National League of Cities Efforts to Ban Guns in America through your local government

Filed under Guns, News, Police State, Self Defense   March 23, 2012 Posted by:

Leave a comment

Who is the National League of Cities and why are they trying to take away your right to bear arms?

national league of citiesThe National League of Cities and their affiliated state Municipal Leagues are both George Soros backed organizations that are aggressively pushing Anti-Gun legislation in localities throughout America. Their President, Tim Ellis, has publicly stated his intent to crackdown on guns and believes that there is an epidemic of children who are “dying from gun violence due to the lack of gun control.”

Through their Public Safety and Crime Prevention committee, one of the NLC’s stated goals is to increase gun control efforts on city, state, and federal levels. The NLC represents over 19,000 cities, towns, and villages and is actively producing policy agenda for local governments throughout the U.S. They also routinely meet with and lobby members of Congress and the President.

The National League of Cities Gun Control Agenda includes:

  • Gun bans in parks, libraries, and other public places
  • Registration for all handguns
  • Restricting Access to Guns and Ammunition
  • An across the board ban on all semi-automatic firearms (NLC Resolution 2008-49, Nov. 2007)
  • New Laws that would apply a 30-day waiting period for the purchase or transfer of all guns
  • Ending the manufacturing of any magazines that hold 10 or more rounds. (2012 Public Safety & Crime Prevention Policy Chapter)
  • Enacting federal legislation to prohibit any individual over the age of 18, but under the age of 21, from purchasing or possessing rifle or handguns.

The NLC has a long history of helping politicians ban guns throughout the U.S., including being the primary group who wrote and aggressively lobbied for the passage of HR 4296.   HR4296 was the legislation that helped President Clinton ban a large number of semi-automatic weapons. Since then, the group has shifted their focus towards banning guns on a local level.

In a bulletin from the NLC’s Action Kit for Municipal Leaders titled, “Restricting Access to Guns” they state:

Enact Gun Control Ordinances

At least 30 states do not allow communities to impose their own restrictions on gun purchases or ownership. Five states (California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, and Massachusetts) specifically grant local governments the right to enact gun control laws. In four other states (Indiana, Tennessee, Virginia, and Washington), cities have some discretion in crafting local gun control ordinances. In states that do allow local gun control, many municipalities have taken positive steps to restrict gun access. For example, local governments in California’s East Bay area had enacted nearly 50 local gun ordinances by late 1998 either to restrict the sale of “Saturday Night Specials” and other “junk guns” or to impose zoning restrictions regulating home-based gun sales.

Even in states that prohibit local governments from passing laws to regulate the purchase or licensing of firearms, cities have found creative ways to restrict the availability of guns.

The NLC has already helped enact a number of extremely repressive gun-control measures throughout the country. In fact, they recently helped South Dakota use tax payer dollars to push for firearms bans in city parks, libraries, transit buses and a number of other public places. They are also in the process of pushing for city-level gun bans in New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Connecticut, Delaware, North Carolina and Virginia.

These people are so Anti-Gun that they would rather see law-abiding citizens become victims of crime than allow them to legally own a gun.

But it’s not just Self-Defense Weapons that they’re trying to ban. In fact, Kenneth Massey, who heads the NLC’s Public Safety & Crime Prevention Committee, recently started targeting hunters. In his home city of Farmington, Michigan, Massey is pushing for a law that would ban all forms of hunting in his city. He’s so against people being armed, that the legislation he’s proposing actually classifies arrows being shot from a bow as the discharge of a firearm.

Emmy-winning reporter and radio host Shad Olson, recently exposed the Soros alliance and reported on the NLC’s  backdoor efforts to push for Gun Control.

Comments

34 Responses to " National League of Cities Efforts to Ban Guns in America through your local government " Please share your thoughts...

  1. Jason Mueller says:

    It just keeps getting worse. I wouldn’t doubt one day the government putting a limit on guns and ammo per household or even how many guns or how much ammo you can purchase in any given year. Buy what you can now and stock up. Who’s to say one day the government won’t be coming to your house to confiscate your firearms. Be prepared everyone.

