Posts Tagged ‘Law’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Gun Control, the Democrats are out for revenge

January 10, 2009

Ever since the election I have been commenting about how the politics of revenge will become the law of the land. My RSS feed has been going nuts about new taxes, new confiscation, and assorted other schemes that the gun control crowd are coming up with in order to deny you of your Constitutional rights with regard to being able to properly, and effectively defend your self, family, friends, and country.

What follows is among the best that I have come across.


Alan Korwin

Gun law update: Brady Gun-Ban Strategy Outlined

2009-01-08 at 2:39 pm · Filed under Vox Populi

(Prior report with Brady gun-ban lists: http://www.gunlaws.com/newstuff.htm)

The powerful gun-ban lobby has developed its own language to color and disguise its true agenda — the disarming of law-abiding Americans in every way possible, and the end of effective self defense.

Their latest set of plans — used as a fund raiser (outlined below) — is filled with nice sounding terms that put a deceptive spin on their goals. Respect for the Bill of Rights is nowhere to be found, only clever end runs and literal destruction of rights Americans have always had.

Starkly missing from these plans is any direct attack on criminals — the whole game plan is aimed at firearms the public holds. It is a product of abject gun fear — hoplophobia — that afflicts the people behind the plan. They deny they’re hoplophobic, but just look at their plans, directed solely at restricting and eliminating guns — instead of the crime caused by criminals they nominally complain about. I noticed that all mentions of accident prevention, a former holy grail for the group, are gone.

The hypocrisy is unequivocal and self evident. Sarah claims, “We need to get these ‘killing machines’ off our streets.” Well, go ahead. Any person, on any street, operating any “killing machine” belongs in prison immediately under existing law, right? Everyone, even the Bradys, know this. It doesn’t matter if your gun is black, or too short, or holds the right amount of ammo.

The problem isn’t the “machines,” it’s the lack of law enforcement — in the bad parts of town and among the gangs where most of the problems occur (see maps: http://www.gunlaws.com/GunshotDemographics.htm). They will not admit this, and they do not address this.

Instead, they act out on their phobia and attack you and me. The real problem of crime and violence is just an excuse for them to work on disarming people who didn’t do anything.

The Federal Bureaucracy of Investigation, along with the Bureaucracy of Alcohol and Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives are in complete sympathy with the plan. The Brady plan will get them more staff, more office space, more of our money and more power, the acknowledged holy grail of bureaucrats.

Politically Corrected Glossary — of Bradyspeak

(See the entire glossary: http://www.gunlaws.com/politicallycorrect.htm)

Full article here

Tags:, , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hunting Fishing and the Great Outdoors, Law, Local Politics Colorado, Men's Issues, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 7 Comments »

Are Democrats Better on Privacy and Surveillance?

December 25, 2008

This piece by James Bovard points out the application of Historical Fallacy by various leftest organizations. Not the least of which is the Democrat Party. To be sure, the Republicans lost any and all credibility over the past eight years as the party of limited government, if indeed they ever truly deserved such a moniker.

The call for a new political party that actually does more than give lip service to the Constitution and Bill of Rights is nothing new. I have serious doubts that anything will come from this need though. Not to mention that the two majority parties have passed laws making any attempt to effectively remove them from the halls of power doomed to utter failure.

The Bush administration has probably illegally violated Americans’ privacy more than any presidency in at least a generation. Many Americans are understandably ready to throw out Republicans who trampled the Bill of Rights.

But is the solution to elect a Democrat? Many liberals were shocked in July when putative Democratic Party presidential nominee Barack Obama voted in favor of the bill to retroactively immunize illegal wiretapping by Bush officials and telephone-company executives. Even worse, the bill authorizes the federal government to conduct far more warrantless wiretaps whenever the president claims the nation is endangered.

Some Americans are looking back at the 1990s as a comparative Golden Age for Privacy. Unfortunately, most people have forgotten that the Democratic Party’s record on surveillance was dreadful.

The Clinton administration consistently championed the right of government employees to stick their noses almost anywhere — into people’s email, car, house, or personal effects. Clintonites set off one false alarm after another to justify extending government’s right to intrude. The administration consistently sought to exploit technological development in order to maximize government’s control over the citizenry.

The Fourth Amendment states,

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The purpose of the Fourth Amendment was to prevent government officials from having dictatorial power over citizens.

The prohibition against unreasonable searches is the key to the Fourth Amendment.

As law professor Jeffrey Standen observed in an article he wrote for Legal Times, each extension of government power makes further extensions “reasonable” — since “reasonable” is defined on a sliding scale by however much intrusion people will tolerate from the government. The Clinton administration often sounded as if the only searches that were unreasonable were the ones that government officials did not care to do.


Public housing and the Constitution

In 1993, the Chicago Housing Authority (CHA) began warrantless sweep searches of residents’ apartments to confiscate firearms. Other cities, such as Baltimore and Philadelphia, also used warrantless mass sweeps of public housing apartments to seize guns and other items. Law professor Tracey Maclin observed, “During these sweeps, officers would rifle cabinets and dresser drawers, look inside refrigerators, overturn mattresses and sofa cushions, and inspect private papers and closed boxes.” In early 1994, the CHA proposed beginning routine no-knock raid sweeps. On April 7, 1994, federal judge Wayne Andersen ruled that the dragnet searches were unconstitutional, warning, “The erosion of the rights of people on the other side of town will ultimately undermine the rights of each of us.”

President Clinton was outraged that a judge limited the power of the police, and announced, “I’m so worried that all the progress that’s been made will be undermined by this court decision.” Two months later, he visited the Chicago housing projects, again endorsed the searches, and declared, “The most important freedom we have in this country is the freedom from fear. And if people aren’t free from fear, they are not free.”

In Clinton’s view, public-housing residents apparently had no reason to fear the housing police’s storming into their apartments. Yet, court testimony showed that the warrantless searches, none of which occurred within 48 hours of actual shooting incidents, were ineffective at reducing crime. Harvey Grossman of the American Civil Liberties Union observed,

Instead of meeting their obligations to provide real safety, Chicago officials perpetrated a hoax by convincing many residents that warrantless sweep searches of all apartments would enhance their safety.

CHA officials have complained that they are forbidden by federal regulations from even checking whether applicants for public housing have a criminal record.


Pawing is not searching

The Clinton administration consistently argued that few, if any, government searches were blocked by the Fourth Amendment. In early 2000, the Supreme Court heard the case of U.S. v. Bond. A Greyhound bus was stopped at an internal Border Patrol checkpoint in Texas. After agents checked all the passengers’ identification, one agent went through and pawed, squeezed, and manipulated each piece of luggage in the overhead bins. He detected a suspicious object in one canvas bag — and Steven Bond was shortly thereafter charged with possession of a brick of meth. Bond’s lawyer argued that groping the luggage was an unconstitutional search.

The Clinton administration argued that no constitutional rights were violated because Bond and other passengers had no “legitimate expectation of privacy.” The Clinton administration brief asserted,

The fact that tactile inspection of a bag’s exterior may reveal information about its contents no more establishes a search than when officers standing on a public sidewalk or in open fields make observations of the contents of a car or a house. Passengers handling bags in a manner similar to the manner of Agent Cantu may not pay attention to what they sense, or know how to interpret it. But nothing bars government officers from using specialized knowledge to keep themselves alert to, and to help them interpret, that which any other member of the public might have sensed. To take this reasoning to its logical conclusion, since people in rush hour subway trains are occasionally most uncomfortably pressed against each other — so cops should be allowed to press their bodies against that of any passenger.

The Supreme Court, in a decision written by archconservative Chief Justice William Rehnquist, scorned this particular minimalist interpretation of the Fourth Amendment. He declared, “Physically invasive inspection is simply more intrusive than purely visual inspection.”

Some of the Clinton administration’s anti-drug policies were highly egalitarian, striving to violate everyone’s privacy. During the 1996 presidential campaign, Clinton proposed mandatory drug tests for all teenagers applying for a driver’s license. This followed the Clinton administration’s endorsement of mandatory drug tests for school students in a 1995 Supreme Court case. Clinton administration Solicitor General Drew Days argued that a school district “could not effectively educate its students unless it undertook suspicionless drug testing as part of a broader drug-prevention program,” as Cato Institute lawyer Tim Lynch noted.


High-tech hustles

A 1998 ACLU report observed that the Clinton administration had

engaged in surreptitious surveillance, such as wiretapping, on a far greater scale than ever before…. The Administration is using scare tactics to acquire vast new powers to spy on all Americans.

On April 16, 1993, the Clinton administration revealed that the National Security Agency had secretly developed a new microchip known as the Clipper Chip. A White House press release announced “a new initiative that will bring the Federal Government together with industry in a voluntary program to improve the security and privacy of telephone communications while meeting the legitimate needs of law enforcement.” This was practically the last time that the word “voluntary” was used.

The Clipper Chip presumed that it should be a crime for anyone to use technology that frustrates curious government agents. The ACLU noted,

The Clipper Chip proposal would have required every encryption user (that is, every individual or business using a digital telephone system, fax machine, the Internet, etc.) to hand over their decryption keys to the government, giving it access to both stored data and real-time communications. This is the equivalent of the government requiring all home-builders to embed microphones in the walls of homes and apartments.

Marc Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, observed, “You don’t want to buy a set of car keys from a guy who specializes in stealing cars.” When the federal National Institute for Standards and Technology formally published the proposal for the new surveillance chip, fewer than one percent of the comments supported the plan.

The administration eventually abandoned its Clipper campaign but stepped up its attacks on purveyors of encryption software.


