The Legion

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/03/16/obama-supreme-court-pick-faces-conservative-heat-on-gun-votes.html?intcmp=hpbt3   Published March 16, 2016 FoxNews.com The NRA and other pro-Second Amendment groups came out strongly Wednesday against President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, warning that Judge Merrick Garland would threaten gun rights while citing his role in a landmark firearms case.  “President Obama has nothing but contempt for the Second Amendment and law-abiding gun owners,” Chris Cox, head of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action, said in a statement.  Senate Republican leaders already have said they don't plan to consider Garland's or any nomination. But conservative groups pressuring lawmakers to hold the line largely are focusing on the D.C. appeals court judge's votes related to the 2008 Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller, which weighed D.C. residents’ right to keep handguns in their homes. The case reached the high court after a three-judge panel of the District’s U.S. Court of Appeals struck down parts of D.C.’s handgun ban. The heavily Democratic D.C. government opposed the decision and asked the full appeals court to reconsider. But the request was denied in a 6-4 vote. Merrick was among the four on the full court who voted to re-hear the case, though he took no formal position on the merits. The Supreme Court ultimately upheld the individual right to self-defense, in an opinion delivered by the late Justice Antonin Scalia, whom Garland is seeking to replace. Still, critics saw Garland’s earlier vote to re-hear as a signal that Garland backed the D.C. gun restrictions. Cox said his group “strongly opposes” the Garland nomination “on behalf of our five million members and tens of millions of supporters across the country.” “There is no longer a majority of support among the justices for the fundamental, individual right to own a firearm for self-defense. Four justices believe law-abiding Americans have that right and four justices do not,” Cox also said. Carrie Severino, chief counsel for the Judicial Crisis Network, argued Wednesday that Garland’s roughly 19-year record as a judge supports the conclusion that he would vote to reverse one of Scalia’s most important opinions. Beyond Garland’s 2007 vote on D.C. gun ownership, Severino points to his 2000 vote on the appeals court to allow the FBI to continue to retain gun-sale records to help with criminal background checks on firearms sales. The decision was a defeat for the powerful NRA, which filed the lawsuit. Severino argued Wednesday that while two cases might appear like too small of a sample, such gun cases rarely reach the D.C. court. “They are two good indicators, telling examples and adequate evidence,” she told FoxNews.com. “It’s impressive enough to have two cases that squarely address the Second Amendment.” Severino’s group says it will spend at least $2 million on advertising to oppose the 63-year-old Garland’s nomination, whom it says “has a very liberal view of gun rights.” Other conservative-leaning groups also have joined in opposing the appointment of Garland, who was appointed to the appeals court by President Clinton, then served during the Bush and Obama administrations. “We are one liberal Justice away from seeing gun rights restricted,” said Michael Needham, chief executive for Heritage Action. The group, the policy advocacy group for the influential Washington think tank the Heritage Foundation, is also backing the GOP-led Senate’s decision to hold no confirmation hearing. He argues that Americans in just seven months will pick a new president, who should make the decision about replacing Scalia, a leading conservative voice on the high court. Brian Rogers, executive director for the group America Rising Squared and a former spokesman for Arizona GOP Sen. John McCain, said Garland’s vote to re-hear the D.C. gun law case “is deeply concerning to all who care about our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.”  Obama, meanwhile, urged Republicans to reconsider their opposition.  “I hope they’re fair. That’s all,” Obama said Wednesday. “To give him a fair hearing and up or down vote.”

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/03/11/guns-in-america-know-case-for-background-checks-is-weak-if.html?intcmp=ob_article_sidebar_video&intcmp=obnetwork     Published March 11, 2016 FoxNews.com Academic advocates of gun control apparently need to manipulate the data in order to argue for background checks on private gun transfers.  Even the prestigious medical journal, the Lancet, does not seem to be above publishing junk science on gun control.  There has been extensive, glowing media coverage from the Los Angeles Times, CNN, Reuters, and US News & World Report. Currently, background checks must be performed when a gun is purchased from a dealer.  “Expanded” background check laws would require that checks also be conducted on private transfers of guns (say between a father and a son or with a neighbor). These laws exist in 19 states.  Of course, previous public health researchers simultaneously carefully pick one state at a time to examine (Missouri or Connecticut), which years to look at, and what types of crime to study.  To do the matter justice, a researcher really must look at all of the states that passed the laws, and then compare the changes in crime rates between those states that passed the laws to those that didn’t.  Using data from 2010, the new Lancet study claims that these background checks on private transfers will reduce state firearms deaths (homicides plus suicides) by 57 percent.  Yet, few researchers would look at firearm deaths across states in one year. To put this in perspective, let’s look at another simplistic comparison.  A lot of people like to point to the UK’s lower homicide rate and fewer guns and attribute this to strict gun control laws. Many cite this as proof that gun control reduces homicides.  But there is a problem. The UK had an even lower homicide rate before the country banned handguns.  After the ban, homicide rates rose by 50 percent over for the next 8 years.  The point is that homicide or suicide rates can differ for lots of reasons that have nothing to do with gun control, and that simply looking across countries or states is often quite misleading. The most accurate option is to see how a place’s crime rates change after new laws go into effect and then compare that change with the changes that occurred in places where the laws didn’t change. Again, the cherry-picking of numbers is outrageous.  Gun laws for 2009 are used to evaluate firearms deaths in 2010.  Then 2013 is chosen as the year that firearm ownership is looked at.  No explanation is offered for why these different years are used.  The normal approach is to use all the available years of crime or suicide data.  One must have a very good reason for omitting certain years data, and there really is no good explanation for what was done in the Lancet study. There are many other problems with this study, such as looking at the impact of the different gun control laws in separate regressions instead of studying their impacts all at one time. When I did my own study in the 2010 edition of "More Guns, Less Crime" (University of Chicago Press), I used data for all the states from 1977 to 2005. I found that these expanded background checks were associated with a very small and statistically insignificant 2 percent increase in murder rates. Expanded background checks have become this year’s hot political issue for Democrats.  After every mass shooting, President Obama has called for these new checks. Strangely, the recent shootings in Oregon, Colorado, California, and Paris are being used to push gun-control laws that already existed in those places and that evidently failed to prevent the attacks.  There’s already evidence that these attacks don’t decline in frequency as a result of expanded background checks. Public health research has become completely corrupt.  Too often, the conclusions seem to be more important than the accuracy of the research.  With money flooding in from Michael Bloomberg, George Soros, and others, we are unfortunately going to be seeing a lot more of these types of studies in just the coming year.

I have several different guns I use for carry depending on were I am going or time of year.  My rotation consist of :   Ruger LCR .38 + P Glock 26 Gen 4 9mm Sig Sauer P226 Legion 9mm Glock 20 Gen 4 10mm

It is pretty bad in some areas around here. 

IDPA match has been canceled due to Flooding.

The crime is slowly moving into Bartlett.  We had a neighbor robbed in their driveway as they came home from the grocery store.

That is something you don't see everyday.  Great picture.

http://www.localmemphis.com/news/local-news/proposed-crime-plan-would-arm-residents   MEMPHIS, TN   After a spike in recent break-ins and other crimes, a neighborhood leader in Raleigh is unveiling a bold proposal--arming and training neighbors to defend their properties. Members of the Twin Lakes Neighborhood Association will talk about the idea at their monthly meeting Thursday night. There's a mix of opinions on this idea, which depending on perspective, would either enhance the neighborhood's sense of security or put it at risk for unintentional gunfire. “There was a time when Raleigh was very quiet, a very nice place to live in, but that crime has picked up," said Twin Lakes Neighborhood Association president Charles Henderson. The growing concern of people breaking the law is why Henderson wants more of his law abiding neighbors to legally carry a gun and be trained to use it if necessary. "Before it gets out of hand any further it's responsible for each household to take care of what's theirs," said Henderson. Crime statistics in Twin Lakes back up neighbor’s concerns to defend their homes at any cost. Within a half mile of the neighborhood entrance, reported crimes jumped from 52 this time in 2015 to 153 so far this year. That's a 194% increase. “Neighborhood is kind of going down. They put some low income housing in the neighborhood and that really brought the neighborhood down," said resident R.L. Powers. But not everyone believes more guns equals more security. "I don't know about that. Probably have enough guns already. I think just watching the neighborhood would be better than just having guns myself," said resident Mack Campbell. The meeting gets underway at 6:00 p.m. six tomorrow at the Cunningham Community Center. A shooting range employee will also be there to discuss gun training safety.

