CCRKBA Email Alert: Paul Revere or Chicken Little?

I awoke this aye-em (at the crack ‘o ten, if it’s any of your business…late nite, programming) to an article in my inbox, screaming that Obama Is About To Take Away My Guns. And yours. All our guns. Without Congressional approval. Now, ordinarily, I’d say this is more gun porn – just a way for some lobbying org to fire up the faithful, and get them to send in their hard-earned shekels so they can go all Genghis Kahn on the ObamaNation. But given that the President recently chose to simply ignore the ruling of a Federal judge who ruled the entire ObamaCare law un-constitutional, I’m not so sure . . .

[Side note to MikeB, PorscheSpeed, and the rest of our Liberal fringe group: I am NOT saying that this is for real, or that it’s anything more than the over-hyped rantings of a group trying to stir up some controversy. But when Obama decided to ignore that separation of powers thingy in the Constitution, it does raise the spectre of “he COULD do this, and probably get away with it.”]

Here’s the letter:

Are you prepared for Obama’s attack of new anti-gun laws? I hope so. Because right now, Obama is holding meetings that could determine if you can even own a gun in the future!

That’s right – instead of doing his job – i.e. fixing the economy and creating jobs – Obama is pouring all of his energy into a massive campaign TO GRAB YOUR GUNS! We must stop Obama before our Second Amendment Rights are obliterated – FOREVER.

I urge you today to fill out the electronic CITIZENS INJUNCTION FORM – right away!
Please, do it now. This is extremely urgent.

Your CITIZENS INJUNCTION FORM will DEMAND that U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell to use his position as Senate Minority Leader to help stop Barack Obama from sneaking his gun-confiscating agenda past Congress.

Obama WILL issue his gun control plan via “executive orders” to bypass Congress! You see, despite what he claims, Obama hates being “transparent.” He loves to weasel his fanatical ideas right past everybody – before people like you and me have the chance to stop him.

BUT NOT THIS TIME! THIS IS OUR CHANCE AND WE WILL STOP HIM! We will not let Obama get away with hijacking our ability to protect ourselves and our families while he turns a blind eye to the real problems in our country.

So far, Congress has blocked Obama’s freedom crushing plans. But, by using the “executive order” loop-hole, he can get away with stripping your gun rights without even going to the Congress first.

That is unless the Congress blocks him by overriding his anti-gun executive orders.

And without your help now, along with the help of thousands of other gun owners, Congress won’t act to defend your gun rights. Contrary to what they might believe, the truth is; Congress works for us. And we won’t rest until they’re WORKING HARD to stop Obama’s assault on law-abiding gun owners.

Your CITIZENS INJUNCTION FORM will urge Senator McConnell to:

  1. EXPOSE Obama’s planned use of his “executive order” power to increase federal fees on guns and ammunition, ban guns that are imported, extend waiting periods, ban the use of guns on all government property and even make it illegal to own a gun if you smoke or use tobacco products.
  2. PUBLICLY DENOUNCE Obama’s back door gun control methods that threaten our Bill of Rights.
  3. LEAD A BATTLE in Congress to nullify each and every anti-gun “executive order” that Barack Obama signs into law.

At this very moment, the White House staff, along with radical gun ban groups, are working overtime on scores of anti-gun rights proposals that Obama could enact by executive order -at any minute!

No President has ever been as anti-gun and vindictive to gun owners as Barack Obama.

And unless you and I act today, HARSH AND PUNITIVE gun control measures will soon be executive ordered by Barack Obama.

But, Senator Mitch McConnell can pull the plug on Obama’s grand scheme and get the Senate to block his gun-grabbing legislation.

So again, please sign your CITIZENS INJUNCTION FORM today.

The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms has been working non-stop to defeat this “executive order” threat ever since we first learned of it.

And we both know that Barack Obama can’t be trusted.

Thanks to the pro-gun Americans like you, there is mounting pressure to stop Obama in the Senate. But it will take the lead of the Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell, to bring the pressure to a scalding boil.

Please do not assume that the slick, dishonest Obama Administration and their anti-gun allies in the media will report any of what you are reading right now. They want to keep Americans ignorant and in the dark – while they work behind the scenes to take your guns away.

Unless Congress steps in, the White House will ruthlessly advance their gun hating objectives for their anti-Second Amendment messiah.

And unless you and I act today, Barack Obama with the stroke of his presidential pen could get away with eradicating the Second Amendment – FOREVER!

You and I can stop this treacherous anti-gun policy by signing your CITIZENS INJUNCTION FORM.

We need to DEMAND Senator Mitch McConnell fight Obama’s anti-gun “executive order” game plan. Then we must create a grassroots uprising of Americans willing to back up our stand.

Senator Mitch McConnell is a strong gun rights supporter. But, unless he knows that you and other gun owners are going to stand up behind him, we can’t expect him to lead the fight.
That’s why I’m counting on you to sign your CITIZENS INJUNCTION FORM.

…And if you can afford it, please generously give a contribution of $20, $30, $50, $100 or more to the Citizens Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

But your CITIZENS INJUNCTION FORM alone will be enough.

In fact, my staff has estimated it could take a minimum of 1 to 2 MILLION Injunctions to have a real impact on Capitol Hill.

And, at roughly 36 cents apiece, it will cost us more than $355,000 to print and distribute this minimum amount.

What’s more, we will need funds above and beyond this amount to help make our case on radio, TV, in newspapers and on the Internet.

So please sign your CITIZENS INJUNCTION FORM today!

For more than two centuries, Americans have bravely fought and died to protect our Bill of Rights. You and I owe it to them to see to it that Barack Obama does not, with the stroke of his pen, destroy their sacrifices and our Second Amendment for good.

Are you fired up? Are the folks over at the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms a bunch of modern-day Paul Reveres? Or are they Chicken Littles?

Before The O-Man pulled that stunt with the Federal judge and ObamaCare, I’d have thought this to the the latter. I still don’t think that Mister “I’ll let the Cheeze-Loving Surrender Monkeys Take the Lead on That Libya Thing” Obama is the kind of guy to face the mighty wrath of the American Gun Owner.  (And that “you won’t be able to own a gun if you smoke thing” – whaaaaa?)

But I figured if it hit my inbox, it might have hit yours, and what better thing to froth over than this on a Friday?

comments

  1. avatar Javier E says:

    Paul Helmke ” a problem that doesn’t really exist”

    Which problem the break – ins or the criminals sueing after they get hurt.

    http://www.loweringthebar.net/2009/10/armed-robber-sues-after-being-shot-by-armed-victim.html
    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-5522569-504083.html

  2. avatar NCG says:

    As for Obama “ignoring” a federal judge, that case will work its way through the system. Though I’m not particularly a fan of Obamacare, which I see as corporate welfare for insurance companies, I think it’s a bogus decision by a hack judge. The law merely imposes a tax, well within the constitutional mandate of congress. And did GWB change his policies every time some pesky circuit court judge ruled his behavior unconstitutional? Not until the Supremes rule will policy change.

    That being said, I think privately Obama cares about gun control about as much as Newt Gingrich cares about family values. He’s got to appease a certain constituency, which he’ll do by making some vague noises and backing some timid legislation that will never get through congress. I think the real action is at the state level – with issues like hi-cap mags and scary black rifles.

    I also think these sorts of hysterical, conspiracy-minded fund raising campaigns do more harm than good for the gun rights movement. They just reinforce the image of gun owners as paranoid right-wing freaks. Since a substantial number of gun enthusiast are, in fact, paranoid right-wing freaks, this image problem is going to be hard to overcome. The increase in concealed carry is definitely a positive, as people see that the streets are not running with blood just because law-abiding (and sometimes, gasp, liberal) citizens are armed.

    1. avatar John says:

      Re: ObamaCare: You are simply wrong. This isn’t the place for a discussion of ObamaCare but wrong is wrong and needs to be corrected. The Congress did not implement a tax, they implemented a mandate the you engage in some sort of commercial activity (buying insurance) for the privilege of being a citizen. They most assuredly do not have that authority under the Constitution and the “hack” judge said so.

      1. avatar Jordan says:

        You are both correct, the mandate is in the form of a tax. That is the only way I see OC getting overturned. Do we give people who break the speed limit an extra “tax”? No, we fine them. The language needs to be changed in the HC law to either call it what it is; a punishment and at that point it is unconstitutional, or take the mandate out.

        1. avatar Brad Kozak says:

          The judge made the point that the mandate is unconstitutional. Because the law is funded via the mandate, there is no way for the law to be constitutional. It’s a similar concept in the law to the “fruit of the poisoned tree” – the law can’t be kosher if it can’t walk in on two clean feet. Ergo, he declared the whole thing unconstitutional. In order for it to be enforced, the Obama administration would have to find a friendly appellate court judge to issue a stay on the first judges’ rule, and then appeal the ruling to a higher court. I don’t believe they’ve done any of that. They simply ignored the judge’s order. That response, in and of itself, is unconstitutional (under the separation of powers and the powers granted to each branch). That means that Obama has violated his oath of office. Which is (drum roll please) an impeachable offense.

    2. avatar Brad Kozak says:

      NCG: In order for a case to wend it’s way through the courts, the Obama Administration will have to file an appeal. To my knowledge, they’ve not done so. They simply ignored the ruling. The dirty little secret of our Democratic Republic is that obeying the law is largely voluntary. If Obama ignores the law (which he is), he can get away with it, if nobody calls him on it. So far, the Republican leadership has been absolutely gutless. As far as the ruling from the Federal judge you refer to as a ‘hack,’ I’m afraid his qualifications and fitness for office don’t enter into it. Our system depends upon people playing by the rules. Obama simply figured out that those on the right are too frightened to A) shut down the government and be labeled “obstructionists” or B) threaten impeachment and be labeled “racists out for revenge.”

      I see Obama as an ideologue. His pragmatism extends only to throwing people and issues under the bus to protect HIS core values – primarily expanding government and governmental control over…well, everything. I think he’s willing to ditch gun control – for now – to protect his pet issues. But once he has those locked down (if he gets that far) don’t be surprised to see him turning his attentions to firearms. He’s shown a complete willingness to achieve his goals in any way possible, including Presidential Directives and using groups like OSHA and the EPA to work around Congress and the courts.

      I do agree with you, completely, by the way, regarding the effects of these “sky is falling,” over-hyped email campaigns. To many of these “crying wolf” missives just numb everybody to any REAL dangers. I just don’t know what’s a real danger and what’s trumped up any more.

      A more interesting question is the superhero/super villan dichotomy issue. Let’s say we (the gun rights crowd) wins. What next? Once the NRA is no longer having to crusade against gun grabbers, do they scale back and focus on gun education, or do they find “commies in every closet” so they can justify keeping their war chest full? Same goes for the Brady Bunch – win or lose, they only get money if there’s someone/thing to fight. I’m beginning to see this whole thing as a symbiotic relationship – the VPC, Brady bunch, and Mayors Against Common Sense need the NRA as much as the NRA needs them.

      1. avatar Magoo says:

        Brad, the appeal was duly filed in a timely manner. Judge Vinson ruled the insurance mandate provision unconstitutional but declined to either issue an injunction or to employ separability. Naturally, the Obama administration then filed a motion for clarification, asking the court how it should proceed. Judge Vinson then issued a stay on his ruling so the case could be appealed. That appeal has since been filed — over two weeks ago, actually.

      2. avatar NCG says:

        I’ll defer to Magoo on the legal situation with Obamacare.

        Otherwise, I agree with pretty much everything you said, except that Obama is an ideologue. He’s sold out all his lefty principals, if he ever had them. I’m sure there are ideologues around him, but his policies have been pretty much center-right, with few exceptions. Left unchecked, I think the executive branch will continue to claim more power for itself, regardless of party. And SCOTUS is totally out of control.

        I think your point about the superhero/super villain dichotomy is right on the money. Keep us fighting about guns/abortion/gays/taxes whatever, while Wall Street robs us blind. Do you think the Republican Party wants to win on abortion? No more than the Democrats want to win on gun control. The fight is lucrative. Just like our overseas adventures.

        1. avatar Magoo says:

          Obama is a raging centrist, a devout moderate. He ran to the right of H. Clinton in the primaries. The most radical thing about him is his color, so he signifies monumental change nonetheless.

          The Left so believed he would change the world, he was awarded the Nobel Prize as he took office. All its progressive hopes and dreams were projected upon him, regardless of his stated positions.

          The Right fears him and what he supposedly represents so much, it refuses to believe that he is a natural-born citizen. He is a Marxist, a Mau Mau, foreign material lodged in the national fabric. Again, despite anything he has actually said or done.

          Neither side gets it. Bi-racial, raised by white grandparents, a professor of constitutional law by training, Obama is a compromiser, an appeaser, a fixer, a bringer-together. That’s who he is, and hardliners on both sides refuse to recognize it. The Left is just as disappointed with Obama as the Right is frightened. However, running from the center, where he has been all along and where the vast majority of Americans live, he will be re-elected in 2012.

  3. avatar Ralph says:

    There may a degree of hyperbole in this CCRKBA missive, but the message is correct. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Especially when the true enemy, and maybe the only viable enemy, is the government.

  4. avatar Jayson R says:

    Wow, the petition form has a convenient place to make a donation to the CCRKBA. Whodda thunk it.

  5. avatar CUJO THE DOG OF WAR says:

    Well, it is the same old story isn’t it? A self righteous, pompous liberal with sweeping generalities making such mindless statements as a homeowner “sweeping the streets with an ak-47” with no regard for innocents, and the rabid,frothing gun owner waiting for someone to step on his property! Well, let’s assume that I am, indeed, the antichrist, just as my ex-mother-in-law claimed! I have a simple statement. Bring it on criminals, because you will be shot entering my home because you are, well, a criminal. I will shoot center mass and using safer bullets for less chance of ricochet and over penetration, you will be dead. Therefore I will not have to worry about being sued by you at least, and ya won’t break in to someone elses home! Oh, and if I am having a particularly bad day, I may use a fighting knife instead. I’m sure someone once preached for knife and sword control at one time, so let’s fulfill their apprehension as well-after all, I am pure evil! alas, evil is as evil does! Too bad that natural selection hasn’t caught up to the pacifists yet! Having dealt with hardened criminals for 8 years, I learned one thing-the worst have no compassion nor mercy when you have what they want. Some men only understand and respect violence AND this is the only way to handle them! I’m off to sacrifice a kitten………..

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Cujo, may I suggest that a bowl of warm milk and a nap by the fire will do wonders for your blood pressure.

  6. avatar John Fritz says:

    Did you see Mr. White Glove press the decocker thinking it was the slide release?

    1. avatar Aaron says:

      Exactly why I stay away from Sigs… I don’t want to play “guess the lever” under any sort of firearms related duress..

  7. avatar Ralph says:

    Here’s a poll question: Is there a bigger douchbag on the planet than Paul Helmke?

  8. avatar John Fritz says:

    …instead of doing his job – i.e. fixing the economy and creating jobs…

    Well, as soon as I read that my eyes glazed over. That little line is code speak for tax/redistribute and grow government.

  9. avatar Terry4Strokes says:

    I was snoozing until I got to the tobacco thing. Does this mean I won’t be able to shoot cigarettes out of my mouth anymore?

    Maybe I should send these guys some money…

  10. avatar mikeb302000 says:

    Brad, That’s a helluva sales pitch you passed on there. I’m glad you’re not taking it totally seriously.

    About the video, I thought Helmke said a few things that were unnecessarily exaggerated like the AK-47-spraying-the-neighborhood remark. But his point is absolutely right. If someone is unarmed and breaking in your house or car and you blow their brains out you’re wrong. That would be manslaughter in the very least, maybe 2nd degree murder.

    The fact that there’s a law now in Missouri that sanctions this doesn’t change the moral imperative which says you can’t kill people except in self-defense. That’s a right or wrong thing, and you guys should be the first ones to recognize an unlawful or immoral law.

    1. avatar Javier E says:

      I have two young children in my house. Mike if someone breaks in they will not be leaving under their own power. Death may actually be wished for by the criminal by the time the police arrive. And that is only if my wife is home with the kids. If we’re both there and he’s unarmed I’ll have to restrain my wife first.

    2. avatar Ralph says:

      Does that go for my 5’1″ GF too? So if some big guy breaks into the house when I’m gone, he’s no threat to her because he’s unarmed? With all due respect, Mikey, you’re out of your mind.

    3. avatar Anon says:

      I’m curious – do you have any grasp of American law, or do you just make it up as you go, and sprinkle in buzz words and emotionally-laden phrases whenever you get the chance?

      Suffice to say, this: “If someone is unarmed and breaking in your house or car and you blow their brains out you’re wrong. That would be manslaughter in the very least, maybe 2nd degree murder.” is flat out wrong in the very least, maybe intentionally misleading.

    4. avatar Shelley says:

      The “Make my Day” laws may be questionably nicknamed, but they are without a doubt necessary. Having worked in law enforcement, the prison system, and Probation & Parole, I have known many murders and rapists. I cannot tell you the number of those people that started out as simple unarmed burglaries where the criminal thought no one was at home. What occurred afterward were either crimes of opportunity (such as rape) or crimes in fear of getting caught and convicted (such as assault and murder). The criminals usually picked up something from inside the home to use as a weapon against the homeowner. The percentage was very high.

      If someone is breaking into my home or property, I have the RIGHT to defend either with deadly force! The criminal’s choice to commit a crime negates their right to protection from harm. To say it is not “moral”, “right”, or “ethical” is placing your values on everyone else. You assume a moral superiority. While you may sleep better tonight in your liberal bed, you may think differently if you or your family are ever victimized.

      Further, where is your outrage at the criminal’s lack of concern that his actions are not “moral”, “right”, or “ethical”? They are making a conscious decision to violate the law and I will make a conscious decision to act in a manner protected by the law… and I will sleep well at night knowing I am doing “right” by my family.

  11. avatar mikeb302000 says:

    Sorry, guys, you’re ideas about this sound like so much adolescent posturing and macho bullshit. Killing a threatening person has to be the very last resort.

    1. avatar Phil says:

      I would like to know what you think an intruder can do or say, to convert their de facto threat to non-threat (other than leave/flee immediately upon your challenge). If they haven’t left, what is your next move? Do you ask them to prove they are not armed and will not approach or harm you? Do you tell them “give me three steps and you’ll never see me no more?” What about other people in the house? Will you allow an intruder access to your family or any other person in the house? How do you know you do not need to defend yourself and any other in the house? I would like to know what you think you would do with an intruder in your house. Are you going to have a conversation with someone that has broken into your house and hasn’t left?

      1. avatar Shelley says:

        Excellent questions, Phil!

  12. avatar Magoo says:

    Brad says: “I do agree with you, completely, by the way, regarding the effects of these “sky is falling,” over-hyped email campaigns. To many of these “crying wolf” missives just numb everybody to any REAL dangers. I just don’t know what’s a real danger and what’s trumped up any more.”

    Do a little reading up on the CCRKBA. First off, it’s not a “committee.” It’s one guy named Alan Gottlieb, who has made a sizable fortune operating the direct mail and fund-raising campaigns for this organization and others. The organizations are 501s, but the direct-mail company is for-profit. Big profits.

  13. avatar Gunnutmegger says:

    “Obama is a raging centrist, a devout moderate. He ran to the right of H. Clinton in the primaries.”

    Centrist? How exactly do you justify that description?

    And while the Obamateur might have run to Hitllary’s right, he also ran on closing gitmo (still open!), disengaging from war in the middle east (Still in Iraq, still in Afghanistan, now attacking Libya!), and transparency in government (Obamacare bill not posted to internet before voting, as promised).

    So, what the Obamateur ran on means nothing.

  14. avatar Christopher says:

    Let’s look at some facts here.

    Obama is the most liberal POTUS we have ever had. Though once he got the office he starts acting like a centrist. Sheep in wolf’s clothing.

    I don’t see Obama being in the Oval Office after January of 2013. He has pissed on too many people on both sides. You can’t argue that fact.

    CCRKBA has always be a brushfire starter. I usually lean more towards GOA. I have heard nothing of this executive order stuff in a while.

    If zerO did executive order gun rights out the window…. there are a lot of american jobs that are gun-related. I mean think about the metal, polymer/synthetics, gunpowder, target-paper, leather, optics, and other industries taking the hit from this. That would not look good when this move pushed unemployment above 10%. Not to mention the unemployment dues that would have to be paid..

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email