Category Archives: NRA

Anti-gun AGs Push “Universal” Background Checks for Ammunition

Facebooktwittergoogle_pluspinterestyoutube

Gun control laws aren’t about stopping violent criminals, they are about burdening law-abiding gun owners. Few pieces of legislation illustrate this fact better than H.R.1705/S.1924. READ MORE

ammo background checks

SOURCE: NRA-ILA

H.R.1705/S.1924 would extend anti-gun lawmakers’ cumbersome so-called “universal” background check proposal to cover the commercial and private transfers of ammunition. On September 23, this onerous plan received the support of 21 politically minded state attorneys general, who signed a letter to congressional leadership advocating for the proposal.

H.R.1705, introduced by Rep. Debbie Wasserman Shultz (D-Fla.), would treat commercial sales of ammunition in the same manner as the commercial sale of firearms. Under the legislation, any person seeking to purchase ammunition at a store would be required to undergo an FBI National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) check before acquiring the ammunition.

Moreover, the legislation would encumber nearly all private transfers of ammunition. The bill provides,

“It shall be unlawful for any person who is not a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer to transfer ammunition to any other person who is not so licensed, unless a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer has first taken possession of the ammunition for the purpose of complying” with the NICS background check requirement.

The legislation provides a minor exemption for ammunition transfers between immediate family members. There are other narrow exemptions for transfers “at a shooting range or in a shooting gallery or other area designated for the purpose of target shooting,” “while reasonably necessary for the purposes of hunting, trapping, or fishing,” or “while in the presence of the transferor.”

It is difficult to overstate how burdensome this policy would be for gun owners. Forcing all ammunition sales through a Federal Firearms Licensee would put non-FFL ammunition sellers out of business. This would severely curtail the availability of ammunition to the average gun owner. Gun owners would no longer be able to order ammo through the mail directly to their home, as they would need to have an FFL run a background check before taking possession of the ammunition.

Every law-abiding gun owner would be forced into a potentially lengthy background check procedure each time they purchased ammunition. A shooter couldn’t pick up a box of .22lr from his friend on the way to the range. A reloader couldn’t give a friend a new rifle load for them to try out on their own property.

This inconvenience is not a trivial matter. According to the 2018 NICS Operations Report, only 70 percent of NICS checks result in an instant determination, while 10 percent result in a significant delay. Only 1.2 percent of checks result in a denial.

Many individuals experience a delay for merely sharing a personal characteristic similar to that of someone with a potentially prohibiting record in NICS. FBI notes that “A delay response from the NICS Section indicates the subject of the background check has been matched with either a state or federal potentially prohibiting record containing a similar name and/or similar descriptive features (name, sex, race, date of birth, state of residence, social security number, height, weight, or place of birth).”

It is bad enough that such delays are so prevalent when Americans purchase firearms, which are a durable good. Extending this to ammunition sales, which occur with far more frequency because ammunition is a consumable good, would compound this injustice.

Despite being the top law enforcement officials in their respective states, it does not appear as if the anti-gun attorneys general know anything about existing federal gun laws. According to their letter to congress, the proposed legislation — would make it illegal for individuals who are already “prohibited purchasers” under federal law — including convicted felons, domestic abusers, and individuals with serious mental health conditions — from purchasing or possessing ammunition.

The attorneys general might find it interesting to learn that prohibited persons are already barred from purchasing or possessing ammunition. 18 USC 922(g) provides that it is unlawful for a prohibited person — to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

A prohibited person found in possession of a single round of ammunition faces up to 10 years imprisonment.

The attorneys general also appear unaware that the U.S. has already experimented with federal ammunition control. The Gun Control Act of 1968 required all ammunition dealers to be federally licensed. Moreover, the GCA required all ammunition dealers to keep a record of sales of — ammunition to any person unless the licensee notes in his records, required to be kept pursuant to section 923 of this chapter, the name, age, and place of residence of such person if the person is an individual…

The experiment was not a success.

