NRA leaders press importance of voting to prevent Clinton election

NRAs Wayne LaPierre is warning members and all gun owners about the importance of the Nov. 8 presidential and congressional elections. He is joined by NRA chief lobbyist Chris Cox. [Dave Workman]
The top officers of the National Rifle Association have sent an open letter to NRA members declaring that “the stakes in this year’s presidential election could not be higher.”

Unlike previous anti-gun presidential nominees, who often tried to hide their support for gun control, Hillary Clinton has made the dismantling of our Second Amendment-protected rights a centerpiece of her campaign,” wrote NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox, executive director of NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action.

The letter appears in the November issue of America’s First Freedom, an NRA magazine.

Earlier this year, NRA endorsed GOP nominee Donald Trump, and various polls have him either trailing Clinton, or running in a virtual dead heat.

Will this presidential election be the most important in American history?

Earlier this week, Clinton was endorsed by a coalition of 17 different gun prohibition lobbying groups.

According to LaPierre and Cox, “Donald Trump and Mike Pence strongly support our Right to Keep and Bear Arms. They will protect our firearm freedoms. Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine, on the other hand, will stop at nothing to eliminate our rights.”

The NRA isn’t the only important voice warning people about the gun control agenda. In an Op-Ed appearing in the Deseret News, Nevada Lt. Gov. Mark Hutchison has ripped Question 1 on the Silver State ballot. That’s the public initiative ostensibly pushing a so-called “universal background check” requirement, an idea that is also on the Maine ballot Nov. 8.

Hutchison has done his homework, noting, “Question 1’s advocates present it as an innocent measure meant to close a “loophole.” Nothing could be further from the truth — this is unnecessary gun control that will cost Nevadans time, money and freedom.

“Like most of us,” he continues, “I agree there should be background checks when an individual acquires a weapon from a gun dealer. This measure goes so much further because it requires a background check nearly any time a gun leaves the physical possession of its current possessor. For instance, Nevadans who want to loan their gun to a cousin or trusted, lifelong friend would be required to perform a background check on the cousin or friend before they could lend the gun, even if only for a few hours.”

And here’s the capper: “The law is so poorly written that when the gun is being returned to its legal owner, the person who borrowed it must run a second, subsequent background check to legally return that gun. That doesn’t make very much sense.

If that sounds familiar to Washington State gun owners, it’s the same requirement included in Initiative 594, the gun control/registration measure passed by voters two years ago. That law was pushed on the grounds that it would help prevent “gun violence.” So far, there is no evidence that it has prevented a single crime, or kept guns out of the wrong hands. The suspect in this past summer’s triple homicide in Mukilteo legally purchased the firearm he allegedly used, and passed a background check to do it.

This year’s elections, from the White House on down through Congress, state legislatures and state ballot issues, are literally for all the marbles, according to Second Amendment advocates.


If you haven’t checked out and liked our Facebook page, please go here and do so.

And if you’re as concerned about Facebook censorship as we are, go here and order this new book:

Banned: How Facebook enables militant Islamic jihad
Banned: How Facebook enables militant Islamic jihad – Source: Author (used with permission)

Related Articles

Our Privacy Policy has been updated to support the latest regulations.Click to learn more.×