Questions Everyone Should Be Asking About Red Flag Emergency Risk Protection Gun Laws

Questions Everyone Should Be Asking About Red Flag Emergency Risk Protection ERPO Gun Laws : Rally for our Rights Colorado

If you’re not familiar with Red Flag Laws, also known as Emergency Risk Protection Orders (ERPO),  you’re not paying enough attention.  And if you know what Red Flag Laws are and support them, you’re probably also not paying enough attention.

Red Flag Laws allow an intimate partner, former intimate partner, or family member to make a report to the courts with claims that an individual is going to either hurt themselves or others with a firearm.  Within 24 hours the court hears a preponderance of evidence and issues an order to have the persons gun confiscated.

To some people, this sounds good on the surface.  I mean, who doesn’t want to save lives?  But feel good laws like these do more harm than good, and this one is no exception.  In fact, it may be one of the worst.   These laws lack due process, they grossly violate our right to keep and bear arms, and they would have a chilling effect on free speech.  Not to mention they would prevent people who truly need help from seeking it – especially those who are suicidal.

There are many questions we should be asking.  Here are some that I’ve developed after reading through the language in these proposed bills in many states.

• How can lawmakers ensure a stalker or domestic abuser is prevented from using an ERPO to disarm their victims, potentially putting those in our society who need protection the most in harms way?

• Are there safeguards in place to prevent this from being used as a form of retaliation or as a hate crime – for example being used to disarm a transgender person, a person of color, or a certain religion?

• Why is all information such as accusers, allegations, accusations, etc sealed and require a court order for release?

• Many of these ERPO’s allow the accuser to report via telephone, as well as attend the initial hearing via telephone – making these easier to obtain than a Temporary Protection Order, opening the door to rampant abuse.

• What kind of proof is required that the accuser is or has been in an intimate relationship with the accused, or is a family member?

• What kind of punishment would be in a Red Flag Bill for false accusers?

• Will requiring police to confiscate the guns of people who could be innocent, put law enforcement officers in harms way?

• When these confiscation orders are being carried out, quite likely against someone who is innocent, will that put families and children at risk?

• Why are these laws being promoted as “mental health” laws when in fact they have no mental health components?

• Because the accused who would have their firearms confiscated has not been accused of a crime, they would not be eligible for a public defender to get their firearms back, leaving the poor in our society at a disadvantage.

Do you have other questions that I have missed?  Drop them in the comments.  

Here is how these laws would work:

Step 1: A petitioner (either a current or former intimate partner, or a family member, with no proof required) makes a report via telephone or in person that you have firearms, have bought firearms, or have bought ammunition – and that they have heard you make a threat that you may harm another or yourself.

Step 2: A court hearing is scheduled within 24 hours either over the phone or in person with the petitioner to determine if an Emergency Risk Protection Order (aka Red Flag Order) should be issued.  The one most important person notably missing from this hearing is YOU.  You are not even so much as informed that this hearing is taking place.  During this hearing the judge will hear a “preponderance of evidence” from the petitioner, and only the petitioner, with the goal to convince the fact finder that there is a greater than 50% chance that the claim is true.

Step 3: An Emergency Risk Protection Order (ERPO) is issued.  The sheriff’s department will visit your home and demand you turn over your firearms, and if you refuse to comply, they will be confiscated by force (placing everyone present in a dangerous situation).  YOU will be left alone, without what may be your most important means of self defense – your firearm – because someone just had it confiscated.  It doesn’t matter if you bought that firearm to protect yourself from a stalker, an abuser, or simply to walk home from work late at night. It also doesn’t matter if the person who requested your firearms be confiscated is that same abuser or stalker.

Step 4: Then, and only then, will you be given instructions as to how to defend yourself in court and get your firearms back.

You can read more about Colorado’s 2018 version of the Red Flag Bill here.  A new bill has not yet been introduced for the 2019 legislative session, but it undoubtedly will be.

If you want to be part of the fight to defend your gun rights, please subscribe to our email list and/or make a donation.

Why Compromise Is A Losing Game For Gun Rights

There has been a lot of talk lately about “common sense” gun laws. Anti-rights groups have been crowing for them and boasting that the vast majority of United States’ citizens want them.

But what are these “common sense” laws?

While parading a few, with the common disclaimer, “We do NOT want to take your guns!,” in fact, they DO. Along with this, the anti-rights fanatics have blathered for “compromise” and plead that lack of action has cost lives.

What, exactly, do they mean by “compromise?”

