Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 30

Thread: Red alert: Obama creating national gun registry!

  1. #1
    TWG2A
    Guest

    Red alert: Obama creating national gun registry!

    RED ALERT: OBAMA CREATING NATIONAL GUN REGISTRY!

    Since taking office two years ago, Obama has consistently bypassed Congress and has given the federal government control of almost every aspect of our lives.

    NOW HE'S COMING FOR YOUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS.

    Citing border violence, the ATF has issued an "emergency order" requiring any store that sells more than two rifles within a five-day period to report the names, addresses and serial numbers of those transactions if the firearms are greater than .22-caliber, semi-automatic, with the ability to accept a detachable magazine.

    If it's so important, why didn't Obama allow Congress to vote on it? Because Congress wouldn't touch it. And if it's all in the name of border security, as he insists, why does it apply to every state and not just border states?

    This regulation is expected to take effect Wednesday, January 5th!

    Please stop RIGHT NOW and Fax every Member of Congress. Tell them you OBJECT to Obama taking away your Constitutional freedoms! You are the only thing that stands in the way of Obama's radical, anti-gun agenda! Please include a donation to CCRKBA so we can continue to fight these kinds of assaults on our Second Amendment Rights!

    Obama is attempting to regulate a fundamental, individual right guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution---but it shouldn't surprise you, because he's done nothing but "regulate" us to death since he's been in office.

    The Obama administration has known about this ATF proposal for months, but they kept it quiet, knowing that people like you and me would be outraged.

    And he was right, we are outraged! Please stop RIGHT NOW and Fax every Member of Congress. Tell them you OBJECT to Obama taking away your Constitutional freedoms! Please include a donation to CCRKBA so we can continue to fight these kinds of assaults on our Second Amendment Rights!

    Don't wait! You don't want to wake up and find out that Obama has taken away your rights!

    Barack Obama is openly hostile to your gun rights. He has chosen a very strong, anti-Second Amendment ATF head for an administrative job that has far more influence over the practical exercise of the Second Amendment rights than any other job in the country.

    Now that very agency is going to require stores to report their sales transactions! You can be sure this is only the beginning!

    This regulation is expected to be approved unless there is IMMEDIATE and VEHEMENT objection from Members of Congress and the public.

    So, don't wait, Fax Congress RIGHT NOW and tell them to stop this assault on our freedom! Please include a generous donation to CCRKBA so we can continue to fight for our right to bear arms! You are the only thing that stands in the way of Obama's radical, anti-gun agenda!

    Let me be clear how urgent this is: registration requirements will go into effect THIS WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 5th unless YOU AND I stop it!

    Fax Congress NOW and donate to CCRKBA so we can prevent Obama's unconstitutional intrusion on our rights!

    Mexican President Felipe Calderon has repeatedly blamed the U.S. for Mexico's problems with violence, despite evidence to the contrary. Now Obama is taking away freedoms from legitimate, law-abiding citizens while he ignores our open borders and tramples all over the Constitution---all in the name of "security."

    Obama spent the month of December trying to push amnesty for millions of illegal aliens through Congress, and NOW he's all of a sudden concerned about border security?

    I don't buy it! This is just an excuse to push through FIREARMS REGISTRATION WITHOUT CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL. And it's the first step in taking away your Second Amendment rights.

    You do not want to wake up tomorrow---or any day---and discover that your gun rights have been taken away by this administration! Contact Congress right now and stop this ATF regulation! And please include a generous donation, so CCRKBA can keep watch over this administration's efforts to take away your Second Amendment rights!

    Each year, firearms are used more than 60 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives. But Obama would rather treat US as criminals, and bow to the rhetoric of another country, than honor the Constitution. The time for action is now.

    You and I know how precious our freedoms are, and how much we appreciate the Constitution. But Obama just doesn't get it. He is chipping away at our freedoms every single day, ignoring the will of the People, ignoring Congress, ignoring the rule of law. Is this latest attempt to end our Second Amendment Rights going to be the straw that broke the camel's back? Will this spur you to take action and stop his dictatorship?

    Please give the largest gift that you possibly can to CCRKBA as we EXPOSE Obama's agenda to take away our Second Amendment rights, and stop his unlawful ATF regulation from taking effect.

    Respectfully,

    Alan M. Gottlieb
    Chairman
    Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms




    If you prefer to donate by check, please mail to:

    Citizens Committee for the Right
    to Keep and Bear Arms
    Dept Code 5324
    Liberty Park
    12500 NE 10th Place
    Bellevue, WA 98005

    With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of the nation's premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States. Contributions are not tax deductible. The Citizens Committee can be reached by phone at (425) 454-4911 or by email to InformationRequest@ccrkba.org

  2. #2
    TWG2A
    Guest

    What? I can't hear you.....

    --Moderator Deleted--

    ..--Rules Violation--

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    ABP. At least twice. With the appropriate levels of indignation.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Big D
    Posts
    1,059
    That was a little sensational. The new program requires FFL's in ONLY 4 BORDER STATES to report the disposition of certain rifles (as described.) Existing programs require similar reporting of sales of 2 or more handgun purchased by an individual in a 5 day period nationwide.

    It has nothing to do with open carry of handguns. It is targeted data collection to identify straw buyers, and while it is definitely a bad precedent to set regarding federal databases of firearms, it is narrowly targeted to places where cross-border traffickers have been buying rifles.

    This was proposed on December 20, and is expected to go into effect this month, but it has not been announced yet.

  5. #5
    Regular Member jbone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    2,241
    Another piece of the "Fundamental Transformation". A Bill of Right doesn't fit into the "Fundamental Transformation".

    "...but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf" Here he was'nt still speaking of the Warren Court, he was expressing his beliefs, with his words.

  6. #6
    TWG2A
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by nonameisgood View Post
    That was a little sensational. The new program requires FFL's in ONLY 4 BORDER STATES to report the disposition of certain rifles (as described.) Existing programs require similar reporting of sales of 2 or more handgun purchased by an individual in a 5 day period nationwide.

    It has nothing to do with open carry of handguns. It is targeted data collection to identify straw buyers, and while it is definitely a bad precedent to set regarding federal databases of firearms, it is narrowly targeted to places where cross-border traffickers have been buying rifles.

    This was proposed on December 20, and is expected to go into effect this month, but it has not been announced yet.

    --Moderator Deleted--

    ..--Rules Violation--

  7. #7
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961
    Quote Originally Posted by nonameisgood View Post
    That was a little sensational. The new program requires FFL's in ONLY 4 BORDER STATES to report the disposition of certain rifles (as described.) Existing programs require similar reporting of sales of 2 or more handgun purchased by an individual in a 5 day period nationwide.

    It has nothing to do with open carry of handguns. It is targeted data collection to identify straw buyers, and while it is definitely a bad precedent to set regarding federal databases of firearms, it is narrowly targeted to places where cross-border traffickers have been buying rifles.

    This was proposed on December 20, and is expected to go into effect this month, but it has not been announced yet.
    Letting BATFE make up rules as they go along has everything to do with the right to keep and bear arms, including the open carry of handguns.

    The draft document does not say only in 4 states, nor does it say only dealers. So, potentially all FFLs, including collectors, will have these mandatory reporting requirements.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by TWG2A View Post
    WHAT? None of you glassy-eyed B.O. loving commies want to try to defend this crap?
    I didn't think so.
    The reason you're not hearing much is because this has been on the radar for a little while. Old news, albeit a current and important situation.

    Others beat you to it on this forum, and the calls, faxes, and e-mails have been underway for a little while already.

    Maybe you could try doing a little thread title searching before sounding off and calling names. Please.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    , , Kernersville NC
    Posts
    783
    This is exactly what the sheep want to believe. "its only a few states, or it doesnt effect OC" This is how the wolves take our liberties one by one. Hitler did it a little at a time and if we let them so will the Obama and BATFE. The Jackasses would definately take away our rights given the chance. Dont be so naive to think otherwise. WAKE UP!!!!

  10. #10
    Regular Member marionmedic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Marion, Mississippi, USA
    Posts
    97
    Sorry if we don't freak out and run around screaming like schizophrenic lemmings every time one of these attempts pops up.

    It means nothing.
    It won't survive the first challenge.

    Besides,
    How is this ruling effecting you????

    It isn't me.

    I can buy a firearm today, pass the instacheck, and walk out the door with it withing a few minutes.
    One or 50.... doesn't matter.

    And then, if i so desire, I can sell it to my co-worker FOR CASH.
    WITHOUT further "paperwork".

    _OR_

    I can buy a firearm from anyone in my state... FOR CASH... NO PAPERWORK.... and walk away.

    This has been legal and has been going on forever.

    We don't have to report personal sales or "register" a thing.
    Not now, and not under any new "rule".


    I also have a gun that was bought for me on the day I was born.
    It never even had paperwork done on it when it was NEW.

    They have ZERO idea who owns what.. or how many.
    They have ZERO control over the many firearms in this nation.
    And NEVER will.
    Too many out there ..... and too many "off the books".
    What part of "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" is so hard to understand ???


    James: Ain't this a little showy, Pa? I mean with the guns out an' all?

    Big Jake: James, don't be fooled. They all know what's in this box, and they all want it. what we're doin' with this audacious DISplay is tellin' 'em they can't have it. Who knows, we may be savin' some poor miscreant soul's life this way.

    www.dixieleather.com - www.dixiepreparedness.org

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by TWG2A View Post
    Written like a good, glassy-eyed commie loving sheep. Keep trying to put lipstick on it, pal.
    Quote Originally Posted by wethepeople View Post
    This is exactly what the sheep want to believe. "its only a few states, or it doesnt effect OC" This is how the wolves take our liberties one by one. Hitler did it a little at a time and if we let them so will the Obama and BATFE. The Jackasses would definately take away our rights given the chance. Dont be so naive to think otherwise. WAKE UP!!!!
    The statements were accurate. The OP text is hyperbolic.


    Yes, this deserves notice and action to counter it, but such action should be based upon a factual account of what it is, not upon hyperbole.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  12. #12
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961
    Quote Originally Posted by marionmedic View Post
    Besides,
    How is this ruling effecting you????

    It isn't me.

    I can buy a firearm today, pass the instacheck, and walk out the door with it withing a few minutes.
    Well there used to be a day when you could buy a firearm via the U.S. mail with no paperwork. Those days are gone.

    There is a stupid law about school zones.

    It is shocking that people think that the chipping away of the right does not effect them.

    This time it is worse. There is no law, just a regulation with no basis in law.

    Live zfree or Die,
    Thundar
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Super Secret Squirrel Bunker, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    485
    Quote Originally Posted by nonameisgood View Post
    That was a little sensational. The new program requires FFL's in ONLY 4 BORDER STATES to report the disposition of certain rifles (as described.) Existing programs require similar reporting of sales of 2 or more handgun purchased by an individual in a 5 day period nationwide.

    It has nothing to do with open carry of handguns. It is targeted data collection to identify straw buyers, and while it is definitely a bad precedent to set regarding federal databases of firearms, it is narrowly targeted to places where cross-border traffickers have been buying rifles.

    This was proposed on December 20, and is expected to go into effect this month, but it has not been announced yet.
    The proposed information collection action applies to all FFL's in ALL states. There are no regional or state "delimiters" in the proposed action in the federal register.

    It is more than a "targeted" data collection, it is a nationwide data collection scheme, brilliantly executed, masterfully scheduled and intentionally performed to obfuscate public input. It was posted to and then subsequently removed from regulations.gov, effectively suppressing public input from the pro-gun community.

    Hopefully many here commented on the information collection action proposed as well as offered their disapproving thoughts to their congressional delegations. There are numerous problems with the scope of this attempt, as well as the way it was attempted:

    http://www.gunleaders.com/blog/2010/...-registration/

    You can see the documents used to "justify" this so called "emergency" here:
    http://www.gunleaders.com/blog/2011/...justification/

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Super Secret Squirrel Bunker, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    485
    Quote Originally Posted by marionmedic View Post
    Sorry if we don't freak out and run around screaming like schizophrenic lemmings every time one of these attempts pops up.

    It means nothing.
    It won't survive the first challenge.

    Besides,
    How is this ruling effecting you????

    It isn't me.

    I can buy a firearm today, pass the instacheck, and walk out the door with it withing a few minutes.
    One or 50.... doesn't matter.

    And then, if i so desire, I can sell it to my co-worker FOR CASH.
    WITHOUT further "paperwork".

    _OR_

    I can buy a firearm from anyone in my state... FOR CASH... NO PAPERWORK.... and walk away.

    This has been legal and has been going on forever.

    We don't have to report personal sales or "register" a thing.
    Not now, and not under any new "rule".


    I also have a gun that was bought for me on the day I was born.
    It never even had paperwork done on it when it was NEW.

    They have ZERO idea who owns what.. or how many.
    They have ZERO control over the many firearms in this nation.
    And NEVER will.
    Too many out there ..... and too many "off the books".
    How do you know all of this to be true?

