Firearms Owners Against
Crime
"A general dissolution of principles and manners will
more surely overthrow the liberties of
E-Newsletter & FOAC
Meeting Notice
July 13, 2008
Meeting Agenda Issues:
None
9.1
Targeted
races in the PA House, PA Senate and Congress
9.1.1
Impact
of Grand Jury Indictments
9.1.2
Rep. Ramaley
and Chief of Staff for Rep. DeWeese Indicted
9.1.3 Senator Regola Cleared by Jury
9.2
Candidate
interactions, meetings, developments and grassroots efforts (i.e. Door to Door,
etc.)
9.3
Grand
Jury Results and pending impact on election efforts
9.4
Political
Events Review and Summary and Candidate Positions and Statements
9.4.1 Preliminary Endorsement Issues
9.5
2008
Fall Breakfast Updates
9.6
Membership
committee developments
9.7
Review
of State & Federal legislative developments 2008
Federal issues:
9.8
USSC:
Heller v. D.C. Court renders ‘Individual Rights’ Decision
Events:
**PA Gun Collectors Gun Show: Sept 13th & 14th (Westmoreland Mall Annex)
**Rep. Daryl Metcalfe’ Annual ‘Pig Roast’: August 2nd
**Rep. Tim Solobay ‘Annual Night at the Ballpark’: August 7th
**ACSL Monthly Meeting: August 14th
**Rep. Jaret
Gibbons’ Annual Summer Picnic: July
26th
FOAC - 2008
Meeting Schedule
Jan 13, 2nd Sunday,
Feb 10, 2nd Sunday, Mar 9, 2nd Sunday, Apr 13, 2nd Sunday, May 4,
1st Sunday, Jun 8, 2nd Sunday, Jul
13, 2nd Sunday, Aug 10, 2nd Sunday,
Sep 14, 2nd Sunday, Oct 12, 2nd Sunday, Nov 2, 1st Sunday, Dec 14, 2nd Sunday
**Time of Meeting: 10:00 AM
**Location:
****Coffee and Donuts will be
provided
***General Election – Nov. 4
DC/Heller Ruling Leaves Nation Polarized
by Dave Workman, Senior Editor
In the beginning, it was the Supreme Court's 5-4 ideological split that defined the Second Amendment as protective of an individual right to keep and bear arms regardless of affiliation with a militia.
But the historic ruling, written by Justice Antonin Scalia, quickly divided a nation, and in the aftermath there did not seem to be much middle ground. The evidence was clear, in the hysteria-steeped reaction by anti-gunners including Washington, DC, Mayor Adrian Fenty, California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, and Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, contrasting sharply with the victory remarks from gun rights leaders and activists, including Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, and Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation.
Perhaps Daley's outlook was glum
because less than an hour after the high court announced its ruling, SAF and
the Illinois State Rifle Association filed a federal lawsuit against Daley and
the city of
"This is a great moment in American history," LaPierre said. "It vindicates individual Americans all over this country who have always known that this is their freedom worth protecting."
"Wisdom and truth have triumphed over hysteria and falsehood," Gottlieb added. "This decision makes it clear that a right 'of the people' is a right enjoyed by, and affirmed for, all citizens. It destroys a cornerstone of anti-gun rights elitism, which has fostered—through years of deceit and political demagoguery—the erosion of this important civil right."
Scalia's majority opinion brought to an end decades of dispute over the meaning of the Second Amendment. The high court ruled that the amendment "protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."
The opinion, supported by Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Anthony M. Kennedy, left the door open to regulation of the right, noting that "like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited."
"The court's opinion," Scalia wrote, "should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ilL or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."
The ruling also demolished the argument long advanced by anti-gunners that the 1939 Miller case (See Hindsight column in the July 1 issue of Gun Week) relegated the right to bear arms as being conditional to militia service.
But Scalia's majority opinion also castigated the arguments offered in the two dissenting opinions authored by liberal Justices John Paul Stevens and Steven G. Breyer, who were joined by David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. In Stevens' case, the majority opinion suggested that the argument put forth in his dissent that the Second Amendment's right to bear arms would "cause the protected right to consist of the right to be a soldier or to wage war" amounted to "an absurdity that no commentator has ever endorsed."
