The Second Amendment March is still being planned,worked on and so on. For an update on the people, places, and things related to it go HERE.
Posts Tagged ‘Gun Control’
Second Amendment March Newsletter
November 25, 2009Truly, a match made in heaven: Gay Marriage?
November 24, 2009Today, Michael Bloomberg’s coalition against illegal guns placed a full-page ad in the Washington Post urging lawmakers to prevent suspects on a federally maintained “terror watch list” from being allowed to purchase guns.
“500 mayors agree with the Obama and Bush Administrations: stop terror suspects from getting guns,” the ad says.
It’s also been an issue that Rahm Emanuel voiced support for back in 2007, according to this video clip.
“We got to make this a number one issue, as a test vote, and take it into the election.” He added, “If it’s between that terrorist list and the NRA, I know where America is going to be every time.”
Bloomberg said closing this loophole was his “number one priority.” He also offered the following description of why gun control critics have been so successful in blocking this kind of restriction: “There’s extremists in the pro-gun movement who threaten our elected representatives around the country, whether they’re in the legislature or executive side with working to get them removed, to remove them from office if they don’t support the line that the extremists want: no reasonable restrictions, no enforcement of federal laws, elimination of federal laws. And we’ve just got to say ‘we’re not going to take it anymore.”
Question? How long till these two come out of the closet and get hitched?
A bit of a history lesson
November 24, 2009This is about your rights. Your rights that are God given, and or in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Weaken any, and you weaken them all.
“Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence.”
George Washington.
Read the entire contents HERE
Olofson Relief Fund: You could very well be next!
November 24, 2009David Olofson has been subjected to a gross miscarriage of justice. What happened to Olofson could happen to any American who owns a semi-automatic firearm.
He was convicted of knowingly transferring an unregistered machine gun — a standard semi-auto rifle which fired two three-round bursts and then jammed. Gun owners call that a malfunction. The federal government calls it an easy way to get a felony conviction. David was sentenced to 30 months in federal prison.
The Olofson Relief Fund has been set up to allow concerned Americans help the Olfosons make their mortgage and (their one) car payments while Dave is unable to work. Gun Owners of America is acting as the agent for the fund.
ALL moneys collected will be transferred regularly to the mortgage and car loan holders.
For more information about Olofson’s railroading, and to contribute to the fund, please see: http://gunowners.org/olofson.htm
Matt Mead rejected as governor: Wyoming does the right thing
November 21, 2009When it comes to Governors never back an attorney for the office. To be blunt, they kiss butt way too much. Wyoming Gun Owners points out the obvious with a very informative piece that outlines the threat to states rights, as well as the federal mandate based in mysandry and ex post facto law.
While Wyoming did go a long way toward correcting a fundamentally flawed law it did not go nearly far enough. Nor do I see any way that the law that was passed could, or would, be recognized by other states. Or that a person that had been convicted in another state could use Wyoming residency to have their rights restored in Wyoming. Read on, and I hope that Wyoming Gun Owners start allowing comments at some point. At least from dues paying members such as myself.
By Anthony Bouchard
The headline should read “Gun owners beware of formers U.S Attorneys”. But it’s best that you decide…
In 2004, The Sovereign State of Wyoming enacted legislation that established a procedure to expunge misdemeanor convictions “for the purposes of restoring any firearm rights lost”.
This was specifically to aid Wyoming citizens in restoring gun rights if they had a misdemeanor such as domestic violence on their record. The NRA backed Lautenberg legislation bans gun ownership and use of guns or ammunition by individuals convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence. Wyoming legislators recognized there was nothing to protect individuals that were erroneously convicted.
Full Story HERE
A tale of a Congress that just is not happy
November 20, 2009Yes, I about fell over when I read this. No, not about the content. But? The source!
Growing discontent over the economy and frustration with efforts to speed its recovery boiled over Thursday on Capitol Hill in a wave of criticism and outright anger directed at the Obama administration.
