Obama takes no action on gun control;

[TakeYouToTasker]

Guess I'll just post this here:

 

 

http://cnsnews.com/b...ny-owner-claims

 

 

 

“My name is Joe Sirochman owner of American Spirit Arms...our Web site orders have jumped 500 percent causing our Web site e-commerce processing larger deposits to Bank of America. So they decided to hold the deposits for further review.

“After countless hours on the phone with Bank of America, I finally got a manager in the right department that told me the reason that the deposits were on hold for further review -- her exact words were -- ‘We believe you should not be selling guns and parts on the Internet.’”(emphasis added)

Sirochman also wrote that he told the bank manager that “they have no right to make up their own new rules and regs” and that “[American Spirit is a] firearms manufacturer with all the proper licensing.”

He also noted that he has been doing business with Bank of America for over 10 years, but will now be looking for a new bank.

According to Unlawful News, this isn't the first time Bank of America has targeted a customer involved in the firearms industry.

McMillan Group International was reportedly told that its business was no longer welcome after the company started manufacturing firearms – even after 12 years of doing business with the bank.

Something tells me that Bank of America just lost itself a ton of business. I know I'll be closing all the accounts I hold there.

[B-Man]

Crony capitalism: Obama going for gun control with tactic used to pass Obamacare.

 

“President Obama plans to ally himself with big business once again by using crony capitalist tactics to pass gun control just as he used them to pass Obamacare. In this case, Obama reportedly plans to make sure that the new gun control law benefits big businesses that sell weapons.”

 

Which is funny, because it’s the gun-control fanatics who are always accusing the NRA of being a stooge for the gun industry. As usual, if you turn their accusations around you get a clearer picture.

 

 

.

[Keukasmallies]

Our man Joe Biden, PhD in bumbling in hand, will resolve the whole gun control thingy...heh, heh, heh.....

[IDBillzFan]

Badge? We don't need no stinkin' badge.

 

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-obama-might-use-executive-order-deal-guns_694984.html

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

Badge? We don't need no stinkin' badge.

 

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-obama-might-use-executive-order-deal-guns_694984.html

 

Ugh....

 

I don't even own a gun right now but I'm fearful for what this douchebag is going to try to ram through err...bypass and around.

 

Now is as good a time as any for me to go start buying the guns I've had my eye on for a while. I wasn't in any rush before but I am now.

 

I'm sure its too late to make a difference (since it will take me about 9 months to get cleared) but its time to apply for NY pistol permit. Just hope I will even have a change to LEGALLY purchase one next year.... sigh.

Edited January 10, 2013 by drinkTHEkoolaid

[3rdnlng]

CNN and the gun grabbing media are now calling for Alex Jones to be shot the day after his heated appearance with Piers Morgan.

 

In a segment on Piers Morgan’s CNN program, sports columnist for the Daily Beast, Buzz Bissinger, shockingly states:

 

“I don’t care what the justification is that you’re allowed in this country to own a semi-automatic weapon – much less a handgun. But what do you need a semi-automatic weapon for? The only reason I think you’d need it is, Piers, challenge Alex Jones to a boxing match, show up with a semi-automatic that you got legally and pop him.”

 

Abby Huntsman (Huffington Post) : “I’d love to see that… [laughter] in uniform.”

 

Piers Morgan: “I’ll borrow my brothers uniform.”

 

 

The other guests laugh and say they’d like to see it. Without a doubt, this amounts to a veiled threat.

 

Earlier in the episode, another guest expressed hope that Alex Jones’ children would not be killed, which Jones’ says terrorized his children and family as they watched on from home.

 

CNN Guest Says Kill Alex Jones! FPS Russian Executed

 

This call to violence from those demanding gun control is nothing new.

 

Shortly after the Sandy Hook shooting massacre, advocates for firearms restrictions flooded Twitter and other mediums, demanding the murder of the NRA president and other NRA supporters.

 

 

http://www.infowars.com/veiled-threat-piers-morgan-guest-says-shoot-alex-jones/

 

 

 

 

This article was posted: Wednesday, January 9, 2013 at 10:45 am

 

 

[3rdnlng]

http://www.infowars.com/obama-signs-bill-giving-him-armed-protection-for-life/

 

 

 

"The new bill, which will cost American taxpayers millions of dollars, is a re-instatement of a 1965 law which will see presidents protected for life as well as their children up to age 16.

The irony of Obama seeking to surround himself with armed men for the rest of his life while simultaneously working to disarm the American people via a gun control agenda that is likely to be enforced via executive decree represents the height of hypocrisy."

[B-Man]

The Real Gun-Control Consensus.

 

The next time you hear a fellow American bemoaning the lack of Washington bipartisanship, tell him to cheer up. There is one issue on which Congress still resoundingly agrees: gun rights. Bear that in mind, too, the next time you read a story about the "new" political debate over gun control.

 

 

An almost cosmic disconnect has been building in the political sphere since the tragedy of Sandy Hook. On the one side is the gun-control community, which sniffed a rare political opening and is determined to use it to the max. Vice President <a class="topicLink" href="http://topics.wsj.com/person/b/joe-biden/6352">Joe Biden's gun-violence task force has given that community a vehicle for its ambitions, even as it has encouraged it to ramp up its demands.

 

By this week, the elites were calling for a gun-control agenda unmatched in modern times. The closing of the gun-show "loophole"? Restrictions on large-capacity clips? An "assault weapons" ban? They want all that, plus a national gun database, and a background check for every gun sale, and similar checks for ammunition sales, and regulation of Internet transactions, and Michael Bloomberg crowned emperor. (A position for which Mr. Bloomberg no doubt believes himself suited.) The media have reported all this as rational, reasonable and doable.

 

On the other side is the reality that any of these proposals must, in the normal course of things, pass Congress. A few quick facts about that body. 1) More than half of its members have an "A" rating from the National Rifle Association. 2) The few members today calling for gun control are the same few who have always called for gun control. 3) The House is run by Republicans.

Despite the press's exuberant efforts to cast congressional gun supporters as having changed their minds, there has been no actual movement. Senate Democrat Joe Manchin caused a media sensation when he declared, immediately after Sandy Hook, that nobody needed "30 rounds in a clip." Less reported was that it took the Democrat about the time necessary for your average West Virginian to drive to a ballot box to clarify that statement and to add that he's "so proud of the NRA." Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, even with the press's best efforts to parse his remarks, has committed himself to nothing more than a "thoughtful debate."

 

Montana's Jon Tester and Max Baucus, Alaska's Mark Begich, Arkansas's Mark Pryor, South Dakota's Tim Johnson, Louisiana's Mary Landrieu—all are quiet on that red-state Democratic front. North Dakota's brand new senator, Heidi Heitkamp, declared proposals mulled by the Biden task force as "way in the extreme" and "not gonna pass." Unlike Mr. Obama, all of these members still face elections.

 

{snip}

 

Whatever the White House intends, it is already in a tough position. The task-force leak, combined with Mr. Biden's tantalizing suggestion of a gun-related executive order, has seriously raised expectations. Anything less than the dismantling of the Second Amendment will earn Mr. Obama a lambasting from his left.

 

At the same time, the more sweeping any gun proposals, the more dead on arrival they will be in Congress. Mr. Obama might know that and be planning to take credit for going big while blaming failure on Congress. If so, he'll have to beat on his own party.

 

He might instead consider that gun rights are an excellent—and rare—example of an issue on which Republicans and Democrats have for some time been on common ground, and in which they have honestly represented their constituents. Last heard, that was exactly the sort of bipartisanship the president claimed to want more of.

 

.

[3rdnlng]

http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2013/01/11/obama-opposed-gun-ban-exception-defend-home/

 

 

 

As a state senator in Illinois, President Obama opposed legislation providing an exception to handgun restrictions if the weapon was used in the defense of one’s home.

Obama’s vote would have maintained the status quo, which made it a violation of municipal gun ban law to use a firearm to save your own life in your own home. But the bill was passed anyway without his support.

The vote is a sign of how committed Obama may be to strict gun control measures.

The Illinois vote is hardly ancient history, having occurred in 2004 as Obama was running for election to the U.S. Senate. In opposing the measure, Obama lined up well to the left of the mainstream, as the Illinois Senate included 32 Democrats to 26 Republicans but approved the bill by an overwhelming margin and subsequently overrode a veto by then-Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

Obama did not participate in the veto override, which occurred in November 2004, likely after Obama had resigned his state Senate seat in order to prepare for his new role in the U.S. Senate.

The Illinois legislation was passed after a man who shot a burglar in his home was fined $750 by his town for disobeying its handgun ban. The absurdity and injustice of the situation doesn’t seem to have made much of an impression on Obama.

[B-Man]

A palpable lack of enthusiasm :

 

 

Dem Senator Mark Begich: I’m “not interested” in a new assault-weapons ban.

 

“Other red-state Democrats up for reelection: Mary Landrieu, Max Baucus, Tim Johnson, Kay Hagan, and Mark Pryor. Landrieu and Baucus voted no when the last AWB came up for renewal in 2004, and although Pryor voted yes, Arkansas wasn’t quite as red then as it is now. There’s no chance Reid will get to 60 in the Senate for a new ban; there’s a very slim chance that he won’t even get to 50. If you’re Pryor and you’re facing a tough campaign on unfavorable terrain, what’s your incentive for voting for a new AWB that hasn’t a prayer of passing?” Especially when it’s not going to get through the House.

[keepthefaith]

I'm waiting for the uber liberal Physchiatric industry to declare that anyone that wants to own a gun is mentally ill and for the President to approve $billions in research grants to the pharm companies to develop a drug that suppresses the desire to own or shoot a gun.

[Fingon]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/15/nyregion/new-york-legislators-hope-for-speedy-vote-on-gun-laws.html?partner=MYWAY&ei=5065&_r=1&

 

 

Perhaps it is time to refresh the tree of liberty with the blood of those who deny us our 2nd amendment rights? If they come door to door taking guns, I would hope that people would defend their rights with their lives.

[B-Man]

FromDemocrat Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid;

 

DON’T EXPECT AN ASSAULT WEAPON BAN.

“The Second Amendment is something that was adhered to by Hubert Humphrey, John Kennedy,” Reid said. “So I don’t think anyone wants to diminish the Second Amendment, but I think everyone should just take a deep breath and realize where we are and where we need to go.

“We have too much violence in our society, and it’s not just from guns. It’s from a lot of stuff. and i think we should take a look at TV, movies, video games and weapons. And I hope that everyone will just be careful and cautious.”

 

Oh, I think plenty of people want to diminish the Second Amendment. But that’s a good reminder that support in the Democratic Party used to be broader.

 

 

.

[B-Man]

On Monday night, the New York Senate passed what is being touted as “the most restrictive gun law in the nation” with a vote of 43-18. One of the 18 who voted against it was Republican state senator Greg Ball, who was quoted by the Associated Press as saying, “We haven’t saved any lives tonight, except one: the political life of a governor who wants to be president. We have taken an entire category of firearms that are currently legal that are in the homes of law-abiding, tax paying citizens. … We are now turning those law-abiding citizens into criminals.”

 

 

“At what point do you say, ‘No more innocent loss of life?’” asked the governor in question, Democrat Andrew Cuomo. The success of this bill in banning the innocent loss of life should be easy to evaluate. Actually, he probably meant to say “loss of innocent life,” since “innocent loss of life” would be the opposite of murder. This is what you get when you don’t insist on being treated like grown-ups by your political leaders, America.

 

http://www.humanevents.com/2013/01/15/gun-control-cliff-update-for-january-15-2013/

 

 

.

[Fingon]

On Monday night, the New York Senate passed what is being touted as “the most restrictive gun law in the nation” with a vote of 43-18. One of the 18 who voted against it was Republican state senator Greg Ball, who was quoted by the Associated Press as saying, “We haven’t saved any lives tonight, except one: the political life of a governor who wants to be president. We have taken an entire category of firearms that are currently legal that are in the homes of law-abiding, tax paying citizens. … We are now turning those law-abiding citizens into criminals.”

 

 

“At what point do you say, ‘No more innocent loss of life?’” asked the governor in question, Democrat Andrew Cuomo. The success of this bill in banning the innocent loss of life should be easy to evaluate. Actually, he probably meant to say “loss of innocent life,” since “innocent loss of life” would be the opposite of murder. This is what you get when you don’t insist on being treated like grown-ups by your political leaders, America.

 

http://www.humaneven...anuary-15-2013/

 

 

.

 

Cuomo will never be president after this bill. There is absolutely, positively no way that he could win a litany of swing states.

[IDBillzFan]

They were really clever banning guns to people with mental illness the way they did. Maybe the NYT can print a map showing everyone in NY with a mental illness.

[Fezmid]

Can anyone explain this?

 

The expanded ban on assault weapons would broaden the definition of such weapons, banning semiautomatic pistols and rifles with detachable magazines and one military-style feature, as well as semiautomatic shotguns with one military-style feature.

 

Does it ban semiautomatic pistols outright? Or or pistols with detachable magazines and one military-style feature? Very poorly written.

 

And what's a "military-style feature," anyway? Laser sight? Flashlight? Stock?

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

This is a disgusting piece of shady half assed poorly thought out and written legislation to push an agenda and further intrude on private law abiding citizens rights. I'm literally disgusted at this.

 

This is so stupid. This law won't do anything to stop mass shootings.

 

!@#$ NY and any politician who voted for this.

 

To put in perspective how stupid this law is, the extremely popular Ruger 10 .22 (has a 10 round rotary magazine) will now be affected by this legislation. Wtf are you kidding me.

Edited January 15, 2013 by drinkTHEkoolaid

[D521646]

This will be challenge by the end of the week in court. No way this stands a constitutional challenge, IMO.

 

Tim-

[Gary M]

Can anyone explain this?

 

 

 

Does it ban semiautomatic pistols outright? Or or pistols with detachable magazines and one military-style feature? Very poorly written.

 

And what's a "military-style feature," anyway? Laser sight? Flashlight? Stock?

 

Read it here:

http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/api/1.0/lrs-print/bill/S2230-2013