Obama Budget Lays Groundwork for Universal Gun Registration… and Eventual Confiscation

Guest post by GOA

Last Friday, Attorney General Eric Holder testified before a House appropriations subcommittee on behalf of his department’s proposed budget for FY2015.

Apparently, Holder didn’t think anyone would read his written submission, because he all-but-admitted that Obama intends to implement a Universal Gun Registry by executive fiat.

He also asked Congress to help fund so-called “smart gun” technology, which would prevent a gun from firing unless the shooter is wearing an accompanying bracelet or ring.

“Smart guns” are a dumb idea

Given that “smart gun” technology only works about 80 percent of the time — according to the New Jersey Institute of Technology — gun owners almost universally consider this a “dumb” idea.

Even police have rejected the “dumb gun” approach for themselves.

Currently, there are no such guns on the market in the United States. One gun store did briefly offer an Armatix .22 caliber earlier this year, but public outrage forced them to pull the handgun from the shelves.

Holder pushes a Universal Gun Registry

This year’s Obama budget shows how the administration is trying to quietly create the infrastructure for a universal gun registry.

In proposed “Program Increases” for the FBI, Holder has this to say:

“This program enhancement will double the capacity of the existing NICS [National Instant Check System] system. These expansions are vital in ensuring that the NICS system can support a Universal Background Check requirement, which is expected to double gross NICS transactions.”

Huh?

It may have escaped the Attorney General’s notice, but the Democrat Senate defeated his Universal Background Check requirement.

So, in effect, Holder’s asking for $ 100 million and 524 personnel to implement a program Congress rejected.

But that’s not all.

Holder seeking more ATF agents to copy to 4473 forms

In the section on ATF “Program Increases,” Holder demands $ 51.1 million and 255 agents and other personnel for enforcement and inspections.

In case anyone has forgotten, these are the people who are going to the FFL’s in connection with “annual inspections” — and physically copying all the 4473’s and bound book entries. GOA has reported on these efforts before, and one can read first-hand accounts from gun dealers here and here.

So under Holder’s proposed budget, many more 4473’s would be copied and fed into ATF’s de facto registry.

At the same time, Obama’s illegal Universal Background Check — implemented, presumably, by executive fiat — would ensure every gun transaction would have to go through an FFL. And this, of course, would guarantee that every American gun owner would have a 4473 which can be copied.

Think about it. With Republicans expected to take the Senate this fall — and Obama stymied legislatively — he has every incentive to go “full tyrant.” And that, apparently, is exactly what he intends to do.

But we have no intention to sit back and let Holder take away our Second Amendment rights. We have drafted legislation to prohibit ATF from copying 4473’s — and to require it to destroy any 4473’s it currently has.

UPDATE: GOA recently alerted you that an import ban on certain ammunition could be forthcoming from the ATF. Well, it’s official now — the ATF just declared that Russian-made 7N6 5.45×39 ammo is armor piercing. This lawlessness represents another reason that Congress needs to cut the ATF’s budget.

ACTION: Contact your Representative. Demand that the Commerce-Justice-Science appropriations bill contain language to prohibit ATF from compiling a national gun registry by copying and retaining the 4473’s of every American.

Hat tip: BadBlue Gun News

Doug Ross @ Journal

TICK TOCK: The Countdown To Government Confiscation Of Your Retirement Savings Has Begun

Writing at Zero Hedge, Nick Giambruno of Casey Research sounds the alarm on President Obama’s new “MyRA” program.

Simply put, the new myRA program put forward by Obama is at best a sucker’s deal… or worse, it’s a first step toward the nationalization of private retirement savings… Even before the new myRA program was announced, there had been whispers about the need for the US government to assume some risk for US retirement accounts. That’s code for forced conversion of private retirement assets into government bonds.

…With foreigners not buying as many Treasuries and the Fed tapering, the US government has been searching for new buyers of its unwanted debt. And this is where the new myRA program comes in.

In short, it’s ostensibly a new way for people to save for retirement. Of course, you can only invest in government-approved investments—like Treasuries—which probably won’t even come close to keeping up with the real rate of inflation. It’s like Jim Grant says: “return-free risk.”

In reality, a myRA doesn’t really provide any significant new benefits over existing options. To me it just looks like a way for the US government to pass the hot potato on to unsuspecting Americans in exchange for their retirement savings.

The net effect is the funneling of more capital to Treasury securities and thus helping the US government finance itself.

I believe myRA is a way to nudge the American people into gradually becoming more accustomed to government involvement in their private retirement savings.

It’s incorrect to assume nationalization couldn’t happen in the US or your home country. History shows us that it’s standard operating procedure for a government in dire financial straits… In just the past six years, it’s happened in some form in Argentina, Poland, Portugal, Hungary, and numerous other countries.

To me it’s self-evident that most Western governments (including the US) have current debt loads and future spending commitments that all but guarantee that eventually—and likely someday soon—they will try to unscrupulously grab as much wealth as they can.

To put this news in context, consider that in late 2008 Democrats openly discussed the possibility of confiscating private retirement accounts in order to “strengthen and protect Americans’ 401(k)s, pensions, and other… plans”.

The [Congressional] testimony of Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic policy analysis at the New School for Social Research in New York, in hearings Oct. 7 drew the most attention and criticism. Testifying for the House Committee on Education and Labor, Ghilarducci proposed that the government eliminate tax breaks for 401(k) and similar retirement accounts, such as IRAs, and confiscate workers’ retirement plan accounts and convert them to universal Guaranteed Retirement Accounts (GRAs) managed by the Social Security Administration.

…The current retirement system, Ghilarducci said, “exacerbates income and wealth inequalities” because tax breaks for voluntary retirement accounts are “skewed to the wealthy because it is easier for them to save, and because they receive bigger tax breaks when they do.”

…GRAs would guarantee a fixed 3 percent annual rate of return, although later in her article Ghilarducci explained that participants would not “earn a 3% real return in perpetuity.” In place of tax breaks workers now receive for contributions and thus a lower tax rate, workers would receive $ 600 annually from the government, inflation-adjusted. For low-income workers whose annual contributions are less than $ 600, the government would deposit whatever amount it would take to equal the minimum $ 600 for all participants.

In a radio interview with Kirby Wilbur in Seattle on Oct. 27, 2008, Ghilarducci explained that her proposal doesn’t eliminate the tax breaks, rather, “I’m just rearranging the tax breaks that are available now for 401(k)s and spreading — spreading the wealth.”

Now that the Democrats have nearly decimated the economy (Stimulus II, anyone?), the trillions of dollars in private retirement accounts represent the juiciest of all possible targets.

So why so concerned about the Democrats taking over your 401(k) plan, Sparky? What could possibly go wrong?

Hat tip: Mark Levin

Doug Ross @ Journal

IT BEGINS: New York Gun Confiscation Letters Arrive

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution reads as follows:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Robert Farago, writing at The Truth About Guns:

[New York] requires people to register, sell or transfer (out of state) “assault rifles” and “high capacity” magazines. Many Empire State gun and standard capacity ammunition magazine owners have complied. Many have not. So, at some point, the State’s gonna go get ‘em. People on both sides of the law enforcement divide will die and the s will hit the fan. Meanwhile, there it is: the reason why expanded background checks, indeed all background checks and any type of registration, set the stage for confiscation. And tyranny.

The Constitution is written in what we normal folks call “Plain English”.

It was designed to be read by all citizens at the time of the founding, so that they could read, understand, and ratify it. The Constitution — no matter what temporary politicians, activist judges and other leftists may tell you — is the highest law in the land.

The Constitution protects your rights, no matter what the Statists, the Marxists and the Progressives tell you.

Molon Labe.

Hat tip: BadBlue Guns

Doug Ross @ Journal