Protecting the Second Amendment – Why all Americans Should Be Concerned [Archive]

Team Sergeant

01-29-2013, 10:14

29 Jan 2013
Page 1 of 3

Protecting the Second Amendment – Why all Americans Should Be Concerned

We are current or former Army Reserve, National Guard, and active duty US Army Special Forces soldiers (Green Berets). We have all taken an oath to “...support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.…” The Constitution of the United States is without a doubt the single greatest document in the history of mankind, codifying the fundamental principle of governmental power and authority being derived from and granted through the consent of the governed. Our Constitution established a system of governance that preserves, protects, and holds sacrosanct the individual rights and primacy of the governed as well as providing for the explicit protection of the governed from governmental tyranny and/or oppression. We have witnessed the insidious and iniquitous effects of tyranny and oppression on people all over the world. We and our forebears have embodied and personified our organizational motto, De Oppresso Liber [To Free the Oppressed], for more than a half century as we have fought, shed blood, and died in the pursuit of freedom for the oppressed.

Like you, we are also loving and caring fathers and grandfathers. Like you, we have been stunned, horrified, and angered by the tragedies of Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora, Fort Hood, and Sandy Hook; and like you, we are searching for solutions to the problem of gun-related crimes in our society. Many of us are educators in our second careers and have a special interest to find a solution to this problem. However, unlike much of the current vox populi reactions to this tragedy, we offer a different perspective.

First, we need to set the record straight on a few things. The current debate is over so-called “assault weapons” and high capacity magazines. The terms "assault weapon" and "assault rifle" are often confused. According to Bruce H. Kobayashi and Joseph E. Olson, writing in the Stanford Law and Policy Review, “Prior to 1989, the term ‘assault weapon’ did not exist in the lexicon of firearms. It is a political term [underline added for emphasis], developed by anti-gun publicists to expand the category of assault rifles.”

The M4A1 carbine is a U.S. military service rifle - it is an assault rifle. The AR-15 is not an assault rifle. The “AR” in its name does not stand for “Assault Rifle” - it is the designation from the first two letters of the manufacturer’s name – ArmaLite Corporation. The AR-15 is designed so that it cosmetically looks like the M4A1 carbine assault rifle, but it is impossible to configure the AR-15 to be a fully automatic assault rifle. It is a single shot semi-automatic rifle that can fire between 45 and 60 rounds per minute depending on the skill of the operator. The M4A1 can fire up to 950 rounds per minute. In 1986, the federal government banned the import or manufacture of new fully automatic firearms for sale to civilians. Therefore, the sale of assault rifles are already banned or heavily restricted!

The second part of the current debate is over “high capacity magazines” capable of holding more than 10 rounds in the magazine. As experts in military weapons of all types, it is our considered opinion that reducing magazine capacity from 30 rounds to 10 rounds will only require an additional 6 -8 seconds to change two empty 10 round magazines with full magazines. Would an increase of 6 –8 seconds make any real difference to the outcome in a mass shooting incident? In our opinion it would not. Outlawing such “high capacity magazines” would, however, outlaw a class of firearms that are “in common use”. As such this would be in contravention to the opinion expressed by the U.S. Supreme Court recent decisions.

Moreover, when the Federal Assault Weapons Ban became law in 1994, manufacturers began retooling to produce firearms and magazines that were compliant. One of those ban-compliant firearms was the Hi-Point 995, which was sold with ten-round magazines. In 1999, five years into the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, the Columbine High School massacre occurred. One of the perpetrators, Eric Harris, was armed with a Hi-Point 995. Undeterred by the ten-round capacity of his magazines, Harris simply brought more of them: thirteen magazines would be found in the massacre's aftermath. Harris fired 96 rounds before killing himself.

Now that we have those facts straight, in our opinion, it is too easy to conclude that the problem is guns and that the solution to the problem is more and stricter gun control laws. For politicians, it is politically expedient to take that position and pass more gun control laws and then claim to constituents that they have done the right thing in the interest of protecting our children. Who can argue with that? Of course we all want to find a solution. But, is the problem really guns? Would increasing gun regulation solve the problem? Did we outlaw cars to combat drunk driving?

What can we learn from experiences with this issue elsewhere? We cite the experience in Great Britain. Despite the absence of a “gun culture”, Great Britain, with one-fifth the population of the U.S., has experienced mass shootings that are eerily similar to those we have experienced in recent years. In 1987 a lone gunman killed 18 people in Hungerford. What followed was the Firearms Act of 1988 making registration mandatory and banning semi-automatic guns and pump-action shotguns. Despite this ban, on March 13, 1996 a disturbed 43-year old former scout leader, Thomas Hamilton, murdered 16 school children aged five and six and a teacher at a primary school in Dunblane, Scotland. Within a year and a half the Firearms Act was amended to ban all private ownership of hand guns. After both shootings there were amnesty periods resulting in the surrender of thousands of firearms and ammunition. Despite having the toughest gun control laws in the world, gun related crimes increased in 2003 by 35% over the previous year with firearms used in 9,974 recorded crimes in the preceding 12 months. Gun related homicides were up 32% over the same period. Overall, gun related crime had increased 65% since the Dunblane massacre and implementation of the toughest gun control laws in the developed world. In contrast, in 2009 (5 years after the Federal Assault Weapons Ban expired) total firearm related homicides in the U.S. declined by 9% from the 2005 high (Source: “FBI Uniform Crime Reporting Master File, Table 310, Murder Victims – Circumstances and Weapons Used or Cause of Death: 2000-2009”).

Team Sergeant

01-29-2013, 10:15

Protecting the Second Amendment – Why all Americans Should Be Concerned
29 Jan 2013
Page 2 of 3

Are there unintended consequences to stricter gun control laws and the politically expedient path that we have started down?

In a recent op-ed piece in the San Francisco Chronicle, Brett Joshpe stated that “Gun advocates will be hard-pressed to explain why the average American citizen needs an assault weapon with a high-capacity magazine other than for recreational purposes.”We agree with Kevin D. Williamson (National Review Online, December 28, 2012): “The problem with this argument is that there is no legitimate exception to the Second Amendment right that excludes military-style weapons, because military-style weapons are precisely what the Second Amendment guarantees our right to keep and bear.”

“The purpose of the Second Amendment is to secure our ability to oppose enemies foreign and domestic, a guarantee against disorder and tyranny. Consider the words of Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story”: ‘The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.’

The Second Amendment has been ruled to specifically extend to firearms “in common use” by the military by the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in U.S. v Miller (1939). In Printz v U.S. (1997) Justice Thomas wrote: “In Miller we determined that the Second Amendment did not guarantee a citizen’s right to possess a sawed-off shot gun because that weapon had not been shown to be “ordinary military equipment” that could “could contribute to the common defense”.

A citizen’s right to keep and bear arms for personal defense unconnected with service in a militia has been reaffirmed in the U.S. Supreme Court decision (District of Columbia, et al. v Heller, 2008). The Court Justice Scalia wrote in the majority opinion: “The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.“. Justice Scalia went on to define a militia as “… comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense ….”
“The Anti-Federalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved.” he explained.

On September 13, 1994, the Federal Assault Weapons Ban went into effect. A Washington Post editorial published two days later was candid about the ban's real purpose:“[N]o one should have any illusions about what was accomplished [by the ban]. Assault weapons play a part in only a small percentage of crime. The provision is mainly symbolic; its virtue will be if it turns out to be, as hoped, a stepping stone to broader gun control.”

In a challenge to the authority of the Federal government to require State and Local Law Enforcement to enforce Federal Law (Printz v United States) the U.S. Supreme Court rendered a decision in 1997. For the majority opinion Justice Scalia wrote: "…. this Court never has sanctioned explicitly a federal command to the States to promulgate and enforce laws and regulations When we were at last confronted squarely with a federal statute that unambiguously required the States to enact or administer a federal regulatory program, our decision should have come as no surprise….. It is an essential attribute of the States' retained sovereignty that they remain independent and autonomous within their proper sphere of authority.”

So why should non-gun owners, a majority of Americans, care about maintaining the 2nd Amendment right for citizens to bear arms of any kind?

The answer is “The Battle of Athens, TN”. The Cantrell family had controlled the economy and politics of McMinn County, Tennessee since the 1930s. Paul Cantrell had been Sheriff from 1936 -1940 and in 1942 was elected to the State Senate. His chief deputy, Paul Mansfield, was subsequently elected to two terms as Sheriff. In 1946 returning WWII veterans put up a popular candidate for Sheriff. On August 1 Sheriff Mansfield and 200 “deputies” stormed the post office polling place to take control of the ballot boxes wounding an objecting observer in the process. The veterans bearing military style weapons, laid siege to the Sheriff’s office demanding return of the ballot boxes for public counting of the votes as prescribed in Tennessee law. After exchange of gun fire and blowing open the locked doors, the veterans secured the ballot boxes thereby protecting the integrity of the election. And this is precisely why all Americans should be concerned about protecting all of our right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment!

Throughout history, disarming the populace has always preceded tyrants’ accession of power. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao all disarmed their citizens prior to installing their murderous regimes. At the beginning of our own nation’s revolution, one of the first moves made by the British government was an attempt to disarm our citizens. When our Founding Fathers ensured that the 2nd Amendment was made a part of our Constitution, they were not just wasting ink. They were acting to ensure our present security was never forcibly endangered by tyrants, foreign or domestic.

If there is a staggering legal precedent to protect our 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms and if stricter gun control laws are not likely to reduce gun related crime, why are we having this debate? Other than making us and our elected representatives feel better because we think that we are doing something to protect our children, these actions will have no effect and will only provide us with a false sense of security.

Team Sergeant

01-29-2013, 10:16

Protecting the Second Amendment – Why all Americans Should Be Concerned
29 Jan 2013
Page 3 of 3

So, what do we believe will be effective? First, it is important that we recognize that this is not a gun control problem; it is a complex sociological problem. No single course of action will solve the problem. Therefore, it is our recommendation that a series of diverse steps be undertaken, the implementation of which will require patience and diligence to realize an effect. These are as follows:

1. First and foremost we support our Second Amendment right in that “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”.

2. We support State and Local School Boards in their efforts to establish security protocols in whatever manner and form that they deem necessary and adequate. One of the great strengths of our Republic is that State and Local governments can be creative in solving problems. Things that work can be shared. Our point is that no one knows what will work and there is no one single solution, so let’s allow the State and Local governments with the input of the citizens to make the decisions. Most recently the Cleburne Independent School District will become the first district in North Texas to consider allowing some teachers to carry concealed guns. We do not opine as to the appropriateness of this decision, but we do support their right to make this decision for themselves.

3. We recommend that Assisted Outpatient Treatment (AOT) laws be passed in every State. AOT is formerly known as Involuntary Outpatient Commitment (IOC) and allows the courts to order certain individuals with mental disorders to comply with treatment while living in the community. In each of the mass shooting incidents the perpetrator was mentally unstable. We also believe that people who have been adjudicated as incompetent should be simultaneously examined to determine whether they should be allowed the right to retain/purchase firearms.

4. We support the return of firearm safety programs to schools along the lines of the successful "Eddie the Eagle" program, which can be taught in schools by Peace Officers or other trained professionals.

5. Recent social psychology research clearly indicates that there is a direct relationship between gratuitously violent movies/video games and desensitization to real violence and increased aggressive behavior particularly in children and young adults (See Nicholas L. Carnagey, et al. 2007. “The effect of video game violence on physiological desensitization to real-life violence” and the references therein. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 43:489-496). Therefore, we strongly recommend that gratuitous violence in movies and video games be discouraged. War and war-like behavior should not be glorified. Hollywood and video game producers are exploiting something they know nothing about. General Sherman famously said “War is Hell!” Leave war to the Professionals. War is not a game and should not be "sold" as entertainment to our children.

6. We support repeal of the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990. This may sound counter-intuitive, but it obviously isn’t working. It is our opinion that “Gun-Free Zones” anywhere are too tempting of an environment for the mentally disturbed individual to inflict their brand of horror with little fear of interference. While governmental and non-governmental organizations, businesses, and individuals should be free to implement a Gun-Free Zone if they so choose, they should also assume Tort liability for that decision.

7. We believe that border states should take responsibility for implementation of border control laws to prevent illegal shipments of firearms and drugs. Drugs have been illegal in this country for a long, long time yet the Federal Government manages to seize only an estimated 10% of this contraband at our borders. Given this dismal performance record that is misguided and inept (“Fast and Furious”), we believe that border States will be far more competent at this mission.

8. This is our country, these are our rights. We believe that it is time that we take personal responsibility for our choices and actions rather than abdicate that responsibility to someone else under the illusion that we have done something that will make us all safer. We have a responsibility to stand by our principles and act in accordance with them. Our children are watching and they will follow the example we set.

The undersigned Quiet Professionals hereby humbly stand ever present, ever ready, and ever vigilant.

Team Sergeant

01-29-2013, 10:20

1100 Green Berets Signed this Letter

We have a list of all their names and unlike any MSM outlets we can confirm that over 1100 Green Berets did sign. The list includes Special Forces Major Generals & Special Forces Command Sergeants Major down to the lowest ranking "Green Beret".

The letter stands for itself.

Read it and send it everywhere.

Team Sergeant

Richard

01-29-2013, 11:51

PDF of the letter for dissemination.

Divemaster

01-29-2013, 12:31

Amen and great work gentlemen! :lifter

Stargazer

01-29-2013, 12:41

It is both an honor and privilege to disseminate the above referenced letter. Thank you. LL

SF18C

01-29-2013, 12:46

Thank you Brothers for all your efforts!

Badger52

01-29-2013, 12:53

To all the Quiet Professionals who've honored this letter with their endorsement, Bravo Zulu and thank you.

Forwarding at will.

To the current administration:
No further. Out.

TFA303

01-29-2013, 13:03

Given that SF might well be pressed into a role enforcing such laws, I'd wondered what the reaction of the QP community might be.
This answers that question very clearly.

I deeply appreciate the efforts and courage that went into this document.

steel_eel

01-29-2013, 13:12

Submitted to Breitbart as a tip. Thank you, gentlemen.

DJ Urbanovsky

01-29-2013, 13:18

Fantastic.

DIYPatriot

01-29-2013, 13:27

I hope this letter catches on like a wildfire. Very well-written! Considering the source(s), I'm not surprised at all. Bravo Zulu, gents! Thank you for this.

Stiletto11

01-29-2013, 14:56

Exceptional!!!!

Badger52

01-29-2013, 15:50

It taketh, and runneth with.
:lifter

Mack27

01-29-2013, 15:53

I've been talking to lots of friends, family, and co-workers about this subject. Unfortunately I haven't been as eloquent and concise in my discussions with them regarding gun control legislation. This letter will help me convey the facts more precisely and hopefully help those I talk with to understand that more gun control legislation is not necessarily the key. I will be forwarding this letter to a whole lot of people, as well as using it's points to engage in discussion better. Thank you for writing this and putting it out there, hopefully it gets the attention it deserves!

By the way TS, were you involved in crafting this letter? If so kudos! It is a great piece of work.

Mack

Chaplain Scott

01-29-2013, 16:26

Gentlemen: Thank you for the article, but thank you even more for the courage to take an open and public stand, esp. when there may likely be quiet efforts to silence you. It fills my heart with pride to be an American Soldier.

Gypsy

01-29-2013, 16:27

BZ, Gents.

Oldschool45B

01-29-2013, 16:36

Posted in several places. I am honored to have served with and supported men with this kind of character, dedication, and honor.

Flagg

01-29-2013, 16:37

Some cogent talking points to add to the gun control conversation arsenal.

cbtengr

01-29-2013, 16:49

A very well thought out voice of reason, thank you!

Oldrotorhead

01-29-2013, 18:29

I'd like to thank you all again for your service and your willingness to stand up for the 2od Amendment. I have forwarded this to a couple of ex-SF guys I know that are not on this site.

cetheridge

01-29-2013, 18:51

OUTSTANDING! Sending to friends, State and Federal Representatives and Senators :lifter

Thanks to all who participated in crafting this document!

bjm300

01-29-2013, 20:21

That letter makes me extremely proud to be a member of this forum. Thanks for posting it.

Smurf

01-29-2013, 20:42

In your face Advertisement 24/7 is the only way America will wake up.

Now its up to us the modern day Paul Revere, just get them printed up and place them ever where......If there is a copier in you office--bring your paper and print ever day-------its got to be 24/7 in your face Advertisement.

Sharp Stick

01-29-2013, 20:58

EXCELLENT piece of prose. If only facts mattered in this debate. Dissemination in progress...

SF_BHT

01-29-2013, 21:16

Great job.....

bberkley

01-29-2013, 21:36

I haven't been around this board for some time, but I do want to commend you gentlemen on this letter.

It is one of the more concise and cogent arguments presented, and I appreciate it very much.

MR2

01-29-2013, 22:43

fng13

01-29-2013, 23:19

It's up on soldiersystems.net right now, hope it keeps going.

I'll look for it on the news in the morning.

Great job.

BOfH

01-29-2013, 23:44

:lifter :lifter

funnyman

01-29-2013, 23:52

Check out all the morons commenting here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022279730

No wonder this country is in such trouble.

MtnGoat

01-30-2013, 01:23

Excellent and great work gentlemen! Great push forward.

ddoering

01-30-2013, 04:37

Check out all the morons commenting here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022279730

No wonder this country is in such trouble.

We got their panties in a twist.:p:munchin:p

Dusty

01-30-2013, 04:51

We got their panties in a twist.:p:munchin:p

I've read a buttload of posts all over the net regarding the letter, and nearly all of the statements other than those of the obviously lib sites refer to pride and honor.

The responses come across as being from those who have been reassured in some way.

ddoering

01-30-2013, 07:12

I was referring to the site posted above.

Dusty

01-30-2013, 07:16

I was referring to the site posted above.

Roger, Bro-I gotcha. I meant to differentiate between the lib posts and those of normal people. ;)

Knight

01-30-2013, 07:26

Amen! Will keep this moving forward.:D

Badger52

01-30-2013, 07:31

The responses come across as being from those who have been reassured in some way.Because of the provenance and authorship I think you are in the X-ring as to many areas of the country. More so than some other manifestos, those who only know what they've seen on TV and the silver screen are likely, whether they admit it or not, to view this as a light in the darkness, particularly those in states in the firm clutches of 'Empire'.

They still see MSG Muldoon & Doc & Peter-san, they're still wishing for the Wolverines to get some help, and they still believe "men who mean just what they say."

The notion of still standing with and for something bigger than oneself is not dead. You're seeing that now.

Dusty

01-30-2013, 07:45

Because of the provenance and authorship I think you are in the X-ring as to many areas of the country. More so than some other manifestos, those who only know what they've seen on TV and the silver screen are likely, whether they admit it or not, to view this as a light in the darkness, particularly those in states in the firm clutches of 'Empire'.

They still see MSG Muldoon & Doc & Peter-san, they're still wishing for the Wolverines to get some help, and they still believe "men who mean just what they say."

The notion of still standing with and for something bigger than oneself is not dead. You're seeing that now.

I believe you're 100% right.

Outstanding work, SF.

HALOMAN007

01-30-2013, 08:03

How do I sign?

You need to go to the below link and follow the instructions before posting again - especially item #3.

http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3452

Welcome to PS.Com.

Richard

Goggles Pizano

01-30-2013, 08:36

This letter is precisely why this website (and you Quiet Professionals individually) is so important. To the author(s) of this letter a note of personal thanks. Forwarding to commence immediately.

salfc563

01-30-2013, 09:06

I've been monitoring the 2nd Amendment issue since Sandy Hook, but never really taken to heart what it meant for Americans. Better late than never I guess. In any case I'm learning very quickly all that is at stake and how these very same events have taken place throughout history. I did learn early on in my enlistment, "the one thing that we learn from history is that we never learn from history!" I'm very encouraged to see that many of my brothers in arms are taking this quite seriously and are ever vigilant! I gladly and proudly stand with you!

If we thought it was impossible to fail, what would we attempt to achieve??

Surf n Turf

01-30-2013, 09:18

TS
Well played :lifter
SnT

orion5

01-30-2013, 10:19

I've read a buttload of posts all over the net regarding the letter, and nearly all of the statements other than those of the obviously lib sites refer to pride and honor.

The responses come across as being from those who have been reassured in some way.

That's what I've seen as well, a general sense of excitement and gratitude that some of America's finest warriors have spoken up.

I don't want to focus on the negative comments I've seen, as many of those are to be expected. Instead, I'm hoping many of those Americans quietly watching in the background...many like me, tired, over-stretched in our lives, with no time for political BS...I'm hoping those people are now waking up and paying attention to the larger issues at hand. Anyone in a "neutral" wait-and-see position right now is not neutral at all. They're being dragged backwards in a mis-directed wave of hysteria. This is the time to do something, not wait.

It's too bad more Americans can't know you QPs, individually, to understand the weight of your words. The QPs I have the privilege of calling Friends are not about fear, loathing and love of violence. The exact opposite: they love and value their country, are positive and full of laughter. And when they speak, I listen.

Well done, gentlemen.

Team Sergeant

01-30-2013, 10:23

TS
Well played :lifter
SnT

Thanks but we're not playing. We mean what we say and say what we mean.

The letter was crafted by many Special Forces soldiers, now the American public knows how we feel about the 2nd Amendment and why.

Ronin_326

01-30-2013, 10:46

I appreciate the well written petition and only hope that our politicians see the truth in it. They are so often only interested in their own political agenda and supporting whatever cause gets them re-elected that they forget that they are there to work for the people.

Thank you!

We'd appreciate it if you'd go to the following link and follow the instructions - especially item #3 - before posting any further.

http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3452

Welcome to PS.Com.

Richard

stever

01-30-2013, 10:49

Thank You - I plan on sharing with friends and family - whoever will listen. I apprecaiate the stand by the "Quiet Professionals"

ddoering

01-30-2013, 11:21

A betting man would wager that the Oath of will be changed soon and re-sworn. I pledge loyalty to der Leader.......

TXGringo

01-30-2013, 12:15

It's getting big. Top story at The Blaze.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/30/read-the-letter-1100-green-berets-signed-for-protection-of-the-2nd-amendment/

"The letter was originally posted on the website Professional Soldiers, a forum that Military.com explained is operated by retired Army Special Forces Master Sgt. Jeff Hinton. Military.com also noted that the 1,100 signatories were not officially named due to the nature of their careers, but the letter notes all are current or former Special Forces members.

“Like you, we are also loving and caring fathers and grandfathers. Like you, we have been stunned, horrified, and angered by the tragedies of Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora, Fort Hood, and Sandy Hook; and like you, we are searching for solutions to the problem of gun-related crimes in our society,” the letter by “Team Sergeant” reads."

Surf n Turf

01-30-2013, 12:23

Thanks but we're not playing. We mean what we say and say what we mean.

The letter was crafted by many Special Forces soldiers, now the American public knows how we feel about the 2nd Amendment and why.

TS,
The comment was about the effectiveness of the document, not the serious nature of the endeavour. :D
SnT.

funnyman

01-30-2013, 12:43

Just a point of clarification: I didn't post the link to that trash site to demoralize anyone. I was just dumbfounded (though I shouldn't have been at this point) at the sheer idiocy of the posts by the idiots there. Although we can expect American society to have elements that are anti-military/pacifist/tree-hugger/socialist/marxist/etc, it reinforces to me that we have some folks who are truly incapable of seeing through the fog of verbal persuasion to understand what's really happening in this country.

I had a chance to chat with one of the signers of this doc last night, and expressed my gratitude. Personally, it's quite refreshing to see such a document made public, and most of the blogs I've read had comments that reflected my feelings. Even though this document is an expression of opinion, not call to action (as was told to me), I doubt most civilians understand the true magnitude of the document.

That's what I've seen as well, a general sense of excitement and gratitude that some of America's finest warriors have spoken up.

I don't want to focus on the negative comments I've seen, as many of those are to be expected. Instead, I'm hoping many of those Americans quietly watching in the background...many like me, tired, over-stretched in our lives, with no time for political BS...I'm hoping those people are now waking up and paying attention to the larger issues at hand. Anyone in a "neutral" wait-and-see position right now is not neutral at all. They're being dragged backwards in a mis-directed wave of hysteria. This is the time to do something, not wait.

It's too bad more Americans can't know you QPs, individually, to understand the weight of your words. The QPs I have the privilege of calling Friends are not about fear, loathing and love of violence. The exact opposite: they love and value their country, are positive and full of laughter. And when they speak, I listen.

Well done, gentlemen.

Surf n Turf

01-30-2013, 12:58

Some comments on the letter from THE BLAZE
SnT

cdn1979 Posted on January 30, 2013 at 12:54pm
so, what is the point of this letter? who cares who signs it, what it says, or who sees it? The content is no different than other pro gun stances. It makes sense, but what is the value add of it? who is it for?

Thundergod Posted on January 30, 2013 at 1:24pm
When a Green Beret speaks, people are wise to listen. These men train freedom fighters to throw off the yoke of tyranny. When they see it in America, those politicians imposing tyranny should recognize they arent working to free men,but to enslave them.

True American66 Posted on January 30, 2013 at 1:36pm
An outstanding correspondence from the protectors of freedom to the masses they protect.
This letter represents a knowledgeable, comprehensive, analysis of a complex and emotional issue. I couldn’t be more proud of these fine American men. It seems that smart, sincere collaboration can still exist somewhere among us. I am not at all surprised that it would come from some of our most respected and trustworthy military members. Gentlemen, I salute you.

BlackCrow Posted on January 30, 2013 at 1:17pm
There have been those who would question if ordered would the military take our guns. I would submit these outstanding young people would be standing on the side of liberty and the Constitution. Why would Obama call for an armed federal civilian corps? Why do Communists want to further gut the military? I would submit this as the reason. This is not the scribblings of an uneducated trailer park redneck or the member of an underclass who the Army is the employer of last resort.
I would be honored to load the authors magazines!

Team Sergeant

01-30-2013, 13:27

ZonieDiver

01-30-2013, 13:36

A betting man would wager that the Oath of will be changed soon and re-sworn. I pledge loyalty to der Leader.......

I am a betting man, and I'll bet it doesn't happen. The oath will stay as it is.

Is there an 'over-under' or 'point spread'?:D

Richard

01-30-2013, 13:44

I am a betting man, and I'll bet it doesn't happen. The oath will stay as it is.

I agree - as it should IMO.

Richard :munchin

fng13

01-30-2013, 13:52

I just sent a tip to Drudge that it's a top story on the blaze.

We shall see.

ImagesNC

01-30-2013, 13:52

I am the webmaster for WarontheSecond.com and with the main writer's permission I've put it up there in our featured section. We've gone over 10,000 unique visitors in the first month and 120,000 page hits. Not nearly as big as the Blaze but the more eyes the better

Congo336

01-30-2013, 14:07

As a citizen or anyone living in the USA enjoying most of the fruits of citizenship, what are we to do? Ignore the problems and hope they go away? Trust that “someone else” will do something? Focus our action to voting and other political input and hope that’s enough? Or do “We the People” have to contemplate and perhaps accept that if left unchecked, we may actually have to fight a rogue government in order to preserve the Republic as it was created? Is the divisive nature of politicians part of an orchestrated effort to not only split the people apart, but to also split the nation?

When America began, I believe God was on our side and I believe that God has been on the American side throughout history and is evident when you look at the results. However, over the last two or three decades our elected representatives, our public schools and colleges, our lawyers, our public servants at all levels, and perhaps most importantly, our media has been trying to take God out of the USA in all but the most private of venues. There is a much needed discussion that has to take place or be started in many groups about the true state of the Nation and what the real, non-politically correct reasons are behind what could be argued, is a spiraling state of decline.

