Gun Owners of America president Larry Pratt appeared Tuesday on the Talk to Solomon Show alongside conservative blogger Greg W. Howard, of Twittergate fame, for another chance to spew anti-Obama conspiracy theories.
Pratt predicted that President Obama may begin confiscating guns in order to provoke a violent response to justify further oppression, which host Stan Solomon feared would lead to the imprisonment of hundreds of thousands of people.
Pratt once again insisted that Obama is acting like King George III, a sentiment with which Solomon concurred, saying, “That will happen quickly and they will wipe those people out to set an example.”
But Solomon wasn’t finished: “I believe they will put together a racial force to go against an opposite race resistance, basically a black force to go against a white resistance, and then they will claim anyone resisting the black force they are doing it because they are racist.”
Howard agreed: “You may be right because he has been sowing the seeds of racial hatred; we were healing quite well as a nation on racial issues until Obama came along and now we have a lot of racial discord.”
After arguing that Obama is “not American” and not a natural born citizen, Howard maintained that Obama may begin “wiping out a few hundred people who own guns, pull a large scale Waco or a Ruby Ridge type incident” and have it “tinged it with racial overtones.” But just in case Obama goes through with his plans to “take down” the Internet, “people are setting up phone-trees all over the place” to stop Obama in his tracks.
“If Obama can take your guns away he can take your car, he can take your home, he can take your bank account, he can take your very life,” Howard said.
Unsurprisingly, Pratt agreed with their insane ramblings: “I do agree that the Obama administration would definitely be capable of something as evil as you were suggesting.”
However, Pratt warned that “a lot of people resolved, ‘no more free Wacos,’” and that if Obama “starts playing the massacre game the way you did at Waco, well, you’re going to get surrounded, you won’t be able to go home safely, your family won’t be safe.”
Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America once again compared President Obama to King George III during an interview with the UK’s Channel 4 News. He told reporter Matt Frei that Americans don’t accept the “statistical argument” that a lack of gun control is linked to higher levels of gun violence, arguing that the Second Amendment is meant to “keep the government at bay.”
“When the colonists said you’ve become a tyrant, stop it, and when he wouldn’t stop, we shot, and we got rid of your King,” Pratt said, who went on to liken Obama to King George III.
Pratt said that President Obama “should remember King George III’s experience” as he “seems to forget that he was democratically elected.”
Later in the interview, Pratt said that people are “already being encouraged by the President’s actions and his words to go and buy firearms” because Obama is “doing all he can to destroy” the Second Amendment.
He added that he is “not calling the President a tyrant yet, but the President certainly has indicated he has a low regard for the law and a low regard for the Constitution.”
They would be going door-to-door to see if you’ve registered your guns. That would be, I think, a very dangerous thing for them to do. I think they had better consider how it worked out for George III.
They don’t want to be told that they’ve crossed the line and become rebels against the Constitution. They have crossed the same line that George III did and they should consider how that ended for him. Actually, he ended up in a nut house, it was pretty stressful for him and he couldn’t handle it. That’s where I see this administration; they are just completely detached from the Constitution and from the law.
Congressman Steve Scalise (R-LA) appeared on Washington Watch with Family Research Council president Tony Perkins yesterday to discuss the State of the Union address where he pushed the standard right-wing canards that President Obama is leading an attack on freedom and trying to exploit “tragedies that he uses to his own benefit.”
Perkins: There’s not been an administration that’s been more hostile to our first freedom, our fundamental right of the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion.
Scalise: Right, look, just go in order. Right after that, he’s gone after freedom of speech and religion, now in that same speech he is going after our second amendment rights, our freedom to defend ourselves by having the ability to own guns for law-abiding citizens. All of these things he talked about, these tragedies that he uses to his own benefit, none of them would have been prevented by his own gun control measures, it just takes away the rights of law-abiding citizens.
Responding to Rep. Steny Hoyer’s insistence that Congress let the Bush tax cuts expire, Scalise falsely claimed that the tax cuts raised revenue and led to an economic boom.
Scalise: You know they are just living in some kind of parallel universe that doesn’t mesh with reality. You know I’ll just give you one point that he mentioned there Tony right out the box, he said, ‘oh we didn’t pay for the Bush tax cuts.’ Maybe Steny Hoyer needs to go back and look at the history, back in 2003 when those tax cuts took full effect the federal government actually took in forty percent more revenue, it actually brought in more money to the federal treasury to cut taxes because people had more money in their pockets and the economy took off in 2003. Go look at the history of this.
Scalise’s assertion about tax revenues also reveals that the congressman himself hasn’t taken a “look at the history of this.”
Citing data from the Congressional Budget Office, the Annenberg Public Policy Center concluded that the Bush tax policy “had a total negative effect on revenue growth,” and former Bush economist Alan Viard of the right-wing American Enterprise Institute said that there is “no dispute” among economists that “federal revenue is lower today than it would have been without the tax cuts.”
Former Reagan economist Bruce Bartlett also determined that “revenue as a share of G.D.P. was lower every year of the Bush presidency than it was in 2000,” citing this helpful chart:
source: Congressional Budget Office.
“Perhaps the whole point of the apparent Republican disinformation effort to deny that the Bush tax cuts reduced federal revenue is to make the reverse argument next year,” Bartlett writes, “allowing them to expire will not raise revenue.”
Texas Republican congressman Steve Stockman announced today that he is “excited to have a patriot like Ted Nugent joining me in the House Chamber” during President Obama’s State of the Union, once again confirming Stockman’s position as one of the most far-right members of Congress.
Nugent in the past has threatened to kill President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and California Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer.
“I was in Chicago and I said hey Obama, you might want to suck on one of these you punk; Obama, he’s a piece of shit, and I told him to suck on my machine gun,” Nugent screamed during a concert while brandishing two machine guns, “Then I was in New York and I said, ‘Hey Hillary you might want to ride one of these into the sunset you worthless bitch…. Then I was out in California and I thought, Barbara Boxer, she might want to suck on my machine gun, hey Dianne Feinstein ride one of these you worthless whore.”
Nugent at a National Rifle Association gathering said that if Obama and his “vile, evil America-hating administration” win re-election then “I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year.”
He also told NRA members that Obama and other Democratic officials are “criminals” and like an animal that needs to be shot.
Besides threatening to kill U.S. officials, Nugent also claimed that he now wishes that the South had won the Civil War and attacked civil rights leaders over their “ebonic mumbo-jumbo.” He has even denounced what he calls Obama’s “racist agenda” and “liberal jihad.”
But unlike most people who have been visited by the Secret Service over their violent threats to elected officials, Nugent is invited to the State of the Union address.
The American Family Association’s Buster Wilson yesterday warned that President Obama is on the brink of establishing a dictatorship. Reacting to the recent drone memo leak, Wilson strongly suggested that Obama may start killing conservatives and Christians who oppose his administration. He said the drone memo “scares me” because the Department of Homeland Security considers conservative Christians to be potential terrorists. Wilson was referring to a DHS report [PDF], which he completely distorted, on violent racist and anti-government extremists.
Later, Wilson claimed to have heard three anecdotal reports that the military under Obama is requiring personnel to affirm their willingness to “fire on American citizens,” including people resisting what Wilson believes is a looming gun ban.
But since Wilson doesn’t have the courage to take complete ownership of his anti-government paranoia, he once again qualified his conspiracy theory with the weak cop-out that he’s “just asking the question.”
Maybe the “person” who told Wilson about the new military plan was the same one who sent him the hoax “Obama’s foreign student ID” photo.
This week we’ve had two people talk to us, we’ve actually had three—one story not quite as well-vetted as we’d like—but we have three anecdotal representations that military personnel are being asked on written tests in the military if they would be willing if so ordered by the Commander-in-Chief to fire on American citizens, would they be willing to do it? Then there this, you know it’s on the level of conspiracy theory right now, but there’s this one guy in Canada who is saying that the President is vetting his command structure with the question on whether or not they’d be able to fire on American citizens. In light of the current gun control stuff that’s going on, that’s one of the scenarios that we understand is being presented, if a group of citizens are not willing to give up their guns would you be willing to fire upon them? Then you take the fact that we’ve had military exercises in four American cities: Miami, St. Louis, Houston and Chicago; just all of it together. Then the revamping of the continuation of government executive order that the President did and posted on March 16 of last year, it’s enough that I think it’s a fair thing for the thinking American to ask the question: what is going on? We certainly haven’t heard about a conglomeration of all of these things coming together, a nexus of these things coming together with any other President, not in my lifetime at least, so I think it’s a fair question to ask.
Alan Keyes may no longer be the Religious Right superstar he once was, but rest assured, he is still active and remains just as erudite and unhinged as always. Appearing recently via webcam on something called "The Talk to Solomon Show," Keyes declared that everyone knows that our society is on the verge of slipping into lawless chaos and it is therefore "insane" for anyone to be promoting any sort of gun control efforts at this time.
In fact, said Keyes, any government official who supports gun control is doing so because they want average citizens to be rendered defenseless against the "criminals and psychotic folks" who are going to running wild in the anarchy to come because it serves the larger goal of curbing the global population and the effort is "intended to make sure that people will be slaughtered by the thousands and the hundreds of thousands":
By now everyone has seen NRA head Wayne LaPierre declare that “the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun” while calling for armed guards in every American school. The NRA’s proposed solution to gun violence can be boiled down to even more guns, and the group wants concealed weapons in all public spaces – including churches, schools, bars and airports.
If there’s one place that I would expect to be able to take a concealed gun, it’s to a gun show. That’s why I was struck by the advice doled out by the NRA’s National Firearms Museum on “How to be a Gun Collector.” In the article, authored by NRA museum director Jim Supica, would-be gun collectors are directed to “practice basic gun safety” at gun shows.
Supica starts off with the most basic rule of gun safety, warning against allowing “the muzzle of a gun you're handling to point at other folks.” But then he stumbles badly off-message (from the NRA party line) with some commonsense advice that, were President Obama to say it, would hasten comparisons to Mao and Hitler.
The NRA’s Supica directs gun collectors to “keep your guns tied inoperable” (like this) when attending a gun show, noting that this is a “requirement at the better shows.” And he isn't done.
Supica then directs gun collectors to “never bring a loaded gun into a show,” even if it’s a “legal concealed carry gun.” Furthermore, collectors should never “test chamber a round in a show.” Of course, your typical armed guard or concealed carry enthusiast already has a round in the chamber, but never mind that.
Supica observes that “negligent discharges are very rare at shows.” However, when they do happen they typically involve “a concealed carry gun that was brought in loaded.”
You might be wondering why this namby-pamby Supica character hates the Second Amendment so much or whether the NRA knows it has a gun-hating pinko running its museum. But in their defense, Supica’s article bears this disclaimer: “Opinions are those of the author and not necessarily those of NRA or the National Firearms Museum.” Well, that’s a relief. Supica may be an NRA employee and run their museum, but at least his commonsense, life-saving advice can’t be pinned on the NRA.
But maybe Supica isn’t such an outlier. As Scott Keyes reported in January, gun shows typically ban attendees from carrying loaded guns. Yet the NRA categorically supports efforts to expand concealed carry to “previously prohibited places.”
The takeaway, then, is that guns should be unloaded, tied inoperable and held out in the open at gun shows. But if you’re at a church, school, bar or shopping mall, you should feel free to conceal and carry a loaded gun with a bullet in the chamber. And that is how you practice basic gun safety.
On the most recent episode of "Prophetic Perspective on Current Events," Rick Joyner was discussing the shooting at Sandy Hook, which he claimed was the result of demonic possession, when he warned that the shooting was going to lead to an attempt by the government to confiscate weapons, which would in turn lead to a "second American revolution."
Joyner claimed that the modern-day prophets have received several "trustworthy revelations that were warnings from above" that "we are facing, right now, the break-up of our country and it is much closer than almost anybody is talking about":
Conservative writer Erik Rush writes today that President Obama’s press conference on gun violence was actually a way to distract the public so he could confiscate guns, provoke “civil unrest,” and train the military to kill U.S. citizens in order to justify “his move of declaring martial law” and to pursue his “totalitarian end game.” He claims Obama wants to copy “Mao, Lenin , Stalin and Castro – men who murdered hundreds of millions in their ascent to total dominion over their respective nations,” and establish a dictatorship.
In an earlier life – the one the press refuses to report – Obama summarily declared that he believed Americans should not own guns. That declaration seems to have been forgotten by some who are attributing to Mr. Obama scruples, morals, and decency that he does not possess – not to mention his demonstrated disregard for the Constitution of the United States in general. Reasonableness is what the American public generally displays and expects in return.
I’m sorry to burst the bubble here, but that is not what is happening on the Obama side of that ledger. Lies, obfuscation, the sweet smile, the demonization or marginalization of those who uphold the Second Amendment, assurances of faithfulness to the Constitution and a love for the children are merely diversionary precursors to his totalitarian end game. All are bogus, all staging and melodrama for the cameras.
Tyranny is coming in America, despite the fact that more than half of her citizens are too deluded, arrogant, or stupid to see it. If Obama’s policy processes continue unchecked, America will experience cataclysmic civil unrest; again, unfathomable to most Americans, this is precisely what Obama intends.
Has he ever followed through on conducting an open and honest discussion with the American people about anything? So we have our answer.
A second question might be this: Do you believe that the President will alter his long-standing belief that no American should own a gun after this discussion is over? The third and final question, assuming the answers to the first two questions are “no,” is Might the training of American military and police in guerilla warfare techniques coupled with manuals in the “How to” of gun confiscation be an indicator of where this “discussion” is really going?
If the answer to that one is “yes,” then have Americans just been convinced into thinking that the President is “open” to changing his thinking, and is “transparent” enough not to have a hidden agenda?
Obama, with the eager cooperation of the American press and the anti-gun lobby, are creating the perception of Second Amendment proponents as manifestly evil. Not misguided, not wrong – but evil. As such, he will set the stage for all “reasonable” Americans to support the wholesale dismantling of the Second Amendment, and if this means wholesale firearms confiscation and the bloodshed to which this will no doubt give rise, so much the better. This will give him legitimacy in his move of declaring martial law – in fact, he will have “no choice,” so it will appear.
This will be, as we’ve seen in so many other nations, the move across the threshold into totalitarian rule. We must never forget that this is a person who grew up studying and admiring Mao, Lenin, Stalin, and Castro – men who murdered hundreds of millions in their ascent to total dominion over their respective nations. Just this week, it was reported that a former senior military staffer revealed Obama’s new litmus test for top military brass: Can they give the order to fire on American citizens?
Former Pennsylvania GOP state lawmaker Sam Rohrer, now with Let Freedom Ring and the Pennsylvania Pastors Network, appeared on VCY America’s Crosstalk this week to argue that a literal reading of the Bible reveals that gun rights come directly from God. However, he went on to say that Jesus’ teachings on non-violence should not be taken literally.
Responding to a caller who asked if there was a connection between new gun laws and Agenda 21, a nonbinding framework for sustainable development that is the source of many conservative conspiracies, Rohrer maintained that government will use both policies to increase its control over people’s lives and to reduce the population, explaining that as a result of new gun and environmental laws there will be “people who will probably lose their lives and there will be a loss of population.”
Caller: A couple months ago you had a program on about Agenda 21 and it seems to me like there is a plan to undermine our whole society in order to accomplish the goal of reducing our population. I think this is part of it, gun control. If we can remember about the Hegelian dialectic, that is where you start out with a thesis and you want an antithesis, you do things in order to bring about a synthesis, right? I believe that this is a plan in order to bring about the things that they want to accomplish so gun control is a part of it.
Rohrer: I think without question. I have spoken a lot on Agenda 21 even years ago before it became a public manner. There are attempts out there clearly, whether it’s to diminish or lower the number of the population is one thing, but certainly control I think is the common aspect behind it. Agenda 21 is a control of our property, it’s a control of our legal system to the local level; so is the intent to take away the ability of people to defend themselves, ultimately government says I don’t want a challenge and so taking away the ability to defend oneself is effectively consolidating the control of government. At the end of the day I think the result of that is that you will have people who will probably lose their lives and there will be a loss of population, but it’s really a gaining and a garnering and centering of control.
Buster Wilson of the American Family Association routinely uses his radio show to push bizarre and false claims that the government is fomenting violence against its citizens and building concentration camps while also promoting quasi-birther allegations.
So it was no surprise that a caller on his show seemingly threatened President Obama’s life, telling Wilson that “we need to take him out, one way or the other.”
While Wilson made sure to reject and distance himself from the caller’s threat, he went on to tell her about his latest conspiracy theory, one endorsed by fellow AFA radio host Bryan Fischer, about how the government is seeking to make ammunition unavailable to gun owners. The next caller told Wilson that they might soon be sharing a jail cell.
Wilson: Cynthia, thanks for calling from Palestine, Texas, glad to have you on.
Caller: Thank you sir, I just want to say nobody is bringing up the fact that that Muslim shot up Fort Hood and they knew he was on the move to do that, and Benghazi you bet and the Border Patrol, where’s the bullets for them? But you want to come out here and you want to take everything we’ve got and set up the Muslim Brotherhood just clearly shows it’s like a zero dart right into the center. Also talking about holding us hostage to get his ceiling, the checks won’t come, you know, this guy. America, we need to take him out, one way or the other.
Wilson: Okay Cynthia, thanks for calling. Well I want to be careful on saying things like that we don’t want anybody to think we’re talking about—we don’t support any kind of concept of taking the President out. We had an opportunity to vote him out and the country didn’t take it so he is rightfully our president, he was voted by the majority so there you go, he’s in. but you did sort of sum it all up in one sentence everything from Benghazi to Fort Hood to Fast and Furious to the Border Patrol.
You know something else that a lot of people are not mentioning, I called my dealership that I trade with on a regular basis today to ask about the purchasing of another gun and they didn’t have any. They couldn’t tell me when they were going to have any in, they couldn’t tell me when they were coming, they didn’t know if there were going to be any more coming. She said “until we have the dust settled on all this stuff from yesterday” she couldn’t tell me if there were going to be any more guns coming in stock.
Ammunition, same thing, can’t find ammunition. You can find a few guns but you can’t find ammunition. Somebody asked me last night and I thought it was a perfect question to ask, almost a billion and a half rounds of ammunition purchased last year by the Department of Homeland Security, Border Patrol and even the armed services of the Postal Service ordered a large cache of ammunition. Why is the government ordering these huge, I mean the numbers are unbelievable, almost a billion and a half rounds by Homeland Security alone, why is the government ordering such large amounts of ammunition and you and I, Mr. Average Joe America, can’t find any ammunition? Is it just the supply and demand thing or is there something else going on? I don’t know, I don’t want to be the conspiracy theory guy, but it is a question somebody needs to answer. Let’s talk to John from Alabama.
Caller: Long time no hear Buster. Maybe one day we can get to share a jail cell and praise the Lord together.
Wilson: I hope not but I’m ready to go if need be.
After the caller warned that Obama is implementing the planks of the Communist Manifesto and creating a Nazi-like state, Wilson moved from his standard ‘I’m just asking the question’ excuse to plainly arguing that the government is planning to make ammunition unavailable to gun owners in order to “make our guns obsolete.”
Wilson: I’ve said this before, what they’re going to do in the place of confiscating the weapons that they know will cause too much civil unrest, they’re going to go after the ammunition. As I mentioned earlier, right now I can’t find anywhere where I live to buy the ammunition I want, it’s not out there. I believe whether it’s through taxation or whether it’s through demands on the corporations that are the manufacturers, they are going to do something that will stop the flow of ammunition and that’s how they will make our guns obsolete. It’s a Second Amendment right, that’s why we look at it. I just shared with you two stories today about how they are attacking the First Amendment right. The First and Second Amendments, our government, this government today, seems to be in all-out war against.
The right-wing press really can’t get enough of the comparisons of President Obama to Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin over his new executive actions and proposed gun laws, including the reauthorization of the Assault Weapons Ban. While the first Assault Weapons Ban that lasted from 1994 to 2004 didn’t produce a fascistic dictatorship, WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah writes today that “Obama’s gun grab” is how “every mass-murdering tyranny in the history of the world started.” Farah claims that the left will bring about “the end of liberty” and that Americans will be in the same situation as the colonists confronting a “tyrannical government” during the American Revolution.
Left leads to the end of liberty. The right path buys us time to restore the principle of constitutionally limited government.
If the U.S. government renders its citizens as subjects by disarming them, it will be the end of the dream of liberty that drove our founders to arms to fight for self-government and independence.
In fact, that was what precipitated the War of Independence. When British occupying forces set out to seize New Englanders’ arms depots at Lexington and Concord, the colonists drew a line in the sand. They understood that without firearms, they would lose any leverage they might have with their masters. They understood that without firearms, they would be hapless subjects of tyrannical government forever.
A new generation of Americans find themselves in just that predicament again, as Barack Obama puts on a full-court press to ban entire classifications of firearms leading inevitably to a government monopoly on force.
He’s appealing to emotion, and, for many Americans, dumbed down by government education and cultural institutions that place no value on freedom and personal responsibility, it’s working.
Yes, children were slaughtered at Newtown, Connecticut’s Sandy Hook Elementary School. But not one of those children would have been saved by Obama’s gun grab. To many Americans, that doesn’t matter. They just feel that something must be done.
What they don’t understand is that they are helping to set up more carnage, more Sandy Hooks, more bloodshed and, ultimately, the end of government accountability to its citizenry.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist or a Ph.D. in history to know that every mass-murdering tyranny in the history of the world started like this. They began with a government monopoly on force. Once that is established, the citizenry is no longer served by government, government is served by its subjects.
Shortly after the Sandy Hook tragedy, David Barton appeared on Glenn Beck's television program where he made the case that the Second Amendment was intended to guarantee to citizens access to any and all weapons that might possibly be used against them in the name of self-defense. And since citizens might have to defend themselves from the government, they were entitled to own the same types of weapons that the government possesses.
Under Barton's logic, the Second Amendment therefore guarantees to citizens the right to own tanks and bombers and attack helicopters and destroyers and even nuclear bombs because that is what the government owns.
But that seems crazy and he couldn't possibly mean that, right?
Wrong. That is exactly what he means because he made the same point today on "WallBuilders Live":
The Second Amendment is not to arm you less than it is to arm the government. Because what specifically happened was if the Americans had not been able to go home and grab their guns off the mantel over the fireplace, they could not have taken on the British coming after them.
The British was their government and the Americans had to have equal firepower with whoever was coming after them and that's why they went to Fort Ticonderoga and got all the British cannons and came back and used those. That was just individual citizens doing that.
So the purpose of the Second Amendment was you have got to be able to defend yourself, your rights, period against anybody and that sometimes means it may be your government coming after you. So if the government has got AR-15s, guess what? The people can have AR-15s ... Whatever the government's got, you've got to be able to defend yourself against. So there was no limitation on what you could or couldn't do with the Second Amendment; it was a self-defense amendment and if everybody is coming at you AR-15s, you don't defend yourself with BB guns, you get AR-15s.
The right-wing group Gun Owners of America has for the past few years been pushing the debunked conspiracy theory that the health care reform law will be used to collect information on gun owners, information that will later be used as part of a gun-confiscation scheme.
Speaking with Family Research Council president Tony Perkins yesterday, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) echoed that theory, claiming that President Obama’s new executive actions have “language in there talking about doctors being required to report on patients and ask patients if they own guns or not.”
He warned that President Obama’s “going to use Obamacare apparently to have doctors informing on their patients to whether or not they have guns” and will put the information into “government databanks.” He added: “I’m very much opposed to this kind of information going into government databanks because I fear that the time will come when this data will be misused.”
Paul: He’s going to use Obamacare apparently to have doctors informing on their patients to whether or not they have guns.
Perkins: I mean, that’s crazy.
Paul: How exactly he’s going to make this work, I don’t know, but there is language in there talking about doctors being required to report on patients and ask patients if they own guns or not.
Perkins: I read that and I was just flabbergasted…. Senator, not everybody may know this but you’re also a physician so I think you have probably a pretty different perspective on that, not just as a patient but as a doctor. I mean do you want to ask, how are you feeling, got a little fever and by the way how many guns do you have? I mean, how do you work that into the conversation?
Paul: The whole idea that the government is going to be in between you and your doctor, that the doctor-patient relationship which is a very private relationship. In fact it’s part of our Hippocratic Oath that if you come to me and see me and I’m treating you for problems which often can become personal problems and private problems would you want me going down to the grocery store and saying, I just saw so-and-so and he’s got this. You know it’s really not the kind of relationship you want with your patients.
Same way would you want your government to know and does your government need to know what medications you take, whether you own guns. I’m very much opposed to this kind of information going into government databanks because I fear that the time will come when this data will be misused.
Paul’s interpretation of the executive action is, of course, completely off-base, as are his claims about Obamacare.
The White House statement does discuss having doctors talk to patients about gun safety if someone in the home has mental health issues, rebutting the rumor that Obamacare prohibits doctors from asking about gun ownership.
Contrary to Paul’s claims, this neither “requires” doctors to ask patients about gun ownership nor makes doctors give government “databanks” information on who owns guns. A plain reading of the law finds that it explicitly prohibits such data collection:
‘‘(c) PROTECTION OF SECOND AMENDMENT GUN RIGHTS.—
‘‘(1) WELLNESS AND PREVENTION PROGRAMS.— A wellness and health promotion activity implemented under subsection (a)(1)(D) may not require the disclosure or collection of any information relating to—
‘‘(A) the presence or storage of a lawfully possessed firearm or ammunition in the residence or on the property of an individual; or
‘‘(B) the lawful use, possession, or storage of a firearm or ammunition by an individual.
‘‘(2) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION.—None of the authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act shall be construed to authorize or may be used for the collection of any information relating to— ‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition;
‘‘(B) the lawful use of a firearm or ammunition; or
‘‘(C) the lawful storage of a firearm or ammunition.
‘‘(3) LIMITATION ON DATABASES OR DATABANKS.—None of the authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act shall be construed to authorize or may be used to maintain records of individual ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition.
‘‘(4) LIMITATION ON DETERMINATION OF PREMIUM RATES OR ELIGIBILITY FOR HEALTH INSURANCE.— A premium rate may not be increased, health insurance coverage may not be denied, and a discount, rebate, or reward offered for participation in a wellness program may not be reduced or withheld under any health benefit plan issued pursuant to or in accordance with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act on the basis of, or on reliance upon—
‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition; or
‘‘(B) the lawful use or storage of a firearm or ammunition.
‘‘(5) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS FOR INDIVIDUALS.— No individual shall be required to disclose any information under any data collection activity authorized under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act relating to—
‘‘(A) the lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition; or
‘‘(B) the lawful use, possession, or storage of a firearm or ammunition.’’
On this week's installment of the "Hagee Hotline," Matthew Hagee weighed in on the issue of gun control by citing the 1890 massacre at Wounded Knee, in which hundreds of members of the Sioux tribe were killed by government forces, as the sort of thing that happens "when the federal government attempts to confiscate firearms and take from Americans their liberty":
According to WND columnist Erik Rush’s definitely real “sources,” the Obama administration is giving American land to the Chinese government in exchange for debt forgiveness. While this does sound a lot like the plot of the Albert Brooks book 2030, Rush says this is all part of Obama’s push “for the disarming of the American populace” to please his Chinese overlords and usher in communism. And all this time we thought Obama was ushering in Sharia!
Let me share that which was related to me via one international business interest with strong ties to the nations highlighted in the following scenario: According to this source, President Obama had a mid-level U.S. official meet with a Chinese officer in 2011 to find out if the Chinese were open to a land and resource swap for debt forgiveness. The upshot of this is that the Chinese are now engaging in experimental “farming” and “scientific” studies in several locations in the U.S. (in various states). The personnel involved are all Chinese military, and the plan is to use these as the base for the expansion of “land settlements” in payment of the U.S. debt to China.
So Obama has sold America out – literally – which will come as little surprise to many readers, this plan apparently being the brainchild of Obama’s senior adviser, Valerie Jarrett, and members of China’s Politburo Standing Committee. Thus, the under-reported but long-standing goals of Jarrett, Obama, David Axelrod and a host of communist Obama cronies to bring America under communist sway will finally come to fruition.
Such activities have been rumored over the last couple of years, but had not been substantiated. However, this data has been verified by sources I know to be reliable; in fact, I have reported on their information previously, much to the consternation of the Chinese government.
It is the Chinese who are pushing for the disarming of the American populace. They do not want to bear the brunt of the backlash from the American public when their work and aspirations are exposed. Three weeks ago, I was told that “this will happen in weeks, not months,” and it is now occurring.
So much for our curiosity as to why in the midst of our economic woes, Obama is so vigorously capitalizing on the Sandy Hook massacre to advance what will certainly be draconian and unconstitutional measures relative to firearms. Obama’s gun-control plan includes at least 23 different executive actions – bypassing Congress and prompting at least one GOP lawmaker to suggest impeachment proceedings if Obama acts in this manner.
At this juncture, I think that impeachment is incredibly unlikely despite his treason, given what he has succeeded in getting away with under the noses of the Republican leadership. As I have been informed, there are key Republican leaders who are aware of what is transpiring between China and the Obama administration. These have been sold the notion that America is bankrupt, but that they can work with our debtors to see that an equitable settlement is reached.
The question to which this gives rise, of course, is: Equitable for whom? Is this the precursor to the Second American Revolution, or have gun sales gone through the roof for no apparent reason and toward no apparent objective (such as “to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution”)? Are heretofore sane, sober citizens of this republic taking leave of their senses en masse, or are they quietly and methodically preparing to stop our Union, to which thousands have given their lives, from being torn asunder?
I lean toward the latter. God help us all, and God bless America.
The American Family Association’s Buster Wilson has been warning for the last few weeks that President Obama is getting ready to confiscate guns en masse. When Obama announced his twenty-three executive actions yesterday, gun groups largely shrugged them off, but not Wilson. In his latest effort to stoke fear, he’s warning that the Obama administration may take guns away from pastors and radio talk show hosts like himself who denounce homosexuality:
Wilson: What if the Attorney General, and listen the reason I say this might happen is because if you remember the first report put out by the Director of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, when the President became President of the United States, she put out a paper talking about the people who are the categories of people who might be homegrown terrorists. In that list she put people who believe in the second coming of Jesus Christ, people who believe in pro-life issues, people who don’t believe in having illegal aliens here, they put a lot of good, decent categories of people in that paper. Well here’s what number four says, the Attorney General can put who he wants to on the list of people who are too dangerous to get guns. What if he decides radio talk show hosts who don’t believe in gay marriage, they’re dangerous, so they shouldn’t get guns; what about pastors who preach against abortion and homosexuality, they’re too dangerous get guns; that could happen.
Contrary to what Wilson said, the fourth executive action simply directs the Attorney General to make sure that people who are already prohibited from owning a firearm do not do so, not to come up with any new categories:
Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.
Not only did Wilson clearly distort the plain wording of the executive actions, but he also grossly misrepresented the DHS report on right-wing terrorism.
He said that the DHS report tacked “good, decent” people “who believe in the second coming of Jesus Christ, people who believe in pro-life issues, people who don’t believe in having illegal aliens here.”
The 2009 report [PDF], which concentrates on racist and anti-government militias, only mentions abortion in a single footnote as an example of how violent actions can be driven by a single issue, such as the bombings of clinics or the murder of abortion doctors. The only references to the Second Coming or Christianity are to the racist, anti-Semitic Christian Identity movement – whose members have engaged in violence – and a note about how End Times and doomsday prophesies have in the past radicalized certain individuals or groups.
As for immigration, the DHS only addresses the connection between anti-immigrant militarism and hate crimes against Hispanics, like violent border vigilantes, not political activism on illegal immigration.
The author of the report, Daryl Johnson, is actually an anti-choice, Mormon gun owner and a Republican. His warnings were prescient – right-wing extremists recently committed a massacre in a Sikh temple in Wisconsin and a shooting at the Holocaust Museum.
But to Wilson, completely twisting Obama’s gun orders and the DHS report on right-wing extremism are all par for the course of a job of an AFA spokesman.
On the "Faith and Freedom" radio program, Matt Barber and Mat Staver warned that the Second Amendment was under attack, which was no surprise since the Left is always "drooling [and] can hardly contain themselves" over opportunities to exploit tragedies like Sandy Hook in order to "completely disarm" America.
But taking away guns won't stop school killings, Staver stated, because then people would just resort to knives or to constructing massive fertilizer bombs like Timothy McVeigh.
The real problem, Staver and Barber insisted, is that we've removed prayer and the Ten Commandments from our schools and so America is in a "moral crisis" and "sick to the core":