NRA

Uncategorized

Wayne LaPierre On Trump’s Win

November 15, 2016 by 1 Comment

The NRA released this video yesterday. Wayne LaPierre congratulates the 5 million men and women members of the NRA and outlines some of the things they intend to push President-elect Trump to sign once he is in office.

Here is the transcript of the video:

Transcript

On November 8, you—the 5 million men and women of the National Rifle Association of America, along with the tens of millions of gun owners all over this country who followed your lead—achieved a truly extraordinary, historic, even heroic, accomplishment. In northern Florida and Pennsylvania, throughout Ohio, Wisconsin and Michigan, in small towns and communities all across America, you were the special forces that swung this election and sent Donald Trump and Mike Pence to the White House.


You did this. Don’t let anybody else tell you otherwise.


In the wake of this historic event, the same disgraced group of so-called experts, talking heads, pundits and pollsters that got everything wrong before the election are trying to deceive you once again. So let me remove all doubt: gun owners made this election happen. Hillary Clinton made her hatred for the Second Amendment a central issue of this campaign and as a result of that fatal mistake, she’s on permanent political vacation.


Your determination to defend individual freedom, joined with the other issues at the very heart of this race, ensured that only one candidate could receive the approval of the American people: Donald Trump.


The disgraceful media attempted to manipulate your emotions. They tried to suppress your enthusiasm, your speech, your vote. But you would not be distracted from the core freedom that was truly at stake—and for that, you deserve the gratitude of the entire nation. You proved the founders right: that the ultimate check and balance in this country is the American people.


I joined this quest to restore Second Amendment freedom almost 40 years ago. Many of you were there with me. Together, we have restored, expanded and protected the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution—and are prepared to pass it forward to the generations of Americans who will take up this cause.


Our victory in this election is a monumental step toward securing the future of this freedom. Soon, President Trump will nominate a constitutionally sound justice to replace Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court. Make no mistake: that will be a generational victory for Second Amendment freedom—and you made it happen.


But we must also face the reality that still confronts us. For eight straight years, Barack Obama flooded the appellate courts and the federal judiciary with judges who truly despise Second Amendment freedom. More than 300 Obama-appointed anti-gun judges represent an infection for which there is no cure, other than time and vigilance. They will pose a threat to our gun rights for decades to come.


We also face a growing group of anti-Second Amendment elitist billionaires, led by George Soros and Michael Bloomberg. By pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into state and local elections, they have succeeded in confusing many voters into believing clever labeling like “universal background checks” and so-called “common sense” schemes will make a difference in the safety and security of our communities.


The truth is, the anti-gun billionaires have only one goal: the absolute eradication of the Second Amendment freedom for the average American citizen. Not for their security forces, their families and themselves. But for you: the everyday American who stormed the polls in an act of ultimate defiance of the elites. They will continue to enjoy the support of an openly dishonest media that truly hates your right to speak, your right to worship and your right to vote. And most of all, your right to keep and bear arms.


In the face of the bitter hatred and elitist condemnation, this is our historic moment to go on offense and defeat the forces that have aligned against our freedom once and for all. The individual right to carry a firearm in defense of our lives and our families does not, and should not, end at any state line. I call on Congress and the president-elect to pass National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity as quickly as it can be written and signed.


And it is time, once and for all, to end the absolute fallacy of gun-free zones. Not one more American serviceman or woman should be murdered on a military base because the government denied their right to defend themselves with a firearm. We revere the men and women in uniform who defend our freedom, and their rights must be restored immediately.


I also call for protections that stop the tyrannical erosion of gun rights in states and cities where corrupt leaders use their political power to abuse the rights of American citizens. I’m talking about a deceitful web of gun bans, ammo bans, magazine bans, exorbitant fees and taxes, and registration schemes—all designed to undermine the meaning of the Second Amendment and the Supreme Court decisions that uphold it.


The Court’s Heller decision recognized the right of Washington, D.C. citizens to own a firearm in their home for personal protection. But eight years later, it is still almost impossible to legally buy a firearm in that city. If the anti-gun forces can get away with sanctuary city-type exclusions where they unilaterally defy the rights of American citizens, then your Second Amendment protections only exists if your local government recognizes them. It must be illegal for corrupt, bureaucratic elites to deny law-abiding Americans their full measure of Second Amendment freedom.


