STARTERS


Regarding the Ft. Hood murders Act II:
"Whatever the story here, the idea that the U.S. Army has to call 911 when their bases are attacked is flat-out insane."  --David Burge, Enemies of Liberalism


////////


Sign seen at a rally:
Waterboard the President: Find out if he knows anything.


////////


Two perceptions of guns:
Crime, fear, anxiety, revulsion and danger
vs.
Liberty, strength, honor, responsibility and safety.
There it is in a nutshell.


////////


Gun ownership is centrist:
"It's the other side's views that are radical and extremist; this side has 250 years of history, law and tradition. We're moderate centrists -- you know, Constitution, rule of law, delegated powers, consent of the governed, free markets, free thought, individual responsibility, entrepreneurial spirit, profit motive, firearms ownership, morality, religion -- the basics that make America what it is, a shining beacon of hope and freedom for the entire planet."

--Response to a hate-spouting left-wing radically bigoted ignorant network newscaster, attempting to paint conservatives as the opposite of what they truly are. More:
The American Way https://www.gunlaws.com/TheAmericanWay.htm


////////


TV Advertisement for Gun-Free-Zones
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=xZ0obTU4AzM


////////


Perfect Self-Defense in Dallas makes the news:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HT4bho7QVmQ






Bomb Jokes At Airports --
And 186 Other Things You'd Better Not Say
https://www.gunlaws.com/BJAA.htm




 
352 pages, only $19.95 +S&H

"Are you married?" is an "illegal question," according to The Washington Post. Along with:
How much do you weigh,
where were you born,
how many children do you have,
do you own or rent your home,
where do you usually go on vacation,
are you on any medications,
tell me about your family, and dozens of others,
in the context of a job interview.
Who owns a private business anyway?
Read selections from the book, or jest get a copy:
https://www.gunlaws.com/BJAA.htm


----:::----


CORRECTION
That cool video of a gal's purse (in Page Nine No. 132):
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=qrhSf8CEgC8
Maybe you noticed, as did a handful of Page Nine readers, that she keeps pointing guns at her arm (and doesn't even know it). I apologize for providing the link without a parental warning about dangerous gun behavior. (If anyone knows the woman, please pass this memo on.)


----:::----


AVAILABLE AGAIN AT LAST!

This item has been unavailable for a year,
only a limited supply now in stock


TEMPUS FUGIT
by Lawrence Lee Rowe
Only $20, hardcover
 

Summary: Washington, Jefferson and Franklin find themselves inexplicably transported to the future, and explore the country they launched two centuries earlier. A fascinating examination of the Founders’ original values and hopes, contrasted beautifully with where we are today. Deeply insightful, amazing confrontations, a true masterpiece.

What would happen if those three Founders suddenly materialized in the modern world? What would they think? Had their plan for a new nation built on liberty succeeded? Incredibly well researched (he tastefully uses some of their letters to create the current dialog!), you get a deep sense of each Founder’s style, as they discover what America has become in 225 years...

The three suddenly find themselves in a forest, a dangerous place in Colonial times, where savages could attack at any moment. What were Washington’s first words? “I’m unarmed.” Jefferson responds, “Me too.”

Tempus Fugit ("Time Flies")
 

WARNING: This book deals frankly with the racism of slave-owning colonial America, and “the N word” is used accurately in context, which, though artfully done, may be offensive to some readers. But that niggling detail might only bother naggers.
Get all 5 of our thrilling novels for one low package price

BLOCKBUSTER:
1- "Prohibited Person" is now "Prohibited Household"

New wrinkle in rights-denial


The lamestream media told you:
The lamestream media told you:

Nothing, except we want to get as many people into the background-check system as possible, to make everyone safer. 90% of the public supports this. (92%, according to a democrat's party mailer with Mr. Obama's name on it:)







The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:
The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

First, let me repeat: 90% of the public doesn't support much of anything, especially gun stuff, so that number, like most "news" numbers these days, especially from advocates, politicians or government (unelected apparatchiks) is totally bogus (John Lott dissected their ludicrous math). Even so, try this "thought experiment" opinion poll: "The bill proposed for universal background-checks will create a government list of everyone in America who owns firearms, and makes a criminal out of anyone whose list of guns is inaccurate or incomplete. Do you support this?" Still 92% in favor? Not. I described the actual bill in plain English last year: https://www.gunlaws.com/Page9Folder100up/PageNine-122.htm

--

An insightful analysis of background checks, by Page Nine reader Bryan Potratz in Wyoming, and reviewed by the Uninvited Ombudsman and gun-rights attorney Dave Hardy, has received little attention before now. It makes it clear that if a Prohibited Possessor lives anywhere, no one else who lives there can have free access to firearms or ammunition. This has gone basically unreported, even though it is in effect.

