Gun Owners of America applauds immediate past NRA President Sandy Froman, who stepped up to the plate last week with a call to arms for all NRA members to vigorously oppose the nomination of Judge Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. (See the article below). GOA has been calling on our members to oppose this nomination since it is clear that Sotomayor is anti-Second Amendment and wants to legislate from the bench. The official position from current NRA leadership is to take a "wait and see" approach to the Sotomayor nomination which may well allow her to wiggle through and be confirmed. GOA calls on all pro-gunners across America to urge NRA leadership to join in this critical fight to protect the Constitution -- and especially our gun rights. -- GOA Vice-Chairman Tim Macy ---------------------------------------- NRA Members Must Oppose Sotomayor by Sandy Froman Wednesday, June 24, 2009 Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Barack Obama's first nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, has a narrow view of the Second Amendment that contradicts the Court's landmark decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. A heated debate has started in the U.S. Senate over her opposition to the right to keep and bear arms. This issue, which has decided the fate of presidential elections, could also decide her nomination. Gun owners, and especially the members of the National Rifle Association, must aggressively oppose Judge Sotomayor's confirmation to the Supreme Court. On June 24, senators began speaking on the floor of the Senate expressing grave concerns over Judge Sotomayor's Second Amendment record. Senator Jeff Sessions R-AL, the Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, pointed out that although her record on the issue is "fairly scant," she has twice stated that the Second Amendment is not a fundamental right. Senator Sessions also noted that in Second Amendment and other constitutional cases, Sotomayor's analysis of important constitutional issues has been lacking suggesting "a troubling tendency to avoid or casually dismiss difficult Constitutional issues of exceptional importance." Sotomayor's view on the Second Amendment clearly reflects an extreme anti-gun philosophy, and some Democrat senators from pro-gun states are justifiably nervous. Last year, the Supreme Court held in Heller that the Second Amendment guarantees the right of individual Americans to keep and bear firearms. But that ruling was a fiercely-contested, 5-4 split decision. Justice Kennedy joined the four conservatives on the Court to make the majority, with the four liberal justices writing passionate dissents about how the Second Amendment does not apply to private citizens. Bluntly speaking, the Second Amendment survived by a single vote. Had one justice voted differently, the Second Amendment would have been erased from the Bill of Rights forever. Today in the Supreme Court, the right to bear arms hangs by a single vote. The next question the Supreme Court will decide is whether the Second Amendment is a "fundamental right" that applies to cities and states, thus preventing them from restricting gun rights. Even the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held earlier this year in Nordyke v. King that the Second Amendment is a fundamental right, yet Judge Sotomayor disagrees. When Barack Obama nominated Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, it belied his flowery rhetoric about respecting our constitutional gun rights. Out of almost 200 federal appeals judges in this country, Judge Sotomayor is one of only six to weigh in (after the Heller case) to hold that the Second Amendment only limits federal actions. If your state or city chooses to ban all guns or take away the ones that you already have in your home for hunting and self-defense, Sonia Sotomayor says the Constitution can't help you. This position becomes all the more radical when it's revealed how she reached this conclusion. Only six judges have denied gun rights against the states. Of these, three did so in a recent Seventh Circuit case, NRA v. Chicago, writing a detailed opinion that the Second Amendment doesn't apply to the states because they thought an old 1800s Supreme Court case tied their hands on the issue, and they commended the case up to the Supreme Court after long and scholarly consideration. Judge Sotomayor and two of her liberal colleagues, however, wrote only a single paragraph on the whole issue when deciding their own New York case, Maloney v. Cuomo. In one paragraph, she said the Second Amendment gives people no rights at all when it comes to state or city laws. She gave no explanation, and made no call for Supreme Court action. Then we find that this has been a consistent belief for Sotomayor. In a case before her in 2004, she and her colleagues concluded that there is no fundamental right in the Second Amendment but provided no substantive analysis to justify this conclusion. Throughout her career, Judge Sotomayor's record is one of consistent opposition to the private ownership of firearms. America has almost 90 million gun owners who value their rights. And of these, no one does more to protect the Second Amendment than the four million members of the National Rifle Association. I served as an officer of the NRA for nine years, including a two-year term as president. I saw NRA members turn the tide on Election Day 2000 to defeat Al Gore. We fought again to help defeat John Kerry in 2004. We can do the same with Sonia Sotomayor, if we call our U.S. Senators and tell them to vote against this anti-gun judge. No fewer than fourteen Democrat senators have solid records on the Second Amendment, and we must urge them to oppose this nominee. Next year, the Supreme Court is likely to take up NRA v. Chicago, which will decide whether the Second Amendment applies to states and cities like it does the federal government. This case is as important as Heller, and will massively impact gun rights forever. We already know where Judge Sotomayor stands. It's time to tell the Senate, "Vote No! on Sonia Sotomayor."
