Tag Archives: guns

More Bureaucrats Have Guns Than U.S. Marines

Hope-and-Change

BY: Elizabeth Harrington

There are now more non-military government employees who carry guns than there are U.S. Marines, according to a new report.

Open the Books, a taxpayer watchdog group, released a study Wednesday that finds domestic government agencies continue to grow their stockpiles of military-style weapons, as Democrats sat on the House floor calling for more restrictions on what guns American citizens can buy.

The “Militarization of America” report found civilian agencies spent $1.48 billion on guns, ammunition, and military-style equipment between 2006 and 2014. Examples include IRS agents with AR-15s, and EPA bureaucrats wearing camouflage.

“Regulatory enforcement within administrative agencies now carries the might of military-style equipment and weapons,” Open the Books said. “For example, the Food and Drug Administration includes 183 armed ‘special agents,’ a 50 percent increase over the ten years from 1998-2008. At Health and Human Services (HHS), ‘Special Office of Inspector General Agents’ are now trained with sophisticated weaponry by the same contractors who train our military special forces troops.”

Open the Books found there are now over 200,000 non-military federal officers with arrest and firearm authority, surpassing the 182,100 personnel who are actively serving in the U.S. Marines Corps.

The IRS spent nearly $11 million on guns, ammunition, and military-style equipment for its 2,316 special agents. The tax collecting agency has billed taxpayers for pump-action and semi-automatic shotguns, semi-automatic Smith & Wesson M&P15s, and Heckler & Koch H&K 416 rifles, which can be loaded with 30-round magazines.

The EPA spent $3.1 million on guns, ammo, and equipment, including drones, night vision, “camouflage and other deceptive equipment,” and body armor.

When asked about the spending, and EPA spokesman said the report “cherry picks information and falsely misrepresents the work of two administrations whose job is to protect public health.”

“Many purchases were mischaracterized or blown out of proportion in the report,” said spokesman Nick Conger. “EPA’s criminal enforcement program has not purchased unmanned aircraft, and the assertions that military-grade weapons are part of its work are false.”

“EPA’s criminal enforcement program investigates and prosecutes the most egregious violators of our nation’s environmental laws, and EPA criminal enforcement agents are law enforcement professionals who have undergone the same rigorous training as other federal agents,” Conger continued.

Other administration agencies that have purchased guns and ammo include the Small Business Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Department of Education, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

The report also highlighted that the Department of Health and Human Services has “special agents” with “sophisticated military-style weapons.” Open the Books also found $42 million in gun and ammunition purchases that were incorrectly coded.

“Some purchases were actually for ping-pong balls, gym equipment, bread, copiers, cotton balls, or cable television including a line item from the Coast Guard entered as ‘Cable Dude,’” the report said.

Open the Books appealed to both liberals like Bernie Sanders—who has called for demilitarizing local police departments—and conservatives in its report.

“Conservatives argue that it is hypocritical for political leaders to undermine the Second Amendment while simultaneously equipping non-military agencies with hollow-point bullets and military style equipment,” Open the Books said. “One could argue the federal government itself has become a gun show that never adjourns with dozens of agencies continually shopping for new firearms.”

_

Update June 23, 10:15 a.m.: Following publication of this article, Adam Andrzejewski, the CEO of Open the Books who wrote the report, pushed back against the EPA’s statement, and provided contract data to back up his claims.

“How can the EPA spokesperson deny hard facts from their own checkbook?” he said. “Alongside our oversight report, OpenTheBooks.com also released a PDF of all raw data. This line-by-line transactional record from the EPA’s own checkbook on page 113 clearly shows that in 2013 and 2014 the EPA purchased tens of thousands of dollars of ‘Unmanned Aircraft’ from Bergen RC Helicopters Inc which on a net basis amounted to approximately $34,000.”

“All of the assertions in our oversight report are the quantification of actual spending records produced and reported to us by the federal agencies themselves,” Andrzejewski said.

SOURCE

Father’s Stunning Claim: Son’s School Is Teaching That Americans Don’t Have the Right to Bear Arms

Conn. Father’s Stunning Claim: Son’s School Is Teaching That Americans Don’t Have the Right to Bear Arms
By Billy Hallowell

A Connecticut father is accusing his son’s school district of teaching children that Americans do not have a constitutional right to bear arms. Steven Boibeaux of Bristol, Connecticut, is claiming that his child, an eighth-grader at Northeast Middle School, was given a social studies worksheet that is anti-Second Amendment in nature — or, at the least, opposed to the conservative view of the provision.

In an interview with Fox News’ Todd Starnes, Boibeaux said that he’s “appalled” and that the school seems to be “trying to indoctrinate our kids.” The worksheet in question, published by Instructional Fair, is entitled, “The Second Amendment Today,” and it allegedly proclaims that American citizens do not have the right to guns.

“The courts have consistently determined that the Second Amendment does not ensure each individual the right to bear arms,” it purportedly reads. “The courts have never found a law regulating the private ownership of weapons unconstitutional.”

When it comes to interpreting the Second Amendment, the worksheet provides additional parameters through which the constitutional provision should be viewed. Starnes explains:

The worksheet, published by Instructional Fair, goes on to say that the Second Amendment is not incorporated against the states.

“This means that the rights of this amendment are not extended to the individual citizens of the states,” the worksheet reads. “So a person has no right to complain about a Second Amendment violation by state laws.”

According to the document, the Second Amendment “only provides the right of a state to keep an armed National Guard.”

Boibeaux also alleges that the teacher told the class that the Constitution is a “living document” and the worksheet seems to drive this point home, noting that “the interpretation changes to meet the needs of the times.”

“I’m more than a little upset about this. It’s not up to the teacher to determine what the Constitution means,” the father told Starnes. “I just don’t appreciate this as a parent. I expect teachers to teach my kids and tell the truth – not what they think their point of view is.”

This report comes as debate over classroom studies across America — and CSCOPE and Common Core-aligned curriculum, in particular — rages.

Read the entire report here.

SOURCE

And it begins. What will YOU do when they come?

Feinstein rumored to be pushing semi-auto ban if Obama reelected

By: David Codrea

“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?… The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If…if…We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation…. We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”
? Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn

California Senator Dianne Feinstein‘s Washington, D.C. “…staff held meetings on Friday with FTB/ATF [Firearms Technology Branch/ Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives] legal staff to discuss a new ‘Assault Weapons Ban,” Jim Shepherd of The Shooting Wire reported yesterday, characterizing the meeting as a “rumor” based on “pretty good intelligence.”

Feinstein’s rumored bill “would ban pistol grips and “high-capacity” magazines, eliminate any grandfathering and ban sales of ‘weapons in possession’” Shepherd writes.

Gun Rights Examiner has been holding on to identical information attempting to get verification, but with its publication in a prominent gun owner community venue, it becomes legitimate to share the discussion. This correspondent received an email from a source purported to be forwarded from Lawrence G. Keane, Senior Vice President, Assistant Secretary and General Counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, which stated:

I just heard that Sen. Feinstein’s attorney is meeting right now with folks from FTB and ATF legal (Eric Epstein [legal], Todd Martin [Legal] and Earl Griffith [FTB] and others) to discuss a new SAW ban, that she would want to start pushing through as soon as (if) Obama gets reelected.

– – No pistol grip allowed
– – No HC Mags
– – No grandfathering
– – No sale permissible if in possession

That is all I know right now

This is certainly consistent with President Obama’s call in the debates to re-up the federal semi-auto ban (as well as go after handguns), and is further circumstantially corroborated by a new NSSF release relating how Feinstein continues to defend ATF actions in Fast and Furious gunwalking, all the while still “claiming, erroneously, that 70 percent of guns seized in Mexico were traced to the United States.”

Since Keane was the purported source of the email, he was the one to ask about its authenticity.

“Just got this forwarded to me–is it genuine?” this correspondent emailed earlier today.

No reply has been sent at this writing, so the query was extended to another insider source to probe its credibility.

“The ATF personnel noted are indeed the players,” the source replied, “but what is noticeably absent is anyone from the executive level, AD or DAD [Assistant Director/Deputy Assistant Director]–the policy implementer/makers. That part is strange and shows that while ATF may have had to go to the meeting, the Bureau and DoJ are not necessarily supportive.

“In addition, the cost of enforcement and regulation would be tremendous,” the source continued. “I don’t see the financial aspect being supported if such a law were passed unless it is revenue neutral and ownership was taxed like NYC does with guns.”

There’s then the matter of how likely, barring an unforeseen event, such a bill would be to make it to the White House for signature. While the current political thought is not very, political thought can change with the circumstances of the day, and who really knows what events could put such legislation on the front burner?

But even if Feinstein’s latest assault on liberty fizzles, one unexpected prediction in the source’s reply may prove to be a bombshell if [his/her] instincts are right, and remember, this is someone who knows the Bureau and the culture it operates in, so the opinion can’t just be dismissed as wild speculation:

“My true feeling is that ATF is likely toast after the election, no matter who wins.”

Zombie Bullets In High Demand Following Flesh-Eating Attacks

Zombie Bullets In High Demand Following Flesh-Eating Attacks

Zahra Huber

– Worried about a zombie attack? Buy zombie bullets.

Talk about zombies and a possible zombie apocalypse has increased due to recent gory accounts of drug-induced, flesh-eating attacks in the news.

Stores across the U.S., including in Metro Detroit, are getting in on the undead action by selling Zombie Bullets, made by Hornady Manufacturing.

In promoting the product on their website, Hornady suggests, “Be PREPARED – supply yourself for the Zombie Apocalypse with Zombie Max ammunition from Hornady! Loaded with PROVEN Z-Max bullets… MAKE DEAD PERMANENT!”

So, will this ammunition actually defend against the things that go bump in the night?

WWJ Newsradio 950?s Zahra Huber spoke with company spokesman, Everett Deger, who said, while the bullets are real, they’re only meant to be used on targets and not on people (or zombies).
Zombie Bullets In High Demand Following Flesh Eating Attacks

(credit: Hornady)

Deger said company president Steve Hornady came up with the idea for Zombie Max bullets because of his love for zombie movies and shows.

“After it gained some acceptance among some of us here in the company got on board with the idea we decided just to have some fun with a marketing plan that would allow us to create some ammunition designed for that … fictional world,” Deger said.

He said the Zombie Max and Z-Max bullets are Horady’s most successful products.

“This is probably one of the only (product) launches that we’ve seen when people who are not in the hunting and shooting industry will go out and they will purchase this,” Deger said.

“I mean, I’ve heard of guys who buy it just because they think the packaging is cool and they set it on their cube and they don’t even own a gun,” he said. ”It has that sort of cross-market appeal, which I think is rare to find these days, where you can actually sell something that will transcend not just one market but go into several.”

In Michigan, the bullets are available at Cabela’s.

SOURCE

ATF Preparing to Outlaw Shotguns

ATF Preparing to Outlaw Shotguns

The Constitution states that Congress and the federal government shall not infringe upon the right to bear arms. However, we know in the past the federal government has trampled this liberty. Remember the assault weapons ban that banned AR-15s and other rifles?

It appears the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms is preparing to pass its own law leaving Congress out of the equation and clearly ignoring the Constitution. This time its shotguns that are under attack.

The Greeley Gazette
notes of the ATF’s coming ban:

The ATF completed a study regarding the importability of certain shotguns. The basis for a possible ban is based on a loosely defined “Sporting Purpose” test. Using the vague definition almost all pump-action and semi-automatic shotguns could be banned as they are all capable of accepting a magazine, box or tube capable of holding more than 5 rounds. Other characteristics determined to be “military” by the ATF can also be used as a basis for a ban.

Ironically, many shotguns with “military” features are currently being used in shooting competitions held by the USPSA, IDPA and IPSC. The rules could also result in obscure regulations where an individual would be unsure if he is violating them or not.
Dudley Brown, Executive Director of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, said if the ATF succeeds with the banning of tactical shotguns it “will be the most dangerous interpretation of the 1968 Gun Control Act ever envisioned and will outlaw thousands of perfectly legitimate home defense shotguns.”

The ATF is currently allowing public comments on the study until the end of the month. Those wishing to express concerns about the study can send an email to [email protected]

SOURCE

Could Your Shotgun Soon be Outlawed? Maybe, If the ATF Has Its Way

by Jonathon M. Seidl Jonathon M. Seidl

What’s the definition of a “shotgun?” According to Dictionary.com it’s “a smoothbore gun for firing small shot to kill birds and small quadrupeds, though often used with buckshot to kill larger animals.” For the gun enthusiasts, that’s only partly true, as there is also the option of using slugs. But what if there’s another addition that will soon be added to the definition? How about, illegal.

Could Your Shotgun Soon be Outlawed? Maybe, If the ATF Has Its Way

In a series of fascinating, and eerie, posts over at the blog Beregond’s Bar (and linked on Redstate.com), author “Tom” pens a four-part series on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms and their new campaign to change the definition of the term “shotgun.” A change, based on a recent study,* that could soon make some of them illegal. But as Tom points out, the implications for all guns are chilling.

Could Your Shotgun Soon be Outlawed? Maybe, If the ATF Has Its Way

Below are excerpts from the series. Click on the appropriate link to read more.

Part 1, which focuses on changing the term “sporting use” in order to ban certain shotguns:

The Obama administration is seeking once again to do via regulation what they would never be able to do via legislation. This time shotguns are in the crosshairs, specifically certain popular imported weapons.

[…]

Sporting use is one of the three main thrusts of gun control efforts in America. The other two are racism and those who openly advocate complete bans except for military and police. (The complete ban advocates often hide under cover of sporting use, but that and the racist history of gun control are topics for another day.
Click here to find out more!

Sporting use was how the original distinction was made about what weapons would be subject to a special tax in the National Firearms Act (NFA) in 1934, and again in Title II of the Gun Control Act of 1968. The congressional power to tax was used selectively to make ownership of weapons the government didn’t like burdensome and expensive. This was gun control via the back door, as even the ATF admits. As would become the pattern, politicians found that actually dealing with crime and criminals was difficult and expensive. Blaming guns and passing a law to look like they were doing something about it was much simpler.

Part 2, which notes that the administration and the ATF’s definition of “sporting use” includes a list of things that cannot apply to such use. Things that are common in hunting and self-defense:

In this case the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) is seeking to master the definition of the term “sporting use” to “traditional” sports, things similar to what might have been found in 1934 when the Treasury Department first began regulating firearms. The ATF “Study on the Importability of Certain Shotguns” (PDF) limits “sporting purpose.”

However, consistent with past court decisions and Congressional intent, the working group recognized hunting and other more generally recognized or formalized competitive events similar to the traditional shooting sports of trap, skeet, and clays.

In order to decide what shotguns fit the “sporting purpose” definition the study comes up with a list of characteristics that aren’t sporting. Nobody has yet taken to bayoneting deer or skeet as far as I know, so I’m not going to raise a big stink about bayonet lugs being on the list of features that aren’t particularly suited for sporting purposes. (Please stop shouting that the Constitution of the United States says nothing about “sporting purpose.” We’ll look at why the “sporting purpose” rule violates the constitution in Part 3.)

One major problem (aside from the constitution) is that many of the features the ATF study group settled on make a shotgun particularly useful for self defense, especially home defense. Here are the characteristics that the study has decided are unsuitable for sporting use:

(1) Folding, telescoping, or collapsible stocks;

(2) bayonet lugs;

(3) flash suppressors;

(4) magazines over 5 rounds, or a drum magazine;

(5) grenade-launcher mounts;

(6) integrated rail systems (other than on top of the receiver or barrel);

(7) light enhancing devices;

(8) excessive weight (greater than 10 pounds for 12 gauge or smaller);

(9) excessive bulk (greater than 3 inches in width and/or greater than 4 inches in depth);

(10) forward pistol grips or other protruding parts designed or used for gripping the shotgun with the shooter’s extended hand.

Some of these features, such as folding stocks and larger capacity magazines clearly are useful in sports if you include practical shooting sports.

Part 3, which looks at how “sporting use” stacks up to the Constitution and how it came into use:

But there is a far more basic objection that must be raised to this new attempt at regulatory gun ban- Nowhere in the constitution of the United States is there anything about a “sporting purpose.” The second amendment says:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Like all rights of Americans, the rights exist because you are a person. The Constitution is a contract we have with the central government to protect those rights against all enemies, foreign and domestic. One of the enumerated rights is the right to keep and bear arms. Nary a “sporting purpose” in sight in the entire document. So where did it come from?

And finally, Part 4, which shows that the ATF’s “sporting use” definition puts all guns, not just certain shotguns, at risk of being outlawed:

One factor that jumps out from the current ATF study is that it differs from the Clinton gun ban in a critical way. The Clinton ban looked at guns and said if it could accept a high capacity magazine and had any 2 other characteristics then it was banned. Thus you could have a magazine and a pistol grip, or a magazine and night sights, and still be legal. Few people missed having a bayonet lug, and grenade launchers and grenades had essentially been banned from civilian hands since the NFA became law in 1934. The current study says that any ONE item on a list, including a magazine that holds more than five rounds or a place to attach a flashlight so you can see the burglar in your home, and the gun is banned.

