Gun Owners of America“What is wrong with the people here in this country?” asked anti-gun Senator Barbara Boxer on the floor of the Senate Monday.
Boxer was questioning why even the anti-gun Senate had not heeded her call for more gun bans, and concluded that something was wrong with America.
Well, here’s an idea, Senator Boxer: Nothing’s wrong with America. But something is wrong with you.
And, in particular, something’s wrong with your state of California, which registers guns, bans many semi-automatics, has a $24 million gun confiscation program to send SWAT teams to people’s homes, and is rated by the anti-gun Brady Campaign as having the strictest gun control laws in the nation — and yet was unable to prevent another massacre of school kids on May 23.
It probably won’t surprise you that Sen. Boxer doesn’t blame this massacre on the fact that California left all of the victims as unarmed “sitting ducks.”
Or that even the New York Times now realizes that its sensationalist coverage has created these copycat killings.
Or that it’s the CRIMINAL who is actually at fault!
No. Boxer instead concluded that this was another opportunity for her to exploit a tragedy for political gain. And that’s exactly what she has done.
The text of Boxer’s hilariously-named “Pause for Safety Act” was not available at press time. But, by her own definition, it would allow a universe of people which could include virtually anyone (for instance, “co-workers,” according to Boxer) to sue to take your guns away.
After the lawsuit is commenced, you would have to take thousands of dollars (which, presumably, you have lying around the house) and hire a lawyer to resist that petition. Of course, if you didn’t have the money to hire a lawyer, your constitutional rights vanish in thin air.
Gun Owners of America has had lots of experience with the far-less-expansive restraining order gun ban added to the “prohibited persons list” in 18 U.S.C. 922(d) and (g).
Constantly — and we mean constantly — we receive e-mails from innocent law-abiding members who cannot afford the cost of resisting a petition to take their guns away. Constantly, we see the impact of “he-said she-said” reciprocal gun-ban petitions which are the inevitable outcome of failed relationships which are increasingly common in America.
So, yes, Senator Boxer: We understand what you’re up to. If the Boxer bill were to become law, virtually anyone could lose their guns at any time because someone with “deep pockets” didn’t like them.
But the good news is that Boxer’s proposal is so transparently anti-gun and so odious that we can nip it in the bud if we act now.
No BABARA BA BA BA BOXER! There is something seriously wrong with you between your ears.
Please tell Ms Boxer that if she harbors such negative feelings about the Constitution and We the People, We the People would be more than happy to provide her with a one-way ticket to a gun-free nation of her choice. I am sure she can find some country where the citizens are disarmed but that the tyrants are allowed to have armed body guards.
After all, the only reason to disarm citizens is to guarantee that the existing power structure keeps its power, unchallenged. If she were truly concerned about people dying, she would be investigating doctors and big pharma or perhaps even drivers of automobiles, both of whom have better records for killing people.
Someone ought to give this Boxer a TKO and be done with her.