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.

Monday, February 4, 2013

Who Needs to Listen to Whom??

I want you to let that quote sink in for a minute………. Got it? Okay, now who do you think uttered those words?

If you guessed Obama, then you guessed right!

That makes me wonder, has he ever listened to himself? Does he not know the basic Golden Rule, “Do unto others, what you wish done unto you.” If he is saying the things above, then I’m guessing he has never heard that…

What I’m getting at is simple: If he’s not going to listen to us, then why should we listen to him? There have been many times over the years that he had the opportunity to listen to the majority, to hear our voices, and what did he do? NOTHING. He ignored us.

Just like he’s ignoring us now. He seems to overlook the fact that no matter how much you try to ‘Big Brother’ weapons and the sale of, it’s not going to make a difference. Criminals have their ways to get their demands answered, they have ways around the law and they can make homemade assault weapons or alter current ones to fit their needs.

Instead of letting him be a hypocrite and tell us to sit back and listen, we need to speak up EVEN LOUDER until he gets the hint that we ARE NOT GOING AWAY!

Gun Stores in Kennewick, Wash., See Record Sales

Kennewick's Columbia Gun Rack looks empty.

Handguns are sparse in the glass showcase where General Manager Holly Myers helps a seemingly endless line of customers.

Soaring sales of guns and ammunition are making it difficult for businesses like Columbia Gun Rack and Grigg's Department Store in Pasco to keep their shelves stocked.

More Tri-Citians seem to be exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms as lawmakers debate adding restrictions and banning certain firearms.

President Obama has called for a ban on so-called "assault weapons," a 10-round limit for ammunition magazines and a requirement for background checks on all gun sales, including those at gun shows and between private individuals.

Click Here to read the whole article.

Capitalize on Another Tragedy Mr. President, it's Your MO

Many of you most likely know by now that Chris Kyle, author of "America's Deadliest Sniper, and a decorated ex-member of seal team 3 was gunned down at a Texas gun range while trying to help another veteran who suffered from PTSD. With him his neighbor and good friend also perished as a result of the shooting.

There is no doubt that President Obama will use this tragedy to push his anti-gun agenda even further and try to use it to validate what he has felt all along. Unfortunately as I look at this terrible event I see one thing above all else that failed Chris, and the alleged shooter, mental health problems. As Obama tries to persuade American's to fork over even more of their constitutional rights for what he claims is the good of the country he will claim that his proposals will help people get better access to mental health treatment. He will say whatever he needs to, in order to grasp as much support as he can. But I ask you, is this really about better healthcare for the mentally ill, or is this really about Obama's utter hatred for guns? I assure you his proposals will do little to increase mental health treatment, but it will surely label hundreds of thousands of American's as mentally unfit to own a firearm and pit doctors against patients. Once that label is stuck to them, good luck ever getting it removed, even if it was just a temporary mental break.

I can say with certainty that Chris Kyle would not approve of the unconstitutional disarming of American citizens. The very Constitution he and his comrades fought for are in jeopardy. Obama capitalizing on this just as he did the Sandy Hook tragedy is going to be a sick demonstration of the democratic parties lack of morals. They will smear Chris Kyle's name and everything he worked for to fight for an agenda that goes against everything that America stands for.

It's time America treats its veterans like the heroes they are and provides them with the healthcare they need to move on from the grotesque brutality that our government subjected them to. It's not time to strip them and everyone else of the rights guaranteed to them by the U.S. Constitution. Surely our forefathers are rolling in their graves.

R.I.P. Chris Kyle. Thank you for your service to this country. You will never be forgotten.

Obama Tries to Undercut the NRA in Gun Control Debate

President Obama on Monday tried to undercut National Rifle Association leaders and appeal directly to their membership, claiming gun owners support the "common-sense" gun control measures he's proposed -- and urging those supporters to "keep the pressure" on Congress.

The president spoke in Minnesota, in his first campaign-style stop as part of a second-term push for new firearms laws.

On the other side of that debate, the NRA has aggressively argued against Democrats' call for a new and stronger assault-weapons ban, a ban on high-capacity magazines and universal background checks. But in a risky move, the president used his speech Monday to try and sideline America's most powerful gun lobby.

"The overwhelming majority of gun owners think (universal background checks are) a good idea," Obama said, referring to recent polling that shows most gun owners support background checks at gun shows and for private sales. "So if we've got lobbyists in Washington claiming to speak for gun owners saying something different, we need to go to the source and reach out to people directly.

Click Here to read the whole article.

The Media's War on Guns: Are You a Victim?

With Obama's push for more extreme gun control measures at full swing and the media now reporting on every American shooting they can get their grimey little fingers on, I'm left wondering. Will the illusion that our streets are less safe today then they were before Sandy Hook, essentially blind side the right to keep and bear arms?

The media is using fear tactics to try and scare the American people into believing that less guns equals less death. The less informed citizens are easily swayed by the media and take their reporting at face value. Through the Sandy Hook tragedy we witnessed first hand how irresponsible the media can be in reporting inaccurate information. Even worse, when they do recant their original statement and replace it with the accurate intel, they don't focus the same attention on correcting their mistake as they did in their initial report. Therefore people are left believing fallacies. An example, despite major outlets reporting that they were wrong when they said the Sandy Hook shooter used an AR-15 in his mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, but rather used several handguns, the majority of American's still believe the initial report. Hence the attack on semi-automatic rifles. This could be in part a result of our elected officials push for strict gun control and unwarranted bans on certain firearms, yet it is a complete bait and switch.

Now I'm not claiming that all news agencies are left leaning democrats. But the scales are definately tipped in the wrong direction. How many other political agendas have been pushed through Congress right before our eyes using the same dirty tactics and outright lies that is occuring right now?

Anybody who does a little research on guns in the news will stumble upon a few articles from Chicago and Massachusetts where gun control is stronger than anywhere else in the nation. Yet despite having these repressive laws on the books, gun violence is out of control. How can that be? If the mantra less guns equals less death, then these laws should single handedly be driving gun violence into the ground. But they're not. They aren't working because these laws do nothing to stop criminals from finding guns and using them during their crimes. Some politicians will claim if we make it even tougher for legal citizens to aquire guns it will make it that much harder for criminals to get them. Let's be real, only a fool would believe that. Drugs have been illegal in this country for decades, yet the war on drugs proves those laws do little to stop criminals from distributing drugs inside our borders. Those laws ban everyone from buying or selling these substances, so how can we have a drug problem at all if laws stop criminals?

If you are one of the people wondering why it seems like there are so many shootings this year compared to years past, then the media is getting to you. Guns are no more a problem today then they were in the past. Gun violence has been decreasing for years and despite what liberals will tell you we are far safer as an armed society than not. The minute criminals realize that law abiding citizens won't fight back, not only will gun violence increase, but every other type of violent crime will increase with it. America doesn't need thousands of more rapes, assaults, and robberies a year. Our citizens don't need the government to control every aspect of our lives. Obama now controls our healthcare, he can leave our guns the hell alone.

Gun Crimes Increase in Massachusetts Despite Tough Gun Laws

Massachusetts has a national reputation as a bastion of gun control, but crimes and injuries related to firearms have risen — sometimes dramatically — since the state passed a comprehensive package of gun laws in 1998.

Murders committed with firearms have increased significantly, aggravated assaults and robberies involving guns have risen, and gunshot injuries are up, according to FBI and state data.

To gun-rights groups like the National Rifle Association, these statistics are evidence that gun control does not work. But to gun-control advocates, the numbers show that no state — no matter how tough the laws — is protected from firearms violence when guns are brought in from other states.

"The quality of your gun-licensing laws is only as good as those surrounding you," said James Alan Fox, a Northeastern University criminologist.

Click Here to read the whole article.

Obama Take His Gun Control Push on the Road

Continuing his drive to rein in gun violence across the country, President Obama today will visit Minneapolis, a city the White House lauds for having taken "important steps" toward reducing gun crimes.

The president will deliver remarks to local leaders and law enforcement officials about his "comprehensive set of commonsense ideas to reduce gun violence," according to the White House, before meeting with members of the community to discuss their experiences with gun violence, as well as further action that can be taken at the federal level.

Since Mr. Obama undraped a multi-part package of proposals two weeks ago to help tackle the nation's escalating gun violence problem, lawmakers have been scrambling to answer what has largely been a national cry for help following December's massacre at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school. Earlier this week, the Senate Judiciary Committee heard testimony from those lobbying both for and against tighter gun laws, featuring star witnesses Mark Kelly - husband of former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who survived a shot to the head two years ago during an assassination attempt that left six people dead - and National Rifle Association CEO Wayne LaPierre.

Click Here to read the whole story.

Sunday, February 3, 2013

Proper Security Can Help End The Violence

There it is, another school shooting…On January 31, 2013 at Price Middle School in Altanta, one child opened fire on another. Well, their ‘suspect’ is a child anyways. Luckily, there weren’t massive damages this time. But, unfortunately one child was hurt and had to be taken to the hospital due to a bullet wound.

What was the difference from this shooting and all the others?

Once you have all the information, it’s not hard to surmise WHY. There was an armed officer ready to take the situation head on. Now, the articles are not clear whether the officer was working at the school at the time, or showed up shortly after. But, it does show that IF we had the ability and the training in our schools then there would be less damages.

Which is the biggest concern, isn’t it?? Some think that providing classes on self-defense and gun handling for our teachers is an ‘un-called for’ plan. Well, let’s put this in perspective with lives and our schools funding.

What happens when we enroll our kids in school? We, as parents, have a long laundry list of supplies we must provide. EVERY YEAR this list gets longer because the schools can’t fund them and neither can the teachers. This year I even found myself buying reams of printer paper because the school couldn’t provide it. If they can’t afford the supplies, then how are they going to provide the security our children deserve?

The Government isn’t going to clear the way to fund for the protection they need. So, naturally the cost is going to fall on us as parents. If I am going to pay for them to make copies then I expect all other money to be put to use wisely. And if that includes providing PROPER gun handling classes for our teachers, then why not??

All it takes is ONE person to make the difference, ONE person to put a stop to the violence!

Saturday, February 2, 2013

Stand Up and Fight

It amazes me watching the media coverage of the gun control debate just how one sided the reporting is. It has never been clearer to me just how far left most of the big outlets are and as a result I have removed many of them from my watchlist. The days of fair and unbiased news is long past. Our country is at a crossroads. We can stand back and watch as the liberal media brainwashes the next generation of Americans or we can stand up and fight for the inalienable rights we as citizens are supposed to be entitled to. Our voices must be heard, because if we don't speak out, nobody will. The newest threats towards our Second Amendment rights are just a small injustice in a series of countless others.

President Obama may have been elected by the people, but it was far from a majority. In fact to prove my claim of biased media, when Gerorge W. Bush was elected by a similar margin the democrats cried foul. They demanded recounts and they never let President Bush and the Republicans forget that he did not win by much so therefore much of the country did not support him. The media played this out his entire term. Now that Obama has won by similar numbers the Country has spoken according to the media. As a whole we supposedly want what Obama has to offer. I say bull. The very narrow win shows that Obama's agenda lacks the support he likes to think America needs. He may have fooled the majority by hanging with celebrities and lying, but he will not jeapordize the safety and security of our citizens by playing from the same deck of cards.

I urge everyone who may know others who either dont pay intention or simply fall for the propaganda on television to educate them. Wake them up from their brainwashed slumber. Make it known that if we don't take a stand now, we may never recover. Our country is at risk of imploding at the hands of democrats and the far left. Without our rights, without our constitution, America will be nothing more than another country ruled by a dictator. It's already started. First he tells us we must have health insurance, then he says we don't need guns. Next it will be what food we can eat, what TV we can watch...when does it end.

Friday, February 1, 2013

Guns Can Save Just As They Can Hurt

Guns can kill, there is no question about that. But, if they kill for the right reasons does that still make them bad? Recently Good Morning America (GMA) covered a story about a Georgia Mother that had to use a gun to save her and her children. She was at home alone with her children when the home invasion occured, at which point she took the children to the attic. Calling her husband on the phone, she waited in hopes that the perpetrator would not find them.

As the call resumed, he proceeded to break through two doors on his way to finding them. When he came through that door, she followed her husband’s pleas and shot the man several times in the face. While this did not kill him, it did make him run.

When we call for the removal or restrictions of guns, we don’t think about how many times they have saved us. If the weapon is used correctly, by a person in the right state of mind, it’s not a weapon it’s a savior. Had that mother not been able to use a gun, who knows how close that man (prior arrests for battery) would have brought them to irreparable harm.

Physical harm is not the only endangerment in these cases. The family may still suffer from some anxiety, but since she was able to adequately protect her children chances are she will recover much faster. This is the EXACT reason why Deans tell young college women to take self-defense classes. If you feel you CAN defend yourself then you will be more likely to physically protect yourself.

This isn’t going to say that everyone should carry a concealed weapon. But, for those of us that are responsible with them, we should still be able to continue collecting or using them.

The Georgia women’s husband said it perfectly, “Her life is saved and our kid’s lives are saved. That’s all I have to say.”

You can see GMA’s full story here: