New York City Guns archive
Category : Activism

Giuliani: ‘White police officers wouldn’t be there if you weren’t killing each other.’

Categories: Activism, Education, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: November 23, 2014

Former NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani debated Georgetown professor Michael Eric Dyson on Meet The Press. Chaos ensued. (NBC News)

Former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani faced immediate Web backlash Sunday morning after he asked why people protest the killing of unarmed Ferguson, Mo., teenager Michael Brown but not black-on-black crime.

“Ninety-three percent of blacks are killed by other blacks,” Giuliani said, triggering a heated argument on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “I would like to see the attention paid to that that you are paying to this.”

Read More…

Anti-gun liberals claim SAFE Act working because death rates dropped…before law passed!

Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: November 23, 2014

CuomoUrinalSticker

A rather cute effort is being made by anti-gun zealots in New York State to link the SAFE Act with lower death rates. It all began with a story in the Legislative Gazette about a study conducted by the left-leaning Violence Policy Center that allegedly shows states with strict gun laws have lower death rates. Supporters of Governor Andrew Cuomo’s unconstitutional SAFE Act immediately leaped to the conclusion that the study reaffirms the law’s effectiveness.

The problem? There are several.

First, the study is based on statistics collected duringthe years 2011 and 2012. The SAFE Act was passed in January 2013. Therefore, no matter what one’s feeling on Cuomo’s gun grab, there is no way of claiming the study is an endorsement of the SAFE Act, which didn’t take effect until after the study was published.

Read More…

Federal judge considers contempt charge against D.C. over gun laws

Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: November 22, 2014

Image Credit: publicdomainpictures.net

 

A federal judge is weighing a request to hold the District in contempt of court for enacting new gun laws that are so restrictive as to be out of compliance with his order to allow for firearms to be carried publicly in the city.

During a hearing Thursday, U.S. District Judge Frederick J. Scullin Jr. asked the city and the plaintiffs fighting the regulations for additional filings on whether the city should be considered in contempt of his order that officials develop a licensing scheme “consistent with constitutional standards enabling people to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.”

Attorney Alan Gura, who is representing four gun owners in the 2009 Palmer v. District case, argued that, despite passing new laws that allow for concealed carry, the District has not lived up to its court-ordered obligation because the plaintiffs he is representing are still unable to obtain gun-carry permits under the city’s strict regulations.

Please Take Action – Ask Congress to Protect the Interests of Law-Abiding Gun Owners and Sportsmen Today

Categories: Activism, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: November 22, 2014

Image Credit: NRA Store

 

As Congress considers budget legislation, the NRA respectfully urges that the interests of law-abiding gun owners and sportsmen be protected from the ongoing attacks of the anti-gun Obama Administration.

The NRA has worked hard to include numerous pro-gun provisions in the House of Representatives’ budget that would protect lawful gun owners and prevent federal government harassment and overreach on your right to Keep and Bear Arms. Importantly, the House of Representatives also includes a provision to prohibit the Obama Administration from banning the trade and sale of lawfully-owned ivory, which is contained in many antique firearms (click here to see the initial grassroots alert).

The NRA supports efforts to stop poaching and the illegal trade of ivory. However, banning lawfully-owned domestic ivory will have no impact on elephant poaching in Africa. On the contrary, such a ban would affect only honest, law-abiding Americans by making their possessions valueless.

In a previous Grassroots Alert, we highlighted that the Obama Administration has begun a series of executive actions aimed at banning the sale and trade of ivory.

Please call your Representative and Senators at 202-224-3121 and urge them to pass legislation that prohibits a ban on lawfully-owned domestic ivory and holds the Obama Administration accountable.

Your actions today may determine if the sale and trade of firearms that contain ivory, as well as the importation of sport-hunted elephants, will be banned. The NRA is currently meeting with offices in the House and Senate, and we will continue to keep you informed as this issue progresses.

For more information on the proposed ivory ban, please read the NRA-ILA Ivory Ban Fact Sheet here.

