If you hadn't heard Colorado successfully recalled two State Senators, including the President of Senate. I know, it was quick blurb and then over-shadowed by the Naval Yard Shooting, which of course was followed by more calls for gun control.

But it happened. Here are some articles:
Reuters: Colorado Election Recall
Town Hall: Grassroots activists take home Second Amendment Victory in CO

Also, the local State GOP scoffed at the attempt labeling it as impossible:
CO State GOP scoffed at recall attempts

It proves that people like their guns and distrust politicians/bad laws. In Colorado - not exactly a Red State. But, how can this be? After all, poll after poll showed that 120% of Americans supported the ambiguously written draconian legislation?!

If the polls are accurate, perhaps people aren't willing to answer them honestly. That's a thought provoker in itself.

However, the big take away is that gun owners vote. Even in a battle ground state. And when their rights are threatened (hurriedly taken away in this case) that they are willing to vote people out - even powerful people. Another thought provoker - and the way it t to be.

Remember Colorado!

Boy, they are sure like using "common sense" background checks to promote any agenda. This time they are attacking NFA registered firearms. Currently you can use a trust to get a tax stamp, but if you dno't go the trust route you have to get your Chief Law Enforcement Officer to sign off on it. At least in my area - good luck with that.

This gives your local law enforcement authority complete discretionary control over your legal purchase. They can (and regularly do) deny their signature without ANY reason. Sound fair? What other item give your local CLEO that type of authority?

Unless I am mistaken there is still a background check done for a tax stamp. Somebody correct me if I am wrong. So, this means that the REAL goal of the White House is not a background check - but rather give your local police complete veto power.

The second restriction is to ban the re-import of "military" firearms from other countries. What are we re-importing? Mainly WWII items - so M1 Garands (Which don't even have a detachable mag!), M1 Carbines, and bolt action rifles! That's right Enfields and Springfields 1903s would be banned for reimport as assault weapons! Still think that they aren't after all guns?

This article only vaguely resembles the version from this morning. I reproduce it here in case it be rewritten again:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/ap-exclusive-obama-offers-gun-control-steps-20104584

Powers Limited, Obama, Biden Seek Action on Guns
WASHINGTON August 29, 2013 (AP)
By JOSH LEDERMAN Associated Press
Associated Press

Months after gun control efforts crumbled in Congress, Vice President Joe Biden stood shoulder to shoulder Thursday with the attorney general and the top U.S. firearms official and declared the Obama administration would take two new steps to curb American gun violence.

But the narrow, modest scope of those steps served as pointed reminders that without congressional backing, President Barack Obama's capacity to make a difference is severely inhibited.

Still, Biden renewed a pledge from him and the president to seek legislative fixes to keep guns from those who shouldn't have them — a pledge with grim prospects for fulfillment amid the current climate on Capitol Hill.

"If Congress won't act, we'll fight for a new Congress," Biden said in the Roosevelt Room of the White House. "It's that simple. But we're going to get this done."

One new policy will bar military-grade weapons that the U.S. sells or donates to allies from being imported back into the U.S. by private entities. In the last eight years, the U.S. has approved 250,000 of those guns to come back to the U.S., the White House said, arguing that some end up on the streets. From now on, only museums and a few other entities like the government will be eligible to reimport military-grade firearms.

The ban will largely affect antiquated, World War II-era weapons that, while still deadly, rarely turn up at crime scenes, leaving some to question whether the new policy is much ado about nothing.

"Banning these rifles because of their use in quote-unquote crimes is like banning Model Ts because so many of them are being used as getaway cars in bank robberies," said Ed Woods, a 47-year-old from the Chico area of northern California.

Woods said he collects such guns because of their unique place in American history. He now wonders whether he'll be prohibited from purchasing the type of M1 Garand rifle his father used during World War II. The U.S. later sold thousands of the vintage rifles to South Korea.

"Someday my kids will have something that possibly their grandfather, who they never had a chance to meet, is connected to," Woods said in an interview.

The Obama administration is also proposing to close a loophole that it says allows felons and other ineligible gun purchasers to skirt the law by registering certain guns to a corporation or trust. The new rule would require people associated with those entities, like beneficiaries and trustees, to undergo the same type of fingerprint-based background checks before the corporation can register those guns.

Using the rule-making powers at his disposal, Obama can only place that restriction on guns regulated under the National Firearm Act, a 1934 law that only deals with the deadliest weapons, like machine guns and short-barreled shotguns. For the majority of weapons, there is no federal gun registration.

"It's simple, it's straightforward, it's common sense," Biden said of the measures he unveiled Thursday as he swore in Obama's new director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Todd Jones.

The quick reproach from gun control opponents, however, underscored that the same forces that thwarted gun control efforts in Congress have far from mellowed on the notion of stricter gun laws in the future.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., accused the president of governing only by executive action while failing to sufficiently enforce gun laws already on the books. And the National Rifle Association called on Obama to stop focusing his efforts on inhibiting the rights of law-abiding gun owners.

"The Obama administration has once again completely missed the mark when it comes to stopping violent crime," said NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam.

But proponents of gun control called them important steps to keep military-grade weapons out of American communities and plug a deadly hole in the background check system.

"It's time for Congress to stop dragging its feet and pass common-sense reforms that keep criminals and the dangerously mentally ill from illegally buying guns," said New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Boston Mayor Thomas Menino in a joint statement.

There are few signs the calculus in Congress has changed dramatically since April, when a package of measures including expanded background checks and an assault weapons ban flopped in the Senate despite intense advocacy by families of the 20 children and six adults gunned down in December in Newtown, Conn.

Holy cow! These inexpensive mini-safes are not so safe...

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/07/28/researchers-show-how-easy-it-is-for-toddlers-to-open-a-gun-safe/

According to: Air Force Times Article

Some highlights on why:

■ A number of pistols can outperform the M9, which is manufactured by Beretta. There have been significant advances in trigger mechanisms in the 26 years since the M9 entered service. The Army’s Small Arms Branch at Fort Benning, Ga., put these to the test and found troops had more hits and tighter groups of hits as a result.

■ There are too many issues to overcome. The M9’s slide-mounted safety is one issue. When troops rack the slide to alleviate a jam or stovepipe, they often inadvertently engage the safety — and won’t realize this until they reacquire and squeeze the trigger. The open-slide design allows contaminants and dirt into the system.

The 9mm round also lacks the stopping power most soldiers need. And an improved M9 would need a modular grip, integrated rail, night-sight capabilities and the ability to suppress fire.

■ The numbers don’t add up. Easlick’s team did the budget drills and found that a new pistol would be less expensive to produce and maintain.

How much cheaper? Simply improving the M9 would be a “waste of time and money,” Easlick said.

For example, many newer pistols use a polymer frame. While that will not be a requirement, that frame is cheaper and more durable.

■ User feedback. Unlike the M4 carbine, which has a strong approval rating among users, the M9 consistently ranks as the weapon in which troops have the least confidence.

Another interesting tidbit was that soldiers that were issued the entry-level S&W (tm) Sigma (tm) actually preferred them to the M9. The M&P (tm), as well as others, should perform very well in any trials then.