    • SheepDog says:

      The government will get my guns one round at a time. Outlawing gun does nothing to protect law abiding citizens and does everything to help the criminals. Awesome

      • Mark says:

        OMG thats perfect. you can have my guns one round at a time… nicely put.

  2. Molen Labe says:

    Shocking how much of this stuff is right out there for the public to see yet everyone has such a hard time believing that they are coming for our guns. Now you see why so many people were buying Rugers!

    • PreptoSurvive says:

      Right under their noses and people still won’t wake up. The day is coming when there will be a knock at the door and your 2nd amendment rights will be gone. If you really look at how many places where gun ownership is restricted in America you would be shocked.

      If you looked at where it is restricted because of the U.N. in most other countries you would realize that it’s coming.

      • Pat Henry says:

        Agreed, and if we don’t have an agreement amounst all constitutional loving gun owners that if they do come to take our guns they will pay dearly for the effort.

        The agreement must be that you fire even on your own country men if necessary until you are out of ammo or your dead, becasue the only option is that you will be a slave or disappear like people did in the Soviet Union or Germany int he 30s.

        • Mike says:

          When I served in the military we took an oath “To defend this country and it’s constitution from all enemies both foreign AND DOMESTIC.” If my government becomes my enemy I will do what I can to protect the people of this nation and our constitution from that corrupt government until I am unable to fight any longer. I would urge anyone else to have taken that oath to adhere to it, remember it and keep your word.

          • Rick says:

            Apparently my opinion is very controversial. But if you think that it is a good thing everyone has access to guns you are very wrong. By stating that your govermnent is corrupt by outlawing guns is plainly stupid. Guns are not for protection, guns only create even more dangerous environments. I hope that one day you will see this. Untill then I will pray for you and your ignorance.

          • Texan says:

            I’m grateful that I had a firearm in my truck when I a wide-eyed drug addict attempted to carjack my vehicle. He saw the firearm leveled at his forehead and he split!

            For those of you who thing firearms should be outlawed, gun free zones in Chicago aren’t doing much good, are they?

        • will fight for the our 2nd amendment right says:

          I’m glad to hear that we can depend on our own guys in the milatary to protect us from our own government. How sad is that. We all better be prepared to fight for our 2nd amendment.

          • sherman says:

            Rick, don,t you even know why the 2nd.amendment was written? It is to protect the public from a goverment that is no longer of the people by the people and for the people. Gun control simply makes it easier for the feds to take complete control of our lives.If I was out to rape and rob someone I would not want them to be armed.Gun control only helps criminals like our goverment.

    • Tonjia says:

      Excellent “one round at a time.” Look up Tom woods and Nullification, the act of state sovereignty that can protect your 2nd amendment rights, despite the feds. :)

  3. Joe Q says:

    this is a bunch of b,s i thouht this was a free country but everoyday we loose, more of our rights and freedomz we have to start standing up for whats right if not you can expect to one day have to give up your guns to our currupt government. mark my words it will happjen….

  4. Owl Creeper says:

    Well Folks, Mr. Soros has hit North Carolina. The city of Greensboro struck down a Concile Carry bill for parks. I guess this was a test site to see if he could get his “progressive” machine active in NC. Check out NRA site for more info.

  5. bridak says:

    That is awesome news! What’s this thing with America and Gun’s? The less you have them and the less violence you have therefore less violent crimes are committed therefore there are less violent offenders therefore it creates a society where gun’s are only needed for hunting and such and where the “cowboy” mentality is forgotten.

