Posts Tagged ‘Gun Control’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Illinois Supreme Court Dismisses Lawsuit Against Gun Industry

March 19, 2009

In Illinois? I about fell over when I read this. I mean..? The land of obama and Daley? Well, even broken clocks show the correct time twice a day…

Fairfax, Va. – Today, the Illinois Supreme Court dismissed yet another reckless lawsuit aimed at putting firearms manufacturers out of business. Adames v. Beretta was dismissed under the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act of 2005 (PLCAA). The court’s order affirmed the original trial court judgment in the case.

This is the second judicial decision in 2009 upholding a dismissal under the PLCAA. Ten days ago, the U.S. Supreme Court denied appeals in the cases of New York v. Beretta and District of Columbia v. Beretta.

NRA chief lobbyist Chris W. Cox said, “We are pleased that the Court recognized that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act is the law of the land. America’s law-abiding firearms manufacturers must be protected from reckless suits, such as this one, that have no legal merit. Blaming gun manufacturers for the acts of criminals is not the way we do things in America, and today the Illinois Supreme Court confirmed this view.”

The Illinois Supreme Court found that “the discharge of the Beretta was caused by a volitional act that constituted a criminal offense, which act shall be considered the sole proximate cause of any resulting death.”

The Court also agreed with the appellate court in finding the PLCAA was constitutional. Finally, it let stand the trial court’s findings that “the Beretta [pistol] was not unreasonably dangerous or defectively designed” and that the danger of pointing a gun at another person and pulling the trigger is open and obvious, even if the person pointing the gun mistakenly believes that the gun is not loaded.

Several cities and individual plaintiffs began suing firearm manufacturers in the late 1990s, based on the expectation that although the industry manufactured a legal product, forcing manufacturers to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in legal fees just to prove their innocence in court would drive them into bankruptcy.

In addition to being based on bogus legal theories that seek to evade personal responsibility for criminal or reckless acts, these lawsuits endangered American military personnel and law enforcement officers. During congressional debate on the PLCAA, the Department of Defense issued a statement agreeing with the NRA that bankrupting U.S. gun makers and making us dependent on foreign countries like France, Russia or China for small arms would be a threat to America’s domestic and international security.

-NRA-

Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America’s oldest civil rights and sportsmen’s group. Four million members strong, NRA continues its mission to uphold Second Amendment rights and to advocate enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation’s leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the military.

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 2 Comments »

Obama secretly ends program that lets pilots carry guns

March 17, 2009

So much for the flying public’s safety. But what did you expect from the folks that want to disarm you so that they can prey on you right along with criminals and terrorists?

After the September 11 attacks, commercial airline pilots were allowed to carry guns if they completed a federal safety program. No longer would unarmed pilots be defenseless as remorseless hijackers seized control of aircraft and rammed them into buildings. Now President Obama is quietly ending the federal firearms program, risking public safety on airlines in the name of an anti gun ideology.

Read About It: The Washington Times
SOURCE

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

“The Elmer Fudd Protection Act.” S22 is back

March 17, 2009

S22 is back after some politicians got together Lautenberg style and did what politicians do. That is compromise away your rights while attempting to cover their tracks with meaningless window dressing so that you think that they are actually representing your better interests.We know better though. Read on …

An Important Message From Gun Owners Of America
— Land grab bill coming back, again

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

Monday, March 16, 2009

Do you agree with people like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, who treat
the Second Amendment as if it were written only to protect your ability
to go hunting and target shooting?

Or do you agree with Gun Owners of America, George Washington and Thomas
Jefferson, who believe that the Second Amendment protects a pre-existing
fundamental right that is essential to the preservation of liberty?

Well, a whole lot of people in Congress are claiming to protect your
Second Amendment rights, but all they’re really doing is protecting your
hunting season.

We’re talking about the Omnibus Public Lands Act. You helped to defeat
this bill last week in the House, but Congressional leaders have vowed
to bring it up again soon.

S. 22 is an enormous package of over 190 bills lumped together with a
price tag of $10 billion. The bill will greatly expand the amount of
land controlled by the National Park Service, thus spreading the
agency’s unconstitutional gun regulations to more areas.

Fear of upsetting gun owners — who helped elect many members of
Congress from both parties — kept this bill off the floor for several
weeks.

Then, in a meeting last Tuesday, not held in an open committee hearing
but behind closed doors, House leaders brokered a deal with some
supposedly pro-gun Democrats.

They said they were concerned about your gun rights. They said they
were going to “fix” the bill.

But they did not address the NPS anti-gun regulations that prohibit
carrying a firearm for self defense without a government issued
concealed carry permit.

What did they do? They added language to the bill to say you can still
go hunting.

That’s right. Many Congressmen claimed to be protecting the Second
Amendment, when all they were really doing was thumbing their noses at
self defense.

Here is the entire “pro-gun” amendment that was considered in
the House.
Judge for yourself if this really protects your Second Amendment rights:

“Nothing in this Title shall be construed as affecting the authority,
jurisdiction, or responsibility of the several States to manage,
control, or regulate fish and resident wildlife under State law or
regulations, including the regulation of hunting, fishing, trapping, and
recreational shooting. Nothing in this Title shall be construed as
limiting access for hunting, fishing, trapping, or recreational
shooting.”

They may as well have called it the “Elmer Fudd Protection Act.”

A lot of people who voted for this bill campaigned for office as
champions of gun rights. They said “Send me to Washington; I’ll fight
for the Second Amendment.” And this is what we get? Pathetic.

But let’s be clear. The issue is not just about the NPS gun
restrictions, as bad as they are. And whether or not you personally use
federal land is not the point.

What is important is the disdain with which legislators hold your Second
Amendment rights.

It is imperative that you speak up on this issue. The outcome of this
battle will be a preview of what we can expect for the next two years.
Will your gun rights be comprised away little by little? Or will we
stand together and hold legislators accountable to their campaign
promises to uphold the Second Amendment?

This week there may be several votes in both the Senate and House on the
Omnibus Land bill.

Congressional leaders plan to act quickly in an attempt to ram this down
the throat of the American people without a fair and open process. They
desperately want to avoid any amendment that would truly protect your
gun rights.

Congress hopes to leave the gun ban in place, and enlarge the areas
affected by it. For example, the bill expands existing park land,
creates new national trails that will fall under the gun restrictions,
and authorizes the federal government to buy more land adjacent to
national parks and trails.

House and Senate leaders plan to move on this bill rapidly, although
they are ambiguous about the process.

But our message to Congress is simple: Stop playing around with our
Second Amendment rights!

We don’t care about the process. We care about the Second Amendment.
And we mean ALL of the Second Amendment, not just hunting.

Tell Congress you expect them to protect your right to keep and bear
arms without compromising. Please take a few seconds and send the
pre-written message below.

When you’re done, become a force multiplier. Send this alert to a few
friends.

It is important that you take this action because right now GOA is the
only gun rights organization speaking out for ALL of your Second
Amendment rights.

We’ve all forwarded jokes or funny pictures to our friends. How about
forwarding a message to help protect our God-ordained constitutionally
protected right to keep and bear arms?

And please do not think your voice won’t be heard. Remember, this bill
failed to pass the House by just two votes last week because people like
you took action.

Congressmen need to know that their votes in the coming days will impact
YOUR vote next year. But if they don’t hear from you and they think
you’re not looking, many will treat your rights with contempt.

We’re not alone in this battle. In the Senate, pro-gun champions such
as Sens. Tom Coburn and Jim DeMint are prepared to lead the fight
against this bill.

In the House, Reps. Paul Broun, Rob Bishop and Doc Hastings are among
those fighting hard for your gun rights.

In fact, there are many in Congress willing to stand up for the Second
Amendment, but they are repeatedly squashed by the anti-gun leadership
or undermined by pro-gun compromisers. Pro-gun Congressmen who want to
repeal the gun ban are being told, in effect, to “Shut up and
vote!”

Friends, we know we’ve asked for a lot of action from you already this
year.

Unfortunately, that is not going to stop. But we will all draw the line
at some point. Let’s work together and do it now.

Thank you for working with Gun Owners of America. Our effectiveness in
Washington depends on your activism. PLEASE try to get your pro-gun
friends and family involved. Now more than ever, every voice is
critical.

ACTION: Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://gunowners.org/activism.htm to tell your Representative and
Senators to reject the lands bill (S. 22) unless your Second Amendment
rights are protected. Per usual, a pre-written letter is provided for
your convenience.

—– Pre-written message —–

The Omnibus Public Land Act of 2009 is expected to come to the floor
soon.

I urge you to oppose this bill if, as expected, the leadership does not
allow an amendment to repeal the anti-gun regulations of the National
Park Service.

