Advertisements
Home

Americans Don’t Think ‘Universal Background Checks’ Extension for Gun Shows Are Needed, National Poll Finds

1 Comment

This is from the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

It seems the crap sandwich touted Sen. Joe Manchin (D.W.V.).

and Sen. Pat Toomey (RINO, Pa) is not popular.

It seems only 40% of Americans approve of it.

Yet Sen. Joe Manchin (D.W.V.).  wants us to think it is a 

popular crap sandwich.

Only four out of ten Americans support so-called “universal background checks” at gun shows after being informed that the vast majority of firearms sales at these shows are transacted by licensed retailers that already conduct such checks through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) as required by federal law. The poll results stand in contrast to the vague claim often reported in the media and attributed to gun control proponents without important contextual detail that 90 percent of Americans surveyed support “universal background checks.”

 links to hi-res JPG 

These findings were the among the results of a national scientific poll of more than 1,200 Americans conducted in November by McKeon & Associates and released today by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for the firearms and ammunition industry. The McKeon poll found that only 40 percent of respondents said that extension of “universal background checks” to private transactions at gun shows are necessary, while 53 percent said they are not necessary and 7% said they did not know.

links to hi-res JPGThe Americans polled also said by a combined 74 percent margin that conducting background checks against an incomplete database was not effective at all or not very effective while 54 percent said that requiring background checks for transferring guns between friends and family members was not at effective at all or not very effective in reducing violent crime.

The poll also discovered that 92 percent of Americans agree that the states should submit all records of persons federally prohibited from owning a firearm to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check Systems (NICS), passing legislation if needed.

“We commissioned this poll to help determine where Americans stood on the various aspects of how the NICS system actually works today,” said Larry G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel. “When properly informed of relevant details, it turns out that only four out of ten, not nine out of ten Americans support so-called ‘universal background checks’ at gun shows or for firearms transfers. The poll also found that Americans want a National Instant Criminal Background Check System with a dependable and accurate database, which supports the goal of the FixNICS initiative we launched in 2013 and will continue in 2014.”

links to hi-res JPGThe poll conducted Nov. 6-7 has a margin of error of +/- 4.1 percent. Respondents self-identified as 33 percent Democrat, 26 percent Republican and 41 percent independent. As to ethnicity, 62 percent of respondents said they were Caucasian, 18 percent African-American, 11 percent Hispanic; and 9 percent, other. As to age, 20 percent of respondents said they were 18-30; 36 percent, 31-45; 23 percent 46-60; and 21 percent, 60 or older.

Advertisements

Why Are They Trying So Hard To Demonize Gun Owners?

2 Comments

This is from The D.C.Clothesline.

The left knows that their sheeple get their news from ABC,NBC,CBS,CNN and PMSNBC.

These upstanding news talking heads are the guardians of the Truth.

At least this is how they portray themselves.

 The truth be told about them the Obama Media would make Nazi Propaganda Minister

Joseph Goebbels turn green with envy. 

 

There is an all-out effort to demonize gun owners in the United States today.  Those that own guns are repeatedly portrayed as being uneducated, mentally deficient racists in the mainstream media.  No evidence is ever produced to actually back up those claims.  Gun owners regularly make lists of “potential terrorists”in official government documents, and many government officials openly regard them as ultra-paranoid “conspiracy nuts” that are a serious threat to national security.  Of course the truth is that gun owners are actually among themost law-abiding and patriotic people in the entire nation, but that doesn’t really fit with the radical gun control agenda of the progressive elite.  In order to move their agenda forward, they must make gun owners look bad, and they will go to ridiculous extremes in order to achieve that goal.  And to a certain extent, it is working.  As you will see below, some large financial companies no longer want to conduct business with gun owners, and just the sight of a gun is enough to get people freaking out and calling the police in many communities in America today.

Never underestimate the power of propaganda.  Just think about it – pretty much the only time that advocates for gun owner organizations are invited to appear on the mainstream media is when the big news organizations think that they can make them look bad.  Other than a few token appearances by pro-gun advocates, most of the time it is a relentless flood of anti-gun messages on the mainstream news.

And often the anti-gun messages that Americans are being fed are absolutely absurd.  In fact, they would be absolutely hilarious if so many people were not taking them so seriously.

For example, Michael Moore actually believes that the reason why so many “white people” want to own guns is because they are “afraid of black people”…

“It’s because too many white people are afraid of black people. Period. The vast majority of the guns in the U.S. are sold to white people who live in the suburbs or the country. When we fantasize about being mugged or home invaded, what’s the image of the perpetrator in our heads? Is it the freckled-face kid from down the street – or is it someone who is, if not black, at least poor?”

And Chris Matthews is apparently convinced that most gun owners are virulent racists that hate Barack Obama just because he has dark skin…

I have to tell you this. I see a far bigger fight than over background checksand gun shows. It’s culture war. They don’t accept an African-American president or president of color who has some antecedence in Africa. No. It has to be us or him. And our guns or him. And everything is totemic; everything is iconic; everything’s fighting words.

It is easy to laugh at such bizarre comments, but millions of people actually take these jokers seriously, and they are having an impact.

Just recently, the owner of one of the largest gun stores in America, Hyatt Gun Shop, was informed by his credit card processor (Authorize.net) that he had violated their service agreement and they no longer wanted his business.

So what did Hyatt Gun Shop do wrong?

Well, they sold guns.

Yes, I know that this sounds crazy, but this is actually happening.  The following is the text of the actual email that Larry Hyatt received

Dear Hyatt Gun Shop Inc,

Authorize.Net LLC (“Authorize.Net”) has determined that the nature of your business constitutes a violation of Section 2.xiv of the Authorize.Net Acceptable Use Guidelines and Sections 3.3 and 11.3 of the Authorize.NetService Agreement (the “Agreement”).

These sections include, but are not limited to, the sale of firearms or any similar product.

Accordingly, pursuant to Section 4 of the Acceptable Use Guidelines, your ability to access and use the Authorize.Net Services will be terminated on September 30, 2013.

And in case you are tempted to think that this is not a big deal, it should also be noted that Authorize.net is a fully-owned subsidiary of Visa USA.

Are big financial companies such as Visa going to start simply refusing to do business with anyone that sells guns?

If you believe that this could never happen, just check out what the owner of American Spirit Arms said about his dealings with Bank of America on Facebook

My name is Joe Sirochman owner of American Spirit Arms and I wanted to share my recent experience with Bank of America (which we have been doing business with for over 10 years)…. Everyone is familiar with the latest increase in guns sales, dealers selling out of inventory,Manufacturers back logged for months, large revenue all generated in the last two weeks …. American Spirit Arms is no exception to the overwhelming demand. What we have experienced is that our web site orders have jumped 500% causing our web site E commerce processing larger Deposits to BANK OF AMERICA ..Well, this through up a huge RED Flag with Bank of America . So they decided to hold the deposits for further review, meaning that the orders/payments that were coming in through the web, (being paid by the customer and that were shipped out by American Spirit Arms), the BANK was keeping (UNDER REVIEW )..as you could imagine this made me furious…After countless hours on the phonewith BANK OF AMERICA I finally got a Manager in the right department that told me the reason that the deposits were on hold for FURTHER REVIEW …HER EXACT WORDS WERE ….. “WE BELIEVE YOU SHOULD NOT BE SELLING GUNS and PARTS ON THE INTERNET”

But of course it is not just financial companies that are demonizing gun owners.

Some more examples of this phenomenon were cited in a commentary authored by Dr. Michael S. Brown

In San Clemente, California, a school groundskeeper who had won a large sexual harassment settlement from the local school district was the target of a dramatic SWAT team raid on his residence. He was held on one million dollars bail for the heinous crime of possessing allegedly stolen rakes and buckets. Someone, perhaps seeking revenge, tipped off the police that the man had a large gun collection.

News reports contained no mention of the man making threats or plotting violence; he simply owned guns. A school district administrator was quoted as saying, “I’m personally horrified that someone who has daily contact in the vicinity of children and teachers owned the arsenal he apparently had.” Other officials crowed that they had prevented another Columbine. It is unlikely that the man will receive justice in a culture that vilifies gun owning citizens in this manner.

At a large university in Seattle, a white collar employee with an excellent work record was involved in a minor dispute over computer access. When he was called into the administrator’s office to discuss it, two campus police officers were present. “We know you have a concealed weapons permit. Are you armed?” He was not, but the damage to his reputation had already been done. Apparently, a coworker who was competing with the man for a position had tipped off the administration that he was a gun owner.

We are rapidly getting to the point where being a gun owner in America will automatically make you an outcast.

And progressive strategists don’t plan on letting up.  In fact, it was recently revealed that they have drafted an 80 page “how-to manual” that actually encourages gun control advocates to emotionally exploit major shooting incidents to advance the cause of gun control…

Democratic strategists have drafted a how-to manual on manipulating the public’s emotions toward gun control in the aftermath of a major shooting.

“A high-profile gun-violence incident temporarily draws more people into the conversation about gun violence,” asserts the guide. “We should rely on emotionally powerful language, feelings and images to bring home the terrible impact of gun violence.”

The 80-page document titled “Preventing Gun Violence Through Effective Messaging,” also urges gun-control advocates use images of frightening-looking guns and shooting scenes to make their point.

“The most powerful time to communicate is when concern and emotions are running at their peak,” the guide insists. “The debate over gun violence in America is periodically punctuated by high-profile gun violence incidents including Columbine, Virginia Tech, Tucson, the Trayvon Martin killing, Aurora and Oak Creek. When an incident such as these attracts sustained media attention, it creates a unique climate for our communications efforts.”

If you would like to read the entire manual, you can find it right here.

And of course Barack Obama continues to issue more executive orders about guns almost every time a major shooting incident makes the news.

But with conservatives in charge of the U.S. House of Representatives, he knows that there is a limit on what he will be able to do for now.

So the Obama administration has been busy pushing the new international treaty on arms regulation that it hopes will advance the cause of gun control.  Fortunately, many gun owner organizations are deeply concerned about this and they are sounding the alarm.  The following is from a recent Fox News article about this new treaty…

But the treaty also advocates keeping data of arms purchases, which the NRA and other groups say could be used as an international log to keep tabs on gun owners.

The record-keeping section in the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) encourages members to “maintain records of conventional arms covered under Article 2,” which include battle tanks, armored combat vehicles, large-caliber artillery systems, warships and small arms and light weapons.

Further, those records should be kept for a minimum of 10 years, the treaty states — which NRA leader Wayne LaPierre has referred to as “nothing more than gun registration by a different name.”

Because the treaty’s language is so broad, LaPierre has said that “manufacturers of civilian shotguns would have to comply with the same regulatory process as a manufacturer of military attack helicopters.”

One thing is for sure – the attacks from the progressives on gun owners are not going to stop.

It does not matter to them that a study that was recently published in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy discovered that nations that have more guns tend to have less crime.

It does not matter to them that approximately 200,000 women in the United States use guns to protect themselves against sexual crime every single year.

Apparently what those women are supposed to do is be sexually assaulted first and then call the police for help.

That sounds absolutely insane, but that is the world that the progressives want us to live in.

Let us hope that they do not win.

 

Here we go again – Another Connecticut politician caught in blatant untruth

Leave a comment

This is from The Daily Caller.

Big surprise another DemocRat lying  about gum owners

guns,gun shows and gun manufactures.

This is going to be a long hard battle for guns owners

gun manufactures.

 

Unfortunately, it has become somewhat less than startling when Connecticut’s politicians make absurd and baseless claims that slander their constituents who work in the gun industry.  First it was Governor Dannel Malloy, who told CNN that“What this is about is the ability of the gun industry to sell as many guns to as many people as possible – even if they are deranged, even if they are mentally ill, even if they have a criminal background,” Malloy said. “They don’t care. They want to sell guns.”

Despite a strong letter of protest from executives at Mossberg, Malloy not only refused to apologize for his incendiary and baseless claims, but actually doubled down on his remarks in a subsequent interview.

Now comes Senator Chris Murphy, who gave a press conference at the Connecticut state capitol this past Friday, along with Senator Dick Blumenthal.  They vowed to continue pursuing the passage of expanded background checks, and a reporter asked how they would counter the “legitimate reasons” that NSSF and others opposed the bill.  Murphy not only said that reasons for opposing the bill were “made up,” but he also repeated Malloy’s slanderous claim.  You can watch the video for yourself here, the exchange begins at 12:01.

Reporter:  NSSF told us they lobbied heavily against it for several reasons that sound quite legitimate.  They have told us that they lobbied against it, number one, because the way the background checks were set up, it would have given priority to gun shows for background checks, which primarily happen on weekends, which would have effectively shut down the background system for the regular retailers….they also say that the background check bill required the private sales, to have their background check done by a regular retailer, who’s going to have to do all of the paperwork and be responsible for it, and have all the liability for it, which their members say they don’t want.  Is there any way around that stuff?

Murphy:  There’s no way around it because it’s a made up argument — there’s no liability on behalf of the person who’s doing … (follow up question) there’s no legal liability, then let’s take the first argument as well.  A background check takes a handful of minutes, there’s no argument that adding additional background checks is going to create an undue burden on people who are buying guns today through federally licensed dealers.  The system absolutely has the capacity to be able to do additional background checks, and it is just a made-up argument to suggest that there are going to be some burdensome inconvenience by this bill. 

The Shooting Sports Foundation and the NRA are captives of the gun industry, right, and the gun industry is interested in selling more guns, whether it be to law-abiding citizens or criminals.  I don’t know that I believed that at the beginning of this process, but having watched the conduct of the foundation and the NRA, I am convinced that their business model relies on selling guns to anybody and everybody who wants them.”

I would suggest Murphy first consult the Obama budget blueprint.  According to this Washington Post article, “The Obama administration estimated in its budget request that expanding background checks to all private firearms sales would have doubled the system’s workload. The administration projected that if such a universal requirement was imposed, the FBI would need to spend $168 million in fiscal 2014, or $100 million more than projected under current law.”  So the system actually does not “absolutely” have the capacity to handle the additional checks.

And it’s not even remotely arguable that gun show checks would not have been prioritized under Manchin-Toomey, blocking retail gun sales if even one gun show check came up “delayed.”  There’s nothing “made up” about it, it’s the text of the bill on white paper.  Maybe the Senator should read the bill himself before he speaks and embarrasses himself.

But since Murphy, like Malloy, is willing to state the blatant untruth that the “gun industry is interested in selling more guns, whether it be to law-abiding citizens or criminals,” then we’ve gone past the point of no return.  There’s no point trying to argue the facts with politicians who are willing to lie to the media and slander their own constituents in order to score cheap political points.  All we can say is, here we go again.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/30/here-we-go-again-another-connecticut-politician-caught-in-blatant-untruth/#ixzz2STQVrF00

 

MILLER: The gun-show loophole myth

1 Comment

This is from The Washington Times.

Part two of the Times random act of journalism.

The Times may become a source for actual journalism.

 

FBI checks have to be fixed; new laws not needed on private gun sales.

 

For the first time in 14 years, the CEO of the National Rifle Association (NRA), will testify on Capitol Hill. Wayne LaPierre’s appearance Wednesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee underscores how seriously the nation’s largest gun-owners organization takes the latest assault on the Second Amendment.

Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy, Vermont Democrat, invited former Rep. Gabrielle Gifford’s husband, Mark Kelly, among others, to testify for the other side. In his prepared remarks, Mr. LaPierre will say, “When it comes to the issue of background checks, let’s be honest: Background checks will never be ‘universal’ because criminals will never submit to them.”

(This is the last of a four-part series on dispelling gun myths. Click here to read part one: The Assault Weapon Myth.  Click here to read part two The High-Capacity Magazine Myth.  Click here to read part three The Cop-Killer Bullet Myth.)

Currently, a gun owner who goes to a retail shop to purchase a gun from a licensed dealer is subject to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. The system, run by the FBI reviews criminal history, mental health and restraining-order records to weed out those who are legally barred from gun ownership.

The gun grabbers’ real goal has always been universal registration, and tracking every gun owner in the country would be a big step in that direction.

“The law already requires licensed gun dealers to run background checks, and over the last 14 years that’s kept 1.5 million of the wrong people from getting their hands on a gun,” said Mr. Obama, when he announced his gun-violence task force results on Jan. 16. “But it’s hard to enforce that law when as many as 40 percent of all gun purchases are conducted without a background check.”

The 40 percent figure that Mr. Obama and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California Democrat, cite so frequently comes from a 1997 Justice Department survey. A closer look at that 40 percent number reveals it includes 29 percent of gun owners who said they got their guns from family members or friends and acquaintances.

That leaves 11 percent of firearms obtained through unfamiliar people. Of these, 3 percent reported they got their firearms “through the mail,” a process that requires a background check from a federally licensed firearms dealer. Four percent said “other,” and 4 percent made their purchase at a gun show.

The “gun-show loophole” is an exaggeration designed to foster the false impression that this is how the bad guys acquire firearms. A 2001 Justice Department survey found 0.7 percent of state and federal prison inmates bought their weapons at a gun show.

Gun shows aren’t the equivalent of the Wild West. The vast majority of vendors at the shows are fully licensed dealers who must run the FBI check at the time of sale. What the gun grabbers are really after are transactions between private individuals trading or selling their personal property.

The White House publicity blitz is having an effect on public opinion, as a recent poll put support around 90 percent for criminal-background checks for all gun sales. Washington politicians are determined to do “something” about the Newtown, Conn., shooting, but it makes no sense to put so much effort into an area where criminals aren’t buying their guns.

More good would be done by strengthening the current background-check system by ensuring states submit felony convictions and mental health records. That’s the most effective way to keep guns out of the wrong hands.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/30/the-gun-show-loophole-myth/#ixzz2JoTxmEV0
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

 

Buchanan: “There Would Be A Revolution” If Government Confiscated Weapons

2 Comments

This is from Freedom Outpost.

i will say Pat is 100% correct a revolution if there is a confiscation attempt.

The revolution will make the Civil war look like a Sunday picnic.

One of the best exchanges over the weekend took place on The McLaughlin Groupwhere Pat Buchanan emphatically stated that gun confiscation would result in a revolution among Americans.  Of course, he could barely get a word in edgewise, with the ever-yelling John McLaughlin barking his ridiculous call for stricter gun laws, but he made his point nonetheless.

From Real Clear Politics:

 

PAT BUCHANAN: There are three million ArmaLite rifles — those Bushmaster types — out there right now, and people are buying them like hotcakes. Every gun show, the sales are up enormously. Forty-one percent, they were up in December — for last December — which was a record year. John, what is common though, Eleanor [Clift] is correct, the push is going to come on three things: grandfather in the assault weapons that are here now; to try to outlaw assault weapons, outlaw magazines that carry more than 11 or 12 bullets; and also background checks at gun shows.

JOHN MCLAUGHLIN: With no Second Amendment, Congress could pass a law, as limited as this: banning assault rifles or as sweeping as prohibiting all private firearm ownership and requiring the surrender of all privately held firearms.

BUCHANAN: There would be a revolution in this country!

MCLAUGHLIN: Baloney! That doesn’t mean you can’t own one, but you have to put it in first and then go try –

BUCHANAN: There are 270 million guns in this country right now, John, and they’re adding to them at a rate of 16 million a year. (The McLaughlin Group, weekend of January 5, 2013)

Watch the entire segment or pick up at the 17:00 mark:

 

Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/01/buchanan-there-would-be-a-revolution-if-government-confiscated-weapons/#ixzz2HckTWnYY

 

%d bloggers like this: