AmmoLand: Gun Voters Could Deal A Punishing Blow on Election Day

Dave Workman at Ammoland.com writes about how Gun Voters Could Deal A Punishing Blow Driving Home the Win on Election Day 2022. Despite court victories re-affirming the individual right to keep and bear arms, oppression-minded politicians and organizations continue to press for the denial of people’s rights across the nation. Here in the northwest, Oregon’s Ballot Measure 114 is perhaps the most onerous gun control farce on the ballot.

The critical Nov. 8th 2022 midterm elections are only days away. As people continue talking about a “red wave” sweeping across the U.S. landscape to wash anti-gun Democrats from Congress and state legislatures, the “gun vote” could be the decisive factor in many of these races.

According to Fox News, “The discussion surrounding gun control in the United States is a core issue for some voters heading to the ballot box this November.”

The critical factor is whether gun owners—who often are guilty of lethargy and/or election season apathy—will turn out in adequate numbers to swing the vote. They did last year in Virginia, putting solid pro-gunners in statewide offices, but will they repeat that performance on a national scale?

Take a look at Massachusetts, where the Gun Owner’s Action League just released a report showing how homicides in the Bay State have increased 110 percent since the passage of the 198 Gun Control Act in that state. GOAL Executive Director Jim Wallace, in a telephone conversation with AmmoLand News, said the report speaks for itself:

“The Commonwealth’s decades old gun control scheme has been an unmitigated disaster.”

The law failed to reduce gun-related homicides. It failed to reduce accidental firearms fatalities, and it has done poorly in efforts to reduce gun-related suicides.

Call it the “October non-surprise” since gun control laws have also failed in other regions.

Out in Oregon, Fox News is reporting on Ballot Measure 114, an extremist initiative that would add Oregon to a list of states currently requiring a permit to purchase a firearm. [government permission slips]

According to Fox, “Oregon’s law would be the only one that mandates a live-fire safety class approved by the state police and administered by local law enforcement.”

The proverbial fly in the ointment is that nearly all police agencies do not have the facilities to provide the required training.

The story further notes, “The Oregon State Sheriff’s Association opposes Measure 114, citing the burden it would place on financially-strapped law enforcement agencies. Officials say it would delay law-abiding citizens from being able to purchase guns by months or even longer.”

Kevin Starrett, director of the Oregon Firearms Federation, told Fox News essentially the same thing he told AmmoLand News months ago: “The measure is designed to absolutely guarantee that people will not have the means to protect themselves and to dox anybody who attempts to comply with the permit process.”

In Georgia, it’s gun owners versus an avowed anti-gunner in Stacey Abrams, whom Fox News described as “one of the most significant advocates of gun control in a battleground election against Republican Incumbent Gov. Brian Kemp.”

The Fox report also pointed to Ohio, where anti-gun Democratic State Representative Tim Ryan is squaring off against Republican JD Vance.

It is against this backdrop that Friday’s attack on Paul Pelosi, husband of Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi—another perennial gun control proponent on Capitol Hill—was so shocking. Pelosi was brutally attacked in his own San Francisco home. He was seriously injured by a suspect who wielded a hammer, demonstrating that blaming guns and penalizing gun owners for violent crimes is a false flag.

Reacting to the attack, Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, said the nature of the attack “should preclude any effort by Speaker Pelosi’s Democrat colleagues to exploit this horrible incident for the purpose of advancing their extremist gun control agenda.

“This is the kind of violent crime against which average citizens, including Speaker Pelosi’s constituents, must be prepared to defend themselves on a daily basis in an environment where the far left has pushed ‘defund-the-police’ efforts and adopted policies which have allowed dangerous individuals to roam our streets and neighborhoods,” Gottlieb added.

In Gottlieb’s home state of Washington, there is also an energetic challenge of 30-year-incumbent Democrat Sen. Patty Murray—a dependable anti-gunner—by Republican Tiffany Smiley, a political newcomer who has been waging a remarkably effective campaign. A strong turnout of Evergreen State gun owners could provide a nasty surprise to Murray, who critics say has never represented their interests in Congress…(article continues)

For more on Oregon’s Ballot Measure 114 see this video from Colion Noir:

Ammoland: Leaked ATF Resignation Letter Shows Agents’ Frustration Over Politicization

Ammoland has an article citing an ATF agent’s resignation, complaining over the increasing politicization of prosecution through the Department of Justice. While one person’s letter cannot cover the entire range of agents’ beliefs, it is still unlikely that this agent’s complaints are unique. The entire resignation letter is posted at the original article linked just below.

Leaked ATF Resignation Letter Shows Agents’ Frustration Over Politicization

A leaked resignation letter provided to AmmoLand News shows the ATF agency in turmoil over political pressure.

Brandon M. Garcia was a career Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) special agent until he resigned over the politicization of the federal agency and the Government’s attempt to divide people.

Garcia sent a lengthy six-page resignation letter (embedded below) laying out his reasons for leaving the Bureau after 18 years of service. He explains that he didn’t do the job for money or “fun.” He wanted to put violent criminals behind bars. But lately, he doesn’t feel like he knew what the mission was anymore. He was asked to do things that didn’t make sense, and when he asked “why,” he was always told because “they” said so.

“I don’t know what the mission really is anymore, but I don’t like it. For the past couple of years, I have found myself asking “why” a lot more often. As of late, the answer is typically because “they” said so. I still don’t know who “they” are. But I seem to disagree with whoever “they” are on pretty much everything,” Garcia wrote in his resignation letter.”

The former Special Agent highlights how crimes across the country are prosecuted differently depending on if the state is a “red” state or a “blue” state. He explains that agents are expected to set aside their personal and political beliefs but says that the same standard doesn’t apply to the entire Department of Justice. He claims other ATF employees are struggling with the same realization.

Garcia claims that the “woke left” is running the country. He specifically targets the DOJ Civil Rights Division. He insinuates the low morale at the ATF and in law enforcement, in general, is because of the anti-law enforcement movement that he feels is being pushed by the administration and Joe Biden’s Attorney General. Merrick Garland. He says the DOJ was using COVID as a “scapegoat.” He points out that the last time that morale was as low as it is now was under the Obama administration, which was also hostile to law enforcement. He also points out that each administration celebrates diversity unless it is the diversity of thought.

“The last time morale was this low with ATF was probably 2013-2016. Coincidentally, that was also the last time we had an administration openly criticize law enforcement,” Garcia wrote. “Both administrations preached diversity, or rather “celebrate” it, but then expect everyone to have the same liberal opinion.”

The now former Agent wrote that he believes the country is more divided than ever, pushing people to extremes, and leaving those in the middle to suffer. He thinks the Government is “adding fuel to the fire.” Garcia thinks that the ATF’s leadership isn’t fighting for agents. According to him, the leadership is just going along with the administration not to lose their job. Biden demoted former ATF Acting Director Marvin Richardson for not going far enough with the new final rule surrounding the redefinition of a firearm.

Garcia believes that the ATF focuses too much on “the gun.”

He claims the recent actions by the ATF show that it is aligned with the left and says he doesn’t want to investigate the gun. He wants to investigate the criminal. He claims that the ATF used the failed vaccine mandate to increase the ATF’s budget to concentrate on “the gun.” He claims that the ATF “catered” to Biden’s dislike of guns. He says that most ATF agents are pro-gun and anti-criminal. He states that ATF agents didn’t become agents to go after law-abiding citizens for non-compliant firearms or to argue what a gun is or is not.

“Did our leaders forget that ATF agents are law enforcement? Most agents are pro-gun. All agents should be anti-criminal. We did not become ATF agents so we could collect data, ensure firearms are in compliance, seize trigger groups, argue about what a firearm is or is not, seize firearms for reasons other than prosecuting criminals, or spend countless hours inputting data to justify someone else’s existence in HQ. We became ATF agents so we could work the streets and smack evil in the mouth. We took this job because we are willing to risk it all and hope that we can make the streets just a little bit safer for the law abiding, upstanding citizens of the USA. At least that’s why I became an ATF agent,” Garcia wrote.

Garcia talks about how the Biden administration talks about guns and violent crime in the same sentence and pushes for banning certain types of firearms, but in blue states, those charged with gun crimes are only given a slap on the wrist.

He also states that violent crimes committed with firearms are usually “pled down to non-violent crimes, and the defendant again avoids prison.”

He also believes that banning guns wouldn’t stop crime. Garcia logically points out that criminals do not obey the laws. He doesn’t think criminals will stop using firearms no matter what the law says. He believes that banning guns will only affect law-abiding citizens.

The former Special Agent believes that the administration is targeting the conservative population. Garcia points out that very few people were charged with rioting during the summer of 2020, but hundreds have been arrested for the January 6 event for just being there. He even insinuates that pallets of bricks and frozen water bottles were planted at the scene of the 2020 summer riots.

“We can probably agree that law abiding citizens do not commit gun crime. I think that we can probably also agree that the majority of gun owners tend to be more conservative than liberal. So essentially, gun control will only affect law abiding, conservative citizens. Therefore, the Government is only punishing the conservative population. Similarly, in the summer of 2020, rioters were allowed to burn cities, assault the police, and terrorize citizens with little to no consequence. However, the chaos associated with January 6 has resulted in hundreds and hundreds of prosecutions. The vast majority of the defendants have been convicted of simply being there. They didn’t even have pallets of bricks or frozen water bottles staged at the scene, let alone Molotov cocktails for them to throw at the police. Still, 18 months later, the left continues to be absolutely obsessed with it,” Garcia said.

Garcia calls out President Joe Biden for blaming January 6 on Trump. He highlights Biden was saying you can’t be “pro-insurrection and pro-cop.” He insinuates that Biden and the Democrats are not “pro-cop.” he says that the administration changed the definition of “hypocrisy” like they changed the definition of “vaccine.”

“Where was the support of law enforcement from the Democratic party during the presidential campaign? For at least the past 10 years, the Democratic party and the DOJ Civil Rights Division has consistently justified criminal behavior, advocated for decriminalization, and scrutinized the officer’s actions when an officer was assaulted. That is the equivalent of asking a domestic violence victim what they did to cause their spouse to beat them up,” Garcia wrote.

During the January 6 event, a Capitol Police Officer shot and killed Ashli Babbitt. Garcia surmised if the protestors and Babbitt were left-wing, then the liberal media would crucify the officer, making sure he would never have worked again. He believes the DOJ is the “driving force behind this double standard.” He calls for equal treatment under the law.

He claims that politicians do not care about the truth. He says that they only care about public opinion. Garcia claims that the majority of the population supports law enforcement. He says most criminals dislike cops but that the Democrats are trying to appease the criminal population.

Garcia also takes issue with the amount of “violent federal defendants released following their detention hearing.” He says the system was broken. The agent blames the revolving door of prison as the reason for the rise of violent crime over the past few years.

Garcia says guns are not the problem. He believes that the problem is not holding criminals accountable for their actions. The former agent doesn’t think seizing firearms will combat violent crime. He believes that more violent criminals should be locked up and accuses legislators and members of the judicial system with neglecting their oath to uphold the Constitution.

He ends by saying he believes in God, I believe “in The Constitution, and I believe that bad guys belong in prison.” He doesn’t think the Government believes in those anymore.

Ammoland: New Report ‘Crime in Washington 2021’ Damning Proof of Gun Control Failure

New Report ‘Crime in Washington 2021’ Damning Proof of Gun Control Failure is written by Dave Workman at Ammoland News. It reports on the failure of Washington State gun control laws to deter crime.

In the midst of a continuing pattern of rising crime in Washington State, a new report released by the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs (WASPC) does two things, one of them completely unintentional.
The report says there were 325 murders last year in the state, “an increase of 5.9 percent since 2020.” It is the highest number of murders recorded since WASPC began collecting data in 1980.
What the data also demonstrates is that restrictive gun control initiatives pushed through by a billionaire-backed gun prohibition lobbying group based in Seattle have failed to make communities safer, essentially putting the lie to any promises or predictions made by their proponents.
Translation: Gun control advocates misled Evergreen State voters. Their forecasts and arguments were wrong, just as Northwest gun rights leaders said they would be.
According to the Crime in Washington 2021 report, “In 2021, Violent Crimes showed an increase of 12.3% with 29,238 offenses reported; compared to 26,036 offenses reported in 2020. There were 325 murders in 2021; this is an increase of 5.9% compared to 307 murders in 2020.”