The majority also stated that Stevens' arguments, based on his reading of the drafting history of the amendment, indicate that Stevens "flatly misreads the historical record."
Scalia also wrote that "Justice Breyer's assertion that individual self-defense is merely a 'subsidiary interest' of the right to keep and bear arms...is profoundly mistaken."
Scalia's opinion castigates dissenting minority rulings
Stevens lamented in his dissenting opinon that "I fear the District's policy choice (the gun ban) may well be just the first of an unknown number of dominoes to be knocked off the table" by the majority opinion. He argued that the majority opinion upholding an individual right interpretation amounted to "the announcement of a new constitutional right to own and use firearms for private purposes..."
Breyer contended that gun violence
in modern-day
But Scalia countered in the finale paragraph of his majority opinion that, "We are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country, and we take seriously the concerns raised by the many amici who believe that prohibition of handgun ownership is a solution...But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table.
"Undoubtedly," he continued, "some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct."
The ruling ignited a firestorm,
with supporters of the ban complaining that it will lead to increased violence
in
Polls run by several news organizations found an overwhelming majority of on-line respondents supported the individual rights ruling That did not stop the invective from spilling over on several newspaper forums It reached a fever pitch with the traditionally antigun Chicago Tribune calling for a repeal of the Second Amendment in an editorial the following day.
Within hours of the ruling, the
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence was out with a fund-raising plea that
declared, "The Heller decision will no doubt embolden ideological
extremists to file new legal attacks on existing gun laws. But with the help of
the
They were attempting to raise $50,000 by June 30, and it was not clear whether they met that goal.
"We disagree with the Court's decision giving individuals a right to possess guns for private purpose," the news release stated. "However, what is critically important is that all nine Justices agreed that a wide variety of gun laws are constitutional, including restrictions on carrying concealed weapons, guns in schools and other sensitive places, and bans on 'dangerous and unusual' weapons."
An anti-gun forum called "The
Gun Guys" called the ruling a "misguided decision" that will
lead to an increase in violent crime. They have an archive of stories about
shooting victims called "
"We only wish that the
justices of the Supreme Court could have first looked at an archive similar to
ours to see the devastation of guns in
But LaPierre disagreed with that assessment.
"Our founding fathers wrote and intended the Second Amendment to be an individual right," he said. "The Supreme Court has now acknowledged it. The Second Amendment as an individual right now becomes a real permanent part of American Constitutional law." The New GUN WEEK, July 1, 2008
SAF-ISRA, NRA launch federal suits vs.
by Dave Workman,
Senior Editor
Within an hour of the Supreme
Court's ruling on the Second Amendment, attorneys representing the Second
Amendment Foundation (SAF) and the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA), and
four
One day later, the National Rifle
Association (NRA) and four other citizens also filed suit against the city's
decades-old handgun ban. The NRA's action is broader, however, in that the
organization and four individual citizens in
The Heller ruling on the
"Our goal," Gura said "is to require state, and local officials to
respect our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
Alan Gottlieb, founder of the SAF,
noted in a prepared statement that "
ISRA Executive Director Richard
Pearson added, "
Curiously, Illinois' Sen. Barack Obama, waiting to officially secure his party's nomination for president at its convention in Denver, CO, offered a tepid reaction to the ruling, insisting that he supports the individual right to keep and bear arms, but adding that the decision still allows for local control measures.
But a furious Daley called the
ruling "very frightening" during a press conference at
Quoted by The Chicago Sun-Times, Daley told reporters, "Does this lead to everyone having a gun in our society? If they think that's the answer, then they're greatly mistaken. Then, why don't we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West? You have a gun and I have a gun and we'll settle in the streets."
Individual plaintiffs in the lawsuit are retiree Otis McDonald, former police officer Adam Orlov and David and Colleen Lawson.
McDonald is a retired maintenance
engineer who worked at the
In addition to being a civil rights
and union leader in the
"This lawsuit, I hope, will allow me to bring my handgun into the city legally," he said in an interview with Gun Week. "I only want a handgun in my house for my protection."
