In an odd turn, just before Halloween one prominent gun control group briefly got out of costume: read all about what was underneath it… SEE MORE
SOURCE: NRA-ILA
When former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and husband Mark Kelly launched Americans for Responsible Solutions (now named Giffords) in early 2013, gun owners were assured that the group sought moderate “common-sense solutions” to gun violence. The group admonished NRA for not working to “to find the balance between our rights” and gun regulation. Giffords and Kelly explained, “we don’t want to take away your guns any more than we want to give up the two guns we have locked in a safe at home.”
This, of course, was all a marketing ploy. From its inception, Giffords has pushed the same warmed-over gun control policies as their less messaging-savvy peers.
To help their anti-gun allies better deceive the public, in 2016 Giffords put out a gun control messaging manual titled, “A Guide to Understanding and Engaging Americans on the Need for Stronger Gun Laws.” In a section labelled, “The Do’s and Don’ts of Talking About Gun Violence,” the guide made clear to gun control supporters that “Talk about creating a national gun registry, or banning or confiscating guns” was a definite “Don’t.” The group went on to falsely contend none of those measures “are policy priorities or have widespread support among gun violence prevention organizations.”
Not only is a national gun registry a priority for gun control advocates generally, as former Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent and current Giffords Senior Policy Advisor David Chipman made clear to The Hill this week, it is an explicit policy priority for Giffords.
In response to a question about AR-15 rifles, Chipman responded, “What I support is treating them just like machineguns.”
Reiterating that America’s most popular rifle should be subject to the National Firearms Act (NFA), Chipman went on to state,
To me, if you want to have a weapon of war, the same gun that was issued to me as a member of [the] ATF SWAT team, it makes sense that you would have to pass a background check, the gun would have to be in your name, and there would be a picture and fingerprints on file. To me, I don’t mind doing it if I want to buy a gun.
Chipman and Giffords’s preferred policy is similar to that supported by gun confiscation advocate Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). In early 2013, Feinstein proposed legislation that would have subjected tens of millions of commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms to NFA regulation and registration.
While a former federal bureaucrat might not mind navigating the convoluted federal bureaucracy in order to exercise a constitutional right, most should abhor the prior restraint of NFA regulations.
In order to acquire a machinegun, the transferee and transferor must submit a Form 4 Application for Tax Paid Transfer and Registration of Firearm to the ATF. The form requires identifying information about the firearm and personal information about the applicant. The transferee must submit an identifying photograph along with two completed FBI Forms FD-258 fingerprint cards. This information is compiled in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record, colloquially known as the NFA registry. The transferee must also pay a $200 tax.
The NFA procedure is also a prohibitive waiting period. The latest ATF data measured the wait time for completion of a Form 4 at seven months, or over 200 days. At certain points in 2016, waits stretched to about a year.
Chipman’s policy of treating AR-15s “just like machineguns” would also mean a ban on the civilian possession of newly-manufactured AR-15 rifles. In 1986, anti-gun members of Congress were successful in getting one piece of gun control into the vital Firearm Owners’ Protection Act. A late, and controversial, amendment from Rep. William J. Hughes (D-N.J.) placed a ban on the transfer and possession of machineguns manufactured after May 19, 1986. Treating AR-15s like machineguns would mean a permanent freeze on the total stock of AR-15s Americans could lawfully possess.
There are good reasons gun control advocates seek to obscure such radical goals.
An October Gallup poll showed that 57 percent of Americans oppose “a law which would make it illegal to manufacture, sell or possess semi-automatic guns, known as assault rifles.” For the last seven years, every time Gallup has asked this question opposition to a ban has outweighed support.
Moreover, there is no evidence that further restricting commonly-owned semi-automatics would reduce violent crime. A pair of Department of Justice-funded studies of the 1994 Clinton semi-automatic ban could not determine that the ban reduced violent crime. The later of the two studies, from 2004, stated, “the ban’s impact on gun violence is likely to be small at best, and perhaps too small for reliable measurement.” In explaining why, the researchers wrote, “estimates consistently show that AWs [commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms] are used in a small fraction of gun crimes.” More recent research from the RAND Corporation determined, “Evidence for the effect of assault weapon bans on total homicides and firearm homicides is inconclusive.”
History also shows that otherwise law-abiding gun owners are unlikely to comply with gun registration requirements. In the year and a half following implementation of the N.Y. SAFE Act in early 2014, 23,847 people registered 44,485 guns. Estimates of the number of firearms in the state subject to registration were 1-1.2 million. Gun control advocates didn’t have any better luck that year in Connecticut. Despite estimates that Nutmeg State residents owned several hundred thousand firearms and 2.4 million magazines subject to new registration requirements, owners registered a mere 50,016 firearms and 38,290 magazines.
Anti-gun advocates are well aware that the American people, through their elected representatives, have repeatedly rejected the severe gun control measures they support. Faced with this reality, gun control advocates have continually dressed up their fanatical goals in all manner of disguise. Constantly masquerading as moderate, for gun control supporters every day is like Halloween. As for anyone who falls for their ruse, it’s all tricks and no treats.
In the words of former Supreme Court justice SCALIA, “The second amendment protects your muzzleloader.Beyond that you are on thin ice ” I firmly believe that semi auto and auto rifles bigger than 22 long rifle calibre should be turned into pruning hooks along with all hand gun mags larger than 6 rounds.
I understand carbon monoxide in your garage from a running vehicle is painless, why don’t you give it a try?
How long have drugs been illegal in the USA? We are completely free of drugs in this country, right? If USA 100% banned the possession of any firearm for any reason, guns and gun violence would immediately disappear, right? Or do you think criminal gangs in Mexico would start importing illegal guns rather than illegal drugs? How have gun laws stopped gang shootings in Chicago? By definition, law breakers care nothing about gun laws. If we start getting rid of Constitutional amendments “to save lives” how long before the First amendment is “adjusted” for our protection and free speech and the right to assemble and petition the government for grievances? Until you can change the criminal’s heart you cannot legislate safety. Just put a sign on your lawn that says “no weapons on the premises”. Feel safer? What do you think a criminal will think about that? How do you think criminals will feel about knowing every law abiding person in USA has no firearm but they do? Christmas time!
While I will give you the benefit of doubt that you actually believe Antonin Scalia said that and are not simply telling a Leftist lie, please post a citation which includes that quote. I even searched Mother Jones, where the writers should have jumped for joy at a quote like that from Scalia, to no avail. So let’s have your source for the quote you posted.
I agree I never heard Scalia say that. Is this alleged quote by Scalia being quoted out of context? Did Scalia ACTUALLY write that in an appellate case somewhere? If so, WHAT appellate case did Scalia say the above at? Name the case and name the year of that case. Inquiring minds would like to know.
Well James, if you let them take anything or every thing else, it won’t be long before they come for your .22. I am certainly glad you don’t speak for all of us. As for me, I will keep my AR and my 30 round magazines not because I plan on shooting someone but because it is my constitutional right.
SICK….SICK…!!!
You are being manipulated by your anti-gunner masters and you dont even realize it. Its called conditioning, son. People who believe like you are being conditioned to be slaves and serfs…you are very weak minded.
You come to my house along with this b**** and try to take my AR along with anyone else you want to bring and see how well that goes for you!Shall not be infringed means just that!
I’m not a fan of the AR-15, but it has nothing to do with gun registration or gun control. It’s because I’m a tightwad They aren’t anymore dangerous than a 22 rimfire semi automatic. Any idiot should be able to reason that only the person behind the trigger can make it dangerous. Gun control is people control. These Democrat morons don’t even consider registering knives, poison, ice picks, ball bats, hammers, axes, hatchets& etc. The list can go on & on. They’ll have us registering all these things if they thought it would give them more control over the general population. I forgot about automobiles. I read somewhere a number of years ago that more people die in automobile accidents every year than in WW 2. We do register cars , but they don’t seem to think it’s as bad as dying by gunfire.
If they’re gonna outlaw guns, then body guards shouldn’t be allow to use them. Democrats seem to think it’s OK if their body guards have them.
Can’t these people be reasoned with. In light of the recent mass shootings, how many of the loved ones of the people that were murdered wouldn’t give everything to have been there with an AR and known how to use it? In the name of gun control they want to take this ability away from the public. It makes me think the people in charge of gun control are on the side of the murders and there supporters are just following along. They make NRA supporters look like the bad guys. How do they get away with it?
I think the gun control supporters need to be made aware of what their leaders are really up to under the guise of Gun Control.
What makes you think the people who support gun controllers are actually so (stupid) (isolated from the world) pick one – that they are unable to discern that which is self-evident to us? Those pushing the narrative can’t be reasoned with. They know what they are doing and see gun control as the only way to assure the Socialist-Democrat path to unchallenged power.
As opposed to the CONSERVATIVE -REPUBLICAN path to unchallenged power?
“To me, if you want to have a weapon of war, the same gun that was issued to me as a member of [the] ATF SWAT team…”
And that should set off our Bravo Sierra detectors. Either this clown wasn’t even a GS-1811 anywhere in government, much less on the “ATF SWAT” team, or he’s a liar about the weapons issued either to the ATF Special Response Team (SRT)*, or the US Military. Oh, wait, either way he’s a liar. The military doesn’t issue the AR-15, the standard issue since the late 1960s has been first the M-16A1 etc. series and then also the M-4. ATF and other Federal law enforcement agencies tracked the military issue with the M-16s and now issue the Colt M-4, only someone who doesn’t know spit from Shinola would claim the ATF SWAT team was issued semi-automatic AR-15s.
* He doesn’t even know it isn’t the “ATF SWAT Team”
What would happen if all these ppl soros, griffords and everyone that want these gun bans if someone broke into their houses in the middle of the night. I bet that would change their minds.
Considering recent remarks made on twitter by Representative Swalwell about “nuking” Americans in a war. Nothing can be left to chance with these crazies that are coming online in January. I find it ironic that people like him have no trouble killing fellow Americans and imprisoning as many as necessary to obtain the desired level of gun confiscation, but to juxtapose their objection to controlling the massive influx of illegal aliens by allowing them to come through our open borders.
In the last 3 decades the murder rate has declined 25% , the number of legal guns has increased times 4. Just do the math, it’s as easy as 2+2 for most people.
James Shmitt , I have a quote for you , “Those who beat their guns into plowshares , Will Plow for those who dont” – Thomas Jefferson , You my short sighted friend can look that one up ! Enjoy your pruning shears !