Today's Needed Responses To Attacks On Free Speech

At this time it appears to me, as a (Self-declared) “Avocational Historian”, that the USA is rapidly approaching such divisions as were rampant in this land in the 1770s and1850s. That is, the current divisions (As described on an attachment to this letter) are going well beyond the levels or conditions as would allow resolution, for the common good, as produced by rational discussion. Those past divisions led to bloody war---And, an increase in freedom in this nation.

Such divisions become most apparent when good citizens are no longer willing to compromise with those attacking their essential rights and attacking them physically and when they realize that such compromise will only result in the total destruction of those rights and the physical endangerment of themselves, their families-and-friends and all law-abiding people.

At this time (Or shortly hereafter) the only rational and proper response to those attacks against our freedoms and persons (Or will be) the immediate use of deadly force (eg By use of modern firearms) against all such attacks (eg Mob threats) which represent a “clear and present danger of death or great bodily harm” OR the perceived threat of such endangerment. [This appears to be why the “Left” (ie The Democrat-Socialist-Fascist Party) is attempting to destroy the individual right of law-abiding, America, citizens to “keep and bear arms” to facilitate their attacks on other rights and against innocent persons.]

In USA Guns & Violent Crimes In INVERSE Relation

Yes, I know that "Coincidence is not causation"!

Yet, all should note that the most recent information shows a steady decrease in violent crimes as the number of guns, privately held, in the USA increases (And as the number of licences/permits to carry concealed weapons increases AND with an increase in the number of states which do not require law abiding citizens such documents to CCW).

Right To Carry Outside Homes: Historic-Legal Note

<https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3456940>

The Right to Carry Your Gun Outside: A Snapshot History

Law and Contemporary Problems, Forthcoming

Duke University Law School

George Mason Legal Studies Research Paper No. LS 19-18

The Right to Carry Your Gun Outside: A Snapshot History by Joyce Lee Mal... The right of self-defense is the core of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms as the US Supreme Cour...

26 Pages Posted: 21 Sep 2019 Last revised: 25 Sep 2019

Joyce Lee Malcolm

George Mason University - Antonin Scalia Law School, Faculty

Date Written: September 19, 2019

Abstract

The right of self-defense is the core of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms as the US Supreme Court has affirmed in two landmark decisions. The right does not, and cannot, stop at the domestic doorstep. Nevertheless there are those arguing that somehow the right “to bear arms” is confined to the home. This essay addresses this latest effort to deny the individual right to keep and bear arms that the Court has affirmed. It focuses on the right to carry a gun outside the home, mindful that the right to keep and bear arms, like other rights, included some practical restrictions. In reviewing the history, the crucial time for an understanding of the meaning of the Second Amendment is the point in the evolution of the Anglo-American right when the amendment was drafted and added to the American Bill of Rights.

Keywords: self-defense, Constitution, Supreme Court, firearm, weapon, Heller, militia

JEL Classification: K10, K30

Suggested Citation:

Malcolm, Joyce Lee, The Right to Carry Your Gun Outside: A Snapshot History (September 19, 2019). Law and Contemporary Problems, Forthcoming; George Mason Legal Studies Research Paper No. LS 19-18. Available at SSRN: The Right to Carry Your Gun Outside: A Snapshot History by Joyce Lee Malcolm :: SSRN

Gun Registration ---> Confiscation

SPECIAL NOTE: I regret that I have lost the URL for the first section of the materials presented below.

What are some examples of where gun registration lead to gun confiscation?

Let's stick to fairly recent examples, say the last 25 years. Anywhere in the world. Are there any?

You mean aside from Cuba, China, Russia, and most other totalitarian states?

Let's see...New Zealand, 1921 the ownership of revolvers were allowed in the name of personal defense, 1970s this list was used to confiscate all revolvers.

Canada...registration list 1990s, old guns grandfathered in, but this list is used for the state to confiscate the guns upon the death of the holder with no compensation to the estate

1996 Australia used its list of registered semiauto hunting rifles to confiscate all those weapons.

The UK government instituted handgun registration in 1921, and about every 10 years or so they further restrict what can be owned and use the registration rolls to collect what is illegal.

How about Chicago, put in registration of long guns, used that same registration to confiscate semiauto long guns in the early 1990s

What about California, couldn't make up it's mind if the SKS was covered or not (1989), decided AFTER the registration period was closed that they needed to be registered, declared a second 'grace period' for registration...then about 5 years ago they decided that those SKSs registered during the grace period were illegal because the grace period was illegal, and in certain cities and counties sent law enforcement to the listed addresses demanding surrender of the firearm. Because there is the legal option of removing the gun from the state of CA, and these officers had no warrants, smart gun owners turned them away with the claim 'I gave it to a relative in Oregon (or whatever)' but MANY were seized with no compensation. (Cities and counties later on offered compensation for anyone who had a receipt, but the police weren't giving out receipts, only a few people who demanded them had them and they were basically notes scribbled on whatever spare paper the officer had)

Side Note, the SKS was the MOST common weapon in the hands of Korean Shop Owners who used them to defend themselves and businesses when the LA riots happened.

Buffalo NY seizes deceased gun owners' firearms

Posted by David Hardy · 14 November 2014 11:01 AM

NY law requires permits to possess handguns, and after a firearm owner dies sets a limit on how quickly his or her survivors must transfer the handguns to the heirs. In practice, the time limits are not often enforced. But Buffalo police have begun showing up at the houses of deceased gun owners, demanding to be allowed to search for and seize firearms. The program involves comparing death records to handgun permit lists, and the officers apparently are not informing the survivors that they can get the guns back, and improperly taking long arms, too.

As Dave Workman observes, so much for the claim that registration does not lead to confiscation.

Trump's Duty & Supporters Of Impeachment

The fact that the "Daddy" of a potential criminal (ie Hunter Biden) is a candidate for the Presidency is NOT a block 

to POTUS (ie Donald J. Trump) asking for an investigation about any such criminal acts committed-in or inflicted-upon

an ally of the USA.

In fact, a failure to bring such, possible, criminal conduct to the attention of the President of The Ukraine would appear

to be a violation of both a treaty between the our and that nation and a violation of President Trump's oath to enforce 

the relevant laws (eg About fraud and the abuse of the power of the Vice-Presidency)!

Those who would give Joseph Biden (And his improbable son) immunity from queries as to possible-to-probable

criminal conduct appear to be members/supporters of one-or-more of the following groups:

1. The Democrat-Socialist-Fascist Party; Or,

2. The "Never-Trumpers" who have infested such as The National Review and unsuccessful GOP candidates for the

Presidency; Or,

3. Saboteurs operating out-of and for "The Deep State"; Or,

4. Victims of early onset senility.

The Real "Mass Killings"

In this era's USA the real "Mass Killings" are:
1. Inflicted by Black thugs;
2. Using hand guns [ie Not by any types (Including those scary looking, faux,"assault rifles") of rifles which are used to murder less than knives or "blunt objects"] which are illegally obtained without  "record checks;
3. With other Blacks as primary victims;
4. In a very few cities (eg Baltimore, Detroit, Chicago, Washington, St. Louis) which have been under the political control of Democrats (ie Now "Democrat-Socialists" who have both failed to control such, weekly, "mass killings" and are among the leaders of a Jihad against the individual right of
law-abiding citizens to "keep and bear" those modern-and-effective firearms as, in other places, allowed those good people to defend themselves against criminal attacks; And,
5. Who select-out, on the basis of race, White victims at a rate many, many, times the reverse.

Minimizing Defensive Use Of Guns

In reviewing the "research" on the defensive use of firearms there is (At least) one factor which has been ignored.

That is, in cases where the gun is not discharged by the  targets of criminal attacks, such incidents may not be reported out of a reasonable fear that the defenders' guns may be seized as "evidence" by the police. Such seizures leave the defender-victims unprotected against a return attack by criminals or by some attack by other thugs.