Top Navigation  
U.S. Flag waving
Office Hours Momday - Friday  8 am - 5 pm Pacific 1-800-835-2418
Facebook   YouTube   Twitter
Backwoods Home Magazine, self-reliance, homesteading, off-grid

 Home Page
 Current Issue
 Article Index
 Author Index
 Previous Issues
 Print Display Ads
 Print Classifieds
 Free Stuff
 Home Energy

General Store
 Ordering Info
 Kindle Subscriptions
 Back Issues
 Help Yourself
 All Specials
 Classified Ad

 Web Site Ads
 Magazine Ads

BHM Blogs
 Behind The Scenes
 Ask Jackie Clay
 Massad Ayoob
 Claire Wolfe
 Where We Live
 Dave on Twitter
Retired Blogs
 Oliver Del Signore
 David Lee
 Energy Questions

Quick Links
 Home Energy Info
 Jackie Clay
 Ask Jackie Online
 Dave Duffy
 Massad Ayoob
 John Silveira
 Claire Wolfe

Forum / Chat
 Forum/Chat Info
 Enter Forum
 Lost Password

More Features
 Meet The Staff
 Contact Us/
 Change of Address
 Write For BHM
 Disclaimer and
 Privacy Policy

Retired Features
 Country Moments
 Radio Show

Link to BHM

Massad Ayoob on Guns

Want to Comment on a blog post? Look for and click on the blue No Comments or # Comments at the end of each post.

Archive for the ‘Firearm Owner’s Civil Rights’ Category

Massad Ayoob


Monday, August 25th, 2014

Jews for Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO) approached Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) with a view toward SAF taking over the financially foundering JPFO. Many in JPFO were not pleased. There has been some badmouthing of the Second Amendment Foundation and its leader Alan Gottlieb lately.  Having known Alan for decades and having served for many years on SAF’s board of trustees, I feel compelled to offer a word or two.

It was Gottlieb’s vision decades ago which, through SAF, funded much of the scholarly legal research published in respected law journals which today is recognized as authoritatively repudiating many “gun control” arguments. It was SAF that gave impetus to the two greatest US Supreme Court precedents supporting individual rights under the Second Amendment, Heller v. District of Columbia and McDonald, et al v. City of Chicago. And SAF is extremely active at the grassroots level as well, as seen here on Fox News.

One commentator said the late founder of JPFO, Aaron Zelman, did not respect Alan Gottlieb and the Second Amendment Foundation. Excuse me? I knew Aaron Zelman, and recall seeing him attending and speaking at the SAF-sponsored Gun Rights Policy Conference.  Aaron was no two-faced hypocrite; I’m sure he would not have supported with his attendance an organization of which he disapproved.

I’ve heard Alan and SAF criticized for their choice of lawyers. Um, excuse me? Are they talking about Alan Gura, the brilliant lawyer who won those great victories for the Second Amendment in the Supreme Court of the United States? Both Alans are Jewish, Gura presently in Tel Aviv I’m told; are there members of Jews For Preservation of Firearms Ownership who bash two of the strongest fighters for the Second Amendment who are Jews themselves? What?

Speaking only for myself, it appears to me that SAF is the ship willing to pick up the survivors of the sinking JPFO, and to get them back sailing again on the course that Aaron Zelman founded for his great organization.  If members of JPFO are able to keep the original organization afloat, more power to them.  If not, I would much rather see SAF take the helm and keep JPFO on course instead of watching JPFO and its accomplishments sink beneath the waves.

All who read this are invited to attend the GRPC. There is no fee, and attendees receive a substantial amount of research materials. Over two days, they’ll hear from the best and the brightest in the pro-gun movement, encompassing national and grassroots organizations alike. Information is available here. Come and talk with Alan Gottlieb and others from SAF, and judge for yourself.



Massad Ayoob


Friday, August 8th, 2014

In legal theory, crimes are divided between malum prohibitum and malum in se.  Translated from Latin, malum in se means that the thing being described is evil in and of itself, and is probably so in every civilized society.  Malum prohibitum essentially says “It’s bad because we prohibited it.”

Case in point: you are a responsible young single mom, gainfully employed in the medical profession to support your two little kids.  Becoming the victim of a couple of crimes has caused you to arm yourself, go through training, and get a permit to carry a gun where you live, in Philadelphia.

After crossing a state line, you are pulled over in a routine traffic stop.  You do what you think is the responsible thing: you advise the police officer that you are licensed to carry a gun and do have it with you.

You are then placed under arrest, and find yourself facing a MANDATORY penalty of three years in prison and becoming a convicted felon for life, because the state you’re now in is New Jersey, and they do not reciprocate with Pennsylvania or any other state on concealed carry permits.

We gun folks know that the fifty states are a patchwork quilt with fifty different sets of laws. This young woman is not a gun person.  She apparently didn’t know that a state that would recognize her driver’s license wouldn’t recognize her carry license.  Read about it here: .

She’s not the first to make this honest mistake, and won’t be the last.  (And, before anyone questions that it was an honest mistake, why would someone who knew they were breaking the law spontaneously tell the first cop they encountered that they were doing so?)  This case is the very definition of malum prohibitum.

It’s also why I and so many others have been calling for national reciprocity for decades.

Massad Ayoob


Monday, July 28th, 2014

A Federal judge has just overturned the Federal ban on handgun carry in the District of Columbia: .

Rockstar Second Amendment attorney Alan Gura and the Second Amendment Foundation have scored another major victory.   Here is Washington writer Emily Miller’s take: .

The DC police chief has reportedly ordered officers not to arrest gun carriers who have legitimate permits from other jurisdictions at this time, which would have the effect of legalizing carry with permits from elsewhere but not for DC residents, who have none. Some folks interpret the ruling as “Constitutional Carry” which encompasses DC residents whose handguns are registered in the District as per local law.  However, a lawyer friend of mine close to the situation offers this cautious advice:  “Obviously, I do *not* recommend carrying or possessing a firearm in D.C. until this matter is fully litigated, unless such carrying or possession would be legal under the law as it previously stood; it is likely that the decision will be promptly stayed once an appeal is filed.”

Discussion invited.

Massad Ayoob


Thursday, July 3rd, 2014

As we celebrate Independence Day, we need to remember among other things not to take liberties with our liberties.

Open carry – that is, carrying or wearing a visible firearm out and about in public – has become a hot topic on both sides of the gun debate. On our side, there are some who claim “a right not exercised is a right that will wither away.” In recent years, it has turned out otherwise. Ostentatious open carry led to it being banned by the state legislature in California. More recently, a series of store and restaurant chains, most recently Target, have come out and asked customers not to come there armed with firearms. These have been direct results of AR15s, AK47 clones, etc. being carried in their premises for no reason other than “because I can.”

My own position is middle of the road. I would like to see the open carry of a handgun made legal in all fifty states without a permit, with the practice prohibited to convicted felons, those adjudicated mentally ill, and the like. First, legal open carry prevents arrest of concealed carry permit holders whose gun becomes visible when the wind blows their coat open. Second, when someone becomes a stalking victim or the target of death threats overnight, they don’t have time to wait for the bureaucracy to take weeks or months to process a concealed carry permit.

However, a growing majority of gun owners – including me – are fed up with clowns who sling a rifle over one shoulder, a camcorder over the other, and go out to show off and maybe taunt a policeman or two. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these people weren’t false-flag plants from the other side. Not all of them are, though.

It’s self-delusional to think that you’ll spread a positive Second Amendment image by frightening people already made leery of armed people in public by news reports of atrocities like Sandy Hook. The gay rights movement didn’t make the strides it did by having its members have sex with each other in Starbucks, and wandering into a coffee shop or department store with a loaded military style rifle won’t make positive strides for gun owners’ civil rights. A small handful of attention whores have done huge damage to the vast majority of responsible gun owners.

Enjoy the Fourth. I intend to be setting off some fireworks myself, but on the range. Hope you get some fun time for the holiday weekend as well.

Massad Ayoob


Wednesday, June 18th, 2014

Hillary Clinton’s ill-concealed campaign for nomination as President continues, with her accusing us NRA types of promoting views which “terrorize” the general public. Is she sure that concussion didn’t cause some brain damage?
Although the NRA annual meeting was discussed here in the blog, an expanded version can be found here:
The next big conclave for gun owners civil rights activists will be in September, the GRPC (Gun Rights Policy Conference). Info here:
Hope to see you there!



Copyright © 1998 - Present by Backwoods Home Magazine. All Rights Reserved.