If there were ever a time when the American people needed to know the facts about how their elected representatives were voting on issues that mean a lot to them -- like our Second Amendment rights -- this is the year.

 The level of misinformation, half-truths and outright lies being spread by politicians is greater now than ever before.  As a gun owner, you know you can rely on us to give you an honest assessment as to whether your Congressman and Senators are making things better or worse for us.

 But, not too long ago, the Congress managed to ram through a bill disguised as “campaign finance reform” that was nothing more than a “gag rule” against groups like Gun Owners of America.  These legislators wanted to prevent groups like ours from being able to tell you how they acted, especially at election time, when voters really need information.

 Called the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act, this bill was nothing more than a direct assault on free speech.  And, yes, the McCain co-authoring the bill was Senator John McCain, a politician who has good cause to keep his voting record hidden.  I know this might be upsetting to read since Senator McCain served his country during the Vietnam War and was a P.O.W. for more than five years after his plane was shot down over Hanoi.

 While we should honor him for his service to the nation, Americans must also look at his voting record to see if he is representing their best interests.  The McCain-Feingold Act was not the first time McCain teamed up with the radical Left to support their agenda.

 At the beginning of the year, he voted with the left in support of the rabidly anti-gun Eric Holder for Attorney General.  During the Clinton years, he voted for several appointees who were opponents of gun ownership.  He authored legislation to effectively shut down gun shows as well as voted to restrict ammunition, and to require self-defense guns to be locked up.

 But this isn’t about Senator McCain.  It is about GOA’s right to be able to tell you the things you need to know about candidates so that constituents will know when office holders are blowing smoke.  Then they can take action and put the heat on those incumbents who say they are pro-gun but are really anti-gun types.  Now, even 30 days before a primary election when they are much more responsive to their constituents views we can use their precious name in ads to light a fire underneath them.

 We intend to use this right to ensure that every gun owner in the United States, especially members of Gun Owners of America, will be able to put the heat on office holders when it can make the most difference-right before an election.

Also included in the Supreme Court’s decision is our right to provide Pro-Second Amendment information using a variety of media, including radio and TV ads.  And, yes, GOA is currently raising funds to help distribute such information to multiple media outlets around the country -- including Arizona, which is Senator McCain’s home state.

We are targeting areas of the country where we believe our Second Amendment advocacy message is most needed.  And we intend to try to conduct our Second Amendment advocacy campaigns in as many states as we can.  But we know that our budget may limit the number of races we can focus on.

 We believe that our Federal and State Campaign to ensure constituents put the heat on when it counts the most will be a powerful new tool that constituents can use to make sure that their public servants serve them.

 If you believe, as I do, that an informed electorate is the best hope for keeping America safe and strong, I urge you to help us right now.

 The Supreme Court recognized our right to use the names of politicians.  Now, it’s up to us to use this opportunity to help our nation get back on its feet by making sure candidates are not forgetting the Second Amendment when they make promises to get elected.

 Your contribution, today, in any amount -- Please Click Here -- will go a long way to helping GOA reach its goal of demanding candidates support the Second Amendment.

 Thank you for your continued support for our work.

 Sincerely,

 Larry Pratt

Executive Director

P.S.  Whatever amount you can afford to donate, whether it is $5 or $500, will be gratefully appreciated and put to work immediately on our Federal and State Campaign to ensure constituents put the heat on when it counts the most-right before an election  Thank you!

If you were thinking that President Obama was too much involved with his health care bill to do any serious damage elsewhere, you would be mistaken.

 As a Senator, Barack Obama voted wrong on gun rights issues every chance he had.  And he is now under tremendous pressure by forces from the anti-gun Left to do everything he can to eliminate your right to keep and bear arms.

 But how can he possibly take on another extremely controversial issue like gun control since he’s already been beaten up badly in the battle over ObamaCare?   The answer:  He’ll do it the same way the radical left has always managed to sneak anti-gun bills through the Congress – using dirty tricks and secret back-room deals.

 Sadly, there are plenty of Representatives and Senators, from both parties, who would vote to limit your gun rights and mine, but who are terrified of being tossed out of office by millions of pro-gun voters.

 But now, it looks like President Obama has figured out a way to protect them as they vote away America’s gun rights – permanently!

 At the end of last year, while everybody was focused on the economy, jobs and heath care, President Obama ordered his UN Ambassador to vote in favor of continued talks to regulate firearms around the world.

 This vote reversed a previous vote cast by pro-gun UN Ambassador John Bolton who dramatically stood up for America’s Second Amendment rights in opposing any push towards a Global Gun Control Treaty.  Mr. Bolton understood that a UN Treaty had the power to undermine the Constitutional rights of American gun owners.

 By ordering his Ambassador to vote in favor of this treaty, President Obama not only reversed his own campaign promise to protect Second Amendment rights, he also put America on a path that would require us to follow the edicts of the United Nations instead of our own U.S. Constitution!

 This was no mistake on the part of the Obama Administration.  It is a major policy shift.

 Secretary of State Hillary Clinton publicly stated that, “Conventional arms transfers are a crucial national security concern for the United States, and we have always supported effective action to control the international transfer of arms. The United States is prepared to work hard for a strong international standard in this area.”

 The truth is that if the United States becomes a signatory to the final version of this arms control treaty, our Congress may be required to enact anti-gun legislation to put America into full compliance with its terms.

 It’s a deadly trap for America’s gun rights and a clever loophole that Congressmen can hide behind, claiming that they have no choice but are being forced to pass gun control laws or face sanctions from the UN!

 How might passage of a Global Gun Control Treaty affect ordinary, law-abiding gun owners like you and me?   Well, the treaty requires all signatories to maintain the “highest possible standards” to keep weapons away not just from terrorists and organized crime, but also from all “criminal activity.”

 How could the United States possibly hope to keep all firearms out of the hands of common criminals?  That’s an impossible task, obviously, but President Obama will still argue there’s only one way to keep guns out of the wrong hands … and that’s to keep firearms out of everyone’s hands.  That’s right!  In order to comply with this UN edict, the United States would have to disarm its civilian population, reserving firearms only for military and police forces!

 I don’t mean to imply that an army of blue-helmeted UN soldiers would immediately descend on your community, armed with a list of registered firearms owners to confiscate your weapons – at least not right away.  No, instead, they would ask the Congress to pass a number of gun control measures to try to “solve the problem.”

 This would be a dream come true for the gun grabbers.  The U.S. Congress would introduce an array of “lock up your guns” bills; semi-auto bans; ammo bans; magazine bans; and every other restrictive measure they can think of.

 And they would vote to approve these gun-grabbing bills because they could claim America is under the mandate of a UN treaty and the United States would face economic sanctions if it failed to comply!

 As bad as this would be for the United States, it would actually be even worse for people in oppressed countries.

 This treaty is a dream come true for tyrants and rogue nations for it would help them disarm their civilian populations, giving them a monopoly of force so they could crush any opposition.  That’s why countries like Iran support civilian arms control!

 And if you want to know what UN-sponsored gun control will look like in our country, just study those countries that have been ratcheting up the restrictions on their citizens.  In Australia, police are now authorized to enter the homes of licensed gun owners to ensure that the firearms are properly put away.  One of their police superintendents was quoted as saying: “Officers will be examining all gun safes to ensure they comply with the legislative requirements, particularly in relation to the standard and security of safes.”

 This is alarming!  Police can just enter gun owners’ homes and examine their guns to make sure “that weapons are stored in such a way as to limit the possibility of loss or theft, so they don't come into the possession of a person who isn't authorized to hold them.”

 And what if the guns aren’t locked up properly?  Well, then, Australian gun owners can face up to two years in jail!

 Never mind the fact that this new, UN-based gun control has not benefitted the community.  Australia is now suffering from a deadly, rapidly escalating wave of violent crime since the implementation of the Port Arthur gun ban with assaults alone at a rate of 840 per 100,000, nearly twice that of America’s crime rate.

We simply cannot allow our government to sign the Global Gun Control Treaty and make our own Constitution and Bill of Rights subservient to the whims of a UN largely controlled by thugs and despots.

 We have to let our Senators know that we are aware of the attempt to use this UN treaty as a means of denying Americans their Constitutional right to keep and bear arms – and we will not stand for it.

Let me make this perfectly clear:  if this arms control treaty passes, your right to keep and bear arms, as guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, will be eliminated – replaced by the global governance of the United Nations.  Freedom, as you know it, will be extinguished forever.

Ordering our Ambassador to the United Nations to support this treaty is, in my opinion, a violation of President Obama’s Oath of Office when he swore to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

 And let me also warn you that getting the Senate to oppose this treaty will not be easy.  That’s because many Senators really want it to pass because they hate debating the gun issue.  Nothing would give them more pleasure than to shift that burden onto somebody else – like the UN.

 They feel that if they can quietly move the battle over gun rights to the United Nations, they will never have to deal with those annoying gun owners and their sacred gun rights again.

 Well, I’m sorry to disappoint them but this treaty will not be dealt with quietly! With your help, we are going to be shouting this one from the rooftops; exposing both their cowardice and their contempt for the Constitution and our Bill of Rights!

 That is why I would like you to contact your Senators reminding them that, like the President, they are bound by Oath or Affirmation to support and defend the Constitution.  And allowing the United Nations to trample the Second Amendment is a flagrant violation of that oath.

 We need to end this grave threat, not just to our Second Amendment rights, but to our nation’s sovereignty, as well.  Our country has the right to govern itself without any outside interference.

 Sovereignty, like individual freedom, is usually something that, once lost, is never fully recovered.  Allowing the UN to put its authority above our own Constitution would certainly be the beginning of the end of America as we know it.

 So, for the sake of our gun rights and the fate of our nation, I urge you to contact your Senators today.

 Then, I hope you will consider donating to GOA the most generous contribution you can afford.  This is a battle that we simply cannot afford to lose.

We will use your contribution to bring the battle to the Capitol, marching into every Senator’s office and demanding that he declare, YES or NO, whether he or she will support and defend our Second Amendment rights or delegate them to the United Nations.

 And we will let them know that opposition to our gun rights will put them at the top of the list of those Senators destined for defeat at their next election, because America does not need Senators who cannot summon the integrity to honor their oath of office.

 We will not stop until we have solid commitments from a clear majority of Senators or until the treaty is defeated.

 Right now, I need you to commit to helping us with the most generous contribution you can afford to give at this time.

 And while I hope that amount is $100, $500 or more, every dollar counts -- whether it’s $50, $35, $20, $10 or even $5.  Please Click To Contribute.

 Thank you in advance for your loyalty and continued support for our work.

 Yours truly,

 Larry Pratt

Executive Director

 P.S.  Our national sovereignty -- as well as our gun rights -- is under attack by the United Nations … and the Obama administration is all for it!  Your help is vitally needed to counter this vicious assault on liberty.

“Our veterans took an oath to uphold the Constitution and they deserve to enjoy the rights they fought so hard to protect.” Senator Richard Burr (R-NC)

Anti-gun legislation is usually passed in the middle of the night, or just before a holiday break or at the close of a Congressional session.  In most instances, it is when the lawmakers are in a rush to get out of town and when few members are actually present for the vote.

 More often than not, anti-gun bills are disguised and written in such a way as to mask the true intent of the bill.  Such was the case when, in December of 2007, the House and Senate passed one of the worst anti-gun bills in recent history, the so-called NICS Improvement Act.  The bill passed by Unanimous Consent in both chambers, which means there was no recorded vote.

 But rather than “improving” the NICS background check system, the bill which was signed into law by President George Bush only made things worse … a lot worse.

 NICS stands for National Instant Criminal Background Check System.  Any American who wishes to purchase a firearm from a gun dealer must first submit to a background check to determine if he or she is a criminal.

 But the NICS system actually has a much broader agenda. The background checks are also designed to prevent anyone who is "adjudicated as a mental defective” from purchasing a firearm.  Originally, the mental defective prohibition was intended to target criminal defendants who escaped punishment because they were found not guilty by reason of insanity.

 In recent years, however, gun control advocates within the government have expanded the reach of the “mental defective” prohibition to even include many of our brave military veterans!

 Students of history know that the first step taken by dictators and despots is to brand their opponents as insane so they can be locked away forever. Supporters of the Brady law and the NICS database claim their goal is to prevent those who may pose a danger to society or to themselves from purchasing firearms.

 And yet, over and over again, we see these gun control proponents aren’t really interested in going after criminals, because they also advocate expansive gun bans that target ordinary citizens.

 In America, citizens expect a rigorous and fair process before any of their Constitutional rights are taken away.  Unfortunately, when it comes to veterans and their families, the process is neither rigorous nor fair.

 After the Brady law went into effect, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) began sending the names of many of its beneficiaries to the FBI so they could be added to the NICS list, denying these individuals their right to purchase a firearm.  To date, more than 150,000 military veterans have been denied.

 However, none of these veterans were ever convicted of a crime; none were found to be a danger to anyone; and none were afforded any meaningful due process of law.  Under the semblance of being “mental defectives,” these veterans were added to the list strictly because a doctor or a bureaucrat in the VA appointed someone to manage their finances.

 The al Qaida terrorists in Guantanamo have been given more due process than the American soldiers who fought them!

 This is a travesty of justice!

 So ask yourself, if this outrage is already taking place under the VA's national health care system, what might await America under the giant government medical database created by ObamaCare?  That’s why GOA has been working tirelessly to expose this indignation and is determined to pass a bill to restore the Second Amendment rights of veterans.

 Pro-gun Senator Richard Burr (R-NC) authored S. 669, the Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act, that will safeguard for veterans two of the most fundamental Constitutional rights enjoyed by Americans: due process of law and the right to keep and bear arms.

 The Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act simply requires that a veteran cannot lose his or her gun rights “without the order or finding of a judge, magistrate, or other judicial authority of competent jurisdiction that such person is a danger to himself or herself or others.”

 This very reasonable bill passed out of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee last June, having been approved unanimously, but anti-gun Majority Leader Harry Reid will not let it see the light of day.  Sen. Burr is currently seeking opportunities to attach the bill as an amendment to another piece of legislation.

 I need your help to get this bill passed.  You must tell your Senators you expect them to support this bill.  We will be exposing this outrage in the media, on the internet and wherever we can have our voice heard.

 Please contact your Senators.   We can win this battle, but only if we each give our maximum effort.  Thank you again for your continued support for our work. And if you can, CONTRIBUTE TO GOA to help us in this important fight.

 Sincerely,

 Larry Pratt

Executive Director

Immediately after President Obama was elected and the Democrats gained big majorities in both the House and the Senate, the first thing they tried to do was grab another seat in Congress by pushing through a bill to give the District of Columbia a vote in the House of Representatives (S.160).

 Liberal Democrats want to give statehood to Washington, DC, and S. 160 would take a major step in that direction by giving them a vote in the House of Representatives.  Moreover, if DC becomes a state, there will be two more liberal votes in the Senate -- a situation that would allow them to break any Republican filibuster that would stymie their anti-gun agenda.

 The Senate passed S. 160 last year, and if it were not for Gun Owners of America and Senator John Ensign, it would have been signed into law last spring.

 Pro-gun Senator John Ensign and Gun Owners of America worked together to attach an amendment to the DC bill (S. 160).  The amendment would repeal all the restrictive gun control laws still on the books in DC after the landmark D.C. v. Heller Supreme Court decision. The vote margin was an amazing 62-36 in the Senate!

 Wiping out DC’s still very restrictive anti-gun laws was not what Speaker Pelosi and other rabid anti-Second Amendment members of the House wanted to see.

 So far, the House has been unable or unwilling to take any action on the Senate measure.  While Speaker Pelosi has no desire to see a pro-gun provision within the DC bill, many House members are afraid to vote for any such bill that doesn’t contain the pro-gun Ensign amendment.  In short, this has been a real Mexican standoff that has lasted for nearly a year.

 But now, the game has changed.  When the Democrats lost Senator Kennedy’s old seat to a Republican in last month’s election, they lost their 60 vote majority in the Senate.  And in the House, passage of the health care bill could come down to one or two votes, putting all of their plans at risk.

 Suddenly, the opportunity to pass S. 160 and pick up an additional House seat is a lot more important to many Democrats, making them more willing to take the risk of angering gun owners.

But will they take that risk, knowing what it cost them the last time they challenged gun owners?

 That’s the big question that has everybody wondering.  And, to be sure, we cannot afford to underestimate the depths of corruption in this Congress.  What’s abundantly clear is that having lost their supermajority in the Senate; they will try to get even more liberal Democrats elected so they can get their agenda rammed through Congress.

 That’s why passing S. 160 (or its House equivalent, H.R. 157) is so important to them.  It would take Democrats to the first level, giving them another seat in the House.  Since socialized health care may hang on one vote in the House, this might very well give ObamaCrats the extra vote they need to push this through that chamber.

 Then, once they get their extra House seat, liberal Democrats will argue it’s unfair for DC residents to just have a vote in the House but not in the Senate.  They’ll demand that they be granted the right to elect two more liberal, anti-gun Senators right away!

 I am writing to you today, not only to alert you to this very volatile situation, but to enlist your aid to help me help your Representative make the right decision.

 Right now, Speaker Pelosi is trying to figure out a way around this roadblock.  She is currently floating an offer that if the Senate agrees to accept a House version of the DC bill without the pro-gun Ensign amendment, she will guarantee a quick House vote on a separate, standalone version of a bill to repeal the DC gun ban.

 But that’s a farce.  Does anyone really think she has gun owners’ views in mind?  Does anyone think that when the DC gun ban repeal passes the House, that anti-gun Majority Leader Harry Reid won’t try to bottle it up in the Senate?  Does anyone think that Pelosi and Reid truly want to send this to the President’s desk?

 This is just a move to sidetrack gun owners and get more liberals elected to Congress.  And right now, there are back-room negotiations taking place on this bill.  The District’s non-voting delegate to the House has stated that movement is likely in the next few weeks, but she will not approve of the bill if the DC gun ban repeal is still part of it.

 This is unacceptable to Gun Owners of America because we really don’t want to give the Democrats one more liberal seat in the House -- nor, for that matter, a 60-plus vote supermajority in the Senate.  The way to prevent all this from happening is to nip it in the bud by killing S. 160.

 We must not let this bill pass!  A separate vote on the DC bill without the pro-gun Ensign amendment is a non-starter, as far as we are concerned.  I hope you agree and will help Gun Owners fight to protect not just the gun rights of DC’s citizens, but each and every gun owner in the United States.

 If you do agree, then I urge you to quickly contact your Representative and urge him to continue to oppose S. 160 and warns that passage of this bill without the Ensign Amendment shall be counted as an anti-gun vote by all of the major pro-gun organizations.

 Supporters of S. 160 claim the bill is “fair” because it also gives the state of Utah -- typically a Republican stronghold -- an extra congressional seat.  However, the Utah seat (unlike the one in DC) is temporary, which means that after the next census, Utah could very well lose that seat to a liberal state like California, resulting in two additional anti-gun Democrats in the House of Representatives -- one from DC, the other from California.

 This is nothing but a vote-packing scheme by the liberals.  How’s that for fair?

 There is a right way and a wrong way to do things.  And, lately, Congress has been behaving very badly.  By now, most Congressmen are aware that Americans are, in general, fed up and disgusted with their sleazy actions.

 Finally, I hope you can afford to send Gun Owners a CONTRIBUTION so we can continue to be, not only your “eyes and ears,” but your strong voice on Capitol Hill and in state houses all across the country.

 And please don’t think, for one minute, that a gift of a few dollars doesn’t matter.  It does and will be most gratefully received and put to work immediately.

 Thank you again for your continued support of our work.

 Sincerely,

 Larry Pratt

Executive Director

The Hill reports that Republican Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC) is laying down roadblocks that could thwart the ObamaCare agenda.