Great letter and count on me for being among its supporters.

Badger52

01-30-2013, 14:09

This was my personal favorite........

Some comments on the letter from THER BLAZE:

Log in to Reply

blanco5
Posted on January 30, 2013 at 1:51pm
Well, we know who the first 1,100 people the government is going after!

My answer:

blanco5,
Just WHO do you think the government would send? :munchin
Team Sergeant:cool:

I can't even remember who said this but it always stuck:
"Telling someone they're about to step on a landmine isn't a threat. It's simply good manners."

Still, while I'm appreciative of the very affirming nature of the reaction to the letter, I hope to see at least an equal amount of focus amongst those venues on the specific recommendations made - because it is a communication that also furthers a dialogue IF the other party is truly willing to have one - containing another side of what an actual conversation would be. As Clint Eastwood said to the chair, "No, you shut up for now, it's my turn to talk."

If not, then the last thing they hear under their foot may be 'click'...
:rolleyes:

uplink5

01-30-2013, 14:10

Having been out of the net, I wish I had known and signed it before this was published. I shall endeavor to keep my awareness up in the future....

That said, I must point out how proud I am of this letter's commission, and for the men who stand behind it. I too took a solemn oath of allegiance to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, and this oath is for life.
God Bless you all….jd

grog18b

01-30-2013, 14:12

funnyman

01-30-2013, 15:18

I was recently talking to a Marine officer who's a friend. He's also a civilian LEO. We were discussing the opinion of the second amendment among young ones serving. The conversation revealed what I had suspected: that the younger folks are not educated on the fundamentals of the US Constitution and some just don't care. In a LEO's case, they're just taught the legalese of when it's OK to arrest someone. That's great except that so many current laws appear to be unconstitutional (IMHO).

I remember, as a young PFC, just thinking I need to do what I was ordered to do. I assumed every order was a legal one unless it was something to the effect of 'go blow grandma's brains out'. If I was ordered to confiscate weapons from civilians, I would have done it. AFAIR, at NO time did either an officer or NCO brief us on the Constitution and how it impacted our responsibilities or actions. Sure, we were explained Geneva Convention stuff, but IMO, that's different.

I've been ETS'd for quite a while now, so maybe things have changed since then. But I think our armed services and LEOs need to do a better job explaining the Constitution to the young folks. And the older folks should get refresher training. After all, if they're going to take an oath to defend it, they sure as hell should understand what it's all really about.

If I were still in, I'd be having a heart-to-heart with the guys both up and down my chain of command.
Are those conversations happening today? I sure hope so.

-Just my $.02

sfofficer

01-30-2013, 17:01

As A former SF soldier and a Retired US Army Special operations NCO I find that General McCrystal is out of touch with reality. He has forgotten what fredom means. Also when the general public is disarmed then we fall under the same rules as a commie state. It is a known fact that when a country is disarmed their crime rate increased ten fold. It also means that the goverment can then control the general public and force them to do what the goverment wants them to do. The proof is look what the man in office is doing now. He is using his office to ram his policy's down our throats and is bragging that he doesn't care what anyone thinks or what the other political parties want. He stated that he has the right to do what he wants while he is in office. All those people who voted for him and putsfofficer him back in office need to wake up and remember this time and what is happening. The General will be most happy to say what ever the President wants or tells him to say. I will say no more at this time. But pay attention to whats comming most of it thru the back door or under the table.

sfofficer

Surgicalcric

01-30-2013, 17:09

I can't even remember who said this but it always stuck: "Telling someone they're about to step on a landmine isn't a threat. It's simply good manners."

Where was that guy on 28 Oct 2012? :D

Crip

Team Sergeant

01-30-2013, 17:56

Where was that guy on 28 Oct 2012? :D

Crip

You made me laugh Brother....... Glad you can joke about it!

SF18C

01-30-2013, 17:58

Where was that guy on 28 Oct 2012? :D

Crip

J...now that was rich!

chance

01-30-2013, 18:23

Where was that guy on 28 Oct 2012? :D

Crip

Now that's just funny Doc.

Divemaster

01-30-2013, 18:27

Where was that guy on 28 Oct 2012? :D

Crip

You owe me a keyboard.

Your country owes you more than we could ever repay.

But if the country sends you a keyboard, I've got dibs.

Snaquebite

01-30-2013, 18:34

Where was that guy on 28 Oct 2012? :D

Crip

Damn James...YOU DA MAN.:lifter

Off to Walmart for a new keyboard.:D

Monsoon65

01-30-2013, 18:56

Where was that guy on 28 Oct 2012?

Geez, now that's just too freakin' funny. My 2 year old is giving me funny looks because I was laughing so hard.

:)

SF18C

01-30-2013, 18:57

Dusty

01-30-2013, 19:01

Where was that guy on 28 Oct 2012? :D

Crip

That's got to be the coolest post I've read on this site in nearly four years. :D

Gypsy

01-30-2013, 19:06

Where was that guy on 28 Oct 2012? :D

Crip

Thanks J, I almost choked to death. :D

I've spread this around, and have sent it to my congress critters.

afchic

01-30-2013, 19:11

Where was that guy on 28 Oct 2012? :D

Crip

I wish I had 10% your positive view of life!!!! This deserves to be post of the year for 2012 and 2013!!!!!!!:lifter

Stargazer

01-30-2013, 19:32

Just to add to the 2nd Amendment debate:

December 29, 2013 marks the 123nd Anniversary of Wounded Knee!

Wounded Knee is the just another example of why the Second Amendment exists, and why we shouldn't be in such a hurry to surrender our Right to Bear Arms.

This reminds me of a letter in an Idaho newspaper by Dennis Edelbrock. The letter is titled, Guns: Heed history's lessons. Have you read it?

One of my brothers that lives in Idaho scanned the article (or someone he knows did) and forwarded. I've attached the pdf.

Badger52

01-30-2013, 19:51

Where was that guy on 28 Oct 2012? :D

CripIf some folks had a shot glass of your attitude they still wouldn't know what to do with it. Thanks for the smile.
:D

Joker

01-30-2013, 20:25

If some folks had a shot glass of your attitude they still wouldn't know what to do with it. Thanks for the smile.
:D

If common folks had 1/2 of a shot glass of Crip's attitude and drive, they'd be passed out face down from fright. That is why it is labeled “Break In Case Of Emergency!”:lifter

Surgicalcric

01-30-2013, 20:50

If common folks had 1/2 of a shot glass of Crip's attitude and drive, they'd be passed out face down from fright. That is why it is labeled “Break In Case Of Emergency!”:lifter

OMG!!!!! You guys are killing me...

SF18C

01-30-2013, 20:52

OMG!!!!! You guys are killing me...

Apparently nothing else can!:lifter

Divemaster

01-30-2013, 21:21

OMG!!!!! You guys are killing me...

I met one of your bros on a contract in the FLA panhandle last month. He had visited you at WR and gave you major props when speaking to me. Your attitude speaks volumes for you personally and for the brotherhood writ large.

Team Sergeant

01-30-2013, 21:57

Apparently nothing else can!:lifter

Good one.;)

cactijoe

01-30-2013, 21:58

Sdiver

01-30-2013, 22:17

Apparently nothing else can!:lifter

Looks as if Chuck Norris is going to start checking under HIS bed for Crip. :eek: :D

Divemaster

01-30-2013, 22:25

Looks as if Chuck Norris is going to start checking under HIS bed for Cric. :eek: :D

When Chuck Norris wants to kill something he asks Surgicalcric if he is ready to step up.

DocDougan

01-30-2013, 22:46

In the Peoples Republic of New York we're further along the rest of the country. Confiscation starts in earnest in April 2014. If you have PTSD or almost anyother psych label, your guns are gone. Walmart already has software programs in place to record every bullet you buy. You won't get pistol ammo without a pistol permit. My grandaughter's Remington .22 Viper is illegal in NY! She can register it now. Just makes it easier for them to conficate it next year. This is not hearsay. I have a copy of the law sitting on my desk. It's pretty ugly and it's going to get worse.

Uman

01-31-2013, 00:32

We need to get this signed by as many as we can.

1stindoor

01-31-2013, 08:44

Geez, now that's just too freakin' funny. My 2 year old is giving me funny looks because I was laughing so hard.

:)

I went from laughing to tears.

tonyz

01-31-2013, 09:14

Somebody picked on the wrong girl...GLOCK advertisement.

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=l6Ik8qDR1SI&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dl6Ik8qDR1SI

funnyman

01-31-2013, 09:46

<sarc>
Poor guy, he was probably just abused as a child. She should have just tried to talk it through with him. A hug really helps in a situation like this.
</sarc>

Somebody picked on the wrong girl...GLOCK advertisement.

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=l6Ik8qDR1SI&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dl6Ik8qDR1SI

tonyz

01-31-2013, 10:42

"To limit the Second Amendment to muskets would be the equivalent of limiting the First Amendment to writing with quill pens. " Anonymous web poster

A link below to an organization (and links to reportedly 800 Mayors) that might benefit from reading the letter in the OP.

http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/members/members.shtml

ODA CDR (RET)

01-31-2013, 10:52

One of the comments on our letter on NY firearms.com.

"The Green Berets are good people to have on your side."

shadowbox

01-31-2013, 12:56

great letter on the 2nd. during the looting during several of the hurricanes here in florida i confronted looters in my hood with my m-16 with 30 rd mag. they got the message. well regulated militia me thinks. don,t think muzzle loader would have gotten the job done.

It's surprising how much safer our neighbors feel when we who govern ourselves and maintain our weapons are around during those times of emergency, yet have no idea "what possible reason" there might be for us to own them when the media hype begins. Perhaps this letter will bring some of them back to reason.

Outstanding letter gentlemen; it has been further disseminated.

-SD

BryanK

01-31-2013, 13:22

I felt almost a sense of obligation to include this letter in a reply to my Congressman whom I've been in contact with recently. So I did :D. I'm not as well versed as you all are in these matters, and my writing style needs some polishing, but here is the reply to my Congressman I just sent out:

Congressman Hoyer,

I want to thank you for your response to my email. I would also like to present a few counter-arguments to some of your statements. Let me start with your initial statement of, and I quote, “The shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut have compelled the nation to reexamine how we can avoid such a senseless tragedy from occurring again.” I will try to be brief.

To me, as a constituent, I fail to see why it took a mass shooting to spark the outcry of an Administration who prior to this event, did not seem to attend to the plethora of communities and victims lost to gang violence, stabbings, rape, drugs, people being struck and killed by drunk/drugged drivers, people killed by distracted drivers, etcetera. I understand everyone wants the senselessness to end, but being realistic, none of the proposed resolutions regarding firearms themselves will curb any of the aforementioned crimes to include crimes where a firearm is used.

I agree with more thorough background checks; however I disagree with [quote] “banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines”. The term ‘assault weapon’ itself is very misleading. Just because a firearm in its appearance, looks like a military or law enforcement issued firearm, it is not. Anyone can dress like a duck, but that does not make them a duck. A determined assailant can do just as much damage with 3 ten-round magazines as they could with a thirty-round magazine with little to no training. Even if firearms were abolished altogether, that would not stop criminals who are committed to do harm from illegally obtaining firearms to completing that goal. There are several examples around the globe that echo this statement.

I believe, as do many others, that the problem lies with so-called ‘gun control’ itself. Obstructing law-biding citizens from their inalienable right to possess arms just empowers criminals that much more to commit crimes. Most of the crimes which involve firearms occur in heavily legislated, gun-free metropolitan areas, and outlying areas. There are statistics from various sources which verify this. There are also other statistics that can be interpreted in either direction; be it in favor of further gun control, or against gun control in its entirety. My question to you Congressman Hoyer, is how are you interpreting these statistics, and how are you representing your constituents who have the common-sense approach of further gun control not being a viable solution?

I would like to propose solutions, however a more eloquent proposal has already been written by, and signed by, over one thousand active duty and retired members of the elite military organization, the United States Army Special Forces; also known as ‘Green Berets’. I have attached their open letter titled “Protecting the Second Amendment” to this email. I challenge you to read this letter, and to ponder the facts and solutions suggested therein.

In conclusion, I want to thank you again for your taking the time to read my correspondence, and I look forward to your reply. This is a very turbulent time in our Nation, and any decisions regarding the Rights granted to us by the U.S. Constitution should not be acted upon forthwith without due diligence and considerations of all the facts. Have a great day.

Sincerely,

XXXXXX

hso

01-31-2013, 13:30

Well said!

The FBI UCR shows 12,644 murders took place in 2011. 323 of those were committed with rifles. That's only 2.5% of all murders and those were committed with every type and caliber of rifle. (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8) Some states collect more detailed information on semi vs. bolt vs. lever/pump rifles that would identify the number of semiauto rifles used in murders. In my state, less than a quarter of the rifles used in murders were semiauto (no information on what type of semi was collected). If we assume that 1/4 of the 323 rifles used in murders in 2011 were semis, there were less than 80 of these rifles used in murders, or 0.6%. Six tenths of a percent??!? This tiny number can't rationally be the basis for national policy or legislation.

The UCR Five Year Trend graph (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/violent-crime/violent-crime-offense-figure) shows that violent crimes dropped by 220,000 since 2007. This drop has occurred while the very firearms proposed for banning have become more and more popular for recreation, competition, hunting, personal defense. More importantly, both have occurred while the rates of murder have dropped since the expiration of the AWB. These out of date and out of touch politicians with their out of date and out of touch proposals want want to reinstate the failed AWB of '94 regardless of the data showing their solutions will not reduce violent crime rates. This can’t rationally be the basis for national policy or legislation.

The murder rate is at the lowest point in a generation, this has occurred since the failed AWB expired, the firearms to be banned and their magazines have become more popular for law abiding citizens and politicians can’t come up with any new ideas for identifying the root cause of violent crime and murder or for identifying real meaningful changes that will reduce the rates of murder or violent crime. There's no risk basis for trying to prohibit law abiding citizens owning, purchasing, or selling these firearms and their magazines.

Once again you gentlemen have done a service to the nation.

tonyz

01-31-2013, 17:04

One man's thoughts on the subject at hand in a 2 minute YouTube video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4n8egXfmJM&feature=player_embedded

Team Sergeant

01-31-2013, 17:10

One man's thoughts on the subject at hand in a 2 minute YouTube video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4n8egXfmJM&feature=player_embedded

Great video.

I agree, it's about natural rights.

Some people "get it".

The Reaper

01-31-2013, 19:49

Looks like we are not the only ones with a letter.

I like the way this is headed.

Grassroots!

TR

BKKMAN

01-31-2013, 20:05

Looks like we are not the only ones with a letter.

I like the way this is headed.

Grassroots!

TR

Great letter...my favorite line (amongst so many great ones):

One need look no further than the embarrassment of New York’s Combined Ballistic Identification System that devoured $44 million in taxpayer money over 11 years to regulate lawful gun ownership and which resulted in no convictions of anyone for anything to illustrate the non-complicity of lawful gun-owners in recent events.

How tasty was that $44 million dollar turd? :eek::rolleyes:

Badger52

01-31-2013, 20:27

Looks like we are not the only ones with a letter.

I like the way this is headed.

Grassroots!

TRAgree, fine letter. I don't think they ever intended to get any push-back from someone who can be articulate, given their view of the peasantry they want to control. Such assumptions can be a critical mistake.

PSM

01-31-2013, 21:05

Looks like we are not the only ones with a letter.

I like the way this is headed.

Grassroots!

TR

Geez. They're still using typewriters in Saratoga County? :eek:

Pat

BOfH

01-31-2013, 22:59

Looks like we are not the only ones with a letter.

I like the way this is headed.

Grassroots!

TR

Nothing like NY polecats :rolleyes: :mad:

"The more that they understand the law and the more they hear about the law, the better they are going to feel because it has nothing to do with the legitimate ownership of a gun..." - Gov. Cuomo

"You can’t give more ammo to the criminals." - State Sen. Eric Adams when finding out that NYSAFE does not explicitly exclude LEO

Hmm, if this has nothing to do legitimate gun ownership, and a state senator admits that criminals don't follow laws(duh!) even though the entire intent of the bill was to prevent criminals from doing just that, then who does NYSAFE apply to?

Badger52

02-01-2013, 04:43

then who does NYSAFE apply to?New York Serfs Against Feudal Empires - we all know it's about control.

Jleebron

02-01-2013, 06:33

I have been sending this letter on to others who need to read these well written lines regarding the rights that are ours. The challenges to the Constitution are more fierce than ever, and we have sworn an oath to protect and defend this Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. I did not cease believing the oath when I took off the uniform and never will. Thank you.

Morumbi97

02-01-2013, 10:13

To the QP's who drafted and signed the letter, thank you! I have sent a copy to all of my representatives (UT) in DC and I've encouraged many others to do the same. I also sent a "thank you" letter to my county Sheriff (for drafting and signing the letter from the Utah Sheriff's Association (http://www.utahsheriffs.org/USA-Home_files/2nd%20Amendment%20Letter_1.pdf), and a link to the letter from the QP's.

"Honorable Senator Hatch,

Regarding the attack on the 2nd Amendment and the American people, I urge you to read this letter (below)from a group of over 1100 U.S. Army Special Forces soldiers (Green Berets, who's 19th SFG(A)is HQ'd in Utah). It is the one of the clearest explanations and most compelling statements in favor of protecting our natural right to keep and bear arms that I have read. I agree with it completely and ask you to fight for this cause against President Obama, Vice President Biden, Senator Feinstein and all those who seek to attack this right. I thank you for reading my email and the attached letter.

Earnestly,
Michael Hayter"

(letter copied and link attached)

Team Sergeant

02-01-2013, 11:15

I've had one or two folks (out of hundreds) question the authenticity the 1100 signers.
Ladies and gent's the signers were not SOF (Special Operations) personnel, they were Special Forces soldiers. There is only one unit in the United States military called Special Forces and they are also known as the "Green Berets". This letter was signed by over 1100 "Green Berets". More have asked to sign it but we took down the website.

Currently there are hundreds of former, retired and active duty "Green Berets" on this website. But please don't take my word on the subject, if anyone doubts we didn't have over 1100 please speak up and allow the hundreds of Green Berets on this website to answer. Everyone that has a "Quiet Professional" title on this website is a verified Special Forces soldier, aka a "Green Beret". Feel free to send any of them a message and ask about the letter.

Also hundreds of you have joined in the last 72 hours and are about to post for the first time. Before you do go to our rules section and read it again.

http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3452

If you wish to post on this board your first post should go into the "Introductions" thread. This allows the other members to get an idea of whom they're speaking with.

http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36757

If you take a look around this website you'll notice a few things, there's no advertising and we don't sell anything. This website is dedicated to the Special Forces soldier, it's a website for us to discuss and catch up with old friends. As a courtesy we opened up the forums to the general public to interact and ask questions. That said we have very little tolerance for trolls or trouble makers. You don't need to agree with us, in fact we enjoy a spirited debate, all we ask is that you keep it civil.
Team Sergeant

sinjefe

02-01-2013, 11:36

I proudly signed it!

Divemaster

02-01-2013, 11:47

Currently there are hundreds of former, retired and active duty "Green Berets" on this website. But please don't take my word on the subject, if anyone doubts we didn't have over 1100 please speak up and allow the hundreds of Green Berets on this website to answer. Everyone that has a "Quiet Professional" title on this website is a verified Special Forces soldier, aka a "Green Beret". Feel free to send any of them a message and ask about the letter.

Team Sergeant

Signed it.

alelks

02-01-2013, 11:47

A proud signer!

Snaquebite

02-01-2013, 11:53

Yep...Signed it :lifter

jkirkthomas

02-01-2013, 13:23

I signed it!

Combat Diver

02-01-2013, 13:23

Another proud signer

CD

Badger52

02-01-2013, 13:26

I've had one or two folks (out of hundreds) question the authenticity the 1100 signers.
Ladies and gent's the signers were not SOF (Special Operations) personnel, they were Special Forces soldiers. There is only one unit in the United States military called Special Forces and they are also known as the "Green Berets". This letter was signed by over 1100 "Green Berets". More have asked to sign it but we took down the website.

Currently there are hundreds of former, retired and active duty "Green Berets" on this website. But please don't take my word on the subject, if anyone doubts we didn't have over 1100 please speak up and allow the hundreds of Green Berets on this website to answer. Everyone that has a "Quiet Professional" title on this website is a verified Special Forces soldier, aka a "Green Beret". Feel free to send any of them a message and ask about the letter.
TS, I caught a blogsphere post covering this and the owner remarked, with some perception I thought, that one ought not to necessarily take the number of signators as the sole benchmark. Rather, aspiring despots ought to consider those still out there who didn't get to sign it at the time for whatever reason. Most of the glacier is under the surface kinda thing.

That was worth a :cool:

Also, it's gratifying to see that some are starting to focus on the balanced nature of what was actually suggested - words matter. A position with substance & suggestions as well. That is a good thing.

alelks

02-01-2013, 13:54

bluebb

02-01-2013, 15:06

signed it.

Pericles

02-01-2013, 15:25

Excellent - thanks to all involved.

SF_BHT

02-01-2013, 15:34

Yep...Signed it :D:lifter

Beef

02-01-2013, 15:46

Over 1,100 signatures were collected in about 60 hours. There are MANY more who if given the opportunity would have gladly signed it. This was done in VERY short notice and we did very well. :lifter

It's a shame that some of the more radical sites are using it to promote their agenda and it is to be noted that we do not support those agendas.

Would have signed it, given the opportunity and guarantee all of my SFA chapter (79) would have signed. Our most popular scholarship fund raiser was an M-4 carbine raffle. That being said, as you may recall, Homeland Security sent out a memo a few years ago listing potential domestic terrorist groups to monitor. Military veterans and groups were prominently listed. With quite a bit of backlash and little to no apology. I believe this was done based on our obviously vocal willingness to uphold our oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

MR2

02-01-2013, 16:12

Signed it.

One of my favorite comments about the statement so far was:

Those Green Berets don't just have our six, they have our 360!

Gypsy

02-01-2013, 18:40

As I'm reading through this thread I cannot help but think how proud the Colonel and Big Teddy would be.

This was my letter to my Congressman. I'm still working on the letter to the Lt Gov of IL who wrote about how she comes from a hunting family. :rolleyes:

Congressman Roskam

Thank you for your response, I appreciate your thoughtful comments. I agree that more work needs to be done to prohibit criminals and the mentally unstable from obtaining weapons.

You may or may not have seen this document that has been posted on the internet within the past 24-48 hours, so I am attaching it for you to read. This is a well thought out and informative piece and was originally posted at www.professionalsoldiers.com. It is a Military community made up of mostly active duty and retired Special Forces Soldiers. Their names are not on this public document as many are still active duty, but I would imagine some would be quite happy to speak or correspond with you.

Illinois, and more specifically Chicago, has the most strict gun laws in place and yet the news is filled with reports of more shootings every evening. The laws that are in place have not stopped the shootings, the only people who cannot protect themselves are the law abiding citizens. We don't need more gun laws, we need a review or revamping the existing laws but not at the expense of the Second Amendment.

It is imperative we uphold the Second Amendment, many people I've spoken with feel the current administration (both in Washington and in Illinois) would love nothing more than to abolish it. Thank you for reading, we must protect the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

Best regards,

SF18C

02-01-2013, 18:45

I'm a Signer! :cool:

alelks

02-01-2013, 19:11

I couldn't help but laugh when I read this. I really like this guy. :D

Very heart warming story. I will sign on to support the green berets, as I am approaching 70 yrs old but I can still march and shoot. But I may have to take a Nap in between Fire fights. I salute you all, and I will see you all at the appropriate stone wall when the time comes..

Sdiver

02-01-2013, 19:17

PSM

02-01-2013, 19:21

..... but stand WITH you.

SD

Well, someone on here, a signer I reckon, has already volunteered me for KP as Pots and Pans Man. :D

Pat

Dusty

02-01-2013, 19:25

Joker

02-01-2013, 19:31

I signed.

Javadrinker

02-01-2013, 19:40

Tahnk you all.

Ambush Master

02-01-2013, 19:44

I signed!!

Team Sergeant

02-01-2013, 20:10

I signed.

tonyz

02-01-2013, 20:19

An interesting perspective on the recent attempts at gun control from a Constitutional law professor.

Op-Ed: Gun control fails rationality test
The Washington Examiner
January 29, 2013
Randy Barnett

Randy Barnett teaches constitutional law at Georgetown Law and is the author of "Restoring the Lost Constitution: The Presumption of Liberty" (2005).

On Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on the various gun control proposals that have been floated in the wake of the Sandy Hook school shootings. Although they are said to be merely "reasonable regulations" of the Second Amendment's right to keep and bear arms, most or all of these proposals are irrational and unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court has established a two-tiered protection of liberty. Under the lowest tier, "rational basis review," it will uphold restrictions on liberty so long as it can imagine any possible reason why Congress might have adopted the measure. By contrast, if a liberty is deemed by the court to be a "fundamental right," it will subject restrictions of that right to "heightened scrutiny," meaning that it will skeptically examine the means Congress chose to achieve its ends. This close comparison of means to ends is intended to smoke out justifications that are really pretexts for efforts to improperly stigmatize or restrict the exercise of a fundamental right.

In 2008, the Supreme Court held that the right to keep and bear arms was a fundamental right. In DC v. Heller, the court did not specify the exact type of heightened scrutiny it would employ when legislation restricts gun rights, except to insist that it would be higher than "rational basis review," and that a complete ban on weapons "in common use" by the citizenry for self-defense and other lawful purposes -- such as handguns -- is unconstitutional under any type of heightened scrutiny.

So, when considering the constitutionality of bans on so-called military-style assault weapons, or restrictions on the capacity of magazines, senators should begin by asking whether the weapons being banned are in common use by civilians. When it comes to so-called assault weapons, like the AR-15, or 30-round magazines, the answer is clearly "yes." Millions of such weapons and magazines are in private hands.

That should settle the matter, but senators can go a step further and ask whether these or other measures are actually rational -- to articulate the end they are seeking to accomplish, then assesses whether the means adopted actually match up with the purported end. Would they actually have prevented a mass shooting or ameliorated real crimes?

This heightened "rationality review" could help ensure that the reason being articulated is the real reason for the law.

For example, "assault weapons" are a made-up category of weapons that is based solely on cosmetic features that make them look like the fully automatic weapons used by the military. Banning them leaves other rifles that are functionally identical in their lethality and rate of fire completely legal. Moreover, far more powerful hunting rifles are left untouched by the law, as are shotguns. This is simply irrational and therefore unconstitutional.

The same can be said for New York's law limiting handguns to seven rounds, while allowing both active and retired police officers to keep their handguns that hold up to 15 rounds. If retired cops need 15 rounds to effectively protect themselves and others, then so do other citizens. Arbitrarily discriminating among Americans in this way is irrational and unconstitutional.

In fact, heightened rationality review confirms what we independently know is going on. Within hours of Sandy Hook, gun control proponents were beating the drums for their long-desired measures, like background checks for private gun sales, that would not in any way have prevented that tragedy. But the exploitation of these deaths is not just morally offensive.

The measures now being rushed through Congress before emotions can subside are irrational and pretextual, which means they are also unconstitutional.

SF18C

02-01-2013, 21:23

NO! :p

Cordite

02-01-2013, 22:51

The letter was OUTSTANDING!

As the Second Amendment goes, so goes the Constitution. I do not intend to leave my children, grandchildren or their children a legacy of subjugation.

ODA CDR (RET)

02-01-2013, 22:58

the 1000.

Divemaster

02-01-2013, 23:13

the 1000.

:lifter

echoes

02-02-2013, 04:10

To the QPs who composed, signed and wanted to sign this letter ....

I think it's safe to say, that speaking for the majority of us, although not QPs and unable to sign, we support you 100% in this endeavor, and know that we do not stand behind you ..... but stand WITH you.

SD

S~,

Very well said!!! I echo your sentiments and can only hope that the SF Men on this site know how much folks like us appreciate ALL that they do, and proudly support each and every one of them!

OUTSTANDING Gentlemen!!!!:lifter

Holly

JM1347

02-02-2013, 12:33

Gentleman thank you for all the work you did drafting this letter. It is very well written and has the facts supporting your view. I know that it has been re-posted on many different site, which will help get the information to as many people as possible. As a retired Airborne Infantryman, I will proudly stand with my Special Forces Brothers to ensure the freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution are not taken from American citizens

CW3SF

02-02-2013, 13:05

I signed.;)

azmg

02-02-2013, 13:29

Gentlemen,
I extend my gratitude to the authors and signers of this document and commend you for crafting such an appropriate response to what has become such a controversial topic.

And while I didn't write it or sign it, I wouldn't hesitate to defend it.

Where was that guy on 28 Oct 2012? :D

Crip

Make it 5 keyboards, you better start buying by the dozen James!

As a citizen or anyone living in the USA enjoying most of the fruits of citizenship, what are we to do? Ignore the problems and hope they go away? Trust that “someone else” will do something? Focus our action to voting and other political input and hope that’s enough? Or do “We the People” have to contemplate and perhaps accept that if left unchecked, we may actually have to fight a rogue government in order to preserve the Republic as it was created? Is the divisive nature of politicians part of an orchestrated effort to not only split the people apart, but to also split the nation?

When America began, I believe God was on our side and I believe that God has been on the American side throughout history and is evident when you look at the results. However, over the last two or three decades our elected representatives, our public schools and colleges, our lawyers, our public servants at all levels, and perhaps most importantly, our media has been trying to take God out of the USA in all but the most private of venues. There is a much needed discussion that has to take place or be started in many groups about the true state of the Nation and what the real, non-politically correct reasons are behind what could be argued, is a spiraling state of decline.

Great letter and count on me for being among its supporters.

While it's certainly not a surprise that many on this site think the same way, it's nice to see that one is not alone when pondering the larger issues. In short, thank you for posting this.

Ret10Echo

02-02-2013, 13:34

Proud to be one of the "1000"

Stiletto11

02-02-2013, 14:56

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/victor7.1.1.html

This guy crafted a prose right to the point to answer the question, "why do you need an AR?"

Cobwebs

02-02-2013, 15:40

It was a privilege to sign this letter.:lifter

Old Dog New Trick

02-02-2013, 15:43

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/victor7.1.1.html

This guy crafted a prose right to the point to answer the question, "why do you need an AR?"

Can this guy run the NRA!

Great words of wisdom! :D

tonyz

02-02-2013, 18:00

God Bless Texas.

"In Texas, we know a heck of a lot about fighting oppressive government intrusion. To President Obama and his elitist, liberal allies I say what Texans have said for generations: Come and Take It!"

http://www.daviddewhurst.com/blog/tell-obama-to-leave-our-guns-alone

Dog Pound Zulu

02-03-2013, 20:10

http://redflagnews.com/headlines/more-than-1000-green-berets-sign-letter-supporting-second-amendment?fb_action_ids=415098168578572&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=aggregation&fb_aggregation_id=246965925417366

alelks

02-03-2013, 20:25

SF_BHT

02-03-2013, 20:32

That photo has been out on the web and MSM from an awards ceremony. Guarantee they did ot sign a release but as you know they never ask.....

SF18C

02-03-2013, 20:42

Ret10Echo

02-04-2013, 06:29

That photo has been out on the web and MSM from an awards ceremony. Guarantee they did ot sign a release but as you know they never ask.....

It has been out there....however it was not an awards ceremony.

They are paying respects during the transfer of the Fallen... Ramstein AB if I recall correctly.

SF_BHT

02-04-2013, 06:36

It has been out there....however it was not an awards ceremony.

They are paying respects during the transfer of the Fallen... Ramstein AB if I recall correctly.

OK I remember one article about awards and they had that photo. Just another MSM cut and paste to do a story. Thanks for the correction....

pcfixer

02-04-2013, 10:50

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/victor7.1.1.html

This guy crafted a prose right to the point to answer the question, "why do you need an AR?"

This is a very well written letter. A "Must read"
This...
I am an American. As such, none of my rights depend on a showing of need. I am a free man who has the right to define and pursue my happiness in any peaceful way I see fit. The government does not grant me rights. I was born free. The legitimate role of government is to act as my agent to protect my rights; which exist independent of government. Americans do not beg the government for rights nor are they required to demonstrate a "need" for rights.

I cherish lots of my rights for which I can’t demonstrate any need. I don’t need the right to say highly offensive things to another person. Although I generally don’t try to offend other people, I cherish my right to do so. I also cherish, and would aggressively defend, your right to say highly offensive things to me. Defending the rights of people to say things most people agree with is entirely unimpressive. Liberty must always be defended at the edge.

I thank all here of the more than 1000 professional soldiers who signed.
"salute"

gwbarnes

02-04-2013, 12:33

Kudos to the author(s) of this letter, and its thousand plus signatories. I have seen it posted on firearms, shooting and political sites everywhere. It was through a link that I found and joined this site. Great work.

CHET18Z

02-04-2013, 18:47

The Income Tax is found in Subtitle A of Title 26 USC (IRC). It is the most pervasive control mechanism of the US government on American citizens. It only applies to the class of persons on which Congress laid the Income Tax. Are you part of that class? Can you state the attributes of that class? Do you know where in the IRC the details of that class are published? What, if any, are the circumstances that brought you into that class? Does not being able to answer these questions suspend your right to property?

As a 25+ year veteran of the ache, pain, terror, pleasure and utter exhilaration that is the life of a Special Forces Trooper, I have taken De Oppresso Libre to the masses at www.nontaxpayer.us. If you would require the US government to obey the Constitution, join me in defunding their antics today. Or you can accept being spanked with a plank of the Communist Manifesto in sullen resignation. The choice is yours. :munchin

Razor

02-04-2013, 19:08

Proud to stand with my brothers as a signer.

scooter

02-04-2013, 19:31

Chet18Z, interesting profile. Apparently during your European Escapade, South of the Border Snookering, and Oriental Orientation, you forgot how to follow instructions.

Edit.
Chet18Z, Post an introduction

SF18C

02-04-2013, 20:00

tonyz

02-04-2013, 21:38

It looks like the good people of upstate NY are responding to the state assault on the 2A. Pray that the misguided politicians come to their senses and listen to the words of otherwise law abiding citizens. A short 4 minute video.

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=BTdhVxva5KU&list=UUUSd6KeUU1qE11NV0pOS9KQ&index=1&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DBTdhVxva5KU%26list%3DUU USd6KeUU1qE11NV0pOS9KQ%26index%3D1

Old Dog New Trick

02-05-2013, 14:21

orion5

02-05-2013, 20:00

Handy little interactive map of those in congress that either own guns, won't answer or say they do not.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/Interactives/Guns_of_congress.htm

Seems favorable to not passing new laws, or showing the level of hypocracy in congress if something new does pass.

That's a very interesting chart....I hope they continue to push those 17 Democrat Senators who've declined or not answered. According to the Pew Research Center, 25% of gun owners are Democrats. Already 31% (16 out of 52) of the Dem Senators have indicated they're gun owners, which is more than their constituents, and I suspect the percentage is even higher than that.

But I know there are many gun owners, or people neutral to guns, that have fallen into the trap of condemning anything labeled "assault" or "hi cap". According to Pew, this is especially true of women, minorities, young people, urbanites and north easterners. The percentages are pretty clear. If we want to drive a grass roots effort, or drive the national lobby, it needs to be directed towards re-educating those groups on what the 2A means, and why the current gun laws are not effective in eliminating gun crime.

Pew Research Center article: [LINK] (http://www.people-press.org/2012/12/20/after-newtown-modest-change-in-opinion-about-gun-control/)

Team Sergeant

02-06-2013, 10:22

Sdiver

02-06-2013, 10:31

One of the local towns here in the Phoenix area has a good idea. An elementary school principle asked the local police if they would like to utilize an empty office at the school as a police substation. The police agreed and now the police can do paperwork, make phone calls etc from that substation without the need to return the police HQ and get the small stuff done.

Not a bad idea.

Nice.

Douglas county, just south of Denver, is doing something along those same lines. PD officers are sitting in school parking lots during their lunch breaks and either doing paperwork in their cars, or they are invited inside and get a free lunch (or they bring their own), which they're more than happy to sit with the kids.

PedOncoDoc

02-06-2013, 10:42

Nice.

Douglas county, just south of Denver, is doing something along those same lines. PD officers are sitting in school parking lots during their lunch breaks and either doing paperwork in their cars, or they are invited inside and get a free lunch (or they bring their own), which they're more than happy to sit with the kids.

Eating with the kids is a nice touch - if the proper officers are sent, it can develop a positive opinion of law enforcement and provide role models for those children who are lacking in either. It can also remind police officers that kids don't always make the best decisions, but that doesn't make them criminals.

MR2

02-06-2013, 12:05

Excellent ideas developed at the local level - more fodder for the Talking Points.

Badger52

02-06-2013, 12:24

Excellent ideas developed at the local level - more fodder for the Talking Points.Nice to see; that's where it's at. (Solutions, that is.)

mark46th

02-06-2013, 14:48

"One of the local towns here in the Phoenix area has a good idea. An elementary school principle asked the local police if they would like to utilize an empty office at the school as a police substation. The police agreed and now the police can do paperwork, make phone calls etc from that substation without the need to return the police HQ and get the small stuff done." TS

And they can hit on the young, hot teachers...

Stiletto11

02-06-2013, 17:13

Here is a father of a victim of the Columbine shooting's testimony to Congress in May of 1999. Together with the testimony of the father of a child who was immersed in the Sandy Hook tragedy one of sound mind would think that the lawless will commit crime no matter what the law is. This can only prove that the movement to disarm Americans can only have evil intent. IMO this hits a nerve concerning the decay of our society.

"Since the dawn of creation there has been both good & evil in the hearts of men and women. We all contain the seeds of kindness or the seeds of violence. The death of my wonderful daughter, Rachel Joy Scott, and the deaths of that heroic teacher, and the other eleven children who died must not be in vain. Their blood cries out for answers.

"The first recorded act of violence was when Cain slew his brother Abel out in the field. The villain was not the club he used.. Neither was it the NCA, the National Club Association. The true killer was Cain, and the reason for the murder could only be found in Cain's heart.

"In the days that followed the Columbine tragedy, I was amazed at how quickly fingers began to be pointed at groups such as the NRA. I am not a member of the NRA. I am not a hunter. I do not even own a gun. I am not here to represent or defend the NRA - because I don't believe that they are responsible for my daughter's death. Therefore I do not believe that they need to be defended. If I believed they had anything to do with Rachel's murder I would be their strongest opponent

I am here today to declare that Columbine was not just a tragedy -- it was a spiritual event that should be forcing us to look at where the real blame lies! Much of the blame lies here in this room. Much of the blame lies behind the pointing fingers of the accusers themselves. I wrote a poem just four nights ago that expresses my feelings best.

Your laws ignore our deepest needs,
Your words are empty air.
You've stripped away our heritage,
You've outlawed simple prayer.
Now gunshots fill our classrooms,
And precious children die.
You seek for answers everywhere,
And ask the question "Why?"
You regulate restrictive laws,
Through legislative creed.
And yet you fail to understand,
That God is what we need!

"Men and women are three-part beings. We all consist of body, mind, and spirit. When we refuse to acknowledge a third part of our make-up, we create a void that allows evil, prejudice, and hatred to rush in and wreak havoc. Spiritual presences were present within our educational systems for most of our nation's history. Many of our major colleges began as theological seminaries. This is a historical fact. What has happened to us as a nation? We have refused to honor God, and in so doing, we open the doors to hatred and violence. And when something as terrible as Columbine's tragedy occurs -- politicians immediately look for a scapegoat such as the NRA. They immediately seek to pass more restrictive laws that contribute to erode away our personal and private liberties. We do not need more restrictive laws. Eric and Dylan would not have been stopped by metal detectors. No amount of gun laws can stop someone who spends months planning this type of massacre. The real villain lies within our own hearts.

"As my son Craig lay under that table in the school library and saw his two friends murdered before his very eyes, he did not hesitate to pray in school. I defy any law or politician to deny him that right! I challenge every young person in America , and around the world, to realize that on April 20, 1999, at Columbine High School prayer was brought back to our schools. Do not let the many prayers offered by those students be in vain. Dare to move into the new millennium with a sacred disregard for legislation that violates your God-given right to communicate with Him. To those of you who would point your finger at the NRA -- I give to you a sincere challenge.. Dare to examine your own heart before casting the first stone!
My daughter's death will not be in vain! The young people of this country will not allow that to happen!"
- Darrell Scott

Source: Snopes says this speech was made to a sub committee in May 1999

Snopes says this speech was made to a sub committee in May 1999

Dusty

02-06-2013, 17:32

Entire post.

Outstanding. Thanks.

1stindoor

02-07-2013, 09:52

And they can hit on the young, hot teachers...

Leave my wife out of this!:D

EverlACEting

02-07-2013, 10:12

I apologize if this has already been posted in this thread or others like it. These videos (the first being a quick summary and the second being a longer version of the first) is the people's reaction to gun laws in the North Country ie Northern New York. If you have a moment, enjoy

shorter version : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTdhVxva5KU&list=UUUSd6KeUU1qE11NV0pOS9KQ&index=1

longer version : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ol1SzjHPFGw

orion5

02-07-2013, 13:58

bluebb

02-07-2013, 19:53

The Rifle on the Wall: A Left Argument for Gun Rights [LINK]

Excellent argument!

grog18b

02-07-2013, 20:59

Outstanding piece in the Polemicist blog. I've been struggling with articulating my views on gun rights with friends, family and even strangers I've sat next to on planes. Not getting emotional or reacting to their irrational frothing, but sticking to the basic arguments and facts.

This is a pro-gun rights piece, but written by a New Yorker who considers himself a "left-socialist". He is not a gun owner, but believes in a full definition of the 2A. I could not have worded it any better than he did, and will borrow heavily for discussions with those in my AO.

I disagree with his premise that the right is a "political" right. It is a right, pre-dating any sort of Government. The intention of the 2ndA is simply a protection of that right. The right itself is not written. The reason it is not written is because once you write down a right, that then permits lawyers to dissect the right, just like people try to do with a simple statement like the 2ndA. That is the reason the right is not written as "We the people have the right to hunt." or "We the people have the right to use firearms to fight a corrupt Government." It is not written because it existed before the USofA. The simple right to have and use firearms for any legitimate purpose imagined. Even just for the hell of it if we want.
So, I disagree with the "political" reason for his description of why the 2ndA was needed when written. It is (IMHO) simply a statement insuring a right is not infringed upon. Also (IMHO) it is not doing its intended job. We are not allowing it to do its intended job.
Ever since 1934 the Government has been doing exactly what this statement (the 2ndA) prohibits. Infringing. Funny how almost every other right has been expanded. The speech right has been extended to the point of people being allowed to tell LEOs to fuck off, give them the finger, and so on. Say bad words on the radio, show tits and ass on TV, and so on and so on. The right to vote has also been expanded, from once only allowing property owners (white type, one each) to vote. That right has since been expanded to allow women, minorities, and such to vote. All this expansion is no doubt, good for the American Citizen. For some reason however, the right to bear firearms has been more and more restricted. I find this funny (not in a haha way) and sad at the same time. Why are we, as American Citizens allowing this to happen? Why are we not fighting this tooth and nail? Why did people allow this to happen in 1934 and onward?
:) Just some food for thought.

tonyz

02-09-2013, 21:42

Dan Bongino: “In a society of wolves you DO NOT fight back by creating more sheep.”

http://www.therightscoop.com/awesome-dan-bongino-theres-no-such-thing-as-gun-control-just-people-control/

tonyz

02-10-2013, 18:11

A short story on gun control from our neighbors to the north.

REGISTERING FOR CONFISCATION

January 8, 2013

Brian Lilley gives an important warning to his American friends: Registration of firearms will lead to the confiscation of firearms.

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/featu...n/2081848359001

orion5

02-10-2013, 21:55

I disagree with his premise that the right is a "political" right. It is a right, pre-dating any sort of Government. The intention of the 2ndA is simply a protection of that right. The right itself is not written.

I agree with you on that. Thanks for your thoughts on it.

Since 25-30% of gun owners are Dems, I would expect a lot more Dems to be sounding off about not wanting additional gun controls. I've tried googling for articles, blogs, etc from Dems arguing for gun rights. I can't find much. I did find the web site for "Democrats for Gun Ownership" [LINK] (http://democratsforgunownership.org).

No Democrat in the Senate has come out against Obama's gun plan. None. I don't view the Second Amendment as a Dem vs Rep issue but apparently we can't do what's right anymore, because it doesn't follow the party line.

As you say, grog18b, there are points in the Polemicist's "Rifle on the Wall" that might not fit my views, but I was delighted to find someone left of center who was willing to speak up for the 2A. I wonder if anyone is listening to him...

badshot

02-11-2013, 06:11

Excellent Letter.

In my personal view the Second Amendment's intent was for Military Style Weapons, current ones too. Still kicking myself for not buying that suppressed mp5 they had in the now closed Scottsdale gun shop in 03. Thought 10k was too much! I guess not being woken up by the ATF doing surprise visits to check on it is some consolation...nice :rolleyes:

Can't imagine the uproar if the vacuous puttered with the First Amendment in the same manner they do with others, it couldn't possibly be self serving, could it?

An entertaining thought; current leaders draft a new Amendment, only four hundred pages long.

I fear the subtleties of complex, realistic, and profound thought combined with language craftsmanship are long gone from our elected leaders, and has been replaced with let's do something...whatever it is, we'll know what's in it when it is passed...

Dusty

02-11-2013, 06:35

I fear the subtleties of complex, realistic, and profound thought combined with language craftsmanship are long gone from our elected leaders, and has been replaced with let's do something...whatever it is, we'll know what's in it when it is passed...

'Fundamental transformation' means destroying the basis. Doesn't require any more subtle, complex, realistic or profound thought than does using an ax to chop down a tree.

Trapper John

02-11-2013, 07:24

Entire Post

This is excellent and sums up the problem entirely! Thank you for posting this.

sinjefe

02-11-2013, 07:58

badshot

02-11-2013, 14:38

'Fundamental transformation' means destroying the basis. Doesn't require any more subtle, complex, realistic or profound thought than does using an ax to chop down a tree.

Good point...fools still have to understand it

pcfixer

02-12-2013, 15:12

I disagree with his premise that the right is a "political" right. It is a right, pre-dating any sort of Government. The intention of the 2ndA is simply a protection of that right. The right itself is not written. The reason it is not written is because once you write down a right, that then permits lawyers to dissect the right, just like people try to do with a simple statement like the 2ndA. That is the reason the right is not written as "We the people have the right to hunt." or "We the people have the right to use firearms to fight a corrupt Government." It is not written because it existed before the USofA. The simple right to have and use firearms for any legitimate purpose imagined. Even just for the hell of it if we want.
So, I disagree with the "political" reason for his description of why the 2ndA was needed when written. It is (IMHO) simply a statement insuring a right is not infringed upon. Also (IMHO) it is not doing its intended job. We are not allowing it to do its intended job.
Ever since 1934 the Government has been doing exactly what this statement (the 2ndA) prohibits. Infringing. Funny how almost every other right has been expanded. The speech right has been extended to the point of people being allowed to tell LEOs to fuck off, give them the finger, and so on. Say bad words on the radio, show tits and ass on TV, and so on and so on. The right to vote has also been expanded, from once only allowing property owners (white type, one each) to vote. That right has since been expanded to allow women, minorities, and such to vote. All this expansion is no doubt, good for the American Citizen. For some reason however, the right to bear firearms has been more and more restricted. I find this funny (not in a haha way) and sad at the same time. Why are we, as American Citizens allowing this to happen? Why are we not fighting this tooth and nail? Why did people allow this to happen in 1934 and onward?
:) Just some food for thought.

I agree with you on all the post, Most excellent thinking. Especially the RED
portions. "salute"

Lan

02-12-2013, 16:32

blanco5:
Well, we know who the first 1,100 people the government is going after!

My answer:
blanco5,
Just WHO do you think the government would send? :munchin
Team Sergeant

Thank you for sharing this Team Sergeant. It's an honor to witness what I believe is a pivotal moment in American History. I quoted this because blanco5 made a comment typical of someone who chooses his 1A over his 2A. We have 2 ears and 1 mouth for a reason, and if the typical liberal listened more they would understand that our 1A doesn't mean much without our 2A. Non thinking people like him are what will ultimately lead to the demise of our liberties. The most recent election proved they are the majority IMO.

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -Benjamin Franklin

And for the politicians who are doing everything they falsely believe will better our society, or the ones who propose legislation that infringes on my safety to push a liberal agenda in an effort to be re elected-

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

I appreciate the 1100 Quiet Professionals who made their stance known.

badshot

02-12-2013, 17:04

I appreciate the 1100 Quiet Professionals who made their stance known.

dido!

and there many others like yourself whom will not wavier.

Yours Truly,

Tired of wimps, whiners, freeloaders, lairs, and emotionally void intellectuals with poor reading comprehension and logic skills imposing their fears and limitations on others.

Boy that felt good...

ZonieDiver

02-12-2013, 18:13

dido!

and there many others like yourself whom will not wavier.

Yours Truly,

Tired of wimp's, winer's, freeloader's, lair's, and emotionally void intellectuals with poor reading comprehension and logic skills imposing their fears and limitations on others.

Boy that felt good...

How ironic!

badshot

02-12-2013, 19:42

How ironic!
Indeed :D

pcfixer

02-12-2013, 19:49

Looks like some has the intestinal fortitude to just say it! ( Ie balls)

ZonieDiver

02-12-2013, 21:15

Indeed :D

I'm not sure what you meant by the above... with the :D, but I was attempting to point out the irony of your criticism of people with "poor reading comprehension and logic skills" in a post filled with poor spelling and punctuation.

Spellcheck is your friend.

(Note to Newbies:
Some might say this is not important, but it is. The value of your words is lessened by poor spelling and grammar. Take your time. If what you have to say is important, it is worth saying well.)

SF18C

02-12-2013, 21:37

After watching the POTUS give the SOTU address my thoughts...

I agree with one thing BHO said: Let's have a vote!

Put YOUR name on the line that strips the 2nd A from us! Let us know where YOU stand!

Congress, let's have a vote!

badshot

02-12-2013, 22:22

I'm not sure what you meant by the above... with the :D, but I was attempting to point out the irony of your criticism of people with "poor reading comprehension and logic skills" in a post filled with poor spelling and punctuation.

Spellcheck is your friend.

(Note to Newbies:
Some might say this is not important, but it is. The value of your words is lessened by poor spelling and grammar. Take your time. If what you have to say is important, it is worth saying well.)

Thanks, I'll use my friend next time...and will correct the post when near a PC.

Richard

02-12-2013, 22:51

...and will correct the post when near a PC.

Too late. First impressions and such. Good luck in your next life.

Richard :munchin

badshot

02-13-2013, 00:14

Too late. First impressions and such. Good luck in your next life.

Richard :munchin

And so it goes...

bluebb

02-13-2013, 00:53

Originally Posted by Richard
Too late. First impressions and such. Good luck in your next life.
Richard

Originally Posted by Badshot
and so it goes...

Badshot

oh snap :p

pcfixer

02-13-2013, 18:03

NRA found this document
Summary of Select Firearm Violence Prevention Strategies
Greg Ridgeway, Ph.D.
Deputy Director National Institute of Justice

http://www.nraila.org/media/10883516/nij-gun-policy-memo.pdf

Memo from DOJ

http://americanvisionnews.com/5476/nra-exposes-doj-gun-confiscation-memo#commentlist

:munchin

Badger52

02-13-2013, 19:33

How embarassing for the NRA. Even the 2nd source reference gets it wrong, calling it a DoJ memo and then citing what it really is, a study by the Nat'l Institute of Justice. One is a Big Gov agency, the other a think-tank that takes grants & does studies. (They also did a similar one that examined the efficacy of the Clinton AWB (https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf).)

If you will give a reasonable read of the document you will see they are documenting what the prevalent thought process is for simplistic advocates of gun control, then what the actual measures needed are to make such an idiocy work, and then a discussion.

They get grant money sometimes from DoJ but when the result comes out looking like this - as many of the post-Clinton CDC studies did - you'll notice that the DoJ is not very quick to publish and say, "a-HA!"

Finally, 'cause I'm tired, they get their source of illegal gun information from....
drum roll please....
the ATF. If you look at the chart/graphic they provide you'll see that this is not saying 47% of sales are straw purchases, it's 47% of the illegal guns, which is an unknowable number even if you're a Big G agency running sting storefronts in Milwaukee. (sorry, bad example)

Frankly, one of the things that drives despots crazy with the issue of private sales of any kind is that they don't have the widget they can count. They know there are hundreds of millions of firearms out there based on 4473 actions. But - what - about - the - ones - they - don't - know - about ?

It's a study, worthy of a thorough read, not just the Adobe highlights added by a blog.

pcfixer

02-14-2013, 07:18

Badger52

02-14-2013, 08:48

Good explaination. Most importantly as I see it is the "plan" of the administration and DOJ to have universal background checks, registration of all firearms, nationwide gun buy back ( will not work). This all leads to a confiscation program no doubt. It is the intent to 'control' the population by disarmament.I agree that would be some of their goals. I'm just also pointing out that their own studies, which objectively told them in all candor one (of many) ways ahead, have also told them it won't accomplish much. Other than to disarm citizens.

This is a case where both sides are highlighting their favorite parts of the same page. For one it's to sound a klaxon, for the other it's to help them in their playbook & talking points. Both miss the results of all these studies that indicate - THIS STUFF DOESN'T ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING in terms of mitigating what their rhetoric says is their concern, something the QP's published treatise has addressed most eloquently.

tonyz

02-19-2013, 19:43

With the volume of state gun control legislation - there is little doubt that our highest court will be rendering a decision on the matter in the near future.

Antonin Scalia says gun control is heading to Supreme Court

Washington Examiner
Paul Bedard
February 13, 2013 | 11:28 am | Modified: February 13, 2013 at 11:30 am

"Conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, decrying America's demonization of guns, is predicting that the parade of new gun control laws, cheered on by President Obama, will hit the Supreme Court soon, possibly settling for ever the types of weapons that can be owned."

"Scalia, whose legacy decision in the 2008 case of District of Columbia vs. Heller ended the ban on handguns in Washington, D.C., suggested that the Constitution allows limits on what Americans can own, but the only example he offered was a shoulder-launched rocket that would bring down jets."

"And the wily judge suggested to an audience of Smithsonian Associates at George Washington University's Lisner Auditorium Tuesday night that he is not just preparing for a new gun control challenge, but that he's softening up one of his liberal colleague on guns."

<snip>

http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2521413

nousdefions

02-20-2013, 15:40

Hard Hitting Video (http://t.co/7uR66h5TBd)

Maybe the ''Low Information" will finally get it.

Surgicalcric

02-20-2013, 15:46

That is an awesome ad. It is about time someone brought this fact to light.

Crip

BKKMAN

02-20-2013, 19:56

Hard Hitting Video (http://t.co/7uR66h5TBd)

Maybe the ''Low Information" will finally get it.

I got goose bumps and wood watching that...

This video is much better than the ad where they talked about the security of President Obama's daughters...this one focuses on the core arguments surrounding the 2nd Amendment...it almost seems like they read our letter and then slapped together a video...

Gypsy

02-20-2013, 20:07

Excellent ad, thanks for the post.

Stiletto11

02-20-2013, 20:19

An add isn't going to stop them. Olympic Arms in Washington state told New York politicians that it will not supply NYLE with arms until they repeal the anti gun legislation against law abiding citizens. I think you have to hit them in the wallet to get their attention. Colt in Connecticut and MagPul in Colorado have plans to move south. If more of these companies did the same thing then we can counter Bloomberg and his money. Billions will be lost in tax revenue not to mention jobs; Fight fire with fire because they don't give a shit about our Constitutional rights.

SF18C

02-20-2013, 20:51

Hard Hitting Video (http://t.co/7uR66h5TBd)

Maybe the ''Low Information" will finally get it.

Did anyone catch the lady firing the AR10 at 49 seconds....what the hell was that a 5 round AR Mag????

nousdefions

02-20-2013, 22:00

Didn't catch it, but you're right. It looks like a 5 round magazine. I remember when I bought my AR-15, it came with a "hunting" magazine, a 20 rounder that had a metal insert that only allowed 5 rounds to be loaded. It was easy to remove.

badshot

02-21-2013, 03:08

If more of these companies did the same thing then we can counter Bloomberg and his money. Billions will be lost in tax revenue not to mention jobs; Fight fire with fire because they don't give a shit about our Constitutional rights.

:cool:

The Remington factory in Upstate New York may move as well...

Lets hope they all follow...

pcfixer

02-21-2013, 11:51

Written By Constitutional Attorney Michael Connelly, J.D.

How would you feel if you received a letter from the U.S. Government informing you that because of a physical or mental condition that the government says you have it is proposing to rule that you are incompetent to handle your own financial affairs? Suppose that letter also stated that the government is going to appoint a stranger to handle your affairs for you at your expense? That would certainly be scary enough but it gets worse.

What if that letter also stated: “A determination of incompetency will prohibit you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition. If you knowingly violate any of these prohibitions, you may be fined, imprisoned, or both pursuant to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, Pub.L.No. 103-159, as implemented at 18, United States Code 924(a)(2).”?

That makes is sound like something right from a documentary on a tyrannical dictatorship somewhere in the world. Yet, as I write this I have a copy of such a letter right in front of me. It is being sent by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to hundreds, perhaps thousands, of America’s heroes. In my capacity as Executive Director of the United States Justice Foundation (USJF) I have been contacted by some of these veterans and the stories I am getting are appalling.

The letter provides no specifics on the reasons for the proposed finding of incompetency; just that is based on a determination by someone in the VA. In every state in the United States no one can be declared incompetent to administer their own affairs without due process of law and that usually requires a judicial hearing with evidence being offered to prove to a judge that the person is indeed incompetent. This is a requirement of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that states that no person shall “… be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law…”.

Obviously, the Department of Veterans Affairs can’t be bothered by such impediments as the Constitution, particularly since they are clearly pushing to fulfill one of Obama’s main goals, the disarming of the American people. Janet Napolitano has already warned law enforcement that some of the most dangerous among us are America’s heroes, our veterans, and now according to this letter from the VA they can be prohibited from buying or even possessing a firearm because of a physical or mental disability.

Think about it, the men and women who have laid their lives on the line to defend us and our Constitution are now having their own Constitutional rights denied. There are no clear criteria for the VA to declare a veteran incompetent. It can be the loss of a limb in combat, a head injury, a diagnosis of PTSD, or even a soldier just telling someone at the VA that he or she is depressed over the loss of a buddy in combat. In none of these situations has the person been found to be a danger to themselves or others. If that was the case than all of the Americans who have suffered from PTSD following the loss of a loved one or from being in a car accident would also have to be disqualified from owning firearms. It would also mean that everyone who has ever been depressed for any reason should be disarmed. In fact, many of the veterans being deprived of their rights have no idea why it is happening.

The answer seems to be it is simply because they are veterans. At the USJF we intend to find the truth by filing a Freedom of Information Act request to the Department of Veterans Affairs to force them to disclose the criteria they are using to place veterans on the background check list that keeps them from exercising their Second Amendment rights. Then we will take whatever legal steps are necessary to protect our American warriors.

The reality is that Obama will not get all of the gun control measures he wants through Congress, and they wouldn’t be enough for him anyway. He wants a totally disarmed America so there will be no resistance to his plans to rob us of our nation. That means we have to ask who will be next. If you are receiving a Social Security check will you get one of these letters? Will the government declare that you are incompetent because of your age and therefore banned from firearm ownership. It certainly fits in with the philosophy and plans of the Obama administration. It is also certain that our military veterans don’t deserve this and neither do any other Americans.

-- Michael Connelly, J.D.
Executive Director, United States Justice Foundation..

ODA CDR (RET)

02-21-2013, 12:22

I am exactly who this letter describes, SS & 100% PTSD. I'll let you know if I get one of these letters.

Lan

02-21-2013, 13:04

MR2

02-21-2013, 14:05

Veterans determined Incompetent by VA

A cursory search of United States Justice Foundation (https://usjf.net/) produced no discussion of this "letter".

pcfixer

02-21-2013, 14:42

A cursory search of United States Justice Foundation (https://usjf.net/) produced no discussion of this "letter".

Good question! Trust but verify.
http://michaelconnelly.jigsy.com/

added :
Yet, as I write this I have a copy of such a letter right in front of me. It is being sent by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to hundreds, perhaps thousands, of America’s heroes. In my capacity as Executive Director of the United States Justice Foundation (USJF) I have been contacted by some of these veterans and the stories I am getting are appalling.

sinjefe

02-21-2013, 14:52

Good question! Trust but verify.
http://michaelconnelly.jigsy.com/

added :

Dude, somebodies blog is not proof of a governmental conspiracy. Not that they wouldn't, but you have to have a more reliable source than that.

Lan

02-21-2013, 17:26

GUNS (Virtual State of the Union 2013) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_T-F_zfoDqI)

Please share!!

badshot

02-21-2013, 22:25

Dude, somebodies blog is not proof of a governmental conspiracy. Not that they wouldn't, but you have to have a more reliable source than that.

IMHO, Think pcfixer was referring to MR2's comment on a reference. Your comment is though spot on none the less, facts or evidence is always helpful when making accusations, especially if you're a JD!.

No personal umbrage intended to pcfixer or the writer of the blog and letter, as the intent was to help others, but the totality of the author's background and interests make his cause and possible effect theorem less creditable even without the accusation. Unless of course you have a strong belief in ghosts or don't believe attorneys should present clear evidence when making claims of improper behavoir.

Ok, here we go with the ghost fans and worshipers...you may email me at jimmycrackcorn@dontcare.com :D

Team Sergeant

02-22-2013, 10:32

GUNS (Virtual State of the Union 2013) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_T-F_zfoDqI)

Please share!!

Outstanding video!

Sounds like someone took a page from our letter.

Badger52

02-22-2013, 12:16

Outstanding!

sinjefe

02-22-2013, 12:43

Bill Whittle for President!

pcfixer

02-22-2013, 14:37

Yes, Great Video. Makes sense to me.

tonyz

02-22-2013, 14:38

Team Sergeant

02-22-2013, 14:47

January 2013...alone... = 2,495,440

Below is a chart illustrating NICS background checks. Of note, November and December 2012 as well as January 2013.

Total NICS Background Checks November 30, 1998 - January 31, 2013

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/20130205_1998_2013_monthly_yearly_totals.pdf

And those numbers may in fact be a lot higher. Here in Arizona if you have a concealed carry permit (like me) you can walk into any gun store and purchase a pistol, rifle etc. with no background checks.

I don't know how many other states do this. Food for thought.

tonyz

02-22-2013, 15:07

And those numbers may in fact be a lot higher. Here in Arizona if you have a concealed carry permit (like me) you can walk into any gun store and purchase a pistol, rifle etc. with no background checks.

I don't know how many other states do this. Food for thought.

Interesting. And, if you look at each Form 4473 there is room for up to 5 firearms...thus, it seems possible for the purchase of up to 5 firearms per each NICS background check.

Of course, not many of us purchase 5 at a time and not all NICS checks result in a sale. But, the overwhelming majority of checks do result in a sale. The numbers are staggering - is DC listening?

I'll defer to our FFLs to confirm the 5 firearms per 4473 and one NICS background check.

In any event, the law abiding citizenry of this great nation appear to be embracing the 2A like never before.

Lan

02-26-2013, 09:51

I thought some of you might enjoy reading a well written pro 2A article that sheds light on the tyranny we face here in Kalifornia.

Sac Bee Article (http://www.sacbee.com/2013/02/23/5210460/gun-control-language-assaults.html#dsq-form-area)

"California has some of the toughest – and arguably some of the most overbearing – gun laws in the nation. But you'd never know it to hear our legislators yammer.

Lawmakers give lip service to liberty, while concocting terrifying yet meaningless new terms to justify restrictions on lawful gun ownership.

When it comes to demagoguing guns, state Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg is one of the finer practitioners working today. Announcing the Legislature's gun control agenda a couple of weeks ago, Steinberg peddled all of the usual clichés about "safety" and "common sense." He even genuflected ever so slightly in the direction of the Bill of Rights.

"We respect the Second Amendment right of law-abiding citizens to have guns for hunting, for sport, for protecting their homes and families," the Sacramento Democrat solemnly intoned. Then he proceeded to explain how he and his colleagues intend to trammel upon that right.

The Second Amendment, of course, has nothing whatsoever to do with hunting or sport, and it's only tangentially about self-defense. Steinberg merely mouthed the words. He had to. Judging by his proposed legislation, he obviously doesn't believe them.

That politicians spread falsehoods to advance a political agenda is hardly a novel observation. But the facts are inescapable. Notwithstanding the spree shootings that have horrified the nation, gun violence on the whole has fallen steadily and substantially over the past 20 years.

The federal assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004 and Democrats ardently wish to resurrect, had practically no influence on that decline. Why not? Those weapons are used in only a tiny portion of crimes. But they sure look nasty, don't they?

Yet Steinberg went on to denounce "loopholes in California's tough gun laws" that "have been exploited long enough." What loopholes? Exploited by whom? To what end?

In reality, the senator was lamenting how well firearm manufacturers have complied with California's law, which banned certain cosmetic features on semiautomatic rifles, shotguns and handguns.

Steinberg and his Democratic colleagues gave the game away with their proposal to ban all semiautomatic rifles with detachable magazines. In other words, they want to ban just about every semiautomatic rifle on the market today. Are those guns popular? Oh, yes. Are they used in crimes? Again, almost never. No matter. Ban 'em anyway – with all due "respect" to the Second Amendment, naturally. We'll see if that holds up in court.

California already bans the manufacture, sale and import of those much-discussed "high-capacity" magazines – another misleading term that apparently isn't terrifying enough. So lately we've heard the phrase "assault magazine" enter the discourse. Somebody must have poll-tested it, because House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, a host of Congress members, San Francisco District Attorney George Gascón and the left-liberal think tank Think Progress all picked up the term recently. I'm sorry to report the phrase even crept into the editorial column of this exemplary newspaper.

Do you want to know what a real "assault magazine" is? A rolled up copy of Vanity Fair used to bonk an obtuse lawmaker on the top of his thick head. Otherwise, a magazine is a magazine. Some hold seven bullets, some hold 10, and some hold 20 or 30. By itself, however, a metal box with a spring can "assault" no one.

Closely related to the "assault magazine" is the "assault bullet." You're probably thinking: Aren't all bullets "assault bullets"? Given the right circumstances, an "assault bullet" could also be a "defense bullet." But in general, a bullet is a bullet – and not to be confused with a shotgun shell, which usually sprays pellets.

Bullets come in different shapes and sizes. In this case, an "assault bullet" refers to one that expands on impact. A more accurate, less inflammatory, generally accepted term for this type of ammunition is "hollow point." Police use hollow point ammo for good reason: Expanding bullets don't penetrate walls, which means they're less likely to injure innocent bystanders or neighbors. They also have more stopping power.

In other words, "assault bullets" are safer and more effective than most bullets. Just ask your friendly neighborhood cop.

All of these preposterous neologisms matter, of course, because he who controls the language controls the debate.

Two decades ago, a clear majority of Americans supported some form of gun control. Today, it's barely a plurality. The question remains: What kind of gun control?

Bans are easy – and useless. Universal background checks may have potential. But the California proposals, which also include mandatory liability insurance and a ban on gun loans, would turn many otherwise law-abiding gun owners into criminals simply by virtue of their likely noncompliance.

Steinberg and his colleagues have made a fetish of what they consider evil objects. They shun the far more difficult task of identifying and separating truly dangerous people from dangerous weapons. Far easier to slap the "assault" label on everything they hold wicked, and tell themselves they've done the world some good. They're deluding themselves – and the public. Don't believe the hype."

Max_Tab

02-27-2013, 09:38

Same maniacal group as http://www.bradycampaign.org/ ?

Same group that supposedly posted this on their Facebook page and denies they did it after it caused such a tremendous uproar?

Just checking...

that is probable they worst thing i have seen in promotion for gun control. Being close to someone who was raped it literally makes me sick to my stomach.

tonyz

03-01-2013, 21:20

An interesting read -- scroll to comment #8 for additional interesting reading.

A Culture of Entrenched Cowardice
22jan13
Chris Hernandez

"I don’t claim to know the true motivations of everyone who opposes armed citizens’ response to mass shooters. But I do know that this mindset certainly can be a cynical, self-serving way to disguise blatant fear of taking action as “good sense”. I fear that this mindset is changing us from a brave culture, a culture where people are expected to defend the defenseless, to a culture of deeply entrenched cowardice. A culture where outright refusal to defend even one’s own family is celebrated as a mark of high intelligence."

<snip>

link to blog article and comments below:

http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2013/01/22/a-culture-of-entrenched-cowardice/

DarkFungus

03-02-2013, 09:56

Holy smokes. This, this was beautiful. It is being sent by email, and I can 99 percent guarantee it is spread. "Sociological issue" Hit the fucking nail on the head. Absence of inner peace is the problem - not the existence of guns, knives, heavy things, fists, bats, and dangerous places to fall and hit your head. :p

This was full of actual thought! It was great reading something about this topic that had thought applied to it. Emotion always gets in the way of the gun-control people and I can never tell what they are actually thinking, if they are thinking at all. Same thing happens to both sides, really, but emotional arguments are much more common with liberals.

Very grateful for the effort. Thank you.

MR2

03-02-2013, 19:33

The Second Amendment in 2013 (David B. Kopel) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6swSM_nqCnk)

David Kopel is the Featured Speaker, details below! - I'll be attending.

Jefferson County Republican Mens Club, Monday, March 4, 2013

“Just the (Meeting) Facts”: JCRMC meets every Monday, 7am-9am, Howard Johnson Denver West, 12100 W 44th Avenue (I-70, exit 266 South three blocks @ Ward Road, opposite Travel Centers Truck Stop). Twelve dollars, Fifty Cents, $12.50, covers generous yummy Davie’s Chuck Wagon Diner yours-to-order breakfast; and exciting, productive meeting, with informed, concerned, involved and active -- cool, cool men and women. Women, students, young people especially invited.

Badger52

03-11-2013, 07:38

Regularly updated compendium to have at hand; scroll down just a bit for the variously-sized versions of the PDF. It is exceptionally well-bookmarked.

http://gunfacts.info/

Lan

03-13-2013, 13:18

Pelosi: Assault weapons ban will not pass Congress (http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/03/12/pelosi-assault-weapons-ban-will-not-pass-congress/)

But it does feel good seeing this Liberal outlet and its trumpet admitting defeat.

There's still a lot to do on the State level.

This is what we're facing in California :rolleyes:

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

mojaveman

03-13-2013, 17:11

This is what we're facing in California

I'm most concerned about SB 374, 53, and 293. With too many democrats in office here and a future that's leaning in their direction, it's high time to cross the Colorado river and move to Arizona. I've actually been thinking about it for a long time. I grew up in California but in the past few decades it has changed all for the worse.

badshot

03-13-2013, 17:23

I'm most concerned about SB 374, SB 53, and SB 293. With too many democrats in office here and a future that's leaning in their direction, it's high time to cross the Colorado river and move to Arizona. I've actually been thinking about it for a long time. I grew up in California but in the past several decades it has changed all for the worse.

It's sad that there are only a few states left where you aren't sucked dry (not the good kind) and the Constitution still applies.

I left ca when after getting a permit to carry there I'd get frisked every time I got pulled over, jackasses

The Reaper

03-13-2013, 19:57

The Congress doesn't have to.

The states are doing their dirty work on the 2nd Amendment for them.

TR

Snaquebite

03-13-2013, 20:05

Still pushing our letter every chance I get....

badshot

03-13-2013, 20:23

The Congress doesn't have to.

The states are doing their dirty work on the 2nd Amendment for them.

TR

Yes they are and have been...

Thank you Snakebite, TR, TS, and the 1000 for spending the time and effort to speak for the many whom stand behind you.

Sdiver

03-13-2013, 21:11

Still pushing our letter every chance I get....

May have to print off a few (hundred) and hand them out at the P-mag give-a-way this Saturday in Boulder. :D

....Of course with your permission. ;)

Badger52

03-14-2013, 13:50

The Congress doesn't have to.

The states are doing their dirty work on the 2nd Amendment for them.

TRA not too bad piece by Lott here (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/03/12/can-poor-people-be-trusted-with-guns/) on a segment of the disarmed electorate.

Couple excerpts:
Can poor people be trusted with guns? Overwhelmingly, Republicans thinks so. But while Democrats fight against taxes on the poor and oppose voter photo IDs because they impose too much of burden, they seem to be doing everything possible – from fees, expensive training requirements, and photo IDs -- to make it next to impossible for the poor to own guns.
....
But Democrats seem to think that waiting for police to arrive from a 911 call is good enough for the poor.

Next week Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) will introduce legislation that will ban the production of inexpensive guns in the United States. While it is true that some criminals use these guns, these smaller, lighter handguns are also ideal for self-defense. And of course they are particularly helpful for poor would-be victims who can't afford more expensive guns.

Just a few weeks ago, the Obama administration made the extremely unusual move of lobbying state House members in Colorado for a bill that would charge people a fee when they purchase a gun. Democrats voted down Republican amendments that would have exempted poor people from paying the fee and capped the fee at a maximum of $25.Disarmed electorate as a social priority. And when the checks stop comin'...
:rolleyes:

Lan

03-15-2013, 11:44

Great infographic here (http://thumbnails.visually.netdna-cdn.com/the-value-of-a-wellarmed-citizenry-infographic_513f86d8ad21b.jpg) :lifter

Team Sergeant

03-15-2013, 12:30

I think our letter had an effect...... ;)

Pelosi: Assault weapons ban will not pass Congress (http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/03/12/pelosi-assault-weapons-ban-will-not-pass-congress/)

But it does feel good seeing this Liberal outlet and its trumpet admitting defeat.

There's still a lot to do on the State level.

This is what we're facing in California :rolleyes:

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Pelosi: Assault weapons ban will not pass Congress

Clare Kim, @clarehkim
3:11 PM on 03/12/2013

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said the assault weapons ban passing Congress is unlikely in an interview with the Denver Post Monday. Pelosi focused on another attainable goal—passing legislation requiring all gun buyers to get a background check.

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/03/12/pelosi-assault-weapons-ban-will-not-pass-congress/

orion5

03-15-2013, 12:44

pcfixer

03-18-2013, 14:43

"Pelosi: Assault weapons ban will not pass Congress"

Google translate says:

Pelosi: All those anti-American Republicans will vote down party lines therefore we need to get rid of their ignorant asses ASAP so we can march towards Shang-ri-la uninhibited.

I don't think with the Republican House that much on gun, magazine or ammunition bans will pass either.

States have are passing more restrictive measures. Maryland is one also
with SB 281.

Also this week in March 18-27 is the UN Arms Trade Treaty talks/conference.

Lan

03-18-2013, 14:53

I think our letter had an effect...... ;)

I bet it did.

G&A Ranks the Best States for Gun Owners in 2013 (http://www.gunsandammo.com/2013/03/14/ga-ranks-the-best-states-for-gun-owners-in-2013/#.UUKGU4BMRpc.reddit)

miclo18d

03-19-2013, 08:10

I bet it did.

G&A Ranks the Best States for Gun Owners in 2013 (http://www.gunsandammo.com/2013/03/14/ga-ranks-the-best-states-for-gun-owners-in-2013/#.UUKGU4BMRpc.reddit)

Florida #12 :D (should be better!!!!)

Streck-Fu

03-19-2013, 08:22

Indiana #16 probably should be higher. Our permit is not for concealed carry only. It is a license to carry a firearm and open carry is permitted (though you may have a conversation with a police officer in some cities).

tonyz

03-19-2013, 08:41

Perspective from the General Counsel for O.F. Mossberg & Sons Inc.

Gun Bans Don't Work, Only Hurt Business

By JOSEPH H. BARTOZZI | COMMENTARY
The Hartford Courant
8:51 p.m. EDT, March 15, 2013

Connecticut has a rich history of firearms manufacturing — from Eli Whitney to Sam Colt, Oliver Winchester and O.F. Mossberg, among others, our craftsmen have provided high-quality firearms to customers all over the world for generations.

O.F. Mossberg & Sons Inc. has been located in Connecticut since its inception in 1919, and is the oldest family-owned and operated firearms manufacturer in America.

Mossberg and the firearms industry have provided generations of good, well-paying jobs in this state — exactly the types of jobs Connecticut needs and is spending millions of dollars to attract. In fact, firearms manufacturers, suppliers and dealers contribute more than $1.7 billion in economic activity to this state alone.

Throughout the recent debate over proposed additional gun control laws in the wake of the Sandy Hook tragedy, we have asked theConnecticut General Assembly not to react emotionally, but rather to look at areas that will have a meaningful and lasting effect on the safety of residents.

For example, gun and equipment bans (such as banning firearms on the basis of appearance, or creating some arbitrary magazine capacity limit) have never been proved to reduce crime or gun violence. A Clinton administration study regarding the 1994 to 2004 federal assault weapons ban concluded that "the evidence is not strong enough for us to conclude that there was any meaningful effect (i.e., that the effect was different from zero)." Additionally, violent crime and gun deaths have been steadily decreasing while firearms ownership and the number of firearms in circulation have increased.

Mossberg is deeply concerned about proposed legislation that would hurt our significant and long-standing relationship with this state, and especially our roughly 270 Connecticut employees. We have been meeting with state officials to caution them about the economic impact of some of the proposed legislation and to offer our expertise as a resource for technical information to the legislature.

We have opened our doors to legislators and state policy officials to educate them about the types of jobs that we provide; the firearms and component parts that are made in our North Haven facility; and the employees who could be affected by ill-advised legislation. Our position is that because bans on firearms and equipment have never been proved to reduce violence or crime, a different approach is necessary.

Although the reports from the Sandy Hook shooting are not yet public, it seems obvious that an area where the legislature can do some real good is with regard to limiting access to firearms by prohibited or at-risk individuals. Currently there are states that routinely fail to provide timely mental health, restraining order status, or other prohibiting factors to the National Instant Check System, known as NICS. We strongly support state and federal programs to get all proper information into the NICS database as soon as possible.

In addition, the firearms industry has long supported safe and responsible storage of firearms. Mossberg has been providing free locking devices with its firearms since 1989. Mossberg has distributed well over 9.5 million firearms locking devices since that time — without any state or federal requirement to do so.

This legislature can draft new (or revise existing) legislation to criminalize straw purchasers — those who purchase firearms for prohibited persons — and define and prosecute gun traffickers to the fullest extent of the law. These suggestions are but some of the initiatives that, if adopted, would have a meaningful, long-lasting and positive impact on public safety.

We also recommend that the state engage in widespread public service announcements to remind owners of firearms to keep their guns inaccessible to children or other at-risk individuals. The "Click it or Ticket" program was a reminder to buckle seat belts. A similar approach can and should be taken to remind firearms owners to keep their guns safely stored.

We believe that legislation aimed at keeping firearms out of the wrong hands will create a safer community. Mossberg is proud to be a part of Connecticut's manufacturing base, and we would expect that any legislation that comes out of the Sandy Hook tragedy be results-oriented — not politically motivated.

Joseph H. Bartozzi is senior vice president and general counsel at O.F. Mossberg & Sons Inc. in North Haven.

http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/hc-op-bartozzi-gun-control-access-storage-0317-20130314,0,7714416.story

Team Sergeant

03-19-2013, 12:03

I think the dem's heard us loud and clear..... Dianne Feinstein (D-Kalif) GO POUND SAND!!!!!
TS

Congress: Assault-weapons ban nixed from bill

Whither assault weapons ban: “Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said on Monday that a controversial assault weapons ban will not be part of a Democratic gun bill that was expected to reach the Senate floor next month,” Politico notes. “After a meeting with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Monday, a frustrated Feinstein said she learned that the bill she sponsored — which bans 157 different models of assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines — wouldn’t be part of a Democratic gun bill to be offered on the Senate floor. Instead, it can be offered as an amendment. But its exclusion from the package makes what was already an uphill battle an almost certain defeat.”
Cont:

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/19/17371231-congress-assault-weapons-ban-nixed-from-bill?lite

Streck-Fu

03-19-2013, 12:20

As long as they don't try to sneak it in as a quiet amendment. But good news, none the less.

tonyz

03-19-2013, 12:24

30 seconds left in round #1 and DiFi is sucking wind.

Pressure, pressure, pressure.

DiFi and little Chuckie Shumer, and all those of similar ilk, may be spineless - but they are relentless on this issue.

tonyz

03-19-2013, 14:24

Gun Owners Separate Friends from Foes

A fast-growing website flags businesses that permit concealed carry — and those that don’t.

By Frank Miniter
National Review Online
MARCH 18, 2013 4:00 A.M.

"Chris Walsh didn’t set out to punish businesses that don’t allow him to carry his concealed handgun. He’s just a software designer from Richmond, Va. He started the website Friend or Foe in 2009 to keep track of where he could shop and eat without running afoul of business policies and local regulations. But then gun owners started using his website. As word got out on gun-rights blogs, people began adding more business ratings to Friend or Foe, highlighting the establishments that ban firearms and those that don’t. Before long, Walsh found he’d become an activist, and his fast-growing website was helping to fortify a civil-liberties movement. He’s okay with that. He has big plans for how to separate friends of the Second Amendment from foes."

"His latest deed was integrating Google-mapping software. Now anyone can easily log in and rate businesses. A red thumbtack signifies a business that’s not friendly to gun owners. A green thumbtack represents a place that openly welcomes gun owners. A gray thumbtack is a business where folks have carried a concealed firearm without incident, but where the official policy is not known. There are now over 11,000 places rated, and users are adding more everyday."

<snip>

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/343230/gun-owners-separate-friends-foes-frank-miniter

ETA Friend or Foe link below:

http://friendorfoe.us/