So the problem doesn’t end with shotguns. The current study refers to the conclusions drawn in prior ATF studies of rifles in 1989 and 1998, and handguns in 1968. It also draws on the NFA and the GCA (Gun Control Act of 1968) to justify the “sporting purpose” test, and the narrow interpretation that the ATF places on the test. The justifications are all linked together, like a knitted sweater. Pull on the piece of yarn called “imported shotguns” and you find when it’s unraveled enough that you’re tugging on the “domestic shotguns” yarn. Only now the “imported rifle” bit of yarn is hanging loose, just begging for someone to tug on it. Unravel that a bit and you reach “domestic rifles.” A similar bit of unraveling is likely to happen with the piece of yarn labelled “handgun.”

Each piece is well worth the time it takes to read it. Meanwhile, the ATF is taking comments on its study. Tom lets you know how here.

But here’s the catch: in order to let the ATF know what you think, you have to give it your mailing address.

Interesting.

*According to Tom, the study “spends a lot of time showing that hunting, trap and skeet, and target shooting are sports, but plinking and practical shooting sports are not REALLY sports, and therefore guns that are particularly suitable for, or readily adaptable to those sports shouldn’t be allowed into the country.

UPDATE:

Jack Minor of the Greeley Gazette covered the ATF’s study, too. He puts in terms of “military”-style shotguns vs. others. But, he notes, according to the specifications used, “military” could apply to so many shotguns:

The ATF completed a study regarding the importability of certain shotguns. The basis for a possible ban is based on a loosely defined “Sporting Purpose” test. Using the vague definition almost all pump-action and semi-automatic shotguns could be banned as they are all capable of accepting a magazine, box or tube capable of holding more than 5 rounds. Other characteristics determined to be “military” by the ATF can also be used as a basis for a ban.

Ironically, many shotguns with “military” features are currently being used in shooting competitions held by the USPSA, IDPA and IPSC. The rules could also result in obscure regulations where an individual would be unsure if he is violating them or not.

Dudley Brown, Executive Director of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, said if the ATF succeeds with the banning of tactical shotguns it “will be the most dangerous interpretation of the 1968 Gun Control Act ever envisioned and will outlaw thousands of perfectly legitimate home defense shotguns.”

Breaking: confrontation between Alaska gun store and ATF

Breaking: confrontation between Alaska gun store and ATF

Anthony Martin

Breaking information sent to this reporter moments ago via email from a contact in Anchorage, Alaska indicates that a local gun store has refused to comply with an order from the ATF to turn over to the agency the official ‘Bound Book’ that firearms retailers are required to keep on site on customers and their purchases, photo I.D.s, and background checks.

The store’s refusal has provoked a confrontation with the ATF, which claims that the Bound Book is ‘their property.’

An initial report was published here yesterday concerning this new illegal activity on the part of the ATF.

According to a memo from the Anchorage Second Amendment Task Force, the Great Northern Guns store in Anchorage was asked to give their Bound Book to the ATF so it could be copied in its totality. The store refused, citing their legal rights and the fact that to do so would be a violation of the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986.
Advertisement

The Task Force began to make inquiries about the ATF’s request and was told by a local agency official that the Bound Book is the property of the ATF and can be picked up anytime they choose.

But the law appears to say something entirely different.

While it is true that the ATF can gain access to the book, there are specific stipulations concerning the circumstances that would warrant such a request. The law prevents any government agency, including ATF, from taking possession of the entire record of purchases. The agency can, however, gain access to certain specific records under the following three stipulations–there is an ongoing criminal investigation of a customer, there is an annual on site inspection of the store’s records, or there is a need to trace a specific firearm in the midst of an ongoing investigation.

From the Anchorage Second Amendment Task Force Newsletter:

Provisions Of The Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986:
Inspection and Acquisition of Licensee Records

The Gun Control Act required licensees to maintain records of firearm acquisitions, dispositions, and inventories. Furthermore, it permitted warrantless inspection of these “at all reasonable times,” and broadly authorized the Secretary to require submission of reports on the records’ content.

FOPA establishes significant restrictions on the two latter powers. In general, administrative inspections of licensee records now require a magistrate’s warrant, based on a showing of reasonable cause to believe evidence of a violation may be found.

Three exceptions, however, nearly swallow this rule. Neither warrant nor reasonable cause is needed for (1) a reasonable inquiry in the course of a criminal investigation of a person other than the licensee; (2) an annual inspection for ensuring compliance with record keeping requirements; or (3) tracing a firearm in the course of a bona fide criminal investigation. While these sizably reduce application of the warrant and cause requirement, it remains effective for its primary purpose in any event: to prevent inspections undertaken without immediate law enforcement need, or abused for the purpose of harassment.

FOPA also institutes some measures designed to minimize the harassment potential of an otherwise authorized inspection or search. Only records material to a violation of law may be seized and even as to these, copies must be furnished the licensee within a reasonable time. The unusual appearance of the last protection vanishes upon reflection; because a licensee is legally bound to buy and sell only upon recordation, removal of his records is more than an inconvenience.
The power of the Secretary to acquire licensee records is likewise limited by FOPA.
Requirements to (1) submit records upon going out of business, (2) submit a report upon sale of more than one handgun to the same person during the same week and (3) submit reports of sales when ordered to do so by the Secretary, are enacted into law.

Conversely, the Secretary is forbidden to require submission of reports “except as expressly required by this section.” Paralleling this prohibition is the proviso that no future regulation may require that any records required by the Act “be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any state or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established.”

The problem with the ATF’s request is that it has not specified any of these stipulations justifying its demand for the entire Bound Book.

This led the Second Amendment Task Force to question the agency’s motives, even to the point of suspecting that the action is some sort of de facto registration scheme being conducted by the Obama Administration. An agent who was contacted by the Task Force would not provide any information on the request other than to say the directive came ‘from on high.’

The Task Force interpreted that to mean the Seattle Field Division. The Task Force has also initiated inquiries into firearms dealers in other states to ascertain if the ATF directive is broad based or confined to Alaska.

More information will be provided on this breaking story as it becomes available.

Notice! My latest entry in what is turning into a regular, ongoing series of musings after midnight at my blog, The Liberty Sphere, is now posted. I present more in depth personal reflections delineating the acute danger America faces at this hour. It is a dire warning to the serious reader who loves freedom and the principles handed down to us by the Framers. Don’t miss it.

Continue reading on Examiner.com Breaking: confrontation between Alaska gun store and ATF – National Conservative | Examiner.com SOURCE

USA Citizens Buys Enough Guns in 3 Months to Outfit the Entire Chinese and Indian Army


M240B USA Citizens Buys Enough Guns in 3 Months to Outfit the Entire Chinese and Indian Army width=

USA Buys Enough Guns in 3 Months to

Outfit the Entire Chinese and Indian Army

federal nic instacheck data  USA Citizens Buys Enough Guns in 3 Months to Outfit the Entire Chinese and Indian Army

Washinton, DC – -(AmmoLand.com)- It seems that readers of our recent post about honest Americans buying enough guns to outfit the current active army’s of China and India have been having trouble finding the hard data and facts to substantiate this article.

Here is the link to the NICS: The National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

As reported earlier each of the last few months has been a record for firearm purchases or sales in the USA with a record 1,529,635 background checks being performed in March of 2009.

Firearm Sales Continue to Climb in March 2009

Chinese and Indian Standing Army Numbers:

China
India

.

About:
NSSF, founded in 1961, is the trade association for the firearms, ammunition and recreational shooting sports industry. It promotes the safe ownership and responsible use of products its members make and sell. For more information, visit www.nssf.org.

About:

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS, is all about saving lives and protecting people from harm—by not letting guns and explosives fall into the wrong hands. It also ensures the timely transfer of firearms to eligible gun buyers.

Mandated by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 and launched by the FBI on November 30, 1998, NICS is used by Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) to instantly determine whether a prospective buyer is eligible to buy firearms or explosives. Before ringing up the sale, cashiers call in a check to the FBI or to other designated agencies to ensure that each customer does not have a criminal record or isn’t otherwise ineligible to make a purchase. More than 100 million such checks have been made in the last decade, leading to more than 700,000 denials.

NICS is located at the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services Division in Clarksburg, West Virginia. It provides full service to FFLs in 30 states, five U.S. territories, and the District of Columbia. Upon completion of the required Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Form 4473, FFLs contact the NICS Section via a toll-free telephone number or electronically on the Internet through the NICS E-Check System to request a background check with the descriptive information provided on the ATF Form 4473. NICS is customarily available 17 hours a day, seven days a week, including holidays (except for Christmas). See below for more facts and forms.

Source

YOU are the Terrorist your President warned you about

Report: Federal Agents Demand Customer Lists From Food Storage Facility

Mac Slavo


“Just because I’m paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get me.”

-Unknown

You may recall that the FBI, Department of Homeland Security and local law enforcement have regularly issued bulletins regarding domestic terrorist related activities that include suspicious purchasing habits to look for and how to recognize the 8 signs of terrorism. Federal training programs held for police departments across the country detail specific habits and characteristics of potential domestic terrorists including everything from homeschooling, leaning towards libertarian political philosophies, and holding strong religious views, to reading survivalist literature. It’s no secret that the government has been attempting to keep tabs on Americans who are acting outside of the status quo, warning those in the mainstream that any deviation in “normal” behavior should be construed as suspect and potentially dangerous – even your best pal could be a terrorist if he begins acting counter to his usual behavior.

The latest government effort to identify would-be terrorists and persons-of-interest comes to us from Tennessee, where federal agents have taken the need to acquire actionable intelligence to a whole new level. They are, by all accounts, no longer just sitting back and waiting for business owners like surplus store owners or the general public to provide them with suspicious activity reports, but rather, are taking matters into their own hands.

Oath Keepers has learned that federal agents recently visited a Later Day Saints (Mormon) Church food storage cannery in Tennessee, demanding customer lists, wanting to know the identity of Americans who are purchasing food storage from the Mormons.

This incident was confirmed, in person, by Oath Keepers Tennessee Chapter President, Rand Cardwell. Here is Rand’s report:

“A fellow veteran contacted me concerning a new and disturbing development. He had been utilizing a Mormon cannery near his home to purchase bulk food supplies. The man that manages the facility related to him that federal agents had visited the facility and demanded a list of individuals that had been purchasing bulk food. The manager informed the agents that the facility kept no such records and that all transactions were conducted on a cash-and-carry basis. The agents pressed for any record of personal checks, credit card transactions, etc., but the manager could provide no such record. The agents appeared to become very agitated and after several minutes of questioning finally left with no information. I contacted the manager and personally confirmed this information.”

“So on the one hand, government agencies both state and federal are urging you to be prepared and even checking up on you to see how prepared you are, and on the other hand, we now have federal agencies that are attempting to gather information on individuals that are following FEMA suggestions. What is the reasoning behind gathering this information? Are American citizens now being ‘listed’ by DHS if they are simply following FEMA guidance and purchasing bulk food and emergency supplies for their families? It appears as so.”

So why do federal agents want to know who is storing away long-term food storage? We suspect it is for the following reasons:

1. DHS/FEMA wants to know which Americans have food storage so the federal government can at some future point confiscate that food. Just as with lists of gun owners, compiling such lists is the first step toward future confiscation.

2. DHS wants to identify those Americans who are “switched on” and squared away enough to actually store food for coming hard times (such as during an economic collapse). That population of awake, aware, and prepared Americans poses a “threat” to whatever DHS and its masters have in store for the American people, and as Joseph Stalin so ably demonstrated, one of the easiest ways to subjugate defiant people is to confiscate their food and starve them into submission.

Clearly, in light of the above, if you purchase food storage, along with any other preparedness items, you should be concerned about those purchases being tracked and your name winding up on some government list. But don’t let that stop you from storing food and other essential supplies, and don’t let this disturbing incident keep you from using your local Mormon cannery to do so. You need to get prepared. But do it while following the advice of James Wesley, Rawles over at www.survivalblog.com, who repeatedly urges his readers to “think OPSEC!” – if at all possible, buy with cash and pick it up in person, just like the customers of this particular cannery did, which left the “agitated” agents empty handed and frustrated.

Source:
Oath Keepers (via a report by Oathkeepers Founder Stewart Rhodes)

If this report is accurate – and we have no reason to believe it’s not – then not only is government intrusion into the private and lawful activities of American citizens reaching unprecedented levels, but every individual who has ever taken the time to acquire bulk foods and supplies or even discuss preparedness related information on an internet message board is now a person-of-interest.

For many it may be impossible to “get off the grid,” and with so many nodes in the modern day police state there is a paper or digital trail for almost everything. As recommended by Oathkeepers’ Stewart Rhodes, while you may not be able to keep all of your personal activities private (highly ironic considering the principles on which this country was founded), you may be able to minimize your foot print:
****************************************************************************
ACTION ITEM
Assume everything you do is monitored and archived. Everything. Which means, chances are, you’ve already left a Sasquatch footprint in a Fusion center somewhere.

Use cash whenever possible. This is not always feasible, but is good practice, especially when buying hundreds of pounds of food at one time. You can also try temporary credit cards (available at your local grocery store or gas station) but even these provide only a thin level of security.

Don’t readily identify yourself as a preparedness minded individual

Be aware that when you say or do something, someone else may see something and report it

If you have like minded family and/or friends then make an effort to diversify your assets. Don’t keep all of your food and other supplies in any one location. Confiscation, as we saw in the aftermath of New Orleans, is the reality when martial law has been declared. If you are engaging in any of the “suspicious” activities and behaviors highlighted in this article, then you should assume that you will be targeted by agents of whatever authority is charged with protecting residents in a disaster or emergency area.

Consider preemptive contingency planning for the possibility of confiscation now. Obviously, someone is trying to get their hands on lists of names, and you must assume you’re on that list (regardless of how careful you think you’ve been). If they come, they will come at exactly the moment that you have nothing to spare. Designate one or two people to acquire goods, while others store those goods at your retreat or bug out locations. While not foolproof, this strategy may provide some level of protection.

Always have backups for your backups. Get a shovel, dig a hole. Store at least 60 – 90 days of emergency food and other supplies (you know which ones) in a location that is known only by you and your closest and must trusted family/friend(s). Also remember, as a prepper, you can never have enough holes dug (take that literally or figuratively)

You can call it paranoia. But it’s becoming increasingly clear that you’re justified in your thinking – and you’re not alone.

SOURCE

22 “Fast and Furious” facts: What did the Obama White House know and when did they know it?

22 “Fast and Furious” facts: What did the Obama White House know and when did they know it?

“Fast and Furious” is not about cars and women but about guns, drugs and murder!

“What did the President know, and when did he know it?”: Howard Baker, Vice Chairman of the Senate Watergate Committee

What do President Obama and Eric Holder know, when did they know it and will the “Fast and Furious” operation to sell weapons to Mexican drug cartels be the scandal that brings the Obama White House down?

Are there still any truly investigative mainstream media journalists out there along the lines of Woodward and Bernstein of The Washington Post, who actually felt it was their job and duty to break the Watergate story?

There actually may be a few still out there (H/T Sharyl Attkisson of CBS News)!

22 “Fast and Furious” facts that could be extremely problematic for the Obama White House and for the President’s 2012 reelection bid!

#1 During Operation Fast and Furious, ATF agents purposely allowed thousands of guns to be sold to individuals that they believed would get them into the hands of Mexican drug cartels.

#2 ATF agents were specifically ordered not to intercept the guns before they crossed the border. The following is a brief excerpt from a CBS News report that detailed the fierce objections that many ATF agents expressed when they were ordered to stand down….

On the phone, one Project Gunrunner source (who didn’t want to be identified) told us just how many guns flooded the black market under ATF’s watchful eye. “The numbers are over 2,500 on that case by the way. That’s how many guns were sold – including some 50-calibers they let walk.”

50-caliber weapons are fearsome. For months, ATF agents followed 50-caliber Barrett rifles and other guns believed headed for the Mexican border, but were ordered to let them go. One distraught agent was often overheard on ATF radios begging and pleading to be allowed to intercept transports. The answer: “Negative. Stand down.”

CBS News has been told at least 11 ATF agents and senior managers voiced fierce opposition to the strategy. “It got ugly…” said one. There was “screaming and yelling” says another. A third warned: “this is crazy, somebody is gonna to get killed.”

#3 Operation Fast and Furious remained a secret until the murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry last December. Two guns that were sold during Operation Fast and Furious were found at the scene of the murder.

#4 ATF Special Agent John Dodson was one of the first to blow the whistle on Operation Fast and Furious. Dodson explained to the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee on June 15, 2011 that many ATF agents were becoming extremely frustrated when they were ordered to cut off surveillance on the weapons that were being sold because they knew “that just days after these purchases, the guns that we saw these individuals buy would begin turning up at crime scenes in the United States and Mexico.”

#5 It appears that Operation Fast and Furious began some time around September 2009. At that time, the ATF began pressuring gun shops near the border with Mexico to participate in a new covert operation that was being set up. The gun storeowners were told to help the ATF get guns into the hands of people that would take them back to the Mexican drug cartels.

The following description of the mechanics of Operation Fast and Furious comes from a recent Los Angeles Times article….

In the fall of 2009, ATF agents installed a secret phone line and hidden cameras in a ceiling panel and wall at Andre Howard’s Lone Wolf gun store. They gave him one basic instruction: Sell guns to every illegal purchaser who walks through the door.

For 15 months, Howard did as he was told. To customers with phony IDs or wads of cash he normally would have turned away, he sold pistols, rifles and semiautomatics. He was assured by the ATF that they would follow the guns, and that the surveillance would lead the agents to the violent Mexican drug cartels on the Southwest border.

When Howard heard nothing about any arrests, he questioned the agents. Keep selling, they told him. So hundreds of thousands of dollars more in weapons, including .50-caliber sniper rifles, walked out of the front door of his store in a Glendale, Ariz., strip mall.

#6 In some gun stores, cameras were set up so that top ATF officials could actually watch these transactions take place. Back in June, U.S. Representative Darrell Issa stated the following….

“Acting Director Melson was able to sit at his desk in Washington and himself watch a live feed of straw buyers entering the gun stores and purchasing dozens of AK-47 variants.”

#7 It has also come out that in some cases ATF agents were actually the ones buying the guns and getting them into the hands of Mexican drug cartels. The following is how author Michael A. Walsh recently explained this in an article in the New York Post….

This just might be the smoking gun we’ve been waiting for to break the festering “Fast and Furious” gun-running scandal wide open: the Department of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives apparently ordered one of its own agents to purchase firearms with taxpayer money, and sell them directly to a Mexican drug cartel.

Let that sink in: After months of pretending that “Fast and Furious” was a botched surveillance operation of illegal gun-running spearheaded by the ATF and the US attorney’s office in Phoenix, it turns out that the government itself was selling guns to the bad guys.

#8 According to the Los Angeles Times, guns that were purchased during Operation Fast and Furious have “turned up at dozens of additional Mexican crime scenes, with an unconfirmed toll of at least 150 people killed or wounded.”

#9 Mexican authorities were never informed that thousands upon thousands of guns were being allowed into Mexico.

#10 Authorities in Mexico have asked the U.S. government over and over to explain what in the world happened during Operation Fast and Furious but they have not been given an adequate answer. In fact, according to the Los Angeles Times, the Obama administration has not even responded to questions from the attorney general of Mexico….

Marisela Morales, Mexico’s attorney general and a longtime favorite of American law enforcement agents in Mexico, told The Times that she first learned about Fast and Furious from news reports. And to this day, she said, U.S. officials have not briefed her on the operation gone awry, nor have they apologized.

#11 U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has been withholding key documents about Fast and Furious from Congress and has been consistently stonewalling U.S. Representative Darrell Issa, U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley and other members of Congress that have attempted to look into this matter.

#12 The acting director of the ATF, Kenneth Melson, had been cooperating with the investigation. At the end of August he was suddenly transferred to the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Policy.

#13 Several other key officials that were heavily involved in Operation Fast and Furious actually got promoted.

#14 On May 3rd, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder testified under oath in front of the House Judiciary Committee on Operation Fast and Furious. During that testimony, Holder made the following statement….

“I probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks.”

#15 Since that time, a large amount of evidence has come out that Holder was not telling the truth. For example, a recent Fox News article discussed some of the very revealing memos about Fast and Furious that have been discovered recently….

However, newly discovered memos suggest otherwise. For instance, one memo dated July 2010 shows Michael Walther, director of the National Drug Intelligence Center, told Holder that straw buyers in the Fast and Furious operation “are responsible for the purchase of 1,500 firearms that were then supplied to the Mexican drug trafficking cartels.”

Other documents also indicate that Holder began receiving weekly briefings on the program from the National Drug Intelligence Center “beginning, at the latest, on July 5, 2010,”

#16 Holder now claims that he simply misunderstood the question. He now says that he had heard of Operation Fast and Furious previously but that he was not aware of the specific details.

#17 Emails exchanged between two Department of Justice officials last October make it abundantly clear that high-level officials at the DOJ were very aware of what was going on…

Two Justice Department officials mulled it over in an email exchange Oct. 18, 2010. “It’s a tricky case given the number of guns that have walked but is a significant set of prosecutions,” says Jason Weinstein, Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the Criminal Division. Deputy Chief of the National Gang Unit James Trusty replies, “I’m not sure how much grief we get for ‘guns walking.’ It may be more like; “Finally they’re going after people who sent guns down there.”

#18 House Republicans are now asking for a special prosecutor to be appointed to investigate whether or not U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder lied to Congress during his recent testimony in front of the House Judiciary Committee on Operation Fast and Furious.

#19 U.S. Representative Darrell Issa believes that those involved in the Fast and Furious gun trafficking operation may have violated international arms trafficking agreements and could potentially face very serious criminal charges.

#20 U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley is absolutely convinced that a major cover-up is going on….

“But I can tell you this. They’re doing everything they can, in a fast and furious way, to cover up all the evidence or stonewalling us. But here’s the issue, if he didn’t perjure himself and didn’t know about it, the best way that they can help us, Congressman Issa and me, is to just issue all the documents that we ask for and those documents will prove one way or the other right or wrong.”

#21 Did Barack Obama ever know about Operation Fast and Furious? He says that he did not authorize the program. On March 22, 2011 Obama made the following statement….

“I did not authorize [Fast and Furious]. Eric Holder, the attorney general, did not authorize it. There may be a situation here in which a serious mistake was made. If that’s the case, then we’ll find — find out and we’ll hold somebody accountable.”

#22 CBS News investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson claimed on the Laura Ingraham show the other day that officials in the Obama administration were literally screaming and yelling at her for aggressively investigating the Fast and Furious scandal….

Ingraham: So they were literally screaming at you? ?Attkisson: Yes. Well the DOJ woman was just yelling at me. The guy from the White House on Friday night literally screamed at me and cussed at me. [Laura: Who was the person? Who was the person at Justice screaming?] Eric Schultz. Oh, the person screaming was [DOJ spokeswoman] Tracy Schmaler, she was yelling not screaming. And the person who screamed at me was Eric Schultz at the White House.”

SOURCE

Survey Says………

Somali children win guns and grenades for Qur’an recital

Radio station backed by al-Shaabab gives out AK-47s to winners of annual competition

Xan Rice in Nairobi

An Islamist-backed radio station in Somalia has awarded assault rifles and hand grenades to the winners of a children’s Qur’an recital competition.

Andalus radio, which is run by al-Shabaab militia, said on Monday that the first prize was an AK-47 and £450. The runner-up received an AK-47 and £320, while the child who came third received two F1 hand grenades and £250. The three children also received religious books.

Pictures of the senior Islamist leader and spokesman Sheikh Mukhtar Robow presenting the awards in Elasha Biyaha, about 11 miles from Mogadishu, were posted on an rebel-affiliated website.

Al-Shabaab controls much of southern Somalia and is trying to overthrow the transitional government in Mogadishu. Designated a terrorist organisation by several western governments, the group has links to al-Qaida and practises an extreme version of Islam.

In certain areas al-Shabaab leaders have banned musical ringtones, films, football broadcasts, dancing at weddings and even shop signs written in English or Somali, rather than Arabic. Punishments include double amputations and stonings. The rebels have also systematically recruited children under 15 to fight for them, according to Amnesty International.

The Qur’an recital contest has been running for three years and takes place after Ramadan. The two previous award ceremonies have occurred in Kismayo, an al-Shabaab stronghold on the far southern coast. In 2009, prizes included hand grenades, anti-tank mines and an AK-47. The winners of that contest were between 17 and 20 years old.

The age of the winners of this year’s competition, who represented the towns of Elasha Biyaha, Kismayo and Mogadishu, are not known.

Radio Andalus takes it name from Andalusia in southern Spain, which was part of the Islamic empire at various times between the eighth and 15th centuries.
SOURCE

Florida Stands on the side of the Second Amendment

Florida Forces Towns to Pull Local Laws Limiting Guns
By LIZETTE ALVAREZ

MIAMI — The signs — “No Guns Allowed” — are being stripped from many Florida government buildings, libraries and airports. And local ordinances that bar people from shooting weapons in their yards, firing up into the air (think New Year’s Eve) or taking guns into parks are coming off the books.

The state has spoken, again, on the matter of guns, and this time it does not want to be ignored: since 1987, local governments in Florida have been banned from creating and enforcing their own gun ordinances. Few cities and counties paid attention, though, believing that places like Miami might need to be more restrictive than others, like rural Apalachicola, for example.

But this year the Legislature passed a new law that imposes fines on counties and municipalities that do not do away with and stop enforcing their own firearms and ammunition ordinances by Oct. 1. Mayors and council and commission members will risk a $5,000 fine and removal from office if they “knowingly and willfully violate” the law. Towns that enforce their ordinances risk a $100,000 fine.

To comply with the law, cities and counties are poring over their gun ordinances, repealing laws and removing gun-related signs. In Palm Beach County, that means removing ordinances that bar people from taking guns into county government buildings and local parks and from firing guns in some of its most urban areas. In Groveland, that means they can now fire their guns into the air to celebrate. And in Lake County, firearms will soon be allowed in libraries.

“Now you can have a shooting gallery in your backyard,
” said Shelley Vana, a Palm Beach County commissioner. “We are really urban areas here. I come from a rural area in Pennsylvania. I understand that guns are appropriate in a lot of places with no problems. But in an urban area, it’s different.”

State lawmakers who supported the bill, which was backed by the National Rifle Association, said local governments were overreacting, particularly since the original law that pre-empted local gun ordinances was passed in 1987.

“The notion that a city ordinance stops violence is patently absurd,
” said State Representative Matt Gaetz, a Fort Walton Beach Republican who sponsored the bill. “People lawfully carrying weapons with permits are rarely part of the problem.”

The law seeks to protect licensed gun owners who travel from county to county and may not be familiar with the patchwork of rules that dictate where they can carry and shoot a gun.

Florida gun laws are broader than local ordinances. They restrict guns, for example, at legislative and city council meetings but not inside the buildings themselves. They permit target shooting under “safe” conditions and in “safe” places, and they make it illegal to display a firearm in a rude or threatening manner, unless it is in self-defense. Floridians also cannot knowingly fire a gun in a public place, in an occupied building or on a paved street. But those who support stronger laws said words like “knowingly” and “safe” often make enforcement difficult.

Local gun ordinances first galvanized gun rights advocates in 2000 when South Miami passed an ordinance that required trigger locks for guns while stored. The National Rifle Association took the town to court, and the town lost. But counties and cities across Florida continued to vote on or enforce their own gun ordinances.

“The bill provides a remedy, if somebody chooses to be irrationally stubborn,”
Mr. Gaetz said.

Some cities and counties, though, say they will lobby for a change so they can have more flexibility. Officials say that none of their ordinances violate the Second Amendment; they just give them added power to tamp down crime.

“It’s a disregard for public safety,”
said Shirley Gibson, the mayor of Miami Gardens, where signs prohibiting guns in parks were taken down. “It’s not a good message to send.”

Kraig Conn, the legislative counsel for the Florida League of Cities, said fining individual mayors and council members for their legislative actions sets a “horrible precedent.” Lawmakers hold immunity that protects them from liability in civil lawsuits for duties they perform. “It pierces legislative immunity,” he said. “This is part of our common law system.”

It also runs counter to the Republican principle that local control is best.

In a state of 18 million people, with rural and urban areas adjacent to one another, “the State Legislature doesn’t know where it makes sense to restrict guns,” Mr. Conn said.

SOURCE