In From My Cold Dead Fingers, Sheriff Mack outlines why the right of the people "to keep and bear arms" is essential to the preservation of liberty and domestic tranquility. Mack reminds us of facts that were self-evident to earlier generations of Americans, but which are all but forgotten today.

In America's Last Hope, Sheriff Mack covers decades of research to prove that the sheriffs in this country are the ultimate law authority in their respective jurisdictions. The sheriff absolutely has the power and responsibility to defend his citizens against all enemies, including those from our own Federal Government.

Both books only $25 plus $3 shipping and handing.

MAIL ORDER:
Send a personal check for $28 payable to Buckeye Firearms Foundation. Mail to:
Cold Dead Fingers & Last Hope, 15 West Winter Street, Delaware, Ohio 43015.

By Dave Yost

A year ago, the United State Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment's right to bear arms belongs to individuals, not to state militias. The decision started more legal arguments than it settled, and the battle is still raging in the lower courts.

The Supreme Court decision, District of Columbia v. Heller*, has already produced plenty of litigation. Since it's a Supreme Court case, it can only be overruled by the Supreme Court. But even a Supreme Court decision can lose its authority by the slow erosion of lower court decisions.

A lower court that does not like a binding precedent can look to the facts of the case, and in its opinion, "distinguish" the facts. Once it finds that the facts are different, the binding precedent is no longer binding in the new case.

In its first year, at least 16 lower court cases "distinguished" the holding of Heller, and fifty-two more were decided on the basis that Heller's holding was "limited."

Some of those cases were well-considered, like the felon who tried to overturn his weapons conviction. But other cases contain language that is worrisome.

By Sandy Froman

Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Barack Obama's first nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, has a narrow view of the Second Amendment that contradicts the Court's landmark decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. A heated debate has started in the U.S. Senate over her opposition to the right to keep and bear arms. This issue, which has decided the fate of presidential elections, could also decide her nomination. Gun owners, and especially the members of the National Rifle Association, must aggressively oppose Judge Sotomayor's confirmation to the Supreme Court.

On June 24, senators began speaking on the floor of the Senate expressing grave concerns over Judge Sotomayor's Second Amendment record. Senator Jeff Sessions R-AL, the Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, pointed out that although her record on the issue is "fairly scant," she has twice stated that the Second Amendment is not a fundamental right. Senator Sessions also noted that in Second Amendment and other constitutional cases, Sotomayor's analysis of important constitutional issues has been lacking suggesting "a troubling tendency to avoid or casually dismiss difficult Constitutional issues of exceptional importance." Sotomayor's view on the Second Amendment clearly reflects an extreme anti-gun philosophy, and some Democrat senators from pro-gun states are justifiably nervous.

Click here to read the entire op-ed from TownHall.com.