In April 2022, Santa Rosa County Sheriff Bob Johnson, during a press conference, said, “If somebody’s breaking into your house, you’re more than welcome to shoot them in Santa Rosa County, and we prefer that you do.”

This was after 32-year-old Brandon Harris, with 17 previous arrests, went on a string of home invasions in Florida.

An unidentified homeowner had shot at Harris during one of the break-ins, but the sheriff didn’t know who it was and offered the person a firearm safety class.

“Whoever that was, you’re not in trouble. Come see us. We have a gun safety class we put on every other Saturday, and if you take that, you’ll shoot a lot better, and hopefully you’ll save taxpayers’ money.”

Knowing when you can and can’t use your firearm in self-defense is important, and it’s not always legal if someone is breaking into your home. In most jurisdictions, you have to be in fear for your life or grave bodily harm. This article talks about the factors involved that justify the use of deadly force, which are ability, opportunity, and intent.

There was a lot less gun violence when they taught gun safety in schools, and you could have your rifle in the back window rack of your truck.

Maybe proper firearm training for the masses is the way to go.

How Many AR-15s Are in The United States

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) estimated that there are over 24 million Modern Sporting Rifles (MSR) in the United States, which include AR and AK-style rifles. Some estimates have the overall number of firearms in the US, including handguns, at over 400 million.

Why is an AR-15 a Popular Gun?

The AR-15 is a popular choice among everyday gun owners for various purposes, including sporting events, home defense, and recreational shooting.

The AR-15 is a modular design, and because of that, you can customize and upgrade parts easily. The flexibility to personalize the rifle to suit the needs of each shooter is a big reason for its widespread popularity. You can use the same base gun for sports shooting, competitions, and personal protection.

How Common is an AR-15?

The Washington Post did a survey at the end of 2022 and estimated that 31% of adults own a firearm; out of that, 20% owned an AR-15-style rifle. That’s 6% of the adult population.

“The data suggests that, with a US population of 260.8 million adults, about 16 million Americans own an AR-15.”

The AR-15 accounted for only 1.2% of all sales in 1990 but jumped to 23.4% in 2020.

Thanks for showing how popular they are, Po. Protected arms https://t.co/pjDEVn7o6b pic.twitter.com/j8UyL6c4DD

— President Non_Fudd (@Non_Fudd) November 14, 2023

In Common Use

Recently, the term “in common use has come up.” The Supreme Court determined that the Second Amendment protects firearms “in common use” by “law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes” in its historic DC v. Heller ruling. The court ruled that if the gun is “in common use,” it is covered under the Second Amendment.

1 in 4 guns sold in America is an AR-15.

1 in 20 Americans owns an AR-15.

10 of the 17 deadliest American mass shootings since 2012 involved AR-15s.

For all of these reasons and more, today’s @WaPo deep-dive on the AR-15 is a must-read. https://t.co/GbdqYpPA19

— John Feinblatt (@JohnFeinblatt) March 27, 2023

In March, the president of Everytown for Gun Safety, John Feinblatt, tweeted, “1 in 4 guns sold in America is an AR-15. 1 in 20 Americans owns an AR-15.” His organization is anti-gun, and you would think his numbers would support the claim that AR’s are not in common use, but they appear to do just the opposite.

If one out of every four guns made is an AR and one in twenty people owns one, it seems common. Its widespread popularity makes it one of the most recognizable and commonly owned rifles worldwide. The AR-15 is arguably the most popular rifle in America.

What Does a Well-Regulated Militia Mean?

As simply as I can explain, “militia” basically means a smaller, lesser, loosely organized, or ad hoc military force. Militias have played crucial roles in American history. In the Battle of New Orleans, War of 1812, the militia played a decisive role in our victory over the British forces.

In post-WWII Athens, GA, citizens armed up, formed up, and put a stop to a corrupt sheriff and politician who attempted to steal the election by confiscating all the ballot boxes. More recently, we saw “militia” deployed in the Bundy Ranch standoff against the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), which was running full tyranny over them. The ranchers won without firing a shot, and despite the government’s efforts to prosecute as many as possible, the participants were acquitted.

In my book, INFRINGED: Assaults on Our Natural and Constitutional Rights, I delve deeply into the history and meaning of militia, far more than I can in this article. In essence, “militia” is every citizen capable of and willing to bear arms to support the regular army to repel an invasion or, in the case of tyranny, to resist the government.

We find this meaning in the quotes and writings of great men such as Tench Coxe, who said, “Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American… The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God, it will ever remain in the hands of the people.”