Some history:

Since 1927 the federal government has been attacking citizens’ Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. They began by banning mail-order firearms (some exceptions); then (in 1934), short-barreled rifles and shotguns and silencers were taxed and fully automatic weapons were strictly regulated. All done in the name of “stopping crime.” In 1938 they began licensing dealers and manufacturers of firearms, and compelled them to keep records. They also banned sales to felons. It was in 1968, driven by (initially) JFK’s assassination, Martin Luther King’s murder and Robert Kennedy’s murder that federal government really stepped up restrictions on sales to minors, criminals, drug addicts and interstate firearm sales.

Finally, in 1993 (after surviving a 1981 assassination attempt on then-president Reagan, for whom he was press secretary), James Brady saw his more than a decade of campaigning for stronger gun control come to fruition: congress passed the Brady Bill and president Clinton signed it into law.

The bill required background checks for gun sales and a waiting period for handgun sales (waiting period later removed, due, in part, to legal concerns over liability in self defense purchases).

Many states (and cities) have been passing assorted “laws” restricting certain firearms with arbitrary features, assorted magazines – based on capacity, and various accessories deemed “too dangerous” (read: it looks scary!). The interesting facts here are that virtually all of these restricted or banned items still turn up in the hands of criminals. It appears the only people suffering from governmental overreach are law-abiding citizens.

So; let’s get back to the cries for “compromise:” to date, law-abiding citizens have seen rights taken at every turn, with few reversals or repeals to the restrictions (record keeping was deemed unconstitutional and later removed as a provision, some interstate sales were allowed and some import restrictions lifted).

Compromise? It appears that the anti-rights groups define compromise as trampling Constitutional rights and “allowing” law-abiding citizens to practice SOME rights protected by the Constitution – at their discretion and after paying a fine. AND – rather than defend our rights, elected charlatans and prima donnas seize the opportunity to do SOMETHING (ANYTHING!) and pass laws to infringe on the LAW-ABIDING among us. Then they crow about how they care and ignore the fact that criminals continue to commit crimes.

Remember; laws passed will have NO impact on criminals, other than to simplify their goal to steal, harm, rape and murder.

For me, and many like me, compromise means give and take. We have given much and received NOTHING, anti-rights groups have taken much and given NOTHING. So let’s stop this talk of compromise, no matter how nice it sounds to others. It is a seizure of rights, infringement, plain and simple.

“Infringe”
in·fringe
/inˈfrinj/

– to actively break the terms of a law or agreement.
– act so as to limit or undermine.

Now we’re getting somewhere. “Infringement” sounds more like what anti-rights groups term “compromise.” Why do you suppose compromise is the endorsed word? Could it be that “infringement” is specifically cited as forbidden in the text of the Second Amendment? That “compromise” sounds so friendly and reasonable, while “infringement” sounds more like the attack on rights that they are endorsing?

It appears compromise is not what they are after, so we move on.

Who decides what laws equate to “common sense” gun control? It sure SOUNDS reasonable. Unfortunately, the anti-rights groups don’t mention that they alone get to set the parameters of “common sense.” There will be no dialogue with supporters of Constitutional Rights to determine where the boundaries lie. Anti-rights fanatics will determine:

• Who is allowed to own a firearm

• How many firearms a law-abiding citizen may own

• What fee must be paid to allow law-abiding citizens to practice their Constitutionally-protected right

• EXACTLY what type of firearm law-abiding citizens may own

• How many bullets law-abiding citizens may carry said weapons

• When and where law-abiding citizens my carry or store their weapons

• How law-abiding citizens MUST store allowed weapons (often unloaded, making quick use impossible)

• In some cases, how much ammunition law-abiding citizens may possess

I repeat “law-abiding citizens” because, remember, criminals don’t worry about what laws “feel good” politicians pass.

Only self-aggrandizing, foolish politicians would think restricting the rights of all will impact the actions of criminals.

Tired of being demonized as a law abiding gun owner?  Help us get these billboards up!  Donate here: www.gofundme.com/gun-rights-billboards

gun rights save lives billboard colorado rally for our rights

 

Trump Admin Bump Stock Ban: What You Need To Know

Trump admin bans bump stocks Rally for our Rights ColoradoA few months ago I was at a gun rights rally when a news reporter came up to me and asked, “How is it legal for these people to be carrying these machine guns out on the streets?!”  She was referring to the half dozen or so attendees (among hundreds) who were open carrying rifles.  She was pointing in particular to a gentleman with a .22 rifle slung snugly on his chest, and another young woman with her AR-15 slung on her back.  I held back my chuckle, looked her right in the eye, and said: “Ma’am, those may be machines and they may be guns, but they are not machine guns.”  I went on to explain that while by definition any firearm is technically a machine, actual machine guns were regulated under the National Firearms Act.  We then walked around and people eagerly explained the very few differences between the handguns some had, and the rifles others had.  We had a great discussion about what had been banned in Boulder, CO with real life examples – and even she began to grasp the absurdity of it.  Needless to say, we had great media coverage that day.

This conversation came back to me yesterday morning as I learned the Trump administration directed the ATF to finalize an impending “bump stock” ban. What it does is essentially label an arbitrary piece of metal or plastic, that has no automatic functioning mechanical parts, as a “machine gun”.  This ban places bump-stock-type devices under the NFA, a grossly unconstitutional law requiring citizens to pay exorbitant amounts of money, register with the Secretary of Treasury, and jump through dozens of government hoops, to obtain certain firearms.

In the ATF’s amended regulation released yesterday, bump stocks are defined as “devices that allow a semiautomatic firearm to shoot more than one shot with a single pull of a trigger.”  This is interesting because just last year, Michael Curtis, chief of the Firearms Technology Industry Services branch of the ATF, said the product was not prohibited “since the device does not initiate an automatic firing cycle by a single function of the trigger [and therefore] it is not a machine gun under the NFA.”  

Under the new ban those in possession of bump-stock-type devices must turn them in to an ATF field office or destroy them by March 21st, 2019.

Trump admin bans bump stocks Rally for our Rights Colorado

Many people may believe bump stocks are simply a fun accessories for gun enthusiasts, but what they are missing is that bump stocks were originally created to help those with limited mobility in their hands.  A friend of mine has testified on this premise, stating: “Regardless of the opinions of others, I as a disabled person should be able to determine which tools are best for me in my pursuit of recreational, legal shooting sports. It is sickening to me how many people either do not know about bump fire stocks helping disabled people, or who try to minimize or pretend that there is no debate, and that civilians should not have access to them.”

Bump fire action can also be replicated with a rubber band, a belt loop, or even your finger (if you know what you’re doing).  Will we next regulate rubber bands as machine guns?  Because that’s how absurd this new law is.

Make no mistake, this ban does not come without justified legal challenges.  Immediately after Tuesday morning’s announcement, attorneys for an owner of a “bump-stock” device and three constitutional rights advocacy organizations filed a federal lawsuit against the Trump Administration.  The suit comes with multiple arguments.  First, they are challenging Matthew Whitaker’s legal authority to serve as Acting Attorney General and issue rules without being nominated to the role and confirmed by the Senate.  Second, they are challenging the confiscatory ban on firearm parts. And third they are requesting an immediate temporary injunction to prevent the Trump Administration from implementing and enforcing the new regulation.  Click here to learn more about the legal action and how you can help.

There are many people, even in the gun rights community, arguing that this is simply throwing a bone to the gun grabbers in an effort to quiet them.  This attitude is completely wrong.  It not only doesn’t appease the anti-gun community, it motivates them.  Just yesterday, Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action, says to her it signals a new openness on the part of the administration to continue to tighten firearms regulations.

The “bump stock” ban is an assault on the Constitution and law abiding gun owners, but it’s also an assault on the uninformed general populace who have been led to believe it will do ANYTHING beyond create a false sense of security.

Tired of being demonized as a law abiding gun owner?  Help us get these billboards up!  Donate here: www.gofundme.com/gun-rights-billboards

gun rights save lives billboard colorado rally for our rights

Red Flag Gun Bills Have Nothing To Do With Mental Health And Everyone Should Care

Earlier this year, during the 2018 legislative session, Colorado Republicans held a one seat majority in the state senate.  This was enough to stop a poorly written and heavily rushed Red Flag Bill from becoming law.  Unfortunately for those who support gun rights and due process, that single seat was lost in November’s election along with several others, and 2019’s legislative session is expected to be a fight – with a Red Flag Bill a top priority for lawmakers who are proving to be against the civil rights of the same citizens they were elected to represent.

Here’s a thorough breakdown of the last Red Flag Bill Coloradan’s faced, as well as details about the major issues within such legislation.

Colorado’s Red Flag Bill (HB18-1436) was heavily promoted through the media – both radio and TV- as a mental health bill, implying that it would help the mentally ill and get them treatment.  But when Sheriff Sprulock was asked on May 7, 2018 in a Senate committee meeting, “Does this bill address how to get those people that mental health treatment?”  Sheriff Sprulock answered, “No it doesn’t.”

The issuing of an Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) begins with the petitioner making a phone call, at minimum, to the court to request an ERPO.  There is no verification or proof required for this phone call.  This call could come from someone claiming to be a “dating partner” or a “family member”.  Your bitter neighbor could claim to have had an affair with you.  There is no limitation to how long ago you dated or who the family member is, or even if they are in the state of Colorado.

