• Obama Wants to Tie the UN Noose Even Tighter Around the Necks of Gun Owners

  • Recent Shootings Spur Gun Debate

  • Oppose Obama’s Proposal to Make Information-Sharing on Guns Illegal

    -- Today is the last day for submitting comments Read More
  • Gun Rights Advancing Across the Country!

  • Congress Pushes to Arm Service Members at Military Recruitment Centers

  • Momentum Building for Repealing Gun Free Zones

        Read More
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6

GOA News

  • END THE CHECK
  • UN Gun Control
  • CA Gun Takaway
  • GOA Blasts Dems
  • GOA: Abolish Gun Free Zones

GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA: ABOLISH BACKGROUND CHECKS, DESTROY LINKED DATABASE

On August 31, Breitbart News spoke with Gun Owners of America’s (GOA) executive director, Larry Pratt, about background checks for gun purchasers, and he made clear that GOA opposed them when they were first introduced under President Bill Clinton and that GOA believes they should be abolished now.

Pratt also stressed that the database tied to them should be destroyed.

Our conversation began with a discussion of how yet another public attacker, Vester Lee Flanagan, demonstrated the impotency of background checks by passing one to acquire the gun he used to shoot and kill Alison Parker and Adam Ward in Virginia.

Pratt responded by pointing out that public attackers are not the only ones background checks fail to stop. He said, “During the last year of record, although the government has done millions upon million of background checks, they brought 14 prosecutions to court for trial–hardly a crime-fighting tool.” He said some people respond to this by pointing out that there were people who were “denied getting a gun at the point of sale,” but these people fail to note that criminals get guns in ways that completely circumvent the checks.

Read More

UN GUN CONTROL BODY SUPPORTED BY OBAMA SETS UP VETO-PROOF FRAMEWORK

Representatives attending the UN Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) in Mexico this week have set up a structure for future conferences on gun control that include a veto-proof decision making process.

According to Reuters, representatives from 130 countries gathered in Mexico, although only 72 countries have fully ratified the treaty. They determined that Geneva will be “the seat of the permanent secretariat for the ATT” and they unanimously decided that unanimous agreements would not have to be reached on gun control decisions going forward.

This gives the body a veto-proof process for making gun control decisions going forward.

Anna McDonald, director of the international gun control group Control Arms, praised the agreed-to decision making process and the role representatives at the conference see for “civic groups.”

On August 23, Breitbart News reported Gun Owners of America’s warning that officials from the Obama administration would be attending the conference, even though the U.S. Senate had not ratified the ATT.

Read More

CA CITY SEIZES WIFE’S GUNS BECAUSE HUSBAND UNDERWENT ‘PSYCHIATRIC EVALUATION’

San Jose’s Lori Rodriguez says the city seized her 12 guns after her husband was forced to undergo a “72-hour psychiatric evaluation,” and she is suing the city to get back the guns....

These cases highlight the danger Breitbart News, the NRA, and Gun Owners of America have warned about in instances where domestic violence and other issues are used as a Trojan Horse for gun control. The push is insidious, and once those promoting gun control get their foot in the door, they often simply continue pushing.

Read More

GOA Blasts Anti-gun Democrats as Tyrants who Prefer Their Subjects Unarmed

 

 

 

 



 

On August 20, Gun Owners of America executive director Larry Pratt described the Democratic Party on the federal level as “increasingly” tyrannical and focused on passing laws to take guns away from law-abiding Americans.

Pratt said, “The Democrat Party has increasingly become a party of tyranny. And you can’t be a good tyrant if there are a whole bunch of schlubs running around with guns.”

And Pratt is not wrong. The link between federal-level Democrats and a relentless push for gun control is undeniable. Obama craves it, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) continually push it, and Representatives like Elizabeth Etsy (D-CT-5th) and Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA-5th) eagerly promote it.

Read More

GOA:  Abolish Gun Free Zones by Hitting Their Creators in the Pocketbook

On August 19 Breitbart News spoke with Gun Owners of America (GOA) executive director Larry Pratt and he described gun free zones as “murder magnets” that must be abolished by hitting their creators where it hurts–“in their bloody pocketbooks.”

GOA has been unflinching in their opposition to gun free zones in schools from the moment Senator Joe Biden (D-Md.) introduced them in 1990. They remain opposed to the current cacophony of “guns allowed” versus “no guns allowed” areas in schools, colleges, and businesses that we see around the country today. This confusing mix presents law-abiding citizens with certain places where self-defense is honored and certain places were law-abiding citizens check their dignity and their ability to defend themselves at the door.

Read More

Self-Defense Corner

  • Two Intruders Down
  • Turn the Other Cheek
  • Father Saves Son
  • Grandma Got Her Gun
  • Intruder Shot

FL man shoots 2 intruders after finding dead dogs in his home

A Florida man returning to his Lantana home last week opened fire on two intruders he found inside, killing one and seriously injuring the other. Now the surviving suspect is charged with murder for the death of his accomplice.

Read More

ALLEGED ROBBER CORNERS FEMALE CLERK, GETS SHOT IN BUTT BY CLERK’S HUSBAND

On August 18, an alleged armed robber who cornered a female clerk was shot in the butt by the clerk’s 75-year-old husband. The husband was sitting feet in away in a chair and unnoticed by the robber until it was too late.

Read More

No charges against Oregon father who fatally shot prowler trying to break into kids’ bedroom

The Josephine County District Attorney announced Aug. 11 that no charges would be filed against an Oregon father who shot and killed a man trying to break into his Grants Pass home last month.

Read More

Elderly Woman Pulls Gun To Thwart Two Men Attempting to Rape Her

An elderly California women thwarted two home invaders with the only practical tool for the job:

Read More

Homeowner Shoots Intruder In Lake Highlands

A Lake Highlands homeowner shot an intruder Tuesday morning.

Read More
John McCain's Top 10 Class-Warfare Arguments Against Tax Cuts
As published at Human Events

1. "I don't think the governor's tax cut is too big -- it's just misplaced. Sixty percent of the benefits from his tax cuts go to the wealthiest 10% of Americans -- and that's not the kind of tax relief that Americans need.... Gov. Bush wants to spend the entire surplus on tax cuts. I don't believe the wealthiest 10% of Americans should get 60% of the tax breaks. I think the lowest 10% should get the breaks....

"I'm not giving tax cuts for the rich."

-- Discussion with media, reported in "Bush, McCain Snip Over Tax Cut Plans," Los Angeles Times, and "GOP Rivals Bicker on Taxes," Washington Post, Jan. 5, 2000.

2. "I have never engaged in class warfare. I am very much in favor of tax cuts for middle-income and lower-income Americans. I'm deeply concerned about a kind of class warfare that's going on right now. It's unfortunate. There's a growing gap between the haves and have-nots in America, and that gap is growing, and it's unfortunately divided up along ethnic lines.

"I feel very strongly that we ought to have middle-income and lower-income tax cuts, and we'll be getting into it, I'm sure, later on in this program. Mine are basically comparable to Gov. Bush's, in some cases far better. But I'm not sure we need to give two-thirds of that tax cut, of that money, to the wealthiest 10% of America."

-- Michigan Republican Debate, Jan. 11, 2000.

3. "I always thought that class warfare was to take away from the rich. I always believed that that was what class warfare was all about. As I said, there are tax breaks and money for the richest in America and the very rich, but I think that it's clear that there's a growing gap between rich and poor in America, the haves and the have-nots. And many studies have indicated that, and I think that the people who need it most and need the relief most are working middle-income Americans and that's what I want to give to them. And at the same time, the greatest benefit that I can give them is to make sure that their Social Security benefits are there. And I also don't think it's fair for us to lay a $ 5.6 trillion debt down on future generations of Americans."

-- NBC's "Meet the Press," Jan. 16, 2000.

4. "We give the millionaire a $2,000 refund. Gov. Bush gives him $50,000."

-- Quoted in "John McCain: How Straight a Shooter?" by Jeff Jacoby, Boston Globe, Jan. 27, 2000.

5. "There's one big difference between me and the others -- I won't take every last dime of the surplus and spend it on tax cuts that mostly benefit the wealthy. I'll use the bulk of the surplus to secure Social Security far into the future to keep our promise to the greatest generation."

-- McCain campaign commercial, January 2000.

6. "I don't think Bill Gates needs a tax cut. I think you and your parents do."

-- Michigan State University rally, Feb. 20, 2000.

7. "Mr. President, the principle that guides my judgment of a tax reconciliation bill is tax relief for those who need it the most -- lower- and middle-income working families. I am in favor of a tax cut, but a responsible one that provides significant tax relief for lower- and middle-income families. And I commend Sen. Grassley for moving in that direction. But I am concerned that debt will overwhelm many American households. That is why tax relief should be targeted to middle-income Americans. The more fortunate among us have less concern about debt. It is the parents struggling to make ends meet who are most in need of tax relief.

"I had expressed hope that when the reconciliation bill was reported out of the Senate Finance Committee, the tax cuts outlined would provide more tax relief to working, middle-income Americans. However, I am disappointed that the Senate Finance Committee preferred instead to cut the top tax rate of 39.6% to 36%, thereby granting generous tax relief to the wealthiest individuals of our country at the expense of lower- and middle-income American taxpayers."

-- Senate floor statement during debate over President Bush's tax relief package, May 21, 2001.

8. "During the debate on the Senate version of the tax reconciliation bill, I had urged my colleagues that substantial tax relief to middle-income Americans should be our top priority. While I regret that my amendment to cut the top rate by one percent to 38.6% so millions more middle-class Americans would fall into the 15% tax bracket failed on a tie vote, Sen. Grassley did move in that direction in the Senate bill by insisting that the top rate should be cut to only 36%. As a result, I reluctantly voted for the bill but pledged to vote against the conference report should further reductions in the top tax rate be made at the expense of the majority of Americans who are in much greater need of tax relief.

"Unfortunately, the conference report did just that by jettisoning the commendable work both Senators Grassley and Baucus did in crafting a Senate reconciliation bill that provided more tax relief to middle-income Americans. This conference report lowers the top rate cut to 35%, at the cost of delaying, for several years, much needed tax relief for married couples unfairly penalized by our tax code....

"We had an opportunity to provide much more tax relief to millions of hard-working Americans. . . . I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us, at the expense of middle-class Americans who most need tax relief."

-- Senate floor statement before voting against President Bush's tax cut, May 26, 2001.

9. "I am concerned that repeal of the estate tax would provide massive benefits solely to the wealthiest and highest-income taxpayers in the country. A Treasury Department study found that almost no estate tax has been paid by lower- and middle-income taxpayers. But taxes have been paid on the estates of people who were in the highest 20% of the income distribution at the time of their death. It found that 91% of all estate taxes are paid by the estates of people whose annual income exceeded $190,000 around the time of their death....

"We have no idea what our financial or economic situation will be ten years from now.... We may want to have the flexibility to provide significant tax relief for lower- and middle-income taxpayers. Other unforeseen issues may arise. The point is that we must think beyond the horizon. Making the repeal of the estate tax permanent fails to take these new circumstances into account.

"We will need resources to deal with ... responsible tax reform that benefit lower- and middle-income taxpayers."

-- Senate floor statement opposing HR 8, a bill to permanently eliminate the death tax, June 11, 2002.

10. MCCAIN: "Shouldn't we give relief to average citizens who also are double taxed every single day?"

HOST KATIE COURIC: "But, Sen. McCain, if you listen to Commerce Secretary Don Evans, and he just appeared on this program, working Americans, the middle-class Americans, under the Bush proposals will get a major break. A family of four making $39,000 a year, according to Mr. Evans, will get a $1,100 tax cut for several years, allowing them to plan their individual budgets. That sounds like something that won't just simply benefit the wealthy."

MCCAIN: "Well, I think it will. But when you look at the percentage of the tax cuts that -- as the previous tax cuts -- that go to the wealthiest Americans, you will find that the bulk of it, again, goes to wealthiest Americans.... A lot of Americans now are paying a very large a -- low and middle-income Americans are paying a significantly larger amount of their income in taxes. I'd like to see them get the bulk of the relief."

-- NBC's "Today," Jan. 7, 2003.

Op-Ed Articles