In Confiscating #Guns, #Ukraine Confirms Putin was Right #2A

Ukraine Sets Deadline for Militias to Surrender Illegal Guns – NYTimes.com.

In 2008, Putin told George Bush “Ukraine is not a real country” – maybe he was right, after all.

Pushed by the EU, Yatsenyuk is giving militia groups until Friday to surrender illegal arms and comply with Ukraine’s restrictive gun laws.  The groups had confiscated arms from the Interior Ministry during the Revolution.

Yatsenyuk says if people want assault weapons, they should join the national guard or army.  Yup, the national guard that was formed two weeks ago.

Ukraine’s insane policy of discouraging the formation of “a people trained to arms” has real consequences.  For example, US Senator Chris Murphy recently opposed sending small arms to Ukraine because he thought they would be wasted due to the general lack of training.

The new government is perilously misguided in thinking widespread ownership of arms would create instability and justify Russian intervention.  Exactly the opposite is true:

Was Putin right?  Real countries have borders.  Ukraine is a real country to the extent it is willing and able to defend them.

Renouncing US Citizenship Increasingly Popular

Story here says renunciations of US citizenship are increasing sharply due to a number of factors, including a change in law allowing renunciants to spend more time in the US while retaining the more favorable tax treatment driving most renunciations.  Several financial advisors have told me they have renunciants for clients, but these advisors (and presumably their clients) are generally clueless about the loss of Second Amendment rights attending renunciation.  Articles about renunciation in the mainstream press typically fail to mention this drawback.

McDonald Case Worthless Unless You Update Your Family Constitution

At a meeting of estate planners a few weeks ago, I mentioned my free concealed weapons class (http://GUNLAW.PRO, more details at http://WorldExaminer.com) and that I design trusts with incentives for multi-generational firearms training.  A well-known and highly respected attorney recalled and related to us a terrible experience he had a long time ago on a family outing, when he realized to his horror that he was "accidentally" (negligently) pointing a loaded gun at his own daughter.  It was obvious to me this had powerfully affected his view of guns, unfortunately in a negative way.

This kind of negligence is so easily avoidable, with some good basic training plus REGULAR DRY PRACTICE to engrain rigid compliance with the four basic safety rules, as to virtually ELIMINATE any possibility of this kind of thing ever happening.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of gun owners do not even know what they do not know.  I gather this from teaching over 70 ccw students, many with military and law enforcement backgrounds.  Worse, many gun owners are too prideful (or fearful) to even consider formal training.  Firearms skills (both efficiency and safety) are perishable and we can all benefit from holding each other accountable. 

Despite the great result in McDonald, reasonable restrictions are still permitted.  The four dissenting justices in McDonald provide a glimpse as to what "reasonable" means in Alice's Wonderland, possibly your children's future. 

As the Supreme Court has acknowledged, a well-regulated militia cannot exist without a people trained to bearing arms.  Unless we step up our efforts to train each other and our children, we will lose the right to bear arms within a generation.

Family Protection Clinic | GUNTRUST.ORG, Professional Law Corporation, Laguna Hills, CA.

The clinic is an informal gathering of clients, financial advisors, friends, and any member of the public who would like to attend (not necessary to be a client) for free general information and discussion about estate planning, asset protection and family protection, including a discussion of Unloaded Open Carry (UOC) in California; plus free target practice with realistic laser simulator (moving/transitional targets, including hostage rescue scenario). [You can also complete the shooting prerequisite for attending free CCW class (ccw details at http://www.worldexaminer.com).] Video:

McDonald Court Holds the Mao: Serves Up a Double for the Second Amendment

This just in: The Supreme Court has just held, 5-4, in McDonald v. Chicago:  THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS INCORPORATED AGAINST THE STATES UNDER THE 14th AMENDMENT!

Thomas says under "Privileges or Immunities" clause, other justices say under Due Process clause.

Decision is located here:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf 

(The Heller decision two years ago held the Second Amendment guaranteed a fundamental individual right of self-defense, but until now this applied only against the federal government.)

More analysis to follow later here at http://sacredhonor.us

Nordyke v. King: Excerpts & Commentary (GunLaw.Pro)

Nordyke v. King: Excerpts & Commentary (GunLaw.Pro).

On April 20, 2009, for the first time ever, Californians received judicial recognition of their Second Amendment rights. The exact scope of these rights remains to be decided, and Nordyke v. King will be criticized for giving too much latitude to the County in refusing to strike an overly broad ordinance trampling on a fundamental right, and for the clumsy manner in which it treats Heller’s “sensitive places.” It is too early to say how or even whether the decision will affect policies for CCW issuance by the Orange County Sheriff or other sheriffs in California. For the full decision click here; below are excerpts from the portion of the decision incorporating 2A against the states (citations omitted for brevity):

Nordyke v. King: Excerpts & Commentary (GunLaw.Pro)

Nordyke v. King: Excerpts & Commentary (GunLaw.Pro).

On April 20, 2009, for the first time ever, Californians received judicial recognition of their Second Amendment rights. The exact scope of these rights remains to be decided, and Nordyke v. King will be criticized for giving too much latitude to the County in refusing to strike an overly broad ordinance trampling on a fundamental right, and for the clumsy manner in which it treats Heller’s “sensitive places.” It is too early to say how or even whether the decision will affect policies for CCW issuance by the Orange County Sheriff or other sheriffs in California. For the full decision click here; below are excerpts from the portion of the decision incorporating 2A against the states (citations omitted for brevity):