Category: Anti Civil Rights ideas & “Friends”
September 02, 2021
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” George Santayana famously wrote. Apart from a few garbled anecdotes about Captain Cook and Ned Kelly, and something about Aborigines, Australians are, by and large, quite ignorant of their history. Is it any wonder that we’re repeating it?
Many Americans will have seen the shocking images from last weekend in Melbourne. Tear gas, pepper spray, heavily armored police chanting like soccer hooligans and firing rubber bullets. “The world’s most livable city” suddenly looks more like Belfast in the 1990s.
This sort of brutal state power has never been seen in Melbourne before. Not even when hundreds of African migrants fought pitched battles in the Melbourne CBD during the annual Moomba festival, the city’s premier family event, in 2016. When tens of thousands of BLM protesters swarmed in defiance of lockdowns last year, none were arrested or even fined. Instead, police joined in the ritualistic abasement of “taking the knee.”
“After 230 years, Australia has reverted to being an island prison.”
But the brutality of premier “Dictator Dan” Andrews, the Australian equivalent of a governor in Melbourne’s state of Victoria, is only the tip of the medically induced dictatorship that has seized Australia in the wake of the Wuhan pandemic.
Like Soviet citizens, Australians are prevented from even leaving their country. After 230 years, Australia has reverted to being an island prison.
That means that, under a pandemic, the states suddenly have tremendous power, wielded through public health bureaucracy and under “state of emergency” declarations. The federal government in Canberra has been rendered mostly helpless. In fact, thanks to state border closures, Prime Minister Scott Morrison is a virtual prisoner in Canberra, forbidden to travel anywhere else in the country he is supposed to be running.
The states have also effectively wrested the running of the national economy from the Commonwealth. When premiers like Daniel Andrews have shut down their entire states for weeks on end, they have demanded that the Commonwealth bail them out with emergency welfare payments. Facing an election next year, the Morrison government has not dared say no.
So Australia is racking up tens of billions of national debt, solely to protect state premiers from the economic consequences of their authoritarian policies.
Victoria, Melbourne’s state, is far and away Australia’s COVID capital. 1980s Australian rock band Little Heroes might have sung that Melbourne Just Isn’t New York, but “Dictator Dan” is Australia’s Andrew Cuomo.
Despite the harshest restrictions in Australia (Melbournians have spent 200 of the past 500-odd days under lockdown, with no end currently in sight), Victoria has easily the worst record of Covid deaths: five times as many Covid deaths as the rest of Australia combined.
All courtesy of Andrews’ staggering, inept hotel quarantine scheme.
In a grim echo of Cuomo’s aged-care cock-up, the Andrews government made a series of shocking blunders with hotel quarantine. The security contract was granted to a technically insolvent firm, solely because it was an “indigenous enterprise.” Security guards were hired via WhatsApp. None of them were given training in infection control or wearing protective gear, but they were required to undergo “diversity and inclusion” training. Quarantine staff took their meal breaks in a nearby KFC. Medical waste was stored in open bins in a public car park.
“Dictator Dan” has steadfastly refused to accept any responsibility. Instead, his government has ground the bootheel ever harder on the state’s citizens.
The violence in Melbourne last weekend was just the culmination of months of increasing authoritarianism. The city has been placed under curfew—twice—for the first time in its history. Even during the darkest days of WWII, Melbournians were freer than they are now.
Andrews has vastly increased state power under a “state of emergency” that was promised to run for four weeks. It’s now been in place for over a year, with no end in sight. The only sunset clause in Victoria is that the premier has declared it out-of-bounds to sit on the beach to watch the sunset.
Police in Victoria may now detain any person or group for as long as “reasonably necessary,” restrict the movement of any person in the state, close any premises, and “require the destruction or disposal of anything.” Police can enter homes and seize property without a warrant.
Police and army patrol the Murray River—the border between Victoria and New South Wales—like Stasi watching over the Berlin Wall. Drones buzz in the Melbourne skies, and snitches diligently scan social media for WrongThink.
So it was that pregnant Zoe Buhler found herself being handcuffed in her pajamas, in her own home, in front of her children, for posting on Facebook. Journalist Avi Yemini was visited at home by police, warning him to stay away from covering protests. When he ignored them, he was crash-tackled by a squad of riot police. His cameraman and security guard have both been arrested.
But Victoria is far from unique. In West Australia, Premier Mark McGowan has sealed off the state for most of the past year. McGowan has also passed “emergency” legislation exempting himself from criminal law and civil liabilities. His decisions and actions cannot be appealed. The premier can also now make laws without reference to parliament, in direct contravention of Australia’s Westminster tradition of government.
Just to make it completely clear, McGowan has also ruled that individuals or organizations whose views “do not represent the views of the West Australian government” are barred from state-owned venues.
If Americans are astounded by what they’re seeing from Australia, many of us here never thought it could happen here, either. After all, our national anthem tells us “we are young and free.”
We were wrong.
As the Taliban celebrates the withdrawal of U.S. forces by parading their American-sourced tactical vehicles, aircraft, guns and other weapons, reports have emerged that the Biden Administration has ordered federal agencies to delete online information respecting the cost of this military equipment and related spending in Afghanistan, while proclaiming its support for more gun control.
A Forbes article states that by August 23, at least “two key reports on the U.S. war chest of military gear in Afghanistan … had disappeared from federal websites,” including a Government Accountability Office (GAO) audit of U.S.- funded equipment for Afghan National Defense and Security Forces (GAO-17-667R, Aug. 2017).
A week later, Forbes reported that the U.S. State Department admitted the documents had been removed and had instructed other federal agencies to “review their web properties” for similar content and “remove [it] from public view.” The reason given was the need to ensure the “safety of our Afghan contacts” by deleting information that poses “a security risk.” A GAO spokesperson contacted by Forbes confirmed that “the State Department requested we temporarily remove and review reports on Afghanistan to protect recipients of US assistance that may be identified through our reports and thus subject to retribution.”
In the circumstances, this is a less than convincing justification. The deleted GAO Report, for one, lacks any personally identifiable information about members of the Afghan defense and security forces or other partners. Moreover (as pointed out in the Forbes article), the Biden Administration itself would have directly jeopardized such individuals already, when government officials allegedly provided the Taliban with the names of Afghan allies during the evacuation of Kabul.
A group of U.S. Senators is now demanding that the administration provide a full accounting regarding the U.S. military equipment left behind “as a result of our poorly executed withdrawal from the country,” questioning why such assets weren’t adequately secured prior to announcing the withdrawal from Afghanistan.
A cynic may be excused for believing that the Biden Administration is acting out of concern about the political blowback once the details of the unprecedented extent of state-of-the-art weaponry, paid for by American taxpayers and currently in the hands of the brutal Taliban, become more widely known.
One early casualty of Biden’s fast and furious exit from Afghanistan is the complete loss of credibility on gun control the President and his administration have as a result.
For decades, Joe Biden has pushed for strict gun control, hectoring Americans about the evils of guns in general and “assault weapons” in particular, yet a conservative estimate indicates that the weaponry left behind includes well over half a million rifles, handguns, shotguns and machine guns, together with an undisclosed amount of ammunition (the GAO report did not account for small arms ammunition and other ammunition was included with the billions spent in general “sustainment” expenditures). As NRA-ILA noted earlier, Biden’s “bungling of [the withdrawal] ensured that not just firearms but some of America’s more sophisticated military technology is now available to terrorists and other enemies who are and will continue to use them against Americans, American interests, and American allies.”
Even more jarringly, NRA witnessed – just a day after the August 30 pullout – a State Department official speak at the Seventh Conference of States Parties to the Arms Trade Treaty (“Promoting responsibility in international transfers of conventional arms”) to “underscore the continuing commitment” of the administration “to responsible international trade in conventional arms” and affirm its steadfast support for “strong and effective national controls on the international transfer of conventional arms.”
By now, Americans don’t believe in Biden’s policies or buy into his gun control agenda. A poll released at the beginning of this month shows that only 15% of U.S. voters polled “strongly approve” of President Biden’s handling of “gun policy,” compared to 35% who “strongly disapprove,” and over 60% thought the country had “gotten off on the wrong track.”
GOA Attacked for Holding a Compromising Politician Accountable
If you are not already a member, please consider joining GOA to support our mission protecting YOUR gun rights around the country.
|
On Thursday of last week, a Florida gun group launched an attack on our state director Luis Valdes and, by extension, on Gun Owners of America.
One pro-gun writer described it as an “attack piece” against GOA.
From left to right: GOA’s Erich Pratt, pro-gun Rep. Anthony Sabatini (R-FL) and GOA FL Director Luis Valdes
|
This broadside was then reprinted by a national group, as well as another state gun group in Florida.
GOA has made it a practice not to speak ill of other pro-gun groups, and so I don’t intend to do so here. At the same time, given the coordinated attacks by several groups, it’s necessary that I respond to the false allegations because there are surely many GOA members who have read the articles, and they want to hear our side of the story.
You can read my full response to these accusations at The Truth About Guns.
NOTE: If you haven’t yet read my response at The Truth About Guns, I encourage you to stop reading here, click on the link directly above, and take a moment to read the article before continuing on. It will give you the best overview of the situation.
And make sure to read the comments at the bottom. They are universally supportive of GOA!
As you know, GOA is a no-compromise group, which means that we will never give politicians a pass for compromising — no matter what their party affiliation. GOA has been critical of many Florida legislators for refusing to pass substantive pro-gun bills. And ultimately, we are being attacked for holding accountable one legislator in particular: Rep. Cord Byrd (R-FL).
After The Truth About Guns printed my response, the other author has doubled down and launched a second attack against GOA. If you have questions regarding what this is all about, I encourage you to read my original response to this organization from Saturday, and the second ad hominem “attack piece” against GOA on Sunday. And as you do, here are a few things you should notice between these two articles:
- The author of the attack piece claims that it was GOA who attacked him, the “messenger because [we] couldn’t handle the message.” But if you read my Saturday article, you will see that I studiously avoided mentioning the author or either of the two groups he represents. In fact, if you read people’s comments at the bottom, the only somewhat “negative” comment is that I was too nice because I didn’t “name names.” The reason was that we wanted to stay focused on the real problem – which is the compromising politicians and avoid an “infighting” situation.
