How a Young Undergraduate's Mind Works or NOT?

Gun Rights Group Targets New York’s Nonresident Carry Restriction By Mark Chesnut On Nov. 21, the Firearms Policy Committee (FPC) filed a lawsuit against the State of New York, challenging the state’s ban on carrying firearms for residents of other states. In Shaffer v. Quattrone, the plaintiffs argue that the carry ban for lawful nonresidents, which restricts their constitutional right to carry within state boundaries, violates their Second Amendment-protected right to keep and bear arms. Plaintiffs in the case are individual FPC members Matthew Shaffer, Ralph Flynn, Peter Robbins and Charles Pompey, and the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York will hear the case. FPC President Brandon Combs stated in a news release announcing the action, “We will continue to teach Governor Hochul that the right to keep and bear arms doesn’t end at New York’s borders. We look forward to ending New York’s immoral ban on carry by non-residents and allowing millions of peaceable people to exercise their rights as they visit the Empire State.” In the complaint, FPC lawyers stated: “As a result of the ban, most non-residents who visit New York, whether occasionally or regularly, are ineligible to apply for any New York State firearms license, and so are prohibited from carrying or possessing loaded, operable firearms and semi-automatic rifles in New York. Thus, the Individual Plaintiffs, other similarly situated FPC members, and many other non-residents are barred from lawfully possessing or carrying a firearm in public for self-defense when they visit New York.” In the complaint, FPC also argued that the Second Amendment is the only constitutional right that government entities believe they can restrict to within state borders. “Citizens do not lose protection of their rights under the First Amendment’s speech or religion clauses when they cross state lines,” the complaint stated. “Nor do they lose their protections under the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures. Likewise, they do not surrender their Second Amendment protected rights when they travel outside their home state.: In the end, FPC is asking the court to rule that the law violates the U.S. Constitution and halt its enforcement. “In sum, New York’s Non-Resident Ban violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, as well as Article IV of the same—the Privileges and Immunities clause,” the complaint stated. “This Court should enter a judgment that declares the Ban unconstitutional and enjoins Defendants from rejecting firearms license applications from non-residents whose applications are otherwise proper.”

The QUESTION was asked...Why do gun owners not understand that I don’t like being around guns and they should be banned for public safety? Gregg Kielma Gun owners do understand some people don't like being around guns. However, it's our right to bear arms. Please stop trying to push your agenda on us. It won't work, says FFL-Firearms Instructor and Gunsmith Gregg Kielma. Kielma's thoughts along with a fellow first amendment friend contributed to this article. Americans are often mistaken about their own gun laws. The public safety you speak of is partly due to the gun owners. They are why your government can never turn too tyrannical ways and why you can never be invaded by land. remember Paul Revere? This is why you have a right to own guns. It’s to stop burglars, killers, rapist and people that want to do us harm and it’s also to prevent the government from turning tyrannical. Murders happen constantly in this country and the lack of guns just makes it easier. Knives, acid and pressurecooker bombs are used as well. Murder is unfortunately natural, and American murders are incredibly brutal. In conclusion, if your government is currently sending everyone to prison for outrageous Facebook posts and threats to mankind, you have gun owners to thank for this. If not shame on the federal and local governments. Why are anti-gun owners so incredibly smug that they don't think a disagreement towards themselves can even exist without ignorance? Is it just your smuggery that causes your smuggery or have you ever accomplished anything in your life? Most likely not. I bet your one of those loud liberals. You probably have purple hair and a constantly sour off face, blaming conservatives for everything. Don't travel to conservative cities and we won't visit your crappy liberal state. We don't want you. Nobody wants to travel to your shitty liberal cities anymore either, just to get robbed and/or raped or possible killed all while having to listen to unhygienic propaganda junkies barking unrequested opinions all day. We want to go to middle America or the Southeastern States where the men are strong and hardworking, where the women are, beautiful and not hopelessly brainwashed. It's awesome in these places with all the gun owners, fresh air and friendly people. Meanwhile your town is probably covered in turds and homeless people. Good luck wallowing in your misery. Smart up liberals.

Question: My house in CA got raided and 2 of my shotguns were confiscated by police because according to them they were stolen, but they aren't. How can I get my shotguns back in my possession? Gregg Kielma “Stolen” from who? Next time buy a firearm from a reputable dealer says FFL, Firearms Instructor and Gunsmith Gregg Kielma. Let’s look at this and think this through” Were you arrested for possession of stolen property? Let’s go with the first one: Did you or did you not purchase the firearms from a licensed firearms dealer? If so, then you should be able to locate a receipt or a credit slip or have the credit card issuer send you a copy of your monthly statement that you can then take back to the business and have them provide you with a record of the sale. If you purchased the firearms from a private party, then things are going to get dicey. Unless you are certain that the private party didn’t steal the weapons, nor bought them stolen, you have no idea about the provenance of those weapons. If that’s the case, you may want to get an attorney, and write off the weapons as they are unlikely to ever be returned to you Which is it? As to the second one: If you weren’t arrested for possession of stolen property, especially firearms, then that’s VERY odd. If, as you claim, your home was “raided” (I assume that you mean that a search warrant was served, and your home was subject to a search defined by the warrant) then even if the weapons weren’t what the police were seeking, your possession of them should have been grounds for you to have been arrested. And the police would have only discovered that the weapons were indeed reported stolen hours or days later when they inventoried and inspected the items seized from your home. They wouldn’t check them while in your home for a host of reasons. If they did discover that you were in possession of stolen goods, if you escaped arrest after the search warrant, you would be arrested NOW if you are foolish enough to try to reclaim stolen property. Obviously if the weapons have been reported as being stolen, then the person in whose possession they were found is likely a suspect in their theft. It would be unwise to attempt to reclaim the firearms until after you have spoken with an attorney and received advice from him or her. Unless you bought the firearms new or used from a licensed dealer, then I would suggest writing them off as a loss. You have no proof that they were not stolen at some point; and attempting to retrieve alleged stolen property is going to simply cause you more problems than you already seem to have. Either way, talk with an attorney before you proceed.

Could someone please show me the "right to a 30-shot clip" section of the Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights? Gregg Kielma and a Fellow Blogger There are a few points that need to be addressed here. And I would like to point that it’s amazing that you think that YOU know better and your opinions on the standard 30 round magazine should override The Constitution, The Bill of Rights, the Federal Courts, and hundreds of years of history. 1) Thank you for demonstrating your ignorance and ineptitude. You have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that you know absolutely nothing about firearms. How did you do this? It was your use of the word “clip” when addressing rifle magazines. They are NOT interchangeable. Especially when discussing 30 round mags. The clip is a device that helps you to load the magazine faster and with more precision. The magazine is a device that stores and loads ammunition into a repeating firearm. The AR15, for example, is a repeating firearm. While it only fires one round per pull of the trigger, cycling is done automatically. Hence the term “semi-automatic”. When a round is fired, the rifle automatically ejects the spent casing as the BCG slides backwards. When the spent casing is ejected, the spring inside the magazine pushes the next round upwards, and the BCG slides forward into position and is ready to fire. While it ejects and loads the next round automatically, it still only fires one round per pull of the trigger. The clip and the magazine are two entirely separate, entirely different. 2) 30 round magazines are NOT “high capacity”. The fact that YOU think it’s too much doesn’t really mean much of anything. The 30-round magazine is the standard capacity for the AR15. Your opinions on the matter are irrelevant. You aren’t owed an explanation. You aren’t owed anything, in fact, where it concerns others exercising their rights. Furthermore, you do not, in any way, shape, or form, have the right to tell others what they do and don’t “need” in relation to their firearms and how they choose to exercise their 2nd amendment rights. Your rights do not give you the right to infringe on the rights of others. You’re not entitled to a damned thing. 3) Where 30 round magazines come into play concerning the 2nd amendment. You seem to be forgetting the intention behind the 2nd. The point is ensuring that the people retain their power in the face of a federal government. Protecting themselves, their families, their properties, their rights, and everything this nation stands for, as in a final line of defense against tyranny and invaders. The ability to defend against criminals and oppression. In the 2008 case District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court held that the "Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within and without the home." The militia clause is just as relevant today as it was back then. But here is the most important part. The fact that we have a standing army does not negate the importance of the 2nd amendment. It’s the protections afforded through the 2nd amendment that ensure that at the end of the day when all else has failed, our people retain the ability to prevent and defend against tyrannical oppression. Like I said, it’s the 2nd amendment that ensures the people have a check against the federal government - that the power is balanced in such a way that the power remains with us. And even then, our founders didn’t take it too far. It’s why we are a Constitutional Republic, not a straight democracy. Because they protected our rights not just from the possibility of tyranny and oppression, but also protected our rights from mob rule. They ensured that a majority is irrelevant when it concerns our rights - not even a majority has the power to strip away and infringe upon a minority. They ensured that it was understood that absolutely NOTHING is more important than the individual’s rights. And the 30-round magazine? It’s protected by the 2nd amendment through the intent of the amendment. Even California’s own Federal 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stuck down the state’s ban on magazines more than 10 rounds - because it was a blatant violation of the 2nd amendment. The panel of judges found that such firearm magazines are protected arms under the Second Amendment and are not "unusual arms" that would fall outside its scope. Like I already pointed out? They aren’t “high capacity” magazines. The 30-round magazine is the standard magazine for the AR15 and other similar sport rifle platforms. I could understand calling a 30-round magazine “high capacity” in relation to it being a 30-round mag for a 9mm pistol - sure. But for rifles? That’s not true at all - nor is it unusual. Many tube-fed rifles hold between 22 and 30 rounds. Bans against the standard capacity 30 round magazine criminalizes the possession of half of all magazines in America today. It makes unlawful magazines that are commonly used even in handguns by law-abiding citizens for self-defense! A ban on the standard 30 round AR15 magazine substantially burdens the core right of self-defense guaranteed to the people under the Second Amendment - not to mention the people’s ability to stand against tyranny and oppression. 4) The AR15 is protected by the Constitution. It’s literally the MOST popularly owned rifle in America today. 10s of millions of these firearms are owned by the people. The right to keep and bear arms? It’s a right, regardless of the individual’s intention where it concerns the militia. The militia? It’s the people of the United States as a whole. The people, the unorganized militia consisting of the people of the United States as a whole? The weapons brought to bear are personally owned weapons. This is just as true today as it was when the people got together and revolted against the British during the Revolutionary War. The Supreme Court has been clear on the matter. District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 624-25, 627-28 (2008). Heller’s reasoning is sound and persuasive and begins with the Second Amendment’s text: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” The Supreme Court ruled that the “prefatory clause,” concerning a Militia and the security of a free State, simply reflects the historical justification for the amendment, but does not modify the “operative clause” concerning the right to keep and bear Arms. As to the operative clause, the Supreme Court found it “guarantee[s] the individual right to possess and carry weapons in common use for lawful purposes like self-defense.” Guess what - the AR15, and its standard 30- round magazine are in common use today. And this is on top of the fact that the unorganized militia still exists to this day as the whole body of the people. The AR15 platform is protected. The rifle is the most owned by the people. The rifle is the most popular rifle in the nation today. Estimates put the number of AR15s owned by private citizens over 16 million as of 2018. The modern sporting rifle (including the AR15 platform) is the most common and popular for a reason. Since our country’s founding, civilian owned sporting rifles evolved alongside military platforms. The AR15 isn’t unusual in this instance for that. No, instead, the AR15 is just the next in line following that tradition. They are my favorite because they are good rifles. Their accuracy, reliability, ruggedness, and versatility serve every facet of firearm ownership. Everything from sport and target shooting, self-defense, hunting, competition, and even hobbyists are served through the AR15. The AR15 is a true “all-weather” platform. These weapons have been popular, and in circulation, since the 1960s. Absolutely NOTHING is more important than the rights of the people. Attempts to ban the AR15, attempts to ban its standard capacity 30 round magazine… these things are unconstitutional. Your ignorance and fear? Those aren’t justifications for infringing on the rights of 330 million US citizens. Your rights don’t give you the right to infringe on the rights of others, and you don’t HAVE a right to “not be afraid”. Your fear is your problem, it’s a personal problem - it’s not OUR problem. Your rights don’t give you the right to tell others how they will, or won’t, exercise their rights. And you certainly don’t have any right to determine other people’s “needs.” And we don’t have to provide you with any sort of justification. It’s my right. That’s all the justification I, and every other AR15 owner, will EVER need.

If the Law Enforcement comes to my house and I don't answer the door what can happen? If the Police want into your home or business, they will get in, warrant or not. My suggestion, if they come knocking, answer the door but do not open the door. Say nothing but, “What do you want.” Be polite, at this point things are not looking good for you. If they say they have a warrant, they will break into your house before they show you the warrant (they may claim they thought you were destroying evidence). Law Enforcment Comes In They may use false pretenses and distort the truth to fit a narrative, to the judge or judges to get the warrant. They may manufacture an anonymous tip and start fishing through your drawers). If they say they want to talk to you, tell them you do not want to talk to them and answer no questions (nothing you say will stop them from asking questions. Only misinformed people answer questions a police officer asks. They may use your answer to make you look guilty, even if you have not done anything illegal). If they want to look in your house, say, “NO!” then call a lawyer, you are going to need one. The police don’t care for people that exercise their 4th Amendment Right to Searches and Seizures. Be smart, polite, keep your hands where they can see the…then say nothing. Next, invoke your 5th Amendment Right to remain silent, then do just that, say nothing, until you have legal representation.

Can off-duty police carry guns at Disney World? From a Retired Law Enforcement Office Almost 30 years ago, my (now late) wife and I visited Disneyland. I had heard that Disney Security would accommodate a request for a tour if the request was from a law enforcement officer. Both my wife and I qualified, and we were told to ask for security personnel at the Guest Relations desk just inside the main entrance to the park. We were escorted “backstage,” as Disney likes to call it, by a uniformed security officer. As we entered the portal, the security officer said, “Through the looking glass…” The security manager for that day gave us a brief tour of their facilities and described the operation, which I found to be fascinating. He asked that I not discuss specifics with other people, and I have continued to honor that request. One topic I can share is Disney’s policy on firearms in the park. They do their best to make Disney property as firearms-free as they can. On-duty officers on official business are encouraged to allow Disney Security to locate and bring in anyone that law enforcement might be looking for. They have long-standing operational agreements with local law enforcement, and the cops know that Disney Security is very good at delivering people on request, without a disturbance, and usually without anyone else even noticing. They can’t stop police on official business from entering the park with their firearms, but they seldom have to be concerned about that. If you go to Disney World, you will see the occasional uniformed deputy sheriff or Florida Highway Patrol trooper patrolling the property. Most of these are off duty with regard to their regular law enforcement employers and are being paid an hourly rate by Disney. They will be in uncontrolled access areas like Disney Springs (a mostly retail and restaurant area on Disney property) and on the roads connecting the parks and hotels. They seldom enter the parks. Off duty police and concealed weapon permit carriers are a different story. If Disney finds a guest carrying a gun, they are asked to secure the gun with Disney Security for pickup on leaving the park, or to leave the park entirely. At Disney World, this would apply to the entire resort, including hotels and water parks. People who are adamant about keeping their firearm are escorted out and told not to return. If they do, they are subject to arrest for trespassing. There was an aspect to our meeting with the security manager that he didn’t know about. While my wife and I were enjoying his hospitality in the security office, my wife (a university police officer) was wearing a waist bag containing a 9mm pistol and two reload magazines. I had a .38 Special revolver strapped to my ankle. He never spotted either weapon. We felt pretty secure inside the park, but the walk between our offsite hotel and Disneyland proper was a bit dicer. There are lots of bad folks in the area who prey on the tourists. I’ve been to Disney World a couple of times since then. Both times, I stayed at Disney property I left my gun at home.

FBI Report “The Active Shooter” Gregg Kielma A new report by the FBI documenting where "active shooter incidents" happened in the U.S. in 2023 reveals that open spaces – which include roads, neighborhoods, parks and outdoor venues – are the places where victims are most likely to be targeted. Federal investigators say there were 48 active shooter incidents in total last year across 26 states, resulting in 105 deaths and 139 injuries. California – which has some of the toughest gun control laws in the country – led the way with eight incidents, followed by Texas and Washington state, each with four. The FBI says it defines an active shooter as "one or more individuals actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area." The deadliest shooting unfolded on Oct. 25, when 18 people were killed by a gunman at a bowling alley and bar in Lewiston, Maine, before he was found dead two days later from a self-inflicted gunshot wound. Of the 49 shooters involved in 2023’s incidents, all of them were males except one who identified as both female and transgender, according to the FBI. The perpetrators were between the ages of 17 and 72 years old, and 43 handguns were used in the attacks, followed by 16 rifles and one shotgun. The FBI says the release of the report Monday is to "provide an overview of active shooter incidents to help law enforcement, other first responders, and the public better understand the levels of threats associated with active shooter incidents." "In 2023, the FBI designated 48 shootings as active shooter incidents. Although incidents decreased by 4% from 2022 (50 incidents), the number of active shooter incidents increased 60% since 2019 (30 incidents)," it also said. "The FBI designated 229 active shooter incidents from 2019–2023. This represents an 89% increase in active shooter incidents (121) from the previous five-year period (2014–2018)."

Gallup Poll: Gun Ownership By Demographics Are Women Leading The Charge? A recent Gallup poll found more Republican women are becoming gun owners than before, while gun ownership among Democratic-leaning men declines. According to the Gallup survey published Thursday, the percentage of Republican female gun owners has increased from 19% from 2007-2012 to 33% from 2019-2024. Twenty-two percent of Republican women surveyed in 2013-2018 told Gallup they owned guns, meaning there has been a 50% increase in gun ownership among conservative women since. Meanwhile, the rate has fallen seven percentage points among Democratic men, to 29%, and is down five points among independent men, to 39%," Gallup added. "Republican men remain the most likely gun owners among gender and party identification subgroups, at 60%." The rate of gun ownership nationwide is still around 30%, Gallup noted, but the number "masks a sharp increase in ownership among Republican women offsetting declines among Democratic and independent men. Meanwhile, ownership remains high among Republican men but is relatively scarce among Democratic and independent women." Men are still generally more likely to own guns than women, and the study concluded that gun ownership "may be influenced by one’s political beliefs more than in the past, likely because of the salience of the gun issue in political campaigns and political culture today." Vice President Kamala Harris recently announced she owns a gun, prompting surprise across the country, but Republican women were not necessarily wooed by the admission. I have a Glock, and I’ve had it for quite some time," Harris said during a "60 Minutes" interview. Earlier in November, Fox News Digital spoke with female gun owners who reacted to the statement, calling it "smokescreen campaign rhetoric." "I do not believe that she is a gun owner that practices and supports our right to protect ourselves," Jane Milhans, a gun instructor, said. When Kamala Harris started talking about owning a Glock, I felt nothing," Amara Barnes, founder of the Women Gun Owners Association of America, told Fox News Digital. "We all realize that it's pandering and virtue signaling to the right, and she's hoping that we're too dumb not to realize that she is completely anti-gun." Fox News Digital's Hannah Ray Lambert contributed to this report. Andrea Margolis is a writer for Fox News Digital and Fox Business. Readers can send story tips to andrea.margolis@fox.com.

Where can I buy guns with without an FFL? Gregg Kielma Instructor-FFL-Gunsmith 11/23/24 You don’t need an FFL to buy a gun, however, to purchase a firearm legally, go to a reputable firearms dealer who is an FFL. He’ll find the right gun and holster for you, do the background check and make sure it’s a legal purchase. Some Chose Other Ways If you chose you can go, see your neighborhood thug/killer/thief! Note: The Good men and women of the ATF will be looking for you along with your local law enforcement. Please avoid this at all costs if you're a law-abiding citizen. Most of these "transactions" are committed by convicted felons who will sooner or later be caught and do the time for the crime. The thug/killer/thief may have a selection of firearms, handgun, long guns you name it, however, most are junk, and not safe or just plain dangerous. The thug/killer/thief can also provide ammo, body armor, and anything you need to make your drive, I mean, shooting experience a memorable occasion. The thug/killer/thief can usually be found sitting on street corners with his/hers signature red shopping cart, abandoned buildings, at guns shows or your neighborhood drug den. Note: this is highly discouraged for several reasons: • Gun is most likely stolen. Gun could be part of a "straw" deal. • Gun may have been used in a crime or a death. • Serial number may have been removed or altered. • You take out your cash to pay and you get robbed or killed. • The cost will be 5 to 10x’s more. • If caught with this firearm, you could be going to jail. These are very bad people to do “business with. My advice, have no domestic violence charges, be a convicted felon, or have a drug problem to include not having medical marijuana card. Very simple to do it right, safely and legally.