Tag Archives: gun ban

Delaware legislature to vote on magazine ban

Delaware is likely to become the next state to ban magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

The bill, which will limit the manufacture or sale of 11+ round magazines,  was voted out of the committee by a narrow 3-2 vote, but is widely expected to pass the full House in a vote this Wednesday. Governor Jack Markell is also in full support of the measure.

Delaware citizens will still be allowed to own the banned magazines and use them in private settings such as ranges or at home.

Bans such as the one Delaware is considering do not only limit the magazines. The ban also prevents citizens from purchasing many guns that normally come with magazines holding 12 or more rounds. The bill will severely limit the availability of firearms for those wanting one for home defense, personal protection or competition.

Active and retired police officers will still have the ability to purchase the magazines and guns with higher capacities although many firearms manufacturers and retailers no longer sell items to government agencies that the state prevents their citizens from owning. The firearms companies share the common sentiment that if the citizens of a state have had their second amendment rights infringed, then the state agencies should live with the same restrictions.

 

Deconstructing Obama’s Alinsky Message On Gun Control

 

President Obama made a very interesting decision on Wednesday by not only appealing to people’s emotions, but also openly demonizing and mocking the NRA and the U.S. Senate for not passing the Manchin-Toomey plan. It is several tactics defined by Saul Alinsky in “Rules For Radicals.”

guns
The first is openly ridiculing the NRA, gun owners and the Republicans (and Democrats) who voted against the measure. By saying, “… instead of supporting this compromise, the gun lobby and its allies willfully lied about the bill…but that didn’t matter. And unfortunately, this pattern of spreading untruths about this legislation served a purpose, because those lies upset an intense minority of gun owners, and that in turn intimidated a lot of senators (emphasis mine).

Obama is trying to put the NRA, the GOP and gun owners into a box. It’s an attempt to make them ‘the bad guy,’ and out of the mainstream. He does this again with the, “90 percent of Americans want background checks.”

 

This doesn’t tell the entire truth. There are several Quinnipiac polls showing 90 percent surveyed want background checks, but the question is too simple. The survey doesn’t say who should be doing the checks, whether it was national, state or local. It simply asks whether background checks should be done. This is an important distinction supporters of gun control bills aren’t discussing.

 

However, gun rights advocates haven’t explained this. They are instead going on the defensive, which is what Obama hoped. The NRA is only using the “background checks will do nothing to stop crime,”strategy and raising fears about a national gun registry. These are valid concerns, but won’t work long-term because people will get tired of hearing it. As Alinsky says, “A tactic that drags on too long, becomes a drag.”

 

It’s also helping Obama marginalize them even further. The President can now use another Alinsky rule of, “pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Obama can now bring out legitimately hurting families, like those in Newtown and Aurora, to have them push gun control. This tactic puts a face on those who have suffered in horrific tragedies. It makes it easier for the President to point at the NRA and say, “these people are keeping children from being safe.”

 

However, there are ways to use the personalization for gun rights. The best way to do this is bring out the Lone Star College student, who said on live TV, he wished he could have been armed when someone stabbed 14 people. Or have 15-year-old Sarah Merkle talk about gun rights. Or Mark Mattioli who lost his young son at Sandy Hook discuss why new gun laws won’t work. These can be effective push backs against Obama.

 

Obama isn’t going to back off on the push for gun control. While his original attack may have gotten an alternative he was looking for in the Toomey-Manchin plan, that thankfully failed. He, along with New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, are going to come up with new plans.

 

The NRA and gun rights supporters need to come up with their own plan, using new tactics, to beat it off. Encouraging people to the ballot box is one thing. TV and radio spots work as well. However, it’s important for gun rights supporters to remember to use Twitter, Facebook and other social media sites to get the word out.

 

 

It’s not over, and while Obama is president, the fight for gun rights may never end.

 

Connecticut legislators agree to severe restrictions on firearms, ammo

In a move likely to further increase the already-record demand for guns, magazines and ammunition, a bi-partisan group of Connecticut legislators has agreed on a sweeping new set of gun laws for their citizens.

The agreed-to framework contains provisions that will limit magazine sizes, add more than 100 new firearms to the banned list and creates a set of new permits required before even a simple hunting rifle or plinking ammunition may be purchased. The proposal also makes improvements to the state’s mental health system and prevents violent criminals from being released early.

Experts have stated that the only provision likely to prevent any crime is the early release section.

The magazine limit will prohibit the sale or purchase of any magazine over 10 round capacity. Anyone already owning higher-capacity magazines may keep them, but not load them above the 10 round legal limit. 11+ round magazines will also be required by law to be registered.

The registration requirement has some serious flaws. Magazines don’t typically have serial numbers or much in the way of any individual identifying characteristics.

The list of newly banned firearms has not yet been released, but likely includes some or all of those that Sen. Feinstein sought to ban in her federal legislation (shown by Daily Caller screenshot below.)

Guns in the gun ban

In a move unprecedented in other gun bans, the Connecticut group chose to create further obstacles to gun ownership and the purchase of ammunition. In order to purchase any long gun in the state, prospective buyers will need to secure a “long gun eligibility permit.” Previously, only those wishing to purchase a handgun were required to go through the onerous process of asking the government for permission to buy.

The ammunition eligibility certificate is a step beyond restrictions anywhere in the nation. In order to purchase any ammunition for any rifle, shotgun or pistol, the purchaser must have received prior permission from the issuing authority in the form of either a handgun permit, long gun eligibility certificate, concealed carry license or the brand new “ammunition eligibility certificate.”

Even if a hunter never expected to need a permit to purchase, he or she will now even to just go zero in that old rifle.

The new regulations would go into effect in October 2013, just in time for the 2013-14 hunting season. To avoid having to deal with the burden of the new regulations, many are likely to hoard years worth of ammunition and magazines over then next few weeks and months which will certainly make the current shortage of firearms, ammunition and accessories even worse. Not only will those living in Connecticut likely be stripping local gun stores bare, those in other states that might consider similar legislation will soon also be loading closets and cabinets with whatever is available.

The current nationwide shortage of everything used in the shooting sports is likely to continue for awhile longer.

Obama pivots to spanish language television after failures on budget, guns, healthcare

President Obama failureThe President is scheduled for sit-down interviews with Spanish language television networks Telemundo and Univision in an attempt to refocus American’s attention from his failures on the budget and gun control and the growing negative view Americans have on Obamacare.

President Obama is likely to focus on immigration reform – something that is much more likely to yield bi-partisan support than most of the items he focused on during his two terms. The White House is confident that growing numbers of Hispanic voters, many who watch Spanish language television, will help to pressure Congress into passing an immigration reform bill.

Obama has publicly supported legislation that would seek a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants already in the United States.

Obama had spent most of the first part of 2013 trying to paint sequestration as a doomsday device put in-play by Republicans despite press reports and noted journalist Bob Woodward’s expose demonstrating that the White House pushed for sequestration. Recently, the White House cancelled tours of “The People’s House” and threatened the East Lawn Easter Egg Hunt pointing to sequestration as the cause – all while Joe Biden had been taking weekend trips back home, the Obama’s continued to vacation like Hollywood elites, and the Vice President blew over a half-million on a hotel stay in Paris.

The Administration’s attempts to show that budget cuts are painful failed miserably. Sequestration didn’t actually cut the budget, it only reduced the size of recent increases in federal spending of tax payer dollars. With only minuscule cutbacks coming from sequestration, no real change to services or the economy are palpable. Obama’s credibility has taken a tremendous hit as his fiscal cliff turns into a non-event.

The President had also spent the last few months pushing for an outright Federal gun ban. Limitations on shotguns, pistols and incorrectly-labelled “assault weapons” were desired by the Commander-in-Chief – until now. With Harry Reid not wanting to lose his seat as Senate Majority Leader, he was forced to pull the gun ban from the gun bill – instead focusing on background checks and enforcement. Sen. Reid did not want to force Democrats from rural states to have to vote on a gun ban bill which would just about guarantee lost Democrat Senate seats and a Republican Majority Leader come 2014.

This month, even more negative impacts of Obamacare have been brought to the attention of Americans. More doctors are retiring early, fewer are seeking medical careers, the costs of the legislation are skyrocketing, healthcare claims costs will rise 32% on average and more than 80% in some states.

Obamacare, gun control and the budget – all important and highly-visible issues with voters. All issues the President would have liked to have define his Presidency. All of them not headed in directions in Obama’s favor. But not all of them the most important.

According to a March 26th Gallup poll, the economy, federal spending and healthcare are the top three issues with American voters. Obama is now pivoting away from federal spending, trying to pretend Obamacare isn’t really as bad as recent press says it is and has been failing on the economy overall since taking office.

Obama approval ratingServing in his second term, President Obama presides over a nation more divided than any time since the 1960’s.  Racial tensions, class warfare, and an economy taking much longer than expected to recover have left America with a melting pot in shambles. Hoping to prevent a two-term legacy of outright failure, Obama is seeking to use Spanish language television to get at least one thing accomplished that may be looked upon favorably in history’s eyes.

Numerous Firearms Manufacturers Refuse to Sell to Govt

While the President and the rabid left continue to pursue a ban on semi-automatic firearms, manufacturers are fighting back by refusing to sell to government agencies that support the President’s plan.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emannuel tried to pressure Bank of America to stop doing business with firearms companies. Viewed as perfectly acceptable behavior by a large portion of America, firearms manufacturers copied the tactic and returned the favor.

Larue Tactical, Olympic Arms, Templar Custom, Extreme Firepower, Barrett Arms and now RAM Arms have vocalized that they will not sell their products to government agencies that support the President’s position on gun rights.

The President believes that ordinary citizens do not need shotguns with more than 5 rounds, pistols with more than 10 or rifles with more than 10. The math is a bit fuzzy as most murders are committed with handguns containing relatively few rounds. The number of rounds is actually irrelevant. In fact, the gun is irrelevant – apparently, when someone decides to kill someone else, they prefer baseball bats or choking the life out of them over guns.

The number of gun crimes committed by lawful gun owners is infinitesimal – yeah, like, near non-existent compared to the total. I know, who wants facts when emotion can lead us to a final decision?

Oddly, criminals get guns that the lawmakers in Chicago, New York and LA have banned.  How is that possible? They made the law, certainly that means everyone will follow it?

Sarcasm aside, many firearms manufacturers have decided to answer the government’s unconstitutional overreach by refusing to sell government agencies arms or ammunition. As the President says, the people should come first – and so they shall.

The firearms and ammunition manufacturers have been clear that they will sell to law enforcement officers who need equipment and support citizen’s ability to defend themselves during the several minutes (10+ on average) that it would take police to get there. Think about what an assailant could do to you or your family  in 10 minutes…

If government departments or law enforcement officers believe that the President has the best answers to violent crime, they may find themselves without anyone to supply them.

RAM Arms is a manufacturer of firearms and a retail sporting goods outlet. RAM’s CEO Richard Mitchell said in a Facebook post:

While RAM Arms supports our Deputies and Police Officers with every ounce of our hearts, we will not be selling patrol shotguns, ARs or other equipment or ammo to government agencies that support the President’s version of violent crime prevention. As Chicago has proven – his plan doesn’t work and only disarms the innocents.

Individual LEOs that support a citizen’s right to defend themselves with arms are always welcome.

If you haven’t actually thought through your gun rights position, we cannot ethically sell you much of anything.”

LOL Tuesday – Demand a Plan Parody

house of sunnyIt’s LOL Tuesday…the day of the week I’ve decided everyone needs to laugh out loud. Mondays aren’t for laughing, they’re for cursing the sun and overdosing on coffee. Wednesday is already officially Hump Day and Thursday has the pleasurable distinction of being the day before Friday so it’s almost like Friday but not quite. Friday, Saturday and Sunday – well, they’re the weekend! Their importance in our culture will never be superseded. But Tuesday’s are just…there. Tuesday needs a “thing”. So it’s LOL Tuesday, mmmkay?

I’ve got a good one for you today. Comedianne/actress Sunny Lohmann (Houseofsunny.tv) offers us her take on the latest celebrity PSA regarding bad, bad guns. America loves celebrity PSA’s because they make us feel like we actually care about problems. They don’t actually have to do anything, all they have to do is look concerned, speak softly and America will KNOW that THEY – the most important, influential people in the country- CARE. And they are willing to….talk…about…how much they care. See how much they care???? They even shot it in black and white, just so you’ll know they are SERIOUS!

Please to enjoy Sunny’s take on the celebrity PSA. LOL!

 

Firearms specifically banned by Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s bill

There is a section of Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s bill that defines specific firearms (several that aren’t even used by ANY military) that should be banned. Here is that section:

(H) All of the following rifles, copies, dupli-
20 cates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capa-
21 bility of any such weapon thereof:
22 ‘‘(i) All AK types, including the following:
23 ‘‘(I) AK, AK47, AK47S, AK–74,
24 AKM, AKS, ARM, MAK90, MISR,
25 NHM90, NHM91, Rock River Arms LAR– 5
OLL13052 S.L.C.
1 47, SA85, SA93, Vector Arms AK–47,
2 VEPR, WASR–10, and WUM.
3 ‘‘(II) IZHMASH Saiga AK.
4 ‘‘(III) MAADI AK47 and ARM.
5 ‘‘(IV) Norinco 56S, 56S2, 84S, and
6 86S.
7 ‘‘(V) Poly Technologies AK47 and
8 AKS.
9 ‘‘(ii) All AR types, including the following:
10 ‘‘(I) AR–10.
11 ‘‘(II) AR–15.
12 ‘‘(III) Armalite M15 22LR Carbine.
13 ‘‘(IV) Armalite M15–T.
14 ‘‘(V) Barrett REC7.
15 ‘‘(VI) Beretta AR–70.
16 ‘‘(VII) Bushmaster ACR.
17 ‘‘(VIII) Bushmaster Carbon 15.
18 ‘‘(IX) Bushmaster MOE series.
19 ‘‘(X) Bushmaster XM15.
20 ‘‘(XI) Colt Match Target Rifles.
21 ‘‘(XII) DoubleStar AR rifles.
22 ‘‘(XIII) DPMS Tactical Rifles.
23 ‘‘(XIV) Heckler & Koch MR556.
24 ‘‘(XV) Olympic Arms.
25 ‘‘(XVI) Remington R–15 rifles. 6
OLL13052 S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(XVII) Rock River Arms LAR–15.
2 ‘‘(XVIII) Sig Sauer SIG516 rifles.
3 ‘‘(XIX) Smith & Wesson M&P15 Ri-
4 fles.
5 ‘‘(XX) Stag Arms AR rifles.
6 ‘‘(XXI) Sturm, Ruger & Co. SR556
7 rifles.
8 ‘‘(iii) Barrett M107A1.
9 ‘‘(iv) Barrett M82A1.
10 ‘‘(v) Beretta CX4 Storm.
11 ‘‘(vi) Calico Liberty Series.
12 ‘‘(vii) CETME Sporter.
13 ‘‘(viii) Daewoo K–1, K–2, Max 1, Max 2,
14 AR 100, and AR 110C.
15 ‘‘(ix) Fabrique Nationale/FN Herstal
16 FAL, LAR, 22 FNC, 308 Match, L1A1
17 Sporter, PS90, SCAR, and FS2000.
18 ‘‘(x) Feather Industries AT–9.
19 ‘‘(xi) Galil Model AR and Model ARM.
20 ‘‘(xii) Hi-Point Carbine.
21 ‘‘(xiii) HK–91, HK–93, HK–94, HK–
22 PSG–1, and HK USC.
23 ‘‘(xiv) Kel-Tec Sub–2000, SU–16, and
24 RFB. 7
OLL13052 S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(xv) SIG AMT, SIG PE–57, Sig Sauer
2 SG 550, and Sig Sauer SG 551.
3 ‘‘(xvi) Springfield Armory SAR–48.
4 ‘‘(xvii) Steyr AUG.
5 ‘‘(xviii) Sturm, Ruger Mini-14 Tactical
6 Rife M–14/20CF.
7 ‘‘(xix) All Thompson rifles, including the
8 following:
9 ‘‘(I) Thompson M1SB.
10 ‘‘(II) Thompson T1100D.
11 ‘‘(III) Thompson T150D.
12 ‘‘(IV) Thompson T1B.
13 ‘‘(V) Thompson T1B100D.
14 ‘‘(VI) Thompson T1B50D.
15 ‘‘(VII) Thompson T1BSB.
16 ‘‘(VIII) Thompson T1–C.
17 ‘‘(IX) Thompson T1D.
18 ‘‘(X) Thompson T1SB.
19 ‘‘(XI) Thompson T5.
20 ‘‘(XII) Thompson T5100D.
21 ‘‘(XIII) Thompson TM1.
22 ‘‘(XIV) Thompson TM1C.
23 ‘‘(xx) UMAREX UZI Rifle.
24 ‘‘(xxi) UZI Mini Carbine, UZI Model A
25 Carbine, and UZI Model B Carbine. 8
OLL13052 S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(xxii) Valmet M62S, M71S, and M78.
2 ‘‘(xxiii) Vector Arms UZI Type.
3 ‘‘(xxiv) Weaver Arms Nighthawk.
4 ‘‘(xxv) Wilkinson Arms Linda Carbine.
5 ‘‘(I) All of the following pistols, copies, dupli-
6 cates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capa-
7 bility of any such weapon thereof:
8 ‘‘(i) All AK–47 types, including the fol-
9 lowing:
10 ‘‘(I) Centurion 39 AK pistol.
11 ‘‘(II) Draco AK–47 pistol.
12 ‘‘(III) HCR AK–47 pistol.
13 ‘‘(IV) IO Inc. Hellpup AK–47 pistol.
14 ‘‘(V) Krinkov pistol.
15 ‘‘(VI) Mini Draco AK–47 pistol.
16 ‘‘(VII) Yugo Krebs Krink pistol.
17 ‘‘(ii) All AR–15 types, including the fol-
18 lowing:
19 ‘‘(I) American Spirit AR–15 pistol.
20 ‘‘(II) Bushmaster Carbon 15 pistol.
21 ‘‘(III) DoubleStar Corporation AR
22 pistol.
23 ‘‘(IV) DPMS AR–15 pistol.
24 ‘‘(V) Olympic Arms AR–15 pistol. 9
OLL13052 S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(VI) Rock River Arms LAR 15 pis-
2 tol.
3 ‘‘(iii) Calico Liberty pistols.
4 ‘‘(iv) DSA SA58 PKP FAL pistol.
5 ‘‘(v) Encom MP–9 and MP–45.
6 ‘‘(vi) Heckler & Koch model SP-89 pistol.
7 ‘‘(vii) Intratec AB–10, TEC–22 Scorpion,
8 TEC–9, and TEC–DC9.
9 ‘‘(viii) Kel-Tec PLR 16 pistol.
10 ‘‘(ix) The following MAC types:
11 ‘‘(I) MAC–10.
12 ‘‘(II) MAC–11.
13 ‘‘(III) Masterpiece Arms MPA A930
14 Mini Pistol, MPA460 Pistol, MPA Tactical
15 Pistol, and MPA Mini Tactical Pistol.
16 ‘‘(IV) Military Armament Corp.
17 Ingram M–11.
18 ‘‘(V) Velocity Arms VMAC.
19 ‘‘(x) Sig Sauer P556 pistol.
20 ‘‘(xi) Sites Spectre.
21 ‘‘(xii) All Thompson types, including the
22 following:
23 ‘‘(I) Thompson TA510D.
24 ‘‘(II) Thompson TA5.
25 ‘‘(xiii) All UZI types, including Micro-UZI. 10
OLL13052 S.L.C.
1 ‘‘(J) All of the following shotguns, copies, dupli-
2 cates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capa-
3 bility of any such weapon thereof:
4 ‘‘(i) Franchi LAW–12 and SPAS 12.
5 ‘‘(ii) All IZHMASH Saiga 12 types, in-
6 cluding the following:
7 ‘‘(I) IZHMASH Saiga 12.
8 ‘‘(II) IZHMASH Saiga 12S.
9 ‘‘(III) IZHMASH Saiga 12S EXP–
10 01.
11 ‘‘(IV) IZHMASH Saiga 12K.
12 ‘‘(V) IZHMASH Saiga 12K–030.
13 ‘‘(VI) IZHMASH Saiga 12K–040
14 Taktika.
15 ‘‘(iii) Streetsweeper.
16 ‘‘(iv) Striker 12.
17 ‘‘(K) All belt-fed semiautomatic firearms, in-
18 cluding TNW M2HB.
19 ‘‘(L) Any combination of parts from which a
20 firearm described in subparagraphs (A) through (K)
21 can be assembled.
22 ‘‘(M) The frame or receiver of a rifle or shot-
23 gun described in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), (F),
24 (G), (H), (J), or (K).

Troops Ordered To Kill All Americans Who Do Not Turn In Guns

This is from July, 2012, concerning the United Nations gun ban, which has been rejected, but is sure to come back to center stage for Barack Obama and Joe Biden with their push to ban guns after the Sandy Hook shooting.

From the YouTube Description:

Monday, July 16, 2012
The UN Arms Trade Treaty that has been identified by observers as a flagrant threat to the second amendment and which Barack Obama is determined to sign has its roots in a 1961 State Department memorandum which explains how the United Nations will oversee “complete disarmament” of the American people under the ruse of preventing war. The UN Arms Treaty has caused so much controversy because it outlines a plan to target “all types of conventional weapons, notably including small arms and light weapons,” according to Forbes’ Larry Bell.
Former US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton also warns that the agreement “is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there is no doubt that the real agenda here is domestic firearms control.”

A letter sent last month by 130 Republican House members to President Obama argued that the treaty should be rejected because it infringes on the “fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms”. The letter adds that “…the U.N.’s actions to date indicate that the ATT is likely to pose significant threats to our national security, foreign policy, and economic interests as well as our constitutional rights.”

Using the rhetoric of the threat post by terrorists, insurgents and “international crime syndicates,” the UN is busy trying to imply that all weapons are somehow involved in illegal activity on a global scale and should therefore be controlled and regulated by a global authority.

This is precisely the same language used in a 1961 U.S. State Department briefing which outlined a long term agenda to carry out a “Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World.”

Invoking the threat of nuclear warfare, the document spells out a plan to create a “United Nations Peace Force” that would “enforce the peace as the disarmament process proceeds.”

While the document initially focuses on scrapping nuclear weapons, it later makes it clear that the only groups allowed to own weapons of any kind would be governing authorities, “for the purpose of maintaining internal order,” and the UN “peacekeeping” force itself, which would require “agreed manpower.”

“The manufacture of armaments would be prohibited except for those of agreed types and quantities to be used by the U.N. Peace Force and those required to maintain internal order. All other armaments would be destroyed or converted to peaceful purposes,” states the document. While the memorandum outlines a broader mandate to destroy national sovereignty, eviscerate national armies and institute the UN as the planet’s supreme authority with a world army, the document serves as a stark reminder that the plan for the United Nations to oversee the abolition of the second amendment has been in the works for decades.

As Bell points out in his Forbes article, the threat of the Obama administration relying on a UN treaty to do what successive administrations have tried but failed to accomplish — taking a huge bite out of the second amendment — is by no means far fetched.

After all, a plethora of UN treaties and international agreements have already stripped the United States of its sovereignty and its power to decide its own laws. The power to authorize U.S. involvement in wars and conflicts has now been almost completely stripped from Congress and handed to the United Nations.

What even hunters must fear from Washington

I went deer hunting with my father for the first time when I was only ten, duck hunting at 13 and pheasant by 15. The current approach to violence being taken by those in Washington may endanger my ability to do the same things with my children and you with yours.

Sure, for now, they are going after those evil “assault weapons” which are nothing of the sort. But even if they confiscate every one of those firearms, some crazed lunatic will use a bolt action gun or non-“assault weapon” and kill just as many and that will be the call to go after even those more commonly used to hunt game. If the line is not drawn here, there may never be a line from which we can defend our rights.

Many politicos have uttered the now overused line that “I hunt and I never need more than 3 bullets in my gun to shoot a deer”. That’s all fine and good, if the second amendment had anything to do with hunting. But let’s tackle that crap-tastic line just for the sake of argument.

Firearms like the AR-15 are now very commonly used to hunt. Many use the “evil” AR-15 and Mini-14/30 to hunt feral hogs that are tearing up much-needed farmland and to put down coyotes that endanger game and livestock. The truth is that in the hunting world, those guns do far more good than evil and the truth must be used to create reason in the debate.

Our second amendment rights were written down and agreed to, not because our founders had some naive idea of how firearms would evolve or that they wanted to protect our right to hunt mule deer, but because they knew that power-hungry ideologues would some day seek to slowly enslave the people.  It has happened before in so many countries, the same way, little by little until the people had no way to defend themselves.

Evil people will do horrendous things – we cannot stop them. Laws cannot stop them. Only a narcissistic populace can be led to believe that they or their government have the power to stop evil. A thinking people realize that evil exists and will use any means necessary to carry out terrible deeds. Only citizens with the means to defend themselves and others can belay such things.

The tragedy in Newton is a prime example. While an evil man happened to use a firearm to cause such pain, remember that he could as easily have killed his mother with a bat and used the car he stole to plow through the bus line at the school to have the same effect. Would we then outlaw cars? Of course not. We would look to the source of the problem, not the weapon used in the crime.

For the political elite, the answer is laws. Make this illegal or that illegal, as if the evil-doer gives any care to what is or is not legal. Adam Lanza didn’t care that he illegally murdered his mother, that stealing the guns was illegal, that possessing them was illegal, that stealing her car was illegal, that bringing the guns to a school was illegal, that murdering children and teachers was illegal or that suicide was illegal. Everything that happened was already supposedly prevented by laws on the books – but they failed as they always will.

Consider the legislation that Feinstein, Biden, Obama et al are planning to push. Make a certain firearm illegal, stronger laws against firearms on school grounds, laws against magazines – none would have stopped Adam Lanza. He broke a slew of laws to commit his horrific crime. How would one or two more matter?

The guns did not cause Adam Lanza to kill anyone. There were warning signs, actions not taken and mis-steps made along the way by everyone that knew him. The wake-up call should be that we, as a society, don’t know how to deal with people like him before they commit these atrocities. Why not?

The news is focused on his tactics and tools, not his motivation and the failures by so many to prevent his spiral into darkness. America can do better.

The easy thing is to blame the inanimate object – the weapon. Explosives, firearms, knives, clubs and vehicles would already be considered illegal if used in a crime, but they still are used to kill. Should we outlaw all those things or just begin to understand the cause and admit that sometimes evil happens.

If every gun owner does not decide that all guns are rightful and only humans are evil, then all guns will some day be labelled evil. At that point, even your field over-and-under shotgun will be considered a dark and unnecessary thing.

White House Threatens Executive Order to “Deal with Guns”

While Biden sorts out what the new gun legislation should look like and Sen. Feinstein prepares her ban legislation for release on January 22nd, the President, according to Vice President Biden, may be seeking to act a bit faster.

Any gun ban legislation is likely to be slowly debated in the Senate and outright rejected in the House. With that in mind, the President may seek to unilaterally limit American’s access to firearms and accessories – a move he believes he can make on his own through an Executive Order (EO).

The EO could include just about anything the President desires and Attorney General Eric Holder is likely to enforce it as if it is fully-enacted law. Both the President and Holder have voiced idelogically-based anti-gun rights positions and could have the ATF regulate out any firearms and/or accessories the President feels are not for public consumption.

While constitutional challenges will erupt from several states, it’s a lengthy process during which Congress may then enact legislation to codify the EO and pass into law.

The recent rumblings from Feinstein, Biden and company had already escalated gun purchases to a record level and this is likely to ratchet it up further as the timeline for purchasing some guns probably just got a lot shorter.

Winning The Gun Rights Fight

Our friends at Firearms Policy Coalition added a post this morning that we at Conservative Daily News believe is worth sharing. The post below is reprinted with permission. Please be sure to visit FPC and help support them in their fight for your rights.
Firearms Policy Coalition

The new gun rights culture is worth fighting for – and we’re winning

If you’ve spent any time reading newspapers, listening to the radio, or scanning the Interwebs lately, it’s apparent that American gun owners have a significant challenge ahead to defend the Constitutionally-enshrined fundamental (read: inalienable) right that secures all of the others. That’s doubly true for residents of states like gun-ban happy California and Illinois, places where ‘logic’ means doing more of what provably doesn’t work.

Our answer to these calls for a coordinated assault on our individual liberty, is, of course, the truth. And old-fashioned hard work – lots of it. Those are the underpinnings of FPC, and I’m proud to say that our team, both staffers and volunteers, are committed to bringing truth and hard work to the table in abundance over the coming months and years. We’ve set out on a course to unite like-minded organizations and people across the United States for one singular purpose: defend our – your – Second Amendment rights.

The battle for judicial acknowledgement of our right to keep and bear arms was, in large part, won in 2008 when attorney Alan Gura triumphed over the District of Columbia in the landmark decision of D.C. v. Heller. (We can quite literally thank Alan and co-counsel Robert Levy and Clark Neily – three amazing and dedicated men – for securing our right to keep and bear arms and doing what was right in spite of fierce opposition… and not just from those who oppose individual liberty.) The path forward from there was predictable: the Supreme Court followed its Heller decision with a reaffirmation of the fundamental nature of our Second Amendment rights in McDonald v. Chicago (decided in 2010) and applied the Second Amendment to the states and local governments. Chicago had argued that (to paraphrase), ‘fine, so Heller said there’s this Second Amendment thing and maybe the Constitution does mean what it says, but that only binds the federal government – not us. We need the ability to really, really ban guns because our current outright gun ban… erm, we want to be able to experiment with gun bans… erm, well, just treat us differently, ok?

