Sunday, April 12, 2015

SSI Exclusive: Negotiating Rights Away. Cynical Secret "Deal With The Devil" Confirmed. NRA, ATF& bi-partisan group of politicians agree to save ATF from itself and widen the definition of "sporting purposes." "A hole big enough to drive Diane Feinstein's limousine through."

From the press room of the NRA National Meeting, Nashville, TN: Sipsey Street Irregulars can now confirm the broad outlines of a story first disclosed two days ago by National Gun Rights Examiner columnist David Codrea. Last week, a secret deal involving the National Rifle Association lobbying arm and brokered by politicians of both national political parties was struck in Washington DC that would save the ATF from the political and legal consequences of its own regulatory errors. In the process, this deal would broaden the language of the 1968 Gun Control Act regarding "sporting purposes" and allow ATF to extract itself from the potentially catastrophic political damage of enforcing its arbitrary ruling that makes every owner of a pistol grip 12 Gauge shotgun like the Mossberg Cruiser a felon in possession of a "destructive device" subject to the penalties of the National Firearms Act of 1934 -- currently up to 10 years in federal prison and a quarter million dollar fine.
According to sources well-familiar with the legislative rationale and ever-changing and even contradictory regulatory history of the ATF, this crisis for the agency was self-inflicted and precipitated by two legal cases wending their way through the federal courts in Texas and Pennsylvania. Said one, "The ATF doesn't dare reverse itself unilaterally once again on what does and does not constitute a shotgun 'destructive device.' They are frightened to death that either case may go to discovery and reveal their whole sorry rule-making mess." Said another, "There are people currently rotting in federal prison on NFA violations and others walking around scot-free. At some point, unless the Congress gives them the cover by changing the law, they are going to have to explain that in open court."
As explained by sources here and in the nation's capitol, the outlines of what one called "this cynical deal with the Devil" are as follows:
1. The ATF will be let off the hook by broadening the "sporting purposes" language and legislatively negating their own determination that millions of heretofore legal pistol-grip shotguns produced over the past decades by companies like Mossberg are "destructive devices."
2. The NRA will get to claim credit for, as one source said, "riding in out of the storm on a white horse and claiming to have saved millions of firearm owners from federal prison, even though," he added, "everybody in the room with an IQ above room temperature understands that politically and legally there is no (expletive deleted) way that ATF can enforce this ruling on anybody. They can't and they won't . . so" he concluded, "the NRA will claim to have saved their members from a boogeyman that never really existed."
3. In return for allowing NRA to claim the credit, the Democrats demanded another ammunition import ban on "specialty ammunition," to include tracers. Some sources agreed that this last "gimme" was a "throwaway," in the words of one. "Look, their M.O. is to always demand more than they know they can get in to get the thing they really value. They'd like to get it but what they really covet is knocking a bigger hole in the Constitution by (widening the 'sporting purposes' language) . . . this deal will give them one big enough to drive Diane Feinstein's limousine through."
This reporter could get no one from NRA national leadership to go on or off the record to confirm this deal, but other sources familiar with the internal fallout of these revelations say that David Codrea's original story was "spot on," adding "they can't believe they were found out." Other sources in the nation's capitol indicate that the deal was intended to be kept secret until it could be attached as a innocuous rider at the last moment to a "must-pass" appropriations bill. Said one: "The plan was to pass it, claim victory on all sides, and pray that no one noticed the 'sporting purposes tweak.'"
He added: "What they're really frightened about is how you guys found out about this so soon. That's got them rattled." Added another, "they're looking for your sources and looking at each other and wondering who the snitch is." There is much behind-the-scenes speculation here as to how members of the NRA will react, what answers they will demand, and how these revelations will play into the Wayne LaPierre-Chris Cox rivalry for power. It is no secret to the insiders I talked to that there is little love lost between the two and much mutual suspicion of motives. Said one: "The key thing is, was this Cox's baby alone or did he get Wayne's signoff?" And, he added, "who's going to be manuevered into taking the blame for it?" Other sources tell this reporter that some very hard questions are going to be asked of Cox and LaPierre by board members in the coming days.
If so, that will be more reaction than that shown by the so-called "mainstream gun rights press" in evidence in the NRA pressroom. Since David Codrea's story broke two days ago, they have been, as near as this reporter could tell, studiously, deliberately incurious about the implications of these revelations. Copies of David's story have been distributed to them since it broke and most seem to have ignored it and few asked me any questions about it.
What reaction NRA leadership had to Codrea's original story could only be gleaned by second-hand sources, but one said that "what they're telling anybody who asks is that you're both crazy sonsabitches who are making this up. . . You two are not their favorite people right now." I asked another source, "Are they mad because the story is right, or mad because it's wrong." "They're mad," he said with a grin, "because it's right."
So, in the midst of non-denial denials and ad hominem attacks, we will continue to try to drill down to the truth as we can, this last day of the NRA national meeting of 2015.

