Burn the Flag!

States Are Depriving Innocent People of Their Second Amendment Rights - "Red flag" laws leave gun owners defenseless. [More]

Don't tell me. Tell David French, David Kopel and Amy Swearer.

And sorry, Dave Workman: I know what you're saying, but they're not "a great idea on paper," either.

A Butcher's Dozen

11 Incidents in Which Lawful Gun Owners Made a Difference [More]

"Lawful" as opposed to "peaceable," Telling.

I guess these guys would have deserved whatever they got.

Just think how these numbers can be reduced when Amy Swearer-endorsed "gun laws" become more commonplace!

[Via Michael G]

Playing TAPS for the Constitution

Don’t Exploit the COVID-19 Emergency to Push the Anti-Gun TAPS Act [More]

More pushback against sterile bee queen Amy Swearer and her Conservative, Inc. drones.

I just received more links than I know what to do with, so with the caveat that I may or may nor have even clicked on some of these,  let alone read them to see if I'm 100% with 'em, here ya go:

• Firearms Policy Conference HR 838
• Firearms Policy Conference TAPS
• Tenth Amendment Center
• Big League Politics
• GOA
• Crime Prevention Resource Center
• The Federalist Society
• The National Interest
• Ricochet

And you could always just go here and here...

[Via Felix B]

Their Gal in the Gun Rights Camp

Sadly, not only does the Heritage Foundation appear not to have analyzed those bills, this recent paper appears to be nothing but a recitation of Bloomberg/Gifford’s talking points. [More]

But...but...but lipstick...

Go away, Amy Swearer.

[Via Mack H]

Why Give an Inch?

 Heritage Foundation Legal Fellow Amy Swearer deftly dodges Dem Sen. Dick Durbin’s attempts to shut her up on Chicago gun violence [More]

What, did she offer him more "compromises"?

The guy just tried to shut her up to keep the truth from coming out. Only evil people hiding their real intentions do that. What does it take for some to realize any concession only removes another barrier to the end goal?

[Via bondmen]

Only the Beginning, Only Just the Start

Infringing on gun rights just the beginning, says analyst [More]

True dat.

Historically, death camps follow.

That's why you don't give them an inch, ever, sterile bee queens Amy Swearer and the Heritage Foundation.

[Via Mack H]

You're Infringing All Wrong!

New Mexico Gets Its Red Flag Law Wrong [More]

As opposed to Amy Swearer Brand Gun Control ^TM, which gets it right?

I guess when you have Heritage and Koch backing, you move to the front of the influence line.

[Via Mack H]

Playing TAPS for Freedom

At its core, the legislation is about taking the same strategies that we know work at a federal level to prevent targeted mass violence... [More]

What would those be?

And who decided Amy Swearer should be an "influencer"?

[Via Michael G]

'Lawful' Self-Defense

Meanwhile, several Illinois residents are suing the state over significant—and arguably illegal—delays in processing Firearm Owner Identification cards, known as FOIDs. [More]

What's arguable? That definitely violates "shall not be infringed" as mandated in "the supreme Law of the Land."

Speaking of which, ol' Amy Swearer here sure uses "law-abiding" and "lawful" a lot. That leaves those of us who will not comply with disarmament edicts out in the cold. 

It's great hearing DGU stories. My main concern here is for those rendered defenseless by those due process-eviscerating "red flag laws" she advocates. 

[Via Michael G]

I Got Your 'Rightful Cry' Right Here

The rightful cry of Second Amendment advocates has long been that laws should keep guns out of the hands of criminals or those who are bent on violence, and refrain from broadly punishing law-abiding Americans who do not pose a risk to themselves or others. [More]

No, that's been the cry of preemptive surrenderers like Amy Swearer. That she is being given a prominent seat at the table speaks more to manipulation by connected sellouts than anything else. I'd never even heard of her until recently-- now she's the go-to authority for congressional testimony and supposedly representing gun owner interests? Who made that call?

There are no "good" Intolerable Acts. And how would one go about narrowly "punishing law-abiding Americans who do not pose a risk"?

More to the point, what's she going to talk Republicans into surrendering next?

Anyone too dangerous to be trusted with a gun is too dangerous to be trusted without a custodian. And making that determination will require real due process.

Noting who fills her feed bag, I'm with Mr. Jinx.

[Via Mack H]