AND IN TODAY’S NEWS…

New York Senate approves Gun Ban Bill

The New York Senate has just approved the new gun ban bill that limits all magazines to 7 rounds and removes the grandfather clause on magazines. Republicans in the state said they would not block the bill. The measure still needs to pass the assembly and then it goes to the governor to sign. More as soon as we get back from the bar.

Obama to gun-control foes: Examine your conscience

White House Correspondent

PostsBy Olivier Knox, Yahoo! News | The Ticket – 14 hrs agoEmail 0Share Tweet0Share0Print
President Barack Obama speaks about the debt limit in the East Room of the White House on Jan. 14, 2013. (Carolyn …Bringing the curtain down on his first term with a combative press conference, President Barack Obama vowed on Monday to push “vigorously” for measures to curb deadly gun violence and pressed foes of new restrictions in the aftermath of the Newtown tragedy to “examine their own conscience.” Obama also admitted he faced stiff opposition from gun-rights advocates in Congress and vowed executive action when possible.

The president, due to be sworn in on Sunday and make his inaugural address from the Capitol steps a day later, also warned Republicans against refusing to raise the nation’s debt limit in order to wring spending cuts from the White House. “We are not a deadbeat nation,” Obama said.

And he defended himself from criticisms that his nominees to serve in his second-term Cabinet have mostly been older white men, urging Americans not to “rush to judgment” based on his picks to lead the departments of State, Defense and Treasury and the CIA.

“Until you’ve seen what my overall team looks like, it’s premature to assume that somehow we’re going backwards,” he said. “We’re not going backwards.”

One month to the day after the elementary school slaughter in Connecticut, the president said he had received recommendations from Vice President Joe Biden’s task force for curbing a national epidemic of gun violence. Those proposals are expected to face opposition from gun-rights groups like the NRA and its allies in Congress.

The Biden task force has “presented me now with a list of sensible, common-sense steps that can be taken to make sure that the kinds of violence we saw in Newtown doesn’t happen again,” he told reporters. “I’ll present the details later in the week.”

He added, “My starting point is not to worry about the politics. My starting point is to focus on what makes sense, what works, what should we be doing to make sure that our children are safe and that we’re reducing the incidence of gun violence. I think we can do that in a sensible way that comports with the Second Amendment.”

But will Congress adopt proposals like renewing the assault weapons ban? “I don’t know,” Obama acknowledged. Lawmakers opposed to such steps must “examine their own conscience.” In some cases, Congress won’t act but he will, the president said.

“I’m confident that there are some steps that we can take that don’t require legislation and are within my authority as president,” he said. “How we are gathering data, for example, on guns that fall into the hands of criminals and how we track that more effectively.”

Asked about the surge in gun and ammunition sales, Obama blamed “a fear that’s been fanned” by opponents of gun control.

“We’ve seen—for some time now—that those who oppose any common-sense gun-control or gun-safety measures have a pretty effective way of ginning up fear on the part of gun owners that somehow the federal government’s about to take all your guns away,” he said. “There’s probably an economic element to that—it obviously is good for business.”

He added that “responsible gun owners—people who have a gun for protection, for hunting, for sportsmanship—they don’t have anything to worry about.”

Obama also warned congressional Republicans that he will not trade spending cuts for their votes to raise the country’s debt ceiling.

Obama called Republican talk of not raising the limit—of, in effect, not paying the country’s bills—“irresponsible” and “absurd.” He said the GOP will “not collect a ransom in return for not crashing the economy.”

“You don’t go out to dinner and then eat all you want and then leave without paying the check—and if you do you’re breaking the law,” he said. “If Congress wants to have a debate about maybe we shouldn’t go out to dinner next time, maybe we should go to a more modest restaurant, that’s fine. That’s a debate that we should have. But you don’t say, ‘In order for me to control my appetites, I’m going to not pay.'”

Even as Obama spoke, Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement that “the president and his allies need to get serious about spending, and the debt-limit debate is the perfect time for it.”

And Republican House Speaker John Boehner warned that “the consequences of failing to increase the debt ceiling are real, but so, too, are the consequences of allowing our spending problem to go unresolved.” He added: “The House will do its job and pass responsible legislation that controls spending, meets our nation’s obligations and keeps the government running.”

At issue is the congressionally established debt limit, which the country is set to reach shortly. Without additional borrowing, the government will not be able to pay all of its bills, raising the prospect of a default on national debt payments or Washington being forced to stop issuing Social Security checks, pay to troops overseas and other legally required outlays, according to Obama. Either option would likely send shock waves through the fragile global economy.

Raising the debt limit was mostly a matter of routine in Washington under presidents of both parties for decades. The opposition would make a big show of wringing its hands over the nation’s finances (as a senator in 2006, Obama himself called it “a sign of leadership failure” and voted against raising it), and the majority would find a way to pass it.

Republicans broke sharply from that script in August 2011, when they demanded spending cuts equal to the amount that the limit would be raised. The ensuing standoff brought the nation to the brink of default and led to the first-ever downgrade of the country’s credit rating—but also to historic spending cuts, signed into law by Obama. Top Republican lawmakers have said publicly that this time they may be willing to partially shut down the government to secure more reductions.

“Our economy is growing and our businesses are creating new jobs, so we are poised for a good year if we make smart decisions and sound investments” and so long as Washington politics “don’t get in the way,” the president said.

The 223/5.56mm rifle round may be deemed by most states as “too weak” to hunt deer, but it apparently is not too weak to kill 20 kids and 6 adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

This is the ploy to have full gun control. They know full well what they are doing either make it impossible to buy ammunation or impossible to make already owned firearms meet their demands. Maybe the courts under reasonalable clauses will at some point be able to stop this insanity. Lawhers are going to get rich for sure. Question Mass? How do rank and file LEO’S feel about all this? THey will be the ones out there with the BTAFE Storm troopers filling the prisions that is if we live past the initial swat team atacks. At what point does LEO say I’m not going to activly be a part of this? Its a constitutional issue as well as a personal moral issue. Every scum bag Mayor who can get his name in the paper and on TV out west is shooting off his mouth about something he knows nothing about. I believe in the first ammendment, but when these creeps knowingly outright lie in the press they need to be held accountable by the courts. Maybe the NRA needs to spend some of that money taking some people to court. I know its a hard wash, but when the main line media creeps have to use bucks to defend their rights maybe they will be less inclined to mess with ours. Every time a spin job takes place all the gun citizens need to be on the phone and in their faces.

I new that was going to happen, banning handguns just beacause they can hold a high capacity mags. To include the 1911? I can’t believe it. It’s going to be interesting.

Now, that new Glock 30, looks like a winner. It might be something I’ll look into.

Mass better enjoy what Kimber Remington offer at show becuase they are 2 mfgs gun companys that gone be most effect buy Draconian gun laws New York state try pass. How is Kimber Remington gone Mfg guns that are not gone be allowed to be mfg in state that ban them from being?? Gun mfg in New York state well come to end if draconian gun laws go in effect.

But, Mas, Bloomberg is an idiot.

As for the “gun control” drivel that is about to be unleashed upon us, I shall not comply.

ECS

Seems like it is now coming out that the school shooter DID NOT use an AR-15 type weapon at all, but used 4 handguns instead.

Guess the Lame Stream Media too, gets caught up with the “Oh what tangled Webs we weave, when first we practice to deceive” as well.

http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495#50208495

Just checked the gun closet to make sure none of mine had loaded themselves and walked out the door. I kept close attention on the AR-15 just to be safe; you know how evil that beastie can be. I was almost afraid to touch it lest it turn me into a homicidal maniac by it’s mere presence.

FYI: Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) has opened her yap about a $2K tax credit for those who turn in “assault weapons”. As if, lady…my security is worth more than that. And I don’t own an “assault weapon”; I own a semi-automatic rifle.

@Dave

What was the point of that comment???

Maybe if I’m real lucky I have five years left then old age will take me home. I am disabled. I can not run I can not fight, but no matter what any government says I will not be a victim, This is why I ask Mass for the LEO’S take on all this. If you stop a disabled person in your jurisdiction with a 7 ½ round clip in his CLP hand gun are you going to arrest him, slap him with a fine and put him in prison? I have come to the conclusion that from this day forward should there be a violent crime committed right in front of me as long as it does not affect me, my family, friends or little children, you are on your own. Whatever happens to you including police officers in trouble it’s not my business any longer. *I spent 17 years as a first responder with a fire department protecting property and life. I beloved in this country and what it stood for, NOT ANY MORE. This crap will drag out long after I am dead and gone. The best I can hope for is that I will be left alone to live out what is left in piece. I never dreamed when I was growing up in this country it would ever come to this. If it gets completely God only knows what will happen. Given the outstanding support we have had from the republicans in New York State we are in real trouble.

I pray for all of you and my country but no more. I’m out of here!

Manufacturers that are still in states such as California, New York, and Illinois, you will find many other gun friendly states ready and willing to bring you to their state.

I would suspect that the 7 round requirement might fail the undue burden on rights test used in the 7th Circuit. Might even fail the rational basis test. There are several reasons this might be a bridge too far for New York. First, notnstandard magazine size requiring non-existent New York only magazines which would not be able to be sold effectively elsewhere, criminalizing existing guns and magazines without compensation (14th Amendment takings clause) etc. Next, many historic arms used (see 1911, Enfield, Garand, M1 Carbine, even Henry’s level action rifles in such threatening calibers as .22 standard magazines would be banned. If the existing Supreme Court majority stands, this has a good potential to be overturned.

As a side note, if you are a New York resident supporting the 2nd Amendment, I would try to move heaven and earth to defeat every cowardly NY Senator that voted for this monstrosity–primary them, protest them at their offices, contribute to their opponents, Make their bill a Pyrrhic victory along with your authoritarian governor. In the end, we get the government that we collectively deserve.

Let us pray every day on the continued good health of those justices in the majority on Heller and MacDonald.

I am reading some gun (and gun accessory) manufacturers who have pledged NOT to sell to the NYPD (and related agencies) as a result of this bill passing.

Hopefully word has/is been getting around at the SHOT show about this, and ALL manufacturers and distributors will follow suit.

I’d like to see them do to NY what Ronnie Barrett did to CA, but on a much grander scale. There may even still be time to foil a passing vote.

Please pass the word around!

Paul, I believe that clip was based on a very early report with incomplete information.

With 300 million firearms in private hands (one-third of them pistols), the overwhelming majority of gun owners ARE responsible, law-abiding citizens, which is why horrific massacres are not commonplace, but rather terrible outliers that can never be legislated away (e.g. DC, Chicago, and “Gun Free Zones”).

For several examples for the recent use of firearms for defensive purposes not typically reported by the national media please visit: http://www.equalforce.net and forward this site to others to whom this information may be useful. @forceequalizer

I do agree that some of the antics politicians are ridculous.

But comments on the “weakness” of the 5.56mm seem a little, well, silly. It has proven more than capable of killing human beings – be those humans innocent theatre goers who just wanted a nights entertainment, or evil terrorists who wanted to destroy Western civillisation.

And frankly would anyone reading this who was shot at by a criminal armed a 5.56mm NATO rifle, or even a .22LR, NOT feel justified in using lethal force to defend themselves?

Here’s a former Judge who gets it:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/10/the-right-to-shoot-tyrants-not-deer/

(If the link doesn’t work, just google: right to shoot tyrants not deer)

Wow, New York! Your elected representatives are willing to make crimminals out of millions and millions of you law abiding citizens. The Constitution of the United States does not grant individuals rights and freedoms, as their representatives seem to believe. We have rights already – inalienable rights . The Constitution details some of them, but does not put a defining limit on them. It does, however, limit Government, and does not give Government the power to use a needs test to infringe upon those inalienable, God-given rights. Piers Morgan, because he has the mind of a subject, and not a free man, does not get this. The Legislature of New York and it’s “King,” Coumo, either, do not get this, or they are not aware of, or just choose to reject, the founding principles of this country. You can use the faulty logic behind the attempt to eliminate our 2nd Amendment rights to ban anything: automobiles, trains, airlines, electricity, hammers, knives, screwdrivers, building in huricane, flood, or tornado prone areas, Chantix and any number of drugs with known psychoactive properties, peaked roofs, and anything for which there is a risk. Sound farfetched? Look at what has happenned with the Interstate Commerce Clause. This assault upon our rights is not just about the 2nd Amendment.

I’ve been reading through the crap that NY is trying to shove down the throats of their people… Can be found here: http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/bill/S2230-2013

From what I can tell, if you have a magazine that is 7-10 rounds, you can still keep it (after registering I assume), but you may never load more than 7 rounds into it…

How is this going to save lives?

New York State’s New Gun Laws – The Bullet Points

New York has passed the most restrictive gun laws in the history of the United States, ever. Per NBCNews, the law provides for the following:
■Police would create a registry of assault weapons. Those New Yorkers who already own such weapons would be required to register their guns with the state. Current state law defines assault weapons as having two “military rifle” features, but the legislation reduces that specification to just one feature and makes the unsafe storage of assault weapons a misdemeanor.
■Private sales of assault weapons to people outside the immediate family circle would be subject to a background check and online sales of assault weapons would be banned.
■Magazines would be restricted to seven bullets, from the current 10. Current owners of higher-capacity magazines would have a year to sell them out of state. If an owner is found to have eight or more bullets in a magazine, she could face a misdemeanor charge.
■Ammunition dealers are required to do background checks, similar to those for gun buyers, and those sales and amounts must be reported to the state.
■The proposed measure would require that stolen guns be reported within 24 hours.
■The measure would also enshrine a system through which mental health professionals would be required to report to officials when they believe their patients may harm themselves or others. In such cases, police would be allowed to confiscate any guns owned by a potentially dangerous patient.

It is over. We in NYS now are the recipient of the most draconian firearms laws yet adopted by any State. Fortunately, my State Senator (ex-County Sheriff, ex-NYSP) and Assemblywoman opposed this legislation; unfortunatley, their courage and wisdom will probably lead to derision and scorn. They saw it for what it was, a blatant attempt to strip us of our guaranteed Constituional rights in the name of “safety and security” and the “end of a menace”.

Here’s a few tidbits, at least what I can gather, this legislation does not have specifics where they need to be. Consequently, just about any firearm, save for a 6 shot revolver, double barrel shotgun or bolt action rifle could be banned or at least transfer to another owner prohibited.

Semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines that look like military models; banned. A registry will be started.

Magazines holding more than 7, yes 7 rounds of ammunition banned, ownership may or may not be allowed for previously legal 10 round magazines. If you have one holding more than 10 rounds, it will be considered a misdemeanor at best unless they are transferred out of state. If you have a 10 round magazine with more than 7 rounds in it, it would be considered a misdemeanor if you are caught. I guess maybe you can still have a 1911, .45 ACP with a 7 round full size box.

New York was a may-issue state regarding simple handgun posession; now licenses will need to be renewed every 5 years. No details provided, other than the Counties will have to transfer records to the NYSP Weapons Licensing Bureau; no rules or regulation yet specified or promulgated for renewal. This could cause us to loose licenses.

One can still have their firearms taken away for “mental health” issues. If a mental health professional (no clear definition here either) considers you a threat to yourself or others.

We, in NYS tried, we spoke loud and long. Heed this example well as it will be coming to your state next. All of the minor gains we made for our 2A rights were destroyed in one day where tyrants ruled. Not only was the legislative process subverted, but it was trampled by those who professed to protect and defend it. It was an emergency, said the Governor; “we need to pass this before more high capacity magazines and assault rifles were sold”.

Well, this must be a sign from above to buy that M&P15-22 recently advertised by a local guy…FTF, no-paperwork sale of one of those deadly .22LR ARs? Heck, yeah! Thanks for making my decision for me, Mister Mayor; I’ll name it Lil’ Mikey in your honor!

Notice how smart Bloomberg is at business. He’s a billionaire. Then look at how ignorant he is about politics, history, The Constitution and firearms. When someone is “smart” they are smart in some area of knowledge, not all areas.

Notice how, in one form or another, guns are in the news EVERY DAY, and they always have been. If there is a news story about a crime or a war, guns are probably involved. And yet, journalists, who are reporting on the news every day, and frequently encounter firearm-related stories DON’T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT FIREARMS! How can they be considered professionals? They are willingly ignorant of firearms because they don’t like them.

Looks like I won’t be the only law abiding, U.S. loving Vietnam vet who becomes a felon thanks to a bunch of misguided voters who just wanted to do the right thing and have a black man as president.
I would have been proud to vote for a black American.

BTW, now, before the president sends out folks to dig up your guns, bury A LOT of scrap metal all around your yard, have a nice cold lemonade and sit in the shade watching them dig.

Actually I read that we lucky New Yorkers ARE allowed to possess and use a ten round mag, as long as it only has seven bullets in it. More than that is a misdemeanor, which would coincidentally cost you your gun license too. And what are we supposed to do with the other three bullets, keep them in our pocket like Barney Fife? As soon as I can get my ass out of this state, I’m gone.

You just know all the criminals will comply with this NY joke of a law. [sarcasm] We have enough criminals without passing these ignorant laws and creating a few million more!

This should sum it up: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly – it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over”

– Joseph Goebbels, Reich Minister Of Propaganda and liberal visionary

Sorry mas, thanks for the catch.

I rechecked the site, and that was from Dec. 15, 1012

Not that it isn’t something I would put past our current leader anyway?

Rant mode on.

I don’t understand why the anti-gunners are so adamant. It can’t be a conspiracy to take away our guns and then take over the government. They can’t really believe that taking the guns from honest, law-abiding citizens will make the crime rate go down. They can’t really ignore the crime numbers from countries like Australia. Or would they? Or can they?
I don’t understand why some of our elected officials are so eager to disarm us. Are we really that much of a threat ?
And the NRA? Why can’t they do a better job of putting together a plan to help prevent another massacre in our schools that wouldn’t be so repugnant to everyone on the other side?
I know. I’m paranoid, right?

Rant mode off.

So Mas, what I really want to know is how good your shooting is in the new NRA iPad app.

I’m getting the hang of it, but think it might be more fun if the iPad was held in a pistol grip or rifle stock so aiming with the gyroscope is more natural than the two-handed 3&9 o’clock iPad grip which is only found in nature on a Browning 50 cal.

The NRA needs to be raising hell in NY with their Governors new restrictions and doing so loudly.
Tomorrow it is King Obama turn.

As a retired police officer, firearms instructor, life NRA member, hunter and gun enthusiast who believes highly in the right to self defense 7 round limitations is now VERY DANGEROUS against the modern day criminals. The criminals in the early 80’s forced the police departments to go to our semi auto 15 round pistols then to keep up with the force used against us then again with carbine rifles no later than early 90’s we all had them it was a most to fight back.
What about civilian self defense it is now out the window with such strict restrictions???
This is a travesty what happened in NY lets hope this does not happen nation wide because the criminals will have a field day with all of us. We, NRA, Gun Manufactures all need to speak up!

Let’s see if Obama guts the Second Amendment tomorrow. An OK rep is threatening impeachment, a great idea, should have happened after he signed NDAA. Being President does not make you a king. Gutting the Bill of Rights makes you a tyrant.

Question: Will this ban the Smith & Wesson Model 627 revolver that is chambered for 8 rounds of .357 Magnum? How about the Ruger .22 Single Ten?

ECS

I am curious about something. The prisons are already overcrowded, where are they going to put all of the new “criminals” they are going to create? Yes, some people will give up there guns and magazines with over 7 or 10 or whatever number round capacity might be. Alot of others are going to “go underground.”

Once in awhile they will catch someone and make an example out of them,(unless they are David Gregory apparantly.) But I have to wonder, how many people will volunteer for the gun confiscation detail?

I suspect not everyone will go quietly.

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”–
Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

It would seem that the government representatives of New York are first lemmings to jump off the cliff.

“Act in haste, repent at leisure.” NYS legislature’s emotion-driven experience is NOT good government. Ram-rodding this draconian measure just to “do something, anything” as a response to the Newtown atrocity will have unintended consequences that will reveal their folly. Why punish law-abiding citizens? It doesn’t make sense!

I would like our Governor here to close the borders to refugees from NY State. If those folks allowed these wing-nuts to be in power, I don’t think we want them bringing their pathos here and voting the same way.

Steve: you’re not paranoid if they really are out to criminalize you for owning guns.

I think NY – of all the places – has just raised the white flag to Al Queda and the replacement towers aren’t even built yet.

Here is a link to a six minute video regarding the Australian Gun Ban Laws, and what happened there, and their WARNING to America about letting the same thing take place here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=fGaDAThOHhA

From Reuters:

Wed Jan 16, 2013 11:37am EST

* Gun lobby ad refers to president’s children

* Harsh attacks come hours ahead of Obama’s proposals on guns

* White House calls ad “repugnant and cowardly”

By Samuel P. Jacobs

WASHINGTON, Jan 16 (Reuters) – Hours before President Barack Obama was due to unveil proposals on Wednesday to prevent mass shootings like the one in Newtown, Connecticut, last month, the National Rifle Association released an advertisement that referred to his two school-aged daughters.

“Are the president’s kids more important than yours?” a narrator says in the 35-second television and Internet spot. “Then why is he skeptical about putting armed security in our schools when his kids are protected by armed guards at their schools? Mr. Obama demands the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes, but he’s just another elitist hypocrite when it comes to a fair share of security.”

Obama’s two children, who attend private school in Washington, D.C., receive Secret Service protection.

The White House condemned the ad.

“Most Americans agree that a president’s children should not be used as pawns in a political fight. But to go so far as to make the safety of the president’s children the subject of an attack ad is repugnant and cowardly,” White House spokesman Jay Carney said.

Former Obama press secretary Robert Gibbs, speaking earlier on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program, said the ad was “disgusting on so many levels.”

Gun control activists and gun rights advocates have said in recent days that they could find common ground, particularly over the issue of expanding background checks for potential gun owners.

The NRA ad’s tone, however, and the personal nature of the attacks speaks to the cultural gulf that divides both sides.

The clip, called “Stand and Fight,” promotes the leading gun lobby’s proposal to put armed guards in schools. The idea has been at the center of the NRA’s response to the Dec. 14 shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, in which 20 children and 6 adults were killed.

The ad is airing on the Sportsman Channel, a cable network, but will likely receive a much larger viewership on news stations and through the Internet.

The NRA, which says it has about 4 million members, also announced earlier this week that it would produce a nightly one-hour cable talk show hosted by gun advocate Cam Edwards on the Sportsman Channel.

“I am skeptical that the only answer is putting more guns in schools,” Obama said in a recent interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press. “And I think the vast majority of the American people are skeptical that that somehow is going to solve our problem.”

In a survey released on Monday, the Pew Research Center found that people favor putting armed guards or police officers in more schools by a two-to-one margin, 64 percent to 32 percent.

From Yahoo! News:
QUOTE:
Updated 12:45 p.m. ET

President Barack Obama on Wednesday rolled out a sweeping plan to combat gun violence, including a universal background checks for every gun buyers, a ban on assault weapons and ammunition clips that hold more than 10 bullets. It was the most ambitious effort by a U.S. president to tighten gun laws in a generation and faces certain opposition among Republicans and some Democrats in Congress.

Obama was set to to take executive action on 23 items including requiring federal agencies to report more information to the federal background check system and direct the Centers for Disease Control to research gun violence. But he acknowledged his more ambitious proposals would have to clear Congress.

“This will not happen unless the American people demand it,” Obama said, saying people from all over the country, including areas where gun ownership is popular, must speak out in favor of new restrictions.

The president was joined by Vice President Joe Biden and some of the children who wrote to Obama in the aftermath of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School last month that left 26 people dead, including 20 first graders.

The total cost of the president’s proposals is estimated at $500 million.

At the bottom of this post is a fact sheet, provided by the White House, detailing Obama’s proposals. But administration officials on a conference call previewing the announcement fleshed out some important details (on condition that they not be named—and left some important questions unanswered:

– They wouldn’t say whether any of the steps the president is recommending would have prevented the massacre at Sandy Hook and other recent mass shootings. One senior official on the call did say, “There’s no question that both the actions that he’s taking and the legislation that he’s proposing will save lives.”

– They did not provide an estimate of how many lives would be saved annually if the president got everything he wanted, saying the social science on gun deaths is not precise enough to do so.

– Obama isn’t sending “specific legislative language” to Congress, the officials said, instead following his usual blueprint of laying out principles and then letting lawmakers craft a bill.

– In keeping with the president’s promises, his proposals would limit the manufacture of new assault weapons and ammunition clips with more than 10 bullets—but would not affect those already on the market.

– How did they settle on 10 bullets (and not seven, or 15)? One official said that number was taken from the 1994 assault weapons ban that Obama hopes to renew and strengthen.

– Was the so-called “Fast and Furious” gun trafficking scandal a factor in shaping the president’s proposals? “It was not,” said one official.

Bowing to political reality, Obama’s proposals included a wave of executive actions that circumvent Congress, where most Republicans and a few Democrats have balked at sweeping new restrictions they say could trample constitutional gun rights. The potent National Rifle Association lobby has also pledged to defeat new gun control measures.

On the other side, retired congresswoman and mass shooting survivor Gabby Giffords plans to lobby her former colleagues, and national public opinion polls have shown a surge in popular support for new gun laws.

The president has long said he seeks a comprehensive strategy for preventing future mass shootings while diminishing the death toll from smaller-scale daily killings, officials said. Some of what he unveiled would require congressional action, like the assault weapons ban. Some could be achieved with merely a presidential signature—a step that could, in some cases, inflame opposition in Congress, notably among House Republicans.

(Some of those are decidedly small-scale, however: One of the 23 “executive actions” trumpeted by the White House was that Obama will “clarify” that Obamacare “does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.”)

The proposals were the fruit of extensive discussions, led by Biden, with victims’ groups, organizations that represent gun owners, elected officials and law-enforcement leaders.

Obama wants to boost anti-bullying campaigns in schools, and training for educators. He also wants to give schools the ability to use some federal funds to improve safety—but did not explicitly echo the NRA’s demand for armed guards in schools.

Key steps also included imposing background checks on all gun purchases. Right now, an estimated 40 percent fall outside existing law, including those at gun shows and other ‘private’ sales, according to gun-control advocates. The existing system has stopped an estimated 1.5 million improper gun sales, according to an Obama aide, but “there’s still too many loopholes.” The president directed Attorney General Eric Holder to take a “fresh look” into whether the categories of people prohibited from buying firearms needs to be expanded or updated.

Obama also aimed to thaw what the White House called a “freeze” in scientific research of gun violence by the Centers for Disease Control. And he urged Congress to bankroll the CDC to do research into possible linkages between violent video games and other media images and real-life violence, to the tune of $10 million.

Below is a White House-provided fact sheet listing his “executive actions.”

Gun Violence Reduction Executive Actions

Today, the President announced that he and the administration will:

–Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.
–Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.
–Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system.
–Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.
–Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.
–Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.
–Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.
–Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission).
–Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.
–Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.
–Nominate an ATF director.
–Provide law enforcement, first responders and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations.
–Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.
–Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.
–Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies.
–Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.
–Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.
–Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.
–Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.
–Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.
–Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.
–Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.
–Launch a national dialogue led by [Human Services Secretary Kathleen] Sebelius and [Education Secretary [Arne] Duncan on mental health.
UNQUOTE

Yes this is a MP 15-22 I own one just like it. I have to keep it lock up in my gun safe because it keeps trying to walk out the door on its own.Dangedest thing thing I ever seen.

The Sullivan Law was passed to protect the criminals who constituted the base of the Demokrat Partei. This collection of idiocy undoubtedly has the same intent.

New York is assuring itself once again the number 50 spot on George Mason University’s annual State Freedom Survey.

you new york gun owners need to quit whining, pull up your underoos and march on the damn courthouse, guns in hand. if they pull that crap in va, i’d be typing this from the steps now, or busy shooting. they just violated the U.S. Constitution. what more provocation do you need?

Dave Says:
January 15th, 2013

The 223/5.56mm rifle round may be deemed by most states as “too weak” to hunt deer, but it apparently is not too weak to kill 20 kids and 6 adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

Nor is it too weak to serve as the primary rifle round for our military. It is a good round with ltle kick. Perfect for self-defense (apart from its penetration). I have chopped up cinder blocks with it (multiple rounds of course) and shot through cinder block walls after tearing them up.

I woke up a criminal today. Yep that’s right… I’m a tax paying, law abiding citizen not having so much as a parking or speeding ticket in the last 20 years. What’s my crime? Owning fire arms who have been outlawed in the dead of night using underhanded and illegal political tricks that circumvent due process and the will of the people. I have been made a criminal by a self serving, grand standing politician with eyes on a Whitehouse bid in 2016. I’m done with entertaining the given reasons for this farce. Your stated rationale plays on the emotions of a frightened easily manipulated minority and has NO real ability to prevent ANY of the goals you soooo adamantly promised! I’m calling you Andrew Cuomo a liar, a self serving manipulator and a petty tyrant! Offended? Well so am I!!!

Andrew Cuomo rammed through his political agenda on the backs of the dead children and faculty of sandy hook. Like a veteran politician he was not going to let a crisis go to waste. He rammed his arbitrary laws bypassing a review and debate period under the guise of imminent danger to the people of New York. It was soooo critical to have this pushed through that you could not follow due process and wait the 72 hours… If your legislation was soooo good it should hold up to debate and scrutiny and survive on it’s own merits. Apparently it couldn’t or you would not have used EVERY political dirty trick in the book to get what YOU wanted!

I’m calling a spade a spade here… lies and manipulation has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that the deceit and false premise you propagate is just as good as my truth and knowledge. “Cui bono”, “To whose benefit?” literally translated “as a benefit to whom?” I ask who really benefits from this Legislation. The people? The children? The gun manufactures? Or you sir? You just had to be first before the white house had a chance to put their jackbooted foot on out necks. You hope to ride to the white house by the fact that YOU were tough on gun control before the feds! Grand standing spewing false hoods as truth with NO regard to the will of the people!!

If gun control advocates want to actually have meaningful discussion and debate about the “assault weapon” and “high capacity” ban, they MUST address these questions:
– Why ban cosmetic features?
– Why ban guns used in a mere 2% of crime?
– Why base gun control legislation on rare and statistically insignificant mass shootings to begin with?
– Why ban magazines that have been consistently sized since their invention?
And most importantly:
After a decade of failure, why assume that the bans will reduce violent crime THIS time around?

You motives are crystal clear sir! Pure political ambition. This will not end well for your political career as people see right through the thinly veiled motives. And those who you have wronged with this have long memories… It will not be business as usual. You think you have a presidential bid? The people will remember the underhanded tactics used to step on their rights. That is not a quality that will keep you in the governor seat. That being said, why would you think, after this tyrannical move you would EVER be trusted as president? You have proved that you put YOUR ambitions above the people and the constitution. This statement will be echoed by many “You have lost my trust, respect and my vote!”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=974KHC5DozQ

New Hampshire: Your Right to Self-Defense is Under Attack

On Tuesday, January 22 at 1:30 p.m., the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee will hear House Bill 135. This misguided legislation, introduced by state Representative Stephen Shurtleff (D- Merrimack 11), drastically infringes on your inherent right to self-defense by repealing important self-defense provisions enacted in 2011.

In 2011, Senate Bill 88 restored the right to self-defense in New Hampshire with broad bipartisan support and established that law-abiding citizens have the right to defend themselves and a third party from assault wherever they have the legal right to be. However, HB 135, if passed and enacted, would eradicate the aforementioned protections for law-abiding citizens acting in self-defense.

HB 135 would make the following changes to New Hampshire’s current self-defense laws:

1) Eliminates the provision that allows a person to use deadly force anywhere he or she has a legal right to be. This limits an individual’s ability to defend themselves or third party from assault to their own place of residence.

2) Amends the definition of non-deadly force by removing the provision that specifies the act of producing or displaying a weapon is considered non-deadly force. Thus, drawing or exhibiting your firearm to intimidate a perpetrator could be considered deadly force.

3) Repeals the provision granting civil immunity for the use of force in certain circumstances. The elimination of this provision removes legal protections for law abiding citizens acting in self-defense.

This legislation is a step in the wrong direction for New Hampshire. HB 135 severely encroaches on your inherent right to self-defense and will render law-abiding citizens and their loved ones defenseless victims.

Please contact members of the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee TODAY and urge them to reject this imprudent legislation that will put you and your loved ones at risk. Contact information can be found below:

Arizona Legislature Attempting to Make Enforcement of Federal Firearms Law a Felony

I knew there was a reason I liked Arizona. I mean other than the beauty of the desert and the awesomeness that is Gunsite. The Arizona Legislature is now considering a measure that would make it a felony for any public servant, FFL or federal agent to attempt to enforce any Federal firearms law on a gun manufactured within the Arizona borders that remains within those borders. Make the jump for the full text.

A. A PUBLIC SERVANT OR A FEDERALLY LICENSED DEALER WHO SELLS FIREARMS IN THIS STATE SHALL NOT ENFORCE OR ATTEMPT TO ENFORCE ANY ACT, LAW, STATUTE, RULE OR REGULATION OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT RELATING TO A PERSONAL FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY OR AMMUNITION THAT IS OWNED OR MANUFACTURED COMMERCIALLY OR PRIVATELY IN THIS STATE AND THAT REMAINS EXCLUSIVELY WITHIN THE BORDERS OF THIS STATE.

B. AN OFFICIAL, AGENT OR EMPLOYEE OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SHALL NOT ENFORCE OR ATTEMPT TO ENFORCE ANY ACT, ORDER, LAW, STATUTE, RULE OR REGULATION OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT RELATING TO A PERSONAL FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY OR AMMUNITION THAT IS OWNED OR MANUFACTURED COMMERCIALLY OR PRIVATELY IN THIS STATE AND THAT REMAINS EXCLUSIVELY WITHIN THE BORDERS OF THIS STATE.

C. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MAY DEFEND A CITIZEN OF THIS STATE WHO IS PROSECUTED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT FOR VIOLATION OF A FEDERAL LAW RELATING TO THE MANUFACTURE, SALE, TRANSFER OR POSSESSION OF A FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY OR AMMUNITION THAT IS OWNED OR MANUFACTURED AND THAT IS RETAINED EXCLUSIVELY WITHIN THE BORDERS OF THIS STATE.

D. ANY FEDERAL LAW, RULE, REGULATION OR ORDER THAT IS EFFECTIVE ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2013 IS UNENFORCEABLE WITHIN THE BORDERS OF THIS STATE IF THE LAW, RULE, REGULATION OR ORDER ATTEMPTS TO DO ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:

1. BAN OR RESTRICT OWNERSHIP OF A SEMIAUTOMATIC FIREARM OR ANY MAGAZINE OF A FIREARM.

2. REQUIRE ANY FIREARM, MAGAZINE OR OTHER FIREARM ACCESSORY TO BE REGISTERED IN ANY MANNER.

E. A PERSON WHO VIOLATES SUBSECTION B OF THIS SECTION IS GUILTY OF A CLASS 6 FELONY.

F. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, “PUBLIC SERVANT” MEANS ANY OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE OF THIS STATE OR ANY POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE, INCLUDING LEGISLATORS AND JUDGES, AND ANY PERSON WHO PARTICIPATES, AS JUROR, WITNESS, ADVISOR, CONSULTANT OR OTHERWISE, IN PERFORMING A GOVERNMENT FUNCTION.

[Source]

Other states have already passed similar legislation, even going as far as to nullify the National Firearms Act within their borders as long as the device doesn’t leave the state.

What we have here is an extremely interesting standoff between the Federal government and the states. The states are putting forward the same ideas as were popular before the Civil War of the 1860′s, that the states are sovereign and the Federal government is only meant to regulate disputes between the states. However, the Federal government has been increasingly tried to work its way into having power over things previously reserved for the states.

This is uncharted territory. And personally, I would love to see the Federal government get bitch-slapped back into its limited role. But we’ll have to see how this develops.

Federal Assault Weapon Ban Bill to be Introduced on Thursday

According to the Washington Times, Dianne Feinstein’s “assault weapons” ban bill will be officially introduced on Thursday in the Senate. For why an AWB is a dumb idea, mosey on over to this link. As far as we can tell, nothing has changed on the proposed legislation so it will still remove any grandfathering, require registration of “assault weapons” and ban magazines larger than 10 rounds (although that may have dropped to 7 after New York’s stunt). And once introduced, it will immediately . . .

Die. A quick, and painless death.

Probably.

Despite the Obama administration’s lip service that they want this thing passed, the reality on the ground is that there isn’t even enough support within the Democrat controlled Senate to pass the bill in that half of the legislature. The most likely scenario is that the bill is immediately sent to a committee and never sees the light of day.

However, while this bill is probably too politically charged to make its way through Congress, there’s a possibility that something more minor will be introduced and accepted as the “compromise” legislation. Like “only” a magazine capacity restriction.

I’ve already contacted my representatives. You probably should too.