Lawmakers Taking Another Crack at Expanding Gun Checks

By KEVIN FREKING Associated Press

WASHINGTON  - Former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords is returning to Capitol Hill on Wednesday to help kick-start a longshot campaign to expand criminal background checks to all commercial firearms sales.

Similar legislation that sought to expand background checks failed to get a hearing in the House last session. With the GOP expanding its majority and winning control of the Senate, prospects for the bill may be even more unlikely this session.

Still, Democratic Rep. Mike Thompson of California predicted the legislation would pass if GOP leadership would let it come to the House floor for a vote. Congress passed record funding for background checks in the last session, he said.

"If they are willing to fund the system at historic levels, they should support using the system," Thompson said.

Under the current system, cashiers at stores selling guns call in to check with the FBI or other designated agencies to ensure the customer doesn't have a criminal background. Many lawmakers want to expand such checks to sales at gun shows and purchases made through the Internet.

The National Rifle Association opposes expanding background checks. The organization says many people sent to prison because of gun crimes get their guns through theft or the black market, and no amount of background checks can stop those criminals. The group attributed the effort on Capitol Hill to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has worked to impose stricter background checks in several states.

"If Bloomberg and his supporters were serious about solving underlying problems, they would work to reform our broken mental health system, not attack the rights of America's 100 million gun owners," said Chris Cox, executive director of the NRA's lobbying arm.

While Congress has declined to pass expanded background checks for firearm purchases, five states have done so since the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings in December 2012. They are Washington, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware and New York, according to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

Giffords and Kelly, a former NASA space shuttle commander, founded Americans for Responsible Solutions. The organization advocates for stricter gun laws. They are both scheduled to be at the news conference with Thompson and a handful of other lawmakers on Wednesday. The Arizona Democrat has become an increasingly active player in the gun-control movement since being shot in the head as she met with constituents in Tucson nearly four years ago.

The legislation that ushered in background checks for guns bought from federal licensed dealers was named after James Brady, the press secretary to President Ronald Reagan who was shot in the head in 1981 and died last year.

"We fought a long, hard battle to pass the Brady Bill with bipartisan support in 1993 and now we simply need to finish the job!" said Sarah Brady, co-founder of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

Reference: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/lawmakers-taking-crack-expanding-gun-checks-29366740

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.