News

Fast and Furious’ goal was to undermine legal firearm ownership

2 Comments

From Investors Business Daily.

Excerpt:

Newly obtained documents show that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives discussed using its covert operation Fast and Furious to argue for new rules about gun sales. We told you so.

[…]As CBS’ Sharyl Attkisson reports, emails show ATF officials discussed using the deliberate transfer of weapons to Mexican drug cartels to justify a new gun regulation known as “Demand Letter 3.”

We say deliberate because congressional testimony by ATF agents demonstrates how the tracking of Fast and Furious weapons stopped at the border and that requests to interdict the weapons transfers and arrest the gun traffickers were denied by higher-ups.

Demand Letter 3 was so named because it was the third ATF attempt to have Southwest gun shops report all long-gun (rifle or shotgun) sales to the ATF — even those to law-abiding American citizens with all the proper registration and other forms.

On July 14, 2010, five months before Terry’s murder, ATF Field Ops Assistant Director Mark Chait emailed Bill Newell, the ATF’s Phoenix special agent in charge of Fast and Furious: “Bill, can you see if these guns were all purchased from the same (licensed gun dealer) and at one time? We are looking at anecdotal cases to support a demand letter on long-gun sales. Thanks.”

On Jan. 24, as the ATF was preparing to announce arrests in Fast and Furious, another email showed Newell saw it as an opportunity “to address multiple sales on long guns issue.”

After the press conference, Chait emailed Newell that in “light of our request for Demand Letter 3, this case could be a strong supporting factor if we can determine how many multiple sales of long guns occurred during the course of the case.”

You can read the news article from CBS News right here. The headline is “Documents: ATF used “Fast and Furious” to make the case for gun regulations”.

Related posts

Podcasts

Neurosurgeon calls Mark Levin show and explains what Obamacare really does

Leave a comment

I found this on my friend Wes’ Facebook page.

Consider this news story from the UK, where they have a massive state-run health care system called the National Health Service.

Excerpt:

A young woman who is starving to death after being diagnosed with a paralysed stomach has been told that NHS bosses refuse to fund an operation to save her.

Rudi Hargreaves, 22, has shrunk from a healthy 10st to a skeletal 5st 10lb after being diagnosed with the crippling condition last year.

Within weeks of being diagnosed with gastroparesis, Rudi found her size 12 clothes were hanging off her – as her stomach became unable to digest food at a normal rate.

The condition can be treated with a £14,000 operation to fit a gastric pacemaker – although this is still considered to be an experimental treatment.

But health chiefs have refused to fund the surgery, saying ‘insufficient supporting information’ has been provided by her GP.

[…]A spokesperson for NHS Hull said: ‘To date, the application in question has not been agreed as, crucially, insufficient supporting information has been provided to allow due consideration to take place.

‘Any requested procedures must also fall in line with the provider trust’s priorities for service development and delivery.

‘The patient’s clinician has been invited to provide the necessary clarification, receipt of which should enable the patient’s case to be progressed within the PCT.’

What’s even more troubling is the situation in countries like Canada, where the government decides whether you will be treated. And worse, if they deny you treatment, you cannot pay for treatment out of pocket. You have to leave the country and pay someone else out of pocket for the treatment, even though you have have already paid some huge amount of your earned income into the system for many years – which will go to treat other people who need abortions, breast implants , sex changes and IVF. So your money is good enough for them to collect over your life, but when you need treatment, you may not be allowed to get it, and you may not even have the money (after taxes) to go abroad for treatment.

News

Pregnant woman uses her shotgun to scare burglars out of her home

1 Comment

From CBS News. (H/T Wes from Reason to Stand)

Excerpt:

It’s the last thing two burglary suspects expected to hear when they broke into a Coon Rapids home. From within the house came the unmistakable sound of a pump shotgun. At the other end of that gun was a 22-year-old woman who is nine weeks pregnant.

The young woman asked not to be identified because the two suspects are still at large. However, she says when the men ignored her barking pit bull and black lab, and broke through a kitchen door, she had no other choice but to chamber a round into the 12-gauge shotgun.

There’s perhaps no other sound that commands as much respect and fear. The young woman at the business end of that gun was home alone and prepared to protect herself.

[…]With a single pump of her 12-gauge shotgun, the would-be burglars bolted out the door and through the backyard.

“Yes, a shotgun racking is something you don’t forget if you’ve ever heard one. So, it frightened these two suspects off right away, they took off running,” said Coon Rapids Police Captain John Hattstrom.

They ran across the backyard and into a nearby church parking lot where they were seen getting into a two-door, newer model automobile. But they didn’t escape without notice. The woman was able to get a long look at the two and provided police with a description.

The thing that liberals never understand about legally-owned firearms is that the people who own them are law-abiding people and they would prefer not to have to fire the weapon at all when they have to use the weapon to deter or halt a crime. This is known as peace through strength – the best way to stop an evil person from doing something evil is to raise the cost of doing evil. And weapons in the hands of law abiding people accomplishes that.

For those who would like to know what the Bible says about self-defense, check out this podcast featuring famous theologian Wayne Grudem.

The case for legal firearm ownership… in videos!

ABC News explains in this short 6-minute clip:

And here is a longer 44-minute show from Fox Business: (featuring a debate between economist John Lott and the Brady Campaign spokesman)

There are other debates in the show as well.