Posts Tagged ‘Hoplophobia’

April 5, 2013

From Anthony Martin Conservative Examiner.

 

Good morning, my friends, and welcome to another edition of Musings After Midnight. It has been very cold here in the mountains, foothills, and Piedmont region of the Carolinas. So, pull up a chair and warm yourself by the fire, and have some hot coffee.

I wish I had good news to report to you this morning, but truth is, I do not. In fact, the news is not just bad. It is dismal. But you need to know the truth. You need to be informed about what we face, and that means a sobering, grim assessment of what is ahead.

Those of you who read these pages regularly are aware that ever since Obama and the Democrats in Congress announced their all out assault on the gun rights of citizens in the aftermath of Sandy Hook, I have maintained that we are down to 30 seconds to midnight on the doomsday clock — the hour when the darkness falls on America for perhaps a thousand years.

I must now inform you that we are down to 15 seconds to midnight, and the clock is ticking. In the time since we last spoke, circumstances have changed for the worse. Frankly, I don’t give the nation any hope apart from an all out war to restore the Constitution. I wish with all my heart that it were not so. I am truly grieved by it, and my heart is very heavy.

In spite of the fact that Obama’s attempt to destroy citizens’ rights has been met with numerous roadblocks in Congress, the states, one by one, are falling into the most egregious tyranny. New York, Connecticut, Colorado, and Maryland have passed laws that are clearly unconstitutional and that fly in the face of a clear, absolute declaration in our Constitution that the right of citizens to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. One of those states is going to begin fingerprinting all citizens who purchase firearms and ammo as if they were common criminals.

These acts, these laws, are themselves criminal. The very act of attacking the freedom and liberty of the American people is a criminal act in and of itself. In the best of all possible worlds, the politicians in each of these states who voted in favor of these tyrannical laws would be sitting in jail as we speak, charged with the crime of seeking to deny citizens their Constitutional rights. They are the ones who should be treated as common criminals, the lowest of the low, little small minded tin horn fiefs who are drunk with their own power. Their actions should not be tolerated anywhere by anyone. And they should not be allowed to serve in an elected office no matter what kind of “majority vote” they get. Sometimes, especially in these modern times when imbeciles reign supreme, the majority makes decisions that are too stupid to be valid.

Our Framers stated clearly that when laws are passed that are contrary to the Constitution, those laws are not to be obeyed and the people responsible for passing them are tyrants guilty of crimes along with the people who elected them to office. We don’t have “majority rule” in America nor should we. What we have is a Constitutional Republic based on principles that even the majority cannot negate. As long as the majority adheres to those principles, then well and good. But when they discard those principles, then the majority of voters are just as criminal and tyrannical as the crooked liberty-killers they elect to office. Their decisions are to be viewed as rubbish that do not carry the weight of law or authority. And at that point, the Patriots, the real descendants of Jefferson, Washington, Madison, Franklin, Adams, Henry, and Webster are obligated to defy the majority, disobey the unconstitutional laws passed by the tyrants, and if necessary forcibly remove such tyrants from office.

What does this mean exactly?

It means that I am not obligated to obey any law that directly contradicts the Constitution of the United States. I am not obligated to submit to the authority of tyrants. I do not recognize their authority. They are illegitimate, and therefore, their laws are illegitimate. And if you as a citizen support and enable the work of these tyrants, then you are not my fellow countryman but a traitor worthy of nothing but disdain and derision…and jail. I have exactly ZERO respect for any citizen who supports robbing me of my rights.

Thus, to New York, Connecticut, Colorado, and Maryland, I will say to you that you are are a shameful embarrassment to our country. You are a worthless bundle of mindless sheep being led around by a pied piper into a brave new world that neither recognizes nor affirms that human beings have certain natural unalienable rights, except for what you make up in your demented minds that have been rotted from within, from stem to lobe, by your progressive vision that is based on rank Marxism. You would deny me the right to defend myself with a firearm but turn around and claim that all human beings have a “right” to health insurance, even if you have to force me to pay for it. You are a fool. A despicable, sick, and evil fool.

The situation as it now stands is this. The states are falling into tyranny, clearly, blatantly, and arrogantly defying a direct statement in our Constitution that protects the right of all citizens to defend themselves with firearms. Barack Obama and his feminized, kept man with a rich wife, otherwise known as “Lurch” John Kerry, have approved the U.N. Small Arms Treaty that reaches down into our sovereign nation, grabs it by the throat, and requires it to regulate firearms. And in the Senate, some Republicans are standing perched and ready, like the deadly, menacing fowl sitting on powerlines ready to swoop down to slaughter their human prey, as depicted in Hitchcock’s “The Birds,” to help their Democrat counterparts pass a stringent assault on private property rights by requiring private gun sales, citizen to citizen, to be subject to background checks.

You had best be watching potential traitors such as McCain, Graham, Murkowski, Portman, Corker, Alexander, Kirk, Collins, Flake, Toomey, and Ayotte very closely on this. They will sell us out in a heartbeat if we do not keep up immense pressure on them to resist any and all gun control measures, including this sham and ruse of “universal background checks,” which is nothing but a backdoor method of registration, a national database, and eventually, confiscation.

Party affiliation is meaningless in this matter. It should be noted that in the blue states that passed unlawful restrictions on gun rights, Republicans helped the Democrat majority in those states pass these laws.

Frankly, I don’t care one whit about Party here. I have seen the truth about some things, and it ain’t pretty. In the Senate there are only six Republicans I have one ounce of respect for. I have ZERO respect for any Democrat. In the House, I can respect and affirm 40 to 50 Republicans at the most. Again, ZERO Democrats. But this means that in both the House and Senate I cannot support nor respect a large majority of the Republicans. The Democrats are a total lost cause.

Some want me to name the Republicans I can support. I can readily do that, at least in the Senate since they are so few in number. They are Cruz, Paul, Inhofe, Rubio, Vitter, and Lee. This does not mean I agree with them on everything. But at least they have some principles. Most of the others are as worthless as the Democrats.

Are you beginning to understand why I am so pessimistic about the future of the country?

The electoral process has failed us. We can no longer trust the voters to do the right thing, make sane decisions, or even be fully informed on the issues. Both Parties have failed us. And as for the White House? How can any sane American feel good about the country when two times in a row the voters went for a grandiose, dictatorial egomaniac?

And the Vice President is a village idiot who I’m surprised can remember his own name.

For a while when it became clear that Obama was not going to get most of his gun control proposals approved, I had begun to feel a bit better about the country. But now it has become all too apparent that the season of hope was to be shortlived. I see no way out of this mess short of Jefferson’s final solution. The tree of liberty from time to time must be refreshed with the blood of patriots and of tyrants, said Jefferson.

Jefferson knew something that no one else knew, or at least they would not admit that they knew — the kind of liberty they envisioned for this country is very fragile and tends to erode with time at the hands of evil men who make their way into positions of power. And thus, in order to keep those liberties from being totally annihilated, Patriots must be willing to do whatever is necessary to preserve or restore them, including going to war with fellow citizens and the tyrants they have placed in elected office.

It is now 15 seconds to that hour when this nation plunges into the most important war since the American Revolution of 1776. This will be a war to restore the Constitution that has been attacked, ignored, ridiculed, maligned, shredded, and violated by the president, the Congress, the Supreme Court, and at least a dozen states.

If the states continue down the path set by New York, Connecticut, Colorado, and Maryland, then they had best get set. They are starting a long, hard-fought, and bloody civil war. If Obama and Democrats in Congress, along with a few faux Republicans, continue their assault on the liberties protected by the Constitution, then their actions are tantamount to a declaration of war on the citizens. And if the Supreme Court continues to make asinine decisions such as affirming Obamacare in spite of no precedent and no rational argument in favor of it, then they, too, are asking for war.

The citizens have been arming themselves to the hilt for four years. And they are accumulating ammunition, just like Nappy at Homeland Security. You got bullets, Nappy? Well, we have them too…billions of rounds.

And let this be a warning to those who sit in the seats of power in what was once this Constitutional Republic — if you intend to open fire on us, then be fully aware that we will respond in kind. We will never start a war. But you will. We have seen people of your ilk in action before — in Nazi Germany, Communist Russia, Communist China, Communist Cuba, and Communist North Korea. We know what your kind will do if you feel your power is being threatened.

Do you want to be like them? Well, if you do, be fully aware that we, the people of America, are not submissive sheep like they were in those countries. We are American Patriots who will fight to the death for liberty. Fair warning.

The Liberty Sphere

No More “Mr. Nice Guy” It’s time for Congressmen to get off the pot

April 5, 2013

GOA has been issuing multiple alerts recently because of the imminent danger that is facing us – as the Senate will soon be taking up gun control legislation.

Much of the focus has been on the Senate. But if anyone thinks that the House – and specifically Speaker John Boehner – is our fail-safe to killing gun control in the Congress, they had better think again.

Speaking on Meet the Press on March 10, Speaker Boehner said that he has “made clear if the Senate acts on gun control legislation, the House will consider it.”

Quite simply, that means that House Speaker John Boehner will allow the House to consider votes on gun control legislation.

Not only that, in an article entitled “House GOP Leaders: We can pass gun control, immigration, without Republican support,” Breitbart.com reported that on issues like guns, Speaker Boehner was open to “taking rogue Republicans across the aisle to work with Democrats.” The House leadership quickly backtracked from this position once the Breitbart article was published.

Regardless, this just underscores how we can’t forget about the House, and how we need to keep the pressure on congressmen – especially the Republicans.

Sadly, at a time when the House leadership announces that they support universal gun registry legislation – only to quickly backtrack – we get nothing but excuses, excuses, excuses about why many GOP congressmen have not signed onto the Stockman-Broun letter.

Representatives Steve Stockman (R-TX) and Paul Broun (R-GA) are doing a bang-up job in the House. They are two of the most active leaders working to defeat gun control in Congress.

And to that end, the Stockman-Broun letter uses precedent to call upon Speaker Boehner to reject all gun control legislation unless it has the support of 117 Republicans. This is called the “Hastert Rule.” And, if Boehner follows it, virtually no gun control can come to the floor of the House. Virtually none.

So far, more than 25 pro-gun Representatives have signed onto the Stockman-Broun letter – and they should be thanked. But there should be lots more.

It’s very frustrating, however, when we have asked pro-gun Congressmen to sign onto the Stockman-Broun letter to tell Speaker Boehner NOT to bring up gun control, but we hear all kinds of excuses as to why they can’t.

Here are the types of excuses that GOA is getting as to why congressmen won’t sign onto the letter, and our answers to their lame excuses:

  • EXCUSE #1: One office said it had signed other gun control letters.
    ANSWER: There’s no quota on your support for the Second Amendment.
  • EXCUSE #2: Another office said they were afraid of Boehner’s wrath.
    ANSWER: You may want to consider your constituents’ wrath instead.
  • EXCUSE #3: A third office said that gun control was never coming to the House.
    ANSWER: Are you going to do nothing until the anvil actually falls on your head? Boehner has publicly stated that Senate-passed gun control would be “considered” by the House.
  • EXCUSE #4: A fourth office said the congressman had promised to be bipartisan.
    ANSWER: Obama’s ruthless pursuit of his political goals, at the same time he mouthed words of “bipartisanship” is the reason why he controls the White House and you don’t.
  • EXCUSE #5: A few offices have said they fear this letter is challenging Boehner’s authority.
    ANSWER: The Stockman-Broun letter does nothing of the sort. It simply asks the Speaker to follow a rule that was established by a former Republican Speaker of the House. No sanctions are stated or implied – it is only a request asking the Speaker to use the Hastert Rule to kill gun control.

Click here to see the list of Republican congressmen who SHOULD BE on the Stockman-Broun letter, but are not.

ACTION: If your congressman has NOT cosigned the Stockman-Broun letter, then please contact him or her immediately. You may click here to send them a prewritten email. Demand that your Representative sign the letter invoking the Hastert Rule to kill gun control in the House.

 

2nd amendment and what is comming and why: Guest Commentary

April 2, 2013

This is from a member of a forum that is not usually considered to be a political website. Posted with permission. Edited to fit the format here at WordPress. Hat tip to the vampiresmurfhunter.

 A lot of us don’t know whats going on behind the closed doors of the people that are attacking the 2nd amendment. I said after newton that the firearms debate would be forever changed as the anti firearms people would use that tragedy to push for new laws, and they have. What is not really well known is where these new laws are really going, snippets are getting out, but never covered in the media. What is covered is unfortunately the same line of BS that has been used since this president was elected again, a common sense approach. The problem is that common sense approach is new laws that will do nothing to stop or prevent any crime and they have even admitted to it, in one state down south a city councilmen is pushing through expanded background checks, he admitted that they will do nothing to stop crime, so then the Question becomes, why pass something that will not do anything to fix the problem? The answer is, because that is not what they are trying to do at all. So another Question, what are they trying to do?? Well here we go, Ill explain it below.
  Here is the 3 main anti firearms laws, anti 2nd amendment laws they are trying to pass.
  1. Extended background checks. What this is about is anytime a firearm is transferred from one person to another you have to call and have a background check done, even if youre loaning the firearm to a buddy to hit the range with, if you give your child or a wife a firearm, or if you leave it to someone in a will, it all have to go through the nics background check. What is really funny about this is, the government has already said many times over that the background check system is so messed up and not up to date, that it is almost totally ineffective.
  2. Hi capacity magazines, or anything over 15rnds, 10rnds, or even 7rnds. Why and what is this about? This is all about 3, and of course saving the children from another massacre. Seems to me when a psycho does one of these horrific rampages they have plenty of magazines and plenty of ammo, so there basically prepared. So making a person carry more magazines will not solve this problem, and if you have spent anytime shooting a semi auto then you should be proficient enough to change a magazine without an extended amount of time before you are ready to rock and roll again. These anti firearms people would like the world to believe that the time it takes to make a magazine change is all the time people need to bum rush the person that just unloaded a firearm before he can reload, like we all have superhuman speed while we are ducking for cover and trying to make sure our loved ones are not injured. Yes, that’s the answer, while hes reloading, we will grab our scissors or a stapler and bum rush the guy with the guns, yeup that’s the smart thing to do. Ahh, we all should know that’s a stupid thing to do, youd probably wind up dead doing that, but in some cases it could work, but I would rather shoot back at the person then rush them with my trusty stapler at my side, but if someone ever did subdue someone with a stapler they would want to ban those next as it would then be a proven weapon. This magazine ban is all about control, limiting law abiding Americans from the same equipment that the police have, to make sure that WE THE PEOPLE cannot stand toe to toe with their firepower. 2 comments I can remember being said after NY passed their new firearms laws where these, I would prefer the people had less rounds to shoot, something less then a single shot muzzle loader, but people would say we were taking there guns then. The 2nd comment was made by another NY official that was part of drafting the new laws,,, the original draft of the new laws we passed was for us to have everyone register every firearm they had at home, then after we had our list was to go door to door and confiscate all the firearms, magazines and ammo from everyone in the city. He said in the same interview that was the first draft, but realizing that the people of NY would not go for that, they had to scale it down and slowly work towards that goal, we are not done yet, but this is a stepping stone towards total confiscation of guns in NY and the country. So you can see where the magazine ban was just the first step, they are currently trying to pass a bill to limit the amount of ammo a person can have in their home, and how they are going to go door to door to all registered gun owners to inspect the house and check on how much ammo is present.
 
  3. Assault weapons ban. What this is really about and what it covers in the ban. I have actually posted on this before, Sen. Feinstien, I really hope I spelt her name wrong, I have no respect for her at all, lol. We have tried her assault weapons ban before, it did nothing to curb crime, crime sprees or any mass shootings. The way the law that she continues to push is written is interesting in ways that most people that are not firearms owners, or a person that keeps up on the laws can really grasp or understand, it is so broad that it encompasses just about everything dealing with a firearm. Now there is a lot to say about this, so I am going to try to break it down into a lot of different areas, so make yourself comfortable this will take a bit.
  The assault weapons ban that did pass and has expired was proven to do nothing, but if you ask any anti firearms person about it they will deflect the conversation away from the real information, the real statistics about the number of crimes that really did occur before the ban and during the ban. Why? Because they cannot stand on the real numbers, so they use ones that never existed in fact, but that were projected to happen about 40 years before the assault weapons ban ever existed. The ban did exactly nothing that they sold it on, that is why it was left to expire, probably the one biggest and greatest thing any politicians ever did with a law. It did not turn into a monster that usually happens anytime a law is passed, it failed and they did the right thing for once, they let it die.
  The new assault weapons ban bill. Again this is a Sen. Fienstien idea, right out of her delusional head. This thing is a monster, and the definitions involved in it are so encompassing that it boggles the mind, its hard to find one place to start to attack it because all the parts of it are linked together and it gives peoples headaches trying to explain it, namely me, lol. So lets start with the so called assault rifles, and why sen fienstien is so important. She has drafted what will probably be the definitive ban and all out grab of all firearms, she has stated more than once that her bill is just the start, we have to register all the firearms so we know where to go get them from. So why was that important to the rifle part? the old ban was mainly a twofold situation, one for money, for the tax stamp for a fully auto rifle or pistol, and the second part was the extensive background check and registration of every fully auto firearm in the country. Before this ban was implemented the government had only guesses as to how many there really was, after it was instituted they knew exactly how many law abiding Americans had and who had them. It didn’t really ban anything, but it put a lot of people out of range of buying one, and counted and told them where they were, it was registration in its purest form. It did ban a few things as far as accessories on the firearms themselves. Folding stocks, bayonet lugs, in all just minor things to see how far they could push before we get pissed and say outright NO. this new bill of hers bans everything to do with the furniture of the rifle, iron sites is about all you can have. No scopes, ho holographic sites, so flip up sites, no more rails on the fore end, no folding stocks, no collapsible stocks, somewhere part of the original ban, some of these are add ons for this new bill that the outrage from the newton shooting they think they can get in this time around. Who cares about the furniture on the rifle? Well this then gets into any rifle I’m sure many of you have in the safe or on the wall. Well take a look at what you got and see if you have anything other than iron sites on it, if you do then it would be illegal with the new bill. Certain rifles have been added to the bill by name, make and model; they got really specific about what they were banning in some areas. What are they banning? Scary looking rifles. No really, it’s scary looking rifles. It has nothing to do with what the rifles do, there action, what caliber they shoot, some are actually single shot, it is all about appearance and if it looks scary. Some like the AR family of rifles are on the list because they look like military rifles that are the main reason they give in public. Behind closed doors they have admitted they do not want anyone to own or posses any rifle that the military has or looks like a rifle the military has. So for you hunters out there that use anything in the AR family, it doesn’t matter what caliber it is, what you hunt with it, it is on the list. It was probably on the list already because of the furniture you have on it. Ok the next part of the rifle ban, you got anything that’s in .223? well that is illegal under the bill as well. Now there is a few exceptions to that, a single shot breach loader, or a box magazine that holds 5rnds or less, it might be 4rnds or less. I haven’t heard much on this part other then firearms manufactures are trying to figure out a way to redesign the box mags to meet this part of the law. For those with a magazine well inside the stock, your rifle would be illegal and there is nothing you can do about it except turn it in. again your rifle would probably be illegal anyways because you would have a scope on it. Start to see why this is so mind boggling to try to explain the frigging complexity of this bill? Lol. One of my favorites of this bill was muzzle loaders, a few of them were put on the list of banned firearms. Why? Because some are 50cal, yup just because of their caliber.
 

Ok now for the important part of this, now that you know all of your rifles would be illegal under the assault weapons amendment to this package of crap there trying to pass. The assault weapons part was dropped from the main part of the new guns laws they are trying to pass because they felt it would hurt them from getting enhanced background checks and the hi capacity magazines ban passed. They have said they don’t have the votes to pass it as part of the main bill, so they will add it as an amendment. That means they will put everything they have at the first 2 and get them passed hell or high water. We cannot allow any enhanced background checks, and we cannot allow a hi capacity magazine ban. Joe biden just said it the other day in a speech, this is just the beginning. In other words, they are going to keep adding, we gave an inch and they will take a mile behind closed doors. This amendment they will have to vote on, they know it will fail, but they want to see who’s on their side, who is right on the edge of voting for it, who will not vote for it because there about to face an election year, and who will vote for it knowing they have an election coming up they may lose. Their testing the waters to see who’s on their side.
  Ok the handgun part; I love this part because it is pretty simple. You can do nothing to change a pistol from the factory; it has to be factory original. Absolutely nothing the military uses can be on the pistol, you cannot change the recoil spring, cannot change the grips, cannot put on night sites, cannot put on a flash light, no trigger jobs (same for rifles too), no hi cap mags, if it originally came with double stack mags you have to get single stacks for it, they added a special part to the bill after seeing a YouTube video, so no race springs, no race holsters. See how ridiculous this is getting. Funny thing here, they outlawed the 50cal rnd for rifles, but it also applies to handguns too because the person that wrote that part didn’t know that you don’t shoot a 50bmg from a pistol, so as the law stands, no 50cal pistol. Heres a funnier part, they recognized there error and said, who needs a 50cal pistol? Who do they think they are Arnold Schwarzenegger (Ok I cannot spell his name but they did say his name when rationalizing this part to keep it in). so there rational for no-one having a 50cal handgun was a movie star, nothing to do with hunting bores, hogs, I know some do some big game hunting with pistols, but they don’t matter because a movie star decided this. Well not personally, just his character in movies did. Can you start to see the mentality of the people who are writing this stuff? They don’t know what they’re talking about, they just want to save the kids, it’s all for the kids. Remember that line; you will start to see more of it, a lot more of it.
 
  Well ok what does all of this mean? Well it is for our safety, it is for the kids, it is to lower the crime rates, to stop the mass murders, and it is for all those things. So if it is for all of those things? How can every anti firearms person all agree that this will do nothing to lower crime rates or make anyone safer? See they all say we have to do these things now, if it just saves one child, or stops just one mass murder spree, anything, but we must do something. They know what they are doing, it is why we have the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, the 2nd amendment, they can’t get around that pesky 2nd amendment thing. I hope some read the post I made a bit back about the history of the 2nd amendment and why our forefathers put it in our Constitution. At the end of the day all of these laws lead and only lead to confiscation, they have said so many times. You have to listen to what they say and how they say it. They have changed the words, the definitions, and how they say things as they need to, they need to always make it bad, to confuse the general public about what they are talking about. If I’m loosing you here no worries, just follow me for a minute and it will make sense.
  I think the best way of describing this is to think of obamacare, every promise made was an absolute lie, but more than that was the fact that everything said was actually the opposite when it was finally read. The something will happen with the gun debate, you hit them with facts and they ignore you, or say your facts are wrong and only there’s count. We can see the progression of this with the language, first it was hi capacity clips, now they have learned because all of us that know something about firearms were laughing at them because a clip is totally different then a magazine. So now they have changed the terms to say magazines, but it’s hi capacity clips and magazines, I still laugh about that. It was AR type rifles after newton, now to help scare the people; it is military style weapons of war. Some of you may have noticed how the new catch phrase is; weapons of war do not belong on the streets of America. They pull numbers of deaths by firearms almost out of thin air, but when challenged on the real facts of their numbers they run and hide, totally dismiss all the facts about the numbers they use. Here is a little tip on how to always shred the argument that America’s gun violence is the highest or 2nd highest in the world. Break down the number they toss out there, they always use the number of all deaths by firearms. They never break it down by, actidental discharge, murders, gang on gang shootings, rifles, shotguns, hand guns, or police shootings. The last one there is important because it accounts for just about 1/3 to half of shootings. Self defense shootings or justifiable shootings take up another huge part as well. When you break down their own numbers they will always dismiss it, news rarely mentions the actual facts of where the numbers come from or how they are broken down, they need the fear for those that don’t know the facts and refuse to educate themselves about what is going on. For them it is simple, politicians said it is bad, it’s for the kids, these are weapons of war and we don’t need them on our streets, we must act now, we cannot forget about the kids, etc, you will hear these lines more and more as well as the Newton brought up more and more before they vote on this bill.
 

These things are all parts of a larger push to register all firearms, the start of that is the expanded background check, which is the way to find all firearms in the country, it may take a few years, but eventually they will have a complete list, then they can come and take them. Notice the assault weapons bill, I did not want to type all of that, but I had to. I had to tell you all everything that was being defined in that bill, so you can see where the registry begins. Everything you own is in that bill in some way or another, everything will be registered and they will know what you have and where you live. Hi cap mags, that is just another way to take something from us, to show they have control and we are sheep. Bear posted a story we all should read, it is about a man that sent an email to a rep in his state about the 2nd amendment and that states own Constitution, and the laws that would be broken if they passed any gun laws or even voted for them from the federal gov. the reply the man got had nothing to do with the 2nd amendment, and the rep actually threatened the mans life, if you haven’t read that story, you should.
  Lastly and most importantly, gotta tell a story first so you’ll know where I am coming from on this. On 2-23 I went to a pro firearms, pro 2nd amendment rally here where I live. It was supposed to be a warm day so everyone was dressed for basically a day at the park lol. Well it was snowing and cold as all get out and no-one was dressed for that, not even the congressman that showed up to give a speech. After his speech the rally broke up, but the congressman was still there talking to a small group of people, I went and joined that conver and talked to him and the 7-8 others for over an hour, freezing our butts off, hands and fingers were turning blue, it was cold. So whats the point here? He said to send emails to your reps, to call them all, bug them daily with phone calls and emails telling them you support the 2nd amendment and to pass no new firearms laws. He said that phone calls and emails really do matter and in a lot of ways that’s how their offices judge what the people want them to do. So your voice must be heard in those ways, they do matter and it does work. So please, even if you have a pro firearms rep, call them and say thank you, keep up the good work on the 2nd and keeping my rights.

