FYI, I'll be joining Mark Walters on Armed American Radio again this evening at 8:30 pm EST to discuss the latest "Project Gunwalker" developments.
Click here for a radio station in your area, or here to listen live via the internet.
Sunday, May 29, 2011
Oath Keepers to muster in memoriam of Marine vet slain by SWAT team
I just got off the phone with Stewart Rhodes, founder and president of Oath Keepers. He and Sheriff Richard Mack will be conducting a Memorial Day muster tomorrow morning in memoriam for Jose Guerena, a U.S. Marine Corps veteran... [More]Please spread the word to friends in the Tucson area.
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Seattle Gun Rights Examiner co-authors Chicago Sun Times op-ed
Having an editorial published in the Chicago market by a major newspaper that is traditionally hostile to the right to keep and bear arms is an achievement with untold potential--for many of the readers, it could be the first time they have been exposed to such cogent arguments, plus, as this will undoubtedly provoke pro and con feedback (that is, evidence of readership), it could encourage the paper to continue providing a forum for such viewpoints. [More]Today's Gun Rights Examiner column showcases an ideological foray deep into enemy territory.
Friday, May 27, 2011
June is the Month...
That fits in perfectly with those we can expect to see tossed under the bus...
We're the Only Ones...
Got a few of these today and no time for individual posts:
...Love You Long, Long Time, Whether You Want it or Not Enough
...Shaking Down Enough (Note our prior report)
...Who Just Want to Hold You Enough
...Mechanical Enough
...Choking You Up Enough
...Not a Follower Enough
...A Real Mommy's Boy Enough
[Via Portly Pirate, Ron W, William T, Parrothead Jeff, Smiley Starfish]
...Love You Long, Long Time, Whether You Want it or Not Enough
...Shaking Down Enough (Note our prior report)
...Who Just Want to Hold You Enough
...Mechanical Enough
...Choking You Up Enough
...Not a Follower Enough
...A Real Mommy's Boy Enough
[Via Portly Pirate, Ron W, William T, Parrothead Jeff, Smiley Starfish]
In Response to Today's GRE
Just got this via email in response to today's GRE:
Your latest article was spot on. We got hosed by the Brady's and MAIG because they were using a form emailer to send in comments to the OMB. Apparently the OMB doesn't care about automated emails, they just count the pro and anti tally. That's how the anti-gunners beat us.
John Richardson of the blog No Lawyers Only Guns and Money and I were upset that we got one upped. So we worked together to fight fire with fire. I managed to figure out how to set up an automated email system of our own. It took some work but now we have it up and running on his blog. You simply fill out your name, email, city and state (optional), and there is a pre-filled note stating opposition to the plan. You hit submit, and the website emailmeform.com sends the email to oira_submission@omb.eop.gov on your behalf with your name, email, and city and state if you provided it, along with the pre-filled note and any changes or additional comments you want.
The website I used to create the form mailer is http://www.emailmeform.com/ They have all sorts of different forms for websites, if you want to check it out. It is free for up to 5 forms. You create the form and tell the form what to do with the submission, and then it spits out a html code you can copy and paste to any website.
We're trying to spread the word as quick and as wide as we can. If you wouldn't mind posting a link to http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/2011/05/easy-way-to-comment-on-atfs-power-grab.html or I attached the html code so you can post it yourself on your websites. Either way this is a simple way for our side to drum up support against this plan.
Also, this will work in the future for these comment periods. Since the OMB doesn't care what you say, only that you are pro or anti, we can use this form mailer for other issues or comment periods.
Meanwhile, Across the Pond in Sarah Brady Paradise...
Will gun owner apathy enable ATF’s ‘emergency’ long gun registration scheme?
“Profiles in apathy.” You know, inaction by gun owners that enables “gun control," derails valiant efforts and disheartens those who continually find themselves carrying an inordinate share of the burden? [More]Today's Gun Rights Examiner commentary presents the simplest of tasks, and notes how even this is too much for too many.
This Day in History: May 27
Headquarters, Reading, May 27, 1779
“Major General Putnam about to take command of one of the Wings of the Grand Army, before he leaves the troops who have served under him the winter past, thinks it his duty to signify to them his entire approbation of their regular and soldier like conduct, and wishes them a successful and glorious campaign.” [Read]
Thursday, May 26, 2011
A Difference of Opinion
Per Rand Paul:
UPDATE:
Just received this further explanation from NRA-ILA:
Amendment 363 clarifies that the authority to obtain info under the USA PATRIOT Act does not include authority to obtain certain firearm records.Per Chris Cox via NRA-ILA email:
Thank you for asking about the National Rifle Association's position on a motion to table amendment # 363 to the PATRIOT Act.
The NRA takes a back seat to no one when it comes to protecting gun owners' rights against government abuse. Over the past three decades, we've fought successfully to block unnecessary and intrusive compilation of firearms-related records by several federal agencies, and will continue to protect the privacy of our members and all American gun owners.
While well-intentioned, the language of this amendment as currently drafted raises potential problems for gun owners, in that it encourages the government to use provisions in current law that allow access to firearms records without reasonable cause, warrant, or judicial oversight of any kind.
Based on these concerns and the fact that the NRA does not ordinarily take positions on procedural votes, we have no position on a motion to table amendment # 363.
UPDATE:
Just received this further explanation from NRA-ILA:
As often happens with complex issues, NRA's position on Sen. Rand Paul's defeated PATRIOT Act amendment is being mis-reported by those who either don't understand the facts, or prefer their own version of "facts."
This amendment was rejected by 85 Senators, which included many of the strongest Second Amendment supporters in the U.S. Senate. Unfortunately, Senator Paul chose not to approach us on this issue before moving ahead. His amendment, which only received 10 votes, was poorly drafted and could have resulted in more problems for gun owners than it attempted to fix. For this reason, the NRA did not take a position on the amendment.
To be more specific about the amendment and its problems, the amendment would have prohibited use of PATRIOT Act legal authority for any "investigation or procurement of firearms records which is not authorized under [the Gun Control Act]." There have been no reports of the current PATRIOT Act being abused with respect to firearms records, however supporters suggested a far-fetched scenario in which every firearms sales record in the country--tens or hundreds of millions of documents dating back to 1968--could be sought. Again, we nor anyone else is aware of any case in which this authority has been used to abuse gun owners. (In fact, published reports indicate that few of these orders are ever sought for any reason.)
In particular, the amendment appeared to be aimed at so-called "section 215 letters"--orders from the FBI requiring the disclosure of "tangible things" such as records and documents.
Under the current PATRIOT Act, an application for this type of order with respect to firearms sales records has to be approved no lower than the director or deputy director of the FBI, or the Executive Assistant Director for National Security. The application is made to a federal judge based on "a statement of facts showing that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the tangible things sought are relevant to an authorized investigation ... to obtain foreign intelligence information not concerning a United States person or to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities." The judge has the power to modify the order and must direct the use of "minimization procedures" to protect the privacy of Americans.
If the Paul amendment were adopted, the FBI would have used other ways to access whatever firearms records it might need for intelligence or anti-terrorism investigations. This is especially troublesome for gun owners.
This would result in United States Attorneys simply demanding the same records through grand jury subpoenas, which require no judicial approval before issuance. Fighting a subpoena after the fact can be very costly and carries legal risks of its own, including possible charges for obstruction of justice.
Even worse, the government would have used the Gun Control Act's provision that allows the Attorney General to "inspect or examine the inventory and records of [a licensee] without ... reasonable cause or warrant" during a criminal investigation. That means by simply characterizing its activities as a "criminal investigation," it would enter a licensee's premises and demand these records without "reasonable cause or warrant"--in other words, without judicial oversight of any kind, and without any of the procedural limits imposed by the PATRIOT Act.
Therefore, given all of these potential problems for gun owners, the NRA could not support this poorly drafted amendment.
A Publicity Stunt
Cleveland Law Director Robert Triozzi said the case was 'more of a publicity stunt than a legal maneuver' and concluded that none of the city's ordinances conflicted with state law. [More]Yo, Triozzi,
That's some "publicity stunt," isn't it, genius?
Remind me if I ever need a lawyer to retain someone who's, you know...competent.
And not an oath-breaking, Constitution-hating left-wing parasite.
You and Jackson. No wonder Cleve-burg's such a pathetic urban joke, and the kindest thing anyone can say about it is "At least we're not Detroit."
You know what you guys need to do to fix things?
Ban transfats and smoking and drive even more business out!
Uh...I Mean...
Frank...thought Moses would be "great" for the "entry-level position." [More]Yes, it actually says that.
For Law Enforcement/Military Use Only
For a freakin' backpack?
A correspondent contacted me the other day about this:
The lady on the other end told him it was an ATF requirement!
That didn't sound right, so I chased it down with U.S. Cavalry's PR guy, who told me she was mistaken, it was a requirement imposed by CamelBak, whose PR guy elected not to reply.
Funny thing: I noted Botach Tactical had no such requirement yesterday, but someone scrambled and added the caveat.
So I guess the bottom line is, CamelBak doesn't trust you with a backpack. Me, I'd remember that when they offer to trade what they do trust us with for dollars.
Stupid name for one anyway: "Urban Assault Concealment Pack."
Unless they're going to deploy it like Ruth Buzzi.
A correspondent contacted me the other day about this:
That didn't sound right, so I chased it down with U.S. Cavalry's PR guy, who told me she was mistaken, it was a requirement imposed by CamelBak, whose PR guy elected not to reply.
Funny thing: I noted Botach Tactical had no such requirement yesterday, but someone scrambled and added the caveat.
So I guess the bottom line is, CamelBak doesn't trust you with a backpack. Me, I'd remember that when they offer to trade what they do trust us with for dollars.
Stupid name for one anyway: "Urban Assault Concealment Pack."
Unless they're going to deploy it like Ruth Buzzi.
It's the "Patriotic" Thing to Do!
EXTRA! EXTRA! READ ALL ABOUT IT!
Here's an old report nobody noticed.
And here's the source.
Drudge has been pretty much useless on Gunwalker, too, as well as the gun issue in general.
We're the Only Ones Running Enough
Four federal agencies are probing an alleged gun-running scheme involving Lake County Sheriff's Department personnel. [More]I guess they don't want any competition...?
[Via HZ]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)