The perky one just can’t catch a break. The Daily Caller is reporting that EPIX has pulled her propaganda piece from their online offerings.
The San Fernando Valley NRA Members' Council Posts
There’s even a hashtag for it: #GunGate.
Katie Couric was caught lying about gun rights advocates in her EPIX “documentary” Under The Gun. Through a bit of creative editing (Which is fine for movie making, but not for something that’s allegedly journalism.) Couric and her minions made it look as though the gun totin’ Virginia hicks were dumbfounded by her question about background checks. In fact, the editors spliced in a nine seconds of “B-roll” footage from before the interview started. What she didn’t realize is that the members of the Virginia Citizens Defense League had made their own audio recording of the interview…
So no, Under The Gun isn’t journalism. But in Ms. Couric’s defense, it wasn’t supposed to be. She was getting paid to deliver a product to her clients; not to do real journalism. And per the film’s site, these clients include:
These are groups that paid good money for a “documentary” and they expect results. The last thing they want is an even handed work of actual journalism. They wanted something that says what they want to hear. They wanted an infomercial; not a documentary. Do you think that Couric would ever have lunch in this town again if she delivered the latter? Of course not!
So in her defense, she was simply giving the customers what they asked for. Don’t you wish that all of your vendors were as compliant as Katie Couric?
FRIDAY, MAY 27, 2016
Google-search “Katie Couric, gun control, edited” and you’ll see what we’re talking about. Actually, you’ll see what most news organizations are talking about.
Washington Free Beacon: Audio Shows Katie Couric Documentary Deceptively Edited Interview with Pro-Gun Activists
The articles’ titles pretty much tell the story, but the details go something like this: Couric has produced a documentary promoting gun control. Lest there be any confusion on that point, the documentary’s website says that its partners include Everytown, Moms Demand Action, the Brady Campaign, the Violence Policy Center, the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, and other anti-gun groups. And it urges people to “Reject the NRA” and to contact lawmakers, urging them to support background check legislation and other gun control efforts.
In the documentary, Couric interviews members of a local, Virginia-based pro-Second Amendment group. She asks them why they don’t support “universal” background check legislation. What is shown on camera thereafter is the interviewees sitting speechless for a full nine seconds, after which time the video cuts away, as if they never figured out an answer and the cameraman gave up and turned the camera off. The implication? Couric had proven once and for all that gun control opponents are incapable of producing a single argument against gun control.
But an audio-only tape of the interview, available here, proves that several of those being interviewed answered Couric immediately and at considerable length. Couric’s team simply deleted their answers, and inserted the “speechless” video footage in their place.
The articles linked above make clear that Couric and her director, Stephanie Soechtig, set out not to “document” anything, but to persuade viewers to adopt their anti-gun views. All of this reminds us that Couric is the same political activist that she has always been, first as a “journalist” that would bend the truth to propagandize audiences, and now as a “filmmaker” that will do the same.
According to CNN, Couric says she is “very proud of the film.” Her hubris notwithstanding, it remains to be seen if Couric’s legacy is forever tainted – as it should be – from her attempt to mislead the American public into believing a false narrative on gun control.
FRIDAY, APRIL 29, 2016
In what has become as reliable as clockwork, with the passing of another week comes another Hillary Clinton attack on gun owners. This time, the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination explained to supporters her intent to make an assault on gun rights and NRA one of her top priorities. A video of her comments has been distributed by Breitbart.com and can be viewed by clicking here.
Addressing an April 25 MSNBC “townhall” hosted by left-wing commentator Rachel Maddow, Clinton stated,
I really support everything President Obama said he would do through regulation on guns but we’re going to start the very first day and tackle the gun lobby to try to reduce the outrageous number of people who are dying from gun violence in our country.
Later, the candidate spoke of her party’s chances of taking control of the Senate, stating,
The Democrats have decided they will be led by Chuck Schumer and Chuck Schumer has been one of the most effective legislators in taking on the gun lobby. He and I worked together to get the Brady bill passed way back in my husband’s administration. So I think that it’s the kind of issue you have to start early, you have to work on it every day and we need to make it a voting issue.
A visibly agitated Clinton concluded her remarks on the subject by noting,
I’m going to keep talking about it, and we are going to make it clear that this has to be a voting issue. If you care about this issue, vote against people who give in to the NRA and the gun lobby all the time.
These comments make clear that gun owners and NRA would be in Clinton’s crosshairs from the moment she assumes office. And thanks to Clinton’s recent candor, gun owners don’t have to guess at the types of restrictions Clinton has in mind for them. Clinton has supported a ban on popular semi-automatic firearms and endorsed an Australian-style confiscation scheme for carrying out her vision. Clinton has expressed her vehement opposition to the Right-to-Carry. Most disturbing, under Clinton’s false interpretation of the Constitution, the Second Amendment does not protect and individual right to keep and bear arms and allows gun bans.
Somewhat of a political pragmatist, Barack Obama waited until he secured a second term before launching most of his efforts to restrict firearm ownership. Hillary Clinton is continually making clear that under her reign gun owners would receive no such reprieve.
This is why NRA members, along with their families and friends, must get involved in our efforts to secure a victory for gun owners this fall. At the bare minimum, gun owners must ensure that they and their loved ones are registered to vote. For those that can contribute more to our fight for freedom, NRA-ILA’s Grassroots Division can connect you with volunteer opportunities anywhere in the country, and NRA has made it easier than ever to participate in our efforts. To register to vote or explore further opportunities to help, please visit NRA-ILA’s Election Center at https://www.nraila.org/about/election-center/.
THURSDAY, MAY 26, 2016
Tomorrow, May 27, the state Assembly Committee on Appropriations is scheduled to hear all the bills sent to the suspense file. There are five anti-gun bills that greatly impact gun owners, sportsmen, and Second Amendment supporters. Email members of the Appropriations Committee by clicking the TAKE ACTION button below and urge them to OPPOSE AB 1663, AB 1664, AB 1673, AB 1674, and AB 1695.
Assembly Bill 1663 and Assembly Bill 1664 are similar and would reclassify hundreds of thousands of legally owned semi-automatic rifles as “assault weapons.” These are constitutionally protected firearms that have no association with crime. The changes would happen quickly at the expense of gun owners and without public notice. Governor Brown vetoed similar legislation in 2013 and the California State Sheriffs’ Association has opposed both of these egregious bills.
Assembly Bill 1673 would expand the definition of “firearm” to include unfinished frames and/or receivers that can be readily convertible. Depending on how this vague terminology is interpreted, AB 1673 could essentially treat pieces of metal as firearms, subjecting them to California’s exhaustive regulations and restrictions currently applicable to firearms.
Assembly Bill 1674 would expand the current restriction on the number of firearms an individual can purchase within a 30 day period. Currently the “one gun a month” rule only applies to dealer sales of handguns. This legislation is a misguided attempt to expand the current one handgun per month limitation to long guns. Rather than targeting criminals, this legislation will have severe consequences for firearm collectors, competition shooters, museums, and various charitable organizations. AB 1674 will have no impact on criminal access to firearms and instead significantly hamper law abiding individuals, causing increased costs, time and paperwork to purchase multiple firearms. Californian’s are already required to make two trips to a dealer to purchase a single firearm. For an individual who is purchasing firearms for one of the many popular shooting sports such as Cowboy Action Shooting or Three Gun, this would mean at least six trips to a dealer, three separate sets of paper work, fees and background checks all spanned out over a three month period. Criminals will continue to ignore this law purchasing firearms illegally, ignoring this burdensome and ineffective restriction.
Assembly Bill 1695 would require the Attorney General to send notice to each individual who has applied to purchase a firearm informing him or her of laws relating to firearms, gun trafficking, and safe storage. This legislation also allows the Department of Justice to use funds in the Firearms Safety and Enforcement Special Fund for this purpose. Requiring the Attorney General to send gun law pamphlets to law-abiding gun owners will do nothing to stop the criminal misuse of firearms, because the individuals who are committing firearm-related crimes are likely not receiving the gun law pamphlets. This is just another example of government waste and abuse of gun owners. The monies paid into this fund are intended to fund the background check system in California. Because the fees paid to run these checks exceed the cost necessary to execute them, legislators in Sacramento continue to look for ways to justify the expenses by wasting resources on “feel good” programs.
Don’t forget to forward this alert to your family, friends, and fellow gun owners and sportsmen urging them to also contact the committee and urge them to OPPOSE the above anti-gun bills.
There’s a saying: Don’t let the perfect become the enemy of the good. Yes, there’s probably some perfect way to accomplish a particular task, but a good way will work too. And it will work right now when you need it.
You can say the same thing about political candidates. There are perfect candidates and there are good candidates that can get elected now.
There are many gun owners who let the perfect become the enemy of the good. They want a candidate who emerged from the womb with a CCW clutched in his tiny, little fist. This year’s GOP primary cycle gave us some good candidates when it comes to the 2nd Amendment. There were also, arguably, some perfect candidates when it comes to gun rights. (One hopeful comes to mind that was actually bad.) But the apparent winner is Donald Trump and there are likely more than a few gun owners who have a case of the tight jaws over the NRA’s endorsement of Trump for President.
Is Trump perfect? No. Is he good? Yes. Is he really good? Yes. NRA Board Member Bob Barr calls a vote for Trump a “No-brainer“.
While there are and will continue to be legitimate questions about Trump’s views and positions on a wide range of issues and policies important to conservatives, for any voter who cares about protecting our God-given and constitutionally-guaranteed right to keep and bear arms, the vote for President this November is a no-brainer: Trump, Yes; Hillary, No.
This is quite simply because Hillary is the “perfect” candidate; perfectly bad.
Even as Trump is strengthening his bona fides as a Second Amendment supporter, Clinton is racing further in the opposite direction. Most disturbing in this regard is her recent statement that the 2008 Heller decision by the U.S. Supreme Court — which simply reached the common sense, and historically sound conclusion that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to possess a firearm, as opposed to some sort of “collective” right – is “wrong”; and that she would make it a priority as president to change it.
We’ve mentioned the differences between the two presumptive nominees before. And we’ve also reported here that Hillary has doubled-down on her gun-hating position. There is a stark difference between the two. It’s important this year that gun owners not let the perfectly bad candidate win at the expense of the imperfectly good one. This really is a no-brainer.
FRIDAY, MAY 20, 2016
Fairfax, Va.— The chairman of the National Rifle Association’s Political Victory Fund, Chris W. Cox, released the following statement on Friday:
“The stakes in this year’s presidential election could not be higher for gun owners. If Hillary Clinton gets the opportunity to replace Antonin Scalia with an anti-gun Supreme Court justice, we will lose the individual right to keep a gun in the home for self-defense. Mrs. Clinton has said that the Supreme Court got it wrong on the Second Amendment. So the choice for gun owners in this election is clear. And that choice is Donald Trump. That’s why the National Rifle Association of America is announcing our endorsement of Donald J. Trump for President of the United States.”
Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America’s oldest civil rights and sportsmen’s group. More than five million members strong, NRA continues to uphold the Second Amendment and advocates enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation’s leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the armed services. Be sure to follow the NRA on Facebook at NRA on Facebook andTwitter @NRA.
There’s two distinct ends to the dining spectrum when it comes to choosing what’s for dinner. There’s cafeteria style, where you pick and choose what you want. And then there’s homestyle. And by homestyle, I mean real homestyle; where Mom puts something on your plate and that’s what’s for dinner. There’s no picking and choosing with Mom.
When it comes to protecting civil rights, deciding which rights to protect is supposed to be a homestyle affair; no picking and choosing. And yet, California politicians seem to think that our rights ought to be served up a la carte, but with them picking and choosing which rights are important and which are not. As Dan Walters points out, this becomes a grave threat to civil liberties…
Those who, by word and deed, are out of sync with California’s deeply blue political ethos risk social ostracism.
Increasingly, however, the state’s dominant politicians want to subject dissenters to discrimination and legal harassment – even infringement of constitutional rights.
Smoke a cigarette, own a gun, cut a tree, pan for gold, question the “inconvenient truth” of human-caused global warming, utter an impolite joke or even drive a gasoline-powered car and you may run afoul of an ever-tightening web of laws and rules that punish your heresy – promulgated by political figures who talk constantly about their respect for civil rights.
What happened Thursday in the state Senate typifies the newfangled intolerance. It passed, largely along party lines, 11 new gun control bills whose sponsors, including Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León, promised they would reduce “gun violence.
Walters, who’s largely supported California’s gun control laws in the past, could not help but notice that Senate Democrats could not offer up “a scintilla of objective evidence” that their newest gun laws would do anything to make Californians safer. In fact, these laws are little more than attempts by a few puffed up politicians to position themselves for higher political office.
But it isn’t just the civil liberties of gun owners being threatened by the CA Senate. The Judiciary Committee approved SB 1161, the “California Climate Science Truth and Accountability Act of 2016”. This would give California prosecutors the authority to
bring heresy charges sue corporations who deny the Gospel of St. Algore question anthropogenic global warming. Whether these corporations are right or wrong to do so is beside the point. A corporation is a collective formed by its shareholders. This collective has as much of a right to free speech as any of the individuals do. Burning them at the stake Suing them for unpopular views is a violation of the 1st Amendment. Prosecutors are supposed to be protectors of civil liberties. The last thing the Legislature should be doing is to remold them into a new Spanish Inquisition to hunt down Jews AGW heretics.
The NRA calls the 2nd Amendment “America’s 1st Freedom” for a reason. Our ability to, if necessary, violently put down tyranny is what protects our other liberties. Without the 2nd Amendment, without the threat of armed resistance, the rest of the Bill of Rights is nothing more than a piece of sheepskin with some words on it. It’s been over 200 years since the American People put this 1st Freedom to its intended use and thus it’s become somewhat abstract to most Americans. The CA Senate’s actions this past week are a reminder to us that Freedom’s enemies never sleep and neither can we.
Today, the California State Senate again decided that protecting criminals is more important than defending your Second Amendment rights. The good news is, they have not yet become law!
Ten out of the eleven bills that were approved today will take us one step closer to losing our ability to protect ourselves and our families. Many of these bills will turn thousands of law-abiding citizens into criminals, through the stroke of a pen, because of the new regulations and restrictions that were passed out of the Senate.
While for the most part, these bills were approved by a party line vote, there were many instances of bi-partisanship opposition to the legislation, with Democrats such as Richard Roth (D-Riverside) and Cathleen Galgiani (D-Manteca) voting to preserve your right to keep and bear arms.
In addition to bi-partisan opposition, several brave representatives spoke out to defend the rights of California’s gun owners. Senators Jeff Stone (R-Temecula), Jim Nielsen (R – Gerber), Ted Gaines (R–Rocklin), Senator Mike Morrell (R- Rancho Cucamonga), Senator Jean Fuller ( R-Bakersfield), Senator Andy Vidak ( R-Bakersfield) and Senator John Moorlach (R-Costa Mesa) spoke to promote the rights of Californians protected by the Second Amendment. We appreciate their vocal opposition to the anti-gun bills that were brought to the floor. CRPA sincerely appreciates their efforts and would like to encourage you to call the aforementioned Senators and thank them for their courage. You can find their information by clicking here.
Below you will find a complete list of who voted for and against each anti-firearm bill:
SB 880 (Hall)
SB 1235 (De Leon)
SB 894 (Jackson)
SB 1006 (Wolk)
SB 1407 (De Leon)
SB 1446 (Hancock)
AB 156 (McCarty & De Leon)
AB 1135 (Levine & Ting)
AB 1511 (Santiago)
AB 857 (Cooper & De Leon)
Here is an additional list of each bill that was brought before the Senate today:
SB 880 (Hall) – SB 880 will serve as a reclassification of various weapons such as semiautomatic center-fire rifles or semiautomatic pistols that can accept a detachable magazine to “assault weapons”, meaning that these weapons would now be illegal.
SB 1235 (De Leon) – SB 1235 will require the California Department of Justice to keep a data-base on all ammunition transactions and require purchasers of ammo to undergo screening with each ammunition purchase.
SB 894 (Jackson) – SB 894 will make it a crime if an individual gun owner does not report their gun stolen within 5 days of realizing that their weapon has gone missing. This legislation will also make it a crime to fail to report a recovered gun within 48 hours.
SB 1006 (Wolk) – SB 1006 would direct the University of California to use taxpayer funds for gun control research.
SB 1407 (De Leon) – SB 1407 would require as of, July 1, 2018, that all newly manufactured weapons must have a serial number or unique identifier or the manufacturer or assembler will face consequences. This bill would also require as of, January 1, 2019, that all gun owners who own a weapon with out a unique identifier must apply to the California Department of Justice for a identifier for weapons dating back to 1899.
SB 1446 (Hancock) – SB 1446 would make it, as of, July 1, 2017, a crime to posses any high capacity magazine regardless of when the magazine was acquired. The first offense would be a fine not exceeding 100 dollars and with subsequent offenses, the punishment would rise.
“GUTTED AND AMENDED BILLS”
AB156 (McCarty & De Leon) – AB 156’s original intent was to combat global warming but has been altered to serve as a restriction on ammunition.
AB 857 (Cooper & De Leon) – AB 857’s original intent was to reduce greenhouse gases, but has been altered to serve as a restriction on curios, relics, and home-built firearms.
AB 1135 (Levine & Ting) – AB 1135’s original intent was to form the Kings River East Groundwater Sustainability Agency but has been amended to serve as a reclassification of certain semi-automatic weapons to assault weapons.
AB 1511 (Santiago) – AB 1511’s original intent was to encourage the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission to establish a comprehensive plan to save energy throughout California. The new version of this bill would be to limit the loan of a firearm between two law abiding citizens, for example a hunting trip or home protection.
While these bills may have passed through the Senate, they have not yet become law! You can help us stop the legislation from being approved by the Assembly. The next step in the legislative process is to go before the Assembly Public Safety Committee and the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
You can find a list of members for the Public Safety Committee here, and the list of members for the Appropriations Committee, here. By actively calling committee members, you can help us stop the bills before they get to the Assembly floor.
If the bills are approved by these committees, they will then go before the entire Assembly for a vote. Help us get a head start and call your Assembly member to tell them they need to stop this legislation.To find your Assembly member, please click here.
For a list of contact information for the entire State Assembly, please click here.
Several bills that originated in the Assembly, were approved by the Senate, (“Gutted and Amended”) and will now go before Governor Jerry Brown. Our best hope is to encourage the Governor to VETO these bills. To contact the Governor, please click here.
Some of the battles have ended, but the attack on your rights continues. Help CRPA continue to advocate for your freedoms. Please assist in these efforts by getting involved or making a donation. Your donation will empower CRPA to continue the fight for your constitutional rights in Sacramento.
WEDNESDAY, MAY 18, 2016
Contact your state Senator IMMEDIATELY
Tomorrow, Thursday, May 19, the state Senate is scheduled to vote on NINE anti-gun bills. These bills are being fast-tracked because of political gamesmanship between anti-gun state Senators and Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom. They are fighting to see who can take credit for removing Second Amendment rights first in California. Don’t take our word on the political fighting, click here to read a Reuters’ article, California Democrat dueling over gun control plans by Sharon Bernstein. Constitutional Rights should be treated with the utmost respect as the backbone of this great nation. It is extremely irresponsible that these anti-gun politicians would place your rights in jeopardy for political gain.
The bills have been clearly fast tracked and could be sent to the Governor within a matter of weeks if not days. Gun owners, sportsmen, and Second Amendment supporters IMMEDIATELY contact your state Senator and respectfully urge him or her to OPPOSE SB 1235, AB 156, SB 1407, AB 857, SB 880, AB 1135, AB 1511, SB 894, and SB 1006. Contact information can be found here or by clicking on the TAKE ACTION button below.
WE MUST send a clear message to the State Senate that regulating and restricting our constitutional freedoms will no longer be tolerated.
It is extremely important that you pass this alert to your family, friends, fellow gun owners and sportsmen asking them to contact their state Senator and then forwarding this message on to their family, friends, and fellow gun owners and sportsmen.
It’s CRUCIAL that EVERY law-abiding gun owner, sportsmen, and Second Amendment supporter contact their state Senator and respectfully urge him or her to OPPOSE SB 1235, AB 156, SB 1407, AB 857, SB 880, AB 1135, AB 1511, SB 894, and SB 1006.
If you are not registered to vote, now is the time to do so! Click here to register to vote, so you can support candidates who believe in your right to keep and bear arms.