    Ok now you guy’s with gun’s can shoot me…GO…:)

    • brandan says:

      You have no idea what you are saying. If you would actually bother to do a little research into the topic of guns and crime, you would realize when states ease restrictions on firearms, crime rates drop. I would suggest reading Dr. John Lott’s “More Guns, Less Crime.” He has used every bit of information he can obtain, down to the city and county level of every state that has enacted concealed carry legislation, and compared it with all other possibilities of crime control. In the past 20 years here in the United States, violent crime has dropped nearly 40%. Murder has fell off of the top 15 causes of death for the first time in decades, and gun ownership and carry is at the highest it ever has been in this country. My home state of Ky doesnt require you to get a license to carry your firearm openly, and we have a very low crime rate. It is proven, and gun owners have the facts on their side. The anti’s use scare tactics because they know they have no factual statistics to support their claims. look at australia and england’s crime rates now that they have disarmed their citizens!!

    • Ice says:

      bridak, the primary reason why we have the 2nd amendment is not for hunting, sport, or even self-defense against criminals. Its primary use is to provide the citizenry with the ability to overthrow the American government if it ever became tyrannical. All of the other reasons to have firearms are secondary to that. We have firearms to protect us from our own government and as long as government exists and has the possibility of becoming tyrannical, there will always be a need for that 2nd amendment to provide a check against that possibility.

      Don’t even say that “democracy” is the check. The democratic process is controlled by the government and it can attempt to stop it at any time.

      • Seewo4 says:

        Ice, you are correct. Unfortunately, the tyranny has been creeping on us for years. Think about everything the government controls and the loss of rights that have occurred to date.

    • Plgrm4a_yl says:

      Bridak, IF ONLY it were truly that simple!! The truth is – the BAD GUYS i.e. criminals will ALWAYS have guns. . .no amount of bans and regulations will stop them. All this above discussion is speaking of banning LAW ABIDING CITIZENS the resource to defend themselves from those BAD GUYS. If you will take time to do some research of crime rates in areas where personal firearms are welcome and freely carried- versus the area where personal firearms are banned – you will find that the more freedom people have to carry and defend themselves – the lower the violent crime rates are. Vice versa- where guns are illegal – the crime rates are astronomical. . .WHY?? Because BAD GUYS have nothing to fear- they know that no one can defend themselves. . . . Yet- I know that you have one small point about the “cowboy mentality” – there are an ignorant few who just have this “power thing” but you will find that with law enforcement also – there are always those few who feel “tough” and have to show it… . .They are the “bullies” of the cops. . .ALL this to say that overall – the general public being free to defend themselves brings crime down – Many in the government are afraid we will use them at some point to defend our Liberties .. ..which is the TRUE reason behind the push for bans!!!!

      • old soldier says:

        Bridak. Your comments are very naive.”If people are denied access to weapons….less violent crimes would occur.” Did you ever stop to consider that violent crimes are committed mostly thru anger. If the “bad guy” is given was he or she demands, do you think it stops there?? Definitely not! I have a background in psychiatry AND law enforcement so I oughta know what I’m talkin’ about. If you think a bunch of laws are going to stop the criminals from from having access to weapons, think again! If I said this before and I’ll say it again, gun running is much more lucrative than drugs. If the criminal has the money, he or she has access to any weapon they want. On a final note, and maybe a humorous one, when the criminal is breaking your household or threatening you with bodily harm, what do you throw at them? Insults. End of Message . Out.

    • snipoe609 says:

      DREAM DREAM DREAM ONLY IN YOUR DREAMS…..

    • sherman says:

      OK, come on down,be glad to take care of that for you. this cowboy needs some target pratice

  6. Mick says:

    it won’t happen over night, but it’s happening.

    FU I will not comply!

    • bear22250 says:

      I’m with you, only when they pry my cold dead fingers off my pistol will they get it!!! Or any of my guns

  7. Drftgy@hotmail.com says:

    Dont waste your breath folks. Briidak is a troll. She probably doesnt know which end of the gun the bullett comes out. She is just trying to stire up trouble. Ignore the fool.

