A Colorado family had their front door kicked down as a squad of SWAT officers with drawn guns stormed into the home handcuffing the parents and placing all of the occupants face-down on the floor at gunpoint.  The object of the raid was 10-year old son John who had fallen and bumped his head the previous day.  A neighbor who saw the fall called paramedics who barged uninvited into the boy's home where he was being treated by his father.  The paramedics wanted to transport the boy to the hospital even though they saw no sign of serious injury.  The father, who was a combat medic in Vietnam, preferred to keep the boy under observation at home and refused to allow him to be taken to the hospital.  The paramedics called police and 24 hours later, after the boy had been checked by police and social workers and showed no signs of complications from the fall, Sheriff's deputies acting on a warrant signed by a Magistrate, burst into the family's home and took the boy.  Doctors examined the boy, promptly gave him a clean bill of health, and released him into his parent's custody. Continue reading More SWAT Follies →

    Academics for the Second Amendment have been members of The Firearms Coalition since they were created in 1992 and we have supported their mission and efforts since that time.  Now our very good friends Dave Hardy, Joe Olson, a nd Clayton Cramer are joining forces under the A2A banner to write and file an amicus (friend of the court) brief in the DC gun ban case, DC V. Heller.  While it is unusual for an outfit like ours, which depends on direct support from our readers, to recommend financial contributions to other organizations (When was the last time you saw any other gun group asking you to send money somewhere else?), we think this amicus brief is important and it's something that we are not equipped to do ourselves.  Therefore, I invite you to read the following from Academics for the Second Amendment and, if you are able, consider helping them in this important matter. Continue reading Academics’ Amicus →

    John Hosford, one of the great, unsung heroes of the gun rights movement and a dear personal friend, passed away on Christmas Eve while visiting his son in Washington State.  The Knox family sends our deepest condolences to John's family as we join them in mourning his passing.

    John was one of the biggest men I have ever known, in physical stature, enthusiasm, commitment, loyalty, and heart.  Even though we occasionally found ourselves on different sides of the internal battles that have plagued the gun rights movement over the years, John was one of the few who never let a difference of opinion turn into personal animosity towards my father or our family.  His friendship held through the good times and the bad and he never wavered in his love and friendship.

    The last time I saw John was at the Gun Rights Policy conference in Cincinnati last October.  Even then, two years after Dad's death, John could not speak of him without choking up.  We didn't get as much opportunity to visit that weekend as we would have liked, but I was glad to bump into him while I had Mom on my cell phone to let him say hello.  He returned the phone almost an hour later with a depleted battery after catching up with Mom and reassuring himself that she really was doing well.

     John served in law enforcement for many years, was Executive Director of the Citizens' Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and spent some time in D.C. working for NRA-ILA.  One of his proudest moments was when his baby grandson was recognized as the youngest Life Member at the NRA Convention in Seattle.  John was a committed and tireless laborer for the right to keep and bear arms, willing and able to take a leadership role, but never hesitating to dive into the trenches and get his hands dirty.

    There will never be another like Big John.  He will be sorely missed.

Jeff Knox

27 December, 2007 

    Here is a link to an excellent article out of South Carolina that is definitely worth reading.  It is interesting to note some of the obvious problems with South Carolina's gun laws, particularly the prohibition on concealed firearms in "religious sanctuaries."  This woman's church was a prominent fixture in the story, but the law blocks her and her fellow church members from having the means to protect themselves going to, coming from, and in the church.  I guess it's just "common sense" that no one would ever attack anyone in or arround a church…

    Still, it's a very good article of the type that we rarely see and it is well worth reading and sharing.

    Read the whole story by clicking here . 

What Now?

    Since the Supreme Court announced that they are going to review the DC gun ban case, now is probably a good time to review the case and its convolutions.

    This case has been in the system for a number of years and its journey to the Supreme Court has been anything but a straight shot.  Originally the case involved six DC residents who felt that their constitutional rights were being infringed by the District's strict gun control laws.  While many believe that the case was developed and sponsored by the libertarian Cato Institute, there has never been any formal connection to Cato.  Several people involved in the case do have close ties to Cato, but Cato did not fund or guide the case.

    Besides the Second Amendment questions at the heart of this case, there is also a question of when a citizen has the right to challenge a law as unconstitutional.  The Supreme Court has always held a liberal position on “standing” where constitutional rights are concerned, but the DC Circuit has developed their own precedents on “standing” which are much more constricting.  Of the six original plaintiffs in the “Parker” case, only one, Dick Heller, was determined by the court to have “standing” in the case.  The court said that the other five had not had their rights violated since they had not been “harmed” for exercising or attempting to exercise those rights.

Continue reading DC Gun Ban in the Supreme Court →

I have had several comments from readers like the following so I have decided to share my reply to this one with the rest to you.

Duane said: 

Your recent posts regarding Republican candidates causes me great concern. Let us face facts: the Republican party is for the most part on our side and the Democrats want to destroy the right to keep and bear arms. To thumb noses at Republican candidates is evidence to me you have no clue as to how national politics operates. All your position does is to elect clowns such as Hillary. Most citzens do NOT concern themselves with the Second Amendment when they cast their ballot. Hold your nose, but vote Republican!

And I replied:

Duane,

Most Republicans only support us because they need us to be elected.

As long as they can depend on us "holding our noses" they will do nothing for us.

Look at the previous six years with a "pro-gun" Republican President, a "pro-gun" Republican House, and a "pro-gun" Republican Senate – we got basically NOTHING.

Continue reading Reply to a Republican →

Bobby Jindal, who has represented Louisiana in the US House of Representatives for the past several years, has won his bid to become the Governor of Louisiana.

            Jindal has proven himself to be a good friend to gunowners and we look forward to his tenure as Governor.

    During the recent Gun Rights Policy Conference I had the opportunity to chat for a few minutes with attorneys Alan Gura and Robert Levy, the co-councils in Parker v. DC, the Second Amendment case being considered for review by the Supreme Court.

     Levy and Gura told me that we were placing too much significance on the recent DC Circuit statement about the limits of the case.  Honestly, I can’t understand how our analysis is flawed, but there is much about America’s legal system that is completely incomprehensible – especially to laymen like me.

     Levy and Gura say that the Circuit Court’s statement that their decision was only about handguns does not change the case at all and that the case will decide the fate of entire sections of the DC law, not some parsed sub-sections as we had feared. Continue reading DC Court Case Update →

This past weekend was a busy and productive one as I attended the Gun Rights Policy Conference (GRPC) in Northern Kentucky just outside Cincinnati, Ohio.  The annual event, sponsored by the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and the Citizens’ Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA), brings together activists and scholars from all over the country to participate in seminars, share information, and get connected.

I was surprised and honored to be chosen to receive CCRKBA’s “Grass Roots Activist of the Year” award.  Dad was twice honored with the group’s “Lifetime Achievement Award” – the only person ever to be so honored.  Recognition as the “Grass Roots Activist of the Year” is a tremendous honor and I am compelled to redouble my efforts in the grass roots arena to try to prove myself worthy of the honor.

Continue reading What a weekend →

    (30 September, 07) There has been some significant action in the Parker/Heller DC gun ban case this month.  DC filed their appeal to the Supreme Court and the Parker attorneys filed a their own brief encouraging SCOTUS to review the case.  A few days later they filed a cross appeal asking the Supremes to reverse the Circuit Court's decision to exclude 5 of the original 6 plaintiffs.  A reversal on this would open up much broader areas of consideration encompassing the whole of DC's draconian gun laws.  That is particularly important since it was discovered that the original Circuit ruling striking down part of the DC laws was even narrower than anyone thought.  The Parker attorneys wanted the court to force DC to start living by the part of the ruling dealing with long guns even while the appeals process is ongoing.  The cout denied the request and declared that their ruling had no impact on long gun restrictions because the only plaintiff they accepted, Heller, only talked about handguns in his complaint.  This revelation causes me some concern that without the reinstatement of the other plaintiffs, the Parker/Heller decision might be too narrow in scope to justify Supreme Court review.

    A decision on whether to hear the case should come out of the Supreme Court any day.

    I'll have the opportunity to discuss the case with the lead attorneys in the case, Gura and Levy, next weekend at the Gun Rights Policy Conference in Cincinnati and will keep you posted.