Episodes in both houses of Congress exposed the raw nerves of lawmakers flooded with stories of unemployment and economic hardship back home. They also underscored the stiff headwinds that the administration faces as it pushes to enact sweeping changes to the financial regulatory system while also trying to create jobs for ordinary Americans.
Mayhap’s MSNBC has grown tired of bottom feeding? Probably more along the lines of covering their butts because the backlash that is growing by leaps and bounds could cost them some pretty big nickles down the road. For, after all is said and done, MSNBC is a capitalist organization dependent upon revenue generation.
I’m using MSNBC as a whipping boy here, however, this applies to the entire main stream media. You simply cannot go on forever bashing the beliefs of the people who you are dependent upon for your own survival. Be that anti-tax protesters, supporters of First or Second Amendment rights, people who prefer smaller less intrusive government, pro-life folks, and the list goes on.
Those are the people who pay the bills, including those of the mainstream media. They do not enjoy having their morning bowl of oatmeal being peed in repeatedly. People do not want government involved in their health care much beyond licensing and enforcement of drug policies. They don’t like being laid off from their jobs, yet being repeatedly told that trickle down economics are some sort of voodoo as they lose everything that they own, including any hope of comfortable retirement.
That’s right, stay out of my bedroom as well as my hospital room, leave me alone to pray as I choose to, or not. Leave my ability to properly and effectively defend what is mine alone, and don’t blame a failed state like Mexico’s problems on my freedoms. Don’t pass laws now that hold us accountable for things done years ago or that we had nothing at all to do with.
Don’t preach to we the people MSM, because we don’t like it, and you might just find yourself next to us commoners in the unemployment line.
Support BATFE Reform Bills S. 941 And H.R. 2296
November 14, 2009As we’ve been reporting for months, Senator Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) have introduced S. 941, the “Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Reform and Firearms Modernization Act of 2009” in the U.S. Senate. Representatives Steve King (R-Iowa) and Zack Space (D-Ohio) have introduced a companion bill—H.R. 2296—in the U.S. House. The bills would roll back unnecessary restrictions, correct errors, and codify longstanding congressional policies in the firearms arena. These bipartisan bills are a vital step to modernize and improve BATFE operations.
Of highest importance, S. 941and H.R. 2296 totally rewrite the system of administrative penalties for licensed dealers, manufacturers and importers of firearms. Currently, for most violations, BATFE can only give a federal firearms license (FFL) holder a warning, or revoke his license.
S. 941 and H.R. 2296 would allow fines or license suspensions for less serious violations, while still allowing license revocation for the kind of serious violations that would block an investigation or put guns in the hands of criminals. This will help prevent the all-too-common situations where BATFE has revoked licenses for insignificant technical violations—such as improper use of abbreviations or filing records in the wrong order.
Among its other provisions, S. 941 and H.R. 2296 would:
· Clarify the standard for “willful” violations—allowing penalties for intentional, purposeful violations of the law, but not for simple paperwork mistakes.
· Improve the process for imposing penalties, notably by allowing FFLs to appeal BATFE penalties to a neutral administrative law judge, rather than to an employee of BATFE itself.
· Allow a licensee a period of time to liquidate inventory when he goes out of business. During this period, all firearms sold would be subject to a background check by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
· Allow a grace period for people taking over an existing firearms business to correct problems in the business’s records—so if a person inherited a family gun store (for example), the new owner couldn’t be punished for the previous owner’s recordkeeping violations.
· Reform the procedures for consideration of federal firearms license applications. Under S. 941, denial of an application would require notification to the applicant, complete with reasons for the denial. Additionally, an applicant would be allowed to provide supplemental information and to have a hearing on the application.
· Require BATFE to establish clear investigative guidelines.
· Clarify the licensing requirement for gunsmiths, distinguishing between repair and other gunsmith work and manufacture of a firearm. This would stop BATFE from arguing that minor gunsmithing or refinishing activities require a manufacturers’ license.
· Eliminate a provision of the Youth Handgun Safety Act that requires those under 18 to have written permission to use a handgun for lawful purposes (such as competitive shooting or safety training)—even when the parent or guardian is present.
· Permanently ban creation of a centralized electronic index of out of business dealers’ records—a threat to gun owners’ privacy that Congress has barred through appropriations riders for more than a decade.
· Allow importation and transfer of new machineguns by firearm and ammunition manufacturers for use in developing or testing firearms and ammunition, and training customers. In particular, ammunition manufacturers fulfilling government contracts need to ensure that their ammunition works reliably. S. 941 and H.R. 2296 would also provide for the transfer and possession of new machineguns by professional film and theatrical organizations.
· Repeal the Brady Act’s “interim” waiting period provisions, which expired in 1998.
· Give BATFE sole responsibility for receiving reports of multiple handgun sales. (Currently, dealers also have to report multiple sales to state or local agencies, a requirement that has shown little or no law enforcement value.) State and local agencies could receive these reports upon request to BATFE, but would have to comply strictly with current requirements to destroy these records after 20 days, unless the person buying the guns turns out to be prohibited from receiving firearms.
· Restore a policy that allowed importation of barrels, frames and receivers for non-importable firearms, when they can be used as repair or replacement parts.
S. 941 represents the first time such BATFE reform legislation has been introduced in the Senate. However, the House passed similar legislation (H.R. 5092) in the 109th Congress by a 277-131 vote. A majority of the House–224 congressmen–cosponsored H.R. 4900 in the 110th Congress.
A fact sheet on S. 941/H.R. 2296 can be found here.
As of this writing, S. 941 has 16 cosponsors, and H.R. 2296 has 193 cosponsors.
Please be sure to contact your U.S. Senators and Representative, and ask them to cosponsor and support S. 941 and H.R. 2296! You can call your U.S. Senators at (202) 224-3121, and your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121.
Urgent Alert: Ask Your U.S. Senators And Representative To Sign Amicus Brief Supporting Second Amendment Rights In The States!
November 14, 2009As a critical Second Amendment case goes before the United States Supreme Court, U.S. Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) and Jon Tester (D-MT), and Congressmen Mike Ross (D-AR) and Mark Souder (R-IN) are gathering signatures for an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief by Members of Congress. And we need your support for this important effort next week.
The case is McDonald v. City of Chicago, and it will answer the question of whether the Second Amendment applies to the states—as the Congress clearly intended in the 1860s, when it adopted the Fourteenth Amendment to protect constitutional rights against abuse by state and local governments. This brief is an opportunity for today’s Congress to show just as clearly that it respects the Second Amendment’s importance to all Americans—not just residents of the District of Columbia and other federal territories.
The brief describes Congress’s debates on the Fourteenth Amendment, and points out the many occasions—from 1866 to 2005—when the Congress has spoken in favor of the Second Amendment as protecting a right of all Americans, and taken action to protect that right against actions such as gun confiscation and predatory lawsuits. It also makes the case for Congress’s interest (under its constitutional war powers) in preserving an armed citizenry as part of America’s national defense.
When Congress speaks, the Supreme Court listens. And it did in the historic Heller case last year when 55 Senators and 250 Representatives signed an amicus brief supporting the Second Amendment as an individual right. Now every Senator and Congressman who supports the rights of all Americans should step forward to be heard by signing this brief in the McDonald case.
The brief must be filed within the week, so we need your immediate help! On Monday through Thursday, please call your U.S. Senators and Representative, and urge them to sign on to this critically important brief, which will be a key part of the legal battle to protect the Second Amendment in the U.S. Supreme Court.
You can call your U.S. Senators at (202) 224-3121, and your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-31
AWB 2009 Redux: or maybe 2010..?
