Great news!

GOA members' activism is having a tremendous impact on Capitol Hill.

After the Senate passed an amendment last week to repeal the Washington, D.C. gun ban, GOA alerted activists that the anti-gun House leadership intended to strip the amendment from the underlying bill.

The House Rules Committee had scheduled a hearing this week to craft a "rule" to bring the bill to the floor without the pro-gun amendment. After an outpouring of opposition from gun owners, the entire bill was pulled from consideration.

The pro-gun amendment, sponsored by Sen. John Ensign (R-NV), was attached to a bill that would give the District of Columbia a full voting member in the House of Representatives.

That bill, S. 160, was fraught with Constitutional problems, not the least of which is that Article 1, Section 2, of the Constitution requires that representatives to the House be elected from “each State.” D.C., of course, is not a State.

If D.C. is granted a voting member of Congress, it not only guarantees the anti-gunners will gain a permanent House seat, but is also a stepping stone to gaining two anti-gun Senators as well.

Here’s the bottom line: gun owners have succeeded in slowing down an anti-gun, unconstitutional bill, while at the same time proving that there is strong support to repeal the D.C. gun ban.

Anti-gunners have not given up, however, and the latest move may simply be a tactical retreat by the Democrat leadership to buy time to twist more arms to pick up the votes needed to pass the D.C. voting rights bill without the gun ban repeal.

Gun Owners of America will continue to push for a complete repeal of the D.C. gun ban.

Great news!

Gun owners' activism is having a tremendous impact on Capitol Hill.

After the Senate passed an amendment last week to repeal the Washington, D.C. gun ban, Gun Owners of America alerted activists that the anti-gun House leadership intended to strip the amendment from the underlying bill.

The House Rules Committee had scheduled a hearing this week to craft a "rule" to bring the bill to the floor without the pro-gun amendment.

After an outpouring of opposition from gun owners, the entire bill was pulled from consideration.

The pro-gun amendment, sponsored by Sen. John Ensign (R-NV), was attached to a bill that would give the District of Columbia a full voting member in the House of Representatives.

Read more...

The U.S. Senate voted on Thursday, February 26, to repeal the strict gun laws of the District of Columbia today, passing an amendment offered by pro-gun Senator John Ensign (R-NV).

For over thirty years, residents of D.C. have been subject to a near total gun ban.  Even after last year’s landmark Supreme Court ruling striking down the District’s gun ban, D.C. Council members passed a law that, in many ways, was worse than then one the Court threw out.

For example, an important element of the D.C. law that was repealed today was a “microstamping” requirement.  By 2011, the D.C. law mandates that all semi-automatic firearms sold in the District be capable of "microstamping" a cartridge with a unique serial number. 

Such technology, even if it were possible to implement, would make guns so expensive that no one would buy them.  If only a few jurisdictions passed such a law, it could start a chain reaction forcing gun makers to manufacture ALL guns to meet the new ‘microstamping” standards.

The Ensign amendment -- if signed into law -- will repeal the “microstamping” requirement and other gun restrictions and strips the City Council of its ability to deny Second Amendment rights to its citizens.

The underlying bill, however, remains a concern for gun owners.

The bill, S. 160, would expand the House of Representatives by two seats, one for D.C., the other temporarily for Utah. 

Article 1, Section 2, of the U.S. Constitution requires that Representatives be chosen from the states.  D.C., of course, is not a state.  At least not yet.  The ultimate goal of most advocates of the bill is complete statehood for the District of Columbia, which would bring another two anti-gun Senators to Congress.

As the bill moves to the U.S. House, leaders there indicate they will try to strip the gun ban repeal from the bill. 

Gun Owners of America will oppose any effort to strike the Ensign amendment by the House, or in a conference committee between House and Senate.

-- Legislation may reflect Obama’s thinking

by Mike Hammond

Those of you who regularly peruse the GOA website know that there are dozens of anti-gun abominations which are introduced as legislation in the Senate and House each Congress.  These include, particularly, national gun licensing and broad gun bans.  

GOA provides a summary of these bills for the benefit of our members and friends.  Most of them are cynically introduced so that the Brady Campaign can raise money by threatening anti-gun measures it could never pass.  

But the first anti-gun bill of the 111th Congress -– Chicago Congressman Bobby Rush’s H.R. 45 –- has caught the attention of many in the Second Amendment community as something we need to be worried about.

This is because of the extremity of the bill:  

* H.R. 45 would require a federal license for all handguns and semiautomatics, including those you currently possess; and

* It would require handgun and semi-auto owners to be thumbprinted at the police station and to sign a certificate that, effectively, the firearm will not be kept in a place where it would be available for the defense of the gun owner’s family.  

Pretty scary, huh?  But, while this despotic nuttiness makes you wonder why a congressman from the Murder Capital of the Midwest would think that it would help to make the residents of New Hampshire, Alaska, and Wyoming comply with his blood-soaked city’s anti-gun laws, there have been other bills which are just as unconstitutional.

Rather, what makes H.R. 45 troubling is its sponsor and its timing.  

Its sponsor is Congressman Bobby Rush –- a scion of the same super-corrupt Chicago political machine that produced disgraced Governor Rod Blagojevich and President Barack Obama.  

And as for its timing, it was introduced during the confirmation of Attorney General nominee Eric Holder -- the man who tried exploit the Columbine tragedy in order to pass gun licensing as Deputy Attorney General in the Clinton administration.

And make no mistake about it:  Licensing is only a way-station to discouraging, arresting, or humiliating gun owners and outlawing guns.  Under H.R. 45, for example, the applicant must also make available ALL of his psychiatric records, pass an exam, and pay a fee.  

So... are you a veteran who has ever consulted a psychologist or psychiatrist?  Guess what?  The FBI would soon be examining every confidential statement you have ever made during those consultations.  

Private sales of handguns and semi-autos would be outlawed, and reports to the attorney general of all transactions would be required, even when -- as the bill allows -- the AG determines that a state licensing system is sufficiently draconian to substitute for the federal license.  

But, you may be thinking, “I’m just a hunter with a deer rifle... surely, none of this is relevant to me”?  

Then you should know that, with virtually no exceptions, ALL firearms transactions (including person-to-person private sales of long guns, hunting rifles, shotguns, etc.) would be subject to the same paperwork hassles that are required when buying from a dealer.

In addition, the bill would make it unlawful in virtually all cases to keep any loaded firearm for self-defense.  A variety of “crimes by omission” (such as failure to report certain things to the government) would be created.  

Criminal penalties of up to ten years and virtually unlimited regulatory and inspection authority would be established.  

Combined with the Ammunition Accountability effort to outlaw ammunition in numerous states, this two-pronged attack would soon make gun ownership a thing of the past.  

Barack Obama was fond of saying during the campaign that he supported the Second Amendment.  And we read of gun buyers who are flocking -– while it is still legal -– to purchase firearms, but who concede that they believed Obama’s assurances and voted for him.

But we may soon see a more horrific, nastier side of Barack Obama... and a capacity to go after his political enemies.  And we have to assume that he will view gun owners as just about the most important of those enemies.