gunnutz
12-27-2012, 10:13 PM
Gun Owners:
If you labor under the misconception that Barack Obama’s proposed gun ban will encompass only “assault weapons,” you are about to get a wakeup call: Initial reports indicate the ban will be far more expansive than the one which expired in 2004, and will probably encompass hundreds of types of rifles, pistols and shotguns.
Do not think for a moment that just because you only own a handgun for self-protection, or a shotgun for hunting ducks, that Barack Obama doesn’t have you in his crosshairs. In coming months, you will see that Obama wants nothing less than a virtual end to gun ownership … and the freedom which accompanies it.
Obama assigns Joe Biden to lead
‘assault weapon’ task force
Last Wednesday, Obama called for new bans on what he mischaracterizes as “weapons of war,” and on “high capacity” magazines. He is also calling for closing the “gun show loophole,” which means registering all private gun sales with the FBI via the computerized National Instant Check System.
On Friday, Obama alleged he has 400,000 signatures for the petition he is running at the White House website, and then announced that Joe Biden would lead the “Gun Violence Task Force” which will make recommendations in a few short weeks.
In case you have any doubts about what that task force will recommend, understand that just two days ago, Politico quoted Biden as saying: “There's ‘no reason’ why Congress shouldn't be able to pass a ban on ‘assault weapons…’”
That would be the same Joe Biden who recently bragged: “Remember, I’m the guy that back in 1994, passed and wrote the ‘assault weapons’ ban.”
What will the new ban include?
Maybe you think: “I’ve got a concealed handgun permit to protect myself, but why does anybody need an ‘assault weapon?’”
Or maybe you are saying: “So what? It wasn’t so bad the last time we had a ban. I still went hunting with my [fill-in-the-blank] rifle or shotgun.”
But will the Obama/Biden/Feinstein ban be like the last one? As the saying goes, “not exactly.”
The Washington Post is already celebrating the expansiveness of the bill Senator Dianne Feinstein promises to offer on “the first day” of the new Congress:
“Feinstein’s bill, I’m told, will be more sweeping in its targeting of specific weapons. ‘This bill would name many more weapons than the original ban did,’ the person familiar with drafting tells me …”
Oh, but that’s not all: Beyond specifically named guns and magazines holding more than 10 rounds, reports indicate includes pistols and rifles capable of accepting more than ten rounds and shotguns capable of accepting more than five rounds.
Can you say “hunting rifles and shotguns?” Sure you can.
What will the NRA do?
To its credit, the NRA didn’t come right out and capitulate at its breathlessly-awaited news conference on Friday. Indeed, Wayne LaPierre laid the blame for mass murder squarely on violent cultural influences, media exploitation and ostensibly “gun free” killing zones in which victims are disarmed, even proposing a plan to protect schools.
But that won’t slow down Obama/Biden/Feinstein in the slightest. Why? Because their agenda isn’t about protecting kids; it’s about disarming you!
The real question is: What will the NRA do when gun ban legislation starts moving? Will the NRA, as it so often has in the past, accept a “compromise” under which you lose just slightly less than you would have under Feinstein’s original, draconian proposal?
And what will you do?
That’s the more important question, isn’t it? Many of you are actively defending your rights: Signing petitions, writing letters, contributing to gun rights organizations. For others, it’s time for a little “tough love.”
I’ve heard all manner of excuses for inaction. See if you or anybody you know has said any of these:
“I’m not political.” Really? Then your opponents will thank you (just before they steal your rights) because they certainly are.
“They’re not after my guns, just those ugly ‘assault weapons.’” Alas, the incremental gun bans of Australia and Britain say otherwise. As in 1994, Obama and his cronies are going after semi-automatic firearms first because they can “divide and conquer” gun owners by making them think defensive pistols and hunting firearms are “safe.” In truth, other guns will be the next targets, just as they were in 1994 when Handgun Control, Inc. rolled out its draconian “Brady II.”
“I’ve got all the semi-autos I need.” For now, perhaps, but remember: The “assault weapon” ban which then-Senator Biden engineered in 1994 initially required registering such guns, and registration is the invariable prelude to confiscation. And if you don’t register them, you will never again be able to use them in public.
“They’ll get my guns when they pry them from my cold, dead hands.” Newsflash, Rambo: The government is capable of arranging just that. Remember Ruby Ridge? And failing to comply will make you, an otherwise law-abiding citizen, a criminal for life. As George Orwell pointed out in his book “1984,” a government can’t control the law-abiding. If it wants control, first it has to make citizens into criminals.
