Top Navigation  
U.S. Flag waving
Office Hours Momday - Friday  8 am - 5 pm Pacific 1-800-835-2418
Facebook   YouTube   Twitter
 Home Page
 Current Issue
 Article Index
 Author Index
 Previous Issues

 Kindle Subscriptions
 Kindle Publications
 Back Issues
 Discount Books
 All Specials
 Classified Ad

 Web Site Ads
 Magazine Ads

 BHM Forum
 Contact Us/
 Change of Address

Forum / Chat
 Forum/Chat Info
 Lost Password
 Write For BHM

Link to BHM

Massad Ayoob on Guns

Want to Comment on a blog post? Look for and click on the blue No Comments or # Comments at the end of each post.

Massad Ayoob


Friday, January 28th, 2011

President Obama was vehemently anti-gun before he entered the White House. He has been conspicuously silent on the issue since, for obvious reasons. Bill Clinton himself made it clear that the Assault Weapons Ban came back to bite the Democratic Party hard in the subsequent election, and Al Gore’s position on the issue may well have cost him the election. Why NOT let it drop? Barack Obama has many very pressing issues, and a man as smart as he SHOULDN’T be wasting time on hollow, feel-good legislation while he sits in the Oval Office.

However, we’re now ominously told that a statement on “gun control” is forthcoming from POTUS:

The “usual suspects” have predictably already introduced legislation you may find even more Draconian than the Clinton Assault Weapons Ban, which honest people seem to agree did absolutely nothing to reduce crime in its ten years of existence. Carolyn McCarthy has introduced this bill in the House of Representatives, and Frank Lautenberg has introduced the following in the Senate:

Déjà vu, all over again.

They’ll use the 30+-round magazine in the gun of the Tucson killer as the pivot point of their attack on your rights to own firearms of a kind that have been part of America since the 19th Century.

The sort of people who fear “high capacity magazines” are the ones who have no plan but to lie down and play dead – or die – if they’re ever in the presence of someone like mass-murderer Jared Loughner in Tucson earlier this month.

But the people who appreciate that sort of technology are the ones who are determined enough to fight back against such monsters, even if they have to stand alone. People such as Condoleezza Rice’s dad, who sat alone on the front porch of the family home with a gun in his lap to ward off sheet-head racists back in the days of a gun-owning Republican named Martin Luther King.

I’ll have more to say about the magazine capacity matter in days to come…but I’d like to hear what YOU folks think.


  1. joe Says:

    I agree with you on this. Any regulations only lead to more and more regulations. I don’t see how the politicians don’t see that they are taking the guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens while doing NOTHING to the criminals. Massad, do you have any news on the Bill that was introduced in Nov to ease the restrictions on allowing people in NJ to carry concealed?

  2. ScottK Says:

    Several of the podcasters I listen to on the Gun Rights Radio Network refer to them as Standard Capacity Magazines, which is a much more accurate term that doesn’t sound as scary to those who are not familiar with certain types of guns. The standard AR mag is a 30 round mag. The mags for my Glock 32 are 13 round mags. The Anti’s would have everyone believe that anything over 10 rounds is high capacity.

  3. Mas Says:

    Joe, Google Second Amendment Foundation website and look for an update they’re. SAF is the group that’s pressing the reform. The State of NJ disagrees with them…

  4. Andy Says:

    All gun (control) laws are Unconstitutional, without exception.

    The only reasons we abide by them is because:

    1) we are law-abiding in all other areas of our lives as US citizens, and

    2) if we are perceived as not having obeyed said laws, Federal organizations will be more than happy to send their gun-toting thugs over to raid our houses, kill our pets, terrorize our families, steal our property, plant or fabricate evidence (David Olofson’s case springs immediately to mind), or at the very least take us through the legal system on three-ring circus charges that won’t hold up in court but will suck us dry financially in the process.

    Remember Ken Ballew, John Lawmaster, the Weaver family, and yes even the Branch Davidians, plus many more. All in the name of agencies doing evil under color of laws with purely Unconstitutional roots.

  5. Will Cushman Says:

    Here in the People’s Republic of Kalifornia, we “civilians” cannot possess a (center fire) magazine of more than 10 rounds capacity-period. Just means that we must practice our tactical reloads often.

  6. Brogan Says:

    From the past interviews of Carolyn McCarthy on you tube it’s obvious that she has no clue about the very thing she is making laws about. She is someone who wants to ban something–who wants to make criminals out of people who possess something she doesn’t approve of–and she doesn’t even know what it is!

    She is not the only ignorant politician pushing her outlandish ideas about firearms and why they should be banned. Assemblywoman Patricia Eddington, who wants to ban .50 BMG rifles because, according to her, they shoot an “incendiary…heat seeking device”! (I think she has been watching too many James Bond movies).

    You couldn’t make this stuff up. These are the people who would use the power of the state to disarm you and me. They insist on imposing their ignorance on the rest of us– under force of law. How about making a law mandating that the people making the laws should, at the very least, know and understand what they are trying to regulate.

    We can all agree that we would all be better off without someone who thinks a barrel shroud is “that shoulder thing that goes up.”

  7. joe2 Says:

    Excuse me, but “Martin Luther Kin”? Sorry, but did something get cut off? I don’t remember any history lessons on anyone named “Kin”.

  8. Charles Cook Says:

    Liberals have a mental disorder. Its that simple.

  9. Mas Fan Says:

    Mas, The part that scares me the most is that by limiting law abiding citizens to 10 rounds, the criminal can and will use that to overrun the law abiding with the use of a magazine that exceeds 10 rounds. The politicians never consider scenarios such as this.
    And will we return to pre ban/post ban nonsense ? I hope Congress doesnt buy into this business of punishing tens of thousands of good and decent reasonable people to control a few
    nut cases living on the fringes of society.

  10. NT Says:

    It might be worth commenting on this article, which purports to contain “real data”

  11. Kevin Says:

    Look at how the ATF is laying the groundwork to ban all shotguns that can be modified to contain more than 5 rounds, which is ALL pumps and semis. See page number 10, or page 15 in the PDF.

    It says “import”, but remember that anything that has a caliber over 0.5 inches is not a NFA weapon only because the Attorney General allows it because of it’s “sporting purpose”. If any shotgun that can be modified to have over 5 rounds is defined by the “study” as automatically having no “sporting purpose” guess what happens?

    They are taking comments up to May 1, 2011.

  12. redclay7 Says:

    Mas, in addition to the above, I believe Sen. Boxer of California stated her intention to introduce her ‘Common Sense Concealed Carry Law of 2011,’ which would address making uniform the requirements nationwide for obtaining a concealed carry permit.

    This I believe, stems from the CCW standard, or lack thereof for a permit in Arizona at the time of the Giffords shooting as if it had anything to do with Mr. Laughner’s actions. My fear is that this may ultimately be channeled into a national concealed carry license that is ultimately to be regulated by the US Govt.. Redclay 1/28

  13. MichaelS Says:

    I agree with you and Joe on this. Any gun control measures passed will only be a stepping stone. The anti-gun groups will not stop. They just do not get it, the only ones that any gun laws affect are the law abiding citizens. Criminals will always find a way to get what they want because they do not care about any laws. I am glad my guns have the factory magazine with capacities greater than ten rounds. I do not consider any factory issued magazines as high capacity.

  14. Dann in Ohio Says:

    It philosophically comes down to those who want to take care of and provide for themselves verses those who want someone to take of and provide for them.

    While I greatly respect and appreciate those who serve in civilian and military uniform, My wife and I are still the front line in the protection of ourselves and our family.

    The anti-gunners want to argue about magazine capacity, mental capacity, or “style” of firearm when truthfully; the nutcase in Arizona could have been just as – or even more – deadly and destructive if he had plowed his vehicle into the dense crowd gathered by the congresswoman. Maybe we need limited capacity gas tanks on vehicles?

    I hope that the nutcase gets the harsh justice he deserves, but I’m not willing to give up my rights because of him. I’m not willing to be declared mentally unstable by casual observers without due process. I also have to chuckle that liberal legislators in some states want to bar people who admit to using marijuana from having guns while liberal legislators other states have continual pushes to legalize marijuana use.

    Many anti-gunners complain about the supposed flood of U.S. firearms across the border to Mexico, but fail to admit that even if they had a total ban on guns in the U.S., the same items could flow into the U.S., but not to law abiding citizens – just to criminals.

    And obviously, if a criminal or nutcase is willing to break the law and face the death penalty for killing another person, threatening a few years in prison for having the wrong gun, or full capacity magazine, or carrying in a “gun-free” zone isn’t going to stop them.

    Unfortunately, in a truly free society, an armed population or perception of an armed population will deter many person-to-person crimes, but will never completely eliminate situations like in Arizona where a determined, lone criminal wreaked havoc.

    Is a free society a trade-off for the occasional nutcase like in Arizona? – that may very well be. But I would have liked to seen the outcome at that Safeway if just 4 or 5 of the dozens gathered there in the immediate crowd had been carrying a firearm – even openly carrying a firearm. Even a nutcase would have possibly thought twice if he saw 5 or 6 people standing around, openly carrying a firearm. As more information comes to light, it appears this criminal had planned this rampage for some time and waiting periods, limits on firearms and magazines would not have deterred him.

    As a former LEO, and long-time NRA and 4H Shooting Sports instructor, I have had the opportunity to observe many law-abiding citizens and youth fire hundreds of thousands of rounds without incident. Currently as a university professor and Ohio CHL holder, I have carried my firearm back and forth to work daily for over six years without incident (securing it in my vehicle on campus in accordance with our state laws).

    I know all that seems impossible and even crazy to the anti-gun crowd… maybe they’ll declare me mentally incompetent through casual observation or even by reading this response to your post.

    Dann in Ohio

  15. Rob Says:

    Well, just as things were moderating a bit in the gun buying frenzy, it’ll heat back up again.
    I hope a large percentage of the buying public will lend the voices to the effort to defeat this anti second amendment clap trap.

  16. JoeB Says:

    Mas: For now, I can’t see this going anywhere on a national level thanks to the 2010 U.S Congressional elections. However, their might be some success in the states that are already pretty liberal. Also let’s not forget that whatever a progressive can’t get by passing laws they will turn to using the courts and the massive federal bureaucracy.

  17. Richard Linares Says:

    Ant gun people where waiting for event to happen push ant-gun button again they got that with Jared Loughner. Been no suprise see who pushing on the ant-gun button Msncb same ant gun congressman that all like push that button. I find sad that same people do enough about gun kept calling the high magazines for longs time high clips. Seem they did under stand clips feed rifles from top of gun that Magazines feed firearms below the gun. Goes show how much people want pass stuff do not care or under stand guns at all. Or may be name game becuase if keep telling people gone ban high cap clips well not be like tell them gone want take way every body magazines that hold more than ten rounds. As for Obama I do not trust him he push health care on ever body with out reading it. There word he about say some on this issue soon .

  18. Matt Says:

    Not Going Anywhere. Republican House just isn’t about to touch any antigun stuff – especially with elections now next year.
    Look at Carolyn McCarthy’s high-cap ban bill. See how “many” cosponsors it got outside core urban Blue Nation.

  19. Marc-Wi Says:

    They couldn’t get in the blood and dance fast enough spouting about their new bills that don’t, wouldn’t, and couldn’t help one bit. The perp was in so close he could’ve used a knife. And Joe, those politicians know exactly what they’re doing- taking away our rights and consolidating power for themselves. They must run our lives- after all, we’re too stupid. Mas is right about the two types of people. They’re too craven to protect themselves and FEAR those of us who can and will. They love crime and criminals- it “proves” their point.

  20. Crawler Says:

    Americans have already witnessed what happens when the politicians spend too much precious time on agendas and not on the economy and fiscal responsibility.

    I don’t believe these constitutional infringement bills will ever pass in the House. (or the Senate either). The Republicans are focused on spending cuts, reducing the size of government, repealing/de-funding Obama Care and making sure all of their promises to their constituents are fulfilled; and ridiculous and ineffective new gun control laws most certainly were never promised.

