|Gun Owners of America|
Once Again, Gun Owners Like You Vanquish Reid and Obama — Kudos go to Senators Paul, Cruz, Lee and Cornyn
“Gun Owners of America [has] blasted the bill as a ‘fake pro-gun bill designed to re-elect endangered anti-gun [Senators] up in 2014 in pro-gun states.’” — Roll Call, July 9, 2014
Earlier today, the “Harry Reid Preservation Act,” S. 2363, went down to defeat, as pro-gun Senators successfully filibustered the bill by a vote of 56-41.
In a last minute letter to Capitol Hill today, Gun Owners of America told Senators that a vote to end the filibuster “will be viewed as a vote AGAINST veterans … AGAINST concealed carry reciprocity … and AGAINST preserving the gun industry.”
GOA also warned Senators that a vote in favor of S. 2363 would be scored in our end-of-year rating.
As you know, S. 2363 was a “nothing-burger bill” which existed solely to elect anti-gun Democrats in Red States. This includes Senators like sponsor Kay Hagan (D-NC) — plus cosponsors such as Mark Begich (D-AK), Mark Pryor (D-AR), Mark Udall (D-CO), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Al Franken (D-MN) and Mark Warner (D-VA).
All these Senators are rated as D’s or F’s by Gun Owners of America.
S. 2363 would have allowed hunting on federal lands — unless Barack Obama determined that guns were dangerous. How likely do you think that is?
It would have allowed importation of polar bear parts. Okay, that’s fine, in and of itself. But that’s hardly a fair trade for passing a bill that will help reelect anti-gun Senators like Hagan, Begich, Pryor, Landrieu (and others) — Senators who will vote to confirm Obama’s anti-gun Supreme Court justices, thus overturning the Heller and McDonald decisions.
Thankfully, your help in asking Senators to offer truly pro-gun amendments paid dividends — and got noticed by the media. Said one media outlet on Monday:
“Gun Owners of America is urging its members to urge their senators to oppose the Sportsmen’s Act unless Reid allows [Ted] Cruz, [Mike] Lee, and [Rand] Paul the opportunity to offer meaningful, pro-gun amendments.”
These Senators, in addition to John Cornyn (R-TX) and Roger Wicker (R-MS), did a yeomen’s job in fighting to get genuinely pro-gun amendments offered to the bill. These included national concealed carry reciprocity, gun rights for 175,000 military veterans, and a shut-down of Eric Holder’s Operation Choke Point.
But Reid employed a bully-tactic to block all Republican amendments. It consisted of “treeing” the bill and then invoking “cloture” to make the amendments out of order.
Thus, the 41 anti-gun votes IN FAVOR of invoking cloture — thus ending the filibuster — were votes against veterans, reciprocity and gun dealers.
Fortunately, our strategy worked. Enough Republicans were outraged by Reid’s underhanded tricks they easily sustained a filibuster, thus killing the bill.
Consider how significant your grassroots efforts were. All 26 Republicans who cosponsored the bill ended up listening to your collective voice and voted to filibuster — aka, kill — the bill. They were joined by a handful of anti-gun Democrats who felt the bill didn’t have enough gun control.
So congratulations! And great work! Your activism is a tremendous asset to our efforts in protecting our gun rights.
ACTION: Contact your Senators. Thank them if they voted to support the filibuster on S. 2363. But rebuke them if they supported Harry Reid’s efforts shut off all debate on good, pro-gun amendments.
NOTE: If you click here and use the GOA Engage site, the correct letter will automatically be chosen.
Posts Tagged ‘Gun Control’
The Senate floor battle has now opened on the fake “pro-gun” bill designed to reelect endangered anti-gun Democrats up in 2014 in pro-gun states.
That bill is S. 2363, sponsored by anti-gun crazy Sen. Kay Hagan (D-NC), with the chief cosponsors being endangered anti-gunners who are Mark Begich (D-AK), Mark Pryor (D-AR), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Mark Udall (D-CO), Mark Warner (D-VA) and Al Franken (D-MN).
By now, even the dumbest Senators realize that this “sportmen’s” bill is nothing but a political ploy to keep Harry Reid (D-NV) and Obama’s cronies in power in the Senate. An article in The Hill newspaper made this clear yesterday:
“The legislation is meant to help several red-state Democrats in tough reelection races this year. Co-sponsors include four other Dems who, like Hagan, are facing difficult reelection races this year: Sens. Mark Pryor (Ark.), Mark Begich (Alaska), Mary Landrieu (La.) and Mark Udall (Colo.).”
The Senate yesterday overcame the first hurdle in moving to consider the bill. But thankfully, there are several Senators who wanted to offer good, pro-gun amendments to the bill.
Senators John Cornyn (R-TX), Roger Wicker (R-MS), Rand Paul (R-KY), Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Mike Lee (R-UT) are all heeding GOA’s call to threaten dozens of tough pro-gun amendments to the bill.
Senator Cornyn is prepared to offer a GOA-supported amendment to allow national concealed carry reciprocity.
Senator Wicker has told us he wants to allow guns on the Army Corps of Engineers’ land.
Senator Lee has told GOA he wants to change the Senate rules to prohibit any anti-gun amendments in the Senate.
And Senators Cruz and Paul have “tons of amendments,” including reciprocity, a restoration of gun rights for 175,000 veterans, and a shutdown of Eric Holder’s Operation Choke Point program (that is designed to close gun stores by cutting off their credit).
This is exactly what GOA (and you, our activists) have been encouraging pro-gun Senators to do over the past week. But we believe that Reid will now “tree” the bill — a process used to block any amendments from being offered.
And we believe that, when they are shut out of offering amendments, many (if not all) Republicans will vote against cloture on the bill.
So ultimately, we still stand a good chance of success. Thank you all for your activism!
ACTION: Contact your Senators and urge them to vote for the Cornyn, Paul, Cruz, Wicker, and Lee amendments. And, if Harry Reid tries to shut out amendments, ask them to oppose cloture on the bill.
Once again, anti-gun Senators like Kay Hagan (D-NC), Mark Begich (D-AK), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), and Mark Pryor (D-AR) are trying to trick gun owners into supporting them in their upcoming tough races for reelection in pro-gun states.
At the core of their slimy scheme is a do-nothing bill being pushed as the Sportsmen’s Act (S. 2363). North Carolina’s Kay Hagan, who voted FOR the universal gun registry bill, is the chief sponsor.
Other chief cosponsors are Mary Landrieu (who also voted for universal gun registration) and Mark Begich and Mark Pryor (who, according to Harry Reid’s staff, would have cast the deciding votes for that universal gun registry bill, had their votes been needed). It’s also cosponsored by anti-gun leader Joe Manchin (D-WV).
The Sportsmen’s Act is, substantively, largely a “nothing-burger.” People could hunt on federal lands — unless Obama didn’t want them to. Dedicated funds (from the Pittman-Robertson tax) could be used for ranges — but don’t have to be, and probably wouldn’t be.
Moreover, Section 107(b)(4)(B) of the bill says that the BLM or Forest Service can close down federal public lands that can be used for hunting and recreational purposes for a host of reasons, including “public safety.” Anyone want to bet that these agencies won’t find reasons to do so?
But the bill’s not about substance. It’s about reelecting its anti-gun sponsors — virtually all of them red-state Democrats who face tough reelection battles in pro-gun states. This, incidentally, is the same bill that was used to reelect Montana’s Jon Tester (D). And, although he pretended to be “pro-gun” before the election, after the election, Tester was the Second Amendment’s worst enemy.
The good news is this: Senators Mike Lee (R-UT), Rand Paul (R-KY) and Ted Cruz (R-TX) are prepared to offer genuine pro-gun amendments to this bill — like defunding Operation Choke Point and more.
But here’s the problem: Anti-gun Senator Harry Reid will try to use a procedural tactic called an “amendment tree” to block Lee, Paul, and Cruz from offering any pro-gun amendments.
These pro-gun Senators want to offer good amendments like concealed carry reciprocity, but that won’t be possible if Harry Reid blocks their ability to offer pro-gun amendments with an “amendment tree.”
And the reason is clear: Genuine pro-gun amendments would put anti-gun senators like Hagan, Pryor, Landrieu, and Begich on the spot. It would reveal that their sponsorship of this “nothing-burger” bill doesn’t mean that they are “pro-gun,” but rather that they are anti-gun frauds.
But in order to retain Paul, Lee, and Cruz’ right to offer pro-gun amendments, Republicans will have to block Reid’s efforts to shut down their filibuster of the bill and the motion to proceed to it — until Reid commits to dismantle his “amendment tree” and allow them to offer their amendments.
In other words, we need to say to Reid: No pro-gun amendments = no fake bill.
ACTION: Urge your Senators to oppose Harry Reid’s cheat scheme in pushing the Sportsmen’s Act (S. 2363), which is nothing more than a do-nothing, reelection bill for Harry Reid’s cronies. Tell your Senators to oppose the bill unless Reid allows pro-gun amendments to be offered.
Even though the recent Judiciary committee heard you ‘loud and clear’ when they shut down the background check expansion legislation in May.
The NRA isn’t listening and continues to push the so-called Fix NICS agenda in Wyoming!
The 2014 NRA candidate survey is so telling of their real intentions:
The fact that this question is on their survey means that they will be pushing this agenda again — and if he’s re-elected, use their own NRA “A” rated Senator Fred Emerich, who BTW voted NO on pro-gun legislation SF-104 in 2011.
Because when it comes to the background check expansion scheme, Anti-Gun Senator Emerich is their boy!
You can bet he earns another “A” rating for it too.
This agenda to expand NICS is also being spearheaded by former NY Mayor Bloomberg’s Anti-Gun organization, touted as Fatal Gaps.
Sadly this is happening on the heels of Obama’s 11 signed Executive Orders to change — background checks, health-care privacy regulations and gun owner data sharing — into a keystroke gun registration system.
Obama’s executive order summary:
1. Require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system. (Share all data)
2. Address unnecessary legal barriers particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system. (Privacy)
3. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system. (Bribes to the states)
4. Propose rule-making to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun. (Even on a simple traffic stop)
5. Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers. (Preparing for regulations on private sales)
6. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes. (This information was once private, it will now go on your permanent record)
7. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities. (Doctor patient confidentiality gone)
8. Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover. (Details to record gun owners)
9. Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within Obamacare exchanges. (More gun owner regulations underwritten in the details)
10. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations. (etc.)
11. Launch a national dialogue on mental health. (etc.)
By contrast WyGO’s 2014 candidate survey asks these questions relating to Brady and private sales:
The NRA isn’t working for gun owners in Wyoming and instead is using their $300 million to work for the wrong team!
And the NRA’s actions?
In 2011 when WyGO was on the ground pushing Constitutional Carry at the legislature, the NRA was completly absent from the fight.
In 2012 the NRA actually provided a draft to the Wyoming Security Commission expanding gun free zones in every county building in Wyoming.
In 2014 the NRA didn’t even make a peep on HB-119, legislation that would have repealed gun free zones in Wyoming.
Later in 2014 the NRA flew in field Rep. Dakota Moore to support background check expansion, while WyGO was expending an incredible amount of WyGO member resources in direct mail to kill this dangerous legislation.
The NRA’s record in wyoming shows they have put their money to work just helping Obama’s keystroke registration scheme!
Please contact Wayne LaPierre at(800) 672-3888 and tell him how you feel!
And if you haven’t done so please throw your financial support to Wyoming’s ONLY ‘boots on the ground’ gun rights organization in the state.
Wyoming Gun Owners
P.S. The NRA is working to promote Obama’s background expansion/Registration scheme.
The NRA 2014 candidate survey has revealed that they will continue to push their so-called FixNICS campaign using the money taken from their members, under the premise they will fight against gun control.
ssued following this month’s Las Vegas killings, a bulletin leaked from the New York State Intelligence Center has warned state law enforcement against a “recent spike in violence” targeting them, and cites a figure familiar to Gun Rights Examiner readers as a catalyst for inspiring those so inclined.
“Michael Brian Vanderboegh, a longtime militia member and founder of the III Percent Patriot Movement which was supported by Jerad and Amanda Miller, travelled to NYS at least once in 2013 to speak to the Liberty Oath Keepers meeting in Monticello, NY.,” the “official use only” bulletin marked “Not for public or media release” advises. “The III Percent Patriots are a militia group comprised primarily of gun rights extremists who believe in the need to use violence against the government to prevent what they believe to be an impending seizure of all private firearms.
“The name derives from ‘an obscure, and not particularly accurate, Revolutionary War “statistic” that claimed that only 3% of the American population during the Revolutionary War participated as combatants in the war,” it explains. “The Oath Keepers is an organization composed of current and former military and law enforcement personnel who take a pledge to ‘not obey unconstitutional orders such as orders to disarm the American people, to conduct warrantless searches, or to detain Americans as enemy combatants.’
“There have been multiple observed instances of overlapping membership in the Oath Keepers and the III Percent Patriots, and the Oath Keepers’ founder has spoken supportively of the III Percent Patriot Movement,” the section concludes.
Footnotes make it clear the “information” is being sourced from the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League, both “progressive” groups vehemently anti-gun, at least the privately-owned kind, and neither shy about portraying their ideological opponents as domestic terrorists. (SPLC’s attacks on Oath Keepers have been documented in this column for years.)
While some are claiming New York is behind the curve because the FBI has distanced itself from SPLC, that may be wishful thinking based on a website modification.
“[A] public statement from the FBI and the agency’s own website indicate the removal may mean just that — removal from the site, not a diminishing of the relationship between the two organizations,” a HotAir article cautions. “[T]he spokesperson’s statement indicates the change may just be a public relations move, not a substantive shift in FBI policy.”
Regardless, Vanderboegh decimated the bulletin in his Flag Day Second Amendment Rally speech in Massachusetts on Saturday.
“The Millers are linked to the Bundys — except they’re not,” he said recapping the bulletin after dissecting it for the crowd. “The Millers were supporters of Vanderboegh, the guy who had them ejected from the Bundy security operation — except they weren’t.
“They embraced militia values — except they didn’t, the Three Percent movement is a militia — except it isn’t.” he continued. “And the Three Percent are paranoids for believing that the New York state cops are going to seize semi-auto weapons — except they are.
“Other than that, this is a totally accurate report, Vanderboegh observed. “Does that clear things up for you?
“It’s funny but it’s not,” he cautioned. “This report goes out to police everywhere. Many are going to accept it as gospel. And who do you think they’re going to be reporting? You, with the Oath Keepers tee shirt. You, with the Three Percent patch. You, with the Gadsden flag out in front of your house or the ‘Don’t tread on me’ sticker on your pickup truck. Because everyone now ‘knows’ because of sloppy propaganda like this piece of trash that the Gadsden flag equals Three Percent equals Oath Keeper equals domestic terrorist equals meth-head cop killer.”
That, of course, is the objective, and even clumsier propaganda has been seized on by groups that are desperate for attention and relevance, coming up with stupid slogans like “Let’s tread on them” accompanied by even more stupid graphics.
It’s part of a long-standing and not particularly successful attempt by the “progressives” to chill dissent by making gun owners fear to speak out lest they be tarred with the brush of extremist. Perversely, those who want them to feel that way have been known to come up with extremist advocacy positions like ‘Isn’t it time we started rounding up promoters of hate before they kill?” and “These town hall terrorists could be declared enemy combatants and bundled off to Bagram with the stroke of a pen. If ever there were a reason for suspending civil rights, this is it,” and “Send the guilty monsters directly to Guantanamo Bay for all eternity and let them rot in their own mental squalor.”
As Vanderboegh might say, it’s funny, because of the personal frustrated impotence of the defective cultists doing the demanding, but it’s not, because their voices influence weak minds and embolden politicians, and enable enforcers who then cynically justify terror tactics they’re increasingly confident in using.
“Law enforcement leaders from the Department of Justice, the FBI, the ATF, Chicago police and other regional agencies gathered for a show and tell … of what they believe can be a key tool to reducing gun violence and arresting people who use and sell illegal guns — a group they call ‘three percenters’,” WGN reported.
“The core mission of the Crime Gun Center is to identify these shooters, or these ‘three percenters,’ and the traffickers that sell them guns and get them off our streets,” ATF Special Agent in Charge Carl Vasilko explained.
That’s what ATF has decided to call violent criminals who use guns? Does anyone think the adoption of that name is just a coincidence, coming from the machine Vanderboegh embarrassed with his groundbreaking Operation Fast and Furious revelations and efforts? And curiously, although not surprisingly, its being directed by agents of an administration that is more than happy to befriend extremist “percenters” it approves of.
The list of companies that have stopped selling firearms and ammunition to law enforcement agencies in states that are restricting the Second Amendment has more than doubled since Wednesday and is more than five times larger than just one week ago. There are 44 companies on our list, with more being added as we receive notification. Here are the additions since Wednesday:
- Barrett Firearms
- Exile Machine
- Tier One Arms
- Bravo Company USA
- Primary Weapons Systems
- Crusader Weaponry
- Top Gun Supply
- Kiss Tactical
- Clark Fork Tactical
- OFA Tactical
- One Source Tactical
- Templar Tactical Arms
- NEMO Arms
- Old Grouch’s Military Surplus
- Big Horn Armory
- Midway USA
- CMMG Inc
- Rocky Top Tactical
- Badger Peak
- Controlled Chaos Arms
- SRT Arms
- Norton Firearms
- Citizen Arms
- Evolution Weaponry
- Doublestar Corp
- JCW Industries
- Huntertown Arms
Steve Adelmann of Citizen Arms shared the following from his company’s statement, made the day after New York changed its laws:
”Due to legal, ethical and moral concerns, Citizen Arms offers only those custom firearms that are legal for all lawful citizens of a given state to possess, regardless of law enforcement status. LE personnel living in states where citizens must have restrictive features will only receive like product support from Citizen Arms. We’re very appreciative of the sacrifices made by the law enforcement community but we’re even more appreciative of the right guaranteed to all law-abiding US citizens by the Second Amendment to the US Constitution: A well regulated militia, necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”.
On February 20th, as our story was hitting the web, Ronnie Barrett, the Chairman and CEO of Barrett Firearms posted his company’s position statement on their Facebook page:
Barrett’s Position Regarding the Assault on Liberty
Barrett opposes those who are illegally disarming the American public from their efficient arms and creating superior armed elitist government agencies.
Elected state officials of New York, having been sworn to protect our Constitution, have instead committed an offense against it and their citizens by stripping inalienable rights duly protected and guaranteed under th…e Second Amendment. By their deliberate and sinister actions, these officials now cause their state and local policing agencies to enforce these unconstitutional and illegal so called “laws”.
By current law, Barrett cannot be an accomplice with any lawbreaker, therefore, cannot and will not service or sell to New York government agencies. Barrett also applies this stance to the individual elected official who, as a matter of public record, has voted for or created regulation that violates the constitutional rights of their citizens. This is an expansion of our 2002 ban against the California government due to their second amendment infringements, and shall apply to any future violators.
In the course of world history there have been officials that strip inalienable rights from the people that were given to all by our Creator. Most of these officials inevitably come to trial, some do not.
Intentionally violating constitutional rights by officials that have sworn to uphold them should have severe prison sentences.
With the clear vision of horrible events in history repeating itself, all manufacturers of firearms or related equipment remaining in partnership with such violators should have a respectable fear of being found with the guilty on their day of trial.
During this era of assault on liberty, Barrett will remain steadfast in our efforts to serve law-abiding citizens of all fifty states, and stands together with you in the struggles we will fight and win.
Jeffrey Norton of Norton Firearms not only sends a message about the Second Amendment, but also reminds folks that our rights come to us from “our US Constitution and our Creator.”
Norton Firearms, Inc. is a strong defender of the US Constitution, not only the 2nd amendment. We believe that a government that restricts it Citizens from executing their Constitutional Rights is no longer a government for the people or by the people. It is our policy not to sell our products or services to any organization that tries to diminish the rights given to us by our US Constitution and our Creator. If you are a government agency with a policy of restricting our Constitutional Rights we ask that you take our tax dollars and spend it somewhere else. I am sure there is some profiteering communist foreign company that will be glad to take our dollars for their gain. We will only sell to law abiding, Citizens and those agencies that truly support and will defend The US Constitution.
Doug Prince of Evolution Weaponry told TheBlaze, “Evolution Weaponry is proud to say you can add us to that list.”
I am a US Army veteran. I received a medical discharge due to combat related injuries after 6 years of service. I am a strong believer in American veterans, the US Constitution and individual liberty. My service to this country is among my greatest accomplishments in my life to this point and I carry what I have learned from that into every endeavor I undertake.
Arizona’s Kiss Tactical’s Facebook page also carries a story about denying a California police officer’s request to purchase an AR-15.
On Saturday I refused to sell a AR-15 rifle to a police officer from California. He came into my shop and wanted to buy his duty gun in AZ because the same gun in his home state would cost him more. I told him that I would not sell him the gun even though he had his department letter saying he was able to buy it. I told him that if the gun was not legal for law abiding men and women in CA, I would not sell it to him. after he told me that “civilians don’t need them type of guns” I asked to leave my shop. as he stomped out mad.
Doublestar Corporation (which includes J&T Distributing, DoubleStar Corp., Ace Limited, and the DoubleStar Training Academy) will also be unavailable to law enforcement and government agencies in states suppressing citizen’s rights.
Effective immediately, the J&T Family of Companies will be joining other manufacturers and distributors by ceasing sales of regulated items in states that have altered the rights of citizens to keep and bear arms.
There are also a host of smaller outlets taking a stand.
Witness the recent news from Old Grouch’s Military Surplus in North Carolina:
In support of our customers in the state of New York, effective today we are cancelling all orders to any state or municipal government agency customers in the New York and will accept no more. While we can’t stop the trampling of rights that is occurring there, we certainly can make sure we don’t assist in it in any way going forward.
We hope to keep this list as accurate as possible and will update it with news and additions as we receive them and can confirm their accuracy. Please forward any information directly to email@example.com.
You can also follow the efforts to encourage other companies to join this group here.
Once again the Supreme Court has issued a ruling so bizarre that one must think that they are on drugs… But, this is the very same court that ruled ex post facto law does not violate the Constitution or Bill of Rights.
The Straw Purchase Law was created to stop people from supplying weapons to felons and criminal cartels, period.
How to defeat yourselves in one hundred easy ways: Infighting in the pro freedom and liberty community.June 15, 2014
Some things never change in this world, and dominance seems to be one of them. It’s the old elementary school thing really. At least a variation of it. That said, I am guilty as charged when it comes to jumping all over actions that I see as traitorous to the cause.
After all, I was among the first to call out The National Rifle Association for doing, among other things; Supporting The Gun Control Act of 1968. Supporting the Lautenberg Domestic Violence Act, and it’s lifetime ban on firearms possession and ownership for less than felony convictions. Both of these have direct impacts upon the freedom and liberty of all Americans, even if you are not a firearm enthusiast. Ex Post Facto Law..? King James would be proud to be sure. King George would also be quite pleased at restricting our ability to say no to him without losing our heads in the process. An assault on any part or portion of the Bill of Rights, is an assault on the entire body of it. What follows is from one of the most well thought out writers on the internet. Think about it folks, and by folks I do mean the NRA, SAF, NAGR, and so on.
Maybe we (the gun community as a whole) are victims of our own success. In the last several years we have survived a Democratic controlled Congress along with one of the most liberal presidents in history, and successfully defeated the first real anti-gun legislation we’ve seen at the federal level in 20 years. In the last 12 months we’ve seen sheriffs across the nation come out in support of gun rights and we’ve seen two state lawmakers recalled and a third resign over their stance on gun rights in Colorado.
Sure, there have been some setbacks in some states such as Connecticut and New York, but all in all, we’ve moved forward as a community in the last couple of years. It also seems we’ve become a community divided during that time. Over the last 2-3 months I’ve noticed a severe amount of infighting in the gun community. Now, when I say “gun community,” I’m talking about gun owners in general, gun bloggers, print publications, gun companies, accessory companies, trainers, activists, gun rights groups and grassroots organizers (sorry for whoever I just forgot).
Now I know that gun manufacturers are competing against each other and those of us in the publishing world are technically competing against each other as well. However, I think that we’re all forgetting (perhaps due to the complacency from the positive issues mentioned above), that we’re all on the same side of a lifestyle that is constantly under attack by people who would love nothing more than to take it ALL away.
Recently, I’ve seen several disturbing things (and I’m not going to name names here, which would only add fuel to several fires) including a prominent gun blog call out a print publication over a product review of a controversial new pistol, only to have another prominent gun blog call out the first gun for their calling out of the print publication… does that even make sense? Sure, all of that controversy probably means more pageviews and readers all around, but what damage does it do to the community? You force readers to choose a side and show the anti-gun community a weakness.
I’ve seen the leader of a large, national organization who hasn’t been on the scene very long bash the leader of a well established gun rights group who has literally done more for gun rights in the courts than any other organization. That second organization then had to publicly respond to the comments from the first organization. How does that look to outsiders? Instead of questioning each other’s commitment to the cause how about having a civil discussion on the phone or via email about the differences in your organization’s strategies and thought process?
Read the whole thing here at GUNS SAVE LIVES
On “Meet the Press” earlier this month, Michael Bloomberg claimed that what he is doing “is nothing about gun control.” But host David Gregory, acting as a cheerleader, not a probing questioner, let that statement go unchallenged. Unfortunately, Bloomberg is used to overwhelmingly uncritical media coverage.
Bloomberg, who is currently spending $50 million per year on his various gun control organizations, has pushed for everything from assault weapon bans, magazine size limits, gun-free zones, fees on people buying ammunition or guns, and a long list of other regulations. He now wants to convince us that he is very reasonable.
Unfortunately, Bloomberg is the worst type of gun control true-believer: the type who believes his goals justify making up facts.
You may have seen NAGR’s e-mail a few weeks ago where we publicly exposed Alan Gottlieb’s compromises of your Second Amendment rights.
And we called it what it is: endorsing gun control, and leading the fight for national gun registration.
This isn’t anything new. Alan Gottlieb did the exact same thing last year during the post-Newtown, Connecticut tragedy battle in the U.S. Senate.
It amazed everyone at the time, but Alan Gottlieb proclaimed he helped write the Toomey-Manchin Universal Background Check bill.
You remember that legislation — it forced every firearm sale in America to go through the Brady system, which is, plain and simple, national gun registration.
What else do you call going through a government-mandated system to beg permission to practice what is supposed to be a right — with the records being kept by varying levels of government agents for later retrieval?
That’s gun registration. And since it’s a federal bill in Congress, forcing all states to do it, it’s national.
National + Gun Registration = National Gun Registration.
But don’t take my word for it; take Alan Gottlieb’s word.
Here’s what was written in the Second Amendment Foundation’s (SAF) “The Gottlieb Tartaro Report” Issue 137, May, 2006:
Rabidly anti-gun Sen. FRANK LAUTENBERG (D-NJ) has introduced S. 843, “to establish background check procedures for gun shows,” which in fact is a massive gun registration program of incredibly dangerous scope. (highlight added)
Here, we agree with Alan Gottlieb; forcing all sales at gun shows to go through a Brady check is “a massive gun registration program.” And yes, it’s incredibly dangerous.
Or look at the SAF report from Dec. 6, 2001, when Gottlieb wrote:
The fact is, Charles Schumer always envisioned the Brady Law as a gun registration scheme, and he has seized on this opportunity to lament that the NICS records are strictly off-limits for that kind of political skullduggery.
Well said. It’s a registration scheme — and now Gottlieb himself is leading the charge to pass it.
The good news is that we killed Toomey-Manchin . . . for now.
But it was darn close. Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, and Barack Obama nearly got their way and forced Brady Registration on every American.
To pass this gun control, they needed a “pro-gun” patsy to give them cover.
Enter Alan Gottlieb.
Had it passed — when Alan Gottlieb claimed he helped write it — we could have called that the “Gottlieb law,” forcing every private sale in America to go through Brady prior to transfer . . . and thus register their guns.
And rather than celebrate the victory over Toomey-Manchin, and build a bulwark against any further attempts, Alan Gottlieb’s response is that it’s inevitable, and we should support it.
Had he asked me, I would tell Alan Gottlieb to publicly apologize for playing such a prominent role in passing gun control, and be elated that it didn’t pass.
Now that he’s being called out for his compromises, Alan Gottlieb is using silly and childish antics, and even threatening to sue.
That might have worked with others in the past, but the truth is always a defense.
And all you have to do is watch either video to see that Alan Gottlieb isn’t fighting against universal background checks.
Given his fervor to pass national gun registration, we have to ask some questions:
What other gun controls does Alan Gottlieb think Americans should pass, since they are inevitable?
No, we won’t agree to his compromises.
And we won’t remain silent about them, either.
Executive Vice President
P.S. The President of the Second Amendment Foundation Alan Gottlieb is banging the drums for a new expanded federal gun registration bill. Alan Gottlieb says gun owners should “compromise” with the gun-grabbers.
We say “NO!” and stand ready to fight back against gun control at every opportunity.