Posts Tagged ‘GOA’
GOA Applause: NRA Past President on Sotomayor Nomination
June 30, 2009We won, for now…
March 12, 2009Victory in the House! -- But the land bill battle will continue 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.org Wednesday, March 11, 2009 Thanks to you, a bill expanding gun control on federal land was narrowly defeated Wednesday morning, March 11. The Omnibus Public Lands Act of 2009, S. 22, would have drastically increased the amount of land controlled by the National Park Service, thus subjecting such land to the anti-gun regulations of the agency. The bill was brought to the floor of the U.S. House on what is known as the "suspension calendar." This calendar is normally reserved for non-controversial bills. As such, any bill being passed under the suspension calendar requires a two-thirds majority of those voting. In this case, the pro-gun position prevailed by a mere two votes -- meaning S. 22 is far from being non-controversial. Although suspension bills are not normally amended, one change was allowed in a secret backroom deal between a few members. The amendment, offered by Rep. Jason Altmire (D-PA), was intended to alleviate the concerns of gun owners. The Altmire amendment sought to protect hunting and recreational shooting on federal land, but those steps are completely inadequate to address the concerns of millions of gun owners. The Second Amendment protects, as the Supreme Court affirmed in D.C. v. Heller, an individual right to keep and bear arms. That right was never intended to protect only the shooting sports. Under current regulations, firearms possessed for the sole purpose of self-defense on land controlled by the National Park Service is prohibited unless the person holds a concealed carry permit. While millions of law-biding Americans hold CCW permits, many more do not. It is these citizens' rights that are going unprotected. NPS land covers the gamut from busy thoroughfares to remote wilderness areas. These gun free zones are dangerous, in addition to creating a patchwork of inconsistent regulations between federal and state land. Although we won today, unfortunately the battle is not over. The anti-gun leadership will attempt to bring this bill back to the floor in a way that requires a simple majority, rather than the two-thirds vote they needed Wednesday. Several pro-gun congressmen will try to offer an amendment in committee to simply allow state and local law to govern firearms possession on NPS land. This type of amendment would put more control at the local level and protect the gun rights of all law-abiding Americans. What is expected is that the leadership will propose a new "rule" that blocks any such pro-gun amendments. If that happens, the vote on the rule becomes the gun vote. House leaders have not indicated when they will attempt to bring the bill back to the floor, but it could come up at any time. Therefore, your Representative needs to hear from you once again, for two reasons. First, the entire House needs to be urged to reject any parliamentary trick that excludes language to protect Second Amendment rights on federal land. Next, those who voted against your rights need to know of your dissatisfaction, while those who stood up for your rights should be thanked. ACTION: Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Rep. a pre-written letter. Note: the LAC will automatically load the correct text for individual Representatives, based upon their vote Wednesday. Because the list has to be divided in this way, the pre-written letters are not editable by the sender. ----- Pre-written letter for those who voted pro-gun ----- Dear Representative: Thank you for standing up for the Second Amendment by voting against S. 22, the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009. This bill would greatly expand land controlled by the National Park Service, and thus spread the agency's gun restrictions to even more areas. The NPS gun ban should be repealed, not expanded. Although the pro-gun side won today, the battle is not over. The anti-gun leadership will try to bring the bill to the floor again, this time with a rule intended to exclude a pro-gun amendment to repeal the NPS anti-gun regulations. If that is the case, I urge you to once again stand up for the Second Amendment and vote against the rule. Sincerely, ----- Pre-written letter for those who voted anti-gun ----- Dear Representative, I am extremely disappointed that you did not stand up for the Second Amendment on the issue of S. 22, the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009. This bill would greatly expand land controlled by the National Park Service, and thus spread the agency's gun restrictions to even more areas. The NPS gun ban should be repealed, not expanded. Although the pro-gun side won today, the battle is not over. The anti-gun leadership will try to bring the bill to the floor again, this time with a rule intended to exclude a pro-gun amendment to repeal the NPS anti-gun regulations. If that is the case, I urge you to protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans and vote against the rule. Sincerely,
EMERGENCY ALERT: GOA!
