The Right to Keep and Bear Arms

Trade a Gun for a Rose in SC on Valentine’s Day

February 14, 2009

AP - Police in South Carolina gave away roses on Valentine’s Day. All you had to do to get one for your sweetie was turn in a gun... At a Columbia church, five cars lined up to give away guns before the exchange had even started. About an hour and a half later, police had collected 75 weapons. “We’ve got a great turnout so far,” Richland County sheriff’s spokesman Lt. Chris Cowan said.

A handgun was worth a $100 gift card, while a rifle or shotgun netted a $50 gift certificate. Cowan said one man turned in six handguns, worth $600 in gift cards...

Cowan said the idea was spawned in part by Columbia Police Chief T.P. Carter and Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott, who has made headlines recently for investigating Michael Phelps after a photo surfaced showing the Olympic swimming champion smoking a marijuana pipe. The program was modeled after a California one; similar exchanges have been done in New York and San Francisco.

HR 45 May be More Troubling Than the Average Anti-gun Bill

February 15, 2009

Gun Owners of America - The first anti-gun bill of the 111th Congress -– Chicago Congressman Bobby Rush’s H.R. 45 –- has caught the attention of many in the Second Amendment community as something we need to be worried about. This is because of the extremity of the bill:

• It would require a federal license for all handguns and semiautomatics, including those you currently possess; and
• It would require handgun and semi-auto owners to be thumbprinted at the police station and to sign a certificate that, effectively, the firearm will not be kept in a place where it would be available for the defense of the gun owner’s family.

Licensing is only a way-station to discouraging, arresting, or humiliating gun owners and outlawing guns. Under H.R. 45, for example, the applicant must also make available ALL of his psychiatric records, pass an exam, and pay a fee. So... are you a veteran who has ever consulted a psychologist or psychiatrist? Guess what? The FBI would soon be examining every confidential statement you have ever made during those consultations.

Private sales of handguns and semi-autos would be outlawed, and reports to the attorney general of all transactions would be required, even when -- as the bill allows -- the AG determines that a state licensing system is sufficiently draconian to substitute for the federal license.

But, you may be thinking, “I’m just a hunter with a deer rifle... surely, none of this is relevant to me”? Then you should know that, with virtually no exceptions, ALL firearms transactions (including person-to-person private sales of long guns, hunting rifles, shotguns, etc.) would be subject to the same paperwork hassles that are required when buying from a dealer. In addition, the bill would make it unlawful in virtually all cases to keep any loaded firearm for self-defense.

A variety of “crimes by omission” (such as failure to report certain things to the government) would be created. Criminal penalties of up to ten years and virtually unlimited regulatory and inspection authority would be established. Combined with the Ammunition Accountability effort to outlaw ammunition in numerous states, this two-pronged attack would soon make gun ownership a thing of the past...

“Pork” Bailout Bill Could Ban Guns for Millions of Americans

February 11, 2009

Gun Owners of America - But of even greater concern to gun owners is the fact that a government-coordinated database (which government can freely access) will now contain all records of government-provided and private psychiatric treatment -– including, in particular, the drugs which were prescribed.

Remember last year’s “NICS Improvement Act” otherwise known as the Veterans Disarmament Act? This law codified ATF’s attempts to make you a prohibited person on the basis of a government psychiatrist’s finding that you are a “danger” –- without a finding by any court. Well, roughly 150,000 battle-scarred veterans have already been unfairly stripped of their gun rights by the government....

Dem’s Use “Stimulus” as Cover for More Gun Control

February 13, 2009

Canada Free Press - The liberals are at it again. In a new bill introduced the first day of the present session of Congress, and with zero coverage from the MSM, H.R. 45 (Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009) targets all gun owners in the U.S.A. While the media the world and everyone else is focused on the “phony plan” to spend tax dollars legislation is sneeking through the House and Senate for more gun control.

This nefarious bill seeks to strip us all of our Constitutional Rights to possess and bear firearms of any distinction. It requires, within the first two years, that all new guns be registered. The bill goes retroactive after two years. Meaning that two years after the passage of the bill, ALL FIREARMS in a citizen’s possession must be registered, not just those purchased after the bill passes, and this apparently applies to antique firearms as well...

Gun Dealers Experiencing Shortage In Ammunition

February 10, 2009

After months of heavy buying, gun dealers across the state [Florida] are experiencing shortages. Some say it began with the election of President Barack Obama. Others say it's about the economic downturn or fear of crime. Whatever the reasons, ammunition has been selling like plywood and bottled water in the days before a hurricane...

Ammunition Accountability: Maybe We’d Better Take This Bill Seriously

December 4, 2008

Ever since the early 1970s, whenever downstate Assemblymen rattled sabers and proposed radical anti-gun or anti-hunting legislation, we could count on the conservative Senate Republican majority to block it.

That was then.

The scene changed dramatically on Nov. 4. Now the outrageous stuff coming out of the Assembly has some credence on the other side of the aisle. The Democrats — and that means the New York City mentality — have the majority in both houses. Except for four swing votes, they have pretty much carte blanche.

That's why the fact that the Assembly has bought into a national crusade known as the Ammunition Accountability Act is suddenly a legitimate threat. New York, Pennsylvania and 16 other states have already enacted legislation that would mandate the engraving of a unique serial number on the base of each handgun and “assault weapon” bullet, and an identical number on the cartridge's case. The act calls for dealers of this “encoded ammunition” to record the purchaser's name, birthdate, drivers license number, etc.

All non-encoded ammunition must be disposed of prior to Jan. 1, 2011. The database and other expenses involved would be paid for by a special tax of a half-cent per round of ammunition sold...

Would-be Appointees Quizzed on Guns

November 21, 2008

President-elect Barack Obama’s transition team is asking potential appointees detailed questions about gun ownership, and firearms advocates aren’t happy about it. The National Rifle Association has denounced the move, which has already led one Republican senator to consider legislation aimed at ensuring a president can’t use an applicant’s gun ownership status to deny employment.

It’s just one question on a lengthy personnel form — No. 59 on a 63-question list — but the furor over the query is a vivid reminder of the intensity of support for Second Amendment rights and signals the scrutiny Obama is likely to receive from the ever-vigilant gun lobby.

Obama’s transition team declined to go into detail on why they included the question, suggesting only that it was done to ensure potential appointees were in line with gun laws. “The intent of the gun question is to determine legal permitting,” said one transition aide.

But even some Democrats and transition experts are baffled by the inclusion of the question. Tucked in at the end of the questionnaire and listed under “Miscellaneous,” it reads: “Do you or any members of your immediate family own a gun? If so, provide complete ownership and registration information. Has the registration ever lapsed? Please also describe how and by whom it is used and whether it has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage.”

Paul Light, professor of public service at New York University, said there was no such question for potential appointees when President George W. Bush took office in 2000. “It kind of sticks out there like a sore thumb,” Light said. He expressed uncertainty over why it was included but surmised it was out of an abundance of caution, a desire to avoid the spectacle of a Cabinet-level or other high-ranking appointee who is discovered to have an unregistered handgun at home. “It’s the kind of thing that, if dug out, could be an embarrassment to the president-elect,” Light said.

Clay Johnson, deputy director of management at the Office of Management and Budget and the head of Bush’s 2000 transition, also didn’t quite understand the purpose of the question. “It could be their way to say to prospects that they will have to answer all these questions sooner or later, so be prepared,” Johnson observed.

Matt Bennett, a veteran campaign operative who did a stint at Americans for Gun Safety and who now works for the moderate Democratic think tank Third Way, was equally befuddled. “It strikes me as overly lawyerly,” he said, noting that only a small percentage of guns owned by adults are ever used improperly.

Only half-joking, Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio) alluded to the shooting accident involving Vice President Dick Cheney, suggesting the query could be a better-safe-than-sorry measure. “Given the behavior of the vice president under the last administration, you may want to know these things,” Ryan said. On a more serious note, Ryan suggested that the new president was being “very, very thorough” in his approach. An Obama ally and pro-gun Democrat from a blue-collar region of Ohio, Ryan dismissed the notion that the inclusion of such a question would do any political harm to the incoming president.

But other gun rights supporters want Obama to know the question has raised their antennae. “It’s very odd and very concerning to put out a question like that,” said Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), adding that it may also be “unprecedented.” The freshman senator, who is up for reelection in 2010, had his campaign organization send an e-mail to supporters this week, pledging to enact legislation to bar federal hiring discrimination on the basis of gun ownership. “Barack Obama promised change, and this is proof positive that we are going to see some of the most liberal change in our nation’s history,” wrote DeMint’s campaign in the e-mail. DeMint conceded it was unrealistic to try to get a bill on the matter through during the lame duck session this week. Still, it’s the sort of symbolic issue that may provide a political opening for Republican members of Congress from conservative-leaning states to contrast themselves with the new Democratic administration. “I want him to know that we’re looking for areas we can work with him but also looking for areas of concern that we want to let him know we’re going to fight on,” DeMint said.

The NRA, the gun-rights group that spent millions to defeat Obama, only to see him easily carry sportsmen-heavy states such as Michigan and Pennsylvania, is signaling that it intends to keep up the fight.

“Barack Obama and his administration are showing their true colors and true philosophy with regard to the Second Amendment,” said Chris Cox, the NRA’s top political official. “It shows what we’ve been saying all along — this guy doesn’t view the Second Amendment as a fundamental constitutional right.”

Cox said the group had put the word out to their members on the question. Bennett, though, argued that approach would have little resonance. “The real question is whether he’s doing harm to the broader image of Democrats on guns, and the answer is probably no,” he said. “It may gin up 350,000 hard-core NRA types, but it won’t really bother 65 million other gun owners.”