Stop the Obama gun ban now!
So if you or any of your friends, acquaintances or family members have ever said any of the above, I suggest you get off your butt right now and do four things:
Sign the petition to STOP THE OBAMA GUN BAN by going immediately to: http://grnc.org/stop-the-obama-gun-ban-petition-gpo1203
Tell Congress you won’t tolerate attacks on your rights: Do so by using GRNC’s contact page at: http://grnc.org/stop-the-obama-gun-ban
Support GRNC: We are already meeting with members of Congress to give them a “spine injection” and get them to oppose the Obama gun ban when it is introduced. That means going to Washington, and that requires money. If you haven’t yet joined or contributed, go to:
http://grnc.org/index.php/join-grnc/contribute
Forward this email: Maybe you some know some lazy shooters at the wildlife club; maybe you know somebody with a concealed handgun permit who feels this issue doesn’t affect them. Get them informed and active!
The goals of gun control
I have led gun rights organizations for 18 years. The last time I saw a threat this dangerous was in 1994 and, by some measures this is worse: After 12 years of victories, gun owners have become complacent, figuring the gains we’ve made are set in stone. They aren’t.
Moreover, new gun owners, often brought in via concealed handgun permits, don’t know the history of gun control. They don’t know that in 1994, the relatively “benign” Brady Act for background checks was followed by the seemingly necessary “assault weapon” ban which was then followed by Brady II, which would have:
Banned any handgun capable of accepting more than 6 rounds;
Banned all concealable handguns;
Slapped a 50% tax on ammunition;
Required you to get an “arsenal license” even if you had only two “bricks” of common .22 ammunition;
Legalized warrantless searches of the homes of anyone brash enough to own 20 guns.
By her own admission, Dianne Feinstein has waited years for this “opportunity.” Gun control advocates have long since learned to soft-pedal their agenda, but the objectives remain the same: To end the private ownership of firearms.
Whatever Barack Obama tells you, folks, this isn’t about “assault weapons,” it’s about your freedom.
Armatissimi e liberissimi,
F. Paul Valone
President, Grass Roots North Carolina
*First spoken by Niccolo Machiavelli with reference to the Swiss, “Armatissimi e liberissimi” means “most armed, most free.”
If you labor under the misconception that Barack Obama’s proposed gun ban will encompass only “assault weapons,” you are about to get a wakeup call: Initial reports indicate the ban will be far more expansive than the one which expired in 2004, and will probably encompass hundreds of types of rifles, pistols and shotguns.
Do not think for a moment that just because you only own a handgun for self-protection, or a shotgun for hunting ducks, that Barack Obama doesn’t have you in his crosshairs. In coming months, you will see that Obama wants nothing less than a virtual end to gun ownership … and the freedom which accompanies it.
Obama assigns Joe Biden to lead
‘assault weapon’ task force
Last Wednesday, Obama called for new bans on what he mischaracterizes as “weapons of war,” and on “high capacity” magazines. He is also calling for closing the “gun show loophole,” which means registering all private gun sales with the FBI via the computerized National Instant Check System.
On Friday, Obama alleged he has 400,000 signatures for the petition he is running at the White House website, and then announced that Joe Biden would lead the “Gun Violence Task Force” which will make recommendations in a few short weeks.
In case you have any doubts about what that task force will recommend, understand that just two days ago, Politico quoted Biden as saying: “There's ‘no reason’ why Congress shouldn't be able to pass a ban on ‘assault weapons…’”
That would be the same Joe Biden who recently bragged: “Remember, I’m the guy that back in 1994, passed and wrote the ‘assault weapons’ ban.”
What will the new ban include?
Maybe you think: “I’ve got a concealed handgun permit to protect myself, but why does anybody need an ‘assault weapon?’”
Or maybe you are saying: “So what? It wasn’t so bad the last time we had a ban. I still went hunting with my [fill-in-the-blank] rifle or shotgun.”
But will the Obama/Biden/Feinstein ban be like the last one? As the saying goes, “not exactly.”
The Washington Post is already celebrating the expansiveness of the bill Senator Dianne Feinstein promises to offer on “the first day” of the new Congress:
“Feinstein’s bill, I’m told, will be more sweeping in its targeting of specific weapons. ‘This bill would name many more weapons than the original ban did,’ the person familiar with drafting tells me …”
Oh, but that’s not all: Beyond specifically named guns and magazines holding more than 10 rounds, reports indicate includes pistols and rifles capable of accepting more than ten rounds and shotguns capable of accepting more than five rounds.
Can you say “hunting rifles and shotguns?” Sure you can.
What will the NRA do?
To its credit, the NRA didn’t come right out and capitulate at its breathlessly-awaited news conference on Friday. Indeed, Wayne LaPierre laid the blame for mass murder squarely on violent cultural influences, media exploitation and ostensibly “gun free” killing zones in which victims are disarmed, even proposing a plan to protect schools.
But that won’t slow down Obama/Biden/Feinstein in the slightest. Why? Because their agenda isn’t about protecting kids; it’s about disarming you!
The real question is: What will the NRA do when gun ban legislation starts moving? Will the NRA, as it so often has in the past, accept a “compromise” under which you lose just slightly less than you would have under Feinstein’s original, draconian proposal?
And what will you do?
That’s the more important question, isn’t it? Many of you are actively defending your rights: Signing petitions, writing letters, contributing to gun rights organizations. For others, it’s time for a little “tough love.”
I’ve heard all manner of excuses for inaction. See if you or anybody you know has said any of these:
“I’m not political.” Really? Then your opponents will thank you (just before they steal your rights) because they certainly are.
“They’re not after my guns, just those ugly ‘assault weapons.’” Alas, the incremental gun bans of Australia and Britain say otherwise. As in 1994, Obama and his cronies are going after semi-automatic firearms first because they can “divide and conquer” gun owners by making them think defensive pistols and hunting firearms are “safe.” In truth, other guns will be the next targets, just as they were in 1994 when Handgun Control, Inc. rolled out its draconian “Brady II.”
“I’ve got all the semi-autos I need.” For now, perhaps, but remember: The “assault weapon” ban which then-Senator Biden engineered in 1994 initially required registering such guns, and registration is the invariable prelude to confiscation. And if you don’t register them, you will never again be able to use them in public.
“They’ll get my guns when they pry them from my cold, dead hands.” Newsflash, Rambo: The government is capable of arranging just that. Remember Ruby Ridge? And failing to comply will make you, an otherwise law-abiding citizen, a criminal for life. As George Orwell pointed out in his book “1984,” a government can’t control the law-abiding. If it wants control, first it has to make citizens into criminals.
Stop the Obama gun ban now!
So if you or any of your friends, acquaintances or family members have ever said any of the above, I suggest you get off your butt right now and do four things:
Sign the petition to STOP THE OBAMA GUN BAN by going immediately to: http://grnc.org/stop-the-obama-gun-ban-petition-gpo1203
Tell Congress you won’t tolerate attacks on your rights: Do so by using GRNC’s contact page at: http://grnc.org/stop-the-obama-gun-ban
Support GRNC: We are already meeting with members of Congress to give them a “spine injection” and get them to oppose the Obama gun ban when it is introduced. That means going to Washington, and that requires money. If you haven’t yet joined or contributed, go to:
http://grnc.org/index.php/join-grnc/contribute
Forward this email: Maybe you some know some lazy shooters at the wildlife club; maybe you know somebody with a concealed handgun permit who feels this issue doesn’t affect them. Get them informed and active!
The goals of gun control
I have led gun rights organizations for 18 years. The last time I saw a threat this dangerous was in 1994 and, by some measures this is worse: After 12 years of victories, gun owners have become complacent, figuring the gains we’ve made are set in stone. They aren’t.
Moreover, new gun owners, often brought in via concealed handgun permits, don’t know the history of gun control. They don’t know that in 1994, the relatively “benign” Brady Act for background checks was followed by the seemingly necessary “assault weapon” ban which was then followed by Brady II, which would have:
Banned any handgun capable of accepting more than 6 rounds;
Banned all concealable handguns;
Slapped a 50% tax on ammunition;
Required you to get an “arsenal license” even if you had only two “bricks” of common .22 ammunition;
Legalized warrantless searches of the homes of anyone brash enough to own 20 guns.
By her own admission, Dianne Feinstein has waited years for this “opportunity.” Gun control advocates have long since learned to soft-pedal their agenda, but the objectives remain the same: To end the private ownership of firearms.
Whatever Barack Obama tells you, folks, this isn’t about “assault weapons,” it’s about your freedom.
Armatissimi e liberissimi,
F. Paul Valone
President, Grass Roots North Carolina
*First spoken by Niccolo Machiavelli with reference to the Swiss, “Armatissimi e liberissimi” means “most armed, most free.”