  If nothing else I hope you all learned something about the attacks that are taking place on the 2nd amendment, these are going to be back door deals that you will never hear about on the news, but this is what is coming, the vice pres said it best, there is more to come, this is just the beginning, and if you want to go to jail follow his advice about shotguns for home defense, lol.

~snip~

This was from a person that is not normally politically active, and if people like that are thinking this way? This nation is in for one hell of a roller coaster ride. One that will be anything but pleasant I might add.

 

 

We know, we know. We would prefer to prohibit any and all gun control, even if it had 100 votes…

March 23, 2013

We realize it’s short notice, but we wanted to alert you that, later tonight, Senator Mike Lee of Utah intends to offer an amendment to the budget resolution that would prohibit any gun control legislation which does not have a 2/3 vote in the Senate.

We know, we know. We would prefer to prohibit any and all gun control, even if it had 100 votes.

But if the Lee amendment is passed, the practical effect will be that gun control can never again pass the Senate.

Given the Armageddon-like fight which we are now engaged in in the Senate, achieving a gun-control peace for the rest of our lifetimes would be a good thing.

ACTION: Contact your Senators. Ask them to vote for the Lee amendment which would require a 2/3 vote for the Senate to impose any gun control.

You may Click here to use The Action Center, or you can call your Senators since time is short. The number for the Senate is 202-224-3121.

The Right Not to be Raped or Murdered

February 27, 2013

How about it politically correct hoplophobes and practitioners of misandry? You hate gun owners. We hate your stopping our ability to properly and effectively defend what is ours.

The “Schumer Sell-Out”

February 26, 2013
Anti-gun Sen. Charles Schumer‘s staff is leaking out to the press the Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn is “on the verge” of caving in and agreeing to a ban on private gun sales — and requiring virtually every American to get the government’s approval before exercising their constitutional right to become a gun owner.
According to The Washington Post (2/23/13), the remaining sticking point is Coburn’s reluctance to require a 4473 for every private transaction.  Were this to occur, ATF’s practice of going into gun stores and copying all the 4473’s — a practice which has been documented by GOA — would soon produce a national gun registry.
Schumer’s people have also let it be known that they may have Susan Collins (R-ME), John McCain (R-AZ), and Jeff Flake (R-AZ) in the bag.  (Note to gun owners in these states:  These Senators really need to hear from you!)
Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that the final version of the “Schumer sell-out” prohibits any paperwork from being kept on private gun sales.
Even then, the “Schumer Sell-Out” would still result in one out of seventeen legal gun purchases being permanently and illegally blocked. 
According to scholar John Lott, 8% of all gun purchases are currently blocked by the FBI.  But, according to a recent study by the Department of Justice, only 1.8% of the 8% are blocked because they are “denied.”  That means that 6.2% are neither “denied” nor “approved.”  However, because most gun sellers won’t sell a firearm under these circumstances, even after three days, these legal gun purchasers are permanently denied their constitutional rights by bureaucratic fiat.
Although the FBI is legally required to state a reason for blocking a gun purchase within five days, it NEVER complies with the law — daring purchasers, instead, to “sue us.”  Most purchasers, lack the means to do just that.
What if one out of seventeen lawful voters was illegally turned away from the polls?  What if one out of seventeen innocent men was illegally sent to prison?  What if one out of seventeen newspapers was shut down?  None of these would be acceptable to anti-gun zealots who, with relish, deny the right of legitimate gun purchasers to exercise their Second Amendment rights one out of every seventeen times.
The “Schumer Sell-Out” would still strip 150,000 veterans of their Second Amendment rights with no due process whatsoever.  Sure, there will reportedly be throwaway language, supposedly allowing veterans to get the constitutional rights back.  Schumer fooled Coburn into accepting comparable language on a 2008 law, but it never had any impact.  The problem is not “getting their rights back.”  The problem is preventing their rights from being unconstitutionally stripped — with no due process whatsoever — in the first place.
Under the 2008 Schumer legislation, the Obama administration can use a psychiatrist’s diagnosis to strip veterans and others of their constitutional rights.  No court order is needed.  Soon, under Obama’s Executive Action Number 1, millions of Americans with ADHD, and even post partem depression could have their gun rights taken away with a keystroke by Medicare, Medicaid, and the Department of Education.  Firemen, policemen, and soldiers with PTSD could also lose their gun rights under the “Schumer sell-out,” and there’s nothing they could do about it.
The “Schumer Sell-Out” would exacerbate the problem with NICS system breakdowns during weekends and black Fridays — blocking all gun purchasers.
 
The “Schumer Sell-Out” would strip farmers and Americans in rural areas of their Second Amendment rights.  Sure, there is a possibility that Schumer will accept do-nothing language in the Brady Law protecting remote Alaskan villages.  But millions of Americans would still have to travel hundreds of miles (accompanied by their sellers) in order to transfer a firearm to their next-door neighbor — hoping desperately that they’re not among the 6.2% of Americans who get a non-committal response from the FBI.
The “Schumer Sell-Out” would still be ineffectual to stop Adam Lanza (who stole his guns) and James Holmes and Jared Loughner (who passed background checks).  In fact, an internal Department of Justice memorandum concedes that it would be almost totally ineffectual.
As a result, the main purpose of the “Schumer Sell-Out” remains, and has always been, to “break the back of the gun … lobby” and to serve as a platform for the next round of gun control.
The Sunday New York Times (2/23/13) pointed out what this is all about.  According to the Times, Schumer is jealous to protect the 13 Democratic seats in pro-gun states which will come up in 2014.  Press reports ascribe Coburn’s role as being one who will “provide cover” for Democrats running for reelection.
From a purely partisan standpoint, the GOP should realize that guns will serve as a powerful political weapon for them, unless Coburn’s acquiescence to the “Schumer Sell-Out” takes guns off the table.  In places like Arkansas and Montana, 95% of all voters would no doubt oppose the “Schumer sell-out,” as 95% of NRA members and 96% of 25,000 GOA members did in recent surveys.
Conversely, the “Schumer Sell-Out” will revitalize and engerize the handgun control movement.
 
