BarackObama.com asks for gun violence stories, only shares ones that promote gun control

Posted on by Buckeye Firearms Association
“We’re a nation that believes in the Second Amendment, and I believe in the Second Amendment. We’ve got a long tradition of hunting and sportsmen and people who want to make sure they can protect themselves.” – Barack Obama, Oct. 16, 2012

by Chad D. Baus

On Wednesday, February 20, we received a great suggestion from a reader:

Hello, on the barackobama.com or organizing for action site they have a link for stories for anti gun people, I thought it would be nice if a few thousand people would tell their pro gun story on it. Some links take you to the page to donate but you can get to the page to tell your story also.
http://www.barackobama.com/stories/share-your-story
Pat

I thought Pat’s idea was an excellent one, and immediately went to the website and posted a story about how my father-in-law was able to utilize his right to carry to protect himself when a violent criminal, who was already wanted for homicide, stuck a stolen gun in his face and demanded his truck.

I also passed Pat’s suggestion on to our more than 16,000 followers by posting the link on the Buckeye Firearms Association Facebook page on Thursday morning, Feb. 21.

Several people have commented on the Facebook post, noting that they have submitted their stories. Some have also begun sharing their stories on our Facebook page.

BarackObama.com has begun posting stories, but it’s a funny thing – not one of these stories have been posted. Indeed, only stories promoting gun control are being shared there.

Ex-sheriff says there is precedent for fighting federal gun laws

Posted on by Buckeye Firearms Association

The following article was originally published by The Lima News. Republished with permission.

by Bob Blake

Don’t like the gun control measures being sought by President Barack Obama? Think there’s nothing that can be done about it? Think again. That’s the message a former Arizona sheriff is bringing to people nationwide.

Sheriff Richard Mack knows a thing or two about what it takes. After the Brady bill was signed into law during Bill Clinton’s presidency, Mack sued the Clinton administration claiming the federal government had overstepped its bounds. The case found its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where Mack won.

“There”s still hope and local sovereignty, state sovereignty, state’s rights is the solution. We’ve got to have local officials that tell the federal government there’s just a few things you’re not going to do here,” Mack said. “If we have local officials, sheriffs and state representatives and governors nullifying what the federal government is doing it’s all proper, it’s all constitutional, and it is completely in line with state sovereignty and the 10th Amendment.

“The 10th Amendment guarantees this process that we’re about today. Acting on the powers of the states we can keep this movement peaceful and effective and put the federal government back where they belong.”

Mack was the keynote speaker Saturday during a daylong event at American Legion Post 571 in Maria Stein that focused on the issue. Mack said he’s encouraged by local officials, including Mercer County Sheriff Jeff Grey, Auglaize County Sheriff Al Solomon, Allen County Sheriff Sam Crish and Hancock County Sheriff Michael Heldman, who have said they will not enforce the Obama administration initiatives.

Division of Wildlife Proposes Deer Regulations – sure to stir controversy

Posted on by Buckeye Firearms Association

Editor’s Note: While the Division of Wildlife is proposing numerous changes to the deer hunting regulations, they have not yet answered hunters’ requests to allow pistol caliber rifle cartridges for deer hunting.

CLICK HERE TO PARTICIPATE IN AN ONLINE SURVEY REGARDING THE USE OF PISTOL CARTRIDGE RIFLES FOR DEER HUNTING.

by Larry S. Moore

It has been quite some time since I can remember a year when the Division of Wildlife has proposed sweeping changes to Ohio’s deer hunting regulations. I’ve written in the past that the lack of attendance at the annual open houses are due partially to a lack of interest but in great part due to the lack of controversy in any changes. The last several years the Division has largely been tweaking the system here and there. This year the changes could be considered wholesale in nature. If my predictions are true, then the open houses on March 2, 2013 should be jammed packed with excitement and comments.

First, a summary of the changes is in order:

  • Eliminating the Urban Zones for deer.
  • Eliminating the Zone A, B, C. Bag limits will be set by county. 8 counties to have 1 regular and 1 antlerless-only bag limit. 23 counties to have 2 regular and 1 antlerless-only bag limit. 57 counties to have 3 regular and 1 antlerless-only bag limit.
  • Eliminating the additional gun weekend in December.
  • Eliminating the early muzzle loading season on the 3 special areas – Salt Fork; Wildcat Hollow; and Shawnee State Forest.
  • Adding a statewide early muzzleloading 2 day season that will be for antlerless deer only. The season is slated for the second weekend of October. The entire weekend will be for antlerless deer only regardless if you use a muzzleloader or bow hunt. This will cause a delay of opening fall turkey season to the Monday following this season as turkey hunters are not going to wear hunter orange as required for all hunters anytime there is a deer gun season.
  • Allow hunting 1/2 hour past sunset for gun seasons to align the regulations with the current archery hunting hours.
  • No change to the late statewide muzzle loading season in January.
  • Antlerless-only deer tags will continue to expire on Sunday before the deer gun season.
  • No deer or fall turkey tags will be sold until June 1.

Let’s examine the Division changes and their reasons.

Op-Ed: The truth on background checks

Posted on by Buckeye Firearms Association

by John Lott

Gun control “deserves a vote,” President Obama said time and again in his State of the Union speech on Tuesday. Sadly, the measure Congress is most likely to pass — beefed-up background checks — may cause more harm than good.

First, checks obviously won’t do anything about gun crime in cities like Chicago or New York, which revolves almost exclusively around illegal guns.

But they also wouldn’t stop the mass killings Obama mentioned. The Newtown, Conn., shooter stole his mother’s guns, while the Tucson, Ariz., and other killers didn’t have records that a check would’ve spotted.

You can see the fundamental unseriousness of this proposal just by looking at the numbers cited by its advocates, such as New York’s own Sen. Chuck Schumer.

Schumer tells us that “48 percent of gun sales are made without a background check” and that background checks have “blocked 1.7 million prohibited individuals from buying a gun.” Both stats are just false.

The Exasperating Gun Control Debate

Posted on by Buckeye Firearms Association

by Rand Lennox

Recent school shootings have again reignited the gun control debate.

With The Debate occurring so often, one would think that participants would move their arguments away from emotion and toward fact. But they do not.

Effective debating demands a thorough knowledge of both sides of an issue. Nonetheless, gun control debaters persist in their ignorance of firearms and firearms law basics, with the most passionate often remaining the most ignorant.

For example, after decades of assault rifle vilification, anti-gunners finally learned that what they wanted to ban were not really assault rifles. So they invented the term “assault-type rifle” (say: “not–assault rifle.”) Those anti gunners who researched the topic learned that assault rifles have been strictly regulated since 1934. It is no wonder that the expired assault weapons ban was ineffective; it was formed around an inaccurate premise.

The anti’s finally learned to differentiate automatic from semi-automatic weapons, and, of course, redefined the demon to be semi-automatic weapons, again proposing restrictions, again with minimal understanding. An ineffective result is again entirely predictable.

Pro-gunners are equally culpable. Bill O’Reilly, from his bully pulpit claiming moderate gun control views, continues bloviating about peoples’ right to own ordinary rifles but demanding that “heavy weapons, such as AR’s” be registered and regulated. In fact, the AR, is a light infantry weapon. Despite having a full research staff, O’Reilly remains ignorant, continuing to make self-contradictory statements about controlling “heavy weapons such as the AR.”

A little study by both sides of the debate could yield an understanding of that which they would control; nonetheless both sides persistently rely on emotion instead of information.

Except for one notable organization: The NRA.

Op-Ed: Obama’s proposals won’t reduce gun violence

Posted on by Buckeye Firearms Association

by John Lott

Warning that we need to “get weapons of war and massive ammunition magazines off our streets,” in his State of the Union, Obama kept repeating congress must vote on the three types of gun bills he supports.

The most obvious thing that was left out of the talk was that none of the laws now being proposed would have done anything to stop the various attacks that Obama cited as justifying the laws. Nor does the evidence show that the previous Assault Weapon Ban from 1994 to 2004 reduced crime.

Were some of the killers mentally ill? Undoubtedly, “yes,” but none of these individuals had previously been involuntarily committed as a threat to themselves or to others.

Connecticut already had a strict assault weapon ban. But there is no proposed federal or state ban that would have mattered. Replacing a Bushmaster with a semi-automatic hunting rifle that fired the same small caliber .223 caliber bullets would have made absolutely no difference. The two guns would have fired the bullets with the same rapidity and would have done exactly the same damage.

Nor would it have made any difference to ban magazines that hold more than 10 bullets. Someone who is specifically planning an attack can take many magazines with them. Some of the killers have even worn vests with special pockets that allowed them to conveniently carry multiple magazines. A single large magazine is more of a convenience.

Actually large magazines pose a greater problem for those who want to kill many people because such magazines more easily jam. In a large magazine that holds many bullets, a very strong spring is required to be able to feed the last few bullets into the chamber. The problem is that springs weaken over time and springs in magazines that hold a large number of bullets lose some of their ability to push those last few bullets, thus causing the gun to jam. Guns jammed for this very reason during the Aurora and Tucson shootings.

In the infamous 2011 attack in Norway, the killer murdered 69 people and injured another 110 with his semi-automatic pistol and semi-automatic hunting rifle. He had nothing that would be classified as an assault weapon.

Is protecting our children in school worth $25?

Posted on by Buckeye Firearms Association

Dear Gun Rights Supporter,

I was speechless.

Recently, while reviewing donations, I found myself marveling at the generosity of our many Ohio supporters.

From every part of the state, people of all ages were showing their support for our work on our Armed Teacher Training Program..

Checks for $100, checks for $500, and one massive donation for $15,000 from the Ohio Gun Collector’s Association (OGCA).

I was proud that our years of work had generated this level of trust and devotion from gun owners across Ohio.

That’s when I saw it.

It was a plain white piece of paper, a printout from an online donation made just days before.

It totaled $25.00.

And it was sent from a citizen of Kent in the United Kingdom.

© 2002-2024 Buckeye Firearms Association