Gun Legislation that Amends ‘Brady Bill’ to be Added to Concealed Carry Reciprocity bill (HR 38)

Article credited to OutdoorHub:



Gun Legislation that Amends ‘Brady Bill’ to be Added to Concealed Carry Reciprocity bill (HR 38)

OutdoorHub Reporters

21 hours ago

Iraqveteran8888, who you’ve probably seen in his meltdown videos, posted the following message on his Facebook account after the House Judiciary Committee’s actions on concealed carry reciprocity and background check legislation:

[Read More]

FBI remove thousands of wanted fugitives from gun control database

Article credited to Independent:


FBI remove thousands of wanted fugitives from gun control database

Criminal background check lists ban criminals from purchasing guns in the US

Ruger handguns at a National Rifle Association annual convention in Houston, Texas Getty

[Read More]

NRA Hasn’t Rated Pro-Gun Roy Moore vs Pro-Gun Control Doug Jones (We Will)

Article credited to Breitbart:



NRA Hasn’t Rated Pro-Gun Roy Moore vs Pro-Gun Control Doug Jones (We Will)


by AWR HAWKINS29 Nov 201769

The NRA has not rated pro-gun Republican Roy Moore vs. pro-gun control Democrat Doug Jones in the race for the Alabama U.S. Senate seat, so Breitbart News is rating the two men for voters who are curious as to where the candidates stand on the Second Amendment.

To begin with, Doug Jones is not only open to more gun control but is actually supportive of more gun control.

On November 21 Breitbart News reported that Jones’ support of gun control might not be readily apparent to potential voters because Jones stayed mum on where he stood. But he uttered enough bits and pieces about his positions that clear pro-gun control positions came into focus. For example, he told the Washington Post that expanding background checks to gun shows “would be helpful.”

Jones did not point to even once incident where a mass public attacker acquired his guns at a gun show. Rather, he simply blew the dog whistle for leftists via the Democrats’ age-old war on gun shows.


Jones’ willingness to expand background checks is simply an outgrowth of his overarching belief that the Second Amendment is limited. The Alabama Political Reporter quoted him saying, “We’ve got limitations on all constitutional amendments in one form or another.” Again, this is same phraseology other leftists use when they seek to justify infringing on those rights of which it is written, “Shall not be infringed.” Gun control Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), for instance, said similar things when he told told Rachel Maddow, “The Second Amendment is not an absolute right, not a God-given right. It has always had conditions upon it like the First Amendment has.”

But wait–there is more. Politico recently gave Jones the opportunity to convince voters that he did not want to take their guns and Jones pivoted, focusing instead on another part of the question.

The bottom line is that Jones is another pro-gun control Democrat who varnishes over his liberal positions by assuring everyone he is pro-hunting, although the Second Amendment is not about hunting. Rather, it is about defending our lives and liberty from a tyranny within or without our borders. And this is where Roy Moore comes in. On September 12 he told Breitbart News that national reciprocity for concealed carry should be passed immediately and on September 25 he told an audience, “We’ve got to uphold the Second Amendment.”

He added, “You know, they say that guns are bad; that they kill people. Well I know a lot about guns–I’m the one that used guns in combat. I know what guns do…[But] guns don’t kill, people kill. [You could say] cars kill, are we going to get rid of our cars? Are we going to get rid of our knives?”

Moore lifted a concealed carry revolver in the air in two separate campaign events to show that he and his wife do more than just talk about carrying guns, they actually carry them.

And the differences between Moore and Jones are even clearer when one considers that Moore opposes the very gun controls Jones supports. For example, on September 20 Breitbart News reported that “Moore opposes an expansion of background checks for gun purchases. He views an expansion of background checks as a ruse by which the left can secure government-mandated firearm registration.”

It is clear that Moore understands the insidious nature of expanding background checks, be that expansion at gun shows or to all private sales. He sees that the end of such an expansion is gun registration. Moreover, Moore opposes an ‘assault weapons’ ban and a ‘high capacity’ magazine ban, two bans that are being feverishly pushed by the Democrat Party to which Doug Jones belongs.

So rating these two candidates is not so hard. Moore is absolutely pro-Second Amendment, which includes being for concealed carry and self-defense while opposing the various infringements on liberty being pushed by the Democrat Party. On the other hand, Jones is absolutely pro-gun control, which includes supporting an expansion of background checks and viewing the Second Amendment as limited, therefore open to government regulation.

A victory for Moore means Republicans gain a strong pro-Second Amendment vote in the Senate. A victory for Jones means Sens. Chris Murphy (D-CT), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) get another pro-gun control vote, which bolsters their push to restrict to the Second Amendment.

AWR Hawkins is the Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and host of Bullets with AWR Hawkins, a Breitbart News podcast. He is also the political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at


Gun Control Advocates Shoot Massive Hole Right Through Their Own Liberal Narrative

Article credited to The Daily Caller:



Gun Control Advocates Shoot Massive Hole Right Through Their Own Liberal Narrative


Ryan Salmon fires an assault rifle at the Lynchburg Arms & Indoor Shooting Range in Lynchburg, Virginia, on October 20, 2017.
(Photo: JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images)

In the wake of the most recent U.S. mass shootings in Las Vegas and Sutherland Springs, Texas, anti-gun proponents on the Left have renewed their calls for stricter gun control measures. But a new study shows that such legislation could do little to curb gun violence.

