HOT MIC REVEALS LAWMAKERS INTENT TO CONFISCATE GUNS

Doug Hagmann
homelandsecurityus.com

Every American gun owner, regardless of the state in which you live, is presently or will be the target of gun confiscation. A state-by-state framework of confiscation is being erected in front of us all to strip us of our rights under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Proof of this nefarious intent of disarming citizens was serendipitously caught by a “hot” microphone at the conclusion of the May 9, 2013 meeting of the New Jersey State Legislature.

At the conclusion of the New Jersey Senate Budget & Appropriations Committee meeting last Thursday, an open microphone caught three state senators, identified by voice as Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg, Assistant Majority Leader Sandra Cunningham, Senate Majority Whip Linda Greenstein, and at least one staff member talking candidly about their intent to confiscate all guns from the people they serve. It should be noted that Senator Loretta Weinberg is the chief proponent of the anti-gun legislation being moved through the New Jersey State Senate.

Although some of the candid conversation is a bit difficult to discern due to the ambient noise, their message is clear. “We need[ed] a bill that was going to confiscate, confiscate, confiscate,” stated one high ranking senate member. “They don’t care about the bad guys.  All they want to do is have their ‘little guns’ and do whatever they want with them,” added another in an obviously demeaning manner. Another conceded that gun owners do, in fact, want to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, but added that “they don’t have any regulations to do it.” Oh really?

For anyone doubting the bitter contempt these legislators hold for gun owners and pro-Constitutionalists, a YouTube video that captured the “open microphone moment” is available for review .

During the second hour of The Hagmann & Hagmann Report that aired last night, we interviewed the highly credentialed Scott Bach, Esq., Executive Director of the Association of the New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs who explained the draconian laws being written and passed in the State of New Jersey. “Clearly, this is about nothing less than disarming the American public, and the current battleground is in New Jersey,”  stated Mr. Bach. “You might not be experiencing it in your state… yet, but you will. It’s just a matter of time.”

We must do everything we can to preserve, protect and defend our Second Amendment rights, or we will lose much more. Regardless of where you live, the fight is coming to you, if it has not yet arrived. We must be proactive, and yes, we can make our voices heard to counter the utter contempt of these lawmakers regardless of your state of residence – while we still have the chance. Let’s hold these opponents to our constitutional rights accountable for their words and actions.

The time is now, and the fight has been left to us. Make your views known and your voice heard by contacting the NJ Senate Majority Office by phone (609-847-3700) and/or fax (609-633-7254). Do it before it disappears as an option.

MISSOURI MAN OFFERES FREE LAND TO GUN MAKERS IN RESTRICTIVE STATES

by  Joe Wolverton, II, J.D. | The New American

“Move to Missouri!” That’s the message to gun manufacturers and distributors from Larry Pratt, the president of Gun Owners of America and Michael Evans, host of the America’s Voice Now radio show.

John Negri, a West Plains, Missouri, small business owner who listens to Evans’ show, made a remarkably generous announcement last week on the show that could make that happen.

Specifically, Evans says that Negri is offering exiled elements of the gun industry a free 20-year lease on any of three parcels of land. There is one catch: the offer is available only to gun manufacturers or distributors who have “publicly announced they’re leaving because of restrictive firearms regulations.”

The land consists of three parcels: six acres with railroad siding, 38 acres on a major interstate, and a 100-acre segment.

Evans reports that Negri first approached him with the idea last year after learning that several states — notably Connecticut, New York, and Maryland — were passing laws severely restricting the right of citizens of those states to keep and bear arms.

“There are three specific parcels of land and each manufacturer may have a different desire or need,” Evans explained to OzarksFirst.com. “So essentially what he’s offered is if a manufacturer chooses one of those parcels, they’re not all three up for grabs. Then he’ll provide a manufacturer who will bring a factory or manufacturing or a distribution plant here and provide for them to have a lease on that property. They would have to put up the building or do whatever it needs to do to be in operation, but they’re more than likely going to have to do that wherever they go.”

Larry Pratt recognizes the value of such an offer to an industry placed in the cross-hairs of the latest federal assault on freedom. This time, the target is the right to keep and bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

“It’s important for the firearms industry to know they are supported by the public and states that support our constitutional Second Amendment rights,” Pratt said. “GOA and America’s Voice Now have banded together to support our manufacturers and offer the firearms industry the welcoming arms of a community with skilled labor, low taxes, central locale and a smiling face.”

Likewise, Evans sees in Negri’s proposal a boon to manufacturers of weapons, ammunition, and component parts who are finding their former locations every day less and less hospitable.

“Many firearms manufacturers and distributors are handicapped by regulations, high taxes, and bans on the products they produce in states like New York, Connecticut, and Illinois,” he said.

In a conversation with The New American, Evans reports that in addition to considerable media interest in Negri’s offer, at least two firearm manufacturers have expressed interest in taking him up on it.

“Today, companies like Colt, Remington, Winchester, Armalite, Kimber, Henry, and Smith & Wesson are based in some of the nation’s most restrictive gun law states. Missouri is a firearms friendly state and a staunch defender of the Second Amendment to the Constitution,” Evans added.

He’s right.

As The New American has reported, the state legislature of Missouri recently sent a bill to Governor Jay Nixon.

Drawing substantially on the right of states to nullify federal overreaches as set out by James Madison in his Virginia Resolution of 1798, HB 436 reaffirms the right of Missouri — and all states — to hold as null, void, and of no legal effect any federal act that exceeds the narrow boundaries of the power granted the federal government by the states via the Constitution.

The text of the bill declares that the Missouri General Assembly is “firmly resolved to support and defend the United States Constitution against every aggression, either foreign or domestic.”

Section 2 of the bill goes on to affirm that not only is it the right of the state legislature to check federal overreaching, but that “the general assembly is duty bound to watch over and oppose every infraction of those principles which constitute the basis of the Union of the States, because only a faithful observance of those principles can secure the nation’s existence and the public happiness.”

HB 436 — the Second Amendment Preservation Act — opens with a brief recitation of the history of the creation of the federal government, a recounting that resounds with a firm grasp on the proper, constitutional relationship between state and federal governments, as well as the legal basis for nullification:

Acting through the United States Constitution, the people of the several states created the federal government to be their agent in the exercise of a few defined powers, while reserving to the state governments the power to legislate on matters which concern the lives, liberties, and properties of citizens in the ordinary course of affairs;

The limitation of the federal government’s power is affirmed under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which defines the total scope of federal power as being that which has been delegated by the people of the several states to the federal government, and all power not delegated to the federal government in the Constitution of the United States is reserved to the states respectively, or to the people themselves;

Whenever the federal government assumes powers that the people did not grant it in the Constitution, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force;

The several states of the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their federal government. If the government created by the compact among the states were the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers granted to it by the Constitution, the federal government’s discretion, and not the Constitution, would be the measure of those powers. 

Specifically, the bill denies to the federal government the authority to enact any statutes, rules, regulations, or executive orders “which restrict or prohibit the manufacture, ownership, and use of firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition exclusively within the borders of Missouri.”

Laudably, the bill as amended by the state Senate does not back down from a fight with the federal government over the Second Amendment. Section 3 of the bill boldly asserts: 

All federal acts, laws, orders, rules, and regulations, whether past, present, or future, which infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution shall be invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, shall be specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state.

Although Governor Nixon — a Democrat — has not announced whether he intends to sign or veto the bill, the state’s lieutenant governor, Pete Kinder, urged Nixon and the state legislature to support Negri’s generous gift aimed at attracting the firearms industry to the Show Me State.

“For years, some states that are home to gun manufacturers have continued to bite the hand that feeds them, passing laws to restrict firearms,” Kinder said in a press release provided to The New American. “Some of those companies now are deciding it’s time to pull out and move to more friendly pastures. I encourage Gov. Nixon and lawmakers to send a concerted message to these manufacturers: Missouri welcomes you.”

Given the significant — and well-deserved — heat Nixon is taking for giving the federal Department of Homeland Security a list of Missouri concealed carry permit holders, sources told The New American that there is a chance that the governor will let the 15-day statutory period pass, thus passively allowing the Second Amendment Preservation Act to become law without his signature.

Constitutionalists likewise welcome the praiseworthy efforts of state lawmakers, the Gun Owners of America, the America’s Voice Now radio program, Lt. Gov. Kinder, and John Negri to thwart the federal government’s plan to unconstitutionally restrict the right to keep and bear arms.

D.C. CONSIDERS MANDATORY $250K INSURANCE POLICY FOR GUN BUYERS

WASHINGTON (CBSDC/AP) — Two D.C. councilmembers said Thursday that they support some form of mandate that gun owners carry liability insurance, but they would have to overcome the objections of Mayor Vincent Gray for the District of Columbia to become the nation’s first jurisdiction to require such coverage.

Councilmembers Vincent Orange and Mary Cheh said after a hearing Thursday that any bill they pursue would likely be narrower than Cheh’s initial proposal, which includes a requirement that gun owners insure themselves against intentional as well as accidental shootings.

At least a half-dozen states are considering insurance requirements for gun owners, although none of the bills has made it past the hearing stage.

Some gun-control advocates believe that insurance can help reduce gun violence by encouraging responsible gun ownership, in part through lower rates for gun owners who secure their weapons and maintain a perfect safety record. Insurance would also provide a mechanism to compensate victims of accidental or negligent shootings.

Insurance-industry representatives argued Thursday that there is no market for such coverage, noting that many accidental shootings are covered by homeowners’ policies. The industry is particularly troubled by a clause in the district’s proposal that would mandate insurance for “willful acts,” which would go beyond the scope of conventional liability insurance. Orange and Cheh, both Democrats, said they would likely remove that clause.

The district has some of the strictest gun-control laws in the nation. Handguns were banned outright in the nation’s capital until a landmark 2008 Supreme Court ruling, and since then, about 2,000 people have legally purchased firearms. The 13-member council includes 11 Democrats and two left-leaning independents, potentially making the city fertile territory for those pushing an insurance mandate.

But the Democratic mayor does not think the legislation is necessary, said Chester McPherson, the city’s deputy insurance commissioner.

“The executive is not convinced that there is currently a persuasive argument to support the need for insurance for firearms in the home,” McPherson said.

Council Chairman Phil Mendelson, who crafted many of the city’s gun regulations, also has concerns about the proposal.

“The fact that it’s uncharted territory begs the question: Is there really a need here, or does this simply have the effect of increasing the burden of gun ownership in the name of good intentions?” Mendelson said.

Orange, who chairs the council committee that oversees insurance, said he would support mandating that gun owners add a gun clause to their homeowners’ policies. Homeowners’ insurance already covers some accidental shootings, industry representatives said.

Cheh, who introduced the bill, said that while it would likely become narrower, it’s still worth pursuing.

“I think there’s a path to travel here that would give a source of compensation via insurance to people injured because of negligent acts,” she said.

Some gun owners advocate voluntarily purchasing insurance that covers costs associated with using a firearm in self-defense. The National Rifle Association offers its members a variety of policies intended to protect them from liability for accidental or self-defense-related shootings.

But three gun owners who testified Thursday said government-mandated insurance would be onerous, unnecessary and potentially cost-prohibitive.

“What induces me to take care with my firearm is prison,” said Chris Zarconi, a district resident. “It’s not insurance.”

In neighboring Maryland, Democratic Gov. Martin O’Malley signed a major gun control measure Thursday. The legislation includes provisions banning 45 varieties of assault weapons and makes fingerprinting mandatory to receive a handgun license.

DISARMING REALITIES: AS GUN SALES SOAR, GUN CRIMES PLUMMET

By Larry Bell |Forbes.com

A couple of new studies reveal the gun-control hypesters’ worst nightmare…more people are buying firearms, while firearm-related homicides and suicides are steadily diminishing. What crackpots came up with these conclusions? One set of statistics was compiled by the U.S. Department of Justice. The other was reported by the Pew Research Center.

According to DOJ’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. gun-related homicides dropped 39 percent over the course of 18 years, from 18,253 during 1993, to 11,101 in 2011. During the same period, non-fatal firearm crimes decreased even more, a whopping 69 percent. The majority of those declines in both categories occurred during the first 10 years of that time frame. Firearm homicides declined from 1993 to 1999, rose through 2006, and then declined again through 2011. Non-fatal firearm violence declined from 1993 through 2004, then fluctuated in the mid-to-late 2000s.

And where did the bad people who did the shooting get most of their guns? Were those gun show “loopholes” responsible? Nope. According to surveys DOJ conducted of state prison inmates during 2004 (the most recent year of data available), only two percent who owned a gun at the time of their offense bought it at either a gun show or flea market. About 10 percent said they purchased their gun from a retail shop or pawnshop, 37 percent obtained it from family or friends, and another 40 percent obtained it from an illegal source.

While firearm violence accounted for about 70 percent of all homicides between 1993 and 2011, guns were used in less than 10 percent of all non-fatal violent crimes. Between 70 percent and 80 percent of those firearm homicides involved a handgun, and 90 percent of non-fatal firearm victimizations were committed with a handgun. Males, blacks, and persons aged 18-24 had the highest firearm homicide rates.

The March Pew study, drawn from numbers obtained from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, also found a dramatic drop in gun crime over the past two decades. Their accounting shows a 49 percent decline in the homicide rate, and a 75 percent decline of non-fatal violent crime victimization. More than 8 in 10 gun homicide victims in 2010 were men and boys. Fifty-five percent of the homicide victims were black, far beyond their 13 percent share of the population.

Pew researchers observed that the huge amount of attention devoted to gun violence incidents in the media has caused most Americans to be unaware that gun crime is “strikingly down” from 20 years ago. In fact, gun-related homicides in the late 2000s were “equal to those not seen since the early 1960s.” Yet their survey found that 56 percent believed gun-related crime is higher, 26 percent believed it stayed about the same, and 6 percent didn’t know.  Only 12 percent of those polled thought it was lower.

The Pew survey found that while women and elderly were actually less likely to become crime victims, they were more likely to believe gun crime had increased in recent years. On the other hand, men, who were more likely to become victims, were more likely know that the gun rate had dropped.

Those gun crime rates certainly aren’t diminishing for lack of supply…at least not for law-abiding legal buyers. Last December, the FBI recorded a record number of 2.78 million background checks for purchases that month, surpassing a 2.01 million mark set the month before by about 39 percent. That December 2012 figure, in turn, was up 49 percent from a previous record on that month the year before. FBI checks for all of 2012 totaled 19.6 million, an annual record, and an increase of 19 percent over 2011.

Firearms sellers can thank the gun-control legislation lobbies for much of this business windfall. Marked demand increases have been witnessed over the past five years thanks to the 2008 and 2012 elections of U.S. history’s most successful, if unintentional, gun salesman as president. The firearms market got a huge added boost after the tragic shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newton, Connecticut activated a renewed legislative frenzy.

If that gun-purchasing fervor has abated with the defeat of several congressional regulation proposals, as I’m sure it has, you surely wouldn’t have known it by witnessing the overwhelmingly enormous annual NRA convention in Houston earlier this month. Attendance was estimated to be more than 70,000 people from all over the country.

Those attendees weren’t all guys either…not by a long shot. Last year, the National Shooting Sports Foundation reported that participation by women increased both in target shooting (46.5%) and hunting (36.6%) over the past decade. Also, 61% of firearm retailers responding to a NSSF survey reported an increase in female customers. A 2009 NSSF survey indicated that the number of women purchasing guns for personal defense increased a whopping 83 percent.

Is John Lott, the author of “More Guns, Less Crime” right? Does the rapid growth of gun ownership and armed citizens have anything to do with a diminishing gun violence trend? His expansive research concludes that state “shall issue” laws which allow citizens to carry concealed weapons do produce a steady decrease in violent crime. He explains that this is logical because criminals are deterred by the risk of attacking an armed target, so as more citizens arm themselves, danger to the criminals increases.

Whether or not you buy that reasoning, and it does make sense to me, what about the notion that tougher gun laws have or would make any difference? With the toughest gun laws in the nation, Chicago saw homicides jump to 513 in 2012, a 15% hike in a single year. The city’s murder rate is 15.65 per 100,000 people, compared with 4.5 for the Midwest, and 5.6 for Illinois.

Up to 80 percent of Chicago murders and non-fatal shootings are gang- related, primarily young black and Hispanic men killed by other black and Hispanic men. Would tightening gun laws even more, or “requiring” background checks, change these conditions?

Gwainevere Catchings Hess, president of the Black Women’s Agenda (BWA), Inc., an organization that strongly advocates strict gun-control legislation, rightly points out that  “In 2009, black males ages 15-19 were eight times as likely as white males the same age, and 2.5 times as likely as their Hispanic peers to be killed in a gun homicide.”

Those are terrible statistics, but here are some others. Today, 72% of black children are born out of wedlock, as are 53% of Hispanic children and 36% of white children. Back in 1965, 25% of black children were born out of wedlock, nearly one-third fewer. As a result, promiscuous rappers, prosperous dope peddlers and street gang leaders are becoming ever more influential role models. It’s probably no big stretch of imagination to correlate such grossly disproportionate crime and victimization rates with comparably staggering rates of single-parent families, those without fathers in particular.

Yet in the general population, and although the agenda-driven media hasn’t noticed, we can be grateful that gun violence has been trending downward since 1993 when it hit its last peak. Don’t want to credit a rise in gun ownership and concealed carry by law-abiding citizens for this good news? Fine. But then, don’t imagine that gun legislation is the reason or answer either. Leave that illusion to gun-control cheerleaders in the media.

WHITE HOUSE WANTS POSTERS TO PROMOTE GUN CONTROL

By Chuck Baldwin |NewsWithViews.com

A group of influential pastors and ministers recently met with Vice President Joe Biden at the White House where the Vice President called on them to use their influence to help pass President Barack Obama’s new gun control measures. Of course, these measures include the outlawing of all semi-automatic rifles, outlawing high-capacity magazines, and establishing a government-mandated national gun registration policy, which is subtly identified as “Universal Background Checks.” These measures were recently defeated in the US Senate, so now the White House is calling on the clergy to help sell this gun grab to America’s churches.

Here is how Breitbart.com covers the story: “Vice President Joe Biden wants pastors, rabbis and nuns to tell their flocks that enacting gun control is the moral thing to do. But another vote may have to wait until Congress wraps up work on an immigration overhaul.

“Biden met for two-and-a-half hours Monday with more than a dozen leaders from various faith communities –Christian, Jewish, Muslim and Sikh, to name a few. Both Biden and the faith leaders encouraged each other not to give up on what has been an arduous and thus far fruitless effort by Biden and President Barack Obama to pass new gun laws in the wake of December’s schoolhouse shooting in Connecticut.

“Around a large, circular table in a conference room on the White House grounds, Biden waxed optimistic about prospects for passing a bill, according to four participants who spoke to The Associated Press after the meeting. Biden’s chief of staff, Bruce Reed, joined the group, as did a handful of Obama aides who work on faith-based outreach. The meeting closed with a meditation and a prayer for action.”

The report continued saying, “Monday’s session reflects an attempt to broaden the coalition calling for new gun laws to include a wide array of religious groups–including evangelicals and conservative faith communities.”

The report concluded by saying, “A spokeswoman for Biden declined to comment on the meeting. But Rabbi Julie Schonfeld, executive vice president of the Rabbinical Assembly, said a diverse spectrum of denominations and religious orders were represented. She said they included evangelical leaders Richard Cizik and Franklin Graham, the son of evangelist Billy Graham, as well as Sister Marge Clark of Network, a Catholic group.”

See the report: Biden Asks Clergy To Make Moral Argument On Guns

There is nothing new about the White House attempting to use America’s pastors to promote gun control. Both the G.W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations have had the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) conduct pastor training programs whereby pastors are instructed to use their influence to convince citizens to completely surrender any and all rights and liberties to the federal government in the event of a national emergency or crisis. Submission to tyrannical actions such as forced relocation and gun confiscation is taught in these training programs.

See the report: Secret FEMA Plan To Use Pastors As Pacifiers In Preparation For Martial Law

And here is a local Louisiana television news report on the FEMA “Clergy Response Teams”:

FEMA Training Pastors For Emergency Response

Obviously, the Obama administration’s effort to enact more gun control has already enjoyed the support of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Richard Land (who is a member of the CFR) and evangelist Franklin Graham. It is noteworthy that Mr. Graham was in attendance at Vice President Biden’s private meeting. President Obama must consider Franklin Graham a key ally in his quest to enact these new gun control measures.

Unfortunately, a sizable percentage of America’s pulpits are occupied by men and women who are either extreme liberal and socialist activists or by conservatives who are sheepishly passive and compliant, and who would, therefore, say or do nothing to interfere with or resist any tyrannical efforts by the federal government. There are many other pastors who truly love freedom and would naturally resist any effort of government to usurp God-given liberties, but they have been indoctrinated in the fallacious “obey-the-government-no-matter-what” interpretation of Romans 13. It is more than interesting that FEMA is instructing pastors to teach this perversion of Romans 13 to their congregations. Plus, I seem to recall that this is exactly what Hitler’s Nazi government instructed the pastors of Germany to also do. But this is just a coincidence, right?

This is the biggest difference between Obama’s gun control measures and the efforts of old King George III when he attempted to seize the weapons of the colonists that were stored in Concord, Massachusetts. When that attempt occurred in 1775, the pulpits of Colonial America were mostly unified in renouncing this act of tyranny and in boldly proclaiming the Biblical principles of lawful self-defense to their congregations. But when Barack Obama and Senator Dianne Feinstein tried to enact laws in 2013 that were equally egregious to those of old King George, the silence of America’s pulpits was deafening. Yes, millions of liberty-loving Americans rose to the challenge and helped beat back Obama’s gun grab, but this was done with little or no help from America’s pastors. This fact was not lost to the White House, and now the effort is underway to convince America’s pastors and ministers to openly support Obama’s gun grab.

For the sake of freedom and liberty in this country, it is critical that America’s pastors start sounding forth the clarion call. It is critical that they become “watchmen on the wall.” It is critical that they join the fight to preserve, protect, and defend those Natural rights that are safeguarded in the US Constitution–including the right of the people to keep and bear arms. PASTORS MUST BE ENGAGED.

As I said earlier, there are many pastors and Christians who only know what they have been taught. And what they have been taught is that the Bible does not support the right to resist government, that the right to keep and bear arms is not sacred, and that Christians are supposed to be pacifistic in their approach to issues that relate to the Second Amendment. They are taught this erroneous doctrine in Bible colleges and universities and seminaries all over America–regardless of denomination.

It is for this reason that my constitutional attorney son, Tim, and I wrote a brand new book entitled, “To Keep or Not To Keep: Why Christians Should Not Give Up Their Guns.” This book looks at the right to keep and bear arms strictly from a Biblical perspective. Books outlining the constitutional and historical principles relating to the Second Amendment are plentiful. But I know of NO BOOK written within the last one-hundred years that deals with this subject solely from a Scriptural perspective. That is exactly what our new book does.

Here are some of the questions we answer in our new book:

* Is the right to keep and bear arms a divine right?

* Should Christians surrender their firearms if the law requires them to do so?

* Does the New Testament require Christians to always be non-violent?

* Did the fact that Jesus and the apostles not rise up with arms against tyrannical government mean that Christians today should never do so?

* Were America’s Founding Fathers right or wrong when they rebelled with arms against the British Crown?

These are the questions that Christians everywhere are rightly asking. These are the questions that America’s pastors must be addressing from their pulpits. And these are the questions that Tim and I show the Biblical answers to in our new book.

To order this brand new book, “To Keep or Not To Keep: Why Christians Should Not Give Up Their Guns,” go to Keep Your Arms

I firmly believe that if enough pastors and Christians would read and digest this book, it would revolutionize the way churches respond to efforts such as Obama’s gun grab. It might even be an instrument that could help preserve liberty in our nation for the next fifty years or more.

We MUST get this book into the hands of as many people as possible. I’m asking readers to help me get the word out about this new book. If everyone reading this column would purchase two of these books, one for themselves and one for a friend, the results could be mind-boggling. I truly believe this book has the potential to change the course of America. Why? Because the pulpits and churches have the potential to change the course of America. And this book has the potential to provide the instruction and inspiration necessary to awaken and energize America’s pastors and churches. Perhaps your pastor or Christian school administrator would even be willing to sell multiple copies of this book in their church or school. There are discount prices for bulk orders. Why not ask him or her?

Again, to purchase this brand new book, “To Keep or Not To Keep: Why Christians Should Not Give Up Their Guns,” go to Keep Your Arms.

President Obama and Vice President Biden are trying to enlist pastors and ministers in their efforts to disarm the American people. I’m asking pastors and ministers and Christians all over America to join “the holy cause of liberty.” (Patrick Henry) And make no mistake about it: without the freedom to keep and bear arms, there is no freedom. And, yes, as our new book shows, that is a Biblical principle.

UK NEWSPAPER CREATES ILLEGAL 3D GUN, SNEAKS IT ON TO TRAINS

British tabloid conducts cheeky “investigation,” gets away with committing potential act of terror

Adan Salazar
Infowars.com
May 13, 2013

Following the successful test shooting of the world’s first 3D printed gun, known as the Liberator, media outlets have predictably rushed to demonize the technological feat, which instead of being considered a great accomplishment for mankind and science, is being used to fuel anti-gun paranoia.

Daily Mail journalist prepares to break laws. / Screenshot taken from DailyMail.co.uk.

On Sunday, the UK’s Daily Mail claimed to have “exposed” the “massive international security risk” the organization says comes when people are able to print their own guns.

“We built the weapon, which is capable of firing a live round, from blueprints available on the internet – then smuggled it on to a packed Eurostar train,” the tabloid reported.

Austin-based 3D printing group Defense Distributed sparked outrage from the leftist media last week after they were able to produce a functional firearm created mostly from 3D printed parts, subsequently distributing the schematics freely online. The only parts not printed were the firing pin, which is an easily obtained standard nail, and a 6 ounce piece of metal which makes the gun comply with laws such as the Undetectable Firearms Act, legislation outlawing guns not detectable by airport x-ray machines.

In an awkward and trivial attempt to prove that a plastic gun can be rammed through security undetectably and then smuggled on to a train, the Daily Mail proceeded to print the parts and assemble the piece, intentionally neglecting the 6 ounce metal piece and the metal firing pin, which the paper admits they omitted for “legal reasons.”

The fact that the paper could have gone to any toy store and purchased a plastic gun to test this very same concept makes it clear they genuinely intended to mislead their readers, hoping to negatively influence public opinion regarding 3D guns.

Preying on their readership’s naivety, the paper announced that access to the “deadly, precision-made parts” pose a huge security threat, despite the paper creating their firearm under dubious circumstances.

Fortunately, savvy readers saw through the tabloid’s cunning ploy, calling them out for fomenting an atmosphere of fear where the reality of such a threat is miniscule.

“Utter scaremongering – what use is it without ammunition? That is metallic and would be detected. Must try harder DM,” replied one Daily Mail reader, echoed by another user who stated, “Hello…THE BULLETS would set off the metal detectors! And If they are used as a musket you have to get really close…. and would only be able to get one person before everyone else ran away…so much for mass destruction! Very unlikely terrorists will use this!”

Yet another reader saw the paper’s scheme as illegal in every sense, considering the fact that they openly admitted committing the crime of bringing a firearm on to a train: “So your not only admitting to taking a gun on a train but also evidence for the [Crown Prosecution Service] cps! Nice police have been informed I hope they act.”

Defense Distributed also took aim at the paper’s cheeky experiment, stating in a blog post: “The DM has engaged in an act of terrorism to show us that Eurostar trains will now only be safe when the public itself is eliminated.”

Far from demonstrating whatever it is they sought to prove, the Daily Mail merely highlighted the fact that their “journalists are agents of state terrorism and above the law,” responded Defense Distributed’s Cody Wilson.

Given the State Department’s recent issuance of a take down notice of DefCad.org’s Liberator gun files, coupled with the minimal prospect that “the masses” will soon have access to printable weapons, we can be sure to expect more hit pieces aimed at demonizing the technology, which may grease the skids for increased Internet censorship and government control.

MONTGOMERY COUNTY ASKS RESIDENTS TO HAND OVER THEIR GUNS

By Rachel Baye | The Washington Examiner

Montgomery County residents handed over 111 guns, 11 BB guns, 10,000 rounds of ammunition and a grenade at Saturday’s statewide gun turn-in day, according to county police spokeswoman Lucille Baur.

Among the 111 guns were 68 hand guns, 27 rifles — including at least one AK-47 — 15 shot guns and a tiny pen gun, Baur said. In addition to the guns, police also received a sword and two canisters of tear gas, which were turned in by a former D.C. police officer who told police they left over from riots in 1968.

“A successful day,” Baur said.

Organized by state Attorney General Doug Gansler in coordination with local police departments, the event included 24 stations across the state where residents could anonymously hand over their unwanted firearms and ammunition.

All of the weapons collected will be inspected to see if they have been reported stolen or can be linked to a crime before being destroyed by the police, said David Paulson, spokesman for Gansler.

Montgomery County will also make a donation to the University of Maryland Medical Center’s R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center for every gun it received, according to Baur.

But unlike recent gun buyback events in Howard County in March and in Prince George’s County and Baltimore in December, officials offered no financial incentives for people to hand over their weapons.

Montgomery County has not offered cash or giftcards for a weapon in recent memory. Even at the last turn-in event more than 20 years ago, no financial incentives were offered.

“Incentives can frequently capture people’s attention, and while the money isn’t overwhelmingly — as it’s traditionally done — overwhelmingly the biggest factor, our emphasis was to give people an opportunity to voluntarily and safely turn over their weapons,” Paulson said.

Individual motivations for turning over the weapons included desires to keep guns out of the hands of young children and fears that a home burglary could cause a gun to end up in the wrong hands, officials described.

Germantown resident Blaine Clarke turned in a BB gun, some hunting ammunition that is no longer legal to use and an old “Saturday night special” .38 caliber revolver that belonged to his dad and he said is probably not registered.

“I’ve had that forever in the closet,” he said of the revolver. “Just time to get rid of stuff.

Others offered similar reasons for turning over their weapons, and many didn’t know much about the guns they were handing in.

“The woman who brought in these two long guns, she didn’t know how much they were worth,” said Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office Deputy Steve Austin, who was collecting guns at the Montgomery County Fairgrounds in Gaithersburg. “But she knew they were guns, and she wanted to get them out of her house.”

WASHINGTON POST BLAMES GANGLAND SHOOTING ON SECOND AMENDMENT

Gun control advocates hijack incident in America’s crime capital to demonize law-abiding gun owners

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
May 13, 2013

Despite the fact that the FBI described the shooting at a New Orleans Mother’s Day parade as “a flare-up of street violence” and not a targeted attack, the Washington Post cited the incident as another reason to push through draconian gun control measures.

-

-

19 people were injured yesterday as the parade passed through the 7th Ward neighborhood near the French Quarter in New Orleans. Suspects were witnessed running from the scene after they fired the shots but no one has been apprehended.

In addition to the FBI describing the incident as “a flare-up of street violence,” CNN reported that, “One of the suspects was described as an African-American male, approximately 18 to 22 years old, wearing a white T-shirt and blue jean shorts.”

New Orleans is plagued by gang violence and has been referred to as “the deadliest city in America”. In 2010, the city’s homicide rate was 10 times the national average.

Shootings during parades in poorer areas of New Orleans such as the one embroiled in the incident yesterday have become commonplace. Earlier this year, four people were shot after an argument during the last weekend of partying before Mardi Gras.

Despite the fact that the Mother’s Day parade shooting was almost certainly gang-related and probably carried out by drug dealers, in addition to taking place in one of America’s crime capitals, the Washington Post cited the incident as another reason for increasing gun control measures against law-abiding Americans across the country.

In a diatribe calling for increased background checks, opinion writer E.J. Dionne Jr. remarked, “As of May 8, according to Slate magazine, there had been at least 3,947 gun deaths since Newtown. Sunday saw yet another mass shooting, at a Mother’s Day parade in New Orleans.”

Perennial gun control advocate Piers Morgan, who proudly displays a picture of himself with gun criminal Snoop Dogg, also eagerly tweeted news about the shootings as soon as it broke.

Numerous people also took to Twitter to demand Americans be disarmed and only criminals such as the ones most likely involved in yesterday’s shooting be able to have access to guns.

“Praying for new orleans until the next shooting won’t really help anything. We need gun control. Now,” remarked one user.

Enough is enough: 19 New Orleans shooting victims included 2 kids – #GunControl #Now,” added another.

Quite how making it harder for Billy Bob in North Dakota to purchase a rifle at a gun show will prevent criminal gangs in New Orleans from obtaining firearms is not explained by the Washington Post, Piers Morgan, or any other of the gun control advocates who have once again hijacked an unrelated incident to hype their political agenda.

THE ULTIMATE DOOMSDAY PROVISION: “DESIGNED FOR THOSE EXCEPTIONALLY RARE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE ALL OTHER RIGHTS HAVE FAILED”

By Mac Slavo | SHTFPlan.com

Though the following 2002 court case ended with the liberal Ninth Circuit ruling [1] that, “the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution does not guarantee individuals the right to bear arms,” at least one judge stood in dissent.

In his dissent, Judge Alex Kozinski argued with the very reasoning our founding fathers used to include the right to bear arms in the U.S. Constitution to begin with.

It may be a decade since the Ninth Circuit attempted to rewrite our fundamental law of the land (a move that was eventually nullified by the U.S. Supreme Court), but Kozinski’s views on our right to bear arms ring as true to Americans today as they did over two hundred years ago when our founders argued the same.

But we shouldn’t take Kozinski’s views simply as opinion. His is a lesson of history, and one that the likes of Washington, Adams, Jefferson and Franklin knew well. It’s not often discussed in our pedagogic institutions, nor in the political playing field, because it is considered too controversial of a topic, especially in today’s hyper-sensitive anti-self defense pro-state culture:

All too many of the other great tragedies of history – Stalin’s atrocities, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Holocaust, to name but a few – were perpetrated by armed troops against unarmed populations. Many could well have been avoided or mitigated, had the perpetrators known their intended victims were equipped with a rifle and twenty bullets apiece, as the Militia Act required here. If a few hundred Jewish fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto could hold off the Wehrmacht for almost a month with only a handful of weapons, six million Jews armed with rifles could not so easily have been herded into cattle cars.

My excellent colleagues have forgotten these bitter lessons of history.

The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late.

The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed – where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees.

However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.

Judge Alex Kozinski dissenting in Silveira v. Lockyer, 328 F.3d 567 (9th Circuit 2003) (full text [2])

We may live in a relatively peaceful and open society, but it is our right to bear arms that has made it possible.

Take that away, and in due time, a dark cloud of tyranny will inevitably descend upon the land of the free.

The storm clouds are already on the horizon.

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government”

Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

SEATTLE TO MELT GUN BUYBACK FIREARMS INTO ‘PEACE PLAQUES’

Mikael Thalen
Infowars.com

After collecting over 700 firearms at the Seattle Police Department’s gun buyback program last January, Mayor Mike McGinn announced Tuesday that the firearms would be melted down and turned into plaques, inscribed with children’s “peaceful messages,” to be placed across the city.

Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn announces his plan to melt firearms into “peaceful plaques” / Credits: Komo 4 News

Despite the failure of the SPD’s last buyback program in 1992 and several studies showing gun buyback programs to be nothing more than “political theater,” the City of Seattle, in response to the school shooting in Newtown, Conn., set up yet another buyback program last January offering up $100 gift cards. The program quickly turned into a makeshift gun show as private citizens outbid police with cash.

Now, the city has launched “Weapons to Words,” a children’s contest that asks school age kids to write short quotations on “what a violence-free future means to them,” with guns in mind. The winning quotations will be placed on the plaques, melted and engraved through donations and put in several parks across the city.

“These upcycled plaques, inscribed with the hopes and dreams of the next generation, will transform weapons of violence into something positive,” said Mayor McGinn.

McGinn has received criticism for what many feel is using children to push an agenda while somehow claiming the inanimate guns turned in during the buyback were violent.

“Presumably, children submitting any message about mommy using a firearm to protect herself against a rapist or stalker or violent ex-husband or boyfriend might not be a winner,” said Dave Workman, Washington resident and senior editor of TheGunMag.

Despite the push for gun control from some, including Attormey General Eric Holder who called for “brain washing” school children to be anti-gun, two new reports, including one from the Justice Department released Tuesday, concluded that gun homicides have dropped as much as 49 percent in the last 20 years. The report also found that non-fatal gun crimes have dropped nearly 70 percent.

As gun crime plummets and record gun and ammumition sales are reported, Mayor McGinn’s vision of a non-violent future appears to already be underway, just not the way he wants it to. McGinn also announced his plan for another gun buyback this summer, although no official date has been given.