If you can't prove that your security measures are satisfactory -- to BATFE's unwritten standards --  YOU become a felon for providing contraband to a prohibited person. Even if they never touch anything.

Even a single round of ammo out in the open would put the prohibited person in violation of 'proximity to guns or ammo' (a red-tape concoction that is a looonng stretch from the law as passed, which talks about "possession"). This is the same standard they use for drug busts, technically called "constructive possession," enabling them to arrest everyone in a house where drugs are found (or planted). Courts have backed up this method completely.

The government, as it always does, takes the most restrictive view it can take: If freedom is at stake, drive a stake through freedom, even if it's just a little. Mere presence in the same home meets their definition of possession, and creates the violation.


The real downside is that this now creates Prohibited Households -- entire private homes where you cannot have a readily available gun for emergencies, or even for cleaning or showing to friends. Everyone in the house is (technically) disarmed by the presence of one person on the NICS Index.

The anti-rights people probably don't mind a bit -- it's like a four-for-one sale on gun bans for an average-size family. And it's unlikely the antis actually worked this out ahead of time. It is a boost though for the forces of darkness, because for every person they can get on that NICS Index, that's a multiplier for people they've disarmed. Five people in NICS, figure 10 to 20 or more denied their rights at home.

Bryan goes on to predict that the NICS Index (the prohibited persons list) could be cross-referenced with hunting license, CCW, FOID or similar databases, to identify addresses where violations might be occurring. This sort of cross-checking is routine police work. He also suggests, "BATFE will be able to claim that such correlations are de-facto probable cause for a warrant to check for/arrest a 'prohibited person in possession of firearms or ammunition.' "  He continues, quite rationally, that, "We know how subtle BATFE can be when prosecuting such warrants."

This threat to the right to keep and bear arms has not hit the radar of any of the national gun-rights groups, at least not publicly. But millions of people nationwide are suffering under it right now.

ACTION ITEM:
The concept of "constructive possession" regarding firearms is an affront to freedom and The American Way, https://www.gunlaws.com/TheAmericanWay.htm and should be abandoned in favor of actual physical possession with deliberate mens rea (criminal intent). Prohibited Households is a miscarriage of justice, and anyone attempting to prosecute such a case should be brought up on charges themselves, in an overdue application of 18 USC §241 et. seq. (denial of civil rights under color of law, look it up).






2- "High Capacity" Magazines Are Insufficient

The lamestream media told you:
The lamestream media told you:

We have to do everything we can to ban high-capacity magazines. Nobody needs these things and they have no place in our society, as we have said hundreds of times already, with no luck so far.



The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:
The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

First of all, ownership of property is not based on need. That's the communist model.

No one is in charge of deciding what you need, or has legitimate power to tell you what you can or can't have in that sense. In this country, ownership of property is based on individual choice and ability to pay. You don't need 10 pairs of shoes, and no one is in a position to say otherwise (well, commies can, "to each according to his need").

The real question, if reporters were worth anything these days, isn't why does anyone need these, it's why would anyone want these. The entire "news" media can't answer that or even raise it when it comes up, yet tens of millions of people want and have them. The answer is simple: "For the same reason the police do."

--

The "news" media is actually referring to "normal capacity magazines," a term you should start using, "the same as police use." Changing your language helps deflate their assault on your rights. Normal or regular capacity magazines, the same as police use.

Experts are now marketing magazine carrying cases capable of holding multiple full-sized magazines neatly, because having only a few is insufficient when facing today's criminals and other miscreants (or tyrants, as we observe overseas).

"Leave it to the free market to come up with an appropriate solution," said one tactical expert who refused to be named for this report. "Running out of ammo is not an option when you're life is on the line, and you face criminals who do not obey 'infringed-size' magazine laws passed by idiots in legislatures." Experts want as many rounds of ammo to protect them as possible -- and in the hands of their armed forces, the police and the public at large.

What many people still don't realize is that police are second responders, another term you should start using, to upset the lie newscasters pound daily. The true first responders -- the crime victims targeted by criminals and terrorists, i.e., YOU -- must have at least equal means as the police. You face identical threats. It's just that you face them first.



"Make it illegal for criminals to have these magazines, or any magazines," said the Uninvited Ombudsman, to no one in particular. Oh, wait, we did that. Gun Laws of America -- https://www.gunlaws.com/gloa.htm

"It's much easier to disarm innocent civilians, which just leaves them helpless, than to take weapons from hardened criminals, which we have not figured out how to do, since Biblical times."

What is it that makes the political left think they can finally accomplish that elusive goal -- disarm the bad guys -- by disarming the innocent? Could Dr. Michael Savage's book title be correct -- Liberalism Is a Mental Disorder?


----:::----


----:::----



THE MENTAL CASE AGAINST GUNS
3- Autism Next To Ban Gun Rights?

The lamestream media told you:
The lamestream media told you:

http://news.yahoo.com/us-autism-estimate-rises-1-68-children-210849190.html

NEW YORK (AP) -- "The government's estimate of autism has moved up again to 1 in 68 U.S. children, a 30 percent increase in two years. But health officials say the new number may not mean autism is more common. Much of the increase is believed to be from a cultural and medical shift, with doctors diagnosing autism more frequently, especially in children with milder problems.

"The cause of autism is still not known. Without any blood test or other medical tests for autism, diagnosis is not an exact science. It's identified by making judgments about a child's behavior (emphasis added).

"The new CDC report focused on 8-year-olds because most autism is diagnosed by that age. The researchers checked health and school records to see which children met the criteria for autism, even if they hadn't been formally diagnosed. Then, the researchers calculated how common autism was in each place and overall.

"The CDC started using this method in 2007 when it came up with an estimate of 1 in 150 children. Two years later, it went to 1 in 110. In 2012, it went to 1 in 88. Experts aren't surprised by the growing numbers, and some say all it reflects is that doctors, teachers and parents are increasingly likely to say a child with learning and behavior problems is autistic." (!)

"'We cannot say what portion is from better diagnosis and improved understanding versus if there's a real change,' said Coleen Boyle, the CDC official overseeing research into children's developmental disabilities." [Note: Her "improved understanding" includes no known cause, no test for occurrence, and known racial and sexual bias in diagnosis.]

"For decades, autism meant kids with severe language, intellectual and social impairments and unusual, repetitious behaviors. But the definition has gradually expanded and now includes milder, related conditions."



The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:
The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:


As the Obama administration forges ahead with plans to ban the right to keep and bear arms based on poorly defined, fuzzy-logic mental-health "measurements" and "findings," the CDC has announced radically growing numbers of children now diagnosed with a potentially disabling condition. The "officials" admit they do not understand, cannot measure, lack a diagnostic test for, and cannot cure the condition, and they actually admit is growing because they simply declare more people to have it.

Criteria for measuring the condition whose definition keeps changing, which is diagnosed based on judgment calls by doctors, have been relaxed from severe abnormalities to mild childhood behaviors, according to "scientific" reports just released.

According to the AP report: "In the latest study, almost half of autistic kids had average or above average IQs. That's up from a third a decade ago and can be taken as an indication that the autism label is more commonly given to higher-functioning children, CDC officials acknowledged."

Racist and sexist prejudices have been acknowledged by the experts as well, and drive this field of "medicine," as noted in their report: "Autism and related disorders continue to be diagnosed far more often in boys than girls, and in whites than blacks or Hispanics. The racial and ethnic differences probably reflects white communities' greater focus on looking for autism and white parents' access to doctors, because there's no biological reason to believe whites get autism more than other people, CDC officials said at a press briefing Thursday."

With the practice of medicine proceeding this far from anything remotely scientific, and when even supposedly pro-gun-rights groups are pressing hard for mental-health bans on the right to keep and bear arms, serious gun-rights advocates are predictably worried.

"The idea that so-called experts constantly evolve this condition, change their standards, use judgment to declare a person guilty of the disease that has no known cause, and that the end result could be denial of your fundamental rights -- who wouldn't be terrified of government-run 'medicine' like that?" said one observer, who wishes to remain anonymous, for fear of being diagnosed as paranoid. (See separate story about widespread cultural paranoia setting in. Are Your Crazy? Denial is a symptom that you are...)

The American Academy of Pediatrics, a known anti-gun-rights advocacy group, issued a statement, saying the nation needs to step up screening for the condition and research into autism's causes. Experts say a diagnosis can now be made at age two or even earlier, though the CDC report says most kids are identified by age four. The AP report points out that: Autism support groups and advocates stand to benefit from increased diagnoses, as more patients equals more funding.


In related news:


"All vets are mentally ill in some way and government should prevent them from owning firearms."  Widely web-circulated and attributed to Calif. Senate democrat Dianne Feinstein, she never said this in so many words.

Her actual statement however, in the Senate Judiciary Committee (3/7/13) implied as much, and she called for careful scrutiny of veterans and their ability to keep and bear arms. She has not yet suggested the same for all gun owners or the public at large, for reasons that were unknown at press time.

Speaking about access to so-called "assault weapons," a boogey man she has been fighting for decades, and soldiers who have PTSD or might develop it and cannot all be identified, she said we must, "find a way that veterans who are incapacitated for one reason or another mentally don't have access to this kind of weapon."
http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/feinstein.asp

And in still other news, Gun Owners of America has already reported that somewhere between 150,000 and 200,000 veterans have been added to the NICS Index, the federal list that voids the Second Amendment for anyone on it.

[Senator Tom Coburn was given a figure by the Congressional Research Service that was around 140,000 in 2007.  He shared it with GOA, see it here: http://www.gunowners.org/pdf/Coburnletter.pdf ]; Gun Owners of America has extrapolated from the 140,000 figure -- given that CRS said that 1,000 names were being added every month. GOA is a group that deserves your direct support: https://gunowners.org.

These vets, men and women, were diagnosed, or treated, or committed, or were given drugs for PTSD. Exact details and numbers have been withheld by the government. The massive rights-denial scheme involved no trials, no representation, no appeals, and no luck, just a flat-out ban on the right to keep and bear arms, for former soldiers, for "mental" reasons. Normally, the VA appoints guardians and declares that the vets are unable to handle their own affairs.  This then fulfills their twisted definition of prohibiting individuals who’ve been “adjudicated as a mental defective,” according to GOA.

I asked if these tens of thousands of people whose rights have been stripped away get notice. "After the Veterans Disarmament Act, perfunctory notice is required, but we would be surprised if any veterans got a hearing before the appointment of a guardian.  Rather, veterans have a very short time-frame to hire a lawyer and psychiatrist -- and contest the appointment at their own expense (normally, it’s around $10,000 or more)."


To be clear: Everyone in the pro-gun-rights movement supports keeping guns out of the hands of truly crazy people. How you define and exclusively identify such people, what rights they retain and can have restored, and how to protect the innocent are legitimate concerns that many experts say are not receiving significant attention. That's putting it too nicely. These rights are about to be trampled.

How to prevent government (and others) from using crazy people as an excuse in the evident ongoing effort to shrink or eradicate the right of the people to keep and bear arms, is a legitimate concern and a high priority.

Operatives working within government to fabricate so-called "mental health" as a means toward infringing upon rights or disarming the public, even incrementally, should be brought up on charges and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. 18 USC §241 et seq. Denial of civil rights under color of law is a felony.





4- The 111th U.S. Supreme Court Gun Case
Rosemond v. United States, 134 S.Ct. 1240 (2014)

There are three more SCOTUS gun-related cases that have not been addressed in Page Nine or by Bloomfield Press (my publishing company) yet.

Salinas v. Texas, No. 12-246, 6/17/13
U.S. v. Castleman, No. 12-1371 3/26/14
Abramski v. United States No. 12-1493 (not decided yet)

I'll get to them soon, I promise.
In the meanwhile, check out the first 92 decisions in my award-winning book:
Supreme Court Gun Cases https://www.gunlaws.com/supreme.htm,
written with lawyer-experts David Kopel and Stephen Halbrook.
See the entire list of cases on that page.
If you know of one we missed, speak up.