For more information on H.R. 5052 and S. 2587 please read the NRA-ILA “Lawful Ivory Protection Act of 2014″ Fact Sheet here.

School Suspends Fifth-Grader Armed with Finger, Childlike Imagination (Pussification of the USA)

Categories: Activism, Humor, Legal, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: November 22, 2014

Kid-Finger-Gun-Large

Image Credit: NRA

 

Another sad battle by the agents of political correctness in their war on childhood was waged last Friday, when 10-year-old Milford, Mass., fifth-grader Nickolas Taylor was suspended for two days following an incident in the Stacy Middle School cafeteria. The offense? Armed only with his index finger and a vivid imagination, Nickolas reportedly cut in front of two classmates in the lunch line while firing an imaginary “ray gun” and making corresponding ray gun sound effects.

According to a report in the Milford Daily News, the two pupils who claimed Nickolas cut in line informed a school official of the behavior. When the matter was brought to the attention of Assistant Principal Noah Collins, the administrator deemed Nickolas’ actions a threat and issued the suspension.

Thankfully, it appears reasonable adults have now taken over the situation. According to the Milford Daily News, during a Milford School Committee meeting School Committee Chairman Scott Harrison stated, “Quite frankly, I have zero tolerance for zero tolerance policies.” Harrison added, “We need to make sure we’re not treating situations as black and white when there are shades of gray.” Milford Superintendent Robert Tremblay also suggested that “[r]emoving a child from school may be in effect positively reinforcing a negative behavior.”

In any event, the Taylor family has decided to make other plans for Nickolas’s education. Nickolas’s father Brian told the Daily News that he has submitted the paperwork to pull Nickolas out of Stacy Middle School in order to home school him.

While some forward-thinking local school officials have shown an interest in fixing policies with absurd consequences, NRA is working to change state laws to make sure incidents like these don’t occur in the first place. In Florida NRA helped enact the “Right to be Kids” act, which states that “[s]imulating a firearm or weapon while playing or wearing clothing … that depict[s] a firearm or weapon or express[es] an opinion regarding a right guaranteed by the Second Amendment … is not grounds for disciplinary action or referral [for prosecution].”

Regrettably, overreaction to normal childhood behavior has become common in our nation’s public schools. With millions of students at the mercy of nonsensical zero-tolerance policies that unreasonably punish harmless behavior, and the sometimes thoughtless school administrators who enforce them, state legislatures may be school kids’ best hope for graduating with their records and reputations intact.

Ill-conceived Washington State Background Check Initiative Already Causing Absurd Outcomes

Categories: Activism, Legal, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: November 22, 2014

 

Firearms-Museum-Large

Image Credit: NRA

 

Barely two weeks after Washington State voters approved Initiative 594 — a measure the NRA warned was “deeply flawed” — our predicted consequences are beginning to emerge.

Under I-594’s restrictive language, a person simply handing his or her firearm to another is presumptively required to broker this “transfer” through a gun dealer. This also necessitates the accompanying background check, fee, paperwork, taxes and, in the case of a handgun, state registration.

Proponents of the initiative had assured voters that fears of this overreach were exaggerated. Prior to the vote on I-594, Geoff Potter, spokesman for 1-594 proponents Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility, said I-594 “simply applies the current system of background checks to all sales.”

As recounted in a Washington State news report, however, the Lynden Pioneer Museum has opted to pull eleven loaned WWII rifles currently on display and return these firearms to their collector owners before the “transfer” requirement in I-594 takes effect next month. The reason? The law contains no exemptions for firearms loaned for museum displays, or loaned for similar educational or cultural institution study or uses. Once the law takes effect, the firearms could not be returned to their owners without the mandatory background checks and all the logistics and expenses that entails.

The museum director in Washington came to this decision reluctantly but unavoidably. “I read through the law about 10 different times looking for a loophole,” he said. He found none. Unfortunately, there is no guidance at the state level because Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson has reportedly not formed an opinion about I-594, and no authoritative interpretation of the initiative is available to the public, apart from the text of I-594 itself. In the meantime, the museum’s attorney has stated he would welcome assurances from the state that it would not enforce the law to the detriment of the museum or the owners of the firearms on display. To date, however, no such assurances have been forthcoming.

For his part, Geoff Potter, according to the Associated Press, now states that the museum scenario “is clearly not what was concerned when I-594 was designed,” and added, “You can’t craft every possibility into every law.” The fact that advocates of I-594 ignored warnings by NRA and others of the measure’s overreach, however, tells a different story. These consequences can hardly be considered unforeseen, and perhaps, unintended. While even the staunchest supporters of the law do not appear to be arguing that the museum mishap somehow promotes public safety, it does serve their overarching goal of marginalizing the role of firearms in American life and history.

While we await news of other embarrassing and counterproductive consequences of the law, what is already obvious is that this poorly thought-out and badly drafted law goes too far, and will disproportionately, unnecessarily and unfairly burden law-abiding firearm owners.

Supporters of I-594 have indicated they will use the momentum from the Washington State vote to pursue similar “background check” campaigns in other states, including Nevada and Oregon. Yet if I-594 in Washington is good for anything, it is to painfully illustrate how the gun-control agenda leads to the chilling of innocent conduct, potentially creates criminals out of decent people, requires the willful suppression of reason and reality, and has little to do with public safety. Above all, it counsels that I-594 is a bad decision to be corrected, not one to be replicated in other states.

NRA is committed to doing everything we can to fight I-594 on behalf of our members in Washington State. We are already in discussions about legislative remedies to the most onerous provisions. As always, we will continue to work in whatever arena is realistic – legislative, legal or political – to address the concerns of our members.

The Doctor is In, but Privacy is Out: UK Proposes Adding Gun Ownership Records to Medical Files

Categories: Activism, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: November 22, 2014

 

UK-Doctors-Large

Image Credit: NRA

 

With warrantless home inspections and an onerous registration and licensing scheme, UK gun owners already have little refuge from the prying eyes of the state. However, some law enforcement and Home Office officials are keen to extend gun owner surveillance into the doctor’s office.

On November 9, The Sunday Times published an article titled, “Doctors are told to report on mental state of gun owners.” The title aptly summarizes plans to enlist doctors to inform police when a patient exhibits mental or physical characteristics (including terminal illness) the doctors deem incompatible with gun ownership. In explaining why he wanted to draft physicians as informants, Chief Constable Andy Marsh of Hampshire Constabulary lamented, “Lots of things happen in people’s lives which the police don’t know about.”

Most troubling, the item reported that “Owners of shotguns and other firearms are to have medical files permanently marked.” In other words, gun license information would be placed in a patient’s medical file and automatically supplied to their doctor.

Marsh’s words to the Times echo comments he made in a June 11 meeting of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) Firearms and Explosives Licensing Working Group. According to minutes of the meeting, Marsh said, “Firearms licensing needs an enduring marker on the medical records of people that hold a firearm or shotgun.” If the name Andy Marsh sounds familiar, it might be because last month we reported on his vocal support for surprise warrantless firearm storage inspections.

Serious talks of implementing a surveillance scheme incorporating firearm licenses into medical records have been going on since 2009. At that time, the British Medical Association and the ACPO came to an agreement on the topic, with the BMA stating, “In the BMA’s view such a system can be appropriate, provided it is used as part of the ordinary care given to a patient. It can, for example, be a useful aide-memoire, to remind doctors that the patient has, or may have, access to a firearm.” Anti-gun advocates again pushed the policy in 2010 in the wake of a high-profile shooting in the County of Cumbria.

Unfortunately, the United States hasn’t been immune to this type of intrusion into the doctor-patient relationship. In California, Illinois, and New York, healthcare providers have been deputized as gun control enforcement agents, tasked with alerting police when a patient displays undesirable behavior. Because these states also have registration schemes, the police then cross-check these reports against firearm transfer or licensing databases to determine if the subject of the report is on record as having a firearm. The report itself may be enough to cost the individual his or her Second Amendment rights, with nothing more than after-the-fact opportunity for a hearing masquerading as due process.

As bad as this is, however, the patient-provider relationship in these states is at least not colored by the provider having direct access to records of the individual’s firearm ownership information. In contrast, the UK system would apparently alert a physician to a patient’s status as a gun owner when the doctor opens the patient’s medical file. This exposes all gun-owning patients to whatever personal biases a given healthcare provider may have against firearms and their owners.

NRA has long recognized the privacy and trust concerns inherent in medical personnel taking on an active role in enforcing gun control. That’s why NRA has supported legislation in Florida, Missouri, and Montana designed to keep medical practitioners from collecting information on gun ownership that’s irrelevant to the patient’s individual care. Further, vital language was included in the Affordable Care Act (otherwise known as Obamacare) that prohibits the law from being used to collect information on firearms and firearm owners or to discriminate against owners or users of firearms in access to and delivery of health-related services. Not coincidentally, the Obama’s administration’s nominee for U.S. Surgeon General, Dr. Vivek Murthy, has advocated for the repeal of these provisions.

President Obama has embraced the UK as model for gun control policy. The extreme nature of that endorsement becomes ever clearer, as what little rights and privacies UK gun owners cling to continue to erode.

Federal Investigations to Proceed on Operation Choke Point

Categories: Activism, Legal, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: November 22, 2014

 

DOJ-Investigation-Large

Image Credit: NRA

 

As we reported last month, a coalition of congressional representatives led by Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-Mo.) had requested internal investigators at the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to conduct formal inquiries into Operation Choke Point, as well as any officials and staff involved in the program. Rep. Luetkemeyer is now reporting that those requests have been granted. According to his press release announcing the decisions, “The correspondence I received from the FDIC and DOJ is a great first step in ensuring that those responsible for Operation Choke Point are held accountable and that Congress and the American people receive details and answers they deserve.”

Over the past year, we have reported at length on the abuses of Operation Choke Point, an enforcement program involving DOJ and FDIC (among other agencies) that claims to target financial fraud, but in reality is being used to choke off banking services to legitimate, although politically-disfavored, businesses. These businesses include retailers of firearms and ammunition, a number of which have found their banking relationships abruptly severed with little or no explanation and without reference to anything the individual businesses did or did not do. Earlier this year, a congressional report based on examination of nearly 900 internal DOJ documents found that the operation’s adverse effect on legitimate businesses was not merely an unintended side-effect but the outcome of a deliberate attempt to target entire business sectors that, while legal, were deemed objectionable by regulators.

Many questions about the program remain, including who decided which business sectors should be targeted, the extent of coordination between the agencies involved, and who within the Obama administration knew of or encouraged the activity. The forthcoming investigations should hopefully shed light on these and other important issues. What is clear is that DOJ and FDIC have a lot of explaining to do.

Your NRA remains committed to shedding light on the abusive practices of Operation Choke Point. While other attempts to reign in Choke Point are underway — including legislation and litigation by affected members of the financial services industry — the ultimate solutions to such rank abuse of investigative and enforcement authorities is to ensure they are clearly revealed for what they are and to pinpoint the decision-makers and planners involved. Legislation and court orders, while beneficial and certainly indicated in addressing Operation Choke Point, are no substitute for integrity, sound discretion, and professional ethics. In this regard, Operation Choke Point may have more to say about the character of those administering the system than about the soundness of the system itself.

Ben Carson Seeks to Assure Supporters He’s Solid on Guns

Categories: Activism, Education, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: November 21, 2014

Carson

Image Credit: Illinois Review

 

Ahead of a weekend trip to Iowa, potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson sought to assure supporters Wednesday evening that he’s a strong Second Amendment supporter.

As he inches closer to the prospect of a presidential campaign, Carson used a conference call to try to address questions about his loyalty to gun rights. Skeptics often point to a statement the neurosurgeon-turned-conservative-activist made in 2013 to conservative talk-show host Glenn Beck, who asked whether people have the right to own semi-automatic weapons.

“It depends on where you live,” Carson told Beck. “If you live in the midst of a lot of people, and I’m afraid that that semi-automatic weapon is going to fall into the hands of a crazy person, I would rather you not have it.”

Read More…

Jay Leno Cancels SHOT Show Appearance Because of Bloomturd Intimidation

Categories: Activism, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: November 20, 2014

Image Credit: atoast2wealth

 

Former late night host Jay Leno was scheduled to do an appearance at an annual event hosted by the National Shooting Sports Foundation in Connecticut this January. The Shooting, Hunting, Outdoor Trade Show (SHOT) focuses on pretty much what it sounds like… hunters and the gear they use to engage in the sport. Really dangerous sounding, eh? Well, to some it must have been, and the fact that the group is based in Newtown certainly bolstered their courage to complain.

Read More…

Obama’s Latest Illegal Folly: Unlawful Immigration Action

Categories: Activism, Education, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: November 20, 2014

http://onthenorthriver.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/what-me-worry1.jpg

Image Credit: onthenorthriver.com

 

In at least twenty-five separate occasions caught on video, Obama has stated correctly and unequivocally that the Oval Office has no power to alter or ignore U.S. Immigration and Naturalization laws, rules or policies, as established by Congress. This means that the crime he is about to commit against the United States is both willful and premeditated. The question is… what will members of Congress and the American people do about it?

Once again, Republican Party leaders are talking about suing Obama over his abuse of office. There is no precedence or legal authority granted by the Constitution to sue a president for treasonous acts. The U.S. Constitution states precisely what Congress can and must do when an Oval Office occupant is acting against the United States and beyond their Constitutional authority….

Article II – Section 4 states – “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Congress must impeach Barack Obama for his unconstitutional actions. Suing Obama is nothing more than an overt attempt to escape the constitutional authority and duties of Congress by avoiding the obvious remedy prescribed for just such an occasion in the U.S. Constitution. Before Congress can force the Executive Branch to respect the Constitution, they must respect the Constitution themselves. In this case, Obama’s unilateral action on immigration meets the following test…

· Such an action is beyond the legal authority of the Executive Branch · As a result, it is a direct violation of the U.S. Constitution · The act is of, by and for La Raza and millions of illegal aliens, not the American people · As such, it is an overt act of war against the American people · The act directly threatens both national sovereignty, security, and the rule of law · As such, it is again, an overt act of war against the American people and national security · Congress has placed Obama on OFFICIAL NOTICE in advance of the act · As a result, the act will be with the prior knowledge that it is unconstitutional and illegal

THIS IS AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE – It involves bribery from groups like La Raza via their millions in democrat campaign donations and lobby efforts. It involves numerous high crimes and misdemeanors, the result of which rises to the level of treason against the United States and the American people.

Read More…

GOP Leadership to Relinquish all (Gun) Policy Decisions to Dems, for Next 10 Months

Categories: Activism, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: November 19, 2014

Image Credit: GOA

 

First, the good news. Last week, you contacted your congressional representatives and demanded a “short term” Continuing Resolution. They heard you, and every conservative in Washington is echoing this theme.

Now for the bad news. Even though Republicans just won control of Congress, what’s the first “bright idea” the Republican leadership comes up with after their wave election?

ANSWER: GIVE CONGRESSIONAL DEMOCRATS CONTROL OF THE CONGRESS FOR THE NEXT TEN MONTHS!!!!!

Thankfully, the overwhelming percentage of conservative Republicans in Washington are opposed to this. And that’s why we need to keep lighting the fire under them, so they will continue to keep pressing their leadership to stand up to Harry Reid and Barack Obama.

Here is what’s at stake: Virtually all spending and policy decisions are made on the giant government-funding bill, called the “continuing resolution” or “CR.”

And it’s in the “CR” where we have been able to defund much of Obama’s anti-gun agenda: defunding the shotgun import ban, Fast & Furious, the implementation of the Arms Trade Treaty, etc.