36 comments:

Anonymous said...

The National Rino Association strikes again

Anonymous said...

Time for another song?

The "NRA (Not so secretly) Signin' Your Rights Away" Blues

or "Bastards a Compromisin' Blues"

III

Anonymous said...

"....brokered by politicians of both national political parties...."

Names please!

I will be writing tomorrow via registered mail restricted delivery to Boehner, McConnell, Reid, and Pelosi, that I will never again in my lifetime vote for or contribute to any one of their spineless domestic enemies of The Constitution that so much as comes anywhere near voting for this legislative piece of filth.

If the ATF screwed the pooch and tied themselves into a regulatory box then they made their bed and can jolly well sleep in it.

That the NRA would even consider helping ATF fix their self generated mess would be beyond belief if it wasn't coming from people with the record for digging this stuff out that David and Mike have demonstrated.

“In that case,” said Napoleon, “let us wait twenty minutes; when the enemy is making a false movement we must take good care not to interrupt him.” -- Napoleon Bonaparte 1805

The ATF has been apparently caught, once again, making just such a false movement.

Two questions need answers.

1. Why in the world would Wayne LaPierre or Chris Cox even consider helping BATFE extricate itself from its own foolishness?

2. Why would NRA, who claim to be "the foremost guardian of the traditional American right to "keep and bear arms" even consider giving any political cover to any politician who would be a party to such a "Charlie Foxtrot"?

NAMES.... WE NEED THE FREAKIN' NAMES!

Robert Fowler said...

With your permission, I'll be sharing this.

Anonymous said...

Danse macabre. I can hear the 12 bells clanging away.

Anonymous said...

Someone needs to ask the NRA what "shall not be infringed" means?

Anonymous said...

Anyone believing the NRA is the friend of gun owners is an idiot.
I dropped my membership during the Clinton yrs. when they gave him an A+ rating. Called and argued with some numb-nuts NRA moron to 'watch what he does, not what he says.'
"Well, Clinton says he supports the 2nd amendment."
Yeah.
Right.

Anonymous said...

That's OK. We'll just add them to "the list".

Allen said...

sounds like the fudds and zumbos are throwing the rest of us to the wolves again.

not that this is a new thing...

Anonymous said...

It's just as I have been saying for years and years. The NRA is a gun CONTROL organization used by politicians to gain cover for their chicanery. Fool the FUDDS! Con people into thinking the NRA saved the day by making "the best deal we could get" when what REALLY happens is judicial remedy is made HARDER because the NRA schools gubmint on just how to thwart cases already coming down the pike - lawsuits in Chicago and DC are good examples. State level like Illinois carry ban is another. In that example, the NRA literally PARTNERED in legislation that put DECIDEDLY unconstitutional language right back into code -same exact code that was struck down- all to create a permission slip that requires "training" that it just "happens" to provide....when all it had to do was run out the clock and we'd have had constitutional carry!!!!

No self respecting rights activist or gun rights advocate would be a member of the NRA much less give it a dime. It really IS a tool of GUN CONTROL!