Wiretap mania

When the Clinton administration proposed legislation to massively increase the number of wiretaps, they named their offering the “Digital Telephony and Communications Privacy Improvement Act of 1994.” Apparently, the more the government could invade people’s privacy, the safer they would be. In the final cut-and-paste on Capitol Hill, the bill was renamed the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act.

On October 16, 1995, the telecommunications industry was stunned when a Federal Register notice appeared announcing that the FBI demanded that, as a result of the new law, phone companies provide the capability for simultaneous wiretaps of one out of every hundred phone calls in urban areas. As the ACLU noted, the FBI notice represented “a 1,000-fold increase over previous levels of surveillance.”

The 1994 law led to five years of clashes between the FBI and the communications industry over the new standards. The Federal Communications Commission was designated as the arbiter of such clashes in the act; in August 1999, the FCC caved and gave the FBI almost everything it wanted.

The FCC bowed to FBI demands and required that all new cellular telephones be de facto homing devices. Cell phones must now include components that allow law enforcement to determine the precise location where a person is calling from.


Conclusion

The Clinton administration’s attitude towards high-tech should have alarmed any Americans who think the government is not entitled to read their email, tap their calls, or know precisely where they are. Clinton’s power grabs should have taught Americans of the perils of allowing politicians to ignore the Fourth Amendment. Any such “lessons learned” were declared “null and void” after 9/11 by the same politicians who quickly put their own boot prints on the Constitution.

Unfortunately, neither the Democrats nor the Republicans have a good record of respecting citizens’ privacy. Perhaps it is naive to expect politicians to obey the Constitution when so many Americans believe that omnipotent government is their only hope for survival. Americans need to relearn why the Founding Fathers distrusted politicians across the board, regardless of nation, party, or creed.

James Bovard is the author of Attention Deficit Democracy [2006] as well as The Bush Betrayal [2004], Lost Rights [1994] and Terrorism and Tyranny: Trampling Freedom, Justice and Peace to Rid the World of Evil (Palgrave-Macmillan, September 2003) and serves as a policy advisor for The Future of Freedom Foundation. Send him email.

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, Local Politics Colorado, News, Politics, War, Warfare, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on Are Democrats Better on Privacy and Surveillance?

The most exclusive club in the world

December 24, 2008

This years Democrat avalanche in the election comes with a few loose strings. This is unfortunate because what is at stake is no less than the American way of life. I may be no big fan of team Obama, not in the least, yet I hold that there are things that are more important than what might be termed micro-politics.

Those things that go beyond all the petty differences are the very things that set the United States apart from the rest of the world. We live in America by rule of law. Not by personality, or the will of the mob. We are a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy. We have a Bill of Rights that protects individuals from the whims of government as well as from the mob.

Now, what is all that leading too? In a single word, it is that our system, is based upon integrity. Without that single attribute all the good intentions in the world will not make for good government. The lack of integrity in elected, and appointed people causes fundamental problems that the rest of society has to live, or die, with. There are plenty of examples where the lack of integrity has caused problems. From judicial activism to corruption in elected and appointed officials the lack of personal and professional integrity has caused little but problems.

Now that the smoke has settled there remain two seats in the worlds most exclusive club that have a cloud hanging over them. Which way will the wind blow? Will it blow toward the Constitution and Bill of Rights? Or will it blow in the direction of personality worship?

The disputed U.S. Senate race in Minnesota and the politically toxic appointment of a replacement to the Illinois seat being vacated by President-elect Barack Obama have left open the possibility that the legislative body could reject two would-be lawmakers.

While the scenario seems far-fetched, Article I, Section 5 of Constitution holds that “Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members.”

In other words, if Minnesota certifies either Norm Coleman or Al Franken the winner, a bloc of senators could object on the Senate floor to seating him. The same could happen if embattled Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich appoints a “tainted” successor to Obama.

The new Congress starts Jan. 6, and the potential for havoc is immense.

Either scenario could prompt special investigative committees or even floor votes on whether to seat a candidate if their election certification remain.

Full Story here

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Law, Local Politics Colorado, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

MICHIGAN MAN FINED $15,000 FOR POACHING MOUNTAIN GOAT

December 22, 2008

Thieves at the public trough again.

SALIDA, Colo. – A Michigan man was fined $15,000 after being convicted of three charges related to killing a Colorado mountain goat without a license.

Burt Vincent, 60, of Jackson, Mich., also faces a potential lifetime suspension of his hunting and fishing privileges in Colorado, Michigan and 28 other states.

Vincent pleaded “no contest” in Chaffee County Court on Dec. 10 to illegal possession of a mountain goat, illegally killing a trophy animal in Colorado and hunting a mountain goat without a license.

Two others, Jack and Susan Derr of Florissant, Colo., also pleaded guilty to multiple misdemeanor charges related to Vincent’s case and other wildlife crimes discovered during the investigation. The Derrs were ordered to pay $10,000 to the Colorado Operation Game Thief Fund.

The convictions marked an end to a two-year investigation into multiple poaching incidents.

“This case demonstrates how effectively law enforcement professionals from multiple agencies work together,” said Shaun Deeney, an area manager with the Colorado Division of Wildlife (DOW) in Colorado Springs

Investigators in Colorado and Michigan began working on the case in 2006 after an informant said that Vincent was in possession of a mountain goat from Colorado. However, there was no record in Colorado showing that Vincent was ever issued a mountain goat hunting license.

Based on the original tip, an undercover officer contacted Vincent at his place of work in Michigan. Vincent told the undercover agent that he had killed a mountain goat, adding that he had also killed a bighorn ram and a bighorn ewe in Colorado over the past several years.

The undercover officer had hoped Vincent would talk about the mountain goat, but didn’t expect to hear about the two bighorn sheep.

“Bighorn sheep and mountain goats are majestic symbols of Colorado’s high country,” said Deeney. “Sheep and goat tags are among the most highly prized hunting licenses in Colorado. Every year, thousands of applicants vie for a just a handful of tags. Vincent and his codefendants literally cheated law-abiding hunters out of a chance for the hunt of a lifetime.”

MOUNTING EVIDENCE

Wildlife investigators followed a trail that led them Vincent’s hunting partner Jack Derr.  DOW records showed that Derr bought a mountain goat license in 2006.  The DOW license database also showed that Jack’s wife, Susan Derr, bought bighorn sheep licenses in 2000 and 2003.  This matched Vincent’s claim that he killed a bighorn ram and ewe.

Armed with several key pieces of information, two DOW officers interviewed the Derrs at their home in Florissant, Colo., and executed a search warrant on the residence. Meanwhile, Vincent was questioned by Conservation Officers from the Michigan Department of Natural Resources and special investigators with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Michigan.

In tape-recorded interviews, Susan Derr admitted that she let Vincent use her bighorn ram license in 2003 and her bighorn ewe license in 2000.  She stated that she did not kill those animals but that Vincent did.  Jack Derr also admitted that he gave Vincent his 2006 license to tag a mountain goat that Vincent killed.

During the investigation, Vincent admitted that his rifle was used to kill the mountain goat, but claimed Jack Derr did the shooting.  He further claimed that Derr gave him the mountain goat to take back to Michigan because Derr didn’t want it.

“The officers who conducted this investigation should be complimented on their thoroughness,” said Deeney.  “All of the officers involved acted professionally and courteously throughout the entire investigation despite accusations of impropriety by the defendants.”

In addition to the mountain goat violation, investigators also discovered a case involving an illegal elk killed by Vincent in 2005 in Archuleta County.  Vincent was found guilty in that case last August.  He was fined $2,800 for that crime.

Deeney expressed his gratitude to the investigators with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, and prosecutors from the district attorneys’ offices in Chaffee, Fremont, Teller, Archuleta, and Larimer counties for their help getting the convictions.

Colorado and Michigan are members of an Interstate Wildlife Violator Compact, which includes 30 states that offer some of the very best hunting and fishing hunting and fishing opportunities in the country. The compact includes provisions that establish reciprocal license privilege suspension by member states.  Anyone who loses hunting and fishing privileges in one state is also suspended in the others. Colorado was a charter state in 1991 along with Nevada and Oregon.

Interstate Wildlife Violator Compact Member States:  Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

For more information about Division of Wildlife go to: http://wildlife.state.co.us.

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Hunting Fishing and the Great Outdoors, Law, Men's Issues, News | Comments Off on MICHIGAN MAN FINED $15,000 FOR POACHING MOUNTAIN GOAT

Misandry and the Supreme Court

December 18, 2008

Misandry as expressed by in the various laws passed by people like Patricia Schroeder exhibit the pure hatred that some people have for the Constitution.

One more than significant part of that hatred was the love affair with things like ex post facto law as an inextricable portion of the notorious Lautenberg Domestic Violence Amendment to the Gun Control Act of 1968.

True to form this abomination of Anglo American Law was passed without a vote by sneaking it into a completely different budget vote without any debate.

This is poor law, it was poorly written, then  re-written by regulatory fiat via the rogue agency BATFE. It uses ex post facto penalties. It takes inalienable rights away for less than felony behaviors. It does so for life.


Finally, the Supreme Court is taking up at least part of this assault on common sense and the Constitution. The question however is not one of law, it is one of whether they will bow to political correctness.

READ HERE

This is a long read, and filled with terminology that only Lawyers could love…

Tags:, , , , , , ,
Posted in Domestic Violence, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, Local Politics Colorado, Men's Issues, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 4 Comments »

Pardon Border Patrol Agents Ramos and Compean

December 12, 2008

In what was nothing less than a travesty of justice two Americans were sent to prison based upon misguided, if not criminal prosecution by those sworn to uphold the Constitution . These men sit in prison while President Bush pardons others. Get off your ass Mister President, and do what is just and correct!

Pardon Border Patrol Agents Ramos and Compean

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

Thursday, December 11, 2008

Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) already has filed not one, but two friend
of the court briefs for Ignacio Ramos and Jose Antonio Compean. In
those briefs, GOF has pointed out to the Fifth Circuit Court of
Appeals that the 10-year conviction of the two agents is for a crime
which doesn’t exist.

The two agents were convicted of the “Discharge of a Firearm in
Relation to a Crime of Violence” — something which is not an
offense, rather it is a sentencing enhancement after the government
has established illegal gun possession, use or carrying.

Of course, if the Feds had gone for that kind of charge, they would
have run into the problem that the agents were required to possess,
use and carry guns on them while on duty. That is why the US
Attorney, Johnny Sutton, went for, and succeeded, in making up an
offense that would not force him to explain away that the agents are
required to be armed.

One of the reasons the Border Patrol requires agents to be armed is
so they can use their guns against armed drug smugglers such as
Osvaldo Aldrete.

Even if the Supreme Court reverses this injustice done to Ramos and
Compean, they could expect to sit in jail for upwards of another two
years — for a crime that was impossible for them to commit.

GOF was a friend of the court in a similar case before the Supreme
Court. Our position was upheld nine-to-nothing. It involved a drug
dealer who took a gun in payment for a bag of dope. The Feds gave
him many extra years because he supposedly had “used” a gun in a
crime. The Supreme Court agreed that such a view was ridiculous and
clearly not the intent of the law. The Fifth Circuit has simply
overlooked these fatal flaws in the government’s case.

George Bush is thinking about his legacy. We have a chance to
convince him that his legacy is on the verge of staining his
reputation with the miscarriage of justice perpetrated by the federal
prosecutor, Johnny Sutton. Keep in mind that Sutton lied to the
trial court and to the appeals court about Aldrete’s connections with
the drug trade. He also concealed from the jury that he was paying
Aldrete for his testimony against the agents.

Hopefully, President Bush does not want to be known as one who stood
by while innocent men — and the wives and children — suffered
because of a blatant injustice.

All gun owners should be alarmed at what the government has done to
these two agents. If they will do this to police officers, we cannot
assume they will treat the rest of the population any better. The
two GOF briefs are at:

http://www.gunowners.com/amicus10.pdf
http://www.gunowners.com/amicus14.pdf

ACTION: Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://gunowners.org/activism.htm to send an e-mail (see sample
below) to President Bush to ask him to pardon these two men whose
only crime was to uphold the law.

—– Pre-written letter —–

Dear President Bush:

I am shocked that Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean are still in
jail. Their conviction on the ten-year count was fraudulent. There
is no such crime as “firing a gun in a federal crime.” That is only
an enhancement for other felony charges — for example, reckless
endangerment.

Essentially, Ramos and Compean — to get this sentencing enhancement
— would have had to illegally possess their firearms and recklessly
endanger the drug smuggler they shot. But isn’t the possession of
firearms part of their job description?

Please pardon these men in time for Christmas.

Sincerely,

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, Men's Issues, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 6 Comments »

GOA Members Win Key Battles in 2008

December 10, 2008

GOA Members Win Key Battles in 2008
— While gun rights advanced this year, the prospects for next year
look very tough

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

———————————————-
“The best Second Amendment defense organization in the country is Gun
Owners of America.” — Joseph Farrah, founder and CEO of
WorldNetDaily.com, September 2008
———————————————-

Tuesday, December 9, 2008

Change.

That’s what the next four years are going to bring. More government
regulations… more government spending… and more battles over gun
control.

Once Barack Obama takes his oath of office in January, he will
become, without a doubt, the most anti-gun President this nation has
ever seen.

How are gun owners responding to the oncoming Obama presidency? By
the tens of thousands, they are pouring into gun stores all across
the country and stocking up on guns and ammo, fearing the worst.
Many buyers include first-time gun owners.

And while that is not a bad idea, it’s a short term solution to a
long-term problem that does nothing to defend our Second Amendment
rights from being eliminated by a Congress controlled by people like
Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, Carolyn McCarthy and other notorious gun
grabbers.

That’s why we need you to stand with Gun Owners of America next year.
If you have never become a GOA member — or you’ve let your
membership lapse — we need you on board so that we have the
ammunition necessary to fight every gun control bill that comes our
way.

It takes less than five minutes to go to
http://www.gunowners.org/ordergoamem.htm and sign up. By doing so,
you will be joining — in the words of WorldNetDaily’s founder — the
“best Second Amendment defense organization in the country.”

We need you now more than ever, as we are surely in for the fight of
our lives!

