Illegal Rights, a Final Las Vegas Report and NRA #FakeNews – TTAG Daily Digest

Javier Perez Second Amendment Illegal Undocumented

courtesy dailynews.com and Getty

EXCLUSIVE: Feds, defense in legal duel over whether undocumented immigrant has a Second Amendment right

An undocumented immigrant fires a gun on a Brooklyn sidewalk to frighten off gang rivals.

He gets arrested on a federal charge of being in the U.S. illegally and possessing a gun. But he claims he has a Second Amendment right that voids the charge.

Now for the clincher: The man, Javier Perez, just may have a case.

Perez, a Mexican national, has filed court papers saying that because the law forbids gun possession “in all places, and for all purposes, it violates that (Second Amendment) individual right on its face.”

Brooklyn federal prosecutors blast the argument. First off, they said, Perez doesn’t have a Second Amendment right because he’s here illegally. And even if he did have constitutional cover, prosecutors maintain the law has legitimate aims on “crime control and public safety.”

Las Vegas Shooting Report Sheriff Joe Lombardo

Final police report on Las Vegas shooting unable to determine motive

So now we officially don’t know anything more than we did six months ago . . .

Paddock acted alone, left no suicide note or manifesto, and police found no evidence that he belonged to or supported any hate group or terrorist organization, domestic or foreign. He had no criminal record, and financially, he was indebted to no one, the investigation found.He killed himself as officers closed in.

“In reference to the 2,000 investigated leads, 22,000 hours of video, 252,000 images obtained and approximately 1,000 served legal processes, nothing was found to indicate motive on the part of Paddock or that he acted with anyone else,” the report states.

The investigation did identify what it called “indicators of intent,” most of which authorities had previously reported.

Those indicators included a room Paddock rented but never checked into in August 2017 that overlooked Lollapalooza, an open-air music festival held in downtown Chicago’s Grant Park.

courtesy ATF

ATF releases 2018 Report on Firearm Commerce in the United States 

2016 was a very good year . . .

ATF has released its annual Firearms Commerce in the United States Statistical Update for 2018. As my one friend put it, “Let the nerdery begin.” To be fair, you have to be pretty nerdy to enjoy this stuff, hence me writing about it.

The Annual Firearms Manufacturing and Exportation Report (AFMER) is only current through 2016. This is because AFMER data is not published until one year after the close of a calendar reporting year because the information provided by those who filed a report is protected from immediate disclosure by the Trade Secrets Act. Which is why you see a two year lag (2016 data reporting in the beginning of 2017 and a year delay between its reporting and publication).

In 2016, there were a total of 11,497,441 firearms manufactured. This was up from 2015’s number of 9,358,661 by about 20%. The number of exports was up from the previous year by about 9%, from 343,456 in 2015 to 376,818 in 2016.

Army Sub Machine Gun Contract Procurement

courtesy thedrive.com

Army Reboots Plans To Buy Concealable 9mm Submachine Gun For VIP Protection

Nothing beats the military procurement process for speed and efficiency . . .

The U.S. Army has restarted a program to evaluate various 9mm submachine guns just weeks after canceling it to reexamine the requirements. The service says it could end up ordering as many as 1,000 of these “Sub Compact Weapons,” or SCWs, to give personal security details extra firepower they can carry concealed when they guard senior officials in high-risk areas.

On July 26, 2018, the Army’s Product Manager for Individual Weapons office at Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey re-announced the SCW project and stated it had plans to award contracts to up to six potential contractors. Any firm the Army selects will have to submit 15 examples of their weapon for evaluation, along with three suppressors, various magazines, any necessary special tools, and spare parts. The service had first gone looking for suitable weapons in May 2018, but scrapped those plans earlier in July 2018 to reassess its needs.

The NRA Says It’s in Deep Financial Trouble, May Be ‘Unable to Exist

Oh look. Rolling Stone concocted some #fakenews wishful thinking about the imminent demise of the NRA . . .

The National Rifle Association warns that it is in grave financial jeopardy, according to a recent court filing obtained by Rolling Stone, and that it could soon “be unable to exist… or pursue its advocacy mission.” (Read the NRA’s legal complaint at the bottom of this story.)

The reason, according to the NRA filing, is not its deep entanglement with alleged Russian agents like Maria Butina. Instead, the gun group has been suing New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the state’s financial regulators since May, claiming the NRA has been subject to a state-led “blacklisting campaign” that has inflicted “tens of millions of dollars in damages.”

comments

  1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    Does crazy (or evil) actually need a motive?

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      I don’t believe he was crazy. I think he had a mission. That mission was to do the government a solid. His intent was obvious when you take in all the evidence. The most important evidence to solidify that conclusion (without a doubt) conveniently disappeared. It’s as clear as the 35th president getting shot in the face.

      Obviously, the people will look away from the things they refuse to acknowledge. If you didn’t see it, it never happened.

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        ‘That mission was to do the government a solid.’

        Hence ‘(or evil)’.

