Posts Tagged ‘anti-gun idiocy’

Open Letter to the Sheriffs of Washington State

Posted: March 18, 2015 by gamegetterII in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
1

| Mar 15, 2015 | Editorials, The Battle for Washington State

In the last few months, the citizens of Washington State have come under fire from both state and federal officials.  They have been subject to everything from surveillance to being viewed through the scope of a sniper’s rifle—manned by a fellow citizen.  The people have appealed to the governor to no avail.  According to Governor Inslee’s office, he has no jurisdiction over the federal authorities who seek to subvert liberty and control the populace.  He is incorrect, but the People accept that he is complicit in the criminal enslavement of the citizens.

The governor was served a list of grievances by We the People on 7 February 2015.  Each of those grievances constitutes a crime against the People, and against the founding documents of the state and our nation.  He ignored those grievances and did nothing.  On 25 February 2015 a citizen of Washington State was illegally arrested, detained, and interrogated as a domestic terrorist by federal officials who ignored his rights secured by the rule of law.  The governor refused to stand and serve the citizens of his state as he swore to do, instead submitting himself and the people of this state as subjects to an overreaching federal government.  On 9 March 2015, he was again called to task and the People demanded that he uphold his oath to protect and maintain the rights of the People as secured by the Constitution.  Again, the governor chose to ignore this letter and in doing so, ignored the will of the People, and their unalienable rights.

It is for this reason that the people of Washington State now appeal to the sheriffs, as the senior law enforcement official in each county.  When the system fails, it becomes their utmost duty to stand and uphold the law.  It is obvious that the system of  Constitutional law has failed; at every turn we see the blatant and gross violation of the most basic of the People’s rights.  The government is bound by the Constitution to be accountable to the People; they derive their powers from the consent of the governed.  We, the people of Washington State, reiterate our withdrawal of this consent in light of the government’s refusal to honor the limits to their power and the unlimited rights of the People.

Washington State law lays out the general duties of the county sheriff:

The sheriff is the chief executive officer and conservator of the peace of the county. In the execution of his office, he and his deputies:

(1) Shall arrest and commit to prison all persons who break the peace, or attempt to break it, and all persons guilty of public offenses;

Federal officials broke the peace by illegally and publicly arresting and detaining a citizen who had not committed a crime.

(2) Shall defend the county against those who, by riot or otherwise, endanger the public peace or safety;

Judge Rosanna Malouf Peterson deprived the citizens of their ability to defend themselves by imposing her personal will through an illegal rule that violated their unalienable right.  In doing so, she endangered the public and safety of the people.

(3) Shall execute the process and orders of the courts of justice or judicial officers, when delivered for that purpose, according to law;

The sheriffs are duty-bound to stand and deliver the judge, the Homeland Security agent, the Federal Bureau of Investigation agent, and the United States Marshal involved in this illegal arrest to justice.

(4) Shall execute all warrants delivered for that purpose by other public officers, according to the provisions of particular statutes;

Since the Judiciary of the State of Washington is complicit in these crimes and refuses to prosecute or hold accountable the persons responsible, We the People demand that the sheriffs put forth warrants for their arrest.

(5) Shall attend the sessions of the courts of record held within the county, and obey their lawful orders or directions;

Because the orders and directions of the courts are unlawful and criminal in nature, it is the duty of the sheriffs to act on behalf of the Constitution and the citizens of Washington State.

(6) Shall keep and preserve the peace in their respective counties, and quiet and suppress all affrays, riots, unlawful assemblies and insurrections, for which purpose, and for the service of process in civil or criminal cases, and in apprehending or securing any person for felony or breach of the peace, they may call to their aid such persons, or power of their county as they may deem necessary.

United States Code 18 § 242 speaks very plainly about the crime of depriving the people of their rights.  The marshal, agents, and the judge used the color of law to deprive the People; this is punishable by a year in prison.  They also, together with the snipers on the rooftops in Spokane on 6 March, used deadly force to attempt to impose their will on the People and deprive them of their rights; this is punishable by ten years in prison.  By illegally arresting and detaining citizens they have engaged in kidnapping; this is a crime punishable by life imprisonment or even the death penalty.

It is the duty of the sheriffs to apprehend and secure these people for the felony crime of depriving the People of their rights under the Constitution.  As the state law makes clear, the sheriff can call upon the people and the power of their respective counties for assistance in performing their duties.  If called upon, We the People will support them…in any way necessary.

We the People will no longer allow our government to treat us as subjects.  We are free men, we will act as such, and we will be treated as such.  We will hold accountable those criminals and tyrants in our government who seek to subjugate and control us. We demand that you, the sheriffs of Washington State, stand and perform your duties in accordance with the state law, the state constitution, and the Constitution of the United States of America.  If you do not, it will show that you, too, are complicit in the destruction of liberty, and therefore are its enemy.

We remain non-violent, we remain principled and peaceful, but make no mistake:

These abuses of our liberties will end now.

We will not comply.

Signed,

Liberty for All:
Kit Lange
Anthony Bosworth
Maria Bosworth
and the Patriots of Washington

http://www.patrickhenrysociety.com/open-letter-to-the-sheriffs-of-washington-state/

Growing support for gun rights, and groaning scoundrels who despise the trend

Posted: March 17, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , , ,
1
by Chuck Michel
3:00pm Monday, March 16, 2015

Never doubt the linguistic and logical limberness of professionally coached anti-gun activists.

People in gun control circles are circling their wagons in reaction to a recent Pew Research report definitively showing that more Americans support the Second Amendment than support gun control. Pew’s multi-decade survey on gun control again asked one basic question (among others), namely: “What do you think is more important – to protect the right of Americans to own guns, OR to control gun ownership?” Since any form of gun ownership control is an infringement of the right of Americans to own guns, it is a succinct and reasonably worded question. In the most recent instance of this survey, six percent more Americans think that protecting gun owner rights is more important than enacting gun control.

This isn’t the first time the majority has favored rights over restrictions, though in Pew’s previous polling the margins have been much thinner. Anyone who has watched tracking polls of the past few decades knows that this is the culmination of a long term trend, and is surprising only in as much as Pew’s research appears to be a little behind other surveys (though Pew’s poll was called an “outlier” by an outright liar from a gun control obsessed, maniacal medical school). But members of the media nonetheless flatly proclaimed incorrectly that this was the “first” time Pew had seen gun rights being more popular than gun anti-rights. Maybe this explains why only 40% of the public trusts the news media.

The backlash to Pew’s polling was predictable. Sympathetic left-of-center members of the media sought the opinion of gun control activists to flavor their “reporting.” My favorite was Media Matters, an organization specifically devoted to attacking non-leftist journalism. For a printable quote, they tracked down an assistant professor at the Joyce Foundation funded Center for Gun Policy and Research. Her CV states that she “focuses on how public policies affect mental health, substance use, and gun violence” and also notes that her education is “in Health Policy and Management” but does not mention a background in research methodology design. So when she told Media Matters that Pew’s research was an “outlier,” she either willfully ignored other polling or pulled the conclusion out of her antidepressant pill bag.

Read the whole thing @ http://www.calgunlaws.com/growing-support-and-groaning-scoundrels/

Bloomberg’s Anti-Gun “Grassroots Movement” Explained?

Posted: March 17, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , ,
0

Does Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety really have “two million members?” Is Moms Demand Action really “a powerful grassroots network of moms?” Or are these just front groups that consist of a handful of Bloomberg hirelings, pretending to represent more people than they do, to trick Americans into submitting to their fanatically-obsessed employer’s will?

Investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson may have the answer. In Top 10 Astroturfers, Attkisson explains the phenomenon in which small groups of individuals pretend to be popular grassroots movements, in order to convince other people to join the fake crowd supporting or opposing a particular agenda. The article follows a very informative speechon the same subject, given by Attkisson at the University of Nevada recently.

Attkisson explains, “Astroturf is when political, corporate or other special interests disguise themselves and publish blogs, start Facebook or Twitter accounts, publish ads and letters to the editor, or simply post comments online to try to fool you into thinking an independent or grassroots movement is speaking. The whole point of astroturf is to try to give the impression that there’s widespread support for or against an agenda when there’s not. Astroturf seeks to manipulate you into changing your opinion, by making you feel as if you’re an outlier when you’re not.”

That sounds like a description of President Obama’s attempt to promote gun control during his 2013 State of the Union address, and Bloomberg’s subsequent claim that 90 percent of Americans support mandatory background checks on private transfers of firearms.

Obama claimed, “Overwhelming majorities of Americans, Americans who believe in the 2nd Amendment, have come together around commonsense reform like background checks that will make it harder for criminals to get their hands on a gun. Senators of both parties are working together on tough new laws to prevent anyone from buying guns for resale to criminals. Police chiefs are asking our help to get weapons of war and massive ammunition magazines off our streets.”

In reality, however, the Senate rejected all of those schemes and the House of Representatives refused to bring them to the floor for a vote. In Washington, which is more receptive to gun control than many states, Bloomberg spent millions in support of a background check initiative and got only 59 percent of the vote.

The good news is that some people, at least, apparently can recognize astroturfing when they see it. Attkisson’s informal survey of social media users put Bloomberg’s anti-gun front groups at the top of a list of astroturfers, followed not far behind by several other anti-gun entities, namely Media Matters, Mother Jones, Salon.com, Daily Kos, and the Huffington Post.

Between them, those outfits might have enough anti-gunners to field a team for a game of sandlot baseball. But in the age of the Internet, they are able to pose as speaking to, or on behalf of, millions of Americans. Until their deceit is understood by all Americans, they pose a significant threat in the public debate over rights versus restrictions, freedom versus fear.

© 2015 National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action. This may be reproduced. This may not be reproduced for commercial purposes. 

Police rep says proposed 5.56mm ammo ban unnecessary

Posted: March 5, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
1

A Fraternal Order of Police official said 5.56mm armor-piercing ammo is not typically used against officers

WASHINGTON, March 4 (UPI) — The leader of a national police organization this week said a proposal to ban armor-piercing 5.56mm pistol rounds would be less effective than the government thinks.Last week, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said it plans to outlaw steel-tipped 5.56mm ammunition because it now qualifies as an armor-piercing round. Sale of the ammo has been legal since 1986 because it’s a round that could not, until recently, be fired from a handgun — the stipulation necessary for prohibition of any bullet. Traditionally, the 5.56mm bullets have been fired only in AR-15 rifles.

In a 17-page report, the bureau cited new handguns that are able to fire the round, increasing the likelihood, the ATF believes, that the bullets will be used against law enforcement officers.

However, James Pasco, executive director of the Washington office of the Fraternal Order of Police, believes that banning the ammunition wouldn’t amount to much additional protection.

“This specific round has historically not posed a law enforcement problem,” he said in a report by the Washington Examiner. “While this round will penetrate soft body armor, it has not historically posed a threat to law enforcement.”

With around 325,000 members, the Fraternal Order of Police is the largest organization of sworn officers in the world.

Pasco’s statements give fuel to critics who allege the bullet ban is merely a backdoor attempt by the Obama administration to render AR-15 assault rifles useless.

Supporters of the proposed ban, however, feel that newer handguns available to shoot 5.56mm ammo increase the threat to police.

“We are looking at additional ways to protect our brave men and women in law enforcement and believe that this process is valuable for that reason alone,” White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said. “If there are armor-piercing bullets available that can fit into easily concealed weapons, that it puts our law enforcement at considerably more risk.”

Still, opponents to the ban believe it’s unlikely criminals will purchase the expensive handguns — and even if they did, the firearms are much too large to be considered a concealed weapon.

The ATF is asking for public comment regarding the ban, to be concluded March 16. But the proposal has already encountered stiff resistance. In the House of Representatives, more than half of lawmakers have signed a letter challenging the ban, and the National Rifle Association is urging the public to ask Congress to prevent it. A similar measure is moving through the Senate.

Since news of the proposed ban earlier this month, sporting goods stores have been selling large quantities of the affected ammunition — now at higher cost.

Bipartisan Majority of the U.S. House Opposes Obama Administration’s Ammo Ban

Posted: March 5, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
0

238 Members Sign Letter Opposing Proposed Ban on AR-15 Ammunition

Fairfax, Va. – In an overwhelming show of bipartisan opposition, 238 Members of the U.S. House of Representatives have signed a letter to the director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, opposing the Obama Administration’s attempt to ban commonly used ammunition for the most popular rifle in America, the AR-15.  The National Rifle Association worked closely with House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) to gather signatures on this critical effort.

 “This letter sends a clear message to President Obama that Congress opposes his attempt to use his pen and phone to thwart the will of the American people,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action. “Obama said he would enact his gun control agenda ‘with or without Congress.’ He is now trying to make good on that promise. The NRA would like to thank Chairman Goodlatte and all who signed the letter for opposing this unconstitutional attack on our Second Amendment freedom.”

The NRA is working with Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) on a similar letter of opposition from the U.S. Senate.

Read the letter @ https://shared.nrapvf.org/sharedmedia/1507341/letter-to-atf-director-jones-apa-framework-final.pdf

Anti-gun Blatherings From the Mayor and Police Chief of St. Louis

Posted: March 4, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , , ,
0

The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution declares that “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Since its adoption, scholars and lawyers have debated what the Second Amendment means, and how it applies. Until recently, there seemed to be a consensus that reasonable regulations on guns, the purchase of guns, and the use of guns were both constitutional and wise policy.

That consensus no longer exists in our state.

Last year, we argued against a proposed constitutional amendment that made Missouri law far more protective of guns than the federal Second Amendment requires. We spoke out against the new state amendment because there are too many guns on the streets. Guns are too easy to get, and the plentiful supply of legal guns means they are readily available to criminals. Hundreds of guns are stolen from law-abiding citizens each year: In 2014 alone, more than 470 guns were reported to the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department as stolen. The number of unreported stolen guns in Missouri is not known, because even the simple requirement that legal owners report stolen guns to local police departments is apparently too controversial to be a law.

We also argued that the proposed state constitutional amendment was ambiguous. We warned, loudly and in many venues, including the courts, that it could lead to unforeseen results, results that could endanger our city.

But despite the warning and even though the language was ambiguous, sponsors of the proposed amendment were not dissuaded. They asserted that the amendment could not be used to protect the “right” of a convicted criminal to carry a gun anywhere he pleased. One of the amendment’s proponents, a state senator, even said explicitly that the intent of the amendment was to leave in place the laws prohibiting convicted criminals from carrying guns.

Reassured by this, voters of Missouri adopted the new amendment. Now, we are starting to see the troubling results of that decision.

Last week, a state judge in St. Louis declared that the law banning criminals from carrying guns was unconstitutional, based on the amendment. He ruled that a convicted felon in undisputed possession of a firearm cannot be charged.

The judge’s decision will be appealed, though the law will still be enforced, and the city will follow the case closely through the court system. Also pending in the Missouri Supreme Court is a challenge brought by law enforcement officials and an advocacy group of parents to declare the amendment itself invalid. The outcome of neither case is certain.

The Missouri Legislature, therefore, should not wait.

Many voters took legislators at their word that Amendment 5 would not make it more dangerous for police officers and more difficult for prosecutors to their jobs. It has. Legislators should act immediately to restate the law barring felons from possessing firearms.

In the meantime, we should be resolved as a region to take a hard look ourselves at gun laws. We cannot stand by and allow careless state policy to trump reasonable regulations aimed at keeping our families safe. We must begin to push the limits at the local level, looking at all of our legal options, whether that is a new ordinance, new policing strategies, or a new gun docket in the court system to track those gun criminals that are prosecuted. And we must press our legislative delegation to either fix the law, or to revisit the constitutional amendment in 2016, and let the voters decide whether they want to keep this amendment on the books now that we know how bad its results are.

Francis Slay is mayor of St. Louis. Sam Dotson is the city’s police chief.

Gun rights bill would block ammunition regs

Posted: March 4, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

New gun legislation would push back against a controversial policy from the Obama administration effectively banning armor-piercing ammunition.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) proposed last week to prohibit gun companies from manufacturing and selling 5.56mm projectiles for M855 cartridges that provide ammunition for AR-15 rifles.

But the move is causing an uproar among Republicans, who suggest it would trample on hunters’ Second Amendment rights.

The Protecting Second Amendment Rights Act, introduced Friday by Rep. Tom Rooney (R-Fla.), would roll back the ATF’s power to regulate ammunition.

“The Obama administration’s proposal would unilaterally strip law-abiding hunters and sportsmen of their Second Amendment rights,” Rooney said in a statement. “Congress has made its intentions clear that this ammunition is for sporting purposes and should not be restricted. We cannot and we will not stand by while the Obama administration tramples on the Constitution, the rule of law, and the Second Amendment rights of hunters.”

