ShutYourLib

http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/bank-america-freezes-gun-manufacturers-account-company-owner-claims Bank of America has reportedly frozen the account of gun manufacturer American Spirit Arms, according to its owner, Joe Sirochman. In a Facebook post dated December 29, Sirochman wrote the following: My name is Joe Sirochman owner of American Spirit Arms...our Web site orders have jumped 500 percent causing our Web site e-commerce processing larger deposits to Bank of America. So they decided to hold the deposits for further review. After countless hours on the phone with Bank of America, I finally got a manager in the right department that told me the reason that the deposits were on hold for further review -- her exact words were -- We believe you should not be selling guns and parts on the Internet.(emphasis added) Sirochman also wrote that he told the bank manager that they have no right to make up their own new rules and regs and that [American Spirit is a] firearms manufacturer with all the proper licensing. He also noted that he has been doing business with Bank of America for over 10 years, but will now be looking for a new bank. According to Unlawful News, this isn't the first time Bank of America has targeted a customer involved in the firearms industry. McMillan Group International was reportedly told that its business was no longer welcome after the company started manufacturing firearms even after 12 years of doing business with the bank.

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2012/feinstein-goes-for-broke-with-new-gun-ban-bill.aspx Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)—author of the federal “assault weapon” and “large” ammunition magazine ban of 1994-2004—has announced that on the first day of the new Congress—January 3rd— she will introduce a bill to which her 1994 ban will pale by comparison. On Dec. 17th, Feinstein said, “I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation” and “It will be carefully focused.” Indicating the depth of her research on the issue, she said on Dec. 21st that she had personally looked at pictures of guns in 1993, and again in 2012. According to a Dec. 27th posting on Sen. Feinstein’s website and a draft of the bill obtained by NRA-ILA, the new ban would, among other things, adopt new definitions of “assault weapon” that would affect a much larger variety of firearms, require current owners of such firearms to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act, and require forfeiture of the firearms upon the deaths of their current owners. Some of the changes in Feinstein’s new bill are as follows: Reduces, from two to one, the number of permitted external features on various firearms. The 1994 ban permitted various firearms to be manufactured only if they were assembled with no more than one feature listed in the law. Feinstein’s new bill would prohibit the manufacture of the same firearms with even one of the features. Adopts new lists of prohibited external features. For example, whereas the 1994 ban applied to a rifle or shotgun the “pistol grip” of which “protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon,” the new bill would drastically expand the definition to include any “grip . . . or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.” Also, the new bill adds “forward grip” to the list of prohibiting features for rifles, defining it as “a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip.” Read literally and in conjunction with the reduction from two features to one, the new language would apply to every detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifle. At a minimum, it would, for example, ban all models of the AR-15, even those developed for compliance with California’s highly restrictive ban. Carries hyperbole further than the 1994 ban. Feinstein’s 1994 ban listed “grenade launcher” as one of the prohibiting features for rifles. Her 2013 bill goes even further into the ridiculous, by also listing “rocket launcher.” Such devices are restricted under the National Firearms Act and, obviously, are not standard components of the firearms Feinstein wants to ban. Perhaps a subsequent Feinstein bill will add “nuclear bomb,” “particle beam weapon,” or something else equally far-fetched to the features list. Expands the definition of “assault weapon” by including: Three very popular rifles: The M1 Carbine (introduced in 1944 and for many years sold by the federal government to individuals involved in marksmanship competition), a model of the Ruger Mini-14, and most or all models of the SKS. Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” except for tubular-magazine .22s. Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches,” any “semiautomatic handgun with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” and any semi-automatic handgun that has a threaded barrel. Requires owners of existing “assault weapons” to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act (NFA). The NFA imposes a $200 tax per firearm, and requires an owner to submit photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), to inform the BATFE of the address where the firearm will be kept, and to obtain the BATFE’s permission to transport the firearm across state lines. Prohibits the transfer of “assault weapons.” Owners of other firearms, including those covered by the NFA, are permitted to sell them or pass them to heirs. However, under Feinstein’s new bill, “assault weapons” would remain with their current owners until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government. Prohibits the domestic manufacture and the importation of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The 1994 ban allowed the importation of such magazines that were manufactured before the ban took effect. Whereas the 1994 ban protected gun owners from errant prosecution by making the government prove when a magazine was made, the new ban includes no such protection. The new ban also requires firearm dealers to certify the date of manufacture of any >10-round magazine sold, a virtually impossible task, given that virtually no magazines are stamped with their date of manufacture. Targets handguns in defiance of the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects the right to have handguns for self-defense, in large part on the basis of the fact handguns are the type of firearm “overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose.” Semi-automatic pistols, which are the most popular handguns today, are designed to use detachable magazines, and the magazines “overwhelmingly chosen” by Americans for self-defense are those that hold more than 10 rounds. Additionally, Feinstein’s list of nearly 1,000 firearms exempted by name (see next paragraph) contains not a single handgun. Sen. Feinstein advocated banning handguns before being elected to the Senate, though she carried a handgun for her own personal protection. Contains a larger piece of window dressing than the 1994 ban. Whereas the 1994 ban included a list of approximately 600 rifles and shotguns exempted from the ban by name, the new bill’s list is increased to nearly 1,000 rifles and shotguns. Other than for the 11 detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles and one other semi-automatic rifle included in the list, however, the list appears to be pointless, because a separate provision of the bill exempts “any firearm that is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action.” The Department of Justice study. On her website, Feinstein claims that a study for the DOJ found that the 1994 ban resulted in a 6.7 percent decrease in murders. To the contrary, this is what the study said: “At best, the assault weapons ban can have only a limited effect on total gun murders, because the banned weapons and magazines were never involved in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders. Our best estimate is that the ban contributed to a 6.7 percent decrease in total gun murders between 1994 and 1995. . . . However, with only one year of post-ban data, we cannot rule out the possibility that this decrease reflects chance year-to-year variation rather than a true effect of the ban. Nor can we rule out effects of other features of the 1994 Crime Act or a host of state and local initiatives that took place simultaneously.” “Assault weapon” numbers and murder trends. From the imposition of Feinstein’s “assault weapon” ban (Sept. 13, 1994) through the present, the number of “assault weapons” has risen dramatically. For example, the most common firearm that Feinstein considers an “assault weapon” is the AR-15 rifle, the manufacturing numbers of which can be gleaned from the BATFE’s firearm manufacturer reports, available here. From 1995 through 2011, the number of AR-15s—all models of which Feinstein’s new bill defines as “assault weapons”—rose by over 2.5 million. During the same period, the nation’s murder rate fell 48 percent, to a 48-year low. According to the FBI, 8.5 times as many people are murdered with knives, blunt objects and bare hands, as with rifles of any type. Traces: Feinstein makes several claims, premised on firearm traces, hoping to convince people that her 1994 ban reduced the (relatively infrequent) use of “assault weapons” in crime. However, traces do not indicate how often any type of gun is used in crime. As the Congressional Research Service and the BATFE have explained, not all firearms that are traced have been used in crime, and not all firearms used in crime are traced. Whether a trace occurs depends on whether a law enforcement agency requests that a trace be conducted. Given that existing “assault weapons” were exempted from the 1994 ban and new “assault weapons” continued to be made while the ban was in effect, any reduction in the percentage of traces accounted for by “assault weapons” during the ban, would be attributable to law enforcement agencies losing interest in tracing the firearms, or law enforcement agencies increasing their requests for traces on other types of firearms, as urged by the BATFE for more than a decade. Call Your U.S. Senators and Representative: As noted, Feinstein intends to introduce her bill on January 3rd. President Obama has said that gun control will be a “central issue” of his final term in office, and he has vowed to move quickly on it. Contact your members of Congress at 202-224-3121 to urge them to oppose Sen. Feinstein’s 2013 gun and magazine ban.

Thats the problem in America......we the people...let the government get away with all the B.S. I agree, and this is the final straw that surely allow tyranny to run rampant, without any means to stop it. If this goes through, we will have set the perfect stage for a dictatorship, or worse yet another hitler. I fear for my kids chances of an American dream and for the potential enslavement of grand kids.

I only hope that regardless of what is "voted" in, the people will stand up for their rights. It is unbelievable to me that the media is reporting how the gov't is now recording every text, phone call, etc in the country, that we have bills being submitted, and passing through our senate that allows the gov't to detain American citizens, indefinitely, without any court hearing or due process, and now they are taking away our guns? Are you kidding me? If we all roll over and get this stamp, our pictures, fingerprints and taxes submitted for every gun we own, and losing the ability to pass your family heirlooms (guns) on to your kids after you die? Can anyone believe that the gov actually has the bal!s to even have an idea like this? The gov't no longer fears, respects, or cares about the people. Regardless of what they do, do not let this happen or be enforced, we are already an Orwellian country. Sadly this post will now be recorded and stored by our gov't, just like in china.

Probably g&f

I find it completely ridiculous that we still allow people to walk among us with the ability to create an open flame. I call for a total ban on any flame creating device, we only need flame less warmers anyway. Seriously, when are we going to address the mental health situation in this country? http://www.theblaze.com/stories/man-douses-sleeping-homeless-woman-with-flammable-liquid-then-sets-her-on-fire-in-l-a/

More rumor spreading.... Why hasn't the post been modified yet?

Read, read, read, then go check them all out. http://www.6mmbr.com/optics.html

What I can't stand is the people who sit around and pass judgement. Who are you to judge what type of hunting anyone is doing? As stated above, I'm sure that if you were on the road to get to your favorite glassing spot and saw a nice deer, you would just say oh well I did not walk the ethical number of miles so I won't go after him. What a joke. When I see other hunters on the road, I see them for a few seconds, and do not check up or in on them to see what they are up to. I simply wave to my fellow outdoorsman and continue on my way. Those road hunters paid for a tag just like you, they put a lot of money into the economy, and spent a lot of time away from their families/work to enjoy their time out doing what they like to do. Or, they may be disabled, or old, or sick, or anything. It's none of your ethical policeman business! Another thing I cant stand is men that act like babies. If everyone was walking through the hills, I bet your post would be aimed at those who dont glass, or those who are in "your" spot, or use salt, or sit water holes, or anyone who doesnt do things the way that you deem appropriate. Stop bashing your fellow sportsman!!!!

To the TOOL who started this pointless topic: I would like to know who taught you about hunting, who is the person that told you that you should only be concerned with antler size? I was taught that hunting and animals were here to help and aide us for survival. To only kill a deer because of the size of its rack? I will not tech my kids that. I will teach my kids to be thankful for the opportunity to harvest an animal that provided them a means to make clothing and fill their stomachs. You are pointless and empty for even starting this useless topic. On another note, you are yet just another moron who has to ruffle the feathers of the very people that have a like-minded core belief, the same group of people that feel it is their right to carry guns, the right to free speech, the opportunity to hunt, etc. keep giving the opposite side ammo to use against us and we will keep losing our rights. Sportsman need to stick together, not draw sanctimonious lines through our current rights. Why split hairs, why argue to remove more rights from the current laws? That I even have to type this out pisses me off. Again, you are a TOOL, and won't get it anyway. Just leave.

Yes I used license plate info to get cameras back on 3 ocassions - The last time was hilarious - I followed the guy from his house the weekend after he did the deed , to where he had put my camera up ... Caught him red handed , relieved him of his side arm, looked in the back of his rig and found 27 cameras all differant makes and models about 2/3 of them had differant name and phone # in them.... So we called them all with the a$$ standing there "CRYING" and let them know who took their cameras... One of the victims was a cop and knew the individual and his parents --- We turned the whole mess over to him and he handled it - The theif was just a kiD 19 years old! How do you find out where someone lives with a plate number? How do you make the assumption that because you have a plate number, that they took the camera (just curious as I am thinking about using this method to try and mitigate future theft)? I would think that one of those 27 other victims would also belong to this forum, and probably owes you a big thank you. Were all of the cameras returned to the original owners?

Seem pretty tuff to stop someone from doing this. With or without a shipper anyone paying threw PayPal or a cc could dispute. I can't Stand dishonest people, cl could be such a cool way to buy and sell stuff too. Cash is king!

I noticed a huge change in the vegetation on the mountain that serves as the back stop at Ben Avery. I learned that it was caused by a bullet several years ago. I would think that it a rare event, but with the number of people shooting now a days, and dry climate, I think it's a valid concern. I would never support a ban or agenda that would limit all shooting to a range though. Interesting topic.

Almost forgot, you are a TOOL

You are a Tool. Here is another guy that needs a pat on the back because he killed an animal. I like how you were able to brag about calling in a pig, the pistol caliber, shot placement, your awesome hunting ethics, all while slamming some guy using the same tools that you were, sans cammo. Oh wait, you - or your friend, must be the guys with the “right hands” so you should be allowed to use a high capacity pistol. Out of curiosity, do you have to register your hands as lethal weapons? Obviously, not your brain… Anyway, here is your pat on the back. Now leave. Why would you propose that we have a law or more restrictions against hunters? You are going the wrong way; your way of thinking will have you and your kids drinking your chai tea latte from a silly straw. With your logic, why would any more than 1 round ever be needed? I call BS on your entire post. I want your glass because my swaros aren’t cuttin it "I Heard in the distance what sounded like an auto fire firearm", the canyon was so far away and so big that it sounded like a full auto??? I have never heard of this phenomenon....but wait, you can see pigs running everywhere and bad trigger control? Oh and wait..... this hunter was wearing street cloths??? you mean people hunt without cammo? Oh, they aren’t real hunters unless they have on hard woods baby.... I bet you are the guy in the ghillie suite that I see on opening morning for dove. Just in case you didn’t hear me the first time, you are a TOOL. WOW! You have too much time on your hands. I dont care for a limit of bullet for handguns just an observation of the lack of limits for handsgun verus rifles. The yahoo in street cloths propted me to look at the regs! That must have been you! My bad, wont be hunting near you again! It was a bit more than an observation, if you care to re-read what you posted. Time on my hands? I rarely post, and most of my posts are to call out idiotic behavior. As I have said, I do not understand what you stand to gain by bashing your fellow sportsman or the current rules. The whole cammo thing? Really? Why would cloths play into your definition of a hunter or carry any sort of clout? I never wear cammo, my dad never wore cammo, my grandad never wore cammo, but I guess they were just yahoos, but we all eat/ate very well from the game taken. If I would have seen some YAHOO, in cammo, busting out regs to talk crap about or preach their ethics or made up morals to me, you would have been on your back, so no, it wasnt me.

You are a Tool. Here is another guy that needs a pat on the back because he killed an animal. I like how you were able to brag about calling in a pig, the pistol caliber, shot placement, your awesome hunting ethics, all while slamming some guy using the same tools that you were, sans cammo. Oh wait, you - or your friend, must be the guys with the “right hands” so you should be allowed to use a high capacity pistol. Out of curiosity, do you have to register your hands as lethal weapons? Obviously, not your brain… Anyway, here is your pat on the back. Now leave. Why would you propose that we have a law or more restrictions against hunters? You are going the wrong way; your way of thinking will have you and your kids drinking your chai tea latte from a silly straw. With your logic, why would any more than 1 round ever be needed? I call BS on your entire post. I want your glass because my swaros aren’t cuttin it "I Heard in the distance what sounded like an auto fire firearm", the canyon was so far away and so big that it sounded like a full auto??? I have never heard of this phenomenon....but wait, you can see pigs running everywhere and bad trigger control? Oh and wait..... this hunter was wearing street cloths??? you mean people hunt without cammo? Oh, they aren’t real hunters unless they have on hard woods baby.... I bet you are the guy in the ghillie suite that I see on opening morning for dove. Just in case you didn’t hear me the first time, you are a TOOL.

Very interesting topic. Came across 3 moo cows that were crushed by a big ol' pine. Tree had been blown over from the root and hit all three of them across the back. One of them clearly lived quite a bit longer than the other two, I would guess it finally died of dehydration. While out branding many years ago we had a very thin, very weak coyote stagger straight in to where we were. It could hardly walk. As it got closer we could see the whole bottome of its jaw was just hanging straight down. Somthing had kicked or broken its jaw and it was wandering around with its mouth open and jaw hanging for who knows how long. Well he died from a bullet but he wouldnt have made it much longer.

Wonder if any of those MORONS have ever went to Vegas.

There are tons of videos available on proper skinning, but it sure would be nice to see the right way to flesh, stretch, borax, coat prep, etc. Do you turn the lips/ears?

Wow that is a great haul. Out if curiosity, what is the amount of time you put into the fur after skinning it? I would think they are just dried and stretched? When you get back from the auction i hope you won't mind sharing some of the prices with us.

That is kind of what I thought. I couldn't see anyone's paying35.00 for an az yote. I sure don't see someonein Canada paying that . Have you seen their fur compared to ours? I get out calling about two times per week and have only found a couple of yotes that Have been shot, and that is over quite a few years. I call bs on the entire original post.

Please do. OK, so I have been a very long time lurker on this site. I finally registered and became a member because of your post. I do not understand why so many people choose to bash their own? What is the purpose of your post? Do you want a pat on the back because you sell your pelts? Are you on some sort of moral high ground because you choose to do something one way but bash someone else who does things their way, even though it is perfectly legal. Keep your retarded opinions to yourself. Comments and bickering like this only hurts all hunters in the end. Keep giving all of the true enemies ammo like this and they will eventually fill their guns and level them at us all. Just so you can get on your high horse. I am so happy that you sell your fur. Good for you. Personally, I leave the rotten yote carcasses where they lay. So I get to chap your arse and maybe save some deer in the process.