1. Gun Rights …by Raquel Okyay

2. The notion that a well-regulated militia refers to state governments having the right to arm a military force rather than the individual having the right to arm themselves is COMPLETELY FALSE. There is no basis in either constitutional history or in American jurisprudence. The right to bear arms is an individual right, not a collective one. At the time of the Constitution the word militia did not refer to a select group of individuals like the National Guard. It referred to every able-bodied man in each state. Even under current law, this is still the case. [U.S. Code, Title 10 section 31] [ Source: Alan M. Gottlieb, Chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and Founder of the Second Amendment Foundation.]

3. District of Columbia v. Heller, 2008 decision that protects an individuals right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawfully purposes, such as self-defense within the home. McDonald v. Chicago, 2010 decision that determined the right of an individual to "keep and bear arms" is incorporated by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and applies to the states The Due Process Clause prohibits state and local governments from depriving persons of life, liberty, or property without legislative authorization. This clause recognizes substantive and procedural requirements that state laws must satisfy. [ Source: Wikipedia] Relevant Second Amendment U.S. Supreme Court Cases

4. N.Y.S. passed and signed into law in Jan. 2013 the SAFE Act which has been heavily criticized for being ill-concevied and rushed. Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo used a procedural trick (Message of Necessity) to pass the law in the late evening without public impact and little legislative input within 48 hours. People are reacting through grassroots activism. NYSR&PA, SCOPE, local tea party groups, legislators, sheriffs assoc., reciprical repeal bills in the states senate and assembly. Various peaceful rallies at the Capital in Albany have produced about 2500 to 10,000 participants. NEW YORK STATE

5. Lawsuit (gun rights groups, gun dealers, gun makers, concerned citizens) vs. State of New York (some of the arguments). Firearms banned in the law are commonly and lawfully possessed. Heller protects an individuals right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes. Opponents are using the term assault weapon as a propaganda tool to mean whatever they want it to mean having nothing to do with the original meaning. The main feature of a military-type weapons is a fully automatic that keeps firing; NONE of the semi-automatic firearms banned do that. Features such as stock shape, pistol grip, and adjustable shoulder strap are not sufficient reasons for designating a firearm an assault weapon. [Status: Recent ruling that struck down the magazine capacity limit, but upheld the rest of the SAFE Act. Both sides are in process of appealing. The case is expected to be decided at the SCOTUS level.] [Source: Stephen P. Halbrook PhD, a 2 nd Amendment legal scholar and prevailing counselor in four reported cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.] N.Y.S. Rifle & Pistol Assoc. et al. v. The State of New York

6. People were frustrated that they didnt get a chance to be heard or were ignored last year when 3 anti-gun laws came to a rushed, partisan vote. It is that frustration that led to the recall of 2 sitting Democrat senators (John Morse and Angela Giron) and one Democrat senator who resigned before the recall election could happen. Repeal efforts in the state legislature died in Democrat-controlled committees. The provision of the law that prohibits private citizens from purchasing ammunition above 15 rounds makes an exception for law enforcement. The Bill of Rights isnt meant to protect certain groups at the behest of everyone else. Thats unconstitutional in itself. Currently, Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, a state-based gun lobby, with 100s of 1000s of members is working on flipping majorities to Republican in both chambers. [Source: Rep. Chris Holbert (R. – Parker) sponsor of a bill that would repeal the law that limits magazine sales to no more than 15 rounds.] COLORADO

7. 54 out of 62 Colorado sheriffs together with retired law enforcement, FFL dealers, disabled individuals, and concerned citizens filed a complaint against the governor for violations of the 2 nd and 14 th Amendment. A ban on high-capacity magazines and required background checks for the private sale and transfer of firearms are the 2 components of the legislation being targeted in the lawsuit. The law basically outlawed all magazines not just ones that can hold more than 15 rounds, because any magazine that can be readably converted to hold more than 15 rounds is illegal – which is just about every single magazine made. The law says if a firearm with a magazine attachment was purchased after July 1 it would be a crime; but if that same firearm was purchased before July 1 it is a grandfathered magazine and not considered a crime. When neither the public nor law enforcement can distinguish between 2 magazines that are identical the law is unenforceable. [Source: Weld County Sheriff John B. Cooke.] [Update: Judge reduced sheriff/plaintiff count to 11 in an individual capacity only. This matter is expected to be decided at SCOTUS level.] Weld County Sheriff John B. Cooke et al. v. Gov. John W. Hickenlooper, Jr.

8. NSSF sued the state of California for enacting microstamping laws that deny citizens their 2 nd Amendment rights. In 2007 the Unsafe Handgun Act was signed into law by then-governor Arnold A. Schwarzenegger with a provision to implement microstamping on all newly developed semi-automatic pistols. Scholarly publications and a number of relevant studies demonstrate that the technology is premature, should not be mandated, and needs further study. There is no manufacturing company in the country that is making microstamping-capacity firearms. Todays technology does not allow a manufacturer to consistently allot the mandated information onto the cartridge case. Indentations to imprint these characters are 1/25 th the thickness of a human hair and can be removed with an emery board. National Shooting Sports Foundation v. The State of California

9. It is unlawful to force a company to comply with a law that is impossible to comply with. U.S.-based leader in firearm manufacturing and design Smith & Wesson issued a statement indicating it does not and will not include microstamping in its firearms. Over time the law becomes a gun ban as more and more manufacturers who have fewer and fewer firearms stop selling handguns to Californias consumers who only get to buy the old ones. When manufactures are prevented from making newer and better products, consumers are denied the opportunity to buy a safer, more reliable, and more durable firearm. [Source: Senior Vice President Lawrence G. Keane and general counsel to NSSF the trade assoc. for the firearms industry.] NSSF et al. v. State of California (continued)

10. AG Bondi and Gov. Scott prosecuted Liberty County Sheriff Nick Finch citing official misconduct – for taking a stand in defense of the 2 nd Amendment. After a man was arrested in Liberty County for carrying a concealed firearm without a permit Sheriff Finch, who did not see this as an issue, released him. When the deputy who made the arrest complained to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and the AGs office, Bondi used her discretion to have Finch removed as sheriff. Finch was vindicated by a six-member jury and reinstated as sheriff in early November. [Source: Adrian Wyllie the 2014 gubernatorial candidate from the Libertarian Party, the third largest political party in the state.] Removal of Liberty County Sheriff Nick Finch by Governor and AGs Office

11. THE END