These goals and more are now possible because of the historic work that you have done. It is only because of your sacrifices that we have this unique opportunity to defend the one freedom that protects all the others: our Second Amendment. But before we can say that it has been secured and is intact for us to pass on to the next generation, we must face these very real challenges with the strength, courage and purpose you have proven to possess.


Our time is now. We must approach the coming fights with the same urgency and determined action that ended the political future of Hillary Rodham Clinton. That’s why I need you to renew your membership, upgrade your membership, join this organization and be part of the hard work and the victories that are yet to come. You have proven to be ready for the challenge.

Uncategorized

Colion Noir Calls Out The Media

July 11, 2016 by 1 Comment

The media has been trying to use the shooting of Philandro Castile in Minnesota as a wedge between the African-American community and the National Rifle Association. They are saying that the NRA doesn’t care about black gun owners. Moreover, as this article in Inquisitr makes clear, they continue to try and make this a wedge issue because in the NRA’s call for an investigation in Minnesota they did not mention Mr. Castile by name. They are saying the NRA is facing an internal split. I don’t see it.

Colion Noir calls out the media and commentators who pushing the meme that the NRA doesn’t care about black gun owners. He notes that just like Philandro Castile he is a 32 year old black man with a carry permit that was stopped for a traffic infraction just two weeks ago.

Colion Noir is usually somewhat laid back and cool. Here he is not. He’s angry and he’s tired of putting up with the crap that the media and other critics have spewed towards him personally and to the NRA.

Uncategorized

Confusing The NRA With The NSSF

July 2, 2016 by 2 Comments

The Seattle City Council has mandated that pistols that would normally be traded in when the police department makes upgrades will be destroyed. This boneheaded move which passed council with an unanimous vote will cost taxpayers approximately $30,000 according to the website Blue Lives Matter.

“Officer Blue” then went on to make this statement:

What the Seattle city council is ignoring here is that guns are still being actively manufactured and sold. Destroying old guns doesn’t reduce the number of guns on the streets, it just increases the number of newly manufactured guns being purchased. The NRA is unlikely to oppose such a knuckle-headed policy, because destroying old firearms increases the profits of gun manufacturers. Gun manufacturers only make money on the first time that a firearm is sold. All used gun sales are potentially a lost sale to a gun manufacturer. If other police departments follow suit in destroying their used firearms, then you might want to look into purchasing stock in gun manufacturing companies.

“Officer Blue” is making the common media mistake of thinking that the NRA is an agent of gun manufacturers. While they have good relationships with the manufacturers, it is not the job of the National Rifle Association to increase the profits of the firearms industry. That is the job of their trade association the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

In reality, I think both organizations would oppose the destruction of these firearms. The NRA would oppose it as a matter of public policy as it recognizes that not all shooters can afford new firearms. Moreover, historically many surplus firearms such as M1 carbines were sold directly to shooters under the auspices of the NRA. The NSSF would oppose it because their constituency also includes FFLs as well as manufacturers.

Uncategorized

A Friendly Reminder To Take Action

June 17, 2016 by 2 Comments

Just in case you haven’t already called or emailed or faxed your Senators and Congressman/woman, here is a reminder. I don’t care if you live in San Francisco and you have Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) as your representative, do it anyway. Get it on record so she can’t say she didn’t hear from you.

The
NRA has learned that Senators Schumer, Feinstein and other anti-gun
elected officials are going to offer several anti-gun bills and
amendments next week in the U.S. Congress!
These
measures are wide-ranging and include an attempt to reinstate the
failed federal ban on semi-automatic firearms, commonly referred to as
the “assault weapons ban.”

It doesn’t matter that the Clinton gun ban did nothing to reduce crime.
This is about YOUR freedoms and YOUR Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

But it doesn’t stop there. In fact, one amendment will attempt to strip
the Second Amendment Rights from those on secret government lists while
another could lead to federal registration of all gun owners.

They’re also planning to push for increased federal funding of anti-gun research.

We must defeat every one of these anti-gun proposals.

What’s obvious is that many who want to destroy our firearm freedoms are
using the terrorist attack in Orlando to push their anti-gun agenda.

They’d rather blame you as a law-abiding gun owner than make Obama answer for his failures in the global war on terror.

We can’t let them succeed in this depraved attempt to politicize a tragedy so they can destroy our freedoms.

Please contact your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators immediately
and let them know you oppose any new gun control measures. You can call
your lawmakers at 202-225-3121 or click the “Take Action” button below.

Be sure to share this message with your fellow NRA members and gun
owners and let them know this threat is real. Your action is needed now.

https://act.nraila.org/takeaction.aspx?AlertID=261
Uncategorized

Big Win In DC Today

May 18, 2016 by

In a case brought by the Pink Pistols, Judge Richard Leon of the US District Court for the District of Columbia issued a preliminary injunction against DC’s “good reason” requirement for a carry permit. The case, Grace and Pink Pistols v. DC, seems to have kept under the radar until now.

The text of the decision is here.

Earlier this year, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly had rejected the arguments of the Second Amendment Foundation in Wrenn v. DC. That case had been sent back to the District Court after it was found that Judge Frederick Scullin of New York had not been properly appointed to hear the case.

With the NRA Annual Meeting opening on Friday, the National Rifle Association was quite thrilled by the result. They issued this press release:

NRA Responds to Significant Second Amendment Victory

Federal judge orders D.C. officials to stop enforcing provisions that bar most residents from carrying firearms

Fairfax, Va.— The National Rifle Association (NRA) today responded to an order issued by a federal judge in Grace and the Pink Pistols v. District of Columbia that instructed D.C. officials to stop enforcing provisions of the city’s code that barred most D.C. residents from carrying firearms for self-protection.

“Today’s order is a victory for Second Amendment rights and has real implications for the safety of law-abiding citizens,” said Chris Cox, executive director of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action. “The Supreme Court has held that the Second Amendment protects the core right of self-defense in the home, but as the District Court today reaffirmed, that right is just as important to ordinary citizens commuting to work or shopping for groceries in an unsafe neighborhood.”

In the ruling issued today, Judge Richard J. Leon of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia concluded that the district’s law is likely unconstitutional and that the plaintiffs who are challenging it in court would be severely harmed if the district were allowed to continue to enforce its ban while the lawsuit went forward. The judge held that the district’s “overly zealous . . . desire to restrict the right to carry in public a firearm for self-defense to the smallest possible number of law-abiding, responsible citizens” unconstitutionally flouted the Second Amendment.

In 2008, the Supreme Court struck down a D.C. law banning most citizens from possessing handguns at all, reasoning that such a ban was flatly inconsistent with the individual right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment. The district continued to enforce its ban on carrying firearms in public even after that ruling, however, and a federal district court struck that separate ban down in 2014. The district responded by enacting a new “licensing” scheme that only allowed its residents to carry firearms in public if they could show a specific, documented need for self-defense—for example, by proving that they had been attacked or were receiving death threats. The city issued a minuscule number of licenses, and the scheme had the practical effect of a full ban.

“Legislation that restricts the law-abiding does nothing to reduce crime and is unconstitutional. The NRA is glad that fact was recognized in federal court today,” concluded Cox.

The ruling prohibits law enforcement from enforcing the concealed carry ban temporarily while the constitutionality of the ban continues to be argued in court. The NRA will continue to support this suit financially.

Professor Eugene Volokh has his analysis of the case here.

Uncategorized

What If The Palestinians Were “State Representatives” To UNSCAR

April 21, 2016 by

A post on the Volokh Conspiracy by Eugene Kontorovich from Tuesday caught my eye. He was discussing the demand of 28 US senators that funding for the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change be stopped. The reason that they were demanding that US funding to this UN agency be stopped is that the Palestinian Authority has been accepted by that agency as a “state party”.

Federal law bars any funding for U.N. agencies or affiliates that “grants full membership as a state to any organization or group that does not have the internationally recognized attributes of statehood.” In the official U.S. view, “Palestine” is not a state. Thus when the Palestinian Authority joined the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in 2011, it triggered federal defunding of that organization. Now, federal law requires a similar cessation of any funding to UNFCCC.

The purpose of Professor Kontorovich’s article to speculate what might happen if the Obama Administration ignored the clear law that prohibits the funding. However, for my purposes, the article made me speculate how this law could be used to cut funding of the UN’s gun control efforts.