What Did the Founding Fathers Say About the Militia?

Senator Richard Henry Lee (First Congress) said, “A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves…and include all men (today, of course, we would include women) capable of bearing arms.”

George Mason similarly said, “I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.”

We, the People

As you can plainly see, a militia is literally “we the people.” Many more writings bear this out. Of course, all governments, including our own, fear armed civilians and take measures to ensure government dominion and hegemony. Although space doesn’t allow, a review of the various Militia Acts outlines the government’s takeover of state militias, ultimately resulting in the National Guard.

Check your state laws. Parallel to this is that many, if not all, states have specific laws banning paramilitary training. Would that include communications or TACMED?

You get the point. The fact remains: militia is not an evil thing. It is not sinister. It means we, the people being armed, are crucial to preserving our freedoms!

Would having the populous armed stop an attack of this proportion? Probably not, but it may have given some people a fighting chance.

Israel Disarmed Civilians

Israel had not only disarmed civilians but also disarmed what they call security teams, which differ from the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). Everyone in Israel is required to serve in the military, so they train everyone on how to use a firearm.

A few days ago, I wrote an article highlighting the restrictions on private citizens owning firearms in Israel. A few hours after publishing that article, Israel took it further. It said it would issue 10,000 assault weapons to security teams.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) had taken firearms away from these same civilian security teams over the past three years because of repeated theft. When the attacks began, the security teams had no weapons to protect themselves except for a few handguns.

One individual said, “The IDF took our rifles recently, they left us with just a few. We repelled a Hamas commando terror cell with just pistols.”

Israeli Civilian Security Teams

Civilian security teams protect small towns and communities in Israel’s outlying areas and West Bank settlements. Some teams tried to protect civilians against the Hamas attack on Saturday before the IDF could help. They had handguns to defend themselves against well-armed attackers with rifles and other small arms. The attackers had way more firepower.

Aside from that, regular citizens have been applying through the government website to get a firearm, and Gun Owners of America reported the site was down for a while. Because of that, people couldn’t apply for a license. You’d think at times like this, they’d speed things up.

?BREAKING?

Israel's licensing portal is down—leaving qualified individuals unable to apply to carry a firearm for defense during a terrorist invasion.

Translation⤵️

It is temporarily not possible to fill out the form
Please try again later
We apologize for the inconvenience pic.twitter.com/oNWeBZSSqq

— Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) October 11, 2023

This person Tweeted the process isn’t going smoothly: “I have written about it dozens of times. Twenty-two residents are waiting for approval for a gun. Everyone will finance their own gun. Some just need a permit for a firearm. Please help.” He’s not the only one that has said licensing is being delayed.

In a related article, Scott Kirshner, President of Dedicated Threat Solutions, talked about kidnapping and the risk involved if they move you to a secondary location. Again, these people were unarmed.

Do you think it can’t happen in the US?

If you think something can’t happen here, you’re not watching the news. Some militant groups that are killing people are no bigger than a typical street gang. Add to that the unknowns flooding across the border, and the potential is there. Are we likely to see anything of the magnitude that’s going on in Israel, highly doubtful but that doesn’t mean risks don’t exist.

Instead of fixing the root cause of the problem, politicians added more gun control, leaving people defenseless. They disarmed everyone, including law-abiding citizens and security forces, with training.

Instead of Israel’s politicians trying to disarm everyone, why not solve the theft problem? The law-abiding citizens, as always, were left to fend for themselves with nothing to use except, in some places, a few handguns.

Solve Underlying Issues of Violence Instead of Adding More Gun Control

The United States is heading down the same path. Instead of solving the underlying issues, politicians want to disarm everyone and hope it works. Just look at Gov Grisham, who decided to single-handedly pretend the Second Amendment doesn’t exist and make HER own rules.

In times of emergency or widespread events, it’s essential to remember that no one is coming to save you. You are your own first responder.

Tight gun control laws in Israel and Ukraine have undoubtedly resulted in the deaths of many people. These incidents highlight the importance of the Second Amendment in protecting everyone.

District Court Judge David Urias issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) against New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s executive order banning firearms for 30 days.

U.S. District Court Judge David Urias said, “The violation of a constitutional right, even for minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury,”

Gov. Grisham said, “Over the past four days, I’ve seen more attention on resolving the crisis of gun violence than I have in the past four years. Now is the time to bring clarity of purpose.” This may be true, but will it help her cause in the long run when even her own AG will not defend her?

“We’re thrilled that the Court has ruled in our favor and upheld the Second Amendment, the U.S. Constitution, and Supreme Court precedent,” said Cody J. Wisniewski, FPC Action Foundation’s General Counsel and Vice President of Legal, and counsel for FPC. “Gov. Grisham’s executive order is blatantly unconstitutional and we look forward to continue proving as much in Court.”

The next court date is October the 8th, and from the looks of Gov. Grisham’s statement she has no intent of backing off.

Because of a string of gun-related incidents, New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham issued an emergency order on Friday that makes it illegal to carry guns in public in Albuquerque and the counties around it for at least 30 days. Even with a permit, you can not openly or conceal carry.

In the video below, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham says, “No constitutional right, in my view, including my oath, is intended to be absolute” “I can invoke additional powers”

We have heard “30 days to solve a problem” before

In March 2020, the government, urged on by Dr. Anthony Fauci, enacted mandates requiring wearing masks in public for “15 days to slow the spread” of COVID-19. That was later turned into 30 days and lasted over two years in many places.

Some law enforcement officials have said they will not enforce Grisham’s orders

Lujan Grisham stated civil violations would be enforced by state police. Bernalillo County Sheriff John Allen and Albuquerque Police Chief Harold Medina said they will not enforce it because it raises many constitutional rights concerns.

Bernalillo County Sheriff John Allen said, “While I understand and appreciate the urgency, the temporary ban challenges the foundation of our constitution, which I swore an oath to uphold. I am wary of placing my deputies in positions that could lead to civil liability conflicts, as well as the potential risks posed by prohibiting law-abiding citizens from their constitutional right to self-defense.”

“The governor made it clear that state law enforcement, and not APD, will be responsible for enforcement of civil violations of the order. Our officers at APD will continue to focus on the enforcement of criminal laws and arresting the criminals who are driving violent crime in the city,” Albuquerque Police Chief Harold Medina said in a message to his officers Friday night.

Bernalillo County District Attorney Sam Bregman, the top prosecutor in the Albuquerque area, said, “As an officer of the court, I cannot and will not enforce something that is clearly unconstitutional.”

“Bumping up against the Second Amendment, no doubt about it,” said Jessica Levinson, a law professor at Loyola Marymount’s Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.

Why did the New Mexico governor ban guns?

The Democratic governor said she expected legal challenges but felt obliged to act considering recent killings, including the murder of an 11-year-old kid outside a minor league baseball stadium this week.

At a news conference on Friday, she stated that shootings have reached epidemic proportions and that the suspension provided the state with a “cooling-off period” to decide how to handle gun violence and public safety best.

Even David Hoog, who is an avid anti-gun activist, said he disagreed with her move. One person on Twitter said New Mexico’s “GunSense” Governor has lost David Hogg. Even ducking David Hogg says this is too far.

I support gun safety but there is no such thing as a state public health emergency exception to the U.S. Constitution. https://t.co/6GfbOZLc7g

— David Hogg ? (@davidhogg111) September 9, 2023

Lawsuits over New Mexico’s suspensions of gun rights have begun.

Gov. Grisham said during her news conference, “I welcome the debate and fight about how to make New Mexicans safer.”

The National Association for Gun Rights has filed a TRO and the complaint.

New Mexico Governor Michelle Grisham just declared a "gun violence public emergency" and BANNED the public carry of guns in Albuquerque and the surrounding county by executive order.

Not on our watch! THAT IS WHY WE ARE SUING THE GOVERNOR OF NEW MEXICO!https://t.co/ekMRsXIu91 pic.twitter.com/kRDOt9bxZV

— National Association for Gun Rights (@NatlGunRights) September 9, 2023

Gun Owners of America filed their TRO and complaint yesterday.

?BREAKING?⁰⁰GOA and @GunFoundation have officially filed our lawsuit against NM Governor Grisham and her tyrannical executive order banning firearm carry.

See you in court! ?

— Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) September 10, 2023

Colonel Paul Linebarger’s Psychological Warfare says it is relatively futile to try to parry or discredit enemy propaganda because they have already done the damage the enemy has done with their argument. “Therefore, propaganda does not meet propaganda. Combat forces meet; Psychological Warfare forces pass one another in opposite directions.” Jonathan Swift wrote similarly in 1710, emphasis is mine, “Besides, as the vilest writer has his readers, so the greatest liar has his believers; and it often happens, that if a lie be believed only for an hour, it has done its work, and there is no farther occasion for it. Falsehood flies, and Truth comes limping after it; so that when men come to be undeceived, it is too late, the jest is over, and the tale has had its effect: like a man who has thought of a good repartee, when the discourse is changed, or the company parted: or, like a physician who has found out an infallible medicine after the patient is dead.”

“As the vilest writer has his readers, so the greatest liar has believers: & it often happens, that if a lie be believed only for an hour it has done its work, & there is no farther occasion for it.Falsehood flies, & truth comes limping after it”Jonathan Swift h/t @SykesCharlie https://t.co/o5Zs5uSbEG

— John Dickerson (@jdickerson) November 2, 2022

Then-Lieutenant George S. Patton wrote similarly in his Saber Exercise of 1914, “The saber is solely a weapon of offense and is used in conjunction with the other offensive weapon, the horse. In all the training, the idea of speed must be conserved. No direct parries are taught, because at the completion of a parry, the enemy is already beyond reach of an attack. The surest parry is a disabled opponent.”

Our goal must be not to attempt to parry the other side’s wide array of attacks on gun owners, licensed gun dealers, and law-abiding firearm manufacturers but to disable the other side’s credibility with the American people. We must accordingly depict the other side as dishonest and incompetent gun quacks, and I mean in the same context as cancer quacks, whose actions will put law-abiding people at risk. We must ask repeatedly, “If what they want to do is right, why do they need to lie?” Once somebody is proven a liar, nothing he or she says afterward has any meaning—that’s why “giving somebody the lie” was once a literally mortal insult, and being proven guilty of this character defect is still cause for expulsion from the US Military Academy—and the surest parry is indeed a disabled opponent.

• Knowledge of the Constitution is an essential requirement for the practice of law, and there is no Second Amendment right to hunt. Joe Biden’s statement that you can load only three shells to hunt waterfowl is a partial truth told with intent to deceive, which the US Military Academy’s Honor Code defines as a lie. Former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s statement that nobody needs ten bullets to kill a deer shows that he is either dishonest or incompetent to practice law, the latter if he believes the Second Amendment is a right to hunt deer or anything else. When Cuomo was HUD Secretary, he advocated frivolous and malicious junk lawsuits against gun manufacturers, further reflecting his lack of character and integrity.
• Biden also advised people to fire shotguns to scare off prowlers, reinforcing the perception that he is dishonest, incompetent, or both. Steven Nelson’s “Joe Biden’s Shotgun Advice Could Land Jill Biden in Jail” cites several Delaware laws that would be violated were somebody to discharge a weapon inside city limits except for self-defense against an immediate violent threat. President Biden is licensed to practice law in Delaware, and Biden should know better.

President Biden‘s depiction of knife-wielding assailants as “unarmed” and his suggestion that police officers shoot to wound prove his dangerous incompetence in the realities of armed self-defense.

Katie Couric’s and Stephanie Soechtig’s Under the Gun claimed to prove how easy it is to buy a gun without a background check. “We sent a producer out, and he was from Colorado. He went to Arizona, and he was able to buy a Bushmaster and then three other pistols without a background check in a matter of four hours. And that’s perfectly legal. … He just met somebody in a parking lot in Wendy’s and bought a Bushmaster legally.” A Colorado resident cannot legally purchase a firearm in a private sale in another state. It is, therefore, reasonable to conclude that they made up the story and peddled this fake narrative as a documentary. The producers claim they turned the guns over to police to be destroyed, but this does not change the fact that it was illegal for a Colorado resident to buy them in a private sale in Arizona in the first place, so I believe it never happened.

• The Million Mom March, supported by Hillary Clinton, Dianne Feinstein, and other prominent enemies of the Second Amendment, solicited money and volunteer time under the fraudulent premise that firearm violence kills 12 or 13 children a day. This is true only if one reclassifies young legal adults, 18 and 19 years old and in a very violent demographic age group, as children. The MMM liquidated in 2001 after I and others exposed it for misusing 501(c)(3) tax-exempt money to promote House candidates on its website.
• The 501(c)(3) tax-exempt “educational” Violence Policy Center (VPC) says openly, “The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.” To me, it sounds like the VPC wants to exploit rather than clear up this confusion to gain support for its agenda.
• The Million Mom March, supported by Hillary Clinton, Dianne Feinstein, and other prominent enemies of the Second Amendment, solicited money and volunteer time under the fraudulent premise that firearm violence kills 12 or 13 children a day. This is true only if one reclassifies young legal adults, 18 and 19 years old and in a very violent demographic age group, as children. The MMM liquidated in 2001 after I and others exposed it for misusing 501(c)(3) tax-exempt money to promote House candidates on its website.
• The 501(c)(3) tax-exempt “educational” Violence Policy Center (VPC) says openly, “The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.” To me, it sounds like the VPC wants to exploit rather than clear up this confusion to gain support for its agenda.

The phrase "gun violence" is a fascinating demonstration in how much influence the gun ban lobby has over much of the media and many politicians, who both repeat the propaganda phrase uncritically.

Obviously, gun-related crime is a thing, which is what the shooting in Michigan… https://t.co/3meWv9Xe8M

— Kostas Moros (@MorosKostas) February 15, 2023

The bottom line is that if somebody is doing the right thing, he or she does not need to lie to make it happen. The fact that the anti-Second Amendment side needs to lie repeatedly, with the active participation of the head of the Democratic Party, should tell voters everything they need to know in 2024.

By Bill Levinson, Wilkes-Barre, PA
The views expressed are his own and not those of his employer or any non-political organization he is a member of.

By Stuart Klearman

Credit where credit is due. This condenses and builds upon the works of Brian T. Halonen and Denton Bramwell.

Today, well-regulated’s meaning has changed to mean “government-controlled.” This comes as no surprise, as all governments usurp and centralize power to themselves. However, in the 18^th and 19^th Centuries, the time of the 2^nd Amendment, the phrase meant something quite different. There are plenty of examples in literature from the era to support that when the 2^nd Amendment was written, well-regulated meant more along the lines of operating in a normal or proper state, such as a clock keeping accurate time or a gentleman with good manners.

This was reflected in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), where the Supreme Court wrote that well-regulated could mean nothing more than “trained and disciplined.” I’ll take it to a simpler interpretation…it means skilled marksmanship. The entire purpose of having citizen militias required that those heeding the call needed to be proficient with arms.

More recently, in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, 597 U.S. (2022), the Supreme Court made it abundantly clear that all gun control laws must be anchored in the laws and traditions of 1791. As one more (overlooked) case which I think applies, consider Miranda v Arizona 384 U.S. 436 (1966), which held that “where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no legislation or rule-making which would abrogate them.”

What are some of those literary examples which show the proper meaning of well-regulated?

Let’s take a look at a few.

Anne Newport Royall commented in 1822 that Huntsville, Alabama was becoming quite civilized and prosperous, with a “fine fire engine” and a “well-regulated company.” Obviously, well-regulated had to mean trained and efficient.

From William Makepeace Thackeray Vanity Fair, A Novel Without a Hero 1848, “He did not like to own that he had not as yet been to see his parents and his dear sister Ann—a remissness for which I am sure every well-regulated person will blame the major.”

(Editors note: An engraved first edition of A Novel Without a Hero 1848 will only set you back $6k if you want a copy of your own)

From Trumps: A Novel, Geo. Wm. Curtis, 1861, page 146, “Marriage is a most important relation. Young men cannot be too cautious in regard to it. It is not an affair of the feelings merely; but common sense dictates that when new relations are likely to arise, suitable provision should be made. Hence every well regulated person considers the matter from a pecuniary point of view.”

From The Writings of Harriet Beecher Stowe, Harriet Beecher Stowe, 1896, page 292, “And there’s no sort of reason, Betsey, why you shouldn’t exercise self-control and eat your supper,” pursued Miss Dorcas authoritatively. “A well-regulated mind”—- “You needn’t talk to me about a well-regulated mind, Dorcas,” responded Mrs. Betsey in an exacerbated tone. “I haven’t got a well-regulated mind and never had, and never shall have;”

As you can plainly see from these examples, well-regulated did not mean “government-controlled.”

Some experts say that the Magna Carta, a document from 1215, is one of the oldest examples of this idea. The English Bill of Rights, passed in 1689, said that Protestants could own guns for their defense if it was appropriate for their situation.

The founders of the United States agreed with this idea, and they wrote it into the U.S. Constitution by ratifying the Second Amendment in 1791. It says that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Many familiar names, like Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, Samuel Adams, and John Hancock, are on the list.

Justice Clarence Thomas said in NYSRPA v. Bruen that any law must be consistent with “the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

The history of the “right to bear arms” goes back a lot further than most people realize.

According to Bruen, citing Caetano: “Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.” Ibid. (citations omitted).
Thus, even though the Second Amendment’s definition of “arms” is fixed according to its historical understanding, that general definition covers modern instruments that facilitate armed self-defense. Cf. Caetano v. Massachusetts, 577 U.S. 411, 411–412 (2016) (per curiam) (stun guns).”

Since we did not have the internet in 1791 and the First Amendment has evolved and continued to cover free speech, shouldn’t the Second Amendment do the same?

History wasn’t one of my strong points, so am I missing something?