GOA Sends: Turning America "blue" could lead to California-style gun control

[Colonel Dan, SASS #24025]

"Immigration reform could be a bonanza for Democrats [and] cripple Republican
prospects in many states they now win easily." — Politico, April 22, 2013

 

In 1984, California was sufficiently conservative so that it cast its
electoral votes for President Ronald Reagan. It was not fiercely pro-gun, but,
then again, it wasn't New York.

 

But, in 1986, Reagan signed an immigration amnesty bill, called
Simpson-Mazzoli. The bill was small compared to the current amnesty bill. Three
million illegals benefited.

 

But that was enough to change California from a sometimes "swing state" to a
state almost wholly controlled by Leftists. Within 20 years — and continuing to
this day — California couldn't pass enough gun bans, gun registration,
ammunition limits, and ammunition registration.

 

So it is with some concern that Chuck Schumer’s amnesty bill (S. 744) which
is currently on the table would cover 11,000,000 to 20,000,000 illegal
aliens — four to seven times the size of the Simpson-Mazzoli bill.

We predict that, if the bill is passed, by 2035, the American electorate will
have changed so fundamentally that California-style gun control could become a
very real possibility in this country!

We know you're tired. We have just fought a hard-fought battle over explicit
gun control in the Senate — a battle which we won.

But it does strike us as interesting that the same gun control crazies who
pushed gun control want to slam immigration amnesty through the Senate quickly
so they can redirect their fire against us again.

Who are the chief architects of forging a more anti-gun electorate? Well, the
chief sponsor of S. 744 is Chuck Schumer, and he is joined by other Second
Amendment haters such as Dick Durbin (D-IL), Bob Menendez (D-NJ) and compromiser
John McCain (R-AZ).

Over the next week or so, we'll let you in on some of the anti-gun specifics
of Schumer's "amnesty bill," as it’s correctly dubbed. But for starters, the
bill would push us towards a biometric ID card, which is something that GOA has
opposed for years — given that a de facto National ID poses a huge threat to gun
owners’ privacy.

But then there’s the fact that Schumer’s “amnesty bill” requires the
government to give its okay — in a Brady Gun Check-type procedure — before you
could get a private job in America (section 3©(2)(A)(iii)). Does anyone not
see why this might be a problem?

We've just gone through excruciating pain to stop the expansion of Brady
Checks for guns. Now we turn around and the same parties who were pushing that
are now pushing Brady Checks for private jobs.

It’s ironic that those pushing for background checks are adamantly against
ID’s for voting because that would disenfranchise the elderly, the poor, and
minorities. Hmm, so they do understand that background checks — as a prior
restraint — are a fundamentally flawed concept?

But this is where the real fun starts. You feed the potential employee’s info
into a government database and, according to Senator Durbin, "up pops a
picture." And, says Durbin, "if that picture doesn't match [the one on your ID],
you may not be employed."

The Brady Check deals with a list of names which is in the millions. It deals
only with things like names and social security numbers, not pictures. Yet it
gives “false negatives” 8% of the time. And if you’re one of those 8% who are
illegally denied a gun, the FBI’s response, more often than not, is “So sue us.”
If this weren’t bad enough, the system breaks down for days at a time — normally
the times when the most people need it.

Do we really want to expand this flawed concept to other areas of our
lives?

If this weren't bad enough, we know that, once the government has to give its
approval before you can do something, it’s an almost iron-clad guarantee that it
will exercise that power in a political manner. Under the Brady Check system,
165,000 law-abiding honorable veterans have lost their gun rights, not because
they have done anything wrong, but because they sought counseling from the VA on
the basis of a traumatic experience in the military.

Watching Schumer explain on the Senate floor why those veterans should lose
their constitutional rights without any court order — while he vigilantly
defends due process for foreign terrorists — is like watching a dung beetle drag
its “prey” back to its lair.

So we know 165,000 non-politically correct veterans lost their gun rights
under Brady Checks. Who will become politically incorrect unemployable
non-persons under Brady Checks for Jobs?

Now, one would think that the fact that one million people in Boston were put
under house arrest last week because our current immigration system allowed two
asylum-seekers from terrorist-filled Chechnya to become legal residents and, in
one case, a citizen of our country, will put the skids on the "inevitability" of
Schumer’s amnesty bill. After all, gun control was "inevitable" too.

But the bottom line is this: Just as we saw the gun ramifications of
ObamaCare, we will also see the problems with a bill that alters the electorate
in such a way that the Second Amendment will cease to exist. In doing so, we
will need to make sure that we don’t have most of our guns registered or
confiscated in 2035 because short-sighted politicians listened to MSNBC and
turned our country blue.

But we will also make sure that we do not take bad gun law and turn it into
bad employment law.

ACTION: Click here
to contact your Senators and ask them to oppose the anti-gun Schumer amnesty
bill (S. 744).

 

[Subdeacon Joe]

Don't just shrug this off, folks. This is a very real concern. I've watched CA not-so-slowly change. And CA is kind of a testing ground - work to get it passed here, then, when people get used to the idea, even if just in a "Oh, those idiots in Commifornia" way, it goes to other states, and then national.

[Guest Texas Jack Black]

We could not breed fast enough so as to retain the Red States .Although it would be fun trying.I will be the first to volunteer.

[Dirty Dan Dawkins]

I am glad higher ups are echoing what others and I have said long ago.

And its not just guns folks, its every part of your life and freedom at risk.

[Subdeacon Joe]

Here is the kind of garbage we are facing now in CA: http://nramemberscouncils.com/legs.shtml

 

AB 180 has had a "gut and amend" done to it to make it about registration, AB 187 is still an ammo tax.

 

Here is stuff up this week: http://nramemberscouncils.com/caspecial/2013bills3.shtml

 

Those of you in CA, keep the pressure on the capons.

 

Here is a link with the bills, etc. and a "one click" feature to send an email to your CA reps. http://nramemberscouncils.com/legs.shtml#oneclick