November 13, 2009Well, they are back, as we warned you vigilance is the word of the day. Repeating the same old worn out lies and deceptions yet again, America, is being blamed for the corruption of a nation that is out of the control of legitimate government.
The Hidalgo’s that run Mexico, be they in government, or the real people that run things down there, the cartel’s, have a problem. It is their problem, and not ours. yet, the statists in and out of our own government insist that by depriving our people of their rights it will somehow set Mexico on the straight and narrow.
I say, in no uncertain terms, bullshit! If anything, restrictions on heavy weaponry for common Americans should be relaxed, if not abolished. I don’t buy into the “just enforce the existing laws” argument. Not for a second. We already have too many laws, and more will only muddle the mix even more, not to mention that a lot of laws just plain should not be on the books in the first place.
Want to stop the black markets in weapons? Pull it’s teeth, as in take the incentive from the criminals. Make them legal. Same thing for most gang related violence. End the turf wars via de-funding the gangs. Legalize recreational drugs and the gangs go broke. It’s a lot tougher to by grenades and full auto weapons when you don’t have a ready made money pipeline to draw upon.
So just what brought this up? read about it HERE.
These fools want amnesty for illegals as well. Go figure!
Force Feeding: Long term leftest strategy
November 13, 2009As we see our freedoms and liberty evaporate with the leftest Congress we can become ever more active politically. We can vote the bums out, as some like to say. That is all well and good, and, come Judgment day 2010 perhaps some sanity may be restored.
However, it becomes more complicated when those same people that are in office now gerrymander districts with the long term goal of complete political domination for the foreseeable future. Too make things even more desperate for those that love our nation, there is the ever present threat of the judicial branch being stacked with activist’s that ignore the Constitution that they swore to uphold. That, is what we truly need to concern ourselves with.
We can fight tactically, as in voting out treasonous members of Congress and the Senate. We can fight operationally, as was seen this past summer by letting those that Laired it over the masses know that they may well be in for a figurative Tar and feathering.
However, we have indeed lost the initiative in the theater of strategic politics. Lifetime appointments of judicial appointees by the aforementioned enemies of freedom can, and will, undermine any of our other efforts. Witness the rulings this past year that made such blatant a thing as ex post facto law, something that is profoundly immoral, the law of the land, and that is only one example. Hence, this latest threat in the form of a radical that only obamanites could love.
Obama Pushing a “Radical’s Radical” to the Federal Bench
— Vote could come as early as Monday
— Vote could come as early as Monday
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
Thursday, November 12, 2009
He has been called “extreme” by some. But to others, he’s beyond extreme… he’s a “Radical’s Radical.”
Whatever he is, he could become President Obama’s next choice for the federal judiciary.
This radical is Judge David Hamilton, and he’s been nominated for a position on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
Hamilton has made many political enemies on the right, seeing that his politics are to the far left of the political spectrum. Oh yes, judges aren’t supposed to be political, but this one has engaged in quite a bit of leftist activism.
His biggest opponent on Capitol Hill is Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Based on his analysis of Hamilton, gun owners should be very concerned about a judge who is all to willing to “amend the Constitution.” According to Senator Sessions:
Judge Hamilton stated in a 2003 speech that the role of a judge includes writing footnotes to the Constitution: “Judge S. Hugh Dillin of this court has said that part of our job here as judges is to write a series of footnotes to the Constitution. We all do that every year in cases large and small.” In explaining this statement to Senator Hatch, Judge Hamilton wrote that he believes the Framers intended judges to amend the Constitution through evolving case law.
Of course, we have seen this pattern time and time again. Judges ignore the clear wording of the Constitution — in essence, amending the Constitution through each new case they decide.
The courts then become the vehicle for rewriting the Second Amendment!
Not surprisingly, Judge Hamilton’s politics are to the extreme, far left. He spent a brief stint as a fundraiser for ACORN, the organization that was an aggressive supporter of Barack Obama in the presidential election. In addition to all the evils surrounding ACORN is the fact that the organization has lobbied against Second Amendment rights — as seen by the New Jersey chapter supporting a one-gun-a-month ordinance in Jersey City.
Certainly any judicial nomination put forth by our anti-gun President is suspect, but it’s interesting to note who his chief backer is in the U.S. Senate. It’s none other than Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana, who holds an “F” rating from Gun Owners of America.
Lugar has never failed to support one of Obama’s anti-gun nominations, as evidenced by his votes for Attorney General Eric Holder, State Department lawyer Harold Koh, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor and the incredibly wacky Regulatory Czar Cass Sunstein.
On policy questions, Senator Lugar is no better. To wit, he voted against repealing the gun ban in Washington, DC this year.
Considering Hamilton’s extreme track record, it’s no wonder that Senator Lugar — in introducing Hamilton to his colleagues — begged his fellow Senators to ignore the judge’s policy views. Lugar asked them not to base their votes on “partisan considerations, much less on how we hope or predict a given judicial nominee will ‘vote’ on particular issues of public moment or controversy.”
Instead, Lugar asked his colleagues “to evaluate judicial candidates on whether they have the requisite intellect, experience, character and temperament that Americans deserve from their judges….”
In other words, ignore Judge Hamilton’s liberalism and just vote for him because he’s so smart and because he’s such a nice guy!
Judge Hamilton’s rulings have made a lot of enemies on the political right, especially the one in Hinrichs v. Bosma where, according to a November 3 editorial in The Washington Times, he “prohibited prayers in the Indiana House of Representatives that expressly mentioned Jesus Christ… yet he allowed prayers which mentioned Allah.”
Gun owners have much to be concerned about, as well. Anytime a judge who believes in rewriting the Constitution is elevated to sit as an appellate judge, that’s a scary thing — especially given the fact that most cases never reach the U.S. Supreme Court and are, thus, decided at lower levels in the federal judiciary.
ACTION: Please contact your Senators right away and urge them to vote AGAINST Judge David Hamilton. You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your legislators the pre-written e-mail message below.
—– Pre-written letter —–
Dear Senator:
I urge you to vote against Judge David Hamilton for the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. In addition to opposing his far left views, I don’t appreciate his disdain for the Constitution.
To quote Senator Sessions, the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee:
“Judge Hamilton stated in a 2003 speech that the role of a judge includes writing footnotes to the Constitution: ‘Judge S. Hugh Dillin of this court has said that part of our job here as judges is to write a series of footnotes to the Constitution. We all do that every year in cases large and small.’ In explaining this statement to Senator Hatch, Judge Hamilton wrote that he believes the Framers intended judges to amend the Constitution through evolving case law.”
Of course, we have seen this pattern time and time again. Judges ignore the clear wording of the Constitution — in essence, amending the Constitution through each new case they decide.
The courts then become the vehicle for rewriting the Second Amendment!
Not surprisingly, Judge Hamilton’s written answers to the Senate Judiciary Committee show his lack of understanding regarding the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. While Hamilton cannot ignore what the Supreme Court said in DC v. Heller (2008), he refuses to admit that the individual right to keep and bear arms applies anywhere outside of Washington, D.C. — instead, he just says he will rely on evolving “case law [as] developed in earlier incorporation cases.”
Once again, evolving case law — more often than not — takes us away from what the Constitution actually says.
Please vote NO on David Hamilton.
Sincerely,
The Larry Pratt News Hour is carried by the Information Radio Network on Saturdays (rebroadcasts Sundays). The show is simulcast on the web at http://irnusaradio.com/ and previous episodes are archived at http://irnusaradio.com/our-programs/larry-pratt-news-hour with a number of listening formats, including podcasts, supported.
Recent guests and topics, among many others, have included:
* Jim Kouri — Police Against Socialized Medicine
* Chris Knox — Neal Knox and the Gun Rights War
* Mike Adams — The Campus Wars Against Gun Owners
Conservative Libertarian Outpost 