In 1982 .22 caliber rimfire ammunition was removed from the record-keeping requirement. In 1984, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee concluded that ammunition dealer licensing “was not necessary to facilitate legitimate Federal law enforcement interests.” In 1986, the director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms supported eliminating the record keeping requirement: “The Bureau and the [Treasury] Department have recognized that current recordkeeping requirements for ammunition have no substantial law enforcement value.” As a result, the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986 repealed the ammunition restrictions.

Federal ammunition control is a proven failure. Of course, that’s if the goal was to prevent criminal violence.

The current legislation pushed by Wasserman Schultz and the attorneys general is aimed at harassing law-abiding gun owners to further burden the exercise of their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. If enacted, H.R.1705/S.1924 would achieve this detestable intent.

 

Colt Stops Civilian Sales Of The AR15

Facebooktwittergoogle_pluspinterestyoutube

Sorry, Beto — it had nothing to do with you! And it has nothing to do with gun control. READ MORE

colt logo

SOURCE: NBC News et al.

Last Thursday, Colt Manufacturing’s announced that it will no longer sell AR15 firearms to civilians. While many gun control advocates celebrated Colt’s decision as a victory, it had nothing to do with a shift in Americans’ attitudes toward assault rifles. The gun-maker said the decision is purely market-driven and made no mention of any public pressure. With poor civilian sales and a multimillion-dollar military contract, Colt’s announcement is strictly business rather than a signal.

In a statement posted on the company’s website Thursday, Colt’s CEO Dennis Veilleux explained that it was stopping production of civilian sporting rifles due to “significant excess manufacturing capacity” in that market and low consumer demand for Colt’s products. The company will instead shift production to fulfill “high volume” military and law enforcement contracts.

“Colt has been a stout supporter of the Second Amendment for over 180 years, remains so, and will continue to provide its customers with the finest quality firearms in the world,” Veilleux said. The CEO said the company would continue to supply consumers with pistols and revolvers and did not rule out returning to civilian production of rifles in the future. Colt reportedly has about 110 days of inventory in its distribution network. Its website lists all rifles as “out of stock.”

Shortly after Colt issued the statement, the Department of Defense announced a $41.9 million Army contract with the company to produce M4s for U.S. allies.

Of course, gun control celebrities celebrated what they ignorantly perceived as a victory.

Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke tweeted the news alongside an image of him as the National Rifle Association’s “AR-15 salesman of the month,” suggesting Colt’s decision reflected declining sales of the weapon. O’Rourke made waves in the last Democratic debate by saying he would take away Americans’ AR15s and AK-47s.

CHECK OUT THE TWEETS
@Beto O’Rourke
(Colt Firearms just announced they’re stopping production of AR-15s:

@NRA
Possibly even of the year…

March For Our Lives, the student movement founded after the Parkland, Florida high school massacre, tweeted about the news. “This is real life. We’re winning.”

Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action cited the “lack of public demand” for the AR-15 tweeting, “The @NRA’s #TrumpSlump is the gift that keeps on giving.”

In fact, despite one of the country’s oldest gun makers pulling out of the civilian rifle market, overall gun sales have increased in recent months and in recent years, so have the number of AR15 buyers and sellers.

Firearm sales have steadily risen in the past two years and last month manufacturers posted their second-best August on record, according to data from the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF).

According to a 2018 Gallup Poll, support for an assault weapons ban dropped in the years following the mass shooting in Las Vegas. The poll showed 40% favored a ban and 57% opposed it. The level of opposition was close to the 2016 record high of 61% of Americans who said they did not support a ban.

 

Meet the Woman Who Took on Beto O’Rourke

Facebooktwittergoogle_pluspinterestyoutube

A Colorado woman challenged Beto O’Rourke’s gun confiscation plan at a town hall last week and the video went viral. READ MORE

beto challenged

SOURCE: NRA-ILA

NRA Member Lauren Boebert’s interaction with the presidential candidate was viewed more than 5 million times on NRA social media and was shared 190,000 times. Boebert was even featured on national news. The NRA sat down with Boebert for a Q&A. Here’s what she had to say.

Q. Millions of Americans watched you take on Beto O’Rourke at his gun control rally in Colorado. How did that come about?

A. In Colorado, our Second Amendment rights have been hit hard in the last decade. Politicians have been shaving off pieces of our Second Amendment with knee jerk reactions any time they can find an excuse to restrict us. When I heard Beto was coming to my state to push for more gun control, I knew I had to speak up.

Q. Were you scared?

A. Not scared, but intimidated because I was surrounded by people who disagreed with me. There were a couple of hundred people who didn’t want me there. But I had to put those fears aside, because who am I to lose that opportunity to speak on behalf of millions of Americans everywhere?

Q. What advice do you have for others who want to speak out in support of the Second Amendment?

A. It starts at home, in your community, and with the people you have relationships with. We must educate those around us and teach them that a firearm is for self-defense and protection.

Q. How did you go from growing-up in a gun-free home to being a passionate gun rights advocate?

A. A man was beat to death in the alley behind our restaurant, and I wondered how I would defend my employees if something like that were to happen to one of them. I knew we could not be defenseless.

Q. Final thoughts on what it takes to be a Second Amendment activist?

A. We are the silent majority and because we are so silent, it seems like we are the minority. It’s time that we rise up and speak up, we need to be heard. We’re not going to let Beto O’Rourke tell us how to defend ourselves. If politicians are so concerned with gun control, they need to start with the criminals. If they can make their gun control schemes work in Chicago, then maybe, we’ll listen. But we already know they’ve failed. Let Beto start his gun buy back scheme with criminals, then come talk to us.

See the full exchange HERE

 

Virginia Police Chief Advocates Ban on All Guns at U.S. House “Assault Weapons” Hearing

Facebooktwittergoogle_pluspinterestyoutube

Chief says: “I believe any weapon that can be used to hunt individuals should be banned.” READ MORE

gun ban

SOURCE: NRA-ILA

On Sept. 25, the Democrat-led U.S. House Judiciary Committee held a 3 ½ hour “hearing” entitled “Protecting America From Assault Weapons.” That framing of the issue underscored the erroneous notion that Americans need protection from inanimate objects, rather than from violent criminals who have and always will use any means at their disposal to harm innocent, defenseless people. It also revealed the unfortunate agenda of the proceedings, which was to emphasize politics and finger-pointing over any useful exploration of how Congress might take meaningful steps to improve public safety.

The most startling claim of the proceedings came when Dr. RaShall Brackney, Chief of the Charlottesville Police Department in Virginia responded to a question from Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) about whether she would support a ban on hunting rifles. “I believe any weapon that can be used to hunt individuals should be banned,” Brackney replied.

This admission seemed to indicate that Brackney would be open to the banning of any firearm — or even any weapon — whatsoever, since a criminal bent on “hunt[ing] individuals” could use virtually any firearm for that purpose.

Dr. Brackney was given two opportunities by pro-gun committee members to walk back or provide more context for that statement. Instead, she dug in and reiterated the statement.

Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) even asked her directly, “Okay, so you then stand for the proposition to ban any type of firearm, because any firearm can be used and misused to kill people.”

Rather than answering the question directly, Dr. Brackney began talking about police and the social contract. Rep. Steube tried asking again, only to be interrupted by an anti-gun committee member who tried to raise a point of order. She claimed that Rep. Steube was “attacking” the witness — when in fact he was merely trying to get a straight answer — and requested that he “tone down his words.” That exchange took up most of Steube’s remaining time for questioning, which was not reinstated.

Again, however, Rep. Steube tried, to clarify, asking, “Any type of weapon … that can be used to kill people should be banned?” “Sir,” Brackney replied, “you’re adding the word ‘type.’ I said ‘any weapons,’ so that’s my answer. Thank you.”

The entire exchange can be seen at this link, click HERE

Notably, none of the committee members or witnesses in favor of the ban attempted to distance themselves from Brackney’s push for a complete gun ban.

Unfortunately, Dr. Brackney’s statements may have been one of the only honest claims of the entire hearing by those arguing in favor of the ban.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a Harvard Law School graduate, told a breathtaking whopper about the U.S. Supreme Court’s pivotal Second Amendment decision, District of Columbia v. Heller. He claimed the decision says, “the Second Amendment gives you a right to a handgun for purposes of self-defense and a rifle for purposes of hunting or recreation, but nowhere does it give you a right to weapons of war … .”

The essence of the Heller decision is that Americans have a right to possess the sorts of bearable arms “in common use for lawful purposes,” particularly self-defense, and that handguns qualify because they are overwhelmingly chosen by responsible, law-abiding persons for that purpose. Notably, the decision does not purport to overturn the 1939 Supreme Court case of U.S. v. Miller, which held that the Second Amendment protection extends to arms that are “part of the ordinary military equipment” or the use of which “could contribute to the common defense.” It also notes that while Americans of the founding era might have owned firearms primarily for self-defense and hunting, the founders themselves wanted to ensure the Second Amendment provided an effective check against disarming the people, which in turn was necessary to “be able to resist tyranny.”

Nowhere does either decision suggest that rifles are only protected to the extent they are used for hunting or recreation. Indeed, Heller makes clear that self-defense is the “core lawful purpose” with which the Second Amendment is concerned.

Another theme pushed again and again was that “assault weapons” like the AR-15 are “battlefield weapons” that have no place on “America’s streets.”

Fortunately, as witness Amy Swearer testified, the overwhelmingly majority of the 16 million or so AR and AK pattern rifles in America are not “on the streets” but in the homes of law-abiding owners who never have and never will use them for anything other than lawful purposes. Violent criminals have not embraced semi-automatic rifles as their “weapons of choice.”

Rifles of all types, of which the guns that would be categorized as “assault weapons” are only a subset, are used in only 2% of homicides. In 2018, more than five times as many people were killed with knives than were killed with all rifles. The same year, more than twice as many people were killed with personal weapons like hands, fists, or feet.

When all was said and done, gun owners had no reassurance that there was any limiting principle to the anti-gun committee members’ prohibitive intentions or that they were willing to learn anything that would influence their decision-making. Indeed, one could imagine that long after semi-automatic rifles were banned, the exact same hearing could be held on the next class of firearm law-abiding gun owners would be forced to surrender because the guns were used in crimes they did not commit.

 

Slow and Steady Gun Control?

Facebooktwittergoogle_pluspinterestyoutube

In an interview with Fox News anchor Ed Henry Thursday on new control measures being decided on in the coming weeks, President Trump said that negotiations on the issue are “going very slowly.”

Image result for trump guns

“No, we’re not moving on anything. We’re going very slowly in one way, because we want to make sure it’s right. We want to — we’re doing a very careful job,” Mr. Trump said.

If you’re nudged a few inches each time something happens, eventually you’ve been moved a mile. I’ve heard this for years, and always put stock in it. In 2019 it seems the trend may continue with more measures being taken by the current administration to impose some form of “common sense” gun control.

Image result for nudge

In the wake of two shootings in August, the Trump Administration began the process of working with warmed over gun control measures proffered in 2013 from senators Manchin and Toomey. The measures in question carry a stronger background check system, without calling for universal checks, but even this has been walked-back since it’s announcement. Attorney General Barr, and Senator Murphy are said to be in on the architecture of the new proposals expected to roll out after the United Nations General Assembly next week.

Image result for trump guns

In the Fox News interview, Mr. Trump also slammed Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke, who has called for a ban on assault weapons and a mandatory buyback for any assault weapons currently possessed by gun owners.

Beto (honestly, what is a beto?) said in the previous debate, “Hell, yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47,” referring to his support for mandatory buybacks of war weapons {sic}.

Image result for beto o'rourke guns

“Part of the problem that we have is because of Beto O’Rourke’s statement about taking away guns,” Mr. Trump said. “A lot of Republicans and some Democrats now are afraid to do anything, to go down that slippery slope. A lot of people think this is just a way of taking away guns and that’s not good, because we’re not going to allow that.”

He went on to say “I am, if it’s not going to hurt a good, solid, great American citizen from keeping his weapon because they want that and they are entitled to that. We have a Second Amendment. I don’t want to have crazy people have guns. I don’t want to have bad people have guns, but we’re going to do nothing to hurt the Second Amendment, and what we want to do is see if we can come up with a compromise, and that’s what we’re working on.”

Here we stand, waiting with baited breath, for our current republican lead government to decide on yet another “nudge.” Until the root cause of the recent rash of shootings, stabbings, and other cruel acts of the mentally unstable are confronted, any act to diminish the rights of law abiding citizens is yet another inch we’ve been moved toward tighter restrictions on our Second Amendment right.

Is there a right answer? Is there a test? Is there an amount of freedom we’re willing to give up in order to ensure the wrong people don’t end up with a weapon capable of doing harm on a scale larger than hand to hand combat? Is it all or nothing? Keep it civil in the comments, but please feel free to discuss!

Beto O’Rourke: We’ll Use Fines to ‘Compel’ Compliance with AR-15 Ban

Facebooktwittergoogle_pluspinterestyoutube

Robert “Beto” O’Rourke explained he plans to use fines to “compel” American gun owners to comply with his AR-15 ban, during an exchange with reporters last weekend. READ MORE

beto

SOURCE: Breitbart News, AWR Hawkins

O’Rourke made his claim in a video posted by Fox4 DFW’s Teresa Riley.

He was asked how he plans to make Americans comply with his AR-15 ban and he said, “I begin by saying we expect our fellow Americans to follow the law. If they do not there would be a fine imposed to compel them to follow the law.”

Teresa Riley
@TeresaRFox4
Question: what happens if people don’t sell their guns back to the govt….answer:

See the video HERE

O’Rourke went to talk about the example of Australia, citing how that country put in place a similar ban. He claimed Australia witnessed, “a near 50 percent reduction in gun violence deaths” as a result. But O’Rourke did not mention that rifles are not a statistically significant contributor to overall gun deaths in the U.S.

In fact, FBI crime stats for 2017 show there were 403 rifle-related deaths for the year, and those deaths were from all kinds of rifles combined — breech action, pump action, bolt action, lever action, semiautomatic, etc. Crossing the street resulted in over 5,800 deaths in 2017.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation reports there are 16 million-plus privately owned AR-15s in the U.S.

AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and the writer/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is the political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com. Sign up to get Down Range at breitbart.com/downrange HERE.

 

 

Trump Will NOT Support Universal Background Check Bill

Facebooktwittergoogle_pluspinterestyoutube

The latest (early this week) reports indicate that President Trump will not support H.R. 8. READ MORE

trump

SOURCE: Brietbart, AWR Hawkins

President Donald Trump is reportedly not planning to include House Democrats’ universal background check bill as part of legislation he supports in response to mass shootings.

The Democrat gun control bill is H.R. 8.

Politico reports that a source familiar with the White House “conversation on guns” indicated that Trump is not going to rally behind H.R. 8.

On September 9, 2019, Breitbart News reported that Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) asked Trump to support H.R. 8, thereby giving “political cover” to allow other Republicans to support it.

Schumer said, “President Trump has an historic opportunity to save lives by indicating his support for the House-passed bill [H.R. 8]. Speaker Pelosi and I have repeatedly and personally asked him to do this.”

He added, “[President Trump] can lead his party to support something that the NRA has prevented Republicans from supporting for years. That is why Speaker Pelosi and I sent the letter to him today, urging him to give his party political cover to pass … [the] background check legislation.”

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) spoke in favor of Trump’s reported rejection of universal background checks, saying, “The things that [the Democrats] are proposing just aren’t realistic and they know that and so it’s designed more to talk to their political base and it’s a lot more about that than I think an actual solution.”

AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and the writer/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is the political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com. Sign up to get Down Range HERE

Wal-Mart Expands Their Anti-Gun Agenda

Facebooktwittergoogle_pluspinterestyoutube

What the absolute heck is Wal-Mart doing? Once a proud symbol of American Capitalism, and the face of big-box retail, Wal-Mart continues to alienate it’s base of consumers with another knee-jerk reaction prodded by woke-troopers and social justice warriors.

wal-mart ammo

by Midsouth Shooters

Wal-Mart has been steadily rolling back their support of the Second Amendment since 1993 when they stopped the sale of all handguns in every state except Alaska. Then, in 2015 it ended the sale of AR-15 style MSR rifles, and any toy or airgun resembling any “military-style rifle used in mass shootings,” per the published Wal-Mart policy. Last year, it raised the minimum age for gun purchases from 18 to 21, two weeks after 17 students and teachers were killed in a shooting at a high school in Parkland, FL.

Just this past week, Wal-Mart rolled out another set of policies after the recent shooting at a Wal-Mart Super Center in El Paso, TX. The shooting resulted in 22 deaths and 24 injuries. Patrick Crusius, a 21-year-old from Allen TX, was arrested shortly after the shooting and charged with capital murder. Police believe he published a document, described by others as a white nationalist, anti-immigrant manifesto, on 8chan shortly before the attack, citing inspiration from that year’s Christchurch mosque shootings in New Zealand.

Wal-Mart CEO, Doug McMillon was quoted as saying:

“After selling through our current inventory commitments, we will discontinue sales of short-barrel rifle ammunition such as the .223 caliber and 5.56 caliber that, while commonly used in some hunting rifles, can also be used in large capacity clips on military-style weapons,” Walmart CEO Doug McMillon said in a memo to employees on Tuesday.

Wal-Mart has also stated in it’s newly minted policy they will no longer sell handgun ammo. McMillon previously said Walmart was responsible for 2% of firearm sales in the US and 20% of ammunition sales. Walmart expects its share of ammunition sales to drop to between 6% and 9% as a result of the newly announced changes. The company will continue to sell the shotguns and rifles that it carries.

“In a complex situation lacking a simple solution, we are trying to take constructive steps to reduce the risk that events like these will happen again,” McMillon said in a memo to employees on Tuesday. “The status quo is unacceptable.”

Another rider on the new Wal-Mart policy affects customers who open-carry in their stores. If shoppers openly carry guns into Walmart stores going forward, store managers may ask the shopper to leave and safely secure their gun in their vehicle before returning to the store. “The policies will vary by location, however, and shoppers who are openly carrying guns may not always be asked to leave the store,” a Walmart spokesman said.

“We encourage our nation’s leaders to move forward and strengthen background checks and to remove weapons from those who have been determined to pose an imminent danger,” McMillon said. “We do not sell military-style rifles, and we believe the reauthorization of the Assault Weapons ban should be debated to determine its effectiveness.”

In the days since the new policies have taken effect, Kroger, and it’s holdings have also announced their plans to cease the sale of handgun ammunition.

It’s the belief of this writer the precedent set here is a slippery, if not inherently dangerous one. Capitalism is the lifeblood of any strong economy, and works hand-in-hand with a strong republic, but allowing a company to be swayed by social temperature is inherently dangerous, not only for the company, but the population at large.

In a quote from 2007, Jason Hornady of Hornady Ammunition said, “As long as a Hornady is at Hornady, we will never sell direct to Wal-Mart. They are no friend of the industry.”

Midsouth Shooters was founded on the tenants of honesty, family, and fairness, rooted in American and God. For a company, or organization, to be swayed by knee-jerk reactions sets a precedent of allowing the mob to dictate overreaching policies which put many in harms way. Effectively, Wal-Mart has been bullied into cow-towing to the social justice warriors, and woke-ninjas in the vocal minority.

Wal-Mart may not sell the ammo you need, and more companies beholden to the pressure of the vocal minority may follow suit. Midsouth will continue to sell the ammunition and reloading supplies you need, regardless. Our Second Amendment right is a sacred right, and for you to protect your family with the tools available, you need access to fairly priced ammunition and firearms.

Parkland father Andrew Pollack: Daughter’s murder made me ‘pro-Second Amendment’

Facebooktwittergoogle_pluspinterestyoutube

Not what “they” expected this man to say, but this is the reality of the value of the Second Amendment. READ MORE

pollack

SOURCE: The Washington Times, by Jessica Chasmar, and Fox News

Andrew Pollack, the outspoken father of one of the students killed during the Parkland, Florida, mass shooting, said last Wednesday that he was never a big gun-rights supporter until he realized how defenseless his daughter was when she was gunned down at school last year.

“I was never such a pro-Second Amendment type of guy until this happened to my daughter and I saw how she became such a victim on that third floor and no one came in to help her,” Mr. Pollack, whose 18-year-old daughter Meadow was among the 17 students and staff killed by a gunman on Valentine’s Day at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, told Fox News host Martha MacCallum.

Mr. Pollack cited the recent mass shooting at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, where 22 people were killed and others attempted to hide or flee, as an example of people needing to be able to carry guns so they can fight back.

“Every time that there’s a mass shooting and there’s a victim cowering, like at Walmart recently where those people were killed in Texas and there were victims cowering — it shows you how important the Second Amendment is,” he said. “When seconds count, you need to be able to protect yourself. First responders are usually minutes away.

“That is why I am such a believer in the Second Amendment and I’ll never let one of my friends or loved ones be a victim, like what happened to my daughter on that third floor.”

@AndrewPollackFL
When SECONDS matter, police are MINUTES away.

This is why people must start protecting themselves with a gun until police arrive.

I will NEVER again let what happened to my daughter happen to one of my friends or loved ones. #FixIt

SEE it HERE

See full article HERE

Virginia Hunters Raise $17,684.89 to Feed the Hungry

Facebooktwittergoogle_pluspinterestyoutube

Amazing program puts needed vittles on the table all at the hands, donations, and efforts of hunters. READ MORE

va hunters logo

SOURCE: NRA Hunters Leadership Forum, Phil Phillips

It is a fact that hunters are the world’s top conservationists and do more for wildlife than any other group. But what many people don’t know is how much we hunters care about our fellow man and how proactive we are in helping people in our own communities to fight hunger. For nearly 30 years, we have been helping to feed those less fortunate through the Hunters for the Hungry (HFTH) movement, sharing the wild game we harvest through state-based programs where we hunt and live. By donating and in many cases also paying to process the meat, we are providing a high-protein, low-cholesterol meat source to those who otherwise would go hungry.

va nters for the hungry

For someone who spends a fair amount of time in Virginia, I am proud that one of the most prominent HFTH programs is Virginia Hunters Who Care (VHWC). Launched in 1991, it has provided more than 27.7 million quarter-pound servings to feed hungry Virginians to date. VHWC holds fundraisers across the state that my wife and I try and attend, the most recent being the 8th annual VHWC banquet in Manassas, Va., on July 20, where hunters mobilized to net $17,684.89. For anyone who thinks a gathering of hunters could not possibly make such a difference, VHWC Projects Coordinator Gary Arrington says this dollar amount is enough to fund the processing and distribution of 79,582 quarter-pound servings of venison.

Welcoming supporters to the event, Arrington shared an incredible eye-opener on why hunters taking action is so important. “One in eight families in Virginia alone is impacted by hunger,” he said. “Nearly one million emergency meals are served in the state each month, and nearly 50 percent of those receiving meat through the program are children and the elderly.” Think about that for a moment. Thanks to VHWC, in just eight years Arrington said this single fundraising event has raised $165,303.89, which equates to 743,867 quarter-pound servings of high-protein, low-fat venison going to men, women and children across the state.

In fighting hunger just outside our nation’s capital, Arrington added, “We want you to know the difference you make. We’re processing venison for 93 cents per pound so it goes a long way.” He explained it takes all of us in the hunting community, singling out the event’s corporate sponsors including Cabela’s and Sportsman’s Warehouse, conservation groups like the NRA and local chapters of Ducks Unlimited, the National Wild Turkey Federation and Safari Club International. “Please support these groups,” he urged. “Do business with the company that makes it possible for us to feed people.”

Arrington’s blessing for the meal included a prayer for freedom and to watch over and care for our fellow man and acknowledged VHWC founder David Horne, who passed away in 2002. Giving a heartfelt thank you, he said, “On behalf of Hunters for the Hungry and all those whose lives are touched by your generosity, thank you for all that you are and all that you do in support of our program.”

Arrington said VHWC’s goal for 2019 is to yield 325,000 pounds of venison with the ultimate goal of processing and distributing more than 500,000 pounds of meat per year. “In Virginia we are blessed with a bountiful whitetail deer herd and with donations of deer and successful program funding,” he said, “we continue to be able to provide an average of 1.2 million quarter-pound servings each year. We will process and distribute 4.5 quarter-pound servings for each dollar raised here tonight.”

va nters for the hungry

Witnessing the Launch of a Movement
Like every other hunter who is aware of HFTH, I am a proud supporter. Before the national hunter-backed movement had an official name, as a Colorado outfitter in the late 1980s, I wanted to do my part to make sure every ounce of protein was used from the game animals my clients harvested to help others enjoy the health benefits of the low-cholesterol, high-protein venison. I started a similar program with my hunters who did not need or could not take their meat home. We covered the processing fees so I legally could donate the processed meat to senior living centers and needy families. Some recipients were older people who could not hunt any longer and missed the opportunity to have wild game in the freezer. But in most cases, I witnessed how the meat donations fed people who fought hunger every day.

By 1991, the NRA had gotten behind the HFTH movement on the national level and was running the NRA HFTH Information Clearinghouse to help put hunters in touch with programs in their communities. As an NRA Life member, I was proud of the NRA’s efforts and, years later, I continue to enjoy donating meat and attending local HFTH fundraisers in my home state and in the areas where I hunt. To date, one of the most prominent state-run HFTH programs to emerge is VHWC, which continues to receive grant funding from The NRA Foundation and other organizations that support its mission.

Important to note, while helping to feed people, VHWC — and every other state-based HFTH program in the country — helps to address other important issues. HFTH encourages hunters to harvest additional deer to help manage thriving deer herds by helping to reduce overall deer numbers statewide. It also enhances public safety on highways and near airports while helping to reduce crop and other damage caused by deer overpopulation. And finally, HFTH helps to promote the hunting heritage in a positive manner while demonstrating the respect and care we hunters show all across our country. State-based HFTH programs are non-profit feeding programs that promote both the tradition of hunting and the tradition of caring — hallmarks of the American sportsman.

va nters for the hungry

Making a Difference
“We are so very blessed to live in this great nation of America, where no child should lay his or her head down at night and feel hunger,” said Arrington, leading into the start of the event’s live fundraising auction. “Please help us to meet our needs so we can meet the needs of those less fortunate all across Virginia. You can make a difference, touch the life of a stranger.”

And that is what the crowd did. As mentioned earlier, the live and silent auctions from this one event raised $17,684.89 for VHWC, with items including hunting and kayak float trips as well as firearms, hunting equipment, jewelry, Washington Nationals baseball tickets and a hand-crafted, hand-painted wooden U.S. flag. It was fun to bid on things and, on a couple of occasions, to win the prize, knowing every dollar raised made a difference.

About the Author: NRA Life member, award-winning outdoor TV host and recreational real estate associate broker Phil Phillips of Hayden Outdoors has hunted five continents, taking more than 200 big-game animals and nearly 60 species worldwide. Prior to hosting hunting programs, he started Colorado’s first Ranching for Wildlife Program for antelope, which he ran for 15 years. Working alongside professional land managers to restore and protect habitat, Phil went on to guide clients to 500-plus big-game animals that have qualified for the record book. In 1992 Safari Club International honored him as the North American Bowhunting Outfitter of the Year. Email Phil at phil@haydenoutdoors.com.

Follow NRA Hunters’ Leadershipship Forum on Twitter @HuntersLead.