AR-15 rifles are popular with some hunters, but they provide a big cause for concern for law enforcement officials because they can fire bullets to penetrate bullet-proof vests.

To date, the ammunition for AR-15s has been exempt from the Law Enforcement Officers Act, but the ATF’s draft framework would change that.

“No final determinations have been made and we won’t make any determinations until we’ve reviewed the comments submitted by industry, law enforcement and the public at large,” ATF spokesman Corey Ray told The Hill last week.

But Republicans are looking to pre-empt the ammunition restrictions. The Protecting Second Amendment Rights Act would “would prohibit the ATF or any other federal agency from issuing or enforcing any new restriction or prohibition on the manufacture, importation or sale of ammunition in the United States.”

http://thehill.com/regulation/administration/234292-gun-legislation-protects-ar-15-ammunition

Lawmakers aim to repeal Safe Act

Posted: March 4, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
0
MCCLATCHY NEWSPAPERS

COOPERSTOWN — State Sen. Jim Seward, R-Milford, is sponsoring legislation that is aimed at repealing and amending the controversial NY SAFE Act gun control legislation enacted two years ago.

Seward, in a statement, this morning, acknowledged that winning passage of the package of four bills will be “a difficult fight” because of what he called New York’s “political landscape.”

To repeal or significantly amend the law would require that the measures co-authored by Seward and Assemblyman Anthony Brandisi, D-Utica, would require that that the bills be approved by the Assembly, which is dominated by New York City area Democrats, who largely favor the gun control measure advanced by Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

The SAFE Act was also supported by Senate Republican Leader Dean Skelos, R-Nassau County, who heads the GOP conference of which Seward has been a member for 28 years.

Cuomo has maintained the law has helped protect New Yorkers from gun crimes. But many county sheriffs, including Otsego Sheriff Richard Devlin Jr., Schoharie Sheriff Tony Desmond and Delaware Sheriff Thomas Mills, have criticized the statute as an encroachment on the rights of law-abiding gun owners.

Seward, who voted against the SAFE Act, said though he favors the full repeal of the law, he is also “working to chip away at several of the law’s worst features.”

“The reactionary, hastily drafted and passed NY-SAFE Act was meant for headlines and has done nothing to stop criminals from getting guns and using them for illegal purposes,” Seward said. “We need to take action now to correct the many technical issues the law created for responsible gun owners who shoot for sport, collect firearms, and carry guns to protect themselves and their families.”

The Seward-Brindisi package aims to accomplish the following:

■ Amend the NY-SAFE Act to again allow for the gifting of long guns to close relatives and to holders of valid statte pistol licenses.

■ Repeal the provision struck down in federal court which limits the number of legally permissible cartridges in a 10-round magazine to seven.

■ Terminate an “ overly burdensome” state program requiring all ammunition retailer register with the state and conduct background checks on all customers. The bill also redirects state funding allocated to this program to public school districts to assist in the hiring of school resource officers.

■ Prohibit county judges and other licensing officers from imposing “extraneous restrictions that go above and beyond state law” when issuing pistol and handgun licenses.

White House: AR-15 Ammo Ban Would Save Cops’ Lives

Posted: March 4, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , , ,
1

The White House says a proposed bill that would ban a popular ammo for the AR-15 assault rifle would help protect police officers.

“We are looking at additional ways to protect our brave men and women in law enforcement, and believe that this process is valuable for that reason alone,” White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Monday, according to The Washington Times.

The proposal would make it illegal to buy and sell the .223 M855 green-tip ammo commonly used in the AR-15, a civilian version of the military’s M16 rifle. The legislation would use the fact that the ammo is armor-piercing to declare it illegal.

Earnest said the ban would save first responders’ lives.

“The president has long believed that there are some common-sense steps that we can take … to ensure that we’re protecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans while also taking some common-sense steps to prevent people who shouldn’t have guns from getting them,” Earnest said.

“This seems to be an area where everyone should agree that if there are armor-piercing bullets available that can fit into easily concealed weapons, that it puts our law enforcement at considerably more risk.”

More than 100 lawmakers in Congress have signed a letter addressed to Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Director Todd Jones that is against the legislation, reports the Times. The ATF is asking the public to comment on the proposal.

“[The ban] will interfere with Second Amendment rights by disrupting the market for ammunition that law abiding Americans use for sporting and other legitimate purposes,” the letter reads, according to the Times.

The lawmakers add that there are no documented cases of a single M855 green-tip round being fired at a police officer.

Maybe there’s enough of a backlash growing that this dumb assed ban won’t happen?
We can only hope. If BATFEIEIO bans M85 surplus ammo,what’s to stop them from banning 7.62×51 surplus ammo because it can be fired from a handgun? (TC Contender,etc.)
This is a very slippery slope BATFEIEIO is going down,we all know the ban has nothing whatsoever to do with “officer safety”,it wasn’t too long ago that Holder’s DOJ claimed cops were racist trigger happy civil rights violating threats to society-now it’s all about protecting cops? Bullshit.
BATFEIEIO needs to be disbanded,the FBI already does the NICS checks-which also need to go,but hey,one corrupt useless ,gov inc. gestapo type agency with it’s own stormtrooper force at a
time-we can get rid of the FBI next,followed by DEA,BLM,USFS,USFWS,DOI,EPA,DOE-(education and energy)-HUD,HHS…

Gun Owners of America to score amnesty votes in politician gun ratings

Posted: March 3, 2015 by gamegetterII in anti-gun asshattery
Tags: , , , , , , ,
0

News that can help shape the political landscape of the gun rights advocacy community was broken last night on the nationally-syndicated Armed American Radio program, when Larry Pratt, Executive Director of Gun Owners of America, announced GOA will begin scoring politicians on their support or opposition to amnesty for illegal aliens.

GOA has been alone among national gun rights groups warning that a “pathway to citizenship” will provide for millions of new anti-gun voters with the electoral clout to undo all hard-won legislative and judicial gains gun owners have enjoyed in recent years. That the administration is working toward that and other agenda goals is corroborated by what Homeland Security Jeh Johnson told the United Conference of Mayors, when he maintained that “the approximately 11 million people who are in the country illegally have ‘earned the right to be citizens.’”

The danger of allowing that to happen was emphasized recently by Oregon’s Rep. Kurt Schrader, who declared immigration “will decide who is in charge of this country for the next 20 or 30 years.” Plus, Obama’s counting on that.

The discussion took place in the third hour of the program, beginning at the 45-minute mark. I was one of the panelists, along with Pratt, host Mark Walters, Neil W, McCabe of Human Events, and blogger, trainer and gun authority George “Mad Ogre” Hill. Referencing back to a guest from the second hour, Georgia Congressman Doug Collins, I regretted not being able to establish his position on joining with so-called “Republican rebels” and separating Barack Obama’s amnesty from Department of Homeland Security funding.

“I know that there are pro-gun politicians that get A-ratings and things like that, but should not amnesty also be a part of the way that these people are scored?” I asked Pratt.

“Well the answer you’re going to get from us at GOA is absolutely, it should be a part of scoring, and it’s something that we plan on including in our rating of Congress this next year, because as we’ve already discussed, if we don’t block this amnesty move now, before we get five, eight-million previously illegal aliens now voting 85 percent anti-gun Democrats, that’s the ballgame,” Pratt replied. “That’s it.

“We lose our Second Amendment, it doesn’t matter whether it’s still in the Constitution in writing or not,” he continued. “The National Archives can’t protect it from this kind of assault.”

At that point, legislative and judicial avenues will be closed, and all gun owners will need to make a decision that carries terrible personal consequences.

GOA’s decision will offer further contrast with the way political grades are assigned by the larger National Rifle Association. With NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre telling the Conservative Political Action Conference that “[T]o defend firearm freedom, we need more than just firearm freedom … One right depends on another,” with a recent NRA advertising campaign promoting the message that all rights are connected, and with NRA’s bylaws mandating the organization to “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States [and] promote public safety, law and order, and the national defense,” the continued “single issue” excuse for avoiding amnesty is neither consistent nor credible.

http://www.examiner.com/article/gun-owners-of-america-to-score-amnesty-votes-politician-gun-ratings?CID=examiner_alerts_article

Older Entries
Newer Entries