resolutionaffirming Second-Amendment rights in a 6 p.m. business meeting Thursday, Feb. 19.

A Ceasefire Oregon flyer assumes that the resolution opposes expanded background checks for gun sales and aims to help felons buy firearms.

"Clackamas County commissioners will consider a resolution that ostensibly supports the Second Amendment but will, in reality, continue to enable criminals and domestic violence abusers to buy guns," the flyer reads.

Chair John Ludlow insists that's not what the resolution is about.

"I know [background checks] exist and I feel good about the current ones," Ludlow said in an interview Friday. "We now hear from various people that we are passing a law, and that is certainly not the case here, that would put guns in the hands of felons and domestic abusers. I would invite them to again look at the resolution. There is no way that could be construed as putting guns in the hand of felons."

Some gun-control groups are pushing this year for state legislation that would expand background checks to private gun transactions.

Tualatin resident Christine Martin is concerned the resolution could shut down a meaningful discussion about what can be done to keep guns out of the hands of potentially dangerous people, she said.

"[The resolution] is an attempt to prevent smarter gun possession by law-abiding citizens," Martin said. "We need to look at protecting our children. If that means closing some loopholes and leveling the playing field, then I support that."

Some opponents of the resolution have mistaken it for a law, ordinance or bill.

More:
Clackamas County considering Second-Amendment resolution; Some concerned it would help felons get guns

Published February 23, 2015

A flurry of firearm and Second Amendment-related bills introduced in the Nevada legislature have already generated plenty of controversy, according to The Las Vegas Review-Journal.

This could be the year of the gun, as Republicans, who are in the majority in the Legislature for the first time in decades, see a chance to enact Second Amendment measures supported by many of their constituents.

At least nine bills directly relating to firearms have either been introduced or are being drafted. And there are related measures, including a bill that would extend justifiable homicide to carjacking situations, and another that would allow foster parents who are in law enforcement or who have concealed weapons permits to carry loaded firearms.

First there was a dust-up between Senate Democrats and Republicans over a GOP-backed gun measure that includes domestic violence provisions that Democrats said fell short of what is needed.

Then Assemblywoman Michele Fiore, R-Las Vegas, generated some controversy over comments she made in a New York Times story about her bill to allow those with concealed weapons permits to carry their weapons on college campuses.

If these young, hot little girls on campus have a firearm, I wonder how many men will want to assault them, she said.

To read more from The Review-Journal click here:

Follow this link:
This could be year of the gun in Nevada