Archive for May, 2013
New York Michael Bloomberg exemplifies everything that is wrong with modern politics. I don’t mean to sound bitter or to wage some kind of irrational mudslinging campaign; I mean it in the most literal sense. He is everything that is rotten about politics in America.
No longer content with disarming the law-abiding in his own crime-riddled island wasteland, Bloomberg has set his sights on a much grander and far-reaching goal: disarming the American populace…. Because it has worked so well for the good citizens of New York, D.C., Chicago, Newark and South Central L.A.
Bloomberg spends his days and nights looking to invoke his will on the people and punish those that resist. Some might call it fascism, but when it’s a lefty doing it, all is forgiven.
Bloomberg and his stormtroopers, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, have begun a pricey $350,000 ad campaign to target Arkansas Democrat Senator Mark Pryor who is up for re-election next year. His crime? He had the audacity to vote against the unconstitutional universal background check bill.
- Mayor Bloomberg’s Anti-Gun Group Launches Ad Campaign Against Senator Mark Pryor (stoptheaclu.com)
- PRUDEN: Mike Bloomberg’s gun accident (washingtontimes.com)
- Bloomberg strangely aims anti-gun attacks at Democrats (rare.us)
- Bloomberg gun group zeroes in on Mark Pryor (usatoday.com)
* Attrocious Gun Laws Assault Gun Owners
Read about one guy learning the hard way.
Some want to make this about the guy, but it’s about the bad laws. Dustin Reininger is no saint, but what’s happening to him in New Jersey is a sin.
* Lying for Money – and to Steal Your Rights
The anti-rights lobby doesn’t just twist statistics, they make them up – then keep repeating the lies even after they’re uncovered.
Both of these stories, and much more, can be found on our web site,http://www.FirearmsCoalition.org
Don’t forget that the Senate will probably renew efforts to expand background checks and criminalize private transfers soon.
Should you go to jail for swapping guns with a regular shooting buddy?
Call your senators every day, or at least once a week, and let them know that you don’t want any new gun control laws.
No New Gun Laws! No Bans. No “Universal Background Checks.” No Dangerous New “Anti-Trafficking” laws. No Compromise!
The Capitol Switchboard number is 202-224-3121.
Please forward this E-Update to every freedom-loving American you know.
If you’re not a Supporting Member of The Firearms Coalition, we invite you to step up now to help us fight for your rights. Formed by Neal Knox in 1984, The Firearms Coalition has been fighting for your rights for almost 30 years, but we can only be effective if we have your help. Please visit our web site at FirearmsCoalition.org and make whatever contribution you can afford. Visit us on Facebook, and share our columns and information with your friends and family. Together we can protect our rights and save our republic.
Yours for the Second Amendment,
The Firearms Coalition
- Gun Control Debate Ricochets on Long Island (longislandpress.com)
- This Is How the NRA Ends (newrepublic.com)
- * Gun control report fails to prove new laws are needed. (hardnoxandfriends.wordpress.com)
- Missouri Lawmakers Pass Bill Nullifying Federal Gun Control Laws (stlouis.cbslocal.com)
- Reason #7,452 to Stay out of NJ – TX Man Transporting Unloaded Firearms Through NJ Doing 3-5 Years in Prison (fireourgovernment.wordpress.com)
- Avoid the State of Insanity (gunwatch.blogspot.com)
“It is clear why gun owners are being joined by growing legions of other citizens in their distrust of government.”May 21, 2013
BELLEVUE, WA – Citing concerns about First Amendment erosion based on revelations about covert Justice Department probes of journalists, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms today called the government snooping “deplorable, if not despicable.”
“It is disturbing that James Rosen, who covers the State Department for Fox News was targeted,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb, “but now published reports suggest that the DOJ, in a separate effort, apparently also targeted Fox News reporter William La Jeunesse, who broke several stories about Operation Fast and Furious.
“We find this deplorable and despicable,” he added, “and a clear sign that the Obama administration is not simply out of touch, it is out of control. It is time for Congress to put a check on the Executive branch and rein these people in, and it is also time for Attorney General Eric Holder to go.”
Gottlieb noted that, “It is the role of the press to be a watchdog on government, not the other way around.” He said Rosen and La Jeunesse “not only did nothing wrong, they did their jobs. In La Jeunesse’s case, he has been instrumental in exposing the outrage known as Fast and Furious to the American people.”
Fast and Furious is the scandalous Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives gun trafficking operation that authorized at least 2,000 AK-type rifles to be purchased by known criminal suspects. It was terminated immediately after a gun associated with the operation was recovered at the scene of a gunfight in 2010 that resulted in the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.
“It should not surprise anyone that the First Amendment is every bit as important to us as the Second Amendment,” Gottlieb observed. “The Citizens Committee is not an organization that cherry picks from the Bill of Rights. Unlike the Obama administration, we revere all the individual rights protected by the Constitution, while they seem intent on ignoring its very existence.
“In light of these scandals,” he concluded, “it is clear why gun owners are being joined by growing legions of other citizens in their distrust of government.”
- Obama Tells Mexicans Half A Story On Guns Used In Crime, Says CCRKBA (sys-con.com)
- JOD Targeted TWO Fox News Channel reporters (privateinvesigations.blogspot.com)
- Schumer Lies About Alternative Gun Bill Reveal His Extremist Views, Says CCRKBA (prnewswire.com)
- Drunk on Power: DOJ Secretly Monitored and Criminalized Three Fox News Reporters (1800politics.com)
— Tell HHS their new regs are crazy
It’s quite a compliment when the New York Times thinks that you are doing “tremendous damage.” But you can be sure that the other side is not going to go away quietly.
And sure enough, the Obama Administration is trying to unilaterally undo our recent victory in the Senate – and to undo the “damage” that all of us inflicted together.
But first, a little history.
Remember when Senators Pat Toomey, Joe Manchin and Chuck Schumer formed an unholy alliance during the recent gun battle on Capitol Hill? Remember how their amendment would have encouraged your psychiatrist to turn you in to the FBI’s gun ban list?
And you remember how we stopped that provision, because over 40 senators found it to be odious and a violation of the Second Amendment?
Well, guess what? Barack Obama has just concluded that “he don’t need no stinkin’ Senate.”
Instead, Secretary Kathleen “ObamaCare” Sebelius – and her Department of Health and Human Services – has promulgated regulations which would, by executive fiat, waive all federal privacy laws and encourage you doctor to report you to the FBI.
Understand a couple of things: First, the standard which your doctor would use to turn you in is embodied in Clinton-era ATF language and in the anti-gun Veterans Disarmament Act of 2007. Specifically, you doctor would “drop a dime” on you if he suspected you were even a slight “danger to yourself of others” or were “unable to manage your financial affairs.”
So if they say you can’t balance your checkbook, then you lose your constitutional rights.
But there’s another problem: The day these regulations become law, lawyers will be lining up to sue “deep-pocket” psychiatrists for every case where they failed to turn in a patient to NICS – if the patient subsequently engages in a horrific act.
The bottom line? Any psychiatrist who failed to report all of his patients to the NICS system risks losing everything if any of them engages in harmful conduct. Soon the rule of thumb will be: See a shrink; lose your guns.
And the regulations will apply to private, as well as government-employed psychiatrists.
The bad news is that 165,000 military veterans have already lost their gun rights because of the “see a VA shrink, lose your gun rights” precedent from the Clinton-Bush era.
Sadly, what happened to military veterans has now begun in the private sector – especially in places like New York, after they recently passed their misnamed SAFE Act.
According to gun rights reporter, Dan Roberts, firearms are now being confiscated from gun owners because of their mental health information. For example:
“[John Doe] received a letter from the Pistol Permit Department informing him that his license was immediately revoked upon information that he was seeing a therapist for anxiety and had been prescribed an anxiety drug. He was never suicidal, never violent, and has no criminal history.”
So now taking anxiety pills can result in one’s forfeiting their Second Amendment rights in New York!
This is where the gun haters want to push their agenda. And this is one reason why background checks are so dangerous – because they give government bureaucrats the opportunity to deny law-abiding people their constitutionally-protected rights.
But the good news is this: The HHS rulemaking is still at an early stage, and HHS is (no doubt reluctantly) taking the views of the general public.
ACTION: Go to the Federal Register – at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-04-23/pdf/2013-09602.pdf – and respond to the regs entitled “HIPAA Privacy Rule and the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).”
Let the HHS know how you feel about waiving all federal privacy laws for people who seek counseling.
Also, be sure to tell your congressmen that you oppose the “see a shrink, lose your guns” regs issued by the HHS. Ask him to issue his own comments as well.
The regs themselves lay out several ways that you may submit your opposition. The comment period ends on June 7, 2013.
This is a very well stated position based in logic and historical fact. A must read of the entire article.
[Click to Enlarge]
Some things I have learned to simply accept, if not with good humor, then at least without comment. As an attorney, I often receive (unsolicited) the glossy “brag books” in which a bunch of Seattle and Bellevue attorneys call themselves “Super Lawyers”, or publications like this one, intended to create confidence that if you have the negligence/personal injury/product liability case in which you don’t have confidence to properly handle yourself, referral to their firm would be a great thing for your client.
These things usually clutter up my mailbox, and I confess to rarely giving them a second look, but in this case, I did…for obvious reasons. And I found myself very angry because of it.
For better or worse, members of my tribe are viewed as authorities on the subjects we speak on. It’s one of the reasons I try to make damn sure I know…
View original post 532 more words
Another in the List of Thousands of Reasons Why the Only Response to Calls for more “Gun Control Laws” is “NO.”May 16, 2013
This is a must read folks!
Sometimes it’s easy to focus on the fact that government is prohibited from any infringement period (for any citizen who is not in the state’s custody), and forget the more obvious fact that government has already demonstrated that it does not approach the issue in good faith and already violates the law as it applies to its actions with regard to “gun control”.
This piece from Armed and Dangerous offers a refresher on this take…go now, and read it.
Received in an email from a friend. No time to completely verify it all, but if even a quarter is true then I would submit that full blown treason has happened at the highest levels at worst, utter cowardice at best…
Subject: Gregory Hicks’ explosive testimony at the Benghazi hearings;Judge Napolitano: Hillary Clinton Could Be Prosecuted Over Benghazi Testimony
Gregory Hicks’ explosive testimony at the Benghazi hearings
Gregory Hicks: “I Swore an Oath to Uphold and Defend the Constitution, I am Here to Honor That Oath.”
by Stewart Rhodes * May 09, 2013
One of the most moving statements made by star Benghazi witness Gregory Hicks during yesterday’s hearing was about his oath. During his opening statement, Hicks said, “On February 19th, 1991, I swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. I am Here to Honor That oath.”
And honor it he did, with frank, honest, and heartfelt testimony that laid bare the horrendous fact that two inexplicable stand-down orders were given that left Hicks and Special Forces personnel in stunned disbelief and outrage, and left their brothers in Benghazi to fend for themselves.
Stand-down order #1 was when Hicks requested deployment of the special incident Foreign Emergency Support Team (FEST), which is specifically designed to handle such attacks. Hicks testified that the FEST team had dedicated aircraft capable of responding within four hours – which is exactly why that team was created after the attack on the USS Cole. When asked why the FEST team was not deployed, Hick’s answered, “I don’t know.”
Stand-down order #2 was when the Special Forces team in Tripoli was all set to jump on a C-130 and fly to Benghazi and rescue their brothers, when their commander, Lt. Col. Gibson, was ordered to stand-down and stay in Tripoli.
As Hicks said, “I told him to go get our people and that is what he wanted to do.” When asked how Colonel Gibson reacted to being told to stand-down, Hicks said he “was furious.”
Judge Napolitano: Hillary Clinton Could Be Prosecuted Over Benghazi Testimony
Extortion 17 to Benghazi to Obama
Benghazi: It Is About Obama/Clinton Running an Illegal War
First, we were told that some Muslims didn’t like a YouTube video, so they killed some Americans. Now, even the Dems are not believing that lie.
Now, we are being told that it was “terrorists” who wanted to kill some American officials, but it was covered up so Obama could get re-elected.
That doesn’t make any sense, either, because the American sheeple would be waving the flag if they knew upfront that Muslims were killing American officials. Why try to hide that? Makes no sense. And it probably makes no sense because it probably is not true.
The REAL story just might be that Obama and Clinton were running an illegal war both in Libya and Syria and that Chris Stevens was a central figure in the Iran-Contra style of illegal shipment of weapons from Libya to Turkey and Syria — and that Obama/Clinton were doing this to SUPPORT “al Qaeda terrorists.”
The story also involves General Paetreus, in that the REAL reason for his resignation was about Benghazi and not an affair.
Here are some stories with some background supporting evidence for this theory (note, skip down to the story with the title “The Real Story at Benghazi”):
And (although the author does not believe it, he cites a general who claims it is true):
This angle makes A LOT more sense for a cover-up, is consistent with what we know about black ops and CIA, is consistent with what we know about “The Database” (aka “al Qaeda”), explains why Hillary would get in such a hissy fit over any investigation (as head of the State Department, she would have been a KEY person in making the decision to do what was done), and explains why even the Repubs are sidetracking this issue to only discuss why there was no military response after the attack began.
- What Did Obama Know and When Did He Know It? (frontpagemag.com)
- Besieged Benghazi Envoy Made Distress Call After Attack (bloomberg.com)
- ‘Terrorist has personal effects of slain U.S. ambassador’ (wnd.com)
- US officials blocked rescue efforts while Benghazi burned, Congress told (guardian.co.uk)
- Now We Know-It Never Made A Difference To Hillary (sago.com)
- Special forces in Tripoli told ‘you can’t go’ to Benghazi (americanthinker.com)
- The Benghazi Scandal Grows (commentarymagazine.com)
- Obama Administration blocked rescue effort while Benghazi burned, Congress told (atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com)
“I will never leave a fallen comrade to fall into the hands of the enemy and under no circumstances will I ever embarrass my country.” The Creed, an abridged portion thereof.
I’m not sure if you were able to read my message last week about Rep. Cheri Gerou (R-Evergreen) voting to restrict your gun rights and now working overtime to silence gun owners!
But you need to hear this…
Voting records and actions don’t lie; they reveal who people really are when (they think) no one is watching.
“C’mon, you don’t say! A Republican wouldn’t actually vote with Democrats to take away our gun rights, would they?”
“She emailed me personally and told me not to listen to RMGO, she says you’re lying.”
And one of my personal favorites…
“It can’t be true; the NRA gave the legislator an A-rating.”
Of course if you’ve been following politics for any amount of time you know when it comes to defending the Second Amendment…
, I don’t need to tell you politicians are shifty or underhanded or that they don’t just come out and claim to be anti-gun to your face.
In Gerou’s case, she voted against what the Colorado media labeled as the most controversial gun control measures.
But once the cameras were off and Coloradans’ attention was directed toward other issues like immigration and education, without missing a beat, Rep. Gerou voted to restrict your Second Amendment Rights.
That’s why RMGO keeps a weathered-eye on the issues even when they don’t garner the limelight.
Here are the bills that Rep. Gerou voted for this year:
The truth is in the public records!
In fact, out of 28 House Republicans, Gerou was only one of three House Republicans to vote for gun control. Of the nine gun control measures Gerou voted on in the House, Gerou voted for anti-gun measures four times — the most of any Republican in the entire legislature!
Normally we don’t hand out grades at RMGO, but in this case we’re going to make a special exception for Rep. Gerou:
RMGO Grade – 55%-F
To make matters worse, now “representative” Gerou has filed an “ethics” complaint against RMGO Lobbyist Joe Neville in a radical attempt to silence pro-gun supporters at the state Capitol.
Despite being the instigator and aggressor in this incident, she had the audacity to have one of our staffers “investigated” by anti-gun tribunal.
While she claims RMGO is lying about her behavior, just take a listen to her testimony about the incident in the video below.
I don’t know about you, but to me, sounds like “representative” Gerou isn’t as pro-gun as she’d like you to believe.
You see, Gerou represents House District 25, the safest Republican seat in all of Jefferson County and also one of the largest support bases for the Second Amendment in all of Colorado.
This is why we believe Gerou is doing everything possible to block, shutdown, and firewall the public from knowing the truth about her anti-gun positions.
But those who know me know there’s nothing that infuriates me more than weak-kneed politicians playing fast and loose with our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
I will expose the records of those politicians from ANY PARTY who fail to stand up for our Second Amendment Rights, NO COMPROMISE!
I don’t work for one party or another. I work for the tens of thousands of pro-gun supporters just like you who expect me to protect and defend your right to keep and bear arms.
As the Executive Director of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners that has been my promise to you and I intend to keep it.
So if you haven’t yet, please click here to help RMGO fight back against Representative Gerou’s radical attempt to silence gun owners.
Only together can we win this fight to preserve our constitutional rights.
P.S. Rep. Gerou voted for four of the nine anti-gun measures. This was the most of any Republican in the entire legislature!
Now, Gerou has filed an ethics complaint against RMGO Lobbyist Joe Neville in a radical attempt to silence pro-gun supporters at the state capitol.
So if you haven’t yet, please click here to help RMGO fight back against Representative Gerou’s radical attempt to silence gun owners.
Colorado now seeks to torpedo free speech: First it was the ability to defend yourself. Well, we did warn you.May 2, 2013
We had to know this was coming sooner or later. A government that believes itself to be powerful enough to restrict the right of citizens to self-defense with firearms will sooner or later seek to torpedo free speech as well.
Invariably collectivist governments around the world prove the point. From the old Communist Soviet Union to Red China, from Hitler’s Germany to Castro’s Cuba, such regimes are convinced it is necessary not only to insure that their citizens are disarmed but that their right to criticize the government or to utter other forbidden ideas must be severely restricted.
The name of the game is centralized control. Government fears the freedom of the people. Thus, the people must be muzzled and deprived of their guns.
Colorado is the latest case in point.
Just weeks ago the Colorado legislature and governor, both of which are under the control of Democrats, passed highly restrictive gun control measures over the objections of millions of citizens, leading a major gun magazine manufacturer to promptly leave the state, taking its jobs with it. Sportsmen and hunters have vowed to boycott the state. Hunting and fishing are a multimillion dollar industry in Colorado, and the state government benefits handsomely from the activity.
But perhaps the thing that sticks in the craw of Colorado politicians the most is the vociferous verbal attacks they are receiving from citizens who astutely observe that the state has crossed a line that is totally unacceptable to freedom-loving citizens. Threats of recall elections have been rampant, and forces are now amassing to oust all Democrats from the legislature in the next election for their shocking overreach in trampling on the rights of citizens.
However, it is to be noted that the main instigator of the current attack on free speech is a Republican.
In addition, Colorado has become a target for nationwide civil disobedience as gun owners vow they will deliberately break the state’s new gun laws.
But instead of such outrage leading the politicians to back off their ill-conceived attacks on citizen rights, the pompous purveyors of prepotent despotism decided instead to muzzle the citizens, preventing them from advocating for Second Amendment rights.
One writer called the action “an unprecedented abuse of power.”
When the gun control bills were being considered in the Colorado legislature, Rep. Cheri Gerou, a Republican, burst forth in a tirade over her constituents’ views on guns. One of her targets was a representative of the Rocky Mountain Gun Owners Association, Joe Neville, who eloquently defended the legislator’s gun rights constituents. In retaliation Gerou filed a complaint against Neville and launched an investigation by an “anti-gun tribunal” into the gun owner group and Neville.
The full story of the confrontation instigated by Gerou can be found here.
This kind of behavior on the part of elected representatives who are supposed to represent all of their constituents cannot be tolerated. If her actions are sanctioned or overlooked, and if she is successful in silencing Neville and the gun owners group, then the forces of anti-freedom will win yet another battle.
- Colorado gun lobbyist upset over ethics charge, walks out of hearing (denverpost.com)
- In email to members, RMGO’s Dudley Brown blasts GOP lawmaker for filing ethics complaint, seeks donations (kdvr.com)
- Colorado gun lobbyist says he did nothing to warrant an ethics charge (denverpost.com)
- Recalls underway for Colorado Democrats: 1st Amendment is not absolute (communities.washingtontimes.com)
- Two more Colorado lawmakers face recalls over gun-control votes (blogs.denverpost.com)
- Colorado to pay piper after Dems’ war on guns (wnd.com)