About this case (Rosemund)--

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/11/11/1253580/--I-Didn-t-Know-the-Gun-SCOTUS-to-Hear-Rosemond-v-US#

http://blog.legalsolutions.thomsonreuters.com/top-legal-news/scotus-rules-first-landmark-aiding-abetting-case-30-years/


The lamestream media told you:
The lamestream media told you:

When it comes to Supreme Court cases, the "news" descriptions, and what the decision actually says and means are usually night and day. Read the decisions, they are your law, fascinating in most cases. Sickening in how different they are from what the media tells you. The media largely ignored this gun-related case.



The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:
The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Rosemond concerns whether a prison sentence should be increased because someone during the commission of a drug sale (one pound of pot) fired a gun. Legally speaking, it's about aiding and abetting a crime, and the difference between taking actions, wanting to (known as mens rea, a guilty mind), and foreknowledge of events.

It's an exciting story, with a drug deal, theft of the goods, seven shots from a 9mm with no hits, no gun found, witness stories all over the place, and many facts never established. Having, brandishing or firing a gun during certain drug crimes increases the sentence (5, 7 and 10 years). It was never determined who exactly fired the gun, but the government sought the added charge and jail time because a gun was used.

Almost half of all federal prisoners are in for drug charges, and 30% of federal dockets are drug cases. This is big business for the "criminal justice" system and all the people who earn their livings there -- cops, special agents, bail bondsmen, law clerks, lawyers, court staffs, jailers, judges, stenographers, reporters, it's a long list. (They really do have a reverse incentive against seeing this sort of crime disappear, it would cost them their jobs.)

What's important to recognize in this case is that the government argued, in essence, that anyone involved in a crime is guilty of all aspects of the crime, no matter who committed them or what you thought. This is extremely dangerous for the public, because it means if you have even remote connection to some illegal act, the government's inclination is to presume you are guilty of the worst part of whatever took place.

That may have some value in dealing with gangs who, as the government pointed out, often act in concert to achieve some criminal end. But it is a terrible precedent for the innocent. Any wrong-minded youth (or adult) who gets mixed up (or suckered into) something, would end up as guilty as the people who are really bad actors, if the authorities have their way. The potential for abuse is too great to allow on those grounds alone. Like RICO forfeiture, they could condemn everything in sight, lock everything up, just for the bad acts of a lone individual.

Now, the Supreme Court shut down this line of thinking 7 to 2, in a decision written by Elana Kagan. This time. But the fact that your government, here to help you, is thinking this way, is a very bad sign.

Guns made it into a footnote denial: [8] "We did not deal in these cases, nor do we here, with defendants who incidentally facilitate a criminal venture rather than actively participate in it. A hypothetical case is the owner of a gun store who sells a firearm to a criminal, knowing but not caring how the gun will be used. We express no view about what sort of facts, if any, would suffice to show that such a third party has the intent necessary to be convicted of aiding and abetting." (But they thought enough about it to write that disclaimer. Hmmm.)







5- Media Hides Gun Business Milestone

The lamestream media told you:
The lamestream media told you:

Nothing.


The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:
The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:



NSSF.org picked up this announcement about massive economic growth, missed by the lamestream media for unknown reasons --

GUNBROKER.COM Celebrates Major Milestone:

March 15 marked the 15th anniversary of GunBroker.com, the world's largest online auction site for firearms and accessories. Growth has been steady, as the company last year recorded nearly $1 billion in sales and cemented its position among the 400 largest U.S. websites.

Six years ago the company logged its one millionth registered user; that number now exceeds 3 million, a tripling of business and only one of several GunBroker.com milestones. http://www.gunbroker.com/User/Announce.aspx

The most popular sidearms for February: 1st - Smith & Wesson M&P, 2nd - Sig Sauer 1911, 3rd - Colt 1911, 4th - Sig Sauer P238, 5th - Sig Sauer P226. For semi rifles it was: 1st - Ruger 10/22, 2nd - Smith & Wesson M&P, 3rd - Kel Tec Sub 2000, 4th - Ruger Mini-14, 5th - Springfield M1A.

GunBroker's average customer is tech-savvy, under forty, and has a median household income of $88,000. The site attracts 5.5 million visitors monthly and averages about 650,000 firearms for sale at any one time.

