Friday, August 16, 2013

Even Gun Control Advocates Think Bloomberg Has Gone Too Far

It looks as though New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's, Mayor's Against Illegal Guns is turning off some of it's members, causing them to leave the group. Many of whom are citing their dissatisfaction with the groups abandonment of it's mission of going after illegal guns and rather attacking lawmakers who support gun rights.

I suppose there is hope that some of the blinded will find the light and see what this lunatic is trying to do to this country, as well as the constitution. Bloomberg has never been a friend of guns. His policies and position have been made clear time and time again through his actions. Despite New York City's strict gun laws, the city still has some of the highest gun violence rates in the country. Now I know we will never ever be able to persuade this guy any different, but those of us that use our own heads and not politicians' know the real reason for this. It sure isn't because law abiding gun owners are turning into crazed monsters hell bent on shooting sprees. No, it's because of the lack of enforcement, lack of prosecution, and the black market. Criminals get guns no matter what the law is. Gun control is a pacifier for the ignorant. It gives people a sense of false security and only prevents good people from getting guns.Mayor Bloomberg's mission is to take away our God given right and he won't settle for anything less.

More guns in the hands of law abiding citizens prevent crime. Wake up Bloomberg and don't tread on our Second Amendment rights. I hope your group of zombies crashes and burns, because in the end no politician has more authority than the United States Constitution.

**If you want to help in the fight against politicians like Michael Bloomberg and their assault on the Second Amendment, become a member of the NRA today. Visit www.fightforguns.com.

Tuesday, July 16, 2013

My Take on The George Zimmerman Case

It isn't about black or white, and it most definately isn't about hate. The George Zimmerman trial was a very low point in our criminal justice system. A man who set out to help protect his gated community from a rash of burglaries fell victim to an unfortunate situation that led to the death of a 17 year old black teen.

A case that has headlined the news for well over a year, there weren't many American's who hadn't at least heard about the case. Now that the trial has finished and the verdict of not guilty has been read, protestors all over the country are struggling to make sense of everything. Unfortunately, the majority of these people suffer from a lack of information.

Gone are the days of innocent until proven guilty. Thanks to the media and their terrible reporting, too many people declared Zimmerman finished before the trial even began. However if you had followed the case from start to finish. Listened to the evidence and the facts. One could not conclude that this was an instance of racial profiling that led to second degree murder. In fact it was so bad, that I have to wonder why the prosecution even charged Zimmerman. The media fueled rage and that pressure forced the prosecutions hand.

It is a god given right of all American's to be able to protect and defend themselves against the imminant threat of serious bodily harm. Zimmerman, although foolish for following Martin, found himself on the receiving end of a vicious assault. With his head being smashed into the pavement and fearing for his life he made a decision that nobody who carries a firearm wants to make, he drew his weapon and fired a shot that proved fatal for Trayvon Martin.

Some say Zimmerman racially profiled Trayvon because he was black, but he did nothing different then anyone else would do given the circumstances. A gated community that had suffered from numerous break ins by African American persons, one would be foolish to look the other way if they saw someone fitting the description walking through their streets late at night. Had the suspect of the break ins been white, and Zimmerman followed and defended himself against a white person would we standing here today even discussing this? No. The power of the NAACP to make mountains out of mole hills and fuel animosity between the races is sickening. It is 2013, not 1960. Racism still exists, but not to the extent the NAACP would like you to believe.

The justice system worked the way it was designed during this case and an innocent man was set free. It is unfortunate that Trayvon Martin is not with us, but it was he, and he alone that made the decision to turn a peaceful situation into a violent one. Had he just kept walking, none of this would have happened. George Zimmerman excercised his Second Amendment right and that is the only thing he is guilty of.

The federal government is now looking at whether it should charge Zimmerman with federal hate crimes. A huge display of grasping for straws, especially by Eric Holder whose department is guilty of letting thousands of firearms illegally cross the border into Mexico that later were used to kill both Mexican and Americans alike. I say the feds have no right sticking their noses in this case, just like they have no right sticking their fingers in my gun safe.

Tuesday, June 18, 2013

Is Anybody Paying Attention?


In today's world and the existing state of American politics, nothing surprises me anymore. However when I discovered that the Obama Administration had concluded Syria's government had used chemical weapons against the rebels who are fighting President Assad's forces and would begin providing them with weapons I was dumbfounded.

Politicians, mostly democratic, fight tooth and nail day after day, year after year to pull the noose tighter and tighter around the necks of law abiding gun owners here in the United States. Bill after repetitive bill is introduced to make it more difficult for able bodied American's to exercise their Second Amendment rights. If Obama feels that a group of Muslims with ties to Al Qaeda, a group who has shown has no love for this country, have a right to defend themselves and overthrow their government, then why do we as American's have to fight with every ounce of energy to simply own a firearm to rightfully defend ourselves and our families?

Our government has everything so backwards it is unbelievable. Our President has more compassion for people from terrorist nations then he does the very people who he was elected to represent.

We as a people need to really take a step back and look at what this Administration has done to our country in the past 5 years. Not just in regards to attempted gun control legislation  but the whole picture. We need to stop electing people like Barack Obama and start thinking for ourselves. If you spend more time watching MTV then you do reading unbiased news stories then you should be scared. The United States is becoming a fire pit for liberals to burn what's left of the constitution.

I am embarrassed that a country who tried to impeach a president for having an affair and lying about it has now bent over backwards to cover up the sins of a dictator in training. IRS, NSA, Benghazi? Obamacare was the biggest government overstep in the history of this nation. If you think that is the end of it, think again. The liberals aren't done attacking your gun rights. Stand up and fight, join a group like the NRA and show your politicians you won't stand for it.

Tuesday, May 21, 2013

TX Man Transporting Unloaded Firearms Through NJ Doing 3-5 Years in Prison

A TX man, who was in the process of moving to Maine, made a very simple mistake, and never made it to his hew home. Dustin Reininger is serving a 3-5 year prison sentence in the Garden State because he made a mistake, he stopped to take a nap in NJ during his multi day drive from Texas to Maine.

Police approached Reininger’s car when he was taking a nap near a bank in Readington, NJ.

Police then searched the suspect’s vehicle after seeing gun cases laying in the back seat and found the man’s personal gun collection, which was being transported in the car. This included 14 rifles, 4 shotguns and 3 handguns along with hollow point ammunition (which is extremely illegal in NJ). Reininger was arrested, convicted and sentenced to 5 years in prison, with a chance for parole after 3.

Reininger would not have been arrested if his guns were simply in locked cases, or if he possessed a NJ Firearm Owner’s Identification Card, which not being a resident of NJ, he obviously did not possess.
Reininger’s attorney has serious issues with the way the search was conducted on his client’s vehicle and he is also upset that jurors were not told about a federal law which allows people who are traveling to transport guns through states which may have more restrictive gun laws. Although the transportation exemption also requires guns to be locked and inaccessible.

Click Here to Read the Whole Article

Tuesday, April 30, 2013

Arizona Governor Puts a Plan Into Action That Doesn't Fare Well

There have been many arguments in Arizona over the regulation of seized and voluntarily surrendered weapons. The confusion occurs because of a legislation that requires police to sell seized weapons to legitimate dealers and current legislation from the Governor that wants them destroyed. You can see where the problem lies...

Why destroy legitimate guns and sell confiscated ones? It doesn't make much sense and does seem like a waste of time and money. Thus, the people are arguing that destroying weapons oversteps boundaries and should in fact, be resold much like the confiscated ones.

For some counties that pay cash for the voluntarily surrendered weapons, it would be a way for them to make that money back.

While the bills and veto's are still open to interpretation, you can read the full article and get a say so in here.

Wednesday, April 24, 2013

W.Va. Teen Arrested After 'Almost Inciting Riot' Wearing NRA Shirt to School

A West Virginia teen arrested and accused of nearly inciting a riot after a confrontation with a teacher over his National Rifle Association t-shirt has inspired dozens of students across his county to wear similar apparel in solidarity.

Jared Marcum, 14, had a confrontation Thursday with a Logan Middle School teacher over his NRA t-shirt, which bears the organization's logo, along with an image of a hunting rifle and the phrase, "Protect your right."

Marcum's lawyer, Ben White, said that when the teen was told to remove the shirt or turn it inside out, he attempted to engage the teacher in a debate.

"Jared respects firearms and has training to use them, and believes in the Second Amendment," White told ABCNews.com. "He believes it's being threatened by current legislation. He wore [the shirt] as an expression of political speech and the need to protect the Second Amendment."

White said that Marcum had been wearing the shirt without causing any problems from homeroom at the beginning of the school day through fifth period, and was confronted by one of the school's teachers while getting his lunch. When Jared refused to remove or reverse the shirt, the teacher began to raise his voice, and it caught the attention of students eating their lunch, White said.

Click Here to Read the Whole Article

Sunday, April 21, 2013

Sunday's Just Got More Interesting...

While watching TV today, I saw something that would be good to share. Besides, wanted to do something outside the political facet of our gun stance today. :)

CMT is featuring a new show called, Guntucky. The previews look pretty interesting as a family, heavily attracted to guns and puts them to use. I'm actually surprised with all of this debate, that they would air this... Then again, I'm guessing they were assured to have plenty of viewers!

So, if you didn't know about the show, you should check it out! I know I will be viewing the first episode to see what secrets it may hold!

USAToday goes a bit further into the previews!

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Legal BUT Generally Illegal.....WHAT sense does that make?

Fox News has enlightened to a nice, new piece of laughter from the parts of government that would like tighter gun laws. Even though it seems to have calmed down, the storm is still brewing. Especially, on the singular level.

Colorado and New York legislators have enacted their newest gun laws, which include registration and restrictions on the number of bullets in magazines. These are only a few of the statutes within the new laws they are putting into action.

While the NRA is not going to stand back and let this occur on a state's level either, they do propose abiding by the laws until things change. So, anyone in New York with the new 'assault weapons' needs to register them by the years end. Fortunately, the NRA does plan to fight that, as soon as they finish fighting the magazine statutes.

Alright, enough with the background information, it's time to laugh. Ready?

Per Fox News "acknowledging that manufacturers don't make seven-bullet magazines, the Cuomo administration and New York lawmakers amended their law on March 29, keeping 10-bullet magazines legal but generally illegal to load them with more than seven bullets"

"Legal by generally illegal"...... in the 'general' view this doesn't make much sense. But, I could see from the legal or political point of view. It really leaves it up to interpretation depending on who is the person in charge..... How fair is that? Let's not even think about the fact that it wouldn't be hard to circumvent this gaping hole....

To Read More: Fox News

Thursday, April 11, 2013

More Proposed Garbage Legislation

So stricter background checks are the answer to all our problems? Forget about the fact that our government routinely fails to enforce existing gun control laws or the fact the NICS already has a hard time keeping up with the workload. This feel good legislation will do nothing to stop criminals from getting their hands on guns while tightening the reins on law abiding citizens and their purchases. Refusing to back down, democrats and other anti-gun lawmakers are struggling to salvage the last breath of tighter gun control by coming up with a bill that does nothing.

The incompetence of congress to ask the right questions and target the proper arenas, is sickening to me. What are we doing about mental health shortfalls? From reporting to treatment, mental health care is despicable in this country. Politicians are attempting to close the gun show loophole and are pushing even further by seeking background checks for internet sales. Wait a second, aren't all internet sales transferred to a FFL who then must do a background check before releasing the firearm? Yes they are. These morons are talking about ads people place online, who then meet in person to conduct the transaction. That isn't an internet sale, that is a private face to face sale. I know personally if I am selling a firearm and I feel even the slightest suspicion about the individual, I'm not selling. Why aren't we holding the people who are selling firearms to criminals responsible? What about straw purchases? What about the black market? What about firearms thefts?

Clearly our government is wasting too much time playing politics, and not enough time finding a real solution. It's time these people wake up, stop blaming guns for their incompetence, and start doing the right thing. Law abiding citizens aren't the problem, criminals and the government bureaucracy are.

Wednesday, April 10, 2013

L.D. 265: Maine Lawmakers Attacking Law Abiding Gun Owners

For a couple of weeks now I have sat back and watched as politicians across the nation, both at the state as well as the federal level play Russian roulette with our Second Amendment rights. Yesterday I found out that L.D. 265, sponsored by Sen. Stan Gerzofsky, D-Brunswick, would repeal a 2011 law in the state of Maine that prohibited employers from barring employees with concealed-handgun permits from leaving concealed handguns in their cars at workplaces.

The 2011 law was common sense. Citizens who have been screened and deemed worthy of having a concealed weapon permit through the state police or other law enforcement entity should not be required to leave their firearms at home. Even if they never have to remove their firearm from their vehicle and use it at work what about the ride to and from? What about the stop at the grocery store? If this bill passes, it in effect castrates concealed permit holders and leaves them unarmed by irresponsible legislation.

According to Gerzofsky, who is also the co-chairman of the Legislature's Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee, "We are fixing a problem last year that didn't exist."

This is nothing more than a sad attempt by a democrat to once again scratch at the surface of violating state and federal constitutional rights. We aren't talking about criminals. We are talking about trained and permitted law abiding citizens. Gerzofsky and his supporters need to take this bill and burn it, before they start striking matches dangerously close to U.S. Constitution.

Friday, April 5, 2013

Is A Government Conspiracy Growing?

Many questions are arising as stores seem to be lacking ammunition these days. Many stores are even taking extra precautions because of the mass fear and thus action of legitimate gun-owners. With these new concerns, some are raising questions about the government being behind some of these efforts.

It may be that we have beaten the original bans through the Senate, but that hasn't stopped people from being scared for their rights. As we all know, there is NO shortage of conspiracy theories out there and a new one has consumed many. Ideally, the theory is a way of saying, the government doesn't play fair.

Stores like Dick's Sporting Goods have put up lines and enforced a 'ticket' counter for people wanting to buy rounds. Some stores have even been limiting the amount you can purchase. Why? Obviously, the chains are being completely emptied of their stock.

Thus, who's buying it all? Are they truly legitimate or (like usual) are some criminals sneaking their way into the lines? Is the government using 'snakey' measures to make sure the ammunition supplies slowly disintegrate, enforcing their love of taking away this right? After all, the war still reigns over what they can actually do....Just because they don't go through the government doesn't mean they don't have people all over, walking into stores and doing their best to buy everything......

Hmmmmmmm....... Got to love conspiracy theories!

If you would like to read more on this impending concern of ammunition, click here.

Tuesday, April 2, 2013

The Senate, NRA and Obama Administration....Who makes it out?

There is now a measure of gun control that the Senate and the NRA are in agreement on where they stand. Both are far against the Obama Administration. What could this be?

Well, amazingly it has to do with the U.N. and one of it's most recent decisions. Simply put, they have enacted a treaty regulating the multibillion-dollar international arms trade. Now it makes sense, right? The fact that the Obama Administration would agree to this.

On the Senate's hand, they have already made an addition to the budget proposal in order to prevent the US from participating with the Treaty. Senator Thad Cochran of Mississippi has already stated that an action from the President on this, such as signing the treaty, would be pointless because the Senate won't ratify it.

This isn't to control the domestic use of weapons but it doesn't require establishing national regulations in regards to arms trades.

This is not something new and the U.N. has been working hard at making the treaty work for everyone. The main goal is an attempt to make it harder for terrorists, insurgents and many others to get their hands on the weapons. Would it work?

If you would like to read more from the U.N. or Senate on this, click here.

Monday, March 25, 2013

Money Can't Buy Everything...

This is where members of the political world, have lost their senses. They think if they have poured enough money into an issue, then it is bound to happen. Bloomberg is currently focusing all his efforts on this fact alone.

While the assault weapons ban is to be dropped from the Senate bill, there is still the issue of Background checks. Next month, that will be the food on the table, and Congress will be forced whether to partake of the meal or not.

According to the poll from the Washington Post, 91% of the public do agree with some form of background checks. But, the NRA isn't going to listen to that, nor are they stepping down. Bloomberg thinks he can spend $12 million on advertising to keep turning the odds. For the majority of the general public, it isn't going to matter how much money you spend on ads. They want the facts and more importantly, they want to know they are not being imposed on.

Just as Wayne LaPierre, of the NRA, pointed out "He can't spend enough of his $27 billion to impose his will on the American people."

Background checks may seem like a good idea to lessen the amount of guns that reach criminals and the mentally insane. Yet, there is no real history to support the facts that this will help anything. They do background checks for many jobs but that doesn't stop the criminals or mentally unstable from infiltrating, if they choose....


Click here to read more.

Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Assault Weapons Ban Dropped From Senate Gun Control Bill

The leader of the Democrat-controlled Senate on Tuesday dropped a proposed assault weapons ban from the chamber’s gun-control package – dealing a blow to supporters of the ban, though it could still come up for a vote.

The sponsor of the measure, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., revealed that Reid told her the proposed ban would not be in the initial package. Feinstein said she's "disappointed" with the decision, and is expected to nevertheless offer it as an amendment.

But the move by Reid to cut it from the main bill signals a lack of congressional support for a proposal that would not only revive, but strengthen, the decade-long ban that expired in 2004.

The proposed ban passed was passed last week by the Senate Judiciary Committee, along with three other measures. The others dealt with providing more school safety aid, expanding federal background checks on potential gun buyers and helping authorities prosecute illegal gun traffickers.

Feinstein has led the gun-control charge since President Obama called for federal legislation in the wake of the Newtown and other mass shootings.

Click Here to read the whole article.

Friday, March 15, 2013

Kansas is Being More Supportive About Self-Protection

It just keeps getting better and better. The more the federal government tries to manipulate our Second Amendment rights by force, the more our individual states through up barriers. Several states have started legislative action to include weapons in different areas as the prospect of protection weighs against the massive criminal acts we have seen.

Now, Kansas has joined the group. Both HB2055 and HB2052 passed the Kansas House of Representatives this week.

HB2055: This bill passed with an 84-38 vote and is very interesting in the least. In layman's terms, it dictates that any building with inadequate security will allow citizens with concealed carry licenses to provide self-protection. If public buildings are unsure about allowing this then they can set up a checkpoint to ensure NO ONE can enter with a weapon. On the hand they don't want to spend the extra funds to provide that security measure, then law abiding citizens can provide their own security.

This measure is set to reduce the zones that are often targeted because they are deemed 'gun-free zones' but don't actually have any security in place to ensure that a criminal doesn't get in with a weapon.

HB2052: This is the bill that many will be able to breathe a sigh of relief about and it passed with a 121-2 vote! How many times have you seen a story about someone defending themselves with a gun and being prosecuted because they did so? If you ask me, too many to count. Thus, this bills says that any citizen to discharge a firearm legally, while hunting or during self-defense, CAN NOT be prosecuted!

How refreshing is it to know that now you can defend your family from harm without winding up in cuffs afterwards? (If you reside in Kansas, that is.)

Check out more information at NRA-ILA.

Kansas is Fighting Back With Force!

Well, you can't that Kansas is going quietly.....at least, not anymore. As Kansas provides quite a bit of hunting grounds and plenty of gun advocates, the lawmakers have done what's needed for the people.

HB2199 is going to stir up a lot of controversy and will make way for more states to follow in their footsteps. In short the bill says that any federal government law that would inhibit the Second Amendment WILL NOT be enforceable in Kansas.

How did this pass? With a whopping 50 count difference! That's right, the last count was 94-29! I would say that's a small win for the larger battle!

But, they didn't stop there. The legislature also included specifications that, in fact, could create jobs in the state. As the economy is what it is, this will be a great benefit in the eyes of many unemployed citizens.

According to Rep. Ken Corbet, Topeka representative, having a shield that protects the basic rights of Kansans is what's important.

To read more information on this and find out how to take action in support of this action, visit here.


Thursday, March 14, 2013

Texas is Taking Control

The state of Texas is rearing it's head against the Obama legislation and the attempt at destroying our Second Amendment rights. In fact, it's manipulating the new laws on many levels. Granted some of the measures will be hard pressed it put into action, their point is being made pretty clear.

Texas is a sovereign state and they're not going to let anyone tell them differently!

On Wednesday, lawmakers convened to discuss alternative options to overthrow the federal control should they get their efforts passed. One of the major discussions included was the ability to prosecute ANY law enforcement personnel that tried to persecute someone according to the federal laws. That would be an interesting concept, don't you think?

Another measure that will be taken into consideration is the legislation that originally failed in 2011. What was it? To allow registered and licensed concealed carry options on campus. The House Committee on Homeland Security and Public Safety is going to debate this because all of the recent shootings on campus. Whereas those against the measure believe that it will add more violence to the schools, the theory of it preventing further mass shootings, does have it's validity.

 For more information on the criminalization of federal laws-- Click Here

Information regarding the Committee is located here.

Wednesday, March 13, 2013

Mark Kelly, Another Liberal Space Case

So Mark Kelly walks into a gun shop. Sounds like the start of a joke right? Not quite. In fact the husband of former congresswoman Gabby Gifford's did just that and purchased an AR-15 in a sad attempt to show Americans how easy it is to purchase what he calls an "assault weapon."

This just goes to show how desperate he and his foundation are for publicity. Any American with half a brain can see right through his message. All his efforts did was prove that a law abiding citizen is capable of passing the NICS background check and allowed to purchase a legal semi-automatic rifle.

If Mr. Kelly wanted to prove that our background checks were flawed he should have tried something a little less, well ignorant. Had he went in with a convicted felon and said individual was allowed to purchase a firearm I may be concerned. But he couldn't do that because that individual would have left empty handed.

No matter what Mark Kelly tries. No matter what stunt he pulls off next. The fact still remains that criminals are capable of acquiring whatever firearm they want on the black market. No matter how many unenforceable laws he tries to push, he will only be making it more difficult for the law abiding citizens to acquire firearms legally.

In the words of St. George Tucker, "The right of self defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine the right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever...the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction."

It's time these crazy liberals start reading up on what our founders truly meant when they drafted the US Constitution.

Only YOU Can Truly Protect YOU!

The leftist media would like American's to believe that citizens are dumping their guns in droves. Even going as far as to claim that America is absolutely peaceful and their is no need for an armed society. They think that the police departments have crime under control and when threatened all you need to do is dial 911 and everything will be ok. Well I have a problem with their ill informed attempts at brainwashing my country. Relying solely on 911 would result in countless rapes, assaults, and murders. After all, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

What about rural areas that are often left unpatrolled or semi-covered by an inadequate sheriff's department. What happens when someone is trying to break into your house at 2:30 AM and the nearest deputy is only 30 miles across the county? Do you hope your locks hold out until he/she can get there? What happens if the perpetrator gains access to your home? Will your closet door be strong enough to stop them?

The utter ignorance that the mainstream media fills the uninformed minds of America with is the biggest disservice this country has ever seen. It plagues elections, decides law, and forms misguided opinions. If you are smart and if you want to ensure the safety of yourself and your family you will not fall for their false security claims. When it matters, when things really get hairy, the only person you can rely on protecting you is you. Believe it or not, it's not just gun hugging looneys buying up guns. Mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, all across this country are choosing to excercise their GOD GIVEN right to self defense. I advise you do the same.

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

Background Check Proposal Stalls in Washington House

It appears the Washington state House is struggling to push their proposal to expand background checks to private sales. On Monday they were forced to delay deliberations until at least today after they fell just a handful of votes short that would have ensured its passage.

The disruption comes despite a strong lobbying effort which included a call from Gabrielle Giffords, the former US Congresswoman that suffered a gunshot wound to the head during a shooting rampage in 2011.

Rep. Maureen Walsh, a Republican from Walla Walla who initially supported the measure withdrew her support for the bill, later stating that she acted in a reactionary way, and now doesn't feel that it's passage would help stop gun violence. This despite receiving a call from Giffords telling her to "be strong" and "be courageous."

The Democrats are finding it difficult to attain the support of Republicans in regards to this measure and I believe that Rep. Walsh hit the nail on the head. I have expressed mixed opinions on the matter, but when push comes to shove the question really is a matter of what will this do to prevent future violence committed at the hands of someone using a gun. As always, a criminal will gain access to firearms if they are dead set on it. No law will stop them.

The Democrats are now looking for ways to rework the bill to land the support of enough Republicans to get the measure passed.

Monday, March 11, 2013

If They Can Play Politics, So Can We....

As time continues and the debate heats up, the Democrats are starting to get shook up. In previous articles, we had discussed the play on words people are using in order to get what they want. Well, now the constituents are making their own plays.

The biggest question Democrats must ask themselves: To be elected or not to be elected.

Max Baucus, current U.S. Senator knows this all too well. In fact, it wasn't long ago that he faced the same choice and almost ended his career with his decision. According to the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Montana "boasts more hunters per capita than any other state in the nation."

It's for this reason that even Republican's are saying it would be a monumental mistake on Baucus' part to support any of these gun control restrictions. In fact, all it would take is one time and running opponents would have the ammo needed to knock Baucus or any of the others from the West and South, right out of their seats.

That could mean a dramatic turn of events during next years election. Which also means, that for once Congress may actually pay attention to the little people.

Read More on This Discussion Here

Congress Aims to Raise Taxes on Guns

Congress is pushing to raise taxes on firearm purchases in six states, including California, to provide more funds to gun violence programs, according to the Los Angeles Times.

The 10 percent tax increase will pay for firearm safety campaigns, anti-violence programs and gun buybacks. The raised taxes could produce tens of millions of dollars in revenue.

The tax hike would include the sale of handguns and ammunition.

Democratic Assemblyman Roger Dickinson proposed a nickel tax added to every bullet sold in California. The money generated from this tax would pay for the treatment of children with mental illnesses.

Congress outlined the proposals after anti-smoking campaigns and health care programs that were initiated by federal, state and local governments.

The debate about raising taxes on firearms was reignited after the elementary school shootings in Newtown, Conn.

The other states that may be imposing raised taxes on guns and bullets include Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Jersey and Washington state.

Click Here to go to the article.

Maine Town to Take Symbolic Vote on Mandatory Gun Ownership

By Sarah Mahoney

DURHAM, Maine (Reuters) - Residents of a Maine town are expected to vote on Monday on whether each household should be required to own a firearm, a decision that has thrust the tiny town of Byron into the heated national debate on gun control.

The vote is scheduled to take place on Monday evening in a potentially rancorous annual town meeting for the rural western Maine town's 140 residents, and will be largely symbolic.

The town's head selectman says the vast majority of households in Byron already have at least one gun, and a requirement to possess guns and ammunition would be unenforceable because Maine law bars municipalities from legislating on firearms.

"It was never my intention to force anyone to own a gun who doesn't want to. My purpose was to make a statement in support of the Second Amendment (to the U.S. Constitution)," said head selectman Anne Simmons-Edmund, who proposed the ordinance and said it would be put for a vote on Monday.

Click Here to read the whole article.

Thursday, March 7, 2013

The Issue is Not a Coat of Paint

What is the number one rule of gun ownership? When not in use, keep them locked up, away from ammunition. Why do I bring this up, because I just read an article from another gun owner who happens to be a toymaker. He explains that in his industry toy companies are heavily regulated when it comes to fake guns. They are required by law to use "blaze orange" barrel plugs or distinctive markings so they are not mistaken for real firearms. He goes on to talk about pink firearms, and how he is appalled that firearms manufacturers are not held to the same standard as toymakers in regards to appearances. In his opinion it is wrong that toy guns can't look like real guns, but real guns can look like toy guns. Citing an example in which a 3-year old boy was killed when he and his sister were playing with a handgun that was kept in the house by his mother. In that case the children thought it was a toy.

Although the author poses some good points I disagree with him completely. The issue is not the appearance of the gun, instead a lack of responsible gun ownership. I have two small children, and in my state I am required to have two locks to access my weapons, one being the front door, and two my safe. If I leave a firearm accessible to my children and god forbid something happens, I will pay the consequences judicially as well as personally. If I am not carrying my weapon on me, then it goes in the safe. It is simply the responsible thing to do.

A child should never have the opportunity to confuse a real firearm for a fake one. Pink, purple, or black they need to be locked up or in the case of concealed carry permit holders, on your person at all times. If you think your safe takes to much time to access, purchase a biometric safe. People who cannot respect the importance of responsible gun ownership, should not own firearms, period, and those that are negligent, should be punished, to the full extent of the law.

Wednesday, March 6, 2013

The Internet Provides More than They May Be Able to Handle...

Over the past few days, I have been doing some thinking in regards to all the discussions around the governments new stance on guns. Their restrictions anyways. I have one question to ask......

Are they going to add monitoring the internet to their job roles?

They want to add more laws when they can't enforce old ones because they don't have all the manpower, so are they willing to add more work to their jobs? Let's say that the get this new law passed and all of a sudden our guns are altered and taken off the shelves.

What will stop the criminal from altering the weapons they can legally own? Of course, it's not that easy to do......but when is a criminals job ever easy? When I was in high school, I participated in Debate and Forensics. One subject that year was about Weapons of Mass Destruction. You know what we did?

Well, we researched. Granted we weren't criminals and we weren't looking to harm anyone, but do you know how easy it was for us to get instructions on how to make a bomb?? If a high school student can do it, then it doesn't take a genius to find the sites.

Now that you have thought about that, I bet you can guess what I did....If you think I looked online to see how many sites talked about converting guns, you are right. In about 5 minutes with a number of different keystrokes and keywords, I stumbled across over 100 results. Obviously, it doesn't take a rocket scientist.

If these new laws go through, all it means is more criminals are going to visit the vast world of the world wide web and they are just going to find different ways to convert weapons they already own. After all, they figured out ways to make homemade silencers among other things.

Moral of the story: Big Brother can't do their jobs correctly now, how can they add responsibilities and expect to do their job any better?

Monday, March 4, 2013

Are We Going To Far?

According to the Indiana News today, a teacher is being investigated for a....well, complicated message. If you listen to parents that used to be students, it was normal for this teacher to act like this. The message read:

1. You are idiots!!!!!!!!
2. The guns are loaded!!!
3. Care to try me ?????????


Now, if we hadn't had all these random shootings, would this message be alarming? What did the teacher really mean? When I was in school, this message would have simply meant that we were going to be piled with homework and we had to make up for whatever we did wrong.

Apparently now, it means that he is having a meltdown and might shoot up the school that he has worked diligently at for 28 years.

Although they do not believe so, the cops are investigating this act to see if there was an alternative message within those words. But, when does this stop? When do we stop looking over our shoulder or trying to interpret every little thing that gets said??

Honestly, if a teacher was going to open fire on a classroom, the last thing they would do is publicize the act. It's like someone with severe depression and suicide issues, the ones that are in real trouble are the quiet ones. Sure they may leave some letter or write in a diary to explain it all, but they aren't going to tell someone beforehand. That would defeat the purpose.

Of course, this isn't to say it never happens or to condone any such act.....but it is to note, that a person's personality should be taken into account... Whether or not the person has made claims like that in the past with a separate meaning....

Anything is possible, but acting like every individual is the enemy doesn't help, it just creates a giant snowball of panic...

Saturday, March 2, 2013

Businesses Are Playing Roulette With Democrats

Things just get more and more interesting. Now it's not just the people that are disagreeing with these new 'bills' but businesses are getting more involved as well. One specific state of concern is Colorado. Legislature has been considering the new laws regarding excess rounds and such, but one company has put a halt on the direct discussion.

An ex-Marine started this company, by the name of Magpul, that produces the magazines and weaponry the government is about to ban. Of course, the company is not happy with it, as it will effect their sales. So, they have told the government that if they do in fact make this ban, Magpul will move the company out of state. Normally, you could ask why this would bother the lawmakers. After all, it's just one company and there are still others available.

If Magpul were to move, it would put around 400 and possibly more people out of work. This even includes subcontractors...That's quite a bit of jobs, especially when things like Unemployment Benefits are possibly being cut.

What makes it even more scary, is that other states have told the company that they would be happy to have them along for the ride. After all, who wouldn't want a company that can project a net of $85 million!!

In response to this ultimatum, Democrats have come back and told the company they can still produce the larger magazines, BUT they can only be sold out-of-state, to the military or to the officers.

Almost making them sound like hypocrites. Magpul has released that sometimes their larger rounds wind up all the way in California, which have limits of 10 instead of 15. SO, if they are still being made, produced and sent elsewhere then why wouldn't they just make their way back to Colorado? Or you can think of it this way: it's OKAY for another state to have the larger rounds that everyone is afraid of, but not OKAY for Colorado? Does that even make sense? In fact, I'm sure other Democrats in separate states might be a little taken aback by the fact that Colorado Democrats hold themselves higher than others.

What I can say is that if ONE company can make lawmakers jump through hoops, then why don't all the businesses do the same? I wouldn't mind watching more government squirm...

Friday, March 1, 2013

Mr. Biden Didn't Get It Completely Wrong This Time...

"They're looking to build roadblocks," Biden said. "They say it isn't about guns - they're just wrong, it is about guns."

So, this is Biden's new approach to getting people to change their minds. Does he not realize, that although the words have changed, it's still the same thing? I bet what else he doesn't realize, is with that statement, he as fed opportunity to those of us against gun control laws.

How?

With the same thing that the house of Republicans are now asking questions about. The previous laws on guns. We did discuss this earlier this week, but I think it is a subject that really needs looking at. And with the House on board and asking questions now, it's even more important.

A total of 23 Representatives sent a letter to the President and the Attorney General requesting that they release about 11 years of data regarding the prosecution of firearm crimes. Some of the information they attained, was pretty astounding.

In fact, in 2010 there were only 62 prosecutions that came from around 4,700 applications sent off for investigation. Now, how many actually believe that ONLY 62 actually needed prosecuting out of the much larger number? Yeah, as I tell my kids: 2+2 is not equaling 4 there.

Even the letter written and signed by the house brings up the point that it is impudent to start new laws when the old ones are being prosecuted. It means that many of the guns out there today are held by criminals and possibly even the mentally unstable because we are letting people get away with whatever they want. If you want a law to be effective then you actually have to get up and do something about it, not just weigh society down with yet another law that the officials are going to continue to ignore.

Well, Mr. Biden I want to thank you for bringing up an excellent point in our debate. You are partially right, it is about guns.....the prosecution of guns that is! Get the Attorney General to do his job and I bet the gun violence prevention will rise on it's own without sacrificing our Second Amendment Rights! :)

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Gun Control is Beyond Legislation

I may have been away from the computer for awhile, but I wasn't away from the news and what's going on. I have noticed one thing for sure, this debate is no longer just about legislation. It has entered the wide world of political interpretation. What is this, you ask? It's where politicians mince words in order to achieve greater results. How can we tell this?

Well, because the advocates for the legislation are not calling it 'gun control'. According to Mark Glaze (Director of Mayors Against Illegal Guns) "We find that it's one of those terms that has some baggage. We talk about gun violence prevention, because that's what it is." While he may be right about the 'baggage,' how can he compare gun violence prevention to this legislation?

If it was about the prevention of violence with guns, they wouldn't pass guns out to illegals in an attempt to find gun smuggling rings. If it were about prevention, why would they stop with just certain types of guns? Why not go further? I don't think they have quite thought that far ahead. If they did, they might realize that the terms 'gun violence prevention' carries it's own baggage and allows for wide interpretation.

If they get this legislation through the door and passed, then what will stop them from passing 'gun violence prevention' laws again? Who's to say that next they will determine regular pistols to be needing 'violence prevention' laws?

At least with the NRA and the groups like us, our words aren't open to interpretation. If you ask someone like me what I think about these 'gun violence prevention' measures, I'm going to tell you it is simply an imposition on our rights.

I'm going to say that no matter how you word it, it will still be a control issue because you are taking away from the constitution, the very WORDS we built our foundation on.

In my opinion, it's time for the legislators to ignore the words that will get you re-elected and start taking your job into consideration. It is your job to protect our Constitution, not destroy it.

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

How Necessary Are New Laws Compared to the Old?

What if, instead of imposing more control, we actually enforced the laws already in place? This concept along with the actual numbers haven't been touched much in this debate. Yes, we have had some pretty shocking tragedies, that no one thought would ever occur. But, is that really a good reason to start a panic?

According to a study done by Syracruse University, the gun crime prosecution rate was down 40% in 2011 compared to their record high point in 2004. Why are so many crimes going unpunished? First, the Attorney General's office has limited resources. Secondly because the crimes wouldn't hold a jury's attention.

Ok, here are my problems with those statements. 1. If the resources are limited, then why don't they create jobs and increase their resources? 2. Who cares if it wouldn't hold a jury's attention?!? They have come up with different ways to prosecute crimes that aren't jury 'worthy'.

I know, there are other 'government issues' to be concerned with. But if around 6 million people applied for guns and only 2% of those were denied??? Well, you do the math......

I think of it this way. If I got had 2 puppies and both were needing to be potty trained, what would happen if I only took one puppy outside? Of course the answer is simple there, only one puppy would get potty trained and the other would only know how to continue exhibiting the bad behavior.

As you can see, the connection here is pretty clear. If we only show some of the criminals that there is punishment for committing an illegal act, then only some of them are going to listen. Adding another policy is going to be useless unless we enforce the laws we have already enacted in order to keep guns out of the wrong hands.

For more information on this perspective and more interesting numbers please view Fox News.

Senate Panel Likely to Write Gun Bills Next Week

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate Judiciary Committee seems all but certain to start voting on an assault weapons ban and other gun curbs next week, Congress' first roll calls in response to the Newtown, Conn., slayings of 26 students and staff at an elementary school in December.

The Democratic-written bills largely follow President Barack Obama's proposals for limiting gun violence, which have been opposed by the National Rifle Association and generated little support from congressional Republicans.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., the committee chairman, said Monday that the panel would consider:

—A bill by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., banning assault weapons and ammunition magazines holding more than 10 rounds;

—A Leahy measure toughening federal penalties for illegal trafficking of guns, including up to 30-year sentences for people buying firearms they know will be used in crimes;

—A measure by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., increasing federal grants for school safety measures such as installing surveillance equipment.

Click Here to read entire article.

Monday, February 25, 2013

Why Do They Attack the Law Abiding Citizens?

Peace, love, and happiness! This is what libs think their gun laws will bring to America. Completely out of touch, and ignorant to the fact that this will never happen, anywhere in the world. Sure there are times of peace, but in the end there are always sadistic people who bring that peace to an end. On the streets of America gangs and criminals run rampant. They target innocent people, they assault, rape, and murder with no regard for human life. When caught, if caught, the laws that are supposed to protect are disregarded. Max sentences are under utilized and convicted criminals serve but a fraction of their time then are released to commit their crimes again.

For weeks now, we have looked at ways to make it tougher for law abiding citizens to obtain and own firearms for the protection of themselves and their families. Politicians at the local, state, and federal level have introduced bills banning select firearms and magazines. Media outlets have villified concealed weapons permit holders as incompetent, gun hugging, vigilantes. They have twisted statistics, told outright lies, and all in the name of restricting access to firearms while telling the American people they support the Second Amendment.

Stop attacking law abiding citizens! Stop punishing those that follow your laws, and start taking action against those that do not. Our government clearly cannot control the violence problem that plagues our nation, and it is not because of poor gun laws. It is because of poor enforcement and an utter inability to admit responsibility. American citizens, deserve to be safe in their homes and in public. We have an inalienable right to keep and bear arms. No branch of government has a right to disregard the US Constitution or the Bill of Rights. Liberal, Republican, green, purple, it doesn't matter. Go after those responsible for the murders of our loved ones and stop trying to use fear tactics to scare people into supporting your insane ideas.

The Obama Administration does not support the Second Amendment despite the blatant lies they say. Neither does the majority of democratically elected politicians. The only thing they support is complete control of our lives.

It is imperative that everyone who believes in the Second Amendment, do whatever they can to defend it. The dems are trying to muscle their legislation through Congress. We need to fight back. Love them or hate them, the NRA is the largest weapon we have on our side. They have the power to keep this unconstitutional attack at bay. If you aren't already a member, you can't afford to wait any longer. Show our politicians that you will not sit down and let this happen. Stand up and fight for your rights. Demand nothing less.

NRA Uses Justice Memo to Accuse Obama on Guns

The National Rifle Association is using a Justice Department memo it obtained to argue in ads that the Obama administration believes its gun control plans won't work unless the government seizes firearms and requires national gun registration — ideas the White House has not proposed and does not support.

The NRA's assertion and its obtaining of the memo in the first place underscore the no-holds-barred battle under way as Washington's fight over gun restrictions heats up.

The memo, under the name of one of the Justice Department's leading crime researchers, critiques the effectiveness of gun control proposals, including some of President Barack Obama's. A Justice Department official called the memo an unfinished review of gun violence research and said it does not represent administration policy.

The memo says requiring background checks for more gun purchases could help, but also could lead to more illicit weapons sales. It says banning assault weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines produced in the future but exempting those already owned by the public, as Obama has proposed, would have limited impact because people now own so many of those items.

Click Here to read the whole article.

Sunday, February 24, 2013

One Student Takes On The Police....

Okay now, I am not saying anything against the law enforcement with this video. I think they are absolutely wonderful and serve many purposes. This video is merely interesting in nature and it does make several good points. The intent of this video is up to the viewer's individual discretion, so take from it what you will...

Many forms of this video can be found on YouTube.

Pictures You May Enjoy! :)

Hey guys!! Sorry I have been absent the last week or so! It has been a tantalizing week of moving and for a few days we didn't have internet. Then when we did, I didn't seem to have time to get online between getting everything else done! I'm sure that you guys can relate to that. :)

But, during my time off, there have been some pictures I came across that I am sure you guys will enjoy. I was sent these via Facebook, so I'm sure with a simple search you can find more of them!!



Friday, February 22, 2013

White House Supports Biden's Shotgun Comments

Yesterday I wrote an article covering the comments made by Vice President Joe Biden during an interview with Parent's Magazine. What I didn't cover was the White House's support of Biden's comments. The White House press secretary Joe Carney told the press that Biden's comments were in line with their position on the Second Amendment and that the President fully agreed with the Vice President. In a complete dodge, Carney addressed the fact that Obama too felt American's wanting to excercise their Second Amendment right to protect their home do not need a military style rifle to do so, "a shotgun would be a logical choice."

What Carney did not address was the matter of irresponsibly firing a double barrel shotgun in the air, and the legality of such an action. This administration has proven time and time again just how out of touch they are with the American people, this case is no different.

I find it funny that the people making these "decisions" regarding what is best for us citizens are protected daily by secret service or body guards often times armed with the very weapons they are chastising. When they are ready and willing to provide armed security for every man woman and child in this country, then and only then can they pretend that we as a people are safe from violence.

Thursday, February 21, 2013

Joe Biden: The Shotgun Salesman

In a classic example of proving just how out of touch Vice President Joe Biden is with reality, during a interview with Parent's magazine, he told mothers to buy a shotgun. Several times actually.

"If you want to protect yourself, get a double-barrel shotgun," he said during the interview. He then went on to say that AR style rifles are not good home defense weapons as they are "harder to aim, harder to use, and you don't need 30 rounds to protect yourself. Buy a shotgun. buy a shotgun."

The interview became even more ignorant when he advised people to load the double barrel shotgun if there is ever an issue, go outside, aim it in the air and fire two blasts. He then guranteed that anyone trying to get in wouldn't after hearing that.

So lets get this straight, a man, whose family is protected by round the clock secret service agents, is advising us normal citizens, to irresponsibly fire shotguns into the air? Mind you it is illegal to discharge a firearm within so many feet of a dwelling all across the country. I think the safer alternative, would be to attempt to retreat, and when all else fails, identify your target and if in fear of your life take action.

Who is Biden to tell us how many rounds we need to protect ourselves or our families in our homes? Who is he to tell us that we don't need a particular firearm, a shotgun will do? It's a guarantee that Joe Biden will never have to use a firearm in his lifetime to defend himself, because the taxpayers are paying to make sure other people have to do that for him. I would rather have more than enough ammunition to stop a threat then be dead or lose a child or my wife because our Vice President thinks I'm too ignorant to know what is good for me.

This man has no sense of responsible gun ownership, gun usage, or how to use a firearm for self defense. He clearly has no clue how things are in the "real" world and has no business heading any gun control talks anywhere.

Sunday, February 17, 2013

Why Additional Gun Restriction is Wrong


Written by Christopher L.

Basically speaking, I support the second amendment, albeit with one or two caveats. I do not support the second amendment because I am a violent individual who is going to go out and slaughter innocent civilians, nor do I support it because I am some backwoods hick that “don’t want no government takin’ my boomstick away.” I am a freshman in high school, and my family does not own a single firearm, much to my chagrin. I support the second amendment because I believe that, with few exceptions, it keeps the general population safe.

Nobody in their right mind is going to break into a house if they have any reason to believe that the house has one or more firearms within its walls (but if you’re breaking into a house anyway, I doubt you’re in your right mind). However, if guns are banned, feel free to pillage and plunder whoever’s house you choose! Not like they can shoot you! And in an area where huge numbers of people carry guns, open or concealed, nobody is going to try anything violent, lest they get a bullet or bullets in one or many of their vital organs. Were guns banned altogether, of course the number of shootings would decrease sharply, but the amount of violent crime overall would increase drastically (just look at Britain).

What really needs to happen is to have much stricter rules on who can own certain types of guns, and progressively more intensive tests and background checks as the potential danger of the gun increases, e.g. a more intense, restrictive test for an M4 assault rifle than for a Glock 17.

Saturday, February 16, 2013

Bangor Daily News Vs Gun Owners

In a move that infuriated Mainers across the state, myself included, the Bangor Daily News issued a Freedom of Information Act request to all the state's police departments requesting the names, addresses and dates of birth of all concealed carry permit holders. The newspaper claimed they wanted the information strictly for research purposes and that no personal identifiable information would ever be published. Unfortunately after what occured in New York state a few weeks ago, when hundreds of names and addresses of concealed carry permit holders were published, the public is skeptical and rightfully so.

Why are permit holders so against releasing their information to the public? Well for one, it's called a concealed carry permit for a reason. If we wanted everyone to know we were carrying a firearm, we would simply open carry which is legal in the state of Maine. Second, criminals are smarter than you think. If this information were ever released to the public, it provides a list of targets. Essentially telling them that there are firearms in this home at this address, all you have to do is wait until nobody is home and you found yourself a score. Then that leaves the worst case scenario. What if a criminal thinks nobody is home, but a wife or child is home alone when they decide to strike? Such irresponsibility would put lives at risk, and simply something that we as LEGAL gun owners do not want to risk.

Maine Governor Paul Lepage was angered by the request made by BDN. On Twitter he posted "If newspapers want to know who has a concealed weapons permits, they should know I do."

Existing law requires that this type of information be released upon request. However in light of the situation, Governor Lepage has moved to block data on concealed weapons permits by introducing an emergency bill. The Bangor Daily News withdrew their request, but the Governor said that other groups have submitted similar requests for the information, one of which was submitted anonymously.

The backlash following the BDN request has some gun control advocates worried that it may errode support for some gun control measures. They fear that it will distract people from what they call a "meaningful debate about legislation we believe will save lives." Of course the validity that any new legislation will save any additional lives can be argued. The timing of this request, in the heat of a national attack on gun rights was suspect. Gun rights activists fight tirelessly to prevent any infringement on our Second Amendment rights. We will not sit back and just throw our hands in the air. If anyone expects any less than a full blown defense then they are underestimating us. Try infringing on the First Amendment and see how the media reacts.

Wednesday, February 13, 2013

Craigslist: Anti-Second Amendment? Not Quite.


We all know Craigslist doesn't allow ads for firearms sales. However I just encountered something I found very interesting. Several weeks ago I posted an ad under 'Gigs' looking for like minded supporters of our Second Amendment rights to come on board as contributors of the Second Amendment Journal. The ad was in no way harassing or threatening in any way. There was nothing illegal about the ad, I didn't even publish a link to the site. Tonight I was shocked when I received an email from Craigslist informing me that my ad was flagged and removed for violating the terms of service. As I sat scratching my head, I went back to read the ad. I have posted the exact text below:

"I run a pro-second amendment blog called the Second Amendment Journal. Currently it is mainly an opinion blog from my perspective and I try to keep up with a few posts a week. I am looking for like minded supporters of our right to keep and bear arms to contribute to the blog through opinion articles, news reports, and even gun reviews, or firearms tips. Ideally I would like someone who would write at a minimum two posts per week. Right now the blog doesn't generate any revenue so the gig would be simply on a volunteer basis. You will receive credit on all your posts. In the future if the blog begins to generate advertisement revenue and NRA referrals I would be willing to share some of the revenue with my contributors. If you are interested or would like to take a look at the blog, shoot me an email and I will get back to you as soon as possible."

With the ad fresh in my mind I proceeded to check out Craigslist's Terms of Use. Section 4A covers postings. It states that postings are intended as a local service and users are allowed to post only in their geographical area. It also goes on to state that similar content cannot be posted in multiple categories. Considering I had one ad posted in writing gigs, I didn't violate that term.

Prior to section 4 under section 3A Craigslist covers content. This is where we get into the nitty gritty of what really isn't allowed on the site. To make things simple, this is exactly what the site states:

"Content prohibited from craigslist includes but is not limited to: (1) illegal content; (2) content in facilitation of the creation, advertising, distribution, provision or receipt of illegal goods or services; (3) offensive content (including, without limitation, defamatory, threatening, hateful or pornographic content); (4) content that discloses another's personal, confidential or proprietary information; (5) false or fraudulent content (including but not limited to false, fraudulent or misleading responses to user ads transmitted via craigslist); (6) malicious content (including, without limitation, malware or spyware); (7) content that offers, promotes, advertises, or provides links to posting or auto-posting products or services, account creation or auto-creation products or services, flagging or auto-flagging products or services, bulk telephone numbers, or any other product or service that if utilized with respect to craigslist would violate these TOU or CL's other legal rights; and (8) content that offers, promotes, advertises or provides links to unsolicited products or services. Other content prohibitions are set forth in guidelines for particular categories or services on craigslist and all such prohibitions are expressly incorporated into these TOU as stated in section 1 above."

None of which pertained to my ad. So after my initial investigation I still had no understanding of why my post was removed for a legitimate writing gig. Then I read this and realized what was going on:

A user shall not "flag" (or otherwise seek removal of) content on craigslist without a personal, good-faith belief that the content violates the TOU. A user may flag content only on his/her own behalf. A user must not permit, enable, induce or encourage others to flag content for them. A user must not flag content for others."

There you have it. Craigslist did not flag my post themselves, but instead a Craigslist user who clearly is anti-gun did. In an attempt to silence me and others from speaking out against gun control they flagged my post, thus removing it from the site. It shouldn't surprise me as I have received hate emails from similar individuals in response to the ad.

Since I cannot find a single reason why my ad was removed from the site I will be contacting Craigslist directly regarding the matter. I'm interested to see what their response will be, if any. If Craigslist has any sense of constitutionality, they will allow my ad to return to the site and punish the user who wrongly flagged my ad. My guess is nothing will come about it, but I will not let censorship stop me from my mission of protecting our inalienable right to keep and bear arms. I'll keep you posted.

Where Can I Find .223 and 5.56 Ammo Online?

It's no secret that ammunition is in short supply as of late. Obama's demands for stricter gun control, and liberal assaults on AR-15s and other guns have sent the American people into a frenzy to stock up fast before it is too late.

Two of the most common ammunition types often found in the AR-15 and other rifles, .223 and 5.56 Nato have been next to impossible to get your hands on. One of the Second Amendment Journal's suppliers however is constantly adding stock to their website online, but it goes quick.

If you are looking for .223 or 5.56 ammunition online, then you really should check them out. You may be surprised to find it in stock and ready to ship. I have provided a direct link to their site below. Good luck.

America Won't Lay Down Guns, Ammo Will Fall Victim

Let's face it, even as I get wound up when the thought of gun control comes up, Barack Obama will never have the support to pass the sweeping gun control laws that he claims will protect our citizens. What I mean by that is simple. This government will not be able to come after our guns. Confiscation will never take place so long as I am alive, or the millions of lawful gun owners for that matter.

So how after making all these promises to the minority of Americans that new measures will be taken to curb what Obama calls "gun violence," will he satisfy his promises? The concept is simple really. When the assault weapons ban is shot down and other legislation that attacks guns themselves proves impossible to pass the Obama Administration and his congressional cohorts will work tirelessly to regulate and tax ammunition and accessories.

Clearly a slippery slope in regards to infringing on our lawful right to keep and bear arms, but not quite unconstitutional, and the President knows it. The whole show the democrats are putting on right now is merely a ruse to make people think they are working on a solution. When people stop paying attention and tempers cool, the new ammunition regulations and taxes will slip in under the radar, and as always the GOP will cave to the democrats to prove bipartisanship and keep their seats.

As far as I am concerned, regulating the very thing needed to make a firearm function is nothing less than infringing on our rights to keep and bear arms. What good is a hollow 4-10 pounds of steel, aside from a club? Teetering on the constitutional line is extremely dangerous and shows how close our nation is to falling over a cliff we can never recover from. The 2014 mid-term elections will be a defining moment in protecting the second amendment. If the democrats win the majority in both the house and senate, they have proven they will stop at nothing to disarm our citizens. We have a little under two years to ensure that does not happen. Joining the NRA and supporting their work will help to ensure that the democrats don't destroy this great nation. Aside from that, we can only hope that Obama isn't given the opportunity before the end of his term to nominate a supreme court justice. We can not afford to have a gun hating elitist deciding the constitutionality of bearing arms.

Monday, February 11, 2013

Another Rant: Smoke and Mirrors

Let's stop and reflect on what is going on, politically, as it pertains to the Second Amendment. Lawmakers at the state and federal level are pushing relentlessly to get new, restrictive gun control measures passed that they say will help protect the American people. Gabrielle Giffords, a former congresswoman and victim of gun violence herself, has alongside her husband Mark Kelly created an anti-gun lobby to fight the likes of the NRA and GOA. Tragedies are being used as political ammunition to support baseless lies. If we want to sum it all up without listing everything, the American people are being duped, plain and simple.

Take Gabby Giffords for example. As she pushes congress to act on new gun legislation she is gaining support through pity. If she can't see it, I can. People who pity her for the devastating injuries she sustained at the hands of a lone gunman, back her agenda because they feel sorry for her. What does an assault weapons ban have to do with her shooting? She was shot with a Glock 9mm. What does an assault weapons ban have to do with Sandy Hook? That shooter used multiple hand guns. Better yet, what would background checks on all gun sales done to stop Sandy Hook. The shooter was denied purchase of an assault rifle prior to the shooting. He was forced to steal his mother's gun, only after murdering her in cold blood.

Many Americans are under the impression that violence committed by a person with a gun, yes I said it, is out of control since Sandy Hook. Really the media giants who support the democratically insane are simply covering more shootings then ever before to make it appear like America is sliding downhill. Ask yourself though, in the last 3 months, heck in the last year, how many news reports have you seen about a law abiding citizen preventing a crime with the use of a firearm? Not nearly as many right? When in actuality the number is extremely high. However the media won't cover those stories because they do not support their agenda.

This whole ruse by Congress and the media is nothing but a bunch of smoke and mirrors. As politicians waste their time arguing and debating a mute issue, one that can be shown does not reduce gun violence and in fact in some countries has resulted in more gun violence, our nation's debt issues continue to go undiscussed. If our government cannot get their fiscal responsibilities under control, what right do they have telling us how to live our lives.

Even Bruce Willis Can See the Problems With the Proposals



In case you aren’t aware, this quote came from the Die Hard star, Bruce Willis. I think he captured it perfectly. He makes a valid point that these incidences were not committed by a weapon, but in fact by people who were missing a few marbles.

How do we take care of this problem? NOT by stepping on our rights, that’s for sure. We have given much thought to people that aren’t in the right frame of mind, and that’s when they say we should do background checks to make sure that the buyer is legit. Now, let’s think of the issues with that answer…

1. How many people with a faulty background are going to get their guns from stores?
      2. How exactly does this stop the sale of guns on the street?
      3. What about a ‘normal’ person that already owns guns and has a sudden ‘mental breakdown’?

Of course, 1 & 2 have already been discussed, but has anyone thought about #3? Even if the renovation of weapons goes into effect, the background checks and all the extra security, what is stopping them? Everybody has issues and everyone has different methods to deal with them. Some people will make their issues known to those around them, but some will go quietly about sinking deeper into the dark abyss.

When they break, who’s going to know? How are ANY of these ‘new’ precautions going to stop them from breaking down, grabbing from their collections and doing as they please with it? That’s right, there will be no one. There is always going to be psychopaths, sociopaths and people with mental insecurities that will get through the system. Isn’t that what they have considered the perpetrators in these events anyways? People with mental issues or being a sociopath?

State Lawmakers Rush to Draft Gun Bills in Response to Shootings

Democratic lawmakers across the country are proposing gun-control bills in the wake of recent mass-shootings, including at least one far-reaching state measure that might interfere with federal laws.

At least seven states have proposed such legislation. Among the most recent proposals are ones requiring gun owners or makers to buy liability insurance to cover damages for injuries caused by their weapons.

Two California Democrats proposed a bill last week in the state Assembly that encourages owners to attend gun-safety classes and lock up their weapons to get insurance discounts.

Assembly member Philip Ting, of San Francisco, told a local TV station the proposal was comparable to mandatory auto insurance for motorists.

Last week, Democrats in the Colorado House and Senate proposed a slate of gun-control bills including one to make manufacturers and sellers of assault-style weapons legally liable for the damage caused by their firearms.

Click Here to read the whole article.

Saturday, February 9, 2013

Wyoming Lawmakers Shoot Down Guns on Campus Bill


CHEYENNE -- Emotions ran high Friday in the overflowing Senate Education Committee room when state lawmakers tabled what many were calling the most controversial bill of the 62nd Wyoming Legislature.

House Bill 105, titled the Citizens' and Students' Self-Defense Act, would have allowed anyone 21 or older with a concealed carry permit to bring a firearm into any public school, community college and the University of Wyoming.

After nearly two hours of testimony by supporters and opponents of the bill, the committee took no action -- a de facto decision to kill the bill -- after a number of education officials opposed the legislation because of safety and other concerns.

Sen. Hank Coe, R-Cody, said the bill brought up a tough issue and that all lawmakers on the committee had sterling records with the National Rifle Association. Because the lawmakers didn’t vote on the bill, it won't show up as a yes or no vote on their NRA scorecards.

As he faced the members of the Senate Education Committee during his testimony, bill sponsor Rep. Alan Jaggi, R-Lyman, said he felt like Col. George Custer, giving the bill one last stand.

An overwhelming number of high-ranking education officials around the state, some of whom testified Friday, didn't want the bill to see the Senate floor. The Legislation passed the House on Feb. 1.

Click Here to read the whole article.

More Than 100 Guns Collected at Lansing Gun Buyback


More than 110 guns have been collected at Lansing’s second gun buyback Saturday afternoon at the Tabernacle of David Church.

The gun buyback was scheduled to run until 2 p.m., and final tallies were not immediately available.

Lansing Police Public Information Officer, Robert Merritt, said the program has done well. It’s the second time in a year that the department has held such an event, with the most recent buyback being held in August of 2012.

“Our handguns (buybacks) are outnumbering our long guns, so I think it’s a real good success,” Merritt said.

Last August, 60 long guns and 40 handguns were turned in.

Those turning in weapons were paid with Meijer gift cards, thus the “Guns for Groceries” moniker the city used to promote the event. The city offered $50 gift cards for long guns, $100 for handguns and $150 for assault/military style guns. Only functional weapons were accepted.

By 1:30 p.m. Saturday, 70 handguns, 42 long guns and two assault/military style guns had been turned in.

Click Here to go to the original article.

Colorado Prepares for All-Out Gun Fight


Colorado's state legislature is the stage where one of nation's fiercest gun debates will unfold.
A state with a strong tradition of sport shooting and hunting, Colorado is also home to two of the country's deadliest mass shootings.
Recently state legislators have introduced bills on everything from universal background checks, to limiting high-capacity magazines over 10 rounds, to holding gun manufacturers and dealers liable if their products fall into dangerous hands—a bill that actually runs counter to current federal law, which protects gun makers and sellers.
"It's going to be a hard fought and nasty battle," says Tom Mauser, a gun-control activist whose son Daniel was killed at Columbine High School. "The linchpin is that Colorado's been home to two of the worst massacres and the demographics of the state are really changing."


Friday, February 8, 2013

Maine Governor Paul LePage Vows to Protect Second Amendment

AUGUSTA, Maine — Gov. Paul LePage’s remarks to a rally Friday against gun-control legislation under consideration in Congress lasted only a few seconds, but his message was crystal clear.

"While I’m your governor, they will not infringe on our rights," said LePage to approximately 150 people who gathered outside the State House despite swirling snow and single-degree temperatures. "The Second Amendment and our state constitution is very clear, and free people — law-abiding citizens — should have the ability to carry guns. That’s what keeps us safe and free."

With that, LePage descended into the crowd, where he received embraces and encouraging words.

"Wear a hat out here, Paul! We’re going to need you for a second term," yelled one person.

"Keep up the good fight; we support you!" bellowed another.

Friday’s event was held in concert with similar events planned at state capitols across the country, according to Jessica Beckwith of Lewiston, who organized the rally through social media. At issue is an increased focus on gun control since last year’s tragic massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. Among the myriad gun control bills under consideration in Congress and in many states is a controversial proposal by U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., to ban assault weapons.

Click Here to read the entire article.

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Violence Committed by a Person With a Gun

I believe the term "Gun Violence" to be ridiculous and inaccurate. A gun is simply a machine incapable of operating on it's own. The real fault lies in the individual or individuals using the firearm in an unlawful manner. We don't have a gun violence problem in this country, rather we have a violence problem. If liberals want to label it anything different then they should be calling it "violence committed by a person using a gun." There is no model of firearm to blame for any of the tragedies that have struck this nation over the years. Aside from the individuals themselves who committed these atrocities, the blame lies on existing gun laws, or rather law enforcements ineffectiveness at enforcing them, and our extremely poor mental health system.

Veterans suffering from the tragic reality of war return home from warzones across the globe, receive mediocre treatment, and are thrown out into the real world to deal with their PTSD alone. Drugs are prescribed to millions of Americans, some linked to suicides, to treat people without the care of a psychiatrist. Mental health is looked at by many as taboo and ignored, leading to violence and even mass shootings.

When will people wake up and focus their efforts on improving the real problems and stop labeling the 99.9% of gun owners who are law abiding, productive citizens as "crazies?" Yes you are the government, but believe it or not, you don't always know what is best for us. Let the gun sales following President Obama's gun control announcement do the talking. You think because background checks in January decreased by 10% it means we are starting to agree with you? Not quite, the shelves are bare. If there are no guns to buy no background checks are being done. People are turning to private sales and gun shows to get what they need. It's ironic isn't it.

Grossly Ignorant School Policies Lead to Suspensions

In an outrageous display of school policies taken way too far, a Poston Butte High School student in Florence, AZ was suspended from school for have nothing more than a picture of an AK-47 laid a top a flag set as his school issued laptop's wallpaper. There was no violent depictions of people being shot, nobody was being killed, it was simply a picture of a single gun and a flag.

The freshman student, Daniel McClaine Jr, said that a teacher spotted the picture and turned him in. The school responded initially by suspending him for three days.

ABC 15 reported that because the laptop was school property, district policy prohibits "sending or displaying offensive messages or pictures" as well as accessing, sending, creating or  forwarding pictures that are considered "harassing, threatening, or illegal."

Daniel says the picture does not harass or threaten anyone, and I for one agree with him.

When the school was contacted by ABC, school officials backed down and allowed Daniel to return to school.

This isn't the only case of insane school policies at work in our country. Students as young as 5 and 6 are being kicked out of school for making fake guns with their hands, to bringing pink bubble machines with a pistol handle to school, and even imaginary grenades. School officials nationwide, as well as the left's gun control advocates are attempting to scare our youth into submission to their will. They are effectively training them at an early age to either agree with their views or be punished. We are witnessing manipulation at it's finest and I say it needs to stop. Instead of teaching our kids that everything about guns is bad, we should be teaching them about guns in a responsible manner. Children that grow up with a respect for firearms are certainly going to become safer citizens. To keep kids away from guns all together only increases their curiosity and desire to get their hands on them, and that can lead to disaster.

Arkansas Bill Seeks to Make Gun Permit List Secret

Arkansas senators are considering a proposal that would make secret the names of about 130,000 people in the state who are permitted to carry concealed handguns.

The Senate plans to vote Wednesday on legislation that would make the list of concealed carry permit holders exempt from Arkansas' Freedom of Information Act. State law currently only allows the state to release the names and ZIP codes of permit holders.

Republican Sen. Bruce Holland of Greenwood says he proposed the change after a New York newspaper published the list of concealed carry permit holders following last year's school shooting in Connecticut. Gov. Mike Beebe and several media organizations are opposed to the bill.

The current law was the result of a 2009 compromise struck in the Legislature.

Link to Original Article - Click Here

Tuesday, February 5, 2013

Are We Just Repeating The Past?


How many of you have heard of the Brady Bill? It’s quite difficult to research, probably because it didn’t work as well as the government wanted. With this bill, sheriffs were asked to enforce background checks all over the country.

How well did that work?

Obviously, it didn’t. Some courts had decided that the Brady Bill was overstepping its boundaries. So, if this bill didn’t work out, why are we trying to do this again? It’s only causing a greater argument between the people then it’s worth.

States are even promoting State laws that will keep the federal government or federal officials from enforcing any gun regulations in the state. One of these gutsy states, is Arizona. They know that this is a long shot and that it will be difficult to uphold the state’s ruling versus federal, but they are willing to take it on. Not because they want a legal battle, but because the people of Arizona have asked for this to happen.

Within the last couple of years we have had several changes in the legal systems. How many of these laws have actually made a difference? The Feds still are against Marijuana but there are several states that now consider it legal. Either fully or for medical purposes. The Feds are not taking any action there.

So, who’s to say that the Feds won’t just give up on this as well? How many states are willing to go the same distance that Arizona is? If this is only going to cost us more time and money, what is the point?

Debate Over Gun Control is One-Sided in Idaho

BOISE, Idaho — Somewhere in America, supposedly, there is a debate about regulating guns. But it is hard to find here.

In Idaho’s graceful, striated-marble Capitol, home to one of the more ardent and adamant state legislatures in the nation in standing up for the Second Amendment, lawmakers from both parties say that a torrent of public passion, even panic, about new proposed federal gun rules is pushing in only one direction: toward more guns, not fewer.

If Idahoans, like Americans in many states, have rushed to buy guns out of fear for personal safety in the aftermath of recent mass shootings, or out of fear of tighter legal controls, then democracy has already spoken, many lawmakers said. People have voted with their pocketbooks.

"Enable them to do what they believe is right," said State Senator Marv Hagedorn, a Republican who was designated to be his chamber’s point man on proposed gun legislation in the session that began in January, describing what he sees as his mandate. "There’s a huge call to all of us to protect the Second Amendment rights."

Click Here to read the whole article.

Minn. House Eyes Limits to Gun Access, Ownership

ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) — A half dozen police chiefs and sheriffs argued Tuesday in a packed Capitol hearing room that Minnesota isn't doing enough to protect against gun violence, kicking off three days of hearings on a host of new proposed limits on firearm ownership.

Hundreds of people swarmed the Capitol office building for the hearing, jamming the committee room and several overflow areas a day after President Barack Obama visited Minneapolis to tout his federal gun-control proposals.

"For a whole host of reasons, we're not keeping guns out of the hands of individuals who shouldn't have them," said Dennis Flaherty, executive director of the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association. He testified in support of a bill to require background checks for all gun purchases, cracking down on purchases at gun shows, online or with unlicensed, private dealers.

With Democrats controlling the Legislature, new limits on gun access have their best shot at the Capitol in a number of years. But the debate could expose divides between urban Democrats, whose constituents strongly support new limits, and rural Democrats from areas with high gun ownership and little support for serious curtailments on the right to own guns. Gov. Mark Dayton, also a Democrat, has not wholeheartedly embraced new gun control measures; he told the Star Tribune on Monday that any changes would need support from rural lawmakers in order to get his signature.

Click Here to read the whole article.