Home

Gun Rights Headlines

Second Amendment Sisters say NO to Scott Brown in New Hampshire PDF Print E-mail
Written by SAS   
Sunday, 15 December 2013 22:04

Press Release

Second Amendment Sisters say NO to Scott Brown in New Hampshire

Protest Planned for December 19, 2013 at 5:30pm at the Hunt Memorial Building in Nashua, NH

Concord, NH, December 15, 2013:  The Second Amendment Sisters have not forgotten Scott Brown’s support of firearms bans. Brown still has not learned that you cannot stop bad people from doing bad things with bans. Criminals win every time law-abiding citizens pay the price for their crimes by our governments’ continued violations of their oath of office to protect and defend all of the Constitution. Using the deaths of innocents at the hands of a mad man is an example of the political hyperbole being used to justify their actions.  Women have the natural right to defend themselves, their family and property. We also have the right to enjoy shooting sports.  Placing limits on which firearms the government will allow us to own is equal to the elitist making these decisions that they themselves are often exempt from. We the people need to act now, failure to stand up for our rights will result in having no rights at all.   

Contact:

Honorable Jennifer Coffey

National Director of Legislative Affairs

Second Amendment Sisters, Inc.

SAS Phone: 877-271-6216

 

To reach Jenn Coffey:

e-mail:  This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Phone: 814-422-JENN

 

####

Last Updated on Sunday, 15 December 2013 22:09
 
More on Fast & Furious: The Stonewalling Continues PDF Print E-mail
Written by Jane Weaver   
Monday, 07 October 2013 08:22

Jane Weaver, Maryland Coordinator

Originally published in the SAS Newsletter - Spring 2013


Our summer 2011 issue reported on the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DoJ) “gunwalking” scandal and the alleged cover-up that ensued. While Justice’s own internal report is expected soon, the congressional investigation is ongoing. We have seen more stonewalling, attempts to blame the previous administration, and now the White House has joined the effort to stifle the congressional investigation.

In an article titled “Fast And Furious-Like 'Gun-Walking' Probe Mentioned In 2007” (nola.com, 11/4/2011), Associated Press writer Pete Yost described a 2007 briefing paper prepared for newly appointed Attorney General Michael Mukasey that discusses Bush-era Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF) operations, including “Wide Receiver.” Suspected straw-purchasers were allowed to buy firearms from U.S. gun shops and then tracked afterwards in an attempt to nab ringleaders receiving the arms. US agents alerted Mexican authorities when vehicles carrying guns crossed the border, but Mexican agents claimed they never saw the vehicles. The ATF quickly ended the failed operation.

In contrast, the Obama administration’s “Operation Fast & Furious” (F&F) began in 2009, and guns were allowed to “walk” without surveillance and without alerting Mexican authorities. While no casualties were reported from Wide Receiver, F&F has been implicated in the deaths of one and possibly two American law enforcement officers plus hundreds of Mexican citizens. Howard LaFranchi reported that up to 2,500 high-powered firearms were allowed to walk, and the Mexican government has criticized the botched operation (“Why Obama administration’s Fast and Furious troubles may not be over,” csmonitor.com, 8-30-2011).  As Dave Workman reported, taxpayer money was used to purchase some illegally-trafficked firearms, and ATF supervisor David Voth allegedly had oversight of both F&F and a separate but similar operation (“Another F&F ‘bombshell’ and a familiar name rises to surface,” examiner.com, 9-26-2011).

 

Read more...
 
ATF’S INVOLVEMENT IN GUN-SMUGGLING: NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE? PDF Print E-mail
Written by Jane Weaver   
Monday, 07 October 2013 08:09

by Jane Weaver, Maryland Coordinator

Originally published in the SAS Newsletter - Summer 2011

 

The Department of Justice’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) initiated “Project Gunrunner” in 2006, to stem firearms trafficking (“Project Gunrunner”, retrieved July 12, 2011 at atf.gov).  ATF claims to share information with “Federal, State, local and tribal partners, as well as our Mexican law enforcement counterparts.” They allow straw purchases of firearms to proceed, even instructing gun shops to cooperate, and then agents follow the arms to their delivery points and make arrests.  The article states there “are nearly 4,500 active Project Gunrunner investigations throughout the United States”.  A publication titled Project Gunrunner: The Southwest Border Initiative (ATF Publication 3317.6, Revised March 2009) lists key “indicators” to profile buyers to assist gun shops in spotting traffickers, such as those seeking to purchase a “large number of the same model firearm, or similar firearms” and those who “lack the physical stature to handle the firearm being purchased.”

 

According to a June 14, 2011 report on the program produced for the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, in fall of 2009 ATF initiated “Operation Fast and Furious” to target kingpins in trafficking networks instead of straw purchasers and lower-level operatives receiving arms.  In a June 15, 2011 hearing, ATF agents testified that the Phoenix Field Division changed its strategy and began allowing illegally purchased guns to “walk” into the hands of Mexican drug cartels and other criminals without surveillance or the knowledge of Mexican law enforcement counterparts. Guns from the operation have been recovered at crime scenes on both sides of the U.S.-Mexican border. The agents reported that punitive actions were taken whenever they questioned superiors about this practice that clearly went against their training and showed no regard for human life.
 

Last Updated on Monday, 07 October 2013 08:21
Read more...
 
Do You Think Like A Free Person? PDF Print E-mail
Written by Pat Webb   
Monday, 24 June 2013 07:43

There are many people today who relish the idea of freedom...but do they really understand what they are referring to?  Here is a simple quiz.

  • Should you be required to obtain a license in order to get married?
  • Should you be required to have your motor vehicle inspected?
  • Should you be required to obtain a permit before you can sell a product you manufactured?
  • Should you be required to ask permission from the government before you can add on to your house?
  • Should you be required to certify you have received training before you can purchase a product?
  • Should you be limited to what you can buy, where you can possess it or how you can use it?

Now let's take a closer look at the answers to these questions.  According to our form of government, the PEOPLE have RIGHTS and the GOVERNMENT has POWERS.  These powers that the government has are GRANTED by the PEOPLE.

Let's take this concept one step further.  You should never have to ask PERMISSION from your government to do anything.  If you want to get married, you should not need permission from the government...your parents, maybe!  But not from your government.  Same holds true for things like dog licenses, business licenses, etc.  It could be argued that dog licenses keep rabies at bay, but there is already a law that says you must get rabies shots for your animals.  Just prosecute those found to be breaking the law...done!  You could say that business licenses help us by keeping businesses honest...but do they?  Or do they just cost us all extra tax dollars by adding another branch of government?  You should not need permission from your government to sell a product that you make.  There are laws that govern building codes, ethics, theft by deception, etc.  Agencies that issue permits rarely do anything to enforce laws.  They only serve to collect revenue at the expense of the consumer and the taxpayer while they drive up costs to produce goods and services.  Sure we have building inspectors who make sure that our homes are not sub-standard construction...or do they?  Does anyone remember Hurricane Hugo where an entire neighborhood was wiped out?  It turns out that none of the homes in that area had the REQUIRED hurricane reinforcements, yet they passed the building inspection!  Your tax dollars at work, folks.

Motor vehicle inspections keep us safe, right?  Well, not really.  Aside from the fact that they are another form of tax collection, there are laws on the books that prohibit you from operating an unsafe vehicle.   Case in point...Virginia requires an annual vehicle inspection and Maryland only requires an inspection at the time of sale.  Are there more accidents in Maryland?  Not enough to cause an outcry for annual vehicle inspections.  In addition, there are ways to get around the inspection.  People steal stickers or go to mechanics that "won't look too hard" when they have vehicles that are questionable.  Plus, if you get your car inspected this month and your brake fluid leaks next month, who is there to "force" you to fix it?  The reality is that vehicle inspections are merely a revenue source for the state government.  Same with hunting and fishing licenses, marriage licenses, dog licenses, etc.  But it is even more insidious than that.  Did you know that dog licenses were originally enacted to keep freed slaves from owning dogs?  Dogs which, by the way, could have been trained to aid in the defense of their owners.

As for having to certify competency before purchasing a product, in a truly free society it would be your RESPONSIBILITY to become proficient, to seek out whatever training you need.

Imagine for a moment that there was a law that said you could only buy one book a month.  In addition, you could only read that book in your living room, a library or on the steps of the courthouse.  You would need a special permit to read the book in the park or in your bedroom, or even in a hammock in your backyard.  In addition, if the book were about cooking you would need to take a cooking class and show a certificate of completion before you could purchase that book.  You would then be issued a permit that would allow you to buy the book and to use it in your kitchen.  However, if you use it in someone else's kitchen you would need another permit.  This cookbook would only be allowed to hold 150 recipes...more than that in one book would be banned.  Sound absurd?  Well that is exactly what Congress is trying to do with firearms purchases.  Not the same, you say?  I submit that more people suffer from food related illness every year than from ill effects from legally owned and used firearms.  From the CDC web site, "Food-related diseases affect tens of millions of people and kill thousands."

One final thought.  Passing laws in a reaction to a crime is effectively punishing the law abiding for the actions of the criminal.  NO LAW EVER STOPPED A CRIME.  They only inconvenience...and sometimes endanger those who follow the law.

 


Page 2 of 12
Banner