There will be an IDPA Match this Saturday (3/12) at Memphis Sports Shooters Association in Lakeland, TN. Walk Through at 9;30AM $10 Members $12 Non-Members

There will be a USPSA match at Memphis Sports Shooting Association this Sunday (3/6). Walk through at 9:30am. $10 Members $12 Non-Members

http://wreg.com/2016/02/27/battle-rages-over-florida-law-limiting-doctors-gun-speech/   MIAMI — As a pediatrician, Dr. Judith Schaechter can ask parents of her patients all sorts of questions regarding their safety and well-being: what the child eats, whether there’s a backyard pool and whether the child gets enough sleep. Yet the question of whether there is a gun in the home is generally off limits. A Florida law bans routine gun questions even though eight children or teenagers are killed every day in the U.S. with guns, according the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Doctors such as Schaechter believe a discussion about guns is essential to child safety. “A doctor has to be able to ask,” said Schaechter, who is chair of the Department of Pediatrics at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine. “We do this for so many issues. This is but one. Yet it is an extremely important one, for when we don’t discuss prevention, the results can be lethal.” Schaechter is among thousands of physicians, medical organizations and other groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union that challenged the law, formally called the Firearm Owners Privacy Act, in a lawsuit known popularly as “Docs vs. Glocks.” The law, passed in 2011 amid strong support from the National Rifle Association, is the only one of its kind in the nation, although similar laws have been considered in 12 other states, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics. The legal battle, which has raged since the law’s inception, is a clash between the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech and the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms, amid a national discussion about the role and availability of weapons across the U.S. The lawsuit is now pending before the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals following conflicting earlier rulings on its constitutionality — and the case could wind up in the U.S. Supreme Court. Supporters in the Republican-controlled Florida Legislature and the NRA say the law became necessary when, in their view, doctors began overstepping their bounds in the examination room by pushing an anti-Second Amendment, anti-gun political agenda. The NRA cites several examples of doctors telling patients they’d have to find a new physician if they refused to answer questions about gun ownership or telling parents they should get rid of any guns in the home. The law, supporters point out, permits doctors under a “good faith” provision to ask about firearms if the questions are deemed “relevant to the patient’s medical care or safety” or the safety of other people. “These provisions target discrimination and harassment, not speech, and they do nothing to impair doctor-patient discussions of firearm safety,” NRA attorney Charles Cooper said in court papers. “Even if viewed as a speech regulation, the (law) is a reasonable regulation of speech incidental to the practice of medicine.” The law also has some teeth: doctors who violate the law could face professional discipline, such as a fine, or even lose their medical licenses. The state Department of Health would investigate any complaints, although the law has never been enforced because it was blocked in 2012 by a Miami judge’s decision that found it an unconstitutional violation of free speech rights. Since that decision by U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke, the law has been entangled in an unusual web of appeals brought by Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, a Republican. The same panel of three 11th Circuit appeals judges has overruled Cooke on identical 2-1 votes — but in three separate opinions, each replacing the one before. Most recently, in December, the panel found that any free speech concerns were outweighed by Florida’s interest in preventing doctors from using their so-called “power disparity” over patients to chill exercise of their Second Amendment rights. In other words, the three-judge panel found that doctors had a First Amendment right to talk to patients about guns but couldn’t use it most of the time, said attorney Doug Hallward-Driemeier, who represents the physicians and their allies. The law, he said, “singles out doctors’ speech about guns for restriction because the government disagrees with their message. That is precisely what the First Amendment protects us against.” After that December opinion, the full 11th Circuit Court of Appeals stepped in to take up the case, tossing out the decisions by its own three-judge panel. The court’s 11 judges in coming months will likely hold oral arguments, followed by a decision that could be appealed again to the U.S. Supreme Court, Hallward-Driemeier said. Schaechter, the pediatrician, said she views concerns about Second Amendment violations as misguided. With a nation awash in guns — the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service pegged the number at 310 million guns in 2009 — it’s simple common sense for a doctor to question patients about them, she said. “This isn’t about the Second Amendment. It’s about speaking up to save lives, and that’s my right and it’s my patients’ right to hear what I have to say,” she said. “I trust if they don’t want to answer my questions, they will tell me. So far, none of them have done so.”

There are Indoor IDPA Matches at TWRA (Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency) in Bartlett, TN every 1st and 3rd Tuesday of each month.   TWRA Cost $10.00 Shooters Cost $1.00 to cover targets, tape, and target stands.  No $1.00 cost for people shooting their first at TWRA.   The match begins at 6:00pm sharp.    

http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/31321756/bill-could-make-parents-responsible-for-kids-finding-guns   MEMPHIS, TN (WMC) - Multiple stories have been reported where children have gotten their hands on loaded guns and it has turned out tragic.   Loaded guns easily accessible to children have become a problem, and now a new bill might make parents think twice about where their loaded guns are stored. The bill is calling for criminal charges when loaded guns are left out where children can pick them up. There are 27 states with similar legislation, and now the bill is headed to the senate judiciary next month. For many people, they agree parents should be held more accountable if they choose to own guns with children in the home. "If you're going to have a gun, you should be held accountable for what's done with the gun," Talisha Ingram said. Two Democratic Tennessee state legislators have proposed have proposed the idea. Representative Sherry Jones from Nashville and Senator Sara Kyle from Memphis are behind the bill that seeks a criminal penalty for an adult leaving a loaded gun unattended and accessible to a child under 13 years of age. Even 9-year-old Zoe Ingram knows what the rules should be when it comes to guns. "I think they should, because they shouldn't even have a gun when the kids are around," Zoe said. The bill comes as several young children have died or been injured after picking up a gun in their own home or a relative's home. Last year in Shelby County, 4-year-old Aabriel Jones Jr. died after finding a gun in his house and accidentally shot himself. In 2014, a 6-year-old found a gun and shot a 4-year-old girl. She survived the shooting. In 2012, a 10-year-old was accidentally shot and killed by his 12-year-old brother. Those are just a few of the accidental shootings when children found guns. The bill would also require licensed gun dealers to post signage warnings. It is a criminal offense to leave a loaded gun accessible to children.

I could not resist.  I became a Life Member.

I carry mine on occasion in a crossbreed holster.

There will be a USPSA match at Memphis Sports Shooting Association this Saturday. Walk through at 9:30am. $10 Members $12 Non-Members

