Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Chris Cox NRA “Follow the Money”

Chris Cox NRA “Follow the Money”

Ratings: (0)|Views: 11 |Likes:
Published by AxXiom

More info:

Published by: AxXiom on Nov 27, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Chris Cox NRA ³Follow the Money´
I¶m going to describe a group that recently demanded enactment of a sweeping federal gun control agenda.Let¶s see if you can guess who it is.The group has 22,000 members in more than 100 countries. Membership categories include ³city managers,highway safety specialists, psychologists, attorneys, coroners and management analysts,´ among others. Thegroup has offices in Europe and the Caribbean, and the group¶s website describes its governing board in your choice of English, Spanish, Portuguese and French.
hy does a new report from the International Association of Chiefs of Police read like every gun-ban strategy we¶ve heard forthe last 10 years? To find out, all one has to do is follow themoney.
 Is it a new United Nations disarmament agency? No, the group is the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), headquartered in the nation¶s capital. And the story behind the report is a shadowy web of hugedonations, made by an activist foundation in the Midwest, leading straight to puppet strings that control theagenda of gun ban groups, the IACP and even New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg.The IACP report, called ³Taking a Stand: Reducing Gun Violence in Our Communities,´ is nothing more than arubber stamp, bought and paid for, of the pre-existing agenda for gun ban groups. It is a blueprint the enemiesof freedom plan to pursue after the 2008 elections--if they win total control of the White House and Congress.What compelled the IACP to issue this sweeping report? Follow the money. A note on the cover proudlydeclares that the report was issued ³with support from the Joyce Foundation.´That¶s a familiar name to longtime readers. The Joyce Foundation has pumped tens of millions of dollars intothe coffers of gun ban groups over the years. The Violence Policy Center (VPC), an unashamed promoter of atotal ban on handguns, collected more than $1 million of Joyce money just in 2005 and 2006. In 2000, the JoyceFoundation paid a VPC advisor and former Handgun Control, Inc. board member to edit a ³Second AmendmentSymposium´ issue of the Chicago-Kent Law Review. That slim volume contains nearly half the anti-individualrights articles ever published on the Second Amendment.The IACP newsletter proudly notes that the Joyce Foundation has ³made more than $30 million in grants togroups seeking public health solutions that offer the promise of reducing gun deaths and injuries in America.´This year, the Joyce Foundation invested heavily in IACP. They paid IACP over $500,000 to host ³The GreatLakes States Summit on Gun Violence,´ and then to issue the report from the conference. That comes out tonearly $11,000 per page, but the Joyce Foundation got what it paid for--no surprise given the report¶s thank youto Joyce Foundation Communications Director Mary O¶Connell for ³her editing, writing and consistent work to produce this report.´Of course, she had a lot of help. The list of ³Report Contributors´ includes Kristen Rand and Tom Diaz of theVPC, as well as David Mitchell, a former staff member of Handgun Control, Inc. The list of ³Summit Advisors´is even more swollen with luminaries of the gun ban faction, including the heads of three anti-gun groups thatoperate at the state and local level--all of which also receive direct funding from Joyce.
The list also includes Fred Grebauer, who happens to be the top gun control advisor to none other than NewYork City Mayor Mike Bloomberg. Joyce has been generous with Bloomberg as well, paying out $175,000 tothe ³Mayor¶s Fund to Advance New York City,´ a contribution intended to help ³organize a coalition of mayorsfrom around the country to promote national, state and local policies, litigation and law enforcement strategiesaimed at reducing the flow of illegal guns into cities.´ So now we know who¶s paying the tab for Bloomberg¶sobsessive gun control campaign as well. Now that we¶ve identified the Joyce Foundation as the wizard behind the curtain, what¶s at the end of its yellow brick road? Most of the report¶s recommendations are old, tired and shopworn. There¶s the standard rhetoricurging Congress to ³enact an effective ban on military-style assault weapons.´ There¶s a call for banning ³.50caliber sniper rifles,´ and a demand to ban ³armor-piercing´ ammunition. The report suggests that Congressshould regulate gun shows out of existence, and--of course--there¶s a tip of the hat to Bloomberg¶s obsessions,in the recommendation to repeal the privacy protections of the Tiahrt Amendment. Nothing new, there.But the report goes much further, and reveals some of the more bizarre long-term goals of the Joyce anti-gunaxis. One section contains suggestions to ³Reduce the availability and lethality of firearms to criminals.´ Arethey suggesting that guns should be less lethal when used against criminals? No. Poor grammar aside, they areactually suggesting that Congress should ³enact legislation to allow federal health and safety oversight of thefirearms industry.´ We know where that will lead; the Joyce-funded VPC has long advocated federal ³healthand safety´ regulation that includes ³pre-market approval power´ over ³firearm products that might pose athreat to public safety,´ and total bans on guns that ³present an unreasonable risk of injury and death.´ In VPC¶sworld, that means handguns--for starters.If any gun manufacturers or stores managed to survive the onslaught of such ³safety´ regulations, the reportwants to subject them to a whole new layer of bureaucracy and red tape by demanding that ³state and/or localgovernments should license all gun dealers.´ Countless local governments have long abused zoning ordinancesto shut down gun shops in places where they don¶t want them, but under this proposal, discrimination againstgun retailers would be a simple and routine matter of just denying a license.IACP didn¶t forget the customer, either. The report wants states to limit handgun purchases to guarantee that³certain precautions, including the notification of state and local law enforcement agencies, are in place.´ Notification of what? That someone is legally buying a handgun? Stop the presses!And the report wants law enforcement to get to know your firearms as well, demanding that ³state and localgovernments should mandate that a ballistic fingerprint is recorded for every gun sold.´ Of course, ³ballisticfingerprint´ is just a high-tech term for gun registration. But this recommendation goes well beyond even thegun ban groups, who have limited their demands for ballistic registration to apply only to new handguns. Iwonder what IACP plans to do with a couple-million envelopes full of spent lead shot from all the 12-gaugeshotguns sold every year. Are you starting to get the feeling that the authors of the report wouldn¶t know a 12-gauge shotgun if they found one in a labeled box? The report only notes that this mandate ³could enhance public safety and curtail gun violence.´ We have to wonder if IACP bigwigs envy their overseas colleagues whohave no obstacles like the Second Amendment in their way.The most chilling recommendation is positively Orwellian, calling for ³law enforcement agencies and their  partners to develop and implement education campaigns targeted at gun owners.´ What do they plan to³educate´ us about? They cite bogus research that, they say, has ³demonstrated that gun owners aredisproportionately at risk for gun injuries and gun suicide´ and ³effectively disputes the argument that gunownership deters crime.´
So the goal is to convince us to dispose of our firearms, which explains why another report recommendationcalls for the implementation of ³gun surrender programs.´ Once the guns have been surrendered, the reportdemands that ³law enforcement agencies should mandate destruction of all firearms that come into their  possession.´ This suggestion sounds like it came from a U.N. disarmament agency after all.There¶s more, but you get the idea. Don¶t be personally offended, though, at the group¶s attitude. After all, theydon¶t trust rank-and-file law enforcement with firearms, either. The IACP fought against the Law EnforcementOfficers Safety Act, legislation to authorize law enforcement officers to carry firearms outside of their  jurisdiction. Congress passed the bill anyway, giving the group what they said was ³a lot of heartburn.´That was then, and this is now. There¶s a load of heartburn for gun owners in the IACP report, and the anti-gunaxis is already planning to move forward. No matter how many times we close our eyes and click our shoestogether, the new offensive from the Joyce Foundation and its puppet groups is not going away. As gun owners,we must be vigilant--and prepare for a long, tough election year to prevent these groups¶ political allies fromgaining power in Washington.That axis--in addition to creating a new call for confiscatory bans on a wide range of individually owned, now-legal firearms--also demands mandatory gun destruction on a massive scale.But don¶t take my word for it. Believe what they say.It¶s all spelled out in a new gun control manifesto called Taking A Stand. This Joyce-funded IACP report waslargely written by the likes of Tom Diaz and Kristen Rand of the Violence Policy Center (VPC) and DavidMitchell, the newly appointed head of the Department of Safety and Homeland Security in my own state of Delaware. As NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox points out in his in-depth special report, Mitchell¶sgun-ban credentials include a stint as a major player ³for law enforcement´ at the Brady Campaign.Among the IACP/VPC/Brady Campaign/Joyce Foundation recommendations is this anti-gun, anti-freedomdirective:³Law enforcement agencies should mandate destruction of all firearms that come into their possession once anylaw enforcement use for them is completed.³Law enforcement is in the unique position of acquiring tens of thousands of firearms a year either throughconfiscation, recovery or surrender. These weapons should be destroyed « .´Recovered? That clearly includes stolen guns. They want to destroy my property simply because it was stolenfrom me?But seizure and confiscation of guns from individual citizens would also be covered by the IACP¶s sectionmaking improper storage of firearms in the home a serious crime.Key among their ³recommendations´ is this: ³State, local and tribal governments should mandate safe storageof guns, provide voluntary off-site storage facilities and prosecute those who fail to comply with safe storagelaws.´You can presume--no, you can bet on it--that prosecution under the IACP/Joyce Foundation vision of ³safestorage´ would include individuals having their firearms forfeited. And of course, once in the custody of police,those guns would fall under IACP¶s rule to ³mandate destruction of all firearms that come into their (police)

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->