Firearms Owners Against Crime
Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action
Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action
Over the last 2 weeks, the courts have issued quite a few decisions. Some good… some… well… maybe not so good.
The US Supreme Court overturned the bump stock ban. FOAC-Institute has ALWAYS opposed the “ban” of plastic things and we are even more opposed to “redefining” words to suit anti-liberty claims. Such as those that stated that accessories or plastic or wood or metal pieces were “guns” or “machine guns”. The June 14th decision sets POSITIVE precedent and is a very good thing.
FOAC Anti-bump stock ban meme from 2018
June 13th, U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor vacated the ATF Rule that banned pistol braces. This litigation may or may not continue to be appealed (likely it will), but for now… the ATF Rule is defeated. The June 13th decision sets POSITIVE precedent and is a very good thing.
June 11th, U.S. District Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk granted a preliminary injunction against the ATF rule that redefines who is “engaged in business” and could be interpreted in a way that eliminates private gun sales. This injunction does not appear to apply to all American citizens, however, this is one more small battle won against the tyrants at the ATF.
I am always astounded by the elected class’s propensity to re-define terms as they see fit to benefit their tyranny-di-jour.
Also on June 11th, a Delaware Jury found Hunter Biden guilty on 3 separate gun charges. Hunter could face up to 25 years in prison and $750,000 in fines. I do not miss the irony that the son of the most anti-gun President in US History is now a convicted “gun criminal”.
This situation has caused much discussion among my peers and within my sphere of influence.
Let me throw this piece of meat into the pit.
Does a drug user have a right to defend himself or herself?
Why is it that in Pennsylvania, a “habitual drunkard” is prohibited from obtaining a license to carry? Why does someone with multiple DUI’s lose their 2A rights? They can still buy a car, but they cannot carry a firearm to defend themselves and those that they love.
Does someone under the influence have the right to defend themself?
DEFEND……..
Keep in mind that Article 1 Section 21 of the Pennsylvania Constitution and the 2nd Amendment does not GIVE you your right to keep and bear arms to defend yourself. That right is God given, natural born, and self-evident. A human being, no matter their race, creed, age, background, or political leanings has the right to defend themselves. Article 1 Section 21 of the Pennsylvania Constitution and the 2nd Amendment restricts the GOVERNMENT from infringing, questioning, limiting or restricting YOUR individual right to bear arms to defend yourself and those that you love.
George Soros backed Philadelphia DA Larry Krasner
Although many district attorneys in Democratically controlled cities (by default) give criminals permission to commit violent criminal acts by NOT prosecuting them, nobody has the right to commit violent crimes against other people.
There is a huge difference between personal defense and violent crimes. Although many gun control pundits fail to publicly recognize this fact, or they are hell bent on pushing the gun control narrative and focus on “the gun”. Hell, I am even falling into this right now. I am talking about “gun control” and it really ain’t about the “gun”… it is about the “control”. Is it not?
If a murder serves his time and is now freely living among the citizenry, does that person have the right to defend themself? Should that person be able to worship how they see fit, express themselves, be able to obtain legal representation, vote, and buy a firearm to defend themselves? I would say YES.
Do you say NO?
If you say “no” then I ask, “Why then would you let that person out of prison to begin with?”
The government must hold criminals accountable and stop victimizing citizens for exercising their individual rights.
Do you think that the government should tell you how to exercise your rights? Maybe they should they HELP you exercise your rights.
Be careful what you wish for!
Back in 2021, Joe Biden issued an executive order to use the government’s “reach” to register people to vote… including throughout the US Prison System. To read Executive Order 14019 click here. Would you say it is a good idea to let incarcerated prisoners purchase a firearm? Is it a good idea to let incarcerated prisoners vote? This is very much a states rights issue. However, as of April 2024, convicted felons in Maine, Vermont, and Washington, D.C. retained the right to vote WHILE incarcerated.
Why would Joe Biden want to “get out the vote”, and “rock the vote” in the big house?
On June 12th, the U.S. Supreme Court said that it will NOT consider taking up a challenge to the order until September 30th. Early voting begins earlier in September in 4 U.S. states.
This Supreme Court announcement is rather disappointing.
The original Petition for Writ of Certiorari Before Judgement that challenged the order was filed by PA Lawmakers. You may recognize some of the names.
Why would Joe Biden want to “get out the vote”, and “rock the vote” in the big house? Might mail in ballots postmarked from Sing Sing and Folsom accidentally get counted? Maybe….. maybe not…. However, THIS is YET one more example of how the elected class gun control Biden regime rewards criminals.
George Soros backed California Governor, Gavin Newsom
“As California goes, so goes the nation.”
- Unknown
On June 11th, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that prohibiting the sale of firearms and ammo on “state property” does NOT violate the 2nd Amendment. An announcement from the CA Attorney General said:
California Attorney General Rob Bonta announces that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has ruled in favor of the state defendants in B&L Productions, Inc. v. Newsom, two cases that challenged recent legislation prohibiting the sale of firearms and ammunition on state property, including at the Del Mar Fairgrounds in San Diego and the Orange County Fair & Event Center.
George Soros backed California Attorney General, Rob Bonta
California Attorney General Bonta said, “Guns should not be sold on property owned by the state, it is that simple”.
The precedent that this decision sets can only be followed up with the question of “what is state owned property?” Look for a new interpretation of “state” or “owned” or property” coming soon from California.
THANK GOD, and/or your lucky stars that we have preemption (PA Title 18 Section 6120) in Pennsylvania. However, if we continue to lose seats in the House or if we lose the Senate… noting will save us.
Pennsylvania will be worse than California in less than a week!
Make sure you and ALL of the people in your sphere of influence get out and vote for the best candidate. NOT VOTING is a vote for the winner!
MONUMENTAL DECISION: United States Supreme Court Overturns Bump Stock BanPosted on the Prince Law Blog June 14, 2024 by Dillon Harris, Esq.
Those who have been long-time readers of our blog will be aware that we have written numerous articles about bump stocks, covering the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the 923-page Comment we filed that broke the eRulemaking Portal, the publication of the Final Rule, the lawsuit we filed against the Final Rule only hours after publication (Guedes, et al. v. ATF, et al. 920 F. 3d 1 (CADC 2019)), and the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Appeals unanimous ruling that Bump Stocks are not machine guns. But what might turn out to be the most important of our past articles, was how to surrender your bump stock.
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the ATF’s bump stock reclassification and ban when it issued a 6-3 decision in Garland v. Cargill stating:
We hold that a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock is not a “machinegun” because it cannot fire more than one shot “by a single function of the trigger.” And, even if it could, it would not do so “automatically.” ATF therefore exceeded its statutory authority by issuing a Rule that classifies bump stocks as machine guns. Slip Opinion, p. 6.
The relevant portion of the definition of a machinegun requires that a weapon must shoot, be designed to shoot, or be able to be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b). Justice Thomas, writing for the majority, thoroughly explained the mechanical operation of AR-style triggers, complete with diagrams and a link to this gif. For those who listened to the oral argument and heard several of the justices ask questions demonstrating a total lack of understanding of these mechanics, this clear and thorough explanation is a relief. Justice Thomas explains that “[f]or each shot, the shooter must engage the trigger and then release the trigger to allow it to reset. Any additional shot fired after one cycle is the result of a separate and distinct ‘function of the trigger…’ A bump stock does not convert a semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun any more than a shooter with a lightning-fast trigger finger does.” Slip Op at 12.
Justice Thomas continues to explain that even if a bump stock allowed a rifle to fire more than one shot by a single function of the trigger, it wouldn’t be doing so automatically. He quotes Judge Henderson’s opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part from our Guedes case, stating the “statutory definition of ‘machinegun’ does not include a firearm that shoots more than one round ‘automatically’ by a single pull of the trigger AND THEN SOME.” 920 F. 3d at 44 (emphasis original).
Justice Thomas concludes his opinion by excoriating the ATF and the dissenting opinion for making the argument that this decision renders the machinegun ban useless by making it too easy to circumvent (we would love it if that was the effect). “The dissent [] fails to prove that our reading makes §5845(b) ‘far less effective,’ much less ineffective (as is required to invoke the presumption.) Slip Op. at 19.
What Now?
Well, unless and until Congress acts to ban bump stocks, they are not machineguns (or firearms) under federal law. Because this decision is made on the basis of statutory interpretation, specifically the interpretation of the federal definition of “machinegun[s],” this decision does not invalidate any state laws that have outlawed bump stocks. If you do not live in a state that has passed its own ban, bump stocks are now lawful to purchase, sell, and possess. For those of our readers located in Pennsylvania and Maryland, Pennsylvania does not have a law banning bump stocks, Maryland does have such a law.
If you previously owned a bump stock that you surrendered to ATF or another law enforcement agency, you should have surrendered under protest like we recommended in in 2019. If you did, it’s time to dig out the property receipt you should have received and call the ATF field office you surrendered it to, to arrange a time for you to go and retrieve your property.
If you would like to discuss your rights in light of this decision, contact FICG today to discuss your options.
Who is Dr. John Lott? By George E Emanuel FOAC-ILLEA Member
John Lott stands as a towering figure in the arena of Second Amendment advocacy, his influence stretching far beyond the confines of academia to shape public discourse and policy debates surrounding gun rights in the United States. With a career spanning decades, Lott has left an indelible mark on the landscape of gun policy, his contributions ranging from groundbreaking research to fervent advocacy for constitutional freedoms.
At the core of Lott's work lies a commitment to empirical analysis and evidence-based argumentation. His seminal book, "More Guns, Less Crime," published in 1998, challenged conventional wisdom by presenting data-driven insights that upended prevailing narratives about the relationship between gun ownership and crime rates. Through meticulous statistical analysis, Lott demonstrated that areas with higher rates of gun ownership often experienced lower rates of violent crime—a phenomenon that came to be known as the "Lott Effect."
The implications of Lott's research extend far beyond mere statistical correlations. His findings have profound implications for the ongoing debate over gun control policies, challenging the assumption that stricter regulations necessarily lead to reduced crime. Instead, Lott's work suggests that an armed citizenry can serve as a deterrent to criminal activity, fostering safer communities through the exercise of individual rights.
One of the key areas of Lott's research has been the impact of concealed carry laws on public safety. Through extensive analysis of state-level data, Lott has argued that laws permitting the concealed carry of firearms by law-abiding citizens contribute to reductions in violent crime. States with shall-issue concealed carry permit systems, which grant permits to qualified individuals without requiring a specific demonstration of need, have seen decreases in crime rates, according to Lott's research. By empowering citizens to defend themselves, concealed carry laws serve as a crucial component of ensuring public safety, as Lott contends.
Beyond his scholarly contributions, Lott has emerged as a vocal advocate for Second Amendment rights, actively engaging in public debates, media appearances, and legislative hearings to defend constitutional freedoms. His testimony before Congress and expert analysis in media outlets have helped shape public opinion and inform policy discussions on gun-related issues. Despite facing criticism and opposition from proponents of stricter gun control, Lott remains steadfast in his defense of individual liberties, undeterred by the challenges that come with advocating for a controversial cause.
Lott's impact extends beyond the borders of the United States, influencing discussions on gun control policies in countries grappling with similar challenges. His research has been cited in debates over firearm regulations in nations such as Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom, where policymakers seek to strike a balance between public safety concerns and individual rights. Lott's work serves as a valuable resource for policymakers and advocates seeking evidence-based solutions to complex societal issues.
Moreover, Lott's influence extends into the realm of legal scholarship, where his research has been cited in numerous court cases, including landmark decisions such as District of Columbia v. Heller (2008). In Heller, the Supreme Court affirmed an individual's right to possess firearms for self-defense, citing Lott's research as evidence supporting the historical understanding of the Second Amendment. Lott's scholarly contributions have thus played a pivotal role in shaping legal interpretations of constitutional rights and informing judicial decisions on gun-related issues.
In essence, John Lott's legacy is one of intellectual rigor, passionate advocacy, and enduring influence. Through his groundbreaking research, outspoken advocacy, and unwavering commitment to constitutional principles, he has left an indelible mark on the discourse surrounding gun rights in America and beyond. As the debate over gun control continues to evolve, Lott's work serves as a guiding light, illuminating the path towards a more informed and balanced approach to safeguarding the rights of law-abiding citizens. Love him or loathe him, John Lott's impact on the Second Amendment debate is undeniable, shaping the conversation for years to come.
Click here to read the entire decision
(Left to Right) John Lott, Dr. Charles Gallo (Former FOAC VP) and Kim Stolfer (FOAC Founder and Former President) Testifying in Pittsburgh in 2019.
(Left to Right) Stephen LaSpina, Klint Macro, Kim Stolfer, Jim Stoker, and Kevin Jackson in Harrisburg, PA in 2022.
Jury Finds Hunter Biden Guilty of All Three Gun Charges
Fast-growing gun group enhances insurance coverage to protect members amid blue state 2A crack downs
Just Two Percent of NY Gun Owners Moving to PA Can Change Presidential Elections; Will They?
No Charges in Deadly ATF Arkansas Home Raid
Fallout from Trudeau’s Gun Grab: Crime is Up, Number of Gun Ranges Drops
Biden Rolls Out Anti-Gun Campaign Ad Following Bump Stock Decision
6 Things You Can Do to Secure Your Home
President Biden Threatens War on U.S. Citizens, Repeats Gun Control Tropes
Pew Data Reveals What Gun Control Supporters Expect From A President Biden Relection
Federal Judge Vacates ATF Rule on Pistol Braces
RFK, Jr's VP Pick Warns About Biden's Gun Control Agenda
Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction Against ATF Rule on Gun Dealers
Body Armor Ban Bill Returns from the Dead
No Charges in Deadly ATF Arkansas Home Raid
Sportsmen feel pinch of global gunpowder shortage as Chinese restrictions, Ukraine war crimp supply
Number of New Gun Owners Since 2020 Equals Population of Florida
Private School Founder Undermines Arguments Against Armed Teachers
FOAC-Institute presents Concealed Carry Seminars with Pro-Liberty Elected Officials, works with County Sheriffs at Satellite License to Carry Events, provides information tables at Gun Shows, and organizes for Pro-2A Rallies, gun bashes, and special events. To see the most up-to-date schedule of FOAC-Institute events and meetings, CLICK HERE.
FOAC-Institute is a member of the Allegheny County Sportsmen’s League.
Sign up for the ACSL Family Field Day by Clicking Here.
FOAC-Institute ResourcesTo read the Blog Posts from FOAC-Institute President Jim Stoker Click Here
To read the Blog Posts from FOAC-Institute VP Klint Macro Click Here
To Read the Blog Posts from FOAC-Institute Board Member Stephen LaSpina Click Here
To Read past editions of the FOAC-Institute Newsletter Click Here
FOAC-Institute, ACSL, BCSCL, and USP virtually meets with new
PA Game Commission Executive Director, Stephen Smith
FOAC-Institute President Jim Stoker presents at USCCA/FOAC-ILLEA PA Gun Law Seminar in Warrington, PA
FOAC-ILLEA and Delta Defense Volunteers at the PA Gun Law Seminar in Scranton, PA
Once more the Pennsylvania Senate might be falling for the lies of the Convention of States organization.
Paid pundits like Rick Santorum continue to slither their way through the halls of the PA Senate to try and convince Senators that an Article V Constitutional Convention will fix everything from term limits, to balanced budgets. They also claim that a Convention would not “run-away” jeopardizing the 2nd Amendment (and the rest of our Constitutional Republic).
PA SR77 would call for an Article V Constitutional Convention. FOAC-Institute is VEHEMENTLY opposed to an Article V Con Con.
The last time we had a Constitutional Convention, was in 1787 when the representatives tossed out their form of government and replaced it with our current form of government. Thank God or your lucky stars that there were so many wise men at THAT Convention. I don’t have as much faith in their contemporaries.
Ask them if they support an Article V Constitutional Convention. If they do, then ask them what document gives direction on the process of how one would occur. Who would be the governing body that would hold it? Who would chair it? Where would it occur? How would representatives be selected to attend it? Who would set the calendar or schedule? How would the debate topics be decided upon? Who would control the gavel?
If your Senator or Representative gives you a definitive answer… they are either overly optimistic, misguided, or lying.
An Article V Constitutional Convention has never been done before. There is NO guidance on how one should proceed.
Ask yourself, why would YOU give elected officials the ability to change the rules that restrict THEM? Remember…. The Constitution and Bill of Rights don’t give you your rights… it restricts the government from restricting or abolishing them.
We have written extensively on this subject. Below are some examples. Read up and share the info with your Senator and House Rep.
Constitutional Convention Exhibit List-Why it Should Be Opposed
Newsletter October, 30th, 2022
Dangers of a Constitutional Convention with Dave Giordano of the JBS Presented by FOAC-ILLEA
We actually spoke about this and other political tom foolery on a recent episode of my show Meet The Pressers (Sponsored by FOAC-Institute).
Enjoy the warm weather, get to the range with your friends and family!
Stay Armed and BE Well Regulated!
Yours In Liberty,
Klint Macro
FOAC-Institute VP
FOAC-Institute is continuing to fight for the hearts and minds of our fellow Pennsylvanians to promote individual liberties and freedoms. We are steadfast and resolute and dedicated to protecting our Constitution and advancing the cause of the 2nd Amendment and Article 1 Section 21 of the PA Constitution.
FOAC-Institute’s educational efforts are expanding across the Commonwealth. FOAC-ILLEA volunteers are teaching more concealed carry classes each month and additional virtual education events are forthcoming.
FOAC-Institute is continuing to fight in the courts. Whether this means new litigation to challenge local tyrants, fight the bureaucrats that make it harder for Pennsylvanians to exercise their most basic rights, or the funding of amicus briefs to support others who are already involved in court battles, we are actively helping to establish case law that will help advance the cause of liberty.
FOAC-Institute volunteers research proposed legislation, consult with experts, and offer advice to elected officials about legislation as well as educate the public on the strength or folly of legislation that could have lasting positive or negative effects upon our liberty and the liberty of our children.
I urge you to help me spread the word about FOAC-Institute. Share this newsletter and the website with your sphere of influence. Get a fellow gun owner to join FOAC-Institute.
Contact your Legislators HERE.
Read previous newsletters HERE.
The FOAC-Institute website is a wealth of information. Track current legislation, contact legislators and elected officials, look up gun laws, read easy to understand synopsis’ on stand your ground, castle doctrine, and legal use of force. Keep up to date with current gun related news. There is all this and more on the FOAC-Institute website.
Get involved!
If you have read this entire newsletter and made it here to this statement… you are already interested and vested.
Donate your time, your talents, or your treasure. VOTE pro-2A and get your friends to vote pro-2A as well. Become a member and get your friends to become a member. If you are already a member, consider “upping your membership” to a higher level. Volunteer to help at the bash. Volunteer to join a committee to send emails, write letters, make phone calls… NOW IS THE TIME TO DO. DON’T PUT IT OFF. “We the People” have been sitting on the sidelines too long.
An Armed and Educated Citizenry is the true check and balance in our Constitutional Republic and the ultimate homeland security!
