Tag Archives: Gun grabbers

Sandy Hook Commission advises taking firearms from “bad” people

By Doug Book, editor

The 16 members of Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy’s Sandy Hook Advisory Commission have completed their report on the December, 2012 murder of 26 children and adults at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown.  And as might be expected from a hand-picked group of “healthcare professionals, public safety professionals and academics” their recommendations—offered in a 250 page anti-gun rights treatise—will have little to no effect preventing the next lunatic killing at will in one of Connecticut’s widely publicized Gun Free Zones.

“We support the concept of firearm registration,” writes the editorial board of the CT Post, “though that would not have prevented the deaths of 20 first graders and 6 educators in Sandy Hook because the shooter used weapons legally bought and owned by his mother.”

But effective or not, the mandatory registration of every privately owned firearm in Connecticut is to be the necessary starting point for “tougher gun control laws.” Just think how well the law requiring mandatory registration of “assault weapons” has worked in the state. Implemented immediately after the Newtown murders, some 50,000 owners of semi-auto rifles have foolishly registered their weapons in the past 2 years. Yet an estimated 400,000 have refused to make their rifles and rights easy prey for liberal politicians. And by the way, state officials have still not decided whether to enforce, ignore or repeal this unconstitutional statute.

So how has the Governor’s Advisory Commission recommended the state anticipate the hidden agenda of psychopaths like Adam Lanza? “Tougher gun laws, better mental health programming to treat troubled school kids and mandatory locks inside classrooms are, according to the CT Post, among the key recommendations in the final report.” Door locks. Such inspiration! Such vision! Along with Gun Free Zones the State will proudly warn miscreants of  Door Locks in the coming year. Certainly that must discourage the most determined mass murderer.

It may be some time before the Commission’s report can be thoroughly appreciated for what it is, but in the interim here are a couple of nuggets which must frighten even the least dedicated believers in the right to keep and bear arms. Along with the mandatory registration of all firearms, the laser imprinting of ammunition for tracing purposes and the restriction of ammo buyers to those calibers chambered for one of their licensed guns, the report includes “some 95 recommendations on mental health, the physical security of schools and most controversially, guns.”

One of the more interesting provisions on mental health states: “Any person seeking a license to sell, purchase or carry any type of firearm in the state should be required to pass a suitability screening process.” The process would not be limited to mental health diagnoses as noted by the panel as, “certain individuals are not suited to own, possess, or use firearms.”

And who will have the privilege of defining “not suited?” First there will be state judges, “…who should be given the power to order temporary confiscations of gun, ammunition and carry permits from a person who is the subject of a restraining order.” Then come family members who may, based upon current “feelings” tell authorities that Uncle Henry is acting strange and that Henry has 10 or 15 rifles, pistols, all kinds of stuff. That will summon police to Henry’s house where, upon the passage of Commission recommendations into law, SWAT team members may be deployed to round up all of Henry’s weapons. Naturally Henry will be given the opportunity to recover them, should he be able to convince anti-gun liberals in the bluest of states that owning a dozen or so firearms is neither illegal nor crazy. Best of luck, Henry.

Perhaps 2 million or more gun owners have proudly and publicly refused to abide by the Safe Act in New York or the “Assault Weapons” registration law in Connecticut. May we expect the political powers in Hartford to learn from the lesson of their “Assault Weapons” boondoggle; that gun owners will not be intimidated by thugs who pass unconstitutional laws?

“We’re balking at taking the next step, which is literally taking guns out of the hands of bad people,” said Commission Chair,  Hamden Mayor Scott Jackson.  It’s easy for the brave Mayor to talk about taking guns from “bad” people. He won’t wind up looking down the bore of a 30 06 when the gun’s law abiding owner refuses to let it be stolen in the middle of the night by one of Mayor Jackson’s officers.

And these are not “bad” people, Mr. Mayor. They just have very bad laws enacted by arrogant, liberal politicians.

Sources: http://www.guns.com/2015/02/13/newtown-panel-all-guns-should-be-registered-all-ammo-serial-numbered/

http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Sandy-Hook-report-New-gun-laws-classroom-locks-6077646.php

http://www.governor.ct.gov/malloy/lib/malloy/SHAC_Doc_2015.02.13_draft_version_of_final_report.pdf

Get your free PDF of Coach’s book “Crooks Thugs& Bigots: the lost, hidden and changed history of the Democrat Party.” If you don’t know the truth all you’ll have are Democrat lies. Just ask at kcoachc@gmail.com  

Why does the left keep aiming at our guns?

By Doug Book, editor

In 1996, Washington Post reporter and FOX News’ faux-conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer wrote “…the [Clinton Administration’s] assault weapons ban will have no significant effect either on the crime rate or on personal security.  Nonetheless, it is a good idea . . . .  Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation.”

Of course, Krauthammer soon learned that the American people cannot be “desensitized” to the left’s arrogant enterprises of would-be gun theft.  On the contrary, recent in-your-face efforts by gun control zealots to force gun owners into 2nd Amendment defeatism have inevitably resulted in defiance, not submission.  The unparalleled explosion in gun sales upon the installation of Barack Hussein in the White House, the absolute refusal to appease the left after New Town and the unexpected appearance of armed freedom fighters at the Bundy ranch; all have served to give provide the nation’s Krauthammers with a real education.

And today the left is faced with what may be its greatest fear—a serious, firearm owning public which has drawn a line in the sand that a gun grabbing government is not permitted to cross.

But why did the government choose this fight? Why did a battle over 2nd Amendment guarantees take on the seeming appearance of life and death to the American left? Was the Democrat Party somehow convinced disarming the American people would be an easy win? Did Chuck Schumer and Diane Feinstein really believe a coupling of the left’s laughable “nobody wants to take your gun” mantra with a professed “common sense” approach to gun control had actually fooled the nation’s gun owners?

Anyone who believes liberal claims of heartbreak over 19,000 annual firearm suicides or even the yearly average of about 250 youngsters accidently killed by mishandled guns must first ask how the left can abhor these numbers yet celebrate some 1 million annual abortions.

In 2010, the FBI reported 8,874 firearm homicides in the United States. In 2011, the number was 8,583. Of these homicides, as many as half—and depending upon location, sometimes far more—are committed by gang members. As of 2011 there were some 1.4 million active gang members in the United States comprising 33,000 different gangs. The FBI determined gangs to be responsible for “…an average of 48 percent of violent crime in most jurisdictions and up to 90 percent in several others.” This means the American left has spent decades doing everything in its power to trample the Constitution and disarm the American public, all for the prevention of some 4,300 deaths.

Does anyone really believe that Democrats and other dedicated gun grabbers can get all broken up over 4,300 shootings?

Sources:

http://www.gunscholar.org/gunban.htm       Krauthammer. Disarm the Citizenry. But Not Yet.  WaPo, April 5, 1996.

http://www.abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/2011-national-gang-threat-assessment/2011-national-gang-threat-assessment#Executive

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_04.pdf

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

 

 

The NRA stood tall and tough when it counted most

By Doug Book, editor

Though liberal Democrats have little appreciation for the spiritual meaning of Christmas, events of December 2012 would bring Joy to the Political World of every avid, gun-hating politician in Washington D.C.

For on December 14th, twenty children and six adults responsible for their care were shot to death at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. Their killer ended his own life minutes later with a round to the head.

Understanding the importance of disarming the American people, gun confiscation advocates like Chuck Schumer, Diane Feinstein and Barack Obama no doubt wished the death toll had been higher. But as children were involved, even 20 dead would have the American public ready to accept—however unwillingly– a raft of new, anti-gun edicts. Democrats and the national media would see to that. For neither the NRA nor pro-gun Republicans would have the gall to stand in the way by quoting chapter and verse of the 2nd Amendment. Not this time.  After all, never had the left been blessed with such a delicious level of exploitable carnage! It would be a legislative gimme!

Then, four days after the killings, the NRA offered its eagerly anticipated response to the left’s set-up story of evil “assault weapons” and the ease with which they can be acquired. But refusing to be cowed by liberal Democrats or their equally anti-gun proponents in the national media, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre told the American public that “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” The next psychopath intent upon taking advantage of the defenseless victims of “gun free zones” will only be stopped by the armed response of good people, not a new layer of ineffective legislation.

The media was stunned. Liberal Democrats were taken aback, feigning disgust at the brazen, unfeeling nature of LaPierre’s remarks. Of course the unexpressed media/Dem Party response was really one of: “Damn, what happened!” This collection of dedicated gun grabbers had expected a contrite, almost apologetic NRA. They would relish the unconditional surrender of an NRA which had for some years displayed a less confrontational side; one which earned the contempt of members across the country. The NRA had endorsed Harry Reid for God’s sake!

But far from apologizing for a history of oft times rigid, pro-gun positions, LaPierre hit the left right between the eyes. And guess what! The American people–gun owners and non-owners alike–stood 4-Square with the NRA. DC Democrats were apoplectic. All of their plans of gloating over the defeated carcass of the once feared gun group went up in smoke. Visions of mandatory gun registration, confiscation of “assault weapons” and “high capacity” magazines, SWAT teams intimidating American citizens with midnight raids and the ultimate manufacture of subjects from what had once been free citizens—it had all gone to Hell. The NRA had picked the right time to be tough. It had defined the problem of gun free zones and offered the only solution for the defense of unarmed innocents.

There is no question that NRA higher-ups have sometimes displayed weakness, stupidity, even lunacy. How can the premier American gun-rights organization endorse Harry Reid?

But one very courageous statement offered at exactly the right time did more to derail a dangerous, liberal assault against gun owners than the combined efforts of DC Republicans for the past decade. As gun owners, we owe the NRA a lot.

“Nobody wants to take your guns”

by Doug Book,  editor

There is nothing so dependably disingenuous as a liberal who proclaims a willingness to have an honest debate or engage in a legitimate compromise. For decades spent in the practice of calculated deceit have made truth a foreign concept to these unprincipled vermin.

And no subject has been the cause of more outright dishonesty from the left than the right to keep and bear arms.

For decades, liberals have begun each new call for “common sense” gun legislation by reassuring gun owning, 2nd Amendment supporting Americans that nobody wants to take their guns. “No one is seriously proposing to ban or confiscate all guns,” claims Martin Dyckman, Associate Editor of the St. Petersburg Times.  “You hear that only from the gun lobby itself, which whistles up this bogeyman whenever some reasonable regulation is proposed.” Rather than suggest Mr. Dyckman may not be telling the absolute truth, let’s hear from the “bogeyman” himself:

“Our ultimate goal–total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time.” “The final problem is to make possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition-except for the military, police, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors-totally illegal.”
Richard Harris in The New Yorker, quoting Pete Shields, founder of Handgun Control, Inc.

“It will happen one very small step at a time, so that by the time people have “woken up” — quote — to what’s happened, it’s gone farther than what they feel the consensus of American citizens would be.”
Stockton, California Mayor Barbara Fass: Speaking of the banning of firearms in the US, beginning with “the banning of semi-assault military weapons, that are military weapons, not “household” weapons.”

“There is little sense in gun registration.  What we need to significantly enhance public safety is domestic disarmament . . . .  Domestic disarmament entails the removal of arms from private hands.”
Former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, San Antonio Mayor Henry Cisneros and Baltimore Mayor Kurt Schmoke, upon signing the Communitarian Network’s “Case for Domestic Disarmament.”

“I shortly will introduce legislation banning the sale, manufacture or possession of handguns (with exceptions for law enforcement and licensed target clubs).”
Sen. John H. Chafee (R.-R.I.): In View of Handguns’ Effects, There’s Only One Answer: A Ban, Minneapolis Star Tribune, June 15, 1992, at 13A.

“Mr. Speaker, my bill prohibits the importation, exportation, manufacture, sale, purchase, transfer, receipt, possession, or transportation of handguns and handgun ammunition.”
Rep. Major Owens (D-Brooklyn, N.Y.), 139 Cong. Rec. H9088 at H9094, Nov. 10, 1993.

“There is no reason for anyone in this country, anyone except a police officer or a military person, to buy, to own, to have, to use a handgun.” “I now think the only way to control handgun use in this country is to prohibit the guns.”
Michael Gartner (then president of NBC News), Glut of Guns: What Can We Do About Them?, USA Today, Jan. 16, 1992

Speaking of the Assault Weapons Ban:  “Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation.”
Charles Krauthammer (nationally syndicated columnist), Disarm the Citizenry. But Not Yet, Washington Post, Apr. 5, 1996

“I think there should be a law — and I know this is extreme — that no one can have a gun in the U.S.  If you have a gun, you go to jail.  Only the police should have guns.”
Rosie O’Donnell. Shannon Hawkins, Rosie Takes on the NRA, Ottawa Sun, April 29, 1999  

“We’re talking about limiting people to one gun purchase or handgun purchase a month.  Why not just ban the ownership of handguns when nobody needs one?  Why not just ban semi-automatic rifles?  Nobody needs one.”
Statement by Time Magazine, National Correspondent Jack E. White
L. Brent Bozell III, Lock-and-Load Mode Against the 2nd, Washington Times, May 8, 1999

“We will never fully solve our nation’s horrific problem of gun violence unless we ban the manufacture and sale of handguns and semiautomatic assault weapons.” 
Jeff Muchnick, Legislative Director, Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, Better Yet, Ban All Handguns

“The goal of CSGV is the orderly elimination of the private sale of handguns and assault weapons in the United States.”
 Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, http://www.csgv.org/content/coalition/coal_intro.html (visited June 20, 2000)

“We Are NOT “Gun Banners”-and never have been… Handgun Control, Inc., has never advocated banning firearms used for legitimate purposes such as hunting and recreation.”  Measures We Don’t Support,” Handgun Control Inc. March 16, 1999
As Eugene Volokh of the UCLA Law School points out: “Hopefully you noticed Handgun Control, Inc. (now the Brady Campaign) doesn’t include self-defense as a “legitimate purpose” for owning a firearm.”

Apparently, as long as the Brady Campaign considers a specific firearm usage “legitimate,” gun owners have nothing to fear.   

Just remember: Nobody Wants to Take Your Guns!

Sources:

http://www.gunscholar.org/gunban.htm

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcnobody.html

When gun confiscation begins, ALL politicians must be viewed as enemies of freedom until proven otherwise

by Doug Book,  staff writer

As the far left pass into law unconstitutional and unforgivable statutes by which to confiscate the firearms of the American people, a number of gun rights supporters believe the reclamation of our 2nd Amendment rights must depend upon the continued election of declared,  pro-2nd Amendment Republicans. 

Unfortunately, such is the rose-colored-glasses thinking of individuals either too foolish, too gullible or too cowardly to recognize the perpetual treachery of elected Republicans for what it truly is— a politician’s perception of political necessity taking precedence over his duty to support the God given rights of the American people.

And never mind the argument that politicians who vote for gun confiscation will be in imminent danger of losing their jobs and therefore get what they deserve. That is irrelevant to the situation. For such politicians are traitors to the nation and to the American people. They are intent upon eliminating a God given, constitutionally codified and protected right! Therefore, reclaiming their elected office ceases to be an issue of any import as the very fact of their vote to abolish the right to keep and bear arms means they have lost all right to be a lawmaker in a free country.

In fact, it is not the right to their job which has been forfeited, but their right to continued existence. For as enemies of freedom and liberty, they have become implacable enemies of the American public. And no American has the obligation to tolerate the continued efforts or existence of anyone whose clear purpose is the enslavement of American citizens. Any laws implemented by such traitors are void and like all unconstitutional, illegal legislation, need not be obeyed.  

In short, these politicians have already forfeited their jobs. Upon the implementation of gun confiscation, it shall be up to Americans to decide if they have also forfeited their lives.

Over the years, the Republicans Party has displayed nothing if not a well-known willingness to “go along to get along.” The importance Republican politicians place on retaining their jobs and power rather than doing what is right—protecting the Constitution by honoring their oath of office—has proven that no political party should ever be depended upon to secure the rights and liberty of Americans. In the end, that is OUR responsibility. Too long we have entrusted politicians with the care of our liberty and watched as it has been either trampled or stolen away. It is long past time we demand politicians follow the dictates of the Constitution or be removed from office. And NOT by the next vote, but by force.

God given rights are not negotiable. They cannot be bartered away by politicians in search of some nebulous “greater good.”  And Americans must never permit the importance of their rights to be re-defined downward from the meaning and weight given them by the Founders.  For in so doing we lose our constitutional republic and become no more than the slaves the left is so intent upon making us.