Skip navigation

Monthly Archives: March 2013

Apathy


I read this with interest even though the subject is specific to the firearms debate, relates to our approach to voting and who we vote for. Take firearms out of the equation and we have the basic subject of this writing.

By Tim Schmidt USCCA Founder

I once heard a man say, “Apathy is always at the door.  He’s waiting for you to let him in.”
Apathy is like a thief who is waiting for you to slip up and give him access to your home.  Once Apathy gets in, he steals your livelihood and takes away everything that is valuable to you.
While this metaphorical image seems obscure, it’s a perfect picture of what can happen to our rights if we are not vigilant.  Sure, it’s easy to speak up for your rights, beliefs, and convictions in the heat of an election or public debate, but what happens six months after the debate dies down?  What happens a year after?  Most people let Apathy in the door and they let him rob them of their values and convictions.
Becoming apathetic about the natural born rights we have to defend ourselves and our loved ones is not something that anyone can afford.  The moment you become apathetic about your beliefs, you risk the chance of losing them forever.
What am I getting at?  You’ve probably noticed by now that I, along with many of our writers, have been saying the same things about our rights over, and over again lately.  Do you know why?  Because we are unwilling to let Apathy in our front door to rob us of our liberty.  Our rights are worth causing a stir over, and you will not see any of us sitting down to see how this plays out.  Waiting for things to pan out will only lead to defeat.
I want to encourage you to stave off apathy during a time of political and corrupt scheming.  Lend your voice to the cause of freedom, and contribute to preserving the rights that were afforded us by the blood of countless patriots.  Call and email your state and federal representatives.  Sign petitions.  Support organizations and businesses that are fighting for freedom.
Your action can preserve the freedom that our children deserve.  Not acting can cause devastation they should not have to bear.

Take care and stay safe,

O’Reilly et al.


The recent dustup about and from Bill O’Reilly is indicative of the unseeing and not willing to know what the true facts are in the budget negotiations. It is easy to push the envelope of truth in the name of journalism but to get fact appears to be out his grasp. If the time were spent on obtaining all of the facts as far where the economy is at this time compared to where it came from the story may be different. There have been numerous accounts from economists well known and not so well known that show that in spite of fiscal cliffs and sequesters the economy is growing at a steady but slow pace. The jobs are returning, more people are working, the exceptions are the people who have just stopped looking for work. The ability of well known naysayers, naboobs (not an error) and high profile commentators to stretch, shrink and otherwise alter the truth is the reason many people have no correct idea  where the economy really is. It is OK to consider these opinions (and that is exactly what they are) but the truth while not as loud is always there in plain sight. Between  high profile politicians and high profile political entertainers the public has a very narrow window of truth. We as readers, listeners and voters need to take advantage of that window by looking at all sides and not accept as fact ALL of the offerings from these known talkers.

Plain As Day!


The recent filibuster by Rand Paul is clear evidence that our Congress is obsessed with getting elected and a possible future  upwardly mobile role in politics. The current seat fillers (Scamocrats and Dupublicans) are of one mind and that is not doing the work they were elected to do. The single purpose is to stay in office long enough to get a good pension, win friends and influence for their” post  Congressional” life. The Congress will never create a term limit situation because they can get by with little or nor effort beyond following party lines and occasionally making a ripple. The only term limits that apply are those applied in the voting booth by the voters. This last failed filibuster had nothing to do with the issue but just another way to get his name in the press. This is the way Congress works, yell about any and everything then do nothing. Our economy is in tatters but  we are still fighting the same fight over and over again. If an opportunity to go to war comes along the Congress will be all over that before the ink is dry but when it comes to doing the right thing for the American people without a war that is quite different. The Congress appears to be making war on the American People. Do we all need to arm ourselves against the Legislature?

Sequestered, Now What?


For the past 8 years the Erstwhile Congress has shown that it as a body is seemingly unable to do what they were elected to do. That is do whats best for all of the people and not just big donors, lobbyists and the loudest screamers. The majority of America’s voters do not scream and yell but they are vocal about what matters to them. The Congress (both parties) have espoused ideas of  what the American people want, these unfounded citations are no more than appeasement to the constituency that matters most to them. That constituency is not the “American People” that has been so widely cited. As a voter I am staunchly for Government working as it should not necessarily as I want it to. What we want is not necessarily what we need but these seat fillers take requests like a lounge singer with the payoff being  enacting or delaying legislation that benefits their retention or after Congress well being. It is evident that our Congress has failed long before Mr. Obama, both Bush’s, Clinton and beyond. The idea of being in Congress and what can they can get out of it seems to be the driving force , not a sense of service. There may never be a great or upstanding member of Congress in my lifetime but I will certainly do my part by always voting for a new office seeker rather than an incumbent. Congress will never set term limits on themselves so it is up to the voters to impose those limits through the balloting process. Remember a run for a political office is not about serving, it is about power and prestige which does not benefit the voters.

Culture or Nonsense?


The attached information is indicative of how facts are manipulated to suit the agenda of the issuer. The idea of owning, not owning firearms is personal. We have been beaten over the head about a “gun culture”, there is no” gun culture”. What exists and is called a “gun culture” is simply the choice of Americans to own firearms legally, our issue should be the illegal possesion and availability of illegal firearms, this is not a culture just a free choice to legally own and use firearms according to State and Federal guidelines. There will always be lawbreakers so the issue should be what can we do about it?

“WASHINGTON (AP) — The National Rifle Association is using a Justice Department memo it obtained to argue in ads that the Obama administration believes its gun control plans won’t work unless the government seizes firearms and requires national gun registration — ideas the White House has not proposed and does not support.

The NRA’s assertion and its obtaining of the memo in the first place underscore the no-holds-barred battle under way as Washington’s fight over gun restrictions heats up.

The memo, under the name of one of the Justice Department’s leading crime researchers, critiques the effectiveness of gun control proposals, including some of President Barack Obama’s. A Justice Department official called the memo an unfinished review of gun violence research and said it does not represent administration policy.

The memo says requiring background checks for more gun purchases could help, but also could lead to more illicit weapons sales. It says banning assault weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines produced in the future but exempting those already owned by the public, as Obama has proposed, would have limited impact because people now own so many of those items.

It also says that even total elimination of assault weapons would have little overall effect on gun killings because assault weapons account for a limited proportion of those crimes.

The nine-page document says the success of universal background checks would depend in part on “requiring gun registration,” and says gun buybacks would not be effective “unless massive and coupled with a ban.”

The administration has not proposed gun registration, buybacks or banning all firearms. But gun registration and ownership curbs are hot-button issues for the NRA and other gun-rights groups, which strenuously oppose the ideas.

Whether to require record-keeping for private gun sales is holding up a congressional compromise on legislation to expand background checks, now required only for transactions by federally licensed dealers, according to people familiar with bipartisan Senate talks who spoke on condition of anonymity because the talks are private.

Justice Department and White House officials declined to provide much information about the memo or answer questions about it on the record.

The memo has the look of a preliminary document and calls itself “a cursory summary” and assessment of gun curb initiatives. The administration has not release it officially.

But the NRA has posted the memo on one of its websites and cites it in advertising aimed at whipping up opposition to Obama’s efforts to contain gun violence. The ad says the paper shows that the administration “believes that a gun ban will not work without mandatory gun confiscation” and thinks universal background checks “won’t work without requiring national gun registration” — ideas the president has not proposed or expressed support for.

“Still think President Obama’s proposals sound reasonable?” Chris W. Cox, the NRA’s chief Washington lobbyist, says in the ad.

Last month, White House spokesman Jay Carney said none of Obama’s proposals “would take away a gun from a single law-abiding American.” Other administration officials have said their plans would not result in gun seizures or a national gun registry.

A Justice Department official who would only discuss the issue on condition of anonymity said the NRA ad misrepresents Obama’s gun proposals and that the administration has never backed a gun registry or gun confiscation.

While the memo’s analysis of gun curb proposals presents no new findings, it is unusual for a federal agency document to surface that raises questions about a president’s plans during debate on a high-profile issue such as restricting firearms.

Obama wants to ban assault weapons and ammunition magazines exceeding 10 rounds that are produced in the future. He wants universal background checks for nearly all gun purchases. Today, checks are only mandatory on sales by federally licensed gun dealers, not transactions at gun shows or other private sales.

His plan also includes tougher federal laws against gun trafficking and straw purchases, which occur when a person legally buys a firearm but sells it to a criminal or someone else barred from owning a weapon.

Interest in the gun issue has intensified since the December shootings in Newtown, Conn., that killed 20 first-graders and six staffers at an elementary school. The Democratic-led Senate Judiciary Committee plans to write legislation addressing some of Obama’s proposals in the next week or two.

The NRA’s Cox declined to say how his organization obtained the memo.

He said the commercial is running online in 15 states, including many Republican-leaning states where Democrats will defend Senate seats next year, such as Alaska, Arkansas, Louisiana, Montana, North Carolina, South Dakota and West Virginia. There are also ads in papers in five states.

The memo was written under the name of Greg Ridgeway, acting director of the National Institute of Justice, the Justice Department’s research arm. It is dated Jan. 4, nearly two weeks before Obama announced his plan for restricting guns, and Ridgeway’s first day as acting chief.

Justice Department officials said Ridgeway was not granting interviews. He came to the institute last July from the RAND Corporation, a nonprofit research institution where he studied criminal justice issues, and has a Ph.D. in statistics.

The memo says straw purchases and gun thefts are the largest sources of firearms used in crimes, and that such transactions “would most likely become larger if background checks at gun shows and private sellers were addressed.”

Gun control supporters said the NRA ad and the Justice memo don’t mention that the current federal background check system blocked gun sales to 2.1 million criminals and others barred from owning guns between 1994, when the checks began, and 2010. Also ignored is that Obama has proposed cracking down on straw purchases to prevent a growth in illegal transactions, they said.

Advocates of restricting guns also said the memo omitted mention of several studies that affirm the effectiveness of firearms curbs. These include a 2010 police group analysis showing more than one-third of police departments found increased criminal use of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines since the 2004 expiration of the ban on those items.

“It doesn’t appear to be a serious discussion of gun violence prevention policy, never mind an expression of administration policy,” said Joshua Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence.

The memo says that out of 11,000 annual gun homicides, an average of 35 deaths yearly are from mass shootings, defined as those with four or more victims.

“Policies that address the larger firearm homicide issue will have a far greater impact even if they do not address the particular issues of mass shootings,” it says.

It says there were an estimated 1.5 million assault weapons before the 10-year ban on those firearms began in 1994, so their sheer number would weaken a new ban exempting existing weapons. Such guns accounted for just 2 percent to 8 percent of crimes before the 1994 ban, so eliminating assault weapons “would not have a large impact on gun homicides,” the memo said.

Recent data on the assault weapons ban impact is scarce because since the 1990s, Congress has blocked most federal research on the effect that firearms have on public health. As part of the gun restrictions Obama proposed last month, he ordered federal scientific agencies to research gun violence.”

Cheney at his best?


Former Vice President Dick Cheney of  “shooting his attorney and Halliburton” fame has loudly criticized the current nominees to the Presidents cabinet. This was done at a Republican gathering in Wyoming. It is certainly easy to point fingers when one feels that their hands are clean. This is a person who is apparently  more anti-American than some of our Asian allies. His dealings as CEO of a company that gouged the government during the WMD search and subsequent war in Iraq which cost billions in money and untold numbers of American lives to no good end needs to be held up for scrutiny as the self serving idiot he is. It is under stood that he absented himself from the actions of Halliburton but the company should never have gotten a government contract at all. Now the ( I consider) neer do well ex vice president will receive the gift of secret service protection for the next few years at our expense. How much more will he gouge the voters for? We have a vapid Congress that has through several Presidents done as little as possible until their hand was forced. Now that the current President has pushed the envelope the seat fillers have become outraged. As voters the outrage should be ours. There will never be a law creating term limits but the voters can set those limits by merely voting against the current members. We do not need a party or parties to tell us who to vote for, we do not need special interests to give us an opinion or validate our opinions, we just need to exercise our voting rights according to our own common sense and desires. As citizens of one of the Free countries in the world we have the ability to change the government from the outside of politics by merely voting ineffective officials out of office. This action should have nothing to do with Race or  Religion,  just what is best for all of us. Remember a political ad is just that -an ad- and like all ads is designed to sell you something.