- Our antagonist claims we erred in saying that the pro-gun champion of the Florida legislature, Rep. Anthony Sabatini (R-FL), has introduced Constitutional Carry. For starters, the author ignores this statement that GOA made in our Florida alert last Friday: “Rep. Anthony Sabatini (R-FL) stand[s] before gun owners at the State Capitol pledging to introduce Constitutional Carry for the third time in a row.” That clearly indicates the bill has not yet been finalized. Moreover, Sabatini is the past sponsor of the bill, and he has already submitted the draft to the House Bill Drafting Service for printing. You can read what Rep. Sabatini told our state director Luis Valdes about the bill’s status here.
- The writer claims that the GOA leadership was “in a quandary” over what our Florida Director Luis Valdes did (in being critical of compromising politicians). Well, as the Chairman of Gun Owners of America, I can assure you that neither I, nor the top officers of this organization, ever expressed any regret or doubt – and we were never in a “quandary.” It’s a shame that being a reporter, the author never picked up the phone and called me or my two vice presidents for a comment, because we could have quickly disabused him of that notion.
- The Sunday article claims that we err in not blaming the entire leadership in the Florida legislature for the failure to pass Constitutional Carry. He accuses us of only blaming one Republican lawmaker, and he claims that Luis is unable to find legislative offices to meet with. Sadly, a quick purview of our website would have revealed the error on both counts. In fact, we have repeatedly blamed the entire Republican leadership in the legislature for their compromises, including the House Speaker Chris Sprowls and Senate President Wilton Simpson. See here, here, here, here, here, here and here – and notice how many times these reports reveal Luis meeting with state legislators (and the Governor’s office). Luis was able to meet with all these offices, even though the Capitol was officially closed due to COVID.
- The author also attacks Luis as a political neophyte who has no prior 2A experience. Again, a modicum of research would have shown this to be false. Luis was involved in helping organize the Tallahassee gun rights rally in 2018 which drew hundreds of people. He has written dozens of articles (as a reporter) for The Truth About Guns over the past several years. And, in his former life as a cop, he publicly called out other officers for their actions during an arrest of Florida Carry members in Miami Beach.
- Finally, in reading both GOA’s article and the author’s rebuttal, you should notice a stark difference. GOA’s article is packed with citations throughout. His article is a collection of ad hominem attacks and allegations without substantiation. His article is full of personal invectives against our Florida Director. GOA’s article has none of that, because again, our aim is to focus on the real problem – which is the compromising politicians.
GOA’s “no-compromise” approach wins key battles
Ultimately, this comes down to a disagreement over how GOA lobbies. Rep. Ron Paul said that, “GOA is the only no-compromise gun lobby.” If you ever wondered what that means, this is one such example.
GOA doesn’t compromise, and we never have during our 40-plus years in operation. And while that drives some politicians crazy, it also upsets some gun owners who are willing to compromise if it means that they can have a “seat at the table.”
So case in point: While the author is a board member of the state group that is attacking GOA, he also writes for a national gun group that, in 2013, was pushing the Manchin-Toomey gun control bill in the wake of the Sandy Hook shooting.
Yes, that’s right. A national gun rights group was pushing the Manchin-Toomey compromise – which was a Universal Background Check-lite bill.
Well, GOA took a different approach in 2013. We opposed ALL gun control that year (as we always do), and we blasted the compromises that some gun rights advocates were pushing.
Rather than taking what legislators give us — and simply tweaking it to make it “not so bad” – we rallied the grassroots with the message: “Oppose all gun control.”
We generated so much grassroots pressure, that Republican Senators who were thinking about supporting gun control-lite, quickly backed away.
Consider this report from Slate: “When Sen. Tom Coburn, an Oklahoma Republican, backed away from bipartisan talks to expand background checks earlier this year, he did so after Gun Owners of America and its members flooded the senator’s office with e-mails and phone calls.”
In the end, GOA’s approach won. And the New York Times even credited GOA with killing Universal Background Checks (UBCs) in 2013.
But notice: Our approach differed from other lobby groups that were trying to broker a compromise on UBCs. Again, their approach can be summed up as getting a “seat at the table” where they can negotiate gun control language that’s “not as bad” as the original.
That’s not how GOA operates. We mobilize YOU — the grassroots — because the millions of gun owners like yourself are the ones best suited to blast the compromisers and rein them back in. Sadly, other groups don’t mobilize the grassroots this way.
The state group which is attacking GOA only sent one legislative alert to its grassroots members this year. Only one! By contrast, GOA put out over 20 alerts into the state within the period of a few months. But what’s ironic is that in the past week, this group has sent double the number of alerts (2) as they have legislative alerts (1) in 2021 – but both alerts in the past week focused on attacking a fellow gun organization.
This has not gone unnoticed by Florida gun owners. On Sunday, in the wake of the second hit piece on GOA, one Floridian posted this on Facebook:
They [the state group] doubled down attacking Luis Valdes and Gun Owners of America-Florida today with a condescending yet entirely emotional ad hominem tirade. Literally the only two emails I’ve received from them in almost two years were to attack other gun groups. Yet they’re nowhere to be found otherwise.
In a nutshell: GOA is under attack for refusing to compromise. But you have my promise that GOA will never do that. We are NOT going to compromise. And we will continue to hold politicians accountable when they do, and we will be sure to “name names” and tell you who the oath-breaking politicians are.
So thank you so much for standing with us. We can’t do what we do without your activism.
In Liberty,
Tim Macy
Chairman
Gun Owners of America
P.S. Go here to read this alert online.
P.P.S. See the announcement below for all the ladies of GOA!
By Tim Macy
This week, a Florida gun group launched an attack on our state director Luis Valdes and, by extension, on Gun Owners of America.
This broadside was then reprinted by a national group, as well as another state gun group in Florida.
GOA has made it a practice not to speak ill of other pro-gun groups, and so I don’t intend to do so here. At the same time, given the coordinated attacks by several groups, it’s necessary that I respond to the false allegations because there are surely many gun owners who have read the articles, and they want to hear our side of the story.
As you know, GOA is a no-compromise group, which means that we will never give politicians a pass for compromising — no matter what their party affiliation. GOA has been critical of many Florida legislators for refusing to pass substantive pro-gun bills, and ultimately, this is why we are being attacked.
One would think that suggesting there is a problem with Florida’s elected Republicans would be a no-brainer. After all, Florida has a Republican supermajority which means that Democrats have no power to stop significant pro-gun bills — if only Republicans had the will to push them.
But as I will explain below, Republican politicians have been stealthily working to undermine pro-gun bills. One such politician is Florida state Representative Cord Byrd, who has refused to bring up important pro-gun bills — such as Constitutional Carry and 2A Sanctuaries — after he had promised to do so.
This is something that Luis Valdes has pointed out. It’s information that gun owners need to know.
Sadly, the group attacking GOA gets personal and questions Luis’ motives, writing: “I understand Valdes wants to generate buzz and possibly a headline, and he’s not the first to go after a well-known member of the gun community in the hopes it will create even more of a splash.”
To the contrary, Luis was not trying to generate “buzz” or “headlines” or create a “splash.” What he is doing is holding legislators accountable who are in a position to move pro-gun legislation but refuse to do so.
Pro-gun champion in the Florida House calls out RINO Republicans
While Rep. Byrd has voiced support for Second Amendment rights, it’s also clear that he has put his promises to gun owners on hold in order to appease the Republican leadership, who simply want gun owners to go away and leave them alone. (I’ll explain this below.)
But first, it’s worth noting that Rep. Anthony Sabatini, who is the sponsor of Constitutional Carry, has been quick to point out how Republicans are killing pro-gun legislation behind closed doors. He has seen this firsthand and has not hesitated to call them out.
At a recent press conference, the media reported: “Sabatini called out his fellow Republicans, some by name … for not doing enough for gun rights.”
And in this video, Rep. Sabatini calls out the “spineless RINO Republicans” in Florida for “lying to the American people about being strong on the Second Amendment.”
Likewise, pro-gun media have noted how the Republican leadership in Tallahassee is refusing to bring up substantive, pro-gun bills like Constitutional Carry:
The state of Florida has been semi-jokingly referred to as the Gunshine State. However, they’re not nearly as pro-gun as a lot of people think. They have a long way to go to really be one of the most pro-gun states in the nation. Yet they could make a big step toward that if they were to pass constitutional carry. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be much political will.
After our press conference in Tallahassee to push Constitutional Carry, pro-gun media reported: “Let’s hope the powers that be in Florida step up and listen. If not, maybe it’s time for some lawmakers to start looking for a new line of work.”
Of course, the “powers that be” are Republicans who have held a supermajority for years. This means that Democrats have NO WAY to stop Constitutional Carry…if only Republicans had the political will to pass it.
Sadly, they don’t have the will to do so. And they don’t like it when we start naming names.
The big lie: ‘We don’t have the votes’
When Republicans who don’t want to move pro-gun legislation come under fire, they complain that “their hands are tied” or that “they don’t have the votes.” This is a lie that is repeated time and time again. We hear it in Congress and in state legislatures across the country.
And incidentally, this is exactly what Texas Lt. Gov. Daniel Patrick tried to do to gun owners this year, claiming “we don’t have the votes” to pass Constitutional Carry:
“If we have the votes to pass a permitless carry bill off the Senate floor, I will move it,” Patrick said in a statement. “At this point we don’t have the votes on the floor to pass it.”
Of course, that means: “We don’t have the political will to pass Constitutional Carry.”
As you know, GOA’s team was the key force in pushing Constitutional Carry onto the Governor’s desk in Texas. And we did so over their “we can’t get your bill passed” objections. We demanded the legislature vote on the legislation — despite the Republicans’ claims that “they didn’t have the votes.”
And guess what? When push came to shove … and they forced a vote on the bill … they actually had the needed votes!
Lies and Broken Promises
In Florida, Rep. Cord Byrd was assigned to be the Committee Chair for the House’s Criminal Justice & Public Safety Subcommittee, which is a very important one since the majority of the pro-gun bills were assigned to this committee.
Rep. Byrd’s prior legislative action showed hopeful advancement for the cause of liberty in Florida. In 2018, he voted against SB 7026, the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act.
Otherwise known as the Parkland Gun Control bill of 2018, it was the legislation that gave Florida an under-21 purchase ban, Red Flag Gun Confiscation Orders, and other horrible pieces of gun control.
As such, in the start of the previous session, our state director, Luis Valdes, approached Rep. Byrd and asked him when he was bringing up Constitutional Carry (HB 123), the Repeal of the Parkland Gun Control (HB 6083), and other pro-gun bills. He informed Luis that it would be the middle of session.
As time went on, GOA supported Rep. Byrd’s own bill — State Preemption (HB 1409) — plus the Church Carry bill (HB 259) that Rep. Byrd co-sponsored.
One thing that the hit-piece on GOA did NOT mention is that we have been very complimentary of Rep. Byrd where appropriate. In March of this year, GOA’s Valdes stated: “I believe that Rep. Bryd is a good man. As a lawyer, he even promotes himself as a ‘Gun Lawyer’ through his law firm.”
So we praise legislators when it’s appropriate, but we also have to hold them accountable when they don’t follow through on their promises.
This is a key point. To ignore a politician’s broken promises would be akin to believing the husband who tells his wife that, despite having committed adultery, he has always been solidly committed to the marriage.
When the middle of session came, Valdes asked Rep. Byrd again where he was on bringing up the other pro-gun bills. After all, why would Rep. Byrd not want to push a bill to repeal the Parkland gun control that he voted against?
He told GOA that, “They don’t have Senate Companion Bills,” so bringing them up is a waste of time. (Sounds a lot like what we were hearing out of Texas, doesn’t it?)
Of course, Byrd’s statement was only a partial truth. Yes, they did not have companion bills. But under Florida’s legislative rules, bills do not need a companion in the other chamber to advance. The House can introduce legislation and pass it. It then advances to the Senate where they can choose to advance it or not.
And Rep. Byrd absolutely knows this. After all, Rep. Byrd has brought up other bills that did not have companion bills in the Senate (HB 411 and HB 1397). Byrd held votes on both of these non-gun related bills, and both passed favorably out of his committee, but then died in other committees.
So when he says that he can’t bring up bills for a vote that have no Senate companion bill — because that would be a waste of time — well, that’s just simply untrue.
The question that gun owners should be asking Rep. Byrd is: “Why will you bring up non-gun related bills for a vote — even when they don’t have Senate companions — but you won’t do that for substantive pro-gun bills, such as Constitutional Carry?”
Democrats push anti-gun bills, even when they don’t have sufficient votes
Consider how anti-gun Democrats at the national level push their agenda. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi doesn’t wait for companion bills to be introduced in the Senate. She pushes anti-gun bills to a vote, even if she knows they’re dead in the Senate. The reason is: She wants to create momentum.
This is exactly how national Democrats got the Brady Bill passed in 1993. For several years, they pushed for votes in one chamber — even though they couldn’t get a vote in the other chamber. Nevertheless, they forced votes year after year — and it worked. Even though Senator Bob Dole could have stopped the Brady bill from passing the Senate (by objecting to a Unanimous Consent agreement), he wilted, stating that: “Let’s get the best deal we can and move on.”
The pressure campaign to generate momentum had worked. The other side wore down “our side” in the same way that General Washington wore down the British.
So to say that “bringing them up is a waste of time” is simply not true. Victory feeds upon itself — and the momentum generated by holding hearings and conducting votes is extremely valuable. Our side needs to push substantive pro-gun legislation like Constitutional Carry. We need hearings, committee votes, chamber votes, etc.
Florida: A long record of killing pro-gun legislation
In the end, state Rep. Byrd allowed Constitutional Carry to die in committee without a vote or even a hearing.
This a pattern the Republican Party of Florida has used for years — they pick a designated “blocker” to hold up gun legislation that is popular with gun owners, but which is not favored by the party establishment.
That blocker is considered electorally “safe,” is leaving the legislature anyway, or is assured of a lucrative position should harm befall them.
In prior years, there was Sen. Anitere Flores, Sen. Rene Garcia, Sen. Miguel Diaz de la Portilla, Senator Ellyn Bogdanoff, Senator John Thrasher, and Rep. Richard Corcoran, just to name a few. They all held important positions or chaired important committees and killed bills like Open Carry and Campus Carry over the past decade.
What do they all have in common? They were Republicans who originally campaigned as being pro Second Amendment, and they received endorsements and high ratings from other gun rights organizations.
The compromising by other gun groups is not a well-kept secret in Florida. Chandler Langevin, who is President of Protect the 2nd in Florida, is running for Florida House District 52.
Langevin, who also works in a legislative office in the Tallahassee House, has an inside look at what’s happening in the state capitol. And this is what he had to say about Rep. Byrd and the attack on GOA and Luis Valdes:
Thank you, Luis Valdes and Gun Owners of America/ Gun Owners of America — Florida for fighting a NO COMPROMISE fight for our 2nd Amendment rights here in Florida.
Florida Carry on the other hand would rather shill for the NRA and keep our fight for Florida’s gun rights stagnant. This is an unacceptable and cowardly approach. It will also render the organization illegitimate in any future battles for gun rights.
Let’s be perfectly clear. Cord Byrd had the opportunity to push Anthony Sabatini’s bills for Constitutional Carry, a 2nd Amendment Sanctuary State, and another bill to repeal Red Flag Laws to a committee hearing. Cord didn’t allow even a hearing, he didn’t go to the media to raise awareness. No, he killed them.
Langevin truly understands the legislative process. There is no reason that, in a state which has a Republican SUPER majority, we should not see the legislature pass important pro-gun measures like Constitutional Carry and 2A Sanctuary bills. Or at least to hold legislative hearings!
‘Old Guard’ to the grassroots: Get back in line, we know better than you!
GOA was attacked for supposedly not understanding the legislative process. More specifically, the email broadside against GOA quotes Marion Hammer (who is the head of the Unified Sportsmen of Florida) as saying:
When groups and group spokespersons, who don’t understand the legislative process, attack legislative leadership and committee chairmen who support the Second Amendment, they shoot themselves in the foot and do an enormous disservice to law-abiding gun owners.
This is quite ironic, given our success in getting Constitutional Carry passed in Texas this year. But many have reacted against these comments and blasted that statement for coming across as arrogant.
As one person responded: “Luis must’ve struck a nerve. Good. This is nothing more than a command from the ‘ruling class’ to ‘the serfs’ to get back in line and shut up — WE know what’s best for you.”
The truth of the matter is that, in Tallahassee, GOA has outperformed the group that is now attacking us by every certifiable measure. That may sound like braggadocio. But this can be verifiably proven.
For one, GOA put out as many as twenty times more email alerts than did this other group. But that’s not all.
A simple search of lobbyist records shows that GOA’s Florida director Luis Valdes was present for every gun-related hearing. And this includes his testifying on the church carry bill (HB 259) which eventually passed. However, the group behind the attack on GOA did not testify at a single gun-related hearing in the House. (See the accompanying images below.)
So in review: When it came to mobilizing the grassroots and testifying before legislators, GOA outperformed the gun organization that is now attacking us.
As suggested above, it makes me very uncomfortable to point these things out. It is not GOA’s policy to comment on what other pro-gun organizations do or don’t do. That’s their business, and they have to answer to their own members for their actions. Very often, these are well-meaning Second Amendment advocates who simply hold to a different lobbying philosophy than GOA’s.
But as I said before, when another organization takes a swipe at GOA, which has a long-record of legislative accomplishments, we owe it to our membership to answer the false allegations. Because naturally, many will have questions.
GOP Senator reveals RINOs don’t get negative criticism from 2A community
For over twenty years, the Republican Party has held a supermajority in Florida. Yet the state is falling behind in the advancement of liberty — and worse, it was Republican lawmakers who advanced gun control!
Failing to bring up pro-gun bills for a committee hearing or vote can be summed up easily: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
This describes the problem in Florida and is exactly the point made by Sen. Dennis Baxley (R) in 2019:
Republican Lawmakers don’t support pro-gun legislation because they don’t hear any negative criticism from their constituency. They take the silence of gun owners as approval.
If Florida gun groups refuse to hold compromising politicians accountable, then Sen. Baxley’s analysis becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. The failure to hear criticism will result in more of the same — which means that we only get “table scraps” when it comes to gun rights.
If we are going to get Constitutional Carry enacted in Florida — or anywhere else in the country — we must demand that Republicans act to support our rights.
We want hearings … we want votes … we want the bill sent to the Governor. And if legislators refuse to do this, we must hold them accountable.
Anything short of that, as Sen. Baxley suggested, will only encourage Republicans in any state to continue ignoring the voice of pro-gun voters.
Again, Gun Owners of America does not compromise, and we will not carry water for any political party (or politician) when they compromise. The Second Amendment is apolitical, it belongs to everyone and the best way to secure that is to advance liberty.
This is GOA’s message both in Florida and across the country, and we urge all gun owners to be always vigilant in holding their elected official accountable.
Tim Macy is the Chairman of Gun Owners of America, a grassroots lobby representing more than two million gun owners nationwide.
The people behind the initiative swear it’s not a “transaction.” Rather, it’s intended to show would-be offenders what it’s like to help out their community.
The city of San Francisco will pay 10 lucky individuals who are “at high risk of shooting someone” $300 not to pull the trigger or be involved in shootings.
This is what city officials elected to do as a solution to heightened crime rates and increased gun violence. The mid-year crime stats for San Francisco show 119 gun violence victims so far, versus 58 at the same time last year. The crime statistics also show 26 homicides as of July 2021, compared to 22 for mid-year 2020.
Even as California’s population has been on the decline, and it will soon lose a congressional seat, the Golden State still maintains vast influence. As of 2015, California accounted for just 12.5 percent of the total population of the United States, yet many lawmakers seem to feel that its policies should lead the way for the rest of the country.
For supporters of the Second Amendment that has unfortunately included its gun control efforts.
California has some of the most restrictive firearms laws in the United States, and some communities have passed ordinances that make even legally owning a firearm difficult. The Golden State was first to adopt a ban on so-called assault weapons in 1989, which led to the 1994 assault weapon ban (AWB) nationwide. Just a few years later Los Angeles County banned the sale of firearms on county property – essentially killing the Great Western Gun Show, which had been the largest gun show in the country.
Now the state’s Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein is seeking to dictate California’s stance on guns to all Americans. She has already received support outside of California from two other Democratic lawmakers – Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) – in introducing legislation that could hold account online gun marketplaces for illegal gun sales. It could take aim at websites including Armslist.com and potentially auction sites such as GunBroker.com.
Armslist in the Crosshairs
The three lawmakers specifically called out Armslist.com, the “Craigslist for guns,” which is currently the largest free gun classifieds on the web. Feinstein and her two distinguished colleagues argue that online gun marketplaces such as Armslist can essentially “evade basic background check laws” by allowing unlicensed sellers to sell guns to anyone.
The lawmakers noted, “Armslist and its competitors have become rife with illegal and dangerous gun sales; unlicensed sellers comprise as many as three in four sellers on Armslist alone.”
Feinstein, Blumenthal and Whitehouse have made the case that in enacting Section 230, Congress did not intend to grant a sweeping liability shield to all companies, including firearms marketplaces, merely because they operate in cyberspace.
“Under the Accountability for Online Firearms Marketplaces Act, online firearms marketplaces will no longer enjoy sweeping, blanket immunity—a change which will help take guns out of the hands of dangerous persons seeking to evade background checks and other gun safety measures,” the senators suggested, adding that the Accountability for Online Firearms Marketplaces Act would clarify Section 230 to ensure that the law’s blanket liability shield does not apply to online firearms marketplaces.
The Accountability for Online Firearms Marketplaces Act has already received endorsement from Everytown for Gun Safety, Brady, Giffords, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, the Connecticut Coalition Against Domestic Violence, Newtown Action Alliance and Sandy Hook Promise.
Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer who has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers and websites. He regularly writes about military small arms, and is the author of several books on military headgear including A Gallery of Military Headdress, which is available on Amazon.com.
U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “Discovery in the above case rendered these gems of ATF groupthink … Imagine what the discovery is going be like in the trigger case????” Historic Arms LLC firearms designer Len Savage posted on an AR15.com thread talking about the Rare Breed Trigger case. “It will not be pleasant for ATF as I suspect their own internal emails will damn them.”
For those who have not been following that story, ATF issued a cease-and-desist order to Rare Breed Triggers over its FRT-15 Trigger, claiming it is a machinegun. The company says it will not comply with the order and has filed a lawsuit.
The previous case Savage was referring to was when ATF classified one of his submitted designs as a machinegun but had to make some major “modifications” to do it:
“ATF has a long history of using zip ties to make machine guns…See for yourself,” he wrote elsewhere in the thread, providing links to an ATF response letter revealing how they arrived at that conclusion, with the “help” of zip ties, duct tape, and chain.
This was a revelation of ATF “testing” procedures I first covered on my The War on Guns blog in 2008, presenting correspondence with ATF’s Firearms Technology Branch, and noting:
In addition to going through contortions to declare his property a machine gun and then refusing to return it, they’ve assigned his design submissions to an agent whose testimony Savage challenged.
Further detail was presented in my 2009 report after ATF arrested Savage’s submission. As I noted at the time:
With that criteria, given enough added parts that are not part of the submitted design, I know a lot of people who could turn a banana into a machine gun.
Because Savage chose to fight back – and to not hold back on how ridiculous he found ATF’s methods to be – and because that had been the way he had dealt with in-your-face ATF absurdities in other cases, it’s clear that retaliation and “getting” him back was the Bureau priority.
But don’t take my word for it. Take what’s been documented in ATF internal correspondence.
“FTB has received a response from Historic Arms,” John R. Spencer of the FTB informed his colleagues. “Mr. Savage has declined our offer to register his machinegun.”
“Let the fun begin,” Gary N. Schaible replied. As an aside, but for context, he’s the ATFer who had to provide testimonial cleanup in 1996 for the head of the National Firearms Act Branch after he was caught on videotape essentially admitting to institutional perjury:
“Let me say that when we testify in court, we testify that the database is 100 percent accurate. That’s what we testify to, and we will always testify to that. As you probably well know, that may not be 100 percent true.”
“I almost feel bad for that dude sometimes,” Violent Crime Analysis Branch’s Daniel L. Pinckney wrote about Savage in an email to NFA Branch Specialist Ernest A. Lintner. “Almost.”
As an aside, it’s clear from multiple emails that Pinckney bore a personal animosity to Savage, and from the tone of this and subsequent statements, it’s not unreasonable to infer an unfulfilled “You will respect my authoritah!” undercurrent going on.
“He is setting up a good case for a retaliation case though,” Pinkney had to admit. “The more he testifies as an ‘expert’ against ATF, and the more he gets hammered by FTB for anything he submits, the better his case gets for a civil suit at some point.”
“I wonder sometimes if we don’t ‘manufacture’ a firearm in the process of getting it to work,” Lintner acknowledged. “That is if someone in the public were to be caught with that rig, would we want them charged with manufacturing? I bet yes.”
“I remember seeing the pictures once before. I do think Len is an ass, and he deserves everything he has brought on himself, but if we/they have to stoop to that level to reject one of his projects, does it make us any better than him?” Pinckney responded, again showing personal hostility toward a citizen standing up for his rights against what the analyst knew, legally and morally, to be wrong. “If anything the zip ties, chain, and metal plate should be the illegal conversion device. 😊 ” [He actually ended his email with a smiley face icon.]
“I agree – if we alter course one way or the other based on who submits it, then the tail is wagging the dog – and in a case like this one manufacturer could use the agency to damage or wreck marketplace competitors,” Lintner replied.
“The emails shown are an internal commentary of what was going down,” Savage tells me. “Pickney and Lintner were equivalent to baseball commentators in that they were not playing the game or calling the shots, but they were reporting on the ball in play with color commentary.
“It shows the cold, callous math of folks who depend on the Department of Just-Us for a paycheck,” Savage notes. “They were just calling it as they saw it.”
It also shows how the “us vs. them” worldview results in a “team player” mentality and hostility toward “the other side,” even among functionaries not directly involved. It’s not hard to imagine those whose “professional judgments” are being publicly challenged, and whose careers can be affected by “losses,” are even more vested in winning at all costs (and resentful of vocal challengers).
Rare Breed Triggers’ Lawrence DeMonico has not been shy about standing up for himself in no uncertain terms, and in doing so has exposed the Bureau’s decision-making as political and worse. You can bet those he won’t just roll over for are taking that personally.
Savage is right. Discovery should produce some revealing examples of that.
About David Codrea:
David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.
Governor Roy Cooper, who is no friend to the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens, also ignores the recommendations of law-enforcement. Today, he vetoed House Bill 398, NC Sheriffs’ Association-backed legislation to repeal the pistol permit in favor of the federal NICS background check. This is the second piece of pro-Second Amendment legislation Gov. Cooper has vetoed this year, the first being a self-defense bill.
The pistol purchase permit was created before modern, computerized background checks existed. The federal NICS checks that licensed firearms dealers conduct are often completed in minutes. North Carolina’s court system finished furnishing mental health involuntary commitment records to NICS in 2019, ensuring that it can do thorough checks.
Repealing the pistol purchase permit ensures that law-abiding citizens can exercise their Second Amendment rights without this unnecessary obstacle and fee that is also a burden on law-enforcement resources.
Please stay tuned to www.nraila.org and your email inbox for further updates.
Communist Biden regime plans to put “antivaxxers” on “no gun list” so Americans can’t defend themselves from CDC internment camps
Thursday, August 26, 2021 by: Lance D Johnson
16KVIEWS
(Natural News) The Biden regime desperately wants to put the “unvaccinated” on a “no fly list” — permanently segregating tens of millions of innocent Americans from air travel. The tyranny doesn’t end there. Once Americans are placed on a “no fly list” and labeled domestic terrorists, they can be put on a “no gun list” — leading to firearm confiscation and forever depriving Americans of their right to keep and bear arms.
This is all being done intentionally, step-by-step, and in a clandestine way, because it is so much easier to round up dissenting Americans and put them in internment camps when they are unarmed and stereotyped as a subhuman class of citizens.
Democrats propose putting the “unvaccinated” on a “No-fly, No gun” list
The Department of Homeland Security has already claimed that anyone who opposes vaccines, masks, social distancing or lockdowns poses a “potential terror threat” to society. Their latest memo labels Americans as “extremists” if they do not go along with travel restrictions and bodily mandates.
The memo states, “These extremists may seek to exploit the emergence of COVID-19 variants by viewing the potential re-establishment of public health restrictions across the United States as a rationale to conduct attacks. Pandemic-related stressors have contributed to increased societal strains and tensions, driving several plots by domestic violent extremists, and they may contribute to more violence this year.”
The Democrats have already introduced HR 4980, directing “the Secretary of Homeland Security to ensure that any individual traveling on a flight that departs from or arrives to an airport inside the United States or a territory of the United States is fully vaccinated against COVID-19, and for other purposes.” The Atlantic and other controlled media outlets parroted the Orwellian proposal.
If this escalates, then tens of millions of Americans will be classified as “domestic terrorists” banned from travel, and then stripped of their firearms. First, they put you on the no-fly list, then they can automatically put you on a no-gun-buy list, as the Democrats have proposed for years. The No Fly, No Buy, Gun Control law has bipartisan support. Joe Biden, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Donald Trump have all supported a national security system that places Americans on a “no fly list” if there is reasonable suspicion to believe they pose a threat to public safety. These politicians all agree that Americans who are placed on this “no fly list” should also be put on a “no gun buy list” that would block them from purchasing firearms from a federally licensed dealer.
Targeting and disarming unvaccinated Americans makes it easier to put them in internment camps
With tens of millions of Americans disarmed and wrongfully classified as domestic terrorists, the government can then round these people up and put them in the CDC internment camps. The CDC has proposed a “shielding approach” to future public health initiatives, establishing “a group of shelters such as schools, community buildings within a camp/sector (max 50 high-risk individuals per single green zone) where high-risk individuals (the unvaccinated) are physically isolated together.”
Once their firearms are taken and they are put on a list, unvaccinated people will be easier to confront, door-to-door, as the Biden regime initially planned. It will be much easier to physically overpower and take the unvaccinated to these CDC internment camps, where they can easily be reeducated, abused, forcibly inoculated, exterminated or forced into slave labor (like communist China).
Governments have already developed armies of contact tracers to track people down, monitor their whereabouts and confine them in their homes. Now, the National Guard is currently hiring people to work as “internment resettlement specialists” and “correctional officer, internment resettlement specialists.” The job description for these includes: supervision of confinement and detention operations; external security of facilities; providing counseling/guidance to individual prisoners within a rehabilitative program; and maintaining records of prisoners/internees and their programs.
Make no mistake about it: If these communist criminals can defraud, intimidate,and coerce millions of Americans to give up their body autonomy and inject a deadly bioweapon, then they are certainly capable of targeting those who don’t comply, stripping Americans of their self defense rights, and relocating them to internment camps that are already being approved through emergency order on American soil.
Sources include: