Firearm Owners Against Crime (FOAC) News


July 10, 2017

FOAC’s ‘The Blast’ Newsletter

Whenever there is a shooting, as in the case of the Alexandria VA shooting of Congressmen, anti-gun groups and their sycophants ‘always’ push the ‘answer’ that is not an answer, namely the charade of more gun control. The fact that it has been tried and it has failed every time to stop violence is akin to recommending voodoo as a solution. What’s truly absurd in this debate is the demeaning expression “gun nuts.”

What about “gun control nuts?”

What about people who seem to think murders will go down if fewer guns are sold even though a major crime drop starting in the 1990s was accompanied by a huge increase in the number of guns?

It is also the case that these so-called “Gun Nuts” do not have lobbying heft because we get big bucks from gun manufacturers but because there are millions of gun owners who happen to vote.

True to form, PA’s ‘gun control nut’, Shira Goodman of CeaseFire PA, trotted out her unfounded self-righteous indignation, once again, over the failure to enact more gun control in the face of the Alexandria VA shooting. In an article in the Philly newspapers she blathered on about how “Silence and inaction unacceptable in face of gun violence” and that this violence was a direct result of “lax laws that provide easy access to guns to people who should not have them” as if the Washington DC gun laws are not enough!

The big players in the gun control movement—the Democrat Party, CeaseFire PA, the Brady Campaign, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, whatever rock Mike Bloomberg is currently hiding under—all tend to espouse the same legislative ambitions for gun control, yet these would be effectively useless at stopping both mass shootings and gangland and domestic incidents of gun violence.

More Gun Laws Simply Won’t Stop Criminals

Name a mass shooting in America over the past 20 years or so and you’re likely to find one of two factors: either the shooters obtained their weapons legally, in which case the popularly proposed legal remedies would have made no difference, or they obtained their weapons illegally, and in a manner that the popularly proposed remedies would not have affected.

Put another way: in virtually every shooting incident that gun controllers cite as evidence of the need for more gun control, the gun control they demand would not have stopped the shooting. It would be tantamount to Mothers Against Drunk Driving demanding stricter government inspection standards for windshield wipers in an attempt to prevent drunk driving incidents: it would accomplish nothing.

The same is true for the more day-to-day gun violence that plagues a fair number of American cities and urban areas. It has been known for some time that criminals do not, as a rule, get their guns legally. The types of new rules anti-gun advocates often propose—expanded ‘Universal’ background checks, say—would thus have very little effect on American gun violence and have failed in states like California where it was once offered as the answer to violent crime.

Yet gun controllers would have us believe that, with the passage of a universal background check bill, murderous thugs and gang members would suddenly decide of their own volition, “Gee, I guess I’d better get my firearms through legitimate channels from here on out!” This is a thoroughly improbable scenario.

What is REALLY going on?

So we are left with this question: if their proposed remedies would be so obviously and demonstrably unlikely to solve the very problems they claim to intend to solve, then why do gun controllers keep advocating these ridiculous and counterintuitive laws?

The answer is not hard to see. Gun control advocates, like most political actors, are pragmatic and practical. They understand that certain legislative goals and ambitions must play out over a period of time rather than in one giant government mandate.

So anti-gunners propose these useless laws and regulations not in an attempt to honestly curb gun violence but rather in a long-form attempt to pass other laws down the road. It will be much easier to ban large classes of semiautomatic rifles, after all, after five or ten years of banning scary-looking AR-style “assault weapons.” It will be far easier, too, to sharply restrict firearm purchases after a decade of regulating ammunition sales, the latter of which will soon begin in California.

This isn’t some grand conspiracy theory or sky-is-falling, tin-foil-hat intrigue. Gun ban advocates are not stupid. They understand and are playing the long-game on political action and do it as well as anyone. They are aghast at the thought of guns and the 2nd Amendment and they are more than patient enough to play the drawn-out politics necessary to curtail American gun rights.

In the end, to wish for more gun control is to wish for more blood in the streets.

Supreme Court Sidesteps the Constitution

On Monday/6-26, the U.S. Supreme Court decided against hearing a case involving the right to carry a firearm outside of one’s home. California resident Edward Peruta had challenged a state law limiting gun-carrying permits to those showing “good cause.” Simply mentioning self-defense is not enough – San Diego policy requires residents to list specific threats they believe they’re facing.

Although the right to carry has been a hot topic across the country, Peruta v. California did not interest at least four of the justices, so it will not be added to their docket at this time.

That really peeved off Justices Clarence Thomas, who dissented from the bench.

“The Second Amendment’s core purpose further supports the conclusion that the right to bear arms extends to public carry,” Thomas wrote. “Even if other Members of the Court do not agree that the Second Amendment likely protects a right to public carry, the time has come for the Court to answer this important question definitively.”

Thomas went on to say that he and his colleagues are too removed from everyday American life to understand why this case is so important.

“For those of us who work in marbled halls, guarded constantly by a vigilant and dedicated police force, the guarantees of the Second Amendment might seem antiquated and superfluous. But the Framers made a clear choice: They reserved to all Americans the right to bear arms for self-defense. I do not think we should stand by idly while a State denies its citizens that right, particularly when their very lives may depend on it,” Thomas added.

Newest Justice Neil Gorsuch joined on to Thomas’s opinion.

Without the chance to be heard at the Supreme Court, the lower court rulings stands. In a vote of 7-4, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals determined that the San Diego restrictions were permissible. Score; 2nd Amendment 0, Gun Owners 0 – Anti-gun Groups 1.

Arming Teachers – SB 383 – Good Idea but Poorly Drafted

Senator White’s legislation, SB 383, to provide a framework for teachers being allowed to be armed while teaching has passed the Senate 28-22, unfortunately. Why do we say unfortunately? Because there are significant concerns about its’ failure to protect the privacy of school staff who choose to carry while working.

There is vague language contained in Senate Bill 383 and, as an example, one of the provisions mandates districts provide law enforcement with a list of names identifying armed staff members at each school. There’s no direction, in the bill, as to how to protect that information, before, during or after its disclosure and that’s a HUGE problem – legally and ethically.

What makes this bill even worse is the amendment, added on a vote of 49-1, by Senator Street that requires a psychologist to sign off on a person’s fitness for using a firearm in self-defense.  That’s an arbitrary standard delegated to a psychologist of the authority to deny a right and that violates Article 2, Section 1 of the PA Constitution!

We fully support having armed teachers as ‘Gun Free Zones’ are an unmitigated disaster but the flaws in this bill are too great to ignore.

See this article for more:

California’s Gun Control Efforts Suffer 2 Legal Setbacks

California’s efforts to strengthen what already are some of the nation’s strictest gun laws took two blows this week, the latest coming when a federal judge blocked a law set to take effect Saturday that would have barred gun owners from possessing high-capacity ammunition magazines.

The judge ruled Thursday that the ban approved by the Legislature and California voters last year takes away gun owners’ Second Amendment rights and amounts to the government seizing people’s private property without compensation.

California law has prohibited buying or selling the magazines since 2000, but until now allowed those who already owned them to keep them.

Allowing the law to take effect would have given thousands of otherwise law-abiding citizens what San Diego-based U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez called an untenable choice: “Become an outlaw or dispossess one’s self of lawfully acquired property.”

He issued a preliminary injunction blocking the law from taking effect while he considers the underlying lawsuit filed by the National Rifle Association-affiliated California Rifle & Pistol Association.

Earlier this week, California regulators temporarily blocked proposed new rules on assault weapons submitted by Attorney General Xavier Becerra in May. The Office of Administrative Law said Becerra went too far in trying to impose the new regulations without allowing for public comment.

Thoughts on Independence Day 4 July 2017:

On Wednesday, 19 Apr 1775, Gage’s troops approached Lexington Common in search of military supplies (think gun control) that Gage’s spies had told him were stored there. The rebels had their own spy network and knew of the British approach. Captain John Parker, commander of the local contingent of Minutemen, ordered his hastily assembled men to “Stand your ground. Don’t fire unless fired upon. But, if they want a war, let it begin here.”

“Lay down your arms, you dammed rebels, and disburse,” came the command from Major Pitcarin of the Royal Marines. Parker told his men to disburse, but to keep their arms. A shot was fired, and Pitcarin’s men immediately fired a volley into the Minutemen. The volley was followed with a bayonet charge.

One British soldier was wounded. Eight Minutemen were killed and as many wounded. The rest ran away. Pitcarin’s unit went on to do what it had come to do. They located military stores, and, without even bothering to break open the crates and boxes, threw them all into a local pond. They were later recovered, intact, by the Minutemen.

We KNOW what Freedom meant to these unsung heroes of our nation, so what does Freedom mean to YOU!

Seattle Washington Gun Tax – Murders Double – Gun Dealers Close

Seattle City Council introduced the tax in 2015. It put a $25 tax on every firearm sold in the city and up to 5 cents per round of ammunition. The measure easily passed and took effect January 1, 2016. Comparing the first five months of 2017 with the same period before the gun tax went into effect, reports of shots fired are up 13 percent, the number of people injured in shootings climbed 37 percent and gun deaths doubled, according to crime statistics from the Seattle Police Department.

In selling this gun tax to the public, it was predicted to generate between $300,000 and $500,000 annually. Seattle anti-gunners are gloating, and soliciting money, following Friday’s signing by Mayor Ed Murray of the gun and ammunition tax ordinance, which the Civic Skunk Works blog contended yesterday will “undoubtedly save lives.

Judge Upheld Seattle ‘Gun Violence Tax’ Despite Challenge From Gun Rights Groups

Seattle officials have refused to say how much the tax brought in the first year, only giving the number “under $200,000.” Gun rights groups have sued to get the exact amount.

But Mike Coombs, owner of Outdoor Emporium, the last large gun dealer left in Seattle, said the actual tax revenue is almost certainly just over $100,000, a figure based on information he says the city shared with his lawyers.

On the Fox network Tucker Carlson took on noted anti-gun advocate Mark Glaze about this failure on the part of this gun tax and this video – – is worth watching to see the verbal gymnastics Glaze uses to deflect from the failure of this unconstitutional Gun Tax.

If there is any doubt left that this Gun Violence Tax is all about anti-gun ideology, consider that Seattle’s city attorney, Peter Holmes, said while testifying for this tax that he is part of “Prosecutors Against Gun Violence,” an anti-gun rights group. Holmes also said he plans to take the issue for consideration to other jurisdictions.

The idea that gun owners should pay for gun violence started in Cook County, Ill., where they have a similar $25 gun tax (they dropped an ammo tax). NSSF’s Keane said, “I am not aware of any other local jurisdictions imposing taxes specifically on guns and/or ammo for the alleged purpose of combatting gun violence. We are, however, concerned about gun control groups, e.g., Lawyers Committee Against Violence (“smart gun laws”), Bloomberg, etc., pushing local ordinances, even where there is state pre-emption. This is definitely a new tactic being deployed by the anti-gun movement. The Seattle law was modeled on Cook County’s tax, which was advanced by Chicagoland anti-gun groups and politicians.”

Question of the Day: Can You Carry A Gun At The Post Office?

First, watch this video: Can You Carry A Gun At The Post Office? – VIDEO

So what should you do if you have to go to the post office and you have your gun? Well, there are a few options. You could leave your gun at home, but I know that most of you won’t view that as an option and I don’t blame you. You could park in a parking lot that is not on post office property, store your firearm securely, walk to the post office, conduct your business and then return to your car. Or you could send someone else to handle your mail for you.

Quote of the Day: “[A] constitution of government once changed from freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.”John Adams, letter to Abigail Adams, 1775

Pennsylvania Self-Defense: Man Shoots Robber Armed With Knife in Upper Darby

A man who was armed with a gun turned the tables on a robber armed with a knife and shot him in the leg in Upper Darby late Sunday morning, according to police. (6/12/2017)

Buffalo NY Mayor calls out Judicial System for a Revolving Door For Criminals to blame for shootings

Buffalo NY Mayor Byron W. Brown is throwing down the gauntlet on the judicial system for what he sees as a “revolving door” of criminals responsible for a large number of the shootings in the city.

There was a 23 percent increase in shootings last year which can largely be blamed on a group of repeat offenders that seem to rotate in and out of the prison system. Approximately one-third of those arrested on gun charges were repeat offenders.

“The frustration that our police department feels is that, to a degree, there is a revolving door,” Brown said. “There’s certainly a breakdown in the system that doesn’t occur at the Buffalo Police level,” he added.

Brown said law enforcement officials believe the shootings are being perpetrated by a small number of bad actors that do not represent the greater community they terrorize.

“It is a small percentage of people involved in a large percentage of the crimes,” he said.

Congressman Tom Massie wants DC to recognize concealed carry permits from other states

Rep. Thomas Massie introduced a bill Thursday (H.R. 2909) allowing people with a concealed carry permit from their home state to use that permit while in the District of Columbia following Wednesday’s shooting at Republicans’ baseball practice.

‘What I’m trying to do is anticipate how to avoid a tragic situation in the future, and what the American people don’t realize is that most congressmen do not have a security detail, and we are as exposed as the general public is exposed as they come to visit our nation’s capital,’ Massie, R-Ky., said in an interview on Fox Business.

‘I don’t want to extend a special privilege just to congressmen. I recognize that everyone has the right to defend themselves, and that’s in the Constitution.’

PA Newspaper – Times Tribune – Seeks Ban on Shotguns – Why Should ‘You’ be Allowed to Own Them

In response to a work related crime where 3 supermarket workers were killed, the Times Tribune drags out all the old anti-gun clichés to justify their myopic viewpoint that they are ‘weapons designed solely to fulfill fantasies’.

The newspaper focuses on the shotgun used in this crime rather than the ‘reasons’ it was committed in the first place with the editors only concerned about advancing their own bias rather than solutions.

Quoting portions of statistics or researchers of these issues who manipulate data to arrive at narrow minded solutions have been shown every time in the past to be doomed to failure as the National Academy of Sciences has shown for every gun control concept.

In the end this newspaper has lost its’ respect for citizen’s rights, trust in the good nature of its’ fellow citizens’ ‘and’ perhaps most of all their responsibility to report the news within the confines of the 1st Amendment. The media ‘always’ say that gun owners must be responsible in how we exercise our rights and then they turn around and ignore their own responsibility to avoid manipulating public opinion with biased facts and propaganda!

IF you think that owning shotguns will not be a focus of the anti-gun crowd then this article shows that you are living in a pipe dream!

Remember what James Madison said about government, ‘The essence of government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse.’  It is up to us to hold government accountable!

If you want a clear example of how detached from reality some politicians are the actions of Philadelphia City Councilman Darrell Clarke is one of the best. On Thursday (6/8) Clarke held a press conference heralding the return of fellow councilman David Oh who was stabbed in an assault outside his home the prior Wednesday (5/31). How did Council President Clarke respond you ask? Clarke railed against ‘GUN VIOLENCE’ in the city! Yes, that’s right he introduced a resolution to create a ‘Special Committee on Gun Violence’; in response to a stabbing???!!!

Being the suspicious sort, and knowing the politics behind Philadelphia, we smell the ministrations of CeaseFire PA and Shira Goodman as using this stabbing to provide a ‘soap box’ as a way to push the Gun Control Agenda. Stay tuned as I’m sure the next thing we will hear is that Universal Knife Background Checks and One Knife a Month legislation will be introduced soon to prevent these incidents! In case you think this is unlikely remember that knives are tightly controlled in England in response to waves of violence with knives there.

Firearms Owners ID Cards – New Jersey’s History

NJ GUN CONTROL & FIREARMS ID CARD, Why and How. Here is the real history and background behind New Jersey’s draconian gun laws and how and why these NJ gun laws came into being and the politics behind them.  See the Video:

BATF Records in Disarray / Unethical and Immoral Prosecutions!

“NFA database seriously flawed,” attorney and author David T. Hardy charged Wednesday on his Of Arms and the Law blog. “Mind you, felony prosecutions are undertaken relying on the NFRTR to establish that a gun is not registered, and with evidence consisting of an affidavit from the custodian of records for the NFRTR certifying that no record of registration could be found.”

While the revelation of the inaccuracies of the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (‘NFRTR’) are nothing new, the documents reveal a very different perspective on the issue. OIG had taken a survey of ATF Industry Operations Inspectors (‘IOIs’) on the NFRTR. Prior to IOIs conducting a compliance inspection of a FFL who has an SOT, they print off a list of the firearms the NFRTR says the dealer should have and compare it to the physical inventory.

49.2% of the IOIs said that they requested an inventory report from the NFA branch one to two weeks prior to conducting an inspection. When asked how often there was a discrepancy between the report and the inventory 16.4% of the IOIs responded that it was all of the time, 30.1% said most of the time and 39.5% said some of the time.

The NFRTR’s inaccuracies place individuals at risk and for some it may result in the seizure of a firearm, loss of license or at worst, a felony conviction. Hopefully Mr. Hardy’s FOIA request will continue to shed light on the inaccuracies of the NFRTR.

Our nation is based on trust in the government will act appropriately on behalf of the people.  Sam Adams’ views are appropriate here, ‘Nothing is more essential to the establishment of manners in a State than that all persons employed in places of power and trust must be men of unexceptionable characters.’  It is up to each of us to make sure that we hold government accountable when they stray from this standard and that is why our Founding Fathers created the Bill of Rights with the belief that there were ‘four boxes of liberty’ – to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo. The reason for the second amendment is clear!

In Closing:

Many times gun owners question the importance of fighting efforts such as the Goslin case regarding weapons on school property. The masterful job of Attorney Josh Prince before the Superior Court resulted in a landmark decision that has already saved one law abiding citizen from certain prosecution. Delaware County District Attorney, Jack Whelan, withdrew charges against Dom Jordan for lawful possession of a firearm ‘after’ he was illegally arrested.

Your active involvement does matter and I’m sure Dom Jordan appreciates it greatly!

Yours in Freedom,

Your FOAC Freedom Team

Join FOAC:

Donate to FOAC:

Contact FOAC:

For more information visit:

Firearms Owners Against Crime (FOAC) is non-partisan, non-connected all-volunteer Political Action Committee organized to empower ‘all’ gun owners, outdoors enthusiasts and supporters of the 2nd Amendment to the Bill of Rights, of the U.S. Constitution, and Article 1 Section 21 and 25, of the PA Constitution, with the tools and information necessary to protect freedom from transgression.  FOAC was formed shortly after the City of Pittsburgh’s illegal gun and ammunition ban of 1993.  This was an active year for gun legislation in Pennsylvania (Act 84 of 1994-HB 185 the preemption law, Casey’s gun ban) and the United States (Brady Bill, Assault Weapons Ban…).  A number of those who fought the Pittsburgh gun ban realized that a more politically active role was necessary if we were to protect and keep our rights.  FOAC became a formal statewide Political Action Committee in early 1994.

Additional Article Highlights:

General News

  • Finding America’s Murder Problem: The vast majority of murders in the United States occur in just a tiny percentage of counties, and even in those counties there are large areas where there are no murders. Fact is, there is not a nationwide murder problem—and therefore we can’t expect blanket solutions to promote public safety. more
  • Law allowing concealed firearms with no permit (Idaho) a year old: Exactly one year after it went into effect, an Idaho gun law that allows people to carry concealed firearms without a permit has had little effect on crime rates, state law enforcement officials said. more
  • PA bill to arm teachers raises doubts in pro-gun community: A proposal to arm teachers winding its way through the Pennsylvania legislature this year raises some doubt in the pro-gun community about its failure to protect the privacy of school staff who choose to carry while working. more
  • Over Seven of 10 Gun Owners Say Right to Own Firearms ‘Essential’ to Freedom: A recent PEW Research survey shows that 74% of gun owners believe the right to own firearms is “essential” to freedom. more

Legal Issues

  • Supreme Court agrees non-violent misdemeanor crimes may not strip 2A rights: The nation’s high court on Monday let stand a ruling against the government in the combined cases of two men blocked from gun possession after run-ins that resulted in convictions for non-serious crimes. more

Self-Defense Issues

  • Alaska Self-Defense: Armed 11-year-old boy saves fishing party from charging bear: Quick action from a Hoonah boy saved a fishing party from a charging brown bear on June 18, the Empire has learned through Alaska State Troopers and family members. more