Friday, February 23, 2018

How To Destroy Business Using Twitter


Enterprise Rent A Car provided an affiliation group discount to NRA members for car rentals. As you can see from the tweet below, that ends effective March 26th as they kowtow to an organized campaign from the gun prohibitionists.




In case you are wondering what are the Enterprise brands, they are Enterprise, Alamo, and National car rentals. I have used all three in the past. Any future rentals will be with a company that has a bit more spine.

If the Enterprise conglomerate is this wimpy in the face of the anti-gunners, imagine how well they'd stand behind you if you got into an accident at which you weren't at fault.

As a final aside, I find it illustrative that @mamabear64 uses a Stalinist style icon of Hillary as her avatar.

UPDATE: Well, you can add Hertz, Avis, and Budget to the list.





Wrap Your Head Around This Logic


My friend Charlie Foxtrot made a comment on a prior Quote of the Day that I thought was especially relevant considering the way young high school students are being used for props by the gun prohibitionists. With his permission, I've made a meme out of it. I think he'll like it.





Contradictory logic seems to be prevalent in the recent debates - if you can call media driven propaganda, debates - over firearm policies and how to protect school children.

Thursday, February 22, 2018

Firearms Restraining Orders In NC? No, Thank You!


Rep. Marcia Morey (D-Durham) who was appointed to fill an empty seat in the North Carolina House of Representatives is proposing the establishment of firearms restraining orders a'la California. Though Morey is a former judge, it seems she sees no problem in adopting something flies in the face of due process.

Grass Roots North Carolina sent out an alert on this yesterday asking that gun rights supporters email every Republican in the NC House and demand an end to this.

From GRNC:
GUN CONFISCATION
COURTS TO BE PROPOSED

You read that right. Rep. Marcia Morey (D-Durham), a former judge, whose April appointment to the NC House filled a vacant seat, is looking to turn North Carolina into California—but not regarding sunshine and fad diets. In short, Morey will be proposing the establishment of “firearm restraining orders” (FROs) in our state. An FRO would be issued as a result of an “exparte” (emergency) hearing, where a judge can authorize the seizing of a private citizen’s guns where no crime has been proven (no guilty verdict delivered), and in fact, even where no arrest has taken place. Most likely, the proceedings will be allowed to take place even in the absence of the accused. This means the accused citizen cannot face his accusers, nor defend himself through counsel or otherwise. This is a serious violation of fundamental Constitutional due process rights.

A First Amendment Analogy
One could liken an FRO hearing, and subsequent confiscation, to accusing a reporter of so-called “hate speech,” and then, once the accusation is made, an emergency hearing is held without the presence of the accused reporter. The hearing could result in a ten-day gag order being placed on the reporter, barring the reporter from speaking (or reporting) until a primary hearing. So, the reporter’s First Amendment rights are suspended—absent any due process! In the case of Second Amendment rights, even if the accused’s firearms are returned after ten days, there is nothing to prevent the police from having registered them with the BATFE. Moreover, the accused will still be out thousands of dollars spent on the ensuing legal defense—that is, only if the accused can afford it in the first place.

No Pretense, Just Straight-up Confiscation
FROs are not a foot in the confiscatory door. There is no pretense here. FROs blatantly and aggressively kick that door down, and once FROs are in place, the valid reasons for establishing an FRO against an individual will surely loosen. At first, perhaps close family members and a few others very close to a person may be able to point a finger and “report” him. That’s bad enough, but be sure, the already Orwellian rules surrounding FROs will surely expand. It’s likely that, eventually,virtually anyone in a person’s sphere will be able to accuse a person and begin the unconstitutional process of having the accused’s legally owned firearms forcibly confiscated. Does this sound like a free country to you, a free state?

Will Republicans Protect the Citizenry?
As of now, we don’t know how the Republican majority in Raleigh will react when asked to establish a gun confiscation mechanism. We do know that there is always danger that politicians will stick a finger in the air and just “go with the flow,” as the anti-gun crowd aggressively pushes to not “let a crisis go to waste.” There is real danger here. We need to inform our representatives that we will not allow them to rescind our Constitutional due process rights. Free, law-abiding citizens are to remain free, and we will not tolerate being punished for the crimes of another.

Below, see how you can contact your representatives to let them know you won’t tolerate the establishment of extra-Constitutional laws in our state.


IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED!


    • EMAIL REPUBLICANS IN THE NC HOUSEClick here,then here, and then here. Check your default email program after clicking each link. Each time, an email should have been automatically generated for you. Simply add your name to the bottom and hit “send.” If the email(s) were not generated, or were not generated properly, simply use the copy/paste email lists provided below, and the copy/paste text provided under ‘Deliver This Message.’

  • PHONE YOUR NC REPRESENTATIVEUse this link to find your representative. Tell him or her that you expect them to actively and vocally stand against any legislation that would establish extra-Constitutional “Firearms Restraining Orders,” kangaroo courts setup to strip citizens of gun rights without due process.
CONTACT INFO
Republican NC House copy/paste email *list(s)
Jay.Adams@ncleg.net; Dean.Arp@ncleg.net; John.Bell@ncleg.net; Hugh.Blackwell@ncleg.net; John.Blust@ncleg.net; Jamie.Boles@ncleg.net; Beverly.Boswell@ncleg.net; John.Bradford@ncleg.net; Bill.Brawley@ncleg.net; William.Brisson@ncleg.net; Mark.Brody@ncleg.net; Dana.Bumgardner@ncleg.net; Justin.Burr@ncleg.net; Mike.Clampitt@ncleg.net; George.Cleveland@ncleg.net; Jeff.Collins@ncleg.net; Debra.Conrad@ncleg.net; Kevin.Corbin@ncleg.net; Ted.Davis@ncleg.net; Jimmy.Dixon@ncleg.net; Josh.Dobson@ncleg.net; Nelson.Dollar@ncleg.net; Andy.Dulin@ncleg.net;Jeffrey.Elmore@ncleg.net;   John.Faircloth@ncleg.net

Carl.Ford@ncleg.net; John.Fraley@ncleg.net; Holly.Grange@ncleg.net; Destin.Hall@ncleg.net; Kyle.Hall@ncleg.net; Jon.Hardister@ncleg.net; Kelly.Hastings@ncleg.net; Cody.Henson@ncleg.net; Craig.Horn@ncleg.net; Julia.Howard@ncleg.net; Pat.Hurley@ncleg.net; Frank.Iler@ncleg.net; Linda.Johnson2@ncleg.net; Bert.Jones@ncleg.net; Brenden.Jones@ncleg.net; Jonathan.Jordan@ncleg.net;Donny.Lambeth@ncleg.net; David.Lewis@ncleg.net; Chris.Malone@ncleg.net; Susan.Martin@ncleg.net; Pat.McElraft@ncleg.net; Chuck.McGrady@ncleg.net; Allen.McNeill@ncleg.net; Tim.Moore@ncleg.net; Bob.Muller@ncleg.net;
 
Gregory.Murphy@ncleg.net; Larry.Pittman@ncleg.net; Larry.Potts@ncleg.net; Michele.Presnell@ncleg.net; Dennis.Riddell@ncleg.net; David.Rogers@ncleg.net; Stephen.Ross@ncleg.net; Jason.Saine@ncleg.net; John.Sauls@ncleg.net; Mitchell.Setzer@ncleg.net; Phil.Shepard@ncleg.net; Michael.Speciale@ncleg.net; Bob.Steinburg@ncleg.net; Sarah.Stevens@ncleg.net; Scott.Stone@ncleg.net; Larry.Strickland@ncleg.net; John.Szoka@ncleg.net; John.Torbett@ncleg.net; Rena.Turner@ncleg.net; Harry.Warren@ncleg.net; Sam.Watford@ncleg.net; Donna.White@ncleg.net; Linda.Williams@ncleg.net; Larry.Yarborough@ncleg.net; Lee.Zachary@ncleg.net

*Spam filters or email program limitations may cause the need to send more than one email, to cover the entire list of representatives. If required in your case, the list above is split into three pieces, for your convenience. 



DELIVER THIS MESSAGE

Suggested Subject: "Protect Due Process, No to Firearm Restraining Orders"  


Dear Representative:

I am writing because I’ve just been informed of the horrifying proposal that Rep. Morey is preparing to introduce. I understand Rep. Morey would like to establish “Firearm Restraining Orders” (FROs) in our state. FROs are simply mechanisms for bypassing constitutional due process protections in order to confiscate firearms, at whim, from accused persons who have not been convicted of any crime. Not only can one’s firearms be confiscated based on accusation alone, FRO hearings can also be held without the presence of the accused. To say this is unacceptable is an understatement.

I am incensed that any representative in an ostensibly free state would even suggest such an ominous mechanism be established within our legal system. I assure you, citizens like me will not stand for the suspension of our Constitutional rights. I insist that you act now to put a stop to any legislation that would establish these extra-constitutional judicial bodies, which are designed to strip people of their rights based on accusations alone.

Also, I must insist that you explain to me where you stand on this issue. I must be sure that my representatives are on the side of liberty—protecting my rights—and are not willing to oppress Constitutional guarantees simply due to the current direction of political winds.

I need a response from you, and I will also be monitoring your actions on this matter through alerts from Grass Roots North Carolina.
Respectfully, 

Quote Of The Day - Editorial Version


Jim Shepherd of The Outdoor Wire had an interesting editorial today discussing the latest earnings report from Ruger along with some recent pronouncements from President Trump. After discussing the earnings report, he noted that much of the good news and bad news for the firearms industry seem to tied to President Trump.

He continues:
That’s because his announcement earlier this week that he wants a ban on bump fire stocks and other devices that increase the rate-of-fire of AR-style rifles is viewed as a politician, once again, throwing gun right supporters under the bus after wooing their support to get elected.

Indeed, candidate Trump and later President Trump could be characterized, at least until Tuesday’s announcement, as having a simple message for gun owners: “we will never, never, never infringe on our Second Amendment Rights.”

Now it may seem that our definitions on what Second Amendment protections really mean may differ significantly. For most Second Amendment supporters, any additional regulations on guns are beyond the pale. In fact, many gun rights groups have already begun to spread the word they will seek legal remedies should Attorney General Sessions make a move to place restrictions on either bump stocks or binary style triggers.

Seems a fight with the man gun owners helped put in the White House is brewing over gun rights. If that happens, Mr. Trump may learn that formerly ardent supports make the most fierce opponents.

Like Trump, gun owners don’t easily forgive- or forget- a betrayal.


We’ll keep you posted.
 Jim's absolutely correct. Instead of kow-towing to a bunch of people that never supported him and never will support him, Mr. Trump needs to remember just who put him over the top in the battleground states. It sure as hell wasn't members of Moms Demand Action.

The Establishment Has Spoken


The Wall Street Journal ran an unsigned editorial yesterday regarding background checks for firearms purchases. They noted the Florida school murderer was a known threat. He had been reported to the FBI, the local sheriff's department had been called multiple times, and the school had a warning out asking to be notified if he showed up with a backpack.

The editorial then advocates for the passage of Sen. John Cornyn's Fix NICS Act of 2017. They say this could be done quickly if only, in my words, those ideologues in the House would decouple national concealed carry reciprocity from their version of Fix NICS. While they are at they could throw in a Trojan Horse ban on bump fire stocks.

From the editorial:
The bill would tighten an imperfect background-check system and is supported by the National Rifle Association, police associations and the White House. The House passed the legislation last year, but it also added a provision requiring reciprocity for owners of concealed firearm permits across state lines. Democrats oppose the reciprocity provision, which can’t pass the Senate.

Republicans would be wise to let that reciprocity provision die and send a clean Fix-NICS bill to the Senate. The House can throw in a ban on so-called bump stocks, which let an AR-15 rifle fire more rapidly. That also has bipartisan support, and President Trump on Tuesday directed the Justice Department to propose a regulation banning bump stocks.

These ideas might not have stopped (killer's name redacted), but then neither would the oft-proposed ban on AR-15s. He could as easily have bought handguns, which is how (killer's name redacted) killed 32 people at Virginia Tech in 2007. But one consequence of Parkland should be a debate on how American society can deny the dangerous mentally ill access to guns of any kind. That will require a rethinking of privacy laws and state mental-health statutes.

Democrats keep saying they merely want “common sense” gun laws, not a ban, and the Cornyn bill is a test of their sincerity.
So let me get this straight so I can understand the thinking of the Establishment. If the Democrats "compromise" and support a bill that gives them virtually everything they want short of a ban on semi-automatic rifles and universal background checks, it is a "test of their sincerity". However, this also implies that if the Republicans insist on fulfilling their promise to the American voters on national reciprocity they will be considered obstructionists.