Recent changes made by the Interior Department only allow persons with a
concealed carry permit to possess a self-defense firearm on NPS land.
Non-permit holders are still prohibited from carrying a firearm for
their protection.

And please don’t be fooled by a supposedly pro-gun amendment to
“fix”
the bill that was brought up last week during the House debate on S. 22.
That language only modestly protects hunting and recreational shooting.

While protecting the rights of sportsmen is important, the Second
Amendment is NOT about hunting rights. I am more concerned about my
ability to defend my life, and the lives of my loved ones, than I am
about plinking cans.

Congressional leaders have been ambiguous about how this legislation
will come to the floor, but my message to you is clear: protect ALL of
my Second Amendment rights.

Please OPPOSE final passage on any land bill that does not repeal the
NPS gun ban.

Sincerely,

****************************

Pratt on Fox

Once you have contacted your legislators, please consider checking out
GOA Executive Director Larry Pratt’s recent appearance (along with noted
author Dr. John Lott) on Judge Andrew Napolitano’s show “Freedom
Watch.”
Fox has posted the video on YouTube at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQEZoknylIA

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hunting Fishing and the Great Outdoors, Law, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on “The Elmer Fudd Protection Act.” S22 is back

Broken Clocks?

March 14, 2009

Even a broken clock shows the correct time twice a day as the saying goes. The forces of anti-liberty often point to Great Britain as a fine example of how things like gun control are a panacea for ending violent crime. What they do not like though is reality.

The horror of the school shooting in Winnenden will be followed by calls for Germany’s already restrictive gun laws to be tightened. But the hope that this will work is misplaced.

After the Erfurt school shooting in 2002, guns controls were supposedly strengthened and before that, in 1972, Germany introduced draconian gun laws to combat Baader-Meinhof terrorism. In the first three years after the legislation was passed, German military and police armouries “lost” 34 machine guns, 198 sub-machineguns, 363 automatic rifles and 1,142 pistols: with such firepower available from the organs of the State itself, the Federal Republic did not have enough terrorists to go round. As we in Britain now know, having seen the doubling of handgun crime within five years of our total ban on pistols, “gun control” is a perverse concept.

If the Germans are serious about stopping killers running amok in schools, they might consider the Israeli solution of arming teachers. It works there, as it has on occasion in America – the massacre in the “gun-free zone” of Virginia Tech can be contrasted with the assault by a former pupil on the neighbouring Appalachian Law School in 2002 that was halted by two armed students.

FULL STORY

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hunting Fishing and the Great Outdoors, Law, Local Politics Colorado, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

Get the lead out..? Why?

March 14, 2009

Yet another back door attempt at gun control and a hunting ban based upon nebulous reasons not science. Please note that I happen to be a big fan of solid copper bullets, and Hevi-Shot however they are very expensive compared to conventional ammunition. Nor are they all that available, or even the best choice for all situations. If this idiotic back door law via regulation goes through how long until all BLM as well as other public hunting venues are subjected to the same sort of emotion based management?

Friday, March 13, 2009
The National Park Service (NPS) has announced its intention to ban traditional ammunition containing lead in all its parks. The move would needlessly push hunters to use more costly bullets made of tungsten, copper, and steel. The restrictions, set to take affect by the end of 2010, were announced without regard to science and without soliciting feedback from sportsmens’ groups.

Park ranger“The NPS announcement demonstrates either complete ignorance or complete arrogance as to the effect that this policy will have on hunters,” said NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox. “There is no science to support NPS’s contention that the use of lead ammunition in hunting is causing environmental contamination, having a negative effect on wildlife, or posing a threat to the health of visitors or park staff. This policy, and the lack of communication in advance with the sportsmen’s community, is a deliberate attempt to reduce the number of people who will want to hunt in the 60 parks that are open to hunting. This plays directly into the hands of radical anti-hunting organizations like the Humane Society of the U.S. which is advocating that hunters be banned from using lead ammunition.”

NRA-ILA will continue to be a voice of opposition against this unnecessary action and is committed to protecting the rights of hunters to use the ammo that is best suited for their hunting needs and budget.

To read NRA-ILA’s comments regarding the Elk Management Plan and the use of lead ammunition in Theodore Roosevelt National Park, please click here.

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hunting Fishing and the Great Outdoors, Law, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

Homeland Security plans for violence

March 14, 2009

So you thought that the uproar over Americans having their rights taken from them as a result of Mexican Criminal activity had silenced to gun grabbers? Not so… As usual it simply put a hush on things for convenience. Nothing has changed a single iota. The administrations plan is still to take away Americans ability to fight back in an effective manner against murderous thugs. Or perhaps it is so that Americans cannot resist their own government when they become the thugs? The fine folks that brought you Ruby Ridge and the Waco Holocaust are going to rescue you once again from yourselves! Yes, pigs are flying but they are a buffed and polished bunch. Now with pretty new lipstick.

Read on

Homeland Security plans for violence on U.S. border

By EILEEN SULLIVAN and SUZANNE GAMBOA
The Associated Press

Related Tags (BETA)
mouse over a tag to see related stories
U.S. border
drug violence
money-laundering
Woodrow Wilson
smuggling
gun laws
Customs and Border Protection
DOD
triggers
homeland security
International Center
Mexican President Felipe Calderon
margins

WASHINGTON — Tighter gun control and stronger law enforcement in Southwestern states were recommended Thursday by lawmakers concerned about drug violence in Mexico possibly spilling across the border.

The escalating violence — which has killed thousands, mostly south of the border — has been blamed on Mexican drug cartels which one Homeland Security official described as the biggest organized-crime threat facing the United States.

Roger Rufe, Homeland Security’s head of operations, outlined the agency’s plans for protecting the border, a response that includes — as a last resort — deploying military personnel and equipment to the region if other agencies are overwhelmed.

Echoing comments a day earlier from President Barack Obama, Rufe said there currently was no need to militarize the Southwestern border with Mexico, despite violence that threatens to migrate into the United States.

“We would take all resources short of DoD [Defense Department] and National Guard troops before we reach that tipping point,” Rufe told lawmakers on a House homeland security subcommittee. “We very much do not want to militarize our border.”

Rufe did not specify what circumstances would trigger a call for troops.

The violence is blamed on Mexican President Felipe Calderon’s crackdown on drug cartels over the past two years.

In recent weeks, his government has deployed 700 extra federal police to Ciudad Juarez, a city across from El Paso, where local police have been swamped by drug violence. This month, 3,200 federal troops were sent to the city.

Tijuana and Culiacan are also hotbeds of violence, according to Andrew Selee, director of the Mexico Institute at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Mexican officials say the violence killed 6,290 people last year and more than 1,000 in the first eight weeks of 2009.

“The United States and Mexico border violence can only be solved if we look at all parts of the equation,” Rep. John Tierney, D-Mass., said Thursday during a House subcommittee considering changes to U.S. gun laws. “Let’s examine our gun laws, let’s cut down on U.S. drug consumption, let’s ask there to be more resources to root out drug-money laundering,” he said.

Tierney said 90 percent of the weapons seized from Mexican organized crime came from the United States. Tierney said the information was from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

Gun-control expert Tom Diaz said the U.S. needs to enforce gun-importation laws already on the books to prevent weapons coming into the U.S. and ending up in Mexico.

Lawmakers also weighed increasing inspections of people and vehicles leaving the U.S. to go to Mexico to help stop the potential smuggling of weapons. The Customs and Border Protection agency currently does some inspections. But Salvador Nieto, a senior official within the agency’s intelligence division, said more resources would be needed if Congress wants to step up inspections.

Warring drug cartels are blamed for more than 560 kidnappings in Phoenix in 2007 and the first half of 2008, as well as killings in Atlanta, Birmingham, Ala., and Vancouver, British Columbia.

Rufe said that while the violence along the border in Mexico is appalling, violent crimes have not increased in U.S. border cities as a result. He said kidnappings are up, but violent crime is down.

“We’re not so concerned, at least at this point, about that violence spilling over into our cities,” he said.

Further, the Homeland Security Department’s representative in Mexico, Alonzo Pena, said the violence there is not as dangerous to U.S. tourists as has been portrayed.

Pena said the violence is in isolated areas of the country and affects only the people involved in crime. He said the violence is not affecting U.S. citizens visiting Mexico, and Americans should not cancel their vacations in the country.

This month, the ATF warned college students on spring breaks not to travel to parts of northern Mexico because it was too dangerous.

In February, the State Department advised travelers to avoid areas of prostitution and drug-dealing in Mexico.

We very much do not want to militarize our border.”

Roger Rufe,
Homeland Security’s head of operations

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, Men's Issues, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 2 Comments »

We won, for now…

March 12, 2009 
Victory 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,

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hunting Fishing and the Great Outdoors, Law, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 2 Comments »

EMERGENCY ALERT: GOA!

March 10, 2009

Why 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

Home

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.

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Education, Gun Control, Law, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on EMERGENCY ALERT: GOA!

Civil Liberties versus Civil Rights

March 10, 2009

Civil Liberties versus Civil Rights. Over the past weekend my mailbox was inundated with questions having to do with the subject. I got tired of responding individually and decided to write a short essay about it. Basically, a comparison contrast piece.

First, some definitions;

Civil Liberties

civil liberties n. rights or freedoms given to the people by the First Amendment to the Constitution, by common law, or legislation, allowing the individual to be free to speak, think, assemble, organize, worship, or petition without government (or even private) interference or restraints. These liberties are protective in nature, while civil rights form a broader concept and include positive elements such as the right to use facilities, the right to an equal education, or the right to participate in government. (See: civil, civil rights)

SOURCE

Civil Rights

Personal liberties that belong to an individual, owing to his or her status as a citizen or resident of a particular country or community.

The most common legal application of the term civil rights involves the rights guaranteed to U.S. citizens and residents by legislation and by the Constitution. Civil rights protected by the Constitution include Freedom of Speech and freedom from certain types of discrimination.

SOURCE

Leave it to Lawyers to muck things up beyond belief! They are nearly as bad as Economist’s when it comes to turning something, anything, from the profoundly simple to that which only confuses.

Both Liberties and Rights have much in common, or at least they appear to. So then, how are they differentiated one from the other? One must step away from politics and enter the metaphysical world of ethics.

In the realm of ethics, as applied in this context, there are the Natural and Unalienable Rights. These are rights that you, as a person are in fact born with, and can never be taken from you.

There are also Inalienable Civil Liberties or Rights. Those are rights that are granted via society or government. Those rights can be surrendered or forfeited based upon behavior. (The link above addresses both.)

The simplified version then, is that a “Natural” right cannot be taken or surrendered. But, again this is very simplified, a Civil Right or Liberty can be taken from you. Most often by surrendering a right for the perceived greater good. A good example would be surrendering your right to self defense via gun control. You will always have a right to self defense, in an ethical context, but you can choose to impose self restrictions upon yourself.

Further, society can in point of fact take your Unalienable Rights from you should it deem it necessary for the good of society. That being execution for true felonies.

Confusing even in a simplified version? Yes, admittedly it can be. A Civil Right is a Natural or God given Right. A Civil Liberty is granted by society or government.

These are the crux of such diverse issues as California’s Proposition Eight, as well as Gun Control, and the list just goes on from there.

Tags:, , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, mysandry, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Uncategorized, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on Civil Liberties versus Civil Rights

Objective Analysis May Lead To Real Reform

March 8, 2009

From time to time, elected officials actually do research an issue, learn the facts, and take the appropriate action. Such is the case with efforts to scrap Canada’s multi-billion, ineffective gun registry.

On February 9, 2009, Garry Breitkreuz, a member of the Canadian House of Commons for the Conservative Party of Canada, introduced Bill C-301–an act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act (registration of firearms). This Private Members Bill would bring to an end Canada’s much-maligned “Long Gun Registry.”

According to a recent article in Canada’s NationalPost.com, when the national long-gun registry was introduced some 14 years ago, Mr. Breitkreuz actually believed the onerous gun registry would help make Canada safer. Now he knows better.

“After many years of research, consultation and more than 600 access-to-information requests as a Member of Parliament, I now know that nothing could be further from the truth,” said Breitkreuz. “The gun registry has not saved one life in Canada, and it has been a financial sinkhole, estimated to have cost some $2-billion. Imagine how many more police we could have on the streets if we had invested more wisely. We need to dismantle the wasteful, futile registry and abandon the notion that this political pacifier is working. But most importantly, we need to stop placing onerous regulations on duck hunters and sport shooters who are not part of Canada’s criminal element.”

To read more about this important story, please click here.

When this law was put into effect we watched to see if indeed the people of Canada would submit to such nonsense foisted upon them. Well? The people not only spoke, they refused to comply. Good show people of Canada!

SOURCE

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hunting Fishing and the Great Outdoors, Law, News, Politics, Uncategorized, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »