NEVER TOLERATE TYRANNY!....Conservative voices from the GRASSROOTS.

New legislation would fire sheriffs who disobey federal gun restrictions

gun-ban

Move over – there might be a new sheriff in town if you don’t go along with federal gun control mandates, says new state legislation. The 380 sheriffs who have vowed to defend the constitutional right to b... may now be at risk to lose their jobs.

Many state legislatures are now pushing to passing measures that would remove any sheriff found defying federal law.

In the Texas state legislature, Dallas Democratic Representative Yvonne Davis introduced a measure that would fire any aw enforcement officer who disobeys state or federal orders.

And it gets worse.

The bill even calls for the removal of any law enforcement officer who just promises — either on paper or just verbally — not to enforce any federal gun control mandates that the federal government passes.

“Beware because once something like this is introduced in one state, it will be followed very quickly in several other states,” one gun lobbyist told the Washington Examiner.

But while some state legislators are working with the federal government to push gun control, others are still fighting against it.The Senate gun bill is expected to be introduced when the Senate reconvenes after the Easter recess.

The Idaho state legislature is working toward passing legislation that would actually prohibit state and local police from enforcing any gun control mand.... State legislatures in Montana, Wyoming, Texas and Virginia are also proposing legislation that would block any new federal gun restrictions.

As for Texas, Gov. Rick Perry has been calling all gun owners and companies to move to the longhorn state, but if this new legislation passes he may have a problem.

If your guns aren’t even safe in Texas anymore, you might want to keep on going to Mexico.

By Laura Byrne /// March 28, 2013

About Laura Byrne

Laura Byrne is a writer for Red Alert Politics. Her work has been featured on Yahoo! News, Fox Nation, and the Daily Caller. If she's not reporting, she's running or reading. She grew up on the Alabama Gulf Coast and spent her college years in New Orleans at Tulane University. After graduating, she finally left her Southern roots to move to Washington D.C. Follow her on Twitter at @Byrne_Notices.

http://redalertpolitics.com/2013/03/28/new-legislation-would-fire-s...

Comment

You need to be a member of REAL CONSERVATIVES to add comments!

Join REAL CONSERVATIVES

Comment by Gordon Ray Kissinger on March 30, 2013 at 7:04am: Saber Rattling or Flanking Maneuver? Reid Drops Legislation

March 24, 2013

by Dave Dolbee
Related Topics: General Gun Rights Industry News Legal Issues News Second Amendment

The major news outlets were quick to report on Tuesday that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid had made the decision to pull Senator Dianne Feinstein’s ban on modern sporting rifles. For many, that was reason to stand up and cheer. However, that could be a premature reaction.

It seems the government only wants to pass laws to strip the weapons from honest gun owners. I have yet to hear of a single law being proposed that seeks to remove guns from the hands of criminals. Have you?

Reid’s decision is not much of a surprise. I wrote as much a few months ago in a blog post, but don’t be lulled into thinking the threat is over. This may simply be a flanking maneuver to avoid the initial vote. After the initial bill is voted on (and assuming it passes the Democrat-controlled Senate) the Dems could still slip it back in before the final vote.

While this seems unlikely to some, remember these are the same people who passed Obama Care by telling us they had to vote on it before they could finish writing it. They are still writing it today—talk about having a blank check! So be wary, until we can read the final language, no one can know for sure. I certainly would not put it past Feinstein and Reid to tactically remove it in an attempt to drop off the radar then magically find what they will pitch as a “moral” reason to slip it back in at the last minute.

Universal Background Checks

The other real threat right now is the bill requiring background checks for all transactions between private sellers. On its face I would like to support it because it sounds reasonable, but the devil is in the details. First, this would place a huge administrative burden on a system that is already less than efficient. NCIS would absolutely crash. Second, it does nothing to address preventing people with severe mental illness from buying weapons.

The third is the scariest of all, which is a national registration of all firearms. And that is not my hype to stir up the base, that is the wording from Obama’s Justice Department.

Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), a leading face in the Democratic party. She previously claimed to be of Cherokee Indian decent to gain preferential treatment when applying for jobs and college. Do you really think Congress is looking for facts over an agenda?

There are several interesting points to this document that show exactly why several of the proposed bills before Congress won’t work. However, instead of Obama and the Democrats heeding the advice, they have chosen to use it as a blueprint for their legislation. This is yet another revealing example of the agenda the Democrats are pursuing. They run out and claim some moral high ground while picking and choosing the facts to fit their agenda.