March 10, 2009Why do I smell a Lautenberg..?
Emergency Alert!
— Compromise on massive land bill does not protect Second Amendment
rights
Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
Tuesday evening, March 10, 2009
Gun Owners of America does not sound the “Emergency alarm”
often — and
when we do, we mean it.
Remember the massive land bill, S. 22, that passed out of the Senate
last month?
It was expected to pass quickly in the House, but your opposition to an
expansion of gun control contained in the bill forced it to be pulled
from the floor.
GOA has just learned that after some backroom deals, the bill is headed
to the floor WEDNESDAY MORNING, without any amendments to truly protect
your Second Amendment rights on National Park Service (NPS) land.
You have fought the battle over the NPS gun ban for a long time.
Unlike U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land,
which allow for state and local law to govern firearms possession, NPS
land is subject to a complete gun ban for any citizen who does not hold
a concealed carry permit.
The bill coming to the floor March 11 greatly expands NPS land, thus
spreading the agency’s anti-gun regulations into more areas.
S. 22 is actually a compilation of over 190 bills, many of which were
never even debated on their own merits.
Here are just a few examples of land expansions in the bill:
* Section 5204 of the bill establishes the Washington-Rochambeau Route
as a Historic Trail. This dual trail begins in Rhode Island and travels
650 miles to Yorktown, Virginia. The trail includes parts of major
thoroughfares on the east coast such as Interstate 95 and US Route 1,
meaning the gun ban could effect hundreds of thousands of unsuspecting
gun owners each day.
* Section 5301 authorizes the federal government to buy private land
adjacent to national parks and trails. Such land would be controlled by
the NPS, and thus be subject to the agency’s anti-gun regulations.
* Section 7002 makes the birthplace of William Jefferson Clinton a
National Historic Site. Perhaps it’s fitting that the legacy of former
President Clinton, who was responsible for so many anti-Second Amendment
laws, will include yet another “gun free” zone.
In all, the bill designates over 2 million acres of wilderness,
establishes three new national parks, a new national monument, three new
national conservation areas, and four new national trails.
In an effort to persuade pro-gun Congressmen to vote for the bill, the
leadership apparently agreed to one backroom change — an amendment to
protect hunting and recreational shooting.
The compromise measure misses the point. The founding fathers did not,
in their struggle to secure essential freedoms, craft the Second
Amendment with the idea that it would protect hunting and recreational
shooting.
It is seemingly simple to understand, yet we have to continually remind
the Congress that the Second Amendment is not about hunting!
If we have any chance of stopping this bill, you must contact your
Representative right away.
The bill is scheduled to come to the floor before noon, Wednesday, March
11.
Please don’t let Congress sneak this expansion of gun control through
the House under the guise that compromise language protects your Second
Amendment rights. It doesn’t.
ACTION: Right now, please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center
at http://gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Representative the
pre-written letter below.
—– Pre-written letter —–
Dear Representative,
On March 11, the House intends to take up S. 22, a massive bill
containing nearly 200 separate pieces of legislation.
This bill will greatly expand land controlled by the Nation Park
Service, thereby expanding the agency’s anti-gun regulations.
There is compromise language being offered to supposedly protect hunting
and sport shooting. That is insufficient, as the Second Amendment is
NOT about hunting and recreational shooting!
And while there may be some parts of this bill that you support for our
state or our district, please do not give such parochial issues priority
over my Second Amendment rights.
I urge you, in the strongest possible terms, to vote against this 1,294
page bill until the leadership allows an amendment that will truly
protect the right to keep and bear arms.
Gun Owners of America will rate a vote for this bill as an anti-gun
vote, and will inform me of your position.
Sincerely,
****************************
Please do not reply directly to this message, as your reply will
bounce back as undeliverable.