What a masterful example of Establishment doublespeak!

The proper response by us gun rights demanding proles is not only no but hell no. Passing Fix NICS with a bump fire ban but no carry reciprocity is no compromise. It should be rightfully seen for what it is:  a willful surrender by spineless Republicans who only give a shit about gun rights when it comes to getting our votes at election time.

The Meme


At the suggestion of Sean Sorrentino I made yesterday's quote of the day into a meme using one of those meme generators.






I posted the meme to Twitter yesterday and it seems to have taken off a bit.

Wednesday, February 21, 2018

Quote Of The Day


Given the gun prohibitionists are hoping for a new Children's Crusade to achieve their aim of universal disarmament (except for the government run by them), I thought this quote from Facebook was appropriate.

Just last week, Congress was calling on Tide to change the design of the Pods so teenagers would stop eating them. This week, teenagers should determine gun policy.

 With some saying that adolescence now goes into the mid-20s, I find it incomprehensible to think that we should defer to the unformed minds spouting nonsense that is merely a repetition of what they've been taught in the classroom and what the media wants them to say.

What Is Wrong With This Statement?


I read a story this morning from the local NBC station in San Francisco. It detailed how the prohibitive gun laws in California and especially San Francisco made trafficking in stolen and/or illegal guns a very lucrative business. That comes as no surprise to anyone who reads this blog or has any knowledge of the Prohibition Era.

The story contained this gem. Let's dissect it to see what's wrong with it.
Roger contacted NBC Bay Area following a joint investigation with the non-profit journalism organization The Trace, which found more than 20,000 guns across the country that were previously reported stolen were later recovered by police in connection to crimes.
Stolen guns used in crime? That makes sense as guns are stolen to be sold or traded to other criminals who are probably already prohibited persons. Guns are a tool of the trade for armed robbers and home invaders and they will do what is necessary to obtain them.

Roger? Nope that was just the fake name used by the criminal for the story. He's now in a witness protection program.

The non-profit journalism organization The Trace? Ah, there's the problem with the statement. While its tax status is irrelevant, calling The Trace a "journalism organization" is one hell of a whopper.  It is the Bloomberg-funded media propaganda arm that masquerades as journalism. Funding for it also came from the Joyce Foundation and Seattle anti-gun billionaire Nick Hanauer. Following the money always will lead you to the truth.


Tuesday, February 20, 2018

The Supreme Court Continues To Be A Doormat


In the usual course of events, when the Supreme Court issues definitive rulings on an area of constitutional law, it fully expects lower courts to abide by their ruling. If these lower courts don't, they get slapped down for their impertinence. However, when it comes to the Second Amendment, the Supreme Court in the post-McDonald era has allowed lower courts to treat it like a doormat. Their submissive posture in the face of decisions coming out of especially the 4th and 9th Circuits that ignore Heller and McDonald is, to be blunt, nauseating. The only justice that seems to have a spine and recognizes the danger to the powers of the court is Justice Clarence Thomas.

I write this as a prelude to the announcement today that the Supreme Court decided to deny certiorari in Silvester et al v. Becerra et al. It was on appeal from the 9th Circuit which found the 10-day waiting period for those with a California CCW, a California Certificate of Eligibility, or already had firearms registered to them had a valid government purpose. While supposedly deciding it on intermediate scrutiny, it was in fact decided on a rational basis. The problem with that is that rational basis cannot be used when it comes to an enumerated right. This case was originally a win in the District Court but reversed by 9th Circuit.

Justice Thomas noted in his 14 page dissent that:
This deferential analysis was indistinguishable from rational- basis review. And it is symptomatic of the lower courts’ general failure to afford the Second Amendment the re- spect due an enumerated constitutional right.

If a lower court treated another right so cavalierly, I have little doubt that this Court would intervene. But as evidenced by our continued inaction in this area, the Second Amendment is a disfavored right in this Court. Because I do not believe we should be in the business of choosing which constitutional rights are “really worth insisting upon,”
Heller, supra, at 634, I would have granted certiorari in this case.
He concluded his dissent by saying:
Nearly eight years ago, this Court declared that the Second Amendment is not a “second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.” McDonald, 561 U. S., at 780 (plurality opinion). By refusing to review decisions like the one below, we undermine that declaration. Because I still believe that the Second Amendment cannot be “singled out for special—and specially unfavorable—treatment,” id., at 778–779 (majority opinion), I respectfully dissent from the denial of certiorari.
I don't know if any other justices voted to grant certiori but I do know that there weren't the required four votes. Decisions like that go to illustrate just how much we miss the late Justice Scalia and his leadership.

The Calguns Foundation which supported this lawsuit along with the Second Amendment Foundation issued the following statement:
WASHINGTON, D.C. (February 20, 2017)­­­­­­ — The Calguns Foundation has issued the following statement regarding the Supreme Court’s decision to not review a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision that upheld California’s 10-day waiting period for existing gun owners who pass a background check:

We are disappointed, but not entirely surprised, that the Court has once again decided against taking up a Second Amendment challenge to plainly unconstitutional laws.

In his important 14-page dissent from the Court’s denial of certiorari, Justice Clarence Thomas detailed why the Ninth Circuit applied an improper “deferential analysis” that was “indistinguishable from rational-basis review,” showing “the lower courts’ general failure to afford the Second Amendment the respect due an enumerated constitutional right.”

We agree with Justice Thomas that the Ninth Circuit’s “double standard is apparent from other cases,” like one where it invalidated an Arizona law partly because it “delayed” women seeking an abortion, and another where it struck down a Washington county’s 5-day waiting period for adult dancing licenses because it “unreasonably prevent[ed] a dancer from exercising first amendment rights while an application [was] pending.”

As Justice Thomas explained, the “Ninth Circuit would not have done this for any other constitutional right, and it could not have done this unless it was applying rational-basis review.” He is, of course, correct—just as we have maintained throughout the course of this appeal and in our briefing to the Supreme Court. But in the Ninth Circuit, it appears, “rights that have no basis in the Constitution receive greater protection than the Second Amendment, which is enumerated in the text.”

From the bottom of our hearts, we wish to thank every single supporter who generously helped us litigate this long-running case through trial and up to the Supreme Court. We also want to thank amici Cato Institute, Crime Prevention Research Center, Firearms Policy Coalition, Madison Society Foundation, Gun Owners of California, and Firearms Policy Foundation for their excellent briefs in support of our case and the cause of individual liberty.

The Calguns Foundation will continue to challenge unconstitutional gun control laws until the Second Amendment takes its place as a peer among fundamental rights, like those in the First Amendment, rather than the “constitutional orphan” and “second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees” that it is in the Ninth Circuit today.

Sorry Donald But This Is Bovine Excrement


President Donald Trump released a Presidential Memorandum today directing Attorney General Jeff Sessions to complete the review of bump fire stocks and to promulgate a rule banning them. The problem with this Presidential Memorandum is that bump fire stocks as exemplified by the SlideFire Stock do not meet the definition of machine guns under the National Firearms Act and applicable BATFE rulings. That was why Rich Vasquez when he was charged with analyzing the SlideFire Stock found that it was not a machine gun nor did it convert a semi-automatic firearm into one. I made this very point in my own comment under the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

If President Trump wishes to change the definition of a machine gun under the National Firearms Act or if he wishes to pass a bill banning bump fire stocks, then he should ask Congress to pass such a bill. Directing the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to make such a change to the existing rules governing bump fire stocks ignores the rule of law despite what he might say in this Presidential Memorandum.

You can read the full Presidential Memorandum below:
After the deadly mass murder in Las Vegas, Nevada, on October 1, 2017, I asked my Administration to fully review how the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives regulates bump fire stocks and similar devices.

Although the Obama Administration repeatedly concluded that particular bump stock type devices were lawful to purchase and possess, I sought further clarification of the law restricting fully automatic machineguns.

Accordingly, following established legal protocols, the Department of Justice started the process of promulgating a Federal regulation interpreting the definition of “machinegun” under Federal law to clarify whether certain bump stock type devices should be illegal. The Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published in the Federal Register on December 26, 2017. Public comment concluded on January 25, 2018, with the Department of Justice receiving over 100,000 comments.

Today, I am directing the Department of Justice to dedicate all available resources to complete the review of the comments received, and, as expeditiously as possible, to propose for notice and comment a rule banning all devices that turn legal weapons into machineguns.

Although I desire swift and decisive action, I remain committed to the rule of law and to the procedures the law prescribes. Doing this the right way will ensure that the resulting regulation is workable and effective and leaves no loopholes for criminals to exploit. I would ask that you keep me regularly apprised of your progress.

You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

DONALD J. TRUMP
If Donald Trump has any desire to have a second term, pissing off the gun rights community which provided his margin of victory in battleground states is a damn poor way to go about it.

“Calling for gun control while Hitler is in the White House makes you sound suicidal”


Comedian Lou Perez has produced a YouTube video entitled, "7 Things You Should Know Before Talking About Guns". It is something everyone who is advocating for gun control should watch before opening their mouths.





Or maybe not. I kinda prefer the enemies of my rights to sound like the blithering idiots that they are.

One correction - "assault rifle" is more than a description of how a gun looks. He confuses that - like most in the media - with "assault weapon" which is a made-up term by Josh Sugarmann of the Violence Policy Center. An assault rifle is a select-fire rifle of intermediate caliber with a detachable magazine. A very early version would be something like the Sturmgewehr 44 which fired the 7.92x33 Kurz round.


H/T Legal Insurrection

Monday, February 19, 2018

Celebrating The Important Things


While I didn't tune out entirely this weekend from social media and the news, I also didn't dwell on it excessively. I had more important things to do.

Things like watch little kids scramble all over the place at Kaeideum in Winston-Salem. It is a children's science museum with tons of hands-on activities.

Things like being there as Olivia had her third birthday party.




Things like going out to dinner with Granny Karen and Papaw Jeff as we all watched the birthday girl eat lamb gyros and french fries fed to her by the Complementary Spouse.

There will be time today and tomorrow and the weeks afterwards to figure out why a 19 year-old who had lost his parents, who had been bullied and ostracized, who had mental problems, who had been expelled from a high school went back to that school and killed as many as he did. There will also be time to investigate why the FBI dropped the ball on this guy. And the fight against those who would roll in the blood of the victims in order to curtail our civil rights will continue as always.

As for this weekend, it was for Olivia and family.

Friday, February 16, 2018

NC Wildlife Resources Commission Seeks Comments On 5 Game Lands


The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission is seeking comments on the development of management plans for five of their game lands. Closest to me is the Cold Mountain Game Lands in Haywood County. Yes, it is the same Cold Mountain as in the book and movie. The four other game lands mentioned are way the hell and gone from me down in the eastern North Carolina.

Of particular interest about the Cold Mountain Game Lands is the Wayne Smith Shooting Range which is a free and open to the public range. It is also the closest range of its sort to the Asheville area. If you follow the links below, the draft management plan for Cold Mountain discusses the range in detail including potential plans for a 25-yard pistol range and a trap range. Among the concerns are noise mitigation and degradation of the facility from overuse. There is discussion of adding a fee for its use or limiting the amount of time one can stay and shoot at the range.

Wildlife Commission Invites Public to Comment on Five Game Land Plans
 
RALEIGH, NC —  After conducting a series of public meetings to gather input on developing management plans for game lands across the state, the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission has posted draft plans for five game lands on its website for additional public comment. 
The Commission is accepting comments through March 15 for the following game lands:
·         Bertie County, comprising 3,884 acres in Bertie County
·         Cape Fear River Wetlands, comprising 7,191 acres in New Hanover and Pender counties
·         Cold Mountain, comprising 3,631 acres in Haywood County
·         Neuse River, comprising 4,900 acres in Craven County
·         Van Swamp, comprising 5,505 acres in Beaufort and Washington counties
Comments can be e-mailed, with the game land name in the subject line and the individual tract within in the body of the email, to gamelandplan@ncwildlife.org. For more information on game lands, go to www.ncwildlife.org/gamelands.
About the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission
Since 1947, the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission has been dedicated to the conservation and sustainability of the state’s fish and wildlife resources through research, scientific management, wise use and public input. The Commission is the state regulatory agency responsible for the enforcement of fishing, hunting, trapping and boating laws and provides programs and opportunities for wildlife-related educational, recreational and sporting activities.
Get N.C. Wildlife Update — news including season dates, bag limits, legislative updates and more — delivered free to your Inbox from the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission.

Thursday, February 15, 2018

The Anatomy Of A Modern Biathlon Rifle


Fox News interviewed biathlon coach Kris Cheney-Seymour about the rifle used in the sport. Let's just say it isn't your average .22 rifle.




Cheney-Seymour was Olympian Lowell Bailey's biathlon coach through high school in Lake Placid, NY. Bailey was the highest placing American in the 10km biathlon sprint earlier this week. His 33rd place finish qualified him for the 12.5km pursuit to be held this coming Monday.

Wednesday, February 14, 2018

Much Ado About Nothing


The Brady Campaign, CNN, and the cult of personality known as Giffords are all in a tizzy that an BATFE official actually reached out to a lobbyist for comments. You may remember the white paper written by BATFE Associate Deputy Director Ron Turk that suggested items for discussion with regard to firearms regulations. The white paper was released after the inauguration of President Trump. It is to be noted that Ron Turk has always maintained that the items discussed in the paper were not official policy but rather items for discussion that he proposed.

According to CNN, after writing his initial draft of the white paper, Turk sent it to firearms lobbyist Mark Barnes for comments.
"If I am missing the mark on a major issue or disregarding a major discussion point any feedback you have would be appreciated," Turk wrote to the lobbyist, Mark Barnes, on January 9, 2017. "My hope is that the agency can demonstrate flexibility where appropriate and identify areas for further discussion, recognizing that solving everyone's concerns on each side would be difficult."
Some of the suggestions from Barnes were included in the final draft of the white paper. Things like allowing dealers to use the NICS system to run background check on their own employees and a re-examination of a 20-year old sporting use study in light of the sporting uses of AKs and ARs. However, things that Barnes also suggested like loosening restrictions on the imports of SKS carbines and Makarov pistols from Russia were not included.

I think what has the gun control lobby and their enablers in the media so upset is that they weren't approached for suggestions.

From Avery Gardiner of the Brady Campaign:
"I was surprised to see that the draft document had been emailed out to a gun industry lawyer and the final product took his suggestions as edits -- without any disclosure of that until we went to court to get these documents," said Avery W. Gardiner, co-president of the Brady Center. ...

"There was a secret white paper that was partially written by the gun lobby. That's exactly the kind of thing the Freedom of Information Act is supposed to address -- transparency of government," Gardiner said.
And from David Chipman, the former BATFE Special Agent who now works for Giffords, who is dismayed by the revelation:
"An independent ATF is critical to this nation's security. The white paper suggests that the gun industry's quest for power and influence has trumped public safety," Chipman said.
An interesting side note on Chipman, he is a 1984 graduate of Phillips Exeter Academy - the ultra-expensive, ultra-upper class, prep school. I'm having a little bit of cognitive dissonance over a preppy actually getting his hands dirty working for a lackluster agency like BATFE. Isn't that a little beneath a graduate of Phillips Exeter?

Back to the story in question, think back to the Obama Administration and all the photo ops and meeting held with the gun control industry. They were quite numerous. I think the problem here is that they are miffed to be on the outside looking in as opposed to the good old days when they had a seat at the table.

The CNN story does have link to all the drafts of the white papers if you are interested. They have also included a video on the page that seems like an outright editorial call for universal background checks. As Glenn Reynolds has often said they are Democratic operatives with a byline. I'd modify it to include gun control advocates with a byline.

Monday, February 12, 2018

Quote Of The Day


The quote of the day comes from a mid-20th century science fiction story called "The Weapon Shops of Isher" by A.E. van Vogt.

THE RIGHT TO BUY WEAPONS IS THE RIGHT TO BE FREE

Given that the US Supreme Court is considering whether to grant certiorari to Teixeira v. Alameda County, I thought it was highly timely. A post by David Kopel at the Volokh Conspiracy regarding an amicus brief he submitted on behalf of the Cato Institute, JPFO, the Independence Institute, and the Millennial Policy Center is what clued me into the book. It is still available on Amazon as a Kindle book as well as in a more expensive paperback and hardback edition.

Sunday, February 11, 2018

The Follow-Up Question 60 Minutes Should Have Asked


I just finished watching Steve Kroft's report on the battle for concealed carry reciprocity on 60 Minutes. I would suggest everyone either watch it or read the transcript. The episode was better than I hoped though you still could hear the sneer in Kroft's voice when he asked Tim Schmidt if you should be allowed to carry "anywhere". Schmidt, to his credit, gave a one word answer - "yes".

One of the people interviewed was Robyn Thomas of the Giffords Law Center who is adamantly opposed to carry reciprocity. Trying to make a point on how much stricter a may-issue state like California is on who gets a permit, she said:
Someone who lives in Nevada, who's able to carry a loaded, concealed weapon in Nevada could now bring that loaded gun into Los Angeles, into San Francisco, and carry their loaded weapon, even though in San Francisco that's not someone who would get a permit.
 Kroft's follow-up question was a softball asking wouldn't reciprocity "usurp" the gun laws of anti-gun places like New York, LA, and Chicago. This brought the expected "yes" answer.

The question that should have been asked - and the responsible question to ask if one wasn't biased - is how many carry permits have been issued in San Francisco. While I had a good idea it was a slim number, I reached out to Brandon Combs of the Firearms Policy Coalition and Cal-FFL to get an accurate answer. According to him, historically, the total number for both San Francisco city and county for the last two decades has ranged between 0 and 15.

Think about that. In a city and county (they are coterminous) of approximately 800,000 residents, at most 15 permits have been issued at any one time. In other words, unless you are the most connected person in San Francisco, you are not getting a permit.

Moreover, while San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego issue very few, if any, permits, there are approximately 90,000 permits in California. Many of these are issued in a virtually shall-issue manner by a number of other California counties. These permit holders are legally able to carry in any city or county in the state including both LA and San Francisco.

Never forget that our civil rights opponents and their media allies will shade the truth when it serves their purpose. Robyn Thomas did it in the interview and Steve Kroft perpetuated it by not asking the questions that should have been asked.

UPDATE: Professor David Yamane details his experiences when he asked about getting a carry permit in San Francisco back in 2013. He knew the answer going in but thought he'd ask anyway.

Friday, February 9, 2018

Reuters: Remington Seeks Financing To File For Bankruptcy


Reuters reported yesterday that Remington Outdoor Company is in search of financing that would allow it to file for bankruptcy. They have reached out to a number of banks and credit investment funds.
The move comes as Remington reached a forbearance agreement with its creditors this week following a missed coupon payment on its debt, the sources said. The company has been working with investment bank Lazard Ltd (LAZ.N) on options to restructure its $950 million debt pile, Reuters reported last month.

Remington is seeking debtor-in-possession financing that will allow it to fund is operations once it files for bankruptcy, the sources said. The size of the financing and timing of Remington’s bankruptcy plans could not be learned.

Some potential financing sources, including credit funds and banks, have balked at coming to Remington’s aid because of the reputation risk associated with such a move, according to the sources.
In addition to sales being reportedly down 27% for the first three quarters of 2017, Remington faces a $550 million term loan that comes due in 2019 along with another $250 million in bonds that mature in 2020.

In other words, Remington is facing a perfect storm.


Thursday, February 8, 2018

A Nice Win For Gun Rights In A California Appeals Court


Prior to a letter sent out by the California Department of Justice in 2014, holders of Curios and Relics Federal Firearm Licenses who also had a certificate of eligibility were exempt from the one handgun a month rule. That changed when the DOJ's Bureau of Firearms issued a letter to all dealers in California that said, in effect, that C&R FFLs would not exempt holders from the one handgun a month rule with regards to modern handguns. The Calguns Foundation and Cal-FFL brought suit in 2014 challenging this as a violation of the state's Adminstrative Procedures Act, contradicted the plain language of Sec. 27535, and ignored the legislative history of the one handgun a month law. The case sought a preliminary injunction in California Superior Court.

The trial court found that the Bureau of Firearm's interpretation of the law was "the only legally tenable interpretation of Sec. 27535" and granted the DOJ's motion of summary judgement. The case was appealed to the California Court of Appeal, 3rd Appellate District which today overturned the trial court.

From the court's opinion:
On appeal, plaintiffs argue the interpretation DOJ announced in 2014 is void because (1) it is inconsistent with section 27535 and (2) it was not adopted in compliance with the APA. We agree with plaintiffs and address their arguments in reverse order. Regarding their second argument, we conclude DOJ’s policy is not exempt from being promulgated under the APA because it does not embody “the only legally tenable interpretation” of the statute. (Gov. Code, § 11340.9, subd. (f).) Having decided that DOJ’s 2014 interpretation of section 27535 is void for failure to comply with the APA, we resolve any ambiguity regarding the proper construction of the statute and construe it as allowing individuals with the designated federal license, and certificate of eligibility, to purchase more than one handgun within 30 days regardless of the type of handgun being purchased. In doing so, we agree with plaintiffs’ first argument as well. We reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Calguns and Cal-FFL released this statement on their win today:
SACRAMENTO, CA (February 8, 2018)­­­­­­ – In a published decision issued today, California’s 3rd District Court of Appeal has issued an important new ruling striking down an illegal California Department of Justice (DOJ) gun control enforcement policy on multiple grounds. A copy of the Court of Appeal’s decision can be viewed at www.calgunsfoundation.org/doe.

The lawsuit, filed in 2014, was brought by two individuals after the DOJ’s Bureau of Firearms sent a letter notifying firearms dealers in the state of a new enforcement policy that prevents Californians who hold both a federal firearms license and a state Certificate of Eligibility, or “COE”, from purchasing more than one handgun in any 30-day period. After nearly two years of litigation, and in spite of both the requirements of the State’s Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and legal precedents on how to interpret statutes, the Sacramento Superior Court upheld the DOJ’s policy. But the Court of Appeal ultimately found that the policy was illegal, agreeing with the plaintiffs on both counts.

“This decision stands for the proposition that Attorney General Becerra and his Department of Justice are not above the law,” explained Brandon Combs, executive director for The Calguns Foundation. “They can’t simply make up the law as they go, without following the rules or having a legal basis in the statutes. The DOJ fabricated and enforced an illegal policy and we put an end to it with this case.”

Combs added that the decision is important for other issues as well, especially because it is citable as precedent. “Today’s decision is perhaps even more important because of the state’s new ammunition and assault weapon laws. Attorney General Becerra has been doing similar things in other areas of state law, and we are eager to show that, like their illegal policy here, those also must be enjoined and struck down.”

Plaintiffs’ attorney Bradley Benbrook of the Sacramento-based Benbrook Law Group hailed the decision. “We are gratified that the court affirmed the important principle that the State can’t take shortcuts when it tries to regulate citizens,” commented Benbrook. “It has to follow the rules.”

Doe, et al. v. Attorney Genera Xavier Becerra, et al. was supported by two California-based civil rights advocacy organizations: The Calguns Foundation, which focuses on legal efforts to protect individuals’ gun rights, and the California Association of Federal Firearms Licensees, the state’s firearms industry group.

The Calguns Foundation is participating in a lawsuit challenging the DOJ’s “bullet button assault weapons” regulations on similar grounds. More information about that case can be found at http://bit.ly/cgf-holt.
While the golden age of cheap surplus weapons may be over, the Curios and Relics FFL is still valuable. The rule of the Court of Appeals today in California affirms that.

Safari Club International Relocates Headquarters


While it may have no hunting season, the District of Columbia is where many of the rules, regulations, and laws that impact big game hunting in the US and in the world are made. Thus, it should be no surprise the Safari Club International has decided to move their headquarters from Tucson to Washington, DC. SCI made the decision at their recent Annual Hunter's Convention. The move was effective on February 1st.

From SCI:
SCI KICKS UP ITS GAME TO PROTECT HUNTING

On February 1, the Board of Directors of Safari Club International changed its headquarters designation from Tucson, Arizona to Washington, DC. The purpose of the move is to focus and intensify SCI's efforts on all forms of advocacy to protect the freedom to hunt, in coordination with other hunting organizations.

SCI's CEO Rick Parsons will relocate to the SCI office on Capitol Hill in early April. SCI has advocacy, Litigation and communication units in that building. The SCI Foundation, which owns the building, houses its conservation department there. Parsons has a degree in International Law and has specialized in wildlife conservation issues. While working with the U.S. Government, he helped to draft and implement the global treaty (called CITES) that regulates trade in wildlife so as to prevent extinctions. Parsons has been with SCI since 1985. He has hunted in Virginia, Michigan, Texas and South Africa.

At the same Board meeting, the SCI Board applauded the new Advocacy Communications program of SCI that emphasizes an aggressive approach to outbound communication based on the theme of hunter pride. The goal of the program is to provide information about hunting to the vast majority of people who are neutral on the issue. The information will be designed to change the conversation by giving these neutrals something new to consider about hunting.

The decision to designate Washington, DC as SCI's headquarters and to relocate the CEO was made in the midst of SCI's 46th Annual Hunters' Convention. The Convention is an extraordinary global gathering of the SCI family and hunting world. In all, 1,100 exhibitors from the U.S. and all over the world showed their hunting opportunities and hunting gear to more than 20,000 attendees.

There were seminars on hunting technique, ethics, legal issues and a host of other topics. There were side meetings with government delegations from Zimbabwe, Tanzania, Zambia, Namibia, South Africa, China and Kazakhstan, to name some. There were evening events featuring fundraising auctions to support the work of SCI and its sister organization, the SCI Foundation.

Between them, SCI and the Foundation put more than $3.5 Million on the ground annually for wildlife conservation, anti-poaching, education and humanitarian efforts related to hunting. SCI also funds a wide variety of advocacy activities in the U.S. and globally. Next year's Convention will be in Reno, Nevada on January 9-12, 2019.

Monday, February 5, 2018

2018 SHOT Show: Industry Day at the Range


I have finally finished my video compilation of my time at Industry Day at the Range. Bear in mind that this is my first attempt at video so be kind with the comments. The video itself runs for a bit over 12 minutes and features video taken by the Complementary Spouse and myself.

We did run into some technical difficulties. For example, shooting video sucks the life out of your iPhone or, at least, it did it to my iPhone 6. As a result, the video I shot of the Archon Type B and an explanation of its features was lost. I think a trip to the Apple Store is in my future to take advantage of their battery upgrade.

In addition to what I shot in this video, see this earlier post of mine that talked about some of the other firearms that I shot.



Safari Club International Adopts Policy On Captive Bred Lion Hunting


The Safari Club International is one of the leading organizations concerned with wildlife conservation in Africa. They work closely with both African governments and game managers on issue related to the conservation of big game on the Dark Continent. Thus, when they adopt a policy concerning the hunting of captive bred lions, it is news.

Their policy, in short, is that they oppose hunting captive bred lions. SCI conventions, other gatherings, and their magazine are perhaps the biggest way that African outfitters reach American hunters. Given this, SCI's refusal to let those who promote the hunting of captive bred lions to participate in those events is a big stick.

From SCI's release:
Considering that the practice of the captive breeding of lions for the purpose of hunting has doubtful value to the conservation of lions in the wild, and considering that such hunting is not consistent with SCI's criteria for estate hunting, the SCI Board has adopted the following policy:

  • SCI opposes the hunting of African lions bred in captivity.
  • This policy takes effect on February 4, 2018 and applies to hunts taking place after adoption of this policy and to any Record Book entry related to such hunts.
  • SCI will not accept advertising from any operator for any such hunts, nor will SCI allow operators to sell hunts for lions bred in captivity at the SCI Annual Hunters' Convention.

SHOT Show 2018: Gunblast.com Day 2 And Day 3


I'm still trying to digest everything I saw as well as find time to edit my own videos from the 2018 SHOT Show. In the meantime, here is a taste of some more of the SHOT Show courtesy of Jeff and Boge Quinn of Gunblast.com. They are much better at quickly editing content than I am!

Day 2




Day 3


Knife Rights Moves To Reform Knife Laws In Michigan


Last year Knife Rights succeeded in getting Michigan's switchblade ban repealed. This year they are seeking to repeal the ban on the concealed carry of specifically excluded knives.

From Knife Rights:
On the heals of last year's enactment of Knife Rights' switchblade ban repeal in Michigan, Representative Steven Johnson has introduced HB 5512 to removed all the knives prohibited from concealed carry in Michigan statute.

Sec. 227. (1) would be removed entirely from Michigan's penal code: "A person shall not carry a dagger, dirk, stiletto, a double-edged nonfolding stabbing instrument of any length, or any other dangerous weapon, except a hunting knife adapted and carried as such, concealed on or about his or her person, or whether concealed or otherwise in any vehicle operated or occupied by the person, except in his or her dwelling house,  place of business or on other land possessed by the person."
We will let you know when it's time to contact your legislator on this bill. Stay tuned.

Knife Rights' record of 28 bills repealing knife bans at the state and local levels in 20 states in the past 8 years is unrivaled. With your support, Knife Rights is rewriting knife law in America™.

Friday, February 2, 2018

There Is A More Important Day Than The Day Of The Rodent


Yes, I know that February 2nd is Groundhog Day. However, as the release sent out yesterday by Ducks Unlimited points out, it is also World Wetlands Day.

Weighing the pro's and con's of the respective days you have on the one hand a day devoted to whether or not a rodent who is often found dead on the side of the road sees its shadow. On the other hand is a day commemorating an ecosystem that filters water, provides habitat for countless animals, and could have protected New Orleans from the worst ravages of Hurricane Katrina if it had been left alone. It's not too hard to figure out which one is more important to me.

From DU:
MEMPHIS, Tenn. – Feb. 1, 2018 – Cities across the world will be celebrating World Wetlands Day (WWD) on Feb. 2, and Ducks Unlimited (DU) is adding its voice to raise awareness of this important day. Since 1937, DU has conserved more than 14 million acres of wetlands and associated habitats across North America. On average, DU and its many partners help conserve more than 250,000 acres per year.

WWD marks the signing of the Convention on Wetlands on Feb. 2, 1971, in Ramsar, Iran. Each year since 1997, government agencies, non-governmental organizations and groups of citizens at all levels of the community have taken advantage of the opportunity to raise public awareness of wetland values and benefits and the Ramsar Convention.
“Ducks Unlimited focuses on conserving wetlands to maintain healthy waterfowl populations, but the state of our wetlands affects everyone in many ways,” said Ducks Unlimited Chief Conservation Officer Nick Wiley.

DU’s conservation projects provide habitat for more than 900 species of wildlife. People also benefit from healthy wetlands and grasslands, which provide flood absorption, community resilience, clean water, recreational opportunities and fisheries resources. And while people across the globe rely on wetlands to help provide clean water, in the last 50 years the United States alone has lost more than 17 million acres of wetlands.

“World Wetlands Day is a great opportunity to raise awareness of the threats wetlands face and how they are important. Every day, however, is wetlands day at Ducks Unlimited, and without the support of great, conservation-minded partners our work would certainly be limited,” Wiley said.

Economists estimate that one acre of wetlands can provide up to $200,000 worth of benefits to people. Nearly 44 percent of America’s population regularly depends on groundwater for its drinking water supply, not to mention the health benefits of wetlands. Wetlands in or near urban areas are the focus of this year’s WWD theme. Parks, ponds and near-urban wildlife refuges provide important opportunities for people to spend time outdoors in a healthy, natural setting.

For more information about World Wetlands Day, visit www.worldwetlandsday.org

Thursday, February 1, 2018

My Endorsements For The NRA Board Of Directors


Ballots for the NRA Board of Directors have been mailed out in the February issues of American Rifleman, American Hunter, First Freedom, and Shooting Illustrated. These have only gone out to Life Members and annual members with five or more years of continuous membership as they are the only people eligible to vote in the Board election.

I have received my ballot and you can see how I'm voting in the picture below. If you look closely, you will see I'm only voting for three people. I'm a strong believer in bullet or targeted voting. Voting for up to 25 people dilutes the power of your vote and makes your top choices equal with your bottom choices.




This has been an unusually contentious election thanks to those in the old guard like Marion Hammer. I want to explain why I voted for these three deserving individuals and only these three. This is not to say that some of the others on this ballot would make good choices but rather that these three need to be on the board.

First, and I'll be perfectly blunt about this, none of these three were endorsed by Marion Hammer. The fact that they weren't endorsed is an endorsement in and of itself. I was greatly surprised that someone with the accomplishments of a Julie Golob was passed over for inclusion Ms. Hammer's endorsements. This is especially true when you have a political hack like Grover Norquist endorsed who has only a marginal connection to the Second Amendment community.

Second, both Adam Kraut and Tim Knight have grassroots support as evidenced by the fact that they were both nominated by petition. Tim sought the petition nomination even though he was nominated by the Nominating Committee. Tim's grassroots efforts in Colorado led to the recall of anti-gun Senate President John Morse and Sen. Angela Giron. He, along with fellow board member Sean Maloney, were on the ground helping to organize the recall and both would later be elected to the board. As to Adam, I was one of the people helping to gather signatures for him as I gotten to know him at the 2017 NRA Annual Meeting and afterwards. While Julie was nominated by the Nominating Committee, I think she has significant grassroots support given her past outreach efforts especially to women shooters.

Third, they are all relatively young when compared to the rest of the board. Adam is in his 30s, Julie is 40, and Tim is in his late 40s. If the NRA is going to appeal to Gun Culture v2.0, they are going to have to appeal to a younger demographic and you don't do that by having a board composed of people my age (60+).

Fourth, both Adam and Julie are masters of the use of social media. Both use Instagram to get their message out and both have podcasts or YouTube channels related to firearm topics. Julie has JulieG Radio while Adams contributes the Legal Brief to The Gun Collective.

Fifth, I think these three will help return the NRA to the reforms engendered by the Cincinnati Revolt of 1977. None are part of the old guard that helped neuter that changes in the NRA wrought by the Cincinnati Revolt as organized by Harlon Carter and Neal Knox. Adam, especially, has publicly promoted bylaw changes that would introduce modified term limits, encourage attendance at board meetings, and provide a means for celebrities to help the gun rights movement without having to serve on the board.

Finally, all three are accomplished in their own right. Rather than rehash their accomplishments, you can read about Tim, Julie, and Adam on their own web pages.


Turkey Hunting Seminars Held By NC Wildlife Resources Commission


The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission in conjunction with the National Wild Turkey Federation will hold a series of seminars on turkey hunting across the state in March. All the seminars run from 6pm until 9pm. As I've never been turkey hunting but have always thought about it I may just attend one of these.

The NC turkey season opens for adults on April 14th and runs through May 12th. There is a special youth-only season beginning on April 7th and ending on April 13th.

More details are below. I might note that the nearest location to me is just around the corner from the Sierra Nevada Brewery which has an excellent restaurant and taproom.

RALEIGH, N.C. (Jan. 31, 2018) — The N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission and the National Wild Turkey Federation are offering 11 free turkey hunting seminars across the state in March.

The seminars, which will be held from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m., are open on a first-come, first-served basis. Each seminar is open to all ages and skill levels, although participants 16 years and younger will need parental permission to register. Pre-registration is required and participants must register online

Topics will include biology, hunting methods, calls and decoys, firearms and ammo selection, camouflage clothing, and turkey processing and cooking techniques. Each seminar will conclude with a Q&A session and a brief overview of R3 (hunter recruitment, retention and re-activation) initiatives.

Dates and locations are:
March 7
Craven County Extension Center
300 Industrial Dr., New Bern, N.C. 28562 

March 8
Onslow County Extension Center
​4024 Richlands Hwy., Jacksonville, N.C. 28540 

March 13
Bass Pro Shops
8181 Concord Mills Blvd., Concord, N.C. 28027 

March 14
Cumberland County Extension Center
301 East Mountain Dr., Fayetteville, N.C. 28306 

March 20
Mountain Horticulture Crops Research and Extension Center
455 Research Dr., Mills River, N.C. 28759

March 21
Haywood Community College
185 Freedlander Dr., Clyde, N.C. 28721 

March 27
Burke County Extension Center
130 Ammons Dr., Morganton N.C. 28655

March 28
Forsyth County Extension Center
1450 Fairchild Rd., Winston-Salem, N.C. 27105 

March 29
Guilford County Extension Center
3309 Burlington Rd., Greensboro, N.C. 27405
“For four years now, the National Wild Turkey Federation has partnered with us to offer these seminars to increase participation in hunting while also maintaining conservation of wildlife and their habitats,” said Walter “Deet” James, the Commission’s hunting heritage biologist. “This year, we’re asking current hunters to bring along someone who has never hunted beforeAny hunter who brings someone new to hunting will receive a Federation-sponsored pledge hat, while supplies last."

The statewide season for male or bearded turkey only is April 14 through May 12, with a youth-only week from April 7-13. Regulations and restrictions on turkey hunting, including information on youth season, are available in the 2017-18 Inland Fishing, Hunting and Trapping Regulations Digest.