Red Flag Bill Emergency Risk Protection Order ERPO Colorado Gun Confiscation Colorado Rally for our Rights

The court must issue a hearing by telephone or in person with the petitioner that same day or the following day.  The judge will hear a “preponderance of evidence” from the petitioner, and only the petitioner, with the goal to convince the fact finder that there is a greater than 50% chance that the claim is true.  This is comparable to a “he said – she said” argument, only the accused gun owner is not informed or allowed to contest the petitioner.  This is a Kangaroo court, and the gun owners’ damnation is absolute.  In the court hearing, evidence such as access to a firearm or purchased ammunition is enough to issue a temporary ERPO.

Once the temporary ERPO is issued, the gun owner is then declared a “dangerous person” and a good faith effort is made to issue the gun owner a statement that they can no longer be in possession of a firearm.  The gun owner must sell the firearms, transfer them to a Federal Firearms Licensed dealer, or hand them over to the police.  It is at this point the accused even learns such a case has been brought to the court. They must comply, no questions asked, or they may face death, as we recently saw in Maryland.

Red Flag Bill Emergency Risk Protection Order ERPO Colorado Gun Confiscation Colorado Rally for our Rights

Seven days after the temporary ERPO is issued the gun owner can have a court date where they are responsible to provide an attorney to defend themselves.  Because they have not been accused of a crime, they will NOT be read their Miranda Rights and an attorney will NOT be provided to them.  They must proceed pro-se or hire an attorney.

If this bill is for mental health, the Petitioner just cost the gun owner thousands of dollars in legal defense fees; funds which could have otherwise been spent on treatment.

This bill states that “clear and convincing evidence” is the requirement to issue a EPRO for 182 days. It also states that having any access to a firearm or the purchase of ammunition is clear and convincing evidence. Because the bill lists the purchase of ammunition as clear and convincing evidence, it has short changed the higher standard of evidence for one that is almost as low as the preponderance of evidence requirement.

Red Flag Bill Emergency Risk Protection Order ERPO Colorado Gun Confiscation Colorado Rally for our Rights

Then if found innocent of everything, you are not guaranteed to be removed from the NICS database and therefore cannot get your firearms back.  If you’re a resident of a city such as Boulder, where an “assault weapons” ban allowed a grandfathering period where you could get your firearms certified, if you did not certify your firearms, you will not be getting them back.

Red Flag Bill Emergency Risk Protection Order ERPO Colorado Gun Confiscation Colorado Rally for our Rights

Bottom line: If you are issued an ERPO, you will have to give up your firearms, you will have to provide your own legal defense at your cost, your name will go into the NICS database as being prohibited from having a firearm, all before you go to court to prove your case, and never once will actual mental health be a topic.

Don’t be fooled, this bill is a gun grab bill in the name of mental health, where gun owners must give up their property before due processes is given.

Gun owners save lives!  Armed citizens stop crime with firearms more than 1.5 million times each year.  Help us get this billboard up for the 2019 legislative session!  Donate here: www.gofundme.com/gun-rights-billboards

gun rights save lives billboard colorado rally for our rights

60 YO Man Killed In Self Defense By 23 YO Woman Is Memorialized As “Gun Violence” Victim

60 YO Man Killed In Self Defense By 23 YO Woman Is Memorialized As “Gun Violence” Victim - Rally for our Rights - Bruce Jones Aubrey Bowlin

UPDATE:  On Sunday evening, December 16th, the GunMemorial website quietly removed this perpetrator from their pages after receiving so much backlash from this article.  Unfortunately, we have discovered thousands of other violent criminals who were killed in self defense on their site. We’ll be exposing some of the worst here soon.

On February 8, 2018 a young woman shot and killed her attacker during a public road rage incident.  23 year old Aubrey Bowlin, was riding her motorcycle along I-5 in Milton, Washington when an irate driver began to act recklessly.

According to witnesses, 60 year old Bruce Jones was distraught by the way Bowlin was driving her motorcycle.  He boxed her into a location she could not drive away from. Jones exited his vehicle and physically attacked the young woman who was sitting on her bike. A fight followed, initiated by the much larger man.  At one point, Bowlin head-butted Jones, who then drove Bowlin’s head into the jersey barrier before taking her to the ground.  He hit her and shook her, she described, like a dog shaking a toy in its mouth. He violently tried to rip her helmet off and was choking her with the neck strap.  She believed he was going to choke her to death. Bowlin shot Jones once in the chest when he attempted to climb on top of her.  Jones died at the scene.

No charges were filed and Bowlin was exonerated by the Pierce County Sheriff’s Department, as this was a clear case of self defense.  Bowlin was a permitted concealed pistol carrier.  She called 911 after ending the attack with her fatal shot, and waited at the scene.  She did everything right, although according to her, she still suffers from PTSD.

Seems like an open and shut case, right?  Nope.

It’s been discovered that the website gunmemorial.org, which puts up photos of people whose lives have been “lost to gun violence,” is memorializing this perpetrator as a “gun violence victim”.  In fact, 90 virtual candles have been lit for him at the time of this writing.  This is a man who nearly pummeled a 23 year old woman to death on the side of the interstate for the public to see.  And he is being held up as the victim by the anti-gun community.

60 YO Man Killed In Self Defense By 23 YO Woman Is Memorialized As “Gun Violence” Victim - Rally for our Rights - Bruce Jones Aubrey Bowlin

It begs the question of how many other of these so-called “victims” are actually perpetrators.  The anti-gun movement has adopted the term “homicide” when speaking of stats.  But did you know homicide and murder are not the same?  Homicide is all death except suicide – even justified deaths, such as those killed in self defense, as is the example here, as well as law enforcement related deaths.  Murder is a malicious act with the intent to cause death (or serious harm resulting in death).  Aubrey Bowlin could have been a murder victim, but she was not because instead she made Bruce Jones a homicide case.  See how that works?  With the ability to sway public opinion so easily by simply using a different word, it’s no wonder those who wish to to take away an individual’s right to self defense with a firearm would use the term homicide in their argument as it carries a much higher number.  A number that portrays perpetrators as victims.

It doesn’t take much digging into this Gun Memorial website to find their connection to the Gun Violence Archive – the website behind the widely spread number of 307 “mass shootings” in 2018 – a story we completely debunked after doing some serious research. (By the way, that real number is 6, not 307).  Gun Violence Archive also makes a habit out of holding up violent criminals as victims – simply by using the word homicide.

Why is it the same people who claim to support women’s rights, want to take away a woman’s right to defend herself with a firearm?  Help us get this billboard up by donating here: www.gofundme.com/gun-rights-billboards

gun rights womens rights billboard colorado rally for our rights

Only Days Left For Boulder, CO Residents To Register Their Firearms

Rally for our Rights has been at the forefront of Boulder, Colorado’s so-called “assault weapons” ban since it’s inception. We attended city council meetings and organized messaging campaigns encouraging residents to contact their local government officials. We organized a street demonstration on April 21st, 2018 in protest to the proposed ban – an event which was attended by hundreds in the heart of Colorado’s most progressive city – even in the rain/snow.  There were threats of lawsuits against Boulder, one of which came to fruition less than 24 hours after the ordinance passed, and another quickly followed.  Despite these efforts, the Boulder elites who make up the city council voted unanimously on May 15th, 2018 to ban the sale and possession of many semi-automatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns as well as bump stocks and magazines holding more than 10 rounds.  This unconstitutional move did nothing to address actual crime, but instead criminalized and demonized the law abiding.

Only Days Left For Boulder, CO Residents To Register Their Firearms : Rally for our Rights

As part of this ban, residents who owned any of the prohibited firearms prior to the day the ban went into law (June 15th, 2018) can participate in the city’s “This-Is-Not-A-Registry” program and grandfather their guns with a certification.  The last day to certify a firearm is supposed to be December 31st, 2018, but Boulder Police have stated that due to the holidays, the last day will actually be December 27th.  The complete ban will officially take effect on January 1, 2019, at which point possession of a banned weapon without a certificate will be punishable by 90 days in jail and/or a $1,000 fine, and firearms will be confiscated and destroyed.

The certification process involves taking the firearm(s) being certified to the police department (unloaded and secured in vehicle) where they will be inspected.  You must have a valid photo ID and a new background check will be run. If the the background check comes back clear, two certificates per firearm will be issued. The cost is $20 for the first firearm and $5 for each additional firearm.

Boulder Colorado Firearms Registration Certification

Gun owners must then keep the certificate with the firearm at all times – forever – otherwise they’re a criminal. Lose this piece of paper? The firearm can be confiscated. Don’t comply? Criminal. Allegedly there are no copies of these certificates kept.

According to Boulder Police Department, they have certified 85 firearms so far.  Now, let’s make this clear – this is not 85 gun owners, this is 85 firearms.  Each prohibited firearm needs it’s own certificate. With the average gun owner possessing eight firearms, it is likely less than ten people have actually complied.  But this begs a question – if they aren’t keeping records, how do they know how many certificates have been issued?  According to them they are keeping a handwritten tally.  A handwritten tally of how many law abiding gun owners are certifying their firearms, because we know the people we should actually be concerned with aren’t certifying theirs.

Then we had to ask how many bump stocks or magazines above 10 rounds have been turned in?  You guessed it, ZERO.

Boulder’s ban includes:

1.) All semi-automatic center-fire rifles that have the ability to accept a detachable magazine and have a pistol grip, telescoping stock, or off hand stabilization feature.

2.) All semi-automatic center-fire pistols that have the ability to accept a detachable magazine other than in the pistol grip or has any other secondary stabilization feature.

3.) All semi-automatic shotguns that have the ability to accept a detachable magazine, or have a fixed magazine over 5 rounds, or have any secondary stabilization features.

Read the “assault weapons” ban ordinance in it’s entirety here.

And read the bump stock/magazine ban ordinance here.

What’s Next:

One of the most common questions we receive is how is this legal, and if it has been challenged in court.  It is not legal, and it is being challenged in court.  The day after the ordinance passed into law, Mountain States Legal Foundation filed a suit in federal court.  Not long after, the NRA filed a suit in state court.  The federal suit is on hold until the state suit is decided.

Colorado has a preemption law in its state constitution that clearly states what Boulder has done is not legal.

C.R.S. 29-11.7-103:

A local government may not enact an ordinance, regulation, or other law that prohibits the sale, purchase, or possession of a firearm that a person may lawfully sell, purchase, or possess under state or federal law. Any such ordinance, regulation, or other law enacted by a local government prior to March 18, 2003, is void and unenforceable.

Boulder is claiming because it is a home rule city, it is not beholden to the state constitution or state laws.  If this is the case, we have to wonder if more gun friendly home rule cities can claim the same, and exempt themselves from Colorado’s magazine limits and enhanced background checks.  Your move, Colorado courts.

With 250,000 medical malpractice deaths each year, you are 10,000 times more likely to be killed by a doctor than an AR-15.  Help us get this billboard up!  Donate here: www.gofundme.com/gun-rights-billboards

gun rights medical malpractice AR15 billboard colorado rally for our rights

 

Actually, David Hogg…It’s Illegal To Use Tax Money To Fund Gun Control Research

On another episode of “Things Anyone Can Say On Twitter” gun control proponent, David Hogg, recently tweeted: “Congress ought to create a federal tax on gun sales to fund gun violence research.”

For someone who cares so much about laws, and creating new laws (even while current gun control laws are failing at the fault of the government), Hogg himself fails to understand there are currently laws in place that would make it illegal for tax money to be used to fund research into what he calls “gun violence”.

In fact, it is illegal for the arm of government responsible for researching risk and prevention, the Center For Disease Control, to use funding to advocate for or promote gun control.  This is due to 1996’s “Dickey Amendment“.  Most recently, in March, 2018, President Donald Trump addressed the Dickey Amendment in his $1.3 trillion spending agreement, but did not include a change in funding.  Instead it clarified that the CDC can conduct research into gun violence, but cannot use government appropriated funds to do so.

But this brings to question, what would the CDC find if they did unbiased research?  They might find that while gun crime is going down, public perception believes otherwise.

It’s Illegal To Use Tax Money To Fund Gun Research gun crime rally for our rights colorado

David Hogg rose to fame along with fellow classmates as they politicized the February, 2018 Parkland High School shooting and used it as a platform to call for stricter gun control under the guise of March For Our Lives – an organization that works under the umbrella of the Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety.  Since it’s inception, some of Hogg’s classmates have left the movement citing a change of heart when actually talking with gun owners and gaining a better understanding of why they those choose to own firearms.

So, Mr. Hogg, before you continue asking for government to make more and more laws, I’d suggest you learn more about the ones that we currently have on the books.

Want To Help Fund Gun Rights Billboards in Colorado? Here’s How!

gun rights womens rights billboard colorado rally for our rights
Rally for our Rights is excited to announce our latest effort to get three different billboard designs out around Colorado!  We’ve just begun the fundraising effort to make this happen.  The more we raise, the more creative and strategic we can be with our placement.  There are options of digital billboards available that will rotate to different locations, as well as your traditional roadside billboards.  We want to use all to get the most bang for our buck!

gun rights save lives billboard colorado rally for our rights
With the recent elections turning Colorado bluer than blue, we are expecting to see gun control legislation worse than even 2013 when three Democrat state legislators were recalled over gun bills.  These billboards are an opportunity to grow our member base to allow us to better fight this legislation, as well as engage the average citizen who typically becomes apathetic between elections.  It’s time to pay attention!

You can support this effort by making a donation and sharing our GoFundMe here: www.gofundme.com/gun-rights-billboards

Mailing a contribution to:

Rally for our Rights
PO Box 721
Johnstown, CO 80534

Or donating directly to Rally for our Rights via credit/debit card or PayPal by clicking here. 

Please note: These are mock-ups only!  The final versions will be created by the billboard company graphics designer and will utilize all available space.  

gun rights medical malpractice AR15 billboard colorado rally for our rights

Gun control advocates have already placed billboards outside of Boulder, CO, and we expect them to continue.  These are what those looked like…

Gun control billboard boulder colorado rally for our rights Gun control billboard boulder colorado rally for our rights

 

mass shooting headlines gun violence poll rally for our rights mass shootings debunked

You’re Being Lied To About Mass Shootings – And It’s Worse Than You Think

It seems like we can’t go a day without the media hyping up yet another story about yet another mass shooting. The media loves to make evil people famous.  And when they start sharing numbers and stats about these shootings, a distracted populace believes them without question.

