FORWARD THIS TO EVERYONE IN THE FREE WORLD

How many of those do you get a day? Amongst shooters in the current administration, they are getting popular. Here are a couple:

Senate Bill SB-2099 will require us to put on our 2009 1040 federal tax form all guns that you have or own. It may require fingerprints and a tax of $50 per gun.

This bill was introduced on Feb.. 24. This bill will become public knowledge 30 days after it is voted into law. This is an amendment to the Internal Revenue Act of 1986. This means that the Finance Committee can pass this without the Senate voting on it at all.

Sounds scary, except it doesn't actually exist. There is no SB-2009 in this Congress. You can search on bills at Thomas, which is the Library of Congress website where bills are registered.

Another is HR 45, Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act.

Very Important for you to be aware of a new bill HR 45 introduced into the House.

This is the Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sale Act of 2009. Also go to http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-45

I've written about that in the past. Still no co-sponsors, it is sitting in Committee going nowhere.

Here's a Civics lesson:

Steps In Making a Law

1. Write your bill
2. Submit it
3. Get it assigned to the appropriate committee
4. Go get a bunch of co-sponsors
5. Have hearings
6. Get a financial impact statement from the Congressional Budget Office
   
7. Pray it gets out of committee
8. See if you can pass it on your side (Senate or House)
9. Send it to the other side
10. See if they pass it
11. Have a Conference Committee to reconcile the Senate and House versions
12. Both sides pass it again
13. Send it to the White House and see if it gets signed

Most bills die at step 3.

Paying attention to things is good, though......

Of Bad Guys and Good

There was a recent murder at a WalMart. In this crime, one of the criminals walked up to a armored-car guard, pulled out a gun, shot the man in the face, killing him and injuring another innocent bystander, stole the guard's money bag, and calmly walked out the store to his waiting car. http://www.thenewstribune.com/311/story/764728.html

In a recent piece (http://firearmslegislation.blogspot.com/2009/04/self-protection-is-not-vigilantism.html), I discussed the fact that honest people legally arming themselves is a rational thing to do. There are just people in the world that are not nice (to say the least). http://firearmslegislation.blogspot.com/2009/04/disarmament-as-public-policy.html

I certainly don't think that any legally-armed person could have done much of anything to stop this crime. By the time this felon had drawn his gun and shot the guard, it was all over. One could argue that it is more likely that more innocents would have been hurt had someone shot back.

What strikes me about this crime is not only the level of violence, but the absolute disregard for life shown by the criminals both in their action and their comments during the subsequent interrogation. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ABPub/2009/06/04/2009302279.pdf

Turpin initially denied any involvement, even claiming it wasn’t him on the
video. Eventually Turpin admitted he was involved and it was him on the video. A
detective asked if there was anything he would like to say to the family of the
dead guard if he had the opportunity.

He hung his head and said softly, “Sorry, I guess.”

The detective said, “You guess you’re sorry? A man was shot dead for money.”

“I wouldn’t apologize. What would that do. He’s already gone.”

“If you would have gotten away with this,” the detective asked, “how would you have felt?”

“Bad, but, but I would have gotten over it because of the money.”

What those who don't believe in personal protection just don't get is that there are some very, very bad people out there. They just don't care about the rest of us.

And that's why I carry.

Victory in Congress: Gun Ban Repealed!

Individual Congressional Representatives' Vote available.

From: Gun Owners of America

Victory at Last
-- National Park Service Gun Ban Repealed!

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org

"Gun Owners of America was the most consistent and loudest voice on
Capitol Hill in support of the effort to repeal the National Park
Service gun ban." -- Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK)

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Good news!

The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill today that included an
amendment to repeal the gun ban on National Park Service (NPS) land and
wildlife refuges.

The amendment, sponsored by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) and attached to a
credit card industry reform bill, passed the House overwhelmingly by a
vote of 279-147.

For decades, law-abiding citizens have been prohibited from exercising
their Second Amendment rights on NPS land and wildlife refuges, even if
the state in which the land is located allows carrying firearms.

With some limited exceptions for hunting, the only way to legally
possess a firearm anywhere in a national park is by having it unloaded
and inaccessible, such as locked up in an automobile trunk. A Bush
administration regulation partially reversed the ban, but that action
was singlehandedly negated recently by an activist judge in Washington,
D.C. The Department of Interior decided not to appeal that ruling.

Senator Coburn believes, like you do, that Americans should not be
forced to sacrifice their Second Amendment rights when entering NPS land
and wildlife refuges.

GOA worked with Coburn on an amendment that simply allows for state and
local laws -- instead of unelected bureaucrats and anti gun activist
judges -- to govern firearm possession on these lands.

The anti-gun leadership in both the House and Senate went berserk and
fought to keep the Coburn amendment from being attached to the
underlying bill. Sparks were flying on the floor of the House of
Representatives today.

Anti-gun Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) whined that a "very
good" credit
card bill had been "hijacked" by the Coburn amendment. To
this, Rep.
Rob Bishop (R-UT) pointed out that gun control is the policy of tyrants,
as evidenced by the British attempt to confiscate firearms at Lexington
and Concord in 1775.

Congressional leaders and entrenched bureaucrats have fought GOA over
the NPS gun ban for the past eight years.

But your activism has finally broken through. The late Senator Everett
Dirksen said, "When I feel the heat, I see the light!" Well,
you have applied a lot of heat. Members of Congress know that they oppose your Second Amendment rights at their own peril.

As it stands today, both houses of Congress have now passed the Coburn
amendment -- and President Obama is expected to sign the provision into
law (only because it is part of a larger credit card bill that he really
wants).

So, congratulate yourself for winning this long, hard battle. GOA was
the leading, and often only, national gun group involved in this fight.
You involvement was absolutely vital to achieving this win.

Of course, many more battles lie ahead. President Obama continues to
push for the Senate to ratify massive international gun control
treaties. There is a battle over a Supreme Court nominee coming up.
Anti-gun zealots in Congress are aggressively pushing to renew the
Clinton gun ban and close down gun shows.

And as the health care debate picks up steam in the coming weeks and
months, GOA is battling efforts to create a computerized national
healthcare database. Such a database can be used to deny people their
Second Amendment rights in the same way that so many veterans have lost
their gun rights based only on the diagnoses of a doctor for things like
combat-related stress.

GOA will be calling for action on these and other Second Amendment
issues as they move through Congress.

In the meantime, have a safe Memorial Day as we remember those who gave
the ultimate sacrifice so that America would remain "Land of the
Free."

****************************

What's Your Current GOA Status?

Obviously, we now face years of invigorated attacks on our gun rights.
Shutting down gun shows, prohibitions on specific calibers, another
semi-auto ban, and the anti-gun extremists' Holy Grail of mandatory
federal licensing and registration of all gun owners -- these are just
some of the horrors that we already know we'll have to defeat head-on.
Meanwhile, we'll take every opportunity to go on offense and advance the
Second Amendment.

It can't be done without every single voice being counted. That's why we
are asking you to consider making the commitment of becoming a Gun
Owners of America Life Member. By doing so, you put the politicians on
notice that neither you nor GOA is going away -- that no matter who's in
the White House, there is always going to be a solid wall of resistance.

Now is a perfect time to become a Life Member. And if you aren't a GOA
member at all, isn't it time you became one?

Please go to http://gunowners.org/ordergoamem.htm to upgrade your
participation in GOA.

Gang fools Mexico prison guards

This has received little coverage from the US press. Is it because it doesn't fit in with the model of Mexican firearms coming from US gun shows?

No, they were probably too busy covering the Preakness and the Obama's graduation speeches....

Gang fools Mexico prison guards

From the BBC:

An armed gang disguised as police has broken into a jail in northern Mexico and
freed more than 50 prisoners.
A convoy of at least 15 vehicles arrived at the prison with gang members all apparently disguised as federal police officers.
Once inside, the prison authorities were persuaded that an inspection was under way and guards were overpowered.
A manhunt is underway for the fugitives - believed to be linked to the powerful drug
smuggling Gulf cartel.
Army troops as well as local and federal police have begun a search and set up roadblocks near the prison facility in Zacatecas and neighbouring states.
President Felipe Calderon has declared war on the illegal narcotic organisation in Mexico, deploying 40,000 troops to fight the cartels.
In some regions instances of beheadings and attacks on police have become commonplace, with the deaths of 6,000 people last year alone blamed on illegal
narcotics.
But progress in the war against the cartels has been limited by the fact that in the face of well armed and well financed drug cartels, this country's law and order institutions have proved weak and easily corruptible, the BBC's Stephen Gibbs in Mexico City says.

Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/8054021.stm

Published: 2009/05/17 00:19:04 GMT© BBC MMIX

Economy limiting services of local police

Ever wonder why people are buying guns and ammo? Here's another reason. We realize that we're the only people responsible for ourselves.

Economy limiting services of local police

By Kevin Johnson, USA TODAY

The recession is altering local law enforcement in the U.S. by forcing some
agencies to close precincts, merge with other departments or even shut
down.
Once largely spared from the deepest budget cuts, some police
departments are struggling to provide basic services, police officials
say.
"For the first time, because of the economy, police departments ... may
have to change how they do business," says Chuck Wexler, executive director of
the Police Executive Research Forum, a law enforcement think tank. "People will
see a change in the basic delivery of services," from longer police response
times to a dramatically reduced police presence in some communities.
Harlan
Johnson, executive director of the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association, said
political leaders are "choosing whether they keep the streetsopenor the police
on patrol," though it's too early to tell whether the changes will increase
crime.
The Obama administration's $787 billion stimulus plan gives about $4
billion to local law enforcement, including $1 billion to hire and retain
officers. But the hiring money has not been distributed, and applicants have
requested more than is available.
Among the recent cuts:
• In
Pennsylvania, 19 suburban and rural police agencies have closed in the past 15
months, and seven others have cut patrols. The "unprecedented" closures and cuts
have forced the state police — who face their own budget struggles — to assume
full or partial public safety responsibility for about 54,000 more people, says
Lt. Col. Lenny Bandy, deputy commissioner of operations for the state
police.
• In Minnesota, nine small police agencies have closed in the past
five months, leaving sheriffs' departments to protect the public. The Elko New
Market Police Department was briefly the 10th shuttered agency, until residents
last month demanded that the City Council reverse its 2-week-old decision to
eliminate it. "A lot of people felt that we were sending a potentially dangerous
public message ... without a police department," says Mayor Jason Ponsonby, who
opposed the closure.
• In Portland, Ore., police are consolidating operations
by eliminating two of five patrol precincts. Portland police spokesman Greg
Pashley says some residents fear response times will rise and established
officers will be replaced by others who are unfamiliar with local problems. He
says the move, which takes effect in June, was needed to cut costs, but he
believes it will not compromise safety.
• In Southern California, Indio and
its neighbors Palm Springs, Desert Hot Springs, Cathedral City and Beaumont have
merged some key functions and also plan to combine dispatch operations to
increase efficiency. "It's the legacy of the budget crunch," Indio's Capt.
Richard Banasiak says.



Find this article at:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-05-17-police-closure_N.htm

Copyright
2008 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.

Concealed Carry and National Parks

On May 12th, the Senate voted to include the "Colburn Amendment" on to a bill from the House to better regulate credit card companies. The two Washington Senators, Murray and Cantwell, voted Nay. Not a huge surprise, as they are usually voting lock-step with Democrat Party Instructions. It puts them with an esteemed anti-gun crowd which includes Senators Boxer and Feinstein of California, Senators Durbin and Burris of Illinois, and Senator Kerry as well as others.

Here is Senator Colburn discussing his amendment:





The history of this issue is interesting, but not surprising. The Bush Interior Department rescinded a rule which prohibited concealed firearms carry in the National Parks after a lengthy (and extended) public comment period. The rule, itself, was issued late in 2008, but the process had gone on for a couple of years. The rule states that concealed carry laws in a state extend into the National Park within the state border. For those of us in Washington, it allows those who can legally carry concealed in the state to continue to carry concealed in Mt. Rainier National Park, for example.

The anti-gun (anti-personal-responsibility) groups protested the rule change arguing that:

1. There would be outbreaks of gunfights in the parks


2. Poaching would increase

The Congressional Representative from Washington's 6th District, Norm Dicks, strongly opposes the change.

The supporters of the rule change argued that law enforcement is very sparse in the parks and that crime in the parks is increasing.

Despite the popular support for the change in the rule, the Brady Campaign and others sued in court for an injunction. Citing a lack of an Environmental Impact Study on the effects of carrying a concealed pistol, Federal District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued a preliminary injunction reversing the rule. Certainly the environmental impact of an unfired gun pales at the impact of mosquito spray in the

The Obama Administration has not elected to appeal the ruling, but the National Rifle Association is appealing.

It is likely that the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act of 2009 (HR 627) will pass. After all, it has strong support from the White House.




Let us just hope that the Senate/House Conference Committee doesn't strip the Colburn Amendment out.

Disarming "Terrorists"

Now unless you have been hiding under a rock, you know about the recent flap over the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) recent report of potential right-wing terrorists. In the report, DHS takes a swipe at both Veterans and Gun Owners:

(U//FOUO) Proposed imposition of firearms restrictions and weapons
bans likely would attract new members into the ranks of rightwing extremist groups, as well as potentially spur some of them to begin planning and training for violence against the government. The high volume of purchases and stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by rightwing extremists in anticipation of restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primary concern to law enforcement.

— (U//FOUO) Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS/I&A is concerned that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.

One can only assume that veterans who own guns are probably a lethal combination. Until reading this report, which actually wasn't supposed to go public, we also didn't realize that the "stockpiling of weapons...[continues] to be a primary concern to law enforcement."

So now comes HR 2159, Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009. Keep explosives from terrorists? Sounds like a good idea to me. Reading on:

To increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of firearms or explosives licenses to a known or suspected dangerous terrorist.

The bill provides that the Attorney General

`Sec. 922A. Attorney General's discretion to deny transfer of
a firearm

`The Attorney General may deny the transfer of a firearm pursuant
to section 922(t)(1)(B)(ii) if the Attorney General determines that the
transferee is known (or appropriately suspected) to be or have been engaged in conduct constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to terrorism, or providing material support thereof, and the Attorney General has a reasonable belief that the prospective transferee may use a firearm in connection with terrorism.';

So this allows the Attorney General to deny an "appropriately suspected" person to purchase a firearm. If we read again the DHS report, a Veteran can be an "appropriately suspected" person. So can anyone who already owns firearms, or anyone who is stockpiling, a term not defined.

If we read on, the Attorney General doesn't have to disclose -- in fact is prohibited from disclosing -- who is suspected of being a terrorist:

(g) Attorney General's Ability To Withhold Information in Firearms License

Denial and Revocation Suit- Section 923(f) of such title is amended--

(1) in the 1st sentence of paragraph (1), by inserting `, except that if the denial or revocation is pursuant to subsection (d)(1)(H) or (e)(3), then any information on which the Attorney General relied for this determination may be withheld from the petitioner if the Attorney General determines that disclosure of the information would likely compromise national security' before the period; and
(2) in paragraph (3), by inserting after the 3rd sentence the following:
`With respect to any information withheld from the aggrieved party under paragraph (1), the United States may submit, and the court may rely on, summaries or redacted versions of documents containing information the disclosure of which the Attorney General has determined would likely compromise
national security.'.

So there it is. Take the contents of the DHS report and the contents of this bill and anyone who owns a gun or is a Veteran might be a terrorist and, therefore, should be prohibited from owning any more.

Let us hope this blatant violation of the First and Second Amendments dies in Committee as it should.