Misrepresentations

We have all followed the legislation in Colorado to ban standard capacity—if you look at law enforcement, Department of Homeland Security or civil defense guidelines… high-capacity if you are a gun control advocate—magazines. The Governor, John Hickenlooper, cited a statistic provided by the Sherriff of Golden, Colorado as a primary reason he signed the legislation.

The statistic claims that more police officers and civilians have been wounded or killed with weapons having the capability to carry more than 10 rounds than in the past. When you cherry pick the facts and spin them, that statement is true. More handguns produced and sold these days come standard with magazines that hold 13 to 17 rounds.

Here is just another example of the hypocrisy of the left. First, Gifford’s husband, Mark Kelly, is caught buying an AR-15 then photos surface of his wife, Gabrielle “Gabby” Giffords holding an AR-15 for a campaign photo.

It does not take much to find the fallacy in the Sherriff’s argument though. The report does not state that the higher capacity of the weapon was a cause for the increase. The average number of rounds fired in these incidents is four. And that is the average. Which means there are a lot more one and two round incidents to account for any act where more than 10 rounds were fired. It also fails to differentiate between lawful shootings and criminal acts. Therefore, if a SWAT team expends multiple rounds in apprehending a criminal this goes into the statistic.

Conclusion

It seems the government only wants to pass laws to strip the weapons from honest gun owners. Occasionally, they will pass feel-good legislation they know will not address the problems they have exploited to bring the legislation to a vote. That certainly seems to be the motivation behind the current legislation.

I have yet to hear of a single law being proposed that seeks to remove guns from the hands of criminals. Have you?

Comment by Gordon Ray Kissinger on March 29, 2013 at 9:07pm: Dana Loesch vs. Piers Morgan and Van Jones On Gun Control: Need We ...

29 Mar 2013

by Jason Howerton

Photo Credit: CNN

Things got tense Thursday night on CNN when Piers Morgan went head-to-head with conservative radio host Dana Loesch on the issue of gun control. Also on the show were former White House czar Van Jones and Grover Norquist — quite a diverse panel.

Morgan began by blasting the National Rifle Association’s “outrageous” and “utterly insensitive” leadership. Norquist replied by dismissed gun control and citing statistics that show several cities with very strict gun laws also have very high crime rates and shootings.

Shaking his head, Jones said the points that Norquist made were “not true.”

“You can’t deny the science. You’re a science denier, man,” Norquist replied, shooting Jones a wink. Jones then argued that the issue really is “military-style assault weapons” being out on the street in America, a point with Loesch quickly refuted.

“That’s a false premise,” Loesch said. “I’m going to correct you, because I am tired of this talking point being put out there. First and foremost, let’s get something straight. ‘Military-style assault weapons’ are not out on the street. We are talking about semi-automatic weapons, weapons that are capable of–” Morgan and Jones then teamed up on Loesch to argue that semi-automatic weapons like the popular AR-15 are, in-fact, “military-style assault weapons” because Gen. Stanley McChrystal used the phrase.

Watch video here:

Read more from this story HERE.

Read more: http://joemiller.us/2013/03/dana-loesch-vs-piers-morgan-and-van-jon...

Comment by Gordon Ray Kissinger on March 29, 2013 at 8:54pm: Alabama lawmaker sends shocking RACIST rant to gun-rights constituent, and copies every member of the state legislature

A black member of the Alabama legislature uncorked a racist tirade in an email this week to a constituent who urged him not to embrace new gun control laws - copying his incendiary language to every member of the state legislature.

Joseph Mitchell, a Democrat who has represented parts of the city of Mobile since 1994 and ran for re-election unopposed in 2010 and 2006, castigated a voter named Eddie Maxwell, a Jefferson County man whom he correctly presumed was white.

'Hey man,' Mitchell wrote. 'Your folk never used all this sheit [sic] to protect my folk from your slave-holding, murdering, adulterous, baby-raping, incestuous, snaggle-toothed, backward-a**ed, inbreed [sic], imported criminal-minded kin folk.'

Lashing out: State Rep. Joe Mitchell, D-Mobile, pictured, lashed out in an email to a man who asked him and other lawmakers not to pass any laws that would restrict gun ownership

The email he was responding to asked him, and the other members of the Alabama legislature, to keep state gun laws in step with the Second Amendment to the US Constitution, which guarantees citizens access to firearms.

'Do not violate your oath of office by introducing additional gun control bills,' Maxwell urged Mitchell, or by allowing those already enacted to remain in the body of our laws.'

The exchange, which occurred during a stretch of two weeks ending on February 13, was first reported by Yellow Hammer Politics, an Alabama-based conservative political blog. Mobile's Press-Register published the complete, unedited email chain Wednesday morning.

Mitchell's reply also suggested that he favored arming black Alabamians before enforcing new gun-control measures, in case they needed to defend themselves from racist white southerners.

Accused: Eddie Maxwell, pictured, replied back to Mitchell by defending himself as not racist and offended by his accusation, especially coming from someone in office

'You can keep sending me stuff like you have however,' he wrote, 'because it helps me explain to my constituents why they should protect that 2nd amendment thing AFTER we [blacks] finish stocking up on spare parts, munitions and the like.'

'Bring it,' he concluded. 'As one of my friends in the Alabama Senate suggested – "BRING IT!!!!"'

Maxwell, a retired coal miner, objected to amending the state constitution with new gun laws 'when the change is forbidden by the people.'

'You have sworn to support our constitution,' his initial email read. 'Do not violate your oath of office by introducing additional gun control bills or by allowing those already enacted to remain in the body of our laws.'

After reading Mitchell's race-laden reply, Maxwell sent another follow-up email.

'That's not the type of reply I expect to receive from a state legislator,' he wrote.

'I'm not a racist and I find your reply to be especially offensive considering the position you hold.'

All eyes: Mitchell continued to argue with the gun activist who also accused him of being racist in emails sent back and forth while continually CC'd to fellow lawmakers

'My parents and grandparents taught me to love God and my fellow man as myself. My father was threatened by members of his church back in 1954 for inviting a black family to attend the church he pastored.

'My father-in-law was threatened when he hired a young negro man to work in his shop back in 1968 in a community where several neighbors were members of the Ku Klux Klan. He didn’t allow those threats to keep him from treating people of all races equally.'

Racial siding: Mitchell, pictured, said in one email that he favored arming black Alabamians before enforcing new gun-control measures, in case they needed to defend themselves from racist white southerners

'Racism,' Maxwell concluded, 'is not exclusive to my own people. I learned that before 1955. It is just as ugly now as it was then, regardless of the race of the person who is consumed by it.'

Mitchell kept the thread going, continuing to copy all his legislative colleagues and insisting that it's impossible for a black man to be a racist.

'Historically, violence on Black folk was committed by White folk,' he insisted. 'It's a fact but is it "racist?" It is "racial."'

'A person without the power to exercise a threat cannot be a racist because he or she will be eliminated. A person who can, by merely stepping back on the sidewalk ore [sic] being quiet can support racism and benefit from the ‘first hired,’ affirmative action, preferential treatment fostered by systemic racism and bigotry.'

Mitchell ended his email with the taunting sign-off: 'Lock and load'

Neither MailOnline nor the Press-Register got responses when they reached out to Mitchell's office for comment.

But Maxwell told the Press-Register that he had no regrets about challenging his elected representative.

'It just makes me more determined that we the people need to stay involved," he told the paper in a telephone interview. 'It's up to us as citizens to watch our government.'

Maxwell also told the Press-Register that two other members of the state legislature have reached out to him to register their shock about their colleague's language.

This member hears you loud and clear,' he said Democratic state Rep. Patricia Todd of Birmingham wrote. 'I just received this chain of emails and wanted to let you know that I am with you on the gun issue and am saddened by the tone of my colleague's email. All of us have suffered from the racism of the past and I thank you for your civic and thoughtful response.'

Maxwell added that he was hopeful that Mitchell would be sanctioned by his fellow lawmakers.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2300114/Joseph-Mitchell-Ala...
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Comment by Gordon Ray Kissinger on March 29, 2013 at 8:45pm: The Second Amendment Does NOT Give You The Right To Bear Arms

By Pat Henry / 28 March 2013

Following the tragic shootings in Connecticut, a number of anti-gunners took up the old “Let’s Just Repeal the Second Amendment and We Will All Live Happily Ever After” mantra once again. A fellow named Edward Falzon, for example, opined in the Huffington Post Online that people should “Perhaps start by outing the NRA as the violence-supporting organization they are. These massacres that seem to be occurring ever-more-frequently in the USA have all been made possible by the NRA’s insistence that fully automatic, concealed weapons with armor-piercing rounds are not what kill people.”

The sheer hyperbole and factual distortion are egregious sins to be sure, but certainly not unusual. The NRA was formed after the Civil War because of a perceived lack of marksmanship among the troops, and it has evolved into the premiere firearms education organization in the world. A look at the mission statement of the NRA foundation is instructive; their activities “are designed to promote firearms and hunting safety, to enhance marksmanship skills of those participating in the shooting sports, and to educate the general public about firearms in their historic, technological, and artistic context (which) benefit a variety of constituencies throughout the United States including children, youth, women, individuals with physical disabilities, gun collectors, law enforcement officers, hunters, and competitive shooters.” Sure sounds like a “violence-supporting organization”, doesn’t it?

Falzon reveals his complete lack of information and understanding when he says that the NRA promotes “fully automatic, concealed weapons with armor-piercing rounds”, and that these mythical weapons are killing people. The so-called “assault weapons”, notably the AR-15 that are so reviled by Senator Feinstein and the rest of the anti-gunners are not fully automatic, are not concealable, and there are no “armor-piercing” rounds available for them, which would not increase their lethality on children in classrooms anyway. Without going into the technical details, suffice it to say that this is simply another example of conjuring up a bogeyman to scare the uninformed.

On top of that, the mass shootings are in fact not “ever-more-frequently-occurring”. Criminologist James Allen Fox of Boston’s Northeastern University, who has been studying the subject since the 1980’s says, “There is no pattern, there is no increase.” While mass shootings rose between the 1960’s and the 1990’s, they declined in the 2000’s. “If it seems like these dreadful crimes are occurring more frequently,” Fox argued after the Connecticut shootings, “it is really the immediacy and pervasiveness of media coverage that creates the impression.”

Interestingly, Obama’s own DOJ released a report on firearm violence prevention strategies dated January 4, 2013, that says among other things that “Assault weapons are not a major contributor to gun crime. But of course the gun grabbers never let a crisis go to waste, and they invent one if necessary … Since assault weapons are not a major contributor to US gun homicide and the existing stock of guns is large, an assault weapon ban is unlikely to have an impact on gun violence.” But that doesn’t stop the gun grabbers from recommending an “assault rifle” ban anyway.

But what if the elaborate procedure to amend the Constitution was carried out, and enough states voted to ratify the repeal, would that be the end of your right to keep and bear arms?

No, it would not, because the Constitution does not give you rights, it merely instructs the government not to interfere with the God-given rights you already have. A casual look at the Declaration of Independence reveals this tidbit: “We hold these Truths to be self-evident (so obvious that we shouldn’t have to mention them, but then there are liberals…) that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator (not by the government) with certain unalienable Rights (cannot be taken away by repeal of an Amendment or anything else) … That to secure these Rights (to protect them, not to take them away) Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed (We the People empower the government to do what we tell it to do), that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it (mess with it and tyrants will be overthrown)…

The purpose of the Constitution was to LIMIT the power of the Federal Government, not to expand them. Anything not specifically given to it was reserved to the states or the People. You can see how the Congress and the courts have respected that over the years! When the 13 colonies were operating under that Articles of Confederation, there seemed to be the need for a central government with some control, as it was necessary for example to beg each state individually for money or soldiers if something that affected the entire nation needed to be done. The Constitution was drawn up, but even then, as today, there was a debate between the big-government Federalists (who were small-government folks by today’s standards) and the limited government Anti-federalists. Before they ratified it, many states, insisted on provisions to limit the powers of the central government and to ensure the protection of the natural rights of liberty and property of the people. Edmund Randolph of Virginia, George Mason of Virginia, and Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts demanded a Bill of Rights if they were to support the Constitution. So, in a very real sense these are not “add-ons” but an integral part of the Constitution itself.

So, the next time some liberal suggests that the easiest way to do an end-run around all of us would just be to eliminate the Second Amendment altogether, tell him that eliminating your natural right to defend yourself from tyranny, be it from an individual who wants to violate your person or steal your property, or from a government that wants to violate your person or steal your property, is not open to discussion.

http://girlsjustwannahaveguns.com/2013/03/the-second-amendment-does...

Comment by Gordon Ray Kissinger on March 29, 2013 at 8:32pm

To view this email properly, click *Display Images*

An Exclusive Publication of The
United States Concealed Carry Association

"Media wages war on logic [more laws, please!]..."