    Go ahead McCarthy and Lautenberg, champion your gun bills. But do so at your own party’s peril…

  21. Random voice Says:

    I myself am getting really upset over this lack of thinking things through and looking at historical precident. I’m normally pretty calm and cheerful, but hearing all of these stupid arguements from the gun banners is giving me an effect that I can only equate to shoving a bunch of scrap metal into a microwave. Probably doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, but thats how I feel.

    I began tinkering with the idea that banning high capacity or standard capacity mags might have an effect… Until I remembered the North Hollywood Shootout.
    To my knowledge, it was the worst police shootout in American history and it took place smack-dab in the middle of the Sociolist Republic of California during the Assault Weapons ban. It did NOTHING!!! The guys had 100-round drum magazines for illegally fully-automatic AKs in the middle of the most gun-shy state in the entire US. This simple event alone should blast a huge hole in the hull of any Assualt Weapon Ban ship. I’m still confused as to how people insist on controlling inanimate objects to control violence rather than controlling the people who use then for violence.
    Grrrrrrrrrr… I miss the old days when criminals were punished.
    Yes, I know they still are but I keep seeing all these people flocking to protect criminals that I feel like they get more respect than people that go out of their way to help others.

    Yeah, simply put they’re going to use this as a ramrod to force another chunk of useless legislation down our throats that has no positive effect whatsoever on the nation as a whole.

  22. Racer Says:

    It’s all fueled by disingenuous communists with an agenda to fulfill for consumption by ignorant hoplophobes. And we get caught in the swirling vortex of stupidity to suffer the concequences. Frankly Scarlet, I’m pissed! Getting reeeeeeally tire of moron sheeples making laws for me. I’m not being mean, I’m being descriptive. I can be mean if you like.

  23. Scott C Says:

    Most likely the bills set forth in congress will die with the 2012 election season just starting to warm up. I am sure most Democrats remember what happened in 1996. Bill Clinton blamed the NRA for that loss. I fear the President will accelerate efforts on the UN small arms treaty and issue executive orders to satisfy his base. What exactly those orders will be is anyone’s guess.

  24. Mark Laderwarg Says:

    If the Tucson shooter did not have a magazine twice as long as standard, then perhaps an elderly woman would not have been able to rip it out of his hand when he was trying to reload. Therefore, if we are true to the theory of knee-jerk legislation, we should require ALL magazines to be “double capacity.”

    For the 30+ years I was a police officer, the politicians thought it was OK for me to have as many rounds in my magazine as I needed. Now that I am retired, I do not feel any less important. Nor is my skin any less valuable to me and to my family.

  25. waypasthadenough Says:

    The question might be ‘whose shoe is about to drop?’

    “But, clearly, the prime minister has laid down some ground rules which any functioning democratic state would insist upon, having to do with, you know, arms belonging to the state, not to — not in private hands. The current circumstances come out of what I think is a very important and indeed appropriate action that the Iraqi government has taken.” – U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in a news story about a militia in Iraq refusing to lay down their arms. (How about that imported ‘democracy?’)

    Some of our ‘friends’ are not necessarily our allies.

    “The National Rifle Association has been in support of workable, enforceable gun control legislation since its very inception in 1871.” – NRA Vice President Franklin L. Orth(And that’s the problem. You should join Gun Owners of America, the ‘no compromise’ gun lobby.)

    Bush the First was the first modern(well post GCA ’68, which should be repealed along with the NFA) president to issue a ‘gun control’ edict of some sort. Remember when AK variants skyrocketed in price from about 250 bucks to over 800?

    The Senate may yet be insane enough to try something, but if garbage like that mentioned above gains any traction in the House beyond some crazy commie sponsoring it then us Patriots and ‘tea partiers’ have been wasting our time.

    It will take more than a few election cycles to fix this mess if it can be fixed. Our enemies, domestic and foreign, have invested too much time, sweat equity and blood in this process to just throw up their hands and say “Oh sorry we bothered you. We’re going home now to live with our neighbors in peace and Liberty.”

    If they do say that we know from history they’re lying and they’re just sliming off to re-group and re-work their lies in some dark corner.

    It’s time to stop hunkering down for the apocalypse and start thinking Normandy.

    Don’t understand? Start here:

    And don’t miss my column on last summer’s SCOTUS decision:

  26. justbill Says:


    This will be but the first salvo in the gun haters’ war renewed jihad against the Second Amendment. First the “large capacity” magazines get banned, along with “assault weapons.” When the next psychopath displays some skill using multiple 10-rd. magazines and kills xx number of innocents, the subsequent ban will be against “rapid reloading” firearms of any kind. Then some nut will see himself as a modern Josie Wales with a belt full of revolvers and shoot-up a school, mall, etc. The antis will counter with a prohibition on “powerful magnums.” And on and on. Pretty soon we as gun owners would be in no better shape than the good people of Great Britain.

  27. rpm64 Says:

    The logic Democrats are using to say that a 30 round magazine is too much can also be used to take us back to the single shot 22. Then since the logic worked so well why not just flintlocks or swords, better yet, no weapons at since the government is there to “protect” us. We had all better be watching our politicians votes so we can fix the problem in the next election.

  28. MamaLiberty Says:

    Have to disagree with this one:
    “The sort of people who fear “high capacity magazines” are the ones who have no plan but to lie down and play dead – or die…”

    Might well apply to some misguided ordinary people, of course, but certainly not to the big shots, politicians or career bureaucrats. How many of them are armed or travel with an armed bodyguard of some kind? Almost all of them. They surround themselves with police and barriers because they KNOW they are vulnerable.

    So it is not out of ignorance that they attempt to disarm US. It is malice and fear, nothing else.

  29. Roger in NC Says:

    Well, Shoot! Just when gun and ammo prices were becoming reasonable again we now have to out flank another volley from these morons that will tempt some of us back into our hoarding behavior. If we all have time to read and post here, we have time to fire emails toward our elected officials. Read each proposal (they won’t) and make precisely targeted remarks. Before you log off today, send one down range.

  30. Dustoff Says:

    The real Boogie-Man in the closet is the UN Small Arms Treaty being negoitated by Sec Clinton. This is not only “gun control” at its most blatant, but an assult on our American soverignty. With the current resident of the White House and his Shadow Government of appointed Czars, don’t be suprized by ANY Executive Order we may see in the next two years.

  31. Ed Williamson Says:

    I don’t believe any of this crap will become law. The DEMRADS will, like Bill Clinton, cause a surge in the price of hicaps. Actually good for the manufactures. Not so good for us though because the price of the things will probably surge.

  32. Gpbbiker Says:

    As the old saying goes, “in Washington, when they say it’s about the money; it’s NEVER about the money!”

    All the craziness from both sides notwithstanding, this makes absolutely no sense! Why would a president who is just coming off a speech that was all Kum By Ya and warm fuzzies, spoil it by tackling one of the most divisive and polarizing issues of the day? So much for moderating political discourse! We need to look at this in the light of the fact that the Whitehouse has considerable regulatory power that can accomplish much “gun control” completely under the radar! Not to mention the power of “Executive Order”!
    When a House member or a Senator introduces an anti-gun anti-freedom bill THEY take the heat. Why would the Whitehouse suddenly want to be in that game??
    So why float this trial balloon now? Why create all this activity and speculation? I have to wonder, understanding that our current Administration is as Machiavellian as any other, why create what appears to me, a smoke screen.
    It makes me wonder what is going on in the water under the duck.
    Is this just an attempt to mitigate the heat that was created by Anti-Freedom groups because Obama didn’t validate their existence by including them in the SOTU address? “Mommy! Obama won’t play fair! Do something Mommy!”
    And then simply sit back and let the situation return to “normal” after the news cycle wears this out??
    Inquiring minds would like to know!

  33. Aix Sponsa Says:

    The ultimate agenda is disarmament. USArmy soldiers have actually been asked if they would disarm US civilians if ordered to. They have also been taught residential home invasion for use in places like Iraq? When our inevitable economic collapse comes, be prepared to defend yourself from looters, thieves, and government brown shirts. We will see who has the will to follow through with all their “cold dead hands” bragging. IMO it will be soon.