That’s even more homicides than the annual FBI Uniform Crime Report listed for 2020, the most recent year for which FBI data is available. The Crime Report is released in late September each year. For 2020, the FBI listed 298 homicides, of which 177 were committed with firearms. That was up from the 209 murders, including 141 involving guns, posted in the 2015 Crime Report.

The new WASPC report “compiles data from 232 state, county, municipal and tribal agencies,” according to KOMO News. It “is designed to give residents information on what is happening in their communities. It covers a wide variety of crime, an issue people living in Seattle say is getting out of hand.”
The report came as news from neighboring Oregon confirmed Initiative Petition 17, which seeks to ban so-called “large capacity magazines” and require Oregonians to get a permit before they can purchase a firearm, has qualified to appear on the November ballot.
New Ban Push
A new report from KING5, the Seattle Times, Washington State University’s Murrow College of Communications and the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public says 61 percent of survey respondents would support a ban on so-called “assault weapons.” However, because the Supreme Court granted certiorari to a challenge of the ban in Maryland—in a case brought by the Second Amendment Foundation, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and others—and then remanded the case back to the lower court for further consideration based on the June decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, such a ban could be held unconstitutional sometime during the next two years as the case is reconsidered.
According to KGW, the WA Poll was conducted by SurveyUSA among 825 participants, which seems a pitifully small number, considering the WASPC report says there are now 7,772,506 Washington residents.
“People living in western Washington were also more likely to support a ban,” KGW reported. “A total of 65% strongly or somewhat support the idea of an assault weapon ban. Meanwhile, 48% of people from eastern Washington opposed a ban, with 35% being strongly opposed.”
Further reinforcing the notion that Democrats have become the party of gun prohibition, the poll found, “Democrats largely supported the idea, with 75% saying they strongly support a ban and 16% saying they somewhat support it. Though there was some support for a ban from Republicans, more than 50% said they were opposed, with 44% being strongly opposed.”

There is no small irony here, because the National Shooting Sports Foundation just released a new estimate on the number of modern semi-auto sporting rifles (MSRs) now in private hands. According to NSSF, the number of MSRs now in circulation is 24,446,000, which is an increase of more than 4.5 million rifles since the organization last made an estimate in 2020.

Almost simultaneously, anti-gun Congressman Jerry Nadler (D-NY), chairing the House Judiciary Committee, made a startling admission during a hearing on H.R. 1808, the bill to ban so-called “assault weapons.” When Rep. Dan Bishop (R-NC) asked if the bill is designed to ban “weapons in common use,” Nadler unequivocally answered, “Yes, that is the point of the bill.”

The admission ignited a lively discussion on Twitter.

It was during this hearing that David Hogg, who became a poster boy for gun control after the 2018 high school shooting in Parkland, Fla., was ejected from the hearing room. According to Fox News, Hogg disrupted the hearing by accusing House members of inaction on gun control. As he was escorted out by security officers, Hogg reportedly declared, “You are perpetuating violence…stop these things now.”
The push to pass gun control legislation now may unintentionally signal fear from Democrats that they are likely to lose the majority on Capitol Hill in November, thus stopping efforts to place additional restrictions on gun owners, and derail Joe Biden’s gun control agenda.

Ammoland: ATF Ponders Changing Definition of What Is a Firearm To Target Growing Gun Diversity

Ammoland reports: ATF Ponders Changing Definition of What Is a Firearm To Target Growing Gun Diversity

Several large type-7 Federal Firearms Licensed manufacturers, The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), and Polymer80 met with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) today.

Although the detailed discussions of the meeting are unknown at this time, AmmoLand News received leaked emails from our sources that show that the ATF is seeking a new definition of a firearm. Joe Biden has targeted so-called “ghost guns” and semi-automatic rifles and recent days. Sources say he is pushing to accelerate those changes by using the ATF as a stop-gap for stalled federal legislation.

The email states: “As you know, under current regulation 27 C.F.R. 478.11, the definition of firearm frame/receiver states that it is that part of a firearm which provides housing for “the hammer, bolt or breechblock, and firing mechanism, and which is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel.”

The email goes on to state that many frames/receivers do not meet this definition. The meeting was to solicit input and feedback on the new definition to include all current firearm frames/receivers on the market.

The Wallstreet Journal incorrectly reported that the meeting was to be about targeting unfinished (80%) frames. Actual emails received indicate the “listening session” with ATF was more about the growing diversity of new gun styles and how to serialize more gun parts. Including Rifle Chassis Systems but also the long unchanging history of the firearms’ receiver definition and the need for updates to reflect “changes in technology”.

An AR-15 lower receiver houses the hammer and firing mechanism while the upper receiver houses the bolt. In a FAL, the upper receiver is the serialized firearms. The meeting seems to be stepping in the direction to change the discrepancies between different guns.

Recently there have been multiple cases where the ATF has arrested someone for selling an AR-15 lower receiver. The defendant challenges the ATF because an AR-15 lower receiver doesn’t meet the definition of a firearm. The ATF quietly dropped the cases without comment.

One case that stands out is the ATF arrest of Joseph Roh for illegally manufacturing AR-15-style rifles in Los Angeles. He challenged the ATF’s classification of an AR15 lower receiver as a firearm. Instead of fighting the case, the ATF quietly dropped it. Most believe that the ATF was worried a judge would decide in Roh’s favor unending gun control efforts.

The 60 plus person video meeting included multiple firearms industry manufacturers and industry representatives including Larry Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) who commented:

“As the firearm industry’s trade association, NSSF is always willing to engage with ATF in a dialogue concerning regulatory matters that impact our industry members businesses so that we can protect their legal and business interests.”

Changing The Definition of What Is A Firearm

Sources inside the ATF tell us that the agency is considering changing a firearm’s definition to encompass the upper instead of the frame. The ATF reasons that anyone can finish an 80% frame or even 3D print one, but most of the general public do not possess the tools to complete a slide.

Safety Harbor Firearms produces a .50 caliber magazine-fed upper for the AR-15 called the SHTF 50. The ATF stepped in and insisted that the upper was a firearm and forced the company to serialize it. This decision made both the upper receiver and lower receiver a gun. The ATF reasoned that the company made the upper too much like a bolt action rifle.

Safety Harbor Firearms SHTF 50 Mag Fed Upper

The proposed changes have made their way into the hands of Everytown for Gun Safety even though it is not currently public. The gun-control group seems to be happy with the proposed changes. It isn’t clear how they managed to get the documents.

Ammoland: HR 127 The Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act

From Ammoland, HR 127 The Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act

One sad reality of some of the most extreme anti-Second Amendment legislation is that it will come back in Congress after Congress as long as its sponsor is still out there. The Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act is one of these bills.

This legislation was introduced last year in the 116th Congress and covered in Ammoland. It was part of a package of three bills introduced by Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee – the other two being the Santa Fe High School Victims Act and the Kimberly Vaughan Firearms Safe Storage Act. This year, it is labeled under HR 127, as opposed to being HR 4801 in the last Congress.

As you can imagine, this Congress’s iteration of the Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act is no less onerous and oppressive as its predecessor. If anything, though, some of the provisions now carry new menace given the constant calls for “deprogramming” we hear from pundits and cable “news” outlets of a certain persuasion.

Like its iteration in the last Congress, HR 127 calls for a psychological evaluation of those who wish to exercise their Second Amendment rights. Our past coverage noted that the evaluation could take a lot of time, given the number of interviews that would have to be scheduled. The concern then was the creation of more tragedies along the line of Carol Bowne, who was murdered by an abusive ex.

Now, however, given the desire for “deprogramming,” we could very well see the psychological evaluation used to target those who dissent from anti-Second Amendment extremism, who raise questions about certain issues, or who even supported former President Trump on other issues. After all, we haven’t ever seen government bureaucrats abuse power for political ends before, and even raising that notion might be enough to warrant “deprogramming” these days. After all, to believe some people, Second Amendment advocacy is domestic terrorism.

In addition, the climate of media-fueled hate adds another danger – the registration data is going to be made available to the general public. Someone can look up just how many firearms you own, what types of guns you have. It’s not just a massive planning aid to would-be thieves, but in an era of social stigmatization, it opens the door to discrimination and blacklisting across a number of areas, including employment and housing.

This bill is even more unacceptable now than it was when it was introduced in the last Congress. Second Amendment supporters need to contact their Representative and Senators and politely urge them to oppose this massive infringement that only punishes the law-abiding and to instead support legislation like the School Violence Prevention and Mitigation Act of 2019 and the Protecting Communities and Preserving the Second Amendment Act, which actually address school security and the misuse of firearms and do not infringe on our rights. Second Amendment supporters should also support the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action and Political Victory Fund to ensure that the current anti-Second Amendment regimes in the House, Senate, and White House are defeated at the ballot box as soon as possible.

Colion Noir also talks about it:

Truth About Guns: ATF Brass Recommended Targeting Braces, 80% Lowers Under a Biden Administration

From The Truth About Guns comes this report, Confirmed: ATF Brass Recommended Targeting Braces, 80% Lowers Under a Biden Administration

Yesterday, John Crump published a report at Ammoland.com regarding a recent conference call between the ATF’s top brass and the “Biden transition team.” To be clear, no matter what you may read in the media, Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. is not yet the president-elect. At least not yet. None of the 50 states have certified their election results and the electoral college isn’t due to vote until December 14.

That made the conference call in question both premature and inappropriate. We’ve talked to people with direct knowledge of what was discussed on the call and can confirm Crump’s report that the higher ups at the ATF told the Biden boys they want to target two items should their boss occupy the oval office in January. Number one on the hit list is pistol arm braces and number two is 80% lowers.

The people we’ve spoken to confirm that the push to ban these items is coming from the top two seats at the ATF — acting Director Regina Lombardo and Associate Deputy Marvin Richardson. Also on board with banning these items are three members of the bureau’s general counsel’s office — Chief Counsel Joel Roessner, Deputy Chief Counsel Pamela Hicks and Associate Chief Counsel James Vann.

Both of these items have, of course been legal for manufacture and sale to the public for years. The ATF itself approved the sale of pistol arm braces eight years ago. Since then, millions have been sold and hundreds of people in the industry have jobs that are based on the manufacture and sale of braces.

As for 80% lowers, it’s always been legal for Americans to build their own firearms for their own use. Only a couple of state require serialization and registration of home-built guns now.

An 80% lower is a partially-finished block of aluminum. The buyer is then required to drill and mill the lower to make it functional for use as part of a pistol or rifle. If 80% lowers are banned, would 75% lowers still be legal? How about 70%? Will we have to regulate the sale of all billet aluminum in the country in case someone decides to use it to fashion a gun?

To ban these items, the ATF would have to reverse itself, doing a 180 on scores of opinions and rulings it has been issuing regarding these items for years. Of course, that didn’t stop them when they were ordered by the Trump White House to regulate bump stocks the same way as they do machine guns.

What such a ban would look like is anyone’s guess at this point. They could ban only new sales of the items, letting current owners keep and use them. Or, they could ban their possession, as was done with bump stocks, requiring owners to turn them in or destroy them.

Either way, if Biden is inaugurated and orders the ATF to ban these items, it will touch off a new round of lawsuits from gun rights orgs and owners of the newly-verboten equipment. Thousands of them will soon be sitting on lake beds all across the country.

In the mean time the White House apparently has the detail of what was discussed between the ATF brass and the Bidenbots. The President would be well within his rights to clean house at the ATF, just as he’s recently done at the DOD.

That, of course, would be a calculated risk. If the court challenges and recounts go his way, he’d be able to install replacements that have more respect for the rule of law, not to mention the right to keep and bear arms. But if things don’t go his way and Biden takes office in January, the replacements could well be worse than the asses that are currently in those seats.

It’s a great time to be alive.

Ammoland: Barbarians At The Gates, Is Our Great Republic In Danger Of Falling

The Sacking of Rome is starting to resemble what we’re seeing in America’s cities. JN Sylvestre 1847-1926 / Public domain.

From Ammoland, Barbarians At The Gates, Is Our Great Republic In Danger Of Falling

The Barbarians are at the gates, the cities are in flames, the war for the soul of America is in full swing. What I say here I do not say lightly. America is on the brink of falling, and if history is a guide and a repeating cycle, there will be very little to stop the demise of the greatest nation in the world, just like there was little at the end that could stop the fall of the Roman Empire once the decay and rot had set it.

