• Category Archives Activism
  • Activism means fighting for our rights, as guaranteed by God and teh Constitution of the U.S.A.

  • Jack in the Box Caves to Gun Control Pressure, Restricts Open Carry

    Jack in the Box, a popular fast-food restaurant chain, has followed Starbucks’ unfortunate lead in limiting its customers’ Second Amendment rights. Friday, the company announced it would start enforcing its no-firearms-in-stores policy. Jack in the Box’s Vice President of Corporate Communications Brian Luscomb released this statement:

    “The presence of guns inside a restaurant could create an uncomfortable situation for our guests and employees and lead to unintended consequences.”

    The company’s decision comes a day after gun control group Moms Demand Action launched a petition to pressure the restaurant to enforce the policy. They started the campaign in response to a semi-automatic rifle demonstration inside a Texas-based Jack in the Box restaurant last week. The group ran with the rumor that customers were so terrified that they locked themselves in the store freezer. But, that story has since been debunked.

    Read More…

  • Boehner Secretly Plotting to Stab Gun Owners in the Back

    In a closed-door meeting of wealthy contributors in Las Vegas, House Speaker John Boehner said he was “hell-bent on getting [anti-gun immigration amnesty] done this year.”

    And earlier this week, the Speaker viciously mocked conservative Republicans for opposing him on this issue.

    The wily Boehner had led his conservative Republican members to believe the issue was shelved for the year. Now it appears that Boehner is simply planting a trap for Republicans and gun owners — springing this Obama-backed proposal when it’s too late to primary anti-gun Republican amnesty supporters.

    Gun Owners of America has argued all along that Second Amendment supporters have “a dog in this fight.”

    In 1986, Ronald Reagan signed an immigration amnesty bill for about 3 million illegals. It was supposed to be accompanied by new enforcement measures — which never happened. Instead, the prospect of citizenship only attracted over ten million new illegals. And those granted amnesty in 1986 turned California from a “swing state” into an anti-gun nightmare.

    A Pew poll from last year indicated that if illegal immigrants were given citizenship, they would vote for liberal, anti-gun candidates by an 8-to-1 margin.

    So by the time that a net 8,000,000-plus additional anti-gun voters emerge from Obama’s new proposal, it will be far too late to do anything about it. Handgun bans. Total gun registration. Confiscation programs. SWAT teams. These will be the inevitable consequence of adding 8,000,000 new anti-gun voters to the electorate.

    Boehner’s Republican members understand that anti-gun immigration amnesty could cost Republicans the Senate and House in November — and would damage their prospects even more in long-term.

    This is why, up until now, he was pretending to shelve the issue.

    Boehner thinks he can get away with bushwhacking the Republican members who elected him Speaker. But the good news is that there is a procedure for unseating the Speaker, and we are beginning to work with members in order to invoke it.


    1. Contact your Representative. Please urge him to oppose any efforts to move anti-gun amnesty legislation — regardless of his party affiliation. But if he is a Republican, ask him to move for Boehner’s removal if, as reported, he betrays his own members — and jeopardizes control of the House.

    2. Contact Speaker Boehner and tell him to get off his “hell-bent” road to anti-gun amnesty. There is absolutely NO WAY for you to communicate with the Speaker (via email) if you live outside of his district. So if you wish to communicate with him, please contact his office using the following methods:

    * Phone: (202)225-6205

    * Fax: (202)225-0704

  • Gun lobbyists keep Vermont lawmakers in crosshairs near session’s end

    SINE DINE: Gun rights advocates keeping a close eye on state lawmakers in the final hours of the 2014 legislative session.

    As the legislative session races to an end, gun rights advocates say now is the time to keep a watchful eye on lawmakers in Montpelier.

    “The closer they get to that final gavel, the faster the horses get traded over there in Montpelier,” Evan Hughes, vice president of the Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, told Vermont Watchdog.

    Hughes is one of many Second Amendment defenders camped out at the Capitol this week to make sure anti-gun legislation doesn’t get stealthily passed in the legislative session’s final hours. The session, which began in January, could end as soon as Saturday.

    “Right now my emphasis is on several bills in the Legislature that are still in play. When that final gavel falls between Saturday and Tuesday, there’s no going back.”

    Read More…

  • UK ‘journalists’ epitomize snotty attitude toward U.S. gun owners

    Maybe it’s a resentment that goes back to their unsuccessful attempt to disarm subjects that started a rebellion and lost them a colony, maybe it’s jealousy at being denied trust afforded their American cousins, or maybe it’s just being aware they are subjects of a queen. Regardless, the snotty attitude toward U.S. gun owners, famously exemplified by unwelcome import Piers Morgan, is alive and well in the British press.

    “Glocker Moms: like soccer moms but with guns,” reads the headline for the “Passnotes” column in The Guardian. “Glocker,” get it? How clever the anonymous editorial writer must think he (or she?) is. While gender ought to be irrelevant, Julia Gorin over at Jewish World Review shared some sage insights about anti-gun males a few years back that might apply here, and Sarah Thompson, M.D. shared reasoned observations applicable to either sex Raging Against Self-Defense. Feigned “humor” aside, that’s really what the column writer is doing.

    “Age: Varies,” we are informed about America’s female gun owners. “Appearance: Terrifying.”

    The writer is terrified by the appearance of a woman with a gun? Really? That explains a lot right there. People are afraid of things they’re ignorant about. That leads to prejudice, which combined with admitted fear and obvious resentment, can result in hate — and when ignorant, fearful people hate, they often try to destroy.

    Read More…

  • ‘Gun for Hire’ Colandro asks how N.J. will afford 900,000 new felons Because of new Gun Laws…

    Colandro defies politicians bent on control.

    Addressing the New Jersey Senate in Trenton Monday during a proposed magazine limitation bill hearing, “Gun for Hire” activist Anthony P. Colandro attempted to educate closed minds, earning, if not a change in heart from the rulers, at least an enthusiastic show of support from a number of citizen attendees.

    “I’m a lifelong resident of New Jersey, and up until today, not a felon,” Colandro told the politicians. “I realize that the majority of you here represent constituents who choose free stuff over freedom.

    “Have you thought about the lost taxes and revenue when you have to start incarcerating 10,000 or 100,000 or even 1,000,000 law-abiding, taxpaying citizens, who are fed up with being pushed around with unjust laws that will do nothing to address the real crime issues and criminals?” he asked. “So if just only 19 percent of us legal gun owners stand with me, it will cost the state $550,000,000 a year to house us… Remember, this does not take into account the lost revenue when we, the previously law-abiding citizens, are no longer working and paying our taxes.

    “And as a bonus to most of you,” Colandro added, earning laughter and applause from attendees, “we will all be felons as well, and many of us will lose our jobs and become wards of the state, like the majority of your constituents are now.”

    Promising “I will not comply,” and asking “Who’s with me,” Colandro earned a second round of loud applause, along with numerous raised hands and vocal affirmation of shared defiance.

    Read More…

  • ATF quietly laying groundwork to expand multiple rifle sales reporting in all 50 states

    A little noticed and virtually unreported April 15 notice posted in the Federal Register suggests the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives intends expanding the multiple rifle sale requirement currently imposed on four border states (Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas) to all states.

    Titled “Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Report of Multiple Sale or Other Disposition of Certain Rifles,” and assigned OMB Number 1140–0100, the 60-day notice abstract declares “The purpose of this information collection is to require Federal Firearms Licensees to report multiple sales or other dispositions whenever the licensee sells or otherwise disposes of two or more rifles within any five consecutive business days with the following characteristics: (a) Semi automatic; (b) a caliber greater than .22; and (c) the ability to accept a detachable magazine.

    “Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until June 16, 2014,” the notice advises. That means much of the comment period has already passed with most unaware it ever began. And the ATF website offers no additional information other than links to the notice and to various forms.

    Read More…

  • NYCG Radio Episode #66 – 5/06/14 “SCOTUS: No to Drake”

    New York City Guns Radio Episode

    MAIG Honcho Mark Glaze Cuts His Losses, Quits Bloomberg Gun Control Cabal, Nanny State: De Blasio to Resurrect Attempt at NYC Big Soda Ban, Nearly Half of New Yorkers Are Struggling to Get By, Study Finds, The Bloomberg anti-gun backlash has just begun, The real reason Michael Bloomberg cares about guns, Mark Steyn Weighs in on the Police State, Supreme Court Denies to Hear New Jersey “Drake” Case, New Jersey Senate committee OKs bill to reduce rounds a magazine can hold to 10, Media bias on gun free zones – John Lott, Hillary Clinton: Gun culture ‘way out of balance’, All guns are bad, even nerf guns… MmmmKay? (Pussification of the USA), Obama’s “Operation Choke Point” Raises Alarms for gun businesses, Antigun Journalist Juan Williams Admits Wife Wished for Gun When Criminal Struck, Ask Your U.S. Representative to Cosponsor and Support H.R. 2959 – “The Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act”

    WARNING! This Content Contains AWESOME VULGARITY

  • Supreme Court Denies to Hear New Jersey “Drake” Case

    The United States Supreme Court said on Monday morning it will not consider a case that would define rights related to concealed gun permits in New Jersey and potentially across the country.

    The denial was first reported by SCOTUSblog, which received a printed version of the court orders before they were posted online. (At 9:50 am ET, the Court’s official orders were posted on its website.)

    The case of Drake v. Jerejian was heard in private conference by the nine Justices recently. Orders were issued today and the Drake case was listed among those cases denied by the Court.

    A petition was filed with the Court in January 2014. The petitioners, led by attorney Alan Gura, wanted answers to two questions: whether the Second Amendment secures a right to carry handguns outside of the home for self-defense and if New Jersey officials violated that right by requiring people to prove a “justifiable need” for carrying a handgun for self-defense outside their homes.

    Read More…

  • Mark Steyn Weighs in on the Police State…

    Aside from doing my bit for the First Amendment (your continued support is much appreciated), I’ve lately been taking a much greater interest in the Fourth Amendment, particularly since a meek mild-mannered mumsy employee of mine was unlawfully seized by an angry small-town cop last year. So I’ve been chewing over yesterday’s Supreme Court ruling. The case began half a decade ago in Bellaire, Texas:

    During the early morning hours of New Year’s Eve, 2008, police sergeant Jeffrey Cotton fired three bullets at Robert Tolan; one of those bullets hit its target and punctured Tolan’s right lung. At the time of the shooting, Tolan was unarmed on his parents’ front porch about 15 to 20 feet away from Cotton.

    Happy New Year! Auld Lung Syne: That’s one acquaintance Mr Tolan won’t soon forget.

    But it gets better. The only reason Sgt Cotton was emptying his gun into Mr Tolan was because his colleague, Officer Edwards, had mistransposed a digit when taking down Tolan’s license plate, which is 696BGK. Instead, Officer Edwards entered into the database 695BGK, which came up stolen.

    As Mr Tolan and his cousin exit the vehicle, Officer Edwards draws his gun, orders them to the ground, and accuses them of stealing the car. “That’s my car,” says Tolan, but complies with the request to lie face down.

    It’s worth noting that, in other countries with a different policing culture, a gun would not have been drawn and the officer would have asked to see the registration.

    Instead, hearing the commotion, Tolan’s parents come downstairs in their pajamas and find their son and their nephew lying on the ground with a cop pointing a gun at them. Mrs Tolan explains, “Sir, this is a big mistake. This car is not stolen… That’s our car.”

    Again, in a different policing culture, an officer facing four family members insisting this is a family vehicle might wonder whether it is, as Mrs Tolan suggests, all a mistake – a small mistake, if not yet “a big mistake”. And he might ask the lady if she has any proof of that: How long have they had it, where did they buy it, etc.

    Instead, he radios for back-up – because in America one heavily armed officer shouldn’t have to deal with four unarmed civilians all on his own – and so the small mistake of a transposed number becomes a very big mistake. Sgt Cotton arrives, pistol drawn, and orders Mrs Tolan, a law-abiding person not accused of any crime, to stand against the garage door. She says, “Are you kidding me? We’ve lived here 15 years. We’ve never had anything like this happen before.”

    Read More…

  • All guns are bad, even nerf guns… MmmmKay? (Pussification of the USA)

    It reads like something out of a Comedy Central television program. School administrators and police trying to stifle and harass kids for something seemingly harmless. “Nerf wars“.

    In Wausau, WI it seems at least one resident couldn’t tell the difference between a nerf ‘gun’ and a real gun. That person called police and reported “3 men with firearms”. Wausau police responded and decided that the group of high school seniors, while not committing any crime police could reasonably articulate, needed to be dealt with. Apparently kids out having fun is grounds for disorderly conduct charges and that’s what police cited six seniors for. According to all reports the six seniors harmed no one and damaged no property.

    Most people would wonder why there such an over reaction by police. I can’t imagine when I was that age getting anything more than a stern “knock it off” followed by a chuckle. Apparently the police chief has been listening to Jeff Lindell instead of using some common sense, it’s the only thing that makes sense giving the details of the story.

    Read More…

  • Obama’s “Operation Choke Point” Raises Alarms for gun businesses

    For the last several days, rumors have been circulating about the use of federal financial services regulators to harass and intimidate banks and financial service providers who maintain relationships with legal but so-called “high risk” merchants or businesses. These businesses are said to include, among others, payday lenders, escort services, producers of pornography, gaming interests, and purveyors of drug paraphernalia. By leaning on the banks, so the theory goes, the regulators will cause them to sever relationships with these businesses, thereby choking off their cash flow and forcing them out of the market. While the early phase of the operation has reportedly focused on payday lenders and pornography interests, eventual targets are said to include sellers of firearms and ammunition.

    We have been aware of this story for some time. NRA News, for example, originally reported on it last January. Breitbart news also noted in January that Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), Chairman of the Economic Growth Subcommittee, sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder demanding further information on the program. In a follow up story on NRA News in April, Andrew Langer from the Institute for Liberty reiterated the allegations and reported that the program is expanding. The House Committee on Financial Services additionally held a hearing on April 8 entitled, “Who’s in Your Wallet: Examining How Washington Red Tape Impairs Economic Freedom,” at which concerns over Operation Choke Point were expressed by both sides of the aisle.

    In addition to these concerns, NRA is aware of episodes in which banks have severed their relationships with customers in the firearm industry, as well as the policies of various online services – such as Google Shopping, eBay, Craigslist, and PayPal–to refuse to host listings for, or process sales of, firearms or ammunition.

    We know as well that various anti-gun groups have taken their cause to the private sector with varying degrees of success. Indeed, as we have reported, this is a niche that is actively being pursued by Michael Bloomberg’s recently-acquired (and ponderously named) anti-gun franchise, Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America. In March, NRA successfully defeated a Bloomberg-backed effort to remove firearm-related content from Facebook. Meanwhile, anti-gun mayors have floated plans to use city contracts to impose their gun control wishes, usually with instant pushback from their own police forces. Some public pension plans have also begun divesting themselves of publicly-traded companies related to firearm or ammunition.

    Gun control proponents, having achieved only limited success in the legislative arena, have without question sought additional avenues for restrictions through the business community. While all of these developments deserve close attention, we have not substantiated that they are part of an overarching federal conspiracy to suppress lawful commerce in firearms and ammunition, or that the federal government has an official policy of using financial regulators to drive firearm or ammunition companies out of business. This in no way diminishes, however, the real and continuing threats gun owners face from politically unaccountable federal bureaucrats – whose actions we have recently reported on here, here, and here – or the need for consumers to be aware that their own behavior and spending habits can influence decisions businesses make about firearms.

    Rest assured, NRA will continue to monitor developments concerning Operation Choke Point and report on any significant activity of concern to gun owners. The Obama administration’s record–which includes the Fast & Furious scandal, a federal firearm registration scheme, and a reversal of U.S. policy leading to the signing an international gun control treaty – certainly provides no reason for confidence. Yet whatever the administration might have in store for the future, the firearm industry for now is experiencing robust sales and growth, a reflection of America’s rejection of the gun ban agenda.

  • MAIG Honcho Mark Glaze Cuts His Losses, Quits Bloomberg Gun Control Cabal

    Mark Glaze is OUT at Bloomturd’s MAIG anti-gun group


    Mark Glaze, the head of Michael Bloomberg’s ever-morphing anti-gun empire, has announced his departure from Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the group he helped form and steer since 2011.

    For the last three years, Glaze labored to build an organization off the wealth of a billionaire who, while mayor of New York City, also exploited public resources to pursue his own nationwide antigun agenda. Despite the assets at its disposal, the group has so far accomplished little of note, other than incessant press coverage of its wealthy benefactor. Indeed, Bloomberg’s anti-gun effort has, in its short life, seen public embarrassments, high-profile defections, and repeated attempts at rebranding. It even stooped to bullying similar groups after the Newtown tragedy to assure its own prominence. Now, with the group poised to make its biggest, most-publicized push yet for relevance, its creator and chief architect leaves it to its own devices. What does that say about the movement Glaze was supposed to create? What does that say about the group he formed? We don’t know, frankly, other than this latest development is entirely consistent with how things have gone for Bloomberg’s gun control efforts to date.

    Ironically, Glaze now plans to work as a consultant. If any more evidence of the American character for forgiveness, generosity, and support for the underdog were needed, the fact that Glaze can expect to make a comfortable living in his new profession should provide it. He’s obviously the man to call when you need to leverage astronomical wealth and the unconditional support of the media, academic, entertainment, public health, and Coastal political establishments into colossal failure.

    But, hey, none of this is personal. We know Glaze had a tough job in transforming a defining characteristic of American liberty into something people were supposed to consider hateful, sinister, and dangerous. His attempts to slander ordinary, law-abiding gun owners as having the blood of innocents on their hands were probably more indicative of desperation than of malice. He tried. And his failures, though considerable, were consistent with others who came before him, distinguished mainly by the fact that he had virtually unlimited resources at his disposal.

    John Feinblatt, a former city hall staffer under then-Mayor Bloomberg, will step in as leader of Everytown for Gun Safety, the new umbrella organization for Bloomberg’s gun control front groups.

    While Glaze may have been short on actual policy accomplishments during his tenure, his gun-hating former boss is doubling down with a $50 million pledge to bring his New York state of mind on gun control to the rest of the country. Gun owners should take seriously this well-funded assault on their rights and remember that only by standing together can they assure that Bloomberg’s newest antigun mastermind leaves as empty-handed as his last one.

  • Ask Your U.S. Representative to Cosponsor and Support H.R. 2959 – “The Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2013”

    The “Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2013” (H.R. 2959)–introduced in the U.S. House by Reps. Richard Nugent (R-Fla.) and Jim Matheson (D-Utah)–would allow any person who is not prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm under federal law and who has a valid concealed firearm permit, to carry a concealed handgun in any state that issues its own residents permits to carry concealed firearms. Persons carrying a handgun in another state pursuant to H.R. 2959 would be subject to the laws of that state with respect to where concealed firearms may be carried. Similar legislation to H.R. 2959 passed the House in 2011 by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 272-154.

    H.R. 2959 would not create a federal licensing system, nor authorize the federal government to interfere with the powers of the states to set standards for the issuance of carry permits, nor establish federal standards for carry permits, nor override state laws that recognized the right to carry firearms without a permit. Rather, it would simply require the states to recognize each others’ carry permits, much like drivers’ licenses.

    Please contact your U.S. Representative and ask him or her to cosponsor and support H.R. 2959 – “The Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2013”.

    You can contact your U.S. Representative about this important legislation by using the “Write Your Lawmakers” tool at www.NRAILA.org. You may also contact your Representative by phone at (202) 225-3121.

    To read the full Fact Sheet on H.R. 2959, please click here.

  • Nanny State: Commie Mayor De Blasio to Resurrect Attempt at NYC Big Soda Ban!

    Mayor Bill de Blasio announced this week his administration will pick up where former Mayor Michael Bloomberg left off and will continue the battle to ban sodas larger than 16 ounces. The city will appeal a state court ruling that pulled the plug on the ban last year.

    City lawyers will argue the case at the Court of Appeals on June 4, the New York Daily News reported this week.

    Former Mayor Michael Bloomberg got plenty of headlines in 2012 when he declared war on Big Gulps and other large sugary drinks.

    The much discussed ban on sodas over 16 ounces was an edict issued by the city’s Health Department and never got approval from city council. A state judge in March 2013 blocked the ban and said Bloomberg overstepped his authority in issuing it without the city council’s consent.

    De Blasio and Bloomberg have not seen eye to eye on everything, but the new boss is the same as the old boss when it comes to regulating away that special kind of joy that can only be found at the bottom of a half-gallon of Coca-Cola.

    In fact, de Blasio seems determined to keep up New York City’s reputation as one of the biggest nanny states in the nation. (It’s a city, not a state, of course, but stick with the metaphor, OK?)

    He wants a ban on electronic cigarettes, building on Bloomberg’s long campaign to make it illegal to smoke traditional cigarettes just about anywhere inside the city limits.

    Read More…

  • Bloomturd and Guns: It’s About Controlling YOU LITTLE PEOPLE!

    If Bloomberg wanted to spend some pocket change to undermine any other constitutional right, liberals would quickly complain about how the nation’s elites use their money to overinfluence policy and consolidate power away from the broader citizenry. The billionaire Koch brothers, who fund numerous conservative and libertarian causes, have become archetypes of this phenomenon, to the benefit of Obama-aligned outrage sites such as Salon and ThinkProgress. But when it comes to the Second Amendment, liberals don’t see a question of freedom or liberty, even when a billionaire tries to buy it away.

    What really irks Bloomberg about the right to bear arms isn’t the red herrings we throw around in the gun rights debate, such as hunting or self-defense. Rather, he hates its foundation in popular sovereignty. It’s easy to forget that when the Bill of Rights was being drafted, the founding fathers took for granted that the United States would not field an army during peacetime. With the enumerated rights to association and the press — as well as arms — they attempted to place the tools of 18th century revolution (and thus American sovereignty) permanently in the hands of the enfranchised public. Militias weren’t supposed to be local armies, they were supposed to be the Army. As Rep. Samuel Nasson wrote to Rep. George Thatcher in 1789, “Spare me on the subject of Standing armeys in a time of Peace they allway was first or last the downfall of all free Governments it was by their help Caesar made proud Rome Own a Tyrant and a Traytor for a Master.”

    Read More…