  8. PapaSmurfCFD says:

    At least the article is wrong on one point. VCDL (Virginia Citizens Defense League) was able to get the Firearms Presumption Act passed 2 years ago. No locality either city or county is allowed to pass any law regarding guns, and all such previous local laws were struck down by this same Act. This eliminated a mish-mash of laws that made it almost impossible to own, carry, or transport your guns in a legal manor even in your own state. Open carry is available to any citizen who may legally purchase a firearm almost any where except court buildings and school grounds. CCP holders are allowed to carry in the State Capitol building, and even in restaurants that serve adult beverages(provided said CCP holder refrains from such beverages.)

  9. blackie says:

    i say,,,threaten the asses that will vote the gun control issue in,,,will be the last time they will vote for anything…and they had better leave the state,,,a.s.p. and do the same for your congress men and women……get rid of everybody and lets start new and fresh with the original constitution…..joe

  10. Danielc says:

    I would never wish anything on anyone, but those who choose to expend so much time and effort at an attempt to allow others to protect themselves and their family can eat shit. I grew up during the riots in the 60′s in Detroit. I saw first hand what happens when you cannot protect yourself. I have been a victim, my older sister was victimized, my mother was victimized and these fricken maggots sit behind their fancy desks and make decisions. When terror hits them at home, they will change their minds. Why do so many buy into government propaganda? If we are safer without arms, why does every country in the world have a military force?

  11. Dean Shandler says:

    When they come to take the guns it will be the neighbor boy who joined the every other weekend Natl Guard troops who did what they were told at Kent State, like they did in Louisiana after Katrina, and you will have to decide if today is the day for you to use lethal force. The decision is very difficult to take another’s life. When your life is not immediately threatened most of us would be hard pressed to take the life of BOYS WHO are doing what they are told. Good Luck to us all. I hope the fear we feel will pass like Y2K.

    • Mike says:

      As a member of the National Guard you should have gone through basic training just like us active duty guys and learned about LAWFUL ORDERS just like the rest of us. If you attempt to take my legal firearms unjustly I will percieve you as a threat to my well being and defend myself accordingly. Just because you are issued orders does not mean you follow them without question, it means you follow them to the best of your ability. If you are ordered to remove the firearms of law abiding citizens and are determined to carry out these illegal orders you will be viewed as an enemy combatant and I’ve taken out many of those in active service to this country, your’s will be just another face to haunt me when I sleep and nothing more.

  12. Castlemum says:

    We have the 2nd ammendment, we have government fighting to keep us under control. We bitch and whine over the tyrannical controls and government getting too big. Is anyone DOING anything about it? NO. Is anyone fighting these rediculous laws and mandates? NO. We read the horror and changes, but stay behind our doors at home and DO NOTHING. People may whine, but they are fearfull and cowards to the core.

  13. “Enacting federal legislation to prohibit any individual over the age of 18, but under the age of 21, from purchasing or possessing rifle or handguns.” People who use rifles to hunt are going to be hurt with this one, but having automatics or having guns in public areas can be a problem. I agree they need to register to have a gun, and I think they should have a psychiatric evaluation made mandatory before owning one, but other than that, I don’t think they should come after everyone in general. We do still have the right to protect ourselves and a right to hunt for our food, so they can’t have total control. I have every intention of getting a rifle this year for hunting.

    • Chris says:

      No thanks Lola. You are advocating for requiring a shrink to “allow” me to exercise my RIGHT. What happens when those people are anti-gun and start using their position of power to restrict your lawful ability to otherwise own a gun?

      I mean it isn’t like we require a test for someone to exercise their 1A right, and that can arguably cause even more damage by spurring people to action. I mean just look at the Zimmerman case and how such shoddy reporting (aka people exercising their 1A right) caused tons of issues by people being moved to action over incorrect “facts.”

      Really this is that slipperly slope arguement. While it might not seem like it, it would only be a matter of time before the gov were to start applying this to other rights for “safety” reasons. And the government can move very slowly (it took almost 100 years for England to be able to ban guns, and our country was right on track given it’s history up until the AWB of 1994).

  14. Blackout says:

    Yeah!
    Sounds as though King George and others need a patriot assisted suicide.Or is that from natural causes.

Tell us what you're thinking...