  34. Tom Young Says:

    Like the old proverb says, “Give a child a piece of cookie they’re gonna want a glass of milk” They’re going to try to chip away at the Gun Rights of the citizenry oe little piece at a time.

  35. JP Says:

    As a retired police officer and firearms instructor I will attest more gun control is not the answer. The number of rounds the magazine holds has nothing to do with crime, lawful gun ownership has nothing to do with crime. As expected a liberal president is going after our gun rights again, we all need to remember these folks in 2012 and vote them out of the White House and out of the halls of Congress.

    Maybe one day they will actually keep violent career felons in prison and the very dangerous mentally ill housed until they are safe to be released.
    The answer to cut violent crime is to build more prisons and keep the rascals locked up!!!! That won’t happen because it costs money.

    As usual a very good informative aticle Massad. Keep the fight going for our gun rights, you are a true blessing to all of us who cherish this right to own guns and the right to self defence. As a fellow officer I thank you!

  36. Tim from CO Says:

    Most politicians are bean counters and they only know two things. All beans are the same and you can always get more beans.

    I’ve read some articles in police journals saying criminals are becoming more violent and I agree with it. Criminals are starting to work in groups more as well, so suddenly that 10 round magazine is going to start looking pretty small…

    If there was some kind of disaster that 30 round magazine for my AR is going to be pretty comforting.

    Mas, I think you hit the nail on there being people who have the “it can’t happen to me” mentality then those of us that like to be prepared.

    I have a friend who lives in Kalifornia in a not so great area and he just bought a 10mm Glock for self-defense but it’s unloaded, stays in a safe and he’s not too familiar with guns. Recently, he told me he doesn’t need a large magazine for it either cause “when would you ever need more than 10 rounds?”…

    He’s also called me paranoid for always carrying a locked and cocked XD .45 and advised me a 10mm was far better…

    IF any magazine bans pass I wonder how the Firearms Freedom Act will go? CO has Constitutional Carry proposed and it’d be great if the Firearms Freedom Act passed in CO since Magpul is out here.

  37. Paul Says:

    Massad, the difference between using two 15-round magazines, and using one 30-round magazine, is about one second. And keep in mind that this has come up so far, only once in history. So for that one second, we are to suffer yet another infringement of our rights?

    Not only that, but that woman managed to grab the magazine Loughner was attempting to reload with. Could she have grabbed it if it were only a 15-round magazine?

    Time for a revolution, that’s all. A normal phase in human affairs.

  38. dan Says:

    It is way past time to eliminate the same anti gunners in congress. Trying to vote the bastards out has not worked or will it ever. Time to have Constitutional congressional members charge any and ALL sponsors and co sponsors of these UNCONSTITUTIONAL bills with failure to uphold their oath to the CONSTITUTION that they themselves soar too..This will get around their defense as using the commerce clause to enact legislation. We do not have any more time to ward off these scumbags that trash our country and its foundlings and founders. No more debate with these scum. They deserve NO respect from ANY law abiding individual that calls the USA home.

  39. Adam Says:

    So. I take it that the AW ban of 1994 was just a test run ? Stupid Commies never learn.

  40. Michigan Swampdog Says:

    Some quotes from the Founding Fathers and others

    “A free people ought to be armed.”
    – George Washington

    “Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples’ liberty’s teeth.”
    – George Washington

    “A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.”
    – George Washington

    “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
    – Benjamin Franklin

    “The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”
    – Thomas Jefferson

    “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
    – Thomas Jefferson

    “The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
    – Thomas Jefferson (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria)

    “A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks.” – Thomas Jefferson

    “The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.”
    – Thomas Jefferson

    “On every occasion [of Constitutional interpretation] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying [to force] what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, [instead let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed.”
    – Thomas Jefferson

    “Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion in private self defense.”
    – John Adams:

    “To disarm the people is the most effectual way to enslave them.”
    – George Mason

    “I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians.”
    – George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights and The Virginia Declaration of Rights)

    “Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe.”
    – Noah Webster

    “Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority … the Constitution was made to guard against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.”
    – Noah Webster

    “The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops.”
    – Noah Webster

    “A government resting on the minority is an aristocracy, not a Republic, and could not be safe with a numerical and physical force against it, without a standing army, an enslaved press and a disarmed populace.”
    – James Madison

    “Americans have the right and advantage of being armed, unlike the people of other countries, whose leaders are afraid to trust them with arms.”
    – James Madison

    “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country.”
    – James Madison

    “The ultimate authority resides in the people alone.”
    – James Madison

    “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”
    – William Pitt

    “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.”
    – Richard Henry Lee

    “A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves … and include all men capable of bearing arms.”
    – Richard Henry Lee

    “Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.”
    – Patrick Henry

    I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. – James Madison

    When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny. – Thomas Jefferson

    “This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty…. The right of self defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.”
    – St. George Tucker

    “… arms … discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property…. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived the use of them.”
    – Thomas Paine

    “The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”
    – Samuel Adams

    “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”
    – Joseph Story

    “The ultimate authority … resides in the people alone. … The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation … forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition.” –James Madison

    “What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty …. Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins.”
    – Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts

    ” … for it is a truth, which the experience of all ages has attested, that the people are commonly most in danger when the means of insuring their rights are in the possession of those of whom they entertain the least suspicion.”
    – Alexander Hamilton

    “But the most foolish notion of all is the belief that everything is just which is found in the customs or laws of nations. What of the many deadly, the many pestilential statutes which nations put in force? These no more deserve to be called laws than the rules a band of robbers might pass in their assembly.” Cicero, 1st Century, A.D.

  41. Michigan Swampdog Says:

    Another thing. A liberal would rather FEEL safe than to actually BE safe. After all, it’s all about FEELING isn’t it? I know how all that hope and change FEELS and it ain’t good!

  42. ScoutKansas Says:

    Should such bills pass, it will light a match to a fire with hell to pay. The mood of the country calmed a bit after the election that refuted the leftist Dem liberals and stopped any further efforts to kill our nation. Should this happen it can only be with the help of RINO’s and this would cause untold numbers of people to finally abandon that party. Hope for democratic reform of our bloated government would become lessened a great deal. Civil upheaval would be soon to arrive. I think the shooting will start

  43. Stan S, PA Says:

    Nothing anymore what it seems.

    – A little group of very educated wealthy people manipulates opinion of generally uneducated masses in a favor of a gun control.

    – Some type of an anti-gun conspiracy was agreed in the highest levels of political and business elites.

    – Goal is to make it impossible for American people to resist any undemocratic and unconstitutional steps government can make.

    – Financial and banking elite is grabbing more power from the congress and the president. Accumulation of money and power in few hands is leading US society to a high unemployment, poverty, less freedom and more government control.

    – Establishing a gun control is a part of the process of grabbing political powers in hands of financial elite and few high profile politicians.

  44. Lawrence Keeney Says:


    The only way to answer this is by shining sunlight upon it. Organize and make miserable the lives of any traitor voting for gun control. Protest them and raise money for their opponents, write letters to the editor and pool your money for newspaper ads reminding folks how anti-self defense these people are.

  45. Captain Bob Says:

    Well, I guess we should be thankful that the idiot used a 33-round magazine instead of a “standard” 10-round one because “they” would now likely be screaming for a ban on 10-round magazines and want no more than 2-rounders. Of course the logical point is that, no matter what he used: gun, knife, car, bomb, etc. he would have accomnplished at least part of his agenda. Curious point though, if he HAD used (pick one) of the above other than the gun would they be trying to ban that? NOOoooo. It’s only the object’s fault if it’s a gun. Why is this?

  46. Larry Says:

    Thomas Jefferson told us, “The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.” It’s tiresome, but it’s time to speak up in defense of our freedom once again. In light of the current makeup of the House of Representatives, it seems unlikely that any legislation will go anywhere, especially if we all ensure that our representatives hear from us.

  47. Says:

    Mas, sounds like the Obama administration could be pushing new gun control measures in two weeks…

  48. David Brickner Says:

    In Jan 1995 Clinton was in Cleveland, Ohio making a speech and he said that it was his gun control efforts which resulted in democrats losing 25+ seats in the House. (not to mention NAFTA and a retroactive tax increase) I wrote a letter to the Plain Dealer newsrag saying that he was right and they had better not forget it. They printed it two days running. While there may be only 4 million NRA members (everyone should be) they represent another 40 million gunowners. Obama should never have been elected if it wasn’t for those with SHORT memories.

  49. Long Island Mike Says:

    We hear often that rank and file LE officers don’t support gun control. If this is true why don’t we hear from them? It is now weeks after Tucson and I have not seen a single pro gun LEO on TV, in the papers, on the radio or in any sort of speakup like letters to the editor. Mas, as a LEO why is this the case? The NRA always says that they play a role in the training of tens of thousand of LEO every year. Yet even the NRA doesn’t have anyone to show a pro gun face other than some 70 year old ex LEO guys on the board. I just don’t get it.

  50. Marine-mp Says:

    Mas, When they take the high capacity magazines from the politicians bodyguards, I will surrender mine. Are the politicians and movie-stars who have their bodyguards with magazines any more important than my family? I think not.
    My weapons never got up out of gun safe by themselves and ever shot anybody. Back to that old “cliche”…..”when guns are outlawed, only the outlaws will have guns”. Semper-fi MIke

  51. Phil in NH Says:

    I tend to think the vast majority of liberal politicals cannot NOT push gun control legislation.  Just like the fable of the scorpion, they can’t help it:  It’s what they DO. Gun control and entitlement are the bétes noir and Achilles’ heels of the Democrat party, just like abortion and gender-blind marriage are the bétes noir and Achilles’ heels of the Republicans.

  52. Mas Says:

    Long Island Mike asks why we don’t see more pro-gun cops speaking out publicly as such, but anti-gun police chiefs speak their opinions publicly in uniform. The answer is, government employees in public service are not allowed to be publicly identified as officers when they speak on political issues. The Chief is the guy who decides department policy, and determines what issues the Department may address. He is the voice of the department. Chiefs are appointed. If the appointing authority — the mayor, let’s say — is anti-gun, he’ll pick an anti-gun chief and give him permission to speak for “more gun control” as a public safety issue, not a political one.


  53. Rob Morse Says:

    I think a magazine capacity ban is political theater.

    If the ban is a good idea then it should apply to police as well. Lets require that police carry a revolver again, and why would they need to reload.

    The ban is a test of American foolishness. Maybe will will pass; maybe we won’t pass the test.

  54. RD in WV Says:

    Mas, you know what my solution was–I transitioned my long guns to 1-round feeding devices.
    Of course those one-round devices are metallic links, which just happen to hook together to feed my machine guns.

    But each link holds just one round, so McCarthy and Lautenberg should be overjoyed.

  55. Josiah Says:

    The president can say whatever he wants. Other than issue an Executive Order his only power is to enforce the laws the legislator writes and the judiciary interprets. The other power he exerts is not in law but as the traditional head of his party.

  56. Matt Says:

    Any House member wanting to see THOUSANDS of “single-issue voters” need only go to the next gun show in his district.
    They are the margin of victory or defeat for him in next year’s election.

  57. Bob Says:

    They won’t quit until they get us to single shots, then they’ll give it a go to ban them. Only thing stopping them is us. Remain resolute!

  58. Dave Mason Says:

    “…….government employees in public service are not allowed to be publicly identified as officers when they speak on political issues. The Chief is the guy who decides department policy, and determines what issues the Department may address. He is the voice of the department. Chiefs are appointed. If the appointing authority is anti-gun, ………. give him permission to speak for “more gun control” as a public safety issue, not a political one.

    Mas is right on point with this. Having experienced this first hand as Chief, when I spoke out about the need for safety and limits regarding children handling firearms it was approved by the Selectmen, however when I publicly quoted George Washington and his support for private firearms ownership I was reprimanded.

    I’m only glad I no longer have to deal with those short sighted politicians. And thanks to Mas’ training I still carry and publicly support the private ownership of all firearms.

Leave a Reply

Copyright © 1998 - Present by Backwoods Home Magazine. All Rights Reserved.