New York City Guns archive
Category : News

The “Trump Effect” – Fox News Joins Macy’s On The Losing End of Anti-Trump Efforts…

Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: May 1, 2016

Trump - Every Day

CNN has the strongest surge in ratings in the past 14 years and now beats Fox News in the all important category of 25-54 year old viewership. That age category drives the ad revenue determinations for the industry.

Fox News can’t say they were not warned this would be an outcome of their insufferable decision to continue promoting a media narrative in opposition to Donald Trump. The same thing happened to Macys Department Store after they dropped Trump.

Read More…

Ted Cruz Is Getting Ready to Call It Quits After He Loses Indiana…

Categories: Activism, Education, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: May 1, 2016

Penguin Cruz

Ted Cruz is speaking confidently about knocking off Donald Trump to take the GOP nomination, but his top staffers admit they’re getting nervous.

In interviews, several aides, speaking on the condition of anonymity, expressed growing alarm that Cruz would lose Indiana’s primary on Tuesday — an outcome that would be a major blow to his hopes of holding Trump below the 1,237 delegates needed to clinch the GOP nomination on the party convention’s first ballot. The aides concede that, without a win in an Indiana primary where 57 delegates are at stake, Cruz’s shot at the nomination would significantly narrow.

And while the Texas senator has closed the gap in Indiana in recent days, he still trails Trump and his decision to tap Carly Fiorina as a running mate has provided only a modest boost in the state, according to sources familiar with the campaign’s internal deliberations.

Within the campaign, some are turning to the question of what’s next. One senior aide said there had been no discussion about dropping out before the final primary contests are held on June 7 but noted that Cruz wouldn’t be eager to prolong a campaign he was convinced he couldn’t win.

Many top figures in the party are convinced that a loss on Tuesday would be, for all intents and purposes, the end of the road. “A Cruz loss in Indiana means lights out,” said Scott Reed, the chief political strategist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. “Game, set, match.”

Read More…

NRA Statement on President Obama’s Latest Gun Control

Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: April 30, 2016

Trump2017

Fairfax, Va.— The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) issued the following statements on President Obama’s latest gun control push.

In response to the President’s call for “smart gun” technology:

“President Obama’s obsession with gun control knows no boundaries,” said Jennifer Baker, director of NRA-ILA Public Affairs. “At a time when we are actively fighting terrorists at home and abroad, this administration would rather focus the military’s efforts on the president’s gun control agenda.”

In response to the proposed Social Security Administration (SSA) reporting rule:

“The president’s fixation on social security recipients is just another distraction from his failure to address the underlying issues of violent crime and suicide,” said Baker. “As this president makes it harder for law-abiding citizens to exercise their individual right to self-defense, his own administration is releasing criminals convicted of gun crimes back onto the street and prosecuting 40 percent less firearm crimes than the previous administration. President Obama’s focus on denying disability beneficiaries their fundamental Second Amendment rights while giving criminals a free pass is embarrassing and shameful.”


Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America’s oldest civil rights and sportsmen’s group. More than five million members strong, NRA continues to uphold the Second Amendment and advocates enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation’s leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the armed services. Be sure to follow the NRA on Facebook at NRA on Facebook and Twitter @NRA.

Poll: Voters Not Swayed by Clinton’s Anti-Gun Duplicity

Categories: Activism, Education, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: April 30, 2016

hitlery_chunkfestdance

We’ve been reporting on Democrat presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton and her anti-gun mentality for months. She has been especially focused on the alleged immunity gun manufacturers have under federal law, the Protection in Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). She has often claimed, incorrectly, that gun manufacturers “are the only business in America that is wholly protected from any kind of liability.” Despite the fact that her accusations have been completely debunked as false on Politifact and elsewhere, Ms. Clinton continues to trot out these deceptive talking points, promising she’ll repeal “the gun industry’s unique immunity protection” if elected.

A recent poll by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) indicates that the American public isn’t being taken in by Clinton’s anti-gun nonsense. According to the poll, more than seventy percent of voters surveyed nationally on the issue disagreed with Ms. Clinton and her stance on the PLCAA.

Instead, voters across party lines support the common sense position that it is wrong to hold firearms manufacturers and retailers liable for the actions of third parties who misuse lawfully sold products in crimes. According to a NSSF report on the survey, “a majority of voters in all regions of the country” say the statement about keeping the PLCAA as law more closely reflects their opinion, “even for a majority of those who cast a vote for President Obama in the last election (53 percent) and for a majority of non-gun owners (56 percent).” Significantly, a higher percentage of those surveyed who identified as “Strong Democrat” supported the PLCAA than opposed it. Even among her party’s strong identifiers, Clinton’s duplicity is not winning her any converts.

Commenting on these results, Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel, notes “it’s time for politicians to demonstrate that they have some respect for the good sense of the people and to stop vilifying the hard-working people of an entire industry and exploiting real tragedy that is the result of criminal conduct.” We doubt Clinton will take this advice, but it would behoove her to think carefully when treading in such murky waters come general election time.

Say What? Gun Control Advocates Try to Change the Language of Crime

Categories: Activism, Education, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: April 30, 2016

As a cabinet level official in the Obama administration, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton both reflected and informed the regime’s values and tactics, some of which she has carried forward into her own campaign for the White House. This includes careful and selective use of language to fulfill the Obama imperative to “punish our enemies” and “reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us”. And just as Obama pledged to fundamentally transform the United States of America, he and Clinton are fundamentally transforming the English language to reorient the public on “issues that are important” to their shared agenda of gun control.

For fans of history or literature, this will come as no surprise. The totalitarian regime in George Orwell’s novel 1984 provides the roadmap that Obama and Clinton are now following. “Whatever the Party holds to be truth is truth,” an apparatchik tells a political prisoner. “It is impossible to see reality except by looking through the eyes of the Party.”

Hillary Clinton has been very specific about labeling the NRA (and by extension, the millions upon millions of law-abiding Americans it represents) as her “enemy.” She has also likened NRA to “the Iranians or the Communists” and insisted that pro-gun advocates “hold a viewpoint that terrorizes the majority of people.”

But the NRA represents law-abiding gun owners. What about the criminals who intentionally hurt people with firearms?

Acknowledgement that crime is a product of human choice and behavior is becomingly increasingly unfashionable for many in Hillary Clinton’s party. Clinton-speak even allows for the concept of criminal-free violent crime. During a Democratic primary debate in Brooklyn on April 14, for example, Clinton asserted, “Well, the facts are that most of the guns that end up committing crimes in New York come from out of state.”

Guns don’t commit crime, Madame Secretary. Criminals do.

Just this week, though, the Obama administration doubled down on Clinton’s logic by insinuating that even the terms “delinquent,” “criminal,” or “convict” are now passé. On April 25, the Obama Justice Department announced a $1.75 million initiative to “Help Justice-Involved Youth Find Jobs and Housing.” Someone merely reading the headline could be forgiven for thinking that meant the administration was trying to recruit young people into careers in law enforcement … or maybe even the type of “community organizing” for “social justice” that launched Obama’s own public persona. The press release, however, makes clear that the justice-involved youth are actually people who have broken the law early in life and are reintegrating into society after serving a term in “juvenile justice facilities” or in a state or federal prison.

This follows a similar rebranding of lawbreakers by the gun control group Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence (which, if its name reflected its true make-up and mission, would be called San Francisco Lawyers Trying to Prevent Gun Ownership). As we reported in March, that group similarly insists that preventing urban gun violence necessitates replacing characterizations like “gang members, thugs, or predators” with the more mild sounding terms “clients, individuals, and fellow community members.”

There’s nothing wrong with trying to prevent violence or give offenders who wish to turn around their lives the opportunity to do so.

But any honest discussion of gun-related crime must include the notion of criminals committing volitional acts. Smearing NRA and portraying guns as acting independently, while ignoring or diminishing the culpability of people who actually pull the trigger, isn’t a way to advance the debate. It’s a way to avoid it.

Obama and Clinton invest heavily in semantics because they’re short on facts to support their positions. That’s how NRA members become associated with terrorists and convicted lawbreakers become associated with justice. But whatever sort of linguistic gymnastics they might use to bamboozle the public, the American voter still gets the last word in November.

Hollywood Ramps up Anti-gun Campaign

Categories: Activism, Education, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: April 30, 2016

Hollyweird

Gun control advocates and Hollywood have long been allied in an effort propagandize the public against firearm ownership. However, as detailed in an April 27 piece in entertainment industry trade publication Variety, anti-gun groups and television and film producers are increasingly collaborating on projects and escalating their campaign to indoctrinate viewers.

As we noted back in March, gun control groups and Hollywood have often worked hand in hand to condition the public. Since 2000, the Entertainment Industries Council, whose purported goal is “Encouraging the entertainment industry to more effectively address and accurately depict major health and social issues,” has urged content producers to explore anti-gun scenarios and talking points in their television programs and films. The messaging effort was developed with the participation of Brady Campaign and handgun prohibitionist organization Violence Policy Center. For a time, anti-gun benefactor the Joyce Foundation even granted awards for television programs and films that most faithfully followed their anti-gun directives.

The Variety article makes clear that Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown intends to use an accommodating entertainment industry to amplify their anti-gun propaganda. The piece points to an NRA-fueled storyline in the latest season of Netflix political drama “House of Cards” as one example. Everytown President John Feinblatt consulted with the show’s writers, supposedly in order to “make sure they got it right.” As is often the case with propaganda, Feinblatt and the show’s writers did not get it right when it came to their characterization of federal gun laws or NRA’s grassroots activism. Everytown also arranged that the website for the show’s fictional gun control group redirects to their own.

Illustrating the scope of Everytown’s plans to conscript members of the entertainment industry, the Bloomberg front group has an employee entirely devoted to this effort, dubbed their “Director of Cultural Engagement.” The position is held by long-time public relations flack Jason Rzepka. Earlier this year, Rzepka’s was quoted in numerous articles about Everytown’s successful effort to get the taxpayer-subsidized National Basketball Association to promote gun control. According to a description found in Rzepka’s Linkedin.com profile, “He oversees Everytown’s storytelling efforts, partnerships with the creative community and develops cultural assets that mobilize Americans to support common sense reforms…” A less creative description of Rzepka’s position might acknowledge that he works to brainwash the public.

Most recently, comedienne and cousin to U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) Amy Schumer continued her crusade against firearm ownership by teaming up with Everytown to produce a sketch for her Comedy Central show “Inside Amy Schumer.” In it, Schumer play the host of a home shopping program tasked with selling a pistol priced at $39.99. When a caller states that he can’t buy a gun due to several violent felony convictions, Schumer explains “you can absolutely get a gun if you have several felonies, as long as you buy it on the internet or at a gun show.” Schumer then reveals that the home shopping program is, perplexingly, a gun show. Later, Schumer takes a cheap shot at the disabled, cracking a joke that suggests the actress believes that a physical disability is a legitimate reason for denying an individual their constitutional rights. As with an actual home shopping station, a number is present on screen throughout the sketch; if dialed, a caller is connected with Everytown.

A scene so divorced from reality is difficult to adequately address. Those engaged in the business of selling firearms, defined as those who transact in firearms “with the principal objective of livelihood and profit” are required to obtain a Federal Firearms License and conduct background checks on prospective purchasers. An individual purchasing a modern firearm from an internet retailer must have that firearm shipped to a Federal Firearms Licensee in their home state who will conduct a background check on the buyer before transferring the firearm. Despite what gun control proponents would have the public believe, federal law does not make a special distinction for gun shows; those engaged in the business of buying and selling firearms at gun shows, like Schumer’s fictional shopping network, are required to obtain a Federal Firearms License and conduct background checks. Individual gun owners and collectors who are not engaged in the business of selling firearms are permitted to privately transfer firearms with fellow residents of their state without obtaining prior government permission, whether this transfer occurs between friends and family members, at a gun show, in response to a classified ad, or pursuant to an internet posting.

Such a wildly inaccurate characterization of federal gun laws in a comedic sketch could be forgiven as creative license, if not for Schumer’s bias, Everytown’s participation, and that the show’s depiction of federal gun laws has been taken as fact throughout the more ignorant corners of the anti-gun media. Such outlets have also inaccurately described the sketch as “bold” and “hard-hitting.” It is of course, nothing of the sort. To be truly bold in Hollywood would be to even slightly question its prevailing anti-gun orthodoxy.

The Variety item also reports that officials from Brady Campaign consulted with the writers of CBS’s legal drama “The Good Wife” on an episode advocating the organization’s position on gun dealer liability and the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. In a press release that accompanied the episode, Brady Campaign noted their ongoing efforts to engage “celebrities and partners in the entertainment industry,” and explained the “valuable role Hollywood and cultural influencers can play in facilitating essential conversations.” Additionally, Brady worked with “Grey’s Anatomy” writers to interject an anti-gun message into a recent episode of the ABC medical drama, titled, “Trigger Happy.” Thankfully, the episode was immediately followed by a Brady Center ad, alerting viewers to the fact that the preceding program was intended as propaganda.

Understanding that NRA and America’s gun owners have repeatedly demonstrated their ability to hold politicians to account at the ballot box, and that polling reveals that Americans remain divided on whether firearms laws should be made more strict, anti-gun advocates are putting a greater emphasis on shifting American culture away from firearms and firearm ownership in the hopes that such a shift would facilitate the enactment of anti-gun legislation.

There is evidence that the nation’s leading anti-gun politician understands this calculus as well. On April 21, while addressing a crown in Hartford, Conn., Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton explained, “I’m not here to make promises I can’t keep. I am here to tell you I will use every single minute of every single day if I’m so fortunate enough to be your president looking for ways that we can save lives, that we can change the gun culture.” Here, Clinton makes clear that she is not only seeking to enact a raft of anti-gun legislation, but that she wants to attack our culture as well.

Armed with the facts, NRA members should work to identify the anti-gun group propaganda permeating television programming and film and to dispel the intentional inaccuracies it perpetuates. By alerting family and friends to this well-orchestrated campaign to diminish our rights, and sharing with them the facts on lawful gun ownership, we can help counter this disturbing effort to re-educate the American people.

Aging Has-Been Rocker Preaches to College Students: You’re Too Drunk, Violent, and Stupid for 2A Your Rights

Categories: Activism, Education, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: April 30, 2016

Throughout its history, rock-n-roll music has provided youth who are fed up with being lectured and condescended to by out-of-touch or hypocritical elders a voice to respond and to advocate for their own generation. Athens, GA, rocker Micheal Stipe and his band R.E.M. helped fulfill that role for those who came of age in the 1980s and ‘90s with a string of memorable hits. On Monday, however, Stipe said too much, and not enough, with a preachy, barely coherent editorial railing against the Second Amendment rights of today’s college students.

The occasion of Stipe’s lecture was Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal’s ongoing consideration of H.B. 859, a bill the legislature passed last month that would partially lift Georgia’s ban on the concealed carrying of handguns on college campuses for those with a concealed carry license. This bill recognizes two simple and irrefutable facts: Violent crime can strike anywhere and the law-abiding who obey gun bans on college campuses remain at the mercy of those who do not.

Stipe said the “battle” over the legislation “hits close to home” because he met his “future R.E.M. bandmates when we were all students at the University of Georgia in Athens.” Why that would qualify him to argue against the rights of today’s students is not especially clear, but he apparently believes R.E.M.’s creative trajectory would have been interrupted if the band members could have carried guns on campus at the time.

Stipe went on to express the silly and unsubstantiated arguments that college administrators have used to explain why the same young adults who they portray as the best and brightest in their recruiting and promotional materials are too stupid, savage, and addled by substance abuse to exercise a basic right.

As with other gun ban advocates, Stipe is apparently unable to conceive of a law-abiding victim benefitting from the chance of meeting an attacker on equal terms. “[S]urvivors of sexual assault,” he wrote, “may soon have to face an armed assailant at the time of the crime and again at the disciplinary hearing.” Yet as one advocate for the bill argued, “The fact of the matter is it is a fantasy for us to say right now guns will not appear on our campuses. All that means is someone of unlawful intent will be armed while licensed concealed carry holders will be disarmed.”

Nevertheless, Stipe’s attitude simply mirrored that of another opponent of the bill who insisted on the Senate floor that she would not want to have a weapon at her disposal, were she to be accosted by an armed attacker bent on raping and/or killing her. “No,” she said, “that gun would much more likely be used against me.”

This mind-numbing embrace of passivity, helplessness, and denial ignores the experience of millions of all ages, sexes, and physical states who have successfully warded off violent attack with firearms. They have included mothers, grandmothers, college students, even minors.

It’s an incredibly infantilizing and condescending outlook that would demand college students meekly submit to whatever victimization a predator might choose for them.

While that might be Stipe’s version of reality, it’s not the reality that most Americans agree with or live by. Rather, it is the sentiment of a once relevant musician now so conditioned by the Establishment that he can no longer imagine a young adult standing on his or her own feet. For those who value both rock-n-roll and the Second Amendment, it’s the end of Stipe’s credibility as we know it.

Social Security Administration Releases Proposed Rulemaking on Disability-Related Gun Ban

Categories: Activism, Education, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: April 30, 2016

On Friday, the Social Security Administration (SSA) released a draft of a proposed rulemaking that would supposedly bring the agency into compliance with what it claims is its responsibility to report prohibited persons to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The proposal focuses on five factors to determine if certain SSA recipients receiving Disability Insurance or Supplemental Security Income (SSI) have been “adjudicated as a mental defective” and are therefore federally prohibited from possessing or receiving firearms. It would also create an administrative procedure for affected individuals to petition for restoration of their rights. The proposed rule will remain open for public comment for 60 days.

We have been reporting since last summer on the Obama administration’s plan to use SSA as a basis to strip Americans of their Second Amendment rights. Concerns were initially raised by a report in the Los Angeles Times that SSA would follow the lead of the Department of Veterans Affairs by broadly reporting all beneficiaries receiving payments whose funds were disbursed to another individual on the beneficiary’s behalf. This prompted congressional inquiries, to which SSA replied that the plan would not apply to all beneficiaries assigned representative payees. The agency did not, however, elaborate on who would be included, and it did not rule out using the assignment of a representative payee as a consideration in determining who was reportable.

SSA’s intentions have now been made public. As outlined in the proposal, SSA would use five factors to determine which of its Disability Insurance or SSI recipients have been “adjudicated” by the agency as “mental defectives.”

The first factor is whether the individual filed his or her claim with SSA based on disability. Thus, merely receiving retirement benefits from SSA would not trigger further action.

The second factor would require the agency to determine which individuals have “been found disabled based on a finding that the individual’s impairment(s) meets or medically equals the requirements of one of the Mental Disorders Listing of Impairments” set forth in SSA rules. Those disorders cover a broad range of conditions, including but not limited to organic mental disorders, intellectual disabilities, anxiety-related disorders, personality disorders, substance addiction, and autism and other developmental disorders. Symptoms of these disorders can range from outright incoherence or hallucination to milder presentations such as sleep or appetite disturbances, decreased energy, or even “inflated self-esteem.”

The third factor is whether the individual has “a primary diagnosis code in [SSA’s] records based on a mental impairment.” According to the proposal, “The primary diagnosis refers to the basic condition that renders an individual disabled” under relevant SSA rules.

The fourth factor focuses on the individual’s age, specifically on whether he or she is at least 18 years old but has not yet attained full retirement age.

Factor five is whether the agency has determined the beneficiary’s payments are to be made through a representative payee based on a determination that he or she is incapable of managing them as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition or disease.

If all five of these factors are met, the individual would be reported to NICS as a “mental defective” and banned (presumably for life) from receiving or possessing firearms.

The rule would also allow affected individuals to petition for restoration of rights. Under its terms, relief from Second Amendment disabilities “may” be granted if the individual could “establish to [SSA’s] satisfaction that the circumstances regarding the disability, and the applicant’s record and reputation, are such that the applicant will not be likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety, and that the granting of the relief would not be contrary to the public interest.”

Overall, while the proposal is not as drastic as many initially feared and is procedurally more narrowly-tailored than the indefensible procedures of the Veteran’s Administration (VA), it still raises substantial cause for concern. Far more people are potentially implicated in the SSA regime than in VA’s regime because of the broader reach of SSA’s programs. The White House itself estimates that some 75,000 each year could be affected, with no upper limit or end in sight. And while SSA’s procedures at least consider (unlike VA’s) whether the underlying basis of disability is a mental impairment, those impairments cover a range of conditions, from those that might increase a tendency toward aggressive or self-destructive behavior to those that won’t.

Indeed, at no point in the actual “adjudication” is the individual’s propensity for violence a necessary consideration. Rather, the question ultimately devolves to whether or not the individual has any sort of mental condition and can responsibly handle money, which is not a fair basis to strip someone of their constitutional rights. The procedures established for relief, moreover, lack adequate due process and do not even allow the petitioner the opportunity for an administrative hearing.

From beginning to end, in fact, SSA’s process makes no provision whatsoever for the individual to attend a formal hearing before an adjudicative authority, to put forth their own experts, or to cross-examining adverse witnesses. It only involves anonymous bureaucrats reviewing documents in a government-compiled file. That is hardly the process most Americans would consider an adjudication, and certainly not one sufficient to strip someone of fundamental liberties.

Ultimately, SSA’s rulemaking highlights the need for systemic changes to the federal laws concerning when mental illness results in a person being prohibited from possessing and receiving firearms. Financial acumen, even if related to an underlying issue with sleep disturbances or inflated self-esteem, has no necessary relationship to a propensity for violence, and it’s not a sufficient basis to strip persons of their inalienable right to self-defense. This is exactly why NRA is supporting corrective legislation, including the Mental Health and Safe Communities Act of 2015, the Social Security Beneficiary 2nd Amendment Rights Protection Act, and the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act.

In the meantime, comments may be submitted on the SSA rulemaking in several ways:

  • Via the online Federal eRulemaking portal at http://www.regulations.gov (use the “Search” function to find docket number SSA–2016–0011);
  • Via facsimile at (410) 966-2830; or
  • By sending them through the mail to NICS Comments, Social Security Administration, 3100 West High Rise Building, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21235–6401.

Hillary Clinton Promises to Attack Gun Owners Her “Very First Day” in Office

Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: April 30, 2016

Hillary - Consensud

In what has become as reliable as clockwork, with the passing of another week comes another Hillary Clinton attack on gun owners. This time, the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination explained to supporters her intent to make an assault on gun rights and NRA one of her top priorities. A video of her comments has been distributed by Breitbart.com and can be viewed by clicking here.

Addressing an April 25 MSNBC “townhall” hosted by left-wing commentator Rachel Maddow, Clinton stated,

I really support everything President Obama said he would do through regulation on guns but we’re going to start the very first day and tackle the gun lobby to try to reduce the outrageous number of people who are dying from gun violence in our country.

Later, the candidate spoke of her party’s chances of taking control of the Senate, stating,

The Democrats have decided they will be led by Chuck Schumer and Chuck Schumer has been one of the most effective legislators in taking on the gun lobby. He and I worked together to get the Brady bill passed way back in my husband’s administration. So I think that it’s the kind of issue you have to start early, you have to work on it every day and we need to make it a voting issue.

A visibly agitated Clinton concluded her remarks on the subject by noting,

I’m going to keep talking about it, and we are going to make it clear that this has to be a voting issue. If you care about this issue, vote against people who give in to the NRA and the gun lobby all the time.

These comments make clear that gun owners and NRA would be in Clinton’s crosshairs from the moment she assumes office. And thanks to Clinton’s recent candor, gun owners don’t have to guess at the types of restrictions Clinton has in mind for them. Clinton has supported a ban on popular semi-automatic firearms and endorsed an Australian-style confiscation scheme for carrying out her vision. Clinton has expressed her vehement opposition to the Right-to-Carry. Most disturbing, under Clinton’s false interpretation of the Constitution, the Second Amendment does not protect and individual right to keep and bear arms and allows gun bans.

Somewhat of a political pragmatist, Barack Obama waited until he secured a second term before launching most of his efforts to restrict firearm ownership. Hillary Clinton is continually making clear that under her reign gun owners would receive no such reprieve.

This is why NRA members, along with their families and friends, must get involved in our efforts to secure a victory for gun owners this fall. At the bare minimum, gun owners must ensure that they and their loved ones are registered to vote. For those that can contribute more to our fight for freedom, NRA-ILA’s Grassroots Division can connect you with volunteer opportunities anywhere in the country, and NRA has made it easier than ever to participate in our efforts. To register to vote or explore further opportunities to help, please visit NRA-ILA’s Election Center at https://www.nraila.org/about/election-center/.

Donald Trump blasts California protesters as “thugs and criminals”

Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: April 30, 2016

Globullizm

Donald Trump slammed the protesters at his recent California campaign events as “thugs and criminals,” calling for police to dole out harsh punishments in a tweet early Saturday.

Protests erupted Friday in Burlingame, where Trump spoke at California’s GOP convention, with demonstrators shutting down streets and spilling out across the grounds of the Hyatt Regency hotel.

Video of the crowds showed a largely peaceful demonstration, though there were some pockets of aggressive protesters — including some flag-burners and egg-throwers.

Read More…

CLINTON CRASH: Hillary Has Received Hundreds of Thousands Fewer Votes in 2016 vs. 2008!

Categories: Activism, Education, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: April 30, 2016

Hillary Wiped the Server

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has badly underperformed in 2016 compared with her first run for president in 2008, a new data analysis done exclusively by Breitbart News shows.

It’s particularly telling that she’s gotten fewer votes in 2016 than she did in 2008, especially because of the fact that the 2008 race was a three-way race for some time between Clinton, now President Barack Obama, and ex-Sen. John Edwards. She was, despite being the frontrunner for some time, the ultimate loser of that race—and she got more votes that year in a much more competitive primary that she ended up losing than she has this year against a devout, proud socialist in Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) of Vermont.

Read More…

thumbGeorge Soros Paid Protesters Storm Donald Trump Appearance At GOP Convention In California

Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: April 30, 2016


Hundreds of paid for demonstrators descended on the California Republican Convention Friday to protest Donald Trump ahead of his speech, courtesy of George Soros and company.

As Donald Trump hold rallies in California, ‘spontaneous protests‘ are cropping up to greet him. Only thing is, the protesters are collecting a paycheck for their services. It is paid for mostly by George Soros and MoveOn.org and pushed by David Brock at Media Matters for America. It’s also funded by reclusive billionaire Jonathan Lewis, who was identified by the Miami New Times as a “mystery man.” No surprises here.

Read More…

thumbTrump Supporters Beaten, Bloodied by ‘Mexican-Flag Wavers’ (VIDEO)

Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: April 30, 2016

President Trump, When can we liquidate these scumbags?

Fred Reed: The Mask Comes Off: Putrefaction Most Foul (Trump 2016!)

Categories: Activism, Education, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: April 30, 2016

Trump America 2017

I love it: Donald Trump’s campaign reveals the establishment for what it is, a swamp of corruption as fetid as those of Latin America. It is better entertainment than Vaudeville. The frantic scramble to rig the primaries, change the rules, and thwart the voters–anything to defend their cozy entanglement of political tapeworms–makes absurd any pretense of democracy.

This morning in the Drudge Report: “Trump Highest Number of Republican Voters in History.” Who do the Republicans want to get rid of? Trump.

On the same page a poll reports Trump tied with Hillary nationally. Who do the Republicans want to get rid of? Guess.

Read More…

George Neumayr: Trump Thumps the Ruling Class

Categories: Activism, Education, News, Politics
Tags: No Tags
Comments: No Comments
Published on: April 30, 2016

schlonged

“What have you been smoking?” said a partner in a New York law firm to me in early January after I asserted in front of a room full of Upper East Side liberals that “Trump would win the nomination.” Others hooted me for holding that “closeted Trump supporters” exist in the disaffected corners of American life and that Trump would enjoy a reverse Bradley effect.

Last Christmas I ran into Newt Gingrich after Mass in Washington, D.C., and for the heck of it said to him, “So what job do you want in the Trump administration?” He looked at me with utter disbelief. Now I see him on TV bemoaning the slowness with which pundits grasped the Trump phenomenon. He was one of them.

Read More…

Training Schedule
CLICK PRICE FOR DETAILS

06/04/16 Utah CCW/FS Pistol Class
Westside Range 12-4 PM $150.00

06/18/16 Utah CCW/FS Pistol Class
Westside Range 12-4 PM $150.00

07/02/16 Utah CCW/FS Pistol Class
Westside Range 12-4 PM $150.00

07/30/16 Utah CCW/FS Pistol Class
Westside Range 12-4 PM $150.00

NYCG Radio

Current Episode

"Trump is NRA"

#170


Trump 2016!

The only candidate with the vision to save this country and the BALLS to actually do it. Anti-gun clowns, illegal aliens, PC bed-wetters, Marxist scumbags and other assorted libturds NEED NOT APPLY. Regular Americans can help Donald Make America Great Again!

Real Gun Facts
Discount NRA Membership
Join The NRA and Get $10 off a Yearly Membership!
NYCG Gear
Donate to the NYC PBA Widows’ & Children’s Fund

The PBA Widows’ and Children’s Fund, Inc. (the “Fund”) provides aid and assistance to widows, widowers and eligible dependents of police officers who have lost their lives in the line of duty.

If you would like to donate to this 501(c)3 tax-exempt organization, please make a check payable to:

New York City PBA Widows and Children's Fund

And send it to:

Michael Morgillo

Patrolmen's Benevolent Association

125 Broad Street

11th Floor

New York, NY 10004-2400

Welcome , today is Sunday, May 29, 2016