    How "off the books" do you think you really are?

    How are you certain this will not survive a court challenge and more importantly, who is going to mount such a challenge? They cost a great deal of money and an FFL could easily find their license suspended in retaliation for a hypothetical suit ( the burden of this action is on the FFL ).

    Most importantly however is that this attempt affects every gun owner, whether they choose to admit it or not. This action is not backed by a statute from Congress. If it goes through without being "checked" what will they regulate next? They've already clearly indicated that if it passes they may attempt a permanent regulation. What happens to all those serial numbers, names, & addresses collected? What if one of the rifles ends up being one you sold or traded years before and you are the last known owner?

    Maybe it isn't the most important political issue on your radar, but I do hope you can understand that there are grave implications for all gun owners by this action of ATF and it should be opposed vigorously to ensure it never takes place, rather than sit back and let it happen, then hope some deep pocketed law team will swoop in and save the day after it passes...

  15. #15
    Regular Member zoom6zoom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dale City, VA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,694
    It should be noted that they are also attempting to short circuit the normal 90 day comment period, and it's further impacted by being over the holiday season.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    According to this, it affects border states only.

    According to the Notice about the plan, it will require this of about 8,500 FFL holders, but does not state where (or which ones) are being targeted.


    According to the BATFE itself, this is limited to the "four border states."
    Acting Director Announces Demand Letters for Multiple Sales of Specific Long Guns in Four Border States
    Hello, I’m Ken Melson, the Acting Director of ATF.

    A recent initiative by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has caught the attention of national media outlets. I wanted to make sure everyone heard from me about this law enforcement initiative so there isn’t any confusion.

    Recently, ATF announced through the Federal Register our intent to initiate a new Demand Letter requiring the reporting of multiple sales of certain long guns by Federal Firearms Licensees, known as FFLs, in the four Southwest Border States. We took this step as a way to help gain actionable law enforcement intelligence which we believe will help reduce criminal firearms trafficking along the Southwest border.

    Fight it, but fight it based upon fact and not FUD.



    Further down from the last link:
    According to ATF trace data, investigative experience, and Mexican law enforcement officials, a large number of rifles are being used in violent crimes in Mexico and along the border. Our new Demand Letter will implement a limited reporting of multiple sales of certain long guns that functions similarly to the current practice of reporting on the multiple sales of handguns. Currently, all FFLs in the country are required to submit a report of multiple sales to the National Tracing Center when an FFL sells two or more handguns to the same purchaser within five consecutive business days.

    The proposed Demand Letter, which is narrowly circumscribed to meet our objectives, will apply a similar reporting requirement to certain long guns, but with these distinct differences:

    First, the reporting requirement will apply only to FFLs doing business in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California, which are major source states for crime guns seized in Mexico and traced to federal firearms licensees.
    Last edited by wrightme; 01-06-2011 at 02:02 PM. Reason: add information that, frankly, wasn't that difficult to find from the source, and not from FUD.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Super Secret Squirrel Bunker, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    485
    "According to the Notice about the plan, it will require this of about 8,500 FFL holders, but does not state where (or which ones) are being targeted."


    So really the question is, do you believe ATF when they say it's only for 4 states, or when they write down it applies to all 50 states?

    How do you know when ATF is lying?
    a) they're testifying under oath trying to convict someone of a firearms crime
    b) their lips are moving
    c) they're from the government and here to help
    d) all of the above.

    Of course there may actually be some people in ATF who actually believe that they will apply this only to "4 border states" just as there are likely people in ATF who are right now planning a permanent version of this regulation with a full comment period.

    What the ATF says to the public is clearly one thing, yet what was put in the federal register empowers ATF to collect the information nationwide.

    Ultimately it's not worth taking a chance over.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Y View Post
    "According to the Notice about the plan, it will require this of about 8,500 FFL holders, but does not state where (or which ones) are being targeted."


    So really the question is, do you believe ATF when they say it's only for 4 states, or when they write down it applies to all 50 states?

    How do you know when ATF is lying?
    a) they're testifying under oath trying to convict someone of a firearms crime
    b) their lips are moving
    c) they're from the government and here to help
    d) all of the above.

    Of course there may actually be some people in ATF who actually believe that they will apply this only to "4 border states" just as there are likely people in ATF who are right now planning a permanent version of this regulation with a full comment period.

    What the ATF says to the public is clearly one thing, yet what was put in the federal register empowers ATF to collect the information nationwide.

    Ultimately it's not worth taking a chance over.
    That portion has not been shown yet. Find it, and you find the answer to your implied dillemma. That is the main portion that is FUD.



    Further, so far in this thread, I am the ONLY person who has actually linked to any authoritative information about this. Got link to information that supports your claims?
    Last edited by wrightme; 01-06-2011 at 04:53 PM. Reason: acknowledge the two links that I did not see earlier.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    Here it is on ammoland.com:

    http://www.ammoland.com/2010/12/21/a...border-states/

    Here is the video of the BATFE director on youtube:
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Super Secret Squirrel Bunker, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    485
    Quote Originally Posted by wrightme View Post
    That portion has not been shown yet. Find it, and you find the answer to your implied dillemma. That is the main portion that is FUD.



    Further, so far in this thread, I am the ONLY person who has actually linked to ANY information about this. Got link to information that supports your claims?
    From my previous posting:
    You can see the documents used to "justify" this so called "emergency" here:
    http://www.gunleaders.com/blog/2011/...justification/

    These are what ATF submitted to OMB pursuant to 5CFR part 1320.13.
    The other link contained the required cite to authority - specifically USC - on why the regulation should be opposed.

    http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-31761.pdf
    (Federal Register announcement).

    They are not limiting to 4 or any other number of states here.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Y View Post
    From my previous posting:
    You can see the documents used to "justify" this so called "emergency" here:
    http://www.gunleaders.com/blog/2011/...justification/

    These are what ATF submitted to OMB pursuant to 5CFR part 1320.13.
    The other link contained the required cite to authority - specifically USC - on why the regulation should be opposed.

    http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-31761.pdf
    (Federal Register announcement).

    They are not limiting to 4 or any other number of states here.
    The video and links I provided are the entity that is going to enforce it, and they state "four border states," and name those states.

    the "edocket" link appears to be a summary. How many FFL dealers are there in the country? The edocket link mentions only <8,500.

    From the federal register pdf (edocket)
    An estimate of the total number of
    respondents and the amount of time
    estimated for an average respondent to
    respond: There will be an estimated
    9,000 respondents
    , who will complete
    the form within approximately 30
    minutes.
    http://www.atf.gov/about/foia/ffl-list.html
    As of October:

    Arizona, 1565
    California, 2343
    New Mexico, 672
    Texas, 5244
    That adds up to 9,824. Are you going to claim that the pdf that announces the new emergency regulation and comment period covers all 50 states, when less than 10,000 dealers are required to respond?




    I cannot access your "gunleader" links right now. Is that a regulatory or government agency with authority over this requirement?
    Last edited by wrightme; 01-06-2011 at 04:55 PM.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Super Secret Squirrel Bunker, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    485
    Who submitted the data to OMB?
    Who originated the request in the first place?

    The same agency represented in that video, so when are they lying, in the federal register, or in the video?

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Y View Post
    Who submitted the data to OMB?
    Who originated the request in the first place?

    The same agency represented in that video, so when are they lying, in the federal register, or in the video?
    Where is this alleged "lie?"

    How many FFL licensees are in all states? The four border states account for just under 10,000, which matches the impact statement number in the federal register.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Big D
    Posts
    1,059
    Yes, fight it for real reasons. Do not get your panties in a wad over misunderstandings and half-truths intended to raise money for a lobbying organization. Thanks, wrightme, for your allegiance to the facts.

    The organization trying to raise funds in the OP's letter, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, spent a total of about $600,000 in lobbying efforts in the first three quarters of 2010 (opensecrets.org & confirmed on the US House and Senate lobbying databases). Their minimum revenue, based on membership of 550,000 (nraila.org) at $15 per member per year (ccrkba.org), would have been $8.25 million. CCRKBA total lobbying expenditure in 2010 was less than 10% of revenue - so draw your own conclusions.

    This is only intended to present facts which might not otherwise be apparent.

    edit:
    In the OP, the membership is stated at 650,000, so the revenue would be closer to $9.75 million/year.
    Last edited by nonameisgood; 01-07-2011 at 01:04 AM. Reason: To add membership revenue based on OP

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by nonameisgood View Post
    Yes, fight it for real reasons. Do not get your panties in a wad over misunderstandings and half-truths intended to raise money for a lobbying organization...
    This.

    Propaganda, even well-intentioned propaganda, makes us look like tin-foilers. Tell it straight, and refute it straight.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •