Some conservative lawmakers are working to roll back restrictions on the Second Amendment.
They want to stop the government from imposing burdensome requirements for citizens to obtain firearms or concealed-carry permits.
Gun control advocates, on the other hand, are shifting their focus to voters as opposed to politicians.
Alicia Acuna reported on “America’s Newsroom” that when Republicans picked up multiple seats in Congress and state houses nationwide in the midterm election, groups like the NRA and the Second Amendment Foundation saw an opportunity to push for looser gun restrictions.
“We’re seeing lots of pro-gun legislation moving through various state houses across the country, from coast to coast,” Alan Gottlieb, founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation, said.
Acuna reported that a priority for pro-gun groups is concealed-carry.
“Kansas’s governor just signed a law to carry [concealed weapons] without a permit,” Acuna said. “Nearly 20 states have similar legislation in the works.”
You might also be interested in …
Gun-Toting Good Samaritan Thwarts Carjacking
Dem Flies Communist Flag at State Capitol Until Patriots Come Take It Down
Gutfeld on Concealed Carry Permits: ‘Only a Piece Brings the Peace’
These 13 States Want to Allow College Students to Carry a Gun
They want to stop the government from imposing burdensome requirements for citizens to obtain firearms or concealed-carry permits.
Gun control advocates, on the other hand, are shifting their focus to voters as opposed to politicians.
Alicia Acuna reported on “America’s Newsroom” that when Republicans picked up multiple seats in Congress and state houses nationwide in the midterm election, groups like the NRA and the Second Amendment Foundation saw an opportunity to push for looser gun restrictions.
“We’re seeing lots of pro-gun legislation moving through various state houses across the country, from coast to coast,” Alan Gottlieb, founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation, said.
Acuna reported that a priority for pro-gun groups is concealed-carry.
“Kansas’s governor just signed a law to carry [concealed weapons] without a permit,” Acuna said. “Nearly 20 states have similar legislation in the works.”
Meanwhile, advocates for stricter gun laws are targeting several states, such as Oregon, Nevada and Arizona, for gun control measures on upcoming ballots.
“The Second Amendment Foundation calls that ‘buying ballot measures,’” Acuna said. “Their opposition wholeheartedly disagrees.”
You might also be interested in …
Gun-Toting Good Samaritan Thwarts Carjacking
Dem Flies Communist Flag at State Capitol Until Patriots Come Take It Down
Gutfeld on Concealed Carry Permits: ‘Only a Piece Brings the Peace’
These 13 States Want to Allow College Students to Carry a Gun
Why does everyone blindly accept that the governments laws, codes, statutes, edicts, rules and regulations apply to the private person without EVER questioning it?? Obviously there are going to be some idiots whose opinions are in lock step with government employees, their indoctrination to blind obedience is unshakable.. BUT CAN ANYONE ACTUALLY PROVE THEIR LAWS APPLY TO THE PRIVATE PERSON?? Can you??
IF you ask government employees if their CONstitution and laws automatically apply to everyone just because of their physical location within what we commonly refer to as a state, their collective opinion is that YES, their CONstitution and laws apply to everyone, automatically. BUT if you ask them what facts they rely on that PROVE their BELIEF that it is applicable to you, they have no plausible answer, they’ll hang up on you, feign as though they don’t understand the question, tell you that they aren’t going to debate with you “EVEN THOUGH ALL YOU DID WAS ASK FOR FACTUAL PROOF OF THEIR ASSERTION OF JURISDICTION” They’ll tell you that it’s common knowledge that it applies, they’ll even tell you to prove it doesn’t apply to you, this is an attempt to avoid answering your question!!, but they’ll continue to refuse to answer as to what facts they rely on to prove any of it applies to you, BECAUSE THEY DON’T HAVE ANY FACTS THAT SUPPORT THEIR BELIEF BECAUSE IT NEVER EXISTED!.. remember, they already told you it applies, it is their responsibility to prove it applies because they are the ones attempting to bring a charge against you, so the onus to prove it applies is theirs,.. It is not up to you to disprove anything applies!!!
Everyone has been told that the CONstitution and law automatically apply to everyone. it’s everyones opinion that it applies, everyone feels it applies, everyone believes it applies, everyone assumes and presumes it applies. HOWEVER; hearsay, opinions, feelings, beliefs, assumptions, presumptions and or so called common knowledge aren’t proof of a damn thing.
What factual, first hand, irrefutable evidence can anyone offer that proves that their CONstitution and laws apply to the private person simply because they are physically in what we commonly refer to geographically as a state.
Keeping in mind that slavery and involuntary servitude is illegal “per their own laws”. Further, no private person is a party to their CONstitution, nor is any private person a signatory to their CONstitution, nor has any private person sworn an oath to be bound by or to obey the CONstitution and laws.
Do you grasp the gravity of NOT being a party to some agreement, contract, compact or constitution??
When one is NOT a party to some agreement, contract, compact or CONstitution, then one is NOT BOUND TO OBEY IT OR ANY PROMULGATIONS ARISING FROM SAID INSTRUMENT! “those promulgations would be codes, policies, statutes and laws etc”
Who precisely is a party to their CONstitution?? The States are parties to the CONstitution. NOT YOU, THE LIVING BREATHING FLESH AND BLOOD MAN/WOMAN!!
Should you choose to accept the challenge to show your proof/evidence. You shall adhere to the following;
Your proof/evidence MUST be factual and personal first hand information, your proof/evidence shall not be comprised of hearsay, your opinions, someone else’s opinions, your beliefs, someone else’s beliefs, your feelings, someone else’s feelings, assumptions, presumptions, hypotheticals, conjecture, sophistry, fraud, lies, scenarios or what if’s.
Further; You shall not invoke laws, statutes, codes, etc, or their CONstitutions or any amendments to their CONstitutions, as that presupposes that it is applicable, when that is what is in question in the first place!
And since you won’t be able to show any factual, firsthand, irrefutable evidence at all, I included the following!!
U.S. Supreme court; The Clara, 102 U.S. 200 (1880)
the maxim applies quod non apparet non est. The fact not appearing is presumed not to exist.