      2. avatar California Richard says:

        Sorry CZJay, you lost me. Like liberal “common sense”, I just don’t see it. You’re going to have to fill me in on these “obvious” things, if you want me to understand what the heck you’re talking about.

        1. avatar Ingenero says:

          Probably a conspiracy theory involving the shooter being either part of the “deep state”, or trying to get gun control passed by doing this. I don’t tend to buy conspiracy theories, he probably was one of those evil SOBs who come up periodically. I don’t think we necessarily even want to know why he did what he did. Some people’s heads are dark and full of lovecraftian entities.

        2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          What was in his head needed to be splattered on the wall behind him and forgotten.

        3. avatar Ingenero says:

          I could get behind finding out what was in his head that way.

    2. avatar Bob999 says:

      I suspect that once the Freedom of Information Act requests fly, we will find out that there is a preponderance of evidence that points to a motive. Law enforcement often avoids making conclusions based on circumstantial evidence, which is probably why they will not connect that dot. I have my guesses on where this will go. See, I watched a press conference where a reporter got law enforcement to confirm that Paddock accelerated his preparation around the time of the election. The presenter even smiled slightly as if to say that the press figured out what he couldn’t say. I think we are going to find out via circumstantial evidence that he was motivated by politics. Of course, that is an easy prediction because most mass murderers are motivated by politics.

      1. avatar Big Bill says:

        IANAL, but to me that’s not even evidence of anything, much less proof.
        What, exactly, does ” around the time of the election” mean? Before or after, or both? Remember before the election, everyone thought Clinton would win, so if it was before, that sorts blows up your theory. If after, it’s still circumstantial.
        While you might be right, you are just as likely to be wrong.
        This is a problem with trying to advance a theory, based on entirely your perceptions, that you want people to believe. Without the facts, it means nothing.
        Remember when there was, as part of the ongoing investigation, reports that there were bullet holes found in a fuel tank near the airport, and the news (and many here at TTAG) said that the shooter tried to ignite the fuel? Where did t hat actually go? Nowhere, because there is no evidence he actually fired the shots that hit the tank. It’s not like he was the only shooter in Las Vegas since the tank was erected. The bullet holes could have been put there at any time. The report never even said the holes were recent. But, I was told, he definitely tried to ignite the fuel.
        You saw a presenter smile, so you automatically know what he was smiling about. Right.

        1. avatar Rob in Texas says:

          Did you not read the actual article? He fired eight individual shots at one of the tanks and punctured it. But it did not result in an explosion.

        2. avatar Big Bill says:

          While the article did say they traced all 1058 rounds fired, I find that to be a suspicious factoid.
          Seriously? Eight rounds at the tanks? Were all eight bullets recovered? How do you know? There were not eight strikes reported on the tanks. Where were the other rounds found?
          While I can understand the 1058 round number, because it’s easy to count fired empty shells. But 1058 recovered bullets? Seriously?

    3. avatar MarkPA says:

      We ought to be skeptical that we are being told all that has been discovered.

      What bothers me more is that there is ZERO discussion of any lessons learned from this tragedy. It was a repeat of the University of TX Austin tower shooting.

      What provisions – if any – might be made to mitigate an attack from high-ground? Granted, this is a really tough problem to address. In cities, there are always crowds with surrounding high-ground. Take NY City as the most extreme example.

      What are we to understand from those sworn to protect us? Those for whom we pay taxes to equip and employ? Do they simply shrug their official shoulders and reply: “There is nothing we can do”? Very well, then let’s hear them state that on-the-record. We the People are entitled to be told the truth. There really is nothing – WHATSOEVER – that the police can do to stop a shooter from high-ground.

      The lesson from U-TX-Austin was that the unorganized militia could and did do something. They drew-down fire on the tower shooter keeping him pinned to limit his ability to fire on those in view. A civilian joined police in a daring raid on the observation platform to gun-down the shooter.

      The lesson from LV was that . . . we got lucky. An unarmed guard from the hotel distracted the shooter and – apparently – caused him to expect an imminent breach of his position.

      The alternative is that our law enforcement agencies might inform us what they are doing to provide counter-sniper capability to be trained, and on-hand, at large gatherings such as the concert in LV. If law enforcement can support SWAT teams they can also support counter-snipers. If they don’t know how, we PotG would volunteer to show them.

      1. avatar A lone psychopath says:

        I was in LV for New Years Eve on 12/31/2001. There were counter snipers on just about every rooftop on the strip. It was very obvious, it was one of the lamest News Years in LV and they weren’t even trying to hide themselves. There weren’t many people celebrating on the strip. People were just beginning to fly again so it was a lot of people from California. In October through December the airlines and LV was doing everything to get the “tourists” back. A walk down the strip in October was almost post apocalyptic. I would say that this weekend there are counter snipers in Chicago for Lollapalooza based on his actions last year. While the CPD claims they are taking “counter-sniper measures”, they haven’t come out and said that there will be actual counter snipers. I think there was and is. (Its the last day of Lollapalooza)

    4. avatar frank speak says:

      apparently not….but people have trouble accepting that…..

  2. avatar New Comtinental Army says:

    So liberals only want illegals to have all the rights except the 2A. Typical. And we already know what paddock’s motive was, but the media doesn’t want that leaked.

    1. avatar California Richard says:

      No,… the liberals don’t want anybody to have 2nd ammendment rights.

      What was Paddock’s motive? Every @$$#ole with an opinion has come up with a motive. It’s like Baskin Robin’s; 36 flavors. What ever you feel like today!

      1. avatar New Continental Army says:

        Here’s how I see it. I’m not talking about some grand shadow government conspiracy. He shot up a country music festival and everyone sits around and wonders what his motive was. If he had shot a gay pride parade, or a mosque, or an abortion clinic, there would be absolutely no question as to what his motive was. He was a random wacko for sure. One that desired to target conservatives, in a way that would effect conservatism greatly. The only conspiracy here is the Vegas police and media’s desire to keep that one little fact out of the public’s eye. They did the exact same thing with the GOP baseball shooter, until it was impossible to lie about it any longer. And they still refer to the Ft Hood shooter and Chattanooga shooter as “workplace violence.”

      2. avatar CZJay says:

        Go over the recovered evidence, look at the lead up, look into his childhood, review family statements, piece together the event, etc. It’s there for you to figure out if you want to do the work, but most people are not willing to do that because they rather have the government tell them the truth. The truth the officials are going to give you is based on what they have, what they have is curated for them.

        1. avatar jwm says:

          So, cz, if you’ve spent the time and effort to find the ‘truth’ what is it?

        2. avatar A lone psychopath says:

          As for the motives of a psychopath one only needs to look at the family lineage. His father was a “diagnosed psychopath with suicidal tendencies” in the 1960s. My take is unless you are an actual psychopath you will never have a true clue as to his “motives”. Even then I doubt it.

          Mental illness runs in families, I’ve seen this happen firsthand with other mental disorders. A very simple and logical conclusion is that he carried a “psychopathic gene”. As for all the conspiracy nonsense you have to be a conspiracy theorist to think that it was anything but a sick minded person and that’s why Alex Jones is a millionaire.

          As for the whole “hard drive” question, you do know you can use a flash stick as one right? They are easily reformatted and flushed down a toilet. Sometimes the most obvious answer is the real answer. He was a psychopath, plain and simple.

          I refuse to mention his name out of respect for his victims.

  3. avatar Nick says:

    Top pic is just tacky. Russian ammo on the bill of rights? Seriously.

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      What do you expect from the NY Daily News? .30-06? .45 Long Colt? Almost surprised they didn’t feature the .303 British.

    2. avatar jwtaylor says:

      There is nothing more American than using your oppnent’s weapons against him.

      1. avatar No one of consequence says:

        Sure there is.

        Build a bigger, better, badder weapon and use THAT against him.

        (But in the meantime, yeah, take the enemy’s and use his.)

        1. avatar Illinois_Minion says:

          CREEDMORE!!!!

      2. avatar Bloving says:

        Hence my personal custom of always referring to anti-civil rights activists as “bigots”.
        Gawd, I love watching them foam at the mouth like that…
        🤠

      3. avatar Salty Bear says:

        WOLVERINES!

      4. avatar jwm says:

        Word. My first(unauthorized) side arm in the military was a tt33. I’m not going to tell that lie that I killed an officer and took it from him. But in a time when there was much distrust of the m16 it gave me great comfort to have it.

        In 2 seperate cases I had marines let me hold a ka-bar and the pistol as collateral in poker games. I got to keep both and they were both very comforting in their own way.

    3. avatar John Q Public says:

      Oh No, Those Pesky Russian Bots ! Maybe Their trying prevent the DemoCRAPs from Destorying it, or to prevent the DNC from starting a war with the Russia’s. As Killary “Aol– Benghazi” Clinton wanted to do….Could be “NRA Russian agents”!?!?

    4. avatar YaDaddy says:

      The pic makes perfect sense to me. If it came time to go “HOT” and have a straight up fight to protect that document, my curved magazines would be filled with the steel cased goodness sitting on that beloved parchment.

  4. avatar G says:

    Do illegal immigrants technically have any rights? Will be really interesting to see how this plays out because if an illegal immigrant has a valid 2nd ammendent right, then it could be assumed they have all our american rights just by having set foot here, Illegal or not.

    Im not a lawyer though so if im totally wrong on this tell me. Im also not really sure how i feel about illegal immigrants having equal rights as citizens. They are basic human rights however.

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      The right to keep and bear arms is just the logical extension of the right to self defense. Does an illegal alien have the right to fight back with his fists? Does he have the right to grab a crowbar to defend himself from a violent attack? If so, he also has the right to prepare for his defense, aka, the right to keep and bear arms.

      1. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

        I am the son of a legal immigrant. I don’t support any form of illegal presence in the country but do have to agree Perez has a point. The 2A does not grant the right to protect himself. It’s only stating that for any card carrying member of Homo Sapiens, that right is inalienable.

      2. avatar Ed Schrade says:

        What rights does a burgler have in your home during a home invasion ?

        1. avatar No one of consequence says:

          The same as you do, of course, unless a prior felony has resulted in the burgler being stripped of a few of them, e.g. bear arms and vote.

          But, since the Bill of Rights exists to protect individuals against the government, it’s really the wrong question to ask, imho. Instead, let’s try “What obligation do you have to the burgler?”

        2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Even a burglar has the right to defend his life. Generally speaking, property rights never trump the right to life. Unless you’re talking about a human fetus. That said, I have a lot more sympathy for the fetus than the thief.

        3. avatar California Richard says:

          Burglary is a property crime (entering private property with the intent to steal). Home invasion is a form of robbery (entering a private residence, utilizing force or fear against a person, with the intent to steal)….. when you equate the two its like asking: “What rights does a shoplifter have when he robs a store.” Depending on what jurisdiction you live under, hot prowl occupied residential burglary can be assumed to be a violent crime and deadly force may or may not be justified. But like any deadly force encounter, there are no black and white absolutes. Every incident (in theory) gets investigated on its own unique set of circumstances, and every cop, every investigator, every judicial district, every judge, every attorney, every jury, and every outraged citizen who pressures the government to “do something” all determine what “should or should not have happened” and who the “bad guy” is…… everybody has the same rights. The legality of what two citizens do to eachother is determined by others.

      3. avatar Bob h says:

        Interesting take. But my legal question in this case is does a foreign national have to right to own and carry firearms inside the US?

        I believe the answer is a definitive no but activist judges have a long track record of rewriting laws from the bench. Also funny the libs in NY would argue that illegals have every other right just by being here but I’ll bet dollars to doughnuts they are against guns at all costs.

        1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          ‘…does a foreign national have to right to own and carry firearms inside the US?’

          If they’ve got a green card (permanent residency) they do. They have the same (legally recognized) rights as citizens when it comes to the 2A.

        2. avatar Big Bill says:

          IANAL, but here’s how I see it.
          If the illegal is here on his first illegal crossing, he’s not a felon. If it’s his second, or subsequent, and he’s not been convicted, he’s an unconvicted felon.
          However, a much better question is this: in a home invasion, which is a felony most places, the invader is committing a felony, and thus subject to citizen arrest (again, in most places).
          More to the point, if said invader is faced by me with a 12g shotgun, he has two rights: he can leave quickly, or he can hit the floor with his arms outstretched. Those are the only rights he has. If he instead decides to advance on me, I have the right to shoot him in self defense. (I live in AZ, and this is the way the law works here.)(I am not giving legal advice!)
          It’s easy to argue about rights in hypothetical situations, given the way laws are perverted by opposing lawyers in pretty much any court. But what counts is the rights of a homeowner vs the rights of a criminal during the commission of a criminal act. We can’t put that into a legal vacuum; circumstances will dictate available legal actions by both actors, including local laws. That’s why we have juries; to let them take the circumstances into account.

      4. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Like the rest of us, he was born with RKBA. Prosecute him for being in the country illegally and give him back his gun when you toss him back into Mexico.

        1. avatar jwm says:

          I like it.

        2. avatar Jon in CO says:

          This. He has all of the rights bestowed by The COTUS, however, he was breaking the law being here illegally, and firing a gun in public. Rights don’t come from the constitution, they come from God/creator/humanity.

        3. avatar FedUp says:

          give him back his gun when you toss him back into Mexico.

          That’s one way to make sure the Mexicans put him behind bars instead of sending him back to your country.

    2. avatar Kendahl says:

      Most of the rights of citizens apply to everyone within the boundaries of the country regardless of immigration status. Exceptions are the right to vote, run for public office and serve on juries. Being in the country illegally is a disqualifying condition on form 4473. The Perez case is whether that is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. It would be nice to see him win but that’s not likely even after Heller.

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        Voting, running for office and even sitting on juries are not rights, but rather privileges of citizenship. The right to be tried by a jury on the other hand applies to both citizens and foreigners alike.

        1. avatar Craig says:

          Perfectly stated!

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        A disqualifying condition on 4473 means govt is attempting to prevent him from purchasing a firearm, which does not preclude him from possessing or owning one. He is not a prohibited person, similar to a young person who cannot purchase a firearm due to age, but can possess one or even own one.

    3. avatar Nanashi says:

      Other parts of the Constitution MAY apply even for a soldier of hostile foreign group (and before anyone says anything, if being a soldier of a non-government entity instead of a government means one isn’t an “invader” what was Pancho Villa?), but a “right of the people” certainly does not apply to them.

      If someone really wanted to smash that part of the GCA it would be much better to get someone here legally that is not a citizen. There’s no shortage of people in the US on student visas, even if they needed to be in a state where hunting licenses are prohibitively annoying to obtain. Note: I am aware visa holders can get a hunting license in any state, but that actually runs into two other questions: 1: Isn’t this a tax in violation of Grosjean v. American Press Co? 2: Can the federal government force someone to give money to another state entirely to exercise a right? (And they could find a visa holder in a US territory instead of a state so an in-state license is an impossibility.)

  5. avatar former water walker says:

    Ummm…the “NRA is broke” story is all over FB. Are they?!? Paid up member for 2 more years. If they go belly up they won’t get $ from me. Anyone think the Vegas shooting is the “new” JFK assassination?

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      The problem with the JFK murder was the lack of the internet. The “enemy of the people” had full control of the gate and actively spread disinformation to the public. If the internet existed then like it does today, the entire narrative would have been proven wrong within a day.

      After the Las Vegas shooting it took a day or two to prove Alex Jones’ claims as disinfo and a few more days to determine motive. The problem is you can’t provide the public with the ultimate proof they would want because it disappeared. The FBI did a good job at controlling the outcome… Unlike the JFK assassination, the government can’t use the Vegas shooting the way they would like because people already know not to fall for it.

      1. avatar Ingenero says:

        And the moon landing was done in a sound stage in Brooklyn, Joseph Mengele is doing experiments on rats at the CDC, Chemtrails control the weather, Area 51 still has the alien corpses, 9/11 was an inside job, Trump is a reptilian, and the Illuminati have a great party pad. The last was an observation, I like the full grain leather and 100 year old scotch.

        I also don’t think a government that can lose nukes (off the coast of NC, btw), barely keep the employment numbers quiet before publishing, have classified data ripped off by Manning, Snowden, and Reality Winner, and not even manage to predict subsidizing home buying by people without income, a job, or assets (NINJA loans) would cause a housing bubble, is pretty much incapable of finding its multi-trillion dollar behind with the Hubble and a full Army brigade. They couldn’t keep secrets like this. Someone would have a reason to leak it, or Trump would release it to use against Obama and Hillary. I don’t think they’re competent enough to keep something like that secret.

        1. avatar Kenneth says:

          So then we are to think that you buy the Warren Commision’s, and the Select Committee on Assassination’s opinions that Lee Harvey Oswald was a lone shooter?
          Are you actually that gullible a Statist?

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I have never seen an actual reason to doubt any of those things, screeching unproven conspiracies does not make them the truth. The Warren commission has more credibility with me than YOU do!

        3. avatar Ingenero says:

          Do I believe an avowed communist and defector who recently returned from the Soviet Union had a reason to try to asassinate the president, and that the exhaustive analyses since then indicate the guy did it are correct? Sure. Nor do I buy the idea that everyone since then had reason to ignore the coverup and keep the evidence hidden…stuff like that has a way of getting out. JFK died a tragic death, but I don’t see how believing a commie with a military background killed him is either “statist” or stupid.

          If either of you jokers actually believe there’s no evidence against any of the silly conspiracies I mentioned…you need to get out more. And I hardly think assuming the government is largely a bunch of stupid (albeit at times malicious) idiots is too much faith in government.

        4. avatar CZJay says:

          The hard drives from the Vegas shooter disappeared. After the shooting some people broke-in to his house and took some stuff. All we needed to unquestioningly prove his motive was on his hard drives. Doing a full wipe of the drives takes a very long time, you would have to get rid of them physically to get rid of the data. It’s not like the guy was running encrypted drives.

          The FBI already knew about the Parkland shooting well ahead of the attack. They had two people call-in and one of those people had a detailed description of what was going to happen. They “failed” to follow their own rules and forward the case to the proper office in order to stop the attack.

          The FBI knew about the Pulse nightclub shooter because his father worked for the FBI. They were working with his father in regards to Muslim terrorists.

          The FBI worked hard at making sure Hillary got off free; even holding a press conferences saying she isn’t a criminal because she didn’t intend to be. While they were busy not investigating Hillary, they were inside Trump’s campaign trying to entrap him. They used fake “evidence” to get unlawful warrants to spy on Trump. An agent working on both cases wanted to stop Trump from being elected. The FBI director was leaking info to the press through a buddy.

          Don’t forget that the government did not want to release the video of the motive the Austin bomber had recorded. They also downplayed the same type of bombing that happened in California.

        5. avatar CZJay says:

          Watch the killing of JFK, you can clearly see that he was shot from behind and from the front. All the other stuff/arguments surrounding the event is a distraction. Even if you take the government’s story of JFK being shot from behind as complete fact, the evidence shows him being hit from the front, which means there was at least one other person shooting at the president. The official story from the beginning to the end was only one man shot at the president.

          Oswald worked for the CIA/FBI. Recently released documents by Trump verify this old “conspiracy theorist” claim.

    2. avatar Refugee from Illinois says:

      The NRA isnt broke. But if they aren’t able to keep bank accounts, how can they function in today’s society? That is what the lawsuit is about.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        They could open their own bank, couldn’t they? Is there some government control which could prevent that? If so, I can see taking that to court.

        1. avatar Bob999 says:

          With enough money and friends in right places, yes, they can. Unfortunately, NRA has neither the large sums of money needed nor the friends in right places. When I say money, I am talking quantities that most organizations cannot achieve in a lifetime. On the friends side, we are talking friends from the city that controls big banking in the US – New York. It sucks, but New York has a stranglehold on the financial artery of the US, and their leftist masters are trying to use it to control the little people who live in flyover states.

      2. avatar MarkPA says:

        Looks like this NRA thing is being mischaracterized. Their access to the property and liability insurance markets is being blocked by Cuomo. Their assertion – as I understand it – is that their ability to function effectively would be severely constrained if they could not obtain property and liability insurance.

        Assume, for discussion, that they have a mortgage on their headquarters building. The mortgage covenants require them to maintain fire insurance on the collateral. What if no insurance company will write them fire insurance?

        They run a TV channel; and, they need liability insurance for that part of their business. Will the owners of the media infrastructure (cable, satellite) carry their programming without insurance?

        Likely, they will be able to find one out of 5,000 commercial banks to accept their deposits. Nevertheless, do they not have a right to apply to any bank to open an account without repression from a government – such as the State of NY? Could a government harass a bank for maintaining an account for you or me? How about for a church or public service organization such as the League of Women Voters? Such harassment appears to be an indirect violation of the 1A.

  6. avatar Nanashi says:

    There are stronger cases to smash the GCA (something I would very much love to see happen) with than an illegal alien. Arguing that a non-citizen is “the people” is sketchy (Even more so in a post-14th Amendment world). Arguing that an armed invader who professes loyality to another country is “the people” is just plain nonsense.

    Most obvious star that can be arranged VERY easily would be a 17 year old buying a box of 22lr with money they earned themselves. The Supreme Court has already held that minors have free speech rights. Did the GCA make an exception for people convicted of a felony before 1968 (It’s not on the 4473 like restored rights)? It shouldn’t be too hard to find a 70+ year old that committed a crime when he was 18.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      “Armed invader” looks pretty easy to me. As a human he has every right to bear arms in America, as an invader I have every right to shoot him to death.

  7. avatar Whats-a-da-Matta-wit-you? says:

    No, illegal border crossers do not have a second amendment right to self defense. They cannot buy or leagaly possess a firearm in the us. You want all the rights granted by the constitution and BOR? become a citizen.
    End of story.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      You don’t need to become a citizen to be protected under the law. Buying a gun through a FFL as an illegal resident is another story. I think the case for that particular charge will rely on whether the gun was lawfully attained.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        “obtained”

    2. avatar Salty Bear says:

      Armed self defense is a human right, not a privilege granted by a group of people calling themselves “the government.” All people have this right, regardless of which side of some imaginary cartographic line they are on.

      1. avatar KBonLI says:

        Illegal aliens committed a crime by entering. They are considered fugitives until apprehended. They can defend themselves but then should be arrested. This PC “undocumented” BS needs to stop.

  8. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    “Brooklyn federal prosecutors blast the argument. First off, they said, Perez doesn’t have a Second Amendment right because he’s here illegally. And even if he did have constitutional cover, prosecutors maintain the law has legitimate aims on “crime control and public safety.”

    Oh that’s rich,said Illegal Aliens have Constitutional rights,except for Second Amendment rights,when they are Illegal and are not citizens so thus no rights. The Effing Commiecrats want their cake and eat it too,however they get to pick and choose.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      When they get caught crossing the border illegally the Left wants them to be reunited with their children and allowed to stay in the U.S. They also defend cartel members and other criminal Mexicans. But when it comes to the 2nd Amendment they freak out with, “Oh hell no! Get the fuck out of the U.S. you filthy, brown, illegal alien, rapist!”

  9. avatar pwrserge says:

    If you enter the country illegally you are an invader. If you’re not in the uniform of a foreign power, you’re either a spy or an illegal combatant. Either way, you have no rights under international law OR the laws and customs of war.

    1. avatar New Continental Army says:

      Now we’re talkin. This is what needs to be done to prevent the Reconquista of the American Southwest from Mexico. Make no mistake, that is part of the Mexican agenda. Once the numbers are firmly implanted, the insurgency/separatist movement begins.

  10. avatar rt66paul says:

    Anyone here in the US has basic civil rights, even if illegally here. The illegal aliens that work for companies that will hire them are also covered by labor laws. The reason these companies hire them is they don’t stand on their rights. We also have to remember that we all have God given rights to protect ourselves, being here illegally or even being a felon does not take those rights away.
    Who has a bigger need of protection than a felon fresh out of the pen that has gang members pressuring him for money and whatever? Who has more need to protection than the people that live in gang infested neighborhoods, whether or not they are gangsters themselves?
    Sorry, but if I was on a jury in a case of self protection, I would probably vote to acquit, and then ship them back over the border.

    1. avatar Ing says:

      Deportation is the best answer here. Everyone seems to agree that this guy didn’t come here legally. No need to argue about the gun part — just ship his ass out.

    2. avatar Rob in Texas says:

      Actually, according to the law, a felon does NOT have the right to self defense. I, personally, think this is unconstitutional based on the same argument.

      “That because the law forbids gun possession “in all places, and for all purposes, it violates that (Second Amendment) individual right on its face.””

      The biggest difference is that “we” have no way of controlling the illegal entry, “we” do determine if a felon is safe enough to be released from custody. If the felon is so dangerous that we have to make sure that they cannot have firearms or have to be on a watchlist then why are they freed and allowed to walk among us?

  11. avatar Kyle in Upstate NY says:

    I am a bit concerned about the NRA. If they cannot obtain insurance, they will have to close down their media arms, such as NRA TV and their print publications. It is a way to chill political speech.

    1. avatar NRALifeMember says:

      I think NRATV going the way of the dodo bird would be a good thing. The content is fodder for the craziest of the crazies judging by the comment section under every video posted on the faceybooks. I like Dana Loesch to some extent but most of the content is rather bizarre.

      1. avatar Big Bill says:

        Do you read the comments here?
        The number of people who throw around accusations of “traitor” and recommend hanging is high.
        Descriptions of female leftists run from ugly to suggestions of their mothers having mated with various forms of wildlife.
        TTAG is far from being free of the crazies you point out.

        I do wish that TTAG would get their comment section to work right.
        “Notify me of follow-up comments by email” button does nothing. I use Firefox (I was told that was the problem), tried other browsers to no effect. I use Ad Block; tried disabling it, no effect. The only other add-on is Wikibuy; I tried disabling it, no effect. Bog standard Win 10.
        I keep commenting on this with no results. Other blogs I’m on don’t have this problem.

    2. avatar KBonLI says:

      I am also concerned. Cuomo publicly stated that if he could put the NRA out of business he would have done it 20 years ago. The problem is that he can blacklist them, which he did just by a speech. I now can’t get any type of firearm insurance here in NY because of him. I think it’s time to stop being the silent majority and rally all pro gun organizations. Whether you like it or not the NRA is the biggest lobby we have, without them we don’t have much of a voice. Yes there are other organizations which some prefer but they don’t have the same influence.
      In reality we need an organization where ALL gun owners are members (probably a fantasy)

      1. avatar Ed Schrade says:

        KBONLI……Try insurance with USCCA, it’s what I have and it’s a better deal.

        1. avatar KBonLI says:

          I tried that, they don’t have it in NY that’s why I tried Carry Guard. Thanks to Cuomo there is no firearms insurance available other than theft from homeowners insurance. He calls it insurance to murder.

  12. avatar Gladius et Scutum says:

    I can’t wait for Rolling Stone’s totally real report about how the NRA raped some girl at Duke University.

    1. avatar Ingenero says:

      Don’t look now, but Al Sharpton is putting some rallys together about this exact issue. And Freddy’s Fashion Firearms had just gotten off the ground…

  13. avatar Geoff "Mess with the Bull, get the Horns" PR says:

    “Portland Braces For Saturday Bloodshed As Antifa Plans “Direct Confrontation” At Conservative Rally”

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-03/portland-braces-saturday-bloodshed-antifa-plans-direct-confrontation-conservative

  14. avatar Aaron M. Walker says:

    1. Illegal Alien=”🚫 👽!” *(Unfortunately, even U.S. Citizens/Residents of the state…Don’t have any 2nd Amendment rights in NYC…)*

    2. What did everyone expect? The truth–lol ! We couldn’t handle the truth…We’d probably already be in a 2nd American Civil War with the “Deep State” if we did…Better to sit back and continue watching Netflix…While Drinking a beer and eating pizza 🍕 right….? Until the next Suspicious Politcal incident…..

    3. NRA appears to be in good shape. Must be fake news…I’m sure THEIR membership has gone up another million since the last bunch of gun control nonsense. And don’t count out the other [email protected] groups…GOA….SAF….

  15. avatar Kap says:

    Must be Russian collusion with the posting of Russian Ammo on the Bill of rights!
    Pretty sure the Russians, NATO, the UN, and any other country in the world did not do anything too help our exceptionalism grow, but being jealous, they have tried to make us weak like them! Democrats are doing everything in their power to destroy our country, its history, culture and Constitution, especially when our weak kneed spineless politicians sell out in the name of appeasement. (go along to get along) as long as their paycheck is not diminished in any way

    1. avatar KBonLI says:

      Amen!

  16. avatar Jeff Ross says:

    The alleged news about the NRA going bankrupt. I heard that on NPR at 2am last night and it was stated as fact. So I imagine it is on CNN at all the airports by now. Interesting . . .

  17. avatar MarkPA says:

    Javier Perez’s 2A claim: This is one that we PotG ought to think about. The article doesn’t say anything about how long he has been in the US or what his connections to the community are. For the sake of discussion, let’s ASSUME that he has been in the US a long time and has developed deep and rich connections to the community.

    The guarantee of the right to arms runs to “the People”; presumably, the People of the US. It does NOT say “citizens”; therefore, the class of individuals eligible to assert this right is slightly wider. No doubt it includes green-card holders. Perhaps a few others. Had Perez been brought to the US as an infant and remained here into adulthood, he would have a claim to have become a member of the class “the People” which claim ought not be dismissed summarily. Conversely, if he arrived but recently, has no job nor real estate, nor is a member of the choir in his local church, his claim would be weak.

    The number of illegal immigrants of longstanding residence, wide and deep ties to the community, and otherwise law-abiding status, is not insignificant. Many of this class have American-born children; are productive; and, pay some taxes. Their cause is championed by progressives.

    While continuing to insist that illegal immigrants repatriate themselves, or be deported, we, the PotG, do not hold that they are to be deprived of Constitutional rights to which they are eligible. E.g., speech, quartering troops, search & seizure, council, silence. Likewise, we ought to remain open to the possibility that they have a legitimate claim to the right to a means of an effective defense of themselves and their (American-born) children.

    I hasten to add that I remain open to the progressive arguments that illegal aliens must necessarily be barred from making any claim to membership in the class “the People”. They might be able to persuade me that such as these were never endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, among them life, or the means to its defense. That such as Javier Perez should be imprisoned for 10 years for his crime; and then, be deported.

    We PotG ought to solicit the views of progressives concerning the right to arms by illegal aliens. Do they wish to see such individuals prosecuted and imprisoned for exercising their claim to a right under the 2A? This seems an excellent opportunity for PotG to engage in a constructive dialogue with progressives.

  18. avatar Enufistoomuch says:

    The NRA cannot go bankrupt. I sent them $100 just a few months ago. What they hell are they doing, spending it all in one place?

    The Vegas shooter was a crazy person, closed in upon his own thoughts and sickness. The worst kind of killer there is, one with no deep seated desire to be remembered or understood.

    The illegal alien with the .380, shooting in the air is stupid and reckless. Those bullets had to come down someplace, could have killed some innocent person a mile away. I say he is too stupid to be in my country, deport him already.

    The US Army wants to buy some more guns? Okay, how about buy some MADE IN USA GUNS!?!? Or require a foreign brand to license the design to an American gun maker, or open up an American factory. That’s what I’m looking for, spend the money where it does Americans some good. It ain’t as if Americans do not know how to make excellent firearms, after all.

  19. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    The illegal immigrant has a point. Nowhere in the 2nd does it say or imply citizenship.
    As to the Vegas shooting.
    My theory.
    Its as good as what has just been published….Which said NOTHING
    (A lot of sarcasm to follow here folks)
    A very strong dislike for the current “Country” music. And the abomination its become since the Hank Willams days.
    Very much in the same vein as a dislike for “Rap” music which most anyone over 50 year old cant understand anyone having a like of it. Or for the matter why would they??
    But that doesn’t mean I want to shoot up a crowd at a show. Although to call “Rap” anything a form of music. Well that is unfortunately enough reason I believe for some nutcase some day to go and blow up something.
    You don’t have to have an answer as to why in the Nevada case. No one can fore tell insanity and what went on in this miserable excuse for a human beings mind. To preplan what he did was itself insanity.
    Nothing less.

  20. avatar Unrepentant Libertarian says:

    RE “illegal immigrants” and the second amendment. Does someone in the country illegally have the right to defend themselves? YES! Do they have the right to purchase a firearm to do so? NO!

  21. avatar John In Florida says:

    a) I’m with the feds – illegals don’t have gun rights.

    b) The cops – and the FBI – are lying about this. I remain convinced that Paddock was overseeing an arms deal in the hotel room, hence all the guns. Admittedly that doesn’t explain the shooting, but it makes as much sense as anything they’ve said.

    c) Mostly good news there

    d) I’d only be excited if I could buy it.

    e) I’m extremely skeptical of this news. The only way I see this being even slightly true is if banks are monkeying around with their accounts.

  22. avatar Chris T from KY says:

    Why can’t Mexicans stay in Mexico and fight for gun rights in Mexico???
    And a 22 or 38 caliber weapon from the only legal gun store in Mexico, on an army base, doesn’t count.

    But the argument that will be made is a dark skin person (alien) needs gun rights. A white citizen however. No gun for you. And no guns for the blacks. That is the warped mind of a Liberal.

  23. avatar Chris T from KY says:

    Paddock was the trigger guy in Vegas. And in the future it will be shown the government knew about this plan, and did nothing to stop it.

  24. avatar Oscar Cannington says:

    The Vegas shooter was shown wearing a pink pussy hat. He was obviously anti-Trump.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email