By Tim Schmidt
USCCA Founder

Sensationalism always gets better ratings than rationale.

What does this do to honest, well-meaning Americans who are unfamiliar with the issues at hand in the media? It causes them to attach legitimate emotions to false solutions. For example:

Legitimate Emotion: It is unjust, heartbreaking and horrifying when innocent men, women and children are murdered by criminals with guns.

False Solution: Outlaw certain types of guns and magazines, implement stricter gun laws, and work towards a gun-free nation.

There isn’t a sane person on earth who would argue that it’s a good thing when someone is murdered by a person with a gun. It is a terrible crime that all of us wish didn’t exist. Sadly, the barbaric reality of murder is something that we have all come to expect in the news each day.

While I wish there was a magic button that we could push in order to make criminals disappear forever, we all know that crime isn’t going away. In fact, I would argue that men and women have been trying to create this “magic button” since the dawn of civilization. That “magic button” is the countless laws that have been created in every government throughout history.

“Thou Shall Not Murder” is likely the most common law in history, and has held the steepest penalties. Yet, murderers have never obeyed the law. Why?

It’s simple: Laws don't stop criminals intent on committing crimes from committing crimes.

So what’s the solution for the injustice of criminals preying upon the innocent? At the USCCA, we believe the solution is to level the playing field and give innocent, law-abiding people the ability to defend themselves from criminals.

Our founders had the wisdom to write this basic human right into our constitution, and we must hold fast to the truth that every person has the right to defend themselves and their loved ones from harm.

Don’t let the lying sensationalism of the media intimidate you and keep you quiet. Stand for your rights and be unapologetic about your belief that innocent lives are best protected by responsibly armed Americans like you.

Take care and stay safe,

Tim Schmidt
Publisher - Concealed Carry Report
USCCA Founder

P.S.- Just a quick reminder: we're giving away 4 guns to new USCCA ...

Comment by Gordon Ray Kissinger on March 29, 2013 at 8:29pm: MORE EMBARRASSMENT FOR BLOOMBERG'S

ANTI-GUN MAYORS GROUP

Three more names have been added to a veritable rogue's gallery of current or former members of Michael Bloomberg's Mayors Against Illegal Guns who have run afoul of the law with Thursday's criminal charges against Marcus Hook, Pa. Mayor James Schiliro.

Mayor Schiliro is one more example of why we started the 'Gun Owners Against Illegal Mayors' campaign He joins recently convicted former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, and recently indicted former New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, both of whom were MAIG members.

SELECT HERE To Help SAF Continue To Expose Anti-Gunners Such As Blo...

SAF launched Gun Owners Against Illegal Mayors last fall and the list keeps growing.

Schiliro's case is not only bad, but also bizarre. He has been charged with false imprisonment, unlawful restraint, reckless endangerment, serving alcohol to a minor and other crimes, and he also allegedly used more than one gun in this incident, in which at least one shot was fired.

The allegations against Schiliro creped me out; with associates like this, I can understand why Bloomberg doesn't trust people with guns.

According to published reports, Schiliro's attorney says the mayor has sold his guns and entered alcoholism treatment, but this doesn't get any traction with me. If the charges against this guy are proven in court, he deserves to have the book thrown at him, same as Mayor Bloomberg would demand if any other gun owner did what police and prosecutors think Schiliro did.

SELECT HERE To Help SAF Continue To Expose Anti-Gunners Such As Blo...

It is amusing that Schiliro - who signed an infamous letter to the U.S. Senate with 600 other mayors - has suddenly disappeared from the MAIG roster on that group's website.

Mayor Bloomberg should be more interested in the conduct of MAIG members than trying to pry into the personal lives of gun owners or soda drinkers. If anybody needs a background check, it would be a MAIG member.

SELECT HERE To Help SAF Continue To Expose Anti-Gunners Such As Blo...

Bloomberg has launched a 12-million-dollar attack ad campaign thru his group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns. He is targeting certain states where added pressure will be felt on certain Congressman with the Federal Gun Control bill coming soon after Congress is back from their 2 week break.

Bloomberg said, "If 90 percent of the public wants something and their representatives vote against that, common sense is they are going to have a price to pay for that."

It is unclear where Bloomberg got that '90%' figure that people want more gun control. Since Obama has been President, Forbes reported that nearly all polls show less than 50% of people want stricter gun control laws. They also say with America's current views on gun control we are headed toward a figure of around 39% of Americans that want stricter gun control.

SELECT HERE To Help SAF Continue To Expose Anti-Gunners Such As Blo...

With such an extensive workload, SAF is facing severe financial cash shortage and will not be able to continue to respond to anti-gunners without your immediate help.

SAF currently has over 20 open court cases we are involved in and it is our goal to earn a victory for each and every one of them. Our legal action ranges from law suits against cities, states, our Attorney General Eric Holder, and the challenge of certain rulings that violate our Second Amendment rights.

Along with the need to raise funds to pay attorneys hired for important gun rights lawsuits, we must continue to pay thousands of dollars' worth of bills to maintain free grassroots meetings, trainings and seminars.

Together, we can preserve the Constitutional rights our Founding Fathers intended our people to have forever.

Thank you. I know I can count on you.

Sincerely yours,

Alan M. Gottlieb
Founder
Second Amendment Foundation

Comment by Gordon Ray Kissinger on March 29, 2013 at 8:27pm: Filibuster to protect the Second Amendment grows

By United Press International March 29, 2013 6:55 am

Marco Rubio and James Inhofe joined three other U.S. Senate Republicans threatening to filibuster Democrats' gun legislation as violating the Second Amendment.The Florida and Oklahoma Republicans, respectively, joined Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Ted Cruz of Texas and Mike Lee of Utah in vowing to oppose "any legislation that would infringe on the American people's constitutional right to bear arms, or on their ability to exercise this right without being subjected to government surveillance," said a letter Rubio and Inhofe signed.
The letter, dated a week ago, was sent to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and was originally signed only by Paul, Cruz and Lee. It still has seven blank lines available for other signatures, a United Press International review of the letter indicated.

A filibuster is a way for senators to delay or prevent a vote on a bill by speaking for as long as they wish on any topic they choose, unless 60 senators bring debate to a close.

Paul -- a closely watched conservative who, like Rubio, is considering a 2016 presidential run -- led a nearly 13-hour filibuster on the CIA's drone policy early this month, forcing the Senate to delay the confirmation of John Brennan to lead the CIA.

The Senate is expected to debate a gun-violence bill after it returns from Easter recess April 8.

The bill, put together by Reid from Senate Judiciary Committee proposals, is expected to include a Democratic plan to expand the nation's gun background check program, reauthorize a Justice Department school-safety grant program and toughen federal laws on gun trafficking.

Reid has said a ban on certain styles of semiautomatic so-called assault weapons is virtually assured of defeat.

"We should look for ways to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill prone to misusing them, but I oppose legislation that will be used as a vehicle to impose new Second Amendment restrictions on responsible, law-abiding gun owners," Rubio said in a statement.

Rubio and Inhofe announced their intention to join a possible filibuster Thursday shortly after President Barack Obama urged congressional lawmakers to pass stricter gun laws a day shy of 15 weeks after the Dec. 14 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., that killed 20 schoolchildren and six adult staff members at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

"Less than 100 days ago that happened, and the entire country was shocked," Obama said at the White House, surrounded by relatives and friends of gun-violence victims, including some from Newtown. "And the entire country pledged we would do something about it and that this time would be different.

"Shame on us if we've forgotten. I haven't forgotten those kids. Shame on us if we've forgotten," Obama said.

Cruz followed Obama's impassioned remarks with a statement.

"It is saddening to see the president today, once again, try to take advantage of this tragic murder to promote an agenda that will do nothing to stop violent crime, but will undermine the constitutional rights of all law-abiding Americans," Cruz said, promising to "use any procedural means necessary to protect those fundamental rights."

At the same time, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, began floating a competing gun bill that opposes expanded background checks for gun sales -- a key provision of the Democratic gun bill.

---

A service of YellowBrix, Inc.

http://www.gopusa.com/news/2013/03/29/filibuster-to-protect-the-sec...

Comment by Gordon Ray Kissinger on March 29, 2013 at 7:54pm: Iowa’s Largest Newspaper Publishes Online Interactive Map of Public Schools Without Guards

Posted 12 hours ago by Dave Jolly

The Des Moines Register is the largest newspaper in the state of Iowa with a daily circulation of nearly 100,000 and a Sunday circulation of over 200,000. Although the paper is located and concentrates in the Des Moines area, there is a statewide edition known simply as the Register.

This week, the Des Moines Register ran an online story on the number of public schools within the state of Iowa that have some sort of guards, whether it be school resource officers, police officers or private security guards. Out of the 348 public schools surveyed in the state, they received responses from at least 54 schools that indicated they had some sort of guard.

Without thinking of the consequences, they thought it would be a good idea to publish an interactive online map of all of the public schools throughout the state. When you clicked on any school, the map would tell you if that school had guards or not. The map showed that of the 25 largest schools in the state, 3 had no guards.

It didn’t take long for parents to start flooding the newspaper with complaints causing the pam to be pulled from the online post. Some of the complaints read:

David Carlo: “Everyone knows that schools are gun free zones and thus an easy target for sick people wanting to inflict mass casualties. Keep it generic for the children’s safety. 56 schools have a resource officer in the school, 200 have none and 100 did not respond to the survey. This gets the facts across without putting any lives in harm’s way.”

Rebecca Ann Taylor: “I do not understand how you can be so reckless and think this is actually newsworthy!”

Ed Thomson: “Apologies will not suffice. Not this time. Children’s lives were placed at risk.” [Editor Rick Green should] “fire those responsible for this article and then follow that with his resignation!”

Rick Green, Editor of the Des Moines Register replied to questions about the map, saying:

“I’ll tell you, nothing is more important to me than protecting the students, school teachers and administrators and safeguarding a community against any kind of violence.”

“We got a couple of phone calls from readers who were concerned about a map, took it down immediately, re-adjusted it.”

“I’m not going to make the same mistake that has unfortunately plagued some other newsrooms about sensitivity. I try to be fair and responsible and not do anything reckless. I love my job too much.”

“I love the role that we play here in Iowa, and I care too much about the safety of school teachers and students to do anything so that people would think we were being reckless and heartless. I just don’t operate that way.”

What in the world are some people thinking when they do things like this? Don’t they realize that they just provided a road map for any would be wacko that wanted to outdo Adam Lanza’s rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary School? Sadly, this is typical of many members of the press these days in that they are so wrapped up in the story that they fail to see the broader picture and consequences of what may happen because of it.

This reminds me of the New York newspaper that published the interactive map showing the names and addresses of every person in the county that had a firearm permit. It wasn’t long after the publication of that map that some homeowners were targeted by burglars. Hopefully, the same won’t be true with the Des Moines Register map and that it was pulled before anyone with a warped mind could utilize it.

Read more: http://godfatherpolitics.com/10109/iowas-largest-newspaper-publishe...

Comment by Gordon Ray Kissinger on March 29, 2013 at 7:46pm

Video: NRA-ILA Grassroots News Minute 03-29-2013

March 29, 2013 By NewsEditor Leave a Comment

Mayor Bloomberg is up to no good again…

Get Informed! Read More About this topic::

Video: Ex-NYC Mayor Ed Koch: Ban All Guns I used to like Ed Koch a bit, but not...
On Cue, Left Politicizes Murders Of Children Once again, the guns did it, and it’s somehow conservatives’...
Chicago Mayor Targets City’s Vending Machine Snacks As the mayor of a city defined by violent crime...
Koch Industries, Other CEOs Warn Employees Of Layoffs If Obama Is R... Koch Industries, the Wichita, Kan.-based company run by the billionaire...
Video: Bloomberg Sics Bodyguards On Conservative Reporter Ever wonder how Mayor Bloomberg gets away with gun control...

Comment by Gordon Ray Kissinger on March 29, 2013 at 7:44pm

Rubio Threatening Filibuster On Gun Control

March 29, 2013 By Breaking News

Marco Rubio pledged Thursday to join a group of Republicans led by Sens. Rand Paul (KY), Mike Lee (UT), and Ted Cruz (TX), also Tea Party stalwarts, threatening to filibuster gun control legislation that comes to the floor of the Senate.

Rubio posted the following statement on his website:

We, the undersigned, intend to oppose any legislation that would infringe on the American people’s constitutional right to bear arms, or on their ability to exercise this right without being subjected to government surveillance. The Second Amendment to the Constitution protects citizens’ right to self-defense. It speaks to history’s lesson that government cannot be in all places at all times, and history’s warning about the oppression of a government that tries.

Paul, Lee, and Cruz had written earlier this week to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), pledging to “oppose the motion to proceed to any legislation that will serve as a vehicle for any additional gun restrictions.” Reid has plans to bring a bill to the Senate that would increase background checks and penalties on straw purchases of firearms.

Read More at breitbart.com . By William Bigelow.