Finally, the “Schumer Sell-Out” will give Obama the aura of invincibility and make it virtually impossible to stop the rest of his agenda.
If Sen. Coburn really wants to “compromise” with Schumer, he should make Schumer give up some ground and demand that Congress repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act.  Now, that would be a real “compromise” that would save lives!
ACTION:  Contact your U.S. Senators and ask them to oppose the “Schumer sell-out.”  Click here to send a prewritten message to your Senators
Please note that there are two different action responses for you to send, and the system will automatically send that response, depending upon whether your Senator is a Republican or Democrat.

Barrett, LaRue Tactical, Olympic Arms, York Arms, MidwayUSA, Cheaper Than Dirt, Spike’s Tactical: HEROS

February 24, 2013

Ever since the mass murder at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, the Left has rabidly pursued all manner of unconstitutional gun control legislation. Federal, state and local, the NeoComs stop at nothing to deprive us of our unalienable rights, endowed by our Creator. Yet all is not lost as long as we stand firm.

The National Institute of Justice, the research branch of the Justice Department, recently leaked a memo evaluating many of the White House’s preferred gun control measures. For example, the NIJ says that Dianne Feinstein‘s defensive weapons ban is “unlikely to have an impact on gun violence” because — wait for it — those firearms “are not a major contributor to gun crime.” Therefore, concludes the NIJ, in order for a ban to be effective, it would have to include no exemptions and be paired with a mandatory buyback program.

Notably, Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-CA) just introduced legislation to impose a 10 percent tax on concealable firearms, aiming to fund a federal buyback with the revenue collected.

The NIJ reaches similar conclusions about magazine capacity limits, which would be ineffective while exempting currently owned magazines, and universal background checks, which won’t work without national gun registration because criminals use straw purchasers or steal weapons in order to avoid background checks.

The question is, will Obama and the NeoComs pursue NIJ’s recommended “fixes” to their obviously flawed plans?

While movement has temporarily slowed at the federal level, the states are busy enacting their own draconian gun restrictions. In Colorado, House Democrats passed four anti-gun bills including outlawing concealed carry on college campuses (more on that below), requiring universal background checks and limiting magazine capacity to 15 rounds.

As we noted last week, Magpul, maker of the popular PMAG magazine for AR-15 platform weapons, plans to carry through with its threat to leave the state because of the mag cap limit. Democrats tried offering them an exemption to manufacture their magazines in-state as long as they didn’t sell them there, but Magpul wisely didn’t take the bait. “If we’re able to stay in Colorado and manufacture a product, but law-abiding citizens of the state were unable to purchase the product, customers around the state and the nation would boycott us for remaining here,” said Doug Smith, Magpul’s chief operating officer. The move would take $85 million and hundreds of jobs from Colorado.

In Washington, a bill is in the works with a requirement to “safely and securely store” any legally owned “assault weapons.” It would also provide sheriffs with the power to, “no more than once per year, conduct an inspection to ensure compliance,” upon penalty of up to one year in jail.

Maryland Democrats seek to ban “possessing, selling, offering to sell, transferring, purchasing, or receiving an assault weapon.” That goes beyond Feinstein’s federal ban proposal in that it also bans “possessing.” Furthermore, no one under the age of 21 may possess ammunition, meaning they also can’t hunt. Things aren’t going well in the Used-to-Be Free State.

New York, an early adopter of unconstitutional restrictions post-Newtown, isn’t done. Democrats introduced a bill to require that all gun owners in New York “obtain and continuously maintain a policy of liability insurance in an amount not less than one million dollars specifically covering any damages resulting from any negligent or willful acts involving the use of such firearm while it is owned by such person.” Failing this, a gun owner will face “immediate revocation of such owner’s registration, license and any other privilege to own” a firearm. Privilege? Our copy of the Constitution recognizes the right to keep and bear arms.

Speaking of New York, numerous gun manufacturers and sellers are refusing to sell to law enforcement officers or government agencies anything that can’t be legally bought by the average citizen. This move applies to any other state that bans weapons or magazines while making exceptions for law enforcement officers. So far, none of the big three law enforcement suppliers — Smith & Wesson, Glock and Sig Sauer — have joined the effort, but Barrett, LaRue Tactical, Olympic Arms, York Arms, MidwayUSA, Cheaper Than Dirt, Spike’s Tactical and several others have announced the policy change.

We greatly respect and appreciate our nation’s law enforcement officers, but if a seven-round mag is good enough for a civilian, it’s good enough for a police officer. And if civilians can’t own modern muskets, police shouldn’t either. Civilians and law enforcement personnel are fellow citizens, not subjects.

State news isn’t all bad, however. Ten states have proposed legislation to preempt federal gun bans and protect lawful gun owners. Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Washington have all proposed legislation to protect firearms made and kept within their borders. Alaska, Arizona, Montana and Tennessee have already passed such laws.

Finally, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia thinks state guns bans will reach the Court. We agree, and we don’t doubt Scalia is itching to reiterate that the Court meant what it said in its Heller and McDonald rulings, and that the Second Amendment also means what it says.

During the debate in Colorado about concealed carry on campus, Democrat state Rep. Joe Salazar explained why women don’t need guns for self-defense against would-be rapists: “It’s why we have call boxes, it’s why we have safe zones, it’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at. And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around or if you feel like you’re in trouble when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop … pop around at somebody.”

Hot Air’s Mary Katherine Ham retorted, “Well, after all, you might not get raped. In Salazar’s world, not only are women incapable of defending themselves against a physical threat, but they are incapable of even identifying a physical threat, and should therefore be deprived of the ability to try. Empowerment!”

Never fear, the University of Colorado posted some safety tips for avoiding rape, including “kick off your shoes if you have time and can’t run in them.” Failing that, “Tell your attacker that you have a disease or are menstruating. Vomiting or urinating may also convince the attacker to leave you alone.” They conclude, “Only you can decide which action is most appropriate.” Well, unless you decide carrying a firearm is appropriate. Call boxes, whistles and vomiting are peachy ideas, but a handgun would be far better. When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.

Another legislator, Democrat State Senator Jesse Ulaberri, contended that people don’t need guns for self-defense because that just leads to a “whole crossfire.” And besides, the people in Tucson “stood up to defend themselves … and they did it with ball point pens.”

These are the people who think they know what’s best for you.

The Patriot Post

The Left is not happy at all with Gun Owners of America: Nothing new about that!

February 15, 2013
“It’s people like [Erich] Pratt who could derail even modest efforts to bring a modicum of sanity to the nation’s gun laws,” said The Washington Post’s Jonathan Capehart on January 16, 2013.
And then there were the insults that CNN’s Piers Morgan threw at GOA Executive Director Larry Pratt when Morgan ran out of arguments — even calling him an “idiot” and “incredibly stupid.”
The Left is scared that their hopes for greater gun control may fall short.  They are scared that history is going to repeat itself.
Remember the battle in 2004 when we fought the renewal of Feinstein’s semi-auto ban?  The media mourned that:
“GOA’s lobbying probably torpedoed the best chance for [renewing the semi-auto ban] this year.” (National Journal, July 17, 2004).
It’s been almost ten years since we won that battle.  And it’s been even longer since GOA stood alone after the Columbine tragedy — drawing a line in the sand — and told Congress that gun owners would accept NOT ONE WORD of gun control.
Now, here we are in 2013 — and the anti-gunners are hysterical.  They are worried that their attempts to get stricter gun laws this year are about to slip through their fingers.
For us, this is all good news.  But let us make this perfectly clear:  THE BATTLE IS NOT WON YET.
And we have to continue to pound, pound, pound — just as we have done over the past two months.
That said, there are good signs around Capitol Hill that your activism is producing tremendous results:
* Anti-gun radicals have all but given up on their ability to pass Feinstein’s semi-automatic ban and magazine ban.  Instead, they are focusing on their universal gun registry and a trafficking/licensure bill.
* If we can just get 117 Republicans in the House to sign the Stockman-Broun letter insisting that no gun control be brought up in the House without the support of 117 Republicans, it will be difficult for House Speaker John Boehner to bring up any gun control in the House.
* The handful of House liberal anti-gun Republicans seem to be holding firm in opposition to the universal gun registry.  Philadelphia suburban Congressman Meehan -– one of the Left’s two key targets -– yesterday flatly resisted MSNBC’s call for him to endorse the registry.
* Unlike the gun control fight after Columbine -– which we won, with great difficulty -– the pro-gun movement is united.  MSNBC’s Joy Reid lamented on January 25 that NRA had become hard-core in order to “compete with extremist [sic] groups like Gun Owners of America.”
* As predicted, the mainline media has shifted, just a little bit, from gun grabbing to job-destruction and amnesty.
So keep up the good work.  Your efforts have taken us a long way toward victory.  But we are not there yet.  We want to thank you for standing with us and for keeping the pressure on!
In Liberty,
Larry Pratt

Democrats at Feinstein press conference lie to Americans: Of course, that’s what they do best…

January 29, 2013

Congress and the American people:

Today, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) pulled out all the stops in holding a press conference to introduce her long-anticipated ban on modern rifles and magazines, including universal registration of all gun sales. And today, you have been fed lies by the same politicians who have been trying to confiscate guns since at least the early 1990’s.

At the conference, Democrats, including Sens. Feinstein, Richard Durban (D-IL), Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) , recycled virtually every cynical distortion used by gun ban advocates in their effort to divide and defeat not only Second Amendment supporters, but all freedom-loving Americans.

 

Lies you are being told

“We don’t want your guns”

Durbin and Schumer appealed to hunters and sportsman, saying: “We don’t want to take your guns.” But their histories and the history of the gun control movement say otherwise. These cynical manipulators of tragedy hope you don’t remember 1994, when passage of the Brady Act, and then the ban on semi-automatic firearms, was immediately followed by “Brady II,” a draconian gun ban which would have given the BATF power to search the homes of law-abiding Americans and would have banned most common self-defense handguns and magazines.

In the present proposal, the “one feature” test for semi-automatic firearms could ban even a .22 caliber rifle if it has a “thumbhole” stock. More importantly, the arbitrary magazine capacity limit will apply to defensive handguns, limiting your ability to protect yourself and your family.

The legislative history of Sens. Feinstein, Schumer and Durbin is that they will take what they can get, and they will not stop in going for the rest. If they pass this ban, more will follow and they will go after your hunting rifle or shotgun. These people have been consistent and clear, they want to prohibit law abiding citizens from owning any type firearm.

 

“No right is absolute”

Schumer said these are “reasonable limitations” to your Second Amendment rights because, after all, “no right is absolute.” He argued that our First Amendment right to freedom of speech doesn’t allow you to yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater. Apparently, however, this Harvard-educated lawyer is unfamiliar with the concept of “prior restraint.” Prosecuting someone for wrongly yelling “fire” represents prosecution of those who abuse their rights. By contrast, gun control is a restraint on the rights of the law-abiding. If the gun control model were applied to freedom of speech, you would be bound and gagged before entering the theater on the premise that you might yell “fire.”

 

“Only the ‘Gun Lobby’ opposes reasonable measures”

As much as those who would restrict your freedoms want you to believe “the NRA” and the “gun manufacturers” are the only ones opposing restrictive gun control, understand that the National Coalition to Stop the Gun Ban represents a grass roots movement of millions of law-abiding gun owners, the vast majority of whom don’t earn a dime from this effort, and take time from jobs and families to fight for your civil rights. Ironically, it is the “anti-gun lobby” which actually comprises a small number of well-funded gun ban activists and their paid lobbyists.

 

“You don’t need an AR-15 to go hunting”

Regurgitated by several anti-gun politicians at the press conference, it was most completely expressed by Philadelphia Police Chief Charles Ramsey, who pointed to an AR-15 and said, “You can’t go hunting with something like that…there would be nothing left to eat.”

But the Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting. In drafting the Bill of Rights, the Framers intended it as the last in a series of checks and balances against abuse of government – perhaps, indeed, the sort of abuse President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Feinstein and others are determined to thrust on the American people.

 

“These ‘assault rifles’ are weapons of war”

The guns being targeted by this ban are not “assault rifles,” which are military machine guns virtually unavailable to the public since 1934. Yet Schumer and others repeatedly called the guns “assault rifles” in order to confuse you about the guns they want to ban which, in reality, differ from common hunting guns only by cosmetic features.

 

“If the magazine ban had been in effect, kids would be alive in Newtown today”

So claimed Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy (both D-CT), in a complete absence of any evidence to that effect. Virginia Tech shooter Seung-Hui Cho was reported to carry one hundred magazines, and most active shooters carry multiple firearms, making magazine capacity moot. Moreover, contrary to claims by gun ban advocates, the rate of violent victimization in schools during the period from 1994 to 2004, when the last semi-auto ban was in effect, increased by five-fold.

 

Coalition members reject these lies

The thirty-seven (37) participating organizations of the National Coalition to Stop the Gun Ban, representing millions of Second Amendment supporters, reject the lies being told to the American people in order to pass the Feinstein ban.

Some will urge you to “compromise.” The Coalition, however, regards “compromise,” as our opposition defines it, to be a process in which we lose slightly fewer of our rights than under the original proposal. Consequently, any legislation which registers or bans firearms; limits magazine capacity; registers private transactions through NICS; or restricts time, place or manner of self-defense is unacceptable.

Members of Congress who support gun owners by opposing all gun control will, in turn, benefit from support by Coalition organizations. Members of Congress who support gun control by any means, procedural or substantive, will be targeted for defeat by Coalition members. They will be subject to picketing, leaflet drops at events in their districts, phone and mail campaigns, and political action committee opposition. NRA ratings and endorsements will have no impact on Coalition actions.

Do not believe lies promulgated by politicians who exploit tragedy to further their pre-ordained agenda to follow the disarmament path of Britain and Australia. Unlike other countries, the Framers designed our Republic to keep Americans free, and freedom means keeping arms in the hands of the people.

Respectfully,

The National Coalition to Stop the Gun Ban

Signatories

 

Also
The latest Knox Report column has been posted at WND.org.
This week Jeff takes a look at the reality of “Assault Weapons.”
http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/deadly-assault-weapons-what-are-they/
Deadly “Assault Weapons” – What are They?
These “scary-looking” guns are the very type referenced in the Second Amendment
By Jeff Knox

There’s been a lot of talk recently about “Assault Weapons,” but it seems that many of the people doing the talking don’t know anything at all about guns, and that’s causing confusion.

As an Army-certified Small Arms Repairman and a lifelong firearms owner and enthusiast, I know a little bit about guns and assault rifles, so I’d like to set the record straight about a few things.

First off, the term “Assault Weapon” is a made-up name.  There really is no such thing.  The term was coined by some firearm marketers back in the 1970s to describe military-looking, semi-auto firearms.  Anti-gun extremists recognized it as a catchy and scary term and exploited it for all it was worth.  The term was a play on the valid label “Assault Rifle,” which is a lightweight, selective fire rifle or carbine.  The key there is that term “selective fire,” which means the operator can select either single shot or multi-shot modes of fire.  In other words, a true assault rifle can fire one shot for each trigger pull, or it can fire a burst or string of shots for each trigger pull – machinegun mode.

What Feinstein, Obama, and Holder are calling “assault weapons” are not selective fire.  They are not machineguns, and are not capable of selective fire.  Nor are they easily modified to be able to fire like machineguns.  These guns are semi-auto firearms that fire one round each time the trigger is pulled, just like a typical revolver or semi-auto pistol, or the 100-year old Winchester Model 1907.

Read the full article by clicking here.
http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/deadly-assault-weapons-what-are-they/ 
This Update was sent from The Firearms Coalition to our friends and supporters.
Please forward to others concerned about retaining their rights.
*** Please make sure we have your ZIP Code so we can better alert you to important issues in your state! ***
*** Just Reply to this message with your ZIP in the Subject line.  Thanks for your help. ***
Your elected servants need to hear from You!
Please contact your elected representatives now – by phone, email, letters, and faxes – and contact them every few days until they get the message.
STOP ALL Infringements on our rights – No gun bans.  No magazine bans.  No government interference in private firearms transactions.
Tell them that Violent Crime – including “gun crime” – has gone down by more than 50% in the past twenty years – while gun ownership and guns in circulation have gone through the roof.  Tell them to stop trying to control guns and instead do a better job of controlling criminals and the criminally insane.
If you agree with the work we’re doing and you’d like to help, there are three things we ask you to do:
First, stay informed and contact your representatives on a regular basis.
Second, join your local grass roots rights organization and help them in protecting your rights.
Third, join The Firearms Coalition for news, updates, and to add your voice to our efforts.  Contributions – of any amount – are  appreciated.
  
You can contribute online with PayPal or a credit card at www.FirearmsCoalition.org, or you can drop us a check – or just a $5 bill at PO Box 1761, Buckeye, AZ  85326.  If you see value in the work we do, please help us out.  We’ll do our best to give you a good return on your investment.  — Jeff
Please forward, post, and circulate this Update.

Civil War no less..?

January 25, 2013

Within the last two weeks the forces of the progressive, ultra-liberal cabal have managed to amass a coordinated front to attack and render null and void the gun rights of average citizens as protected by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Gun rights enthusiasts say that such actions will provoke civil war.

Today, these forces appear to be simultaneously unleashing their attack on all fronts, from attempting to prevent citizens from gaining access to brass for the purpose of making their own ammunition to the push by leftwing extremists to bully banks into refusing to give loans to gun manufacturers, effectively putting gun makers out of business.

Further, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., introduced her so-called “assault weapons ban” bill Thursday, which actually bans much more than semiautomatic rifles. The bill goes after handguns, shotguns, and ammunition as well. It also sets a federal limit on the number of rounds each citizen can legally possess.

Gun rights groups across the country, which are not known for extremism but for representing citizens from every walk of life, from Democrat to Republican, liberal to conservative, the non-religious to Christian, have warned repeatedly that should the federal government launch this type of attack on the gun rights of citizens, outright civil war would ensue.

That warning was no mere idle threat. The citizens in the heartland are angry, fired up, and ready to defend their Constitution and their rights. The battle lines are being drawn now. This nation stands closer to armed conflict between its own citizens as never before since the Civil War of the 1860s.

The laws being proposed currently will automatically criminalize millions of law-abiding citizens who own the types of guns the government wishes to ban. For example, the handgun of choice for most women and homeowners are the semiautomatic variety made by Sig Sauer, Kel-Tec, and other brands that fire multiple rounds quickly.

And if citizens refuse to comply like sheep with the direct tyrannical assault on our rights, apparently the Obama administration has every intention of using force against our own citizens if they resist turning over their guns and registering the guns they are allowed to keep.

A rumor has been floating around Washington concerning a new mandate the Obama administration allegedly implemented that would require military personnel to state, up front, that they are willing to open fire upon American citizens on our own soil if ordered to do so.

In addition, National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea reported today a most disturbing story out of Fort Drum, N.Y. indicating that the military installation is destroying used ammunition brass, rendering it useless for citizens to purchase in what is known as “reloading” — the practice of making homemade ammunition using expended brass.

The administration attempted this once before and was ordered by Congress to stop. The practice is also against the law, but the installation apparently is still engaging in the practice.

Thus, a united front has amassed on the Left that is determined to shove gun bans, gun registration, and gun and ammo control down the throats of citizens who have always operated under the assumption that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

How many infringements will it take to get clear-headed, patriotic citizens to rise up and demand that the government cease and desist? It appears that such a time has come.

SOURCE