• Mossberg Owners is in the process of upgrading the software. Please bear with us while we transition to the new look and new upgraded software.

The Enemy: George Soros anti gun agenda

carbinemike

Global Moderator
Staff member
Global Moderator
"Philanthropist"
George Soros funds the liberal think tank Center for American Progress. They have a ton of influence in the Obama Administration. The owner of my last employer ran a conservative think tank and I learned how they work. I can't stress enough how much these places control what goes on in our nation. Below are their points that have been submitted to Biden on Friday. I shortened some sections but the one on military grade assault weapons is intact. Warning:it does include some out right lies.

http://www.americanprogress.org/iss.../49510/preventing-gun-violence-in-our-nation/

By Neera Tanden, Winnie Stachelberg, Arkadi Gerney, and Danielle Baussan | January 13, 2013
After last month’s senseless shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut—in which 20 children and 6 adults were shot and killed—we need to immediately address the gaps in our current law that enable mass shootings, as well as the everyday shootings that on average claim the lives of 33 Americans each day.
In this issue brief we recommend 13 legislative proposals and executive actions to prevent gun violence in our nation. These actions are targeted in the following three key areas:
 Better background checks
 Taking military-grade weapons off the streets and out of criminals’ hands
 Better data, better coordination, and better enforcement
We discuss these actions in further detail below.
Better background checks
By Neera Tanden, Winnie Stachelberg, Arkadi Gerney, and Danielle Baussan | January 13, 2013
After last month’s senseless shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut—in which 20 children and 6 adults were shot and killed—we need to immediately address the gaps in our current law that enable mass shootings, as well as the everyday shootings that on average claim the lives of 33 Americans each day.
In this issue brief we recommend 13 legislative proposals and executive actions to prevent gun violence in our nation. These actions are targeted in the following three key areas:
 Better background checks
 Taking military-grade weapons off the streets and out of criminals’ hands
 Better data, better coordination, and better enforcement
We discuss these actions in further detail below.
Better background checks
Legislative proposals
A background check for every gun sale
Almost all Americans agree that certain dangerous individuals—such as violent criminals, the mentally ill, drug abusers, and perpetrators of domestic violence—should not be permitted to own firearms. Under current federal law, such people are in fact barred from possessing a firearm.
The nation’s licensed federal firearms dealers routinely conduct such checks, but under current federal law, gun transfers by people other than licensed federal firearms dealers are exempted from background checks. These so-called “private sellers”—people who maintain that they are not “engaged in the business” of selling guns —are not required to perform checks.
An estimated 40 percent of the gun transfers that occur each year in the United States—more than 6 million gun transfers—originate from private sellers. Such private sellers often congregate at gun shows or sell guns online. This creates an easy opportunity for dangerous individuals who are ineligible to possess guns under federal law—felons, persons adjudicated mentally ill, and other prohibited people—to bypass a background check and obtain a weapon with no questions asked.
Requiring background checks for all gun sales is a noncontroversial proposal that gun owners themselves overwhelmingly support. Indeed, a July 2012 poll by Republican pollster Frank Luntz shows that 74 percent of members of the gun lobby National Rifle Association and 87 percent of gun owners who are not NRA members supported requiring a criminal background check of every individual seeking to purchase a gun.
The administration should submit legislation to Congress mandating criminal background checks for all gun sales consistent with the Fix Gun Checks Act of 2011 (S. 436), with certain narrow exceptions, including for transfers within families. Such a law would essentially end no background-check gun sales.
Of all the major legislation being widely discussed in the wake of the Newtown tragedy, none could do more to prevent gun violence than passage of the Fix Gun Checks Act. The bill would provide stronger incentives for state and federal agencies to submit all the necessary records about individuals who are barred from owning handguns into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, and would require a background check on every gun sale. These checks will ensure that guns stay out of the hands of criminals, the mentally ill, and other dangerous people who are prohibited from gun ownership by law.
Input all necessary records into the FBI National Instant Criminal Background Check System
Though this seems like a common-sense action, states have been slow to provide these records, particularly regarding individuals barred from owning guns due to mental illness. Ten states have failed to provide any mental health records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, and 18 others have submitted fewer than 100 records since the creation of the system in 1999. Without states’ cooperation in submitting these records to the database, individuals who are dangerously mentally ill and pose a substantial threat to the community
The effort to get records into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System can be strengthened in four important ways:
 Toughening penalties on states that do not provide records to the database
 Requiring federal agencies to affirm that they have provided required records to the database
 Clarifying the definition of “mentally ill” to ensure that individuals with a serious mental illness are prohibited from purchasing guns
 Requiring background checks for all gun sales
The Fix Gun Checks Act of 2011 provides for exactly these fixes—and requires a background check on every gun transfer.
Prevent convicted stalkers from acquiring guns
Under federal law, individuals convicted of “misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence” are disqualified from possessing firearms. This is sound public policy, as domestic violence often involves seemingly low-level violence that can escalate quickly into lethal encounters. Because domestic violence occurs among individuals with a familial or intimate relationship who will have repeated contact with each other, removing firearms from these situations is a crucial tool for protecting victims from serious injury or death.
Close the “terror gap”
