Have nothing to do with the [evil] things that people do, things that belong to the darkness. Instead, bring them out to the light... [For] when all things are brought out into the light, then their true nature is clearly revealed...

-Ephesians 5:11-13

Category Archives: Second Amendment

Gun-rights Groups Weigh in on Supreme Court Case on New York’s Concealed-carry Restrictions

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, July 21, 2021:  

Two gun-rights groups — the National Foundation for Gun Rights and the National Association for Gun Rights — have entered the fray over the Second Amendment. On Tuesday they filed an amici curiae (friends of the court) brief on the complaint filed by two gun owners against the State of New York.

When New York citizens Robert Nash and Brandon Koch each applied for permission to carry a firearm outside the home, permission was denied. The official used his discretion, claiming that neither Nash nor Koch had provided “proper cause” sufficient to justify his granting them such permission.

It didn’t matter that both of them cited their needs for self-protection, nor that each had completed extensive firearms training. It didn’t matter that they were upstanding law-abiding citizens concerned for their personal safety. New York has structured the law in such a way that almost no one can obtain such permission.

Each joined with the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (NYSRPA) in filing suit in federal court in February 2018, claiming that the official violated their Second Amendment-protected rights. In December, a district court dismissed their complaint. They appealed. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal in August 2020.

They appealed to the Supreme Court, and on April 26, 2021, the high court agreed to hear the appeal, but with a catch: The NYSRPA wanted the high court to rule on “whether the Second Amendment allows the government to prohibit ordinary law-abiding citizens from carrying handguns outside the home for self-defense.” This would cure and close the loophole left behind in the Heller decision.

The high court instead limited the question to: “Whether [New York’s] denial of petitioners’ application for concealed-carry licenses for self-defense violated the Second Amendment.”

In other words, by limiting the question just to the application required to obtain a permit to carry concealed in New York, the high court is already, by inference, allowing other infringements to remain in place. The core right guaranteed by the Second Amendment will remain open to question even if the high court finds New York’s restrictions on its application unconstitutional.

Nevertheless, the amici curiae makes the case for the fullest and broadest understanding of the Second Amendment even if the high court refuses to consider it in the present case.  The brief notes that “New York officials only grant a permit if an applicant can show ‘proper cause’ … [but] the term ‘proper cause’ is not defined within the statute.” This then “makes it impossible for the typical law-abiding New Yorker to obtain such a permit.”

Just the requiring of a permit to exercise a right is, in and of itself, an infringement:

Requiring law-abiding citizens to obtain a special permit to keep and bear arms, whether for concealed or open carry, violates the Second Amendment….


This is clear from the text of the Second Amendment itself, which enumerated the right and declared that it “shall not be infringed.”

The brief expands the argument that the Second Amendment doesn’t stand alone but is part of the remarkable “experiment in liberty” represented by the Constitution of the United States and its Bill of Rights:

The right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right necessary to our system of ordered liberty.… It is an individual right that existed prior to the Founding….

It is unique:

The right to keep and bear arms is an advantage to that system of ordered liberty “which [quoting Federalist No. 46] the Americans posses over the people of almost every other nation.”

The brief extended its quote from Federalist, No. 46:

Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation … it forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition.

New York’s restrictions contradict the intention of the Founders:

That original understanding binds government from creating policy and regulations which encroach on the original understanding of the pre-existing right that the Second Amendment protects.

The brief also dispatches any notion that somehow only “a well-regulated militia” may carry firearms, by quoting from the high court’s ruling in Heller:

At the time of the founding, as now, to “bear” meant to “carry”…. The phrase implies that the carrying of the weapon is for the purpose of “offensive or defensive action,” [and] it in no way connotes participation in a structured military organization.

The brief makes the case that the Second Amendment’s position as an enumerated right removes it from discretionary restrictions by governments. It quoted Justice Clarence Thomas:

The very enumeration of the right takes out of the hands of government — even the Third Branch of Government [the Judicial] — the power to decide on a case-by-case basis whether the right is really worth insisting upon.


A constitutional guarantee subject to future judges’ assessments of its usefulness is no constitutional guarantee at all.

The brief invites the high court to broaden its consideration of the matter:

This Court should focus on the fact that the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms, concealed or not, was never understood, in the history and traditions of that right, at the Founding, to be limited to the home … a right so limited to one’s home would be no “right” at all.

The brief reminds the high court of the sovereignty of the individual citizen:

[In] our particular form of government … it is the individual citizen who stands as the ultimate source of governmental power and authority.


It is the individual citizen who ultimately possesses inalienable and pre-existing rights such as the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense against tyranny and violence.

The brief decries attempts by the courts to keep the Second Amendment as a “second-class” right:

Consider the value of the rights to speech, assembly, and religion [in the First Amendment] were they to be relegated only to being exercised within the home. Such limitation would neuter the right to the point of it being meaningless.

The brief concludes that “there is no historical or legal basis for the lower courts restricting the right to keep and bear arms, concealed or not, to being exercised solely within the home.” Consequently,

Governments and courts that fear or dislike arms should not be able to cavalierly treat the right of citizens to keep and bear arms, concealed or not, as a lesser right than the right to speech, assemble, or practice one’s religion.

Whether the high court listens and agrees to expand its consideration of the complaint to encompass the full and robust guarantee of the Second Amendment remains to be seen. There are six so-called originalists now on the high court, but recent rulings have brought into question just how “originalist” they really are.

The high court will hear arguments in the fall and make its ruling next spring. In the meantime, the war against private ownership of firearms continues.

Democrat Support for Biden’s ATF Pick Is Crumbling

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, July 20, 2021:

Joe Biden’s pick to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, or ATF, David Chipman, has such a sorry and odious anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment, and anti-American stance on the private ownership of firearms that even the No. 2 Senate Democrat is having second thoughts.

On Monday, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin said “there are a lot of issues” with Chipman, admitting that the nomination “is not where we want it yet, but there’s always a chance.”

That’s Democrat double-speak for “any chance Chipman had to be confirmed by the Senate is now zero.”

Those “issues” to which Durbin referred were reviewed by The New American in May. Chipman’s responses to particularly probing questions by Republican senators were diffident, indirect, and in some cases incoherent. When pressed, he couldn’t define an “assault” weapon, even though he had worked for the ATF for 25 years and no doubt carried one on his person much of that time.

When quizzed about looking into Hunter Biden’s lying on the ATF’s Form 4430 in order to purchase a firearm, Chipman responded, “I will ensure that all violations of law are investigated and referred to.” Regarding Hunter Biden specifically, Chipman was incoherent: “I’m not sure that it has not been investigated.”

Unimpressed with his lies, prevarications, and distortions, not a single Republican Senator leaving the hearing said he would support the Biden nominee. That means that every single one of the 50 Democrat Senators must line up behind Chipman, or his nomination is dead.

The committee deadlocked, 11-11, on whether or not to move his nomination to the floor. That leaves the issue in the hands of Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, who has yet to schedule a floor vote on the nomination.

At least eight Democrats, not including Durbin, are having their doubts. As of Monday, Maine Independent Senator Angus King (who caucuses with the Democrats) said that he still hadn’t made up his mind about Chipman. Senator Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said he was still “working on it.”

Senate Democrat Jon Tester (D-Mont.) said he’s “still analyzing” the issue but added that he’s not “feeling the urgency” to move ahead with the Chipman nomination. Others not “feeling the urgency” include Senators Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), and Gary Peters (D-Mich.).

Chipman hasn’t helped himself with his anti-gun sentiments. But most enraging are his deprecating comments about American gun owners. His denigration made headlines in March when he told them to “secure that gun, locked and unloaded, and hide it behind the cans of tuna and beef jerky that you have stored in a cabinet, and only bring that out if the zombies start to appear.”

With that, he ended his nomination. Those law-abiding gun owners didn’t need to know that he remains on the payroll of the anti-gun Giffords Law Center, or that he previously worked for Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun Everytown for Gun Safety. They didn’t need to know that Chipman, if confirmed, would advance the plan to disarm the American people as part of the Left’s attempt to transform America.

For all intents and purposes, Chipman’s nomination is dead.

Circuit Court: Law Prohibiting Citizens Under 21 From Purchasing Handguns Unconstitutional

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, July 16, 2021:  

In ruling for the majority of the three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday, Judge Julius N. Richardson not only reversed a lower court’s ruling, he exposed the fatal flaw behind Congress’ creation of the Gun Control Act (GCA) of 1968: Congress relied on fudged numbers to make its case restricting the gun rights of those under 21.

The original lawsuit was brought by 19-year-old Natalia Marshall in 2018 after she was denied the freedom to purchase a handgun for personal protection. Familiar with firearms since an early age, she decided to attempt to purchase one through a licensed dealer, but was denied thanks to the 1968 law:

[It is] unlawful for any licensed … dealer … to sell or deliver any firearm or ammunition to any individual … who the licensee knows … is less than twenty-one years of age.

Richardson wrote:

When do constitutional rights vest? At 18 or 21? 16 or 25? Why not 13 or 33?


In the law, a line must sometimes be drawn. But there must be a reason why constitutional rights cannot be enjoyed until a certain age.


Our nation’s most cherished constitutional rights vest no later than 18. And the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms is no different.


Plaintiff seeks an injunction and a declaratory judgment that several federal laws and regulations that prevent federally licensed gun dealers from selling handguns to any 18-, 19-, or 20-year-old violate the Second Amendment.


We first find that 18-year-olds possess Second Amendment rights. They enjoy almost every other constitutional right, and they were required at the time of the Founding to serve in the militia and furnish their own weapons….


Looking through this historical lens to the text and structure of the Constitution reveals that 18- to 20-year-olds have Second Amendment rights. Virtually every other constitutional right applies whatever the age. And the Second Amendment is no different.


The militia laws in force at the time of ratification uniformly required those 18 and older to join the militia and bring their own arms.

While some historical restrictions existed, none support finding that 18-year-olds lack rights under the Second Amendment.


Judge Richardson then opened Pandora’s Box:

We then ask, as our precedent requires, whether the government has met its burden to justify its infringement of those rights under the appropriate level of scrutiny.


To justify this restriction, Congress used disproportionate crime rates to craft overinclusive laws that restrict the rights of overwhelmingly law-abiding citizens.


And in doing so, Congress focused on purchases from licensed dealers without establishing those dealers as the source of the guns 18- to 20-year-olds use to commit crimes.


So we hold that the challenged federal laws and regulations are unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.


Despite the weighty interest in reducing crime and violence, we refuse to relegate either the Second Amendment or 18- to 20-year-olds to a second-class status. Congress may not restrict the rights of an entire group of law-abiding adults because a minuscule portion of that group commits a disproportionate amount of gun violence….


Neither the government nor [its “friends”, i.e., Brady, Giffords, Everytown, etc.] can show that the burden of the challenged laws imposed on 18- to 20-year-olds’ rights has led to any meaningful or measurable positive effects. This highlights the lack of a reasonable connection between licensed dealers and gun crimes.

This is extraordinary. After 53 years of “settled law,” Judge Richardson boldly concludes that Congress erred in using phony data to support its infringements of young citizens’ rights under the Second Amendment.

The two judges concurring were appointed by Republican presidents. The dissenting judge, Obama appointee James A. Wynn, Jr., predictably avoided confronting the arguments the majority presented. Instead, he claimed they gave the “gun lobby a victory” that was otherwise unmerited: “The majority’s decision to grant the gun lobby a victory in a fight it lost on Capitol Hill more than fifty years ago is not compelled by law.”

He then invented another reason why the Second Amendment and its impact on young citizens should be treated differently:

The Second Amendment is exceptional not because it is uniquely oppressed or imperiled, but rather because it is singularly capable of causing harm.

Wynn makes up a new “right” under the Constitution that he thinks must be taken into account when considering the Second Amendment: the “public’s right to live — or “right not to be shot.”

Wynn claimed that the restrictions in the GCA of 1968 applying to young citizens only prevented them from buying a handgun from a licensed dealer and therefore was not really an “infringement”:

Young adults aged 18 to 20 may still possess and use handguns, may still receive handguns as gifts, and can even purchase handguns through unlicensed, but otherwise legal, private sales.


In other words, in enacting the challenged provisions, Congress was careful not to burden use, possession, or non-commercial sales.

This is how a judge unmoored from the “originalist” position when considering what the Founders meant at the time they wrote the Second Amendment responds. Instead, he relied on the fact that, until now, the GCA of 1968 has successfully survived various constitutional challenges and therefore it must be good law:

The challenged provisions are longstanding because they, just like the federal ban on possession of firearms by the mentally ill, were passed in 1968 — over fifty years ago — and because similar provisions making 21 the minimum age to purchase or use certain firearms have been commonplace for more than a century [i.e., the National Firearms Act of 1934 was signed into law by Democrat President Franklin Roosevelt 87 years ago].

The ruling is likely to be challenged by the now anti-gun Justice Department under Biden, knowing that the majority of the judges on the full court are Democrats who will reverse the panel’s ruling. The chances that the inevitable appeal to the Supreme Court will be considered by the high court are slim.

The fight to restore the Second Amendment to its full and robust intention is painfully slow, but the goal is worthy and increasingly achievable. Tuesday’s initial ruling is a small victory in the larger war.

Biden’s ATF Nominee David Chipman to Ban All “Assault-type” Weapons

This article was published by TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, May 27, 2021:

During a Senate confirmation hearing on Monday, Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) pressed Biden pick, David Chipman, who is poised to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), to explain his position on banning the popular semi-automatic AR-15 rifle. Asked Cruz, “The AR-15 is one of if not the most popular rifles in America. It’s not a machine gun, it’s a rifle. Your public opinion is that you want to ban AR-15s. Is that correct?”

Chipman was crystal clear: “With respect to the AR-15, I support a ban.”

He then expanded on his remark, calling the rifle “particularly lethal”:

The AR-15 is a gun I was issued on ATF’s S.W.A.T. team and it’s a particularly lethal weapon, and regulating it as other particularly lethal weapons, I have advocated for.

This was the first among many lies, distortions, and prevarications that punctuated the nominee’s responses to intense probing and questions by Republican senators. The lie: the firearm Chipman was issued was no doubt a fully automatic weapon, capable of firing many rounds rapidly with a single press of the trigger. This is a far cry from popular AR-15s now owned by an estimated 20 million law-abiding American citizens.

The second statement — that the AR-15 is a “particularly lethal weapon” — is even more chilling:

Keep reading…

South Carolina Now an “Open Carry” State, But Not “Constitutional Carry”

This article was published by TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, May 21, 2021:  

When South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster last week signed into law an “open carry” bill that barely squeaked by the State Senate, he said, “I will proudly support any legislation that protects or enhances a South Carolinian’s ability to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights.”

What he got was close to “constitutional carry,” i.e., no infringements on citizens’ right to keep and bear arms. Unfortunately, the state’s senators aren’t quite ready to allow the citizenry to exercise the full and robust nature of those rights.

The title of the bill — Open Carry With Training Act — gives it away.

Keep reading…

Supreme Court: Gun Confiscation Without a Warrant Is Unconstitutional

This article was published by TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, May 18, 2021:  

In a major setback to efforts to disarm American gun owners, the Supreme Court on Monday ruled unanimously — unanimously! — that the seizure of handguns from a residence by police without a warrant was unconstitutional.

The facts of the case — Caniglia v. Strom — are these, from the ruling:

Keep reading…

Trump-appointed Judge Defends Second Amendment

This article was first published by TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, May 11, 2021:  

One of President Donald Trump’s appointments to the federal court ruled that another of the anti-gun Left’s attempts to abrogate the Second Amendment has failed. In an obscure but vitally important ruling, U.S. District Judge Susan Brnovich tossed a lawsuit brought by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

The decision — Travieso v. Glock Inc. — is one in a long line of cases over similar lawsuits meant to bankrupt the American gun-manufacturing industry. And it squarely upholds a federal law designed to prevent just this sort of frivolous lawsuit from succeeding.

In March 2018, Carlos Travieso was shot in the back with a Glock 19 while traveling home from a youth camping trip. A passenger in the vehicle discovered the semi-automatic pistol and, noting that the magazine was missing, pulled the trigger. Unfortunately, there was a round in the chamber. The bullet entered Travieso’s back, severed his spine, rendering him a paraplegic.

The Brady bunch sued Glock, claiming that

Keep reading…

Constitutional Carry Gets Another Boost, This Time from Texas

This article was published by TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, May 6, 2021: 

After eight hours of debate, the Texas Senate finally voted on Wednesday, 18-13, to pass a bill allowing any state resident over age 21 to carry a handgun without first having to seek government permission, unless he or she has a criminal history. The bill now goes to Republican Governor Greg Abbott, who has promised to sign it into law.

The new legislation makes Texas the 21st “constitutional carry” state, though two weeks ago, after the House passed the measure, there was serious doubt whether it would pass the Senate. During the debate, dozens of amendments were proposed, either watering down the bill or designed simply to delay the vote.

The final bill now contains more punishments for felons found with a weapon, including domestic violence offenders, and those carrying while intoxicated.

Upon learning that the Texas Senate had passed the bill, Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick celebrated:

Keep reading…

Gun Sales Continue to Soar, Setting Records for 16 Months and Counting

This article was first published at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, May 4, 2021:

The FBI conducted more than 3.5 million gun-related background checks in April, an increase of more than 20 percent during the same month last year. For 16 months in a row, that upward trend has not abated, with the FBI continuing to process a record-setting number of background checks.

Nearly 1.7 million of the applications in April were directly related to the purchase of firearms, also a record, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF). Records indicate these are first-time buyers from a range of backgrounds: young, old, black, Asian, Latino, Republicans, and Democrats. When it comes to fear driving the need for a means of self-defense, ideology means nothing. More remarkable is the number of black women seeking to purchase their first firearm.

Even anti-gun NPR (National Public Radio) was forced to admit that

Keep reading…

State Department Demands “Ghost Gun” Company Stop Publishing 3D Files. Too Late.

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, April 30, 2021:  

Two days after Cody Wilson’s Defense Distributed (DD) 3D software-publishing company was allowed to resume publishing its files, free to the public, Biden’s anti-gun State Department demanded it stop.

On Tuesday, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals allowed DD to resume feeding computer software files relating to the 3D printing of various firearms already in public use to its website defcad.com, and by Thursday it had published more than 16,000 of them. By the time Wilson learned that the State Department was coming after him, those files had already been downloaded more than 40,000 times.

In a public declaration issued on Friday, Wilson stated:

Keep reading…

Supreme Court Finally Agrees to Review Lower-court Ruling Against Second Amendment

This article was first published by TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, April 27, 2021:  

The National Rifle Association (NRA) was delighted to hear that the U.S. Supreme Court, after more than a decade of silence on continuing infringements by various states on citizens’ abilities to exercise their Second Amendment–protected right to keep and bear arms, agreed to hear New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Corlett (New York State’s superintendent of police) and other cases on Monday.

The pro-gun group exuded:

Today the U.S. Supreme Court decided to hear an NRA-backed case challenging New York’s restrictive concealed-carry-licensing regime.


This sets the stage for the Supreme Court to affirm what most states already hold as true, that there is an individual right to self-defense outside of the home.

The NRA-ILA’s Executive Director Jason Ouimet expanded:

Keep reading…

“Ghost Gun” Laws Likely to Fail

This article was first published at TheNewAmerican.com on  Friday, April 23, 2021:  

A slipshod piece of propaganda written by Annie Karni and published by the anti-gun establishment mouthpiece the New York Times reveals only how concerned the powers that be are about people exercising their Second Amendment rights without government awareness or permission.

Karni said there is now a “proliferation” of so-called ghost guns and, as a result, they “are a growing problem.” She built her case on “data” (without sources) that “show that their prevalence appears to be growing every year.” Their “numbers are rising at what the authorities [source also missing] say is an alarming rate every year.”

Something must be done, she warns,

Keep reading…

Nebraska Joins Growing Number of Second Amendment Sanctuary States

This article was initially published by TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, April 15, 2021: 

When Nebraska Governor Pete Ricketts signed a proclamation on Wednesday declaring his state a “Second Amendment Sanctuary State,” he joined an increasing number of other governors pushing back against unconstitutional federal overreach at the hands of the Biden administration and the Democrat-controlled Congress.

He said:

Nebraska has always been a state that has supported our Second Amendment rights. As a symbol of that support, I am signing a proclamation declaring Nebraska a Second Amendment Sanctuary State, and, with my signature, it will become official.

He also thinks it’s enforceable against federal encroachment:

Keep reading…

Iowa the 19th State to Push Back Against Biden Gun Control

This article was first published at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, April 5, 2021:  

Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds signed into law on Good Friday the latest manifestation of the pushback against federal tyranny taking place across the land. The instant issue is “constitutional carry” — the freedom to enjoy a right without first being required to obtain governmental permission to do so — but the larger issue is this: People belonging to the Country Class are getting sick and tired of the Ruling Class and its condescension and its imposition of its tyrannical agenda.

The new state law, which becomes effective on July 1, allows Iowans to purchase a handgun from private sources without obtaining permission first, and further, to carry it on their person, also without first having to get governmental permission.

Said Reynolds:

Keep reading…

Orange County, California, Shooting: Shooter Violated Many Gun-control Laws

This article was first published by TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, April 1, 2021:

Details about the fourth mass shooting under the Biden administration remain sketchy, but certain facts are becoming known.

The shooter, a male, entered a building complex in Orange County around 5:30pm Wednesday evening and was able to murder four people and wound another before law-enforcement officers arrived on the scene and neutralized him.

Among the victims was “a child,” according to reports.

The other mass shootings — a mass shooting being defined as an incident in which at least four victims were shot, not including the shooter; or in which four or more victims are murdered with firearms — during the Biden administration included:

Keep reading…

California Sues ATF, Demanding It Banish “Ghost Guns”

This article was first published by TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, March 30, 2021:  

The lawsuit filed by the State of California and the Giffords Law Center last fall to force the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to ban “ghost guns” is so filled with misstatements, half-truths, and just plain outright lies that Dean Weingarten decided to expose them.

Weingarten, a former peace officer, military officer, and certified firearms safety instructor since 1973, found so many errors of fact and false assumptions made by the plaintiffs that it’s taken him three separate analyses to cover them all.

In its 59-page brief demanding that the court require the ATF to rewrite its rules,

Keep reading…

Sixth Circuit Says ATF “Bump Stock” Ban Unconstitutional, Sends It Back to Lower Court

This article was published by TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, March 29, 2021:  

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (Michigan) finally ruled on Thursday on the so-called bump stocks case that has been pending since December 2019, i.e., the attempt by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to arbitrarily and unilaterally rewrite its own rule about “bump stocks.” The court ruled that the effort by the ATF is unconstitutional:

Keep reading…

Boulder Shooting: Where Were the Defenders?

This article was first published by TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, March 23, 2021:  

By the time first responders arrived at the scene, shooting suspect Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa had had plenty of time to murder 10 people. Police received the first call at just after 2:30pm on Monday afternoon and the first responder, Boulder Police Officer Eric Talley, arrived at 2:40pm.

Alissa, a resident of Arvada about 25 miles away, entered the King Soopers grocery store in the Table Mesa neighborhood of Boulder, Colorado, and began, according to eyewitnesses, picking off customers at random with his AR15 semi-automatic rifle.

When Talley arrived, a firefight ensued, and the suspect was able to hold off law officers until 3:21 p.m. when, wounded, he was finally taken into custody.

The mainstream media focused on two things: 1) his motive; and 2) the opportunity to press for more gun laws.

As of 9:04 a.m. Tuesday morning, Boulder’s Daily Camera couldn’t report a motive, only that the shooter had been charged with 10 counts of murder.

But rabid anti-gun Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) saw the moment of opportunity, and he took it, tweeting:

Keep reading…

Biden Admin Pauses “Fair Access Rule” That Stopped Banks From Discriminating Against Gun Sellers

This article was published by TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, February 22, 2021: 

Scarcely a week after the inauguration of Joe Biden as president, his Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) announced that the “Fair Access Rule” issued by the Trump administration would be paused to “allow the next confirmed Comptroller of the Currency to review” it.

It’s the rule that was designed to put to bed forever the blackmail activities of Operation Chokepoint established and enforced during the Obama administration. The Obama Department of Justice pressured banks to cease providing banking services, including loans, to “unsavory” businesses. Included were gun stores, ammunition sellers, pawn shops, providers of payday loans, and escort services. The operation ended early in the Trump administration, and the “Fair Access Rule” was designed to keep it buried. The rule simply said that “banks should conduct risk assessment decisions of individual customers, rather than make broad-based decisions affecting whole categories or classes of customers.”

Frank Keating of the American Bankers Association (ABA) said

Keep reading…

Ken Paxton to Biden: You “Won’t Undo the 2A in Texas on My Watch.”

This article was published by TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, February 16, 2021:  

Seizing the opportunity to use the third anniversary of the Parkland school shooting for his anti-gun purposes, Biden called on Congress on Sunday to enact “common sense” gun laws to prevent such a horrific event from happening again.

He said:

Today, I am calling on Congress to enact commonsense gun law reforms, including requiring background checks on all gun sales, banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and eliminating immunity for gun manufacturers who knowingly put weapons of war on our streets.


We owe it to all those we’ve lost and to all those left behind to grieve to make a change.


The time to act is now.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton immediately saw through the façade, tweeting:

Keep reading…

Many of the articles on Light from the Right first appeared on either The New American or the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor.
Copyright © 2021 Bob Adelmann