What we are watching in our streets is nothing that happened overnight, it’s a product of years of social decay, corruption, indoctrination, and just flat out apathy. For as long as I have been active in politics, twenty-five years, which isn’t that long, I have seen the decline of this country, the spread of the corrupt cancer that’s been eating the heart and soul of America spread from the federal government to the states, to the smallest towns. It’s in our colleges, schools, our movies, television shows and in the very fabric of our everyday lives. Now add to that a virus that some would say is dubiously overblown and regulations that a year ago would have been laughed off as insane paranoia but are now seen as patriotism that must be enforced, and you have the perfect storm for the complete downfall of this republic.

George Who?

The fear and pent up resentment reached a flashpoint with the death of George Floyd, who barely gets any mention anymore. Which proves that he was simply used as the match to the fuse that is sparking riots not only all over in our cities, but also round the clock protests in even the smaller communities that don’t get much mention on the nightly news. Companies and sports venues quickly caved in out of fear of being protested next for simply not picking a side. Multimillionaire athletes are now en masse kneeling during the National Anthem before every game or, in the case of the WNBA, walking right off the court altogether. These things would have been unheard of a decade ago, now they’re seen as “taking a stand”.

Monuments are being ripped down, an act that many said would not stop with Confederate statues. It now includes anything that simply offends anyone else. Christopher Columbus, the Founding Fathers, memorials to fallen police officers, military, and veterans, are all targets. We all watched a historic church in Washington, DC nearly be burnt to the ground by anarchists who have been emboldened by liberal politicians who not only have ignored their actions, but in some instances have joined with the protesters against police, all while businesses are being vandalized, looted, and burned.

Today New York’s Attorney General Letitia James announced that she was suing the National Rifle Association with one goal, to dissolve it entirely. Now, I have had many bones to pick with the NRA over the years, and it appears that there has been a lot of mismanagement at the top for a long time, but one thing that everyone needs to see, with eyes wide open, is that if the liberals start with the NRA, they won’t stop there. You can bet they will look into finding a way to shut down every organization that they don’t like, or that stands up to them to defend your rights. The fact that an Attorney General from any state unveils a massive lawsuit against what for decades has been seen as the face of the Second Amendment in America with less than three months to go before perhaps one of the most pivotal elections in America’s history has got to be looked at for what it is, a political move to knock the NRA out of being able to lobby or fundraise for any candidates.

I hope I am wrong, but I feel that the violence we’re seeing is only going to get worse, egged on by the fact that there seem to be no consequences for those who loot and burn, while if you have a business and violate one of the many arbitrary rules that make no sense, you risk having your business shut down, being fined or even facing jail time. In some cities, if you get caught without a mask on, it’s a stiff fine, whereas we all see, night after night, a protest somewhere in this country where it seems that the rioters and looters have been given complete control of the streets.

Our country has been turned upside down, and hardworking, law-abiding citizens are on the bottom and are being trampled by the rioters and the regulations coming from blue states that worsen from day-to-day.

What Americans seem to have lost is hope, and I think that is intentional. The media on every channel beats the public down with talk of sickness, possible school closures, the economy, riots, violence, and politics. There never seems to be any good news, and all the while, everyone is told to stay home whenever possible while protesters are told that their actions are patriotic and, in some cases, necessary to get their point out. Good people are living in fear while the cities are in free fall. So of course, they feel helpless and are at the mercy of their elected officials. Speaking out is not only not good, but it’s going against the grain. Americans are told to not question what’s happening, just shut up, put on your mask, and do as your told.

Where this country goes from here is anyone’s guess, and I am not someone who is simply into the “buy guns and ammo” crowd. You don’t try to buy guns and ammo during a crisis, you should have had them before this all began. A crisis rarely takes a lot of time to spring up, giving you the chance to stock up. I think people should be looking to their own, thinking about where they live and putting away supplies of all kinds. I’m not saying go out and hoard toilet paper, but you can bet if things head south, what you saw at the grocery stores in March will only be an inkling of what they will look like.

America is going through a serious crisis right now, and it’s not just about the Covid virus. The real virus is what we’re seeing elected officials doing to their citizens while allowing criminals to go free or not be arrested at all.

The real virus is the fear that’s now rampaging through the country, making Americans afraid to even go outside for the fear they will catch something that is proving to be far less deadly than we were told. The real virus is the mobs of looters and rioters we’re seeing in our streets every single night, trashing buildings, cars, and destroying businesses while the media calls their actions peaceful. It is yet to be seen if the virus infecting America right now will be fatal to the republic or if we will be able to rally and fight it off. One thing is for sure, we’re running out of time to save the patient.

Ammoland: 9th Circuit Sides with Gun Owners on Standard Capacity Magazines

From Ammoland, Huge Win For Gun Owners In California Standard Gun Magazine Case. In the court’s conclusion, it states that the ban on standard capacity magazines (which the court notes comprize half of all magazines in the US) “substantially burdens the core right of self-defense guaranteed to the people under the Second Amendment. It cannot stand.”

oday the California Rifle & Pistol Association received the much-anticipated ruling in the long-fought Second Amendment case Duncan v. Becerra. This is the same case that led to “Freedom Week” where thousands of Californians were able to lawfully purchase standard capacity magazines much like the rest of the country.

CRPA has been fighting since the 30,000+ member-driven organization filed the case back in 2017, and has led the fight through the courts with the assistance of the National Rifle Association.

Initially won through a positive ruling by the United States District Court in San Diego, the state quickly appealed — and Judge Benitez was forced to stay his ruling to allow the purchase of magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition until the appeal was made to the Ninth Circuit. CRPA’s legal team quickly answered the State’s appeal and presented oral arguments.

“Today’s decision in Duncan v. Becerra is a major victory for the Second Amendment, both in California and across the country,” said Chuck Michel, president and General Counsel of the California Rifle & Pistol Association.

In its case, CRPA demonstrated how prohibiting law-abiding citizens from manufacturing, obtaining, selling, transferring, or even possessing standard-issue magazines for firearms violates the constitution.

“After years of fighting, the Court decided in favor of our plaintiffs’ challenge against the state’s ban on standard capacity magazines that hold more than 10 rounds,” said Michel.

Read the complete opinion from the 9th here:

Duncan v. Becerra Ruling

The court noted that the state’s efforts to ban these [gun] magazines does not pass the strict scrutiny or intermediate scrutiny tests and is a heavy burden on the Second Amendment rights of Californians.

“This is a huge win specifically for the right to possess these valuable self-defense tools. But more generally, this case may present the Supreme Court with an opportunity to set things straight on the underlying issue of what the standard of review test should be when considering any Second Amendment challenge,” Michel said.

“The Supreme Court seems inclined to do away with the complicated subjective tests that many courts have wrongly applied in Second Amendment cases, in favor of a clearer more objective “originalist” approach that considers the text, history and tradition of a law to determine what infringements might be tolerated,” he concluded.

CRPA continues to fight in nearly a dozen major court battles to protect and defend the Second Amendment in California. Our attorneys are reviewing the order now to determine what this means for FFLs and gun owners in California and more information will be made available soon.

Ammoland: N.Y. Attorney General Letitia James Sues to Dissolve NRA

From Ammoland, N.Y. Attorney General Letitia James Sues to Dissolve NRA, detailing NY’s latest step in their months-long investigation into alleged NRA corruption and mismanagement.

New York Attorney General Letitia James on Thursday filed a civil lawsuit in New York Supreme Court, seeking to dissolve the National Rifle Association.

The move comes at a time when NRA is fully involved in the 2020 election process and will be interpreted by many as an effort to cripple the organization and reduce its political influence at a critical moment.

At the same time, the District of Columbia filed a separate lawsuit, naming the NRA and the NRA Foundation as defendants. This action was filed by Karl A. Racine, attorney general for the District of Columbia.

Fox News reported the NRA immediately responded with a countersuit against James, insisting the organization is following New York’s not-for-profit law. The NRA lawsuit asserts James is “targeting the organization for its political positions, violating its free speech rights,” Fox News said.

Fox also quoted NRA President Carolyn Meadows, who describes the New York lawsuit as “a baseless, premeditated attack.” She questioned the timing of the lawsuit.

“You could have set your watch by it,” Meadows said in a prepared statement. “The investigation was going to reach its crescendo as we move into the 2020 election cycle. It’s a transparent attempt to score political points and attack the leading voice in opposition to the leftist agenda. This has been a power grab by a political opportunist – a desperate move that is part of a rank political vendetta. Our members won’t be intimidated or bullied in their defense of political and constitutional freedom.”

Meadows, according to Fox News, insisted the gun rights organization “will not shrink from this fight – we will confront it and prevail.”

The 169-page New York lawsuit alleges that longtime NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre “has exploited the organization for his financial benefit, and the benefit of a close circle of NRA staff, board members, and vendors.” NRA is incorporated in the State of New York.

In addition to LaPierre and the NRA, the lawsuit names former NRA Treasurer Wilson “Woody” Phillips, Chief of Staff and the Executive Vice President of Operations Joshua Powell and General Counsel John Frazer as defendants.

The lawsuit alleges that “With the assistance of Phillips, Powell and Frazer, LaPierre abused his position as a fiduciary to the NRA to obtain millions of dollars in personal benefits in the form of undisclosed, excessive compensation, which includes in-kind benefits and reimbursements from the NRA and its vendors.”

The document further alleges that “LaPierre has undertaken a series of actions to consolidate his position; to exploit that position for his personal benefit and that of his family; to continue, by use of a secret “poison pill contract,” his employment even after removal and ensuring NRA income for life; and to intimidate, punish, and expel anyone at a senior level who raised concerns about his conduct.”

In a statement quoted by the Washington Examiner, James declared, “The NRA’s influence has been so powerful that the organization went unchecked for decades while top executives funneled millions into their own pockets. The NRA is fraught with fraud and abuse, which is why, today, we seek to dissolve the NRA, because no organization is above the law.”

In her complaint, James asks the court to find “that the NRA is liable to be dissolved pursuant to (a) N-PCL § 1101(a)(2) based upon the NRA’s pattern of conducting its business in a persistently fraudulent or illegal manner, abusing its powers contrary to public policy of New York and its tax-exempt status, and failing to provide for the proper administration of its trust assets and institutional funds; and/or (b) N-PCL § 1102(a)(2) because directors or members in control of the NRA have looted or wasted the corporation assets, have operated the NRA solely for their personal benefit, or have otherwise acted in an illegal, oppressive or fraudulent manner.”

Further, James asks the Court to rule “that the interest of the public and the members of the NRA supports a decision to dissolve the NRA.”

James is also asking the court to direct the individual defendants “to account, make restitution and pay all penalties resulting from the breach of fiduciary duties and their misuse of charitable assets for their own benefit and interests.” She also seeks to enjoin the defendants “from future service as an officer, director or trustee, or in any other capacity as a fiduciary of any not-for-profit or charitable organization incorporated or authorized to conduct business in the State of New York, or which solicits charitable donations in the State of New York, or which holds charitable assets in New York.”

Tanya Metaksa, who served as executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action—the organization’s political lobbying arm—told Ammoland News, “I hope it’s going to be a long fight. I think it’s all political.”

Metaksa, now retired, spent 4 ½ years in the position as NRA’s chief lobbyist. She also at one time served on the NRA Board of Directors.

Richard Feldman, an attorney who is also president of the Independent Firearm Owners Association, Inc., said via email, “Perhaps the biggest swamp in the DC area is located at Waples Mill Road! Time to drain that swamp.”

In 2007, Feldman authored a memoir of his time working at the NRA titled, “Ricochet: Confessions of a Gun Lobbyist.” He was both applauded and castigated within the firearms community, depending upon the perspective of each observer.

In a subsequent telephone conversation, Feldman added, “I think it sucks that the NRA leadership has put American gun owners in this almost untenable position.”

He asserted the timing of both lawsuits is purely political.

“They didn’t wait until after the November election to drop this,” he said.

If the NRA is forced to dissolve, that could put enormous pressure on other gun rights organizations to fill a void.

Alan Gottlieb, founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation, and also chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, provided a statement to Ammoland News.

“I firmly believe that you’re innocent until proven guilty,” he said of the allegations contained in the civil lawsuits. “But it is also my belief that the NRA board of directors should have taken action when these allegations were first raised and preempted any action that could be taken by the New York State attorney general and the attorney general for the District of Columbia.”

In recent years, SAF has become a legal powerhouse, fighting dozens of court battles to advance Second Amendment rights, an effort he has often described as a campaign to “make the Second Amendment great again.”

“While there is no doubt both of these attorney generals are opponents of Second Amendment rights,” Gottlieb said, “and have an axe to grind, these are serious allegations that have not been put to bed by the leadership of the NRA over the last several years.

“Fortunately, for the gun rights movement,” he observed, “the strength of the NRA is not only in its leadership but in its members. Its members will not abandon the fight to protect Second Amendment rights.”

The National Shooting Sports Foundation—the firearms industry umbrella group—provided a statement to Ammoland:

“The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the firearm industry’s trade association, is troubled by the politically-driven decision of New York Attorney General Letitia James to seek to dissolve the National Rifle Association, America’s oldest civil rights organization. The lawsuit filed today by Attorney General James seeks to punish the over five million members of the National Rifle Association based on mere allegations of possible wrongdoing by a few individuals.

“NSSF is deeply concerned about the apparent political agenda to silence the strongest voice in support of the Second Amendment ahead of the election in November.

“This lawsuit, and one filed today by the District of Columbia Attorney General, should concern all Americans who cherish both the First and Second Amendments to our Constitution regardless of their views on what laws and regulations are appropriate to address the criminal misuse of firearms.”

The legal action launched by the District of Columbia Thursday was filed in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia, Civil Division.

There have been no criminal allegations in either jurisdiction. Both lawsuits are civil in nature.

In the District complaint, Racine notes the NRA Foundation was “established to operate solely for charitable purposes related to promoting firearm and hunting safety.”

In his complaint, Racine asserts, “In recent years, the NRA has experienced financial problems related, in large part, to low membership and the NRA’s decision to continue to waste funds on improper, lavish spending. To plug financial holes caused by its own poor management, the NRA turned to the Foundation’s funds. Because the Foundation’s Board of Trustees and executives are dominated by the NRA, and the NRA had subverted the Foundation’s independence, the Foundation has allowed itself to be financially exploited through, among other things, unfair loans and management fee payments to the NRA.

“In allowing its funds to be diverted from charitable purposes and wasted to prop up the NRA in impermissible ways,” the District complaint continues, “the Foundation Board of Trustees has failed to provide meaningful oversight and failed in its fiduciary duties. Through this enforcement action, the District seeks injunctive relief sufficient to reform the Foundation’s lack of proper independent governance and a constructive trust over Foundation funds improperly wasted on the NRA.”

Later in the 24-page District complaint, the District observes, “Charitable corporations receive various federal and state tax benefits, including eligibility to receive tax-deductible contributions. Charitable corporations hold their assets for the benefit of the public and must ensure those assets are used for their intended and tax-subsidized purpose. Charitable corporations are not permitted to engage in or fund political campaign activity; may not engage in more than an insubstantial amount of lobbying activity; their assets may not inure to the benefit of insiders, and they may not be organized and operated for the benefit of private interests.”

With both legal actions coming 90 days before the national elections in November, many gun owners and Second Amendment activists, as Feldman and others observed for this story, will be immediately convinced this is a political maneuver to weaken the NRA at a time it needs to be strongest.

Ammoland: NY Governor Cuomo Exposed by New Evidence in NRA Lawsuit

From Ammoland – New York Governor Andrew Cuomo Exposed by New Evidence in NRA Complaint

…According to a press release, the NRA filed a proposed Second Amended Complaint on December 20th 2019, citing documents provided by Lloyd’s this past June. According to the Memorandum of Law, the documents – and other information – “paint a stark and troubling picture of” the actions taken by the Cuomo regime. These included threats of adverse government action “delivered in off-the-record conversations and surreptitious backroom meetings” unless the company stopped doing business with the NRA.

According to a publicly released version of the Second Amended Complaint, the threats were backed up by fines levied against two insurance companies that did business with the NRA, including its Carry Guard insurance program intended to defray legal expenses from self-defense incidents. The coercion from the Cuomo regime eventually led those companies to sign settlements in which they agreed to cease doing any business with the NRA.

The track record of Andrew Cuomo should be no secret to loyal AmmoLand readers. While serving as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, he encouraged big cities to file lawsuits against firearms manufacturers, using the threat of bankruptcy via massive legal fees to coerce the gun companies to agree to restrictions that were largely rejected in Congress and most state legislatures. Did anyone forget that before the 2000 election, Cuomo had succeeded in forcing Smith and Wesson to accept terms that outraged law-abiding gun owners?

…The New York Times magazine noted that the Cuomo regime’s campaign has cost the NRA about $40 million in lost income and attorney’s fees in 2019 alone. Imagine how much $40 million could have done to promote the defense of our Second Amendment rights, training people to responsibly exercise their Second Amendment rights, or even training gunsmiths.

The stakes of the NRA’s fight with New York cannot be higher. As William Brewer told the New York Times magazine, “If they could do it to those guys, they could do it to me. They could do it to all of us.”

Petition to Repeal I-1639 Launched

The initiative to repeal the effects of I-1639 is I-1094 (Defense of the Second Amendment Act of 2020). From Ammoland – Grassroots Revolt to Repeal WA Gun Control Initiative 1639 Launched. Signatures must be turned in by Jan. 3, 2020, so be sure to sign the petition by the end of the year if you support it.

Thousands of yard signs opposing Initiative 1639 in Washington state last year did not prevent passage of the multi-faceted gun control measure. Now there is a grassroots repeal effort, despite a federal court challenge by SAF and NRA. (Dave Workman photo)

U.S.A. –-(Ammoland.com)- Frustration and fury are the two main ingredients of what can best be described as a grassroots revolt in Washington State with the launch of a counter initiative effort to repeal gun control Initiative 1639, the extremist measure passed by about 60 percent of Evergreen State voters last November.

This isn’t a case of “sore losers” but legions of law-abiding private citizens who believe their right to bear arms under both the federal and state constitutions is being violated.

I-1639 has already resulted in one federal lawsuit by the Second Amendment Foundation and National Rifle Association, one declared candidacy for governor by a small town police chief, refusal by sheriff’s in a majority of the state’s 39 counties to enforce provisions of the measure, and the creation of a new crime, “Community Endangerment.” This carries either gross misdemeanor or Class C felony penalties, depending upon the violation.

The initiative also, for the first time in history, defined a firearm that, according to Spokane County Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich, doesn’t really exist: the “semiautomatic assault rifle.” Under the language of I-1639, a “semiautomatic assault rifle” is “any rifle which utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round, and which requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge.” This translates to literally any self-loading rifle ever manufactured anywhere on the planet, according to critics.

There is no indication Sheriff Knezovich, or any of the other lawmen who opposed I-1639, is involved in this repeal effort.

Spokane County Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich said earlier this year that I-1639 defines a firearm that actually doesn’t exist. (Official Sheriff’s Department photo)

Perhaps most famously, the initiative prohibits the purchase of a so-called “semiautomatic assault rifle” to anyone in the 18-20-year-old age group; young adults who can still join the military, get married, enter into contracts and vote. They just can’t exercise their Second Amendment right to purchase or own one of these firearms.

It also created a registry requirement.

The initiative was opposed by nearly every major law enforcement organization in the state, a fact that was systematically downplayed, if not ignored, by the establishment media. It was opposed by some newspapers, endorsed by others.

And now I-1639 has spawned the effort to erase it. The office of anti-gun Attorney General Bob Ferguson, who has spent the last three years filing lawsuits against the Trump administration and who was an early endorser of I-1639, has given this new effort a number and ballot title.

The new measure is Initiative 1094, and the ballot title approved by Ferguson’s says this:

“This measure would remove requirements for sale or delivery of semiautomatic assault rifles, remove certain age limitations for pistols and semiautomatic assault rifles, repeal crimes regarding firearm storage, and change other firearms-related laws.”

The language applies to rimfire as well as centerfire rifles, so such popular sporting guns as the Ruger 10/22, Remington Nylon 66, Marlin Model 60 and Browning SA-22, the popular “gallery gun,” all chambered for the .22 Long Rifle rimfire.

The ballot measure summary provided by Ferguson’s office explains:

“This measure would remove increased background checks, firearm safety training requirements, and waiting periods for purchase or transfer of semiautomatic assault rifles; remove certain age limitations for pistols and semiautomatic assault rifles; repeal crimes related to firearm storage and firearm sales to unauthorized persons; modify requirements for private, non-dealer transfer of firearms; and repeal or amend other firearms-related laws, including requirements for recordkeeping, notification to law enforcement of firearms sales and denials, and background checks.”

The campaign, according to activist John Valle, is so far being conducted via social media. Initiative forms were being printed, and Valle said copies will be available for downloading online for printing on an 11×17-inch sheet.

Valle told Ammoland News, “We have a network of volunteers. Every Patriot group is on board and I’ve got 23 gun shop owners in Eastern Washington who will put it in their shop.”

He has spoken with gun show operators, and there is a growing legion of volunteer signature gatherers who plan to canvas the state.

Here’s the downside. The goal of this unorganized grassroots movement is to collect 5,000 valid signatures every day in order to turn in 300,000 signatures to the Secretary of State’s office.

The deadline for signature turn-in is Jan. 3, 2020 for the measure to appear on the November 2020 ballot, where it faces the likelihood of disappearing amid the presidential, congressional, gubernatorial and legislative election choices.

Among those involved in this effort is Nick Culp, son of Republic Police Chief Loren Culp. He’s the lawman who famously went before the Republic City Council following the passage of I-1639 to declare he would not enforce it and ask that Republic become a “Second Amendment sanctuary.” Sheriffs around the state followed suit, and more than a half-dozen county commissions also expressed opposition to enforcement.

The lawsuit, meanwhile, is lumbering forward. It is joined by gun shop owners in Spokane and Vancouver, and three private citizens in the affected age group. Currently, in the discovery phase, there may not be a hearing or trial until sometime next year.

Backers of the initiative are fired up, though they realize the challenge is formidable. I-1639 supporters spent about $5 million on their campaign. Valle, a Spokane-area resident, told Ammoland that he has no budget, and really can’t start a PAC.

But what this effort has is devoted participants. Getting enough signatures to validate is only half the problem they face. If the measure does quality, supporters face a daunting campaign in which they will almost certainly be out-spent by the Seattle-based gun prohibition lobby, which is bankrolled by billionaires and wealthy elitists, living primarily in a handful of zip codes in and around the Seattle area.

Sheriff Knezovich theorized earlier this year that the reason this measure included a definition of “semiautomatic assault rifle” is to lay the groundwork for a future effort, either via legislation or another initiative, to ban such guns. Anti-gunners think in the long term, he indicated at the time.

From KEPR TV:

Tri-Cities businesses with petitions and signature sheets:

Ace Pawn and Loan, 429 W Entiat Ave, Kennewick, WA 99336

B & B Express Printing, 7519 W Kennewick Ave, Kennewick, WA 99336

Columbia Gun Rack, 314 W Kennewick Ave, Kennewick, WA 99336

Ed & Moe’s Pawn Shop, 419 W Entiat Ave Suite C, Kennewick, WA 99336

Griggs Department Store: 801 W Columbia St, Pasco, WA 99301

Hole in the Wall, 7509 W Deschutes Ave, Kennewick, WA 99336

Talos Tactical, 4096 W Van Giesen St, West Richland, WA 99353

KIRO Radio: Gun rights activists mounting legal opposition to I-1639, AG Ferguson

The following Yakima Valley businesses are also reportedly carrying the petition and signature sheets:

Ranch and Home, Kennewick and Pasco locations
J&L Produce, Richland
The Coffee Bean, 840 Stevens Dr., Richland
Brubaker Arms, Yakima
Old Mill Country Store, 1504 S 36th Ave, Yakima
The Range, 1701 Garretson Ln, Yakima
UPS Store 6788, 420 S 72nd Ave, Ste. 180, Yakima
M&E Seed & Grain, 500 7th Ave, Prosser (unverified)

This link connects to a Google document which lists a large number of signature locations, some confirmed some not, across the state.