To subscribe to free, low-volume GOA alerts, go to
http://www.gunowners.org/ean.htm on the web. Change of e-mail
address may also be made at that location.
Gun control or people control?
February 7, 2009Those that preach the panacea of a society without violence often use legitimate people as whipping boys for their targets. Legal gun owners for example. Their twisted logic states that guns are evil, and that it is the gun that makes the person do evil things.
Those very same people expose the rest of us to extreme violence, and make it tough, if nor outright illegal to effectively defend ourselves. They make laws that create free fire zones for criminals and social misfits. Like schools, parks and so on. People that inhabit such places are turned into cannon fodder by other people that care little for anything other than their agenda. Such measures may have started out as well intentioned but the evidence is more than clear after so many mass shootings that the law of unintended consequences beats intentions every time.
So then, just who is it that commits most gun crime? A tiny minority are sociopaths that shoot up schools, malls and other public places. By far though, the vast majority are gang related. It is a sad fact of life that in America gangs are just about everywhere. Money is the driving force behind most of the violence, and innocent people get caught in these cross fires as groups vie for territory or “street cred.”
Drugs, and the lucrative profits from dealing that the ongoing drug war bolsters are most often tied to gun violence. At least according the the alphabet soup agencies. A recent CNN article pointed out that nearly all gun violence is gang related. So why then are so many different people, and organizations hell bent on disarming the rest of the population?
It could be blamed on mental illness, and many of the anti rights types are clearly hopolophobics. I think though, that is simply that old game of control. They want control of your life, and through that, your death.
As A Rabidly Anti-gun Executive Takes His Oath Of Office…
January 20, 2009As A Rabidly Anti-gun Executive Takes His Oath Of Office…
There is some good news for gun owners
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.org
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
“I, Barack Hussein Obama, do solemnly swear….”
As our new President takes his oath of office today, the war against
our rights is soon to begin. In fact, it has already begun, as Obama’s
choice for Attorney General (Eric Holder) is one of the most anti-gun
picks that he could have made.
As we mentioned in last week’s alert, Holder supported policies —
during his tenure in the Clinton administration — that were aimed at
driving the nation’s gun dealers and manufacturers out of business. As
part of an Obama administration, he will have even more power to
continue his war against gun owners.
At lot has happened since you received our alert last week. GOA was
asked by the Judiciary Committee to testify at the Senate hearings on
Eric Holder, as we were the ONLY national gun group that has told
Senators we will rate their vote on confirming Holder.
We also “hammered” one of the Republican members of the
Judiciary Committee — Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah — in his home state
after he announced his support of the Holder nomination.
Last week, GOA issued a stinging alert and mobilized its members in the
state of Utah after The Hill reported on January 12 that Hatch
“will support Eric Holder’s nomination for attorney general,
giving him a major boost toward confirmation.”
GOA is never timid about putting the heat on faltering legislators, no
matter what their party affiliation. Strangely, GOA was disinvited
from appearing before the Judiciary Committee, and not allowed to
present testimony.
Well, the Committee might try to squelch our voice, but they cannot
squelch yours. Your Senators have to answer to you — and they need to
hear that an Attorney General who just argued (in the DC v. Heller
case) that there is no individual right to keep and bear arms does NOT
deserve to be confirmed.
Please take the recommended action suggested below, even if you have
already contacted your Senators. This is just too important.
And now for some good news… Bush commutes the sentences of Ramos and
Compean!
You might remember that, last month, GOA and its members issued a
strong plea to President Bush, urging him to pardon Ignacio Ramos and
Jose Antonio Compean — two Border Patrol agents who were sentenced to
ten years in prison in 2007 for shooting a smuggler. Their conviction
was fraudulent, as there is no such crime as “using a gun in a
federal crime.”
Because this precedent could greatly impact all gun owners, GOA got
involved in this case and submitted amicus briefs in the courts. If
the feds can prosecute its own agents on trumped up charges for
“using” a gun in a crime, then why not also a mom or dad who
is driving their kids through a gun free school zone while armed?
Well, good news arrived yesterday when President Bush — as one of his
last acts in office — listened to GOA members and commuted the two
agents’ sentences! We wish a full pardon had been granted, erasing
their felony conviction, but at least they will be home soon with their
families.
ACTION: Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators the
pre-written e-mail message below.
—– Prewritten Letter —–
Dear Senator:
I urge you to vote AGAINST Eric Holder for U.S. Attorney General.
Holder has been a long-time gun control activist. Most recently, he
joined 12 other former Justice Department officials in SUPPORTING the
DC gun ban and arguing the Second Amendment does NOT protect an
individual right.
Thankfully, the Supreme Court ruled against Holder in the DC v. Heller
case. But this is a man who will try any means to enforce gun control.
Remember his attempts — as an official in the Clinton Administration
— to make an end-run around Congress and use the courts (through
litigation) to impose gun control? He strongly approved of the HUD
lawsuits against the gun industry, where through a system of extortion,
HUD only promised to drop the lawsuits if gun makers would impose
certain gun restrictions.
Eric Holder is tremendously out of step with the American people. In
February, 2008, a USA Today/Gallup poll reported that 73% of all
Americans support the INDIVIDUAL right to keep and bear arms. Eric
Holder is in the extreme minority. Please don’t vote to put him into a
position where he will be able to use the force of government to
discourage gun ownership in America.
Please vote NO on Eric Holder for Attorney General.
Sincerely,
****************************
What’s Your Current GOA Status?
Obviously, we now face years of invigorated attacks on our gun rights.
Shutting down gun shows, prohibitions on specific calibers, another
semi-auto ban, and the anti-gun extremists’ Holy Grail of mandatory
federal licensing and registration of all gun owners — these are just
some of the horrors that we already know we’ll have to defeat head-on.
It can’t be done without every single voice being counted. That’s why
we are asking you to consider making the commitment of becoming a Gun
Owners of America Life Member. By doing so, you put the politicians on
notice that neither you nor GOA is going away — that no matter who’s
in the White House, there is always going to be a solid wall of
resistance.
Now is a perfect time to come a Life Member. In addition to providing
GOA an infusion of much-needed funds, you can take advantage of a free
firearms inventory software promotion.
And if you aren’t a GOA member at all, isn’t it time you became one? Or
maybe you are a current member and can’t commit to Life at this time,
but could spare another small additional donation. In those instances,
the free software also applies… because GOA is doing all it can at
this time to line up the troops for the battles that surely must be
fought.
Please go to http://www.gunowners.org/ordercs.htm to upgrade your
participation in GOA.
Obama’s message of ‘change’ may include gun rights
December 14, 2008The Obamanites, and “change? We shall see…
Obama’s message of ‘change’ may include gun rights
By Forrest Fisher
The regular New York State big game firearm season ended last Sunday (Dec. 7) and the next day, the short nine-day late archery and regular muzzleloader seasons started so there is still time for hunters to take a whitetail. Every deer is a trophy, regardless of size.
There is nothing quite like the incredible challenge and joy of hunting deer in the woods to develop new savvy and skills. Sportsmen readily express moments of treasure during the Western New York deer hunting adventure of the last three short weeks. Hunting time is priceless and hard to come by for many sportsmen, especially with the holiday season upon us. Plus, recent studies show that 42 percent of Americans work longer hours now than just five years ago and many of the working class spend more than 50 hours a week at their job. So, for all of these folks, hunting season brings more than simple relief.
However, our rights to enjoy the outdoor hunting experience may be changing, friends. With the final coat of post-season gun oil on all metal parts and firearms returned to secured safe places and storage cabinets, there appears to be clamoring discussion in many corners of these United States about the very freedoms of the season in change. Hunting with a firearm of our choice may be about to take new meaning.
Wayne LaPierre and the National Rifle Association have provided early warning information. NRA is tabulating the opening appointments from new president elect, Barack Obama, and the effects it may have on American hunting traditions as we know them. LaPierre figures as Obama selects key personnel for premium cabinet posts, he sends a message about his policy as upcoming president. According to the NRA study, it goes like this.
Obama first appointed to the White House chief of staff Illinois Congressman Rahm Emanuel who has been known as the “point man on gun control.” According to LaPierre’s message, “He will wield enormous power in the battle for the future of our firearm freedoms.” Not good if you have grown up in the tradition of safe firearm use allowed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Then, of course, Hillary Clinton was selected as Obama’s secretary of State. If she is confirmed, word inside the NRA is that she will try to remove the second amendment right because as the nation’s top diplomat, she would have the power to determine whether the United Nations will pass (and Obama will sign) that global gun ban treaty that it has wanted for some time now.
Obama also nominated ex-Senator and former Majority Leader Tom Daschle, known as a confirmed adversary of the NRA, to be secretary of Health and Human Services. If Daschle is confirmed by Congress, which is now overwhelmingly controlled by the democratic party, he could also hold ultimate power to declare guns a “public health menace” and regulate away essential American firearm liberties long taken for granted, especially by sportsmen too lazy to write a letter, make a phone call or express their position.
Then, Obama is nominating Eric Holder to be attorney general. As former assistant attorney general, Holder was a key architect and vocal advocate for the sweeping gun ban agenda of the Brady campaign and the Clinton era. He was the power-drive behind national handgun licensing, mandatory trigger locks that make home defense difficult and ending gun shows. More recently, Holder opposed the Supreme Court’s Heller decision in the District of Columbia that, of course, declared the second amendment an individual right.
According to the NRA, there is a chilling notice to job applicant gun owners that they are not welcome to serve in his administration. The NRA states, “In case you trusted what Obama said about maintaining your second amendment rights during his presidential campaign, in the job application for the Obama Administration, he made it clear that gun owners are not his campaign cabinet choice and essentially told 80 million gun owners not to even bother applying for a job.”
Also according to the NRA, “If all of that wasn’t bad enough, the Brady Campaign just issued a completely bogus poll claiming that two-thirds of Americans, including 60 percent of all gun owners, favor gun registration, licensing of firearm owners and other sweeping restrictions on our firearm freedoms!” Where does the Brady group get this stuff? Skewed data reporting defies common sense since the data tells a different story. Interpretation of data is a science, but use of statistical terms is more a mystical science that can mislead readers.
What can sportsmen do? I don’t agree with everything that the NRA supports, but their objective is to preserve the second amendment. In this light, they represent the most viable voice for firearm rights. So, joining the NRA should be an option. Also in response, Americans have increased their firearm purchase rate by 300 percent following the election.
Sportsmen should prepare to adapt to a new environment of firearm change with hunting and target shooting freedoms requiring a bit more energy to be sustained. There is a new and unsure season ahead for sportsmen. Some sportsmen could seemingly care less to understand firearm ownership and second amendment issues. Learn more about your rights. Advance and be recognized!
Hunting season each year reminds us that the second amendment stands for more than simple words in our constitution. While time has shown that our forefathers exhibited uncanny wisdom in developing the winning road map in the United States, Obama is sending a message that we have entered a time of ‘change.’ Second amendment change? Only time will tell.
Pardon Border Patrol Agents Ramos and Compean
December 12, 2008In what was nothing less than a travesty of justice two Americans were sent to prison based upon misguided, if not criminal prosecution by those sworn to uphold the Constitution . These men sit in prison while President Bush pardons others. Get off your ass Mister President, and do what is just and correct!
Pardon Border Patrol Agents Ramos and Compean
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.org/ordergoamem.htm
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) already has filed not one, but two friend
of the court briefs for Ignacio Ramos and Jose Antonio Compean. In
those briefs, GOF has pointed out to the Fifth Circuit Court of
Appeals that the 10-year conviction of the two agents is for a crime
which doesn’t exist.
The two agents were convicted of the “Discharge of a Firearm in
Relation to a Crime of Violence” — something which is not an
offense, rather it is a sentencing enhancement after the government
has established illegal gun possession, use or carrying.
Of course, if the Feds had gone for that kind of charge, they would
have run into the problem that the agents were required to possess,
use and carry guns on them while on duty. That is why the US
Attorney, Johnny Sutton, went for, and succeeded, in making up an
offense that would not force him to explain away that the agents are
required to be armed.
One of the reasons the Border Patrol requires agents to be armed is
so they can use their guns against armed drug smugglers such as
Osvaldo Aldrete.
Even if the Supreme Court reverses this injustice done to Ramos and
Compean, they could expect to sit in jail for upwards of another two
years — for a crime that was impossible for them to commit.