The current “CR” is slated to expire on December 11. So the Republican House has two choices:

1. It can allow the repudiated Democrats currently in control of the Senate (until January 5) to make all of the spending and policy decisions — which will affect your gun rights — until September 30, 2015. It would do this by passing a so-called “long-term CR” which would set policy and spending until the end of the fiscal year (September 30, 2015).

2. Or it would do a “short-term CR” into January, February, or March. This would allow the newly elected Republican Congress to set spending and policy for the federal government for most of next year.

What difference does it make?

Given Obama’s “veto pen,” all of the pro-gun policy for the next two years will probably be achieved on this bill — or not.

When April 15 hits — and millions of Americans are hit with hundreds of dollars of ObamaFines — we may be able to create a massive fight over ObamaCare’s unconstitutional mandates.

And this could be the best chance that gun owners have of eliminating a backdoor gun ban — where health data is compiled on millions of Americans and used to disarm gun owners (similar to how 175,000 military veterans have already been disarmed).

But we can’t do it without a short-term CR.

Finally, with respect to the anti-gun amnesty provisions Obama is about to illegally promulgate by executive fiat? We can address these in a Republican controlled Congress. But we can’t, so long as Harry Reid is in the catbird’s seat.

So we ask this of Republicans: Why did we elect you? It certainly wasn’t so that you could cede all of the spending and policy decisions to Democrats for 37.5% of your congressional term.

It’s time to show some backbone. And the first step is a short-term CR.

ACTION: Contact your Representative and urge him to insist on a “short-term CR.”

NOTE: This alert contains different messages for Republican and Democrat Representatives. By using the GOA Engage site to contact your Representative, the system will automatically select the correct letter.

Gabrielle Giffords’ Group: We’ll push gun debate in 2016 Rea

Categories: Activism, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: November 19, 2014

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Tucson, is stepping down and will not run for re-election. Her announcement came in a YouTube video. The story from Cronkite News reporter <b> Liz Kotalik </b>.

Image Credit: Cronkite News Online

 

Former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’ anti-gun violence super PAC spent $10.6 million in the midterms and won barely won half of its contests — but the group is already preparing for 2016 and plans to get involved in the GOP presidential primaries.

The group, Americans for Responsible Solutions, faces a steep task: Gun control has hardly registered as an issue on the campaign trail, there’s strident opposition to possible restrictions from the Republican base, and the pro-gun lobby, led by the National Rifle Association, remains formidable.

SHANNON WATTS: Lie Back And Think of Bloomberg (Bloomturd Buddy is Nervous)

Categories: Activism, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: November 19, 2014

The gun prohibitionists of Michael Bloomberg’s Moms Demand Action have led a shrill social media bullying campaign against Kroger grocery stores recently, culminating in an ignored demonstration of just several dozen protesters outside a Kroger shareholder’s meeting in Cincinnati last month.

Last night, the group attempted to spin several criminal acts that occurred on Kroger property around the country as justification for banning the lawful carry of firearms by citizens under local, state, and federal law.

See if you can get your mind around this addled argument:

Responding to news reports of shootings at Kroger Stores in Toledo, Ohio and Fulton County, Georgia this week, Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America is today reiterating its call on Kroger CEO Rodney McMullen and President Michael Ellis to prohibit the open carry of guns in its stores.

“Our thoughts are with the victims of these two shootings at Kroger locations in Ohio and Georgia. The last place I expect to encounter a loaded gun is at the grocery store—especially not a place that promotes being family-friendly like Kroger,” said Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action for Gun sense in America. “These shootings, along with the 16 other shootings and threats at Kroger stores nationwide in the past two years, should be a wake up call to Kroger CEO Rodney McMullen and President Michael Ellis: Guns do not belong at the grocery store.”

In neither incident were guns in grocery stores, Mrs. Watts.

Read More…

Knife Rights’ First Annual Ratings of Best & Worst Cities for Knife Owners (NYC Wins Worst City!)

Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: November 19, 2014

In the past five years Knife Rights has significantly advanced the rights of law-abiding knife owners in the United States, passing 15 pro-knife bills in 11 states. Knife Rights Chairman Doug Ritter explains, “This first annual Knife Rights review of the worst and best knife laws in America contrasts places where law-abiding knife owners enjoy complete or substantial freedom with those places which restrict the freedom of honest citizens by imposing arbitrary and irrational restrictions. These extreme anti-knife regulations are universally ignored by criminals and serve only to harass unsuspecting citizens.” The ratings were released at the National Assembly of Sportsmen’s Caucuses Sportsman – Legislator Summit held in Sunriver, Oregon.

Knife Owners Beware! The 10 Worst Anti-Knife Cities in America

The ten worst anti-knife cities stand out for their outright persecution of honest knife owners and extraordinarily restrictive anti-knife ordinances, far more severe than even the state laws in those areas. All too often this results in unwary citizens being subject to arrest and prosecution, and loss of their knives, for having a knife that is perfectly legal elsewhere in the state.

  1. New York, NY (majority of pocketknives will result in arrest, aggressive persecution of knife owners, over 60,000 to date)
  2. Philadelphia, PA (all knives are illegal to carry except when actually in use on the job)
  3. Ocean City, MD (many common pocketknives are illegal, Catch 22 traps many citizens)
  4. San Antonio, TX (all locking-blade pocketknives knives are illegal to carry except on the job)
  5. Rocky River, OH (2.5-inch blade limit)
  6. Boston, MA (2.5-inch blade carry limit, including in any vehicle)
  7. Cleveland, OH (2.5-inch blade carry limit, registration of any sale or gift of a longer bladed knife)
  8. Chicago, IL (2.5-inch blade concealed carry limit, 2-inch blade limit for 18 and under, but minor cannot legally obtain any knife)
  9. Corpus Christi, TX (illegal to carry any fixed blade knife or a folder with a blade longer than 3-inches except when actually in use on the job)
  10. Aspen, CO (Any concealed knife is illegal to carry in public)

 

More details on each of the 10 worst cities’ knife restrictions can be found at: www.KnifeRights.org/10WorstBest2014

10 Best States for Knife Owners

Tied for First Place: Alaska / Arizona / Kansas / New Hampshire / Tennessee / Utah
Second Place: Georgia

Tied for Third Place: Arkansas / South Carolina / South Dakota

Law-abiding knife owners face no restrictions on the knives they can own or carry in Alaska, Arizona, Kansas, New Hampshire, Tennessee and Utah. In all these states only the criminal misuse of a knife is illegal. In Georgia, the only restriction is that knives carried are limited to a 5-inch blade.

All of the states in First and Second Place have enacted Knife Rights’ model knife law preemption bills. Preemption stops local jurisdictions from passing ordinances more restrictive than state law, preventing a patchwork of local laws that can trap unwary citizens.

Arkansas, South Carolina and South Dakota have no knife restrictions at the state level. However, these states have not yet enacted knife law preemption, so towns and cities in these states are free to enact restrictions greater than state law. Knife owners need to be wary in that regard.

Training Schedule
CLICK PRICE TO ENROLL

11/22/14 Utah CCW/FS Pistol Class
Westside Range 12-4 PM $150.00

12/6/14 Utah CCW/FS Pistol Class
Westside Range 12-4 PM $150.00

12/20/14 Utah CCW/FS Pistol Class
Westside Range 12-4 PM $150.00

1/3/15 Utah CCW/FS Pistol Class
Westside Range 12-4 PM $150.00

1/17/15 Utah CCW/FS Pistol Class
Westside Range 12-4 PM $150.00

1/31/15 Utah CCW/FS Pistol Class
Westside Range 12-4 PM $150.00

2/14/15 Utah CCW/FS Pistol Class
Westside Range 12-4 PM $150.00

2/28/15 Utah CCW/FS Pistol Class
Westside Range 12-4 PM $150.00

Awesome Vulgarity Warning!
EPISODE 94:
“Feral Agitators in MO”

#94


Discount NRA Membership
Join The NRA and Get $10 off a Yearly Membership!
NYCG Gear
Real Gun Facts
Welcome , today is Monday, November 24, 2014