A former
Orlov
told Gun Week that he believes the
The Lawsons
have been near-victims of a home-invasion in which Colleen, alerted by a
neighbor, was able to confront a trio of thugs as they tried to pry open the
back door of the couple's
Perhaps as alarming as the attempted break-in was the response from police. It took them more than a half-hour to respond to a life-threatening situation, and when they arrived, according to Colleen, "they basically just said there was nothing they could do."
Attorney Sigale
observed, The right to defend our homes and families
against those will; would do them harm, whether a random criminal, violent
ex-domestic partner, or other wrongdoer, is one of the principles upon which
Details on the SAF lawsuit can be found online at "chicagoguncase.com."
In the NRA lawsuit, individual plaintiffs are Dr. Kathryn Tyler, Anthony Burton, Van F. Welton and Brett Benson. The New GUN WEEK, July 1, 2008
NRA, CCRKBA join forces in San Fran public housing
suit
by Dave Workman, Senior Editor
First, it was the National Rifle
Association (NRA) and Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) joining in a landmark
lawsuit to stop the infamous
Two months later, SAF and NRA teamed
up with the Law Enforcement Alliance of America and California Association of
Firearms Retailers to successfully battle the city of
Now, NRA has joined forces with the
Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
(CCRKBA) in another lawsuit in
That lawsuit came just 48 hours after the Supreme Court issued its historic ruling in the Heller case declaring the Second Amendment protects an individual civil right to keep and bear arms (see related story).
"Just because someone lives in public housing does not mean that person must surrender his or her civil rights, or their right of self-defense," said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. "This lawsuit seeks to restore the rights of those living in public housing to choose to own a gun for sport or to defend their families."
Attorney Chuck Michel represents the plaintiffs, as he represented the NRA and SAF in the Proposition H lawsuit.
This new legal action was filed in US District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division.
This could become a new experience
for a
9th Circuit Court of Appeals is one of the appellate courts that had
previously held the Second Amendment protects only some sort of
"collective right" to bear arms while serving in a militia. Called
the most liberal, and most overturned, circuit in the nation, if this case
winds its way up to the 9th Circuit appellate court, judges there will have to
deal with the Second Amendment in its traditional and historic context.
The lawsuit was filed in federal
court against the City of
"Before the Second Amendment
can be used to challenge unconstitutional regulations and laws at the state or
local level, it must be 'incorporated' through the Fourteenth Amendment to
apply to the state and local governments," Michel explained. "The
lawsuit will serve to establish the incorporation doctrine in the 9th Circuit Court
of Appeal, including
"As with the advancement of any civil right throughout history, subsequent litigation is essential in order to establish both the parameters of the Second Amendment's protections, and initially to establish that the Second Amendment restricts state and local governments from infringing on your right to self- defense," the attorney noted. The New GUN WEEK, July 1, 2008
Judge declines to block
A
federal judge on June 26, the same day the US Supreme Court issued its decision
in the DC v. Heller case, declined to stop
The
law, which Gov. Charlie Crist (R) signed in April,
will allow employees possessing concealed handgun licenses (CPLs)
to keep guns in their vehicles while parked on their employer's premises. Not
only will employers not be able to stop them, they won't be able to ask whether
an employee has a gun in his or her car, either, The Tampa Tribune reported.
Chief
District Judge R. Hinkle said he was neither granting nor denying the
injunction, but other obligations and the need to research the case further
will probably prevent him from ruling before mid-July, he said.
The
law not only grants employees with CPLs the right to
keep guns in their vehicles, it permits customers to do so as well, but there's
a catch, argued Barry Richard, the chamber's attorney, building on questions
that Hinkle raised about the statute.
As
the judge noted, the statute applies only to "employers" defined as
businesses with at least one employee possessing a concealed weapons permit. If
the business lacks such an employee, it does not qualify as an "employer,"
in which case, neither employees nor customers of that particular business have
a right to keep a gun in their car on the premises.
A
business might have a single employee with a CPL one day, but not the next,
Richard argued— meaning that the customers' rights to have a gun on premises
would change daily.
Attorney Jonathan Glogau, arguing for the state, said that both Richard and Hinkle were stretching the meaning of the statute. The New GUN WEEK, July 1, 2008
PA open carry activists file suits against
by Dave Workman, Senior Editor
Five
open carry activists in Pennsylvania have filed two separate federal civil
rights lawsuits against Dickson City police Officers Anthony Mariano and Karen
Gallagher, and Chief William Stadnitski in the
aftermath of a May 9 incident in which the plaintiffs were confronted and
detained even though they had broken no laws.
Gun
Week first reported the incident in the June 15 edition.
The
first complaint, filed in US District Court for the Middle District of
Pennsylvania, alleges that Gallagher and Mariano "illegally threatened,
harassed, detained and/or accosted" plaintiffs Richard and Judy Banks,
Roger McCarren and Larry Meyer while they were dining
at a restaurant Banks, McCarren and Meyer were all
visibly armed, and were essentially minding their own business.
The
lawsuit asserts that the plaintiffs' rights were violated under the First,
Fourth, Fifth and 14th Amendments.
The
other lawsuit, filed individually by Edward J. Kraft Jr. names Gallagher,
Mariano and the Dickson City Borough, but not Chief Stadnitski.
All
four plaintiffs in the Banks lawsuit were with several other people, and
according to filing papers, Banks, McCarren and Meyer
"were ordered (by Mariano and Gallagher) to report to a different section
of the restaurant for `investigation'." However, the lawsuit contends,
there was no explanation of what was being investigated.
Banks
refused to provide identification, believing that the officers had no
justification to ask for it, so he was then, according to the lawsuit,
"illegally and unjustifiably handcuffed, frisked, and arrested, his
personal property illegally confiscated and he was thereafter placed in the
back seat of the
Kraft's
lawsuit details his encounter with Gallagher and supports the account of the
incident contained in the Banks documents. In all, according to the two
lawsuits, the officers had nine or 10 men in the group standing outside in the
rain, coercing them to produce identification and concealed carry permits, the
latter of which is not required in
Gun
Week earlier spoke to Stadnitski, who said this was
the first incident in his 37 years in law enforcement that involved private
citizens openly carrying a firearm, other than while hunting. He also
maintained that his officers erred on the side of caution when responding to a
911 call from a restaurant patron that complained about people "brandishing
guns."
"There
was no ill will on our part," Stadnitski stated.
That
is not how the incident is portrayed in the lawsuit filed by attorney Robert
J. McGee, who is representing the Banks plaintiffs. He believes the incident
began because another patron in the restaurant was "unhappy and
uncomfortable that someone had a firearm in a holster on their hip" and
called the police. He does not know who placed the initial 911 call.
Magee
told Gun Week that the process could take some time, because the defendants
have 30 days in which to respond, and then there will be motions, discovery,
depositions and a conference, and all of that takes time.
Likewise,
the confrontation between Kraft and Gallagher, as portrayed in the lawsuit
filed by attorney Johanna L. Gelb of
The
Banks lawsuit also complains that Gallagher and Mariano "refused to
return...a handgun which Banks had in his possession at the time..." They
also seized a handgun from McCarren and "refused
to return it to him, on the basis that, according to some type of illegal
registry maintained or available to the Dickson City Police Department, the
handgun was not 'registered' to...McC arren."
Banks
was ultimately released after, according to the filing document,
"Gallagher and Mariano realized they had no basis for placing (him) under
arrest...but it was only after an extended period of time."
Banks'
lawsuit also describes a confrontation between the officers and Judy Banks, who
tried to videotape and audiotape the encounter between
the officers and the three other plaintiffs. The officers ordered Judy Banks to
stop recording "under threat of being arrested for violation of the
federal wiretap law," the document states.
Meanwhile,
Kraft alleges that "Gallagher and Mariano acted with a conscious and/or reckless
disregard of the constitutional rights of Kraft to be free from unreasonable
detentions, searches and seizures, and to be deprived of his property without
due process of law."
Kraft's
lawsuit says both officers "illegally threatened, detained, searched and
seized him, and otherwise interfered with his rights under the Second, Fourth
and Fourteenth Amendments..."
The
incident has infuriated open carry activists across the country, who have been following developments on OpenCarry.org,
an Internet forum set up for the growing open carry community. This is not the
first time an open carry confrontation between citizens and the police has
resulted in a federal civil rights lawsuit. A few years ago, another such
lawsuit was filed, according to Magee, who also represented the earlier client.