This excellent news, reflects the fact that America is strong, businesses are thriving, the public has money to spend, and things are working the way they should. If the daily drumbeat of the "news" media has you convinced otherwise, even if your own situation is presently less than ideal, know that this country can overcome all its obstacles, foreign and domestic, and so can you.









Only $9.95 +S&H.
 


Help us add one million new gun owners --

Your First Gun -- Should you buy one and join 60 million safely armed American homes?
https://www.gunlaws.com/YourFirstGun.htm
(Use the Amazon link there to read some for free!)

Ten bucks, but sold in four-packs for twenty, so you can give 'em away easy.

It addresses the personal questions newcomers always have,
not the nuts and bolts they can get in a hundred places.
Why do I even want a gun? Where would I put the thing?
What about the kids? What will the neighbors think?
What good is it if I have to keep it locked up?
What does buying "off paper" mean? Should I do that?
You gunowners, hey, you'll get a lot out of this too.
You already enjoy my writing, this is icing on that cake.
Click the link and see.

Only $9.95 +S&H.
 

Only $20 for a 4-Pack so you can give 'em away!
 
That's just five bucks each!

Immediate delivery on Kindle, only $4.95!

6- Arizona Moves Good Gun Laws Ahead

Good news!  The bills listed below have been scheduled for Senate Committee of the Whole (COW) hearings on Monday, April 14.  AzCDL (approaching 11,000 members) thanks everyone who has already contacted their Senator!

If you have not yet sent your emails to your Senator on these bills, please do not hesitate any longer.   To access your letter, simply go to the AzCDL Legislative Action center, and take care of business.  The following are the bills that are scheduled to be heard on Monday, April 14.


HB 2339, the AzCDL-requested bill that would allow CCW permit holders to carry in public buildings (unless everyone entering is screened for weapons).

HB 2483, which would strengthen the protection of the lawful use of firearms, air guns and archery equipment on private property.
 
HB 2517, which would add penalties for cities and counties violating state firearms preemption law. (This is the comitatus language I've been railing for, punishment for government failure to obey the laws.)

HB 2535, which would require local law enforcement to sign required NFA transfers within 60 days after receiving a request for certification.

You get to the Legislative Action Center, and once there, the bills are listed on the right side of the page under the “Take Action” banner.  Simply click on each bill and follow instructions.  Be sure to check the “Remember Me” box when verifying your contact information.  If you encounter any difficulties, please contact Fred treasurer@azcdl.org

We expect the following bills to be heard later in the week.  If you have already sent your letters - Thank You!  If not, there is still time to contact your legislators.  Go directly to the AzCDL Legislative Action Center to send the message we have prepared for you.

HB 2103, the AzCDL-requested bill lowering the age limit for CCW permit eligibility to 19 for those with military service, has cleared the Consent calendar and the Majority and Minority caucuses, allowing it to bypass a COW hearing.  It will soon be scheduled for a Senate Third Read vote.
 
HB 2338, the AzCDL-requested bill that adds to the definition of Aggravated Assault the illegal taking, or attempted taking, of a legally possessed (i.e., your) firearm, passed out of the Senate Rules Committee on April 9, and will soon be scheduled for a Senate COW hearing.

SB 1063, the AzCDL-requested bill that would make “no firearms” signs on public buildings unenforceable unless the statutory weapons storage requirements are followed, needs to pass out of the House Rules Committee before it can proceed to a House COW hearing.

SB 1366, which clarifies the definition of a firearm, also need to pass out of the House Rules Committee before it can proceed to a House COW hearing.

As bills progress AzCDL keeps you informed via direct alerts.  Watch for the "Action Alerts" on bills needing your help using the Legislative Action Center.

Don’t forget!  Every AzCDL member who sends the emails generated from the Legislative Action Center will be entered into the raffles for Brownells gift certificates.

These alerts are a project of the Arizona Citizens Defense League, an all-volunteer, non-profit, non-partisan grassroots organization.

AzCDL – Protecting Your Freedom .

Copyright © 2014 Arizona Citizens Defense League, Inc., all rights reserved.






We have it! The new 50-state Traveler's Guide for 2014!

Shipping now, order yours today! Still only $13.95 (+S&H).
Thirty states have changes to their laws, it's all in there!
Massive California changes are on our website,
use the Updates button on our home page https://www.gunlaws.com

 

----:::----


What no president will ever say -- and should (I wish!):
http://www.youtube.com/embed/_T-F_zfoDqI?rel=0


----:::----



NEW TEXAS GUN OWNER'S GUIDE 8TH EDITION AVAILABLE NOW!
NEW TEXAS GUN OWNER'S GUIDE 8TH EDITION AVAILABLE NOW!


The Texas Gun Owner's Guide
https://www.gunlaws.com/tgog.htm

Texas gun laws have changed -- a lot.

New hotel rules; Guns-in-vehicles laws changed; "Inadvertent Display Law";
School Marshal program explained; New knife laws; BB and air-gun laws;
Preemption and school grounds; "Reveal and relinquish your gun" law;
"Defensive Display" law; CHL training has been overhauled...

If you have this book without the flag colors and red emblem on the cover you're out-of date.

Texas DPS is no longer approving training materials, and they
no longer provide the type of support they did when the CHL program started.

The list of laws they give out is PARTIAL -- this book has them all (and describes them).
Can't get your calls and emails answered at HQ? This book answers your questions.
The few bucks you spend here is cheaper (and better!) than a lawyer later.

In spots the DPS website is out of date -- this book is 100% current.

Don't take chances with your freedom --
Get The Texas Gun Owner's Guide.
Only $14.95 +S&H

Trainers -- get this for your students!
Don't teach class without it.

All the Texas gun laws are described in PLAIN ENGLISH,
with a copy of the actual statutes in the back of every book.

Look inside:
https://www.gunlaws.com/TGOG_Contents.htm

STORE OWNERS, CHL TRAINERS:
40% wholesale discount by the half dozen!
PLUS -- one free copy per dozen through Dec. 15, 2013!
Just Call for wholesale orders: 1-800-279-7654. Don't delay.
You don't have to be in business to buy at wholesale for friends and family (minimum six copies).


https://www.gunlaws.com/tgog.htm
"If you knew all your rights you might demand them."

Makes a great holiday gift for someone you know.
Ask for an autograph in the Comments box on the order form.


Some highlights, details (and statutes) included in the 8th edition:

--Mandatory carry-license training has been reduced from 10-15 hours to 4-6 hours.
  Widely publicized by the "news" media. Your need-to-know hasn't dropped, just the government mandate.

--Renewals are now a paperwork and taxing process that can be concluded online, with no new testing required.
   Savvy instructors will start promoting training instead of waiting for expired-license students to show up. Some instructors think this means the end of their business, and for some that may be true. For others, business will increase, as training becomes demand driven instead of government mandated. In Arizona, this demographic and market shift led to new ranges and new training companies opening, catering to newcomers, plus advanced tactical and refresher classes. The ease of renewals led to more original signups.

--Instructors no longer go to the DPS range for testing, they now test each other at a range of their own choosing.

--The risk CHLs used to face for having a gun momentarily show through concealment has been reduced, not eliminated.

--The guarantees of the Motorist Protection Act have been extended somewhat to colleges and universities. It is a step toward Constitutional Carry -- true freedom to carry, without requiring government-issued permission slips.

--The preemption law got some teeth, and BB and air guns are now defined and included.

--Hotels that want to ban your civil right to arms must give you notice or face (minor) criminal penalties.

--A program to provide armed guards in schools ("School Marshals") is underway, though it will be a while before it is robust. Not exactly part of the CHL program, DPS wants other dept. to run it, must have CHL to apply, psych test and a lot more to it. See the book for details.

--The abusive policy of destroying firearms in police custody has ended. Those guns must now be sold, the money used to fight crime.

--The artificial "SA" and "NSA" distinction between semi-autos and non-semi-autos has been discarded. Minimum caliber for the shooting test remains .32, but any qualification allows you to carry any legal firearm, and qualify once in a lifetime (for now).

--Using your social security number for identification in the CHL program is now banned. But forms still have it included.

--Many other smaller changes have also been made. Many are noted in the update summaries at GunLaws.com, linked below. Without the book itself though you get a disjointed view. Get the book. Play it safe.


"It doesn't make sense to own a gun and not know the rules."

"If you knew all your rights you might demand them."

The Texas Gun Owner's Guide
https://www.gunlaws.com/tgog.htm
 

 
Only $14.95 (+S&H)

Women, read this.