The Arms Trade Treaty is administered by UN Trust Facility Supporting Cooperation on Arms Regulation or UNSCAR. While the United States has not ratified the treaty, it is a signatory to it. The Arms Trade Treaty seeks to control not only major weapons systems but also small arms and ammunition. As of now, the Palestinian Authority is not considered a “state representative” to UNSCAR insofar as I can tell. That said, UNSCAR has two current projects going in the Arab and Middle Eastern states.

It would be in the interest of gun rights NGOs like the National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation to lobby to get the Palestinian Authority full recognition as a state and full membership in UNSCAR. While neither organization nor its members usually have much love for the Palestinian Authority given its connections to Hamas and the PLO, getting them recognized as a state representative does cut potential funding for more international gun control efforts.

In my view, that is a good thing.

Uncategorized

NRA “Strongly Opposes” The Nomination Of Merrick Garland

March 16, 2016 by 2 Comments

The National Rifle Association released the following statement this afternoon concerning the nomination by President Obama of Judge Merrick Garland to fill the late Justice Antonin Scalia’s seat on the US Supreme Court.

SCOTUS Nomination: Merrick Garland
“With
Justice Scalia’s tragic passing, there is no longer a majority of
support among the justices for the fundamental, individual right to own a
firearm for self-defense. Four justices
believe law-abiding Americans have that right – and four justices do
not. President Obama has nothing but contempt for the Second Amendment
and  law-abiding gun owners. Obama has already nominated two Supreme
Court justices who oppose the right to own firearms
and there is absolutely no reason to think he has changed his approach
this time. In fact, a basic analysis of Merrick Garland’s judicial
record shows that he does not respect our fundamental, individual right
to keep and bear arms for self-defense. Therefore,
the National Rifle Association, on behalf of our five million members
and tens of millions of supporters across the country, strongly opposes
the nomination of Merrick Garland for the U.S. Supreme Court.” Chris W.
Cox, executive director, NRA-ILA

ü
Merrick
Garland’s record on the Second Amendment is unacceptable to anyone who
respects the U.S. Constitution and an individual’s fundamental right to
self-protection.

ü
He
is the most anti-gun nominee in recent history. This should come as no
surprise, given President Obama’s disdain for the Second Amendment.

ü
He has consistently shown a complete disregard of the rights of law-abiding gun owners.

ü
Garland’s history of anti-Second Amendment rulings support the conclusion that were he to be confirmed he would vote to overturn
Heller.

o  
In
2007, he voted to give D.C. a second chance to have its handgun ban
upheld after a three-judge panel struck it down. At the time, this was
the most significant
Second Amendment case in America.
o  
In 2004, Garland voted against rehearing another Second Amendment case (Seegars v. Gonzales), effectively casting a vote against the individual right
to keep and bear arms.

o  
Justice Scalia was the author of
Heller v McDonald. Heller affirmed that the Second Amendment is an individual right. The
Heller decision stands in the way of gun-control supporters’ ultimate goal of banning and confiscating guns.

o  
If
Heller is overturned, the Second Amendment for all intents and purposes would cease to exist.
o  
In
2000, Garland voted in favor of the federal government’s plan to retain
Americans’ personal information from gun purchase background checks
despite federal
laws prohibiting national firearm registration and requiring the
destruction of these records.

o  
 Judge Garland weighed in on several significant firearms-related cases, including
Parker, Seegars, NRA v. Reno,. He voted against the rights of firearm owners on each occasion.

ü
The
examples of Garland’s disdain for the right to keep and bear arms go on
and on, including  in a major case upholding the then-existing Clinton
“assault
weapons” ban against a constitutional challenge

ü
It’s
almost certain that Garland agrees with Hillary Clinton when she said
“the Supreme Court is wrong” that the Second Amendment protects an
individual
right.

ü
In
his nomination, President Obama has again placed partisanship and
antagonism towards gun owners above the higher callings of his office.

ü
If
Garland is confirmed, Obama would be taking America back in time to an
era where Supreme Court justices uphold the anti-gun policies of the
president.
Obama is hoping Garland will overturn the Supreme Court precedent that
stands in the way of confiscatory gun control, like the gun ban and
confiscation programs implemented in Australia.

Uncategorized

The NRA Responds To Today’s 4th Circuit Decision

February 4, 2016 by 1 Comment

The NRA is very pleased with the 2-1 ruling in the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Kolbe v. Hogan.

National Rifle Association Statement on 4th Circuit Court of Appeals Ruling in Kolbe v. Maryland

Fairfax, Va.— Chris W. Cox, the executive director of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action, issued the following statement in reaction to today’s ruling by the federal 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in the Kolbe v. Maryland case. The case challenges the legality of Maryland’s 2013 ban on so-called assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. The 2-1 decision sends the gun-control law back to a lower court for review because it “implicates the core protection of the Second Amendment.”

“The Fourth Circuit’s ruling is an important victory for the Second Amendment. Maryland’s ban on commonly owned firearms and magazines clearly violates our fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense. The highest level of judicial scrutiny should apply when governments try to restrict our Second Amendment freedoms.” – Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action

You can find my earlier post on the case here.

Uncategorized

NRA Response To Obama’s Executive Actions

January 5, 2016 by 1 Comment

While the gun prohibitionists are declaring victory due to President Obama’s Executive Actions – and who knew it would take so little to satisfy their demands – gun rights groups have also responded. They don’t have such sanguine expectations that these “tweaks” will do much to combat either terrorism or crime.

Below is the response of NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris Cox which is followed by a just released video of Wayne LaPierre speaking on background checks.

Fairfax, Va. – The executive director of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action, Chris W. Cox, released the following statement on Tuesday regarding President Barack Obama’s Executive Gun Control Order:

Once again, President Obama has chosen to engage in political rhetoric, instead of offering meaningful solutions to our nation’s pressing problems. Today’s event also represents an ongoing attempt to distract attention away from his lack of a coherent strategy to keep the American people safe from terrorist attack.

The American people do not need more emotional, condescending lectures that are completely devoid of facts. The men and women of the National Rifle Association take a back seat to no one when it comes to keeping our communities safe. But the fact is that President Obama’s proposals would not have prevented any of the horrific events he mentioned. The timing of this announcement, in the eighth and final year of his presidency, demonstrates not only political exploitation but a fundamental lack of seriousness.

The proposed executive actions are ripe for abuse by the Obama Administration, which has made no secret of its contempt for the Second Amendment. The NRA will continue to fight to protect the fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms as guaranteed under our Constitution. We will not allow law-abiding gun owners to be harassed or intimidated for engaging in lawful, constitutionally-protected activity – nor will we allow them to become scapegoats for President Obama’s failed policies.

NRA News released this video of Wayne LaPierre speaking about the deficiencies of the current background checks. As he says, you don’t need to cast a bigger net – just one with smaller holes.

Uncategorized

Tabloid Journalism At Its Finest?

November 18, 2015 by 7 Comments

As posted on Facebook by the Daily News.

To paraphrase one of the Daily News’ most famous headlines –  NRA to NY Daily News: Drop Dead.

It shouldn’t surprise anyone that this sort of drivel comes from the New York Daily News. Until 1991, their tagline was “New York’s Picture Newspaper.” In other words, they were the paper meant for functional illiterates who needed the story told in pictures rather than words.

The gist of the article is that pro-gun Republicans are standing in the way of legislation that would add those people on the FBI’s Terrorist Screening Database to the NICS denied list. They quote from a GAO report showing how many people on this list were allowed to purchase firearms. Given the error rate and vague criteria for being added to the list, this should not be surprising. What I do find surprising is that the GAO was even given this data given the secretive nature of that list.

The article quotes major proponents of the list (and enemies of civil liberties) such as Rep. Peter King (R-NY) and Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY). Both have been longtime proponents of using the Terrorist Screening Database as another means of denying firearms purchases.

The timing of the article days after the terrorist attacks in Paris is not coincidental. It is an overt effort on the part of the Daily News to cast the NRA – Hillary Clinton’s favorite punching bag – as enablers of Islamic terrorism because they oppose efforts to tie the FBI’s vague and inaccurate terrorist list to the NICS System. It is yellow journalism at its worst.

UPDATE: Colion Noir makes an excellent point on Facebook regarding those on the FBI terrorist list who (legally) obtained firearms. He said, ” If there are 2000 suspects on a terror watch list and each of them “legally” bought firearms that means they underwent a FBI background check, which means the FBI knew about each attempted purchase and approved them.”

I agree with him that this is “dishonest manipulative garbage”.