[Read More]

Gun Control Agents Are Shooting Blanks

Article credited to The Western Journal:


Gun Control Agents Are Shooting Blanks

By Allan Erickson


It is not about protecting us!

Sen. Dianne Feinstein is at it again, trying to ban AR-type rifles, errantly calling them “assault rifles.” This comes at about the same time former Vice President Joe Biden declares the hero of Sutherland Springs, Texas, should not have been able to acquire the AR-15 he used to confront the church shooter.

Describing an AR-15 as an assault rifle is political terminology conjured up to promote gun control. AR does not stand for “assault rifle” or “automatic rifle.” It stands for ArmaLite rifle, a semi-automatic weapon with a 30-round magazine.

[Read More]

The Gun-Control Legislation That Even Republicans Like

Article credited to The Atlantic:


The Gun-Control Legislation That Even Republicans Like

The Gun-Control Legislation That Even Republicans Like

Bipartisan support is still no guarantee that a bill to strengthen the federal background-check system will pass.

Senator Chris Murphy
Senator Chris Murphy heads to the House chamber on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on June 22, 2016, to show support for the sit-down protest, seeking a vote on gun control measures.Alex Brandon / AP

Republicans and Democrats have found gun legislation both sides agree on. But that doesn’t mean it will pass.


In the wake of mass shootings in Nevada, Texas, and California, Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, an outspoken advocate of gun control, introduced a bill to strengthen the federal background-check system for gun sales. Debates over gun control on Capitol Hill nearly always give way to inaction in the face of Republican opposition. But Democrats aren’t alone in supporting this new legislation: It is also backed by Republican Senators John Cornyn, the second highest-ranking Republican in the Senate, Orrin Hatch, Tim Scott, and Dean Heller.

The legislation doesn’t call for expanding restrictions on gun purchases; it’s meant to stop people from buying guns when they were never supposed to be able to in the first place. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS, relies on state and federal officials to report mental-health and criminal-conviction records that legally bar individuals from purchasing firearms. But those records don’t always make it into the system.

After a gunman killed 26 people in Sutherland Springs, Texas, earlier this month, the Air Force conceded that it failed to report the shooter’s prior domestic violence conviction, an action that if it had been taken might have prevented the purchase of the firearms used in the shooting. The new legislation is intended to make sure that something like that never happens again.

Any Republican who decides to back the legislation can argue that they just want existing laws to be enforced. And it looks like the GOP won’t have to fear backlash from the gun lobby. “We applaud Senator John Cornyn’s efforts to ensure that the records of prohibited individuals are entered into NICS,” Chris Cox of the NRA said in a statement. “The National Rifle Association has long supported the inclusion of all legitimate records in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.” The National Shooting Sports Foundation, a trade association for the firearms industry, put out a statement on Thursday in which it “praised U.S. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) for his leadership” on the bill.

Gun-control advocates support the bill too, and say it’s evidence that common ground between Republicans and Democrats in the gun debate is possible. “This is both parties affirming that there are people that we believe should not have access to guns, and we want to make sure that the system is set up in such a way that we prevent access to guns for those people,” Christian Heyne, the legislative director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, which supports the legislation, said in an interview. “This is a real, genuine effort from people who couldn’t be further from each other on the other side of the aisle.”

In addition to Senators Murphy, Cornyn, Hatch, Scott, and Heller, Democratic Senators Richard Blumenthal, Dianne Feinstein, and Jeanne Shaheen are also co-sponsors.

But bipartisan support is still no guarantee that the legislation will actually move forward in Congress or ever be enacted. For that, it needs the support of the Republican congressional leadership. In response to a request for comment asking if Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has plans to advance the bill, a spokesman for McConnell said, “We’re reviewing it.”

There are countless examples of a debate over guns flaring up in Congress in response to a mass shooting, only to stall out not long after. Some Republicans in Congress expressed a willingness to consider a ban on “bump stocks,” a device that enables semi-automatic weapons to fire faster, after 58 people were killed in Las Vegas, Nevada, in what has been called the worst mass shooting in modern U.S. history. In mid-October, Republican Representative Carlos Curbelo and Democratic Representative Seth Moulton introduced a bill to ban the use of bump stocks. Weeks later, the legislation had stalled.

Legislation doesn’t always stall out though: In the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shooting in 2007, Republicans and Democrats came together to pass a bill to improve the federal background-check system after it was discovered that the shooter had a history of mental-health problems that should have barred him from buying a gun. The NICS Improvement Amendments Act, a measure similarly intended to strengthen the background-check system, was later signed into law by Republican President George W. Bush.

Of course, just as the legislation passed in the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shooting has not fixed every problem with the federal background-check system, it’s possible that the current legislation under consideration wouldn’t end every instance where relevant records fail to end up in the national system.

The bill contains a number of provisions designed to ensure that records are reported, including a system of incentives and penalties designed to prevent gaps in the system. States could tap into federal-grant preferences if they implement plans to upload records, while federal agencies would be denied money for political appointees if they fail to report necessary background information.

