Great News! Shaneen Allen is Basically Free
BREAKING NEWS: Eric Holder to Resign
Anti-gun Lobby Trying to Silence GOA!
GOA Once Again Enters the Fray in Important Court Case
Great News! Shaneen Allen is Basically Free -- GOA thanks its members for sending postcards to Gov. Christie



Read the Full Story
BREAKING NEWS: Eric Holder to Resign



Read the Full Story
Anti-gun Lobby Trying to Silence GOA! -- Pulls desperate attempt in attacking pro-gun candidates



Read the Full Story
GOA Once Again Enters the Fray in Important Court Case



Read the Full Story
image Great News! Shaneen Allen is Basically Free
image BREAKING NEWS: Eric Holder to Resign
image Anti-gun Lobby Trying to Silence GOA!
image GOA Once Again Enters the Fray in Important Court Case

Legislative Action Center LINK

GOA News

Top Headline
Sheriffs

Sheriffs Who Are Protecting Liberty

An increasing number of county sheriffs are rising to resist federal overreach in their counties.  About 100 of them met in mid-September at the National Press Club in Washington, DC.  The gathering was organized by the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association -- a group that was formed by former Sheriff Richard Mack.  It was a time of...

Read More...
Privacy Intrusion

Obama administration forcing new gun buyers to declare race

The Obama administration quietly has been forcing new gun buyers to declare their race and ethnicity, a policy change that critics say provides little law enforcement value while creating the risk of privacy intrusions and racial profiling.With little fanfare, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in 2012...

Read More...
Police State

Are We Living in a Police State?

The answer to that question gets an emphatic “yes” by Cheryl Chumley in her book Police State USA: How Orwell’s Nightmare is Becoming our Reality.As with any systematic abuse of power, we find instances of agencies regularly using force or spying against its citizens as a matter of policy.  But force does not always have to be employed.  Back...

Read More...
Correct Obama

Gun Owners Correct Obama On Constitution

President Obama has a long record of misquoting the nation’s founding documents, whether intentionally or accidentally, repeatedly leaving out “God” or “Creator.”Now the leaders of the activist group Gun Owners of America are correcting the commander in chief’s description of a provision in the U.S. Constitution.In an open letter to Obama,...

Read More...

Self-Defense Corner

Top Headline

[Video] Store Clerk Shoots and Kills 2 of 3 Armed Robbers in Gunfight

A Marathon gas station clerk in Canton, Ohio found himself in a gunfight with three armed robbers last night.Despite the odds being stacked against him, it was the would be robbers that ended up on the losing end of the fight.The clerk struck two of the suspects. All three suspects were able to flee the scene, but the two...

Read More...

[Video] Manager of Meat Market Shoots Armed Robber in the Back of the Head, Saves Teenage Clerk

An armed robber entered a Houston, Texas meat market that has been open for over 60 years and demanded money from a teenage clerk.The manager of the business was in an office across the room from the counter with a window facing the action.After observing what was going on, the manager grabbed a...

Read More...

[Video] Walgreens Pharmacist Gets Fired After Using His Concealed Handgun to Fight Off Armed Robbers

This is an older story, but one that we previously never reported. We wanted to highlight it now as it looks like all of the court proceedings are finally over.A Walgreens pharmacist found himself without a job after he was fired from his position at Walgreens after opening fire on a pair of...

Read More...

[Video] NBC’s Home Invasion Tips: Use Wasp Spray and Treat Home Invaders “Like Royalty”

So NBC’s Today Show thought they would highlight some possible ways to defend yourself from a home invasion. It’s all pretty, well, dumb, yeah, I’ll just say it, it’s dumb.Among their suggestions is to use wasp spray (probably illegally) instead of pepper spray and to treat your home invaders...

Read More...

WHY I CARRY: Seven People Attack Pair of Brothers with Machetes in Chicago

Here is another one of our “Why I Carry” stories. These stories, unlike our defensive gun uses, take a look at situations that may have turned out very differently if the victim(s) had been armed. These stories also serve as an important reminder as to why it’s important to carry everyday.The machete is the weapon...

Read More...

McCain's Constitution

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.

Opinion Editorials