On November 8, 2018 – the day after the heartbreaking Thousand Oaks shooting – Denver Channel 7, USA Today, Yahoo, and several other mainstream news outlets released articles claiming that there have been 307 mass shootings in the United States during 2018. Rally for our Rights decided to look into this and what we found surprised even us.  The American public is being grossly lied to – and they should care.

mass shooting headlines gun violence poll rally for our rights mass shootings debunked

In order to determine how many mass shootings there are, we need to know the definition of a mass shooting. Finding that definition seems easy enough, right?  Think again.  There are actually many definitions of “mass shooting” and most seem to be arbitrarily made up to fit the narrative an organization or publication wishes to push.

Mother Jones defines mass shooting as: “Indiscriminate rampages in public places resulting in four or more victims killed by the attacker, excluding the death of the attacker.”

The Gun Violence Archive defines a mass shooting as: “Four or more shot or killed, not including the shooter. They also do not remove any subcategory of shooting – meaning they don’t exclude, set apart, caveat, or differentiate victims based upon the circumstances in which they were shot – including crime, gang activity, and domestic/familial incidents.”

The “experts” at Reddit have decided to make up their own definition, therefore Reddit defines a mass shooting as:  “Four plus people injured or killed by firearm, including the gunman.”

Finally we come to the Congressional Research Service’s definition: “The incident takes place in a public area involving four or more deaths—not including the gunman, the shooter selects victims indiscriminately, the violence in these incidents are not a means to an end.”  It should be noted that CRS breaks up shootings involving four or more individuals as public, familial, and felony (robbery, gang activity, etc).  This is because the motives behind each vary greatly.

To make matters even more confusing, the FBI has separate definitions for “mass murder” and “active shooter”.

There are several inconsistencies between each of these definitions. For such a severe issue that allegedly only occurs in the United States, why do we not have a universal definition for this type of event? And why is it the government can agree on the definition, but the gun grabbers won’t use it?

For the sake of this investigation, we used the definition put forth by the Congressional Research Service.  The CRS’s website explains that it “works exclusively for the United States congress, providing policy and legal analysis to committees and members of both members of the house and senate, regardless of party affiliation.” The website further explains that the CRS  is a “shared staff to congressional committees and members of congress. CRS experts assist at every stage of the legislative process.” To put it simply, congress uses the CRS’s research to develop policy and create laws.

THE LIE

Now that we’re “armed” with the facts we need, lets dissect the statistics being pushed by the media.

The stats used in the news sources cited above stating there have been 307 mass shootings thus far in 2018 are from the Gun Violence Archive.  Okay, let’s look a little deeper into the GVA. The mission statement on their website states it is a “non-profit corporation formed in 2013 to provide free online public access to accurate information about gun related violence in the United States.”

We dug into the website’s “mass shooting” report for 2018. We filtered the list by lowest deaths to highest. Immediately 11 out of the 13 pages were disqualified, as there were between 0 and 3 deaths per incident. That means right away, 287 incidents out of 307 do not qualify as a mass shooting by definition. In fact, 155 of these incidents resulted in zero deaths.  This is unbelievable.

That leaves only two pages to dig through. The most common theme with the remaining list of incidents is that they were primarily either family or domestic violence related. Using the definition used by the CRS, that removes all but six shootings that actually count as a public mass shooting. Yes folks, there have only been SIX mass shootings this year in the United States – not 307.

Here are the six qualifying incidents:

  • February 14, 2018, Broward County Florida (Parkland), 17 dead, 17 injured.
  • April 22, 2018, Antioch, Tennessee, 4 dead, 3 injured.
  • May 18, 2018, Santa Fe Texas, 10 dead, 13 injured.
  • June 28, 2018 Annapolis, Maryland, 5 dead, two injured.
  • October 27, 2018, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 11 dead, 7 injured.
  • November 7, 2018, Thousand Oaks, California, 13 dead, 2 injured.

Six mass shootings compared to 307 is a substantial difference. The media easily plays off the ignorance of the public, taking advantage of the fact that there is not a universal definition of “mass shooting”, and blowing up an issue that, although very tragic, is only part of a larger picture of violent crime, most of which does not involve firearms.

WHY THIS MATTERS

This clearly shows that the media has a blatant disregard for the truth.  They either have an ulterior motive in what they report, or they are too lazy to verify what is being given to them.  It’s likely a bit of both, but the former is rather frightening.  They are manipulating the general populace by creating hysteria through a skewed mass shooter narrative. This in turn will influence public opinion, and ultimately public policy.

Rally for our Rights founder, Lesley Hollywood, released a poll on her Facebook page in coordination with this article.  Lesley was curious what the general public thought had happened when they heard the term “mass shooting.” Out of  508 votes, nearly half of the individuals who participated thought a mass shooting was like what happened in Parkland, FL or Thousands Oaks, CA – not the definition being used by the Gun Violence Archive or many of the others.

gun violence poll rally for our rights mass shootings debunked

This manipulation of perception and public opinion will ultimately be used to conjure up reasons to demonize guns – portraying the objects as evil, with the means of using a lie to go after your ability and your right to keep your family safe and yourself safe.  It also misses the mark terribly at addressing WHY these tragic incidents are happening, and how we can prevent them without infringing on the rights of the law abiding.

*This article has been updated to include the Annapolis, MD incident on June 28, 2018.

No, Most AR-15 Owners Are Not Mass Murderers

In the world of Twitter, it’s easy to say ridiculous, unfactual things with no consequence – and people will readily validate you with a retweet or praise.  In the blink of an eye millions of people are exposed to yet another lie.

This happened just a few days ago when political writer for Newsweek, Nina Burleigh tweeted, and I quote: “Almost every single person I’ve ever heard of with an AR-15 has been a mass murderer.”

This tweet was in response to California Congressman Eric Swalwell letting gun owners know if they were to refuse to comply with a hypothetical gun confiscation, they just might be nuked. 

Well, Ms. Burleigh clearly lives in a very small, very shallow bubble.

There are well over 6 million AR-15’s in the United States, and that is undoutedly on the low end.  These numbers are extrapolated from manufacturer production and the ATF.  AR-15’s are commonly used for sport, hunting, and self-defense.  They are preferred by many, including women and those with disabilities, because they are lightweight, easy to modify to best fit the user, and highly accurate.  As I’ve said many times, if God forbid someone were to enter my home with the intent to harm myself or my daughters, I want the firearm that will stop them the fastest and with the best accuracy – and for myself that is going to be a rifle.

Out of these over 6 million AR-15’s, only 13 have been used in mass murders since 2004.  

So, in honor of Ms. Burleigh, I thought it would be fitting to highlight some AR-15 owners.  They’re your neighbors and your friends.  They’re your co-workers and your classmates.  They’re your average, everyday people who give back to their communities and care about society.

Emily Baker Rally for our Rights AR15 Colorado

Name: Emily Baker
Age: 21
Occupation: Software Developer
Pets: Mookie, American Bulldog
# of Mass Murders Committed: ZERO
# of Community Acts of Service: SIX
  • Adopt-A-Highway Cleanups 
  • Humane Society Donation Drive
  • OUR Center Coat Drive
  • Volunteers with Special Needs Kids
  • Helped organize donation drive after Hurricane Harvey 
  • Volunteered after Joplin, MO tornado

About Emily:  As a baby I was abandoned and left to die on the streets of China.  By the Grace of God, I was rescued and adopted to a couple from the United States where I grew up.  Learning about the communist land I came from has given me a great respect and appreciation for our Constitutional rights, especially the right to keep and bear arms. You can follow Emily on Instagram at @patriot_panda  www.instagram.com/patriot_panda

Name: Jason Boros
Age: 37
Occupation: Mechanic/Service Writer
Pets: 2 dogs, 1 cat and a Guinea pig
# of Mass Murders Committed: ZERO
# of Community Acts of Service: SIX
  • Volunteers with terminally ill
  • Adopt-A-Highway Cleanups 
  • Humane Society Donation Drive
  • OUR Center Coat Drive
  • Donation drive for Mountain States Legal Foundation
  • Organizes free community events to help better educate gun enthusiasts

About Jason:  Animals love me. All of our pets are rescued. I’m a loving family guy. The only thing on my criminal record is a misdemeanor dog off leash ticket.  Mass murderer?  That’s insulting. 

Name: Haley Marcantonio
Age: 19
Occupation: Server at retirement home & full time college student
Pets: Bonnie & Clyde, Chihuahuas
# of Mass Murders Committed: ZERO
# of Community Acts of Service: SIX
  • Domestic violence shelter support
  • Volunteers with adoption agency
  • Christmas gift drives for needy 
  • Volunteers with puppy mill awareness campaigns and efforts
  • Adopt-A-Highway cleanups
  • OUR Center Coat Drive

About Haley:  I’m your typical Basic White Girl – I love my Starbucks, shopping, make up, getting my nails done, and hanging out with my friends. I also have seven younger siblings who I love more than the stars in the sky. Follow Haley on Instagram @misshaleyroseee www.instagram.com/misshaleyroseee