Charlie T Waite

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation is cautioning the public about a new “toolkit” for gun control lobbying groups to help them campaign for passage of so-called “red flag” laws that create “Extreme Risk Protection Orders” designed to take firearms from people based on allegations from family members, intimate partners or others, raising concerns about due process. The document was produced jointly by the Alliance for Gun Responsibility, the Giffords gun control group and the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence. “This document,” noted SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, “raises alarms because there’s a lot in it about taking someone’s guns, but only two paragraphs about returning firearms to their rightful owner.” He recalled an earlier 80-page guide, reportedly paid for by Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns, discovered during an Internet search, that provided strategies to anti-gun groups for mounting gun control campaigns in their communities. He co-authored a book about that experience titled “Dancing In Blood: Exposing the Gun Ban Lobby’s Playbook to Destroy Your Rights.” Gottlieb’s alarms were raised by the inclusion of a letter from a California sheriff’s official that referred to a May 2014 multiple murder in Isla Vista, California as “a shooting spree.” “Six victims in that rampage were stabbed or slashed to death,” Gottlieb recalled. “It also suggests the shooting occurred at the University of California, Santa Barbara campus, but it didn’t. The term ‘gun violence’ appears throughout, but there’s not a word about ‘knife violence’ nor any mention of the fact that the killer bought three firearms, all legally with background checks and waiting periods. “We’re all for preventing violent crimes and tragedies such as suicide,” he added, “but there are genuine civil rights and due process concerns related to the use of such orders to disarm someone, following a court hearing they may not even be aware of, before they have a chance to defend against any allegations. This guide asserts guns are ‘temporarily’ removed, but that is not really be the case in some instances. “This document calls itself a ‘toolkit’ for saving lives,” Gottlieb said, “but it talks more about taking guns from people than protecting their rights and means of self-defense. So far as we can tell, this is just another gun control strategy guide aimed at preventing gun ownership rather than preventing tragedies.”

Despite the bills to ban standard capacity magazines failing to meet the crossover deadline, anti-gun legislators are playing procedural games in an attempt to resurrect this legislation. They introduced House Bill 2947 with much of the same language as the previous bills plus a “buy-back” provision in order to make this an appropriations bill that is not subject to the same deadlines. Additionally, the title of the bill has been changed in an effort to limit amendments on the floor. Please contact your state Representative to express your disappointment in this stunt and ask them to OPPOSE HB 2947. House Bill 2947 bans the manufacture, possession, sale, transfer, etc. of magazines that hold more than fifteen rounds of ammunition. It appropriates funds for the State Patrol to conduct a “buy-back.” Such turn-in events serve as nothing more than propaganda for gun control advocates while failing to promote public safety in any measurable way. These limitations are strongly supported by the Governor and the Attorney General. So called “high capacity” magazines are in fact standard equipment for commonly-owned firearms that many Americans legally and effectively use for an entire range of legitimate purposes, such as self-defense or competition. Those who own non-compliant magazines prior to the ban are only allowed to possess them on their own property and in other limited instances such as at licensed shooting ranges or while hunting. Restricted magazines have to be transported unloaded and locked separately from firearms and stored at home locked, making them unavailable for self-defense. Again, please contact your state Representative and ask them to OPPOSE HB 2947.

Wednesday, February 19th, 2020 BELLEVUE, WA – Anti-gun billionaire Michael Bloomberg is continuing what appears to be an attempted “leveraged buyout” of the Second Amendment as Everytown for Gun Safety—the group he co-founded and bankrolled—has pledged to spend $8 million in Texas; just part of the $60 million that group has vowed to spend in order to elect anti-rights politicians this fall. That’s the observation from the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Former New York City Mayor Bloomberg, seeking to buy his way into the White House by running for president as a Democrat, has weaponized his vast wealth to buy an election. But CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb is reminding Bloomberg that the U.S. Constitution is not for sale. “Michael Bloomberg is spending a fortune on his Johnny-come-lately presidential campaign,” Gottlieb said, “but the one prize he really seems to want—a chance to turn America into his kingdom—will prove to be beyond even his financial reach. He’s tried to tell us what to eat, he’s tried to tell us how much soda we can drink and he has been unrelenting in his crusade to erase the Second Amendment from the Bill of Rights. “But Bloomberg can’t buy American liberty,” he continued, “because Americans aren’t willing to sell. He has amassed great wealth, but that doesn’t give him the right to say nobody else has any rights. And we’re certain that the more Bloomberg talks and the more he spends, the more people will realize this man should not be trusted with the future of the United States. “The Everytown Action Fund pledge to spend ‘at least’ $60 million to elect gun prohibitionists to public office at all levels should alarm, if not terrify, every American voter,” Gottlieb added. “This is the United States of America, not the United Kingdom of Bloomberg, and we should be wary of anybody willing to spend so much money in an effort to put people in office at all levels of government who are politically indebted to a single wealthy demagogue. “If Mike Bloomberg thinks he sees a pricetag on America,” Gottlieb concluded, “he shouldn’t run for election, he should run to the nearest doctor for an eye exam, because he’s seeing something that isn’t there.”

Now is the time to make your voice heard to protect your rights from Des Moines to D.C.! Mark your calendars to join your NRA for two important upcoming events: NRA-ILA Political Update Meeting on February 26th and Iowa Firearms Coalition Second Amendment Lobby Day on February 27th! Please click on the RSVP buttons below for more details and to RSVP: NRA-ILA Political Update Meeting Wednesday, February 26th 6:30 p.m.- 8:00 p.m. The Machine Shed 11151 Hickman Rd., Urbandale, IA 50322 Light food and beverage will be served Second Amendment Lobby Day at the Capitol Thursday, February 27th 10:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. Iowa State Capitol (Room 15 for briefing at 10:00 a.m.) 1007 E. Grand Blvd., Des Moines, IA 50319 Visit IFC on Facebook for more info: Iowa Firearms Coalition We hope you will join us in support of the Second Amendment at these important upcoming events!

DATE: February 19, 2020 TO: USF & NRA Members and Friends FROM: Marion P. Hammer USF Executive Director NRA Past President While Johns Hopkins is well known for their anti-gun leanings, people have long theorized that it has been Michael Bloomberg's money that has influenced the Johns Hopkins political gun control positions. Certainly, no one would have predicted that Johns Hopkins would actually release a study that concluded there is "NO EVIDENCE 'ASSAULT WEAPONS' REDUCE MASS SHOOTINGS." Billionaire Michael Bloomberg gave $300 Million Dollars to Johns Hopkins for the Bloomberg School of Public Health to help to reshape the national public health agenda by focusing on areas affecting public health -- including the subject of "gun violence." Bloomberg has now given over $1 Billion Dollars to Johns Hopkins. The Johns Hopkins Study discredits the "assault weapons" ban as a solution to mass shootings -- and that is surely not what Bloomberg thought his money was buying. It would probably be a safe bet to think that Michael Bloomberg is not a "happy camper" right now. Likewise, the Ban Assault Weapons NOW Committee (BAWN) must be unhappy. BAWN has been collecting signatures trying to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot in Florida to ban so-called "assault weapons." They must surely be shocked that to hear that a Johns Hopkins Study has now exposed the fallacy of BAWN's gun ban message. The following clips give more information: Clips Johns Hopkins Study: No Evidence ‘Assault Weapon’ Bans Reduce Mass Shootings (Breitbart) Bloomberg School Of Public Health: Assault Weapon Bans Don’t Reduce Mass Shootings (Breitbart) Bloomberg School of Public Health: No Evidence ‘Assault Weapon’ Bans Reduce Mass Shootings (DailyWire.com) Johns Hopkins Study: No Evidence ‘Assault Weapon’ Bans Reduce Mass Shootings By AWR HAWKINS Breitbart February 18, 2020 https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/02/18/johns-hopkins-study-no-evidence-assault-weapon-bans-reduce-mass-shootings/ A study released by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health declares there is no evidence “assault weapon” bans lead to a lower “incidence of fatal mass shootings.” Continued... Bloomberg School Of Public Health: Assault Weapon Bans Don’t Reduce Mass Shootings by Tom Knighton Breitbart February 19, 2020 https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2020/02/19/bans-dont-reduce-mass-shootings/ If you hear the name “Bloomberg,” you have every reason to believe there will be a profound anti-gun bias. After all, Michael Bloomberg has been the financial thorn in the side of the gun rights movement for years now. He’s funded a plethora of anti-gun candidates and organizations, so the name is justifiably synonymous with anti-gun bias. However, a recent study by the Bloomberg School of Public health had some findings that are quite inconvenient for candidate Bloomberg, to say nothing of the rest of the Democratic field. A new study from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health has found that there is no evidence that “assault weapon bans” have any impact on “the incidence of fatal mass shootings.”Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, named after notorious anti-Second Amendment activist billionaire Michael Bloomberg, released the results of its study last week. The study “did not find an independent association between assault weapon bans and the incidence of fatal mass shootings after controlling for the effects of bans on large-capacity magazines.” Continued.... Bloomberg School of Public Health: No Evidence ‘Assault Weapon’ Bans Reduce Mass Shootings By Ryan Saavedra DailyWire.com February 18, 2020 https://www.dailywire.com/news/bloomberg-school-of-public-health-no-evidence-assault-weapon-bans-reduce-mass-shootings A new study from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health has found that there is no evidence that “assault weapon bans” have any impact on “the incidence of fatal mass shootings.” Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, named after notorious anti-Second Amendment activist billionaire Michael Bloomberg, released the results of its study last week. The study “did not find an independent association between assault weapon bans and the incidence of fatal mass shootings after controlling for the effects of bans on large-capacity magazines.” The study, which analyzed fatal mass shootings in 45 states between 1984 and 2017, did find that “firearm purchaser licensing laws that require an in-person application or fingerprinting are associated with an estimated 56 percent fewer fatal mass shootings in states that have them.”…Continued.