Tag Archives: NRA

NRA Website with Gun-friendly Ratings for 2014 Candidates

North Carolina Kay Hagan Thom Tillis gun rights stances

As next Tuesday’s mid-term election grows near, many are unsure of their candidate’s position on their right to own firearms for hobbies, hunting and defense.

The NRA has a website that allows voters to see how their local candidates have and likely will vote on gun rights, hunter’s rights and basic American rights issues.

Voters wishing to understand what their candidates stances on gun rights are can go HERE.

For example, here are North Carolina candidates for U.S. Senator Kay Hagan and Thom Tillis’ gun rights ratings.

Kay Hagan is anti-gun

Like Them or Not, They Do Know How to Message

NRA RNC

Depending on the programs you watch on television – or the media avenue of your choice, it is hard not to have seen the commercials produced by the National Rifle Association (NRA). They are well crafted and thought provoking. In fact, if they didn’t include the final branding of the NRA in their closes, even the liberal Democrats amongst us would be hard pressed to find anything to object about in their messages. Without a doubt, the NRA knows how to communicate to the average American. So, why hasn’t the Republican National Committee (RNC) learned from the NRA’s effort?

One of the most paralyzing deficiencies of the Republican brand is the fact – the fact – that they couldn’t brand their way out a wet paper bag. Never mind their other short-comings – the combating of the Progressives’ individual targeting of voters with another old, crusty get-out-the-vote effort, or insisting on attacking a core constituency of the GOP in the TEA Party, or failing to reach out effectively to the Libertarians – messaging has, and most likely always will be, the GOP’s Achilles heel. When compared to the Progressive messaging apparatus, or the Democrat spin machine, the RNC comes in a distant fourth, behind the Progressives and Democrats, and trailing the public awareness campaign for the retirement home for blind squirrels. I won’t even get into how they fair against the Islamic State.

But the NRA has struck a chord. They have crafted thirteen segments, each addressing an issue that has become problematic in a nation that is supposed to sanctify opportunity, individualism, justice and liberty. In each, they state facts and make an argument, something inside-the-beltway 30-something “strategists” obviously ignored during “spin class” when they navigated their ways through “establishment Republican school.”

The issues include:

Anger: The rage that is infecting our society
Courage: The unethical, the cowardly and the apathetic
The Golden Rule: The self-serving element of our society
Honest Broker: The culture of deception and spin
Media Dishonesty: The failure of the free press
Mom & Dad: The abandonment of parental responsibility
Money: The tyranny of the oligarchic elite
Neighbor: The demise of the neighborhood
Privacy: The encroachment of government on privacy
Safety: The failure of government to protect its citizenry
Selective Law Enforcement: The Balkanization of our society through legislation
Service: The government’s betrayal of the US military and veterans
Speech: The attack on free speech and thought
Work Ethic: The culture malaise of celebrity worship and sloth

After spending just thirteen short minutes viewing these commercials – these indictments, it is hard not to see that our society has devolved into much less than what was bequeathed to us from just the generation before. We are rife with apathy, egotism, entitlement and falsely elevated self-esteem. We are far from the people our Founders and Framers were (and no that’s not a good thing) and closer to the dependent Socialists that the Progressive Movement quests for us to be. We exist on the precipice of the completion of the fundamental transformation that then-Senator Barack Obama spoke of five days before the 2008 General Election.

And who stands between our demise and our road to recovery? What group stands as champion to the freedoms and liberties left to us by our forefathers; paid for with blood and treasure of free men? The modern day Republican Party, a group of beltway insiders who have no talent – and no desire to obtain or exploit those who possess that talent – for communicating to the citizenry.

For almost two generations now, Progressives and Liberal Democrats have understood the power and the necessity for controlling the narrative. The “spin doctor” the “pundit” and the “strategist,” are all byproducts of a quest to control the narrative; to message effectively with the people. Progressives have known from the days of Woodrow Wilson that messaging that targets peoples’ emotions or the individual’s financial wherewithal – whether it’s to promise “a chicken in every pot” or to fear-monger about war and big business – is not only motivating, it is effective in moving the populace to vote a certain way, especially the non-engaged and no- and low-information demographic. The Republicans, but for a very few bright spots in history, have been dismal at learning this lesson and exist as followers when it comes to innovations in communicating.

Is it too much to wish for that the media gurus of the RNC would exhibit some humility in contacting the marketing firm that produced the NRA’s media campaign so as to gather knowledge on how to affect emotion in their messaging ahead of the 2014 and 2016 elections?

The results of the 2012 General election prove that the RNC media team needs some continuing education in Messaging 101. They should have been out in front of this election cycle with an NRA-styled messaging campaign three months ago. But then, we are talking about a small group of people who turned a potent TEA Party revolution, born of the tenets of the original Republican Charter, into an internal confrontation between a small group of elitist inside-the-beltway oligarchs and the rest of the entire Conservative demographic.

To borrow from the NRA campaign:

“Hey, RNC leadership, we are the 55 million members of the Republican Party. If you’re one of the good guys too, then join us.”

Are You Smarter Than a Supreme Court Judge?

Stevens’ idea for amending the Constitution is a loser, too.

Stevens’ idea for amending the Constitution is a loser, too.

April was not a good month for Americans that still believe the Supreme Court is a font of legal wisdom. Former Justice John Paul Stevens authored an Op–Ed in the WaPost proving you can be ignorant of history, blinded by ideology and confused regarding the plain meaning of words and still get to wear the black robe.

Stevens’ essay was titled ‘The five extra words that can fix the Second Amendment.’

And no, Stevens’ five words weren’t “you can’t have a gun,” but that’s a good guess.

He began his effort in problem–solving by using the left’s favorite technique: Use distorted statistics to shock the public and advance a disingenuous argument: “Each year, more than 30,000 people die in the United States in firearm-related incidents.”

That’s a big number. Almost as big as the total number of Americans killed each year in car crashes. What Stevens purposely leaves out is the fact that 19,392 — or six in ten — of those deaths were suicide!

Once the suicide is removed from the total, it become obvious that riding in a car driven by a cell phone–wielding woman is much more dangerous than living in Virginia where people are allowed to carry guns openly. And cell phones aren’t protected by the Constitution.

What Stevens should be calling for is federal suicide control. If Congress would stop listening to the mortuary lobby and pass an effective law banning suicide — or at least get the ball rolling by creating suicide–free zones (this alone would speed up Metro travel in DC) — we could eliminate almost two–thirds of the gun deaths overnight.

The rest of the country could experience the safety and tranquility that residents of Detroit and Chicago currently enjoy in their gun–free cities. Once suicide is outlawed only criminals will kill themselves, surely a win–win.

But suicide doesn’t generate much news coverage so publicity–seekers aren’t interested in this sensible step to prevent unnecessary death.

Stevens contends the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment was ‘settled,’ much like global warming science, until the NRA went rogue. “For more than 200 years… federal judges uniformly understood that the right…was limited in two ways: First, it applied only to keeping and bearing arms for military purposes, and second, while it limited the power of the federal government, it did not impose any limit whatsoever on the power of states or local governments to regulate the ownership or use of firearms.”

That’s accurate without being truthful, since for two centuries neither states nor the federal government were trying to ban types of weapons, restrict the sale of weapons or impose ownership restrictions. So who would file a suit to stop an infringement that didn’t exist?

As for not imposing a limit on state or local governments, Stevens proves his knowledge of the Constitution is limited. If what he wrote is true then the Bill of Rights wouldn’t prevent states and cities from limiting speech, searching without a warrant and shutting down the newspaper if it criticized Barack Obama.

Stevens then lurches from urging judges to butt out because, “Public policies concerning gun control should be decided by the voters’ elected representatives, not by federal judges.” To complaining that those same legislators aren’t doing enough to seize weapons from the law abiding in the wake of Virginia Tech and Sandy Hook.

Before gracing us with his five–word prescription for domestic gun bliss, Stevens’ last contribution is to completely misrepresent the Bill of Rights and specifically the 2nd Amendment. He claims the amendment “was adopted to protect the states from federal interference with their power to ensure that their militias were “well regulated.” This is ludicrous on its face. The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution to protect individual rights and without those 10 amendments the Constitution would not have passed.