GOF was a friend of the court in a similar case before the Supreme
Court. Our position was upheld nine-to-nothing. It involved a drug
dealer who took a gun in payment for a bag of dope. The Feds gave
him many extra years because he supposedly had “used” a gun in a
crime. The Supreme Court agreed that such a view was ridiculous and
clearly not the intent of the law. The Fifth Circuit has simply
overlooked these fatal flaws in the government’s case.
George Bush is thinking about his legacy. We have a chance to
convince him that his legacy is on the verge of staining his
reputation with the miscarriage of justice perpetrated by the federal
prosecutor, Johnny Sutton. Keep in mind that Sutton lied to the
trial court and to the appeals court about Aldrete’s connections with
the drug trade. He also concealed from the jury that he was paying
Aldrete for his testimony against the agents.
Hopefully, President Bush does not want to be known as one who stood
by while innocent men — and the wives and children — suffered
because of a blatant injustice.
All gun owners should be alarmed at what the government has done to
these two agents. If they will do this to police officers, we cannot
assume they will treat the rest of the population any better. The
two GOF briefs are at:
http://www.gunowners.com/amicus10.pdf
http://www.gunowners.com/amicus14.pdf
ACTION: Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://gunowners.org/activism.htm to send an e-mail (see sample
below) to President Bush to ask him to pardon these two men whose
only crime was to uphold the law.
—– Pre-written letter —–
Dear President Bush:
I am shocked that Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean are still in
jail. Their conviction on the ten-year count was fraudulent. There
is no such crime as “firing a gun in a federal crime.” That is only
an enhancement for other felony charges — for example, reckless
endangerment.
Essentially, Ramos and Compean — to get this sentencing enhancement
— would have had to illegally possess their firearms and recklessly
endanger the drug smuggler they shot. But isn’t the possession of
firearms part of their job description?
Please pardon these men in time for Christmas.
Sincerely,
A day at the range, new rifles…
October 29, 2008The other day I meandered out to the local rifle range. There were four people there with brand new rifles that ran the gamut from very low cost entry level rifles, to the latest issue of “The Rifleman’s Rifle.”
Let’s start with Jim and his very first big game rifle. Jim is fourteen years old, and has been shooting rim fire competition for several years with the Junior NRA. His rifle was a gift from his grandfather after he had earned the rank of Second Bar Sharpshooter. The rifle? A Remington model 700 ADL chambered in 243 Winchester a proved deer and Pronghorn caliber. It was topped with the excellent Sightron SII 3 X 9 scope. His grandfather was there and told me that he had lapped the barrel, action, and rings. He is a gunsmith and gone through the rifle completely before giving it to Jim. Bearing in mind that his grandfather purchased the entire set up at wholesale and that there were no labor charges involved the cost was estimated at just over $900. That, is quite a savings! The ammunition being used that day was Federal one hundred grain soft point. A proved yet economical deer stopper. Grandpa used his laser bore sight, not only on Jim’s rifle, but on all that were tested. I have to believe that helped save a lot of money!
Jim shot from the bench with the rifle resting on sand bags, the target at one hundred yards. He shot strings of five rounds, and the barrel was swabbed with Hoppe’s Elite between each string. The results were astounding, at least to me they were. The first group was roughly one and a half inches, centered on the seven ring at five o’clock. As noted the barrel was swabbed, and adjustments to the scope were made. String number two was centered on the nine ring at six o’clock and measured just under one inch. Another swab job, and scope adjustment and it was on to string three. That Jim was settling in and getting the feel of his new rifle was pretty apparent. String three was dead on the “X” and measured less than three quarters of an inch! This was not using match ammo, as noted above! Both myself and grandpa are advocates of the “zero point aiming” theory, and he adjusted the scope accordingly. Jim was instructed to hold at six o’clock, and the fourth string was fired. Yet another swab job, and string five was fired down range. We walked out to the target (It was not changed between string four and five.) Everyone was more than a bit impressed. All ten rounds grouped together, and were covered by a dime! I can only foresee better things for Jim and his new rifle as the barrel further breaks in, and he builds even more confidence.
Tomorrow we will cover Diane’s new rifle.
Gun Owners of America Releases Congressional Voter Guide
October 12, 2008— Elections will produce tremendous impact on gun owners’ rights
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.org
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
With the election less than one month away, Gun Owners of America is
doing its best to keep gun owners informed about who is protecting your
rights in the Congress.
Many gun owners are familiar with the differences between the candidates
at the presidential level, but how well do they know the views and actions
of those who are running at the congressional level?
On the campaign trail, almost no candidates for Congress admit to being
against gun rights, making the tasks of compiling the Gun Owners of
America congressional candidate rating both more difficult, and more
important.
GOA determines grades for candidates first based on any past voting
record. Then, all candidates receive a detailed questionnaire. But what
about those with no record and who were not open enough to return a
questionnaire that would reveal their true colors?
In past elections such candidates could be assigned grades by simply
going to a campaign website. Learning what a candidate thought about
issues like banning “assault weapons” and waiting periods for
handgun
purchases was lurking behind a button labeled “gun control.”
Not any more. For one thing, it’s virtually impossible to find a link that
says “gun control” on any campaign website. If a candidate
mentions gun
rights at all (and most don’t) it is usually in the context of
“protecting
Second Amendment rights.”
A reader will find comments such as this one, referring to the recent
Supreme Court decision striking down the gun ban in the nation’s capital:
“I agree with the Supreme Court’s interpretation last week that an
absolute prohibition against gun ownership violates the Second
Amendment right for citizens to bear arms.”
That may sound good at first blush, but a careful reading will reveal
that this statement — made by a former mayor who had considered
joining other cities in suing gun makers out of existence in 1999 — is
almost meaningless.
Facing this kind of doublespeak, it is especially important that voters
take advantage of tools like the 2008 Gun Owners of America voter
guide.
The stakes are high in this election, as they always are. The main
focus is on the presidential race. If elected, Barak Obama would be the
most anti-gun president this country has ever seen, and his
vice-presidential candidate Joe Biden is just as bad. John McCain has
been all over the map on the gun issue, but he did choose a stellar
pro-gun running mate in Sarah Palin.
While the White House may be up for grabs, liberal Democrats are in
firm control of both chambers of Congress. With all the media
attention on the race at the top of the ticket, it is important to
remember that it is in the Congress where most of the battles over
gun rights occur.
GOA’s Voter Guide will soon be landing in mailboxes around the
nation. But you can also view an online version of this guide at:
http://www.gunowners.org/votetb08.htm
GOA hopes you will make use of this valuable tool and share it with
your family and friends. Please distribute this e-mail far and wide.
Thank you!
****************************
Are You A Bitter Clinger?
Who is a Bitter Clinger? According to Sen. Barack Obama, who was
recorded unawares at a San Francisco fundraiser, bitter clingers are
voters who are bitter because of their economic frustration and so cling
bitterly to their Bibles and their guns.
If you are a bitter clinger, Gun Owners of America has a T-shirt for you!
You can proudly proclaim your membership in this class of people so
looked down upon by the elites in our country.
To see the Bitter Clinger T-shirt, and for ordering information, go to:
The National Rifle Association gets it right…for once!
September 20, 2008The National Rifle Association gets it right…for once! Look folks, I am a Life Member that has not donated a penny to them in years. Why? Because they sell out Gun Owners seemingly at every opportunity, that is why! The list is long… More so, for at least the least twenty years or so, the NRA has been a fund collecting organization more than anything else. Now, don’t get me wrong, but if you give money that you work your behind off for, then that organization should at least defend what you believe in! They might as well be televangelists!
Yes I know, sometimes compromise is warranted. But never for ones base values, never. I happen to believe that the Constitution of the United States of America immense value, and that does include the “Bill of Rights.” Some say that it is a document written by “Old White Men.” Meaning that it, and it’s idea’s are outdated,m and worthless. I believe just the opposite. I believe that the “FOUNDERS” were brilliant men and that their ideas spread across time for the benefit of all mankind.
Those beliefs are being challenged by a politician. He is an abomination of the American political system, period. The National Rifle Association has stepped up to the plate and smacked a home run on this one. Go to
Perhaps the NRA has seen the light? One can only wonder I suppose. The Constitution says that GOD given rights, will only be suspended to an individual for felonious conduct, or serious mental disability. So why I ask, does the NRA support such things as the Brady Bill, The Lautenberg Act (s), and the United States Government attacking it’s own citizens at Waco Texas, and Ruby Ridge for example?
Conservative Libertarian Outpost 