• Legislative Shoot-out Expected in the U.S. Senate

  • Senate to Vote on Crapo Amendment to 'Choke' Operation Choke Point

  • ATF Makes a “Tactical Retreat” in the Face of Overwhelming Opposition to its Ammo Ban

  • White House Spits in our Face over AR-15 Ban

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4

Legislative Action Center LINK

facebook_icontwitter_iconyoutube_icon

GOA News

  • CCW Reciprocity
  • Budget Battle
  • Loretta Lynch
  • Response to Tyranny
  • Obama Defeated

Constitutional Carry Reciprocity Advances 2nd Amendment Rights

Recently, some of our good friends issued a statement criticizing federal reciprocity legislation.  We agree with them that the Nugent bill (H.R. 402) has problems, because it would force Americans in “constitutional carry” states to obtain permits in order to exercise their God-given rights. 

Read More

GOA rallies its members as gun debate heats up in Senate budget battle

Gun rights groups are rallying their members behind a series of budget measures aimed at strengthening the Second Amendment and restricting gun control efforts. 

As the Senate debates the federal government’s 2016 budget, Republicans and gun advocates are pushing for a number of amendments that would expand concealed-carry laws and block the Obama administration from issuing what opponents call a “backdoor” ban on guns.

Read More

Gun groups rally against Loretta Lynch

Gun rights groups are making a vigorous push to stop the Senate from confirming Loretta Lynch as President Obama’s next attorney general.

Advocates are organizing petitions, drawing up letters and hitting the phones to urge Senate Republicans to oppose Lynch in a floor vote that could take place as early as next week.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) has sent an alert to its members warning that Obama’s nominee would put gun rights at risk....

Read More

States Moving to Block Federal Gun Control
By Larry Pratt

There have been positive developments in the fight to block the enforcement of federal gun control around the country.

More than a dozen states have introduced bills this year to put federal officials on notice that they will get no assistance in helping federal agents carry out unconstitutional actions.

Read More

Over and Over Again, You Have Cleaned Obama’s Clock 
-- The battle over AR-15 ammo is just the most recent victory

Recently, our Legislative Counsel was on a radio program.  And the host commented about how "frustrating" it was for the Second Amendment community to have to battle Barack Obama's repeated, seemingly unending string of illegal gun grabs.

Our Counsel was stunned.  His jaw dropped to the ground.

Read More

Self-Defense Corner

  • Home Intruder
  • Widowed Mother
  • Masked Gunman
  • Pizza delivery
  • Home Alone

Catawba County, NC Homeowner Shoots and Kills Intruder

A Catawba County homeowner used a shotgun to defend his home against two intruders.  Shooting and killing one, while the second is still outstanding.  The homeowner initially heard them break in and grabbed his shotgun and called the police.  When the intruders kicked in a hall door and came towards the homeowner and his wife, the homeowner he fired one shot, striking one of the intruders in the chest, killing him.  The second subject fled the home and is still out standing.

Read More

Son Gives His Widowed Mother a Gun Out of Concern for Her Safety. Then, One Week Later…

A woman was startled out of her sleep early Thursday morning when she heard what sounded like someone breaking into her home. It turned out to be a robbery suspect who police believe was breaking into neighborhood homes in West Columbus, Ohio.

Read More

Masked Gunman’s Plan Foiled by the Second Amendment — and the Surveillance Camera Caught It All (GRAPHIC)

When a man wearing a bandanna over his face walked into a Pinch, West Virginia, pharmacy on Wednesday, a surveillance camera was rolling and Don Radcliff apparently tried using humor at first to diffuse the situation.

Read More

A Tale of Two Pizza Delivery Girls: One had a gun, the other was raped

For those of you who may have forgotten I recently covered a story concerning a female pizza delivery driver from Papa John’s who fought off two would be thieves/rapists by SHOOTING one of them in the face.

Read More

Woman Home Alone Pulls Gun, Shoots, Ends Alleged Home Invasion 

On February 9, a woman home alone in Madison County, Alabama, pulled a gun and opened fire on four suspects who allegedly forced their way into her home.

Read More
McCain's Constitution
by George Will
as seen at Townhall.com

Presidents swear to "protect and defend the Constitution." The Constitution says: "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech." On April 28, on Don Imus' radio program, discussing the charge that the McCain-Feingold law abridges freedom of speech by regulating the quantity, content and timing of political speech, John McCain did not really reject the charge:

    I work in Washington and I know that money corrupts. And I and a lot of other people were trying to stop that corruption. Obviously, from what we've been seeing lately, we didn't complete the job. But I would rather have a clean government than one where quote First Amendment rights are being respected that has become corrupt. If I had my choice, I'd rather have the clean government.

Question: Were McCain to take the presidential oath, what would he mean?

In his words to Imus, note the obvious disparagement he communicates by putting verbal quotation marks around "First Amendment rights." Those nuisances.

Then ponder his implicit promise to "complete the job" of cleansing Washington of corruption, as McCain understands that. Unfortunately, although McCain is loquacious about corruption, he is too busy deploring it to define it. Mister Straight Talk is rarely reticent about anything, but is remarkably so about specifics: He says corruption is pandemic among incumbent politicians, yet he has never identified any corrupt fellow senator.

Anyway, he vows to "complete the job" of extirpating corruption, regardless of the cost to freedom of speech. Regardless, that is, of how much more the government must supervise political advocacy. President McCain would, it is reasonable to assume, favor increasingly stringent limits on what can be contributed to, or spent by, campaigns. Furthermore, McCain seems to regard unregulated political speech as an inherent invitation to corruption. And he seems to believe that anything done in the name of "leveling the playing field" for political competition is immune from First Amendment challenges.

The logic of his doctrine would cause him to put the power of the presidency behind efforts to clamp government controls on Internet advocacy. This is because the speech regulators' impulse is increasingly untethered from concern with corruption. It is extending to regulation in the name of "fairness." Bob Bauer, a Democratic lawyer, says this about the metastasizing government regulation of campaigns:

    More and more, it is meant to regulate any money with the potential of influencing elections; and so any unregulated but influential money, in whichever way its influence is felt or achieved, is unfair. This explains the hand-wringing horror with which the reform community approached the Internet's fast-growing use and limitless potential.

This is why the banner of "campaign reform" is no longer waved only by insurgents from outside the political establishment. Washington's most powerful people carry the banner: Led by Speaker Dennis Hastert, and with the president's approval, the Republican-controlled House recently voted to cripple the ability of citizens' groups called 527s (named after the provision of the tax code under which they are organized) to conduct independent advocacy that Washington's ruling class considers "unfair."

Which highlights the stark contradiction in McCain's doctrine and the media's applause of it. He and they assume, simultaneously, the following two propositions:

Proof that incumbent politicians are highly susceptible to corruption is the fact that the government they control is shot through with it. Yet that government should be regarded as a disinterested arbiter, untainted by politics and therefore qualified to regulate the content, quantity and timing of speech in campaigns that determine who controls the government. In the language of McCain's Imus appearance, the government is very much not "clean," but is so clean it can be trusted to regulate speech about itself.

McCain hopes that in 2008 pro-life Republicans will remember his pro-life record. But they will know that, regarding presidents and abortion, what matters are Supreme Court nominees. McCain favors judges who think the Constitution is so radically elastic that government regulation of speech about itself is compatible with the First Amendment. So Republican primary voters will wonder: Can President McCain be counted on to nominate justices who would correct such constitutional elasticities as the court's discovery of a virtually unlimited right -- one unnoticed between 1787 and 1973 -- to abortion?

McCain told Imus that he would, if necessary, sacrifice "quote First Amendment rights" to achieve "clean" government. If on Jan. 20, 2009, he were to swear to defend the Constitution, would he be thinking that the oath refers only to "the quote Constitution"? And what would that mean?

--------
George F. Will is a 1976 Pulitzer Prize winner, whose columns are syndicated in more than 400 magazines and newspapers worldwide.

Op-Ed Articles