The obvious plain language of the 2nd protects an individual right to own weapons, but that’s evidently too subtle for a retired Supreme Court justice.

Then Stevens graces us with his solution: His amended amendment: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed.”

If anything those five words would initiate an explosion of litigation.

In Athens a citizen was subject to military service until age 60. I figure I can pull a trigger until well into my 90’s. Sixteen–year–olds often served in militias, too, so many underage restrictions go by the board, thanks to Stevens.

As a serving militia member I will need my weapons at hand in case of a sudden call out. That makes militia members immune to any restrictions on carrying a firearm. I can carry in schools, courtrooms, national parks, football stadiums and even Toby Keith’s.

Stevens evidently believes the same legislators who aren’t passing the gun laws he wants are suddenly going to come down hard on militias. Historically militias were locally based and locally run without interference or control from the state government.

Each militia decided what weapons to carry, uniforms to wear, method of selecting officers and how often to meet. With Judge Stevens help you can think of the new militia as the Shriners with sidearms.

And as for what weapons to carry, let’s look at the world’s best–known militia the Taliban. The Talibs have RPGs, fully automatic rifles, grenades, heavy machine guns and donkeys. Everything the well–equipped American militia member could want, except for the donkey.

Stevens’ ‘solution’ removes age restrictions, expands the scope of weapons allowed for personal ownership and eliminates most geographic restrictions on where weapons can be carried. It’s the exact opposite of what Stevens wants, but not an unusual outcome for leftist social engineering.

If it weren’t for those boring monthly militia meetings, I would support him 100 percent.

ZoNATION: The Black N.R.A.? More like the Fake N.R.-eh?

zonationblacknra

Alfonzo Rachel and the member of his band, “20 lb sledge”, cut to the chase on yet another case of liberal racism. Isn’t it about time that conservatives stop letting that word, “racist”, have as much control as it does in society? Liberals use it all the time to silence conservatives, while engaging in real racism daily, enforcing segregation through restricting economic opportunities, by encouraging blacks to be dependent on the government through social programs. As for this gun issue, the guys nail it, by pointing out that the NRA remains against criminal possession of weapons. The liberals are exploiting fear, by implying that the NRA is for making weapons freely available to criminals, regardless of color. Food for thought….

Democrats Protect NC Pistol Purchase Permits that Allow Felons to Buy Guns

North Carolina democrats push to safe-guard county revenues while allowing felons to purchase guns from local gun stores.

North Carolina House Democrats are siding with the North Carolina Sheriff’s Association in an attempt to block NC HB937.

The bill was voted up by a 31-14 margin in the State Senate. The bill requires the elimination of the handgun purchase permits and instead requires gun store owners to do an FBI background check at the moment the handgun is purchased.

The North Carolina Sheriff’s Association has decided to oppose the measure. Public safety is obviously not their reason for action – it’s the revenues.

Each purchase permit requires a fee for the application and another set of fees for each permit. The county sheriff’s are not ready to let that money disappear just for the sake of gun safety.

Now, House Democrats have decided that the Sheriffs are right and should be allowed to continue collecting fees for permits when instant background checks at the time of purchase would much better protect against illegal gun purchases.

Democrats claim to be for responsible gun control, but in this battle seem to be favoring big government and politics over the safety of the people.

Once a person has obtained a purchase permit, they can put the certificates in a drawer, go commit one or more felonies, serve a year or four in jail, come out and use those permits to legally purchase a firearm. If the pistol permit system – a 90+ year old system intended for when gun stores could not do their own checks – was not in-place, NC gun stores would have to do an FBI background check at purchase. The same felon the Democrats are giving a gun to would be prevented from purchasing a firearm and flagged to local law enforcement for even trying.

The almost 100 year old system is only in-place to provide local sheriffs with revenue. It is NOT about protecting the people. In fact, it is more dangerous than no law at all. It makes a gun store owner an unknowing accomplice in the provision of a firearm to a felon.

The NRA has been fighting hard for HB 937, but in the house the Democrats are requiring concessions in order to please the NC Sheriff’s Association. This bill may fail without public pressure.

It is time to contact the NRA-ILA and our local representatives and tell them that the pistol purchase permit provision must stay in the bill because if it is removed, Democrats will have protected the rights of criminals to get guns.

If you don’t call your representative, join the NRA  and raise your voice.. you are allowing the Democrats to decide for you.

Will Sarah Palin’s Return to Fox News Help Tea Party and Conservatives

Palin has stood and continues to stand on conservative principles that count in American homes.
Sarah Palin returns to Fox News as conservative Tea Party champion and movement leader

Sarah Palin returns to Fox News as conservative Tea Party champion and movement leader

With the stroke of a pen, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin returns to Fox News as a contributor while liberal bombast Chris Matthews of MSNBC loses his weekend syndicated show in July. Does this spell the resurrection of the political street bona fides of Palin who has been a lightning rod for conservatives and the national Tea Party movement since its inception?

What seems clear is that Roger Ailes, the chairman of Fox News has reached a conclusion that the scandal beleaguered administration of President Barack Obama is fair pickings for conservatives. And what better conservative to have on your news team than Sarah Palin who has done considerable heavy lifting for the conservative movement since Obama took the oath of office as president in 2009.

This is especially critical when one considers that the upcoming mid-term elections of 2014 are rife for the political pickings in terms of governorships, the U.S. Senate and increases in the GOP House majority.

Examine the landscape of the world of politics now where the polls are pointing toward a downward slide regarding Obama’s favorability and a notable upward surge in the public’s rejection of Obama’s handling of Benghazi, the IRS attack on Tea Party organizations’ First Amendment rights and spying on journalists.

The surge in public outrage has changed dramatically since Obama’s reelection when he cobbled together a number of key state victories with Chicago style political strong arming that would make dishonored former President Richard Nixon blush. Yet, while America was having its news hijacked by a compliant mainstream media, Sarah Palin remained on the forefront using their own vehicles to communicate the cracks in Obama’s administration armor.

You remember Benghazi, the murder of four honorable Americans, including America’s Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens scandal that would not go away? The investigation by the House Republicans continued to peel back the wall of lies constructed by the White House and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice under the direction of unnamed State Department and White House officials.

Then came the tragic massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn, in December, where gun control advocates like Vice President Joe Biden and Mayor Michael Bloomberg attempted to hustle the grieving American public by misdirecting them on who and what caused the tragic deaths of innocent children and school staff. It took leading conservative Second Amendment leaders, including NRA leader Wayne LaPierre’s to reveal the truth behind the lies being perpetrated against legitimate gun owners, and Sarah Palin was right there speaking out on Second Amendment rights.

So as the months passed and the lies began to unravel in terms of Benghazi with subsequent hearings on Capitol Hill and the embarrassing loss by the administration of their own Democrat backed gun control legislation in a Democrat controlled senate, Americans were waking up to the truth about Obama tendency for deception. This was a president and his practices that Palin had already warned about as she continued her work through the grassroots towns and cities across America.

It seems a bit ironic as the former 2008 Republican vice presidential candidate returns to Fox News that the chief bottle washer for liberals Chris Matthews syndicated show goes off into the sunset it.

This appears to coincide with a reenergized Tea Patriotism that has realized vindication in claiming hundreds of Tea Party groups were systematically targeted by IRS government intimidation since 2010.

It does matter whether if a father in Colorado who is battling for gun rights through his right to free speech. It does matter if a mother like Julie Mosher Prince founder of Conservatives Warriors in Lorain County, Ohio proudly states, “Conservative isn’t just a word,” there is a refreshed conservative sea change occurring. Sarah Palin continued presence and return to Fox News represents Act II of the conservative movement America is embracing. Can this be a Reagan-like redux?

Now, it is all hands on deck. While Obama’s scandal of the week continues to erode the effectiveness of the liberals to undermine American patriots who are committed to the preservation of unalienable Constitutional rights, they will not stop attacking conservatives.

With Sarah back in the saddle at Fox News, that should be good news for patriots and Tea Party members all over the nation to take the U.S. Senate in 2014 and the presidency in 2016.

( Read more – click )

When I disagree with you, your rights should be revoked

Gun show by Marc Langsam

Dave Perry’s frothing-at-the-mouth editorial is a prime example of liberal thinking put on paper. When they don’t like the rights you have, you don’t deserve them – because they say so.

I have seen the light. After all these years, I now agree that it’s fruitless to give the benefit of the doubt to people who are so obviously corrupt, so clearly malevolent, so bent on hurting innocent people for their own sick gain.

No more due process in the clear-cut case of insidious terrorism.

Those first two sentences are the first two in the article. No editing, ‘taking out of context’ or other egregious acts of non-journalism. They are exactly as Mr. Perry wrote them in the Aurora Sentinal.

So who exactly is he so angry with that he feels that their God-given, constitutionally-protected rights should be discarded? Why.. it’s the NRA:

No, no, no. Not the wannabe sick kid who blew up the Boston marathon or the freak that’s mailing ricin-laced letters to the president. I’m talking about the real terrorist threat here in America: the National Rifle Association.

Of course he wouldn’t wish this kind of punishment on someone like Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, or the weirdo that mailed ricin to a member of Congress and a judge – no, not them. Dave wants the NRA to be stripped of due process.

Some may think the post was a joke, but dear old Dave’s own words tell it like it is when after those first two paragraphs he says, “I’m not laughing.” Well, neither is anyone else Dave.

The Boston Marathon bombings, the airplanes used in 9/11 and many black youths that are victims to crime have little to do with the NRA. The Marathon morons reportedly hollowed-out fireworks for their radical Islamist-fueled jihad. The 9-11 terrorist used airplanes. The horrific number of black youths killed by gang violence are almost entirely a cultural issue that years of liberal side-stepping has made worse. But Dave, you keep your head in the sand about our nation’s real problems. Keep toeing the line for the progressive left. Keep saying things that very few Americans actually agree with.

More troubling than Dave’s targeting of the NRA is his total lack of understanding of the U.S. Constitution. Due process cannot be foregone – unless you’re the president and see fit to do so.. apparently. Media outrage? Nope, just more like poor Dave piling on to the “you don’t deserve your rights” movement.

We have New York’s Bloomberg deciding what you can drink and eat. Several states are deciding what firearms your second amendment allows you to own and which one it does not. Day-by-day, the government is deciding that you are not self-sufficient. You, Mr. and Mrs. American, cannot take care of yourselves. You citizens need the government to tell you what rights you do or do not have!

Dave is just saying out loud what all those liberal Democrats are thinking. “They don’t think like us so let’s take away their rights and lock them up!” What’s that you say? Dave never said to lock up the NRA? Oh, but he did:

Send the guilty monsters directly to Guantanamo Bay for all eternity and let them rot in their own mental squalor.

It’s easy to believe that taking away some other law-abiding citizen’s rights is OK as long as it affords you some level of security. Unfortunately, it is also the slippery slope to serfdom.

Sure, you won’t lose all of your rights in a moment. It will be limits on this or limits on that. Slowly, but surely, you won’t be able to say much that the ruling class disagrees with.

Then come the rules about what you may not possess. Harmless at first, then more intrusive until finally you’re stripped of anything the D.C. elite see as an obstacle to their power and agenda.

This isn’t theory, it’s history brought forward. Learning from governments of the past to understand what those actions eventually bring about. Learning from all those citizens who at those times thought “surely that can’t happen here.”

Ignorance is the tool of the left. Whether Mr. Perry wrote this in a moment of rage, out of spite or because he has an agenda is impossible to guess. The results of such thoughts have been proven throughout time.

Umbrella Organizations Always Leave Taxpayers Wet

government wasteSen. Tom Coburn (R–OK), a truly great American, has released his annual report on waste, duplication and redundancy in federal programs. Evidently inspecting catfish is both a vital and difficult task, because it currently takes three different federal agencies to do the job. And as soon as someone can reliably map the location of catfish sex organs, TSA is interested in participating, too.

An editorial in The Washington Examiner has more detail, but what’s important for my purpose is the total figure. If the savings recommendations in Coburn’s last three waste reports had been implemented, taxpayers could have saved almost $300 billion. That’s enough to pay for Obama vacations and Joe Biden’s shotgun shells for the rest of their term.

The problem with figures that large is it doesn’t bother the spenders because it’s not their money and it depresses the taxpayer because he can’t imagine how one would obtain such a sum or make a dent in paying for it.

But don’t despair. We have a waste and duplication situation in Prince William County, VA — where I live — that is easy to comprehend, since it’s one thousandth the size of the fed’s situation, and will give useful training in the art of not wasting taxpayer dollars, because the situation is replicated all across the US.

Currently the county pays almost $300,000 in annual dues to the Metropolitan Washington Council of Government. There are 22 governing bodies that participate and the organization is supposed to have a unified voice on area matters that include police, fire, transportation, homeland security, growth planning and environmental concerns. There is probably a similar organization near where you live.

The WaPost describes the group thusly, “Politically, the council’s members range from very liberal Democrats to tea party Republicans. It’s able to get things done by sticking to non-controversial issues. Those include collecting traffic data and improving communications among emergency personnel after shortcomings were revealed in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.”

What this means is the only projects COG supports are those no one in their right mind would oppose anyway. So why are PWC taxpayers sending $300,000 a year to an organization that does what PWC elected officials are already paid to do anyway? Can’t our homegrown pols represent our interests?

These area umbrella organizations (there’s an apt metaphor: taxpayers get soaked while the organization employees are high and dry) only serve as resume builders for politicians who are eager to move up the electoral ladder and “showing leadership” on a regional basis looks impressive to gullible reporters. COG only serves to increase the size of government and the busybodies it enables.

Until quite recently, if a PWC politician wanted to adhere to a genuine conservative philosophy and withdraw from COG he would have been roasted as a know–nothing reactionary. But that was then, COG, thanks to the hubris of its leftist Democrat members, has now given conservative jurisdictions an excellent reason to withdraw and stop paying dues.

Last month the COG board of directors — with three leftist Dems in charge — voted in favor of calling for a federal ban on assault weapons and armor-piercing bullets, a firearm purchase waiting period and tracing of guns. In MD, DC and Alexandria supporters broke out in drum circles to celebrate. But PW, Loudoun and Frederick counties and Manassas leaders were outraged and collectively threatened to withhold more than $500,000 in dues.

These Virginians said the board had overstepping its bounds and the policy was “inappropriate and disrespectful” of the views of individual localities. Regional cooperation did not include passing federal law and revising the Constitution and was not why COG was created.

It makes you wonder doesn’t it? For that matter, what is COG’s position on Joe Biden’s warning shot or Michelle’s bangs?

The PWC Board of Supervisors was angry enough to pass a resolution opposing COG’s gun control advocacy, with only one member voting against. Frank Principi (D–Ambitious) is one of two PWC members of the COG board and the former COG chairman. Principi didn’t bother to attend the meeting where the gun resolution was passed, but he did find time to vote against the county’s resolution condemning it.

Principi claims he supports the 2nd Amendment — as long as it’s confined to a dusty old parchment — but he didn’t want the board to “pile on.” Principi — a noted profile in political courage in his own mind — blamed politicians who are angling for statewide office for making the COG resolution an issue. What Principi didn’t say was that if he had voted in favor of the county resolution it would have been the kiss of death in a Democrat primary, where the vote would be characterized as ‘caving in to the NRA.’

Feeling the heat, COG backtracked last Wednesday and rescinded the resolution and returned the issue to a committee for further study.  Principi was motivated enough to actually attend that meeting where he voted in favor of both. This is fine, a positive step, but PWC should still head for the door. There are plenty of areas in the county where 300 grand would be better spent.

Fairfax County Board Chairman Sharon Bulova (D–Left), still surprised by the uproar, commented, “I’m hopeful we can find some language, some middle ground, where COG can be a voice on this issue of gun violence, gun safety, safety in our schools and mental health. All of these are appropriate subjects for COG to discuss and come to some consensus on.”

I could not agree more. How about passing a resolution honoring a Fairfax County organization called the National Rifle Association? It’s been doing excellent work on all these issues for years.

Senate Filibuster on Gun Control Fails

Ron Cogswell (CC)

Ron Cogswell (CC)

Ron Cogswell (CC)

Today the filibuster attempt by conservatives on the floor of the U.S. Senate failed. The roll-call on a cloture vote that will permit debate on S.649, commonly titled Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013, included “Yeas” from the following Republicans (those up for re-election or retirement in 2014 are noted.)

Alexander (R-TN)*Re-election in 2014
Ayotte (R-NH)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)*Retiring 2014
Coburn (R-OK)
Collins (R-ME)*Re-election in 2014
Corker (R-TN)
Flake (R-AZ)
Graham (R-SC)*Re-election in 2014
Heller (R-NV)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Isakson (R-GA)
McCain (R-AZ)
Toomey (R-PA)
Wicker (R-MS)

While there is a bill text, it’s already been posited at least by Hot Air’s Allahpundit that this is essentially meaningless. The bill introduced by Senator Harry Reid wasn’t really read by anyone, and likely will not be the bill that is voted on in the end, if the Senators do not take the warning from the NRA. The whole letter offered by the organization on this bill:

Dear Senator,

I am writing regarding the National Rifle Association’s position on several firearms-related proposals under consideration in the Senate.

S. 649, the “Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013”, introduced on March 21, contains a number of provisions that would unfairly infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners. This legislation would criminalize the private transfer of firearms by honest citizens, requiring friends, neighbors and many family members to get government permission to exercise a fundamental right or face prosecution. The NRA is unequivocally opposed to S. 649.

In addition, the NRA will oppose any amendments offered to S. 649 that restrict fundamental Second Amendment freedoms; including, but not limited to, proposals that would ban commonly and lawfully owned firearms and magazines or criminalize the private transfer of firearms through an expansion of background checks. This includes the misguided “compromise” proposal drafted by Senators Joe Manchin, Pat Toomey and Chuck Schumer. As we have noted previously, expanding background checks, at gun shows or elsewhere, will not reduce violent crime or keep our kids safe in their schools. Given the importance of these issues, votes on all anti-gun amendments or proposals will be considered in NRA’s future candidate evaluations.

Rather than focus its efforts on restricting the rights of America’s 100 million law-abiding gun owners, there are things Congress can do to fix our broken mental health system; increase prosecutions of violent criminals; and make our schools safer. During consideration of S. 649, should one or more amendments be offered that adequately address these important issues while protecting the fundamental rights of law-abiding gun owners, the NRA will offer our enthusiastic support and consider those votes in our future candidate evaluations as well.

We hope the Senate will replace the current provisions of S. 649 with language that is properly focused on addressing mental health inadequacies; prosecuting violent criminals; and keeping our kids safe in their schools. Should it fail to do so, the NRA will make an exception to our standard policy of not “scoring” procedural votes and strongly oppose a cloture motion to move to final passage of S. 649.

Debate on the bill is scheduled to start immediately after the mid-day recess. As for fallout over Republicans crossing the aisle on this issue, it appears so far that they are willing to gamble with their NRA support. As for a Toomey and Manchin bill, as stated at HotAir, most likely that will come in the form of amendments to the Reid bill.

How the left misrepresents the NRA

Flag Bill of Needs

News reports are ripe with “gun lobbyists” when referring to to the NRA and gun rights activists while referring to the law enforcement and anti-gun lobbies as .. concerned citizen groups.

The NRA is certainly a lobbying organization as are unions, PACs, citizen groups and many other ways to create a larger voice by banding together.

The picture that progressives attempt to paint of the NRA is a dark one. They claim the NRA is the puppet of gun manufacturers – nothing could be further from the truth.

Gun makers get their money from the gun buying public. Without gun owners, there would be no commercial gun makers. The money does not come from the gun makers themselves, but from the absolutely legal gun-owning American public. If 70 million Americans didn’t think gun ownership was right, they wouldn’t have bought the guns which traded their hard-earned money for a quality firearms product.

Not all gun owners appreciate the power of a concentrated voice. By spending as little as $35, a gun owner can help protect the right to own firearms for themselves, their families and other Americans.

Now, the NRA has launched a program to allow anyone to gain a lifetime membership for just $300.00 by calling 888-678-7894 and asking for a lifetime membership. Unlike the usual, online application, no sponsor is required.

— Every gun owner in America should take advantage of this or the $35 membership to help protect the right of Americans to own firearms —

This united voice is something the left heavily protects for labor law, social justice, gay rights and more. Why don’t liberals find it ok when a large portion of America enjoins their resources for a cause they believe in? Because the left disagrees.

— Anything the left dislikes is evil. Anything the right dislikes makes the right evil.  —

They misrepresent, they lie. They are willing to do whatever it takes to get their way. Are you?

MN Gun Control

gun-free-zone

gun-free-zoneAfter days of hearings in Minnesota House committee meetings, the state senate is now hearing testimony on more gun control legislation for the second day at the Capitol in St. Paul. The Senate Judiciary Committee is taking input this week from experts and the public regarding proposed gun control legislation in Minnesota.

Hundreds of protestors opposed to the legislation have flooded the capitol building making it necessary for the senate to render the meetings “closed” to anyone without a ticket. Overflow rooms, including the Grand Hall, have been streaming live video of the meetings.

Bills up for public testimony include increased ineligibility for people with mental health problems, increased fees and penalties for transfers of firearms and the expansion of background checks for gun purchases.

Testimony on Thursday was nearly identical to the house hearings and included members of the NRA, the Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance, Protect MN, Sami Rahamim and Professor Joe Olson of Hamline University. To read what was said in the house, click here.

Senate File 458, which modifies the eligibility of legal firearms owners to transfer or sell guns privately, was highly contested and took the most testimony.

Also testifying in favor of strict controls on gun ownership and purchases was Minneapolis Mayor RT Rybak who said that Minneapolis has seen a decrease in the number of gun-related crimes in his city. Ironically, the mayor is still in favor of disarming Minnesotans.

Shortly after Rybak’s testimony, Chris Rager of the NRA used the microphone to shoot holes in nearly every statistic proponents of the legislation had set forth to that point in the hearings.

“Gun purchases are at an all time high, yet gun crime is at an all time low,” said Rager. “There is no evidence to suggest that background checks diminish gun crime.”

Rager gave a lesson to Minnesota senators in how gun purchases work, including gun show purchases, and what the federal background check system truly entails. Participation in the system is voluntary by the states and is highly unreliable. Rager is in favor of more local control and says background checks aren’t likely to affect crime statistics.

“Criminals have not and will not submit to background checks. They are criminals.” said Rager, which he said will do nothing to stop violent crime.

The chairman of the Judiciary Committee and author of three proposed bills is Senator Ron Latz, a democrat from the first tier suburbs of the Twin Cities. When asked if the proposed bill #458 regarding transfer of firearms makes the case that the citizenry cannot be trusted to know whether or not a person is a felon, Latz responded, “I think in general, that’s correct. The average person doesn’t do a background check.”

More testimony is expected today as 7 more gun control bills are taken up in the committee. All proposed legislation is expected to be “laid over” for inclusion in a larger omnibus bill that is to be introduced within weeks. The omnibus bill could include legislation related to silica sand mining, education, early voting and gun control, as well as other proposals that have been in both House and Senate committees for several weeks.
**************************************
Follow me on Twitter! www.twitter.com/erinhaust
Follow the hashtag #MNGunHearings for updates from tweeters in the committee room.

DOJ Memo: Obama Wants Mandatory Gun BuyBacks

DOJ_mandatory_gun_buyback

He won’t be happy until he completely un-arms the American citizens.

YouTube Description:

Even Obama’s experts say his gun control policies won’t work. According to an internal Department of Justice memorandum, a gun ban, like the one being debated right now in Congress, will not work without a mandatory gun buyback, and “universal” background checks will not work without requiring gun registration. Call Congress at 202-224-3121 and tell them to reject President Obama’s gun control agenda — and to get serious about prosecuting criminals and fixing our broken mental health system.

« Older Entries