Former Top Rated NRA Senator Rumored to Introduce Gun Ban This Week

[makattak]

http://www.infowars.com/former-top-rated-nra-senator-to-introduce-gun-ban-this-week/

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars

May 11, 2009Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat and member of the so-called Blue Dog Coalition, plans to introduce an assault weapons ban this week. Gillibrand, the junior senator from New York, was at one time highly rated by the NRA for her advocacy of the Second Amendment.  

Newsday claims Gillibrand has “undergone a transformation” over the last three months and has moved away from “her House record that won the NRA’s top rating while remaining a supporter of Second Amendment rights to gun ownership.” Since her Senate appointment, she has “passed just about every test on guns set by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy,” who reintroduced a bill closing the so-called gun-show loophole at a news conference last week.

It appears likely Ms. Gillibrand was a gun-grabber all along and used the Second Amendment as an election ploy. Polls indicate a large percentage of voters strongly support the Second Amendment.

McCarthy’s bill, H.R. 6676, would utilize the National Instant Criminal Background Check System for background checks on all gun store employees and dealers. In addition to H.R. 6676, three other bills have been offered including laws that would make it illegal for known or suspected terrorists to buy guns.

As reported by Infowars last week, the House is currently working on H.R. 2159, The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009, sponsored by Rep. Peter King of New York. The bill would “increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of firearms or explosives licenses to a known or suspected dangerous terrorist.”

Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, told WorldNetDaily the bill will likely be used in junction with the DHS “Rightwing Extremism” report that characterizes advocates of the Second Amendment and others as terrorists. “By those standards, I’m one of [DHS Secretary] Janet Napolitano’s terrorists,” Pratt said. “This bill would enable the attorney general to put all of the people who voted against Obama on no-gun lists, because according to the DHS, they’re all potential terrorists.”

Senator Gillibrand is working closely with gun-grabbing organizations, including New Yorkers Against Gun Violence and the Brady Campaign, according to Matt Canter, Gillibrand’s spokesman. New York City Police Commissioner Ray Kelly and others are working with Gillibrand on “anti-trafficking legislation to stop the flow of illegal guns,” Canter told Newsday.

The Obama administration recently attempted to link the right to own firearms to drug cartel violence in Mexico. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other administration officials have said 90 percent of the weapons used to commit crimes in Mexico come from the United States. In fact, only 17 percent of guns found at Mexican crime scenes have been traced to the U.S. Statistics reveal that most of the guns flowing into Mexico come from the black market, Russian crime organizations, South America, Asia, Guatemala, and the Mexican Army.

Soon after his shoo-in confirmation, Attorney General Eric Holder revived the assault weapons ban debate. Responding to a reporter’s question on weapons’ regulations, Holder said, “Well, as President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons. I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum.” Holder did not provide details on when legislation would be presented to Congress.

Democrats are reluctant to make additional attacks against the Second Amendment. In 1994, the issue was instrumental in handing over control of Congress to the Republicans. Earlier this year, the Democratic-led Senate dealt a body blow to the gun control movement, when 22 Senate Democrats, led by Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., joined 40 Republicans to shelve firearms restrictions in the nation’s capital.

Democrats fearful of backlash have told the Obama administration they would “actively oppose” any renewal of the assault weapons ban. Democrat senators Jon Tester and Max Baucus warned they would “strongly oppose any legislation that will infringe upon the rights of individual gun owners.”

Democrats, however, are biding their time. Veteran gun-grabber Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, author of the 1994 assault weapons ban, told CBS’ “60 Minutes” on April 12 that she has no intention of reintroducing the assault weapons ban at this time. “I’ll pick the time and the place, no question about it,” she said, that is to say when the opportunistic introduction of such legislation is politically expedient and will not damage her party.

Government propaganda and exploitation of recent high profile “gun violence” stories by the corporate media have not turned the public against the Second Amendment. “Recent polls show shrinking support for new gun control measures and strong public sentiment for enforcing existing laws instead. So strong is the shift in public opinion that a proposed assault-weapons ban — once backed by three in four Americans — now rates barely one in two,” reports the Houston Chronicle.

An April poll by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal found that support for curbing the sale of assault weapons and semiautomatic rifles has dropped from 75 percent in 1991 to 53 percent today.

I’m so glad that we have all these blue dog democrats we can always rely on…

Oh, wait, that’s one of them now. Guess we can only rely on them until they get into the national spotlight.

Related: http://www.newsday.com/news/local/politics/ny-usguns0712738461may06,0,977427.story

Edit: Also, no support from anywhere other than Alex Jones >.< yet. Will update with more reliable source as available.

[makattak]

Also, might I note what happens in the Democratic party when a Senator is faced with a threat from her left?

SHE MOVES TO THE LEFT.

What happens in the Republican party when a Senator is faced with a threat from the right? He moves to the Democratic party.

Yeah... it's the horrid Republicans that won't stand for any dissension in the ranks.

Also, I will point out that how "loyal" the liberal Republican are compared to the conservative Democrats.

[buzz_knox]

If this occurs, there will be a lot of crow that deserves to be eaten on various gun boards.  More than a few saw her as a strong ally for RKBA, and disparaged anyone who dared suggest she'd be coopted.

Ah, well.  I don't expect a hint of contrition from any of these individuals.  They'll probably claim it is a clever ploy on her part, to earn points from the left with legislation she knows will fail.

[mtnbkr]

What do you do?  On one side you have a democrat who was pro-2nd by her actions and on the other side you have 2nd Amendment lukewarm (or hostile) republicans.  Who do you trust? 

Chris

[Balog]

If this occurs, there will be a lot of crow that deserves to be eaten on various gun boards.  More than a few saw her as a strong ally for RKBA, and disparaged anyone who dared suggest she'd be coopted.

Ah, well.  I don't expect a hint of contrition from any of these individuals.  They'll probably claim it is a clever ploy on her part, to earn points from the left with legislation she knows will fail.

I still remember people saying that about Bush. /facepalm

What do you do?  On one side you have a democrat who was pro-2nd by her actions and on the other side you have 2nd Amendment lukewarm (or hostile) republicans.  Who do you trust? 

Chris

Yeah, it's a bad situation all around. Purging the 'pubbies of the big spenders and anti-freedom types seems like a good place to start.

[AZRedhawk44]

McCarthy’s bill, H.R. 6676, would utilize the National Instant Criminal Background Check System for background checks on all gun store employees and dealers. In addition to H.R. 6676, three other bills have been offered including laws that would make it illegal for known or suspected terrorists to buy guns.

As reported by Infowars last week, the House is currently working on H.R. 2159, The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009, sponsored by Rep. Peter King of New York. The bill would “increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of firearms or explosives licenses to a known or suspected dangerous terrorist.”

Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, told WorldNetDaily the bill will likely be used in junction with the DHS “Rightwing Extremism” report that characterizes advocates of the Second Amendment and others as terrorists. “By those standards, I’m one of [DHS Secretary] Janet Napolitano’s terrorists,” Pratt said. “This bill would enable the attorney general to put all of the people who voted against Obama on no-gun lists, because according to the DHS, they’re all potential terrorists.”

Aside from the DHS/Terrorist tenuous link... this is a good bill.

Bill 6676 means you have to undergo NICS to work in a gun shop.  Duh.  If you have to go through NICS for purchase, seems you should have to go through NICS to sell as well.

As far as Larry Pratt and the suspected terrorister mumbo-jumbo... I welcome the dotguv to try that crap with any red blooded American and deny a NICS check as that basis.  Watch their lovely law get set up in flames by SCOTUS, setting yet another 2A precedent in our favor.  I'll contribute to that court campaign.

They're gonna kill themselves in the courts and do 75% of our work for us.  These Constitutional Amendment things are pretty cool like that.

So... what moonbattery are we howling at with righteous indignation here?  This is not an AWB or gunshow loophole bill, or anything like that.

[MechAg94]

I guess the main question is will the no-gun list end up like the no-fly list? 

[gunsmith]

I need more than "infowars" links!

She may very well be flipflopping, I do not know.
 I do know however that I do not trust infowars to tell me if it is hot or cold out.

[gunsmith]

Gillibrand had no comment Wednesday on legislation that hasn't been introduced, said her spokesman Matt Canter.

infowars cited this link
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/politics/ny-usguns0712738461may06%2c0%2c977427.story
and flat out lied! the legislation hasn't been introduced,  and Gillibrand isn't set to introduce, McCarthy is!
infowars nutjobbers are not friends of the gun rights movement, they're such a huge lying pita that I suspect they're hired by the Bradybunch to make us look bad.

[buzz_knox]

The "no comment on yet to be filed legislation" must be standard for blue dogs.  Webb basically said the same thing when asked if he'd support a new AWB.

[Standing Wolf]

Newsday claims Gillibrand has “undergone a transformation” over the last three months and has moved away from “her House record that won the NRA’s top rating while remaining a supporter of Second Amendment rights to gun ownership.” Since her Senate appointment, she has “passed just about every test on guns set by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy,” who reintroduced a bill closing the so-called gun-show loophole at a news conference last week.

Maybe someone ought to introduce her to that Spitzer individual.

[Matthew Carberry]

Maybe someone should change the title of the thread, since it seems to be incorrect.

[makattak]

Maybe someone should change the title of the thread, since it seems to be incorrect.

Quite right. So changed.

[GeoJAP]

infowars cited this link
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/politics/ny-usguns0712738461may06%2c0%2c977427.story
and flat out lied! the legislation hasn't been introduced,  and Gillibrand isn't set to introduce, McCarthy is!
infowars nutjobbers are not friends of the gun rights movement, they're such a huge lying pita that I suspect they're hired by the Bradybunch to make us look bad.

Wow, you know NOTHING about InfoWars and Alex Jones.  Alex has been saying for years that the plan is to eventually grab our guns.  He is so far removed from the Brady Bunch it's silly to even put them in the same sentence.  Quit attacking people who are on your side, it's not constructive.

[gunsmith]

Wow, you know NOTHING about InfoWars and Alex Jones.  Alex has been saying for years that the plan is to eventually grab our guns.  He is so far removed from the Brady Bunch it's silly to even put them in the same sentence.  Quit attacking people who are on your side, it's not constructive.

geojap, infowars are not on my side, they are flat out bonkers, & liars.
I even proved it, they said Gillibrand INTRODUCED IT,  that was a flat out bald faced lie.


911 was not an inside job, people who believe it ARE REALLY STUPID!
911 truthers are either really crazy or really stupid

infowars.com  is right about twice a day, & so is a broken clock, the rest of the day they're wrong.

I stand by what I said earlier, I suspect that they are on some kind of mission  to make us regular paranoid right wing extremist look bad

[Matthew Carberry]

Alex Jones fails to properly vet his sources and thus contributes to massive overreaction by credulous gun owners.

That makes us look foolish to the vital pool of undecided folks, who usually agree with us when we present our arguments rationally.

It also distracts credulous gun owners from the more serious subtle threats to our rights by playing up, with chicken-little nonsense, the non-issue vanity legislation presented to reliably die in committee by the usual subjects year after year after year.

[gunsmith]

Alex Jones fails to properly vet his sources and thus contributes to massive overreaction by credulous gun owners.

That makes us look foolish to the vital pool of undecided folks, who usually agree with us when we present our arguments rationally.

It also distracts credulous gun owners from the more serious subtle threats to our rights by playing up, with chicken-little nonsense, the non-issue vanity legislation presented to reliably die in committee by the usual subjects year after year after year.

That's what I would have said if I was half as articulate as you are, thanks!

[GeoJAP]

geojap, infowars are not on my side, they are flat out bonkers, & liars.
I even proved it, they said Gillibrand INTRODUCED IT,  that was a flat out bald faced lie.


911 was not an inside job, people who believe it ARE REALLY STUPID!
911 truthers are either really crazy or really stupid

infowars.com  is right about twice a day, & so is a broken clock, the rest of the day they're wrong.

I stand by what I said earlier, I suspect that they are on some kind of mission  to make us regular paranoid right wing extremist look bad

No, they are not.  You are attacking them but not backing up what you say,  That is disingenuous and has no supporting evidence.  You are asking me to believe you based on faith, or else just on your character.

Please provide me with evidence that Alex Jones is full of crap.  Remember that he backs up all of his news stories with government or corporate documents.  It's hard to argue against their own documents where TPTB discuss their plans for us.

Please tell me where he's full of *expletive deleted*it.  Please.

[GeoJAP]

Alex Jones fails to properly vet his sources and thus contributes to massive overreaction by credulous gun owners.

That makes us look foolish to the vital pool of undecided folks, who usually agree with us when we present our arguments rationally.

It also distracts credulous gun owners from the more serious subtle threats to our rights by playing up, with chicken-little nonsense, the non-issue vanity legislation presented to reliably die in committee by the usual subjects year after year after year.

Alex annotates every single one of his assertions in an online bibliography.  Please provide one example where you can prove he has been disingenuous or not quoted a verified source.  Some sources like Lindsay Williams I will not accept, however, all the Nobel Prize winners and state/national legislators are experts and authorities because of their positions.  If you don't trust what they say just because they have been on the ALex Jones show, then you have issues.

[GeoJAP]

I even proved it, they said Gillibrand INTRODUCED IT,  that was a flat out bald faced lie.

No they didn't, they said that they heard she was going to introduce it.  You didn't read it correctly, did you?  Please respond to my question that you misread the article to confirm your mistake.

[Balog]

Alex annotates every single one of his assertions in an online bibliography.  Please provide one example where you can prove he has been disingenuous or not quoted a verified source.  Some sources like Lindsay Williams I will not accept, however, all the Nobel Prize winners and state/national legislators are experts and authorities because of their positions.  If you don't trust what they say just because they have been on the ALex Jones show, then you have issues.

Citing a source means pretty much nothing. If I post a LiveJournal "article" claiming to have proof Obama is a card carrying Communist who faps to pictures of Mao, citing that just proves you are credulous. Also.....

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat and member of the so-called Blue Dog Coalition, plans to introduce an assault weapons ban this week.

The sauce sez:

But McCarthy said that next week she plans to introduce an assault weapons ban - legislation that is anathema to the NRA and that could pose a problem for Gillibrand.

Totally different, a "bald faced lie" as it were.

No they didn't, they said that they heard she was going to introduce it.  You didn't read it correctly, did you?  Please respond to my question that you misread the article to confirm your mistake.

1. You are incorrect, so perhaps you should confirm things a bit more before berating others. 2. Stop being a dick. Even if you weren't provably, embarrassingly wrong here there's no call to act in the way you are.

[GeoJAP]

Citing a source means pretty much nothing. If I post a LiveJournal "article" claiming to have proof Obama is a card carrying Communist who faps to pictures of Mao, citing that just proves you are credulous.

Like I said, his guests are often Nobel prize winners, and state/national lawmakers.  He also has former administration officials from both parties.  You are conveniently ignoring what I said.  If you want lists of them with interviews, I can get them for you.

You ignored my question.  Why is he full of *expletive deleted*it?  Please tell me what he said and why it is full of crap.  Otherwise, you have libeled him.  Please back up what you have said.

[GeoJAP]

The thing you need to realize Balog, is that you are libeling someone who is progressing the Liberty Movement, who is a human being and obviously not perfect.  You are actually attacking someone who is for open carry and interpreting the second amendment at face value.

You need to step back and re-evaluate.  This guy is on your side.  If you continue to attack, it shows how farked this country has become and we are doomed to fail because our citizens are too ignorant to know how to stand together and fight together when we have common interests.  Don't be "that guy" who is that self-destructive.

[Balog]

Like I said, his guests are often Nobel prize winners, and state/national lawmakers.  He also has former administration officials from both parties.  You are conveniently ignoring what I said.  If you want lists of them with interviews, I can get them for you.

You ignored my question.  Why is he full of *expletive deleted*it?  Please tell me what he said and why it is full of crap.  Otherwise, you have libeled him.  Please back up what you have said.

Ummm, because the article in question cites a shady source, then utterly misrepresents it? Did you actually read my earlier post? Oh, and you are aware that appeal to authority is a logical fallacy?

Additionally, I've seen his 9/11 troof "documentary" and found it utterly laughable. The proof of his lack of credibility is his body of work.

Speaking of conveniently ignoring things, perhaps you'd like to reply to the fact that you attacked a poster here with a blatantly false accusation. Or is the fact that your earlier assertion is entirely without merit (and was proven so after about 1.5 minutes of reading and following links) not worth taking into consideration? Libel is a-ok when leveled against a random forum poster?

The thing you need to realize Balog, is that you are libeling someone who is progressing the Liberty Movement, who is a human being and obviously not perfect.  You are actually attacking someone who is for open carry and interpreting the second amendment at face value.

You need to step back and re-evaluate.  This guy is on your side.  If you continue to attack, it shows how farked this country has become and we are doomed to fail because our citizens are too ignorant to know how to stand together and fight together when we have common interests.  Don't be "that guy" who is that self-destructive.

A lot of vile racists are ardent 2nd supporters too. Shall I welcome them with open arms? Wild eyed, intellectually bereft conspiracy theorists being hailed as reliable sources is far more destructive to our cause than being "that guy." I don't want Alex Jones at my side as a 2nd Amendment supporter any more than I want Fred Phelps at my side as a Christian.

[Balog]

In this post, Balog learns the difference between the "Quote" and "Modify" buttons. /facepalm