People all across this country MUST destroy their membership cards and do so for others to see - explaining openly why! The game is over. The NRA is exposed as double trouble - it takes donations on fraudulent terms and then acts AGAINST our RIGHTS! Stop FUNDING a group that's offending and helping gubmint destroy the one right that protects all the others!!!!
I say again - take that money and buy guns ammo and furniture YOURSELF! That's the best way to defend your right anyway - exercise it!

Mike in Illinois
III
(Almost always anonymous poster)

Anonymous said...

Just one comment, How is the NRA "speaks" Or can negotiate for me?? I do not accept them as my representative. I do not support those clowns, why should they speak for all firearms owners?

From this date forward, I'm not responsible for anyone's negotiations with the enemy but my own. Molon Labe

DixieDennis

Anonymous said...

"...SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!" End of discussion!

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately for the NRA, the newtown debate increased the power of the GOA by several magnitudes and woke a lot of well intentioned gun owners up. GOA now has over 900k likes on Facebook, and I doubt they even had 100k before newtown. They will help spread the word that Codrea and Mike have once again broken. Lets all share this and Codrea's post all over social media and alert the GOA.

We can actually defeat this if enough people find out about it, just like when we all stopped the NRA intended sell-out on BG checks after newtown. Codrea and Mike have once again done God's work, now it is up to us to spread the word.

Jimmy the Saint said...

@Anonymous: "Why in the world would Wayne LaPierre or Chris Cox even consider helping BATFE extricate itself from its own foolishness?"

Well, the the NRA has nothing to fight against, people will have no reason to send it money, so.....

Anonymous said...

Dixie - I attended a "public hearing" along with many others in the heat of the moment -crunch time- regarding Illinois dealing with its carry ban being struck down. Had to show ID to get and had the whole "security" treatment. I signed up to speak - along with others- but the NRA lobbyist had already ensured that the NRA and its underling self appointed "leaders" we're the ONLY ONES who got to speak.
The NRA OPENLY argued AGAINST constitutional carry!!! And it did so to implement the "strictest shall issue legislation in the country". They literally partnered with democrats and after proclaiming that they would NOT throw open carriers under the bus they did exactly that.

Their open partnership ushered through legislation that BANS the carrying of RIFLES! And that's not even mentioning the backing that the NRA lobbyist gave mark Kirk - mr assault weapon ban himself.

But I'm the troublemaker because I called em on it. On. All. Of. It. Uh huh right.

The NRA is corrupt. It is a gun CONTROL organization. And it's time people face it.

HappyClinger said...

So I guess this also means the NRA won't be digging too deep into board member Grover Norquist's Muslim-pushing activities. How many ways can we spell "traitor?"

Steady Steve said...

I quit contributing to these"cheese eating surrender monkeys" many years ago. At some point the NRA went RINO at the leadership level. It's sad to see an organization that has so much potential piss it away. The best thing that can happen is for the grassroots membership quit and organize their own state and local level "we will not comply" movements. I believe we would be best served by taking our message to the politicians on a local and very personal level.

Anonymous said...


Naaaaa...We can whop them without tracers...

Backwoods Engineer said...

I want:
1) "Sporting purpose" language removed from ALL federal laws, especially in Section 922;
2) Immediate release of ALL federal prisoners who were convicted under "sporting purpose" language of the Gun Control Act of 1968, as amended; and
3) the resignations of any and all NRA board members who supported a deal to ban tracers, or anything else.

Anonymous said...

This sounds suspiciously like an arcane activity I have heard of being practiced in Washington DC- "politics" is the technical term.

So you were expecting the NRA and various lobbyists, DemPublican politicians and NGO types who engage in that activity to change the whole playing field by essentially mortally wounding or otherwise neutering/destroying BATFE?

Why do you continuously allow your expectations of these people to include activities that meet your personal taste and version of reality, but would cause them to have to work hard (and think) harder.

Please see Sinclair Lewis...

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it".

Work the reality. Not the dream. Sorry, the difference between bad and worse is infinitely more noticeable than the difference between good and better...

Oregon Hobo said...

Mr. Vanderboegh,

Thank you for all you do. It is to my shame that a long and continuing series of mishaps have disabled me from offering financial support to your efforts.

I shudder to think of how things might have gone had we not had you and Mr. Codrea blowing up the Gunwalker story and now this. Without even touching on the impact of your ideological leadership and your practical-minded demonstrations that defiance without instant martyrdom truly is possible, you are quite literally indispensable to this nation and its uncertain future.

While we have other talented writers and orators, we have no one else with your connections and demonstrated muckraking prowess, or at least none that has made himself known. ...and I suspect that the weight of your infamy has been a key factor in drawing these leakers and informants to your ear.

This next part is difficult even to think let alone write, and I hope you do not take offense, but we must be realists. While I wish for you to be alive and in this fight for a long time yet, I fear that it may be otherwise. Even if our enemies are too timid to rush the process (though their shriveled hearts surely ache to make it so), it sounds like time is not on our side.

Have you given thought to grooming an heir, so to speak?

While I have no objection to you publishing this comment if you see fit, it is meant primarily for your own consideration. Again, thank you.

Take care,

#OREGON HOBO#

Anonymous said...

So why is broadening the language of the 1968 Gun Control Act regarding "sporting purposes" a bad thing? Maybe I don't follow because the post lacks details, like what's meant by broaden the language of the 1968 Gun Control Act regarding "sporting purposes". Seriously, the thing that everyone's so upset about is also the most vague piece of the story. Does it mean that they're planning to make MORE guns pass the sporting purposes test, or LESS guns pass the sporting purposes test? There is literally no way to tell from reading this post. The comments seem to be filled with plenty of rabid derp, but it doesn't take a lot to stir up the derp in gun owners.

So what gives - what does broadening the language of the 1968 Gun Control Act regarding "sporting purposes" mean?

Anonymous said...

If my memory is correct the present leadership made issue of working with Gov when Harlan Carter's leadership did the same thing to make a long story short LaPierre and Cox came out on top with the NO COMPROMISE STAND.Has history turned the tables of the leadership in NRA

PO'd American said...

Anonymous said...
So why is broadening the language of the 1968 Gun Control Act regarding "sporting purposes" a bad thing? Maybe I don't follow because the post lacks details, like what's meant by broaden the language of the 1968 Gun Control Act regarding "sporting purposes". Seriously, the thing that everyone's so upset about is also the most vague piece of the story. Does it mean that they're planning to make MORE guns pass the sporting purposes test, or LESS guns pass the sporting purposes test? There is literally no way to tell from reading this post. The comments seem to be filled with plenty of rabid derp, but it doesn't take a lot to stir up the derp in gun owners.

So what gives - what does broadening the language of the 1968 Gun Control Act regarding "sporting purposes" mean?

April 12, 2015 at 11:19 PM


Just where in your copy of the 2nd Amendment do you see any such terminology referring to "Sporting Purposes?" No laws or regulations currently on the books are valid. No laws or regulations being propose will ever be valid. You seem to have the same understanding that most "uninformed" citizens, politician, judges have...the wrong one!

Anonymous said...

My question is: Why would you believe MV over The NRA? I don't.
I'm totally fed up with Mike's bullshit! Hey Mike, you're now more into blowing your own horn than helping our Second Amendment rights.
If The NRA cooperated with ATF in any way, then it had to be a strategy to help our rights more down the road. The operative word there is "strategy", which may involve more than just squawking and bitching.
- Old Greybeard

B Realio said...

NRA looks more and more like a fudd organization. You know the kind that think the only firearms one needs is a bolt-action rifle and a shotgun. If what is being reported here comes to fruition... the NRA will never see a dime again from me.

Gods Modern Day Martyr said...

Seems facebook NRA is calling this nonsense. Many more are demanding answers!

Anonymous said...

So PO'd American, do you know whether the proposed changes to the "sporting purposes" test would have expanded gun availability, or reduced it?

Nobody - not the author, commenters, nobody - seems be able to say either way. That would be a handy bit of information to have before I can get upset about something.

As to the "no compromise shall not be infringed 'merica" stuff, that's great but in the real world it's not helpful to actually accomplishing what I assume are our common goals of expanding and restoring gun rights. It's the same line of thinking that the Chipotle open carry ninjas use to turn fence sitters into anti-gunners. If your strategy is to take your ball and go home if you don't get 110% of your way every time, then I'm hopeful that you're not in a position to actually influence legislative change in any way.

Anonymous said...

Old Greybeard....

Time to pack your shit and GTFO like you said you would before, you lying sack of shit.

Nick said...

The NRA knows very well that the way to win this battle is to return to the People their authority to "execute the Laws of the Union" as "The Militia of the Several States".
If you want to know the facts, the truth, and the law it is available. It's not hidden in a bunker somewhere that you don't have access to.
First, with the help of the NRA, the social engineers started a program to disarm the populace and taking away the only lawful authority to "execute the Laws of the Union" from the People. A complete an utter violation of law.
Second, the People were convinced that the state can amend the Constitution without the proper procedures as noted in Article 5.
Third, the court became complicit in validating unlawful acts of the legislature in order to consolidate power. It claimed the authority to grant immunity, and interpret the law, but constitutional scholars have noted that the document delegates no such powers, and in fact the Founders discussed the dangers of an imperial judiciary that might act to dismantle the rule of law.
Fourth, the populace became convinced that this was a democracy with no evidence in law to support that nonsense. In fact the Founders wrote extensively against the dangers of democracy.
Fifth, the U.S. Constitution and state constitutions recognized specific control of weapons based on 150 years of history and statutes. Only the People could regulate the ownership of firearms, with inspections conducted by the county Lieutenant of the Militia. And every able-bodied man was required to "keep in good order", "every terrible implement of the soldier".
Sixth, the People became convinced that the national guard is Militia, and that we are the unorganized militia. That is a constitutional impossibility since Militia is stated as the power to "execute the Laws of the Union", and it is in addition an unalienable right. Only ignorance, corruption, and tyranny could dismantle this authority. But further to that, the congress has only the delegated power to "organize Militia" so that prevents them from dismantling it, changing it, or un-organizing it. To add to the point, national guard are actually "Troops" that the states may "keep" by the "Consent of Congress" under Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3.
But those facts of law will never convince those who care not to learn the truth, or from a history that tells us that governments around the world exterminated over 250 Million people in the last century, not counting those who were killed in war.
What we do know is that there is a large segment of the population that will always vote for tyranny, and are more than comfortable selling their neighbor out for ideals that have never proven to benefit anyone other than tyrants, and thugs.

Anonymous said...

#OREGON HOBO# @11:10
I concur with your statements, well said, and ask same question myself

PO'd American said...

Anonymous said...

So PO'd American, do you know whether the proposed changes to the "sporting purposes" test would have expanded gun availability, or reduced it?

Nobody - not the author, commenters, nobody - seems be able to say either way. That would be a handy bit of information to have before I can get upset about something.

Go away troll. You add nothing to this conversation by making statements such as "does sporting purposes expand gun availability or reduce it." I can read the 2nd amendment to you, but I can't comprehend it for you.

Anonymous said...

The NRA just lost my trust. I'm sharing this with everyone. What a shame. Everyone seems to have forgotten how to be a loyal patriot to our cause. It's all politics, smoke and mirrors now. NRA=No Real Allegiance.

Stephen Armstrong said...

I for one want a response from the NRA before I simply jump into the shit.

John Kummer said...

This is interesting in that it marks a shift in policy. As a proponent of the Second Amendment as written, I believe that two other organizations support our freedoms in that area more aggressively; 1. National Association of Gun Rights, and 2. Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (Assoc. Friends of Oath Keepers).

Anonymous said...

I will try this again, apparently my comment was lost in cyberspace last night.
This session, in Idaho, the NRA was complicit in killing a bill for constitutional carry. Their lobbyist, Dakota Moore denies that they killed it, but they would not work for it and brought forth their own bs bill that tried to remove constitutional carry for the legislators. That was the straw that broke this camel's back. Remember, they supported Harry Reid.