‎*** NJ2AS WILL PARTICIPATE IN THE NATIONAL COALITION TO STOP THE GUN BAN

[deadeye74 5]

From the NJ2AS Facebook Page:

 

 

I received the following request and have agreed that the NJ2AS should be included as a signatory to the letter included below it.

 

GunLeaders members:

 

We all know that we face a grave federal danger of the type not seen since 1994. Not only is absolutely everything about the Feinstein/Obama/Biden scheme unacceptable, if even a portion of it passes they will be back for more almost immediately.

 

That was precisely their M.O. in 1993-94 when they ran the Brady Act, the “Violent Crime Control Act (semi-auto ban) and would have followed with the truly draconian Brady II had the 1994 Republican Revolution not intervened.

 

We are starting to see Republicans cave, and there is an excellent chance the ban will pass the Senate, meaning it will have to be stopped in the House. I hope you agree that absolutely no “compromise” is possible because, as is so often the case, “compromise” as defined by our opposition is a process in which we lose just slightly less than in the original proposal.

 

So far, the NRA is making all the right noises, but will they do the right thing when the ban begins to move? Or will they do as they did on armor-piercing handgun ammunition in the 1980s, on the Brady Act, on the first rendition of the Lawful Commerce in Firearms Act, on the NICS Improvement Act and most recently on the Disclose Act? Namely, will the NRA “compromise?”

 

‘NATIONAL COALITION TO STOP THE GUN BAN’

 

So far, we have 8 organizations which have agreed that compromise on this issue is not acceptable. Accordingly, we have jointly created the “National Coalition to Stop the Gun Ban,” which will launch shortly after the 113th Congress convenes on January 3 and will lead with the Open Letter to Members of Congress below, as well as with coordinated press releases and alerts to members of Coalition organizations.

 

The coalition is deliberately limited in scope to prevent infighting over objectives. The letter has been carefully parsed and debated and is the result of multiple inputs from Coalition members.

 

The objectives of the Coalition are:

 

1. Put Congress and the NRA on notice that “compromise” is not acceptable;

2. Shift the center of debate toward our side;

3. Defeat the ban, or at least extract such a high price that it forces the opposition to do a cost-benefit analysis for follow-on gun control initiatives; and

4. Put legislators who vote for gun control on notice that an NRA endorsement will not protect them.

 

WE NEED COALITION MEMBERS

 

In a perfect world, we want dozens of organizations signing on to the letter. We realize that different groups see things differently, and that getting conservatives to agree on anything is, as they say, like herding cats. Understand that nothing will limit the general activities or rights of Coalition members to do business with their members as they see fit. You will receive model press releases and alerts, but change them as you see fit.

 

The Coalition requires only 3 things of any organization that joins:

 

1. You overlook minutia in exactly how the letter is phrased or in other things, and look only at the broader picture;

2. You avoid infighting, including between organizations which have previously had differences; and most important of all

3. YOU AGREE THAT NO COMPROMISE IS ACCEPTABLE ON THIS ISSUE: That means you might have to differ with the NRA or others. It means you won’t start looking at partial gun control measures and say “Gee, that’s the best we can get.” And it means you won’t suddenly change horses and complain, particularly to the media, that Coalition positions are “too extreme.”

 

THIS ISN’T FOR YOU IF …

 

If you are willing to let the NRA simply take the lead, regardless of what they do, this coalition is not for you. If you don’t actually lead a gun rights organization, this coalition is not for you. If you have a history of supporting gun control, this coalition is not for you.

 

BUT IF YOU WANT A NATIONAL VOICE ...

 

But if you want to do something that gives you a national voice on this issue, contact me at: [email protected]

 

Paul Valone

President, Grass Roots North Carolina

Executive Director, Rights Watch International

www.GRNC.org

www.RightsWatch.org

704.907.9206 (mobile)

 

------------------------------------------------------------

 

Open Letter to Members of Congress:

 

In coming weeks, you will face pressure from the Obama administration and others to implement a ban on semi-automatic firearms and certain ammunition feeding devices, and to pass laws requiring private gun transfers to be processed via the National Instant Check System.

 

Yet the “assault weapon” misnomer is a myth perpetuated by gun control advocates who seek to confuse the public about the difference between millions of semi-automatic firearms, which are functionally identical to hunting rifles, and military “assault rifles,” which are machine guns virtually unavailable to the public since implementation of the National Firearms Act of 1934.

 

The truth about modern rifles

 

The modern rifles Senator Dianne Feinstein has, by her own admission, waited decades to ban differ from others primarily by cosmetic features such as barrel shrouds, threaded barrels, flash suppressors, pistol grips and adjustable stocks – things which do not affect function. The notion being promulgated by gun control advocates that such features increase lethality by allowing guns to be “fired from the hip” is absurd: Any firearms expert will attest that rifles can only be effectively utilized from the shoulder.

 

Although you are being told that ammunition used by modern rifles is excessively destructive, in truth it is ballistically inferior to common .30-06 hunting ammunition and was selected by the military not for its lethality, but instead for light weight and low recoil.

 

And when you hear how “high capacity” magazines increase mortality in mass shootings, understand that Seung-Hui Cho carried no fewer than nineteen magazines for the Virginia Tech rampage, and that nearly all mass murderers who use guns carry multiple firearms, rendering magazine capacity moot. Like the misnomer “assault weapon,” the “high capacity” designation of more than ten rounds for magazines represents nothing more than an arbitrary limit set on devices which have been in common possession since the early Twentieth Century.

 

Moreover, attempts to process private gun sales through the National Instant Check System represent nothing less than a stepping stone to national gun registration; under the Clinton administration, the FBI retained NICS transaction records in violation of the Brady Act, creating a defacto national registration system.

 

Most frightening, however, is Sen. Feinstein’s proposal to regulate “grandfathered” modern rifles under the National Firearms Act. Doing so would not only entail registering millions of existing firearms, but would represent unprecedented expansion of police powers through the BATFE by requiring millions of gun owners to be fingerprinted and photographed like common criminals. Because a large percentage will refuse to comply, the scheme, if implemented, will make felons of otherwise law-abiding citizens.

 

Semi-auto ban: No impact on violence

 

Neither have such laws been effective. From 1994 to 2004, the previous ban on semi-automatic firearms and magazines had no impact on school shootings, which actually increased during that period. Indeed, some of the worst school shootings, including Columbine High School, took place during the ban.

 

Despite predictions from gun control advocates that violent crime would increase after the ban expired, it has actually dropped: According to FBI Uniform Crime Reports, between expiration of the ban in 2004 and the most recent for which data is available (2011), violent crime dropped by 17% and homicide, by 15%.

 

Meanwhile, weapons use in homicide has remained unchanged and, significantly, use of rifles (including those targeted for bans) declined slightly from 2.7% of homicides in 2004 to 2.5% of homicides in 2011. Clearly, rifles of any type, including those with features targeted by semi-auto bans, are rarely used in crimes.

 

‘Gun Free School Zones Act’ increased killings

 

What does appear to have impacted school shootings was implementation of the latest version of the “Gun Free School Zones Act” (GFSZA), which is associated with a dramatic increase in school murders.

 

Between the first significant school shooting, in 1966, and enactment of the 1996 GFSZA, media summaries reveal 8 shootings with 134 victims killed or wounded – a rate of 4.3 victims per year. Between 1996 and 2012, the review finds 62 shootings and 367 victims – a fivefold increase to 23 victims per year. Yet, during the same period, FBI Uniform Crime Reports indicate homicide nationwide dropped by 14%.

 

While media summaries may not be comprehensive, the GFSZA has clearly been an abject failure. Worse, evidence suggests it may actually create “kill zones” which attract violent predators.

 

Researchers John Lott and William Landes, then at Yale and the University of Chicago, respectively, studied multiple victim public shootings. Said Lott, “Gun prohibitionists concede that banning guns around schools has not quite worked as intended—but their response has been to call for more regulation of guns. Yet what might appear to be the most obvious policy may actually cost lives. When gun-control laws are passed, it is law-abiding citizens, not would-be criminals, who adhere to them.”

 

Examining data from 1976 to 1995, they discovered that mass homicides in states adopting concealed handgun laws declined by 84%, deaths plummeted by 90% and injuries by 82.5%. Crediting the reductions to deterrence (even suicidal maniacs avoid armed victims), Lott and Landes called their findings “dramatic,” concluding: “[T]he only policy factor to have a consistently significant influence on multiple victim public shootings is the passage of concealed handgun laws.”

 

Coalition position

 

Members of the National Coalition to Stop the Gun Ban demand that Congress refuse to use lawful gun owners as political scapegoats and instead reduce school violence by:

 

• Defeating any attempt to pass gun control including, but not limited to, banning semi-automatic firearms or magazines, or requiring private gun transfers to be registered through the National Instant Check System; and

 

• Repealing the Gun Free School Zones Act of 1996.

 

No ‘compromises’

 

Some will urge you to “compromise,” perhaps even the National Rifle Association. The many thousands of gun rights supporters represented by the Coalition, however, regard “compromise,” as our opposition defines it, to be a process in which we lose slightly fewer of our rights than under the original proposal. Consequently, any legislation which registers or bans firearms; limits magazine capacity; registers private transactions through NICS; or restricts time, place or manner of self-defense is unacceptable.

 

Members of Congress who support gun owners by opposing all gun control will, in turn, benefit from support by Coalition organizations. Members of Congress who support gun control by any means, procedural or substantive, will be targeted for defeat by Coalition members. They will be subject to picketing, leaflet drops at events in their districts, phone and mail campaigns, and political action committee opposition. NRA ratings and endorsements will have no impact on Coalition actions.

 

In coming weeks, we look forward to working with you to reduce school violence by allowing lawful citizens in schools and elsewhere to defend themselves against violent predators.

 

Respectfully,

The National Coalition to Stop the Gun Ban

 

 

Welcome to Gunleaders.comwww.gunleaders.com

[XDJohnTact 49]

Interesting. It looks like gunleaders.com have practically no recent replies on their forums and most posts are a year or more old. What makes us think they have the desire or means to actually make a difference in this issue? Perhaps I am wrong, but that is what it appears like to me?

[deadeye74 5]

Interesting. It looks like they have practically no replies on their forums and most posts are a year or more old. What makes us think they have the desire or means to actually make a difference in this issue? Perhaps I am wrong, but that is what it appears like to me?

 

The NJ2AS Facebook page is always abuzz. I can't say the same for the other group.