http://www.kltv.com/story/31277295/gun-maker-seeks-dismissal-of-lawsuit-over-newtown-shooting     BRIDGEPORT, Conn. (AP) - Lawyers for the company that made the rifle used to kill 20 first-graders and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School are expected to ask a Connecticut judge to dismiss a wrongful death lawsuit filed by families of some of the massacre victims. Freedom Group, the Madison, North Carolina, parent company of AR-15 maker Bushmaster Firearms, is arguing that it is protected by a 2005 federal law that shields gun manufacturers from most lawsuits over criminal use of their products. Lawyers for the plaintiffs, who include the families of nine children and adults who died and a teacher who survived, say the lawsuit is permitted under an exception to the federal law that allows litigation against companies that know, or should know, that their weapons are likely to be used in a way that risks injury to others. The victims' attorneys say the lawsuit appears to be the first of its kind against a manufacturer to claim that exception. Bridgeport Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis is set to hear arguments Monday afternoon on Freedom Group's motion to dismiss. "No lawsuit will ever bring back any of the 26 innocent lives that were stolen or bring peace to the families that will never recover from this," said Nicole Hockley, a plaintiff whose son, Dylan, was killed. "But gun companies must be held accountable for marketing and selling the AR-15, a killing machine designed only for military use, to violence-prone young men. "We're bringing this lawsuit to save other families from having to live with the nightmare that we do every single day," she said. State police say the 20-year-old gunman, Adam Lanza, killed his victims with a Bushmaster XM15-E2S rifle, a model of the AR-15, on Dec. 14, 2012. Lanza killed his mother, Nancy Lanza, at their Newtown home before going to the school a few miles away, and then killed himself as police arrived. Nancy Lanza legally bought the rifle, state police said. The plaintiffs' lawyers, Joshua Koskoff, Alinor Sterling and Katherine Mesner-Hage, argue in the lawsuit that the Bushmaster rifle used in the shooting is too dangerous to sell to the general public. The families are seeking unspecified monetary damages and other potential court actions. Freedom Group denies the allegations. Lawyers for the company argue that Congress passed the 2005 law, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, to protect gun makers from lawsuits over the criminal use of firearms, after determining the lawsuits were an abuse of the legal system. Debate over the law has resurfaced in this year's presidential campaign. Hillary Clinton has criticized fellow Democrat Bernie Sanders' support of the 2005 law when it passed. Sanders is now backing a bill to repeal the law.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/02/08/arcane-nj-law-prevents-retired-cops-from-carrying-concealed-weapon.html?intcmp=hpbt3     Published February 08, 2016 FoxNews.com New Jersey’s arcane gun law is preventing some retired cops from getting a permit to carry a concealed weapon, according to a published report. That’s because the law makes no provisions for retired public university police officers to get one, the Newark Star-Ledger reports. “There seems to be discrepancy in whether [state] university police are viewed as working for a state agency,” attorney Thomas Roughneen told the paper. He represents John Kotchkowski, 55, and Robert Dunsmuir, 48, two retired University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey police sergeants who were denied right-to-carry permits. A judge last month refused to grant Kotchkowski a permit on appeal. Dunsmuir’s appeal will be heard next month. “It’s made me feel like my whole career was a sham, like they’re saying I wasn’t a real cop,” Kotchkowski told the paper Thursday. He lost his appeal even though other retired campus cops have won theirs, the paper reported. Kotchkowski and Dunsmuir both contend they worked for a state agency and thus should be granted a conceal carry permit. But the wording of the law doesn’t make that so clear, according to the New Jersey State Police, which oversees the permit process. “How are UMDNJ police not a state law enforcement agency?" Roughneen asked, according to the Star-Ledger. “By that logic, that makes the entire Rutgers police force -- which is one of the largest in the state -- ineligible. And that flies in the face of the intent of the law, which is to increase public safety.” The law was enacted in 1997 after the murder of a police chief who was killed when he tried to thwart the Newark carjacking of an elderly couple, the paper reported. One of the officers involved in the pursuit of the killers in that case was Kotchkowski. He and Dunsmuir worked on a stolen car task force with cops from Newark and the city of Elizabeth while on the job. “Carjackings. Armed robberies, Domestics,” Kotchkowski told the paper. “We did everything city cops did.”

IDPA will run 6 stages and some will shoot a second gun.   USPSA will run 6 or 7 stages and sometimes a second gun with shoot.   3-Gun will run 4-5 stages at the Action Pistol course and stages at the 200-300 range

http://www.wmcactionnews5.com/story/31135445/university-of-memphis-students-push-for-gun-carrying-on-campus     MEMPHIS, TN (WMC) - A University of Memphis student organization is pushing to see a campus carry law that allows students with state issued gun permits to carry concealed weapons on campus.  In addition, the NRA arrived Wednesday to help educate interested students.   "We believe that students and faculty that are owners of state issued permits should be able to conceal carry on campus," Stuart Dedmon, a member of the U of M Students for Concealed Carry, said. A representative from the National Rifle Association spoke with students at the university about the NRA and their second amendment rights. Students at the event also received a NRA hat and a free year's membership to the NRA. Everyone at the event said they came for more information, but most also want to carry a gun on campus. "People are being robbed walking down the street going to the store or their car. I think it would be safe," Nicholas Mackey, student, said. Student Gilmanur-Rashid, from Bangladesh, said regular citizens cannot carry guns in his country but he would like to carry one on the U of M campus. "I would like to carry one for our safety, especially at night. It's very risky," Rashid said. In a statement, the University of Memphis chief of police said he and U of M officials oppose guns on campus unless it is highly trained public safety personnel like police. Students like Ben Furman share that belief. "I don't think anything good can come from it. We already have police officers for protection. Yeah, it's not a good idea," Furman said. University of Memphis student Destiny Denton also agrees with Furman and officials that guns should not be allowed. "I don't think they should be allowed to carry them. This is a learning institution and it detracts from the learning environment," Denton said. The State of Tennessee prohibits firearms on campuses. Students for Concealed carry would like to change that by lobbying to get bills passed in the legislature.

NEW YORK — Facebook and Instagram are banning private gun sales on its platforms. On Friday, Facebook — which bought Instagram in 2012 — said it is updating its policies to reflect this. Facebook, which has 1.59 billion monthly users, already prohibited people from using its site to sell marijuana, pharmaceuticals and illegal drugs. “Over the last two years, more and more people have been using Facebook to discover products and to buy and sell things to one another,” Monika Bickert, Facebook’s head of product policy said in an email statement. The company specified that it is hoping to crack down on the peer to peer sales of weapons on Facebook. It said that licensed firearm retailers will still be able to post about their goods and services on Facebook, with transactions of sales taking place off of Facebook. Facebook said that it has systems in place to detect private gun sales and that it will remove content that violates its new policy.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/virginia-concealed-carry-reversal-catches-gun-control-advocates-by-surprise/ar-BBoSQLR     The relationship between Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) and gun control groups is quickly souring after critics say he caved to pressure from the National Rifle Association. Virginia will now recognize concealed carry permits from dozens of other states with what critics say are weaker gun laws than the commonwealth. The move, announced by McAuliffe on Friday, represents a sharp departure from the state’s decision shortly before Christmas to block many out-of-state gun owners from carrying in Virginia. McAuliffe hailed the deal as a bipartisan compromise. “This bipartisan deal to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers and people who cannot pass background checks will save lives,” McAuliffe said Friday in a statement. “Give and take is essential to every negotiation, but the balance of this deal changes Virginia law permanently in ways that will keep guns away from people who would use them for harm.” The National Rifle Association (NRA) was able to beat down the Virginia measure that would’ve restricted what it sees as law-abiding gun owners from carrying in its own backyard. The group's headquarters are in Fairfax, Va. The NRA did not immediately respond to requests for comment, but the group’s top lobbyist, Chris Cox, told The Washington Post it "commends leaders in the commonwealth for moving forward on a bipartisan package that will benefit Virginia citizens.” The move comes as a shocking betrayal for gun control advocates. McAuliffe has touted his “F-rating” from the NRA, but Everytown for Gun Safety accused the governor of “caving to the gun lobby’s demands.” “Terry McAuliffe has been a good friend and strong ally to those of us in the gun violence prevention movement in Virginia,” said Lori Haas, director of the Virginia chapter of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence.  “Unfortunately, this deal with the NRA and pro-gun politicians is a mistake that, on the whole, would do far more harm than good,” she added. Last year, McAuliffe campaigned for stronger gun laws alongside Andy Parker, a Virginia resident whose daughter, Alison, was shot and killed on live television while broadcasting the news. "Many of us have spoken with you at rallies,” Andy Parker and other gun violence victims wrote Friday in a letter to McAuliffe. "We’ve backed you in your election for governor. You’ve comforted us and our families in some of our darkest moments. You have been a true friend to each of us and your support has meant so much to us. Over time, we've come to see you as a true champion of our ideals. A courageous fighter who stood up to the callousness of a gun lobby that for too long exerted undue influence over our political process here in Virginia. "This isn't the first time that we've been disappointed in a Virginia politician, but when you campaigned on this issue, [we thought] you were different,” the letter continued. In December, Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring (D) announced the commonwealth was severing ties with 25 states that had weaker gun laws. The concealed carry permits they issued would no longer be recognized in Virginia. Herring feared that dangerous people who would not pass a background check in Virginia could obtain firearms in states with weaker gun laws and bring them into the commonwealth. Those states included Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming. The ban was scheduled to take effect Feb. 1. "I have recommended the state police terminate the reciprocity agreements with 25 states whose laws are not adequate to prevent issuance of a concealed handgun permit to individuals that Virginia would disqualify,” Herring said in a statement. At the time, McAuliffe threw his support behind the decision. But a pressure campaign from Republicans in the state assembly and the gun lobby ensued. McAuliffe agreed Friday to reverse the concealed carry decision in exchange for concessions from Republicans. While Virginia must now allow gun owners from other states to carry in the commonwealth, state police will be instructed to confiscate firearms from people convicted of domestic abuse and will expand voluntary background checks. Despite these concessions, gun control advocates say it is a bad deal that will endanger the public. The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence called it a “mistake” that would allow people from other states who have been convicted of stalking, assault, sexual offenses, drunkenness, and people who are dangerously mentally ill to bring carry guns in Virginia. The group scoffed at the “optional" background check provision McAuliffe negotiated in the deal that "would not require a single private seller in the commonwealth” to comply.

You need to place this in the Firearms Classified area.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/01/25/critics-blast-massachusetts-citys-new-essay-rule-for-gun-carry-applicants.html     Published January 25, 2016 FoxNews.com Critics are blasting a Massachusetts city’s new law that they claim requires residents applying for a license to carry handguns to write “an essay” and pay upwards of $1,100 for training. The new laws take effect this week in Lowell, a city of 110,000 that lies 35 miles north of Boston. Pushed by Police Superintendent William Taylor and passed by the City Council, they require applicants for unrestricted handgun licenses to state in writing why they should receive such a license. Taylor, who was unavailable for comment on Monday, has sole discretion for approving or denying the applications. “It is absurd that people should have to write an essay to the town to explain why they should be able to exercise their constitutional rights,” said Jim Wallace, executive director of Gun Owners Action League of Massachusetts. “We already have a very strict set of gun laws in the state, but this is way over the top.” “It is absurd that people should have to write an essay to the town to explain why they should be able to exercise their Constitutional rights.” - Jim Wallace, Gun Owners Action League of Massachusetts. State law sets guidelines and requirements, but gives local chiefs of police broad discretion in implementation. While other cities and towns in Massachusetts have tough licensing regulations, Lowell’s new requirements, which also include taking a gun safety course over and above one already required by the state, prompted complaints at a public hearing last week. "I will never write an essay to get my rights as an American citizen," resident Dan Gannon told the City Council. The new policy was prompted in part by a year-old federal lawsuit brought by Commonwealth Second Amendment, a Bay State gun-rights group. Attorney David Jensen said the suit stems from Lowell’s history of denying qualified applicants permits to carry handguns without what the plaintiffs consider a legitimate rationale.

I shoot CZ's in the IDPA/USPSA production divisions.  I also am not sure if it is legal or not, but I would not do it.  You may have an AD plus it will cost you some stage time to do it safety.  The CZ's I shoot come from CZ custom and Automatic Accuracy.  My DA trigger pull is a very smooth 7.5 lbs.  I would do some dry firing practice at home and practice shooting small steel targets at 10-15 yard distances to perfect your control of the trigger pull.