Even so, despite all the hurdles that we see ahead, one should not
forget that 2008 was a real improvement for gun rights in many
respects. Gun Owners of America experienced victories in the
courts… in the Congress… over federal bureaucracies… and in the
states.

The following victories are just a few of the accomplishments that
GOA was able to achieve this year with YOUR HELP. So let’s take a
look at our work together, month by month.

January – February

* As the new year dawns, President Bush signs the Veterans
Disarmament Act (a.k.a. the NICS Improvement Amendments Act). This
legislation codifies illegitimate procedures that, over the past
decade, had already resulted in almost 150,000 veterans being denied
the right to buy guns because battle-related stress has supposedly
rendered them unable to manage their own financial affairs.

GOA was able to win some significant concession in the bill, even as
we were trying to kill it outright. Unfortunately, the bill passed
both houses of Congress last year without a vote. Republican Senator
Jim DeMint of South Carolina later complained that the Democrat
controlled Senate had passed 94 percent of its bills this year
without a recorded vote.

* An Associate Director in the U.S. Interior Department defends the
National Park Service ban claiming that “parks are safe places” and
that right to carry laws “do not reduce crime” or protect people
against dangerous wildlife. GOA responds by generating thousands
upon thousands of postcards into the Oval Office, asking President
Bush to put the squeeze on Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne to get
the NPS ban reversed — a reversal that will come about in May.

* The U.S. Solicitor General files a brief with the U.S. Supreme
Court in the D.C. v. Heller case arguing that categorical gun bans of
virtually all self-defense firearms are constitutional if a court
determines they are “reasonable” — the lowest standard of
constitutional review. This view could justify a national ban on all
firearms, including a ban on all hunting rifles.

GOA works with Rep. Virgil Goode (R-VA) and helps him to quickly get
57 additional congressmen to oppose the Solicitor General’s opinion.

* Because of generous contributions from its members, GOA is able to
submit a very unique amicus brief before the U.S. Supreme Court in
defense of Dick Anthony Heller, who was denied the right to own a gun
in the nation’s capital as a result of the draconian gun ban which
exists there.

In this hard-hitting brief, GOA takes aim at the weak arguments put
forth by both the DC government and the Bush Administration. But
more than that, GOA examines the favorable text and context of the
Second Amendment in great detail, while also documenting the pro-gun
history that formed the backdrop of its inclusion into the Bill of
Rights.

March – May

* After looking at all the briefs which have been submitted in the
Heller case, the editors at USA Today decide to use GOA for the
opposing voice on March 19. The paper’s editors tell our attorneys
that GOA had an argument that was clearly distinctive, as we were the
only ones to argue that the words “shall not be infringed”
invalidated all federal gun control laws.

* In the states, GOA helped Utah, Wisconsin and Wyoming to pass
Emergency Protection bills throughout the country. These bills
repeal laws that allow police to confiscate firearms during a
declared emergency, such as what occurred in New Orleans after
Hurricane Katrina decimated the city in 2005.

The sponsor of the Utah legislation, Senator Mark Madsen (R), thanked
GOA in March for the help we offered in helping pass the legislation
in his state.

“GOA supplied me with video that documented the plight of decent gun
owners in New Orleans who had their guns stolen by police after
Hurricane Katrina,” Madsen said. “The DVD was very helpful in
educating other members of the Utah legislature, and my bill to
protect Utah gun owners from gun confiscation, SB 157, passed by
overwhelming margins.”

Sen. Madsen’s new law is one of the best in the country. If someone
were to have his gun illegitimately confiscated, that person could
not only sue for damages, but could hold the offending officer and
his superior personally liable.

* GOA’s attorneys uncover a proposal in April to keep gun owners from
shipping replica or inert munitions through the mail. GOA
immediately submitted a blistering critique to the U.S. Post Office
and contacted thousands of grassroots activists so they could submit
their own comments as well. To date, the agency has backed off of
its original gun control proposal.

* The Bush administration, after more than seven years, has finally
issued regulations permitting the carrying of firearms in national
parks! Beginning in 2009, gun owners will be able to carry firearms
according to the laws of the state in which the park is located.

* GOA learns about Pastor Phillip Miles of South Carolina, who was
sentenced to three years in a Russian prison for carrying a single
box of hunting ammo in his luggage, intended as a gift. GOA urges
President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice to intervene on
Miles’ behalf, as the sentence definitely did not fit the “crime.”
Russian authorities succumb to the outcry shortly thereafter… Miles
is released in June and returns to the United States.

June – August

* The Supreme Court strikes down the DC gun ban! While not perfect,
the Court’s decision recognizes that the Second Amendment protects an
“individual right” and states that the decades-old ban in the
nation’s capital is unconstitutional.

GOA’s brief had countered both the DC government and the Bush
Administration — as the latter had asked the Court to use the DC
case as a justification for all sorts of gun control. GOA is pleased
that the Justices heeded our admonition to limit the Court’s holding
to the case before it, thus shooting down both the DC government and
the Bush Administration in their quest to validate other firearms
restrictions.

* GOA Executive Director Larry Pratt escorts David Olofson to a
federal prison in Minnesota. Olofson was convicted in federal court
of transferring a malfunctioning semi-automatic firearm which the ATF
claimed was machine gun — a determination that should concern every
gun owner who owns a semi-auto.

Gun Owners of America becomes the lead gun organization fighting
against the ATF’s persecution of Olofson. In taking on this case,
GOA is also defending the rights of gun owners who could be
prosecuted for owning a malfunctioning firearm. For the ATF, a gun
that misfires is an excellent opportunity to rack up an easy
conviction on an illegal machine gun charge.

In Olofson’s defense, GOA submits an appeal challenging his
conviction at the district court level, and sets up a relief fund to
help pay for his family’s mortgage and car payments.

September – November

* David Olofson’s wife, Candy, thanks GOA and its members for helping
their family. Candy tells GOA Executive Director Larry Pratt that
because of the financial help that GOA members have given, she has
not had to get a second job, so she is able to spend time being a
Mom.

* GOA’s Larry Pratt travels to the Big Easy to award a brand new
handgun to Patricia Konie — the New Orleans resident who was tackled
and disarmed by police in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Konie was
forced to evacuate her home in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in 2005,
and until recently, had remained disarmed. To this day, she has
never gotten back her stolen gun.

* GOA tells its email activists how the ATF was trying to prevent the
distribution of an electronic 4473 Form. This software has been
developed by a private firm, Coloseum Software Corporation, and is
intended to protect dealers against the “mistakes” that have
allowed
the ATF to prosecute or harass them into giving up their licenses.

GOA issued a grassroots alert in mid-October explaining how the ATF
had been dragging its collective feet for months — keeping Coloseum
from distributing its software, even while the ATF was developing its
own competing software (and possibly, violating the copyright which
belonged to Coloseum).

After GOA asked gun owners to contact the Bush Administration, the
owner of Coloseum contacted us shortly thereafter to tell us that our
alert had been a tremendous success: “After the GOA alert put the
spotlight on criminal activity by the BATFE, they quickly provided us
[Coloseum Software Corp] with the required documentation for the new
Form 4473 which we had been asking for months.”

Sign up with GOA… the battle lines are now drawn!

GOA is on the front lines, fighting to defend your rights. Even if
you have already renewed your membership in GOA, we hope you will
consider making an additional contribution.

With your extra support in 2009, we will fight off every new attack
on our gun rights. And we will remind the Democratic Congress what
happened to their majority the last time they followed an anti-gun
President down this path.

This next year is going to be our most difficult year in a long, long
time. Already, President-elect Obama is surrounding himself with
virulent anti-gunners:

* His pick for Attorney General went to a committed gun grabber in
Eric Holder. Holder signed on to an amicus brief in the Heller case
which SUPPORTED the DC ban on handguns and the ban on using any
firearm for self-defense in a person’s home. Holder’s brief also
argued that the Second Amendment protects a “collective” right, not
an individual right (as the Supreme Court eventually ruled).

* And based on his pick for Chief of Staff, you can be sure that the
Obama administration will use any “crisis” it can to push its gun
control agenda. Obama’s Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, told the Wall
Street Journal recently that, “You never want a serious crisis to go
to waste…. [A] crisis provides the opportunity for us to do things
that you could not do before.”

Get it? Every time a crackpot goes on a shooting spree, the Obama
administration is going to use that “crisis” to come after
your guns!

So please make the decision to stay with us in the upcoming year, as
it will be critical for America’s gun rights. Whether you can help
us out with your gift of $35 or $3500, your contribution will be put
immediately into the fight to preserve and restore all of our gun
rights.

Please go to http://www.gunowners.org/ordergoamem.htm and stay with
us in 2009!

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, Men's Issues, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

Ill. governor arrested…

December 9, 2008

Illinois Governor Blagojevich is corrupt. So says the FBI at least. Now, it would be all too easy to say “I told you so.”

But then, that would be picking on someone that has hit bottom. It would be all to easy to post comments along the lines of “bottom feeding gun grabber” and such…

Let’s all wait for the FBI to put up or shut up, and allow the legal system to work. No comments about how the law is bought and sold across that state. Nor will I speculate about the power of pardon and the President Elect. Or about said soon to be Presidents political cronies.

Nor should we speak in terms of elitism and justice. After all, people like politicians and sports hero’s are above that which we mortals must endure.

story here

In the mean time, I can daydream…

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, Men's Issues, News, Politics, Stupid is as Stupid Does, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

The Brady Bunch and the NRA just more hypocrisy

December 8, 2008

The Brady Bunch once again shows it’s colors with it’s latest press release. The usual ballyhoo of self aggrandizement as well as hypocrisy. The National Rifle Association jumped right on it as might be expected. What the NRA failed to recognize as usual, is their own failings when it comes to really supporting the Constitution of the United States. In any case enjoy the dog and pony show that follows.

source


It is a simple matter of fact, beyond dispute, that for years prior to passage of the Brady Act, the organization now known as the Brady Campaign called for a waiting period on handgun sales and vigorously opposed the establishment of the National Instant Check System (NICS). The anti-gun group, when known as Handgun Control, Inc., ranted and raved against instant check legislation proposed by Rep. Bill McCollum (R-Fla.) in the late 1980s, and by Rep. Harley O. Staggers (D-W. Va.) in 1991.

While NRA strongly opposed the Brady Act because of its five-day waiting period, when Congress passed the Brady Act in 1993, it contained a provision authorizing its waiting period on dealer handgun sales only until a NICS could be established (applicable to all dealer firearm sales). The final bill required that the NICS become operational within five years. As it turned out, Brady’s prized waiting period, which Brady claimed could reduce so-called “crimes of passion” (though by the group’s own admission no data existed to support such a theory) was abolished after only four years and nine months, having taken effect in February 1994, and having been replaced by the NICS in November 1998.

President Bill Clinton signed the Brady Act in November 1993, however, so in November 2008 the Brady Campaign released a 15-year anniversary propaganda paper praising itself and–you guessed it–calling for a federal law prohibiting private sales of firearms, not just those at gun shows, but all private sales. What they don’t say, of course, is that if private sales are prohibited, they will immediately call for the FBI to retain records on all firearm transactions run through the NICS.

The title of Brady’s anniversary propaganda? Get this: “Brady Background Checks: 15 Years of Saving Lives.” Brady checks? These are the same instant checks that Brady has opposed for 20 years, and which have been conducted for the last 10 years, instead of the waiting period that was in place for less than five years before! Barack Obama is not the only one who has “audacity.”

Adding to their lie, Brady claims “the National Rifle Association (NRA) fought long and hard to block Brady background checks.” While NRA opposes waiting periods, it supported NICS, and Brady worked hard to block it. And in the end, NRA’s proposal carried the day.

Adding further to the lie, is Brady’s pretense that the Brady Act is the reason that violent crime has declined in recent years. The Act “has been a resounding success by stopping more than 1.6 million potentially dangerous people from purchasing a gun from a licensed gun dealer,” the group claims.

The reality is something much different. First of all, as the FBI states in its annual national crime report (www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/about/variables_affecting_crime.html), a variety of factors determine the type and volume of crime, and none of these factors is guns, gun ownership, or gun laws. And the Library of Congress, Congressional Research Service, National Academy of Sciences, National Institutes of Justice, and others have studied gun control and found no evidence that it reduces crime at home or abroad.

Secondly, the nation’s violent crime rate began declining in 1991, three years before the Brady Act took effect. And violent crime committed with weapons other than guns has declined, as well as violent crime with guns–the only weapons requiring a background check. This is largely due to tougher criminal justice policies imposed in the states during the 1990s, such as mandatory sentencing and reduction of probation and parole of violent criminals–precisely what NRA has advocated for years.

Thirdly, Brady incorrectly assumes that denying gun sales must necessarily decrease crime, because it believes guns are the cause of crime and it opposes the use of guns for defense against crime. However, since 1991, the number of new guns sold to private citizens has increased by 70 million, and total violent crime has decreased 38 percent, including a 43 percent decrease in murder. Let’s not forget also the deterrent factor posed against criminals by the Right-to-Carry laws now in effect in 40 states.

Brady also claims that before the Brady Act, “gun traffickers had it easy” with “new handguns bought easily over-the-counter in states with weak gun laws.” The fact is, however, that prior to the Brady Act, the 18 states and the District of Columbia that already had Brady-like laws delaying the acquisition of firearms–including waiting periods, purchase permit requirements, and license requirements–accounted for 63 percent of the nation’s violent crimes. Therefore, the Brady Act–particularly during the waiting period phase favored by the Brady Campaign–never had an effect on jurisdictions where most violent crimes occur.

Naturally, the media have reported Brady’s claims as gospel. But otherwise, the anniversary propaganda is little more than a pathetic attempt by a decreasingly significant group whose agenda has been rejected time and again, and whose views are ever further removed from the mainstream of public opinion.

Tags:, , , , , , , ,
Posted in Domestic Violence, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Law, Men's Issues, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 5 Comments »

O.J. gets juiced…

December 5, 2008

O.J. Simpson was sentenced today for crimes against the people of Nevada. The judge was pretty lenient in her sentencing. No doubt at least part of that was pure political correctness.

Here is what I am waiting to see. Will the Federals go after him and stick him with the ten year minimum for any crime committed with a gun. I doubt it, after all he is not a Border Patrol Agent doing his sworn duty…

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Gun Control, Law, Men's Issues, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 3 Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »