Archive for the ‘mysandry’ Category

ObamaCare Challenge Tossed

December 4, 2010

U.S. District Judge Norman Moon, a Clinton appointee, tossed out a challenge to ObamaCare in Virginia this week. This is the second victory for the Obama administration in a wave of lawsuits. Liberty University, the plaintiff in the case, has already decided to appeal in hopes of eclipsing Moon’s decision. “Congress does not have the authority to force every American to purchase a particular kind of health insurance product,” said Mathew Staver, dean of Liberty’s School of Law and an attorney on the case. Liberty argued that the law abuses the Commerce Clause of the Constitution in an attempt to provide the government strict control over the health care market. Their constitutional exegesis is completely sound, but Moon was blinded to that reality.

According to Moon, the law requiring individuals and employers to purchase health insurance falls legally under the Commerce Clause because the lack of the law would drive up costs, “precisely the harms that Congress sought to address with the Act’s regulatory measures.” To this we would ask, if the Commerce Clause can be melded to the whims of the backers of ObamaCare, what powers doesn’t Congress have to continue to shackle the American people?

Along the same lines…

A recent Investor’s Business Daily editorial calls it “the ultimate form of taxation without representation”: the continuing attempts by eco-fascists to force wealth redistribution upon the United States and other “rich” countries. This is all under the guise, of course, of saving the world from the scourge of global warming.

After its abysmal failure in wintry Copenhagen last year, the UN is holding another climate change conference in balmy Cancun, Mexico. There, surrounded by sun and sand, it will once again attempt to convince delegates from 193 countries that, a) the world is in peril and therefore we must drastically reduce emissions; and b) the U.S. and other developed nations must pay poor countries billions of dollars in retribution for the “damage” they caused in becoming, well, developed. The conference will feature the usual fanfare, including 250 presentations about the effects of climate change and proclamations that 2010 is tied for the hottest year since we began keeping records 131 years ago.

This is all smoke and mirrors. German economist Ottmar Edenhofer, who also serves as the pretentiously titled Co-chair of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Working Group III on Mitigation of Climate Change, has openly admitted that “climate change policy is redistributing the world’s wealth.” This would be accomplished in the U.S. with cap-n-trade policies being pushed by Obama and his “progressive” pals in Congress.

Despite the sunny weather, the climate at this conference probably won’t be any friendlier than it was in Denmark. Even before the Republican landslide in last month’s elections, many lawmakers were leery of saddling Americans with more taxes during the recession, especially given the fact that China — the world’s biggest polluter — refuses to make any binding promises about emissions. In addition, in the wake of the Climategate scandal, emerging studies have shot more holes in climate change “science” than in Swiss cheese. Only time will tell, but it looks as if leftists will have to find another way to siphon America’s wealth to other nations.

In related news, House Republicans are set to eliminate the climate change committee created by soon-to-be-ex-Speaker Nancy Pelosi. In Congress at least, the climate has changed.

And yet more commentary on epic fail obama’s choice of czar for BATFE

In another example of the “Chicago Way,” last week Barack Obama tabbed Andrew Traver, currently special agent in charge of the Chicago division of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (better known by the ATF acronym), as the bureau’s permanent head. “You might as well put an arsonist in charge of the fire department,” quipped NRA spokesman Chris Cox.

While the gun grabbers at the Brady Center applaud the choice, Second Amendment advocates are predictably aghast. They criticize Traver because of his ties to the gun-control advocating Joyce Foundation and work during a 2007 conference on reducing gun violence sponsored by the International Association of Chiefs of Police, another fervently anti-gun organization. The IACP report includes a call for legislation to allow federal health and safety oversight of the firearms industry. What Second Amendment?

Others question Traver’s lack of senior-level executive experience, but when has that ever stopped anyone in Washington? The Senate may get a chance to question and confirm Traver, who would take over an agency laboring under acting leaders since 2006, unless Obama decides to use him as yet another recess appointment. Certainly Traver would fit right in with the rest of Executive Branch Washington in an era where the president relies on regulation, as opposed to legislation, to enact his agenda.

SOURCE

Assault weapons and the truth: Here we go again..!

December 2, 2010

The Obama administration is moving into high gear in putting gun-control advocates into important government positions. The administration’s nominee to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), Andrew Traver, should be of particular concern. His attacks on the civilian use of so-called assault weapons raise real questions about his willingness to distort the truth for political purposes. The person nominated to be the nation’s top gun cop shouldn’t use inaccurate descriptions to scare people into supporting gun control.

Mr. Traver is the special agent in charge of the BATFE’s Chicago field division. Therefore, he knows what was covered by the federal assault-weapons ban that sunset in 2004. But in November 2009, NBC interviewed Traver and reported: “Traver says the power and randomness of the heavy caliber, military-style weapons make them so dangerous not only to people, but to police. They’re so powerful, body armor can’t withstand a hit, and they’re so difficult to control, their bullets often get sprayed beyond the intended targets, striking innocent victims even when they’re in their own homes.”

SOURCE & SNIP

And further…

The list of problems with Mr. Traver’s claims is very long. If he really believes that these weapons fire unacceptably “heavy caliber” bullets, he is going to have to ban virtually all rifles. Small-game rifles — guns designed to kill squirrels and rabbits without destroying too much meat — typically fire .22-caliber bullets, which are only slightly smaller than the .223-caliber bullets fired by the M16 (used by the U.S. military since Vietnam) and the newer M4 carbine (used in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars). Deer-hunting rifles fire rounds that are very similar to those used by the AK-47.

Speaking of M16s, M4s, and AK-47s, Traver is correct when he states that the guns covered by the federal assault-weapons ban were “military-style weapons.” But he fails to note that this really just deals with style — the cosmetics of the guns, not how they actually operate. The guns covered by the ban were not the machine guns actually used by the military, but civilian, semi-automatic versions of those guns. The civilian version of the AK-47 may look like the guns used by militaries around the world, but it is different. It fires essentially the same bullets as deer-hunting rifles at the same rapidity (one bullet per pull of the trigger), and does the same damage.

On penetrating body armor, Mr. Traver leaves out one important detail: Rifles in general are often able to penetrate body armor simply because their bullets travel faster than those fired from handguns. The same can be said for going through the walls of houses. But if he had said that deer-hunting rifles can often penetrate walls and lower-level types of body armor, it is unlikely that his comments would have generated the same fear.

Unfortunately, Mr. Traver has done more than make clearly inaccurate claims about so-called “assault weapons.” He has supported banning .50-caliber rifles, regulations that would force many gun shows to close down, the Chicago handgun ban, and repealing the Tiahrt Amendment, which protects sensitive trace data from being misused in frivolous municipal lawsuits against gun makers. He also worked with the Joyce Foundation, which has funded gun-ban groups such as the Violence Policy Center, on the “Gun Violence Reduction Project.”

The fact that Mr. Traver uses the same misleading claims as groups such as the Brady Campaign shouldn’t make it too surprising that gun-control groups are applauding his nomination. Nor is Traver’s nomination very surprising after President Obama appointed two strong anti-self-defense members to the Supreme Court. But Mr. Traver’s nomination is dangerous. Making up claims about guns to demonize them is beyond what is acceptable for someone who wants a position in which he will be regulating American gun ownership.

John R. Lott Jr. is a FOXNews.com contributor, an economist, and the author of More Guns, Less Crime, the third edition of which was recently published by the University of Chicago Press.

More of the same from the nanny government types that ignore the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Now, as a retired Paramedic I can tell you a truism. Get smacked between the eyes with a single shot twenty gauge shotgun, or a fully automatic M2 Fifty caliber machine gun, the result is the exact same thing. You got smacked to death, period. So stop blaming calibers.

“Assault” weapons..? Hey creeps I got a question for you. Why is it that you want to ban effective weaponry to American citizens when the bad guys; be they terrorist’s or criminals don’t bother with things like background checks, or proper training (Mexican Drug Cartels aside.) and buy black market “Choppers” (Full Auto AK47’s) but think that Americans shouldn’t be allowed similar effective weapons..?

The answer is indeed oh so obvious. You “Hate America First.” As well as all things American. Such as refusing to bend a knee toward oppression, kneeling firing position notwithstanding.

Since I support the Minutemen, and other similar groups that support Freedom and Liberty I will in all probability be branded a racist.’ That is after all, what the hell you people do when you cannot argue anything at all based upon logic or reason.

After all, you lost the “sexist” angle when so many women started buying weapons to defend themselves and their families from leftist’s goons… Not from me or others like me. Those folks are often, defined as Social Services, and the BATFE. Best watch out when you go out to destroy a family these days. After all, you never know when that Cop standing next to you is an “Oath Keeper.”

Keep the fire burning friends. As in our newly elected Taxed Enough Already butts. No more of the same old game. No more compromise when Liberty and Freedom are at stake.

PERIOD!

I have no faith whatsoever, in the Country Club Blue Blood Republicans.

Righting “wrongs” based on wrong interpretations of “rights”

December 1, 2010

Socialists,from President Obama on down, look at the government as the
creator and administrator of rights. That is why even some on the left
liked the Heller and the McDonald decisions which overturned gun bans
in Washington, DC and Chicago.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m ecstatic that the Supreme Court ruled
against these the gun bans in these two cities. And I’d rather be in
our shoes today than in the Brady Campaign’s — as they saw their
arguments slapped down harshly by the Court.

So why then would some big-government types like these two decisions
— especially the McDonald case out of Chicago? Because in basing
their decision upon the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, the
Justices perpetuated a false doctrine which has allowed the
Constitution to continue evolving.

The Due Process clause is the place where judges invent rights and
then decide how much the government can control them.

Gun Owners of America argued that the Court should have based its
decision on the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the 14th Amendment.
The Court would have then been using a definitive clause dealing with
rights of citizenship rather than the amorphous “substantive” Due
Process Clause where Courts have run wild and seldom come to
constitutionally-based conclusions.

Justices love the Due Process Clause because it has been interpreted
in such a way to allow judges to twist the Constitution to fit their
big-government world view. They love this approach because they love
righting “wrongs” based on what they THINK are “rights.”

President Obama complained on a Public Broadcasting radio interview,
when he was a state senator, that the Constitution only protects
negative rights and that such a limitation (in his view) must be
overcome. Obama made it quite clear that a constitutional republic
that is governed by our Constitution is antithetical to his socialism.
He talks of a right to health care, and a right to a comfortable
living, and, well, a right to anything the left thinks will help buy
votes.

Indeed, the role of government in the Founders’ Constitution is to
protect liberty, and no more. Socialists want government to provide
for everything, making the people dependent, even at the expense of
liberty.

The left is hoping to pit their understanding of the 14th Amendment
where courts create rights against the Tenth Amendment. They argue
that the Fourteenth Amendment, being enacted after the Tenth, trumps
the earlier amendment. That is why they are so eager to inject their
view of government-created rights into the 14th Amendment.

If the government is the creator of rights, then the government must
be protected from the people. That means they cannot allow any notion
that the Second Amendment is intended to be a check on the
unconstitutional exercise of federal power. The constitutional militia
was intended to be an instrument of the states to protect their
citizens from the federal government (by legal definition throughout
the colonies). All freemen were required to own military long arms.

Wyoming is on the right path. Wyoming has a Firearms Freedom Act which
“interposes” Wyoming against all federal laws involving a firearm
made in the state and which remains in the state. Unlike the other
seven states with identical laws, Wyoming makes violation of the act
by a federal official a state offense punishable by up to 365 days in
jail. Had they added one more day to the potential penalty, any
conviction would result in the loss of gun rights under 18 USC 922(g)
for any federal official who violates their law.

States and county sheriffs are going to need to take the militia
clauses of the Constitution seriously. Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa
County (Phoenix), Arizona has a posse of 3,000. If Arizona were to
create a State Guard and encourage sheriffs to beef up their posse
strength to levels analogous to Maricopa County, and if other states
were to follow suit, the federal government would be less inclined to
assume that there are no limits to their powers.

Such an outcome will not come about until we understand that there is
no conflict between the Tenth and the Fourteenth Amendments, and that
rights come from God, not from government. Government-made
“rights” are the “wrong” rights.

SOURCE

Thunder from down under: Nope, not for a long time

November 22, 2010

At least not from the “law abiding” people of Australia. Theirs is one of the saddest tales when it comes to gun control. But? They chose to defy history and it’s lessons. So, the results were quite predictable, and, in fact they were.

In any case one state is seeking to undo a tiny bit of that national stupidity. Read on…

The state government is reviewing the 1996 Firearms Act, which was introduced after the Port Arthur massacre.

The proposed amendments include removing the limit on the number of firearms for collectors and downgrading the classification of pump action shotguns.

Full Story

Now,where I ask, have we heard all those tired arguments before?

Obama appoints rogue to head rogue agency

November 18, 2010

Nearly two years into his term, President Obama on Monday chose a director for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Mr. Obama will submit the name of Andrew Traver, the special agent in charge of the bureau’s Chicago field division, to the Senate for consideration, the White House said.

Read About It: The New York Times

Statement from Chris W. Cox, executive director, NRA Institute for Legislative Action

The National Rifle Association of America strongly opposes President Obama’s nomination of Andrew Traver as director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE). Traver has been deeply aligned with gun control advocates and anti-gun activities. This makes him the wrong choice to lead an enforcement agency that has almost exclusive oversight and control over the firearms industry, its retailers and consumers. Further, an important nomination such as BATFE director should not be made as a “recess appointment,” in order to circumvent consent by the American people through their duly-elected U.S. Senators.

Traver served as an advisor to the International Association for Chiefs of Police’s (IACP) “Gun Violence Reduction Project,” a “partnership” with the Joyce Foundation. Both IACP and the Joyce Foundation are names synonymous with promoting a variety of gun control schemes at the federal and state levels. Most of the individuals involved in this project were prominent gun control activists and lobbyists.

The IACP report, generated with Traver’s help, called on Congress to ban thousands of commonly owned firearms by misrepresenting them as “assault weapons,” as well as calling for bans on .50 caliber rifles and widely used types of ammunition. The report also suggests that Congress should regulate gun shows out of existence and should repeal the privacy protections of the Tiahrt Amendment — all efforts strongly opposed by the NRA and its members.

Traver also participated in an extremely deceptive NBC Chicago report (http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local-beat/Assault-Weapons-Surge-in-City-69620227.html) in which he referred to “the growing frequency of gang members and drug dealers using heavy caliber military-type weapons” and described them as if they were machine guns: “Pull the trigger and you can mow people down.” Traver and his agents provided the reporter with a fully automatic AK-47, with which she was unable to hit the target. He then said that stray bullets are “one of the main problems with having stuff like this available to the gangs.”

As the Agent-in-Charge of Chicago’s BATFE office, Traver knows that fully automatic firearms are not available through normal retail channels — the opposite of what was implied in the report.

An agency involved in the regulation of a fundamental, individual right guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution should not be led by an individual with a demonstrated hostility to that freedom. For that reason, the NRA strongly opposes Andrew Traver to head the BATFE and urges President Obama to withdraw this ill-advised nomination.

SOURCE

Village idiots: Stuck on Stupid

November 12, 2010

Some things never change; like being stuck on stupid!

Fighting for Pelosi: “Speaker Nancy Pelosi is one of the strongest, most progressive leaders in Washington. Her determination brought health care reform back to life last winter, when the Senate and the White House were ready to scale back. She fought harder than anyone for bigger, better job creation bills. And right now, she is the strongest voice in leadership for ending Bush’s millionaire tax bailout. But after Tuesday’s elections, some corporate Democrats are taking the wrong lesson — saying that Democrats should be less progressive and more like the Republicans. And they’re pushing Speaker Pelosi to step down. This would be a terrible loss for progressives, and for the country.” –MoveOn.org

Unbelievable: “The president himself has to reconnect with the people. Remember, President Clinton reconnected through [the Oklahoma City bombing], right? … And the president right now seems removed. And it wasn’t until that speech that he reclicked with the American public. Obama needs a similar — a similar kind of event.” –Democrat pollster Mark Penn (They “need” another terrorist attack?)

