• Keep Up the Pressure on Obama's Anti-gun 'Legacy' Bill

  • The Second Amendment Made a Huge Difference in Iowa

  • Obama Demonstrates Why Background Checks Suck

  • It's Time to Strike Back Against the Empire

  • Help Me Stop Obama's Gun Grab -- Sen. Steve Daines

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

GOA News

  • Run and Hide
  • Unconstitutional Checks
  • Not Surprised
  • #ENDTHECHECK
  • On the Front Lines

Hide in here, Officer, the bad guys are coming!


GOA's Erich Pratt says it's alarming that Chicago police are being instructed to run and hide from danger, despite the fact that they are fully certified officers.  CNN reported that in case of an active shooter, if evacuation is not possible, unarmed aviation police must "run and hide."   

"That is the most stunning advice that you would give to people supposedly there to protect us,” says Pratt.


Read More

Gun Owners of America: FBI Actions Prove Background Checks Unconstitutional


"The whole National Instant Background Check System (NICS) apparatus needs to be defunded. And once the examiners and analysts tied to that apparatus have been on unemployment for a while, perhaps they’ll understand that they need to do their job. And now I’m dreaming, but maybe the Republicans will actually step up and do this." - Larry Pratt


Read More

Whence a Mexican drug lord's guns came doesn't surprise GOA


 Mike Hammond, legislative council to Gun Owners of America (GOA), says this news comes as the ATF is pushing Congress for more money.

"They're demanding massively more money for the instant check system, massively more money for 200 additional ATF agents, and $500 million -- chump change by Washington standards -- so that they can take people who have problems and want to consult a professional and take away their guns from them," Hammond explains.


Read More

We Don’t Need no Stinkin’ Background Checks


The Obama administration was behind the greatest effort to arm criminals in recent history, but they don’t want you to buy a revolver at a gun show unless government officials approve the sale.  


 

Read More

Gun Groups Launch Campaign to Stop Obama's Gun Restrictions

 


“Gun Owners of America is rallying the grassroots in opposition to the president’s unlawful executive actions. Our hope is to produce enough pressure that either the president backs off of his plans to restrict Second Amendment rights — as he did last year when he withdrew the ban on ‘green tip’ ammunition — or we generate so much momentum that the next president is compelled to rescind Obama’s unlawful decrees during the first week in office," Erich Pratt, the group's executive director, told Newsmax.


 

Read More

Self-Defense Corner

  • CCW Wins Again
  • Deputy Saved
  • Gun Beats Knife
  • Guns Save Lives
  • Two for One

New Jersey man, 35, identified in fatal barbershop shootout with CWP holders

A 35-year-old New Jersey man has been identified as the armed robbery suspect who was shot and killed in a shootout during a botched robbery attempt at a Fort Jackson Boulevard barbershop.

Read More

Officials: Gun-toting veteran saves life of Bastrop deputy

Not thinking about his own life, a local Marine veteran jumped into action and stopped a man from reaching a Bastrop deputy’s gun as the suspect pummeled the officer during a struggle earlier this month.

Read More

Woman Shoots Attempted Robber

A man was shot after he allegedly tried to rob a woman in downtown Louisville.

Read More

90-Year-Old Pulls Gun For First Time In His Life On Home Intruder

 A 90-year-old man had the first reason in his life to use his .38 spc revolver when an unknown intruder entered his home and attempted to sleep in a vacant bedroom in his house.  As the Daily Breeze describes it, the home owner awoke to find the man in the vacant bedroom.

Read More

Pair Of Concealed Carriers Thwart Armed Robbers In Barbershop, Saving Lives

Two licensed concealed carry permit holders turned the tables on two armed thugs who barged into a barber shop wearing masks Friday night, demanding money from everyone inside.

Read More

By Mike Hammond, legislative counsel to GOA
June 13, 2007

 It can hardly be any surprise that anti-gun House members worked to sneak this bill through before anyone was aware that it was going to be considered. The negotiations have left legislation which is WORSE THAN THE ORGINAL McCARTHY BILL.

The worst aspect is, in section 3(2), that it STATUTORILY FREEZES IN regulations at 27 CFR 478.11 which would make you a "prohibited person" if:

* You were found by any "lawful authority" (including a IDEA school therapist, a Medicare psychologist, or a VA doctor to:
1. Represent even a minimal suicide risk;
2. Represent even a minimal playground risk to other students; or
3. Be incapable of managing your own affairs; or
* Were referred by such "lawful authority" to a psychiatrist or psychologist to be evaluated in connection with child custody proceedings or other contexts in which professional assessment is ordered.

This means that a future hypothetical pro-gun administration would be powerless to change the regulations so that they did not apply to:

-- Veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder;
-- Kids put on Ritalin in connection with the IDEA program;
-- Seniors diagnosed with Alzheimer's in connection with Medicare's home health care assistance; or
-- Seniors (perhaps with a gun collection accumulated over a lifetime) who continue to live in their homes, but are put under guardianship by their adult children.

In the pretense of doing gun owners some huge favor, the bill explicitly recognizes, in section 101(c)(1)(C), that a psychiatrist's finding is sufficient to make you a prohibited person, so long as that finding is based on one of the three criteria listed above. And, incidentally, when a kid is put on Ritalin, mom is diagnosed with Alzheimer's, a vet is found to have post-traumatic stress disorder, or gramps is put under a guardianship, it is ALMOST ALWAYS based, in whole or in part, on one of those three factors.

The bill, in section 101(c)(2)(A) and section 105, also requires federal agencies like the Department of Veterans Affairs and states to set up procedures for prohibited persons with "mental disabilities" to "clear their names." There are at least four problems with this:

1. First, prior to this bill, vets suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder were arguably not required to "clear their names." Ditto, seniors with Alzheimer's kids on Ritalin, etc. By statutorily codifying 27 CFR 478.11, this bill, for the first time, makes it statutorily mandated that these persons ARE and SHOULD BE prohibited persons under 18 USC 922 (d) & (g). So the bill makes it absolutely clear that vets, seniors, and adults who were problem kids are statutorily prohibited from owning guns (for life), and then graciously opens the possibility that they may apply for relief, in accordance with unspecified standards based wholly on the discretion of the government.

2. Second, there already is a procedure for persons to "clear their names." It was created by McClure-Volkmer and is contained at 18 USC 925(c). The problem is that, for many years, Congress, on appropriations bills, has barred anyone from using this procedure. So, having blocked procedures allowing people to "clear their names," the House is now creating redundant procedures to do the same thing. And they expect us to trust them?

3. Third, the bill states that "[r]elief and judicial review shall be available according to the standards prescribed in section 925(c) of title 18, United States Code." But, since Congress has blocked the implementation of section 925(c), there is at least a question of whether this new, redundant procedure would not be similarly automatically blocked, at least at the federal level.

4. Fourth, there is also a procedure for "clearing one's name" in subsection (g) of the Statues-at-Large portion of the Brady Law, when the name is erroneously submitted to NICS. The problem is that persons seeking to invoke this procedure to establish that they were incorrectly classified are routinely sent a form letter denying relief.

Ironically, a particularly dangerous person who is actually held in a mental institution may be able to obtain relief after he is "released or discharged," pursuant to section 101(c)(1)(A). But a person who is found to be suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder, childhood behavioral problems, or Alzheimer's -- and who is not held anywhere (or subjected to anything) from which they can be "released or discharged" -- could never take advantage of a provision which is available to the criminally insane. And even this limited provision applies only to federal agencies, and not states.

Incidentally, if Congress appropriates NOTHING to implement this bill, the states will still be required to comply with the unfunded mandates or risk loss of DOJ funds under section 104.

All of this is on top of the usual concerns that the McCarthy bill would still require the states to turn over 90% of all information which was "relevant" to whether an individual was a prohibited person by reason of being "an unlawful user of or addicted to" any controlled substance or a mental defective (as that term will now be defined.).

Ironically, given the "tough enforcement" language being used to try to dislodge the "amnesty" bill, the new draft excludes crackdowns on illegal aliens -- a category which, more than any other, includes terrorists who have snuck into our country. But the Attorney General, without a court order, can, at his or her unilateral discretion, demand any information held by any state (or its agent) which would be "relevant" in determining who fell into other categories, including Medicare medical records, IDEA medical records, National guard medical records, drug diversion records, records of drug charges not prosecuted, etc. And, unlike the convicted serial killer, the unprosecuted marijuana smoker, veteran, or senior would not be protected merely because his records were not available electronically.

And, finally, having compiled, potentially, the biggest list of dangerous persons in existence, the records could not be used to go after terrorists or other criminals.

SUMMARY: It was not the intention of 18 USC 922 (d) & (g) to make veterans, seniors, and misbehaved kids "prohibited persons" with an FBI dossier. Any provision in 27 CFR 478.11 to the contrary is just plain wrong, and should be changed. To freeze these regulations into statutory law is simply evil.

Op-Ed Articles