TX CHURCH SHOOTING PROVES GOOD GUYS WITH GUNS PROTECT SOFT TARGETS

BELLEVUE, WA – The tragic church shooting Sunday in White Settlement, Texas in which church members fatally shot the gunman provides more evidence that good guys with guns are necessary to stop bad guys, and that armed citizens can protect soft targets, the Second Amendment Foundation said today.

“This horrible shooting was live streamed, and shows how the killer was taken down within a few seconds of firing the first shot,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “If one pays attention to the video, it appears that at least six and possibly seven members of the congregation drew sidearms to defend their fellow church members, and at least one member identified in published reports as part of the church security team fired a shot that took the gunman down.”

Gottlieb, co-author of the book, “Good Guys With Guns,” expressed sorrow that two members of the congregation were killed.

“Regrettably,” he stated, “there were casualties among the church goers, but in the flash of seconds, it is obvious that many more lives were saved by the quick action of a church member who was fortunately armed as a member of the church security team. Had it not been for his quick action and accurate shooting, this could have been much, much worse.”

Texas law allows church goers to be armed, a fact Gottlieb cited as crucial to saving lives.

“The fact that so many other church members were also armed, and did not open fire, demonstrates how responsibly armed citizens can perform in an emergency,” Gottlieb observed. “The video belies the oft-repeated myth that armed citizens are irresponsible and even dangerous to one another, which is something we address in ‘Good Guys With Guns’.”

“We don’t know what motivates someone to open fire on a peaceful church congregation,” Gottlieb said. “But thanks to the video, we know what stops them.”

Second Amendment Foundation, January 2020

 

Trump Administration Publishes Historic Rulemaking to Modernize America’s Firearm Export Regime

On Jan. 23, the Trump administration published rules that will be a boon to the United States firearms industry and all who utilize its products. The new regulations will become effective March 9, 2020.

The rules update America’s regulatory regime for the export of firearms, as well as related parts, components, and accessories. They are the result of an intensive, years-long interagency review process, as well as consideration of thousands of public comments.

The changes move firearm-related commerce from an antiquated Cold War paradigm into the modern era of broader international trade and access to information.

No more will small, non-exporting businesses – including gunsmiths – be caught up in an expansive regulatory scheme for manufacturers of “munitions” and their parts that requires a $2,250 annual registration fee with U.S. State Department.

Americans will again be free to publish most technical information about firearms and ammunition – including on the publicly-accessible Internet – without fear of accidentally running afoul of State Department restrictions that could land them in federal prison.

And Americans temporarily traveling overseas with their own guns and ammunition won’t have to register them in a government database or deal with the complexities of completing lengthy forms in commercial exporting software.

Meanwhile, commercial exporters of non-military grade firearms and ammunition will have fewer fees to pay and will benefit from a more flexible, business-oriented regulatory environment. This will enhance their competitiveness in global markets and bring business and jobs that might have gone to unscrupulous foreign companies back to America, which will continue to have unrivaled oversight of its domestic and international arms trade.

To be clear, actual exports of firearms and ammunition will still require authorization by the federal government, including through licenses issued after interagency review to ensure the materiel will not fall into the wrong hands when it leaves the country. End users of the guns in the countries of destination will also remain subject to U.S. monitoring.

But guns and ammunition that can be readily obtained at big box retailers in the U.S. will no longer be treated for export purposes as if they were in the same “inherently military” category as missiles, warheads, howitzers, or other true weapons of war.

This change will additionally ensure that more resources are available to monitor transfers and movement of truly sensitive and consequential military equipment and technology.

The result is an overall win for American business, freedom, and the security of the Free World.  

Needless to say, however, those who would ban firearms completely are already seeking to undermine the changes. Attorneys general from a number of anti-gun states have filed suit in a federal district court in Seattle, Wash., falsely alleging the rule changes would allow for the unregulated proliferation of so-called “3D-printed weapons.” Numerous media outlets have uncritically parroted these baseless claims.

In truth, the final versions of the rules specifically address this concern and will treat any computer code allowing for the automatic printing or milling of a firearm as a regulated item requiring prior authorization before being published on the Internet or released to any foreign national.

This latest action is just one more example of how President Trump continues to move forward with his positive agenda to protect the right to keep and bear arms and the businesses that comprise America’s firearms industry. American manufacturing, as well as lawful firearm ownership at home and abroad stand to make big gains under the president’s export reform initiative.

NRA-ILA, January 27, 2020 

 

How Media Misinformation About Mass Murderers is Harming Us

Having failed for decades to induce the voting public to back its draconian and unconstitutional agenda, the American gun-control movement has hit upon a pernicious alternative to persuasion and political argument: Fear.

To accomplish their goals of more gun bans and restrictions, gun-control groups are now focused on trying to convince Americans of things that are simply not true. Many in the mainstream media are helping them do this by printing their disinformation with few questions asked.

Thus, it has to come pass that many voters believe the number of crimes committed with firearms has risen over the last 30 years; they believe this even though, in fact, the number has fallen dramatically. This overall decline has occurred as the number of guns in private hands has more than doubled, as the number of concealed carriers has risen to around 20 million and as the laws governing the sale, ownership and use of firearms have been loosened almost everywhere.

Thus, many voters falsely believe that America’s schools were more dangerous in 2019 than they were in 1999, even though the opposite is the case.

Plus, many voters now think mass shootings—which, although devastating, remain mercifully rare—are happening every single day in the United States.

This lattermost lie—that mass shootings are ubiquitous rather than unusual—has gained particular currency since the launch, in 2013, of a shameless propaganda outlet named the “Gun Violence Archive” (GVA). The purpose of this so-called archive is to massively overstate the number of mass shootings and to launder that overstatement through media outlets that favor more gun-control laws.

Unfortunately, the GVA has been somewhat successful in its aim—that success has had disastrous consequences not only for the public’s conception of reality but also for public policy. On the basis of the GVA’s preposterous numbers, the press has been busy convincing children and parents that America’s public schools resemble the O.K. Corral; the mainstream media pushes this narrative even though, in fact, the U.S. is more peaceful than it has been in living memory.

To understand the extraordinary scale of the GVA’s dishonesty, consider that, for the year 2015, it counted 335 mass shootings. The FBI, in contrast, counted six that year. The open-source index kept by the left-leaning Mother Jones magazine counted just seven (and they counted the San Bernardino terrorist attack). As Mark Follman noted in The New York Times in 2015, the number of mass shootings since 1982 was then 73—which means that, by his count, there had been five times fewer incidents over the preceding 33 years than the GVA was claiming had occurred in a single year. In the U.S., a person is about as likely to die in a mass shooting as to be struck by lightning, but one would not know this from listening to the press.

The GVA arrives at its bloated figures by conflating a whole host of different sorts of crimes and pushing them into the same category, which not only gives Americans a false sense of reality—one does not think about a gang fight between criminals being a “mass shooting”—but also makes it much harder to construct countermeasures.

Clearly, not all violence is the same, which is why fighting gangs requires a different approach than does reducing domestic violence; also, preventing robberies necessitates a different set of legal tools than inhibiting terrorism.

By pretending that the rarest and most intractable problem in the U.S. is representative of all the others, the GVA and the mainstream media aren’t helping to solve the problem, but are, in fact, getting in the way. They aren’t just misinforming the public, but are actually hindering a rational search for solutions.

By Charles C.W. Cooke – Sunday, January 26, 2020, NRA America’s 1st Freedom

 

GOAL Post 2020-3   By Joe Waldren

Legislative Update from Olympia                                           17 January 2020

I was very pleased to see the turn-out at the rally in Olympia last Friday. But Monday’s turn-out in Richmond, Virginia set a record for public, overt, armed support of the Second Amendment. Virginia State Police say more than 22,000 participants showed up, many of them from other heavily-populated eastern seaboard state. While no one inside the fenced “secure” area was armed, thousands of citizens on the public areas outside were, with everything from concealed carry handguns to every kind of “assault weapon” available – including one guy with a .50 caliber “sniper rifle.” In reaction, the Virginia legislature the next day passed a “red flag” protective order bill out of committee and they are planning to repeal The Old Dominion state’s CPL reciprocity law. The main point is that despite the hysteria generated by Governor “wet panties” Northam and the media, not a shot was fired. One arrest – of a woman violating the “no masks” order, probably Miss Antifa.

I mentioned previously that bills that did not pass out of the legislature during last year’s session were still available for action. Well, on Tuesday the House Rules Committee pulled HB 1010 (Senn D-41, WSP destruction of seized/forfeited firearms) and sent it to the House floor for a vote. Yesterday, the House passed it on a pretty much straight party-line vote. That side-steps half of the process in getting a bill passed. It now goes to Senate Law & Justice for their action. Keep in mind there are more than a dozen other “last year’s” bills they could do this with, avoiding public hearings until they get to the other side. It’s basically a fast-track for bills, good or bad. Don’t count on good (pro-gun) bills being fast-tracked!.

A few new gun bills were filed this week. Again in interests of keeping list congestion down, I’m only tracking those bills that are being acted on this session.

Now that several gun bills have had public hearings, committees are beginning to take votes on them in executive sessions. Four gun-related bills passed out of Senate Law & Justice: 6077 (hi-cap magazine ban), 6288 (violence prevention office), 6294 (CPL training mandate) and 6406 (firearm theft). SB 6288 (Office of gun violence prevention) was sent to Ways & Means to identify funding sources. 6077, 6294 and 6406 were sent to Senate Rules awaiting a floor vote of the full Senage.

Gun bills have been the focus of legislative activity last week, but despair not – a few more will be heard this week! House Civil Rights & Judiciary will conduct a public hearing on Wednesday, 29 January on House Bills 2305 (Doglio D-22, expands prohibition on possessing firearms for subjects of restraining orders), 2622 (Kilduff D-28, failure to surrender weapons after receipt of a restraining/protection order), and 2623 (Walen D-48, added firearm prohibitions for persons convicted of certain offenses, apparently dealing with animal cruelty).

BILL STATUS/GOAL POSITION:

HB 1010   WSP destruction of firearms,   Senn (D-41), S. L&J,   OPPOSE

HB 1365   CPL training requirement,   Tharinger (D-24), H. CR&J, OPPOSE

HB 1374   Repeals state preemption of gun laws,   Macri (D-43), H. CR&J, OPPOSE

HB 1068   Magazine restrictions,   Valdez (D-43), H. CR&J,   OPPOSE

HB 1671   Confiscation of firearms,   Dolan (D-22), H. CR&J, NEUTRAL

HB 2196   Raise standard for issue of a “red flag” order,   Walsh (R-19), HG. CR&J,   SUPPORT

HB 2202   Exempts law enforcement from a/w training ,   Klippert (R-8), H.PubSaf,   OPPOSE

HB 2240   Bans high capacity magazines,   Valdez (D-43),   H. CR&J, OPPOSE

HB 2241   Bans assault weapons and magazines,   Peterson (D-21), H. CR&J, OPPOSE

HB 2305   Expands firearm prohibition re: protection orders,   Doglio (D-22), H. CR&J,   OPPOSE

HB 2467   Centralized firearm background checks,   Hansen (D-23), H. CR&J,   NEUTRAL

HB 2519   Ammunition background checks ,   Walen (D-48), H. CR&J,   OPPOSE

HB 2555   Background checks for “other” firearms,   Goodman (D-45), H. CR&J,   OPPOSE

HB 2622   Court order non-compliance, firearm surrender,   Kilduff (D-28), H. CR&J, OPPOSE

HB 2623   Firearm prohibition, certain offenses,   Walen (D-48), H. CR&J,   OPPOSE

HB 2820   Firearms forfeiture/DV court order (correction),   KLippert (R-8), H. CR&J,   NEUTRAL

SB 5434   Expands gun free zones to parks and day cares,   Wilson, C (D-30), S. L&J,   OPPOSE

SB 6076   Bans assault weapons and hi cap magazines,   Kuderer (D-48), S. L&J,   OPPOSE

SB 6077   Bans high capacity magazines,   Kuderer (D-48), S. Rules,   OPPOSE

SB 6161   Excise tax on ammunition,   Dhingra (D-45), S. L&J,   OPPOSE

SB 6163   Unlawful possession BEFORE conviction,   hingra (D-45), S. L&J,   OPPOSE

SB 6288   Office of firearm violence prevention,   Dhingra (D-45), S. W&M,   OPPOSE

SB 6294   CPL training requirement,   Saloman (D-32), S. Rules,   OPPOSE

SB 6347   CPL validity seven years with training,   Wagoner (R-39), S. L&J,   SUPPORT

SB 6402   Use of a stolen firearm,   Rivers (R-18), S. L&J,   SUPPORT

SB 6406   Concerning firearms,   Wilson, L (R-17), S. Rules,   SUPPORT

SB 6584   Unlawful purchase of a firearm,   Zeiger (R-25), S. L&J,   SUPPORT

HB = House bill, SB = Senate bill. L&J = Law & Justice, CR&J = Civil Rights & Judiciary, PubSaf = Public Safety, HC = Health Care, H. K-12 = House Early education, Aprop = Appropriations, Fin = Finance, W&M = Ways & Means “S” before a bill number indicates Substitute (amended).

For more information regarding GOAL, please visit http://wagoal.org/wordpress/

###