Advice: “Seriously, if we ran Tom Hanks, if we ran Oprah — there’s a whole column of people who are beloved people. Smart and good.” –Michael Moore suggesting a new slate of Democrat candidates

California dreaming: “We’re nothing but a mirror of our consistent thoughts. You tend to manifest what you focus on. If you look around for what’s wrong, you’ll find it. But as all we know up here in San Francisco, when you focus on what’s right, you see it all around you. … There is absolutely nothing wrong with California that can’t be fixed by what’s right with California. … If you’re from another state, you’d love to have the problems of California.” –California Lt. Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom

SOURCE

D.C. Smackdown: Heller II, and more…

November 10, 2010

Coming off some huge Election Day victories in the Congress, Gun Owners of America is now setting its sights on the courts.

A big battle will be taking place next week on Monday, November 15, at the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Both Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners Foundation are involved in challenging an extremely restrictive gun control law in a case known as Heller II.

After the District of Columbia lost its 2008 case in Heller I, the city council enacted a firearms registration scheme that was nearly as draconian as the original law, which the Supreme Court had struck down.

The Heller I decision in 2008 was monumental, as it paved the way for the Chicago verdict earlier this year — which made clear that our Second Amendment rights apply throughout the entire country (not just in Washington, DC).

Gun Owners was also actively involved in the Chicago case, known as McDonald v. Chicago. This case is paying dividends, as recently as last month when a Wisconsin judge used the McDonald case to rule their ban on concealed carry unconstitutional!

The court said it “agrees with Justice Clarence Thomas’s McDonald concurrence and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to this matter. In essence, no State shall abridge the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States. As Justice Thomas demonstrates, the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right, not created by the Second Amendment, but secured or recognized by it.”

This appeal to the “privileges and immunities” of American citizens is exactly the argument that Gun Owners made in its amicus brief before the McDonald court.

It was worth every penny that was spent on the Heller I and McDonald cases.

In Heller II, we are challenging the new DC gun law. After all, what good does it do if the Court says you have an “individual right” to own a gun, but the city in which you live is still allowed to impose draconian restrictions which will cost you hundreds of dollars just so you can exercise that right.’/

That’s why GOA is helping to challenge the DC law… and why we are so excited about the oral arguments that will be delivered to the court on November 15, almost two weeks after the election.

Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners Foundation are submitting an amicus brief in this case. This is an effort that you can help us with — and it’s a lot easier than you might think.

In many federal offices, there are subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) pressures to give to the Combined Federal Campaign. Your boss may think his prestige depends upon getting everyone to kick in. The same thing happens in all too many corporations during the United Way fundraising drive.

You may have wanted to give but couldn”t find a group that wasn’t attacking your rights, let alone defending them, on the list of participating organizations. But that has all changed!

Federal employees now are able to designate Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) as the recipient of their gifts to the Combined Federal Campaign.

Use Agency Number 10042 for Gun Owners Foundation when you make your Combined Federal Campaign pledge or donation. Your gifts will go toward helping us win cases like the Heller II case which is coming just around the corner.

Also, if you work for a company that participates in the United Way, you too may be able to designate that your gift be to Gun Owners Foundation. Many local United Way Campaigns allow Gun Owners Foundation to participate through their Donor Choice Programs. Some, however, do not. Check with your local United Way Agency. You will not only be helping people and protecting your rights, but you will also get a tax deduction.

One additional note. If you are employed by a corporation or organization which has a Matching Gift Program, please keep GOF in mind when making your donation. Contributions to GOF are tax-deductible.

Your support for Gun Owners Foundation helps us to offer quality briefs in defense of gun owners’ rights. (You can read previous amicus briefs on the GOF site at gunowners.com.)

So please help the Second Amendment — while making a tax-deductible contribution either through the CFC or the United Way. Of course, you can always donate online at the Gun Owners Foundation site: http://www.gunowners.com/donate.htm

Thank you very much.

GOA Offering Arguments in Heller II Case
— You can help by giving to the CFC (Agency Number
10042 ) or a similar private campaign

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.com/donate.htm

“seventy-five percent of BATFE prosecutions were constitutionally improper.”

November 9, 2010

What follows is a little dated, but at the time it didn’t get the coverage needed. This is just one of the things that the new Congress takes immediate definitive action on.

The Obama Administration and dozens of politicians are pretending that they are worried that America’s loose gun laws have allowed guns to be smuggled into Mexico for use in the drug wars that are plaguing that country.

President Obama is using this nonsense as an excuse to double the number of BATFE agents so he can blanket the border with agents to stop the flow of guns into Mexico.

What nonsense!  As if the drug cartels that have their own armies, huge fleet of airplanes, submarines and rocket launchers need to rely on smugglers to get guns from the U.S.!

Clearly, this is nothing other than the latest tactic from this antigun administration to add some muscle to the most reckless and corrupt branch of our government – the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

A couple of decades ago, Congress passed the FOPA (Firearm Owners Protection Act) to reign in this renegade agency after a Congressional investigation officially concluded that “seventy-five percent of BATFE prosecutions were constitutionally improper.”

Today, twenty-four years later, the BATFE is just as bad, if not worse, than it was back then.  Only now the White house and the Congress are filled with people who want to give them more power, more authority and more boots on the ground to continue their unconstitutional attack on gun owners.

From using paid “informants” to provide false testimony, to physically tampering with firearms to turn them into “machine guns,” to abusing and harassing mom and pop gun shops who cannot afford to legally defend themselves, this agency appears not only to have little or no regards for the rights of citizens, but is clearly willing even to ignore the rulings of the Supreme Court.

As you know, over the years, Gun Owners has helped dozens of victims of BATFE abuse.  Some of these victims were literally framed by BATFE agents who actually converted semi-automatic firearms into fully automatic weapons – and then charged them with selling unregistered machine guns!

In one case that we were involved with, the Olofson Case, we discovered that the alleged “machine gun” was, in reality, one of thousands of ordinary semi-automatic rifles made by Olympic Arms.  We learned that it only became a machine gun when the BATFE, behind closed doors, mechanically tampered with the rifle to the extent that it would misfire a burst of several rounds before it jammed.

Getting guns to malfunction is a favorite technique of the BATFE as it gives them a great opportunity to rack up convictions on the possession or selling of “machine guns,” which requires a special type of license.

For some time, Gun Owners has lobbied to require the BATFE to videotape their test firings of alleged machines.  We knew that if juries could see the outrageous, even bizarre, efforts the agency uses to get a gun to fire off an extra round or two, they would throw all of these cases out of court and Congress would have the evidence it needs to take action and clean house at this agency.

Unlike all other agencies, the BATFE has no sets of standards or rules for conducting their business.  They have no manuals that set out procedures for the work they do. This gives them the latitude to do whatever they wish with total impunity.

And this is what enables them to make the rules up as they go along.  This allows them to conduct repeated “test firings” until they get the results they are looking for.

Clearly, when a test firing fails to prove that a weapon is a machine gun that should be the end

of any debate as to whether a person is selling “machine guns.”  But because the BATFE has no rules, they simply do it again and again, until they are able to force a gun to misfire.

As you can see, with a renegade agency like this trampling our gun rights, nobody is safe.  Not you, not me and not our favorite semi-automatic firearm.

That is why we are really encouraged about the Fairness in Firearms Testing Act (H.R. 1923).  Introduced by Congressman Phil Gingrey, this bill will require that an unedited video be recorded during the testing of a firearm to determine if it is a machine gun.

Had such a law been in place when David Olofson’s rifle was being “tested,” his case would have been thrown out immediately and he would be home today with his wife and three children.

Had such a law been in place, jurors, the media and the Congress would have seen the extent to which the BATFE is capable of and willing to trample the rights of citizens in their frenzy to put innocent gun owners behind bars.

Sadly, H.R. 1923 is not yet the law of the land.  And, until it is passed, there will be more innocent Americans victimized by this out-of-control agency that acts more like a subsidiary of the anti-gun lobby than an agency under the jurisdiction of the federal government.

The Fairness in Firearms Testing Act ought to be an easy bill to pass.  Who can defend an agency that tampers with evidence to make their case or who pays thugs to entrap ordinary law-abiding citizens?

But with folks like Chuck Schumer and Caroline McCarthy running the Congress, it may be a lot tougher to pass such a sensible bill than you might imagine.  That is why I am looking for all all-out effort from you and all the other members of GOA.

Over the years, GOA has fought for a wide variety of gun rights issues.  Our yardstick for which issues we choose to prioritize is based on securing the liberty of ordinary citizens.  To me, the Olofson case is a clear example of what happens to our freedoms if we let our government abuse the law for its own purposes.

David Olofson has been robbed of all his freedom, not just his right to keep and bear arms.  He has lost his liberty, his family, and his life outside of prison.

It is just a turn of fate that it is David Olofson, not you or me that is rotting away in prison.  Please think about that when I ask you to sign the postcards I have enclosed.  The first postcard is addressed to David.  I have left the message side blank so you can choose your own words to let him know that there are a lot of gun owners out there praying for his release or whatever you wish to say to him.

Of the remaining postcards, one is for you and one for a friend or neighbor.  These postcards express our outrage at the lack of oversight this out-of-control agency receives and demands that H.R. 1923 be passed immediately so that no more innocent American citizens are framed and sentenced to prison so that the BATFE can rack up big numbers in their arrest column.

I also need you to try to make a generous contribution to Gun Owners so we can ramp up our efforts to find more cosponsors for H.R. 1923; call for an investigation into BATFE abuses; and continue our efforts to get David Olofson released and returned to his family.

Please try to be as generous as you can because every day this innocent gun owner remains in jail is not just a personal tragedy for the Olofson family, it remains a threat to all law-abiding gun owners.

I know that money is tight right now.  I feel it the same as you do and, at Gun Owners, we are doing everything we can to stretch every dollar for maximum effect.

So please, even if you cannot afford to send as much as you have done in the past, please try to send what you can safely afford.

Thank you again for your loyalty and your continued support for our work.

Sincerely,

Larry Pratt

Executive Director

SOURCE

A great night for the Second Amendment: Or was it really?

November 5, 2010

The Second Amendment had a great night on Tuesday. Across the nation, the right to arms is stronger than ever, and the stage has been set for constructive reforms in 2011.

U.S. Senate: The net result of Tuesday was a gain of +6 votes on Second Amendment issues.

In not a single U.S. Senate seat did the gun control lobby gain ground. Three open seats switched from anti-gun to pro-gun: Ohio (Rob Portman replacing George Voinovich), West Virginia (Joe Manchin taking the seat of the late Robert Byrd), North Dakota (John Hoeven replacing Byron Dorgan). In Arkansas, John Boozman’s victory over Blanche Lincoln is a significant gain.

Full Story

It just so happens that I agree with Dave Kopel about 99% of the time. Now, having said that..? Just how many of these new kids on the block will take on Lautenberg and Schumer. Two men devoted to the destruction of the Constitution and Bill of Rights? How many will put forth legislation doing away with GCA 1968? Or the ex post facto law portion, if not the entire Lautenberg Domestic Violence Act? The abortion known as obamacare? With it’s hidden as well as blatant un Constitutional mandates..? I myself, am sick of hearing how this or that “D” is pro Second Amendment then all they do is pay lip service… Unless it’s election time, and that goes for RINO’s like McCain as well!

HERE is another good read that, especially if you read the comments. Shows to what extremes some people will go to for the sole purpose of “Lording it over” you and I.

Will the hoplophobia continue on. It is, after all, politically correct mental illness.

Stuck on stupid: A tale of two states…

November 3, 2010

This will be a short post, but to the point. And surly there will be follow up postings.

Colorado and California. That says it all…