Not so fast, said the Supreme Court. Fundamental rights are fundamental!

Since then, a number of significant Second Amendment victories have been seen, such as the two huge U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal wins in – where else? – Illinois. First Ezell v. Chicago [plus a string of wins in places like North Carolina and Maryland], and most recently Moore v. Madigan… the momentum for the recognition of what we’ve all been saying for years (and years) is building. We see public opinion continue to trend strongly not just in favor of gun ownership, but against gun control policies such as those proposed by extremist gun control groups like Mayors Against Illegal Guns, Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, and the Brady Campaign (formerly Handgun Control, Inc. and Million Mom March).

Gun rights has become more fun, positive, inclusive, and diverse; we’ve outgrown the outdated stereotype of wood-stocked duck and deer guns, smokey back rooms, and middle-aged white males. America is not just responding positively to, but embracing our modern-day culture – and the evidence is everywhere: gun ownership and purchases are off the charts, record numbers of people have handgun carry permits and carry for self-defense outside their home, people of all genders, races, ages, and walks of life are becoming invested in awesome shooting sports like IDPA and USPSA, the History Channel’s firearms-based television program Top Shot has massive viewership (former Googler and California native Chris Cheng won Top Shot season 4), the AR-15 platform rifle – truly the Modern Musket – is the most popular long gun in America, compact carry handguns are outselling supply, and… the Flash Bang holster.

The only people not getting the message that gun rights are civil rights and here to stay are some opportunistic, ideologue politicians, Hollywood celebrities, and blooper-reels like Michael Moore and Piers Morgan.

Yes, we have a lot of work ahead of us. It’s not going to be easy, and it’s certainly going to take every single gun owner in America to come together, set aside whatever other differences we have, and join together as civil rights advocates for this, our Second Amendment. We are going to lose some battles along the way. But we will win in the end, because we must. And Americans have always risen to meet their challengers. So we shall again, now.

Be informed. Be resilient. Be confident. Be considerate. Be who we are.

I love our new culture, and I appreciate the opportunity to be a part of it with you.

-Brandon

Brandon Combs is the Second Amendment Foundation’s Director of Programs and Outreach, CCRKBA’s Director of Advocacy and Coalitions, Executive Director and Secretary of the Calguns Foundation (CGF), President of Cal-FFL, a board member of the NRA state affiliate California Rifle and Pistol Association, and a proud gun owner. He also thinks titles should be shorter than a Tweet. When not volunteering for gun rights and individual liberty causes, he enjoys spending time with his Akita, Holly, and traveling.

Feinstein releases more information on proposed gun ban bill

Sen. Dianne Feinstein has been working furiously on new gun ban legislation ever since 2004 when the previous Clinton weapons ban expired.

Dianne Feinstein assault gun weapons ban

Dianne Feinstein assault gun weapons ban

Some information has slowly surfaced about her proposed gun ban bill, and now, the Senator’s office has released a summary including some information that many gun owners should find alarming:

  • Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:
    • 120 specifically-named firearms;
    • Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one or more military characteristics; and
    • Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.
  • Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.
    • Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test;
    • Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test; and
    • Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans.
  • Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:
    • Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment;
    • Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes; and
    • Exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons.
  • Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:
    • Background check of owner and any transferee;
    • Type and serial number of the firearm;
    • Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
    • Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and
    • Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration.

The last paragraph is last for a reason. The Senator knows that registering currently legal firearms could only be desired for one reason: confiscation. A large segment of the American population would never want the government learning what guns they do or don’t have. Look at the outrage in New York when a liberal newspaper released the names and addresses of all gun permit holders in some counties.

Privacy, individual rights, basic human rights – call it what you will. The government has no right to know what we do in our homes unless a crime is committed.

The ATF is not currently informed of the type and serial number of a firearm bought by citizens. The identifying characteristics of the gun are NOT read to the FBI when a background check is performed by a licensed gun dealer. The purpose of the background check is only to insure that the purchaser is legally able to own a firearm – not inform the government of the particular firearm they purchased.

The transfer of the firearm is kept by the individual federal firearms licensee (FFL). Those records are not given to the government unless necessary in an investigation. Requiring that these purchases are registered with the government is unthinkable and eerily equivalent to an invasion of privacy or search without warrant. If I have not committed a crime, there is no probable cause allowing anyone to know what firearms I may or may not have.

Pure and simple, this is unconstitutional – on so many levels.

« Older Entries