Friday, July 22, 2011

The UN Wants Your Guns

NRA beats back gun control measures

Bracing for a wave of expected gun control measures, the National Rifle Association and supporters in Congress pushed back hard this month to derail the initial efforts. At least five antigun efforts were killed for now. "Though none of these votes settle the respective issues," said the NRA, "all are setbacks for gun control supporters who have been encouraged by talk of the Obama administration planning to bypass Congress and implement a variety of gun control schemes under the radar."



By PAUL BEDARD

Bracing for a wave of expected gun control measures, the National Rifle Association and supporters in Congress pushed back hard this month to derail the initial efforts. At least five antigun efforts were killed for now.
Click here to find out more!
"Though none of these votes settle the respective issues," said the NRA, "all are setbacks for gun control supporters who have been encouraged by talk of the Obama administration planning to bypass Congress and implement a variety of gun control schemes under the radar."
The key vote came last week to bar a new rule that would require gun dealers in Southwest border states to report the sales of two or more semi-automatic rifles larger than .22 caliber. The NRA also was able to stop the administration from blocking the importation of shotguns that have various features not liked by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, like extended magazine tubes and adjustable stocks. Those features are typical on guns used for competition.
Also blocked in House committee was a ban on the sale of firearms to those on the FBI's terror watch list and funding to enforce the Army Corps of Engineers ban on gun possession in the 11 million acres the oversee. The NRA says that 95 percent of those on the terror watch list are already banned from buying guns and that hunters need protection on Army Corps land because there isn't adequate law enforcement on Corps land.
Here's the NRA's latest lobbying letter:
Five Big Wins for Gun Owners In House Spending Votes
This week, the House of Representatives Appropriations Committee approved amendments blocking the use of federal funds to implement two controversial schemes by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and it rejected amendments proposing two of gun control groups' other top priorities. In addition, the full House adopted a provision protecting gun possession on Army Corps of Engineers land.
First, on Wed. July 13, by a vote of 25 to 16, the committee approved Rep. Denny Rehberg's (R-Mont.) amendment to the 2012 Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies appropriations bill, prohibiting the BATFE from requiring firearm dealers in states bordering Mexico to file reports on certain rifle sales. The Justice Department had announced earlier in the week that the BATFE would soon begin requiring dealers to file the reports on individuals who buy two or more detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles larger than .22 caliber within a period of five business days.
"For more than a decade, efforts to track rifle purchases and create a national gun registry have failed to gain support in Congress, so the ATF is working to implement these regulations using rules written by unelected bureaucrats," Rep. Rehberg said. "I'm going to keep this government accountable to the people."
By a vote of 28-19, the committee also approved Rep. John Carter's (R-Texas) amendment to stop BATFE from prohibiting the importation of shotguns that have one or more various features disliked by the BATFE, most of which are common to firearms used for protection or sport. Such features include adjustable stocks and extended magazine tubes. Rep. Carter, like Rep. Rehberg, is a member of the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus, and believes that "federal gun regulations often create burdens for law-abiding citizens and infringe upon constitutional rights provided by the Second Amendment."
Anti-gun Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) was not so successful with her amendment to authorize the Attorney General to prohibit the possession of firearms by anyone whose name appears on the FBI's secretive terrorist watch list. Her proposal failed by a vote of 27-18, indicating that a majority on the committee understands the many problems with this idea. Chief among those is that 95 percent of people on the watch list are already prohibited from possessing firearms in the U.S. because they are not citizens or legal residents of the United States. In March, a similar amendment pushed by Rep.Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) was rejected by the House Judiciary Committee by a vote of 21-11.
Joining Lowey in defeat was Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), whose amendment to gut the law that limits BATFE firearm trace data to law enforcement agencies failed by a vote of 27-20. Schiff alleged that the law—the Tiahrt Amendment, hated by gun control groups—had impeded the congressional investigation of BATFE's "Fast and Furious" debacle. However, members of Congress leading that investigation disagreed. In a letter to House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.), Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform, and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said, "the Tiahrt provision has not impeded our investigation. The provision has not been cited by anyone from whom we have sought information as a reason to deny our requests."
Next, in a Thurs. July 14 voice vote on the House floor, the House adopted an amendment to the Energy and Water Appropriations bill (H.R. 2354—which passed the House on July 15) prohibiting expenditures to enforce the Army Corps of Engineers regulation that bans gun possession on the 11 million acres of land and water the Corps manages. he amendment, sponsored by Reps. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), Bob Gibbs (R-Ohio) and Jason Altmire (D-Pa.) will enhance self-defense rights for law-abiding Americans who hunt, camp and fish on Corps property. (Rep. Gibbs, joined by the other lawmakers, has previously sponsored H.R. 1865, the "Recreational Lands Self-Defense Act," to overturn the Corps' anti-gun rule.) Commenting on the amendment, Rep. Altmire noted, "It is important for sportsmen to be able to defend themselves while they legally hunt and fish on property that the Corps owns and operates, much of which is in rural areas without adequate law enforcement."
Though none of these votes settle the respective issues—the pro-gun amendments will still have to pass the Senate, and more anti-gun amendments are always possible—all are setbacks for gun control supporters who had been encouraged by talk of the Obama administration planning to bypass Congress and implement a variety of gun control schemes "under the radar." The Brady Campaign also hoped the rifle sales reports requirement would be followed by a new "assault weapon" ban and a law prohibiting private sales of firearms, the latter of which President Obama alluded to in March. As all of these issues move through the legislative process, we'll keep you informed of new developments; in the meantime, if your U.S. Representative voted to support gun owners' rights on these votes, please be sure to say "Thank you!"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
North: The empire strikes back

For five years now, various committees of the United Nations purport to have been drafting "an internationally acceptable Arms Trade Treaty" that "will make the world safer." If the U.N.'s "Open Ended Working Group on an ATT" completes its "work" on time, the treaty will be voted on next year. The Obama administration is on record supporting the measure, claiming, "The United States is committed to actively pursuing a strong and robust treaty that contains the highest possible, legally binding standards for the international transfer of conventional weapons."


by Oliver North

GEORGETOWN COUNTY, S.C. -- "Will your Boykin hunt?" asked the young man, admiring the little red spaniel at my side. "Casey" wagged her tail and sat, patiently waiting for me to check out of the local farmers market with a basket of fresh peaches, corn and tomatoes.
"She's not yet a year old, but she already works well into the wind, can kick up a bird and if I shoot right and retrieves to hand," I replied with no small amount of hubris. The conversation abruptly shifted to international politics -- but not in the direction I expected.
"What are you going to do with her once 'The Empire' bans your shotguns?" he asked.
For a moment, I was lost. "The Empire?"
"Yeah," he said, "the U.N. -- the global imperial government in New York. 'The Empire' wants to control who can buy or keep a shotgun."
I'm used to strangers approaching me on topics such as hunting, the war, our troops serving in harm's way, the national debt, taxes and the endless list of presidential candidates. But it's unusual for an interlocutor to shift instantly from hunting to the United Nations. So I asked, "Why do you think that could happen while we still have a Second Amendment in our Constitution? The American people wouldn't stand for it."
"Do you really think 'We the People' are paying attention to what the U.N. is doing while we're distracted with everything else that's going on?"
It was a reasonable question -- and I concluded: "No, most people probably aren't engaged on this issue. But some of us are, and there are more than 80 million U.S. gun owners. I'm on the board of the National Rifle Association, and we're paying attention."
"Good," the young man replied with a smile, "because I helped elect you. I'm a life member of the NRA."
After paying for our produce, we spoke for a few more minutes in the parking lot. I again assured him that the NRA and organizations such as Freedom Alliance are doing their best to preserve Americans' individual liberties and protect U.S. sovereignty and security -- even though it often appears to be an uphill fight. I then went home to dig into what the globalists at the U.N. are preparing for us. As usual, it isn't good.
For five years now, various committees of the United Nations purport to have been drafting "an internationally acceptable Arms Trade Treaty" that "will make the world safer." If the U.N.'s "Open-Ended Working Group on an ATT" completes its "work" on time, the treaty will be voted on next year. The Obama administration is on record supporting the measure, claiming, "The United States is committed to actively pursuing a strong and robust treaty that contains the highest possible, legally binding standards for the international transfer of conventional weapons."
Earlier this month, Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the NRA, went to the big blue building in New York to tell the America haters of the "Working Group," in unequivocal terms, why the current draft of the treaty is unacceptable: "The right to keep and bear arms in defense of self, family and country is ultimately self-evident and is part of the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution. Reduced to its core, it is about fundamental individual freedom, human worth and self-destiny." He noted that among the many flaws of the ATT, "a manufacturer of civilian shotguns would have to comply with the same regulatory process as a manufacturer of military attack helicopters."
Freedom Alliance President Tom Kilgannon, who wrote the book on how the U.N. usurps U.S. sovereignty, "Diplomatic Divorce," says we shouldn't be surprised at the international forum's end run on the U.S. Constitution. "The U.N. is a global-leftist organization that uses multilateral treaties like the ATT to enforce their will upon all humankind. It's the ultimate power play. To them, the U.S. Constitution and the sovereign rights of American citizens are irrelevant. If they have their way, they will create a vast new international bureaucracy to document, regulate, track, supervise, inspect and maintain surveillance over every firearm ever made. Such a regime ought to be completely unacceptable to every American."
LaPierre and Kilgannon make clear that including civilian firearms in the ATT is unacceptable to the NRA and Freedom Alliance. Whether that will be sufficient to convince the Obama administration remains to be seen. But there is some good news in all of this.
As we parted ways at the local farmers market, my inquisitor stuck out his hand and said: "You served in the Marines. I was in the Army. We both took an oath to 'support and defend the Constitution of the United States.' I hope that still matters." When he got into his truck, I noticed his license plate: Massachusetts. Home of Paul Revere, John Adams, John Hancock. When an empire struck at Americans in 1775, they knew what to do. Let's hope we still do.

No comments:

Post a Comment