Po Murray of Newton Action Alliance, a group formed after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, killed 20 children in 2012, said that she “applaud[s] the bipartisan effort” and “agree[s] that NICS needs to be fixed,” but that she wanted Congress to pass other gun laws as well to reduce mass shootings, gun homicides, and suicides.

The Murphy-Cornyn legislation proposes changes that fall short of the full roster of reforms that advocates want to see made to the background-check system, including the implementation of universal background checks to cover private and online sales. Senator Murphy introduced legislation in October that would expand background checks for private sales. That bill currently has no Republican co-sponsors, though polling indicates that a majority of Americans support universal background checks.

The recent shootings in Las Vegas and Texas are now being counted as two of the five deadliest mass shootings in American history. That might increase pressure on Congress to do something.

“We’re always concerned that momentum can be lost,” said Robin Lloyd, the director of government affairs for Giffords, the gun violence prevention organization founded by former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. But Lloyd added that the recent tragedies “may be the catalyst for moving something like the Cornyn-Murphy bill over the finish line.”

[Read More]

Opinion  Once again, now is not the time to talk about gun control

Article credited Las Angelas Times:



Once again, now is not the time to talk about gun control

FBI and local law enforcement officials investigate the shooting at Rancho Tehama Elementary School on Nov. 14. (Elijah Nouvelage / AFP/Getty Images)

To the editor: Thank God it was a human and not a gun that killed and injured more people in Northern California on Tuesday. The person (not the gun) also apparently tried to get into a school for more mayhem. (“As gunman sprayed school with bullets, quick action prevented mass bloodshed,” Nov. 15)

Now is definitely not the time to discuss gun regulation, as we are too busy organizing our prayer memorials. Thanks to our president and his fellow Republicans for allowing us to have the weapons to shoot back at these disturbed individuals.

Gallup poll: Majority of Americans now favor more gun laws

Article credited to Politico:
A concealed carry class instructor is pictured. | Getty
Support for increasing legislative checks on guns was particularly high among women and non-white Americans. | Getty

Gallup poll: Majority of Americans now favor more gun laws

A majority of Americans support passing new gun control legislation, according to a new Gallup poll released on Thursday — marking the first time a majority of those surveyed has expressed such a view since Gallup started tracking the issue in 2000.

[Read More]

Senate Dems Pushing for Ban on ‘Assault Weapons’ & Bump Stocks

Article credited to OutdoorHub:


Senate Dems Pushing for Ban on ‘Assault Weapons’ & Bump Stocks

OutdoorHub Reporters

Senate Democrats, headed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, (Calif.) are seeking to ban semi-automatic rifles.

According to The Hill, around two-dozen Democrats introduced the bill on Wednesday that would officially ban semi-automatic rifles, high-capacity ammo magazines, along with bump stocks.

“We’re introducing an updated assault weapons ban for one reason: so that after every mass shooting with a military-style assault weapon, the American people will know that a tool to reduce these massacres is sitting in the Senate, ready for debate and a vote,” Feinstein stated.

Here are the major components of the bill.

Key provisions

  • Bans the sale, manufacture, transfer and importation of 205 military-style rifle by name. Owners may keep existing weapons.
  • Bans any semi-automatic rifle that accepts a detachable ammunition magazine and has one or more military characteristics including a pistol grip, a forward grip, a barrel shroud, a threaded barrel or a folding or telescoping stock. Owners may keep existing weapons.
  • Bans magazines and other ammunition feeding devices that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, which allow shooters to quickly fire many rounds without needing to reload. Owners may keep existing magazines.

Exemptions to bill

  • The bill exempts by name more than 2,200 guns for hunting, household defense or recreational purposes.
  • The bill includes a grandfather clause that exempts all weapons lawfully possessed at the date of enactment.

Other provisions:

  • Requires a background check on any future sale, trade or gifting of a weapon covered by the bill.
  • Requires that grandfathered weapons are stored using a secure gun storage or safety device like a trigger lock.
  • Prohibits the transfer of high-capacity ammunition magazines.
  • Bans bump-fire stocks and other devices that allow semi-automatic weapons to fire at fully automatic rates.


Michigan Bill Aims to Allow Teachers to Carry Concealed Guns in Schools

Article credited to OutdoorHub:



Michigan Bill Aims to Allow Teachers to Carry Concealed Guns in Schools

OutdoorHub Reporters


Michigan lawmakers have voted to let people with extended training – including teachers – carry guns inside churches, schools, as well as other places that were previously banned.

According to WLNS, the bills got the OK on Tuesday, and were fast-tracked to the Senate on Wednesday.

Proponents of the bill say these designated gun-free zones are a “target-rich environment” for mass shooters. On the other side, those opposed say authorizing guns in those areas make them less safe.

The full Republican-led Senate is expected to vote on the measure Wednesday. The bill is anticipated to be changed to close a legal loophole that lets CPL holders openly carry firearms in gun-free zones.

On gun control, Mr. President, keep our city’s name out of your mouth

On gun control, Mr. President, keep our city’s name out of your mouth

[Read More]

Desert Tech is Now Shipping the Multi Caliber MDR Rifle Ideal for Law Enforcement and Hunting

Article credited to Outdoorhub:



Desert Tech is Now Shipping the Multi Caliber MDR Rifle Ideal for Law Enforcement and Hunting

OutdoorHub Reporters

21 hours ago

The MDR was designed to be one of the most compact, adaptable and user-friendly semiautomatic rifles available.  Many unique features set the MDR apart from other rifles. The MDR is also ideal for police and other enforcement agencies, as well as self-defense and hunting.

[Read More]

What’s wrong with gun control? The same thing that’s wrong with immigration restrictions.

Article credited to Learn Liberty:


What’s wrong with gun control? The same thing that’s wrong with immigration restrictions.


Blog post featured image


A common argument for restricting immigration to the United States and other developed countries — maybe even the most plausible one — runs like this. Opening the borders will bring in people who will consume more public services than they pay for in taxes and who will vote for more statist politicians who support those public services. The result will be less freedom for everyone in the long run. Therefore, many conservatives say, immigration control is a regrettable but necessary step to securing freedom.

[Read More]

Gun Rights vs Gun Control


Gun Rights vs Gun Control

  • U.S. gun ownership: 88.8 per 100 people

  • Pro-gun rights money
    to Trump: $969,138
    to Clinton: $48,013

  • Pro-gun control money
    to Clinton: $1,100,698
    to Trump: $1,984

See contributions from gun control and gun rights groups to members of Congress, as well as current NRA data

The fatal shooting in October 2017 at a Las Vegas music festival, which killed 58 concertgoers and injured hundreds more, is the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history.

Only 16 months earlier, a gunman armed with a handgun and a semi-automatic rifle murdered 49 people and injured 58 at an Orlando nightclub in what was then the country’s worst mass shooting.

The horrific attack came less than six months after a man and a woman opened fire at a San Bernardino, California, social services center, killing 14 and injuring 22.

And with each mass shooting — from Columbine to Sandy Hook; Fort Hood to Virginia Tech — the national debate over gun ownership renews.


A couple embraces following a shooting that killed multiple people at a social services facility on Dec. 2, 2015 in San Bernardino, Calif. (David Bauman/The Press-Enterprise via AP)

Despite the outpouring of grief and sympathy that followed the San Bernardino incident on Dec. 2, 2015, the very next day the Senate rejected a bill to tighten background check requirements on would-be gun buyers — just as it did in 2013, shortly after a lone gunman killed six adults and 20 children at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.

Whether 2017 will be any different remains to be seen. In fact, the issue of how to strike a balance between gun rights and public safety has been a political hot potato for years, and one that Congress has dealt with gingerly — too gingerly, in the view of groups favoring tighter firearms regulations.

The political climate of 2017 would hardly seem auspicious for action on the issue. Republicans generally oppose any type of gun control legislation — only four of 54 Senate Republicans voted in favor of the 2015 background check bill — and the GOP controls Congress until at least 2019. President Donald Trump pledged to protect Second Amendment rights if elected in 2016.

Trump’s predecessor, Barack Obama, made 14 televised statements following a mass shooting and supported multiple gun control bills during his eight years in office.

In June 2016, Democrats mounted a successful filibuster that forced Senate Republicans to vote on four gun control proposals — none of which passed.

A .44 caliber political issue

The last major piece of gun control legislation to make it into law was the assault weapons ban, which passed in 1994 as part of a larger crime-related bill approved by Congress and signed by then-President Bill Clinton. But the ban, which applied to the manufacture of 19 specific models of semi-automatic firearms and other guns with similar features, expired in 2004, and repeated attempts to renew it have failed.

84% of Americans

support expanding background checks to include private firearm sales and purchases at gun shows, including a majority of Republican respondents. (Source: Pew Research Center, June 2017)

Some Democrats thought their support for the assault weapons ban cost them control of Congress in the 1994 midterm elections. Whether or not that’s true, there’s little question that the politics of gun ownership have swung to the right. Republicans largely oppose gun control, and Democrats are split, with some lawmakers cautious about going against the views of more conservative constituencies, especially in rural districts.

That was true among the 2016 presidential candidates. Eventual Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton contrasted herself with Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont on the issue of gun control during their primary-season debates. And after nine people were killed in a shooting at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Oregon, Clinton promised she would take executive action as president to expand background checks. Sanders, though historically more sympathetic to the gun rights cause, reacted strongly the day after the San Bernardino shooting with a series of tweets calling for universal background checks, closing the “gun show loophole” and renewing the assault weapons ban, among other proposals.

Gun money to 2016 presidential candidates*

Candidate Gun Rights Gun Control
Bush, Jeb (R) $32,065 $6,900
Carson, Ben (R) $168,452 $6,953
Chafee, Lincoln (D) $0 $1,000
Christie, Chris (R) $7,050 $1,000
Clinton, Hillary (D) $48,013 $1,100,698
Cruz, Ted (R) $518,272 $2,566
Fiorina, Carly (R) $73,192 $500
Gilmore, Jim (R) $16,950 $0
Graham, Lindsey (R) $95,366 $0
Huckabee, Mike (R) $52,051 $0
Jindal, Bobby (R) $13,200 $0
Johnson, Gary (3) $10,305 $2,000
Kasich, John (R) $36,740 $9,741
Lessig, Lawrence (D) $0 $637
McMullin, Evan (I) $0 $0
O’Malley, Martin (D) $2,000 $5,740
Pataki, George (R) $0 $0
Paul, Rand (R) $243,502 $0
Perry, Rick (R) $48,550 $0
Rubio, Marco (R) $251,729 $3,950
Sanders, Bernie (D) $14,392 $117,965
Santorum, Rick (R) $121,792 $0
Stein, Jill (3) $260 $2,000
Trump, Donald (R) $969,138 $1,984
Walker, Scott (R) $39,510 $0
Webb, Jim (D) $500 $2,000
*Career numbers not including any funds raised for state-level campaigns. Based on data released by the FEC as of May 16, 2017

Those measures would likely pass muster with the Supreme Court despite challenges that would surely follow based on the Second Amendment — “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” In 2008, the justices struck down Washington, D.C.’s blanket ban on handgun ownership. The decision confirmed that individuals, and not just the police and military, have a constitutional right to own guns, but the ruling was a narrow one, applying only to a person’s right to keep a gun at home for self-defense. It didn’t imply that guns can’t be regulated in a number of ways.

Still, despite highly publicized mass shootings, no gun control measures have made it through the House and Senate in recent years.

That includes the so-called Manchin-Toomey amendment to require background checks in all commercial gun sales, including those at gun shows. The measure first buy metronidazole 500mg came to a vote in April 2013, four months after the Newtown shooting. It failed, getting only 54 of the 60 votes it needed to overcome a filibuster. The Center for Responsive Politics found that nearly all of the 46 senators who voted against the amendment had accepted significant campaign contributions from the political action committees of gun rights groups. There were exceptions to the rule, notably the measure’s sponsors, Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.). But in general, the correlation was a close one.

No senators who were in office for the 2013 vote changed their position when the provision was brought up again after the San Bernardino killings in 2015. And the second time around only 48 votes of support for expanding background checks could be found. Another bill put to a vote that day, which was sponsored by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and would have prohibited individuals on the terrorism watch list from buying guns, was rejected as well.

The votes on Manchin-Toomey seem out of step with where the public stands. The Pew Research Center found in 2015 that 85 percent of Americans, including a majority of Republican respondents, support expanding background checks to include private firearms sales and purchases at gun shows. In June 2017, Pew found that 84 percent of Americans supported it.

Reflecting the opinion of many liberal political leaders, commentators and organizations, Feinstein said in a statement that Congress “has a problem — a debilitating fear of upsetting the gun lobby.”

Guns and money

There’s no denying that much of the strength of the leading gun rights organization, the National Rifle Association, comes from its broad and passionate membership base and its mastery of grassroots politics.

But if lawmakers seem to tiptoe around gun issues, it’s likely at least in part because the NRA and other gun rights groups are loaded for bear with a seemingly limitless stash of cash ammunition.

Gun rights interests have given about $41.9 million to candidates, parties and outside spending groups since 1989, with 89 percent of the funds contributed to candidates and parties going to Republicans. And in the 2012 and 2014 election cycles, they let loose another $48 million (at least) in outside spending.

Top 20 recipients of funds from gun rights interests, 1989-2018*

Member Party Office State Total From Gun Rights Outside Spending
Gun Control Opposed
Outside Spending
Gun Rights Support
Ryan, Paul R H WI $346,497 $0 $601
Young, Don R H AK $217,976 $0 $138,853
Johnson, Ron R S WI $189,498 $20,493 $1,044,306
Cornyn, John R S TX $189,325 $0 $35,745
Thune, John R S SD $183,215 $0 $578,381
Toomey, Pat R S PA $168,260 $0 $950,835
Paul, Rand R S KY $165,976 $0 $99,955
Sessions, Pete R H TX $159,476 $0 $3,411
Rubio, Marco R S FL $158,194 $0 $1,008,030
Blunt, Roy R S MO $153,543 $0 $1,406,256
Calvert, Ken R H CA $144,466 $0 $775
Goodlatte, Bob R H VA $139,850 $0 $21,924
McConnell, Mitch R S KY $135,350 $0 $771,175
Pearce, Steve R H NM $131,750 $0 $75,450
Cruz, Ted R S TX $130,384 $0 $88,918
Burr, Richard R S NC $125,050 $0 $1,404,496
Inhofe, James M R S OK $122,100 $0 $5,258
Grassley, Chuck R S IA $113,430 $0 $266,356
Royce, Ed R H CA $111,120 $0 $80
Heller, Dean R S NV $108,515 $0 $72,311
*Career figures. Last two columns refer to outside spending. 2018 cycle based on data downloaded from the FEC, September 2017. For more information on how we calculate industry totals visit our methodology page

The NRA has provided the lion’s share of the funds, having contributed $22.9 millionsince 1989. During the 2016 election cycle, it further opened its coffers to make $54.3 million in outside expenditures, up from $27 million during the 2014 cycle.

Gun control interests, by comparison, have been a blip on the radar screen. They’ve given $4.2 million since 1989; 96 percent of their contributions to parties and candidates have gone to Democrats.

But they did unleash $8.6 million in outside spending during the 2014 election cycle, nine times as much as they spent during the 2010 and 2012 cycles combined. Americans for Responsible Solutions, founded by former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-Ariz.) and her husband, Mark Kelly, was behind $8.2 million of those independent expenditures. Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety spent $390,000.

Those figures don’t include $5.6 million in outside spending by Independence USA PAC, a super PAC backed by Bloomberg that he says supports “candidates and causes that will help protect Americans from the scourge of gun violence, improve our schools, and advance our freedoms.” The money went to support federal candidates who were in favor of gun control and attack one who wasn’t; the group had 100 percent success rate. Bloomberg gave a total of $28 million to outside spending groups during the 2014 cycle, of which $17 million went to Independence USA PAC.

In the 2016 cycle, gun control groups accounted for $3 million in outside spending versus $54.9 million from gun rights organizations, including $54.3 million from the NRA.

Top 20 recipients of funds from gun control interests, 1989-2018*

Member Party Office State Total from Gun Control Outside Spending
Gun Control Support
Outside Spending
Gun Rights Opposed
Van Hollen, Chris D S MDS2 $105,595 $0 $0
Masto, Catherine Cortez D S NVS2 $52,145 $0 $2,422,829
Bennet, Michael F D S COS1 $42,887 $0 $38,813
Schumer, Charles E D S NYS2 $22,864 $0 $0
Stabenow, Debbie D S MIS2 $21,450 $0 $95
Feinstein, Dianne D S CAS2 $19,250 $0 $0
Blumenthal, Richard D S CTS2 $18,165 $0 $55,221
Schiff, Adam D H CA28 $15,435 $0 $0
Price, David D H NC04 $13,350 $0 $0
Nelson, Bill D S FLS1 $11,577 $0 $626,122
Carper, Tom D S DES1 $10,500 $0 $0
Baldwin, Tammy D S WIS1 $9,800 $0 $326,223
Murphy, Stephanie D H FL07 $9,675 $0 $0
Durbin, Dick D S ILS1 $8,783 $0 $0
Murray, Patty D S WAS2 $8,750 $0 $6,704
Gottheimer, Josh D H NJ05 $8,373 $0 $0
Conyers, John Jr D H MI13 $8,218 $0 $0
Larsen, Rick D H WA02 $8,000 $0 $0
Esty, Elizabeth D H CT05 $7,050 $42,123 $0
Takano, Mark D H CA41 $7,000 $0 $0
*Career figures. Last two columns refer to outside spending. 2018 figures based on data downloaded from the FEC, September 2017. For more information on how we calculate industry totals visit our methodology page.

Even greater than gun rights groups’ dominance in the realm of campaign finance is their superiority when it comes to lobbying Congress and federal agencies. In 2013 alone — right after Newtown — the gun rights lobby spent $15.3 million making its case in Washington.

The following year, it spent $12 million, and in 2015 pared it to $11.4 million. The NRA accounted for $3.6 million of the 2015 number, but over the years, other groups — such as the National Association for Gun Rights, Gun Owners of America and the National Shooting Sports Foundation — have also made significant lobbying expenditures. And gun control groups? They spent just $1.9 million and under $1.7 million on lobbying in 2014 and 2015, respectively.

In 2016, gun rights advocates spent $10.6 million on lobbying versus $1.7 million by gun control groups.

– Geoff West, updated October 2017

[Read More]

Regulation Alert: Telescopic Sights Now Legal for Minnesota Muzzleloader Hunters

Regulation Alert: Telescopic Sights Now Legal for Minnesota Muzzleloader Hunters

An environmental bill recently signed by Gov. Mark Dayton made Minnesota the latest state to allow the use of telescopic sights (think scopes with magnification) during its designated muzzleloader deer hunting season beginning this year (Nov. 25 through Dec. 10). The move leaves just nine states — Alaska, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota and Washington — with regulations prohibiting them.


In Minnesota, the general bag limit for whitetail bucks is only one per year, taken by whatever legal hunting means. And the rules change regarding the use of optics came after years of political pressing, pleading and lobbying by deer hunters who view the special season as an opportunity to extend their time in the field, and want to use the latest and most efficient technology available, namely an in-line muzzleloader rifle equipped with a high-quality telescopic sight.

Rather than having a side-lock hammer that strikes an exposed percussion cap to ignite the main blackpowder or Pyrodex charge, as a traditional muzzleloader firearm does, an in-line model such as CVA’s Optima V2 or Thompson/Center Impact, locate the ignition source — typically a No. 209 shotshell primer — within the receiver where it’s protected from weather and dirt, and directly behind the powder charge. The result is a near instantaneous ignition of the main charge, which significantly improves reliability and shooting accuracy.

CVA Optima V2 Stainless
TC Impact

Traditions Performance Firearms went a step farther when it introduced its StrikeFire internal striker that eliminates the need to thumb a hammer altogether. Featured on a number of models, including the Vortek StrikeFire, the system employs a sliding striker button to cock the muzzleloader. While the StrikeFire system may be quicker and quieter than thumbing a hammer at the critical moment, as the company asserts, the main benefit of the hammerless design is that it allows the use of low-profile scope mounts, which aligns the scope’s sight-line closer to the bore.

Traditions Vortek StrikeFire

All three models mentioned here are available as a package that includes a 3-9×40 telescopic sight, making them highly accurate muzzleloaders to about 200 yards in the hands of an experienced shooter. Proponents of the rule change say this type of accuracy is necessary because a muzzleloader’s intrinsic multi-step reloading process makes a quick follow-up shot impossible.

In opposition to the new regulation was a faction of those who largely believe the designated muzzleloader season should be reserved strictly for hunting with traditional side-lock percussion cap or flintlock blackpowder rifles that rely on open or peep sights. The object and challenge, they contend, is to get close enough to the quarry to place a lead ball or bullet accurately into the vital zone. Thus, the stand-off between the two boiled down to a clash of ideals — one in which the state took no side.

Minnesota’s Department of Natural Resources viewed the situation as a social issue, explained big game program leader Adam Murkowski when he spoke with Pioneer Press earlier this year. He further noted that the regulation change isn’t expected to greatly affect hunter numbers during the special muzzleloader season, or the total annual whitetail harvest.

At this point, it’s difficult to predict whether any of the remaining states might adopt a similar attitude toward special-season use of telescopic sights. One stumbling block is that there’s disagreement over the definition. In Alaska, for example, big game hunters can’t use telescopic sights during a designated muzzleloader season, but non-magnifying illuminated reticle (red-dot type) sights are legal. In California, however, both are off limits to hunters during a special season.

Given that the special muzzleloader season in Minnesota occurs late in the year, after the regular firearms season has closed and bowhunters have already been afield for a couple of months, the state’s stance seems sound. Modern muzzleloader users and traditionalists should be able to coexist, each hunting in the manner he or she chooses.

[Read More]

NEWS : Video: Federal Premium Drops New .224 Valkyrie MSR , the Furthest Shooting Commercial AR-15 Round


Video: Federal Premium Drops New .224 Valkyrie MSR , the Furthest Shooting Commercial AR-15 Round

Why is FP so high on this new cartridge, you ask? Well, there are many reasons.

The low-recoiling .224 Valkyrie promises to be a very flat shooting cartridge, and is geared towards a target market that includes long-range precision shooters, all the way to medium-sized game and varmint control.

This is a list of planned factory loadings:

  • 100-grain Fusion MSR
  • 60-grain Nosler Ballistic Tip Varmint
  • 90-grain Gold Medal Sierra Match King
  • 75-grain American Eagle

Here’s a video that gives you some more details, but expect to hear much more about this round in future OutdoorHub articles:

New California Ammo Regs for 2018 — A Hassle for Hunters and Shooters

New laws approved by California voters and lawmakers in 2016 have the state’s 6-million-plus hunters, recreational shooters and other gun owners…

[Read More]

NEWS : Georgia Senator, and Gubernatorial Candidate, Plans to Give Away Bump Stock in Raffle Drawing


Georgia Senator, and Gubernatorial Candidate, Plans to Give Away Bump Stock in Raffle Drawing

While the rest of the world points blame and talks about banning bump stocks, one candidate for governor in Georgia plans to give one away, and had some fiery comments regarding recent regulation talks.

According to Newsweek, Republican State Senator Michael Williams announced the raffle in a statement in which he wrote:

“An attack on bump stocks is an attack on the Second Amendment.”

“Blaming guns or bump stocks for the actions of a lunatic, is the same as blaming McDonald’s for heart disease,” Williams continued.

The debate on bump stocks sparked into the wild fire it currently is after police found 12 of the devices on the rifles inside the Mandalay Bay hotel room of the shooter in Las Vegas.

“The tragedy in Las Vegas broke my heart, but any talk of banning or regulating bump stocks in merely cheap political lip service from career politicians, he said. “In reality, the bump stock is the new, shiny object politicians are using to deceive voters into believing they are taking action against gun violence.”

At first, the National Rifle Association was on board with new regulation, however, they believe an all out ban on bump stocks is not necessarily the answer.

Perhaps Williams’ most poignant comments came when he said,

“You cannot regulate evil out of existence, if politicians wanted to have a real conversation on reducing gun violence, they would be discussing mental health awareness, and ways to reduce the weekly bloodbath in Chicago and other inner cities.”

So, do you think there should be a ban on bump stocks?

Georgia is scheduled to hit the polls on November 6, 2018.

Here’s a good video that shows an AR-15 with a bump stock firing in slow motion It will give you a better idea of how they work.

NRA spokeswoman says she’s moving due to gun control death threats


NRA spokeswoman says she’s moving due to gun control death threats

NRA spokeswoman says she’s moving due to gun control death threats
© Greg Nash

The spokeswoman for the National Rifle Association says death threats from “gun control advocates” have forced her to move her family from their California home.

“Spent my weekend preparing to move due to repeated threats from gun control advocates,” NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch tweeted Sunday to her 642,000 followers. The tweet included a photo of bags presumably filled with her belongings piled up on her floor.


Loesch, a frequent cable news guest, also wrote that one person threatened to shoot her after obtaining her private cellphone number, another threatened rape and another “dragged her kids into” the threats, ultimately prompting the move.


Staunch gun control advocate Chelsea Clinton weighed in to support Loesch, calling the threats “awful and unacceptable.”


Loesch is also the host of “Dana” weekdays on BlazeTV.

The 39-year-old mother of two made waves recently after warning that any new gun control measures in the wake of the Las Vegas shooting massacre could result in an eventual total ban on guns.

“They are going to ban every single part of a rifle — period — your regular hunting rifle, until the whole thing is banned. It was made perfectly clear last week and it was made perfectly clear the week before that — no bans, no bills, period. None,” she said.

[Read More]

New California Ammo Regs for 2018 — A Hassle for Hunters and Shooters


New California Ammo Regs for 2018 — A Hassle for Hunters and Shooters

New laws approved by California voters and lawmakers in 2016 have the state’s 6-million-plus hunters, recreational shooters and other gun owners bracing for ammunition price increases, shortages and additional headaches in the near future.

The ammo regs are part of a flurry of new gun control rules — including those enacted as part of Proposition 63 — that cover a variety of bases, including how gun owners can store their firearms and to whom they may be borrowed.

One new rule, which takes effect in January 2018, mandates that Californians who purchase ammunition online or through catalogs must ship their ammunition through a licensed dealer — not directly to their home or business. State residents must also undergo a background check when buying ammunition, and anyone who sells ammunition will need to obtain an “ammunition vendor license.”

“This new law will drive up the price of ammunition to cover sellers’ increased costs,” said Ryan Bronson, director of conservation and public policy for Vista Outdoor, which is the parent company of Federal Premium Ammunition. “It will also essentially ban internet and mail-order ammo sales, since everyone will need to do in-store background checks to take possession.”

Bronson also expects California’s new regulations to affect the company’s considerable ammo donations to charity events and youth shooting programs.

“We are still sorting through the ramifications, but it looks like donations to charitable organizations, and our limited, direct-sale program for 4-H Shooting Sports and the Boy Scouts of America will be prohibited,” he said. “We will also be prevented from shipping product directly to consumers, such as replacement ammo for customer complaints.”

Additional restrictions loom on the horizon. In 2019, vendors will need to keep records of every ammo sale, creating more costly burdens. And in July of that year, it becomes illegal to use lead ammunition for taking any species of wildlife, anywhere in the state.

“The non-lead regulation will be particularly hard on hunters who have rifles in less-popular calibers,” said Bronson. “Retailers will have a tough time stocking these harder-to-find products, and online shopping from out-of-state vendors isn’t a viable option.”

Jake McGuigan, senior director of state affairs for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, predicts California’s new ammo laws will have a variety of effects.

“The regs will be a major inconvenience for law-abiding gun owners, while doing nothing to decrease crime or increase public safety,” he said. “The laws will also have a dramatic impact on state revenues due to a decrease in ammunition sales. When similar restrictions have been enacted in other states and municipalities, everybody ended up going elsewhere to buy ammunition.”

While McGuigan concurs with Bronson about the impact on online and mail-order shopping, he notes that some retailers have historically helped customers work through such rules to obtain their ammunition of choice.

“In Connecticut, which has similar regulations, Cabela’s ships ammunition ordered online to one of their stores for on-site pickup,” he said. “You still have to go to the store, but you can order ammo not available locally.”

Even some of those charged with enforcing the new laws have expressed concerns about the impact California’s new laws will have on gun owners.

David Bess, chief of enforcement at the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, recently told the Sacramento Bee: “There are some definite things . . . that concern me — the difficulty that it’s going to create for legitimate sportsmen and sportswomen . . . completely legal people trying to buy ammo to try to do a legal thing.”

Bess is particularly worried that hunters and other citizens in outlying areas will have trouble finding ammunition when small retailers decide the higher costs of complying with the new rules aren’t worth the effort.

All of which helps explain why California’s ammunition sales are reportedly brisk, as state residents prepare for the new regulations to effect. Even Bess is stocking up. “I was just over at a place the other day . . . with my boys,” he told the newspaper. “I saw some [ammunition I needed], and I said, ‘Hey, grab as much of that stuff as they’ll allow us to buy.’”

Make no mistake — these new regulations will affect California hunters and shooters in a major way. In particular, it would be smart to consider the hassle-factor involved in buying ammo come January 2018 and beyond. Now is the time to check your ammo stock and place a call to Cabela’s or go online to stock up on your favorite cartridges.

Attention California Sportsmen: Right now through Cabela’s you can get free shipping on ammo orders of $99 or more; click here for details.

This article was produced in cooperation with Cabela’s.

[Read More]

Support for stricter gun control legislation increases after Las Vegas shooting

Support for stricter gun control legislation increases after Las Vegas shooting

Support for stricter gun control legislation increases after Las Vegas shooting
© Getty Images

Support for stricter gun control measures has increased after a gunman killed 58 people and injured hundreds more in Las Vegas, according to a new survey.

Sixty-four percent of voters polled by Politico and Morning Consult said they now support stricter gun regulations, while 29 percent of voters polled said they opposed tougher legislation.

The latest Politico/Morning Consult poll shows an increase of 3 percentage points in recent months for support of more stringent regulations on guns.

Sixty-one percent of voters polled last June said they were in favor of tougher regulations on guns, while 33 percent said they were against them.The survey comes weeks after suspected gunman Stephen Paddock opened fire on a country music festival from his hotel room window in Las Vegas.

The event has reignited the debate over gun control policies on Capitol Hill, with a focus on bump stocks, which are devices that can be used to simulate automatic gunfire with a semi-automatic weapon.

The new poll showed, however, that only 26 percent of voters said they believed there was an “excellent or good chance” of Congress passing stricter gun control measures within the next year.

The poll was conducted Oct. 5 – 9, 2017, and uses data from 1,996 registered voters. Its margin of error is 2 percentage points.

[Read More]