Nothing in the current law prevents known or suspected terrorists from clearing a background check and purchasing guns. And some of them are doing just that: According to the Government Accountability Office, between February 2004 and December 2010, there were 1,119 instances when known or suspected terrorists on the government’s Terrorist Watchlist purchased guns or explosives from federally licensed dealers. What’s more, in the past two decades, there have been numerous terror attacks in the United States involving firearms.
Bipartisan legislation—the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act (S. 34/H.R. 1506)—sponsored by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and House Homeland Security Chair Peter King (R-NY) would give the FBI discretion to block gun and explosives sales to suspected terrorists. The Lautenberg-King legislation includes a process for administrative review and legal recourse for anyone blocked from buying a gun who may have been misidentified as a terror suspect. This legislation was drafted and endorsed by the Bush administration, and Attorney General Eric Holder has indicated his support for the legislation as well. It should be passed.
Executive action
Penalize states that fail to provide records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System
The Fix Gun Checks Act is a critical legislative fix to our nation’s broken gun background check system. But the administration can act even before Congress does. As discussed above, the majority of states have failed to provide crucial records regarding disqualified purchasers to the federal government for inclusion in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. Each day that states do not provide these records provides another opportunity for a dangerous individual to obtain a firearm and harm their community. The president should issue an executive order directly to the attorney general to withhold federal Justice Assistance Grant funding from any state that fails to submit a plan—and act on the plan—for facilitating the transfer of these records to the FBI.
Ensure that federal agencies provide required records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System
The federal government itself has not done an adequate job of submitting eligible records already in its possession to the FBI for inclusion in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. In 2008, for example, the Department of Defense excluded Jared Lee Loughner from service in the U.S. Army because of his struggle with drug abuse but did not submit a record into the FBI database.
The New York Times recently reported that the Justice Department has reviewed a series of executive actions to improve the background check system. We urge the administration to expedite the review.
Perform background checks on employees of federally licensed dealers during the course of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives audit inspections
Under federal law, those individuals disqualified from gun ownership are also ineligible to work as an employee who handles guns for a federally licensed gun dealer. There have been numerous cases, however, where felons and other prohibited people were behind the counter at a federally licensed gun dealer. Drug addicts shouldn’t work behind the counter at a pharmacy—and felons shouldn’t sell guns in gun stores.
Take military-grade weapons off the streets and out of criminals’ hands
Legislative proposals
Reregulate assault weapons
The recent mass shootings in Aurora, Colorado and Newtown, Connecticut have a deadly element in common: The shooters used military-grade rifles to inflict maximum damage. These assault rifles, capable of firing more than 30 or more bullets in mere seconds, are legally available for purchase in most U.S. states since a federal law banning the sale of such weapons expired in 2004.
Congress should enact comprehensive legislation protecting the U.S. public from these deadly weapons. These military-style assault weapons should be banned from sale in the United States in the manner proposed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), who plans to introduce a bill to stop the sale, transfer, importation, and manufacturing of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices. Alternatively, the administration might consider legislation to require licensing and transfer restrictions on new and existing assault rifles, similar to the scheme currently in place for machine guns and other Class III firearms. This action would reduce access to such military-grade weapons by felons, the Mexican drug cartels, and mentally deranged individuals.
Ban high-capacity gun magazines
Similarly, gun magazines with a capacity of more than 10 bullets should be banned. These dangerous components serve no legitimate civilian purpose and pose a danger to public safety.
Executive action
Require broader reporting of multiple sales of assault rifles
Federal law requires federally licensed dealers to report to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives when an individual purchases multiple handguns within a five-day period. These reports provide crucial information for the bureau in criminal gun-trafficking investigations. This type of reporting is not generally required for multiple sales of assault rifles, however, despite the fact that many such guns are increasingly used in crimes and are illegally trafficked. We applaud the administration for the 2011 ATF order expanding multiple-sale reporting to require certain dealers on the southwest border to alert the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives about multiple sales of assault rifles. This policy is helping interdict illegal gun trafficking into Mexico. We can do more, however, to deter the illegal acquisition of military-grade assault rifles here at home.
The Christmas Eve ambush of firefighters in Webster, New York, for example, involved a multiple purchase that included an assault rifle by a straw purchaser. A straw purchaser is a person who buys guns on behalf of felons and other persons prohibited from possessing guns. Had the purchase involved multiple handguns, the circumstances of the sale may have triggered a straw-purchase investigation at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, and the straw purchaser may have been caught illegally transferring the assault rifle to the felon who ambushed the firefighters—heading off the attack. But because the multiple purchase involved an assault rifle, it went unreported to the bureau, which allowed the straw purchaser—and therefore the felon—to avoid investigation prior to the attack. The bureau should expand its multiple-sale reporting requirement through its “demand letter” power to any multiple sale involving either:
 A dealer on the southwest border
 A dealer linked to more than five crime gun traces in the prior year
 A rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and is capable of firing a round larger than .22 caliber or any tactical shotgun with a pistol grip
Better data, better coordination, and better enforcement
Legislative proposals
Strip riders from the administration’s fiscal year 2014 budget and all future budgets that restrict gun data collection and sharing
In order to fully understand the scope and nature of gun violence in this country and develop laws and policies to protect the public from future violence, federal agencies, research institutions, academics, and others need access to data on gun crime and gun trafficking. Likewise, government-enforcement agencies need to be able to freely collect and share data on firearms-related violence, crime patterns, and illegal transactions to ensure efficient investigation and prosecution of criminals and federally licensed dealers who break the law.
Yet all relevant federal agencies are hamstrung in their ability to collect and share data on guns because of limitations imposed on their funding in annual appropriations legislation. Three such restrictions involved the so-called Tiahrt Amendments, which restrict federal, state, and local law enforcement functions in the following ways:
 First, the Tiahrt Amendments limit access to and use of crime gun-trace data, including the use of such data in state and local civil enforcement actions that would revoke the license of a gun dealer caught breaking the law.
 Second, the Tiahrt Amendments prohibits the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives from requiring federally licensed dealers to regularly conduct a physical inventory inspection—at least once a year, for example. While dealers are required to notify the bureau promptly when they learn that a gun in their inventory has been lost or stolen, they are not required to affirmatively check to ensure their inventory is complete. During the course of its own audit inspections of gun dealers, the bureau has found more than 30,000 missing guns from inventories each year in recent years—but it only has the resources to inspect dealers once every six years.
 Third, the Tiahrt Amendments require federal agencies to destroy records of completed gun background checks that do not reveal a disqualification from gun purchase within 24 hours. Preserving these data for several months, as was the prior practice, would help give federal authorities the ability to identify and monitor potential straw purchasers who buy guns on behalf of criminals. Having more information on potential straw purchasers can improve gun-regulation enforcement and deter illegal gun purchases.
Other key appropriations riders block data collection and assessment in meaningful ways:
 Another rider limits the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives’s ability to receive, store, and manage data in a modern and efficient manner. The bureau is essentially prohibited from creating an electronic database of gun records already in its possession that is searchable by name, which means that its agents must go through an antiquated and inefficient paper-based process when assisting law enforcement to investigate gun-related crimes.
 The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health are unable to conduct adequate public health and safety research relating to firearms because of language that has been construed to prohibit virtually any study of firearms-related issues.
In its next budget, the administration should remove each of these appropriations riders to permit government agencies and law enforcement to fully investigate and prosecute gun criminals and create a modern, efficient system for collecting and maintaining data. The administration must also free public health research agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health to study gun violence and develop innovative solutions to reducing gun deaths and injuries.
Treat gun trafficking as a serious crime
When an individual commits a crime with a gun, law enforcement focuses on that person for investigation and prosecution. But in many cases, the person who ultimately commits the crime was aided at various points by other individuals in gun-trafficking networks, including straw purchasers and unscrupulous gun dealers. Arresting one criminal takes one firearm off the streets, but by targeting other members of gun-trafficking networks, law enforcement can rid our communities of hundreds of dangerous weapons.
Currently, traffickers are typically charged with selling without a license or knowingly transferring to a prohibited person—both of which carry penalties of only zero to five years. Congress must immediately consider legislation such as the Gun Trafficking Prevention Act introduced by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) that targets criminal gun-trafficking networks. Such legislation would create new criminal penalties for people who participate in gun trafficking at every end, from the person who buys weapons on behalf of someone they know intends to use it to commit a crime to the crooked dealer who knowingly sells firearms to traffickers to those who conspire with and organize gun-trafficking rings. Under this bill, traffickers could face up to 20 years in prison and significant fines. It also provides greater penalties for those who organize gun-trafficking rings, subjecting them to an additional sentence of potentially five consecutive years in prison. Penalties could increase depending on the number of guns trafficked.
Executive action
Begin the process of the FBI absorbing the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
In recent years, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives has become a beleaguered agency that is unable to adequately fulfill its mission to oversee and enforce federal firearms laws. For reasons such as lack of funding, limitations on its activities included in appropriations riders, and a leadership vacuum, the bureau is simply incapable of functioning properly as a standalone agency in its current state. These problems undermine the bureau’s ability to combat gun crime and illegal trafficking. Also undermined is the morale of roughly 2,500 bureau agents who risk their lives daily to make the United States safer. These agents deserve to work in an agency that matches their own tenacity.
The United States already has a well-functioning federal law enforcement agency: the FBI. The president and the Department of Justice should begin the process of making the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives a unit of the FBI, and allow the ATF to focus on its other duties with its limited resources.
Conclusion
Through better background checks; taking military-grade weapons off the streets and out of criminals’ hands; and improved data, coordination, and enforcement, we can reduce the gun violence that plagues our communities, our children, and our families.
Neera Tanden is the President of the Center for American Progress. Winnie Stachelberg is the Executive Vice President for External Affairs at the Center. Arkadi Gerney is a Senior Fellow at the Center. Danielle Baussan is the Associate Director of Government Affairs at the Center.
 
Re: The George Soros anti gun agenda

Here's an article on how the think tank plans to counter the NRA. They have planned this out.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...b07be0-5a8c-11e2-9fa9-5fbdc9530eb9_story.html

Most of it:
The White House is working with its allies on a well-financed campaign in Washington and around the country to shift public opinion toward stricter gun laws and provide political cover to lawmakers who end up voting for an assault-weapons ban or other restrictions on firearms.

With President Obama preparing to push a legislative agenda aimed at curbing the nation’s gun violence, pillars of his political network, along with independent groups, are raising millions of dollars and mapping out strategies in an attempt to shepherd new regulations through Congress.
But the efforts, designed in large part to counter opposition from the National Rifle Association, face serious political obstacles on Capitol Hill. The NRA spent more than $20 million on federal election campaigns last year, and its lobbying muscle extends from Washington to state capitals around the country.

Most Republicans in the GOP-controlled House also oppose additional gun regulations, as do some key Democrats in the Senate — meaning that the groups aligned with Obama will have to persuade dozens of skeptical lawmakers to vote for the president’s eventual proposals.

The groups, whose leaders are in regular contact with the White House, are working to enlist religious leaders, mayors, police chiefs and other influential constituents to lobby their local lawmakers in their home districts. The organizations also plan to stage rallies at congressional town hall meetings across the country in much the same way tea party activists mounted opposition in 2009 to Obama’s health-care overhaul.

A trial run for the burgeoning campaign came this week when the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence ran hard-hitting ads in North Dakota and Capitol Hill newspapers against Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.), who said Sunday that some of the gun measures Obama is considering are “extreme.” After the ads — which told Heitkamp “Shame on you” — the freshman senator’s office issued a statement opening the door to supporting some gun-control measures.
 
Re: The George Soros anti gun agenda

They plan to fund a lot of the above with the group the Gabrielle Giffords started last week. They are already bringing in the bucks. They did this in the 94' ban by trotting out Jim Brady who was shot and survived during the Raegan assaination attempt. A poor hapless figure of gun violence can really pull in the money. I guess that many today know or remember Jim Brady so Gabrielle Richards has been tabbed to raise funding.

A political action committee, Americans for Responsible Solutions, was launched this week by former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and has picked up seven-figure donations from major Democratic benefactors.
 
These efforts aren't to curb violence, they're an organized campaign designed to browbeat officials into supporting massive control measures across the country, using finances for coercion.

What will happen, is if at the state level, any effert is made to not comply with new over reaching federal restrictions or requirements, (such as a 2nd Amendment preservation act?), state funds will be witheld by the fed and if I understand correctly it will be at the discretion of a currupt attorney general.

With the backing of Soros pushing an agenda, the political system is voided. Doesn't even matter. Anything done in the political arena will primarily be for show.

I'm not sure how you begin to counter this kind of effort.
 
These efforts aren't to curb violence, they're an organized campaign designed to browbeat officials into supporting massive control measures across the country, using finances for coercion.
Yep.

To give some insight into these think tanks, here is one from my old job. The owner ran the think tank in DC but would be in 1-2 times a year for meetings. He made himself available to employees that had questions. My group would skip the work stuff and ask about DC policy. They had developed the "troop surge" idea in Iraq right down to the name, how it will work and how to sell it. The surge was not a solution developed by the military although they did ultimately have to sign off and workout how to implement it. This was 6 months before it was sold to the public and discussed by the media.

I'm not sure how you begin to counter this kind of effort.
Brad, I don't know if I have the answer but I would say to keep in mind that this effort is to counter the NRA and other pro gun groups. While they a planning well, the NRA (and others) are too. Like the NRA or not, they have pull in DC and the republican's still hold the house. They will plan to brow beat those on the fence though. I would say at a one man level where we are, keep doing what you are doing. Write representatives, go to rallies, get the word out and if possible support like minded groups financially. I know that's hard to do for many (myself included) as they have the economy crushing people. Let the pro big guns deal directly with Soros and his ilk, keep our chins up and fight the good fight...no one can sit back and let others do their bidding on this.

One thing I particularly didn't like to hear is that they will convince politicians that they can protect them in the 2014 mid term elections. This will help sway those on the fence.

This reminds me of the WW2 Battle of the Bulge. The anti's have suffered losses for quite awhile, they have regrouped and are on a counter offensive. Much like the Nazi's (they were socialists too) they must be defeated.
 
Rossignol said:
I'm not sure how you begin to counter this kind of effort.

Just like fighting terrorism, you cannot fight an idea. A way of thinking.

But we have just as much of a right to opinion as the anti's do.

While I will campaign and put up signs for a candidate that I think is the best person for the job, I am 100% guilty of not financially supporting them to get there.

Maybe I, and others, should start doing just that.

After all, that is exactly what they're doing, and I really feel there are a lot more of us, than they are of them.
 
As far as there being more of us... I'm not sure anymore. The tide is turning and the opposition has used current and recent events to push that. The recent election results show there are more willing to consume than there are willing to produce. How many of those are willing to bite the hand that feeds them, almost litterally, the hand that feeds them...

I feel we are now the minority, and as suggested in CBMikes post, the socialists are offering protection from the fallout for those on the fence and because the way language is used and twisted, who doesn't want to protect "the children" with common sense measures?

We,ve got to get the truth out, I agree, this is why the info in the stats post is so vitally important. But we also need truth in the language being used, we need to figure out how to change the conversation the way they have. We know these so called "military grade weapons" are military grade in appearance only and functionally have little difference compared to anyother semi-auto on the market. We need to convey that somehow in the language. I'm sick of seein that an AR can't be used for any other purpose than to kill. Most people seem to agree and I've even seen and heard recently many pro 2A folks say as much, that serious gun owners know they have no legitimate use for an AR.

Money is a part of it, a big part that I don't personally have. So in the absence of that key factor, how we enact change otherwise as I described above? How do we convince people the rifle isn't evil? How do we overcome the socialist financial machine? Are the takers willing to go against the grain when they stand to loose? They apparently make up about 53% of the population.

I apologize for sounding a little pessimistic this morning, but we aren't confronting merely the political system, its much bigger and better funded and doesn't operate in the light of day.
 
Back
Top