That lawsuit was settled but the terms of that settlement were confidential,
the attorney said.
Richard
Banks is the founder of Pennsylvania Open Carry, an offshoot of OpenCarry.org
The New GUN WEEK, July 1, 2008
NEWS BRIEFS
Armed citizen foils
bank heist in
An armed private citizen has been
hailed as a hero for abruptly halting a bank robbery last month in
Lebanese-born Nabil
Fawzi, who spent time in the Lebanese army, was
tipped to the robbery by another teller and without hesitation, drew a legally-
concealed 9mm Beretta pistol and aimed it at Webster. Fawzi
has a
"You're not going to rob this bank today," Fawzi told Webster as he held the would-be robber until the police arrived.
When Webster handed the clerk a note about the bomb, he also warned against putting dye packs in the bag of loot. The teller hit the silent alarm to alert the police.
Fawzi appeared on the early morning "Fox & Friends" program, telling the audience that he tricked Webster into believing that he was an off-duty policeman. Actually, Fawzi is the proprietor of a gas station, and he frequently stops at the bank en route to his business in the morning.
According to The Ann Arbor News,
As one of two home invaders aimed a gun at his head, a Louisville, KY resident reportedly faked a heart attack to distract the gunman long enough to draw his own handgun- and fatall7 shoot both thugs, according to The Louisville Courier Journal.
Now it turns out that the thugs were armed with a gun that had been stolen from the Louisville Metro Police Department. According to WLKY Newschannel 32, it was not clear whether either of the dead teens had stolen the gun.
Dead are 19-year-old Earl Springer and Desmond Deshawn Turner. The homeowner, 70-year-old Billy Jackson, shot Springer in the chest and hit Turner in the neck and arm. He told authorities that he fired to defend himself and because he feared the gunmen were going to murder his wife, who was in another room
The
The newspaper reported that Springer had been arrested May 23 for trafficking in a controlled substance and evidence tampering, and in May of 2007, he was convicted of carrying a concealed weapon, but a 60-day jail sentence was "conditionally discharged." Turner apparently had no criminal record. The New GUN WEEK, July 1, 2008
Cops lend radar guns
The new program was prompted by the limited number of officers available to catch speeders and because police want residents to become more involved in their neighborhoods.
The department is seeking sponsors to buy two $395 reconditioned radar guns to start the program.
Volunteers will run radar as part of a two-person team. One person will clock any vehicle traveling more than 10 mph over the speed limit, and the other person will write down the license plate and type of vehicle. If police later find the license plate and vehicle description match, a warning letter will be sent to the car's registered owner. The New GUN WEEK, July 1, 2008
S-F top cop skips
qualifying
Looks like San Francisco Police Chief Heather Fong will be spending time away from the office...and on the gun range, after a report in The San Francisco Chronicle revealed that she had not qualified with her duty sidearm in several years.
The newspaper reported that Fong issued a statement in which she offered the alibi that "the duties of a police chief are demanding and time consuming."
"I acknowledge that I have not scheduled time for firearms re-qualifications," she said. "This will be addressed for future re-qualifications."
Gun rights activists seized on the
disclosure, many noting that they practice far more often than the twice-
annually mandated qualifications required for
The police commission appeared ready to take disciplinary action against the top cop.
Information about Fong's failure to fire her gun in qualifications came from a cop she disciplined for his involvement in the 2005 production of a controversial video that depicted officers responding to fake calls. The New GUN WEEK, July 1, 2008
Eagle slaying brings trial
An American Indian who shot a bald eagle for use in a tribal religious ceremony must stand trial, a federal appeals court has ruled, according to Associated Press and Newsmax.com.
A three judge panel of the 10th
Circuit Court of Appeals in
In dismissing the charge, US
District Judge William Downes of
The appeals court ruled that American Indians' religious freedoms are not violated by federal law protecting eagles or the government's policy requiring American Indians to get permits to kill the birds. The New GUN WEEK, July 1, 2008
‘Dressy' Taser toter arrested
What do you get when you combine a dress, pink rubber boots and a Taser in your wardrobe?
Well, in